Aerial panorama of downtown New Orleans and the Superdome from a helicopter 400 ft. above the Pontchartrain Expressway at Baronne St. This was shot almost a month after Hurricane Katrina and three days after Hurricane Rita, which accounts for the eerie look of the almost streets and highways. The Greater New Orleans bridge over the Mississippi River is normally the fifth busiest toll bridge in the U.S.
|“But out of the gobbledygook, comes a very clear thing: [unclear] you can’t trust the government; you can’t believe what they say; and you can’t rely on their judgment; and the – the implicit infallibility of presidents, which has been an accepted thing in America, is badly hurt by this, because it shows that people do things the President wants to do even though it’s wrong, and the President can be wrong.”|
|-- H.R. Haldeman to President Nixon, Monday, 14 June 1971, 3:09 p.m. meeting.|
...and his boss,
-see also, Iraq Election Results Fueling Insurgency and Protests.
The victory of the Shiite religious coalition in the December 15 election hands power for the next four years to a fanatical band of fundamentalist Shiite parties backed by Iran, above all to the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). Quietly backed by His Malevolence, Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, sustained by a 20,000-strong paramilitary force called the Badr Brigade, and with both overt and covert support from Iran's intelligence service and its Revolutionary Guard corps, SCIRI will create a theocratic bastion state in its southern Iraqi fiefdom and use its power in Baghdad to rule what's left of the Iraqi state by force.
" . . . Bill O'Reilly complained about a New York City cab driver who he said demanded $300 to take a friend's daughter to the airport during the city's transit strike, stating: "Immediately that person [the cab driver] should be shot dead." O'Reilly then asked, "Did you get that, you left-wing smear sites who are listening?" He further suggested a possible headline, "Just pass that around -- 'O'Reilly wants cab drivers shot dead' -- big headline on the left-wing website[s]."-These Chickenhawks never have the balls to do their own dirty work. But we do what we can! Anything to be added to another list. Like the one below for instance;
Add your name to our Freedom of Information Act request to get the facts about George Bush's use of the National Security Agency to spy on American citizens:Click here to sign. ________________________________________________
The top of the Drudge Report claims “CLINTON EXECUTIVE ORDER: SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS WITHOUT COURT ORDER…” It’s not true. Here’s the breakdown –
What Drudge says:
Clinton, February 9, 1995: “The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order”
What Clinton actually signed:
Section 1. Pursuant to section 302(a)(1) [50 U.S.C. 1822(a)] of the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance] Act, the Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order, to acquire foreign intelligence information for periods of up to one year, if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that section.
That section requires the Attorney General to certify is the search will not involve “the premises, information, material, or property of a United States person.” That means U.S. citizens or anyone inside of the United States.
The entire controversy about Bush’s program is that, for the first time ever, allows warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens and other people inside of the United States. Clinton’s 1995 executive order did not authorize that.
Drudge pulls the same trick with Carter.
What Drudge says:
Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: “Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order.”
What Carter’s executive order actually says:
1-101. Pursuant to Section 102(a)(1) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (50 U.S.C. 1802(a)), the Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order, but only if the Attorney General makes the certifications required by that Section.
What the Attorney General has to certify under that section is that the surveillance will not contain “the contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party.” So again, no U.S. persons are involved.
-we must stop these un-American bastards from ruining this country
In 1755, Benjamin Franklin observed that “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Our belief in the primacy of individual liberty makes
Establishing reasonable standards of evidence and allowing judicial review of subpoenas and “gag orders” does not threaten anyone’s security; but, these allowances will ensure that civil liberties are protected and maintained today and in the future. It may not be a politically popular stand, but it is one that I believe our country’s Founders would very much understand.
Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.)
Many of my regular readership--however small and humble their number maybe--may do a double take at the title of this post, but I believe the above statements would ring true from whatever quarter it had been issued. However, others have characterized Senator Sununu’s bi-partisan efforts to ensure the inherent checks and balances established by our Founding Fathers as a hindrance to prosecuting
The War Against Terror Global The Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism The War on Islamo-Fascism.
Sununu, Feingold, and others who’ve joined this fight for our civil liberties have repeatedly made it clear that they are not in favor of gutting the act of the most vital law enforcement tools the law provides, but simply extending the act so that further debate upon essential safeguards for our freedoms can continue. A significant number of Republicans oppose this debate, so much so that they would rather see the act expire than be modified in any form, to the detriment of the varied law enforcement agencies that rely on the most pertinent parts of The Patriot Act. Although it has been noted, “The expiration of the law isn't likely to immediately hamper terror investigations,” and that “Federal authorities may still use the existing law to complete probes initiated before the end of the year and launch new investigations using the old act for crimes committed before Dec. 31,” a time will come when the very roadblocks between agencies such as the CIA and FBI that contributed the failures of the “Able Danger” program could arise again.
