Genesis of America, the evangelical theocracy: a conference call
Posted By: Libby on 2005-10-17 In Reply to:
If history is still allowed to be accurate generations from now, this is how the inception of America, the evangelical theocracy, should be documented.
From: http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415 JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
Judgment Call Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?
Monday, October 17, 2005 12:01 a.m.
Two days after President Bush announced Harriet Miers's Supreme Court nomination, James Dobson of Focus on the Family raised some eyebrows by declaring on his radio program: When you know some of the things that I know--that I probably shouldn't know--you will understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe Harriet Miers will be a good justice.
Mr. Dobson quelled the controversy by saying that Karl Rove, the White House's deputy chief of staff, had not given him assurances about how a Justice Miers would vote. I would have loved to have known how Harriet Miers views Roe v. Wade, Mr. Dobson said last week. But even if Karl had known the answer to that--and I'm certain that he didn't because the president himself said he didn't know--Karl would not have told me that. That's the most incendiary information that's out there, and it was never part of our discussion.
It might, however, have been part of another discussion. On Oct. 3, the day the Miers nomination was announced, Mr. Dobson and other religious conservatives held a conference call to discuss the nomination. One of the people on the call took extensive notes, which I have obtained. According to the notes, two of Ms. Miers's close friends--both sitting judges--said during the call that she would vote to overturn Roe.
The call was moderated by the Rev. Donald Wildmon of the American Family Association. Participating were 13 members of the executive committee of the Arlington Group, an umbrella alliance of 60 religious conservative groups, including Gary Bauer of American Values, Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation and the Rev. Bill Owens, a black minister. Also on the call were Justice Nathan Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court and Judge Ed Kinkeade, a Dallas-based federal trial judge.
Mr. Dobson says he spoke with Mr. Rove on Sunday, Oct. 2, the day before President Bush publicly announced the nomination. Mr. Rove assured Mr. Dobson that Ms. Miers was an evangelical Christian and a strict constructionist, and said that Justice Hecht, a longtime friend of Ms. Miers who had helped her join an evangelical church in 1979, could provide background on her. Later that day, a personal friend of Mr. Dobson's in Texas called him and suggested he speak with Judge Kinkeade, who has been a friend of Ms. Miers's for decades.
Mr. Dobson says he was surprised the next day to learn that Justice Hecht and Judge Kinkeade were joining the Arlington Group call. He was asked to introduce the two of them, which he considered awkward given that he had never spoken with Justice Hecht and only once to Judge Kinkeade. According to the notes of the call, Mr. Dobson introduced them by saying, Karl Rove suggested that we talk with these gentlemen because they can confirm specific reasons why Harriet Miers might be a better candidate than some of us think.
What followed, according to the notes, was a free-wheeling discussion about many topics, including same-sex marriage. Justice Hecht said he had never discussed that issue with Ms. Miers. Then an unidentified voice asked the two men, Based on your personal knowledge of her, if she had the opportunity, do you believe she would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?
Absolutely, said Judge Kinkeade.
I agree with that, said Justice Hecht. I concur.
Shortly thereafter, according to the notes, Mr. Dobson apologized and said he had to leave the discussion: That's all I need to know and I will get off and make some calls. (When asked about his comments in the notes I have, Mr. Dobson confirmed some of them and said it was very possible he made the others. He said he did not specifically recall the comments of the two judges on Roe v. Wade.)
Judge Kinkeade, through his secretary, declined to discuss the matter. Justice Hecht told me he remembers participating in the call but can't recollect who invited him or many specifics about it. He said he did tell the group that Ms. Miers was pro-life, a characterization he has repeated in public. But he says that when someone asked him about her stand on overturning Roe v. Wade he answered, I don't know. He doesn't recall what Judge Kinkeade said. But several people who participated in the call confirm that both jurists stated Ms. Miers would vote to overturn Roe.
The benign interpretation of the comments is that the two judges were speaking on behalf of themselves, not Ms. Miers or the White House, and they were therefore offering a prediction, not an assurance, about how she would come down on Roe v. Wade. But the people I interviewed who were on the call took the comments as an assurance, and at least one based his support for Ms. Miers on them.
The conference call will no doubt prove controversial on Capitol Hill, always a tinderbox for rumors that any judicial nominee has taken a stand on Roe v. Wade. Ms. Miers meets today with Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Chuck Schumer of New York, both stalwart Roe supporters, who surely will be interested to learn more about her views. After Mr. Dobson's initial comments about things . . . that I probably shouldn't know, Sen. Arlen Specter, the pro-Roe Judiciary Committee chairman, said, If there are backroom assurances and if there are backroom deals and if there is something that bears on a precondition as to how a nominee is going to vote, I think that's a matter that ought to be known. He and ranking Democrat Pat Leahy of Vermont threatened to subpoena Mr. Dobson as a witness.
Some participants in the Oct. 3 conference call fear that they will be called to testify at Ms. Miers's hearings. If the call is as you describe it, an effort will be made to subpoena everyone on it, a Judiciary Committee staffer told me. It is possible that a tape or notes of the call are already in the hands of committee staffers. Some people were on speaker phones allowing other people to listen in, and others could have been on extensions, one participant told me.
