"Mortgage giants avert potential disaster"

By MARCY GORDON, AP Business Writer

21 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A potential financial disaster that could have shaken the housing market was averted because regulators discovered accounting failures at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the new head of the agency that oversees the mortgage giants said Monday.

The government-sponsored organizations appear to have gotten the message that they need to reform, but it still will take years to repair their internal problems, James B. Lockhart said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"The housing market is so important to this country," said Lockhart, who has headed the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight for about two months.

"And to have it built on what turned out to be a shaky foundation could have caused significant financial problems."

Problems were averted, he said, because the regulators acted to identify and order corrections at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which together stand behind some 40 percent of the $8 trillion U.S. home-mortgage market.

"The good news is that it was caught in time and the remedies are starting to be in place, so that there was no major problem for the average American," Lockhart said.

Lockhart, a friend of Bush from prep school and college, became director of an agency whose previous leader had for years waged a quixotic battle against the two politically powerful companies.

After serious accounting problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac became known, a push by the administration to tighten the government reins on them gained ground in Congress.

Lockhart, 60, was executive director of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the federal agency that backs private defined-benefit pensions, in the administration of the first President Bush.

He has worked in the private financial sector and was deputy commissioner of Social Security before taking his current job.

Like the White House and many lawmakers, he believes the mortgage holdings of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — totaling more than $1 trillion — should be reduced.

He called legislation pending in the Senate "a very good starting point."

Fannie Mae, the second-largest U.S. financial institution after Citigroup Inc. and the second-biggest borrower after the federal government, is restating its earnings back to 2001 — a correction expected to reach at least $11 billion.

The company was fined $400 million in a settlement in May with OFHEO and the Securities and Exchange Commission, one of the largest civil penalties ever in an accounting fraud case.

It also agreed to make top-to-bottom changes in its corporate culture, accounting procedures and ways of managing risk.

The accounting failures and earnings manipulation at Washington-based Fannie Mae became known in September 2004 after the OFHEO regulators discovered them in a special review.

No. 2 rival Freddie Mac had its own accounting crisis in mid-2003, when the company disclosed that it had misstated earnings by some $5 billion — mostly underreported — for 2000-2002 and ousted its top executives.

Similarly, it was fined $125 million by OFHEO and ordered to make changes.

If either company should fail, there could be less money for consumers to borrow to get a mortgage, and interest rates on home loans could be forced higher.

Congress created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to inject money into the home-loan market.

They buy mortgages from banks and other lenders and bundle the loans into securities for sale to investors worldwide.

"The risk has certainly been reduced by the remedial actions that the two management teams have put in place at our direction," Lockhart said.

But it will take a number of years — two, three or more — for the two companies to get their financial houses fully in order, he cautioned.

In addition, he said, "There's still some arrogance in the culture."

"... There are certainly people in both organizations that have retained and will retain some of that arrogance."

OFHEO's review found that current and former executives of Fannie Mae reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses in a deceptive accounting scheme from 1998 to 2004.

Employees are said to have manipulated accounting to hit quarterly earnings targets so senior executives could pocket the bonus money.

Lockhart has promised that his agency will pursue some company executives to recover allegedly tainted bonus money if the Fannie Mae board fails to do so.
___

On the Net:

Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight: http://www.ofheo.gov

Fannie Mae: http://www.fanniemae.com

Freddie Mac: http://www.freddiemac.com

And here's "CON-JOB CONNIE" ......

"Rice: Iraq gov't can prevail over violence"

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer

1 hour, 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday she is certain Iraq's new leaders can prevail over "determined killers" like those that killed 41 people over the weekend.

"No one could have expected that just within weeks of coming to power that the Iraqi government would have been able to stop the violence and to completely address a difficult security situation," Rice said.

She spoke before a meeting at the State Department with Pakistani Foreign Minister Kursheed Kasuri.

The Bush administration has said the permanent democratic government that took power in Baghdad this spring offers the best hope for quelling rising sectarian violence and ending the anti-government and anti-American insurgency.

"There are determined killers there, determined people who really do want to make life difficult and to arrest the democratic progress that Iraq is making," Rice said.

"But I'm quite certain that the combination of a strong government and the security forces that are now engaged in the security plan for Baghdad will be able to bring this situation under control."

Sunni leaders expressed outrage over the weekend killings; most of the victims were Sunnis.

President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd, appealed for calm, warning that the nation stood "in front of a dangerous precipice."

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a Shiite, has set the improvement of security in an increasingly lawless Baghdad as an early test of his administration.

Al-Maliki has promised to disband Shiite militias and other armed groups blamed for much of the sectarian violence.

The groups have flourished in large part because of the inability of Iraqi and coalition forces to guarantee security.

Al-Maliki has also imposed curfews and taken other drastic steps, to little avail.

U.S.-led forces are supporting Iraqi forces in carrying out al-Maliki's security plan.

Eventually, the Bush administration hopes that al-Maliki can assert enough political and security control to allow the withdrawal of most of the more than 130,000 U.S. forces in Iraq more than three years after the U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam Hussein.

Two car bombs struck a Shiite district in Baghdad on Monday, killing at least eight people and wounding dozens, officials said, as sectarian tensions rose following brazen attacks Sunday in which Sunnis were pulled from their cars or picked out on the street and killed by masked Shiite gunmen.

"It is obvious that, for many people, they believe that if you can disrupt Baghdad, you can kill democracy in Iraq," White House press secretary Tony Snow said.

"It is also obvious that it is U.S. policy, and also the policy of Prime Minister Maliki, that that is not going to happen; that they will bring resources to bear to make sure that everything from roving gangs to insurgents who are determined to insight sectarian strife — that they do not succeed."

CCR Report In Full:

Report Details Recent Torture and Inhumane Treatment in Violation of U.S. Law and the Supreme Court’s Recent Hamdan Decision;
http://tinyurl.com/ow8k5

"Eliot's trust issue - Foundation's investments coincide with contributions; Family charity is regulated by Spitzer's office"

BY DOUGLAS FEIDEN
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, the top cop for New York's 60,000 charities and nonprofits, also helps his family run a charity regulated by his office.

The Spitzer Trust invests nearly all of its assets - $25.9 million - in hedge funds and equity funds.

Executives at those firms, meanwhile, have pumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into Spitzer's front-running Democratic gubernatorial campaign.

IRS records and state Board of Elections filings reviewed by the Daily News show that the trust:

Placed $9.5 million with Cramer-Berkowitz, a hedge fund.

Jeffrey Berkowitz, its principal, gave $50,100 to Spitzer through his limited liability company, Berkowitz Capital.

Invested $7 million with hedge funds Seneca Capital and Seneca International.

Douglas Hirsch, the managing partner, also plunked down $50,100, the maximum allowable by law.

Put $3.8 million into Bedford Fall Investors, another hedge fund.

Karen Finerman, president of its parent firm, also handed Spitzer $50,100.

Another manager gave $10,000.

Placed $1 million with Golub Capital Partners, a private equity firm.

Lawrence Golub, its president, also maxed out, and another executive tossed in $25,000.

Berkowitz and Hirsch didn't return calls.

Finerman and Golub were out of town.

The hedge funds are run by people with long personal friendships with the Spitzers.

Given those ties, "It makes sense that the CEOs, as individuals, would choose to support Eliot," said Spitzer communications director Darren Dopp.

But Marcy Murninghan, a Boston-based consultant to foundations and a former ethics professor at Harvard Divinity School, said, "It raises ethical questions - and suggests a level of self-dealing - when financial investments are placed with investors who happen to be his biggest contributors."

Since 2001, Spitzer has served with his parents and brother as one of the four unpaid trustees of the Bernard and Anne Spitzer Charitable Trust.

Bankrolled by his 82-year-old father, Bernard, who struck it rich in midtown real estate, the Spitzer Trust is one of the little-known jewels of Manhattan philanthropy.

With neither staff nor consultants, it keeps overhead low and writes fat checks - discreetly - to dozens of cultural, religious, scientific and educational institutions.

"The family has never advertised the fact that it's donated tens of millions of dollars to charity," Dopp said.

Spitzer declined to address the finances of his charity or any perceived role it might play in his political career.

Dopp said the family members give because they're thankful for their business success and want to give back to the community.

But good-government groups, law professors and attorneys for nonprofits questioned why a public official - the No. 1 charities regulator in the state - would sit on a private charitable board monitored by his subordinates.

"Wearing both hats is a potential conflict because his private life, family life and charitable life could all bleed into his public life," said Rachel Leon, executive director of Common Cause/NY.

Aides say Spitzer has recused himself from any official business his office has with the trust.

He has never asked the state Ethics Commission to approve his work for the charity because, aides say, his post is unpaid and no laws or regulations bar him from serving as a trustee.

That's not good enough, says Blair Horner, legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group:

"Our advice to the attorney general is that he should do one of two things: Either request an advisory opinion from the state Ethics Commission - or withdraw from the board."

The good works of the charity are abundant.

It helps the Anti-Defamation League stamp out hate, funds research into juvenile diabetes, supports programming for Channel 13 and mounts butterfly exhibits at the Museum of Natural History.

But the Spitzer Trust, which is tax-exempt, does not have an unblemished record with the Internal Revenue Service.

It had to pay a $51,768 IRS penalty in 2004 for failing to make charitable gifts at the level mandated by U.S. tax law.

Dopp said the elder Spitzer decided not to meet the trust's obligations because, after giving out several hundred thousand dollars, he had difficulty finding recipients that met his standards for the remaining amount.

So he chose to pay the penalty instead.

"It's not a fraud on the United States - but it is technically a violation of U.S. law," said Marcus Owens, an attorney who was chief of the IRS exempt organizations division from 1990 to 2000.

The great institutions of the city - the Jewish Museum, New York Public Library, Metropolitan Museum of Art - have been the typical recipients of the family's largess.

But politically connected groups that can advance Spitzer's campaign for higher office have also been funded, though there's no evidence they were picked for that reason.

Among them:

The Progressive America Fund, a left-leaning civic group in Brooklyn that runs get-out-the-vote drives, got $30,000 in 2004.

PAF is closely tied to the union-backed Working Families Party, which endorsed Spitzer seven months later.

"Who do you think we'd support?" said Dan Cantor, the party's executive director.

"We'd have paid for the right to endorse him."

The NARAL Pro-Choice New York Foundation, affiliated with the state's most influential abortion-rights group, has received $101,000 since Spitzer became a trustee five years ago.

NARAL endorsed him in February - and slammed his opponent, Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi, as "not trustworthy."

"If they hadn't given us a penny, we'd still be trying to elect Eliot Spitzer," said Robert Jaffe, NARAL executive vice president.

The Drum Major Institute, a think tank linked to defeated Democratic mayoral candidate Fernando Ferrer, a political ally of Spitzer, got $10,000.

Originally published on July 9, 2006

And from America's newest DE-MOCKERY of IRAQINAM .....

What else?

"Iraqis turn to fake IDs for safety"

By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer

Mon Jul 10, 4:17 PM ET

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A bookstore in eastern Baghdad is getting more customers these days, but they aren't looking for something to read.

The owner sells fake IDs, a booming business as Iraqis try to hide their identities in hopes of staying alive.

Although it's nearly impossible to distinguish between a Sunni and a Shiite by sight, names can be telling.

Surnames refer to tribe and clan, while first names are often chosen to honor historical figures revered by one sect but sometimes despised by the other.

For about $35, someone with a common Sunni name like Omar could become Abdul-Mahdi, a Shiite name that might provide safe passage through dangerous areas.

"I got a fake ID card to protect myself from the Shiite militias who are deploying in Baghdad and hunt Sunnis at fake checkpoints," said Omar Abdul Rahman, a 22-year-old university student.

He refused to give the name on his fake ID.

The growing use of fake IDs reflects the spike in violence between Sunnis and Shiites since the Feb. 22 bombing of a revered Shiite mosque in Samarra — an attack that triggered reprisal killings of Sunnis and pushed the country to the brink of civil war.

Interior Ministry Maj. Gen. Mahdi al-Gharawi said officials are aware fake IDs are common but have more important things to focus on — such as stopping violence.

"They are issuing Sunni IDs in the Shiite areas and vice versa," he said.

"It's illegal, but one can understand why they do it."

The problem was thrust into the spotlight Sunday when masked Shiite gunmen ambushed Sunnis in western Baghdad, singling out those with names commonly used by Sunnis to be killed.

Wissam Mohammad al-Ani, a 27-year-old Sunni calligrapher, said his false identification card has a Shiite name and it saved his life when he was approached by gunmen.

"When they saw it, they let me go," he said, adding that two young men standing with him at a bus stop in the Jihad neighborhood were seized.

Shiites are the majority in Iraq, but some Shiites also seek alternate identities to avoid attacks by Sunni-led insurgents.

Just last month, masked gunmen stopped two minivans carrying students northeast of Baghdad, ordered the passengers off, separated Shiites from Sunni Arabs, and killed the 21 Shiites "in the name of Islam," a witness said.

Making fake IDs is relatively low-tech, and vendors can be found in empty houses and in alleys.

The bookstore owner, whose shop is in a predominantly Shiite neighborhood and declined to give his name for fear of reprisals, said he buys blank IDs from print shops.

He then fills in the desired information and adds photos — a process known in the Baghdad street as "the change."

Most of his customers are Shiite drivers and construction workers planning to work in Sunni neighborhoods, with prices ranging from 5,000 Iraq dinars ($3.50) for a card that looks like one issued during Saddam Hussein's regime to 50,000 Iraqi dinars ($35) for a modern version.

Shiite militiamen, who are widely blamed for much of the sectarian violence, allow him to operate because he agreed to turn in any Sunnis who wander into his store.

He said the ID business spiked after the bombing in Samarra.

"Nobody did the change from Shiite to Sunni before that, when the real sectarian tension began," he said.

Sunni and Shiite names often can easily be distinguished in Iraq by tribe or clan, or because they refer to followers of Muhammad who split over who should lead Islam after the prophet died in the 7th century.

Residential areas also can be telling as they are increasingly segregated, with residents fleeing sectarian attacks.

Sunni names include Abu Bakr, Omar or Othman, who are particularly reviled by Shiite extremists who perceive them as having usurped power from Imam Ali, the prophet's cousin and the Shiites most revered saint.

Typically Shiite names are Abdul Zahra and Moussawi.

Sufyan Mahmoud, a 36-year-old Sunni grocer named for Abu Sufyan — the pre-Islamic ruler of Mecca whose descendants opposed Imam Ali — paid $30 for false papers with the neutral Arabic name of Mohammed Ahmed Mahmoud.

Some Iraqis recall having false identification papers to avoid persecution during Saddam's rule, but the practice was rare until recently because the former regime kept tight control over its subjects.

"Under Saddam it used to be shameful, but now everybody's doing it," the bookseller said.

A newspaper commentator mockingly suggested Iraqis should turn to the Bible instead of Islam to find names for their children.

"According to the present sectarian concepts, fathers should choose 'neutral names' such as Jesus, Adam, or Abraham that have nothing to do with the two sectarian camps," Sabah al-Lami wrote in the independent al-Mashriq newspaper.
___

Associated Press writers Qassim Abdul-Zahra and Sameer N. Yacoub contributed to this report.

end quote

Not only has George W. Bush ...

Been shown ....

IN OUR UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT .....

To be more lawless ...

And less civilized .....

And less knowledgeable ....

ABOUT OUR CONSTITUTION .....

OUR LAWS .....

AND OUR TREATIES ...

Than the TAY-RIST who beat him in that august setting .....

HE IS ALSO WORSE ...

FOR IRAQ .....

THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN WAS .....

And so ...

That makes him some kind of WORLD LEADER, I guess .....

And so ....

IF YOU ARE FOR THAT .....

VOTE REPUBLICAN ......

FOR THEY ARE THE "SOURCE" ....

OF THAT LAWLESSNESS ....

AND IGNORANCE .....

And so .....

And so ......

That above here ....

Is the first part ....

Of what is being called the Guantanamo Case ......

Before the United States Supreme Court ....

Involving George W. Bush .....

And the alleged TAY-RIST Hamdan ......

Where it was demonstrated .....

To the HIGH COURT ......

By the alleged TAY-RIST ......

THAT DESPITE HIS OATH OF OFFICE .....

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States ......"

GEORGE W. BUSH .....

WAS IN OPEN ...

AND FLAGRANT ...

VIOLATION .....

OF INTERNATIONAL TREATY .....

AS WELL AS UNITED STATES LAW .....

With his KANGAROO COURT SCHEME .....

TO RAILROAD PEOPLE ......

THAT GEORGE DON'T LIKE ....

And so ......

There are many, many lessons ...

To be gleaned .....

From these words above .....

Of the United States Supreme Court .....

WHICH ARE LAW ...

OF OUR LAND ....

EVEN FOR AN ACCUSED TAY-RIST ....

Despite George W. Bush ...

And his TEXAS-STYLE VIGILANTEEISM ......

And one of those ......

IS THAT THIS FIRST PART OF THIS LANDMARK DECISION .....

WHICH SLAPS GEORGE W. BUSH DOWN .....

SO HARD .....

HIS ANCESTORS ....

BACK IN TEXAS .....

ARE BOUNCING ......

IS REALLY A VINDICATION .....

OF OUR AMERICAN SYSTEM OF LAW .....

AND IF IT IS A REPUDIATION OF ANYONE .....

THAT HAS TO BE .....

ALL OF THE LAWYERS ....

WHO ADVISED GEORGE W. BUSH ......

THAT IT WOULD BE ALRIGHT .....

FOR HIM TO VIOLATE THE LAW .....

AND ONE OF THOSE LAWYERS .....

WOULD HAVE TO BE .....

THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMSELF .....

WHO TOOK NO PART, I NOTICE ......

IN TRYING TO DEFEND GEORGE W. BUSH .....

AND SO ......

IF GERMANY ...

HAD HAD .....

A SUPREME COURT ......

LIKE OURS RIGHT NOW .....

WHEN HITLER WAS TAKING OVER THAT COUNTRY .....

TO SLAP HITLER DOWN .....

THE WAY THIS COURT .....

SLAPPED GEORGE W. BUSH BACK DOWN .....

What a different world it would have been .....

And so ....

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Kennedy, Justice Souter, and Justice Ginsburg join, concurring.

The dissenters say that today's decision would "sorely hamper the President's ability to confront and defeat a new and deadly enemy."

Post, at 29 (opinion of Thomas, J.).

They suggest that it undermines our Nation's ability to "preven[t] future attacks" of the grievous sort that we have already suffered.

Post, at 48.

That claim leads me to state briefly what I believe the majority sets forth both explicitly and implicitly at greater length.

The Court's conclusion ultimately rests upon a single ground:

Congress has not issued the Executive a "blank check."

Cf. Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 542 U. S. 507, 536 (2004) (plurality opinion).

Indeed, Congress has denied the President the legislative authority to create military commissions of the kind at issue here.

Nothing prevents the President from returning to Congress to seek the authority he believes necessary.

Where, as here, no emergency prevents consultation with Congress, judicial insistence upon that consultation does not weaken our Nation's ability to deal with danger.

To the contrary, that insistence strengthens the Nation's ability to determine--through democratic means--how best to do so.

The Constitution places its faith in those democratic means.

Our Court today simply does the same.

"US vows to comply with Geneva Conventions"

by Charlotte Raab

1 hour, 35 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Pentagon pledged to respect the rights of "war on terror" suspects, as the US Senate began looking into new ways to prosecute detainees at its Guantanamo Bay detention center.

In a memo, Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England instructed US military leadership "to promptly review all relevant directives, regulations, policies, practices and procedures under your purview to ensure that they comply with the standards of Common Article Three" of the Geneva Conventions.

"You will ensure that all DoD (Department of Defense) personnel adhere to these standards," said the memo, dated July 7 and made public Tuesday.

The Pentagon announcement appeared to be a reversal of the George W. Bush administration's long-held stance that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to Taliban, al-Qaeda and other combatants targeted in the US-led "war on terror."

The unexpected shift, as well as Tuesday's Senate hearings, were prompted by a Supreme Court ruling late last month rejecting the Bush administration's plans to impanel special military tribunals to try the terror suspects.

The high court ruled that such panels were a violation of international and domestic law.

The US administration, meanwhile, insisted that it all along has respected the human rights of detainees at Guantanamo Bay.

"It is not really a reversal of policy."

"Humane treatment has always been the standard, and that is something they followed at Guantanamo," said White House spokesman Tony Snow.

Daniel Dell'Orto, principal deputy general counsel at the Department of Defense, affirmed the same in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday on prosecuting foreign-born suspects held in the "war on terror."

"We believe the treatment that all detainees are receiving meets or exceeds the standards of Article Three of the Geneva Conventions," said Dell'Orto, testifying at the first in a series of planned hearings on prosecuting Guantanamo inmates.

Common Article Three of the Geneva Conventions prohibits "inhumane treatment" of prisoners and requires certain basic legal rights at trial -- rules that would apparently apply to the Guantanamo inmates and anyone else in US military custody.

The clause also specifies that captured soldiers "shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria."

Bush had insisted after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks that as commander-in-chief he possessed "inherent authority" to hold "enemy combatants" at Guantanamo and use special military tribunals to determine their fate.

Snow said humane treatment has always been practiced at Guantanamo and all other US military facilities.

"The instruction manuals that are used by the Department of Defense all comply with humane treatment, which is obviously the overarching requirement of Common Article Three," said the spokesman.

The June 29 Supreme Court ruling on the Hamdan v. Rumsfeld case faulted the administration for establishing the tribunals without congressional authorization.

Snow said Tuesday that would soon be resolved.

"We're going to work with members of Congress to make sure that the detainees are treated in a manner that's consistent with their human rights, and also that they're brought to justice," Snow said.

Justice Department acting assistant attorney general Steve Bradbury told the Senate panel that the high court ruling -- seen by some as a stunning setback for the Bush administration -- was actually an opportunity.

