If I can figure out how.

As Gabrielle stated above somewhere, I can't use PM, either, and so, I don't know how to contact "management" to pass along this information!

I certainly don't want to have to go through Paypal to post in here!

Thanks for the boot in my virtual ***, Mr. A.B.!

And, of course, you are right!

And sadly, I am human, and so, am capable of perhaps "over-feeling" from time to time, especially up here in this corrupt hell of a place where God has me set down on earth, for the moment, anyway!

I feel like Diogenes laying in a gutter, all bloodied up, teeth kicked in, lantern smashed, yada, yada, yada!

In todays local newspaper, there was an article by one of the good columnists on that subject.

He is saying that the era of big Broadcast-news anchors is over and has been for years.

He also cites the statistic : The average age of the people who watch the news on the three networks is 60. ( I don't think he counted Fox )

This age group is not what the television moguls are really interested in.

The younger group, who they really want are not watching network news.

The columnist considers network news not much more than entertainment now.

He goes on to tell about a short period in his life when he was heading up the local 6:00 P.M. news, the tricks he had to use during the twice yearly rating periods.

He would put on a mentalist on the show to tell people who called in where they would find lost items, and stuff like that.

Ratings would go sky high.

Guess he got sick of those type of games and went back to being a columnist in the paper.

The games people play!

A.B.

It's easy.

Go to " My Assistant " at the top of the page as in after you click on "view new posts."

On the left side you will see a list of the administrators and moderators.

Click one of them and send your message.

A.B.

What's really interesting about all of this IS WHO WE ARE HEARING ABSOLUTELY NOTHING FROM, AND THAT IS GEORGE W. BUSH!

And why?

Why the silence?

Why do we never hear anything from George W. Bush concerning these scams, and these scammers?

WHY?

Top Stories - washingtonpost.com

"ChoicePoint Data Cache Became a Powder Keg"

Sat Mar 5, 9:45 AM ET

By Robert O'Harrow Jr., Washington Post Staff Writer

The man on the phone called himself James Garrett.

Speaking with a lilting accent, the man said he was an executive with a Los Angeles company called M.B.S Financial.

He told an employee at ChoicePoint Inc. that he wanted to open an online account with the company to receive electronic reports on people.

It was the kind of request that ChoicePoint, one of the nation's largest information services, gets all the time.

Thousands of corporate and government clients rely on the company to provide them with publicly available information on people for help in hiring, fraud detection, journalist research, national security and debt collection.

But the man's call last fall was different, according to a detective's description of the encounter and testimony presented in a later court hearing.

Unknown to ChoicePoint, the caller was not Garrett, an actor in the Los Angeles area.

Police said he was a con artist involved in a vast identity-theft scam that succeeded in making off with records of at least 145,000 people.

The real Garrett was just another victim.

The imposter's attempt to gain access to even more files would not only expose the scam, but spark a national outrage and congressional hearings over whether the nation's growing commercial data industry is doing enough to guard personal information.

Yesterday, the burgeoning scandal led ChoicePoint to cut off access to some sensitive data to thousands of small businesses.

The company also announced in filings with the government that two senior executives were under investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission for stock trades that took place after they learned about the scheme last fall but before they made it public.

On the day the man called ChoicePoint in late September, he was close to getting what he wanted.

He had already filed an application for the right to download reports to his computer, for about $15 each, claiming he needed sensitive personal information like Social Security numbers to track down targets of his collection agency.

But to the ChoicePoint employee on the other end of the line, something wasn't quite right.

For starters, the caller used a Los Angeles copy store to fax his paperwork to open an account.

That seemed strange for a businessman, and even more so when an in-house investigator realized that similar requests had recently been made by others in the Los Angeles area.

Something also seemed out of kilter about the local government documents the man forwarded to prove his business existed.

Authorities in Los Angeles were called for help.

The officer assigned to the case, a sheriff's detective named Duane Decker, asked the company whether it could lure the man posing as Garrett back to the copy store as part of a modest sting operation.

ChoicePoint would convince Garrett he needed to go back to the copy store to sign a faxed copy of his application and send it back to the company.

The ruse worked.

On Oct. 27, a man claiming to be Garrett showed up as promised at the Copymat store on Sunset Boulevard.

He approached the counter, asked for a document filed for James Garrett and paid the bill.

Decker, lingering nearby, asked the man if he was Garrett.

When the man said yes, Decker asked him to step outside.

As they left the store, the detective said he thought he had an easy case in hand.

He couldn't have been more wrong.

The man Decker stopped was Olatunji A. Oluwatosin, a 41-year-old Nigerian national.

Oluwatosin claimed he was picking up the paperwork for another man named Bobby, according to testimony at Oluwatosin's court hearing.

On the way out of the store with Decker, Oluwatosin dropped the paperwork he had just received from ChoicePoint and other forms for a company dubbed Gala Financial.

At the time, he was carrying five cell phones, only one of them in his own name.

Three credit cards bore the names of other people, including at least one woman.

At Decker's request, Oluwatosin shared his address in North Hollywood.

Once there, Decker said he found a printout of a ChoicePoint search involving another name, that of a man he later learned had lost $12,000 to identity thieves.

Decker also found a receipt for a public storage business not far away.

Before long, searching in unit B-245, Decker found what he later told a state court judge were the tell-tale signs of an identity theft operation: new televisions, electric generators and other products in shipping boxes stripped bare of details about where the goods came from.

The paperwork offered other leads.

Decker found addresses that turned out to be commercial mail services.

Investigators asked to see the unopened mail at some of those locations.

One clerk brought out two large bags containing credit card applications, financial statements and other mail that had been redirected from homes around the nation.

Driving to more than a dozen commercial mail services in one day, Decker and a postal inspector identified redirected mail from more than 700 people.

Further investigation revealed links to 22 other ChoicePoint accounts that had been opened under false pretenses.

"I realized that this was just absolutely huge and out of control," Decker said.

Identity theft and fraud has become a national problem in a few short years.

In 2003, federal authorities estimated that about 750,000 people fell victim to some identity scam.

Now the prevailing estimate is close to 10 million.

Driving the rise is a growing number of clever criminals who use people's Social Security numbers and other facts of their lives to take on their personas to run up credit cards bills, empty bank accounts and commit other crimes.

But consumer advocates say it's also the failure of so many information brokers, retailers and credit issuers to adequately protect records or do enough to stop swindlers by verifying the identities of customers.

Credit card companies, marketers and others have lost millions of files to hackers and identity thieves in recent years.

Two years ago, ChoicePoint itself was hit by another identity theft scheme involving personal records of thousands of people.

ChoicePoint, based in Alpharetta, Ga., has assembled a huge trove of personal data in recent years.

Much of that information, such as court rulings, driver records and real estate details, comes from government agencies.

The company also purchases information from the three major credit bureaus and other information services.

Its ability to create and electronically transmit exhaustive dossiers on people makes it a favorite of many Fortune 500 companies, government agencies and law enforcement and Homeland Security authorities.

Today, it has more than 100,000 customers and revenue approaching $1 billion, a large proportion based on the resale of details about individuals.

Before granting service, ChoicePoint typically requires a photocopy of a driver's license and business records on file with a state or local government agency.

A ChoicePoint employee would then verify that such a person and company exists.

Identity thieves skirted this system by using fake IDs and by setting up front companies on paper, registered with government agencies in phony names, according to court and company records.

Olatunji Oluwatosin pleaded no contest to identity theft in a California court last month.

He was sentenced to 16 months in state prison.

Authorities are still investigating who else may be involved in the scandal.

They believe others, possibly many others, worked with him.

ChoicePoint officials, meanwhile, said they have since identified more than 50 accounts that appear to be phony.

The company has warned people to watch for unauthorized activity on their credit reports and has offered to give them free access to that information, at an estimated cost of $2 million.

The real James Garrett said he first noticed that something was amiss when he received a call from a credit card company.

The company told him that a card in his name had been redirected to another address.

When Garrett went to police to report the fraud, police told him he was apparently part of an identity theft ring, possibly related to terrorist financing, Garrett said yesterday.

An investigator in the ChoicePoint case later told him that identity thieves had obtained not only his name and address, but his Social Security number, credit card password and mother's maiden name.

"They knew everything about me," Garrett said.

Behind the scenes, the case continues to expand.

Decker and other authorities in Los Angeles have discussed the case with the FBI and Secret Service, which has indicated it may have another identity theft suspect with ties to the ChoicePoint case.

The Federal Trade Commission has begun an inquiry.

At the same time, public ire is intensifying.

Congress is planning to hold hearings about the breach and the information industry in general.

Some of those hearings may involve questions about national security.

Democrats, including Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) have asked for a study about how terrorists might use information brokers like ChoicePoint.

In response to the thefts, ChoicePoint said in an SEC filing that it is "discontinuing the sale of information products that contain sensitive consumer data . . . except where there is either a specific consumer-driven transaction or benefit or where the products support federal, state or local government and law enforcement purposes."

"We fully support a continued national discussion of how to ensure that information is used responsibly, that the positive benefits of information use are preserved and that the illegal uses of data are severely punished," the company's filing said.

The company has defended the sale of hundreds of thousands of shares since November, before the scandal became public, by ChoicePoint chief executive Derek V. Smith and president and chief operating officer Douglas C. Curling, saying the transactions were part of scheduled sales arranged last fall.

Smith said he personally did not know about the security breach until January.

Decker, meanwhile, said that after four months it feels like his investigation is just beginning.

"Sometimes you're looking at Social Security numbers, and all of the sudden a name pops out and you realize, 'These are real people, all of them,'" he said.

"They could all be victims, if not now, in the future."

"The information is out there."

Special correspondent Kimberly Edds contributed to this story from Los Angeles.

And THIS fact which is often bandied about is one that boggles my mind.--

They want the 18 to 34 year old market.

WHY???

They don't have any money!!!

The people with disposable income are the geezer set. WE not they are the one's the admen should lust after.

Maybe they have figured out that we don't watch TV.

I use PayPal quite a lot because I buy things on eBay.

I think the phishing scam relates to people who SELL stuff on eBay. Therefore, I would not hesitate to pay Michael ( I presume that is what we are talking about here ) his $7.95 using PayPal.

Or, send him $8.00 cash in a envelope.

Games, indeed, Mr. A.B.

In my case, this Kapostacy did what "IN THE TRADE" is known as a "SPLICE JOB", which is where the alleged "news" person takes some different "file footage", and then splices it together in such a fashion as to totally concoct a "story" out of it, as though the events depicted in the "SPLICE JOB" occurred in the order, or manner, presented as "NEWS".

Then, in this case, which was "presented" to the unsuspecting public as "BREAKING NEWS", she "used" her voice, feigning a really serious "tone", to "augment" what her "film footage" was allegedly portraying!

People become "mesmerized" when the news anchor, in this case Kapostacy, comes on right at the start of the film, and says in those hushed, serious tones, that what is to follow, is "oh, so serious, yada, yada, yada", and then when they "see" the "SPLICE JOB", THEY ARE HOOKED!

Why, it just HAS TO BE .....

THE TRUTH!

THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH!

BECAUSE .......

THE TELEVISION NEVER LIES!

TRUST THE TELEVISION!

TRUST THE TELEVISION!

THE TELEVISION NEVER LIES!

Don't believe me, just ask Chris!

Or Dan Rather

washingtonpost.com Highlights

"Dan Rather, leaving by the high road - Anchor wraps up 24 years at 'CBS Evening News' with final telecast"

"Now I'm guilty of a lot of things, and I've made a lot of mistakes -- but I haven't made that mistake -- of running, backing away," Dan Rather says.

By Tom Shales

Updated: 12:31 p.m. ET March 9, 2005

WASHINGTON - Emptying out his cubbyhole office in the CBS News building on West 57th Street in New York, wading through stacks and boxes of memorabilia accumulated over the years, Dan Rather came upon a piece of framed embroidery made and sent to him a couple decades ago by a nun who was, one might say, among the faithful -- a regular and loyal viewer.

"Be thou a soul to fullness grown," says one of her meticulously embroidered mottos.

"Arise to gain thy dreams."

Rather's voice warms.

"Pretty nice, huh?" he says.

Among the other embroidered words of wisdom:

"Today's trials were meant to make you strong."

With a few parting words and possibly -- but unlikely -- a few parting shots, Dan Rather will make his last appearance tonight as anchor of "The CBS Evening News," 24 years to the day since his first telecast as anchor and a full year sooner than he planned.

As virtually all of our world knows, Rather agreed to step down in the wake of a scandal involving a discredited "60 Minutes Wednesday" story on George W. Bush's supposed preferential treatment while in the National Guard.

The case, which resulted in four of the top people in CBS News being told to leave, has caused a tremendous schism within the organization, ruining Rather's exit not only by moving it up a year but also by hanging a dark cloud over it.

Rather, who's had many trials and certainly seems a soul to fullness grown, is told it's a shame he couldn't be leaving on a high note.

Rather: 'Leaving on a high note'

"First of all, from where I sit, I am leaving on a high note," Rather says, "and a higher note than I deserve and certainly a higher note than I ever thought possible when I walked into this job."

"Secondly, what's gone on these past few months, it all goes with the territory, as the cliche goes."

"It's part of the turf, particularly if you're determined to at least try to be an independent reporter."

"And I understand that very well."

(Rather's amazing 42-year career at CBS News, including a discussion of the flawed Bush report, will be recapped in a fascinating and evocative documentary, "Dan Rather: A Reporter Remembers," produced by Judy Tygard and airing at 8 tonight, after Rather's farewell newscast.)

In addition to the indignity of leaving the anchor chair prematurely, for weeks Rather has had to endure attacks from not only outside but inside CBS News -- like a combination of Davy Crockett and Julius Caesar.

In a devastating Ken Auletta piece for the New Yorker, such venerable CBS personalities as Mike Wallace and Walter Cronkite were quoted as saying they preferred watching Peter Jennings over Rather and basically dismissed him.

Then on Monday, just two days before Rather's farewell, old man Cronkite, the anchor Rather replaced, had the stupefying temerity to say that he thought Bob Schieffer, the "Face the Nation" host who'll fill in on the "Evening News" until a remodeled program is hatched later this year, would have made a better anchor.

"I would like to have seen him there a long time ago," Cronkite said of Schieffer on CNN.

He also said Rather "gave the impression of playing a role more than simply trying to deliver the news to the audience."

Talk about bad form.

"A codgerly old ass," one Rather loyalist, asking not to be identified, said of Cronkite.

"He stayed alive just so he could see this moment."

However pathetic Cronkite's remarks make him seem, they enforce the image of "Dan Rather -- Alone at the Top."

Unlike some of Rather's adventures over the years -- the coolest anchor, he's one of the few men over 60 who can successfully still wear jeans -- this one is dead serious.

Rather will not be dragged into a mud fight.

"I've said consistently to everybody that I'm not going to respond to that," he says.

But he agrees to continue.

"First, this is parenthetical, but I've been moved, and I like to think I'm not moved easily, by how many people, particularly people who make the place go -- technicians, editors, writers, researchers, producers, people I've worked closest with -- have taken the time and trouble and had the grace to come up to me and say encouraging and supportive things."

"And that means a lot to me. . . . . Now, close parentheses."

Rather often includes punctuation in his remarks.

"This is no big deal, but when you ask me about those specific quotes from those specific people, this is what I have to say, and it's all I have to say: That the accomplishments of these men speak for themselves."

"Individually and collectively, they've had some of the truly great careers in television news, at CBS or anywhere else."

"Since that's the way they feel, they're entitled to express their opinions."

"They've earned the right to voice them."

"Period."

Although Cronkite's later comments made things worse, Wallace said yesterday he and Rather are still friends, and that Auletta's piece was originally going to be about changes in network news generally, not just Rather and CBS.

"I wrote a note, and Dan wrote a note, and I wrote a note, and Dan and I have it all straightened out now," Wallace said yesterday from his home in New York.

"It has to be remembered, too: He's just the best damn reporter there is."

There may not be lots of other CBS News veterans coming forth to cheer Rather, because one says he was threatened with the loss of his own job if he did.

Rather is obsessive in his loyalty to CBS News, but it begins to seem like unrequited love.

"My attitude is, I want to move forward now," says Rather.

