USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[Nemesis6 0]

Voice of America was founded to help promote the ideology and spirit of America to foreign audiences. At least, that’s what I always thought.

But somewhere along the way, it became a mouthpiece for Islamist propaganda. A VOA report by Mohamed Elshinnawi about a Pew poll showing increasingly negative opinions of Islam pushes the line that Americans are just brimming over with “Islamophobia,†and it all stems from ignorance of Islam—despite the fact that Americans have more information about Islam than ever, almost all of it heavily slanted towards the positive: VOA News - Is Islam Misunderstood in America?

CAIR "Islamophobia" Propaganda at VOA

http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-05-24-voa33.cfm

Quote[/b] ]A new survey of U.S. public attitudes toward Muslim-Americans and Islam finds that a majority of Americans — 55 percent — regard Muslim-Americans favorably, but that smaller numbers - only 41 percent — have favorable impressions of Islam as a religion. The study by the Washington, D.C.-based Pew Research Center indicates that many Americans perceive a link between Islam and violence, with more than one in three saying Islam is more likely than other religions to encourage violence among its believers. Experts on Islamic-American relations believe such negative views stem from American ignorance of Islamic culture.

Muslims and Islamic culture have long been an integral part of American society. But today, almost years after the 9/11 attacks by radical Islamists and the start of America’s war on terror, many Americans associate Islam with violence and extremism.

We asked a random sample of people in downtown Washington, DC, what immediately comes to mind when they hear the word “Islamâ€. “Unfortunately, the first thought that I have is something maybe a little charged with aggression and negativity,†said one woman. A man remarked, “The fact that I work in Washington, DC, makes me especially fearful of Islamic terrorism, especially in the time after September 11.†Another woman shared her thoughts: “I know it is a religion founded by Muhammad, and that he was a General, a warrior.†Another man talked about his fears: “It brings a little bit of fear to me after being here on September 11th and watching the planes go in.†...

American Muslim leaders blame the US news media for generating what Nihad Awad, Executive Director of the Council for American Islamic Relations calls “Islamophobiaâ€.

“The kind of coverage that the American audience has been receiving about Islam and Muslims leads one to just one conclusion, that Islam is bad and Muslims are violent,†he said. “The media has failed to capture the reality of the Muslim world and only focused on the actions of the few.â€

This Voice of America article, like almost all mainstream media pieces that cite the Council on American-Islamic Relations, doesn’t bother to mention Nihad Awad’s statement supporting a genocidal terrorist group. Mainstream media also think you don’t need to know that at least five of CAIR’s employees and board members have been arrested, convicted, deported, or otherwise linked to terrorism-related charges and activities.

[Hit_Sqd_Maximus 0]

Did anyone see the speech Bush gave at Oklahoma State University for the graduating class? I go to school there and got a chance to see it. A lot of stuff you may not get because it relates to Stillwater. However I thought it was a really good speech.

Quote[/b] ]THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. President Schmidly, thank

you. Members of the Oklahoma State faculty and administration;

Governor; people in the Statehouse; members of the United States

Congress; distinguished guests; parents, friends, family, and most

important, the Class of 2006 -- (applause) -- thanks for the warm

welcome to this great state, and to this fine campus. I'm honored to be

here. (Applause.)

Laura sends her greetings, and she's disappointed that she couldn't

be here with me. She was even more disappointed when she found out I

had planned a romantic dinner for two -- at Eskimo Joe's. (Applause.)

She also said she had one question to ask the students here today: How

Orange are you? (Applause.) If you read the papers, you know that when

some want to criticize me, they call me a cowboy. (Applause.) This

cowboy is proud to standing here in the midst of a lot of other cowboys.

(Applause.)

I want to thank the moms and dads here for the sacrifice and for

the love you've shown your children. (Applause.) I want to thank the

faculty for your hard work and dedication. (Applause.) I congratulate

the Class of 2006. (Applause.) Some of you are graduating with honors

that involved much sacrifice and achievement. Others perhaps spent a

little less time in the library. (Laughter.) For all of you, I bring a

message of great hope: There's life after English Comp. (Laughter.)