"The decision in Hamdan gives the political branches an opportunity to work as one to establish the legitimate authority of the US to rely on military commissions to bring the terrorists to justice," Bradbury said.

Dell'Orto said at the same hearing that it is important "to avoid the absurd result of adopting protections for terrorists that American citizens do not receive in civilian courts."

Snow agreed that the challenge lay in balancing the rights of the inmates against the security concerns of Americans.

"We're going to do this in a way that's consistent with national security, so as to avoid giving out national security information and putting American lives at risk," Snow added.

"Those are objectives that are shared by the House and Senate, and the Supreme Court has pretty much said it's over to you guys to figure out how to get this done."

end quotes

IF YOU REALLY WANT ...

"TO GET THIS DONE ..."

TRY FOLLOWING THE LAW, TONY .......

TRY FOLLOWING THE LAW ......

IT REALLY IS QUITE SIMPLE .....

And so ...

And before you go to sleep tonight .....

Say a short prayer .....

For the poor people .....

Of IRAQINAMISTAN ......

WHO CAN NO LONGER .....

USE ....

THEIR REAL NAMES .....

FOR FEAR OF BEING MURDERED .....

And so ......

If a nation full of people .....

With a bunch of different fake names .....

Is a sign of a DEMOCRACY...

Then George W. Bush ...

Has created one .....

In spades .....

To the max .....

Over there ...

In IRAQINAMISTAN .....

Where people have to have fake names ....

And false ID's ......

Simply to survive another hour ....

Let alone a day ....

And so .....

"In Baghdad streets, little sign of rule of law"

Tue Jul 11, 12:51 PM ET

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Private Uday Abdullah is one of 50,000 Iraqi troops and police sent on to Baghdad's streets last month to make the city safe -- but he does not see the point.

Lounging in the shade to escape the midday heat on Tuesday, the soldier said it is gunmen from rival Shi'ite and Sunni parties with clout in the government who rule the streets.

"We arrest lots of gunmen and they just walk free the next day."

"They're always from the Mehdi Army or the Badr Brigade or the Islamic Party."

"So what's the point of our job?" he said.

Many in Baghdad wonder the same thing as checkpoints set up as part of Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's crackdown on violence spawn ever greater traffic jams but have failed to prevent dozens dying in sectarian shootings and bombings this week.

"We do nothing but create huge traffic jams with these checkpoints," Abdullah said.

Pointing to the traffic backed up on Senak Bridge, a major artery over the Tigris river, he said:

"I am standing here."

"But I have no desire to be here."

Raed Abd al-Hafudh Saleem, a lieutenant in Baghdad's traffic department, is equally bemused and cynical.

From his concrete booth in the middle of a busy intersection in upmarket Mansour, he has a clear view of the many vehicles carrying heavily armed men that speed past every day.

"I don't know who these people are."

"I can't stop them because they never hesitate to point their guns at me."

Every morning, when he reports for duty at his little booth, he finds fresh bullet casings littering the road.

"I don't know where they come from."

"Everyone carries a gun in this country, from the bodyguards of officials and members of parliament to private security companies.

"How can I distinguish between all those and the insurgents, and militias?" he said.

He told how bodyguards recently fired into the air to clear the road for a ministerial convoy.

When he remonstrated with them, one man fired a burst from his AK-47 just past his head.

"He said to me: 'Who are you to say this'?"

"'I am the state."'

end quotes

George W. Bush .....

Is like the SECOND COMING, alright .......

The SECOND COMING ....

Of HULAGU KHAN .....

To BAGHDAD .....

And so ......

Expect BARBARIANISM ...

And you won't be disappointed ......

Or let down .....

By all of the violence ...

And chaos ....

That George W. Bush ....

Has unleashed .....

On the poor suffering people .....

Of IRAQINAMISTAN .....

Who can't even use ...

Their real names anymore ...

Thanks to George W. Bush ...

And so ....

Hulagu Khan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hulagu Khan 1217 – 8 February 1265

Hulagu Khan (also known as Hülegü, and Hulegu) (1217 – 8 February 1265) was a Mongol ruler who conquered much of Southwest Asia.

The grandson of Genghis Khan and the brother of Arik Boke, Mongke and Kublai Khan, he became the first khan of the Ilkhanate of Persia.

Background

Hulagu, the child of Tolui and Sorghaghtani Beki, a Christian woman, was dispatched by his brother Mongke (who was Great Khan from 1251-1258), in 1255 to accomplish the destruction of the remaining Muslim states in southwestern Asia.

First, the subjugation of the Lurs, a people of southern Iran; second, the destruction of the sect of the Assassins; third, the submission or destruction of the Abbasid caliphate; the submission or destruction of the Ayyubid states in Syria, and finally, the submission or destruction of the Mamluk Sultanate of Eygpt.

Mongke Khan had ordered Hulagu to treat kindly those who submitted, and utterly destroy those who did not.

Hulagu certainly carried out the latter.

The Assassins and marching on Baghdad

Hulagu marched out with perhaps the largest Mongol army ever assembled.

Among his subsidiary generals was Kitbuqa, a Christian.

Hulagu easily destroyed the Lurs, and his reputation so frightened the Assassins (also known as the Hashshashin) that they surrendered their impregnable fortress of Alamut to him without a fight.

Hulagu probably always intended to take Baghdad, which the Mongols had been meaning to attack for over ten years (see Eljigidei), but he used the caliph's refusal to send troops to him as a pretext for conquest.

Hulagu sent a message to the caliph, Al-Musta'sim, containing the following (trans. John Woods):

"When I lead my army against Baghdad in anger, whether you hide in heaven or in earth

I will bring you down from the spinning spheres;

I will toss you in the air like a lion.

I will leave no one alive in your realm;

I will burn your city, your land, your self.

If you wish to spare yourself and your venerable family, give heed to my advice with the ear of intelligence.

If you do not, you will see what God has willed."

Battle of Baghdad

Main article: Battle of Baghdad (1258)

The Mongol army, led by Hulagu Khan set out for Baghdad in November of 1257.

He marched with what was probably the largest army ever fielded by the Mongols.

By order of Monke Khan, one in ten fighting men in the entire empire were gathered for Hulagu's army (Saunders 1971).

Hulagu demanded surrender; the caliph refused, warning the Mongols that they faced the wrath of God if they attacked the caliph.

Many accounts say that the caliph failed to prepare for the onslaught; he neither gathered armies nor strengthened the walls of Baghdad.

Once near the city, Hulagu divided his forces, so that they threatened both sides of the city, on the east and west banks of the Tigris.

The caliph's army repulsed some of the forces attacking from the west, but were defeated in the next battle.

The attacking Mongols broke some dikes and flooded the ground behind the caliph’s army, trapping them.

Much of the army was slaughtered or drowned.

The Mongols under a chinese general, Kuo Kan, then laid siege to the city, constructing a palisade and ditch, wheeling up siege engines and catapults.

The siege started on January 29.

The battle was swift, by siege standards.

By February 5 the Mongols controlled a stretch of the wall.

Al-Musta'sim tried to negotiate, but was refused.

Although the city was defended by 500 thousand men, it didn't stop the Mongols from maching in.

On February 10 Baghdad surrendered.

The Mongols swept into the city on February 13 and began a week of massacre, looting, rape, and destruction.

Sack of Baghdad

As far as damage done, the sack of Bagdad by the Mongols made the sack of Rome by Alaric look kindly.

The Grand Library of Baghdad, containing countless precious historical documents and books on subjects ranging from medicine to astronomy, was destroyed.

Survivors said that the waters of the Tigris ran black with ink from the enormous quantities of books flung into the river.

Citizens attempted to flee, but were intercepted by Mongol soldiers who raped and killed with abandon.

Although death counts vary widely and cannot be easily substantiated, a number of estimates do exist.

Martin Sicker writes that close to 90,000 people may have died (Sicker 2000, p. 111).

Other estimates go much higher.

Muslim historian Abdullah Wassaf claims the loss of life was several hundred thousand or more.

Ian Frazier of The New Yorker says estimates of the death toll have ranged from 200,000 to a million.

The Mongols looted and then destroyed.

Mosques, palaces, libraries, hospitals — grand buildings that had been the work of generations were burned to the ground.

The caliph was captured and forced to watch as his citizens were murdered and his treasury plundered.

The caliph was trampled to death.

Marco Polo reports that Hulagu starved the caliph to death, but there is no corroborating evidence for that.

Most historians believe the Mongol accounts (and Muslim) that the Mongols rolled the caliph up in a rug, and rode their horses over him, as they believed that the earth was offended if touched by royal blood.

All of his sons but one were killed.

Prior to this, the Mongols destroyed a city only if it had resisted them.

Cities that capitulated at the first demand for surrender could usually expect to be spared.

Cities that surrendered after a short fight, such as this, normally could expect a sack, but not complete devastation.

The utter ferocity of the rape of Baghdad is the worst example of Mongol excess known.

(It is said some Chinese cities suffered a similar fate, but this is not documented).

Baghdad was a depopulated, ruined city for several centuries and only gradually recovered something of its former glory.

Aftermath

Thus was the caliphate destroyed, and Iraq ravaged — it has never again been such a major center of culture and influence.

The smaller states in the region hastened to reassure Hulagu of their loyalty, and the Mongols turned to Syria in 1259, conquering the Ayyubids and sending advance patrols as far ahead as Gaza.

Egypt's turn seemed next, but the death of Mongke forced Hulagu and most of his army to withdraw, for the succession crisis that followed was the most ruinous to date.

Indeed, although the succession was finally settled by imprisonment of one of his brothers, and another elevated to Great Khan, (Kublai Khan), the truth is that after 1258 there was no unified Mongol Empire, but four separate kingdoms, including the Il-Khanate of Persia established by Hulagu.

In the meantime, the Mongols led by Kitbuqa had fallen out with the crusaders holding the coast of Palestine, and the Mamluks were able to ally with them, pass through their territory, and destroy the Mongol army at the Battle of Ain Jalut.

Palestine and Syria were permanently lost, the border remaining the Tigris for the duration of Hulagu's dynasty.

Hulagu returned to his lands by 1262, but instead of being able to avenge his defeats, was drawn into civil war with Batu Khan's brother Berke.

Berke Khan had promised such a defeat in his rage after Hulagu's sack of Bagdad; Berke was a Muslim.

Muslim Historian Rashid al Din quoted Berke Khan as sending the following message to Mongke Khan, protesting the attack on Bagdad, (not knowing Mongke had died in China) "he has sacked all the cities of the Muslims, and has brought about the death of the Caliph."

"With the help of God I will call him to account for so much innocent blood." (see The Mongol Warlords, quoting Rashid al Din's record of Berke Khan's pronouncement; this quote is also found in The Mamluk-Ilkhanid War) -- it is notable that Berke Khan kept his promise, allying himself with the Mamluks, and when Hulagu returned to his lands in 1262, after the succession was finally settled with Kublai as the last Great Khan, and massed his armies to avenge Ain Jalut and attack the Mamluks, Berke Khan initiated a series of raids in force which drew Hulagu north to meet him, and Hulagu Khan suffered severe defeat in an attempted invasion north of the Caucasus in 1263.

This was the first open war between Mongols, and signaled the end of the unified empire.

Hulagu Khan died in 1265 and was buried in the Kaboudi Island in Lake Urmia.

His funeral was the only Ilkhanid funeral to feature human sacrifice.

He was succeeded by his son Abaqa, thus establishing his line.

References

Boyle, J.A., (Editor). The Cambridge History of Iran: Volume 5, The Saljuq and Mongol Periods . Cambridge University Press; Reissue edition (January 1, 1968). ISBN 052106936X.

Perhaps the best overview of the history of the il-khanate.

Covers politics, economics, religion, culture and the arts and sciences.

Also has a section on the Isma'ilis, Hulagu's nemesis.

Encyclopedia Iranica has scholar-reviewed articles on a wide range of Persian subjects, including Hulagu.

Morgan, David. The Mongols. Blackwell Publishers; Reprint edition, April 1990. ISBN 0631175636.

Best for an overview of the wider context of medieval Mongol history and culture.

See also

Berke-Hulagu war

External links

A long article about Hulagu's conquest of Baghdad, written by Ian Frazier, appeared in the April 25, 2005 issue of The New Yorker.

An Osama bin Laden tape in which Osama bin Laden compares Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Colin Powell to Hulagu and his attack on Baghdad.

Dated November 12, 2002.

A collection of coins from Hulagu's reign. 1256 - 1265.

In the reign .....

Of THE GREAT KHAN ....

George W. Bush .....

All was chaos .....

And disorder .....

AND LAWLESSNESS ..

And so ....

Who is surprised .....

At this?

"Scientists Question Nature's Fundamental Laws"

Michael Schirber, Special to SPACE.com

Tue Jul 11, 12:00 PM ET

Public confidence in the "constants" of nature may be at an all time low.

Recent research has found evidence that the value of certain fundamental parameters, such as the speed of light or the invisible glue that holds nuclei together, may have been different in the past.

"There is absolutely no reason these constants should be constant," says astronomer Michael Murphy of the University of Cambridge.

"These are famous numbers in physics, but we have no real reason for why they are what they are."

The observed differences are small - roughly a few parts in a million - but the implications are huge: The laws of physics would have to be rewritten, not to mention we might need to make room for six more spatial dimensions than the three that we are used to.

Lines of evidence

The evidence for varying constants focuses primarily on quasar studies.

Quasars are extremely luminous objects, powered by giant black holes.

Some of them are so far away that their light was emitted 12 billion years ago.

Astronomers study the spectra of this ancient light to determine if the early universe was different than now.

Specifically, they look at absorption lines, which are due to gas clouds between us and the quasars.

The lines reveal exactly what is in the clouds, since each type of atom has a "fingerprint" - a set of specific frequencies at which it absorbs.

In 1999, Murphy and his colleagues found the first convincing evidence that these fingerprints change with time.

Using data from the Keck observatory in Hawaii, they detected a frequency difference between billion-year-old quasar lines and the corresponding lines measured on Earth.

Some of these Earth-bound lines were not well characterized, so Murphy and others recently performed careful lab experiments to confirm that there is indeed a shift in the quasar spectra.

A spectra is basically light split into its component frequencies, much like when white light goes through a prism to produce a rainbow.

What's in a constant

Because the frequencies of absorption lines depend on various parameters, the quasar observations are sometimes interpreted as indicating that light was faster in the past, or that the electron had a weaker charge.

But theorist Carlos Martins of the University of Cambridge tells LiveScience that this is not entirely correct:

"It doesn't make sense to talk about a varying speed of light or electron charge."

This is because the values of these parameters include units that might change.

The speed of light, for instance, might be measured one day with a ruler and a clock.

If the next day the same measurement gave a different answer, no one could tell if the speed of light changed, the ruler length changed, or the clock ticking changed.

To avoid this confusion, scientists use dimensionless constants - pure numbers that are ratios of measured quantities.

In the case of the shifts in Murphy's data, the relevant dimensionless constant is the fine structure constant (often designated by the Greek letter alpha), which characterizes the strength of the electromagnetic force.

The researchers found that alpha was smaller in the past, but other "famous numbers" would not be immune to the vagaries of time.

"You would expect variation in all the fundamental constants," Murphy says.

It was therefore not entirely a surprise when - in April of this year - Patrick Petitjean of the Astrophysical Institute of Paris and his collaborators detected a change in the proton to electron mass ratio from molecular absorption lines in quasar spectra.

The mass variation can be interpreted as the strong force's coupling constant being larger in the early universe, Petitjean says.

A hole in the theory

Time-varying constants of nature violate Einstein's equivalence principle, which says that any experiment testing nuclear or electromagnetic forces should give the same result no matter where or when it is performed.

If this principle is broken, then two objects dropped in a gravitational field should fall at slightly different rates.

Moreover, Einstein's gravitational theory - general relativity - would no longer be completely correct, Martins says.

A popular alternative to relativity, which assumes that sub-atomic particles are vibrating strings and that the universe has 10 or more spatial dimensions, actually predicts inconstant constants.

According to this string theory, the extra dimensions are hidden from us, but the "true" constants of nature are defined on all dimensions.

Therefore, if the hidden dimensions expand or contract, we will notice this as a variation in our "local" 3D constants.

Even if string theory is not correct, the current model of gravity will likely need to be revised to unite it with the other three fundamental forces.

"We have an incomplete theory, so you look for holes that will point to a new theory," Murphy says.

Varying constants may be just such a hole.

"I will bring you down from the spinning spheres;

I will toss you in the air like a lion.

I will leave no one alive in your realm;

I will burn your city, your land, your self."


Strikes me that this is what is going on now. My how history repeats itself.


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/071006R.shtml

A Day in the Life
By William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Monday 10 July 2006

Upon reading of the astonishing shooting incident in the al-Jihad neighborhood of Baghdad yesterday, I sat down and attempted to imagine, simply, what it must be like to live in that city these days. I tried to imagine what it must be like to be surrounded by constant violence, escalating cycles of revenge, and a total absence of government control.

Pretend you live in Iraq. The day starts, as it usually does, with you wondering what will happen because of the bombings and killings the day before. Several members of a Shiite family were mowed down by gunmen in the Dora neighborhood of Baghdad yesterday, and three others were shot to death in an ice cream shop. A Sunni cleric was shot to death yesterday, and several people died when a Baghdad mosque was bombed. Four children were killed by mortars in the capital. Outside Baghdad, three US Marines died when their convoy was bombed in al-Anbar.

You hear about all this - Shiites killing Sunnis, Sunnis killing Shiites, the mosque getting bombed and the Marines getting killed - and you know what you knew the day before, and the day before that: someone, somewhere is going to try to exact revenge today for the mayhem of yesterday. It could be Shiite revenge, Sunni revenge or American revenge, but the arc always arrives at the same spot. Someone is going to die today, and you hope it isn't you.

You attempt to go about your business, but that is hardly a simple task. Every neighborhood you pass through is barricaded and patrolled by "neighborhood governments" who are armed to the teeth and murderously distrustful of outsiders. Kidnappings happen all the time. Islamic fundamentalists, once a rarity in Iraq, now patrol the streets doling out punishment to anyone deemed to be dressed improperly.

If your errand is to get some gasoline, you'll be in line for the rest of the day and into tomorrow. If you're looking for food, your chore is equally daunting. Fresh food is hard to come by, and not a good idea generally. Electricity is off for hours at a time, turning your refrigerator into a useless hotbox, and anything you buy will spoil quickly in the stifling heat.

There is no true government outside the so-called "Green Zone" set up by the Americans. Beyond the concrete barricades and hard-eyed soldiers, it is a free-for-all. As you walk, you catch a snippet of the American president bragging about Iraqi democracy on someone's radio, and you laugh to yourself at the absurdity. You laugh quietly, however, and not for long. You don't want to draw any attention to yourself.

You turn the corner into the al-Jihad neighborhood of western Baghdad and head for a vegetable stand a friend told you was good. Before you can get there, you see three cars drive up and stop. Out of the cars pile several black-clad men toting assault rifles, and you dive for cover, and you watch.

The guns erupt and people begin to drop. The gunmen begin kicking in doors and dragging people out into the street, where they are riddled and left to bleed out. You see several people hanged by improvised nooses, and you see others held down and tortured to death with power drills. From one kicked-in apartment door you hear horrifying screams and the sound of a hammer pounding, and you realize that someone inside is being pegged to a wall.

Before you turn to flee, you recognize the shooters as members of the Shiite militia they call the Mahdi Army, which is controlled by powerful cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Mahdi fighters means the ones dying are Sunnis. You count more than fifty bodies on the ground before you duck behind some cars and sprint around a corner. The vegetables can wait.

On your way back home, you hear a distant boom. When you get back to the relative safety of your own neighborhood government-guarded apartment, you hear that two car bombs went off at a Shiite mosque not too far away. You do a little mental calculus: The Shiites gunned down yesterday means the Sunnis who died today paid for that carnage, and the Shiite mosque bombing today means the Sunnis outraged by the massacre in al-Jihad reached out to touch someone.

The electricity comes on for a little while that night, and you tune in to an Al Jazeera news broadcast. You hear the Iraq deputy prime minister for security affairs, Salam al-Zawbae, accuse the defense and interior ministries within his own government of helping the militias organize and carry out the attacks. "Interior and defense ministries are infiltrated," says Zawbae, "and there are officials who lead brigades who are involved in this. What is happening now is an ugly slaughter."

The power abruptly cuts off again and the television screen goes blank. You sit in the dark and think about Bush's happy comments on Iraqi democracy, the words you heard on that radio before the shooting started. Politicians loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr control more than thirty seats on the so-called Iraqi parliament, making any attacks against the Mahdi Army a ready excuse to explode the government. The civil war playing out in the streets is also being fought by those supposedly elected to lead Iraq out of chaos.

You hand-roll a cigarette made of black market tobacco, and you sit in the dark, and you try to guess who will die tomorrow. You hope, as always, that it isn't you.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times and internationally bestselling author of two books: War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know and The Greatest Sedition Is Silence.

http://www.counterpunch.org/

An Illegal War Degenerates
Iraq: Raped
By RAED JARRAR

A few months ago, Abir Al-Janabi was just another 14-year-old Iraqi girl in a small town called Al-Mahmudiyah, south of Baghdad. Both of her parents are from the Al-Janabi tribe, one of the biggest tribes with Sunni and Shia branches.

Omar Al-Janabi, a neighbor and relative, was informed by Abir's mother that the young girl was being harassed by U.S. soldiers stationed in a nearby checkpoint. That is why Abir was sent to spend the night in her neighbor's home. The next day, Omar Al-Janabi was among the first people who found Abir, with her 34-year-old mother Fakhriyah, her 45-year-old father Qasim, and her 7-year-old sister Hadil, murdered in their home. Abir was raped, killed by a bullet in her head, and then burned on March 12, five months before her fifteenth birthday.

