What a waste indeed!

Pattyann... I am probably wrong here, but as i understand it, when the former US ambassador, Joseph Wilson finally questioned in a public newspaper, the statement by President Bush in
his 2003 State of the Union Address, that: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant amounts of uranium from Africa"...... the position of Wilson's wife, as a CIA agent was leaked, and that leak ended up in the current charges against VP Cheney's top aide L.(scooter)Libby.

Apart from leaking security information, there appeared to be an attempt to deflect from the message, by 'shooting the messenger', with this leak about Wilson's wife ...... does the investigation that you are referring to, seem to be in the same category?

[ December 30, 2005, 08:36 PM: Message edited by: norma ]

I agree with all of you. It is another deflection attack. It's just like before the elections, when things started shifting towards democrats gaining points, all of a sudden there was another terror alert to distract us from the valid points the democrats were making. The republicans are just great at setting up smoke screens, and it's time we started turning on the fan and shot the "stuff" back at them. Good job, ladies, all your points and comments are good.

Casey, thanks for bringing in the article from the Washington Post

Casey said:

quote:

---

So I would ask the group: Do you believe that the commander-in-chief powers can trump international law and domestic statutes in our struggle against terrorism? Why or why not?

---

Apparently Bush has used his "power" to trump international law and domestic statutes. Do you mean "can" or should be allowed to? My answer is, if someone died and made him King George or Dictator George he can and will use his power to do whatever he likes. But this is a democracy, a government by, of and for the people. The president is, therefore, a servant of the people, not the other way around. In a democracy there must be checks and balances or there is no democracy, and we need to stop pretending that we have one. There our provisions in our constitution to provide for the checks and balances even in times of war. Both the Justice Department and the Congress have been provided ways to participate in situations such as these. This has been addressed earlier in this forum. Personally, I believe that no one person or group of people is wise enough and altruistic enough to be trusted with that kind of power. That's why the checks and balances must continue, and we, the people, must ensure that they do.


My husband's summary for the day:

Item 1:

This is from an email I received from a friend. Read the article and decide for yourself if this is a boon or a bane.

Are You Being Tracked?
http://www.alternet.org/story/29890/


Items 2, 2A and 2B:

2 - this is a well presented article with arguments from both sides.
Inquiry into leak of NSA spying program launched
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/30/nsa.leak/index.html

2A - Doesn't really say anything new other than it is the NSA who is requesting the probe. It doesn't say who in the NSA did the requesting or whether the NSA was urged to request it. It also doesn't give arguments against the administrations actions.

Justice Dept. Probing Domestic Spying Leak
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20051230/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/domestic_spying_probe_7


2B - A similar article to the one presented by CNN (Item 2), also includes comments by both sides.
Justice Dept. to probe leak of spy program
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10651154/


Item 3:

This item has absolutely nothing to do with Bush, NSA or spying - I just thought you might enjoy it, considering the name of this site: "Boomer Women Speak". I wonder, is she a member????

N.J. woman enjoys celebrity of being 1st baby boomer
http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051230/ts_usatoday/njwomanenjoyscelebrityofbeing1stbabyboomer


Item 4:


Some lamentations from the Christian Science Monitor summarizing 2005.

Saying goodbye has never been so sweet
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20051230/cm_csm/yschorr30

quote:

---

The Iraq war was a tragedy in danger of becoming a disaster, as the Bush administration pressed its efforts to assemble a parliament and a government and avert a civil war.

---

quote:

---

It was also not a good year for civil liberties. We heard the disclosure of the wiretapping of Americans without seeking warrants and learned about the secret prisons abroad for terror suspects and the mistreatment of prisoners under interrogation.

---

That's all he could find for today.

[ January 03, 2006, 09:31 PM: Message edited by: Vi ]

So much has happened this year. There are so many things we've learned, a lot of which tell me some elements of humanity are functioning far below their capacity. I'm not talking about innate intellectual ability here. I'm talking about individual progression along the path of becoming a better person, a higher soul.

Below are news items for the day - compliments of the lovely soul who shares my life.

Item 1:

From the NYTimes - yesterday they were silent on the matter; today they are not. This 2 page article is recommended reading.:
Criminal Inquiry Opens Into Spying Leak
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/31/politics/31inquire.html?th&emc=th

Personal comment:: I believe the following could raise a bit of conjecture:

quote:

---

"The leaking of classified information is a serious issue," said the spokesman, Trent Duffy.