Should hearings begin on Nov. 7 as is now tentatively planned, they would likely turn into a spectacle. Mr. Specter has said he plans to press Ms. Miers very hard on whether Roe v. Wade is settled law. She will have hearings like no nominee has ever had to sit through, Chuck Todd, editor of the political tip sheet Hotline, told radio host John Batchelor. One slipup on camera and she is toast.
Should she survive the hearings, liberal groups may demand that Democrats filibuster her. Republican senators, already hesitant to back Ms. Miers after heavy blowback from their conservative base, would likely lack the will to trigger the so-called nuclear option. The nomination is in real trouble, one GOP senator told me. Not one senator wants to go through the agony of those hearings, even those who want to vote for her. Even if Ms. Miers avoids a filibuster, it's possible Democrats would join with dissident Republicans to defeat her outright.
There are philosophical reasons for Republican senators to oppose Ms. Miers. In 1987, the liberal onslaught on Robert Bork dramatically changed the confirmation process. The verb to bork, meaning to savage a nominee and distort his record, entered the vocabulary, and many liberals now acknowledge that the anti-Bork campaign had bad consequences. It led to more stealth nominees, with presidents hoping their scant paper trail would shield them from attack.
President Bush has now gone further in internalizing the lessons of the Bork debacle. Harriet Miers is a superstealth nominee--a close friend of the president with no available paper trail who keeps her cards so close to her chest they might as well be plastered on it. If Ms. Miers is confirmed, it will reinforce the popular belief that the Supreme Court is more about political outcomes than the rule of law.
Army officer says won't fight in unlawful Iraq war
Wed Jun 7, 2006 7:31 PM ET
By Akiko Fujita
TACOMA, Washington (Reuters) - A U.S. Army officer said on Wednesday that fighting in the war in Iraq would make him party to war crimes and he would not go.
First Lt. Ehren Watada's supporters -- including clergy and a military family group -- said he is the first commissioned officer to publicly refuse to serve in Iraq and risked being court-martialed.
The Pentagon said Watada was among a number of officers and enlisted personnel who have applied for conscientious objector status.
The wholesale slaughter and mistreatment of the Iraqi people is not only a terrible moral injustice but a contradiction of the Army's own law of land warfare. My participation would make me party to war crimes, said Watada in a taped statement played at a Tacoma news conference.
His superiors at the nearby Fort Lewis military base would not let Watada leave the base to attend the press conference. Another news conference took place in Watada's native Hawaii.
Watada, 28, had been scheduled to be deployed to Iraq for his first tour later this month. He joined the Army in 2003, and has served in Korea.
Watada said his moral and legal obligations were to the U.S. Constitution not those who would issue unlawful orders.
Nearly 2,500 U.S. soldiers and an estimated 40,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
In recent weeks, Marines have been accused of killing 24 Iraqi civilians in the town of Haditha, raising concerns about abuse of force.
Paul Boyce, Army spokesman at the Pentagon, said Watada's case was being reviewed, adding it is not the first case, nor is his case particularly unique.
Joe Colgan, whose son Benjamin was killed in Iraq, said sending sons and daughters to Iraq was unpatriotic.
I ask that we all think about our moral conscience and what we have done in God's name, said Colgan.
If I didn't lose count, that's #8 since he was elected. Do I have to listen to 4 years of this? Or is this just about chosing his cabinet and if so, did he fill all the spots yet?
I can read. I don't need to see him except when he takes questions from reporters.
FYI, I never listened to GW's press conferences either. I can't stand canned speeches.
First, he's talking about Iran. They say he is going to talk about health insurance, the economy, etc.
Pres just had a press conference..
listened very discernibly, heard nothing different from his other press conferences... Feel like I'm watching "Groundhog Day" starring Bill Murray, only Bill Murray is much more funny and quite a bit smarter! When will get some real leadership? We desparately need LEADERSHIP!!!
A press conference is where reporters ask...sm
the candidate questions. The candidate does not know what questions are going to be asked. Hence, a teleprompter would be useless at a press conference. Teleprompters are for SPEECHES. Get it?
I saw the press conference. Sad. Feel bad for the
nm
From the way Fitzgerald spoke in the press conference...sm
S. Libby has A LOT to be worried about. It seems he's a bald face liar, and I think what would be interesting to find out is why would he lie and say he didn't even know who Plame was under oath having been briefed on her at least 4 times before coming to court. I smell smoke... I just saw Nancy Pelosi in a press conference...
and I was reminded of the interviews I have seen her in...and frankly...Palin does a HECK of a better job than she does....and nobody seems to mind that. Bear in mind, if, God forbid, something happened to both Pres and VP guess who we get: NANCY PELOSI. She is TWO heartbeats away from the Presidency no matter who gets elected. Good grief, no wonder they send the VP to an undisclosed location and don't let Pres and VP travel together. lol.