"I want to get through Wednesday as gracefully and as classily as I know how and then take a little time to myself and then move right into the next phase of my work."

"Thank God my health is good, I feel vigorous, feel strong, and I want to get into both '60 Minutes Wednesday' and '60 Minutes' and try to do some great journalism."

There are possible problems even with that plan, however.

Leslie Moonves, the CBS president who charged into the scandal and has not been even slightly supportive of Rather or of CBS News, has implied "60 Minutes Wednesday" may be canceled if its ratings don't improve.

And there is some question how welcome Rather will be at "60 Minutes" in the wake of the scandal, even though he's an alumnus (1975-81).

Some insiders think Rather should have done more to protect the discharged employees and should have threatened to leave if they were let go.

The major flaw of the original story was that documents used to support its allegations were not thoroughly verified.

Rather likes to think of himself as a "reporter-anchor," but he hardly has the time to go rummaging through files and halls of records to check on the authenticity of documents that are decades old.

Dogged by bias allegations

All this has been argued to death and could be argued until doomsday.

One of the sad things about it is that it gave the right wing, which has had its sights on Rather for years now, something to cheer and dance in the streets about.

Over the years, ultra-conservatives have made Rather their public enemy No. 1.

They deluged him with hate mail, founded a Web site called Ratherbiased.com and were the prime suspects when a computer was used to jam his phone lines.

He says he doesn't know how he became such a lightning rod for controversy.

"What I do know is that it's not something I worry about," he says.

"I've never worried about it."

"I am independent as a reporter -- determinedly independent and, when I think it's necessary and advisable, I'm fiercely independent."

"And I think the determination to stay independent is part of what's made me what you call a 'lightning rod.'"

"There's always somebody of some political persuasion or some ideological belief and/or partisan political agenda who takes the attitude, 'If you don't report the way I want you to report, if you're not going to reflect my biases, then I'm going to try to hurt you, ruin you if I can, by hanging some negative label on you and calling you names like 'biased.'"

"And at that point, you're in the classic fight-or-flight situation."

"Now I'm guilty of a lot of things, and I've made a lot of mistakes -- but I haven't made that mistake -- of running, backing away."

"I haven't done that, I'm not doing it and I'm not going to do it."

Former CBS and CBS News president Sir Howard Stringer, just named chairman of the entire Sony empire, was once the executive producer of "The CBS Evening News" and remains a Rather admirer.

He used to talk about the unique experience of walking down the street with Rather and feeling all eyes upon them, of Rather's magnetism and "larger than life" persona.

Near the end of "A Reporter Remembers," Stringer says that whatever mistakes were made with the National Guard story, Dan Rather has compiled "an extraordinary body of work."

The question is whether he will be able to keep compiling it.

Obviously if the decision is entirely his, he will.

News — and a news giver

Rather has always been the news as well as being a news giver.

Over the years, he appeared in headlines more often than any of his competitors -- whether for his on-air shouting match over Iran-Contra with George H.W. Bush, his tiff with a Chicago cabdriver or his mugging by a mysterious psychotic who reportedly uttered the seemingly meaningless "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" while clobbering Rather on a New York street.

Some doubted the story's veracity, but years later the same man murdered an NBC stagehand and inadvertently revealed he had attacked Rather, an expression of his clinically paranoid-schizophrenic delusions that people on TV were sending out invisible signals that controlled his life.

On the documentary tonight, Rather points out the man never actually said "What's the frequency, Kenneth?" though that later became the title of an R.E.M. song.

The mugger did ask "What's the frequency?," though, and at one point "addressed me as 'Kenneth,'" Rather says.

It's sort of like "Play it again, Sam," one of those famous quotes that was never said.

Some of Rather's fans breathed a sigh of relief when the man was finally found and the story thus verified, because Rather does seem to run on an electrical current that is his alone.

There is, inescapably, a tension in his appearances on the air -- thus shock-jock Don Imus's irreverent observation at the 1996 Radio and Television Correspondents' Association dinner that Rather delivers the news "like he's making a hostage tape."

But is it tension, or urgency?

Rather believes the news is serious business.

He's not going to lean back in his chair and deliver it to viewers conversationally.

He's not trying to be your friend.

For that reason and others, his departure from the evening-news wars tonight may mark the end of more than one era.

The networks love the revenue that news programs like "60 Minutes" bring in, but they hate the messiness of news, the trouble news causes, the awful unpredictability of it all ("reality" prime-time shows, entirely different, are carefully packaged and controlled).

CBS News, having weathered many a crisis, has hit a larger than usual iceberg this time.

Andrew Heyward, president of the news division, is considered by many to be much more loyal to the corporate side than to news.

For years, the great CBS News presidents -- Richard Salant, William Leonard, Fred W. Friendly -- saw part of their job as standing up to incursions by bottom-liners from the corporate side.

Heyward has been all but invisible since the scandal broke and never publicly offered to resign.

Instead, he and Moonves have been consorting on a revamped "Evening News" that could move the broadcast in the direction of "The Today Show" and other morning magazines -- something lighter and more fun and tailored to attract the 18-to-34-year-olds who rarely watch now.

The great days of network news, days Rather lived through first as a devout radio listener and then as one of the troops -- may be long over.

"Look for it only in books," as is said of the South in the prologue to "Gone with the Wind."

Asked if the old-style news president is an extinct species, Rather declines to answer, the only question he wouldn't even entertain.

But on the matter of network news being in terminal decline, he says he sees the dangers but doesn't think the situation is irreversible.

"Some people conclude the sun is rapidly setting on what was once considered solid broadcast journalism," he says.

"And what makes some people concerned about it is bloggers, paid political operatives posing as White House journalists, paid hucksters hustling political programs all lumped together in a soup that's served up as professional punditry."

"The concern is that we'll reach the day, if we aren't careful, that the premium is no longer put on journalists getting to the truth behind official policy statements but rather making sure that reporters, and the press in general, trample on no toes that would result in the denial of access to those wearing the shoes."

Without mentioning the current Bush administration and the attitudes toward the press it encourages, Rather says, "I confess that I am concerned that we may be reaching the point where too many members of the press fear being labeled unpatriotic or partisan if they challenge the actions or decisions of political leaders of any persuasion.

"What the country doesn't need, particularly just now, is a press that's docile -- never mind obsequious or intimidated."

"I don't agree with those who say, 'Dan, it's already happened,' but I do recognize there's some danger."

Rather, 73, still has plenty of fight left in him, more than a lot of us ever have at what we imagine are our best moments.

Surely it has occurred even to him that it would be nice to just get up from the anchor desk and walk away -- leave all the aggravation and warfare behind.

Rather confesses that he and his brilliant and strong-willed wife Jean -- whom he usually refers to as "Jean Rather" -- did consider this option.

"We did discuss it."

"Jean Rather presented that case in an eloquent way."

"I don't want to mislead you; she did not say, 'This is what I think you should do.'"

"She did say, 'In making a list of things to consider, you should consider this, and I know you better than any other living person and if I don't mention it, you might not think of it.'"

"She fixed some of her famous Jean Rather Prison Chili and we had about two spoonfuls' worth of time discussing it."

"And that was pretty much it."

Dan Rather is not going gentle into that good night.

He's not the type to go gentle, for one thing, and as far as he's concerned, night hasn't fallen by a long shot.

And that's part of our world, Wednesday, March 9, 2005.

Arise, Dan Rather, to gain thy dreams . . . .

Oh, I have no objections to sending him a money order for the fee, but that was not given as one of the payment options.

In fact, the only one seemed to be Paypal, and when I heard that name, a light and warning went off!

I am a believer in this forum, but not in these computer places like Choicepoint and Paypal!

And I sure am not a believer in George W. Bush's plan to make even more of OUR identity material available to the thugs and thieves who are fueling the growth of HIS economy, for the reasons which follow in this next story about, you guessed it, CHOICEPOINT!

THIS, AMERICA, IS THE HORROR WORLD OF BUSH CO.!

Turn everything upside down and inside out, and why, YOU THEN HAVE ARRIVED AT THE TRUTH, Bush Co. style!

And keep in mind that IT IS THIS COMPANY WHICH IS PROVIDING LAW ENFORCEMENT IN AMERICA WITH ITS INFORMATION, ON YOU, INCLUDING WHETHER YOU ARE SUSPECTED OF BEING A TAY-RIST!

SO!

Very serious business, indeed, AND IT IS PLACED RIGHT SQUARE IN THE HANDS OF AN INCOMPETENT PACK OF FOOLS, who apparently are well connected right to George W. Bush's REPUBLICAN PARTY!

Surprise, surprise!

Spam, Scams & Viruses

"ChoicePoint files found riddled with errors - Data broker offers no easy way to fix mistakes, either"

EXCLUSIVE

By Bob Sullivan, Technology correspondent, MSNBC

Updated: 4:41 p.m. ET March 8, 2005

Deborah Pierce held a rare and precious document in her hands.

It was the story of her life, as told by ChoicePoint Inc.

She wasn't supposed to see it; an anonymous source had smuggled the report to her.

But there it was, her "National Comprehensive Report," 20 pages long, a complete dossier of all the digital breadcrumbs she's left behind during her adult life.

At least, that's what it was supposed to be.

Pierce said she felt an uneasy twinge in her stomach as she began to flip the pages.

A dozen former addresses were listed, along with neighbors and their phone numbers.

Almost 20 people were listed as relatives -- and their neighbors were listed, too.

There were cars she supposedly owned, businesses she supposedly worked for.

But the more closely she looked, the more alarmed she became: The report was littered with mistakes.

ChoicePoint, the now embattled database giant, aggregates data from hundreds of sources on millions of Americans.

The reports are then sold to thousands of companies and government agencies that want to know more about their clients, customers, or employees.

As first reported by MSNBC.com, the company last month warned 145,000 people that criminals posing as legitimate businesses had accessed that information, putting them at risk of identity theft.

The incident sparked discussion about the larger industry of data collection, made up of companies known as commercial data brokers.

ChoicePoint is the largest, but there are hundreds of other firms that collect and sell private information for profit.

ChoicePoint also has a host of important government clients, including the FBI and other intelligence agencies.

The Alpharetta, Ga.-based company declined to be interviewed for this story, pointing a reporter toward the firm's Web site for additional information.

The company separately announced Tuesday that it has hired a top official at the Transportation Security Administration to review how the company screens its customers.

Pierce, a privacy advocate, obtained her report nearly two years ago, long before the current controversy.

Thanks to the unknown source -- perhaps a company employee, Pierce said, but she has no way of knowing -- she got a rare privilege most consumers don't: a chance to see what ChoicePoint knows about her.

She didn't like what she saw.

Glaring errors and omissions

What first caught Pierce's eye, she said, was a heading titled "possible Texas criminal history."

A short paragraph suggested additional, "manual" research, because three Texas court records had been found that might be connected to her.

"A manual search on PIERCE D.S." is recommended, it said.

Pierce says she's only visited Texas twice briefly, and never had any trouble with the law there.

"But if I was applying for a job, and there were other candidates, and this was on my record, the company would obviously go for another person," she said.

"It raises a question in your mind."

It's not clear prospective employers would see that part of Pierce's file as part of an employment background check.

The firm declined to answer specific questions about Pierce's report -- or to confirm its authenticity -- but said it was likely designed for law enforcement officials.

"It is ... only intended for trained investigators who use the information as a directional guide of where to go to confirm facts in the public record," said spokeswoman Kristen McCaughan.

Internet searches indicate the reports are also sold to private investigators.

On ChoicePoint's Web site, the National Comprehensive Report is described as a collection of searches that glean data from "national and state databases for a summary of assets, driver licenses, professional licenses, real property, vehicles, and more."

"Each report offers the ability to add associates to the report, which include relatives, others linked to the same addresses as the subject and neighbors."

Knowing former addresses and neighbors — assuming such information was correct — would be of obvious utility to law enforcement officials investigating a crime.

But even if the report was only marketed to law enforcement, Pierce said she was still concerned about who might end up seeing the information.

And there were many more inaccuracies that troubled her.

Under former addresses, an ex-boyfriend's address was listed.

Pierce said she never lived there, and in fact, he moved into that house after they broke up.

The report also listed three automobiles she never owned and three companies listed that she never owned or worked for.

Under the relatives section, her sister's ex-husband was listed.

And there are seven other people listed as relatives who Pierce doesn't know.

"There are all these other people in my file."

"I find that offensive," she said.

Most alarming to Pierce is the fact that, with all this information, the ChoicePoint report she received had glaring omissions, too.

Many of her former addresses aren't listed; and despite the host of other people listed on her report, many relatives and nearby neighbors were missing.

"I see my next door neighbor almost every day when I'm here."

"And he's not there," she said.

"If you were going to do an investigation on me, he'd be the one you'd want to talk to, not the burrito place on the corner."

" ... It really makes you call into question the effectiveness of this kind of data collection."

His ChoicePoint report said he was dead

Pierce's experience neatly parallels that of Richard Smith, another privacy advocate, who paid a $20 fee and received a similar report from ChoicePoint several years ago.

The company offers a wide variety of reports on individuals; Smith purchased a commercial version that's sold to curious consumers.

Smith's dossier had the same kind of errors that Pierce reported.

His file also suggested a manual search of Texas court records was required, and listed him as connected to 30 businesses which he knew nothing about.

Some of the mistakes on Smith's report were comical: That his wife had a child three years before they were married, that he had been married previously to another woman, and most absurd, that he had died in 1976.

"Pretty obviously the data quality is low," Smith said.

He equated a ChoicePoint report to the results of a Google search on a person -- solid information is mixed in with dozens of unrelated items.

The more common a name, the more extraneous information is produced.

"People who use this data should keep that in mind," Smith said.

No way to fix errors

Elizabeth Rosen has also spotted numerous mistakes in her seven-page ChoicePoint report.

Rosen, a nurse from Los Angeles, Calif., was the first consumer to complain to MSNBC.com after receiving a letter from ChoicePoint in February indicating her personal information had been stolen.

Rosen has since received a copy of one of her ChoicePoint reports, a "personal public records search," -- she's still awaiting others -- and already, she's spotted a series of mistakes.

"There are problems on five of the seven pages," she said.

The most serious involve two post office boxes she has owned, one in Florida and one in Texas.

She only held the boxes for a short while, but Rosen believes she's now been connected to every other firm that has rented those boxes.

In Miami Beach, she is listed as the owner of a firm named Adopt-A-Classroom.

In Texas, she's been tied to a nail salon, a deli, and a firm named Phoenix Investigations, among 44 other businesses.

She is also listed as an officer of a firm named "Reimbursement Specialists Of Central Texas, LLC."

But what really bothers Rosen is what happened next.

"I asked the guy at ChoicePoint how I can get these errors fixed," she said.

"And he said they can't."

Rosen was told she had to talk with each furnisher of the information individually -- to the private firm where she rented the P.O. box, for example -- and convince each one to update their information and then send it back to ChoicePoint.

Rosen figures there might be 100 different sources of information in her report, so fixing the errors would be just about impossible.

"I told them, 'I don't want to be spending 40 hours a week correcting your errors,’" she said.

The ChoicePoint data leak has sparked calls for congressional investigations and new legislation.

One bill, proposed by Florida Sen. Bill Nelson, would place companies like ChoicePoint in the same category as credit reporting agencies, which are governed by the Fair Credit Reporting Act and its subsequent revisions.

That law establishes detailed -- albeit imperfect -- procedures for correcting errors in personal information.

That's a start, Pierce said.

But fundamentally, she thinks lawmakers and corporations need to give more consideration to the compilation and use of such reports in the first place.

"Why are they entitled to have this information?"

"How useful is it, if it's not accurate?" Pierce said.

Meanwhile, Smith said compliance with such an accuracy requirement may be much easier said than done.

Companies like ChoicePoint, which has gobbled up dozens of smaller database firms in recent years, often have hundreds of different databases.

The data is often in very different formats, and not linked in any way.

Simply answering the question "What's in my file?" may be impossible.

"There's no business reason for them to do it," Smith said.

"Still, it would be nice if you could pay them ... and just ask, what do you know about me?"

Currently, consumers can order various fee-based reports at ChoiceTrust.com, ChoicePoint's consumer Web site.

A list of consumer products is available at ChoicePoint's Web site.