Muhammad Al-Janabi, Abir's uncle, reached the house shortly after the attack as well. Iraqi police and army officers informed him and other angry relatives that an "armed terrorist group" was responsible for the horrifying attack. This is exactly what the angry relatives of the 24 Iraqi civilians killed in Haditha four months before this incident had been told as well. In that case, U.S. officials initially claimed that a roadside bomb planted by terrorists had killed the 24 Iraqi civilians and one U.S. soldier in Haditha, but the Iraqi people knew that it was the Americans.

Unlike the case of Haditha, where Iraqi public opinion was furious about the massacre months before it reached to the U.S. mainstream media, the Iraqi press had not even heard of Abir until the U.S. army accidentally found out information about her while investigating another incident. This raises questions about the number of other similar cases that were never investigated and were blamed on non-occupation parties instead.

According to Iraq Body Count, a credible project documenting Iraq's civilian casualties, the occupation armies are directly responsible for killing more than one fourth of civilians in Iraq since the beginning of the war. This makes the assumption that Abir's case is just one of many even more plausible.

The "Hadji Girl" song is yet another indicator that what happened to Abir is most like not an anomalous case. "Hadji Girl" is a videotaped song about killing Iraqis written and performed by U.S. Marine Corporal Joshua Belile while he was at the Al-Asad Air Base in Iraq. The song became controversial a few weeks ago when the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) discovered it on the internet and objected to its lyrics.

The lyrics, accompanied by loud laughter and applause, include lines as such as "So I grabbed her little sister and pulled her in front of me. As the bullets began to fly, the blood sprayed from between her eyes, and then I laughed maniacally. Then I hid behind the TV, and I locked and loaded my M-16, and I blew those little "expletive deleted"ers to eternity. And I said Dirka Dirka Mohammed Jihad, Sherpa Sherpa Bak Allah, they should have known they were "expletive deleted"ing with a Marine". A two-week investigation held by the U.S. army ended with no punishment for Corporal Belile. Furthermore, according to the spokesperson for the Mike Church Show, Mike Church is planning to record and release "Hadji Girl" and give royalties to Belile. The right-wing presenter will sing and release the song on air this week.

But even if you believe that the case of Abir is a rare exception, it is still a major scandal in Iraq. Issues relating to honor are even more sensitive for the Iraqi public and government than the ongoing daily civilian murders. The first Iraqi governmental reaction came when an Iraqi female member of Parliament asked for an urgent session for which Prime Minister Al-Maliki was called back home to attend. The Iraqi Parliament described the rape as a crime against "the honor of all Iraqis". As a result, Al-Maliki asked for a review of the laws put in place by U.S. Ambassador Paul Bremer, giving foreign troops immunity from prosecution in Iraq. This seems to be an Iraqi public demand. Iraqi tribal leaders had a number of meetings across the country last week on the anniversary of "Thawrat Al-Eshrin", the 1920 revolution against the British occupation. The largest meeting was that of the mostly Shia Middle Euphrates Tribes. During this meeting, they threatened to initiate a full-scale revolution against the occupation, similar to what had happened in 1920, unless the U.S. army hands over to them all soldiers accused of raping the "Al-Mahmudiyah Virgin," as she is now known.

The uproar created in the wake of the death of Abir is but the culmination of over three years of pent-up frustration and rage the Iraqi people feel. It will only end with the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. What is happening in Iraq is a rape of a nation, not just a rape of a 14-year-old girl, and it has to be stopped as soon as possible.

Raed Jarrar, an Iraqi living in the United States, is the director of the Iraq Project at Global Exchange. Jarrar can be reached at: jarrar.raed@gmail.com

Yes, it does, Snuf ...

History repeat itself, I mean .....

And I like that line ....

About the "Spinning Spheres" .....

PURE KARL ROVE, that line is .....

Plenty of theatrical flair ....

Plus the boasting tone ....

And so ...

Yeah, you just got to love that "ARCHITECT" ......

When it comes to POLITICS .....

HE IS THE MASTER ....

Hand's down ...

Which is why he is in such demand down there in Washington, D.C. .....

By all the wannabees .....

Like "BIG BILL" Frist .....

And so ...

"Novak: Rove was a source in outing Plame"

By PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer

47 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Now that Karl Rove won't be indicted, now that the president won't fire him, now that it really doesn't matter anymore, more details of the Valerie Plame leak investigation trickle out.

In his latest syndicated column released Wednesday, columnist Robert Novak revealed his side of the story in the Plame affair, saying Rove was a confirming source for Novak's story outing the CIA officer, underscoring Rove's role in a leak President Bush once promised to punish.

The columnist said he learned of Plame's CIA employment from a source he still refuses to publicly identify, and then confirmed with Rove and then-CIA spokesman Bill Harlow, whose roles in talking to Novak have been previously reported.

Novak said for the first time that prosecutors looking into the leaks already knew his sources when he agreed to disclose them.

Novak comes late to the Plame game, long after several other reporters talked publicly about the involvement of Rove and of Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby, in leaking the CIA identity of the wife of Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson.

Novak says he kept his mouth shut so long because prosecutors asked him to.

A month ago, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald said he didn't anticipate seeking charges against Rove.

Novak wrote that, more recently, Fitzgerald told his lawyer that after 2 1/2 years his investigation of the CIA leak case concerning matters directly relating to Novak has been concluded, freeing him to talk now.

Triggering the criminal investigation that resulted in Libby being charged with perjury, obstruction and lying to the FBI, Novak revealed Plame's CIA employment on July 14, 2003, eight days after her husband went on the attack against the Bush administration.

Initially refusing to identify his sources to the FBI, Novak knew that Fitzgerald had obtained signed waivers from every official who might have provided Novak information about Plame.

Despite that, Novak was prepared to resist.

He says he relented in early 2004 when it became clear that Fitzgerald "knew the names of my sources."

Novak could still have protected his sources, but his lawyer told him "I was sure to lose a case in the courts at great expense."

In contrast to other reporters whose news organizations footed the bill for lengthy and expensive legal battles, the fact that Novak was a no-show in contentious court proceedings fed a rumor mill.

"Published reports that I took the Fifth Amendment, made a plea bargain with the prosecutors or was a prosecutorial target were all untrue," Novak writes.

The facts were simpler.

He was telling prosecutors everything he knew, and taking a beating in public for not talking about it.

Keeping quiet had the effect of providing protection for the Bush White House during the 2004 presidential campaign, because the White House had denied Rove played any role in the leak of Plame's CIA identity.

As Rove's legal problems grew a year ago, Bush said he stood by his pledge to "fire anybody" in his administration shown to have leaked Valerie Plame's name.

His press secretary, after checking with Rove and Libby, assured the public that neither man had anything to do with the leak.

Now that he's finally opening up, Novak is stirring up more trouble, saying without elaboration that his recollection of his conversation with Rove about Plame differs from Rove's.

Rove's spokesman says the difference amounts to very little.

"I have revealed Rove's name because his attorney has divulged the substance of our conversation, though in a form different from my recollection," Novak wrote.

Novak did not elaborate.

A spokesman for Rove's legal team, Mark Corallo, said that Rove did not even know Plame's name at the time he spoke with Novak, that the columnist called Rove, not the other way around, and that Rove simply replied he had heard the same information that Novak passed along to him regarding Plame.

"There was not much of a difference" between the recollections of Rove and Novak, said Corallo.

Novak says he told Fitzgerald that Harlow of the CIA had confirmed information about Plame.

Harlow declined to comment Tuesday night.

But a U.S. intelligence official familiar with the matter denied that Harlow had been a confirming source for Novak on the story.

The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Harlow repeatedly tried to talk Novak out of running the information about Plame and that Harlow's efforts did not in any way constitute confirming Plame's CIA identity.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because Harlow may end up being a witness in a separate part of Fitzgerald's investigation, the upcoming criminal trial of Libby.
___

On the Web:

Chicago Sun-Times report:

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-leak11.html

end quotes

I am actually surprised .....

That anyone ...

Would take a word ...

Uttered by WHITE HOUSE SPOKESBOY .....

Scottie McClellan seriously .....

Or any of that crowd, actually .....

When the man they work for ...

Has no INTEGRITY .....

Why on earth ....

Would anyone ...

Expect .....

His hand-picked hired help .....

To be any different than he .....

And so ...

KARL ROVE's greatest strength .....

Is knowing ...

THAT YOU CAN OPENLY ...

AND BLATANTLY .....

LIE ...

TO THE SAME PEOPLE ...

DAY AFTER DAY AFTER DAY .....

IF THOSE PEOPLE .....

ARE TOLD .....

THAT IT IS AN "AUTHORITY" SPEAKING .....

And so ......

KARL IS THE MAN .....

And THE MAN has the power ....

And THE MAN ...

With THE POWER ....

Is an UNTOUCHABLE ....

And so .....

Another day .....

In the LIFE ....

Here in OUR AMERICA ....

And so ....

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

Military Commission Order No. 1, which governs the military commission established to try petitioner Salim Hamdan for war crimes, exceeds limits that certain statutes, duly enacted by Congress, have placed on the President's authority to convene military courts.

This is not a case, then, where the Executive can assert some unilateral authority to fill a void left by congressional inaction.

It is a case where Congress, in the proper exercise of its powers as an independent branch of government, and as part of a long tradition of legislative involvement in matters of military justice, has considered the subject of military tribunals and set limits on the President's authority.

Where a statute provides the conditions for the exercise of governmental power, its requirements are the result of a deliberative and reflective process engaging both of the political branches.

Respect for laws derived from the customary operation of the Executive and Legislative Branches gives some assurance of stability in time of crisis.

The Constitution is best preserved by reliance on standards tested over time and insulated from the pressures of the moment.

These principles seem vindicated here, for a case that may be of extraordinary importance is resolved by ordinary rules.

The rules of most relevance here are those pertaining to the authority of Congress and the interpretation of its enactments.

It seems appropriate to recite these rather fundamental points because the Court refers, as it should in its exposition of the case, to the requirement of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 that military tribunals be "regularly constituted" ante, at 69--a requirement that controls here, if for no other reason, because Congress requires that military commissions like the ones at issue conform to the "law of war," 10 U. S. C. §821.

Whatever the substance and content of the term "regularly constituted" as interpreted in this and any later cases, there seems little doubt that it relies upon the importance of standards deliberated upon and chosen in advance of crisis, under a system where the single power of the Executive is checked by other constitutional mechanisms.

All of which returns us to the point of beginning -- that domestic statutes control this case.

If Congress, after due consideration, deems it appropriate to change the controlling statutes, in conformance with the Constitution and other laws, it has the power and prerogative to do so.

I join the Court's opinion, save Parts V and VI-D-iv.

To state my reasons for this reservation, and to show my agreement with the remainder of the Court's analysis by identifying particular deficiencies in the military commissions at issue, this separate opinion seems appropriate.

TO BE CONTINUED .....

"Spitzer links emerge in field of racing bids - Groups vying for NYRA franchise have numerous political ties in state"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, July 12, 2006

ALBANY -- The field of proposed bidders on New York's horse racing franchise includes a secretive company represented by the father of Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's campaign manager.

Among the entries to replace the New York Racing Association as operators of the Aqueduct, Belmont and Saratoga Springs tracks is Western New York Gaming Associates of Sanborn.

WNY Gaming lists Tim Toohey, a lawyer from Lewiston, as its representative, but he won't disclose the principals and competitors say they haven't a clue on who is behind the group.

The 16 prospective bidders also include a casino giant whose lobbyist is one of Spitzer's biggest campaign donors; a group partnering a major Democratic operative and George Steinbrenner's kin; and lobbyists with numerous potential conflicts.

Toohey is the father of Ryan Toohey, manager of Spitzer's campaign for governor.

Tim Toohey recently was convicted of willfully filing a false statement on a federal tax return and was sentenced to both probation and incarceration, but the jail time is being contested.

Criminality could be cause for refusal of racing and lottery licenses by state authorities.

Toohey said he has no intention of running races or video lottery terminals and is only handling bidding for potential bidders he would not identify.

He has represented members of the Seneca Indian Nation in tribal court.

The tribe operates casinos in western New York.

If he wins election in November, Spitzer could decide who gets the racing franchise held since 1955 by NYRA.

NYRA is one of the entities that informed the Ad Hoc Committee on the Future of Racing of interest in bidding on the franchise.

Spitzer has been highly critical of NYRA and has prosecuted past employees.

Besides Toohey, connections to Spitzer among bidders include Stuart Shorenstein, a top lobbyist for MGM Grand, an announced potential bidder.

MGM also is partnering with NYRA on a plan to build a $180 million video lottery terminal facility at Aqueduct and is interested in a bigger role if the state authorizes VLTs at Belmont.

With his wife, Janice, and others living at his address, Shorenstein has contributed heavily to Spitzer -- more than $29,600 since 2001.

Christine Anderson, a spokeswoman for the Spitzer campaign, said the candidate would deal independently on who gets the racing franchise regardless of ties to bidders.

The bidding list also includes Excelsior Racing Associates, whose principals are George Steinbrenner's hand-picked successor to head the New York Yankees -- his son-in-law Stephen Swindal, former Democratic comptroller candidate William Mulrow and former Donald Trump associate Richard Fields and others.

Lobbyist William Powers and others linked to Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno also are believed to be part of Excelsior, according to competitors.

A spokesman, Howard Wolfson, would only confirm Fields and Swindal.

LRW Development, another entity planning to bid, is an offshoot of Steve Wynn's Las Vegas casino business.

The representative for Wynn on the project is Kim Sinatra, formerly with Caesars Entertainment who got into trouble with the state lobbying commission when Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver received perks and discounts at a Las Vegas casino/hotel.

Other entanglements include three lobbying firms who represent competing potential bidders.

James Featherstonhaugh's firm works for the New York State Thoroughbred Horsemen's Association, which is backing Empire Racing Associates, a Saratoga Springs-based firm partnering with Delaware North on a bid.

Featherstonhaugh also represents Churchill Downs, another potential bidder.

Brian Meara represents three potential bidders: Nassau Regional OTB, Empire Racing and Empire Resorts, which runs Monticello Raceway.

He also represents Finger Lakes Gaming & Racetrack its owner, Delaware North.

"I notified all of them that I represent them all; it's totally open and on the record," Meara said.

"I have no belief that there is a conflict."

And the James Crane/Dennis Vacco lobbying group represents three potential bidders: TVG Network, Empire Racing and Delaware North.

"The fact that there's a long list, indicates that industry experts believe that New York state can do better," said Jeff Perlee, head of Empire Racing.

"The involvement and connections by a whole host of out-of-state entities only strengthens Empire Racing's position of the home-grown alternative."

NYRA Chairman Charles Hayward said the association is proposing to bid with a for-profit partner.

Its franchise expires at the end of 2007.

The number and composition of competing bidders is irrelevant, he said.

Bids are due Aug. 15, and the ad-hoc committee is to make a nonbinding recommendation to the governor and Legislature by Sept. 15.

Lawmakers say they expect a decision won't come until next year when a newly elected governor and Legislature is seated.

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

"Suozzi closer to challenge after petition filing - Nassau County official hands in signatures for gubernatorial primary against Eliot Spitzer"

By ELIZABETH BENJAMIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, July 11, 2006

ALBANY -- Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi on Monday filed what his campaign said was more than three times the number of signatures necessary to petition his way into a Democratic primary against gubernatorial front-runner Eliot Spitzer this September.

Thirty-three volumes of petitions -- a total of 4,811 pages that each had space for 10 names -- arrived at the state Board of Elections late in the afternoon, board spokesman Lee Daghlian confirmed.

If every line is filled, Suozzi will have filed 48,110 signatures from enrolled Democrats -- far more than the 15,000 he needs to formalize his candidacy by landing a spot on the ballot.

The Suozzi campaign said it used an army of volunteers and some paid staffers to collect at least 500 signatures in all but one of New York's 29 congressional districts.

The law requires candidates to collect at least 100 names in 15 of the districts.

"We have always known that a candidate with Tom's record of government reform and results, political independence and vision for the state would be what Democrats in New York would want for their next governor," said Suozzi campaign manager Kim Devlin.

Spitzer's campaign has three days to review Suozzi's petitions and decide whether to file a general objection.

That would trigger a six-day period during which the Spitzer camp could file specific challenges to Suozzi's petitions.

"We don't have any plans to challenge the petitions, but we'll take a look at them," said Spitzer campaign spokeswoman Christine Anderson.

Spitzer has maintained double-digit leads over Suozzi in statewide polls and is expected to have millions more on hand when fundraising figures for the last six months are made public on Monday.

Spitzer would be offering Suozzi a rare validation if he formally challenges the underdog's petitions.

The primary winner would face off against John Faso, the Republican and Conservative gubernatorial candidate.

Suozzi isn't the only Democrat who mounted a petition drive.

Charlie King, one of three Democrats trying to force a primary in the state attorney general's race, announced Monday he will file 50,000 signatures at the state Board of Elections this week.

Former U.S. Housing Secretary Andrew Cuomo was the only Democratic attorney general candidate who won enough support at the party's May convention to land an automatic ballot slot.

The campaigns of the two other attorney general hopefuls, former New York City Public Advocate Mark Green and Sean Patrick Maloney, a one-time counsel to President Clinton, refused to say how many signatures they had collected, but insisted they would have more than enough to get on the primary ballot.

Asked if Cuomo would challenge his rivals' petitions, his spokeswoman Wendy Katz replied:

"We fully expect all candidates seeking to be New York's next attorney general to have filed legally sufficient petitions."

The winner of the Democratic attorney general primary will run against former Westchester County District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, the only Republican seeking that office, in November.

Labor activist Jonathan Tasini, who is mounting a long shot challenge to U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton by running to her left with an anti-war campaign, said he will file more than the 15,000 necessary signatures Thursday at the Board of Elections.

Two Republican U.S. Senate hopefuls, former Yonkers Mayor John Spencer and Reagan-era Pentagon official Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland, both received enough support at the GOP convention in June to get on the September ballot.

The winner of that fight will try to topple Clinton in the general election.

Benjamin can be reached at 454-5081 or by e-mail at ebenjamin@timesunion.com.

end quote

My God ....

No wonder "OLD ONCLE ELIOT" has so much money .....

In his CAMPAIGN WAR CHEST ......

When you look at all the people he is in bed with .....

To get all that money ...

Well .....

You'd be surprised .....

IF HE DIDN'T HAVE A BUNDLE ....

And so .....

"Rivals dispute Spitzer's inevitability"

By MARC HUMBERT, Associated Press
First published: Tuesday, June 27, 2006

BOLTON LANDING -- Republican John Faso and Democratic maverick Tom Suozzi said Monday that too many New Yorkers think Eliot Spitzer has a lock on being elected governor.

But the Democratic attorney general, with big leads in fundraising and in the polls, can be beaten, the two said at a conference hosted by the New York State Broadcasters Association.

"I know many out there have said there's a candidate who all he has to do is send out engraved invitations to his inauguration, and he's going to be in office," Faso said.

But Faso, a former state Assembly minority leader, said this fall's election will turn on economic issues and the sorry state of New York's tax climate.

"When people realize that Eliot Spitzer has made billions (of dollars worth) of promises for new spending and new borrowing, and that inevitably Eliot Spitzer's election will require him to raise taxes, they will not vote for him," Faso told the broadcasters, meeting at the Sagamore resort on Lake George.

Spitzer was invited to address the broadcasters, but didn't attend.

Faso outlined his own proposals that include getting rid of taxes on tractor-trailer trucks and eliminating the state's estate tax.

The Spitzer camp has said he has proposals to save enough money by cutting waste and some state spending programs to pay for his ambitious plans to increase spending on education and some health programs.

Suozzi, hoping to force Spitzer into a Sept. 12 Democratic primary, said New York can be fixed, but Spitzer isn't the man for the job.

The Nassau County executive compared state government to a troubled corporation.

Suozzi said Spitzer, as attorney general for more than seven years, "was sitting on the board of directors."

end quotes

No, Tom .....

That's not exactly right ...

Although close to the mark .....

Old "Big EL" Spitzer wasn't just on the "BOARD OF DIRECTORS" .....

HE WAS THE LAWYER ....

WHO WAS PROVIDING COVER .....

FOR ALL THE WRONG-DOING ...

BY THE "BOARD OF DIRECTORS" .....

TO INCLUDE .....

IN AT LEAST ONE CASE ...

UNDER DISCUSSION ...

IN ANOTHER THREAD ...

IN THIS FORUM ...

http://commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/...php/t24721.html

ALLEGEDLY SUBORNING PERJURY .....

SO THAT HE COULD CRUSH .....

CITIZEN DISSENT .....

AGAINST GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION .....

IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK .....

And so ...

"BIG EL" SPITZER .....

IS MORE THAN JUST A PARTICIPANT ....

AS NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ...

HE "EMPOWERS" CORRUPTION ....

WHICH IN TURN ...

BENEFITS HIM .....

BY WINNING HIM FAVOR ...

WITH THOSE ...

WHO BENEFIT THEMSELVES .....

FROM CORRUPT STATE GOVERNMENT ...

HERE IN THE CORRUPT STATE OF NEW YORK ...

And so .....

And while we are on the subject .....

Of the corrupt State of New York ...

Which is held to be ...

ONE OF THE LEAST DEMOCRATIC STATES .....

In the United States ...

If not the world .....

To include Putin's Russia ....

We have .....

"McCain And The NY GOP"

July 11, 2006 at 5:31 pm

by Elizabeth Benjamin, Albany, New York Times Union

Thanks to the plethora of political blogs and the assiduousness of state Democratic Party spokesman Blake Zeff, you’ve probably already seen this new Esquire piece about U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Az., which includes a vingette about his visit here in May to give U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park, a fundraising boost.

Much has been made of the fact that Sweeney, a former executive director of the state GOP, pronounced the entire state of New York to be “in play” when it comes to this fall’s midterm House elections.

Other highlights have included Sweeney’s blaming of the “checked out” Gov. George Pataki, and McCain saying he doesn’t know anyone with a 29 percent approval rating who “thinks he can run for president.”

For the record, Pataki’s approval rating is higher now - it was up to 39 in a June Quinnipiac Poll.