"The fact is that Al Qaeda's playbook is not printed on Page 1, and when America's is, it has serious ramifications. You don't need to be Sun Tzu to understand that," he said, referring to the Chinese warrior who wrote "The Art of War."

The president last week denounced in strong language the leaking of information about the agency's program, saying: "My personal opinion is it was a shameful act for someone to disclose this very important program in a time of war. The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy."

---

Where is the administrations denouncement of the Valerie Plame leak - especially considering that Libby has been indicted, the investigation is still ongoing with possible implications for Rove, Bush's claim that no one on his staff was involved in that leak and his promise to "take action" against anyone who was involved? I may be wrong, but I see this as Bush's ongoing "diversion and deceit" tactics from the "real news" - in this case, that Bush may have broken the law with his unwarranted eavesdropping. For those who believe Bush can do no wrong, this is just another rallying point for them to jump on the bandwagon - a wagon that continually runs on flat tires.

quote:

---

"President Bush broke the law and lied to the American people when he unilaterally authorized secret wiretaps of U.S. citizens," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "But rather than focus on this constitutional crisis, Attorney General Gonzales is cracking down on critics of his friend and boss. Our nation is strengthened, not weakened, by those whistle-blowers who are courageous enough to speak out on violations of the law.

"Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, said his group believed "the priority at this point for the Department of Justice should be the appointment of an independent prosecutor to determine whether federal wiretap laws were violated" by the security agency program, not the leak inquiry.

---

An additional point of interest:

quote:

---

Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit law firm that defends whistle-blowers, said his group would not object to a limited investigation of the leak of classified information. "But if they do a blanket witch hunt, which I fear," he said, "it would trample all over good government laws" intended to protect government workers who expose wrongdoing.

"The whole reason we have whistle-blower laws is so that government workers can act as the public's eyes and ears to expose illegality or abuse of power," Mr. Devine said.

---

And here's a bit of conjecture. Cheney says he can't talk about it, yet he can admit to the events happening (as long as he can do some "finger pointing and criticism").

quote:

---

While President Bush has focused his ire on whoever leaked the information, Vice President Cheney, in remarks to reporters on Dec. 20, was critical of The Times as well. Reiterating that the administration had asked the newspaper not to publish the article, Mr. Cheney said: "Eventually they ran it. I think that's unfortunate. I think it damages national security."

A Justice Department official, asked whether the investigation would examine the newspaper's publication of the information in addition to any government employees who might have leaked it, said he could not comment on any aspect of the investigation.

---

Item 1A: MSNBC's article on the above:
Justice Dept. to probe leak of spy program
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10651154/


Item 2: Again from the NYTimes - not specifically about NSA or eavesdropping, but rather, "favoring big-money politics over the voters."
Conspiring Against the Voters
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/31/opinion/31sat3.html?th&emc=th

quote:

---

By endorsing them, the president has finally shown his commitment to bipartisanship in the worst of ways: by installing another undistinguished group of factotums to referee the democratic process.

---

Item 3: Again from the NYTimes. A 2 page article on Bush's plans for the future - the good(?), the bad and the ugly - recommended reading. To me, it shows the gullibility of many of his followers to empty words on distorted principles, but what do I know? . . . I'm only coming to my own conclusions, based on reported statements.

President Uses a Quiet Vacation To Prepare an Ambitious Agenda
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/politics/01bush.html


Item 4: From USA Today. Again in reply to how "great" our economy is doing.

Wall Street is road to nowhere for indexes
http://www.usatoday.com/money/markets/us/2005-12-30-stocks_x.htm?csp=24

quote:

---

This year was marked by skyrocketing energy prices, a slowing economy, hot-and-cold inflation threats and the Federal Reserve steadily raising interest rates — all of which made investors nervous over the state of the economy and kept stocks volatile but ultimately little changed since the end of 2004.

---

Item 5: From Reuters, and again in reply to how "great" our economy is doing.

Are bears roaming Broad & Wall?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051231/bs_nm/column_stocks_outlook_dc

quote:

---

Instead, thin volume led to volatile movements in stock prices, while crude oil futures climbed back above $60 a barrel, and the bond market began to behave as if the U.S. economy faces trouble.

---

An additional quote:

quote:

---

DANGEROUS CURVE

On Tuesday, the two-year U.S. Treasury note's yield rose above the benchmark 10-year Treasury note's yield, inverting the yield curve for the first time in five years.

Previous inversions have typically signaled a slowing economy or recession.

In the week to come, investors will likely be mulling over whether this time around, the inverted yield curve means the economy is headed for a slowdown or whether heavy foreign buying of U.S. Treasury debt has distorted its meaning.