Bob Sullivan is author of Your Evil Twin: Behind the Identity Theft Epidemic.

And here, Mr. A.B., I just tried that, and when I tried to P.M. Michael to try jeffmoskin's suggestion of sending in the money, the message that I got back was that I am not allowed to use the P.M. feature.

SO!

If somebody can crack this code .......

Ah, BUT THEY DO, jeffmoskin!

Funny money, a la the credit card, or rather, a wallet full of them!

Max one out, what the hey, because they just keep sending you more and more of them.

Manna from heaven, to the admen!

I know younger people who have five or more of the things, and they just keep sending in the minimum amount and you know what, manna from heaven, to the credit card companies!

As to the poor fools themselves?

Well, to the admen and credit card companies, that is what GOD put young people down on this good, green earth for, to not know better.

AAAAHHHHH!

LIFE in George Pataki's corrupt Empire State of New York!

IF you are a politician, you just got to love it up here, as this next story shows!

Why, I have heard that some of these politicans of ours up here are now having extra arms surgically grafted onto their bodies, and a host of extra snouts grafted onto their heads, just so they can rake in more and more and more out of the "TROUGH", 'cause they just can't get enough with the two arms and one mouth that God gave them, and that's a fact!

"Stadium fight enriches the influence industry - Costly campaigns for and against Jets facility boost spending on lobbyists"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union
First published: Wednesday, March 9, 2005

ALBANY -- Spending on lobbying in New York rocketed 20 percent to $144 million last year, fueled by the high octane fight over the New York Jets' bid to erect a publicly supported stadium over the state-owned rail yard on Manhattan's West Side.

Almost $29 million was spent on lobbying for the Jets project alone, driving the increase from 2003's $120 million total.

"It's the Super Bowl of lobbying," said Blair Horner, legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group.

"Lobbying in New York has become major league."

The Jets deal, which is linked to New York City's bid for a future Olympics, enriched teams of lobbyists working the pro or con angles, but especially the con, according to the 2004 annual report of the Temporary State Commission on Lobbying.

The report, released under a Freedom of Information Law request, shows that lobbying in New York broke all sorts of records, including that for the most spent by a lobbying client -- $13.3 million from CSC Holdings (Cablevision).

Cablevision is fighting the Jets deal to protect its Madison Square Garden property.

Added to the nearly $8.8 million that Madison Square Garden itself spent, the opposition forces reached $22.1 million in spending.

The CSC spending alone topped the biggest sum spent in the past -- Local 1199/SEIU and the Greater New York Hospital Association's $11.06 million in 2003 for lobbying on health care issues.

And the Jets spent almost $7 million in the fight, which is spilling into 2005 and resulting in even more lobbying fees.

Madison Square Garden retained 13 lobbyists to fight the stadium, including former U.S. Sen. Alfonse D'Amato and political strategist Arthur Finkelstein, who are close to Gov. George Pataki.

The Jets hired 12, including another former Pataki strategist, Kieran Mahoney, and former communications director Michael McKeon.

"When you're spending millions of millions of dollars it must be resulting in bone-crushing political pressure," said Horner.

Assemblyman Richard Gottfried and Sen. Thomas Duane, Democrats whose districts include the site of the proposed stadium, said TV ads run by both sides and other forms of lobbying are indeed causing a huge amount of interest, and they wondered whether campaign contributions will also be up because of the issue.

Both lawmakers oppose the Jets deal, which would require $300 million in state funding and an equal amount in New York City government funding, plus a $450 million loan from the city.

Gottfried said labor unions that help public officials get elected, and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg are advocating for the project.

"Of course, the city's lobbying efforts don't show up in lobbying reports," he said.

He said Cablevision is spending a fortune fighting the project, but if it didn't, the community would have been "steamrollered" by the Jets.

"That $30 million reflects the fact that this has become a major public issue," he said.

MSG also issued the largest single contracts, $1.16 million to Ask Public Strategies and the third-highest -- $394,936 to the Glover Park Group.

This was well above 2003's top contract of $360,000, given to Patricia Lynch Associates by Destiny USA.

Lynch received the same sum from the mall development company in 2004, but it rated fourth on the list.

"You'd be hard-pressed to find a legislator that hasn't had repeated contacts from both sides of this issue," said Assemblyman Michael Gianaris, D-Manhattan, a proponent of the Jets project.

Gianaris, a candidate for attorney general, said lobbying has been a growth industry in New York, and that's fine as long as people are expressing their First Amendment rights and it's all aboveboard.

Although overshadowed by the Jets fight, gambling and health care also were prominent lobbying issues.

The Oneida Indian Nation, represented by Lynch and others to fight attempts by out-of-state tribes to open casinos in the Catskills, spent $2.55 million last year.

Health and mental hygiene businesses, lumped together in one lobbying category, topped the list of spending among perennial Capitol issues at $18.76 million.

The leading lobbying firm overall continued to be Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, which received almost $6.7 million in contracts, compared with $5.22 million in 2003.

Greenberg Traurig grew the most, 208 percent, largely because it recruited a host of lobbyists, while Mercury Public Affairs, the firm that Mahoney and McKeon lead, grew 88 percent.

The Lynch firm, headed by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's former top aide, grew 43 percent.

And from George Pataki's corrupt Empire State of New York, we whisk ourselves some 3500 miles, give or take, to the westward, to America's second largest city, and LE VOILA!

The Mayor's race, which we have adopted as OUR race of the moment in here, precisely because of the "corruption" element similar to New York State's that is present therein!

Does corruption in government really matter to people, or are we all so jaded that it is just HO HUM, business as usual; gotta go along to get along, as they say down there with all of their various snouts in George Pataki's capital city of Albany, New York?

Stay tuned:

Top Stories - AP

"L.A. Mayor, Councilman Head to Runoff Race"

8 minutes ago

By MICHAEL R. BLOOD, Associated Press Writer

LOS ANGELES - Incumbent Mayor James Hahn survived a close call, making it into a May runoff against a Hispanic city councilman after the third-place candidate conceded defeat Wednesday.

The outcome of Tuesday's primary election sets up a rematch of the 2001 runoff, pitting Hahn, who has been weakened by corruption and other problems, against councilman Antonio Villaraigosa, who is seeking to become the first Hispanic to win the mayoralty in the nation's second-largest city in more than a century.

Nearly 24,000 absentee and other ballots remained to be counted, but candidate Bob Hertzberg trailed second-place Hahn by 5,800 votes, a margin his campaign concluded was too great.

"I called Mayor Hahn this morning and congratulated him on his victory," Hertzberg said during a morning news conference.

Delayed because of foggy weather, the vote tally had continued into early Wednesday.

In 2001, Villaraigosa, a high school dropout who went on to become speaker of the California Assembly, was also the top vote-getter in the primary, but he lost the runoff to Hahn, 53 percent to 46 percent.

With 99 percent of precincts reporting early Wednesday, Villaraigosa led with 124,561 votes, or 33 percent.

The mayor tallied 89,189 votes, or 24 percent, while Hertzberg, also a former Assembly speaker, had 83,420 votes, or 22 percent.

Villaraigosa would have had to get more than 50 percent to have won the election outright.

"People want a fresh start, they want to get traffic moving again, they want to address the challenges that we face," said the liberal Villaraigosa, who opened his runoff campaign Wednesday with a symbolic visit to the San Fernando Valley, where moderate-to-conservative voters snubbed him in 2001.

Election officials blamed the weather for unusually slow returns.

Evening fog forced organizers to abandon plans to use two helicopters to ferry returns to the city's downtown election center.

Instead, a fleet of cars was deployed.

No Los Angeles mayor has been bounced from office in more than 30 years.

Hahn, whose family has been active in Los Angeles politics since the 1940s, has been beset by the corruption allegations at City Hall and his own drab image in the most star-studded city in America.

Villaraigosa and Hertzberg had pounded Hahn over ongoing investigations at City Hall that centered on allegations that members of his administration traded city contracts for campaign donations.

The Los Angeles Times posted on its Web site results of an exit poll of 2,789 voters that found the investigations appeared to make a difference.

Nearly half of those surveyed said the corruption allegations affected their choice.

Running fourth in the counting was Councilman Bernard Parks, the black former police chief who was ousted in 2002 with Hahn's blessing.

The Times exit poll found that, as expected, Parks siphoned off significant black support from Hahn.

The race is non-partisan, and all four top candidates are Democrats.

Villaraigosa, 52, grew up in a broken home on the city's heavily Hispanic Eastside.

His up-from-the-barrio story defines his political image — the son of a Mexican immigrant who rose from a gritty neighborhood to the halls of power in Sacramento and Los Angeles.
___

On the Net:
Secretary of State: http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/elections.htm

from Michael's "Pinned" post:

If you can't or don't want to use paypal you can send a check or money order for $7.95 US payable to Common Ground Common Sense to the following address:

Common Ground Common Sense
330 9th St. E. #201E
St. Paul, MN 55101

FINALS ARE IN!


Villaraigosa, Hahn in Runoff; Hertzberg Concedes
By Michael Finnegan and Jeffrey L. Rabin
Times Staff Writers

11:14 AM PST, March 9, 2005

Antonio Villaraigosa and James K. Hahn opened round two of the Los Angeles mayoral election — and a rematch of their bitter fight for city's top job — when they emerged from the fog today as the top vote getters.

Bob Hertzberg, who had been competeing with Mayor Hahn for second place, conceded defeat today at his Encino headquarters.

"I called Jim Hahn and talked to him this morning and congratulated him on his victory," Hertzberg said at a news conference.

Hahn and City Councilman Villaraigosa face off May 17.

Councilman Bernard C. Parks, a former police chief, and state Sen. Richard Alarcon (D-Sun Valley) finished farther behind.

With 99% of the precincts reporting early today, Villaraigosa won 33% of the vote Tuesday. Hahn had 23.7% of the vote, compared with 22.1% for Hertzberg. More than 24,000 absentee and other votes were yet to be counted, but Hertzberg trailed by Hahn by 5,800 votes.

After a campaign that failed to generate much excitement among voters, the result was a cliffhanger that pushed the suspense into this morning.

Election returns were delayed because dense fog grounded the two helicopters set to fly ballots downtown from San Pedro and the far corners of the San Fernando Valley. By 10 p.m., city officials scrambled to get the ballots trucked in and the Hertzberg camp was objecting to their handling.

For the second time in four years, Villaraigosa, who captured 124,561 votes, came a step closer to his goal of becoming the city's first Latino mayor since the 19th century.

"Some have said that there's not the spark in this campaign," Villaraigosa told exultant supporters celebrating at the Henry Fonda Music Box Theatre in Hollywood. "Some have said that there's not the same kind of excitement around this agenda. But make no mistake about it. L.A. is ready and we're ready. … We're ready to not just do the small things."

Hahn, who defeated Villaraigosa in a bitter 2001 contest, struggled to avoid becoming the first incumbent ousted from City Hall since 1973 — and the first in 72 years to lose office after a single term.

"I wanted to come out here and thank you from the bottom of my heart," Hahn told backers gathered at the Conga Room, a Miracle Mile nightclub. "Thank you again for everything. It looks great, everybody."

Accompanied by his mother, Ramona Hahn, the mayor sang along to "I Love L.A."

Hertzberg, rallying supporters at the AirTel Plaza Hotel in Van Nuys, alluded to the drawn-out count. "It's going to be a long night," he said. "I'm told the fog in the Valley stopped the helicopters from flying in some of the votes."

The Times exit poll of 2,789 voters Tuesday found that Villaraigosa had succeeded in expanding the electoral base he built in the 2001 mayoral contest.

A city councilman and former Assembly speaker, Villaraigosa gained support among whites, Jews, blacks and Valley voters, while carrying the Latino vote by an overwhelming margin, as he did four years ago. His support grew across the length and breadth of the city. He carried the Westside and Central City neighborhoods by large margins and ran nearly even with Hertzberg in the Valley — and with Parks in South L.A.

By contrast, the Times survey found signs of trouble for Hahn.

The poll found that the criminal investigation of alleged corruption in Hahn's administration took a substantial toll. Nearly half of voters surveyed as they left the polls said the allegations played a role in their choice; of those, a solid majority voted for someone other than Hahn.

The poll also found a collapse in Hahn's support among African Americans, his most loyal voting bloc in 2001. Most black voters opted for Parks, an African American councilman whose ouster as police chief in 2002 many saw as betrayal by Hahn.

The election Tuesday set the stage for a 10-week campaign between the top two vote-getters. To win without a runoff, a candidate needed more than 50% of the vote.

Facing polls showing him statistically tied for the lead with Hertzberg and Villaraigosa, Hahn went on the attack last week in his television advertising, running a scathing spot denouncing them as "Sacramento politicians" beholden to campaign donors.

Hahn picked up that theme again Tuesday, signaling he would use it in a runoff.

"If one of those two guys is in the runoff, I think we will have a chance to really show the difference in leadership styles, that I was there fighting for Los Angeles, while they were busy doing things that caused problems for Los Angeles," he told reporters.

Hahn inherited the loyalty of many black voters from his late father, longtime county Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, who represented South L.A. for decades. But many felt deeply betrayed by the mayor's move the following year to oust Parks as police chief.

In the Valley, the mayor's battle against secession alienated many voters, who had overwhelmingly supported him in the 2001 runoff.

In this campaign, Hahn tried to turn his twin liabilities into assets. In one TV ad, he looked straight into the camera and told viewers his "tough decisions" were not politically popular but were "the right choices."

Yet polls found that Hahn's attempts at political recovery had minimal success. Parks consistently ran ahead of him among black voters, and both Hertzberg and Villaraigosa outpaced Hahn in the Valley.

In the end, Republican strategist Arnold Steinberg said, Hahn's effort to defeat Valley secession in 2002 has endured as a source of political grief. "No one in the Valley was happy with him," Steinberg said, "and no one else in the city gave him Brownie points and said, 'Isn't it great he held the city together?'"

Hahn was further weakened by the criminal investigation into alleged City Hall corruption.

The mayor has denied any misconduct, and no one in his administration has been charged with a crime. But three top officials resigned, a grand jury subpoenaed Hahn's personal e-mails, and a public-relations consultant to the city was indicted.

As Hahn's political troubles deepened, an unusually strong field of challengers emerged to exploit his vulnerabilities — and every one of them attacked his ethics.

Responding to the Hahn attack ad, Villaraigosa ran a spot in the campaign's final days featuring grainy images of the mayor speaking in slow motion and flashing headlines on the corruption probe.

"It's kind of been like a four-against-one thing from Day One," Hahn said Tuesday.

Villaraigosa and Hertzberg entered the race with an important edge: expertise in raising huge sums of campaign cash. As Assembly speaker, each was in charge of collecting millions of dollars to strengthen the Democrats' lock on the lower house of the Legislature.

Villaraigosa began with another advantage over a newcomer: a name familiar to voters citywide from his 2001 mayoral run.

Also, the scrutiny that he endured in that race — including an exhaustive airing by Hahn of Villaraigosa's attempt to win early prison release for a convicted drug trafficker — gave Villaraigosa a thorough public vetting that helped him stay focused on his own agenda.

"People see my face on TV and in the newspaper, and I think this time around there's just more familiarity and greater support," Villaraigosa said Tuesday.

But the pillars of his 2001 campaign — organized labor and the Democratic Party — opted not to back Villaraigosa this year. Most of the city's union leaders have shunned the former labor organizer in favor of Hahn, who marshaled the powers of incumbency to win their support. The party endorsed no one.

Hertzberg, a Sherman Oaks lawyer, started as an unknown to most Los Angeles voters, despite his six years in the Assembly.

In Sacramento, he was widely seen as a pro-business moderate when he led the Democrats' heavily liberal caucus. In the mayor's race, he positioned himself as the most Republican-leaning candidate.

To that end, he played up his friendship and political alliance with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican. Hertzberg also kept tightly focused on a campaign agenda designed to appeal to Republicans, such as his vow to break apart the Los Angeles Unified School District and hire 3,000 police officers without raising taxes.

In the campaign's final stretch, Schwarzenegger appeared with Hertzberg to support the candidate's school district breakup proposal. And former Mayor Richard Riordan, the governor's education secretary, campaigned frequently with Hertzberg, including a joint appearance Tuesday.

