Bush busted again for the second time in 2 months...

by the courts for criminally violating the US Constitution.  When are they going to impeach him?  We get 24/7 front page JonBenet coverage (very sad story), but nothing on the crooks in the White House.  All the drama with Watergate and Clinton IMO pales in comparison to what is on this President's mantle.  What a mess.

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2005/082105LINDORFF.shtml

• Bush busted again for the second time in 2 months... - LVMT
  • It won't stop. - Liberal
    • There may be hope! White House to be subpoeanaed. - Liberal
      • Subpoena was issued. Meanwhile.... - LVMT
      • Raw Story? Hardly a MSM news source I would say. SM - Legion
        • Yes. This subpoena is probably fake too. - Liberal
        • Real story from the MSM?.....sm - LVMT

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

I'm not sure what irks me more:  The fact that she is a compulsive, pathological liar or the fact that she's a LAZY one or the fact that she thinks we're all stupid here and can't see what she throws in front of our faces.

My granddaddy used to say, If someone's going to be a good liar, they'd better have a good memory.  Maybe she's just got too many different identities living in that lil brain of hers that it's impeding her ability to remember things that she's already written on this board that are visible to everyone, including her.

Every time I see the initials MT I see Mutilated Truth and know, from all the other times she's been caught in lies, that whatever she writes has no authenticity.  I have to admit, sometimes seeing her posts is like watching a car wreck, and against my better judgment, I sometimes peek.  Lately, though, she/they is/are so WOD (way out dere) that she's/they're becoming more scary than anything, and the sympathetic humanity in me sincerely hopes that she gets the help she so desperately needs soon, before she goes postal and hurts someone in real life, as her rage seems to be increasing and getting out of control. 

Bob Woodward asked him how history would judge the war in Iraq, Bush replied: "History. We don't know. We'll all be dead."

That pretty much sums up the depth of this man.

He's the man who's supposed to be in charge of this country at the present time.  Blaming the individual Presidential nominees for this is ridiculous.  They are one of how many?  The entire gov't is responsible for it and Bush is at the top.  This mess started when he was in office and he should be responsible for cleaning it up.  Perhaps he should give up his salary/pension.  Why should the taxpayers have to pay for the gov'tal leaders mistakes? 

I think politicians should start having to carry malpractice insurance.  Doctors are made to be responsible for their errors, so should the politicians. 

to use them, to create even more havoc, wars, etc.

I'll feel much safer after Obama takes his oath of office (assuming he actually has the opportunity to do so).

NSA Web Site Places 'Cookies' on Computers

By ANICK JESDANUN, AP Internet WriterThu Dec
29, 7:24 AM ET

The National Security Agency's Internet site has been placing files on
visitors' computers that can track their Web surfing activity despite strict
federal rules banning most of them.

These files, known as cookies, disappeared after a privacy activist
complained and The Associated Press made inquiries this week, and agency
officials acknowledged Wednesday they had made a mistake. Nonetheless, the issue
raises questions about privacy at a spy agency already on the defensive amid
reports of a secretive eavesdropping program in the United States.

Considering the surveillance power the NSA has, cookies are not exactly a
major concern, said Ari Schwartz, associate director at the Center for Democracy
and Technology, a privacy advocacy group in Washington, D.C. But it does show a
general lack of understanding about privacy rules when they are not even
following the government's very basic rules for Web privacy.

Until Tuesday, the NSA site created two cookie files that do not expire until
2035 — likely beyond the life of any computer in use today.

Don Weber, an NSA spokesman, said in a statement Wednesday that the cookie
use resulted from a recent software upgrade. Normally, the site uses temporary,
permissible cookies that are automatically deleted when users close their Web
browsers, he said, but the software in use shipped with persistent cookies
already on.

After being tipped to the issue, we immediately disabled the cookies, he
said.

Cookies are widely used at commercial Web sites and can make Internet
browsing more convenient by letting sites remember user preferences. For
instance, visitors would not have to repeatedly enter passwords at sites that
require them.

But privacy advocates complain that cookies can also track Web surfing, even
if no personal information is actually collected.

In a 2003 memo, the White House's Office of Management and Budget prohibits
federal agencies from using persistent cookies — those that aren't automatically
deleted right away — unless there is a compelling need.

A senior official must sign off on any such use, and an agency that uses them
must disclose and detail their use in its privacy policy.

Peter Swire, a Clinton administration official who had drafted an earlier
version of the cookie guidelines, said clear notice is a must, and `vague
assertions of national security, such as exist in the NSA policy, are not
sufficient.