Obama press conference coming up...sm
Is it just me? Or don't we usually only have one president at a time. I thought for sure he didn't take office until January 20th.
Here is NPR's write up of today's press conference by the president for those who would like a quick run down. I just listened to it. Made me nauseous.
WASHINGTON December 4, 2007, 1:04 p.m. ET · President Bush said Tuesday that the international community should continue to pressure Iran on its nuclear programs, asserting Tehran remains dangerous despite a new intelligence conclusion that it halted its development of a nuclear bomb four years ago.
"I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program," Bush said. "The reason why it's a warning signal is they could restart it."
Bush spoke one day after a new national intelligence estimate found that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003, largely because of international scrutiny and pressure. That finding is in stark contrast to the comparable intelligence estimate of just two years ago, when U.S. intelligence agencies believed Tehran was determined to develop a nuclear weapons capability and was continuing its weapons development program.
It is also stood in marked contrast to Bush's rhetoric on Iran. At his last news conference on Oct. 17, for instance, he said that people "interested in avoiding World War III" should be working to prevent Iran from having the knowledge needed to make a nuclear weapon.
Bush said Tuesday that he only learned of the new intelligence assessment last week. But he portrayed it as valuable ammunition against Tehran, not as a reason to lessen diplomatic pressure.
"To me, the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community — to continue to rally the community — to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program," the president said. "What's to say they couldn't start another covert nuclear weapons program."
He also asserted that the report means "nothing's changed," focusing on the previous existence of a weapons program and not addressing the discrepancy between his rhetoric and the disclosure that weapons program has been frozen for four years.
Bush said he is not troubled about his standing, about perhaps facing a credibility gap with the American people. "No, I'm feeling pretty spirited — pretty good about life," Bush said.
"I have said Iran is dangerous, and the NIE doesn't do anything to change my opinion about the danger Iran poses to the world."
Bush said the report's finding would not prompt him to take a U.S. military option against Tehran off the table.
"The best diplomacy — effective diplomacy — is one in which all options are on the table," he said.
The president also said that the world would agree with his message that Iran shouldn't be let off the hook yet.
In fact, Europeans said the new information strengthens their argument for negotiations with Tehran, but they also said that sanctions are still an option to compel Iran to be fully transparent about its nuclear program. European officials insisted that the international community should not walk away from years of talks with an often defiant Tehran that is openly enriching uranium for uncertain ends. The report said Iran could still build a nuclear bomb by 2010-2015.
In Kabul, Afghanistan, Defense Secretary Robert Gates reinforced the U.S. position that the new U.S. intelligence assessment shows that Tehran remains a possible threat. He said it shows that Iran has had a nuclear weapons program and that as long as the country continues with its uranium enrichment activities, Iran could always renew its weapons program.
The U.S. intelligence assessment "validated the administration's strategy of bringing diplomatic and economic efforts to bear on Iran," Gates said Tuesday, speaking at a news conference with Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai.
Bush called the news conference, his first in nearly seven weeks, to intensify pressure on lawmakers amid disputes over spending and the Iraq war. Taking advantage of his veto power and the largest bully pulpit in town, Bush regularly scolds Congress as a way to stay relevant and frame the debate as his presidency winds down.
Democrats counter that Bush is more interested in making statements than genuinely trying to negotiate some common ground with them.
Specifically, Bush again on Tuesday challenged Congress to send him overdue spending bills; to approve his latest war funding bill without conditions; to pass a temporary to fix to the alternative minimum tax so millions of taxpayers don't get hit with tax increases; and to extend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
"Congress still has a lot to do," Bush said. "It doesn't have very much time to do it."
On another matter, Bush was asked about a rape victim in Saudi Arabia who was sentenced to prison and 200 lashes for being alone with a man not related to her — a violation of the kingdom's strict segregation of the sexes. Saudi Arabia has faced enormous international criticism about the sentencing.
"My first thoughts were these," Bush said. "What happens if this happens to my daughter? How would I react? And I would have been — I'd of been very emotional, of course. I'd have been angry at those who committed the crime. And I'd be angry at a state that didn't support the victim."
Bush, however, said he has not made his views known directly to Saudi King Abdullah, an ally. But he added: "He knows our position loud and clear."
The president said the U.S. economy is strong, though he acknowledged that the housing crisis has become a "headwind." He said administration officials are working on the issue, but he is wary of bailing out lenders. "We shouldn't say, 'OK, you made a lousy loan so we're going to go ahead and subsidize you.' "
Asked about the 2008 election, Bush steered himself back out of commenting on politics. "I practiced some punditry in the past — I'm not going to any further."
On other issues, Bush said:
—"The Venezuelan people rejected one-man rule" when they rejected a constitutional provision that would have enabled Hugo Chavez to remain in power for life and drive changes throughout Venezuelan society. "They voted for democracy."
—He talked by telephone Tuesday with Russian President Vladimir Putin and briefed him on the new Iran intelligence estimate. Bush also said he told Putin that "we were sincere in our expressions of concern" about irregularities in the voting that produced a sweeping parliamentary victory for Putin's party.