Part of Hertzberg's campaign strategy was to replicate much of the coalition that elected Riordan mayor in 1993, with appeals to Valley, Jewish, Republican, conservative and moderate white voters.

Hertzberg also distinguished himself with eye-catching television ads that showed him as a giant towering over the city as he recited highlights of his campaign platform and called for a mayor "who thinks big for a change," a backhanded slap at Hahn's low-key personality.

Parks, a freshman city councilman, consolidated a strong base of African Americans in South Los Angeles, in effect stalling Hahn's drive to regain support among black voters.

Alarcon, the first of the major candidates to announce he would challenge the mayor, framed his campaign largely as a bid to curb the influence of developers and big campaign donors at City Hall. He was hampered, however, by a shortage of money.


http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/elect...-home-headlines

Rather was no Cronkite, but he was a cut above the likes of Tom Brokenjaw, a man with ZERO news experience, other than reading it here in L.A. in the 60s to being a host on the "Tom and Jane Show," A.K.A. The Today Show, which is anything BUT news.

Jennings IS a newsman, and I suppose comes across well. But he's a CANADIAN for God's sake. Not that there is anything wrong with being a Canadian in general, but can't we have an AMERICAN anchoring the ABC news???


Ironically, the "incident" which felled Rather is so trivial compared to the perpetual Lying and Distorting which are the basic FORMAT of Faux News and, really CNN too when you get right down to it.

I won't miss Rather (mainly because I don't EVER watch the news on TV, and rarely even programs on TV), but I think he's going out on a bum rap.

jeffmoskin, you're a miracle worker here!

Did anyone ever tell you that?

I had not seen this, and did not know about it.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR INFORMING ALL OF US OF THIS ADDRESS.

I shall have my money order in the mail, today!

I won't "miss" him, either, as I simply do not watch TV, especially what is called by them, "THE NEWS"!

But I do have to agree with you on the "bum rap" aspect of this, as I was covering this "bit of news" on the John Kerry forum, and it got blown all out of proportion, by the Republicans, and in one hell of a hurry, to boot, with great effect, to cover over the fact that while the "memos" were not exactly originals, THEIR CONTENTS were accurate!

George W. Bush did not serve his time HONORABLY!

In fact, he didn't serve his time, and in the end, received a very questionable "honorable discharge", which likely could have been a result of being "DADDY's BOY", because it wasn't for doing the job he had signed up for.

But in my estimation, at least right where I was, this blunder by Rather et al was the straw that smashed John Kerry's back to smithereens.

The anger this story created was incredible, and it was real, tangible anger, where before there had been simply some doubts which were created by the lying, crying REPUBLICAN Swift Boat Boys.

The day this story broke, the alleged "forged" documents, I actually had people that I am friendly with climb right in my face as though I was the "perpetrator" of those alleged forged documents, and with the uproar, there was simply no way to get across the fact that the contents of the memos were factual.

Oh well.

One big botch job is how history is going to end up looking at that failed John Kerry campaign, and with that memo business linked to Terry McAuliffe, and the anger created by the whole thing, the Democrats are down in a real deep hole, and who knows if they will ever dig out again.

How did Forrest Gump say it: "Stupid is as stupid does?"

And thank you again, jeffmoskin for serving as our rov....., er, "man on the scene", out there in sunny Los Angeles, the fabled City of Angels, and for providing us with some insight into this mayoral race which I am finding interesting, well, just because .......

As Mr. A.B. mentioned in a post to Gabrielle, and "theorectically", at least, I have "known" this since my earliest days, having been brought up and educated here in the corrupt Empire State of New York, "corruption" is just something that is out there, like venereal disease, and fungus, and other vermin, AND we don't think about it, BECAUSE .......

It is not us doing it, and we really have no control over it, and so .....

And so, it continues on, and when the politicians think no one is watching, or will scream, they ratchet up the action a few notches, because what they had yesterday just won't suffice for today.

Case in point is that article on New York State "lobbying" or "influence peddling" above!

The area around the State Capitol in Albany, New York is nothing but one great big "RED LIGHT" district with OUR politicians out there doing their damndest to keep those red lights burning brightly 24/7, because if they don't "hustle", "take the pump", as it is called here, well, the geetus, the moolah, it will go to someone else, and so .....

And it is not often, at least outside of New York, where corruption is just so much a part of the fabric of politics that it is not talked about in the alleged "news media", that we see a race like this one WHERE corruption is being made an issue.

Now, I do not want to be a Pollyanna here, and think that this is a sign of hope for the future, because it might be nothing more than a smart political tactic on the part of Villaraigosa to focus people on the corruption, BUT ...

I still took it as a sign of hope where the people interviewed in the exit poll were TURNING AWAY FROM Hahn because of the corruption.

Here, in the corrupt EMPIRE STATE OF NEW YORK, I truly believe it would be the opposite, that the most corrupt guy, the one who could actually demonstrate AND PROVE that he was corrupt, usually the incumbent, HE WOULD HAVE THE PEOPLE BEHIND HIM, as they would hope for some crumbs falling from his plate, while with a challenger, especially a reform challenger, there would be no crumbs, and hence, no support.

Politics in my area is actually referred to in the local newspapers as "BLOOD SPORT"!

What was done to me was actually referred to "having some sport with the boy"!

And so it goes.

Why do I think I keep hearing this tiny voice in my ear: "GET OUT OF SODOM AND GOMORRAH, DO NOT LOOK BACK, GET OUT OF ......."

It sould be noted that 3 out of 4 Angelinos voted for someone OTHER than James Hahn.

There's a vote of no confidence for ya.

Yeah, right, indeed!

As this following story demonstrates:

Europe - AP

"Italy PM Disputes U.S. Version of Shooting"

Thu Mar 10, 2:48 AM ET Europe - AP

By ANGELA DOLAND, Associated Press Writer

ROME - Disputing Washington's version of events, Italy's premier said that an Italian intelligence agent who was shot to death by U.S. troops in Baghdad had informed the proper authorities that he was heading to the airport with a freed hostage.

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi also told lawmakers that the car carrying agent Nicola Calipari and a just-liberated hostage was traveling slowly and stopped immediately when a light was flashed at a checkpoint, before U.S. troops fired on the car.

Though the U.S. and Italian versions of what happened Friday do not match up, "I'm sure that in a very short time every aspect of this will be clarified," Berlusconi said.

The idea that Calipari was killed by friendly fire is painful to accept, the premier said.

But he reassured lawmakers: "The United States has no intention of evading the truth."

Berlusconi is a staunch supporter of President Bush and the U.S.-led campaign and has been struggling to balance his decision to keep 3,000 troops in Iraq against heavy anti-war sentiment in Italy.

The premier said Calipari had notified an Italian liaison officer, waiting at the Baghdad airport along with an American officer, that he was on his way with the freed hostage, journalist Giuliana Sgrena.

However, the top U.S. general in Iraq has said he had no indication that Italian officials gave advance notice of the route the Italians' car was taking.

In a statement released after the shooting, the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division, which controls Baghdad, said the vehicle was speeding and refused to stop.

The statement also said a U.S. patrol tried to warn a driver with hand and arm signals, by flashing white lights and firing shots in front of the car.

Berlusconi's 20-minute address did not mention whether ransom was paid to win Sgrena's release.

Some Italian officials have suggested a ransom was paid, but there has been no official confirmation.

Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini denied Wednesday that ransoms were paid for any Italian hostages.

"There has been no payment," he said, speaking during a talk show on RAI1 state television.

Berlusconi once again urged Italians in Iraq to leave.

"When Italian citizens have been victims of kidnappings, the government has always acted by following two directives: It has always rejected political blackmail while at the same time activating all the political, diplomatic and intelligence channels to obtain the release of our nationals," Berlusconi said.

Calipari was shot and killed as he headed to Baghdad's airport after securing the release of Sgrena, who had been kidnapped on Feb. 4.

Sgrena and another intelligence officer in the vehicle were wounded.

"The case of friendly fire is certainly the most painful to bear."

"It feels like an injustice beyond any sentiment."

"It's something unreasonable," Berlusconi said.

Photos aired by RAI, state TV's main evening news program, showed the light gray Toyota Corolla that Calipari and Sgrena were riding in, which is still in Iraq in the hands of the U.S. military.

The body of the car appeared to have little or no damage on its left side and front, including the lights.

A few bullet holes are visible on the right side — near the wheel and the front door.

Inside, the seats appear to be covered in glass, although the photos of the interior are grainy.

A bullet hole also is evident in the back seat on the left side, where Sgrena reportedly was sitting.

U.S. officials have said American troops fired at the car's engine to stop it.

Berlusconi's address was well received and lawmakers followed it with a standing ovation in Calipari's honor.

The office of Italian President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi said Wednesday that Bush had sent him a letter renewing a promise for a swift and thorough investigation.

In it, Bush called the shooting a "terrible tragedy" and expressed his solidarity, Ciampi's office said.

The U.S.-led coalition in Iraq announced Tuesday it was ordering an investigation into the shooting, to be led by a U.S. brigadier general with Italian officials' participation.

Berlusconi said he expected the joint commission to release its findings in three to four weeks.

end quotes

I HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN GEORGE W. BUSH!

RECALL GEORGE W. BUSH, FOR THE GOOD OF NOT ONLY OUR AMERICA, BUT OUR WORLD AS WELL!

PASS IT ON!

And here is a question for OUR rov ...., er, excuse me, again, OUR "man on the scene" in sunny, at least sometimes, LA, for we don't want jeffmoskin in any way, shape or manner associated with the name Karl Rove, the "SPEER", or "ARCHITECT" of the REPUBLICAN PARTY OF AMERICA AND ALL THE WORLD, AS WELL!

jeffmoskin, exactly what does happen now, out there in the "City of Angels", AFTER this May run-off?

Will there be yet another election, with a REPUBLICAN involved in it, or will the May election be the final one?

Un-confuse us, if you will, please!

The source I found is:

http://www.calpundit.com/archives/003220.html

It is still active.

In essence GWB was sent to an ARF unit. I can't post the graphics (or rather I don't know how) so here's the text:

February 08, 2004
ARF!....No, this is not the sound that Barney makes when the White House staff is late with dinner. Rather, it's the beginning of yet another intriguing mystery regarding George Bush's service in the Air National Guard. Read on for more.

To begin, you need to recall the original mystery of the "torn document" that purports to show Bush's guard activity in 1972 and 1973 (details here and here if your memory is fuzzy). Question: is the document genuine? Or some kind of clever forgery?

Answer: it's real. Here's the untorn version, as delivered to Bob Fertik in response to a FOIA request in late 2000:

-------------xerox copy of ARF points earned--------------------

As it turns out, though, we have traded one mystery for another. It's now clear that the document is genuine, but what exactly does it tell us? In particular:


The first listed date is October 29, not November 29 as we had theorized before. But George Bush was still in Alabama in October. What exactly was he getting attendance credit for?


This is neither a Texas Air National Guard document nor an Alabama document. What is it?


The answer, as you can see from the top line, is that it is an ARF document, as is this record from 1973-74. So what is ARF? I asked Bob Rogers, a retired Air National Guard pilot who's been following this for some time, and what follows is his interpretation of what happened.

ARF is the reserves, and among other things it's where members of the guard are sent for disciplinary reasons. As we all know, Bush failed to show up for his annual physical in July 1972, he was suspended in August, and the suspension was recorded on September 29. He was apparently transferred to ARF at that time and began accumulating ARF points in October.

ARF is a "paper unit" based in Denver that requires no drills and no attendance. For active guard members it is disciplinary because ARF members can theoretically be called up for active duty in the regular military, although this obviously never happened to George Bush.

To make a long story short, Bush apparently blew off drills beginning in May 1972, failed to show up for his physical, and was then grounded and transferred to ARF as a disciplinary measure. He didn't return to his original Texas Guard unit and cram in 36 days of active duty in 1973 — as Time magazine and others continue to assert based on a mistaken interpretation of Bush's 1973-74 ARF record — but rather accumulated only ARF points during that period. In fact, it's unclear even what the points on the ARF record are for, but what is clear is that Bush's official records from Texas show no actual duty after May 1972, as his Form 712 Master Personnel Record from the Texas Air National Guard clearly indicates:

----------------XEROX OF AIR FOrCE RETIREMENT STATEMENT---------

Bush's record shows three years of intense service, followed by a fourth year in which his enthusiasm apparently waned, followed by no service at all in his fifth and sixth years. This is because ARF duty isn't counted as official duty by the Texas guard.

So Bush may indeed have "fulfilled his obligation," as he says, but only because he had essentially been relieved of any further obligation after his transfer to ARF. It's pretty clear that no one in the Texas Air National Guard had much interest in pursuing anything more serious in the way of disciplinary action.

Can we confirm all this? Only if Bush is genuinely willing to release his entire service record, including the disciplinary action that presumably led to his transfer to ARF.

How about it, Mr. Commander-in-Chief? Will you release your full and complete service record, as you promised today on Meet the Press? Or were you just bluffing?

POSTSCRIPT: As always, any corrections, updates, or amplifications are welcome, especially from those with National Guard experience.

UPDATE: I see that I accidentally set off a storm by writing that ARF stands for "Army Reserve Force." This is almost certainly supposed to be "Air Reserve Force" and I've changed the text to remove the army reference. The overall point is to propose the theory that after missing drills and blowing off his physical, Bush was warned that he could be transferred to the reserves for 24 months as a disciplinary measure, the transfer probably happened around October 1972 when he began accumulating ARF points, and ended in November 1974.

The untorn version of the "torn document" is obviously a different copy and was obtained from the ARPC archives in Denver. The original torn document was found in Texas. There's nothing necessarily unusual about this, aside from the fact that the torn document designates Bush's unit as L9CHPY and the Denver version designates it as L9CMPY. I don't know if there's any significance to this.

Posted by Kevin Drum at February 8, 2004 06:59 PM | TrackBack




end of paste




so make of it what you will. Rather got busted on a technicality. The docs he put on TV WERE false -- the type font was wrong. But the information was essentially correct.

Forrest Gump was one smart cookie.

As a low-down-the-totem-pole grunt who voluntarily enlisted in the United States Army on the mistaken impression that OUR America was somehow threatened by a bunch of peasants in Viet Nam up-rising against a totally corrupt, American-puppet regime in Viet Nam, and as one who did serve his full time of commitment, with service in Viet Nam, and as one who did get an "HONORABLE DISCHARGE" for honorable service, I have my own thoughts on this whole matter of George W. Bush and his "SKATING", as "duty-slacking" was known back then, and maybe, just maybe, the very best thing for America's real fighting personnel in harm's way in Viet Nam back then WAS THAT GEORGE W. BUSH served his "time" NOT SERVING HIS TIME, AT ALL!

SLACKERS and SKATERS like George W. Bush serve no purpose in uniform other than to get other people killed!

And he is still doing it today!

Isn't that the truth!

A.B.

Everyone understands that burning wood produces fire.

But when fire feeds on fire, that is a rare condition that yields the greatest illumination.

Two flames come together and yield light more magnificent than either could have given forth alone.

In the case of community activity, this means that when one cooperates with others, the accomplishments are greater than what the individuals can do on their own.

Such a situation REQUIRES a harmony that will generate ideas, inspiration, as well as momentum for growth and action.

IF the combinations occur properly, the results will be like fire upon fire and will illuminate the world.

- Deng, Ming-Dao

end quotes

And Mr. A.B., America is lucky to have older people like you as its citizens, too!

ESPECIALLY IN HERE!

The wisdom gained by your long years on this earth of OURS is sorely needed today, and too often, is locked away in nursing homes, and others places where the elderly are locked and hidden away, out of sight, out of mind, so that we younger ones can continue to pretend that youth is eternal, here in somebody's America where youth is supposed to be eternal!

THE MONEY ORDER IS IN THE MAIL!

Life in OUR America will go on, hopefully, at least, presuming the HARD BOYS don't get me and nail me to a tree for not acknowledging George W. Bush as the SUPERMAN set down to guard over us by GOD, him or herself!

And thanks again, jeffmoskin, for posting this information in here for us duller folks who are subject to "information overload" in here, and so, might not see the trees for the forest!