Sweeney, once Pataki’s Labor commissioner, has been highly critical of the governor many times before.

The two have been on the outs for a while, due to a host of things, including the fact that Sweeney is still firmly in the camp of Bill Powers, the former state GOP chairman ousted by the Pataki camp in 2001 in favor of Alexander “Sandy” Treadwell, who is widely believed to covet Sweeney’s seat in Congress.

McCain, as is noted in the Esquire piece, hasn’t forgotten that Pataki - who, at least in his own mind, is now a McCain rival for the White House in 2008 - tried mightily to keep the senator off the presidential ballot in 2000.

An interesting part of the Esquire story that hasn’t been touched on is the part about Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, (or as he’s referred to in the piece: “old-school Joe Bruno”…”perhaps New York’s most powerful grassroots Republican”) who held a picnic McCain attended while he was in town.

“Bruno—a strong-jawed, thirty-year senator—and about a thousand of his supporters have been waiting in a steady rain to shake McCain’s hand or touch him on the elbow."

"These folks will do whatever Bruno asks of them, and given the 'graciousness of today’s visit,' he is exactly the sort of man who will one day ask them to vote early and often for John McCain.”

It seems the senator really buys in to the idea of Bruno-as-top-dog-Republican in New York.

“Yeah, that was great,” McCain says.

“We won’t have to sue to get on the ballot this time around.”

"Putin's Cheney jab underscores G-8 tension"

By JIM HEINTZ, Associated Press Writer

2 hours, 27 minutes ago

MOSCOW - President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday called Vice President Dick Cheney's criticism of Russia "an unsuccessful hunting shot," a caustic comment that underlines tensions ahead of the Group of Eight summit this weekend.

Under fire from critics who say his country does not deserve to be in the G-8 because of democratic backsliding during his more than six years in power, a confident Putin said the elite club of wealthy nations needs Russia because of its energy riches and nuclear might.

In three interviews with Western TV networks posted on the Kremlin Web site Wednesday, days before the summit in St. Petersburg, Putin set out what sounded like ground rules for dealing with an increasingly assertive Russia, saying his nation is open for constructive criticism but will not be pushed around.

Because of its economic weakness following the Soviet collapse of 1991, other nations countries had strong levers of influence on Russia, Putin said an interview with France's TF-1 television.

"Today these levers have been lost, but some of our partners have retained the desire to influence our foreign and domestic policies," he said.

"They must get rid of this desire as fast as possible and shift to the normal, equal relations of partners."

Putin reserved his most acerbic words for Cheney, who angered the Kremlin with a May speech in the ex-Soviet republic of Lithuania in which he accused Russia of cracking down on religious and political rights and of using its energy reserves as "tools of intimidation or blackmail."

"I think the statements of this sort by your vice president are the same as an unsuccessful hunting shot."

"It's pretty much the same," Putin said in an interview with NBC, referring mischievously to the errant shot by Cheney that wounded a companion on a hunting trip.

Putin, who is sensitive about growing U.S. influence in former Soviet republics and satellites that have turned westward since the Soviet collapse, said he believed Cheney's comments were driven by "political considerations, the desire to support certain political forces in Eastern Europe" at Russia's expense.

"It bothers me that ... this approach is based on a 20th-century foreign policy philosophy under which our partners always acted from the need to hold Russia back, seeing it as a political opponent at a minimum, or as an enemy," he said.

"This is a rudiment of Cold War thinking."

Putin offered his standard arguments against Cheney's criticism, saying Moscow has always fulfilled its natural gas supply contracts with European countries.

He contended that while it is impossible to build democracy swiftly after centuries of czarist and communist rule, Russian democracy compares favorably in some ways to that of the West.

"In your country ... the president is elected not directly ... but through a system of electors," he told NBC, referring to the Electoral College.

"And in our country, in Russia, the president ... is elected by a direct secret vote of the entire population."

"Where is there more democracy in deciding the most important question about power?"

Putin, who regularly makes distinctions between outspoken critics among politicians in foreign countries and the leaders who tend to speak less vehemently, seemed to set Cheney apart from President Bush, calling him "my partner and friend" and suggesting that he is no longer mired in Cold War thinking.

With some in the West arguing that Russia does not deserve a spot in the G-8 — let alone the presidency, which it holds this year and which Putin is using to bolster its international clout — Putin told NBC he sees his country as "a natural member of the club."

"It would be difficult to imagine the effective resolution of the problems we see as today as the most acute for the world economy and world security," he said, adding that Russia has "four times more proven oil and gas reserves than all the other G-8 countries taken together" and is "one of the mightiest nuclear powers."

Despite the criticism and warnings to the West, Putin also stressed that Russia shares "common aims" with the United States and other G-8 nations and is not out to confront them or undermine their efforts on issues such as Iran and North Korea.

"The difference is only in the path to the solution of this problem or that one," he told NBC.

"Bush's Next Job"

By Bill Ferguson, Knight Ridder Newspapers

Salt Lake Tribune

6/16/2006

Every great career eventually comes to an end, and when you're the president of these United States, you only get eight years (at most) to accomplish everything you set out to do.

Then you're an ex-president for the rest of your life.

I'll bet that ex-presidents, like most retired people, find it to be something of a shock to have all that time on their hands when they leave the working world.

So they find things to do.

They work on their memoirs.

They build libraries.

They give speeches.

They support their favorite charitable causes.

But what about our current president?

His term will be up before he knows it, and then it's back to private life.

I'm afraid the transition will be especially difficult for Dubya.

He is a man of action, and I worry about how he'll adjust to a life out of the spotlight.

I think that we, as a nation, owe Bush more than the customary parting gifts of an enormous pension and round-the-clock Secret Service protection when he leaves office.

I think we can do better for him.

I think we should put him to work, and I know just where he ought to go.

Iraq.

There is no question that Iraq will be the legacy of President Bush's tenure, and there is also no doubt that there will still be a lot of work to do there when he leaves office.

I believe we should allow Bush an opportunity to stick with the job even after his term expires.

The next president should appoint George W. Bush to be a special envoy to Iraq and charge him with the responsibility to oversee all American interests there, advise the new Iraqi government, and maintain the morale of American troops who are carrying out the war effort.

The position should be a permanent one, and he would not leave until the "hard work" of helping Iraq to establish a working democratic government has been accomplished.

Or until he leaves this mortal coil.

Whichever comes first.

But I do not believe Bush should go to Iraq alone.

He needs some trusted advisors by his side at all times, and the first two names that immediately spring to mind are Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld.

These men have been instrumental in the planning and execution of the Iraq campaign from the beginning, and I can only imagine how much more effective their work could be if they were onsite 24/7 right where the action is, getting their hands dirty in the cause of spreading freedom to that dark corner of the world.

I know this assignment would be dangerous.

The three senior freedom fighters would be huge targets for the forces of evil in Iraq, and there is a real possibility that one or more of them might meet with an untimely demise in that chaotic environment.

But as Bush has reminded us time and again, the price is high but our cause is just.

Freedom is not free.

I expect that all three men would be ready and willing to undertake their assignments in the battle zone despite the extreme danger they would face.

This would be a chance to show the world that they are willing to put their own lives, and not just the lives of others, on the line for what they know to be right.

So let's start a campaign to send the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld team to Iraq in 2008.

They deserve the opportunity to "finish the job" in Iraq, and I think that the sight of the three of them tooling around the streets of Baghdad in a lightly armored Humvee would do a lot to improve the morale of all Americans.

Bill Ferguson is a columnist for the Macon (GA) Telegraph.

"Bombs kill 60 Iraqis, fueling anger over faltering security"

By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press
First published: Wednesday, July 12, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- More than a dozen bombings killed about 60 people in Iraq on Tuesday, part of a recent surge in violence that prompted lawmakers to ask the government to explain why its security plan for the capital is failing.

Suicide bombers struck across the street from Baghdad's heavily guarded Green Zone, killing up to 16 people -- the deadliest attack.

In all, about 60 people died in more than a dozen bombings, shootings and ambushes -- mostly in the Baghdad area, according to police reports.

The dead included 10 Shiites slain by gunmen who fired on their bus as it left the capital for a funeral in southern Iraq, police said.

Lawmakers summoned the defense and interior ministers to explain the failure of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's security plan for the capital -- where most of the recent violence has occurred.

A statement posted on an Islamist Web site in the name of the Islamic Army in Iraq claimed responsibility for the attack, saying it was in retaliation for Israeli military operations in Gaza and the alleged rape-slaying by U.S. soldiers of a young Iraqi woman south of Baghdad.

The Islamic Army is a major insurgent group but authenticity of the statement could not be determined.

Much of the violence Tuesday appeared to be sectarian, part of a surge in tit-for-tat killings that began Sunday when Shiite gunmen rampaged through a mostly Sunni area of west Baghdad, killing 41 people, according to police.

Al-Maliki's government unveiled a sweeping plan last month to restore security in Baghdad, putting tens of thousands Iraqi and U.S. troops on the streets, increasing the number of checkpoints and stepping up patrols.

Many Iraqi lawmakers and media commentators have complained that the plan has done little except tie up traffic at checkpoints.

America's top envoy in Baghdad on Tuesday denied that Iraq is now embroiled in a civil war but acknowledged growing concern that sectarian clashes could derail the new government if violence is not brought under control.

Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad also said the new security crackdown in Baghdad has been a disappointment and is being reviewed to make "adjustments."

Khalilzad, in Washington to give briefings, also said the United States and Iraq have set up a new commission to outline terms and conditions for the U.S. withdrawal of troops, bringing Iraq into the decision making process for the first time.

Halliburton out

According to The Washington Post, the Army is discontinuing a controversial multibillion-dollar deal with oil services giant Halliburton Co. to provide logistical support to U.S. troops worldwide, a decision that could cut deeply into the firm's dominance of government contracting in Iraq.

Under the deal, Halliburton had exclusive rights to provide the military with a wide range of work that included keeping soldiers around the globe fed, sheltered, and in communication with friends and family back home.

Government audits turned up more than $1 billion in questionable costs.

Halliburton officials have denied the allegations.

Army officials Tuesday defended the company's performance but also acknowledged that reliance on a single contractor left the government vulnerable.

The Pentagon's new plan will split the work among three companies, to be chosen this fall, with a fourth firm hired to help monitor the performance of the other three.

Halliburton will be eligible to bid on the work.

Saddam trial delayed

The judge called a two-week recess in the war crimes trial of Saddam Hussein on Tuesday, hoping to end a boycott by the former Iraqi leader and his lawyers.

But he warned that if they won't come back, court-appointed lawyers will make Saddam's closing arguments.

The lawyers for Saddam and three top co-defendants said they would not appear unless the court met a list of demands, including greater security.

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

Trial by military commission raises separation-of-powers concerns of the highest order.

Located within a single branch, these courts carry the risk that offenses will be defined, prosecuted, and adjudicated by executive officials without independent review.

Cf. Loving v. United States, 517 U. S. 748, 756-758, 760 (1996).

Concentration of power puts personal liberty in peril of arbitrary action by officials, an incursion the Constitution's three-part system is designed to avoid.

It is imperative, then, that when military tribunals are established, full and proper authority exists for the Presidential directive.

The proper framework for assessing whether Executive actions are authorized is the three-part scheme used by Justice Jackson in his opinion in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579 (1952).

"When the President acts pursuant to an express or implied authorization of Congress, his authority is at its maximum, for it includes all that he possesses in his own right plus all that Congress can delegate." Id., at 635.

"When the President acts in absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority, he can only rely upon his own independent powers, but there is a zone of twilight in which he and Congress may have concurrent authority, or in which its distribution is uncertain." Id., at 637.

And "[w]hen the President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb." Ibid.

In this case, as the Court observes, the President has acted in a field with a history of congressional participation and regulation.

Ante, at 28-30, 55-57.

In the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), 10 U. S. C. §801 et seq., which Congress enacted, building on earlier statutes, in 1950, see Act of May 5, 1950, ch. 169, 64 Stat. 107, and later amended, see, e.g., Military Justice Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 1335, Congress has set forth governing principles for military courts.

The UCMJ as a whole establishes an intricate system of military justice.

It authorizes courts-martial in various forms, 10 U. S. C. §§816-820 (2000 ed. and Supp. III); it regulates the organization and procedure of those courts, e.g., §§822-835, 851-854; it defines offenses, §§877-934, and rights for the accused, e.g., §§827(b)-©, 831, 844, 846, 855 (2000 ed.); and it provides mechanisms for appellate review, §§859-876b (2000 ed. and Supp. III).

As explained below, the statute further recognizes that special military commissions may be convened to try war crimes. See infra, at 5-6; §821 (2000 ed.).

While these laws provide authority for certain forms of military courts, they also impose limitations, at least two of which control this case.

If the President has exceeded these limits, this becomes a case of conflict between Presidential and congressional action--a case within Justice Jackson's third category, not the second or first.

One limit on the President's authority is contained in §836 of the UCMJ.

That section provides:

"(a) Pretrial, trial, and post-trial procedures, including modes of proof, for cases arising under this chapter triable in courts-martial, military commissions and other military tribunals, and procedures for courts of inquiry, may be prescribed by the President by regulations which shall, so far as he considers practicable, apply the principles of law and the rules of evidence generally recognized in the trial of criminal cases in the United States district courts, but which may not be contrary to or inconsistent with this chapter."

"(b) All rules and regulations made under this article shall be uniform insofar as practicable." 10 U. S. C. §836 (2000 ed.).

In this provision the statute allows the President to implement and build on the UCMJ's framework by adopting procedural regulations, subject to three requirements:

(1) Procedures for military courts must conform to district-court rules insofar as the President "considers practicable";

(2) the procedures may not be contrary to or inconsistent with the provisions of the UCMJ; and

(3) "insofar as practicable" all rules and regulations under §836 must be uniform, a requirement, as the Court points out, that indicates the rules must be the same for military commissions as for courts-martial unless such uniformity is impracticable, ante, at 57, 59, and n. 50.

As the Court further instructs, even assuming the first and second requirements of §836 are satisfied here--a matter of some dispute, see ante, at 57-59--the third requires us to compare the military-commission procedures with those for courts-martial and determine, to the extent there are deviations, whether greater uniformity would be practicable. Ante, at 59-62.

Although we can assume the President's practicability judgments are entitled to some deference, the Court observes that Congress' choice of language in the uniformity provision of 10 U. S. C. §836(b) contrasts with the language of §836(a).

This difference suggests, at the least, a lower degree of deference for §836(b) determinations. Ante, at 59-60.

The rules for military courts may depart from federal-court rules whenever the President "considers" conformity impracticable, §836(a); but the statute requires procedural uniformity across different military courts "insofar as [uniformity is] practicable," §836(b), not insofar as the President considers it to be so.

The Court is right to conclude this is of relevance to our decision.

TO BE CONTINUED ....

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

Further, as the Court is also correct to conclude, ante, at 60, the term "practicable" cannot be construed to permit deviations based on mere convenience or expedience.

"Practicable" means "feasible," that is, "possible to practice or perform" or "capable of being put into practice, done, or accomplished."

Webster's Third New International Dictionary 1780 (1961).

Congress' chosen language, then, is best understood to allow the selection of procedures based on logistical constraints, the accommodation of witnesses, the security of the proceedings, and the like.

Insofar as the "[p]retrial, trial, and post-trial procedures" for the military commissions at issue deviate from court-martial practice, the deviations must be explained by some such practical need.

In addition to §836, a second UCMJ provision, 10 U. S. C. §821, requires us to compare the commissions at issue to courts-martial.

This provision states:

"The provisions of this chapter conferring jurisdiction upon courts-martial do not deprive military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals of concurrent jurisdiction with respect to offenders or offenses that by statute or by the law of war may be tried by military commissions, provost courts, or other military tribunals."

In §821 Congress has addressed the possibility that special military commissions--criminal courts other than courts-martial--may at times be convened.

At the same time, however, the President's authority to convene military commissions is limited: It extends only to "offenders or offenses" that "by statute or by the law of war may be tried by" such military commissions.

Ibid.; see also ante, at 28-29.

The Government does not claim to base the charges against Hamdan on a statute; instead it invokes the law of war.

That law, as the Court explained in Ex parte Quirin, 317 U. S. 1 (1942), derives from "rules and precepts of the law of nations"; it is the body of international law governing armed conflict.

Id., at 28.

If the military commission at issue is illegal under the law of war, then an offender cannot be tried "by the law of war" before that commission.

The Court is correct to concentrate on one provision of the law of war that is applicable to our Nation's armed conflict with al Qaeda in Afghanistan and, as a result, to the use of a military commission to try Hamdan.

Ante, at 65-70; see also 415 F. 3d 33, 44 (CADC 2005) (Williams, J., concurring).

That provision is Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949.

It prohibits, as relevant here, "[t]he passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples."

See, e.g., Article 3 of the Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Aug. 12, 1949, [1955] 6 U. S. T. 3316, 3318, T. I. A. S. No. 3364.

The provision is part of a treaty the United States has ratified and thus accepted as binding law.

See id., at 3316.

By Act of Congress, moreover, violations of Common Article 3 are considered "war crimes," punishable as federal offenses, when committed by or against United States nationals and military personnel.

See 18 U. S. C. §2441.

There should be no doubt, then, that Common Article 3 is part of the law of war as that term is used in §821.

The dissent by Justice Thomas argues that Common Article 3 nonetheless is irrelevant to this case because in Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U. S. 763 (1950), it was said to be the "obvious scheme" of the 1929 Geneva Convention that "[r]ights of alien enemies are vindicated under it only through protests and intervention of protecting powers," i.e., signatory states, id., at 789, n. 14.

As the Court explains, ante, at 63-65, this language from Eisentrager is not controlling here.

Even assuming the Eisentrager analysis has some bearing upon the analysis of the broader 1949 Conventions and that, in consequence, rights are vindicated "under [those Conventions]" only through protests and intervention, 339 U. S., at 789, n. 14, Common Article 3 is nonetheless relevant to the question of authorization under §821.

Common Article 3 is part of the law of war that Congress has directed the President to follow in establishing military commissions.

Ante, at 66-67.

Consistent with that view, the Eisentrager Court itself considered on the merits claims that "procedural irregularities" under the 1929 Convention "deprive[d] the Military Commission of jurisdiction." 339 U. S., at 789, 790.

In another military commission case, In re Yamashita, 327 U. S. 1 (1946), the Court likewise considered on the merits--without any caveat about remedies under the Convention--a claim that an alleged violation of the 1929 Convention "establish[ed] want of authority in the commission to proceed with the trial." Id., at 23, 24.

That is the precise inquiry we are asked to perform here.

Assuming the President has authority to establish a special military commission to try Hamdan, the commission must satisfy Common Article 3's requirement of a "regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples," 6 U. S. T., at 3318.

The terms of this general standard are yet to be elaborated and further defined, but Congress has required compliance with it by referring to the "law of war" in §821.

The Court correctly concludes that the military commission here does not comply with this provision.

TO BE CONTINUED ......

Dear Livyjr,

Over the last 19 months, when you could have walked away, you dusted yourself off, got back on your feet, dug deeper, and you have fought even harder.

On the biggest issues of our time, and on the critical campaigns that will determine the outcome of this fall's national elections, no group of people has shown more resolve and provided more support than you.

There's no fancy way of saying it: thank you.

Just step back and think for a moment about the impact you have had, the fights that define your convictions, and the impact you will have in November.

Someone who wants to know what our johnkerry.com online community fights for will take a look at what you've done and they'll see something powerful.

They'll see that the hundreds of thousands of johnkerry.com activists who called for a filibuster of the Alito nomination were right.

Right about what kind of Justice he will turn out to be -- and right that we need Justices who will protect the constitutional rights of Americans.

They'll see that the nearly 300,000 people who acted in support of a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq and the Kerry-Feingold Amendment were right.

Right to insist on a change of course in the Bush administration's failed policies and right to keep the pressure on until the future of Iraq is where it belongs -- in the hands of the Iraqi people.

They'll see that the more than a quarter of a million people who have joined Maria Cantwell and me in defending the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge acted because we had to draw a line of protection around this precious natural heritage, and we had to promote an energy policy worthy of America so we never go to war for oil.

But, in 2006, our biggest impact -- our ability to help turn the country around -- will be felt most clearly on November 7th.

We're acting together to elect Democrats who will take power out of the hands of Republicans who have tolerated and excused one unfathomable Bush disaster after another -- and put it in the hands of patriots who will put our country back on track.

Our most crucial work is still ahead of us.

We'll have to pour everything we've got into the last four months of these critical 2006 elections.

But, today, all I'm asking you to do is stop and reflect on what we've done together already.

With your extraordinary support -- a kind of collective activity on behalf of Democratic candidates that is unprecedented in American politics -- together we have contributed or helped raise nearly $10 million for over 160 Democratic candidates, committees, and organizations.

The Democratic Party and its candidates in key races have needed your help, and you have delivered.

In fact, the johnkerry.com community has already poured more than $100,000 into each of eight critical races.

We've acted to help Bill Nelson wage his contest against Katherine Harris in Florida.

When Republican Senator Ted Stevens went to Washington to threaten Maria Cantwell for refusing to let Big Oil destroy the Arctic Refuge, we made it clear that we'll never let those who stand up for what we believe in stand alone.

At a crucial point in her Illinois House race, we raised $150,000 in two days to help Iraq war hero Tammy Duckworth advance her campaign.

And we've stood by Iraq veterans running in Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Colorado as well.

We've drawn attention and support to 12 Democratic challengers running in some of the closest House races in the nation.

And we've weighed in to help Democratic challengers in critical Senate races, from Harold Ford in Tennessee to Sherrod Brown in Ohio to Bob Casey in Pennsylvania.

And, in addition to raising funds, we've helped candidates all across the country recruit volunteers to help their campaigns with voter contact and get-out-the-vote efforts.

When we look up on Election Day, we'll be able to say, with pride and enthusiasm, that no group has worked harder or more effectively than we have to produce the Democratic victories we need to move America forward.