---

Personal comment: The article also mentions that Christmas spending did not turn out to be what retailers had hoped (except maybe for Walmart). Could it be that the economy is so "great" that average people like you and me couldn't afford to spend much? Also, some may say the stock market is not an indicator of the state of the economy, but if your 401k and your company pension plan and most other aspects of your savings are tied directly or indirectly to the stock market, I can't help but wonder . . . .


Item 5A: Again from Reuters, but on something that will definitely effect the economy.

Fuel rules mean no relief for oil prices in 2006
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051230/bs_nm/energy_outlook_oil_dc


Item 6: The year in review. I came across too many "year in review" articles to start listing all of them. They all touched on the items in this thread. I suggest you read a few on your own - a trend is sure to quickly emerge.


Item 7: An additional few thoughts on yesterday's Abramoff article - "tangled is the web we weave . . . . "
An extensive web of financial ties
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10657504/from/RS.2/


Item 8: This story is not about "cookies" like the NSA used. It is about "bugs" the White House website leaves on your computer when you visit the site. Either way, I still see it as an unwarranted invasion.
White House to keep using Web tracking
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10644090/

quote:

---

The White House’s site uses what’s known as a Web bug — a tiny graphic image that’s virtually invisible — to anonymously keep track of who’s visiting and when. The bug is sent by a server maintained by an outside contractor, WebTrends Inc., and lets the traffic-analysis company know that another person has visited a specific page on the site.

---

That's it for today. have a pleasant day, Ladies.
:-P)


It is heartening to find other women who are willing to explore this topic. Thank you for your interest and participation. Here's hoping the coming year brings light to all the dark places, to the places where illegal and harmful things are being done in secret, so we can clear them up and move forward toward a positive future.

Vi

My query letters are in the mail, and it's back to business as usual for me. I thank my dear husband for his help.

Given the amount of information presented in the last three posts, you may feel overwhelmed. But here it is for your perusal.

Item 1: From the NYTimes.

Could this be part of the reason Ashcroft was replaced by Gonzales?

(You may need to be registered at the NYTimes to read this story. Registration is free - only needs a made up ID and password, email addr is so they know where to send the confirmation and (if you chose it) the daily headline summary.)

Justice Deputy Resisted Parts of Spy Program
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/politics/01spy.html?th&emc=th&oref=login

quote:

---

A top Justice Department official objected in 2004 to aspects of the National Security Agency's domestic surveillance program and refused to sign on to its continued use amid concerns about its legality and oversight, according to officials with knowledge of the tense internal debate. The concerns appear to have played a part in the temporary suspension of the secret program.

The concerns prompted two of President Bush's most senior aides - Andrew H. Card Jr., his chief of staff, and Alberto R. Gonzales, then White House counsel and now attorney general - to make an emergency visit to a Washington hospital in March 2004 to discuss the program's future and try to win the needed approval from Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was hospitalized for gallbladder surgery, the officials said.

---

Additional comment by the Times:

quote:

---

It is unclear whether the White House ultimately persuaded Mr. Ashcroft to give his approval to the program after the meeting or moved ahead without it.

---

(In another article, below, it is stated that Ashcroft did not give the okay. His deputy - acting as Attorney General in Ashcroft's absence - did after a private meeting with Bush/Cheney.)

And:

quote:

---

Several senior government officials have said that when the special operation first began, there were few controls on it. Some agency officials wanted nothing to do with it, apparently fearful of participating in an illegal operation, officials have said.

---

Could it be that Ashcroft wasn't "quite" the puppet many thought him to be and actually had some redeeming qualities (other than a fair singing voice)?

The following story from Newsweek through MSNBC lends more insight (they said that Ashcroft did not okay the program) It is an excellent article raising a number of good points - too many to quote. It's 4 pages long, and definitely worth reading!

Full Speed Ahead
After 9/11, Bush and Cheney pressed for more power and got it. Now, predictably, the questions begin. Behind the NSA spying furor.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663996/site/newsweek/site/newsweek/


And here's a little tidbit on what's being done (at least to a degree) with the gleaned spy data. Read it to the end to see how this processing of "innocent" data has been used in the past. Almost makes you wonder who's the terrorist.


NSA gave other agencies surveillance data
Information from wiretapping was processed, cross-checked
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10667276/

A point of concern:

quote:

---

Since the revelation last month that President Bush had authorized the NSA to intercept communications inside the United States, public concern has focused primarily on the legality of the NSA eavesdropping. Less attention has been paid to, and little is known about, how the NSA's information may have been used by other government agencies to investigate American citizens or to cross-check with other databases. In the 1960s and 1970s, the military used NSA intercepts to maintain files on U.S. peace activists, revelations of which prompted Congress to restrict the NSA from intercepting communications of Americans.