And speaking of having no confidence whatsoever in George W. Bush:

Top Stories - The Christian Science Monitor

"War mistake tests Italy's patience"

Thu Mar 10, 9:33 AM ET

Italy and the US have agreed to a joint investigation of the death of an Italian agent who rescued a hostage.

By Sophie Arie, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

ROME - They've had the tears, the tributes, and the angry accusations.

Now, Italians want answers.

In an effort to solder their strained relations, the United States and Italy have agreed that they will join forces to investigate how an Italian intelligence agent was shot dead by American troops as he accompanied a rescued hostage, journalist Giulia Sgrena, to the Baghdad Airport last week.

Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi hopes the joint effort will soothe his country's raw emotions.

"We can be satisfied," Mr. Berlusconi said, according to La Repubblica newspaper.

"Because in this way [President] Bush has assumed responsibility for his friendship with me."

"He has done everything possible."

But for now, Italy - a close American ally that sent some 3,000 troops to Iraq - remains on edge, its pride dented by the wartime mistake.

Many here fear that justice will never be served.

The recent history of how US friendly-fire cases were resolved doesn't raise their hopes.

Justice served?

The death of Italian intelligence agent Nicola Calipari has revived anger over the way America dealt with its own soldiers who killed Italians by mistake in a much more clear-cut case in 1998.

In that incident, 20 people plunged to their deaths in an Italian ski resort when a low-flying US aircraft, on a military exercise from a nearby base, sliced a cable car from its cable.

Each of the four men manning the plane was initially charged with negligent homicide and involuntary manslaughter, but only the two men actually flying the plane were court-martialed.

During the course of the trial, it was found that the plane was flying at speeds in excess of 500 miles per hour - faster than military regulations allow - when it hit the cable car wire.

In the end, with a decision that enraged the Italian government, all serious charges against Capt. Joseph Schweitzer, the jet's navigator, who charted the low-flying mission, were dropped.

He was not tried for involuntary manslaughter or negligent homicide and found guilty only of obstruction of justice after it was discovered he and the pilot had destroyed a videotape recorded from the plane on the day of the accident.

The pilot, Capt. Richard Ashby, served six months in prison.

In more recent cases, involving other countries, America's attempts to do justice and pay compensation have fallen short of their victims' expectations.

Two US fighter pilots who mistakenly dropped a bomb on Canadian troops exercising in Afghanistan in April 2002, initially faced up to 64 years in prison for manslaughter and aggravated assault.

But Col. Patrick M. Rosenow, who presided over a nine-day investigative hearing in January 2003, concluded that although there was sufficient evidence to court-martial each pilot, criminal charges against them should be dropped.

In the end, Maj. Harry Schmidt was found guilty of dereliction of duty and docked one month's salary, about $5,600.

In other cases, such as the May 1999 bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade by US-led NATO forces, the US government agreed to pay $28 million to cover some of the reconstruction costs of the destroyed Chinese embassy, but Washington refused to term the payment as "compensation."

Each family of the three Chinese journalists killed in Belgrade received $1.5 million as "humanitarian assistance," according to Chinese sources.

In many cases of US military errors, critics say there is rarely any recognition of a failure high in the American command chain.

Technical glitches are identified or individual, junior soldiers are punished, usually lightly.

"At best, they will tell us a soldier from Tennessee made a mistake," said Bobo Craxi, the son of Italy's former Socialist Prime Minister Bettino Craxi, dismissing the investigations.

"In a lot of cases, victims are not satisfied," says Daniel Goure, vice president of the Lexington Institute, in Arlington Va.

"The cases that give the most pain are the ones where the military justice system appears not to punish."

"In a sense, the military justice system is biased, but in the same way that a judicial system is."

"There is a long tradition of this in military justice around the world, not just [US] military justice."

"You do not want a military man hesitating to fire because he's worried about the legal ramifications," he adds.

Italy is not the only country feeling uneasy as the American military investigates its own mistakes.

US friendly fire claimed the death of one Bulgarian soldier last week in Iraq.

US officials have pledged to investigate both incidents.

In Italy, which has troops in Iraq despite the fact that at least 60 percent of the population opposed the war, the death of Calipari has snowballed into a diplomatic stand-off.

Mr. Berlusconi is not likely to withdraw Italian troops in retaliation, but he is under pressure to demand answers from his US allies.

Tension is high because Italian and US officials offer competing versions of the accident.

US officials say the Italian authorities themselves may have played a part in the incident by failing to inform the US command in Baghdad of their movements.

George Casey, US chief of command in Baghdad, said the Italian government had not given the US advance warning about the convoy carrying Ms. Sgrena, the kidnapped journalist who was injured in the shooting.

"I personally do not have any indication of that, even on a preliminary basis," he said Tuesday.

Italy initially complained that its agent had been shot despite having notified CIA officials at Baghdad Airport.

Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini confirmed the incident had been an accident, but said Calipari's car had not encountered a US checkpoint on the airport road, it had not been driving at high speed, and US forces had not issued warnings before opening fire.

The US ambassador to Rome has met three times with Italian government officials to lay out the US assessment of the incident.

Italian media have published photos of the car showing eight bullet holes in front and side windows.

Sgrena has told local media that despite her suspicions of a deliberate attack she did not mean to say that American troops tried to kill her.

The incident has exposed the divide between the Italians and the Americans over policy on hostage taking.

While the US firmly opposed all form of negotiation, the Italians have secured the release of three female hostages in recent months, reportedly paying ransoms up to $8 million dollars.

Berlusconi insisted before parliament on Wednesday that the decision for a joint investigation was "of the utmost importance."

"I am sure that in a very short time every aspect of this affair will be clarified," he said.

Italian legislation makes it impossible for Italy to try those alleged to be responsible for acts committed against Italians in foreign territory.

Only a US tribunal can give final judgment.

With its judicial hands tied, the best the Italian government can do, according to Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini, is "demand that light be shed on points that are still unclear, identify those people responsible, if there are any, and ask that they be punished."

But many are skeptical that an Italian court would achieve a better result in such a highly politicized case.

Political pressure

"What people want is a major political admission of guilt," says Roberto Menotti, analyst at Rome's Aspen Institute.

"There is mounting pressure among US allies to find a way for independent tribunals to judge these cases."

But the US, he notes, opposes the International Criminal Court.

"The US is one of the few democratic countries in the world that does not accept the idea of supernational legal action," says Menotti.

"As long as America insists on judging itself, that is a problem for all of its allies."

end quotes

AS A LOYAL, PATRIOTIC, NATURAL-BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN, I HEREBY DISAVOW GEORGE W. BUSH AS MY LEADER, AS I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CONFIDENCE IN THE WORD OF GEORGE W. BUSH, OR THE INTEGRITY OF GEORGE W. BUSH, OR THE ALLEGED "CHRISTIAN NATURE" OF ANY ALLEGED ACTS OF TYRANNY AND OPPRESSION THAT GEORGE W. BUSH ALLEGEDLY COMMITS ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD IN THE NAME OF AMERICA!

RESTORE HONESTY AND INTEGRITY TO GOVERNMENT, HERE IN OUR AMERICA!

RECALL GEORGE W. BUSH!

QUOTE(Livyjr @ Mar 8 2005, 08:28 AM)

As a natural-born American who was brought up in what was a part of the cradle of this nation's founding as an independent sovereign nation on this earth of OURS, as one who has studied OUR history as a nation from the time of my youth, as one who volunteered to fight for America in the Viet Nam war, as one twice-wounded in combat in that war, as one who served honorably as an enlisted soldier in OUR American military, and as one who rose through the ranks based upon knowledge and proficieny and honorable service, it is very difficult for me to put into words exactly how sick and disgusted this business with this Italian case makes me feel, especially coming as it does on the heels of what has been one major cock-up and dog's dinner over there in Iraq right from the get-go!

WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE DOING IN IRAQ, KILLING PEOPLE?

WHAT?

Because it makes George W. Bush "feel like a man"?

It gives him a sense of power?

It "turns him on"?

Gets him kind of breathing fast and makes him .......?

I wonder, when I read these stories, how many people fail to see what is right before their eyes here, and probably, just about everybody, is what I would say.

WHY?

Why do people fail to see?

Well, because while it might be apparent to me, unless you have "been in the game", as armed combat is called, or known by, then the obvious just might not be obvious, at all.

I am not at all proud of it, and rarely do I ever mention it, and I never brag on it, and I had hoped a long time ago to never have to think on it ever again, BUT .....

I rode in the "GOD SEAT" myself for a stretch of time as an aerial sniper in Viet Nam, flying at night over "kill zones" or "FREE-FIRE ZONES" in Viet Nam with a starlight scope-mounted M-14 rifle, and my job was to blow people clean away, FOR GOD AND COUNTRY, until the perverted nature of the whole thing made me so sick that I quit and walked away, never to use a projectile weapon in a hostile manner ever again.

And so, from that perspective, having been a "technician", or "mechanic", or just plain killer, however anyone wants to have it, because they are all the same, I look at this incident with this Italian man, and from what I read, this stinks!

To high heaven.

Now, was it just "sport-shooting", where you are simply bored and kill the next person in sight?

Or was it a planned execution?

Or could it really have been, as the Bush Co. would have us believe, an accident?

Well, let's take a look!

Let's do some "forensics" of OUR own, here, in the interests of justice and "solidarity" with OUR allies, the Italians, OR ARE THEY REALLY ONLY GEORGE W. BUSH'S ALLIES?

After all, we have all the evidence we really need to have here, right before OUR eyes, in these news clips above, which are neither "hallucinations" of mine, nor "inventions" of mine, nor "deluded thinking" on my part, or whatever other excuses or smears or slimes White House SMOKESCREENPERSONS Scotty "BOY" McClellan or this Dan Bartlett, whoever he really is, would heap on me for questioning exactly what we are doing over there in IRAQ?

For the opening of OUR AMERICAN CITIZEN'S INQUEST, which we can do, as American citizens, question the actions of OUR government, let us go to EXHIBIT No. 1, which is the top news story in this "Daisy Chain" of news stories above here, and look at this one sentence:

"Meanwhile, an autopsy performed on the agent who died trying to save Giuliana Sgrena reportedly showed he was struck in the temple by a single round and died instantly as the car carrying Sgrena sped to the Baghdad airport."

SO!

Hhhhhmmmm.

Any thoughts, anyone?

Any "shooters" or "hunters" out there, perhaps?

If so, what do any of you make of this, BECAUSE TO ME, a former sniper, this is pretty good shooting.

ONE SHOT, ONE KILL!

A motto, by the way, and if you don't believe me, find a Marine sniper and ask him, see what he will say, if you can find one who will talk, that is.

AND HERE, I DO NOT MEAN TO STATE OR IMPLY THAT A MARINE ACTUALLY DID THIS, NOT AT ALL!

In fact, by all accounts, it was a soldier from the Army, not a Marine from the Marines, who did the shooting, for Marines are not soldiers, and soldiers are not Marines, despite the fact that the news media is always "interchanging" the two terms, and if the twain meet out on a street somewhere, or in an airport rest room, odds are a fight will be the result, but not always.

And I digress again, which is an admitted bad habit of mine, but I am old, and boy, do we ever wander around in our minds, us doddering old fools who inhabit "Life in OUR America" as our "refuge" from the frantic pace of life, OUT THERE, especially on that airport road over there in Baghdad, Iraq.

Back to the INQUEST!

So!

Exhibit 1 is that the man died instantly from a single round catching him right square in the temple!

Does everybody know where their "temple" is?

Can everyone point to their temple for a moment, and while doing so, ponder just how big an area your "temple" really is, and then, HOLD THAT THOUGHT, for a moment, BECAUSE .....

NOW HOW ABOUT THAT FOR ONE REAL LUCKY "WILD SHOT", WILL YOU, RIGHT IN THE TEMPLE!

BAAANG!

And the Italian man is GONE!

One shot, one kill!

POOF!

NEXT TARGET!

Which brings us to EXHIBIT 2 from that March 10, 2005 article above entitled "Italy PM Disputes U.S. Version of Shooting":

"Photos aired by RAI, state TV's main evening news program, showed the light gray Toyota Corolla that Calipari and Sgrena were riding in, which is still in Iraq in the hands of the U.S. military."

"The body of the car appeared to have little or no damage on its left side and front, including the lights."

"A few bullet holes are visible on the right side — near the wheel and the front door."

"Inside, the seats appear to be covered in glass, although the photos of the interior are grainy."

"A bullet hole also is evident in the back seat on the left side, where Sgrena reportedly was sitting."

"U.S. officials have said American troops fired at the car's engine to stop it."

end quotes

SO!

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, what we have here to consider, in light of the evidence before us in Exhibit 1, is this single statement, as follows:

"U.S. officials have said American troops fired at the car's engine to stop it."

SO!

Okay!

LET US NOT BE HASTY, HERE!

LET US NOT RUSH TO JUDGMENT!

Let us be calm and rational, and look at this statement on its face, for a moment, here.

IF we are to believe this U.S. OFFICIAL, THEN .....

OUR troops were firing at the engine of this car, and okay, let us buy that line of reasoning for a moment!

After all, we ARE all adults, here, I think anyway, and we are ALL PATRIOTS, and LOYAL AMERICANS ALL, so .......

WHERE EXACTLY IS THE ENGINE OF A LIGHT GREY TOYOTA COROLLA LOCATED?

AND ....

Is it bigger than a breadbox?

Can you fit it in the palm of your hand?

IS THE ENGINE OF A LIGHT GREY TOYOTA COROLLA SMALLER, OR BIGGER, THAN THE HUMAN TEMPLE?

Or do we need to call in some kind of team of experts here, including government scientists, and government engineers, and of course, government technicians and mechanics, BECAUSE, AFTER ALL, the light grey Toyota Corolla just might be a statistical anomoly, and it could have been one of those alleged "SUPER TOYOTAS" with the alleged new micro-miniaturized ATOMIC PROPULSION UNIT so small it cannot possibly be seen, WHICH WOULD EXPLAIN, THEN, HOW AN AMERICAN SOLDIER COULD HAVE PUT ONE ROUND RIGHT CLEAN THROUGH THIS GUY'S HEAD, BECAUSE .....

If the engine of the light grey Toyota Corolla was really that small, why, the confusion it would cause to someone trying to put a bullet into it, INSTEAD OF INTO THE TEMPLE OF A MAN'S HEAD!

Yeah, right!

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I think we have hit on the answer here, and so, let's just disband this INQUEST, and go with what the GOVERNMENT SMOKESCREENPERSONS are saying: THE ITALIAN GUY DID IT TO HIMSELF!

Yes, that has to be it!

LE VOILA!

He shot himself!

In the thick of things, why, he just got confused, and excited, and angry, of course, everybody knows just how voluable and excitable those Italians can be, and he pulled out an American rifle, oh, you know how sneaky they are, those Italians, everyone a Mafia, every single one, and with that American rifle, why the guy shot himself right in the temple, and then to make George W. Bush look bad, the woman was a COMMIE, after all, why, they threw the American rifle away before anyone could see it, and now, BECAUSE the Italian people do not like George W. Bush, they are jealous of him, and all that stuff, well, they are trying to make an international incident out of this, AND AS LOYAL AMERICANS, WE JUST CANNOT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN!

Nuke Italy!

Nuke Italy!

NUKE THEM ALL AND LET GOD SORT THEM OUT!

Dismissed!

Thank you for your service to your country!

And now, just go home!

If you know what is good for you, just go home, lock the doors, pull the shades, ask no questions, do not think, do not think, do not think .............

We will make sure to keep those HARD BOYS away from you. But just to be safe, stay away from trees.

I think that was an incredible act of bravery, Livyjr. While I have never been faced with those kinds of decisions, I think that, at the age of....what? 21 or 22? you "figured it all out" and lay down your sword and shield.

Gonna study war no more.

Bravo!


Bravo!

Stay away from trees?

My God, man, I live in the woods!

OH NO!

Run, Livyjr, RUN!

Oh well!

And good morning, America, hope all is well with you today.

