Just so we're all on the same page, here's your homework:
What was "TEAM-B" and what about its premise matches McAntient's HEADS I WIN TAILS YOU LOSE, stay in Iraq forever either way argument?
- http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB139/nitze10.pdf
- http://www.rawstory.com/other/conyersreportrawstory.pdf
- http://www.en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti...p;printable=yes
- http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?d...056907669314763
- http://www.sott.net/signs/forum/viewtopic....id=27704#p27704
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_s...#External_links
What year was the ATC PATCO strike busted by the FEDS?
http://www.en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ronald_R...fic_controllers
What did the USPS have to do with the PULLMAN STRIKE of 1894?
http://review.society.cz/index.php?option=...52&Itemid=2
QUOTE
During the Depression of 1893, George Pullman laid off 3,000 of 5,800 employees, and cut 25-40 percent of the wages, but not his rent and other charges. When Pullman fired three members of a grievance committee,[3] a strike began on May 11, 1894. Pullman workers had been joining the American Railway Union, founded the previous year by Eugene V. Debs. Once Debs, the secretary-treasurer of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, had decided that such brotherhoods were too exclusive. He set out to organize an industrial union to include all railway workers. Late in June, the union workers ceased to handle Pullman cars, and by the end of July had tied up most of the roads in the Midwest.
The roads brought strikebreakers from Canada and elsewhere, instructing them to connect mail cars to Pullman cars so that interference with Pullman cars meant also interference with the mails. Attorney-General Richard Olney swore in 3,400 special deputies to keep the trains running, and when clashes occurred between these and some of the strikers, lawless elements exploited the situation. Finally, on July 3, President Cleveland answered an appeal from the railroads, and sent federal troops into the Chicago area, where the strike was based. Illinois Governor John Peter Altgeld insisted that the state could keep order, but Cleveland claimed authority, and a duty to ensure the delivery of the mails.
Meanwhile Olney had got an injunction from the federal district court forbidding any interference with mail or any attempt to restrain interstate commerce; the principle was that a strike or boycott violated the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
The roads brought strikebreakers from Canada and elsewhere, instructing them to connect mail cars to Pullman cars so that interference with Pullman cars meant also interference with the mails. Attorney-General Richard Olney swore in 3,400 special deputies to keep the trains running, and when clashes occurred between these and some of the strikers, lawless elements exploited the situation. Finally, on July 3, President Cleveland answered an appeal from the railroads, and sent federal troops into the Chicago area, where the strike was based. Illinois Governor John Peter Altgeld insisted that the state could keep order, but Cleveland claimed authority, and a duty to ensure the delivery of the mails.
Meanwhile Olney had got an injunction from the federal district court forbidding any interference with mail or any attempt to restrain interstate commerce; the principle was that a strike or boycott violated the Sherman Anti-Trust Act.
You knew that Maryland's Sixth Regiment during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877 fired on workers in Baltimore, RIGHT?!!! The governor had called out the troops on behalf of the railroad company.
http://www.ranknfile-ue.org/uen_1877.html
Jury delivers its verdict of guilty for the 8 defendants from that strike. All defendants, except Neebe, are sentenced to receive the death penalty. Neebe is sentenced to 15 years of hard labor.
- http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...rketchrono.html
- http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/entry.php?rec=503
- http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h717.html
Given all of the above, when did the destruction of the country that you once knew kick off?
BTW, READ THIS TOO:
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act
And who do you think listens to AAR to hear about Kerry's baseball picks? Is that some kind of BONEHEAD CODE, bringing up non sequiters like your dinner at rue 57. Or do you expect them not charge you for the box of wine you drink when you binge there again?
QUOTE
Born in a Crossfire Hurricane: Anticipation of Death, worse than Death Itself
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
- Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
QUOTE
NYT exporting Judith Miller's disdain for the facts from the newsroom to the opinion page
Effete Warmonger Kristol/Sanitizing Five Years in Iraq
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/print/13520/
QUOTE
AMERICAN DRUG WAR - The Last White Hope (TV14) (2007)
9/11 Catalyzes USA PATRIOT Act's transformation of medicinal and john doe POT HEAD's into GWoT Targets while Afghan POPPY MONEY LAUNDERING industry BOOMs.
http://www.sho.com/site/schedules/product_...com_home#shonav (Also ON Demand Showtime)
Inspired by the deaths of family members from drug use, writer/director Kevin Booth set out to chronicle the failure of America's long-running, expensive, but ineffective "war on drugs" with this startling, eye-opening documentary.