You have played -- and I hope will continue to play -- the most crucial role in this endeavor.

We have four months of hard work and sacrifice ahead of us and we won't stop working until we win.

Thanks so much for all of your help, energy and commitment.

I'm proud of what you do, and I hope I live up to your values and convictions in the way I fight by your side.

Sincerely,

John Kerry

"Suspect Padilla gets access to secrets"

By CURT ANDERSON, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 3 minutes ago

MIAMI - Amid tight security, alleged al-Qaida operative Jose Padilla is being permitted to personally view U.S. government secrets in advance of his trial on charges of conspiring to wage and support international terrorism.

Under a federal judge's order, Padilla is being allowed to examine classified documents and videotapes detailing his statements during 3 1/2 years in Defense Department custody as an unlawful "enemy combatant."

That designation was dropped last fall when he was charged in a Miami terrorism case.

Defense lawyers in terrorism cases are regularly permitted to examine such classified material if they obtain government security clearances.

But it is unusual for an actual terror suspect to be given direct access to secrets.

Padilla is a U.S. citizen once accused by the Bush administration of plotting to detonate a radioactive "dirty bomb."

"There is not a long history of this."

"There have not been a lot of terrorist prosecutions in civilian courts," said Aitan Goelman, a former Justice Department terrorism prosecutor now in private practice in Washington.

U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke's order issued July 5 allows Padilla to view 32 Defense Department documents that summarize statements Padilla made during his years in military custody.

He also can examine 57 videotapes of interrogations he underwent during that same period.

Padilla's attorneys said in court papers that they must examine the materials with their client to discover whether he was mistreated by interrogators, to refresh his memory and find possible leads for their defense and to ensure that prosecutors have turned over all the necessary material and accurately.

The attorneys and a spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office in Miami declined comment Thursday on the arrangement.

Security will be extraordinarily tight for these sessions.

Padilla will be brought to a secure, inner area in the court complex but the door must remain open so a U.S. marshal can keep constant watch.

Cooke's order said the marshal must maintain "an appropriate distance" to prevent overhearing defense trial strategy.

But if the marshal does overhear, "those communications shall not be communicated to any member of the government prosecution team," the judge said.

The challenge in national security cases is in striking a balance between a defendant's right to prepare an adequate defense and the government's interest in protecting its secrets, particularly sources and methods used to obtain intelligence.

"I think the government, in an abundance of caution these days, is protecting as much as it can," said Carl Tobias, law professor at the University of Richmond.

"There is a tension between his constitutional rights to defend himself and see the evidence against him on the one hand and national security on the other hand."

Padilla and two co-defendants are scheduled to go to trial in September on charges of conspiracy and providing material support to Islamic extremist groups around the country.

All three have pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Padilla, a former Chicago gang member and south Florida resident, was arrested in 2002 at O'Hare Airport.

Authorities claimed then he had plotted to set off the "dirty bomb" as an al-Qaida soldier, but the Miami indictment does not mention that.

end quotes

IF .....

All this alleged "SECRET STUFF" .....

IS REALLY ......

NOTHING MORE ....

THAN A BUNCH OF STUFF .....

THAT PADILLA .....

HAS TOLD THE GOVERNMENT .....

THEN WHAT IN THE HELL IS SECRET ABOUT IT?

How much more ridiculous is this CRAP going to get?

For that matter .....

HOW MUCH MORE RIDICULOUS CAN IT GET .....

BEYOND WHERE IT ALREADY HAS GOTTEN TO .....

Where what Padilla told the federal government ....

IS THE TOPPEST OF TOP SECRET ....

Even though it is nothing more than Padilla's own words ...

And so ...

"Former CIA officer sues Cheney over leak"

By TONI LOCY, Associated Press Writer

4 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The CIA officer whose identity was leaked to reporters sued Vice President Dick Cheney, his former top aide and presidential adviser Karl Rove on Thursday, accusing them and other White House officials of conspiring to destroy her career.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court, Valerie Plame and her husband, Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador, accused Cheney, Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby of revealing Plame's CIA identity in seeking revenge against Wilson for criticizing the Bush administration's motives in Iraq.

Several news organizations wrote about Plame after syndicated columnist Robert Novak named her in a column on July 14, 2003.

Novak's column appeared eight days after Wilson alleged in an opinion piece in The New York Times that the administration had twisted prewar intelligence on Iraq to justify going to war.

The CIA had sent Wilson to Niger in early 2002 to determine whether there was any truth to reports that Saddam Hussein's government had tried to buy yellowcake uranium from Niger to make a nuclear weapon.

Wilson discounted the reports, but the allegation nevertheless wound up in President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address.

The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children's lives at risk by exposing Plame.

"This lawsuit concerns the intentional and malicious exposure by senior officials of the federal government of ... (Plame), whose job it was to gather intelligence to make the nation safer and who risked her life for her country," the Wilsons' lawyers said in the lawsuit.

Libby is the only administration official charged in connection with the leak investigation.

He faces trial in January on perjury and obstruction-of-justice charges, accused of lying to FBI agents and a federal grand jury about when he learned Plame's identity and what he subsequently told reporters.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald told Rove's lawyer last month that he had decided not to seek criminal charges against Rove.

"Oil prices settle near $77 a barrel"

By BRAD FOSS, Associated Press
Last updated: 3:47 p.m., Thursday, July 13, 2006

WASHINGTON -- Oil prices settled at a record above $76 a barrel Thursday in a market agitated by escalating violence in the Middle East and the threat of supply disruptions there and beyond.

The latest surge in oil shook stock-market investors' confidence, though economists said most U.S. consumers and businesses appear to be absorbing higher energy costs surprisingly well.

U.S. gasoline demand continues to rise in spite of near $3-a-gallon pump prices, core inflation remains relatively low and the U.S. economy is forecast to grow by roughly 3 percent in the second half of the year.

"Two years ago I might have said that $70 or $75 a barrel would be some kind of a tipping point."

"Now I'm not so sure anymore," said Nariman Behravesh, chief economist at Global Insight, a private forecasting firm.

Still, Behravesh said lower-income Americans are suffering disproportionately from higher energy costs and "I could certainly make a policy case for helping them out on a temporary basis."

Light sweet crude for August delivery shot up as high as $76.85 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange before settling at $76.70.

The rally came as fighting between Israel and Lebanon intensified, explosions hit Nigerian oil installations and a diplomatic standoff dragged on between the West and Iran over its nuclear program.

The previous Nymex settlement record of $75.19 was set July 5.

The previous intraday record of $75.78 was posted two days later.

Adjusted for inflation, oil prices would need to rise to about $90 a barrel to exceed the highs set a quarter century ago when supplies tightened in the aftermath of a revolution in Iran and a war between Iraq and Iran.

Today oil prices are being pushed higher by rising global demand and worries that the world's limited supply cushion would not be adequate to offset a lengthy disruption to output in major producing countries, such as Iran or Nigeria.

There are also concerns about the risks hurricanes pose to U.S. production.

The latest fear being priced into the market is that the conflict between Israel and Lebanon could spill over into other corners of the Middle East, the region that produces nearly a third the world's oil and contains almost two-thirds of its untapped reserves.

Israel intensified its attacks against Lebanon on Thursday, imposing a naval blockade, twice hitting Beirut's airport and blasting two Lebanese army air bases near Syria.

Hezbollah fired more than 100 rockets into Israel, which said one also struck the port city of Haifa.

More than 51 people have died in two days of violence following the capture of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah militants, who have financial links to Syria and Iran.

Iran has threatened on more than one occasion to use oil as a weapon if the United Nations uses economic sanctions or some other punishment in its dispute with Tehran over its nuclear program.

While OPEC's No. 2 supplier has not raised the issue of withholding oil from the market in a sign of solidarity with Hezbollah, the possibility is no doubt influencing oil traders' actions.

"It plays psychologically in people's minds," said Larry Goldstein, president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation, a New York-based industry-financed think tank.

"You don't have to hear them say it."

In Nigeria, government officials said twin explosions hit oil installations belonging to an Italian oil company in the volatile southeastern delta region.

Elsewhere, militants attacked a group of 11 boats carrying supplies to Chevron's offshore oil fields Wednesday, killing four navy sailors who were escorting the convoy, Brig. Gen. Alfred Ilogho said Thursday.

"The oil price has become a register of geopolitical tensions and fears," said Daniel Yergin, who heads Cambridge Energy Research Associates.

Yergin said petroleum supply-demand fundamentals are improving, with global oil inventories and spare oil-production capacity rising, but clearly not enough to offset the geopolitical unrest.

The surge in oil prices rattled stock market investors, sending the Dow Jones industrials sharply lower for the second straight day.

Shares of Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer, slumped 2 percent on the New York Stock Exchange on concerns that high energy prices are cutting into consumers' discretionary income.

"The economy took $50 oil in stride," Yergin said.

"It's clearly not taking $70 or $75 a barrel in stride."

"This is a rougher adjustment."

With U.S. oil companies such as Exxon Mobil Corp. and Chevron Corp. earning record amounts, some members of Congress have proposed taxing "windfall" profits in order to finance energy assistance programs for the poor, but the idea does not have wide support.

The energy-policy debate in Washington right now centers around efforts to repeal the ban on offshore drilling and to fix a law that allows oil and natural-gas companies to avoid billions of dollars of royalty payments on offshore drilling leases.

Critics say Congress has failed in its approach to deal with soaring energy costs because it has not given as much attention to curbing demand as it has to adding supplies, such as a hotly debated proposal to open an Alaskan wildlife refuge to oil drilling.

"We too often forget that the United States is far and away the biggest consumer of oil," said Tyson Slocum, an energy expert at Public Citzen, a Washington-based consumer watchdog.

Slocum said the country needs to invest more in public transportation and to sharply increase automobile fuel-economy standards.

----

Associated Press Writers Sam Ghattas in Beirut and William Nsoyoh in Yenagoa, Nigeria, contributed to this report.

And while we are on the subject of UNFATHOMABLE BUSH DISASTERS .....

One after another ....

"More slayings plague Iraq - Prime minister pleads for end to sectarian violence"

By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press
First published: Thursday, July 13, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Gunmen seized two dozen Shiites from a bus station after separating them from the crowd in a predominantly Sunni area Wednesday, killing them and dumping their bodies in a nearby village -- the latest in a series of brazen attacks.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki appealed for unity and warned the nation's future was at stake.

"We all have the last chance to reconcile and agree among each other on avoiding conflict and blood."

"If we fail, God forbid, I don't know what the fate of Iraq will be," he told parliament.

The gunmen arrived in several cars at the bus station in Muqdadiyah, about 60 miles northeast of Baghdad, at about 6 a.m., forcing the captives into four vehicles they commandeered at the scene, officials said.

The victims, who were handcuffed, blindfolded and shot in the head, were found behind a pile of small rocks near the main street of Azham village, police said.

The massacre was part of a surge in sectarian violence that has killed more than 160 people since Sunday, when Shiite gunmen rampaged through a Baghdad neighborhood killing Sunnis.

Wednesday's attack coincided with an unannounced visit to Iraq by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

He said the new Iraqi government is not yet ready to decide on security issues that will determine the pace of U.S. troop reductions this year.

More than 1,607 Iraqis have been killed and nearly 2,500 wounded since al-Maliki's government took office May 20, according to an Associated Press count.

The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, said "terrorists and death squads" are mainly responsible for the heightened sectarian violence in the capital, and he pledged to provide whatever U.S. forces are needed to avert civil war.

In a positive sign, the Iraqi Accordance Front, the largest Sunni bloc in parliament, lifted its legislative boycott and attended Wednesday's session.

It thanked the parliament for its help in seeking the release of kidnapped legislator Tayseer al-Mashhadani and called for a new spirit of cooperation.

Prosecution sought

Al-Maliki repeated his call for a review of legislation that gives foreign troops immunity from prosecution, in response to the alleged March 12 rape and killing of an 14-year-old Iraqi girl by U.S. soldiers.

Rumsfeld indicated that he did not expect any imminent change in the legal arrangement under which U.S. troops in Iraq are immune from the country's laws.

Saddam on hunger strike

The U.S. military said Saddam Hussein and three of his co-defendants have been on a hunger strike for nearly a week to protest what the defense says is a lack of security for their attorneys.

Lt. Col. Keir-Kevin Curry, spokesman for U.S. military detainee operations, said the defendants were in "good health and receiving appropriate medical care."

And here is something .....

That We are all waiting .....

To see .....

Will this really happen?

Will the LAWLESS UNTRUTHFUL ARROGANT SELF-SERVING REPUBLICANS .....

Get tossed by the American people?

Or will the American people .....

Crawl back to the voting booths ....

One more time .....

TO CONTINUE ....

THE DEBACLE .....

THAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE HANDED US ......

THROUGH THE AGENCY ....

OF THIS PATHETIC BUFFOON BUSH ....

WHO IS THEIR HERO ....

And MAN-OF-THE-HOUR .....

For setting the world on fire ...

WHICH PUTS A LOT OF MONEY ...

RIGHT INTO THE POCKETS OF THE REPUBLICANS .....

WHO DISRUPT OUR LIVES .....

FOR THE MONEY ...

THAT THEY MAKE ....

OFF THAT DISRUPTION .....

And so ....

"Most Americans plan to vote for Democrats"

By DONNA CASSATA, Associated Press Writer

1 hour, 27 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Republicans are in jeopardy of losing their grip on Congress in November.

With less than four months to the midterm elections, the latest Associated Press-Ipsos poll found that Americans by an almost 3-to-1 margin hold the GOP-controlled Congress in low regard and profess a desire to see Democrats wrest control after a dozen years of Republican rule.

Further complicating the GOP outlook to turn things around is a solid percentage of liberals, moderates and even conservatives who say they'll vote Democratic.

The party out of power also holds the edge among persuadable voters, a prospect that doesn't bode well for the Republicans.

The election ultimately will be decided in 435 House districts and 33 Senate contests, in which incumbents typically hold the upper hand.

But the survey underscored the difficulty Republicans face in trying to persuade a skeptical public to return them to Washington.

The AP-Ipsos poll of 1,000 adults conducted Monday through Wednesday found that President Bush has stopped his political freefall, with his approval rating of 36 percent basically unchanged from last month.

Bush received slightly higher marks for his handling of the Iraq war and the fight against terrorism, weeks after his surprise trip to Baghdad and the killing of Iraqi terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in a U.S. airstrike last month.

But a Democratic takeover of either the House or Senate would be disastrous for the president, leaving both his agenda for the last two years in office and the chairmanship of investigative committees in the hands of the opposition party.

To seize control of Congress, the Democrats must displace 15 Republicans from House seats and six Republicans from the Senate.

The AP-Ipsos survey asked 789 registered voters if the election for the House were held today, would they vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in their district.

Democrats were favored 51 percent to 40 percent.

Not surprisingly, 81 percent of self-described liberals said they would vote for the Democrat.

Among moderates, though, 56 percent backed a Democrat in their district and almost a quarter of conservatives — 24 percent — said they will vote Democratic.

Democrats also held the advantage among persuadable voters — those who are undecided or wouldn't say whom they prefer.

A total of 51 percent said they were leaning Democrat, while 41 percent were leaning Republican.

"We still have wind in our face."

"It's a midterm election in the president's second term," said Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee.

"Today is a little bit better in the atmospherics of Washington than it was maybe a month ago."

The president's party historically has lost seats in the sixth year of his service.

Franklin D. Roosevelt lost 72 House seats in 1938; Dwight D. Eisenhower 48 in 1958.

The exception was Bill Clinton in 1998.

By another comparison, polls in 1994 — when a Republican tidal wave swept Democrats from power — the two parties were in a dead heat in July on the question of whom voters preferred in their district.

"It comes down to a fairly simply question: Can Democrats nationalize all the elections?"

"If Republicans prevent that, they have a shot."

"If they don't, they lose," said Doug Gross, the GOP gubernatorial candidate in Iowa in 2002 and the state finance director for the 2004 Bush-Cheney campaign.

Overall, only 27 percent approved of the way Congress is doing its job.

Lawmakers get favorable marks from 36 percent of conservatives, 28 percent of moderates and 17 percent of liberals.

Some criticism of Congress has focused on lawmakers' inability to control spending, with lawmakers tucking in special projects for their home districts.

"They used to say there's nothing worse than a tax-and-spend liberal Democrat," said Gary Wilson, 51, a self-described liberal from Gaithersburg, Md.

"There is something worse: It's a borrow-and-spend Republican."

"This is going to come back to haunt us."

One bright spot for the GOP is that Republicans hold an advantage over Democrats on issues such as foreign policy and fighting terrorism — 43 percent to 33 percent — and a smaller edge on handling Iraq — 36 percent to 32 percent.

The AP-Ipsos poll was conducted after the divisive Democratic debate in the Senate over setting a timetable for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq.

Potential voters were paying attention to the GOP complaint that Democrats want to "cut and run."

"It seems like the Democrats want to pull out or start to pull out, and I don't think that's the correct thing to do," said Eric Bean, 24, a college minister in Fort Worth, Texas.

"I'd much rather see a Congress that would support our president."

"I think George Bush is doing the best he can."

"I think Republicans will support him."

John Dendahl, the Republican candidate for governor in New Mexico, said Democrats, with the help of some Republicans, have been successful at obstructing legislation in Congress while heaping the blame on the GOP.

Tom Courtney, a Democratic state senator in Iowa, said U.S. voters are ready to trust his party to lead.

"I honestly think it's ours to lose," Courtney said.

"My experience, we're not above that."

"Americans are ready for change."

The poll of adults had a margin of error of 3 percentage points and the survey of registered voters had a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points.
___

Associated Press Writers Philip Elliott and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.

end quotes

George W. Bush is "doing the best that he can"?

Well ......

George's best .....

IS DAMN INADEQUATE .....

And it is unacceptable .....

To me, anyway .....

Who is an older American .....

Quite a bit older than 24, anyway .....

ACCUSTOMED ....

TO ACTUAL RESPONSIBILITY .....

IN THOSE WHO WOULD BE LEADERS ....

AS OPPOSED TO ....

ALL THE WHINING .....

AND CRYING ....

AND EXCUSES .....

THAT WE KEEP GETTING ......

FROM THIS LOSER BUSH .....

ALONG WITH A PLETHORA ......

OF FALSEHOODS .....

AS TO THE ABSOLUTE MESS .....

HE HAS CREATED IN IRAQ ....

WITH THE BACKING ....

OF HIS REPUBLICANS .....

And so .....

THE DUTY .....

OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS ....

IS NOT TO SUPPORT GEORGE W. BUSH .....

AS IF THIS WERE SOME TOTALITARIAN NAZI STATE .....

THE DUTY ....

OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS .....

IS TO WRITE THE LAWS ......

THAT GEORGE W. BUSH MUST FOLLOW .....

And so ......

Perhaps this 24-year old college minister in Fort Worth, Texas ......

Ought to go back to school .....

TO LEARN ABOUT OUR AMERICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT .....

As opposed to whatever form of fascism .......

They embrace .....

Down there ....

In the REPUBLIC OF TEXICO .....

Where George W. Bush came from .....

And so ...

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

Common Article 3's standard of a "regularly constituted court affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples," ibid., supports, at the least, a uniformity principle similar to that codified in §836(b).

The concept of a "regularly constituted court" providing "indispensable" judicial guarantees requires consideration of the system of justice under which the commission is established, though no doubt certain minimum standards are applicable.

See ante, at 69-70; 1 Int'l Committee of the Red Cross, Customary International Humanitarian Law 355 (2005) (explaining that courts are "regularly constituted" under Common Article 3 if they are "established and organised in accordance with the laws and procedures already in force in a country").

The regular military courts in our system are the courts-martial established by congressional statutes.

Acts of Congress confer on those courts the jurisdiction to try "any person" subject to war crimes prosecution. 10 U. S. C. §818.

As the Court explains, moreover, while special military commissions have been convened in previous armed conflicts--a practice recognized in §821--those military commissions generally have adopted the structure and procedure of courts-martial.

See, e.g., 1 The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies 248 (2d series 1894) (Civil War general order requiring that military commissions "be constituted in a similar manner and their proceedings be conducted according to the same general rules as courts-martial in order to prevent abuses which might otherwise arise"); W. Winthrop, Military Law and Precedents 835, n. 81 (rev. 2d ed. 1920) ("[M]ilitary commissions are constituted and composed, and their proceedings are conducted, similarly to general courts-martial"); 1 United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals 116-117 (1947) (reprint 1997) (hereinafter Law Reports) (discussing post-World War II regulations requiring that military commissions "hav[e] regard for" rules of procedure and evidence applicable in general courts-martial); see also ante, at 53-57; post, at 31, n. 15 (Thomas, J., dissenting).

Today, moreover, §836(b)--which took effect after the military trials in the World War II cases invoked by the dissent, see Madsen v. Kinsella, 343 U. S. 341, 344-345, and n. 6 (1952); Yamashita, supra, at 5; Quirin, 317 U. S., at 23--codifies this presumption of uniformity at least as to "[p]retrial, trial, and post-trial procedures."

Absent more concrete statutory guidance, this historical and statutory background--which suggests that some practical need must justify deviations from the court-martial model--informs the understanding of which military courts are "regularly constituted" under United States law.

In addition, whether or not the possibility, contemplated by the regulations here, of midtrial procedural changes could by itself render a military commission impermissibly irregular, ante, at 70, n. 65; see also Military Commission Order No. 1, §11 (Aug. 31, 2005), App. to Brief for Petitioner 46a-72a (hereinafter MCO), an acceptable degree of independence from the Executive is necessary to render a commission "regularly constituted" by the standards of our Nation's system of justice.

And any suggestion of Executive power to interfere with an ongoing judicial process raises concerns about the proceedings' fairness.

Again, however, courts-martial provide the relevant benchmark.

Subject to constitutional limitations, see Ex parte Milligan, 4 Wall. 2 (1866), Congress has the power and responsibility to determine the necessity for military courts, and to provide the jurisdiction and procedures applicable to them.