As for me, I just opened my e-mail, and there was something sent in to me concerning the American Flag, and in an "essay" contained therein, some pundit was going on about how he believes that anyone who wants to burn the American Flag CAN DO SO, but only with the permission of a veteran, and when I read that I wrote back as follows:

"I'm a war veteran, and anyone who wants to burn the American flag has my permission, BECAUSE nowhere in the First Amendment does it say that you have to get anyone's "permission" to exercise the rights enumerated in the First Amendment, which is what I was fighting for, and kindly tell this a*****e that for me, thank you!"

SO?

What is it with people in this country, that they get more rights than other people?

In a land of liberty and justice for all, how come some can have a lot less, or none, and others can have a whole lot, without any responsibilities attached thereto?

Why should I, a veteran of combat, GET TO SAY what someone else can or cannot do, or say?

How does, or how would my status as a veteran confer upon me what would in essence be a "SUPER RIGHT" over someone else, and how would that SUPER RIGHT given to me, by this essay writer, not serve to strip liberty from another?

And when that can happen, "mob-o-cracy", or "mob rule" to the passion of the moment, for all practical purposes, is it still a democracy?

Or is it an idle question, because God really gave us democracy, whether we deserved it or not, and that giving was so strong that it can never be shaken, or taken from us, even though we abuse democracy ourselves and totally ignore what it really is supposed to mean, as does this "essay writer" who is propounding this theory of veterans having a say over what can be the First Amendment rights of others in this nation who might choose to have a position contrary to that of the veteran, or mine, especially about the American Flag?

Last night, after I checked out of here in virtual reality, and went back out into real reality, up here in the corrupt Empire State of New York, where it has been quite cold, incidentally, or relatively cold, anyway, since zero fahrenheit won't really freeze your gizzards to a solid block of ice in an instant, as is rumored, ALLEGEDLY, in some of the warmer states of the Union, I sat for a while with a younger American, and we discussed this Calipari case, where the Italian man, a "negotiator" was shot in the temple on the road coming out of the Baghdad Airport, which under this Bush Co. administration, is one of the most dangerous roads in the world, thanks to him and his ineptness and his inability to make anything at all safe for anyone, EXCEPT HIS FAT-CAT FRIENDS, who he has made SAFE FROM THE OPERATION OF LAW, on them!

This young person works hard and so, in his own words, does not have time for the news, which I certainly can understand, and so, he had not heard of this Calipari case above.

When I asked him if he knew of it, or had heard of it, his interest became piqued, and so, I basically read off for him from my mind what I had posted above, which is a summary of the news items on that shooting.

When I got done recounting the "evidence", his thought, like mine, was that was this some damn fine shooting, a "SIGNATURE SHOT", and here, it must be said, that this young man, a "country boy", is one damn fine shot himself, and if you have doubts about that, have the Quinnipeac pollsters do a poll among the white tail deer population in this are ....

But again, I digress.

I told him about asking people to point to their own temples, and I asked him, how big a target is the human temple, and his answer came back right away, "ABOUT AS BIG AS THE TIP OF YOUR FINGER!"

Which is exactly true!

SO!

Here is the scenario as the Bush Co. SMOKESCREENPERSON'S would have it:

a) the car is speeding;

b) our troops panic;

c) they try to shoot out the engine of the car, completely missing, of course any area of the car where the engine is located; and

d) tragically, the Italian "negotiator" is shot right in the temple, which removes any doubts whatsoever as to whether or not he will survive that shot, and so, will ever again get to negotiate with a "TAY-RIST" on George W. Bush's list of people that he does not like, and so, would have tortured, and then killed, SO THAT ALL THE CANDID WORLD WILL KNOW JUST HOW EXTREMELY AWESOME THIS BUSH CO. REALLY IS, AND HOW MUCH GOD LOVES HIM, FOR THAT!

AN ACCIDENT, says Bush Co.!

OH, how tragic.

As for me, I think that is B** S***!

Somebody "popped" that Italian, and left their "AUTOGRAPH" on that guy's head, in a very public way, for all the candid world to see!

No more negotiating with the enemies of George W. Bush by that Italian boy, at least with that head!

There's the message to me, anyway.

If that guy was negotiating with "TAY-RISTS" to get hostages released, THEN HE WAS THE ENEMY of George W. Bush, and to me, George W. Bush has made it clear many, many times what happens to those who are not with him - they are the enemy, and George W. Bush stomps his enemies, so long as he has enough of his friends around to hold down the victim, for George to do his work.

And consider this, IF THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT, IF THE TROOPS WERE REALLY FIRING AT THE ENGINE OF THE CAR, THIS IS SOME OF THE MOST EXECRABLE MILITARY MARKSMANSHIP THAT I HAVE EVER HEARD OF, which, of course, might not surprise me, since everything this Bush Co. touches seems to have an air of incompetence attached to it, and so, if he has turned OUR military into a gang of thugs who cannot hit the broad side of a barn, or the engine of a car, well, HOW TYPICAL, folks, how typical!

SO!

Two choices!

If our troops are not incompetent marksmen, then this was a planned execution or a sport shooting.

If our troops ARE INCOMPETENT MARKSMEN, then they are made in the mold of THEIR Commander-in-Chief, in which case it is no wonder that after all this time, we are still mired down over there in Iraq!

IS THERE A THIRD OPTION?

HAVE I FAILED TO SEE SOMETHING HERE?

Questions for OUR times!

Live!

Details as they happen!

Life, in OUR America!

Well, I for one am not with him. I fear that in his small mind that means I'm with the Tay- rists.

I'll wear my hard hat when I go outside.

And here, I am at one of those "places", a kind of "virtual" crossroads, or intersection, where I wonder where to go next.

If, for example, I were to continue to talk about corruption up here in the corrupt Empire State of New York, I could probably bury everybody here in virtual reality with details of that, because in real life up here, we are buried by details of that each day, without having to do any digging at all, BUT ....

My purpose is not to be lurid, and so, I am not going to talk about corruption in the corrupt Empire State of New York, at least not right now, as it serves no purpose to merely point at it, right now, without having a "greater context" to attach it too, such as corruption, incompetence, and ineptness in OUR America, right from the TOP right on down to the local dog catcher, thanks to Bush Co. and his pack of REPUBLICANS, who up here in the corrupt Empire State of New York can be told out from the general populace since they started getting all those extra arms surgically grafted on to their bloated and distended bodies, kind of like that one guy in the "STAR WARS" movie, JABBA the HUT, maybe; so that they can rake in the graft all that much faster, and since they have started getting all the extra "SNOUTS" surgically grafted onto their heads so that they can empty the "TROUGH" of swill all that much faster, and efficiently!

NO, my path really is kind of divided between talking about the subject of "law and order" today, or the lack of it in OUR America, thanks to this Bush Co. being soft on crime, especially corporate crime, or OUR own history, vis-a-vis "STANDING ARMIES" among civilian populations, and what used to be OUR national revulsion at that concept!

And really, what I am talking about is CITIZENSHIP and PATRIOTISM, AMERICAN-style!

IS GEORGE W. BUSH, BY HIS ACTIONS, BOTH UN-AMERICAN, AND UN-PATRIOTIC?

And is it un-American to ponder that question?

And here, my answer is NO!

In fact, it is un-American TO NOT PONDER THAT QUESTION, when the "evidence" of OUR senses tells us something just is not right here, with what this man is doing, not only here in OUR America, but in the world, as well.

IF YOU HAVE THIS STINK OF EXCREMENT CONTINUALLY IN YOUR NOSTRILS, MIGHT IT NOT BE A BED OF ROSES THAT YOU ARE STANDING NEAR?

Might it in fact be something else, like a running sewer, and if so, DOES BEING AN AMERICAN THEN ATTACH ANY RESPONSIBILITIES TO US, to act to remedy that condition?

Or should we all just scuttle away and hide?

Or simply quit in disgust, as I feel like doing, every now and then, to be truthful!

Should we be "GOOD AMERICANS" these days in the exact mold of the "GOOD GERMANS" in Germany in the 1930's and early 1940's, EIGHTY MILLION or so of whom did not question what their "government" was up to, and in fact, according to an old friend of mine who fought his way across Germany as a soldier in the famed 82nd Airborne, ALL had pictures of THEIR FEARLESS LEADER displayed in a very prominent place in their homes, just in case the local Gestapo or HITLER HARD BOYS paid a surprise visit, to see what their "thoughts" were that day?

SHOULD WE BE MINDLESS?

MUST WE BE MINDLESS?

It is safe, of course, to be so, and George W. Bush would like it to be so, and Karl Rove and the REPUBLICANS want it to be so, and their HARD BOYS will have it be so, AND SO .......

WE SHOULD BE, MINDLESS, THAT IS, IF WE KNOW WHAT IS GOOD FOR US .....

But then, what if some little nagging voice, at least in us older Americans, keeps saying "HEY, WAIT A DAMN MINUTE HERE, BEING MINDLESS IS ABOUT AS UN-AMERICAN AS YOU CAN GET!"

What then?

What do we do?

If being "mindless" in America today is safe, and if acting as if America were still a democratic Republic is very dangerous these days, then WHAT TO DO?

That's the "chat" in here, folks, and it is dangerous "chat", indeed, and make absolutely no mistake about that!

In terms of "FREE RESPONSIBLE SPEECH ON ISSUES OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE TO US IN AMERICA", these are the most dangerous times that I have experienced in nearly sixty years of existence, here in OUR America, and I wonder at that, I really do!

WHERE, OH WHERE, HAS AMERICA GONE TO HIDE, AND WHY?

The question of the hour!

Life, in OUR America!

What is it?

Who has it?

Who controls it?

And how, and why!

Stay tuned!

ME, TOO, jeffmoskin!

And make sure to keep your temples covered, both of them, AT ALL TIMES!

Don't want a HARD BOY's "autograph" on your head, now do you?

ONE SHOT, ONE KILL!

And another "ENEMY" of George W. Bush BITES THE DUST, and you know what, the whole country of Italy is powerless to do a thing about it.

NOW, what are there, only several BILLIONS in the world left to be "PUT DOWN HARD", to make the world safe for George W. Bush and his REPUBLICAN ilk?

Starting with us?

I don't think there's much you fail to see, Livyjr.

You see it ALL.

That may not be a good thing because you and I and most of America are powerless to do much of anything about correcting the slow but sure bringing down of all we have ever thought of the goodness of America.

But if all we can do is to write about it and tell others what we see, that is what we should do, and you are doing it, and doing it very well.

Somehow, I believe the situation has become what it is because those in power were able to effectively do the one thing that they had to do.

And that one thing is -----

They accomplished the " dumbing down " of the citizenry.

Through sweet sounding words, lofty promises, associating patriotism with non dissent, continuing to hammer the message " We are making progress ", " we're doing this there so we don't have to do it here ", and so on, and so on, ad nauseum.

People's minds have begun to believe " That must be right "

How could a man who tells us he reads his Bible every day, not be telling us the truth?

" Democracy is taking hold in the Middle East. "

In a pig's ear, it is.

It wouldn't take much to push Lebanon into another civil war.

The same could happen in Iraq.

In regards to the two assassinations which have happened recently, I use the word assassination because that's what they were, I keep going back to just one premise.

Who would gain?

In the case of Prime Minister Hairiri of Lebanon -- who gained by his death?

Was it Syria? They surely knew it would cause an uprising in Lebanon.

The other entities are involved are :

The Lebanese Government.

Israel.

The U.S.

Frankly, I have no idea who was behind this.

I also wonder how thorough of an investigation we are going to get.

The other assassination, the Italian Journalist.

Who would gain by her death.

The terrorists?

Not likely, they had just released her.

The interim Iraqi Gov't?

The Americans?

I copy the same sentence I used above.

I also wonder how thorough of an investigation we are going to get.

These are very tough times , Livyjr, for all of us who care about our country.

I know for sure the same two things I stated before.

1. What goes around comes around.

2. Never give up.

A.B.

GESTAPO: Geheime Staats Polizei.

A secret-police organization operating ESPECIALLY AGAINST persons suspected of treason or sedition and often employing underhanded and terrorist methods.

SEDITION: Communication or agreement which has as its objective the stirring up of treason or certain lesser commotions, or the defamation of the government.

Sedition is advocating, or with knowledge of its contents, knowingly publishing, selling or distributing ANY document which advocates, or, with knowledge of its purpose, knowingly becoming a member of any organization which advocates the overthrow OR REFORMATION of the existing form of government of this state BY VIOLENCE or UNLAWFUL MEANS.

An insurrectionary movement tending towards treason, but wanting an overt act.

Attempts made by meetings or speeches, or by publication, to disturb the tranquillity of the STATE.

TREASON: A breach of allegiance to one's government, usually committed through levying war against such government, or by giving aid or comfort to the enemy.

The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance; or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power.

Treason consists of two elements: adherence to the enemy, and rendering him aid and comfort.

A PERSON CAN BE CONVICTED OF TREASON ONLY ON THE TESTIMONY OF TWO WITNESSES, OR CONFESSION IN OPEN COURT!

Article III, section 3, UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!

From Black's Law Dictionary

A question, then, IF George W. Bush is acting in a manner inimicable to the provisions of the United States Constitution, and thus allegedly could be considered a "DOMESTIC ENEMY" of the United States Constitution, IS IT TREASON TO AID AND ABET HIM, OR IN ANY WAY, GIVE HIM COMFORT IN THE ALLEGED DOING-SO?

Matthew Lyon

http://www.famousamericans.net/matthewlyon

LYON, Matthew, politician, born in County Wicklow, Ireland, in 1746; died in Spadra Bluff, Arkansas, 1 August, 1822.

He emigrated at the age of thirteen to New York, and, as he was unable to pay for his passage, the captain of the ship, in accordance with the custom of the time, assigned him for a sum of money to a farmer in Litchfield county, Connecticut, in whose service he remained for several years.

He then became a citizen of Vermont, and in July, 1776, was commissioned as lieutenant in a company of "Green Mountain Boys."

In the latter part of the same year he was cashiered for deserting a post on Onion river, but subsequently served as commissary-general, and eventually became colonel of militia.

He was made deputy secretary in 1778, and subsequently clerk of the court of confiscation.

After the war he settled in Vermont and was elected to the state legislature, where he served for four successive years.

He founded the town of Fair Haven, Vermont, in 1783, built saw-mills and grist-mills, established an iron-foundry, manufactured paper from bass-wood, and issued a Democratic newspaper entitled "The Scourge of Aristocracy, and Repository of Important Political Truth," of which the types and paper were manufactured by himself.

He represented Fair Haven in the legislature for ten years, and in 1786 was assistant judge of Rutland county court.

He married a daughter of Governor Thomas Chittenden, became an active political leader, and was elected to congress by the anti-Federal party, serving from 15 May, 1797, till 3 March, 1801.

In October, 1798, he was indicted in Vermont for writing for publication a letter calculated "to stir up sedition and to bring the president and the government of the United States into contempt."

He was convicted, confined for four months in the Vergennes jail, and fined $1,000, which was paid by his friends.

Mr. Lyon is said to have revenged his wrongs by giving the decisive vote for Jefferson.

While in prison he was re-elected to congress, and after the expiration of his term removed to Kentucky, where he established the first printing-office, transporting the type on horseback across the mountains.

He served two years in the Kentucky legislature, and was elected to congress from that state, serving from 17 October, 1803, till 3 March, 1811.

After his final retirement from congress the speaker of the house presented his petition to have the fine refunded to him that he had paid in Vermont, and on 4 July, 1840, an act was passed paying the sum to his heirs with interest.

He was employed to build a fleet of gun-boats for service in the war of 1812, but was made bankrupt by his attempt.

In 1820 he was appointed a United States factor among the Cherokee Indians in Arkansas, removed to that territory, and was elected its first delegate to congress, but did not live to take his seat.

A sketch of his life was published by Pliny H. White, of Vermont, in 1858.

Edited Appletons Encyclopedia, Copyright © 2001 VirtualologyTM

Just thought of one more item which I read in the paper yesterday., and which I intended to put in my post above.

Another country getting very annoyed with our president telling them how to live.

Egypt.

Whether you like them or not, they have been supportive and helpful to us.

Now they are getting a little edgy with our constant " holier than thou "attitude.

A.B.

I think the whole wide world is, and here, I would make one small correction, with respect to "OUR" holier-than-thou attitude.

Make it OUR minus me.

Actually, make it the "holier-than-thou" attitude of JUST George W. Bush and his, and that will be right on point!