The film "American Drug War - The Last White Hope" has won three consecutive awards for “Best Feature Length Documentary." In late spring of 2007, Kevin signed with Page Ostrow of Ostrow & Company who secured “American Drug War” a deal with the Showtime cable network (CBS). In November of 2007, "American Drug War" was honored at the 2007 [Artivist] Awards Ceremony as the Best Feature Film in the International Human Rights category.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1033467/plotsummary
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1033467/usercomments
9/11 Catalyzes USA PATRIOT Act's transformation of medicinal and john doe POT HEAD's into GWoT Targets while Afghan POPPY MONEY LAUNDERING industry BOOMs.
http://www.sho.com/site/schedules/product_...com_home#shonav (Also ON Demand Showtime)
Inspired by the deaths of family members from drug use, writer/director Kevin Booth set out to chronicle the failure of America's long-running, expensive, but ineffective "war on drugs" with this startling, eye-opening documentary.
The film "American Drug War - The Last White Hope" has won three consecutive awards for “Best Feature Length Documentary." In late spring of 2007, Kevin signed with Page Ostrow of Ostrow & Company who secured “American Drug War” a deal with the Showtime cable network (CBS). In November of 2007, "American Drug War" was honored at the 2007 [Artivist] Awards Ceremony as the Best Feature Film in the International Human Rights category.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1033467/plotsummary
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1033467/usercomments
Gary Webb's Enduring Legacy
Webb was correct in his reporting about the Nicaraguan contras' role in smuggling cocaine into the United States in the 1980s.
- http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/121007.html
- http://www.democracynow.org/2004/12/13/inv...webb_who_linked
- http://www.solutionassoc.com/truthfire/blo...ruptionnow.html
- http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/decem...ebbmurdered.htm
QUOTE
The Weapons of Mass Deception
http://www.prisonersofthecave.blogspot.com...%20A%20bookmark
Imagine an exactly identical group in Germany – how would these documents and their authors have measured up at Nuremberg where the Chief Prosecutor, the United States of America, hung the Nazi's for the crimes of invading other countries, of “goosestep[ing] the Herrenvolk across international frontiers”?
Letter to President Bush on the War on Terrorism September 20, 2001 {A6 41} http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm
Richard Perle * Bruce P. Jackson * William Kristol * Richard V. Allen * Gary Bauer * Jeffrey Bell * William J. Bennett * Rudy Boshwitz * Jeffrey Bergner * Eliot Cohen * Seth Cropsey * Midge Decter * Thomas Donnelly * Nicholas Eberstadt * Hillel Fradkin * Aaron Friedberg * Francis Fukuyama * Frank Gaffney * Jeffrey Gedmin * Reuel Marc Gerecht * Charles Hill Eli S. Jacobs * Michael Joyce * Donald Kagan * Robert Kagan * Jeane Kirkpatrick * Charles Krauthammer * John Lehman * Clifford May * Martin Peretz * Norman Podhoretz * Stephen P. Rosen * Randy Scheunemann * Gary Schmitt * William Schneider, Jr. * Richard H. Shultz * Henry Sokolski * Stephen J. Solarz * Vin Weber * Leon Wieseltier * Marshall Wittmann
Henry Martin "Scoop" Jackson (May 31, 1912 - September 1, 1983)
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti...p;printable=yes
U.S. Congressman and Senator for Washington State from 1941 until his death. Jackson was an unsuccessful candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1972 and 1976.
As a Cold War anti-Communist Democrat, Jackson's political philosophies and positions have been cited as an influence on a number of key figures associated with neoconservatism, including Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle.
U.S. Committee to Expand NATO (USCN): PAC lobbied Congress heavily for expansion.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title...p;printable=yes
Bruce P. Jackson, President (Lockheed Martin's director of global development)
Board of Directors: Richard N. Perle
Julie Finley, "founder of the U.S. Committee on NATO" * Tillie K. Fowler * Jeffrey Gedmin * Philip H. Gordon * Robert Kagan * Will Marshall * Sally A. Painter * Paige E. Reffe * Peter W. Rodman * David J. Rothkopf * Randy Scheunemann * Gary Schmitt * Elaine Shocas
Leading the NATO enlargement lobby was the neoconservative Committee to Expand NATO, which brought together several prominent neocons now serving in the Bush administration, along with conservative Democrats such as Will Marshall of the Progressive Policy Institute and the Democratic Leadership Council.