—He has "cordial relations" with Democratic leaders of Congress despite the sharp words between the White House and Capitol Hill. He blamed Democrats for the lack of compromises, saying, "In order for us to be able to reach accord, they got to come with one voice, one position."
I don't know how they can stand up there and lie through their teeth like that...blaming the White House and Republicans for this financial debacle. They know that is a lie. They know, especially Chris Dodd, was central to this. Also mentioned Barney Frank. Good grief. The hypocrisy is staggering. They should be talking about getting us out of this mess....just yesterday they were saying don't play the blame game. Telling McCain not to politicize it while they are politicizing it. That man makes my skin crawl.
And saying there was a "deal" and McCain blew it up. The only "deal" was among senators...the only house person present could not negotiate. He just had to listen. If they had the plan and had gone to the house with it, then the house would have blocked it there and hours if not days would have been wasted. Amazing the gall of some folks. Ridiculous!!!
Why can't they all stop the political posturing and just fix this mess. The House is only reacting to the onslaught of emails from their constituents saying protect us here, we don't like this carte blanche 700 billion. I for one am GLAD at least the Republicans in the house said whoa wait just a minute here.
Obama is doomed to fail miserably, and will probably blame someone else for it all (wait for it....It's Bush's fault...well, and maybe it'll be Congress' fault too, when things fail to work out according to his great plans).
Socialism doesn't work. Ask any true economist, and ask any historian how well Russia, Cuba, Venezuela socialism has worked out.
Call me what you want, just don't call me late for dinner. LOL....
GP, I like your sense of humor.
You call it hysteria, some call it concern for the
nm
Then call it what it is...or call for conservation...
but don't make up a myth to try to gain control. That is what Gore is after...what all the global warming hoohah is after. They have an agenda...pure and simple. And the base fact is that a very low percentage of the greenhouse gas effect is from cars. Every time you breathe out, you contribute. Are we all going to stop breathing? Are cows going to stop belching? I have no problem with ethanol...I have used it. My husband is from Iowa...I would love it if we started using ethanol more extensively. But in previous years, Democrats (Hillary being a primary one) opposed the use of ethanol. I guess if I believed any of those people out there hawking global warming actually believed what they were saying it would be different...but I don't. The science is not there. As I said...if the real interest is conservation with the side benefit of less CO2...fine. Just say so. But as the article pointed out...if it is as bad as they say it is, you can't stop it anyway. It just does not make good sense to me.
Fine. Call if whatever you want to call it....
I will call it as I see it. I look at a totality of things. He has embraced black liberation theology which is racist and has Marxist tones for 20 years. There is no way the man went to that church for 20 years and did not know their doctrine. But, if you choose to believe that, again, fine. I do not. I believe he knows that theology backward and forward and believes it to his core. You don't have to. That is the wonderful thing about America. We can agree or disagree. On this we disagree.
Yes, I am feeling a pinch. But I don't think the government should take money from you and give it to me. I don't think they should take money from any private business and give it to me. If you think that is fair, fine. I don't. That is how socialism/Marxism takes hold. Historically it ends the same way. I don't want that for America. Perhaps you do...you want the pinch eased for you and if that means taking money from someone else that they earned, and giving it to you, who did not earn it, to you it is all good. To me it isn't.
He never has said who the $1000 checks are going to. I am thinking not every person in the whole US of A...so not only does he get to choose who he takes the money from, he gets to choose who to give it to. That would be another interesting piece of the puzzle. If he confirms to the Marxist view, it would be issuing checks to the "poor." And he gets to define who that is. You may be okay with that...me, not so much.
And by the way...have you ever researched an oil company profit margin? It is not as huge as Obama would like you to believe. But, again, he is counting on no one researching what he says. They hear free money and that's all they want to hear. Also, do you think oil companies don't employ people? You think it is one CEO at a desk in an office raking in billions? You don't think there are rank and file regular folks who work for oil companies? Whose jobs might be impacted by you and others wanting to take money away from their employers and doling it out to people who have not earned it? You think there is a chance they might have a problem with that?
I call, fax, and call again and I do campaign....
xx
A DIFFERENT AMERICA...sm
The author has strong opinions, but I think he is right on!
Simon Winchester's recap of the events of April 18, 1906.
Teddy Roosevelt was President the morning San Francisco was hit by its devastating earthquake.