The whole wide world is just plain sick and tired of George W. Bush and his crowd's "HOLIER-THAN-EVERYBODY,-INCLUDING-GOD" attitude, and with good reason!

As for me, here is this guy, the poor little rich boy, who was irresponsible a good part of his early adult life; who did not finally crawl out of a bottle until he was forty, who is now going around making out to everybody under the sun that he is the image of perfection down here on earth, above and beyond everybody else, because in his mind, Jesus saved him from being a drunk!

Wel, get real, George!

I'm glad for you that at age forty, YOU finally saw the light and got religion, and so quit being a mean, nasty drunk who spit tobacco juice on fancy, country-club women's purses, or shoes, BUT GUESS WHAT?

All that makes you is human, not perfect!

So get down off the high horse, please!

On behalf of what would be an extremely grateful nation and world if you did!

What goes around does come back, big time, and boy, don't be standing at ground zero when the s*** hits the fan.

If I learned one thing in Viet Nam, IT IS THAT!

And you have raised some interesting points, here, Mr. A.B., and I think they really need to be addressed, because the question "CUI BONO" really needs to be addressed, and then answered, and my money is on that there won't be an investigation at all.

WHO CAN MAKE ONE HAPPEN?

The Italians?

The can't do ****, if you'll pardon the grossness of the expression.

AND WHAT IS THERE TO INVESTIGATE, really?

The Italian guy, the NEGOTIATOR, is dead from a bullet hole in his temple!

The Italians say the car was stopped.

The woman says the driver was yelling that they were Italians.

Now, it would seem that when the driver started yelling, that the rifles were already raised, and the firing either had started, or was about to start, and he would be the very first to know that, since they were aiming at him, AND it is quite obvious and apparent if you have ever seen it, or ever had it done to you.

As if back in WWII, Mr. A.B. you could not possibly have known that a Japanese plane that you could clearly see with your own eyes was coming in low over the trees to either bomb you, or strafe you.

By this "OTHER" theory of the Bush Co.'s, PERHAPS that Japanese plane was really coming in low over the trees towards your position, BECAUSE some of your personal mail had somehow, through a post office error, been diverted to Tokyo, and in the interests of international friendship and solidarity and brotherhood, they wanted to re-unite you with your mail in the quickest way possible, which of course, would be by fighter plane delivery, since they were so fast.

Isn't it just ridiculous on its face?

In any event, the driver seems to have known that they were in for it, BUT ...

That person's full testimony SHOULD BE brought out in the open for ALL the candid world to hear, since this is a very serious matter, and IT CANNOT JUST BE COVERED OVER TO PROTECT PEOPLE IN HIGH PLACES, which is business as usual, especially in this case, in light of the words of this Doctor Daniel Goure, vice president of the Lexington Institute, in Arlington Va., where he says:

"The cases that give the most pain are the ones where the military justice system appears not to punish."

"In a sense, the military justice system is biased, but in the same way that a judicial system is."

"There is a long tradition of this in military justice around the world, not just [US] military justice."

"You do not want a military man hesitating to fire because he's worried about the legal ramifications," he adds.

end quotes

To be very truthful, AS A DISABLED COMBAT VETERAN, and as a natural-born American citizen, I find these words to be extremely offensive!

We had a Revolution against English tyranny BECAUSE English military justice was very biased, against us, as were the King's courts, all of which is to be found in the language of OUR Declaration of Independence.

I was in the United States Army, and I know that in the very first days of my training, I was in fact schooled in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as were all the others in my training brigade, and we were taught that the United States Military Justice system WAS NOT BIASED, nor should ever become so!

As an enlisted soldier, I could have sat at some point as the jury for a court martial of an enlisted man who had requested enlisted men on his jury, and so, it was very serious business indeed.

And before you could even become an American soldier, you had to have had a minimum high school education, and you had to know about OUR system of justice on the civilian side, WHICH IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE BIASED!

As a trained American soldier, YOU KNEW THE LAW AT ALL TIMES, and before you ever pulled the trigger, YOU ALWAYS KNEW YOUR TARGET WAS "LAWFUL", so what crap is it that this GOVERNMENT CONSULTANT is peddling here, with this statement "You do not want a military man hesitating to fire because he's worried about the legal ramifications!"

What ABSOLUTE SEDITIOUS CRAP is this that is contrary, totally contrary, to everything that I learned in my life, both as an American citizen, and as a member of this nation's armed forces.

AS A MEMBER OF THE UNITED STATES MILITARY, THERE IS NEVER A MOMENT WHEN YOU ARE NOT THINKING ABOUT THE LEGAL RAMIFICATIONS OF YOUR ACTIONS, EVER!

SO!

What kind of murdering thugs who don't have worry about the legal ramifications of their actions are these GOVERNMENT CONSULTANTS planning to turn OUR American military forces into, and for what agenda?

As an American soldier, I was trained as to what differentiates an American soldier from any other soldier in the world, and it is that the American soldier is always a "CITIZEN SOLDIER", volunteer or not.

We fight for OUR liberty, while soldiers of other nations fight for Monarchs, or totalitarian governments, or such.

Now, I hear the GOVERNMENT CONSULTANT talking in such a way that makes it sound as if OUR soldiers of today are enemies of liberty, AND BY DESIGN, and that to me is sedition and treason!

Serious business, indeed, Mr. A.B., serious business, indeed.

In fact, when OUR military oath was explained to us, especially the part about domestic enemies of the United States Constitution, it was explained to us that the ONLY WAY the United States could ever be defeated would have to be from within, from someone, or a group of someones, SUBVERTING OUR GOVERNMENT, which is what appears to be happening here, right before OUR eyes!

I went out in the woods earlier today on snowshoes for about two hours, just to get as far away from this crap as I possibly could, and to clean out my mind, to let it rest, and the thought that came to me, because of that, or despite that, however, is that IF YOU TAKE the words of George W. Bush at face value, that this was a tragic accident that Calipari was shot, and you factor in all the other evidence, it may have been the woman who was the target, and Calipari, if his instincts were honed as mine are, he would have known the shot was coming, and instinctively, he would have moved in front of the reporter.

Elsewise, he was the target, or both.

He would have been the target, I think, because he was the "NEGOTIATOR", which to the Bush Co., would have been an "act of high treason", even though Calipari was not an American, which to Bush Co., would not make any difference:

"IF YOU ARE NOT WITH US, THEN YOU ARE AGAINST US, AND YOU WILL SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES!"

The consequences here are lurid and graphic, and very public, as they would need to be; the man, the "NEGOTIATOR WITH TAY-RISTS", shot right in the temple, right out there for all the world to see.

The only way it would have been more graphic to me is if they shot him in the eye, instead of the temple, because that really freaks people right on out, to see that!

"Bet he won't look anywhere anymore with that eye!"

But this was a temple shot, and so, to me, the message is a different one:

"WHO WANTS TO BE NEXT?"

And the question "CUI BONO" does not really apply, I think!

Rather, an example was made, and that was the point that comes across to me, anyway.

SO!

In that sense, America as defined by George W. Bush benefits.

As to the America of the rest of us, that America is brought even further down into the muck and slime of this new form of government that these alleged seditionists are foisting off on us, through the Bush Co. regime.

As I said before, Calipari's negotiating with TAY-RISTS days are over, and I think that is the single point.

As to the women, she would have been shot because she was a COMMIE who was going to give the enemies of George W. Bush some press, which again, would be seen by Bush Co. as giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

To stop her would cost about what, a dollar, which is the cost of the bullet?

There are many, many Viet Nam vets around still, and one of them is a good friend of mine, a Green beret who was "assigned" to the Phoenix Program in Viet Nam, an "extermination" program, to put it in its proper context, and I will tell you that to the people who "operate" these programs of extermination, which is exactly what they are, human life aint' worth doodly-squat, and if anyone thinks that outright murder is not done in a combat zone, that person is a pure fool.

Outright murder is used as a tool of terror, pure and simple, and by America!

What does anyone think we were doing with that helicopter and the "FREE FIRE ZONES"?

Winning hearts and minds?

Yeah, right!

SO!

Let us have a full and fair and especially, a very open and transparent investigation here of this Calipari shooting, and let us really see where ALL the chips may fall!

In the name of truth, justice and the REAL American way, and not the faux Amerika that these seditionists are trying to create, here in OUR America.

And who on earth is Doctor Daniel Goure, and what is the Lexington Institute, and how does he and it get to have a say in how OUR American military is run, especially with regard to stripping our American military of legal consequnces for its actions?

As to the first question, who is Doctor Daniel Goure, here is a very recent "position paper" on behalf of some company's "interests" that he has posted on the Lexington Institute website at http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org

"A DEAL SO GOOD ONLY THE PENTAGON COULD TURN IT DOWN"

Dr. Daniel Goure
Issue Brief
01 March 2005

Only an organization in desperate straits would even think of turning down a business deal that would lower its costs and provide it additional resources.

Yet, that is exactly what the Department of Defense is doing.

The Pentagon is short of money for the war in Iraq, the transformation of the military and the replacement of aging or battle-worn equipment.

The Air Force, for example, is trying to figure out how it can simultaneously pay for two new fighter programs, procure a new generation of tankers, invest in unmanned aerial vehicles and meet the demand for airlift by a globally deployed military.

Budget limitations are forcing the Pentagon to cut back or even eliminate critical programs.

So when a private company offers to use its own money to acquire a commercial variant of a military aircraft, thereby lowering the price to the Air Fore while simultaneously creating a capability on which the military can call in an emergency, one would think the Air Fore would jump at the chance.

No way.

Instead, the Air Force blocked such efforts for the past four years.

The company in question, Cargo Force, wants to buy at least 25 and possibly 80 C-17s, the Air Force’s premier long-range transport aircraft.

The commercial C-17s would be used to carry high volume and heavy/outsized cargo.

Because of the aircraft’s unique handling characteristics, it could use hundreds of airfields around the world that are too small for large commercial aircraft.

This could be big business, employing tens of thousands around the country and generating billions of dollars of revenue a year

Cargo Force’s proposal has some real advantages for the Pentagon.

Their purchase of C-17s would spread the program’s fixed costs over a larger number of aircraft, thereby reducing the price of each one, including those bought by the Air Force.

Cargo Force’s aircraft could be made a part of the civil air reserve fleet thereby making them available to the Air Force should the need arise.

The Nation would get more C-17s at a better price.

The Air Force is resisting a good deal because it hopes to convince the Pentagon and Congress to pay for more C-17s.

The current approved plan is for 180 C-17s.

However, the Air Force believes that at least 220 are needed to meet mobility requirements.

There are studies underway to determine the appropriate number.

But the Air Force does not want to risk its chances of reaching the magic target by allowing a private concern to buy C-17s.

The Cargo Force proposal is likely to mean more than 180 C-17s for the Air Force and an additional number in commercial use, available to the military, if needed.

This is a good deal for everyone, including the taxpayer.

The Air Force needs to rethink its priorities, particularly at a time of tightening defense budgets.

end quotes

AND SOMETHING MAKES ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE WHATSOEVER HERE, FOLKS!

WHAT EXACTLY IS IT THAT THIS MAN IS NOT TELLING US ABOUT THIS "PLAN" BY THIS CARGO FORCE COMPANY, AND WHO EXACTLY ARE THEY, NOW, AND HOW DO THEY FIT INTO THE PICTURE, HERE?

Lexington Institute
1600 Wilson Boulevard
Suite 900
Arlington, VA 22209
Phone: 703-522-5828
Fax: 703-522-5837
http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org

Mission Statement

In 1775 a handful of citizen-soldiers stood on Lexington Common and defied the military might of the most powerful empire on earth.

They made a stand to secure their rights as free men in an unprecedented democratic experiment.

In doing so, they began a revolution that continues today -- a revolution that advances freedom, opportunity, and equality before the law for all men and women.

It was no accident that the patriots of Lexington made their stand on the Common, the heart and symbol of their community since its founding by Puritans in the early eighteenth century.

Every community that has meaning to its members provides some common ground where they can meet to express their shared values and resolve their differences.

The Lexington Institute participates on the common ground of American democracy, the political process that expresses the will of the people.

It is the goal of the Lexington Institute to inform, educate, and shape the public debate of national priorities in those areas that are of surpassing importance to the future success of democracy, such as national security, education reform, tax reform, immigration and federal policy concerning science and technology.

By promoting America's ability to project power around the globe we not only defend the homeland of democracy, but also sustain the international stability in which other free-market democracies can thrive.

The Lexington Institute believes in limiting the role of the federal government to those functions explicitly stated or implicitly defined by the Constitution.

The Institute therefore actively opposes the unnecessary intrusion of the federal government into the commerce and culture of the nation, and strives to find nongovernmental, market-based solutions to public-policy challenges.

We believe a dynamic private sector is the greatest engine for social progress and economic prosperity.

Dr. Daniel Goure
Vice President
Lexington Institute

Dr. Goure is a Vice President with the Lexington Institute, a nonprofit public-policy research organization headquartered in Arlington, Virginia.

He is involved in a wide range of issues as part of the institute’s national security program.

Dr. Goure has held senior positions in both the private sector and the U.S. Government.

Most recently, he was a member of the 2001 Department of Defense Transition Team.

Dr. Goure spent two years in the U.S. Government as the director of the Office of Strategic Competitiveness in the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

He also served as a senior analyst on national security and defense issues with the Center for Naval Analyses, Science Applications International Corporation, SRS Technologies, R&D Associates and System Planning Corporation.

Prior to joining the Lexington Institute, Dr. Goure was the Deputy Director, International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

At CSIS, Dr. Goure was responsible for analyses of:

* U.S. national security policy;

* the future of conflict and warfare;

* the information revolution;

* counter-proliferation; and

* defense industrial management.

He directed analyses of emerging security issues with a special emphasis on U.S. military capabilities in the next century.

Dr. Goure also has done extensive consulting and teaching.

From 1990 to 1991 he led a study for the U.S. Institute of Peace on deterrence after the INF Treaty.

Dr. Goure has consulted for the Departments of State, Defense and Energy.

He has taught or lectured at the Johns Hopkins University, the Foreign Service Institute, the National War College, the Naval War College, the Air War College, and the Inter-American Defense College.

Dr. Goure is a well-known and respective presence in the national and international media, having been interviewed by all the major networks, CNN, Fox, the BBC, the New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, the Christian Science Monitor, the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times.

He has published written extensively in over two dozen journals and periodicals.

He is also an NBC national security military analyst.

Dr. Goure holds Masters and Ph.D. degrees in international relations and Russian Studies from Johns Hopkins University and a B.A. in Government and History from Pomona College.

Lexington Institute
From SourceWatch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/wiki.phtml?titl...ngton_Institute

The Lexington Institute was founded by Merrick Carey in 1998.

Leadership
James Andrew Courter, Chairman
Merrick Carey, Chief Executive Officer
Dr. Loren B. Thompson, Chief Operating Officer
Don Soifer ( http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/biography/soiferbio.htm ), Executive Vice President
Philip Peters, Vice President
Dr. Daniel Goure, Vice President
Robert Holland, Senior Fellow
Kerry Finnegan ( http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/biography/finneganbio.asp ), Program Director
Dr. Andrew Rhein ( http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/biography/rheinbio.asp ), Research Analyst

Others
Clifford Sobel was is a trustee of the Lexington Institute [1] http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/immigration/cspraid.htm
Bonner Cohen was in 1998 a Visiting Fellow [2] http://web.archive.org/web/20010306071730/...onment/mtbe.htm and from January 1999 [3] http://web.archive.org/web/20000823110441/...hy/cohenbio.htm to 2003 [4] http://epw.senate.gov/108th/Cohen2_040203.htm a Senior Fellow of the Lexington Institute
Paul F. Steidler was from 1998 [5] http://www.lexingtoninstitute.org/education/morteach.htm to 2000 [6] http://web.archive.org/web/20010716082331/.../antisocial.htm Senior Fellow of the Lexington Institute
Robert Severns was involved in the start-up of the Lexington Institute and received posthumously the 'Lexington 2003 Leadership Award'. [7] http://www.severnsfoundation.org/lexleader.html
Russell G. Redenbaugh, director since 1999 [8] http://www.usccr.gov/cos/bio/redenbau.htm
Daniel Strickberger, director since 1999
Adrienne J. Murphy joined the Lexington Institute in October 1998 as Program Coordinator, became the Director of Operations in August 1999, and she was Vice President from August 2000 to summer 2001. [9] http://web.archive.org/web/20010303075709/...y/murphybio.htm
Nancy J. Limauro joined the Lexington Institute in September 1999 as a Program Coordinator until the end of 2000. [10] http://web.archive.org/web/20000823110504/...aphy/limbio.htm

Relation with the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution

Many people involved in the Lexington Institute were before active at the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI).