http://www.antiwar.com/barry/?articleid=2234#columntext
Among USCN's first board members were Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, and Stephen Hadley. Hadley, who serves in the Bush administration as deputy national security adviser to Condoleezza Rice, was a partner in the Shea & Gardner law firm, whose clients included Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
http://www.doublestandards.org/nato.html
Until 2002 Bruce Jackson was planning and strategy vice president at Lockheed Martin, where he served as the advance man for global corporate development projects. One prominent neocon described Bruce Jackson as “the nexus between the defense industry and the neoconservatives. He translates us to them, and them to us.”
http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1566.html
SPEAKING OF NATO:
Christie Blatchford suggests that her perspective of the Canadian NATO contingent in Afghanistan might have been... biased by the practiced hand of US 'handling of journalists'.
http://www.thiscanadian.typepad.com/this_c...#entry-47662818
CONNECT THE DOTS:
''We need to think about charging some of the high-value detainees because there could be strategic political value to charging some of these detainees before the election ... ''
http://www.miamiherald.com/guantanamo/v-pr...ory/474196.html
90-page charge sheets list the names of 2,973 victims of the 9/11 attacks. The men have not been formally charged. Instead they are in the control of a White House appointee, Susan J. Crawford, whose title is the war court's convening authority, and her legal advisor, Brig. Gen. Thomas Hartmann.
Bill Clinton bribed and buttered up every member of Congress he could to pass NAFTA in 1993.
http://www.counterpunch.org/wypijewski03082008.html
The prison population and prison labor (engaged in everything from taking reservations to sewing jeans to building furniture and transmissions for pennies an hour) mushroomed under Clinton's three-strikes-you're-out and kindred crime policies, and organized labor didn't fight. Prisons expanded, and organized labor didn't fight. (To the extent that more cops and more prison guards and more construction crews were real or potential union members, this development was sometimes even welcomed.) Privatization moved apace here as in so many other sectors, and organized labor didn't fight. The prisons filled with young black and Latino men, and black leadership didn't fight, Latino leadership didn't fight, the civil rights movements didn't fight -- not in any robust, sustained and visible fashion, just like the unions with job loss, NAFTA and the decline in real wages. Now one in less than 100 adult Americans is locked up. That was a blip in the news during the campaigns in Ohio and Texas. Hillary Clinton called for even more cops on the streets, more community policing and only lastly a review of sentencing. ...
Economic Meltdown: The Consequences of Legal Bribery
- By Peter Dreier, Huffington Post, March 27, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/80581
... One of government's important roles is to establish ground-rules, and to regulate companies and industries, to save them from their own short-sighted greed. Government is necessary to make business act responsibly. Without it, capitalism becomes anarchy.
Washington now needs to put a short-term tourniquet on the banking industry to stem the damage, and to get back into the business of protecting consumers, employees, and investors from corporate greed.
The icing on the cake was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, enacted during the Clinton years by the Republican-controlled Congress, which tore down the remaining legal barriers to combining commercial banking, investment banking, and insurance under one corporate roof.
As a result of industry consolidation, between 1984 and 2004, the number of FDIC-regulated banks declined from 14,392 to 7,511. In 1960, the 10-largest banks held 21 percent of the industry's assets; by 2005, the 10 largest banks controlled 60 percent of the assets. ...
John McCain's suicide attempt and his resulting PTSD
http://www.usveterandispatch.com/dec07/mcc...uicide_ptsd.htm
McCain says because he survived 5½ years of brutal torture, while a prisoner of the communist Vietnamese, he is better qualified to be president of the United States than any other candidate. McCain claims his POW sufferings included three years in solitary confinement where he was tortured so badly that he "broke," causing him to attempt suicide.
What McCain's promoters have carefully edited out of their McCain-for-president equation is his post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Department of Defense psychiatrists have evaluated McCain for PTSD several times, the results of which remain locked by privacy laws.
Selective Prosecution endorsed by DEM Officials per "Operation Chaos"
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local...yes&sid=101
In Ohio, party-switchers are supposed to sign a form attesting, under penalty of election falsification -- a felony -- that they support the principles of the party whose ballot they are obtaining. "We have no intention of prosecuting Rush Limbaugh because lying through your teeth and being stupid isn't a crime," said Leo Jennings, a spokesman for Democratic Attorney General Marc Dann.