Simply put, in the Senators own words, "They haven't provided any substantive example of how that judicial review would weaken law enforcement's ability... I support an extension - three months, six months, so that we can work out these differences... We should deal with this like adults."
(From the diaries -- Plutonium Page. Please spread the word.)
The story of the student who received a visit from homeland security agents because he had checked out Mao's Little Red Book has now been confirmed to be a fabrication.
The law governing clandestine surveillance in the United States, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, prohibits conducting electronic surveillance not authorized by statute. A government agent can try to avoid prosecution if he can show he was "engaged in the course of his official duties and the electronic surveillance was authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order of a court of competent jurisdiction," according to the law. "This is as shocking a revelation as we have ever seen from the Bush administration," said Martin, who has been sharply critical of the administration's surveillance and detention policies. "It is, I believe, the first time a president has authorized government agencies to violate a specific criminal prohibition and eavesdrop on Americans." Caroline Fredrickson, director of the Washington legislative office of the American Civil Liberties Union, said she is "dismayed" by the report. "It's clear that the administration has been very willing to sacrifice civil liberties in its effort to exercise its authority on terrorism, to the extent that it authorizes criminal activity," Fredrickson said. The NSA activities were justified by a classified Justice Department legal opinion authored by John C. Yoo, a former deputy in the Office of Legal Counsel who argued that congressional approval of the war on al Qaeda gave broad authority to the president, according to the Times. That legal argument was similar to another 2002 memo authored primarily by Yoo, which outlined an extremely narrow definition of torture. That opinion, which was signed by another Justice official, was formally disavowed after it was disclosed by the Washington Post. Justice Department spokeswoman Tasia Scolinos would not comment on the report last night.
Jack spelled out all the abuses that have been conducted by this administration since it took over office in about one minute.
Cafferty: Who cares if the Patriot Act get's renewed.
Want to abuse our civil liberties-Just do it!
Who cares about the Geneva conventions?
Want to torture prisoners-Just do it!
Who cares about rules concerning the identity of CIA gents.
Want to reveal the name of a covert operative? Just do it!
Who cares about whether the intelligence concerning WMD's is accurate.
You want to invade Iraq? Just do it.
Who cares about qualifications to serve on the nation's highest court.
Want to nominate a personal friend with no qualifications? Just do it. And the latest outrage, which I read about in "The New York Times" this morning, who cares about needing a court order to eavesdrop on American citizens. Want to wiretap their phones conversations? Just do it.... What a joke. A very cruel, very sad joke.
The following are the sites I've nominated:So stop by Wampum and nominate your favorite!!! Trackback: http://wampum.wabanaki.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1814
Thursday, December 15, 2005; Posted: 5:44 p.m. EST (22:44 GMT)
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody at some point last year, but he wouldn't provide further details.
Sean Hannity and his guest last night attacked Harvard and Georgetown Universities for accepting money from Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal:
HANNITY: Now, you may remember this Saudi prince from the days after September 11, when Rudy Giuliani turned down his so-called gift of $10 million, because he said that the U.S. needed to, quote, “reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause,” unquote.
Well, Harvard and Georgetown universities are now accepting $20 million each from Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal for their Islamic studies programs. … This is a bad guy. Rudy was right to decline the money. Why would these universities take money from him?
MINITER (GUEST): Because these universities already believe this message. They already believe that America is the problem, that our support for Israel and our arguments against terrorism are the problem. And some professors on these campuses — Churchill doesn’t teach there, but they still do teach at Harvard and at Georgetown in many cases — they believe his message.
So it’s not as if this Saudi prince is changing their views. He is rewarding them financially for views they already have.
Hannity conveniently forgot to mention that his own employer, Fox News, also accepts money from Talal; he owns 5.5% of Fox News. Not only is Talal “rewarding them [Fox News] financially for views they already have,” he’s also changing their views.
(HT: News Hounds)
This is the hostility that O'Reilly's "Wwar on Chritsams" has started. Just because a waitress told this guy, "Happy Holidays," the guy wanted to punch her in the face. (Like O'Reilly, I don't know if the guy was serious.) Update: This has got to be a crank call.
Caller: I wanted to punch her in the face...
O'Reilly: I think you're out of line.----if somebody says "Happy Holiday," there's no reason to get offended.
Brad has the audio.
Emailer Joe: "So then Bill O'Reilly ripped into the guy and said he was a jerk for not tipping her. O'Reilly said "What if you had been Jewish or Muslim" she didn't know what your religion was. She was just trying to be respectful. Then O'Reilly discovered he had contradicted himself and tried to back pedal and explain the difference."