We were a DIFFERENT AMERICA then, Puppies. Just read this:
1. There was no warning...ZERO...than anything was amiss. Unlike August, 2005, there was no 10 days of warning ahead of the disaster. There were no satellites, no wireless, no TV. 2. In a city of 400,000...3,000 died and 225,000 were homeless. This happened in minutes...not days. At 5:12 a.m., the massive tectonic shake brought down a city, Rich and Poor alike. 3. The military responded instantly...in 153 minutes, the troops from the Presidio presented themselves...armed and ready...to the Mayor. Unlike the appalling delays with Katrina, the General in charge took instant command and moved his troops. FEMA stalled everything, including relief water trucks from Wal-Mart! (Ask yourself what sort of people we have become...when we need to wait for a Permission Slip from Brownie to move to help our neighbors?) 4. Mayor Schmiz, commandeered a boat to rush to Oakland, to wire the news to America. (Via Morse Code):San Francisco is in ruins. Our city needs help. 9 simple words. Which was how America found out about the catastrophe. No CNN. No Fox. No Geraldo. And how America responded. 5. The first relief train from L.A. arrived that night. Packed with food and clothing. Nobody in LaLa Land had to ask. They just DID IT. And there was no FEMA to turn back the train. 6. The Navy and the Coast Guard rushed in ships and boats to help. Nobody needed to go through channels. 7. The NEXT DAY Congress had passed legislation that allowed Roosevelt to dispatch rescue trains west....including the LARGEST HOSPITAL TRAIN EVER ASSEMBLED!!!. How is it, way back in 1916, from a standing start, Congress could assemble a massive train like that...when Bush had a hospital ship offshore (the Bataan)...which was never used???? 8. The guy in charge of the Post Office issued an order...signed by him, that NO UNSTAMPED LETTER WAS TO BE HELD UP FOR LACK OF POSTAGE! Can you IMAGINE any of our functionaries in today's wimp world of CAN'T DO Americans...issuing an order like that!! The brave pilots who got relegated to Kennel Duty for rescuing civilians know better.
Winchester does not mention the wonderful story of the founder of the Bank of America...who stood on the sidewalk and made sure his depositors could get cash, even as the bank lay in ruins. That speaks to an ATTITUDE about HELPING everyday Americans, and not just the Tax Pampered rich.
IN TODAY'S AMERICA...THE PUBLIC DOESN'T MATTER. INSTEAD...AT ALL COST PROTECT YOUR JOB, YOUR SENIORITY, YOUR RETIREMENT PACKAGE. Go along, shut up and mind your business.
America..where are you?
Tens of thousands, both American and Iraqi, have died for NOTHING..and when the truth is told finally, we will see the war was based on lies. Bush and his crew need to have something done to them, stand trial, impeachment, imprisonment, whatever..we cannot let this crime against humanity just slide by. I am outraged by it all and deeply saddened but I did not lose a loved one in this immoral war..I cannot even begin to think how I would react if I had lost someone to a war that did not have to be waged..I know, for sure, I would be one extremely rageful person..Give me a president who has had love affairs because of his weakness of loving women anyday over a president who loves to kill and wage war. I cannot believe what America is becoming..There are truly bad times..
America's war on the web
America's war on the web
While the US remains committed to hunting down al-Qaeda operatives, it is now taking the battle to new fronts. Deep within the Pentagon, technologies are being deployed to wage the war on terror on the internet, in newspapers and even through mobile phones. Investigations editor Neil Mackay reports
IMAGINE a world where wars are fought over the internet; where TV broadcasts and newspaper reports are designed by the military to confuse the population; and where a foreign armed power can shut down your computer, phone, radio or TV at will.
In 2006, we are just about to enter such a world. This is the age of information warfare, and details of how this new military doctrine will affect everyone on the planet are contained in a report, entitled The Information Operations Roadmap, commissioned and approved by US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld and seen by the Sunday Herald.
The Pentagon has already signed off $383 million to force through the document’s recommendations by 2009. Military and intelligence sources in the US talk of “a revolution in the concept of warfare”. The report orders three new developments in America’s approach to warfare:
Firstly, the Pentagon says it will wage war against the internet in order to dominate the realm of communications, prevent digital attacks on the US and its allies, and to have the upper hand when launching cyber-attacks against enemies.
Secondly, psychological military operations, known as psyops, will be at the heart of future military action. Psyops involve using any media – from newspapers, books and posters to the internet, music, Blackberrys and personal digital assistants (PDAs) – to put out black propaganda to assist government and military strategy. Psyops involve the dissemination of lies and fake stories and releasing information to wrong-foot the enemy.
Thirdly, the US wants to take control of the Earth’s electromagnetic spectrum, allowing US war planners to dominate mobile phones, PDAs, the web, radio, TV and other forms of modern communication. That could see entire countries denied access to telecommunications at the flick of a switch by America.
Freedom of speech advocates are horrified at this new doctrine, but military planners and members of the intelligence community embrace the idea as a necessary development in modern combat.
Human rights lawyer John Scott, who chairs the Scottish Centre for Human Rights, said: “This is an unwelcome but natural development of what we have seen. I find what is said in this document to be frightening, and it needs serious parliamentary scrutiny.”
Crispin Black – who has worked for the Joint Intelligence Committee, and has been an Army lieutenant colonel, a military intelligence officer, a member of the Defence Intelligence Staff and a Cabinet Office intelligence analyst who briefed Number 10 – said he broadly supported the report as it tallied with the Pentagon’s over-arching vision for “full spectrum dominance” in all military matters.
“I’m all for taking down al-Qaeda websites. Shutting down enemy propaganda is a reasonable course of action. Al-Qaeda is very good at [information warfare on the internet], so we need to catch up. The US needs to lift its game,” he said.