Someday you'll appreciate what you've learned here, you'll make your

teachers proud. I know the professors who taught me English marvel at

my way of words. (Laughter.)

The last few months before graduation are busy ones. Amid all the

excitement, there's one thing that probably eluded a few of you: You

haven't had time to find a job. I speak for your parents when I say:

Now is the time to start looking. (Applause.) Some good news for you:

The job market for college graduates is the best it's been in years.

(Applause.) The economy of ours is strong and so you'll have more jobs

to choose from than previous classes, and your starting salaries will be

higher. (Applause.) And the opportunities beyond are only limited by

the size of your dreams.

You're privileged to live in the world's freest country at one of the

most hopeful moments in human history. Soon you'll leave this

university, you'll take your place in our society. And as you do,

you'll witness dramatic changes, and these changes will present you with

opportunities and choices and great challenges.

Your generation will enjoy unimagined opportunities because of

education. You know, when this university was founded in 1890, it was

called the Oklahoma Territorial Agricultural and Mechanical College, one

of the nation's land-grant colleges. And the investment has paid off

many times over. Some of the old-timers remember that after the Dust

Bowl hit Oklahoma in the 1930s, this university responded by helping the

farmers and ranchers with innovative soil conservation techniques. OSU

is still committed to the land-grant mission of high-quality teaching

and advanced research and outreach to the communities it serves. But

the school has moved far beyond its original focus on agriculture, and

Oklahoma State University is now a comprehensive public university with

eight degree-granting colleges that offer more than 350 programs to more

than 21,000 students.

This fine university has adapted, and to succeed in the 21st century,

you're going to have to adapt, as well. Your degree marks the

successful end of your undergraduate education, and when you leave this

university, you're going to enter a dynamic world and an economy that is

constantly creating new opportunities that will require you to learn new

skills. I urge you to rise to these challenges, take charge of your

future. Be open to new ideas. Be willing to take risks. Treat the

degree you receive today as the first step in a lifetime of learning,

and your lives will be rich in purpose and reward.

Your generation will face unprecedented choices because of technology.

When I was in college, we listened to music on 45 rpm records, as

opposed to the iPod. We used manual typewriters instead of the personal

computer. When we made a mistake while writing a paper, we didn't have

the luxury of SpellCheck. As a matter of fact, we used something that

maybe some of you have heard of -- it was big and bulky -- it's called a

dictionary. (Laughter.) Technology has helped improve almost every

aspect of your life on campus -- except maybe the cafeteria food.

(Laughter.)

Just as technology is making life better for college students, it's

making all of us more productive. If you take a job in an office, the

technology you use will make you more efficient than earlier

generations. If you decide to open a small business, technology can

help you lower your costs or reach more customers through the Internet.

If you're a farmer or a rancher, technology gives you instant access to

expert advice from specialists who may live thousands of miles away. By

helping each of us do our jobs better, technology is improving life for

all of us.

<p>

Some of the most exciting advances in technology you'll see will be in

the field of energy. When I graduated from school, cars drank gasoline.

Last month in California, I saw cars powered by hydrogen that use no

gasoline and emit no pollution. Within your lifetime, advances in

technology will make our air cleaner and our cars more efficient; the

gasoline engine will seem as antiquated as the rotary phone and the

black-and-white TV.

Technology holds promise for extending and improving our lives through

dramatic breakthroughs in the field of medicine. In recent times, we've

gone from X-rays to MRIs, from eyeglasses to laser eye surgery, from

major operations that would keep you in the hospital for weeks to

miracle drugs that can prevent the need for the operation in the first

place. In the decades ahead, you're going to witness incredible changes

in health care that will even be more revolutionary.