"I had the temerity, ladies and gentlemen, to tinker with a tradition, a liberal Democrat tradition: voter manipulation." - Rush Limbaugh
"...But John McCain is another matter. "He's the toughest of the crop,'' said [Sen. Bill] Nelson. "The only one of the Republican candidates that really can win in November, that has a chance to win in November, is John McCain."
- Sen. Bill Nelson Sr. - U.S. Senate, Sr (FL - Democratic),
St. Petersburg Times' Buzz Blog 1/4/08
"Democratic race over? Clinton doesn't think so" - John Whitesides, Reuters
- By Andy Sternberg http://www.laist.com/2008/03/27/will_the_clinto.php#content
... Hillary has flirted with disaster before in the back-and-forth nominating battle with Obama, shrugs off growing predictions of doom and still sees at least a narrow path to victory.
"I hear it in the atmosphere," Clinton said of the increasingly loud chatter about whether she should drop out and let Democrats focus on the general election campaign. "But the most common thing that people say to me ... is 'Don't give up, keep going. We're with you.' And I feel really good about that because that's what I intend to do," she told reporters on Tuesday.
Clinton has not been hearing those words of encouragement from a chorus of media commentators and Obama supporters who have questioned why she is pursuing her uphill fight to catch the Illinois senator. ... The longer she continues, the more chance Obama might slip up and make a mistake that turns the tide of the campaign. Clinton has made it clear she will not consider bowing out of the race until all of the states have concluded their voting. ...
THUS ONE CORPORATE PARTY GOVT:
An Open Letter to John Conyers: Put Impeachment Back on the Table
March 27, 2008 http://www.counterpunch.org/nader03272008.html
... Prominent Constitutional law experts believe President Bush has engaged in at least, five categories of repeated, defiant "high crimes and misdemeanors", which separately or together would allow Congress to subject the President to impeachment under Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution. The sworn oath of members of Congress is to uphold the Constitution. Failure of the members of Congress to pursue impeachment of President Bush is an affront to the founding fathers, the Constitution, and the people of the United States.
In addition to a criminal war of aggression in Iraq, in violation of our constitution, statutes and treaties, there are the arrests of thousands of Americans and their imprisonment without charges, the spying on Americans without juridical warrant, systematic torture, and the unprecedented wholesale, defiant signing statements declaring that the President, in his unbridled discretion, is the law.
In 2005, a plurality of the American people polled declared that they would favor impeachment of President Bush if it was shown that he did not tell the truth about the reasons for going to War in Iraq. ...
http://www.WexlerWantsHearings.com
http://www.snipr.com/2000Lawyers_v_shrub
The Bush administration has proven impervious to public pressure
http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/03...008935477448567
Use this prolonged primary to leverage the two candidates against each other on the issue of ending the war instead of joining in the fun and games of primary politics. ... Look past the rhetoric and it becomes clear that neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton has a real plan to end the occupation. They could, however, be forced to change their positions--thanks to the unique dynamics of the prolonged primary battle. ... http://www.ResponsiblePlan.com/plan
"Body of War" with Phil Donahue on his new documentary and the situation in Iraq
Friday March 28th, 2008
http://www.therealnews.com/web/index.php?t...em#consoleinner
QUOTE
Debate and Protest at Spy Program’s Inception
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
This article is adapted from the book “Bush’s Law: The Remaking of American Justice,” by Eric Lichtblau, which is being released Tuesday by Pantheon Books.
WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program sparked heated legal concerns and silent protests inside the Bush administration within hours of its adoption in October 2001, according to current and former government officials.
In making its case to Congress for broadened spy powers, the White House has emphasized the firm legal foundations of the program conducted after the Sept. 11 attacks. It has even taken the unusual step of giving lawmakers access to classified presidential orders from 2001 and early legal opinions to try to show that the program was on sound legal footing from the start.
But many of the tensions that were roiling the administration at the start of the program have never become public.
In one previously undisclosed episode, Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson refused to sign off on any of the secret wiretapping requests that grew out of the program because of the secrecy and legal uncertainties surrounding it, the officials said. With the veil of secrecy around the program, Mr. Thompson was not given access to details of the N.S.A. operation, and he was so uncomfortable with the idea of approving this new breed of wiretap applications that he had a top adviser write a memorandum assessing the legal ramifications. The adviser warned him not to sign the warrant applications because it was unclear where the wiretaps were coming from.
Inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation, meanwhile, technicians stumbled onto the N.S.A.’s program accidentally within 12 hours of its inception, setting off what officials described as a brief firestorm of anxiety among senior officials. Some who had not been told about the program were concerned that the agency was violating laws that required a court order for the singling out of Americans in wiretaps, and they immediately alerted higher-ups to what they had discovered. “What’s going on here? Is this legal?” one F.B.I. official asked after learning of the N.S.A. operation on American soil.
Robert S. Mueller III, the F.B.I. director, assured nervous officials that the program had been approved by President Bush, several officials said. But the presidential approval, one former intelligence official disclosed, came without a formal legal opinion endorsing the program by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
At the outset of the program in October 2001, John Ashcroft, the attorney general, signed off on the surveillance program at the direction of the White House with little in the way of a formal legal review, the official said. Mr. Ashcroft complained to associates at the time that the White House, in getting his signature for the surveillance program, “just shoved it in front of me and told me to sign it.”
Aides to Mr. Ashcroft were worried, however, that in approving a surveillance program that appeared to test the limits of presidential authority, Mr. Ashcroft was left legally exposed without a formal opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel, which acts as the legal adviser for the entire executive branch.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/washingt...agewanted=print
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
This article is adapted from the book “Bush’s Law: The Remaking of American Justice,” by Eric Lichtblau, which is being released Tuesday by Pantheon Books.
WASHINGTON — The National Security Agency’s eavesdropping program sparked heated legal concerns and silent protests inside the Bush administration within hours of its adoption in October 2001, according to current and former government officials.
In making its case to Congress for broadened spy powers, the White House has emphasized the firm legal foundations of the program conducted after the Sept. 11 attacks. It has even taken the unusual step of giving lawmakers access to classified presidential orders from 2001 and early legal opinions to try to show that the program was on sound legal footing from the start.
But many of the tensions that were roiling the administration at the start of the program have never become public.
In one previously undisclosed episode, Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson refused to sign off on any of the secret wiretapping requests that grew out of the program because of the secrecy and legal uncertainties surrounding it, the officials said. With the veil of secrecy around the program, Mr. Thompson was not given access to details of the N.S.A. operation, and he was so uncomfortable with the idea of approving this new breed of wiretap applications that he had a top adviser write a memorandum assessing the legal ramifications. The adviser warned him not to sign the warrant applications because it was unclear where the wiretaps were coming from.
Inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation, meanwhile, technicians stumbled onto the N.S.A.’s program accidentally within 12 hours of its inception, setting off what officials described as a brief firestorm of anxiety among senior officials. Some who had not been told about the program were concerned that the agency was violating laws that required a court order for the singling out of Americans in wiretaps, and they immediately alerted higher-ups to what they had discovered. “What’s going on here? Is this legal?” one F.B.I. official asked after learning of the N.S.A. operation on American soil.
Robert S. Mueller III, the F.B.I. director, assured nervous officials that the program had been approved by President Bush, several officials said. But the presidential approval, one former intelligence official disclosed, came without a formal legal opinion endorsing the program by the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department.
At the outset of the program in October 2001, John Ashcroft, the attorney general, signed off on the surveillance program at the direction of the White House with little in the way of a formal legal review, the official said. Mr. Ashcroft complained to associates at the time that the White House, in getting his signature for the surveillance program, “just shoved it in front of me and told me to sign it.”
Aides to Mr. Ashcroft were worried, however, that in approving a surveillance program that appeared to test the limits of presidential authority, Mr. Ashcroft was left legally exposed without a formal opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel, which acts as the legal adviser for the entire executive branch.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30/washingt...agewanted=print
Chief of Staff Donald Rumsfeld, President Gerald Ford and Deputy Chief of Staff Richard Cheney at the White House, April 28, 1975 (Photo: Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB178/
After much debate, the Ford administration in 1976 decided to support legislation requiring a warrant for the government to conduct electronic surveillance within the U.S. for foreign intelligence purposes, according to this memorandum prepared for President Ford by his counsel, Philip Buchen.
Washington, D.C., January 26, 2006 - A secret Pentagon "roadmap" on war propaganda, personally approved by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in October 2003, calls for "boundaries" between information operations abroad and the news media at home, but provides for no such limits, any leakage of PSYOP to the American public does not matter.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/index.htm
FLASH:
The government "shouldn't need a warrant when somebody picks up a phone in Iraq and calls the United States," Mukasey said in a question and answer session.." after his talk.