This revolution in information warfare is merely an extension of the politics of the “neoconservative” Bush White House. Even before getting into power, key players in Team Bush were planning total military and political domination of the globe. In September 2000, the now notorious document Rebuilding America’s Defences – written by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a think-tank staffed by some of the Bush presidency’s leading lights – said that America needed a “blueprint for maintaining US global pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power-rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests”.
The PNAC was founded by Dick Cheney, the vice-president; Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary; Bush’s younger brother, Jeb; Paul Wolfowitz, once Rumsfeld’s deputy and now head of the World Bank; and Lewis Libby, Cheney’s former chief of staff, now indicted for perjury in America.
Rebuilding America’s Defences also spoke of taking control of the internet. A heavily censored version of the document was released under Freedom of Information legislation to the National Security Archive at George Washington University in the US.
The report admits the US is vulnerable to electronic warfare. “Networks are growing faster than we can defend them,” the report notes. “The sophistication and capability of … nation states to degrade system and network operations are rapidly increasing.”
T he report says the US military’s first priority is that the “department [of defence] must be prepared to ‘fight the net’”. The internet is seen in much the same way as an enemy state by the Pentagon because of the way it can be used to propagandise, organise and mount electronic attacks on crucial US targets. Under the heading “offensive cyber operations”, two pages outlining possible operations are blacked out.
Next, the Pentagon focuses on electronic warfare, saying it must be elevated to the heart of US military war planning. It will “provide maximum control of the electromagnetic spectrum, denying, degrading, disrupting or destroying the full spectrum of communications equipment … it is increasingly important that our forces dominate the electromagnetic spectrum with attack capabilities”. Put simply, this means US forces having the power to knock out any or all forms of telecommunications on the planet.
After electronic warfare, the US war planners turn their attention to psychological operations: “Military forces must be better prepared to use psyops in support of military operations.” The State Department, which carries out US diplomatic functions, is known to be worried that the rise of such operations could undermine American diplomacy if uncovered by foreign states. Other examples of information war listed in the report include the creation of “Truth Squads” to provide public information when negative publicity, such as the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, hits US operations, and the establishment of “Humanitarian Road Shows”, which will talk up American support for democracy and freedom.
The Pentagon also wants to target a “broader set of select foreign media and audiences”, with $161m set aside to help place pro-US articles in overseas media.
Like 70% of America, I have BES sm
(Bush Exasperation Syndrome), same with Congress. I am active in trying to do something about it though. Tommy Chong has common sense, and Paris is just the art of distraction day in and day out by the media to keep people from paying attention to the real issues. Sure wish people would wake up. Real news: 3,682 dead US soliders. Very sad photo from Rosie's blog. http://www.rosie.com/blog/files/headers/53_large_4mkep2w-1.jpg
And that is what America is all about....
finding common ground. I agree also with your points here...and I am not 100% on McCain, there are some issues there too. But he comes way closer to what I think is good for the country than Obama does, and that has to be my main concern in this election. Because of the Dem stand on abortion and spending and many other things, it would be difficult to vote for a Dem anyway who was hard line. Now you take Zell Miller...there is a Democrat I could love. Old school conservative Democrat like a lot of my family. God bless'em. Their party has left them behind. :)
america first
There is no way we can put the world on our shoulders anymore.
That's what America needs!!!
To be yelled at to wake up!!!!!
Maybe you should go back to American Idol, Dancing with the Stars and Survivor and keep focused on those mind-numbing brainless shows for the brain dead while the country goes down the tubes.
As more people lose their jobs and as others' insurance premiums rise to become the most expensive monthly expense, the "majority" may find themselves unemployed, uninsured and unable to afford health insurance.
I became ill six years ago with a disease for which there is no cure, and I've kept trying to work, but over these six years, my income has dwindled very dramatically as a result of my illness and frequent hospitalizations. (As of this date, I've grossed less than $800.00 total for the year 2009, compared to the $40,000 to $44,000 I grossed prior to the onset of my illness.) I've been hospitalized twice this year, and when I'm not in the hospital, I'm trying to treat myself at home rather than be in the hospital. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn't. I'm on a multitude of drugs (12 total), including a Duragesic pain patch that I wear 24/7. (This drug is 80 to 100 times more potent than morphine.) This, along with other medications I take, is very expensive. I'm fortunate enough to get most of my medications for free from the manufacturers' patient assistance programs. The others I can find on Walmart's list. The ones that I can't, I'm able to use a little card that I printed from the internet for free, and I receive a pretty substantial discount. (I believe anyone can get one of these; it's called a PS Card. In case you need one, the web address is: http://www.pscard.com/)
In addition, I've recently been diagnosed with major depression (I wonder why!), as well as PTSD (for other personal reasons), and I'm at the point where I'm eligible for and am applying for Medicaid benefits. I can't even begin to describe the shame I feel, since I've worked for 40 of my 56 years on this planet, and I know that eventually, my employer is going to fire me for my lack of production. (So far, she's been very kind and understanding and lets me work when I can.) But I've always been healthy, and I've always been easily able to pay my bills, including my health insurance. The thought that I may now be on the government "dole" is a very disappointing thought for someone who has always worked and has always been independent. Since becoming ill, I've lost my health insurance, my car and even my phone. I'm now barely able to pay my cable internet bill and am jeopardy of losing that, as well. If that happens, then my job will be gone. I certainly need that job much more than my employer needs me at this point, because that job is the only source of self-esteem I have remaining in my life, even though I know my contribution is less than minimal.