Daniel Brandt, a privacy activist who discovered the NSA cookies, said
mistakes happen, but in any case, it's illegal. The (guideline) doesn't say
anything about doing it accidentally.

The Bush administration has come under fire recently over reports it
authorized NSA to secretly spy on e-mail and phone calls without court
orders.

Since The New York Times disclosed the domestic spying program earlier this
month, President Bush has stressed that his executive order allowing the
eavesdropping was limited to people with known links to al-Qaida.

But on its Web site Friday, the Times reported that the NSA, with help from
American telecommunications companies, obtained broader access to streams of
domestic and international communications.

The NSA's cookie use is unrelated, and Weber said it was strictly to improve
the surfing experience and not to collect personal user data.

Richard M. Smith, a security consultant in Cambridge, Mass., questions
whether persistent cookies would even be of much use to the NSA. They are great
for news and other sites with repeat visitors, he said, but the NSA's site does
not appear to have enough fresh content to warrant more than occasional
visits.

The government first issued strict rules on cookies in 2000 after disclosures
that the White House drug policy office had used the technology to track
computer users viewing its online anti-drug advertising. Even a year later, a
congressional study found 300 cookies still on the Web sites of 23 agencies.

In 2002, the CIA removed cookies it had inadvertently placed at one of its
sites after Brandt called it to the agency's attention.

Releasing Gitmo prisoners carry risks

Andrew O. Selsky ASSOCIATED PRESS
Thursday, January 29, 2009

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico | The re-emergence of two former Guantanamo Bay prisoners as AL Qaeda terrorists in the past week won't likely change U.S. policy on transfers to Saudi Arabia, the Pentagon says.

More than 100 Saudis have been repatriated from the U.S. military's prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to Saudi Arabia, where the government puts them through a rehabilitation program designed to encourage them to abandon Islamic extremism and reintegrate into civilian life.

The online boasts by two of these men that they have joined al Qaeda in Yemen underscore that the Saudi system isn't fail-safe, the Pentagon said Monday. A U.S. counterterrorism official in Washington confirmed the men had been Guantanamo detainees. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to disclose that fact on the record.

Another two or three Saudis who had been transferred from Guantanamo cannot be located by the Saudi government, said Christopher Boucek, a researcher at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, said the U.S. sees the Saudi program as admirable.

"The best you can do is work with partner nations in the international community to ensure that they take the steps to mitigate the threat ex-detainees pose," he said. "There are never any absolute guarantees. There's an inherent risk in all detainee transfers and releases from Guantanamo."

The deprogramming effort -- built on reason, enticements and lengthy talks with psychiatrists, Muslim clerics and sociologists -- is part of a concerted Saudi government effort to counter the ideology that nurtured the 9/11 hijackers and that has lured hundreds of Saudis to join the Iraq insurgency. Fifteen of the 19 hijackers who attacked the United States on Sept. 11, 2001, were Saudis, as is the mastermind of the attacks, Osama bin Laden.

A total of 218 men, including former Guantanamo detainees, have gone through the reintegration program, according to the Saudi Ministry of Interior. Nine were later arrested again, an "official source" at the ministry said in a dispatch from the official Saudi Press Agency. The report said some of the nine were former detainees, but did not give a breakdown.

The Saudi Interior Ministry official said most of the graduates "resumed their natural lives and some of them voluntarily contributed to the activities of this program to help others return to natural life."

Frank Ciluffo, a researcher on security issues at George Washington University, said a program that doesn't work all the time is better than none because the alternative is an extended prison sentence, which only further radicalizes a person.

The health-care reform debate is in full roar with the arrival of Michael Moore's documentary Sicko, which compares the U.S. system unfavorably with single-payer systems around the world. Critics of the film are quick to trot out a common defense of the American way: For all its problems, they say, U.S. patients at least don't have to endure the endless waits for medical care endemic to government-run systems. The lobbying group America's Health Insurance Plans spells it out in a rebuttal to Sicko: "The American people do not support a government takeover of the entire health-care system because they know that means long waits for rationed care."

In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems. Take Susan M., a 54-year-old human resources executive in New York City. She faithfully makes an appointment for a mammogram every April, knowing the wait will be at least six weeks. She went in for her routine screening at the end of May, then had another because the first wasn't clear. That second X-ray showed an abnormality, and the doctor wanted to perform a needle biopsy, an outpatient procedure. His first available date: mid-August. "I completely freaked out," Susan says. "I couldn't imagine spending the summer with this hanging over my head." After many calls to five different facilities, she found a clinic that agreed to read her existing mammograms on June 25 and promised to schedule a follow-up MRI and biopsy if needed within 10 days. A full month had passed since the first suspicious X-rays. Ultimately, she was told the abnormality was nothing to worry about, but she should have another mammogram in six months. Taking no chances, she made an appointment on the spot. "The system is clearly broken," she laments.