Looking for patterns
Today's NSA intercepts yield two broad categories of information, said a former administration official familiar with the program: "content," which would include transcripts of a phone call or e-mail, and "non-content," which would be records showing, for example, who in the United States was called by, or was calling, a number in another country thought to have a connection to a terrorist group. At the same time, NSA tries to limit identifying the names of Americans involved.

---

BTW, all emails you send contains your email address in the header, as well as the route the email took to get from your computer to the destination. With an email address, it's easy for an authority to find out who you are. In fact, all Internet activity, include page requests when browsing a site, contain the originating ID - how else would it know where to return the data to, and how else would all the website hosting companies be able to supply reports on who visited a given site, when the visit was made and from where? No matter where you go, your computer leaves behind its fingerprint. For the most part, this process is benign, but it can be used for the wrong purposes by untrustworthy people.


And back to the point of concern, the article further states:

quote:

---

Talon is a system that civilian and military personnel use to report suspicious activities around military installations. Information from these reports is fed into a database known as the Joint Protection Enterprise Network, which is managed, as is the Talon system, by the Counterintelligence Field Activity, the newest Defense Department intelligence agency to focus primarily on counterterrorism. The database is shared with intelligence and law enforcement agencies and was found last month to have contained information about peace activists and others protesting the Iraq war that appeared to have no bearing on terrorism.

Military officials acknowledged that such information should have been purged after 90 days and that the Talon system was being reviewed.

---

------


Item 2: From the AP through Yahoo.com

Bush Defends Domestic Spying Program
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060101/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

The article starts with statements made today. It appears that Bush is again changing his wording to play down his actions and improve his image. Interesting that last week he admitted it was only two-way communications, to and from terrorists outside the country, that were being tapped, and later it was revealed that data mining was also taking place on internal US calls and emails. I wonder how many blind followers he'll dupe this time?

quote:

---

SAN ANTONIO - President Bush on Sunday strongly defended his domestic spying program, saying it's a limited initiative that tracks only incoming calls to the United States.

---

At the end of the article, he finds it necessary to further qualify another statement he'd previously made - now he finds he must segregate issues, statements that when originally made were blanket statements (or were they simply meant to be misleading CYAs (Cover Your A$$?):

quote:

---

The president was asked whether he misled the American people in 2004 when, during an event promoting the Patriot Act, he said that any wiretapping required a court order and that nothing had changed. He made the statement more than two years after he approved the NSA program.

"I was talking about roving wiretaps, I believe, involving the Patriot Act," Bush said. "This is different from the NSA program."

---

And another example of how he continually changes his story can be found here: The Bush Legacy: 2006 Is So Yesterday http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/weekinreview/01sanger.html?pagewanted=all where he now says:

quote:

---

"He insists that his real motive in conducting the war in Iraq is to democratize one of the least democratic corners of the earth."

---

What ever happened to WMDs?


And here is yet another article (from MSNBC) on the president defending his spying program. This one, however, seems to be slanted with definite right wing bias - they don't appear to be much concerned with rebuttals and concerns raised, except for a reiteration that Ashcroft resisted the program. They even quote from a FOXNews interview. Also, the arguments they quote are the typical administration type of quotes meant to frighten us into submission.

Bush says spying leak causes great harm
President calls domestic surveillance program limited
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10673060/


That's it for today - an eclectic
smattering of interesting reading.

My husband and I wish all of you a wonderfully Happy New Year.

[ January 01, 2006, 10:11 PM: Message edited by: Vi ]

If you haven't picked up a copy of Jimmy Carter's new book, it's worth the read. A chilling indictment of the current administration from a creditable source.

In it, he does point out (with statistics and all that other good stuff) that there have been MORE terrorist attacks since the war in Iraq was initiated than before.

The Newsweek article was great -- thought-provoking, and balanced. If you read nothing else in Vi's list (Thanks, Vi!) read that one.

Casey, thanks for the information relative to Jimmy Carter's book. I saw him interviewed about it on several programs. He's a good man with a lot of integrity. He walks his talk.

Here's today's stuff:


Item 1: From the NYTimes about the president's Sunday comments in San Antonio as he visited wounded soldiers at the Brooke Army Medical Center.