These advances in technology will transform lives -- and they will

present you with profound dilemmas. Science offers the prospect of

eventual cures for terrible diseases, and temptations to manipulate life

and violate human dignity. With the Internet, you can communicate

instantly with someone halfway across the world -- and isolate yourself

from your family and your neighbors. Your generation will have to

resolve these dilemmas. My advice is, harness the promise of technology

without becoming slaves to technology. My advice is, ensure that

science serves the cause of humanity, and not the other way around.

(Applause.)

Your generation will confront the challenges of a world that is now

at our doorsteps. When Oklahoma was settled in the late 19th century,

this was America's frontier. Now the whole world is within your reach.

You can email friends in Central America, or you can fly nonstop across

the Atlantic or Pacific, or you use your Bank of Oklahoma card and

withdraw money from an ATM in Australia. At the same time, we're seeing

the rise of new competitors like China and India, and this competition

creates uncertainty. Some look at the changes taking place all around

us and they worry about the future. Their reaction is to wall America

off from the world, and to retreat into protectionism. This is a sure

path to stagnation and decline. I ask you to reject this kind of

pessimism. (Applause.)

We should welcome competition, because it makes our country stronger and

more prosperous. Today the citizens of Oklahoma export wheat to Mexico,

or pork to Japan, or liquid pumps to Russia. For your generation, even

more opportunities will come from overseas. Government must help, but

it is up to you to take advantage of what you have learned here, and

meet the future with confidence in your ability to compete and succeed.

A country that shuts itself off from competition will be a country

that isolates itself from the duties and opportunities of our world.

One of the greatest opportunities of this young century is the advance

of human freedom. The advance of liberty is the story of our time, and

we're seeing new chapters written before our eyes. Freedom is taking

root in places where liberty was once unimaginable. Just 25 years ago,

there were only 45 democracies on the face of the Earth. Today, there

are 122 democracies, and more people now live in liberty than ever

before. The advance of liberty gives us hope in the future, because

free societies are peaceful societies. As freedom spreads, the threats

of tyranny and terror will recede, and the rise of democracy will bring

peace to the world and security to the United States America.

(Applause.)

No, this changing world presents you with a lot of exciting

opportunities. Yet a changing world also needs the anchor of

old-fashioned values and virtues, like courage and compassion. These

are the virtues that sustain our democracy and make self-government

possible. These virtues are what we'll need to build a more hopeful

future. And these virtues are present in the Oklahoma State Class of

2006. (Applause.)

We see these virtues in an extraordinary young woman named Melissa

Unwin. Melissa has been studying in your College of Education. Back in

2001, she was diagnosed with cancer, and the doctors doubted she would

ever finish college. If you know anything about educators, you know

that when they tell you -- when somebody tells them something is

impossible, they're going to work harder to prove you wrong. And that's

just what Melissa has done. The degree that Melissa has earned today is

an example of courage in the face of adversity, and she represents a

spirit necessary for your generation to succeed.

We see the spirit of compassion in the members of the Class of 2006

who've stepped forward to serve their community. As part of your "Into

the Streets" volunteer effort this past fall, one fraternity helped

build a playground at the local homeless shelter. They probably

realized it was better to help somebody else than go to the bar.

(Laughter.) Other members of your class traveled down the Gulf Coast

after Hurricane Katrina to help clean up debris, and deliver comfort and

relief. They didn't have to do that, but they felt the calling to go

help somebody in need.

I met seniors who have volunteered in a wide variety of ways, upon my

landing -- they build houses for the underprivileged and visit nursing

homes, and tutor fellow students. One of these volunteers says this

about her service: "I feel I've been very fortunate, and any way I can

help other people to have a house to live in, to have food on the table,

or even a clean yard means I'm making a difference."