It's not just broken for breast exams. If you find a suspicious-looking mole and want to see a dermatologist, you can expect an average wait of 38 days in the U.S., and up to 73 days if you live in Boston, according to researchers at the University of California at San Francisco who studied the matter. Got a knee injury? A 2004 survey by medical recruitment firm Merritt, Hawkins & Associates found the average time needed to see an orthopedic surgeon ranges from 8 days in Atlanta to 43 days in Los Angeles. Nationwide, the average is 17 days. "Waiting is definitely a problem in the U.S., especially for basic care," says Karen Davis, president of the nonprofit Commonwealth Fund, which studies health-care policy.

All this time spent "queuing," as other nations call it, stems from too much demand and too little supply. Only one-third of U.S. doctors are general practitioners, compared with half in most European countries. On top of that, only 40% of U.S. doctors have arrangements for after-hours care, vs. 75% in the rest of the industrialized world. Consequently, some 26% of U.S. adults in one survey went to an emergency room in the past two years because they couldn't get in to see their regular doctor, a significantly higher rate than in other countries.

There is no systemized collection of data on wait times in the U.S. That makes it difficult to draw comparisons with countries that have national health systems, where wait times are not only tracked but made public. However, a 2005 survey by the Commonwealth Fund of sick adults in six nations found that only 47% of U.S. patients could get a same- or next-day appointment for a medical problem, worse than every other country except Canada.

The Commonwealth survey did find that U.S. patients had the second-shortest wait times if they wished to see a specialist or have nonemergency surgery, such as a hip replacement or cataract operation (Germany, which has national health care, came in first on both measures). But Gerard F. Anderson, a health policy expert at Johns Hopkins University, says doctors in countries where there are lengthy queues for elective surgeries put at-risk patients on the list long before their need is critical. "Their wait might be uncomfortable, but it makes very little clinical difference," he says.

The Commonwealth study did find one area where the U.S. was first by a wide margin: 51% of sick Americans surveyed did not visit a doctor, get a needed test, or fill a prescription within the past two years because of cost. No other country came close.

Few solutions have been proposed for lengthy waits in the U.S., in part, say policy experts, because the problem is rarely acknowledged. But the market is beginning to address the issue with the rise of walk-in medical clinics. Hundreds have sprung up in CVS, Wal-Mart (WMT ), Pathmark, (PTMK ) and other stores—so many that the American Medical Assn. just adopted a resolution urging state and federal agencies to investigate such clinics as a conflict of interest if housed in stores with pharmacies. These retail clinics promise rapid care for minor medical problems, usually getting patients in and out in 30 minutes. The slogan for CVS's Minute Clinics says it all: "You're sick. We're quick."

at our current rate of usage - it's basically a drop in the bucket.  And to get all the equipment in place to extract it and refine it would take approximately four years or more.

And that "desolate wasteland" is one of the last pristine areas left in the world.  Does man really have to desecrate every square foot of this earth to satisfy his own greed and consumption?  Guess so.

and she cannot find anyone hiring in her area or anywhere near her area.  She is a registered nurse and is in the process of a divorce and is trying to raise 2 little girls. 

Remember when RNs were needed everywhere?  Now they can't even find jobs.

tests Obama like they did John Kennedy.

"Watch. We're going to have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy."

-- Joe Biden

Is Biden saying that America's current enemies - sorely aware of Obama's inexperience - plan to test a President Obama with similar crises, to see what he's made of?

I guess we all know how JFK's test turned out.  "Bay of pigs" ring any bells.

Biden has also commented Obama's inexperience and said the job of the Presidency "does not lend itself to on the job training."  He's also said Obama's "going to need help."

Well, I guess 'ol Joe has his foot in the door and that's all he really wanted.  I don't believe he's changed his mind about our new President Elect.  I think he saw his way into the White House and jumped on the bandwagon.

Great!  We've got a totally inexperienced, slick snake set to run this country and the man who knows Obama will fail, has announced the Obama will be tested and fail, and probably wants Obama to fail, so he can come out smelling like a rose. 

Well, buckle up.  It's going to be a bumpy ride.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/UBS_SECRETS?SITE=VACUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

I know this is old (July of 2001), but I just came across it and thought it was worth sharing with liberals. 

http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/august2004/082604alexwarned.htm