Much is reiteration of previous articles - Bush's lame arguments, excuses, diversions (we should be investigating who leaked the program, not the legality of it - again they ignore the Plame leak investigation) and contradictions. Still, it's worth perusing, if for no other reason than to see that he's still misleading the public and trying to coerce us with doom and gloom.

Bush Defends Spy Program and Denies Misleading Public
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/02/politics/02spy.html


Item 2: From CNN.com. Basically a repeat substantiation of the NYTimes article.

Bush defends NSA spying program
Senators back hearings as president explains campaign remarks
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/01/nsa.spying/index.html


NOTE: MSNBC also had something on this topic, but it was on a video that wouldn't work


Item 3: From CNN.com. This appears to be a defensive PR "hail the chief" article - don't get stuck in the syrup.

Bush visits wounded troops in Texas
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/01/01/bush.troops.ap/index.html

quote:

---

"The president, as commander in chief, feels it's one his most important duties to visit with those who are serving in the armed forces and providing great sacrifice for this important mission," White House spokesman Trent Duffy said.

"He thanks them for their service. He asks how they're doing. He is always interested in seeing if they are getting the kinds of care they need," Duffy said, adding that not all the troops' injuries were sustained in combat.

---

If he's so "interested in seeing they are getting the kinds of care they need", why did he cut veteran's benefits last year?


In this next quote, you can see the touch of disparity between his lifestyle, those who are giving their lives for him and our country and the everyday average citizen - let them eat cake!

quote:

---

Bush spent the past week relaxing at his ranch where he rode his bike, cleared brush and prepared for his sixth year in office. He and his wife, Laura, and her mother, Jenna Welch, stayed at the ranch on New Year's Eve and had a steak dinner.

---

On the lighter side:

Item 3: From MSNBC, this next article has nothing to do with the thread. It's just a neat story.

‘Hero’ cat apparently dials 911 to help owner
Responding to emergency call, police officer finds feline next to phone
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10663270/


Item 4: And here's a goofy story.

Italian women hostages in Yemen refuse release
Three tourists held say they won’t leave until male companions are set free
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10661738/

And the funny thing is:

quote:

---

Tribesmen frequently kidnap tourists to force concessions from the government in Yemen, a poor, mountainous nation on the southern tip of the Arabian peninsula where state control in outlying areas is shaky.

The hostages are usually freed unharmed, but several were killed in 2000 when Yemeni soldiers carried out a botched raid to free them.

---

Item 5: I also received an article from a friend that I couldn't get a link to. It was in the Wall Street Journal for December 28, 2005. The article was titled,

Some Conservatives Return To Old Argument
Outside Advocacy Group Aims To Rally Support by Backing Bush's Initial Claims on Iraq

Of particular concern to note was the following, about their radio and tv ads:

quote:

---

The hard-hitting spots are part of a recent public-relations barrage aimed at reversing a decline in public support for President Bush's handling of Iraq. But these advertisements aren't paid for by the Republican National Committee or other established White House allies. Instead, they are sponsored by Move America Forward, a media-savvy outside advocacy group that has become one of the loudest -- and most controversial -- voices in the Iraq debate.

---

and

quote:

---

"An organization with a shady tax status participating in partisan activities and saying things that aren't true is a rogue element in American politics."

---

Oddly enough:

quote:

---

The White House didn't return several calls seeking comment. A Republican National Committee spokesman declined to comment.

---

That's it for today. Now back to work - a painting of a wolf in the Grand Teton Mtns. in Wyoming and the writing of my old ladies' novel.

[ January 02, 2006, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: Vi ]

Well, Congress has spoken...

From the Washington Post:
"A report by Congress's research arm concluded yesterday that the administration's justification for the warrantless eavesdropping authorized by President Bush conflicts with existing law and hinges on weak legal arguments.

The Congressional Research Service's report rebuts the central assertions made recently by Bush and Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales about the president's authority to order secret intercepts of telephone and e-mail exchanges between people inside the United States and their contacts abroad."

This is a NON-PARTISAN committee.

Of course, the Bush Administration disagrees:

"Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the president and the administration believe the program is on firm legal footing."

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, states that this discussion, similar to the one we are having in this forum, is asking questions which are central to the American government. That is, what authorities does the president have and is he complying with the law.

Here's the link (you may have to join):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/06/AR2006010601772.html?referrer=email&referrer=email

Peace,

Thought provoking and informative posts Casey and Vi, thanks. Do you think PNAC is no longer something for the rest of us to worry about because of the way other events are unfolding?

[ January 07, 2006, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: norma ]