We see the spirit of service in the members of the Class of 2006 who've

stepped forward to defend our freedom. In this graduating class, there

are 27 new lieutenants who are receiving their Army and Air Force

commissions along with their OSU degrees. (Applause.) They're carrying

on the proud tradition of service in uniform exemplified by an OSU

graduate named Luke James. After earning his commission at OSU in 2002,

Luke had the world at his feet; he had a wife and infant son that he

adored. Yet Luke had chosen a life of service, and in 2004, Second

Lieutenant Luke James, graduate of OSU, was deployed to Iraq as a member

of the Army's 82nd Airborne. Shortly after arriving in that country,

Luke was killed while leading his troops on patrol. He was awarded the

Bronze Star. He's buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

On the anniversary of her son's death, Luke's mom went to visit her

son's grave. And afterward, a young soldier came up to her and thanked

her for the way she had raised her son. He said that Lieutenant James

had saved his life. Luke's mom says this of her son's service: "All of

Luke's life, he was very dedicated to the concept of freedom. While no

soldier wants war, he understood the necessity of war, that it can

ensure the freedoms we enjoy in America." Luke James is part of a

generation who are every bit as selfless and dedicated to liberty as any

that has come before. And the future of the United States of America is

better because of the character of young Americans like Luke James.

(Applause.)

In this time of technological change and global competition,

ultimately the character of America will be determined by your

willingness to serve a cause larger than yourselves. The day will come

when you'll be asked, what have you done to build a better America than

the one you found. I'm confident that you will answer the call to

service. I'm confident that your lives will be more fulfilling, and

your country more hopeful. And I'm confident that you'll look back and

say, job well-done.

Congratulations to you all. May God bless you, Class of 2006. And

may God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

[ralphwiggum 6]

nemesis6, I'm getting tired of your "media bias" angle on all these. I beleive I issued a warning related to those before.

[walker 0]

Hi all

The signs that the Special Prosecutor is looking for charges of conspiracy under the Covert Agent Identity Protection Act are arriving thick and fast.

It now appears Dick Cheney will give evidence against his former employee Lewis "Scooter" Libby.

Today the most recent filings were examined in MSNBC's Hardball:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036697/

Then click on "Cheney in the witness Stand?"

Transcript Below.

Quote[/b] ]CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC ANCHOR: On Monday, Hardball correspondent David Shuster first reported the likelihood Vice President Cheney himself would be called as a witness stand by prosecutors in the CIA leak case against Scooter Libby. Last night, prosecutors filed a motion formally notifying Libby and the Court that Cheney may, in fact, be a prosecution witness. The new pre-trial documents underscore the central role of Vice President Cheney in his office's focus on an administration critic whose wife worked at the CIA and saw her cover status compromised. Here now is David Shuster.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID SHUSTER, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT (voice over): The latest prosecution filings reveal Vice President Cheney had a greater role than previously known in the actions that led to the outing of CIA operative Valerie Wilson.

It was Wilson's husband, ambassador Joe Wilson, who wrote this op-ed criticizing the Bush administration's case for war with Iraq. Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald states, as the defendant Scooter Libby admitted in his grand jury testimony, he communicated extensively with the Vice President regarding the Wilson op-ed during the relevant time period and received direction from the Vice President regarding his response.

Fitzgerald also said this. The state of mind of the Vice President as communicated to defendant is directly relevant to the issue of whether the defendant knowing made false statements to federal agents and the grand jury."

JONATHAN TURLEY, GW law center: "Everything ends up at Dick Cheney's desk. His right hand man is indicted, he's intimately involved in the Niger allegation with the weapons of mass destruction. He's the one who seems to have instructed Libby. The biggest question is not whether he will be called as a witness, but why he wasn't a co-conspirator."

SHUSTER: According to Libby's grand jury testimony about Cheney, the Vice President saw Joe Wilson's op-ed as an attack on his credibility. Prosecutor question to Libby: Was it a topic that was discussed on a daily basis? Libby: Yes sir. Question: And it was discussed on multiple occasions each day, in fact? Libby: Yes sir. Question: And during that time did the Vice President indicate he was upset that this article was out there which falsely in his view attacked his own credibility? Libby: Yes sir. Question: And do you recall what it is that the Vice President said? Libby: I recall that he was very keen to get the truth out. He wanted to get all the facts out about what he had or hadn't done, what the facts were or were not. He was very keen about that and said it repeatedly.