The guidance Congress has provided with respect to courts-martial indicates the level of independence and procedural rigor that Congress has deemed necessary, at least as a general matter, in the military context.

At a minimum a military commission like the one at issue--a commission specially convened by the President to try specific persons without express congressional authorization--can be "regularly constituted" by the standards of our military justice system only if some practical need explains deviations from court-martial practice.

In this regard the standard of Common Article 3, applied here in conformity with §821, parallels the practicability standard of §836(b).

Section 836, however, is limited by its terms to matters properly characterized as procedural--that is, "[p]retrial, trial, and post-trial procedures"--while Common Article 3 permits broader consideration of matters of structure, organization, and mechanisms to promote the tribunal's insulation from command influence.

Thus the combined effect of the two statutes discussed here--§§836 and 821--is that considerations of practicability must support departures from court-martial practice.

Relevant concerns, as noted earlier, relate to logistical constraints, accommodation of witnesses, security of the proceedings, and the like, not mere expedience or convenience.

This determination, of course, must be made with due regard for the constitutional principle that congressional statutes can be controlling, including the congressional direction that the law of war has a bearing on the determination.

These principles provide the framework for an analysis of the specific military commission at issue here.

TO BE CONTINUED ......

And of course .....

This 24-year old college minister .....

From Ft. Worth, Texas .....

Is absolutely right ......

When he says ....

That George W. Bush

Is doing the best he can .....

BECAUSE IT IS TRUE .....

GEORGE W. BUSH ...

IS SIMPLY INADEQUATE .....

TO THE TASK ....

OF BEING ...

A REAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT ...

AND WORLD LEADER ....

And so .....

This what we have gotten from George ......

This bloody and costly mess over in Iraq .....

THAT IS .....

THE "BEST" .....

THAT GEORGE W. BUSH ....

IS CAPABLE OF ......

And so .....

ON THAT POINT .....

WE HAVE NO ARGUMENT .....

And where we do have an argument .....

This 24-year old college minister .....

From Ft. Worth, Texas .....

And myself ....

Has to do .....

With the OATH .....

That EACH president recites ....

In accordance with Article II, Section I of the U.S. Constitution:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

As the United States Supreme Court .....

Has just made clear .....

In this Guantanamo decision ....

George W. Bush .......

DID NOT ....

FAITHFULLY EXECUTE .....

THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT ......

BECAUSE HE ACTED .....

IN VIOLATION ...

OF OUR LAWS ....

AND OUR TREATIES ....

WHICH ARE LAW .....

And so ....

THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR THIS .....

NO "OH, WELL, HE'S TRYING ..."

OR "HE'S FIXING TO GET WITH IT, ANYWAY ...."

NO ....

NONE OF THAT ....

The PRESIDENTIAL OATH .....

Says in clear and unambiguous language .....

"WILL FAITHFULLY EXECUTE THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES ....."

NOT "WILL TRY HARD TO ..."

Or "FIXING TO GET WITH FAITHFULLY EXECUTING" .....

And so .......

IT IS NO SERVICE ....

TO ANYONE ...

EITHER HERE, IN OUR AMERICA .....

OR IN THE WORLD .....

FOR US .....

TO BE SETTING LOWER STANDARDS OF PERFORMANCE .....

FOR GEORGE W. BUSH ......

THAN THAT WHICH THOSE WHO CRAFTED THAT OATH INTENDED ......

And so .....

My thoughts on the matter, anyway .....

And so ....

"Dow ends down 107, Nasdaq ends down 17"

By CHRISTOPHER WANG, Associated Press
Last updated: 5:36 p.m., Friday, July 14, 2006

NEW YORK -- Surging oil prices pulled stocks sharply lower for a third straight session Friday, with bland earnings at General Electric Co. and weak consumer data further dampening the economic outlook.

The Dow Jones industrial average shed 396 points in the past three days.

"I don't think you're going to bring out a lot of buyers in the market after a week like this," Jay Suskind, head trader at Ryan Beck & Co., said of escalating political turmoil in the Middle East, Iran and North Korea.

"Uncertainty over the world situation is just too much for the market to have a solid up day."

Crude futures reached an intraday record of $78.40 a barrel as Israel intensified its attacks on Lebanon, raising concerns about potential supply disruptions throughout the Middle East.

Crude eventually settled at $77.03 a barrel, up 33 cents, on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

Retail sales fell unexpectedly in June, as did consumer confidence for July.

Industrial and financial conglomerate GE's second-quarter earnings matched analyst estimates, but the in-line results troubled investors already concerned that the recent spate of profit warnings was a sign the economy could be headed for a downturn.

The Dow tumbled 106.94, or 0.99 percent, to 10,739.35.

The blue-chip index fell more than 121 points Wednesday and lost almost 167 points Thursday, and is just 21 points from turning negative for 2006.

Broader stock indicators also declined.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index dropped 6.09, or 0.49 percent, to 1,236.20; the Nasdaq composite index declined 16.76, or 0.82 percent, to 2,037.35, a 14-month low.

Declining issues outnumbered advancers by about 2 to 1 on the New York Stock Exchange.

Wall Street has slogged through a gauntlet of mounting uncertainties in recent weeks, with concerns about a potential slowdown in the global economy now exacerbated by increasing political turmoil throughout the world.

The commotion sent investors running for cover, giving stocks their worst week this year.

For the week, the Dow slid 3.17 percent, the Nasdaq plunged 4.35 percent and the S&P 500 sank 2.31 percent.

Much of the market's worries stemmed from the trend of rising interest rates worldwide, which is expected to curtail spending and foreign investment and drag on economic growth.

Although the recent jump in oil prices have reinforced beliefs that the Federal Reserve will boost rates again at its Aug. 8 meeting, the early wave of downbeat earnings data has spurred fears that the economy is weakening and could buckle beneath higher lending costs.

"I think (second-quarter earnings) will come in slightly above expectations, but that still doesn't answer the question of whether the economy is slowing and what companies are at risk," said Steven Goldman, chief market strategist at Weeden & Co.

"The nervousness will not change over the next couple of months."

Bonds steadied after this week's runup, with the yield on the 10-year Treasury note unchanged at 5.07 percent from late Thursday.

The 2-year yield, however, stood at 5.1 percent; the inversion of bond yields signaled expectations for slowing economic growth.

The U.S. dollar gained on the Japanese yen and was flat versus European currencies.

Gold prices advanced, climbing to $650 an ounce.

In economic news, the Commerce Department said June retail sales slipped 0.1 percent after growing by the same amount the previous month.

Analysts had been predicting a 0.4 percent increase.

The University of Michigan said its consumer-sentiment index for July fell 1.9 points to 83.

That compares with expectations for a slight rise to 85.5.

GE said five of its six core businesses saw double-digit earnings growth last quarter; the sole loser was its NBC Universal broadcast unit.

GE, which met Wall Street's profit and revenue forecasts, nonetheless sank 56 cents $32.11.

EMC Corp. added to Wall Street's stress over corporate profits after the software maker said earnings slid 5 percent last quarter.

EMC, which earlier this week warned of a possible miss, fell 15 cents to $9.83.

Petco Animal Supplies Inc. jumped $8.44 to $27.89 after the company said it has agreed to be taken private for $29 per share, or $1.68 billion.

Moody's Investors Service pushed Ford Motor Co.'s debt rating further into junk status, saying the shift from sport-utility vehicles to cars was hurting the company's prospect of recovery.

Ford lost 18 cents to $6.38.

Overseas, Japan's Nikkei stock average plunged 1.67 percent.

Britain's FTSE 100 dropped 1 percent, Germany's DAX index fell 1.9 percent and France's CAC-40 was lower by 1.48 percent.

NYSE final consolidated volume of 2.63 billion shares trailed the 2.31 billion shares that changed hands Thursday.

The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 6.05, or 0.88 percent, to 681.24.

------

The Dow Jones industrials ended the week down 351.52, or 3.17 percent, finishing at 10,739.35.

The S&P 500 index lost 29.28, or 2.31 percent, to close at 1,236.20.

The Nasdaq dropped 92.71, or 4.35 percent, to end at 2,037.35.

The Russell 2000 index closed the week down 28.06, or 3.96 percent, at 681.24.

The Dow Jones Wilshire 5000 Composite Index -- a free-float weighted index that measures 5,000 U.S. based companies -- ended the week at 12,424.71, off 335.63 points from last week.

A year ago the index was 12,254.70.

------

On the Net:

New York Stock Exchange: http://www.nyse.com

Nasdaq Stock Market: http://www.nasdaq.com

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

In assessing the validity of Hamdan's military commission the precise circumstances of this case bear emphasis.

The allegations against Hamdan are undoubtedly serious.

Captured in Afghanistan during our Nation's armed conflict with the Taliban and al Qaeda--a conflict that continues as we speak--Hamdan stands accused of overt acts in furtherance of a conspiracy to commit terrorism: delivering weapons and ammunition to al Qaeda, acquiring trucks for use by Osama bin Laden's bodyguards, providing security services to bin Laden, and receiving weapons training at a terrorist camp.

App. to Pet. for Cert. 65a-67a.

Nevertheless, the circumstances of Hamdan's trial present no exigency requiring special speed or precluding careful consideration of evidence.

For roughly four years, Hamdan has been detained at a permanent United States military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

And regardless of the outcome of the criminal proceedings at issue, the Government claims authority to continue to detain him based on his status as an enemy combatant.

Against this background, the Court is correct to conclude that the military commission the President has convened to try Hamdan is unauthorized. Ante, at 62, 69-70, 72.

The following analysis, which expands on the Court's discussion, explains my reasons for reaching this conclusion.

To begin with, the structure and composition of the military commission deviate from conventional court-martial standards.

Although these deviations raise questions about the fairness of the trial, no evident practical need explains them.

Under the UCMJ, courts-martial are organized by a "convening authority"--either a commanding officer, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary concerned, or the President. 10 U. S. C. §§822-824 (2000 ed. and Supp. III).

The convening authority refers charges for trial, Manual for Courts-Martial, United States, Rule for Courts-Martial 401 (2005 ed.) (hereinafter R. C. M.), and selects the court-martial members who vote on the guilt or innocence of the accused and determine the sentence, 10 U. S. C. §§825(d)(2), 851-852 (2000 ed.); R. C. M. 503(a).

Paralleling this structure, under Military Commission Order No. 1 an " 'Appointing Authority' "--either the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary's "designee"--establishes commissions subject to the order, MCO No. 1, §2, approves and refers charges to be tried by those commissions, §4(B)(2)(a), and appoints commission members who vote on the conviction and sentence, §§4(A)(1-3).

In addition the Appointing Authority determines the number of commission members (at least three), oversees the chief prosecutor, provides "investigative or other resources" to the defense insofar as he or she "deems necessary for a full and fair trial," approves or rejects plea agreements, approves or disapproves communications with news media by prosecution or defense counsel (a function shared by the General Counsel of the Department of Defense), and issues supplementary commission regulations (subject to approval by the General Counsel of the Department of Defense, unless the Appointing Authority is the Secretary of Defense).

See MCO No. 1, §§4(A)(2), 5(H), 6(A)(4), 7(A); Military Commission Instruction No. 3, §5© (July 15, 2005) (hereinafter MCI), available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Aug2005/d20050811MC13.pdf ; MCI No. 4, §5© (Sept. 16, 2005), available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2005/d20051003MCI4.pdf MCI No. 6, §3(B)(3) (April 15, 2004), available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2004/d20040420ins6.pdf (all Internet materials as visited June 27, 2006, and available in Clerk of Court's case file).

Against the background of these significant powers for the Appointing Authority, which in certain respects at least conform to ordinary court-martial standards, the regulations governing the commissions at issue make several noteworthy departures.

At a general court-martial--the only type authorized to impose penalties of more than one year's incarceration or to adjudicate offenses against the law of war, R. C. M. 201(f); 10 U. S. C. §§818-820 (2000 ed. and Supp. III)--the presiding officer who rules on legal issues must be a military judge. R. C. M. 501(a)(1), 801(a)(4)-(5); 10 U. S. C. §816(1) (2000 ed., Supp. III); see also R. C. M. 201(f)(2)(B)(ii) (likewise requiring a military judge for certain other courts-martial); 10 U. S. C. §819 (2000 ed. and Supp. III) (same).

A military judge is an officer who is a member of a state or federal bar and has been specially certified for judicial duties by the Judge Advocate General for the officer's Armed Service. R. C. M. 502©; 10 U. S. C. §826(b).

To protect their independence, military judges at general courts-martial are "assigned and directly responsible to the Judge Advocate General or the Judge Advocate General's designee." R. C. M. 502©.

They must be detailed to the court, in accordance with applicable regulations, "by a person assigned as a military judge and directly responsible to the Judge Advocate General or the Judge Advocate General's designee." R. C. M. 503(b); see also 10 U. S. C. §826©; see generally Weiss v. United States, 510 U. S. 163, 179-181 (1994) (discussing provisions that "insulat[e] military judges from the effects of command influence" and thus "preserve judicial impartiality").

Here, by contrast, the Appointing Authority selects the presiding officer, MCO No. 1, §§4(A)(1), (A)(4); and that officer need only be a judge advocate, that is, a military lawyer, §4(A)(4).

The Appointing Authority, moreover, exercises supervisory powers that continue during trial.

Any interlocutory question "the disposition of which would effect a termination of proceedings with respect to a charge" is subject to decision not by the presiding officer, but by the Appointing Authority. §4(A)(5)(e) (stating that the presiding officer "shall certify" such questions to the Appointing Authority).

Other interlocutory questions may be certified to the Appointing Authority as the presiding officer "deems appropriate." Ibid.

While in some circumstances the Government may appeal certain rulings at a court-martial--including "an order or ruling that terminates the proceedings with respect to a charge or specification," R. C. M. 908(a); see also 10 U. S. C. §862(a)--the appeals go to a body called the Court of Criminal Appeals, not to the convening authority. R. C. M. 908; 10 U. S. C. §862(b); see also R. C. M. 1107 (requiring the convening authority to approve or disapprove the findings and sentence of a court-martial but providing for such action only after entry of sentence and restricting actions that increase penalties); 10 U. S. C. §860 (same); cf. §837(a) (barring command influence on court-martial actions).

The Court of Criminal Appeals functions as the military's intermediate appeals court; it is established by the Judge Advocate General for each Armed Service and composed of appellate military judges. R. C. M. 1203; 10 U. S. C. §866.

This is another means in which, by structure and tradition, the court-martial process is insulated from those who have an interest in the outcome of the proceedings.

Finally, in addition to these powers with respect to the presiding officer, the Appointing Authority has greater flexibility in appointing commission members.

While a general court-martial requires, absent a contrary election by the accused, at least five members, R. C. M. 501(a)(1); 10 U. S. C. §816(1) (2000 ed. and Supp. III), the Appointing Authority here is free, as noted earlier, to select as few as three. MCO No. 1, §4(A)(2).

This difference may affect the deliberative process and the prosecution's burden of persuasion.

As compared to the role of the convening authority in a court-martial, the greater powers of the Appointing Authority here--including even the resolution of dispositive issues in the middle of the trial--raise concerns that the commission's decisionmaking may not be neutral.

If the differences are supported by some practical need beyond the goal of constant and ongoing supervision, that need is neither apparent from the record nor established by the Government's submissions.

It is no answer that, at the end of the day, the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (DTA), 119 Stat. 2739, affords military-commission defendants the opportunity for judicial review in federal court.

As the Court is correct to observe, the scope of that review is limited, DTA §1005(e)(3)(D), id., at 2743; see also ante, at 8-9, and the review is not automatic if the defendant's sentence is under 10 years, §1005(e)(3)(B), ibid.

Also, provisions for review of legal issues after trial cannot correct for structural defects, such as the role of the Appointing Authority, that can cast doubt on the factfinding process and the presiding judge's exercise of discretion during trial.

Before military-commission defendants may obtain judicial review, furthermore, they must navigate a military review process that again raises fairness concerns.

At the outset, the Appointing Authority (unless the Appointing Authority is the Secretary of Defense) performs an "administrative review" of undefined scope, ordering any "supplementary proceedings" deemed necessary. MCO No. 1 §6(H)(3).

After that the case is referred to a three-member Review Panel composed of officers selected by the Secretary of Defense. §6(H)(4); MCI No. 9, §4(B) (Oct. 11, 2005), available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2005/d20051014MCI9.pdf .

Though the Review Panel may return the case for further proceedings only if a majority "form[s] a definite and firm conviction that a material error of law occurred," MCO No. 1, §6(H)(4); MCI No. 9, §4©(1)(a), only one member must have "experience as a judge," MCO No. 1, §6(H)(4); nothing in the regulations requires that other panel members have legal training.

By comparison to the review of court-martial judgments performed by such independent bodies as the Judge Advocate General, the Court of Criminal Appeals, and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, 10 U. S. C. §§862, 864, 866, 867, 869, the review process here lacks structural protections designed to help ensure impartiality.

These structural differences between the military commissions and courts-martial--the concentration of functions, including legal decisionmaking, in a single executive official; the less rigorous standards for composition of the tribunal; and the creation of special review procedures in place of institutions created and regulated by Congress--remove safeguards that are important to the fairness of the proceedings and the independence of the court.

Congress has prescribed these guarantees for courts-martial; and no evident practical need explains the departures here.

For these reasons the commission cannot be considered regularly constituted under United States law and thus does not satisfy Congress' requirement that military commissions conform to the law of war.

As G-8 opens, a rift widens - Tensions rise after U.S. decides not to let Russia join WTO; Putin mocks Bush efforts to bring democracy to Iraq"

By JIM RUTENBERG and ANDREW E. KRAMER, New York Times
First published: Sunday, July 16, 2006

STRELNA, Russia -- In a rocky beginning to a summit conference Saturday, President Bush announced the U.S. had blocked Russia's much anticipated entry into the World Trade Organization.

In turn, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin mocked the state of democracy the Bush administration had delivered to Iraq and said his nation wouldn't be joining any crusades.

At a news conference that offered a slightly rough prelude to the annual summit meeting of the Group of 8 economic powers, Putin and Bush also differed over Iraq, the state of Russia's democracy and Israel's military campaign in Lebanon.

Though they had a few positive announcements as well -- agreeing on initiatives to combat nuclear terrorism and share civilian nuclear material and technology -- overall the appearance highlighted growing tensions between former Cold War rivals now jockeying for global position.

In the sharpest exchange, Bush said that he had told Putin during a private dinner here Friday night about "my desire to promote institutional change in parts of the world like Iraq -- where there is a free press and free religion -- and I told him that a lot of people in our country would hope Russia would do the same thing."

Putin, standing bolt upright in a dark blue suit, responded dryly, "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, I will tell you quite honestly" -- a clear dig at the challenges still facing the American-supported government there.

Bush, in a light blue suit and standing more casually than his counterpart, turned to face Putin, smiled and said, almost to himself, "Just wait."

Both men played down any friction, saying it was indicative of a frank relationship that remains friendly in spite of the areas where their national interests diverge.

Russia, the host of the G-8 summit meeting for the first time, has set an agenda seeking common cause on protecting energy supplies and developing new ones, improving national education systems and combating infectious disease.

But exchanges of military fire between Israel and Hezbollah intruded, and an agreement was reached even before the meeting opened that the attending nations would draft some sort of joint position aimed at heading off a broader regional conflict.

All sides expected some tension between the United States, which has expressed support for Israel's need to defend itself, and many of the other attending countries, whose leaders have deemed Israel's force excessive and have called for a cease-fire.

The leaders also are to discuss the dual nuclear threats in Iran and North Korea.

Putin had hoped to kick off the summit meeting, to officially begin today at the palace erected by Peter the Great nearly 300 years ago in this St. Petersburg suburb, with an announcement that the United States would lift its objection to Russia's accession into the World Trade Organization.

Putin wants membership as a symbol of the new position of Russia, flush with oil money, in the global economy.

Negotiations between Russian and American trade representatives went into the early morning hours of Saturday, but could not break through impasses over financial services, food imports and, to a lesser extent, intellectual property rights.

"We're tough negotiators," Bush said, adding that the United States wanted to ensure a deal is reached that Congress will approve.

He added the two sides were close and that news reports had wrongly inflated expectations.

In a press briefing that followed the joint presidential appearance, the U.S. trade representative, Susan Schwab, said it would likely be months before an agreement can be reached.

Asked if Russia had been correct to believe that a breakthrough was possible by this weekend, Schwab, who had been involved in the late-night negotiations, said "I think both sides would have preferred if we had an agreement."

Her Russian counterparts blamed the United States, complaining in interviews that the sticking points revolved largely around what they considered the small issue of food imports and the American side's objection to having Russian inspectors visit farms in the United States.

But Bush and Putin did agree to start talks to pave the way for a deal allowing nuclear waste generated from American-produced plutonium from around the world to be stored in Russia -- a potential shift in American policy that would be lucrative for Russia.

They also agreed to work together to combat the potential spread of nuclear materials to terrorists, a sign that the one-time nuclear rivals now see a common foe in extremists who have targeted both nations.

Putin and Bush offered no breakthroughs on a common approach to reining in the nuclear ambitions of North Korea and Iran; the United States has been calling for a tougher line as Russia has advocated a more delicate approach.

Putin, whose government's cooperation with Iran has rankled the White House, repeatedly referred to Iran as "our partners."

When a reporter asked a two-part question about whether there were any breakthroughs in countering nuclear proliferation and how he rated the state of U.S.-Russian relations, Putin began, "We will not participate in any crusades, in any holy alliances," which analysts here took as a signal to Iran that Russia is not fully aligned with Bush, or as a dig at Bush's campaign to spread democracy in the Middle East, or both.

But Putin continued, "Our common goal is to make the world a more secure place, and certainly we'll be working with all our partners, including the United States, in order to address this problem."