Since my initial diagnosis, I lost my health insurance when it rose from $622 to $711 a month. Before being forced to cancel my insurance, I called around to a few insurance companies and was literally laughed at and told there was no way I'd be insured by ANY company with my preexisting condition of pancreatitis. (This was before they discovered I have cystic fibrosis, the cause of the pancreatitis, so I'm now forever uninsurable by for-profit insurance companies.)
I just saw the doctor yesterday, and there's now a lump on my abdomen. He says if it's there a month from now, I need to see a surgeon. (I promised him that it WON'T BE.) That's where I draw the line. If I have no insurance, then NO SURGEONS AND NO SURGERY. Same reason I haven't had a mammogram. If they find something, I just can't deal with incurring astronomic medical bills that I can't possibly pay. We all have to go sometime, and if I'm in that position, then I'll just have to go because quality of life is an important issue, as well, and being hit with bill after bill after bill that can't possibly be paid can seriously destroy anyone's quality of life.
I used to feel like a lot of you on this board feel. However, I'm walking in different shoes now, and that has certainly changed my opinion and forced me to understand how others may be forced to live -- forced -- not through any choice of their own. Though I wouldn't wish "my shoes" on my worst enemy, if I could wave a magic wand and just have someone walk in these shoes for a very brief time, it might help others to understand that there are two sides to every story. If my application for Medicaid is accepted, I will be both relieved and ashamed at the same time, but I just might live longer.
This is the time America comes together.
We roll up our sleeves, and roll up our pant legs and we get in there and help. We know that God is great and prayer never wasted. We lend a helping hand and we volunteer. We contribute to charities. We got and help rebuild. We sink in the mud and we come out victorious. What we don't do is blame our President, make excuses for victims who shoot at their rescuers, who are now also patrolling the streets in full body armour with assault weapons raping women. What is WRONG with you? What has happened to this country that people like you are posting things like this. I must say, I am speechless at your impropriety and lack of willingness to do anything but place blame. Shame on you all!
Wake up America
America is becoming a shadow what it once was. Time to clean house from the president down to our state representative. Whether you be Republican or Democrat we need to get new blood in our government. Everyone needs to get out and vote and remember all of these tragedies. Time has a way of healing and being amnesiac at the poles, remember, always remember.
Below 40%, OMG, America is finally *getting it*
September 10th, 2005 11:57 am President's Approval Rating Dips Below 40
President Bush's job approval has dipped below 40 percent for the first time in the AP-Ipsos poll, reflecting widespread doubts about his handling of gasoline prices and the response to Hurricane Katrina.
Nearly four years after Bush's job approval soared into the 80s after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, Bush was at 39 percent job approval in an AP-Ipsos poll taken this week. That's the lowest since the the poll was started in December 2003.
The public's view of the nation's direction has grown increasingly negative as well, with nearly two-thirds now saying the country is heading down the wrong track.
you are innocent until proven guilty? DeLay says it a political vendetta. Who knows, let's let is play out. And I wouldn't be so smug about wrongdoings on the right...There are plenty of those skeletons in the Democrat's closet to last us a lifetime. Remember Ken Starr? Of course THAT was an attempt to destroy a man, but of course THIS can only be wrongdoing by a Republican. Don't embarress yourselves just yet.
Hope we won't hear too much whining about innocent until proven guilty however - DeLay's indictment spells it right out and despite his predictable claims of witch hunt and fanatic partisan vendetta, there really doesn't seem to be any question about what happened. They have the check copies and they have the testimony. So yes, we have to wait for the formal sentencing after the facts have been heard by the Grand Jury - but there is no other side to the story so far as I can see, and no alternate explanation possible about what happened.
.....convince thousands of people that it is all right to exterminate a race of people simply because they believe them to be inferior or subhuman. It happened once and it could happen again.
It has happened many times in many countries. Sometimes the U.S. tries to intervene, sometimes we ignore it and sometimes we, ourselves, are the perpetrators (as with the Native Americans...we viewed them as subhumans as well as supporting regimes that to part in mass murder). We are not a guiltless superpower.
Al Sharpton doesn't have to look far for fuel...see the following story on racism in America.
On June 28 2007 a young black defendant Mychal Bell was found guilty of aggravated assault against a young white man by an all white jury despite conflicting testimony from witnesses.
His defense lawyer was incompetent at the very least and didn't even call the only adult to witness what happened to the stand. This man's testimony could have concievably blown the prosecuters case out of the water.