One alleged fact the Vice President seemed to zero in on was the idea that nepotism contributed to Joe Wilson's findings. On a copy of the Wilson op-ed, Cheney wrote, quote, did his wife send him on a junket? Prosecutors are not asserting that Cheney instructed Libby to leak to reporters and then lie about it to the grand jury.

But Patrick Fitzgerald argues that Cheney's interactions with Libby were a key part of what motivated Libby to obstruct the investigation.

Fitzgerald indicated that he may call Cheney as a prosecution witness. Cheney's testimony would be used to prove that Libby learned Valerie Wilson's identity from the Vice President and other government officials, not from reporters.

SOL WISENBERG, former deputy independent counsel: "If you are the prosecutor, you want to be looking at everything, every little thing that could get you to convince a jury, this is not the kind of thing that a person would forget."

SHUSTER: Last week, Scooter Libby's defense team downplayed the significance of Vice President Cheney's notes on the Wilson column by declaring Libby never saw the notes until the FBI showed him a copy.

But in the actual grand jury testimony, released by Fitzgerald, Libby said of the column, quote, "it's possible if it was sitting on his desk that, you know, my eye went across it."

Documents released earlier in the case indicate Vice President Cheney and Libby talked about the Wilsons on the very day Libby allegedly leaked her identity to two reporters. Is Patrick Fitzgerald trying to build a case against Vice President Cheney?

JONATHAN TURLEY, GW law center: "Sometimes, prosecutors will not indict someone in the hopes that a former colleague will flip, like Scooter. But I gotta tell you, they can't wait until the cows come home, Scooter Libby is not going to flip on Dick Cheney."

SHUSTER: Meanwhile, in the investigation of Karl Rove, sources close to the presidential advisor are now confirming a story first reported in the national journal that Rove, who was a source for columnist Bob Novak, later had a separate conversation with Novak after the investigation began.

Former federal prosecutors are convinced Fitzgerald has explored whether Rove and Novak coordinated their testimony.

But today, a spokesman for Karl Rove said quote, "Karl Rove has never urged anyone, directly or indirectly, to withhold information from the special Counsel or to testify falsely. Circulating such speculation now is nothing short of irresponsible."

SHUSTER: (on-camera) But the contention is not that Karl Rove urged Bob Novak to withhold information, rather it's that Rove was assured early in the case that Novak was not going to burn him. Today, Robert Novak was unavailable for comment. As for the overall investigation, including the Libby case, there was also no comment today from the official who has now become a central figure, Vice President Cheney.

I'm David Shuster, for hardball, in Washington.

With both Bob Novak and Tim Russert now being implicated by others in the case it now brings the possible number of people implicated to five.

It is well recognised that getting a charge on conspiracy is far easier as the people involved can be forced to testify against each other and any attempts to concoct a combined story are easily discovered, as in the case of the Rush Novak phone call. The bigger the number the easier it is.

As the prosecutor noted one person lying as Libby is accused of makes it very hard to find out why they are lying so all you can do in that case is prosecute them for lying to the court but when two or ideally more lie it becomes a whole lot easier.

Then you can force them to give evidence against each other. You cannot be forced to give evidence against your self.

It then becomes a race between the culprits to see who will rat on the others first.

It all just points out why so many US voters are asking this question:

"With an untrustworthy NeoConMan entryist group in control of the US Republican party, willing to place its own agents in the field and intelligence operations in jeopardy, how can any one feel safe to vote republican?"

Kind Regards Walker

[IrishGuy 0]

Did anyone see the speech Bush gave at Oklahoma State University for the graduating class? I go to school there and got a chance to see it. A lot of stuff you may not get because it relates to Stillwater. However I thought it was a really good speech.