Asked what he took Putin to have meant by "holy alliance" and "crusade," Stephen J. Hadley, the national security adviser, said during a press briefing here, "You know, I asked myself the same question."

end quotes

This Stephen J. Hadley BUSHCO ....

Sounds like he is .....

As DUMB .....

As a box of rocks .....

And he must be .....

About the only person ....

On the face of the earth right now ....

Who doesn't know ....

What Putin is talking about .....

When Putin says ....

"We will not participate in any crusades, in any holy alliances ....."

And so .....

Being DUMB ...

AS A BOX OF ROCKS .....

Means ...

That he is NO THREAT ....

To George W. Bush ....

Who also teeters ....

On the brink .....

OF ACTUALLY BEING DUMBER .....

THAN A BOX OF ROCKS ...

EVER THOUGHT OF BEING ....

And so ...

For that reason ...

THIS HADLEY DUDE .....

WAS MADE ...

THE BUSHCO ....

NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR ....

And so .....

Well, Steve .....

AS TO HOLY ALLIANCES ......

"Megachurches build a Republican base"

By Andrea Hopkins

2 hours, 21 minutes ago

LANCASTER, Ohio (Reuters) - It's not Sunday but Fairfield Christian Church is packed.

Hundreds of kids are making their way to vacation Bible school, parents are dropping in at the day-care center and yellow-shirted volunteers are everywhere, directing traffic.

In one wing of the sprawling church, a coffee barista whips up a mango smoothie while workers bustle around the cafeteria.

"There are people here from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. every day -- sometimes later," senior pastor Russell Johnson says as he surveys the activity.

The 4,000 members of Fairfield Christian are part of the growing evangelical Christian movement in middle America.

In a March survey, a quarter of Ohio residents said they were evangelicals -- believing that a strict adherence to the Bible and personal commitment to the teachings of Jesus Christ will bring salvation.

The fastest-growing faith group in America, evangelical Christians have had a growing impact on the nation's political landscape, in part because adherents believe conservative Christian values should have a place in politics -- and they support politicians who agree with them.

In that March survey, more than 82 percent of the Ohio evangelicals who attend church at least once a week said they approve of bringing more religion into politics.

"Christians stepped back too far."

"I prayed in school but my kids can't pray in school," said volunteer Lisa Sexton, 42, a Bible school volunteer.

"I should have spoken up earlier."

Political analyst John Green said evangelical growth has had a major political impact in Ohio, a key swing state that narrowly decided President George W. Bush's election victory in 2004.

"Evangelical Protestants have become much more Republican in recent times, although 40 or 50 years ago more of them were Democrats," said Green, director of the University of Akron's Bliss Institute of Applied Politics.

"There was a particular intensification of evangelical links to the Republican Party during the Bush administration in 2000 and 2004."

GOD AND POLITICS

Sexton believes every word in the Bible, rejects evolution theory, and supports the Iraq war, the Republican Party and Bush -- in part because he is a born-again Christian.

"I trust his opinion because of his beliefs," she said.

Signs of growth are everywhere at Fairfield Christian.

The facilities will soon encompass 325,000 square feet -- about twice the size of an average Wal-Mart superstore.

Outside one window a jackhammer pounds away, part of an endless construction cycle at the suburban church about 30 miles southeast of Columbus.

At the North Campus, 16 miles (26 km) away the main facility, there is another church, 41 acres for baseball, soccer and recreation, and plans for a retirement center.

Johnson seems involved in it all as he tours around the main church, greeting everyone by name.

The pastor also is chairman of the Ohio Restoration Project, a faith-based group that wants to increase the role of religion in public life.

In that role, Johnson is being investigated by the Internal Revenue Service for possible violations of a law that prohibits churches and charities from participating in political campaigns.

He denies breaking any law.

Church members are supportive.

"I appreciate the fact that the church is politically involved," said Kyle Hatfield, a 30-year-old father of two who believes the separation of church and state has gone too far.

"It was not our forefathers' intention to prevent churches from being involved," he said.

"Our forefathers did not want to force people to belong to a church, but that has been tweaked to mean churches cannot be involved."

end quotes

OUR FOREFATHERS .....

DID NOT WANT ...

CHURCHES .....

INVOLVED IN POLITICS ....

PRECISELY .....

BECAUSE .....

OUR FOREFATHERS ....

DID NOT WANT ....

ORGANIZED GROUPS ....

LIKE THESE EVANGELICALS ....

FORCING THEIR RELIGION ...

THEIR BELIEFS ....

DOWN OUR THROATS ....

THROUGH THE AGENCY ....

OF A GOVERNMENT ....

WHICH THEY CONTROLLED .....

AS THEY CONTROL ....

THE REPUBLICAN PARTY ....

AND WHO IT PUTS IN OFFICE ....

LIKE GEORGE W. BUSH ...

HERE IN OUR AMERICA .....

And so ...

"Cheney raises funds for candidate - Vice president attends event for Republican running for congressional seat"

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press
First published: Saturday, July 15, 2006

UTICA -- Vice President Dick Cheney urged Republicans on Friday night to make the war on terror their top issue in the 2006 election, speaking at a fundraiser in a contested upstate congressional district.

"As we make our case to the voters in an election year, it is vital to keep issues of national security at the top of the agenda," Cheney told more than 300 donors to GOP candidate Ray Meier.

Outside the Utica hotel, about 100 anti-war protesters gathered waving signs critical of the "Grand Oil Party."

Meier, a state senator running against Democrat Michael Arcuri to replace a seat now held by retiring Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, said national security is not the first issue in the minds of voters he talks to.

"I think the voters in this district are really more interested in issues closer to home," Meier said, citing jobs, gas prices and the economy.

Republicans expect to raise more than $100,000 in campaign cash from the event for Meier.

Democrats are hoping the event will make Meier pay a price in voters' minds for joining forces with an unpopular administration.

Ahead of the fundraiser, national Democrats sought to portray the visit as proof that Meier is in lockstep with the Bush administration.

Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera branded Meier "Rubberstamp Ray."

Arcuri, Meier's opponent, is a local prosecutor who recently got a fundraising boost from the Democrats' best fundraiser, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y.

Boehlert, R-New Hartford, is retiring after 24 years in Congress, where he earned a reputation as a moderate willing to buck the party line on the environment and social spending.

The race for the 24th District in central New York is attracting national attention because Democrats hope low voter approval numbers for the Congress will give them a chance to win control of the House this year.

end quotes

Vice President Dick Cheney urged Republicans on Friday night to make the war on terror their top issue in the 2006 election, speaking at a fundraiser in a contested upstate congressional district.

"As we make our case to the voters in an election year, it is vital to keep issues of national security at the top of the agenda," Cheney told more than 300 donors to GOP candidate Ray Meier.

"I think the voters in this district are really more interested in issues closer to home," Meier said, citing jobs, gas prices and the economy.

Dick Cheney ....

IS SO OUT OF TOUCH .....

WITH MOST OF AMERICA .....

AND MOST OF ITS PEOPLE ...

That it is not funny .....

AND HE IS .....

OUT OF TOUCH ....

WITH REALITY, as well ......

Which is not surprising .....

When the man is either shooting someone ...

Or hiding in an underground bunker ....

In some undisclosed location ....

Or cadging and wheedling money .....

FOR THE REPUBLICAN PARTY .....

BUT ....

IF YOU HAVE A LOT OF MONEY OF COURSE ...

THEN YOU CAN BUY ...

DICK'S ATTENTION ....

And then ...

You'll have it .....

For a minute .....

For an hour .....

Maybe for a whole day ....

Depending on the size of your bank account .....

And so ....

SALIM AHMED HAMDAN, PETITIONER v. DONALD H. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al., continued .....

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit

[June 29, 2006]

Justice Kennedy, with whom Justice Souter, Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer join as to Parts I and II, concurring in part.

Apart from these structural issues, moreover, the basic procedures for the commissions deviate from procedures for courts-martial, in violation of §836(b).

As the Court explains, ante, at 51, 61, the Military Commission Order abandons the detailed Military Rules of Evidence, which are modeled on the Federal Rules of Evidence in conformity with §836(a)'s requirement of presumptive compliance with district-court rules.

Instead, the order imposes just one evidentiary rule:

"Evidence shall be admitted if ... the evidence would have probative value to a reasonable person," MCO No. 1, §6(D)(1).

Although it is true some military commissions applied an amorphous evidence standard in the past, see, e.g., 1 Law Reports 117-118 (discussing World War II military commission orders); Exec. Order No. 9185, 7 Fed. Reg. 5103 (1942) (order convening military commission to try Nazi saboteurs), the evidentiary rules for those commissions were adopted before Congress enacted the uniformity requirement of 10 U. S. C. §836(b) as part of the UCMJ, see Act of May 5, 1950, ch. 169, 64 Stat. 107, 120, 149.

And while some flexibility may be necessary to permit trial of battlefield captives like Hamdan, military statutes and rules already provide for introduction of deposition testimony for absent witnesses, 10 U. S. C. §849(d); R. C. M. 702, and use of classified information, Military Rule Evid. 505.

Indeed, the deposition-testimony provision specifically mentions military commissions and thus is one of the provisions the Government concedes must be followed by the commission at issue.

See ante, at 58.

That provision authorizes admission of deposition testimony only if the witness is absent for specified reasons, §849(d)--a requirement that makes no sense if military commissions may consider all probative evidence.

Whether or not this conflict renders the rules at issue "contrary to or inconsistent with" the UCMJ under §836(a), it creates a uniformity problem under §836(b).

The rule here could permit admission of multiple hearsay and other forms of evidence generally prohibited on grounds of unreliability.

Indeed, the commission regulations specifically contemplate admission of unsworn written statements, MCO No. 1, §6(D)(3); and they make no provision for exclusion of coerced declarations save those "established to have been made as a result of torture," MCI No. 10, §3(A) (Mar. 24, 2006), available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/d20060327MCI10.pdf ; cf. Military Rule Evid. 304©(3) (generally barring use of statements obtained "through the use of coercion, unlawful influence, or unlawful inducement"); 10 U. S. C. §831(d) (same).

Besides, even if evidence is deemed nonprobative by the presiding officer at Hamdan's trial, the military-commission members still may view it.

In another departure from court-martial practice the military commission members may object to the presiding officer's evidence rulings and determine themselves, by majority vote, whether to admit the evidence.

MCO No. 1, §6(D)(1); cf. R. C. M. 801(a)(4), (e)(1) (providing that the military judge at a court-martial determines all questions of law).

As the Court explains, the Government has made no demonstration of practical need for these special rules and procedures, either in this particular case or as to the military commissions in general, ante, at 59-61; nor is any such need self-evident.

For all the Government's regulations and submissions reveal, it would be feasible for most, if not all, of the conventional military evidence rules and procedures to be followed.

In sum, as presently structured, Hamdan's military commission exceeds the bounds Congress has placed on the President's authority in §§836 and 821 of the UCMJ.

Because Congress has prescribed these limits, Congress can change them, requiring a new analysis consistent with the Constitution and other governing laws.

At this time, however, we must apply the standards Congress has provided.

By those standards the military commission is deficient.

TO BE CONTINUED ....

I don't know, me ....

But I think ...

That these REPUBLICANS .....

Up here .....

In George Pataki's .....

CORRUPT State of New York ......

Have some ISSUES .....

That were better left private .....

And so ....

But that is not the REPUBLICAN WAY, apparently .....

And so ....

"Family strife hits Senate hopeful - Kathleen McFarland's letter accusing father of sexual abuse surfaces"

By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press

First published: Saturday, July 15, 2006

NEW YORK -- Aides to Republican Senate hopeful Kathleen Troia "KT" McFarland insisted Friday that she intends to stay in the race, despite the publication of a lengthy letter in which she accused her father of sexually abusing her and her siblings as children.

"I have always remembered your physical abuse, the beatings you gave me, Tom, Mike and Nancy," McFarland wrote in the seven-page letter dated July 18, 1992.

"I now realize clearly that this brutality also had a sexual component -- sexual child abuse -- specifically, incest."

The existence of the letter, and excerpts from it, were disclosed last month in an article in New York magazine.

But the allegations of sexual abuse were not made public until Friday, when the Daily News published the entire letter on its Web site.

McFarland's father, Augie Troia, and brother, Tom Troia, have both publicly denied the allegations.

In a newspaper interview Thursday, the younger Troia denounced McFarland as "evil" and suggested she'd written the letter to make their father die of a heart attack.

The publication of the letter -- handwritten in cursive, on McFarland's personalized stationery -- is part of the flood of family recriminations that have dominated her longshot campaign.

Still, her advisers said she intends to carry on.

"KT McFarland has been a fighter all her life -- there's not an ounce of quit in her," spokesman Bill O'Reilly said.

"It's why she has accomplished so much in her life and she is not about to change her ways now."

"Her campaign moves forward."

In the letter, the candidate angrily accuses her father of physical and sexual brutality which she said stemmed from insecurities over his being "socially inferior and financially unsuccessful."

She claimed the sexual abuse prevented the rest of her siblings from forming lasting relationships and had driven Michael, who was gay, into promiscuity, leading to his death from AIDS in 1995.

And speaking of .....

CORPORATE WELFARE .....

At taxpayer expense, of course ....

And George Pataki's .....

CORRUPT ....

REPUBLICAN EMPIRE ....

Of New York ....

"Risky business - State's $1.2B deal with AMD is fraught with uncertainties"

By MICHAEL D. MARVIN
First published: Sunday, July 16, 2006

So we are going to build a chip fab plant.

Some say it will put us on the map.

Others say it will create 10,000 jobs.

People seem to be jumping in front of each other to try to take credit for this accomplishment.

This even though Advanced Micro Devices signed a nonbinding agreement with the state, which means they could still pull out.

This even though taxpayers have to cough up $1.2 billion to help build a facility that could house up to 1,200 people.

Amazing.

We are trying to buy 1,200 AMD jobs for about $1 million a job.

That's about 1 percent of the state budget.

If we use the most optimistic projection for job creation of 10,000 jobs, and those jobs paid an average salary of $50,000, New York would recoup $25 million a year through taxes.

However, if the cost of providing that money is 5 percent per year, it will cost $60 million in interest on the $1.2 billion.

Not only wouldn't New Yorkers get their investment back, but the cost would continue to grow each year.

We are not getting a corporate headquarters that would provide leadership and growth.

We are getting a factory.

We are not getting revolutionary technology.

We are getting the latest in incremental changes to a process that has been going on for decades.

Why, then, are we spending $1.2 billion?

Another issue that must be considered is how long this plant will be in use.

Some chip fab plants are used for only three years, though 10 to 20 years is more typical.

I doubt AMD is making any commitments on the length of use of the facilities or the number of employees that would remain at the plant for 20 years.

AMD would certainly not make commitments that would result in the repayment of our tax dollars.

When the plant is no longer in use because of obsolesce or changing business climate, there will be one very large concrete tombstone in our region with no other possible use.

It is a special purpose building, and it will have contained many chemicals.

All of the decision-makers, of course, no longer will be in office when this occurs.

All of AMD's senior officers live outside New York.

They may express regret for the unfortunate result of the plant's closing.

Somehow this will not make me feel better.

What I would really like to know is what other uses were considered by our leaders for our $1.2 billion.

Did they consider reducing our taxes so that we would not be the highest taxed state in the country?

Did they consider building a light rail system for the region that would attract many businesses, reduce reliance on the nonrenewable energy sources (i.e., oil), and improve the quality of life of all of its residents?

Was the possibility of a high-speed rail service to New York City that would better unite our state's work force ruled out?

How about an investment fund for renewable energy companies headquartered here?

How about turning the Harriman Campus in uptown Albany into such an energy efficient workplace that visitors flocked from all over to see it?

Is the contribution of $1.2 billion to help AMD build a chip fab the best use of our tax dollars?

I will say that we have gotten a tremendous amount of press and recognition.

But I still wonder if it is worth $1.2 billion.

Michael D. Marvin is co-founder and chairman emirtus of MapInfo, the Troy-based software developer.

end quotes

Well. Mr. Marvin .....

From the perspective ....

Of New York State's .....

Corrupt politicians .....

WHO ARE "IN IT FOR THEIR POCKETS" .....

The GRAFT ....

And the SKIM ......

Off that 1.2 BILLION ....

Is going to do ....

VERY WELL ...

For them .....

And so ...

They thought ....

That another opportunity ....

TO LINE THEIR POCKETS ....

WITH OUR TAX MONEY ....

WAS THE VERY BEST ...

USE ....

OF THAT TAX MONEY ....

THAT THERE COULD BE .....

And so ...

"Military, civilian leaders are failing the U.S."

By TERENCE L. KINDLON
Albany, New York Times Union
First published: Sunday, July 16, 2006

Forty years ago I quit college to join the Marines.

There was a war on and, like so many of my generation, I was inspired to enlist by President Kennedy, who challenged us to ask not what our country could do for us, but to ask what we could do for our country.

I loved the Marine Corps and, even now, with my memories of Vietnam receding and my 60th birthday approaching, I am intensely proud that I once had the privilege of wearing its uniform.

My 30-year-old son, Lee, is also a Marine.

Lee is a captain, a military lawyer who's just finished a deployment in Fallujah with the grunts of 2nd Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment, where he served as staff judge advocate.

Because of my longtime devotion to the Marine Corps, it has been alarming to follow several months of news reports about a few Marines who went berserk in the insurgent stronghold of Haditha and allegedly murdered 24 civilians, including mothers and their babies.

How could my Marines do such a crazy, evil thing?

Marines have always been warriors, to be sure, but we are noble warriors, not cold-blooded murderers.

If these terrible allegations are true, and reports so far are not encouraging, all of those responsible must be prosecuted with grim determination.

Earlier in this war, after the torture at Abu Ghraib prison was discovered, the military prosecuted a few backwoods sad-sacks who'd been miscast as prison guards.

The decision to charge only low-ranking soldiers was an obscene miscarriage of justice.

It told the Iraqis that, regardless of what we said, Americans were no better than the cruel dictator we had vanquished.

Worse, as we Americans idly stood by, any number of high ranking military officers, civilian officials and politicians -- the people who were actually most responsible for Abu Ghraib -- shamelessly blamed the scandal on a few bad apples while they walked away from the horrific mess they'd made, hoping the world wouldn't notice the blood dripping from their hands.

When we make a list of the people to be prosecuted for the Haditha massacre, the first names on that list, unfortunately, must be the Marines who actually fired the weapons that slaughtered 24 defenseless men, women and children.

It does not matter if they were outraged at the death of a lance corporal, or broken-hearted or freaked out or completely exhausted.

These are just excuses, and Marines never make excuses.

The words "Death Before Dishonor," which many Marines have tattooed on their arms, are more than an empty slogan.

In the Marine Corps, those words represent an immutable principle that sets the standard of conduct.

The murder of civilians flies in the face of that principle and represents a total breakdown of Marine Corps discipline.

But those few Marines in Haditha are not solely responsible for this abomination, and they must not be left to absorb all of the blame alone.

Such misconduct bespeaks a systemic problem, a scandalous failure of leadership, and the killers' superiors share responsibility with the men who actually pulled the triggers.

And this time, unlike the farcical Abu Ghraib cover-up, prosecutors must methodically work their way up the chain of command until they have identified every superior officer who, through neglect, indifference or incompetence has contributed to this catastrophe.

Next, and more important, we must assign blame to the civilian ideologues who poisoned America's well with their strange, selfish, paranoid ambitions.

These radicals, masquerading as "conservatives," lusted after the chance to invade Iraq so they could steal its oil and indulge their bizarre delusions of world dominance.

Craven chickenhawks, most of whom had never heard a shot fired in anger or seen a dead Marine up close, they consolidated their influence to twist intelligence until it suited their purposes, brushed aside the indispensable lessons of Vietnam with a few handy talking-points and led our country straight through the looking glass into another meat-grinder guerrilla war that simply can never be won.

The civilians ultimately responsible for our debacle in Iraq profess that military service is merely another job choice -- for somebody else's children, of course -- and that dying is just an incidental part of the downside.

They've hidden our flag-draped caskets, declared the Geneva Conventions quaint and thus inoperative, sent too few troops off to fight their battles, dispatched them without a strategic plan and supplied them with inadequate armor and defective equipment.

Finally, since they no longer can scrape up enough new recruits and because a military draft would be political suicide, they've issued "stop-loss" orders and consigned our Marines and soldiers to endless, exhausting cycles of deployment after deployment. '

Given all this, is it any wonder our troops are at their wits' end?

Given all this, is it a little easier to understand the collapse of Marine Corps discipline in Haditha and the murder of 24 civilians?

Because of their deceit and incompetence, our civilian leaders have managed to make the United States a global pariah, they have caused the deaths of thousands upon thousands of people and they are breaking the back of our military.

It's hard to believe, but we have now been in Iraq for as almost as long as we fought World War II.

At this point, however, instead of being on the verge of victory, our soldiers are exhausted and their families are disintegrating.

And nobody is able to say what victory is or how it can be attained.

As citizens of this democracy, we cannot permit this debacle to continue.

When the ghost of President Kennedy rises up to ask us what we can do for our country, the answer is stone simple.

What we can do for our country is accept the reality that we cannot win this war and end it now.

What we can do for our country is bring our soldiers and Marines home to their families, make amends and start healing our wounds.

What we can do for our country is take it back from the radicals who've stolen it away and start the process of restoring our integrity and our honor and our hope.

Terence L. Kindlon is a criminal defense lawyer in Albany.

He once was a Marine sergeant and was wounded in Vietnam during the Tet offensive in 1968. His email address is tkindlon@aol.com.

end quotes

There has not actually been .....

A break-down .....

In Marine Corps discipline .....

Rather ...

That discipline .....

HAS BEEN RACHETED DOWN .....

WAY DOWN, IN FACT ....

TO MATCH .....

THE COMPLETE ....

AND TOTAL ...

LACK ....

OF DISCIPLINE .....

THAT THE COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF .....

IS POSSESSED OF .....

And so ....