Name (former) function at AdTI

James Andrew Courter former chairman of the 'Committee for the Common Defense' (an AdTI defense program) and in 1998 consultant at AdTI
Merrick Carey Former President AdTI
Dr. Loren B. Thompson Senior Fellow
Philip Peters staff (1998)
Clifford Sobel director (1996)
Paul F. Steidler director of the AdTI's Education Reform Project
Robert Severns member of the first board in 1989

Gregory Fossedal (chairman of AdTI) wrote about Merrick Carey (who founded the Lexington Institute in 1998)

"... a bright and well-organized fellow who helped give me my start in politics in 1982, as I later gave him a start in the think tank business in 1993." [11]
http://www.adti.net/Severns062703.html

Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
From SourceWatch

The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI) is an industry-funded organization which publishes propaganda from major corporations, giving it an air of respectability.

They also organize coordinated publicity and letter-writing campaigns.

They charge for both services.

Projects

Philip Morris

Working closely with Philip Morris, they issued studies and conducted an astroturf campaign arguing the EPA's regulations (including those of cigarette smoke) were scientifically unsound, overly-burdensome, and unnecessary.

And facing a cigarette tax increase as part of the Clinton healthcare plan, they organized an astroturf campaign to misleadingly attack it
http://cgi.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/cgi-bi...og/2004/05#adti , charging Morris $60,000 for the work.

Microsoft

Heavily funded by Microsoft [1] http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html [2] http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20021227-105113-4829r , they have engaged in a number of campaigns to suggest Open Source Software, and Linux in particular, is dangerous, insecure, and illegal.

They published a book claiming Linus Torvalds did not invent Linux.

The book was widely discredited and earned them the nickname "the think tank that didn't".

(While conceding they did fund the institute, Microsoft refused to comment on whether they specifically funded the book.)

Funding

AdTI is very secretive about their income sources, refusing to divulge any funders, but we do know about some grants they have received.

Between 1988 and 2002, AdTI has received $1,723,900 (unadjusted for inflation) from conservative foundations [3] http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_re...p?recipientID=7 , namely Bradley, Olin, Scaife, the Philip M. McKenna Foundation, and the Claude R. Lambe Foundation (a Koch Family Foundations).

Projects funded by these foundations include:

Bradley grants “to support education-reform research and activities”;

the “Teacher Choice Project”;

$50,000 to “support research on teacher unions and education reform” (Bradley, 2000)

$168,750 “to support research and writing on new tactics of U.S. progressive movement in the Post-Cold War era” (Bradley and Olin, 1998)

$30,000 for “the Action Plan for Defense Privatization, conducted by the Committee for the Common Defense” (Olin, 1995-1996)

$5,000 to “support promotion for The Democratic Century, a book by Gregory Fossedal” (Olin, 1998)

Conservative think-tank Capital Research Center reports funding by Fannie Mae, AT&T Foundation, and Amoco Foundation. [4] http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/orgd....asp?Org=ATI100

Tobaccodocuments.org [5] http://tobaccodocuments.org/lor/92756807-6876.html contains a number of searchable documents produced as a result of the settlement of court actions that link AdTI to Lorillard and Phillip Morris corporations.

AdTI is linked to Dr. S. Fred Singer in the tobacco documents [6] http://www.smokefreeforhealth.org/studies/YachBialous.htm , the Cooler Heads Coalition [7] http://www.cleanairtrust.org/villain.0301.html , Consumer Alert [8] http://www.consumeralert.org/ncc/releases/rally.htm , Heartland Institute [9] http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=1568 [10] http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=1568 and the Competitive Enterprise Institute [11] http://www.cei.org/gencon/014,02832.cfm [12] http://www.cei.org/gencon/014,02833.cfm [13] http://www.cei.org/gencon/014,02821.cfm .

See also: AdTI-Funding.

Personnel

Staff and Associates Name Title

Mike Gravel Chairman
Ken Brown President
Christopher Cox Co-Chairman

AdTI Board of Advisors

John Norquist Co-Chairman
AdTI Board of Advisors

Gordon Macklin Co-Chairman
Market History Research Program

Robert Toricelli Co-Chairman
IMF Assessment Project

Gregory Fossedal Senior Fellow

Donald Payne Co-Chairman
Opportunity Africa

Alveda King Senior Fellow
Education Policy and Civil Rights

Becky Norton Dunlop Director, Democracy and the Environment Research Program

David Kirkpatrick Fellow, Education Policy

Dan Evans Teacher Choice Fellow

Don Koniezco Teacher Choice Fellow

Marilyn Ketter Rittmeyer Teacher Choice Fellow

Sahir Zuberi Webmaster

Others:

Dan Buck Board member

Sita Mazumder, Director

Philip Peters (Salary: $114,083) [14] http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/orgd....asp?Org=ATI100

Merrick Carey Alexis de Tocqueville Institution former president (Salary: $172,000) [15] http://www.capitalresearch.org/search/orgd....asp?Org=ATI100

Cesar Conda [16] http://www.mises.org/econsense/postscript.asp#p407 , [17] http://reason.com/rodgers.shtml , recently was Assistant to Vice President Dick Cheney for Domestic Policy [18] http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=6248 previously was executive director of AdTI, currently on Board of Empower America.

Jack Kemp Co-Chairman, Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and Co-Director, Empower America [19] http://www.house.gov/judiciary/6017.htm

General information

The Alexis de Tocqueville Institution was founded in 1988 in Redwood City, CA.

The first corporate board was formed in 1989 by Robert Severns, Eugene Ravizza and Bruce Thompson.

AdTI claims that they "follow the principles of Tocqueville himself...among these liberal ideas are civil liberty, political equality, and economic freedom and opportunity".

On older pages on their web site they wrote ".. Alexis de Tocqueville Institution, a non-profit public research foundation with offices in Virginia and California" [20] http://web.archive.org/web/20000301192407/...intmonfund.html but for a long time they seem to have no activities in California anymore.

Along with other conservative think tanks AdTI advocates lower taxes and less regulation.

It also works on education 'reform' and against teachers unions, immigration policy, environmental issues and projects on China, Cuba, Africa and Switzerland.

It has defended the interests of the tobacco industry and works on the International Monetary Fund.

More recently it has made a name for itself defending the interests of proprietary software companies and criticising open-source software.

AdTI is a part of the stable of conservative think tanks with their commentary regularly posted on the websites of the Cato Institute, Heartland Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Science and Environmental Policy Project and other websites.

Corporate and business inquiries:

10 Benning Street # 151
West Lebanon, NH 03784

Washington, DC office at:

611 Pennsylvania Ave. SE
Number 119
Washington, DC 20003

However, both addresses are UPS stores [21] http://www.theupsstore.com/locations/locde...nterNum=MBE2438 [22] http://www.theupsstore.com/locations/locde...nterNum=MBE2092 .

On AdTI's 990 for the year 2001 the address was the above mentioned address in West Lebanon.

Earlier 990 forms had 1611 N. Kent Street room 901, Arlington, AV 22209.

Old pages of the Emerging Markets Group had almost the same address: 1611 North Kent Street #901-b, Arlington, VA 22209 [23] http://web.archive.org/web/20020210151110/...com/va/emgroup/ .

On the other hand, the address in West Lebanon can also be found at the 990 form for 2002 of the Ernest Martin Hopkins Institute and was in 2003 shown on the web site of the Democratic Century Fund [24] http://web.archive.org/web/20030622030706/www.dcfund.net which is managed by the Emerging Markets Group.

Web: http://www.adti.net/

AdTI Programs

Most of the following AdTI programs are now defunct:

American Immigration Institute
Center on Regulation and Economic Growth
Committee for the Common Defense
Focus on Agricultural Regulation and Markets (FARM)
International Monetary Fund Assessment Project
Opportunity Africa
Teacher Choice

External links

Michelle Delio, "Did MS Pay for Open-Source Scare? http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,52973,00.html ", Wired, June 5, 2002.

David F. Skoll, "Opening the Open-Source Debate http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/06/...2982813264.html ", The Age, June 10 2002.

Groklaw.net, "Andrew S. Tanenbaum's Reply to ADTI http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040522014416143 " , May 22, 2004

Wikipedia, "Alexis de Tocqueville Institution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis_de_Toc...lle_Institution "

Retrieved from " http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title...lle_Institution "

Committee for the Common Defense
From SourceWatch

Committee for the Common Defense is a program of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (AdTI).

This 'Committee for the Common Defense' sent on January 5, 1995 a letter to President Bill Clinton, signed by Melvin Laird, James Schlesinger, Donald Rumsfeld, Harold Brown, Caspar Weinberger, Frank Carlucci and Dick Cheney.

In this letter they asked Clinton not to terminate the B-2 program (see: AdTI-Funding).

In a report called 'US Military Ammunition Policy: Reliving the Mistakes of the Past?' published in the autumn of 1994 it says about the authors:

"Jim Courter is Chairman of the Committee for the Common Defense, the national security arm of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution."

" ... Dr. Loren B. Thompson is a Senior Fellow at the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and is Executive Director of its Committee for the Common Defense." [1] http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/1994/davis.htm

The John M. Olin Foundation gave in 1995 to the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution $10,000 for the 'Committee for the Common Defense'.

One year later they gave $20,000 to AdTI for "The Action Plan for Defense Privatization, conducted by the Committee for the Common Defense". [2] http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_re...p?recipientID=7

This same 'Committee for the Common Defense' was in 2002 responsible for a pro-Microsoft report stating: Open Source Software May Offer Target for Terrorists http://www.adti.net/opensource_pressrelease_05_30_2002.html .

In the press release they wrote:

"In a paper to be released next week, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution outlines how open source might facilitate efforts to disrupt or sabotage electronic commerce, air traffic control or even sensitive surveillance systems."

"Unlike proprietary software, open source software does not make the underlying code of a software confidential."

"Computer systems are the backbone of U.S. national security", says Fossedal, chairman of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution and its Committee for the Common Defense, which will release the study."

Mr. Rumsfeld was in May 2001 according to Multinational Monitor a member of the National Security Program of AdTI. [3] http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2001/01m...hcc.html#donald

It's not clear what the relationship is between that program and the 'Committee for the Common Defense'.

In February 1994 [4] http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2073011709_1710.PDF the committee members were:

Chairman: James Courter

Senior Advisory Board:

Frank Carlucci
Sen. Ernest Hollings
H.T. Johnson
Sen. John McCain
Rep. Dave McCurdy
Donald Rumsfeld
Rep. Ike Skelton [5] http://www.house.gov/skelton/
Robert Stuart
Rep. Robert Torricelli
John Whitehead

Bush’s Corporate Cabinet: Others In The Bush League

Andrew Card, White House Chief of Staff.

Former job: Chief lobbyist for General Motors. President of American Automobile Manufacturers Association (1993 to 1998). AAA spent $12 million on lobbying in 1997-1998, often to fight higher fuel-efficiency regulations as well as the Kyoto Protocol and other global warming initiatives.

Card is a long-time Bush family supporter; worked as deputy chief of staff for Bush I administration.

On January 20, Card ordered all executive departments to postpone for 60 days the effective date of a wide range of regulations announced by President Bill Clinton in his final days.

Karl Rove, advisor to the President.

Called “the governor’s Svengali” by the National Review.

Philip Morris paid political intelligence operative, 1991 to 1996 (starting at $3,000/month).

Shaped governor Bush’s positions on tort “reform.”

Jeanne L. Phillips, representative to OECD. Managing director of Dallas office of Public Strategies,Inc.; former president of Jeanne Johnson and Co.

John E. Robson, president of Ex-Im Bank.

Senior advisor with Robertson Stephens bank.

Earl Floyed Kvamme, co-chair of President’s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology.

Partner with Kleiner Perkins Caufield and Byers, a Menlo Park California venture capital firm; former executive vice president of sales and marketing at Apple Computer.

Tom Scully, administrator of Health Care Financing Administration. President and CEO of Federation of American Hospitals.

Lawrence Lindsey, top economic advisor to the president. Arthur F. Burns chair at the American Enterprise Institute.

Diana Furchgott-Roth, staff chief to the Council of Economic Advisors. Resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

[b][color=red]Nina Rees, adviser to Vice President Cheney. Senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation.

Stephen J. Hadley, deputy director of National Security Council. Partner in Shea & Garner (representing Lockheed Martin). Lead lobbyist for development of missile defense during presidential campaign.

Michael Powell, FCC Chair. Lawyer who represented GTE (GTE merged last year with Bell Atlantic to form Verizon Communcations). Says he does not believe a “digital divide” is splitting U.S. society between those who have computers and Internet access and those who don’t. “I think there is a Mercedes divide … I would like to have one, but I can’t afford one.”

Kathleen Q. Abernathy, FCC Commissioner. Vice president for public policy of Broadband Office Communications. Former vice president of Air Touch Communications.

Michael J. Copps, FCC Commissioner. Former senior vice president of the American Meat Institute (1989 to 1993); director of government affairs for Collins and Aikman Corp. (1985 to 1989). Recently assistant secretary of commerce for trade development (1998 to 2001).

Nicholas Calio, White House director of legislative affairs. Lobbyist for Tenneco Automotive and Atlantic Richfield Co. Top deputy is Kirsten Ardleigh Chadwick, also formerly a registered lobbyist for Tenneco.

John Negroponte, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. Although he has a four-decade foreign service career, he most recently served as executive vice president for global markets at McGraw-Hill.

Bush’s Corporate Cabinet:

Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense

Ex-CEO of General Instrument Corp. (1990-1993).

Ex-CEO Searle pharmaceuticals (1977-1985).

Leading proponent of National Missile Defense [See “Star Wars, Continued,” Multinational Monitor, October 2000].

Estimated total assets between $61 million and $242.5 million.

Financial disclosure report is 78 pages long (not including appendices).

Chair of Salomon Smith Barney’s international advisory board.

Directorships: Kellogg Company (7/85 - 4/99); ABB; Gulfstream Aerospace Corp. (1/93 - 9/99); Forstmann Little & Co. (5/90 - 1/00); Amylin Pharmaceutical; Gilead Sciences, Inc., chair of board; Chicago Tribune Company; OverX, Inc.; Investor AB (advisor); Metricom, Inc. (advisory board); Hamilton Group (advisory board); Transaction Info. Systems (advisory board); Dreyfus Corp. (nine mutual fund boards); Northrop Grumman Electronic Sensors and Systems Sector (advisory board); Hasbro, Inc.

Other positions: Balkan Action Council, Bilderberg Meetings; World Economic Forum (advisor); U.S. Committee on NATO (executive board); government of Singapore (International Academic Advisory Panel); BP-Amoco (consultant); the Limited Service Corp. (consultant); Bretton Woods Committee; National Strategy Forum; Alexis de Tocqueville Institution-National Security Program; Center for Strategic and International Studies Global Organization on Crime (steering committee); Committee for Common Defense; Alfalfa Club; Bohemian Club.

Subappointments:

Pete Aldridge, undersecretary for acquisition, technology and logistics. CEO of Aerospace Corporation.

Victoria Clarke, assistant secretary of defense for public affairs. General manager of Washington office of Hill & Knowlton.

Gordon England, secretary of the Navy. General Dynamics executive.

William James Haynes, general counsel. Partner at Jenner & Bloch law firm.

James Roche, secretary of the Air Force, Northrup Grumman executive.

David S.C. Shu, under secretary for personnel and readiness. Vice president of RAND Corporation’s army research division.

Thomas White, secretary of the Army. Enron executive.

Paul Wolfowitz, deputy secretary. Received $300,000 from Hughes Electronics as co-chair of Nunn-Wolfowitz task force; Dean of Johns Hopkins U. School of Advanced International Studies