Quote[/b] ]THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. President Schmidly, thank

you. Members of the Oklahoma State faculty and administration;

Governor; people in the Statehouse; members of the United States

Congress; distinguished guests; parents, friends, family, and most

important, the Class of 2006 -- (applause) -- thanks for the warm

welcome to this great state, and to this fine campus. I'm honored to be

here. (Applause.)

Laura sends her greetings, and she's disappointed that she couldn't

be here with me. She was even more disappointed when she found out I

had planned a romantic dinner for two -- at Eskimo Joe's. (Applause.)

She also said she had one question to ask the students here today: How

Orange are you? (Applause.) If you read the papers, you know that when

some want to criticize me, they call me a cowboy. (Applause.) This

cowboy is proud to standing here in the midst of a lot of other cowboys.

(Applause.)

I want to thank the moms and dads here for the sacrifice and for

the love you've shown your children. (Applause.) I want to thank the

faculty for your hard work and dedication. (Applause.) I congratulate

the Class of 2006. (Applause.) Some of you are graduating with honors

that involved much sacrifice and achievement. Others perhaps spent a

little less time in the library. (Laughter.) For all of you, I bring a

message of great hope: There's life after English Comp. (Laughter.)

Someday you'll appreciate what you've learned here, you'll make your

teachers proud. I know the professors who taught me English marvel at

my way of words. (Laughter.)

The last few months before graduation are busy ones. Amid all the

excitement, there's one thing that probably eluded a few of you: You

haven't had time to find a job. I speak for your parents when I say:

Now is the time to start looking. (Applause.) Some good news for you:

The job market for college graduates is the best it's been in years.

(Applause.) The economy of ours is strong and so you'll have more jobs

to choose from than previous classes, and your starting salaries will be

higher. (Applause.) And the opportunities beyond are only limited by

the size of your dreams.

You're privileged to live in the world's freest country at one of the

most hopeful moments in human history. Soon you'll leave this

university, you'll take your place in our society. And as you do,

you'll witness dramatic changes, and these changes will present you with

opportunities and choices and great challenges.

Your generation will enjoy unimagined opportunities because of

education. You know, when this university was founded in 1890, it was

called the Oklahoma Territorial Agricultural and Mechanical College, one

of the nation's land-grant colleges. And the investment has paid off

many times over. Some of the old-timers remember that after the Dust

Bowl hit Oklahoma in the 1930s, this university responded by helping the

farmers and ranchers with innovative soil conservation techniques. OSU

is still committed to the land-grant mission of high-quality teaching

and advanced research and outreach to the communities it serves. But

the school has moved far beyond its original focus on agriculture, and

Oklahoma State University is now a comprehensive public university with

eight degree-granting colleges that offer more than 350 programs to more

than 21,000 students.

This fine university has adapted, and to succeed in the 21st century,

you're going to have to adapt, as well. Your degree marks the

successful end of your undergraduate education, and when you leave this

university, you're going to enter a dynamic world and an economy that is

constantly creating new opportunities that will require you to learn new

skills. I urge you to rise to these challenges, take charge of your

future. Be open to new ideas. Be willing to take risks. Treat the

degree you receive today as the first step in a lifetime of learning,

and your lives will be rich in purpose and reward.

Your generation will face unprecedented choices because of technology.

When I was in college, we listened to music on 45 rpm records, as

opposed to the iPod. We used manual typewriters instead of the personal

computer. When we made a mistake while writing a paper, we didn't have

the luxury of SpellCheck. As a matter of fact, we used something that

maybe some of you have heard of -- it was big and bulky -- it's called a

dictionary. (Laughter.) Technology has helped improve almost every

aspect of your life on campus -- except maybe the cafeteria food.

(Laughter.)

Just as technology is making life better for college students, it's

making all of us more productive. If you take a job in an office, the

technology you use will make you more efficient than earlier

generations. If you decide to open a small business, technology can

help you lower your costs or reach more customers through the Internet.