"Looking past religion into the political candidate pool"

By KATHRYN LOPEZ
First published: Sunday, July 16, 2006

A Washington Post reporter once described evangelical voters as "poor, uneducated, and easy to command."

As we edge closer to the 2008 presidential elections, count on the press being the uneducated ones -- easily led by their farcical view of religious Americans.

In a recent Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll, more than a third of registered voters polled said they would not vote for a Mormon presidential candidate.

Mitt Romney, the Republican governor of Massachusetts, happens to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and is a contender for the GOP ticket; so "the Mormon question" has been a hot topic in some political circles.

But although, among the speculators, it is widely believed that evangelical Christians would no-way, no-how vote for a Mormon, the poll numbers hint that Romney's real obstacle might be a much more traditional political one.

Looking at the numbers, John C. Green, a religion-and-politics expert at the University of Akron, points out, "There appears to have been an increase in the skepticism about voting for a Mormon for president since the late 1990s."

Green speculates: "This increase may reflect the opposition to Mormons among evangelicals and other conservative Christians."

"But it also may reflect opposition from liberal Democrats and seculars who recognize Mormons as a socially conservative group."

In the 2006 poll, self-described "liberal Democrats" were those most likely to oppose a Mormon candidate.

However, these current generic numbers, Green says, "don't necessarily predict outcomes."

"The reason is that the candidates are real people with records, skills and programs -- all of which can matter more at the ballot box than generalized opinions about religious groups."

So as the discussion moves from an anonymous Mormon candidate to the actual Mitt Romney, and from abstract speculation to actual primaries and caucuses, polling will become more meaningful.

Those opposed to a generic Mormon candidate may reveal that their opposition is prompted much more by political ideology than by sectarian concerns about religion.

Michael Cromartie, who runs the Evangelical Studies Project at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, has observed: "Most evangelicals do perceive Mormonism to be a cult and are deeply troubled by its theology."

"But this does not mean they would not vote for someone like Gov. Romney."

When they vote for president, they are voting not for a pastor or confessor, but for a political leader -- and in that arena, evangelicals and Mormons have much in common.

Rewind to April 2005 for a hint at how theological differences fade once we start talking politics.

Some of the most heartfelt remembrances of Pope John Paul II came from evangelical Christians in Congress.

Now, true, a Roman Catholic has already been president, and my crowd (I'm Catholic) is bigger that the Salt Lakers, so folks are a bit more used to us; but papists and evangelical Protestants do have some not-minor theological differences.

Yet on abortion, cloning and gay marriage -- which Romney has some experience fighting in his oh-so-blue Bay State -- there's a real political and cultural bond that transcends theological differences.

I might not go to church with him, but I can work with him.

And if I were a conservative evangelical Protestant, I'd certainly consider voting for someone who talks about a culture of life in the way Romney does.

The media, naturally, will continue to miss the real story: the fact that Romney's convictions, as they are translated into politics, might make him more, rather than less, appealing to evangelicals.

This isn't just conservative grousing, either: CNN political analyst Bill Schneider recently remarked, to the L.A. Times, that "the press is one of the most secular institutions in American society."

"It just doesn't get religion or any idea that flows from religious conviction."

So can a Mormon be president?

Save that question until Romney announces.

And ask it again after people have had some more exposure to him, and can reference some speech he gave -- instead of having their quickest thought-association for "Mormon" in current events be an HBO show about polygamy.

And if and when some opponent tries to use his religion against him as Democrat Ted Kennedy (yes, brother of the religion-and-the-presidency-taboo-breaker Catholic JFK) did in his 1994 Senate race with Romney, Americans will see it for what it is -- that old-time, hardball, sometimes-unholy politics.

Lopez's e-mail address is klopez@nationalreview.com

Perhaps they misunderstood the word and thought the pollster said, MORON

America already has.

I received this in an email today and couldn't help being reminded of the Gulf of Tonkin:

Webster Tarpley issues False Flag warning.
B16712 / Sat, 15 Jul 2006 20:54:09 / "War on Terror"
The following warning was sent by Webster Tarpley, (author of “Synthetic Terrorism”) – 7/15/2006:

HOLD MOSSAD, SHIN BETH, ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCES RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY OF 25,000 AMERICANS IN LEBANON

BEWARE OF FALSE FLAG WAR PROVOCATIONS PLANNED WITH CONNIVANCE OF CHENEY

By Webster G. Tarpley

Washington DC, July 15 (1 PM EDT)—The escalating Israeli assault on Lebanon clearly represents a conscious bid to provoke a general war in the Middle East. The captured Israeli soldiers are only the pretext for the present massive military operations. Israeli spokesmen are making constant allegations that Hezbollah missiles being fired at Israel have been manufactured or delivered by Iran. At the same time, the Israelis accuse Hezbollah of wanting to transfer the two captured Israeli soldiers to Syria or Iran. These statements are an attempt to build a case for an Israeli sneak attack on Syria and/or Iran. US spokesmen, including the Nietzschean fascist Bolton, constantly repeat the litany that Syria and Iran are the supporters of Hezbollah.

How might the Israelis and their Bush-Cheney allies escalate to a Middle East regional war? A linear scenario is that, after further bombardment of Israel by rockets allegedly made in Iran and allegedly delivered with the connivance of Syria, the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) lashes out at Damascus and Teheran. Syrian and Iranian retaliatory measures would then be seized upon by the Bush-Cheney regime as a pretext for US entry into the war. Here the US would be openly dragged into war as the tail of the Israeli dog. But this is a deeply flawed scenario, sure to generate huge waves of resentment against the Israelis and their US partners as the body bags begin to come home.

False flag scenarios would be entirely more effective from the point of view of the war planners. CNN and MSNBC coverage this Saturday morning has been stressing the situation of the 25,000 Americans now stuck in Lebanon. These Americans are being invited to register with the US consulates for possible evacuation. The State Department and the US military have been remarkably slow to begin such an evacuation.

One possible provocation scenario to bring the US into the war is that a helicopter carrying US citizens being evacuated out of Lebanon is hit by a missile and destroyed, killing all on board. The missile might be fired by the Israelis or by their allies among the fascist Lebanese Phalangists. The Israelis would announce that the helicopter had been destroyed by Hezbollah, opening the way for a hysterical campaign by Fox News and the rest of the neocon mass brainwashing apparatus to secure an early US attack on Syria and Iran.

An alternative: a group of Arabic-speaking Israeli Mossad or Shin Beth special forces, or a group of Phalangist militia round up a few dozen Americans and machine-gun them to death. The controlled media then blame the massacre on Hezbolllah, thus stampeding the US population into war.

The “Christian” Phalangist (or “Kataeb Party”) have long been a willing cat’s paw for the US and Israelis in Lebanon. It was the Phalangists, controlled by the Gemayel family, who did most of the actual killing at the infamous Tel-al-Zaatar massacre in August 1976, the midst of the Kissinger-provoked Lebanese civil war. The Phalangists in that case did the dirty work under the supervision of the Israelis. Although the controlled media have been silent about the Phalange, it is clear that they are still available for dirty operations.

In an ominous sign, CNN broadcasts have featured first-person interviews with Caroline Shamoun, supposedly an American stuck in Lebanon. This reference recalls Camille Chamoun, the CIA puppet president of Lebanon who called in US forces in 1958. The goal of the current campaign is manifestly to call US forces to intervene into a Lebanon-centered crisis once again.

All peace-loving governments and all Americans of good will should make it clear that they hold the Israeli Mossad, Shin Beth, and Israeli Defense Forces directly responsible for the safety and welfare of the Americans trapped in Lebanon by the present aggression. Any atrocities against these Americans cannot be attributed to Hezbollah, Syria, or Iran, none of whom has any conceivable interest in provoking the US into an attack. It is Israel and Cheney who have such an interest, as is likely to have been discussed during Olmert’s visit to the US in May and Netanyahu’s visit here in June.

It is imperative that the US and world population be inoculated against the provocation scenarios now being propagandized by CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the controlled media.
——————————————————————
Webster Griffin Tarpley is author of the books “9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in USA,” the only “full MIHOP” or “inside job from A to Z” study of 9/11 in print; and co-author of “George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography,” which was the first to break the story of the Bush dynasty’s key role in launching Adolf Hitler.

You can hear Tarpley’s “World Crisis Radio” show weekly at RBNlive.com
____________________________

Tell me I'm not getting paranoid. Please.

Oh, I don't think you are getting paranoid, Snuf .....

And besides, paranoia is simply a state of mind .....

Real, yes ...

But ......

Years ago, Snuf .....

I was a point man in Viet Nam ......

And I didn't "THINK" people were out to kill me .....

I knew they were .....

Because that is what their job was ....

And that was alright with me ...

Since they wanting to kill me ...

In and of itself ...

Did not make it happen ...

And so .....

My job .....

Was not to be .....

Their victim .....

And so ....

I'm still here .....

And while I don't like what is going on in the world right now .....

Just as I did not back then ....

I still realize ...

That all I might have control over ...

AT BEST ....

IN THE ABSOLUTE MIDST ...

Of the insanity .....

IS ME .....

And all the rest ...

IS HAPPENSTANCE .....

And so ....

I am with jeffmoskin, myself .....

That we are in the midst .....

Of a time of insanity .....

And a long time ago .....

I gave up ....

Trying to use rational methodology .....

To try and understand ...

Irrational behavior .....

And so .....

I OBSERVE .....

I myself have no doubts at all .....

That "these guys" .....

Want to have ...

One final big DUST-UP .....

Over there in the Middle East .....

And my money ....

Is on ...

Them having it ....

Which could plunge the world back into another "DARK AGES" ....

And you know what, Snuf ....

SO BE IT .....

I've got firewood to get in, before winter comes .....

And I am still working on getting a real roof over my head, to ward off the elements ....

And so ...

Life out in the hinterlands of civilization goes on .....

And this is not to say that I am indifferent ...

Au contraire ....

It is just that I do not have the emotional energy ...

To spend ....

On a world gone mad ....

When that expenditure ...

Will cripple me ....

In my own life ...

And so ...

And of course, Snuf ...

THIS IS OPINION ......

Not yet fact .....

And so .....

And that is a problem in our world today ....

The plethora of opinions that we are barraged with ....

Especially down there where you are .....

Where having an opinion is a business .....

OPINIONS AS TO WHAT MIGHT BE ...

ARE MERELY OPINIONS .....

WELL-INFORMED .....

OR NOT .....

I myself do not know the names of half of these people .....

Who have these opinions ...

On which they make their living .....

And I have no idea at all who this Tarpley is .....

Other than someone with the leisure time to write a book or two ....

And so ......

I really pay him no mind at all ......

Beyond considering his words .....

And so .....

We got a guy up here .....

Who is a real fool ....

As only fools can be .....

Out in the country ...

And up here ...

People are just as inclined ...

To take his word on something .....

As readily ...

As they are inclined to take the word of this Tarpley ...

OR ME, for that matter .....

And so .....

Maybe it is just the slower pace of life up here, Snuf .....

Where it takes a week or so ...

After planting seeds ...

To see if something will come up .....

And then it takes weeks and weeks more .....

To see if something will actually bear fruit ......

And then ...

It takes more time .....

To see if the deer and squirrels and whatnot .....

Won't eat all that "fruit" .....

The day before you were ready to pick it for yourself ....

And so .....

Given the real prospect .....

Of freezing .....

And starving .....

In the middle of the winter up here .....

Sort of puts a perspective on things .....

That the folks in the city don't seem to have .....

Where life is much faster .....

And so ......

Priorities, Snuf .....

This Tarpley has a point of view .....

And that is all .....

Nothing to get paranoid over, from my perspective, anyway .....

ESPECIALLY IF HE IS RIGHT ......

And so .....

And with respect to Dick Cheney, Snuf ......

I just go back to this news article right above here .....

And I take my comfort from the reply of this Meier .....

That up here, where I am ......

OUTSIDE THE UNNATURALNESS OF THE "BELTWAY" .....

People are interested .....

NOT IN WHAT SOME WASHINGTON BUFFOON LIKE DICK CHENEY MIGHT BE SAYING .....

They are more interested in LIFE RIGHT HERE .....

And so .....

Let us presume for a moment that Dick Cheney really does have all this power that Tarpley attributes to him .....

IN WHICH CASE .....

He can do whatever HE wants .....

Like blow up the world ...

FOR PROFIT ....

WHICH DICK CHENEY IS QUITE CAPABLE OF DOING .....

In my opinion, anyway .....

Since I think Dick Cheney has gone past some boundary of rationality .....

Over into the uncharted wasteland ...

Of insanity .....

Then in the vernacular .....

IF DICK HAS THIS POWER ...

AND CHOOSES TO USE IT ...

Well ...

In that case .....

WE ARE ALL ****ED ......

Hypothetically, anyway .....

And so .....

In that case .....

What is there to worry about?

We are all already dead ...

And so .....

Might as well go on with life .....

Until the "end" gets here .....

And so .....

And if Dick Cheney does not have this power ...

Then there is also nothing to really worry about ...

Other than freezing .....

And starving .....

In the middle of the winter ....

And so ....

Back to perspective, Snuf .....

Practice being laconic, Snuf .....

Learn to say, "OH, WELL ..."

And then ...

Really mean it ....

Works for me, anyway .....

Out here in the wilds of America ....

And so .....

"U.S. military fears outcome of rape trial"

By RYAN LENZ, Associated Press
Last updated: 10:45 p.m., Sunday, July 16, 2006

BAGHDAD, Iraq -- U.S. military officials fear that religious hurdles in exhuming the body of a teenager could complicate the prosecution of American soldiers accused of raping and murdering the girl -- and create a political nightmare for the U.S. mission here.

Given the seriousness of the allegations, U.S. officials believe a vigorous prosecution is essential and punishment should be severe if the five U.S. soldiers and one former soldier are convicted.

Anything short of that would be seen by Iraqis as a cover up and could shatter remaining support for the U.S. presence here.

Five soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division are accused of raping and murdering Abeer al-Janabi near the town of Mahmoudiya on March 12.

A sixth soldier is accused of failing to report the crime.

The soldiers allegedly saw the victim at a checkpoint in the town and plotted the attack for a week, according to federal court documents.

Three of her family members were killed in the assault.

But the victim's male relatives have refused to allow her body to be exhumed because of objections from a Muslim cleric.

Islamic law frowns on exhumations as desecration of the dead.

"Chief among our concerns is carrying out justice."

"But when you get town officials or an imam saying that exhuming the body doesn't jive with our cultural sensitivities, that creates a massive stumbling block," a U.S. military official in Baghdad close to the investigation said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to speak to media.

Without forensic evidence, prosecutors must rely heavily on statements from the suspects.

Defense lawyers will doubtless claim those statements were made under duress and seek to keep them from the jury.

While some evidence has been collected at the home where the assault allegedly occurred, officials say none of it confirms guilt.

A photograph of the girl's Iraqi identity card, viewed by The Associated Press in Baghdad, showed the girl was 14 at the time of the attack, with her birthdate listed as Aug. 19, 1991.

The identity card was issued in 1993 and shows a picture of the girl as a toddler.

The soldiers -- Sgt. Paul E. Cortez, Spc. James P. Barker, Pfc. Jesse V. Spielman and Pfc. Bryan L. Howard -- are accused of rape and murder.

They allegedly conspired with former soldier Steven D. Green, who was arrested last month in North Carolina.

Green, who was discharged from the Army because of a personality disorder, likely will be tried in federal court.

The former Army private pleaded not guilty to one count of rape and four counts of murder and is being held without bond.

Sgt. Anthony W. Yribe, is charged with failing to report the attack but is not alleged to have been a direct participant.

Those still on active duty face an Article 32 hearing, the military equivalent of a grand jury proceeding, to determine if they should stand trial.

If the case does go to trial, the murder suspects could face the death penalty.

Yet Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has complained that Iraqi courts should try cases of abuse by American soldiers -- something the U.S. command strongly resists -- and last week called for a review of an agreement giving foreign troops immunity from Iraqi prosecution.

"Those who are free from being punished misbehave, and they have misbehaved a lot," al-Maliki said.

The U.S. military always has insisted it will punish soldiers who commit crimes against Iraqis.

During a visit last week, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld underscored that position, insisting that "no one" in the U.S. force "is immune," meaning from U.S. though not Iraqi prosecution.

The attack was the latest in a string of allegations that U.S. soldiers and Marines in Iraq have killed civilians, including the alleged massacre of dozens in Haditha.

"Sweeney ally calls rival rich urbanite - Gillibrand spokeswoman calls comment sophomoric distraction"

By CATHY WOODRUFF, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, July 17, 2006

ALBANY -- A Republican ally of U.S. Rep. John Sweeney accused Sweeney's Democratic challenger Sunday of hiding her true identity as an affluent New York City lawyer in an effort to portray herself falsely as a regular middle-class upstater.

"Is she embarrassed to admit that she is probably more familiar with the price of dog-walkers in Manhattan than the price of a six-pack at Stewart's?" Clifton Park Republican Chairman Michael Lisuzzo asked during a news conference outside Kirsten Gillibrand's law office.

Gillibrand, 39, is challenging Sweeney, a Republican seeking his fifth two-year term in Congress.

"These are false claims," said her spokeswoman, Allison Price.

"The Gillibrands own one home."

"The Gillibrands have never owned a dog," she said.

"When Mr. Lisuzzo wants to send the Gillibrands a six-pack from Stewart's to apologize for these lies, they would prefer root beer."

Lisuzzo, a financial adviser and GOP chairman in the Saratoga County town in which Sweeney now resides, produced a sheaf of documents that he said proves Gillibrand's primary residence is a swank New York City apartment, not an expensive house she owns in Columbia County with her husband.

Price said the Gillibrands bought their Columbia County house in 2003.

At that time, it was a second home while Gillibrand wound down her practice in New York City, and that is why they signed the required "second home rider" with their mortgage documents in July 2003, she said.

They moved to that house permanently in 2004 and no longer maintain an apartment in New York City, Price said.

Sweeney, a Troy native, did not live in his congressional district when he ran the first time in 1998, Lisuzzo acknowledged Sunday.

"But he didn't live in a luxury New York City apartment," Lisuzzo said.

Price called the residency allegations "sophomoric attempts to run away from Sweeney's voting record."

Gillibrand grew up in this region and is the granddaughter of Albany Democratic icon Dorothea "Polly" Noonan.

end quotes

"Hey, Jackie Boy, Hey, Johnnie" Sweeney IS A LAWYER .....

Just like his Democratic challenger is .....

And "Hey, Jackie Boy, Hey, Johnnie" ......

IS IN THE GAME .....

FOR HIS POCKET .....

Which has done very well .....

For itself .....

Since "Hey, Jackie Boy, Hey, Johnnie" .....

First entered "public service" .....

As a REPUBLICAN THUG .....

And GOFER ....

And alleged BAGMAN .....

Back in the 1980's ......

IN CORRUPT REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED RENSSELAER COUNTY .....

IN THE CORRUPT REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED .....

State of New York .....

And so .....

To my knowledge .....

"Hey, Jackie Boy, Hey, Johnnie" Sweeney ....

HAS NEVER HELD ANY REAL JOB .....

OUTSIDE OF BEING A POLITICAL HACK .....

FOR THE REPUBLICANS .....

And so ......

SOME "TRUTH IN ADVERTISING" ......

Just to keep things balanced in here ....

LIKE FOX NEWS DOES OUT "THERE" .....

And so ....

And here is where we are .....

On this day ....

Here ....

In OUR America .....

"Heat wave broils much of nation"

By NAHAL TOOSI, Associated Press
Last updated: 4:36 p.m., Monday, July 17, 2006

NEW YORK -- Temperatures in the 90s and beyond gripped a large swath of the country Monday, sending people scrambling for shade and swimming pools and leading to calls for energy conservation.

On the streets of New York, a spot in the shade competed with a parking space as a valuable commodity.

Men and women made their way under narrow awnings, lounged under trees and took breaks beneath the large umbrellas of hot dog stands.

"It feels oppressive and sticky," said Laura Shaffer, a 30-year-old New Yorker, sipping a soda on her way to work.

In Cleveland, 22 outdoor pools that are normally closed on Mondays and Tuesdays were being opened.

Temperatures throughout Ohio were expected around 90 for the rest of the week.

Tony Godel was already sweating through his brown T-shirt by 10 a.m. as he worked on a remodeling project at a hotel in Cleveland.

He planned to drink a lot of water.

"You get used to it after a while," Godel said.

"You know what you're getting into."

"You're paid to deal with it."

With the sweltering weather expected to continue, calls also went out for electricity conservation.

PJM Interconnection, which operates the electric grid for all or part of 13 states and the District of Columbia, asked people to reduce usage, especially between 3 p.m. and 7 p.m.

Health Authorities

New York state officials issued an air-quality health advisory for the entire state because of ground-level ozone, a major component of smog.

The Philadelphia Corporation for Aging set up a telephone hot line, with nurses available to answer questions about coping with the heat.

The city Health Department sent outreach workers to help the homeless and elderly, just as it does during bitterly cold weather.

Managing Director Pedro Ramos said workers would help them avoid dehydration and find shelter.

In New York City, the record for the date was set in 1953, when Central Park recorded 100 degrees.

On Monday, the mercury had reached 90 before noon.

Shaffer, who studies how corporations deal with environmental issues, decided to buy her lunch at a fast-food restaurant before heading into work so she would not have to go back outside.

"I think that it's a precursor of what we could be experiencing on a daily basis if we don't do something about global warming," she said.

The federal government reported last week that the first half of the year was the warmest in the United States since record keeping began in 1895.

The average temperature for the 48 contiguous United States from January through June was 51.8 degrees, or 3.4 degrees above average for the 20th century.

In Denver, Hyla Ferguson said the heat forces her to get things done in the morning.

"At my sister's house, I've been getting up with the kids and I've been taking them outside early, early in the morning because it's just too hot to have the babies out there at 1, 2 and 3," Ferguson said.

"So that way they get their fix for the day and they don't mind staying inside and watching movies or doing board games."