Before the 2001 terrorist attack "we knew that there had been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan, and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn't know precisely where it went. You've got 3,000 people who went to work that day, and didn't come home, to show for that."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/31/25...67/487503#story
QUOTE
(Warren) Bass (a member of the 9/11 Commission) told colleagues that he gasped when he found a memo written by Clarke to Rice on September 4, 2001, exactly a week before the attacks, in which Clarke seemed to predict what was just about to happen. It was a memo that seemed to spill out all of Clarke's frustration about how slowly the Bush White House had responded to the cascade of terrorist threats that summer. The note was terrifying in its prescience.
"Are we serious about dealing with the al-Qaeda threat?" he asked Rice. "Decision makers should imagine themselves on a future day when the CSG [Counterterrorism Security Group] has not succeeded in stopping al-Qaeda attacks and hundreds of Americans lay dead in several countries, including the US.
Bass's colleagues said he knew instantly that the September 4 email was so sensitive - and potentially damaging, especially to Rice - that the White House would never voluntarily release a copy to the commission or allow him to take notes from the room if they came close to reproducing its language. Under a written agreement between the commission and the White House, notes could not "significantly reproduce" the wording of a classified document. ...
"Bin Ladin Planning Multiple Operations" (April 20)and "Bin Ladin Threats Are Real" (June 30)
It was especially troubling for Hurley's team to realise how many of the warnings were directed to the desk of one person: Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser. Emails from the National Security Council's counter-terrorism director, Richard Clarke, showed that he had bombarded Rice with messages about terrorist threats. He was trying to get her to focus on the intelligence she should have been reading each morning in the presidential and senior briefings
"Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack" (May 3)
"Terrorist Groups Said Co-operating on US Hostage Plot" (May 23)
"Bin Ladin's Networks' Plans Advancing" (May 26)
"Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent" (June 23)
"Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats" (June 25)
"Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks" (June 30)
"Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays" (July 2)
"Are we serious about dealing with the al-Qaeda threat?" he asked Rice. "Decision makers should imagine themselves on a future day when the CSG [Counterterrorism Security Group] has not succeeded in stopping al-Qaeda attacks and hundreds of Americans lay dead in several countries, including the US.
Bass's colleagues said he knew instantly that the September 4 email was so sensitive - and potentially damaging, especially to Rice - that the White House would never voluntarily release a copy to the commission or allow him to take notes from the room if they came close to reproducing its language. Under a written agreement between the commission and the White House, notes could not "significantly reproduce" the wording of a classified document. ...
"Bin Ladin Planning Multiple Operations" (April 20)and "Bin Ladin Threats Are Real" (June 30)
It was especially troubling for Hurley's team to realise how many of the warnings were directed to the desk of one person: Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser. Emails from the National Security Council's counter-terrorism director, Richard Clarke, showed that he had bombarded Rice with messages about terrorist threats. He was trying to get her to focus on the intelligence she should have been reading each morning in the presidential and senior briefings
"Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack" (May 3)
"Terrorist Groups Said Co-operating on US Hostage Plot" (May 23)
"Bin Ladin's Networks' Plans Advancing" (May 26)
"Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent" (June 23)
"Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats" (June 25)
"Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks" (June 30)
"Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays" (July 2)
As is now clear, Rice never took any serious action in response to these warnings......
- So Judge Mukasey...tell us again why we should gut the Constitution you are supposedly sworn to uphold and defend.
- Tell us again just how the administration you are now clearly shilling for, was right on the verge of halting a terrorist attack but just couldn't do it because the Constitution got in the way.
- Tell us again how the administration went to Congress at first and asked for permission to change the law to allow expanded wiretaps without warrants and how Congress said no.
- Tell us again why they then turned around and began wiretapping anyway.
- Tell us how the administration you are now a part of went to the nation's telecomm companies and ordered them to route their main data pipelines for voice and e-mail traffic through government intelligence gathering systems without warrants.
- Tell us again why what they did then, and are doing now, is legal.
- Tell us again that you still don't know whether waterboarding is torture and why you apparently have no interest in knowing.
http://justacitizen.org/JustaCitizen-Interviews.htm
http://patriotsquestion911.com