If you're a farmer or a rancher, technology gives you instant access to

expert advice from specialists who may live thousands of miles away. By

helping each of us do our jobs better, technology is improving life for

all of us.

<p>

Some of the most exciting advances in technology you'll see will be in

the field of energy. When I graduated from school, cars drank gasoline.

Last month in California, I saw cars powered by hydrogen that use no

gasoline and emit no pollution. Within your lifetime, advances in

technology will make our air cleaner and our cars more efficient; the

gasoline engine will seem as antiquated as the rotary phone and the

black-and-white TV.

Technology holds promise for extending and improving our lives through

dramatic breakthroughs in the field of medicine. In recent times, we've

gone from X-rays to MRIs, from eyeglasses to laser eye surgery, from

major operations that would keep you in the hospital for weeks to

miracle drugs that can prevent the need for the operation in the first

place. In the decades ahead, you're going to witness incredible changes

in health care that will even be more revolutionary.

These advances in technology will transform lives -- and they will

present you with profound dilemmas. Science offers the prospect of

eventual cures for terrible diseases, and temptations to manipulate life

and violate human dignity. With the Internet, you can communicate

instantly with someone halfway across the world -- and isolate yourself

from your family and your neighbors. Your generation will have to

resolve these dilemmas. My advice is, harness the promise of technology

without becoming slaves to technology. My advice is, ensure that

science serves the cause of humanity, and not the other way around.

(Applause.)

Your generation will confront the challenges of a world that is now

at our doorsteps. When Oklahoma was settled in the late 19th century,

this was America's frontier. Now the whole world is within your reach.

You can email friends in Central America, or you can fly nonstop across

the Atlantic or Pacific, or you use your Bank of Oklahoma card and

withdraw money from an ATM in Australia. At the same time, we're seeing

the rise of new competitors like China and India, and this competition

creates uncertainty. Some look at the changes taking place all around

us and they worry about the future. Their reaction is to wall America

off from the world, and to retreat into protectionism. This is a sure

path to stagnation and decline. I ask you to reject this kind of

pessimism. (Applause.)

We should welcome competition, because it makes our country stronger and

more prosperous. Today the citizens of Oklahoma export wheat to Mexico,

or pork to Japan, or liquid pumps to Russia. For your generation, even

more opportunities will come from overseas. Government must help, but

it is up to you to take advantage of what you have learned here, and

meet the future with confidence in your ability to compete and succeed.

A country that shuts itself off from competition will be a country

that isolates itself from the duties and opportunities of our world.

One of the greatest opportunities of this young century is the advance

of human freedom. The advance of liberty is the story of our time, and

we're seeing new chapters written before our eyes. Freedom is taking

root in places where liberty was once unimaginable. Just 25 years ago,

there were only 45 democracies on the face of the Earth. Today, there

are 122 democracies, and more people now live in liberty than ever

before. The advance of liberty gives us hope in the future, because

free societies are peaceful societies. As freedom spreads, the threats

of tyranny and terror will recede, and the rise of democracy will bring

peace to the world and security to the United States America.

(Applause.)

No, this changing world presents you with a lot of exciting

opportunities. Yet a changing world also needs the anchor of

old-fashioned values and virtues, like courage and compassion. These

are the virtues that sustain our democracy and make self-government

possible. These virtues are what we'll need to build a more hopeful

future. And these virtues are present in the Oklahoma State Class of

2006. (Applause.)

We see these virtues in an extraordinary young woman named Melissa

Unwin. Melissa has been studying in your College of Education. Back in

2001, she was diagnosed with cancer, and the doctors doubted she would

ever finish college. If you know anything about educators, you know

that when they tell you -- when somebody tells them something is

impossible, they're going to work harder to prove you wrong. And that's

just what Melissa has done. The degree that Melissa has earned today is

an example of courage in the face of adversity, and she represents a

spirit necessary for your generation to succeed.

We see the spirit of compassion in the members of the Class of 2006

who've stepped forward to serve their community. As part of your "Into

the Streets" volunteer effort this past fall, one fraternity helped

build a playground at the local homeless shelter. They probably

realized it was better to help somebody else than go to the bar.