Originally the prosecuter tryed to charge Mychal and others with attempted murder for being involved in what was basically a fight and only backed off because of a worlwide public out cry. Learn more about the case from documents sent to me by Alan Bean, the founder of Friends of Justice a group dedicated to making sure all people are given a fair trial. You can read the documents by clicking the links below:
Article from yesterday's Times Herald documenting in a nutshell Bush's dynamic and equally distrastrous first year for America. It packs a wallop. In hindsight and in black and white, it certainly portends to everything that follows. I wonder if we shall ever recover from the damage that has been done to this country and abroad.
Seven down, one year to go for America
January 14, 2008
As I watched Americans caucus in Iowa and enter voting booths in New Hampshire these past two weeks, I felt the first stirrings of hope for my country that I've felt in a very long time.
It is as though we are peeking out of our caves of fear and despair, still wearing our winter coats and galoshes but preparing to shed them as we step into the promise of springtime.
For seven years, this country has been held in the grip of men who have used us for their own ends. On Sunday, it will be exactly one year until we see the last of the Bush administration.
That is reason for celebration. But it is not reason for turning our attention away from the criminals in the White House. There are times when I barely recognize the carcass of America that they continue to strip as they prepare to discard us.
Only one more year. But we know from experience the kind of damage George Bush and his crowd can do in the space of 12 months. Lest we forget, let's look at just a single year — 2001 — under this, the worst regime in America's history.
Jan. 20, 2001: On the day of Bush's inauguration, his chief of staff issued a moratorium halting all new health, safety and environmental regulations issued in the final days of the Clinton administration.
Jan. 23: Bush reinstates the global gag rule barring U.S. funding for abortion counseling abroad.
Feb. 5: Bush suspends the "roadless rule," which protected 60 million acres of forests from logging and road-building.
Feb. 17: Bush signs four
See Beth Quinn page 18
anti-union executive orders, including measures to prohibit project labor agreements at federal construction sites.
March 7: At Bush's urging, Congress repeals ergomonic regulations designed to protect workers from repetitive-stress injuries.
March 15: Bush abandons his campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
March 20: The Bush administration moves to overturn a regulation reducing the allowable levels of arsenic in drinking water.
March 28: Bush backs out of the Kyoto treaty on global warming.
March 29: Bush shuts down the White House Office for Women's Initiatives and Outreach.
April 4: Bush's Department of Agriculture proposes lifting a requirment that all beef used in federal school lunch programs must be tested for salmonella.
April 9: Bush's Department of Interior proposes a limit on lawsuits seeking protection of endangered species.
May 11: Bush abandons the nation's international effort to crack down on offshore tax havens for the rich.
May 16: Vice President Dick Cheney's task force releases its National Energy Policy report, calling for weaker environmental regulations and massive subsidies for the oil and gas, coal, and nuclear power industries.
May 26: At Bush's urging, Congress passes a $1.35 trillion tax cut.
June 19: Cheny refuses to release records of his energy task force meetings to the General Accounting Office.
June 28: Attorney General John Ashcroft announces a policy that would require gun records be destroyed one day after a background check rather than 90 days later.
July 9: Bush opposes a UN treaty to curb international trafficking in small arms and light weapons.
July 26: Bush rejects an international treaty on germ warfare and biological weapons.
Aug. 6: During the presidential daily briefing, Bush is warned that Osama bin Laden is determined to strike in the United States.
Aug. 9: Bush limits stem cell research to existing lines.
Sept. 11: Terrorists organized by bin Laden crash hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing thousands.
Sept. 22: Bush signs a $15 billion airline bailout.
Oct. 26: Bush signs the USA Patriot Act.
Oct. 29: Bush's Justice Department acknowledges but won't identify more than 1,000 individuals detained since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Oc.t 31: Ashcroft authorizes monitoring of attorney-client conversations in terrorism investigations.
Nov. 1: Bush issues an executive order blocking the release of presidential records.
Nov. 13: Bush orders that "enemy combatants" be tried in military tribunals.
Nov. 14: Bush's Justice Department issues regulations allowing illegal immigrants to be detained indefinitely.
Dec. 11: The Bush White House recommends privatizing Social Security.
Dec. 12: Bush announces that he intends to pull out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty unilaterally.
Dec. 27: Bush repeals the "responsible contractor rule" that had required scrutiny of safety and environmental law violations in the awarding of federal contracts.
There are 372 days left 'til Jan. 20, 2009. Let us hang onto hope for the future.
with eight years of Bush. Who knows what is coming? We have earned our dues....slavery, sterilization of mentally ill and retarded, tanks crawling over those people in the cardboard houses and tents in Hooverville (go read about it, doubt you know any history).....yeah, I think we earned some damnation. If the Rev. Wright is the worst of it, we got it pretty good....Doesn't seem to be getting any traction anymore except of course on FAUX News.
I am NOT discriminating. This is what the POLLS show!
And hopefully also the election: Go, Obama
Chrysler's Thank You America ads sm
After getting bailout money, Chrysler spends a fortune on Thank You America ads. What gall they have. Take a look at the comments about it before someone removes them. Glad to see people do realize how much the government is screwing us over with these bailouts.
marks the location of current message within thread