(Laughter.) Other members of your class traveled down the Gulf Coast

after Hurricane Katrina to help clean up debris, and deliver comfort and

relief. They didn't have to do that, but they felt the calling to go

help somebody in need.

I met seniors who have volunteered in a wide variety of ways, upon my

landing -- they build houses for the underprivileged and visit nursing

homes, and tutor fellow students. One of these volunteers says this

about her service: "I feel I've been very fortunate, and any way I can

help other people to have a house to live in, to have food on the table,

or even a clean yard means I'm making a difference."

We see the spirit of service in the members of the Class of 2006 who've

stepped forward to defend our freedom. In this graduating class, there

are 27 new lieutenants who are receiving their Army and Air Force

commissions along with their OSU degrees. (Applause.) They're carrying

on the proud tradition of service in uniform exemplified by an OSU

graduate named Luke James. After earning his commission at OSU in 2002,

Luke had the world at his feet; he had a wife and infant son that he

adored. Yet Luke had chosen a life of service, and in 2004, Second

Lieutenant Luke James, graduate of OSU, was deployed to Iraq as a member

of the Army's 82nd Airborne. Shortly after arriving in that country,

Luke was killed while leading his troops on patrol. He was awarded the

Bronze Star. He's buried at Arlington National Cemetery.

On the anniversary of her son's death, Luke's mom went to visit her

son's grave. And afterward, a young soldier came up to her and thanked

her for the way she had raised her son. He said that Lieutenant James

had saved his life. Luke's mom says this of her son's service: "All of

Luke's life, he was very dedicated to the concept of freedom. While no

soldier wants war, he understood the necessity of war, that it can

ensure the freedoms we enjoy in America." Luke James is part of a

generation who are every bit as selfless and dedicated to liberty as any

that has come before. And the future of the United States of America is

better because of the character of young Americans like Luke James.

(Applause.)

In this time of technological change and global competition,

ultimately the character of America will be determined by your

willingness to serve a cause larger than yourselves. The day will come

when you'll be asked, what have you done to build a better America than

the one you found. I'm confident that you will answer the call to

service. I'm confident that your lives will be more fulfilling, and

your country more hopeful. And I'm confident that you'll look back and

say, job well-done.

Congratulations to you all. May God bless you, Class of 2006. And

may God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

Thats because your prolly in the 28% percent area who thinks Bush is God and everyone else are sinners and should be damned........

[walker 0]

Hi All

One of the key factors causing the rift between The White House and the Office of the Vice President is Dodgy Dick Cheney's Flouting of Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) in an apparent violation of an executive order issued by President Bush. In the ISOO 2005 Annual Report to the President

http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/2005rpt.pdf

Dodgy Dick Cheney has refused to disclose data on his offices classification and declassification activity.

The full story is available in the Chicago Tribune:

Quote[/b] ]Originally posted: May 26, 2006

Cheney's secret classifications

Posted by Mark Silva at 2 pm CDT

The government slowed down somewhat last year in the classification of top secret and confidential information, and it also declassified slightly more documents than had been opened up the year before.

But the numbers still rank among record-levels: With 14 million decisions made last year to classify information, a slight decline from the 2004 record, and 29.5 million pages declassified last year -- far fewer than the 100 million pages declassified in 2001. And once again, Vice President Dick Cheney, who has refused to report on his office's classification activities since 2003, is missing from the count.

Despite an executive order signed by President Bush in 2003 requiring all agencies or “any other entity within the executive branch that comes into the possession of classified information’’ to report on its activities, the vice president’s office maintains that it has no legal obligation to report on its classification decisions.

Cheney’s office told the Chicago Tribune in an April report on the administration’s propensity for secrecy that it is under no duty to report this information. The vice president maintains that his office is not an agency, and is also unique in serving both an executive role and legislative role - the vice president is president of the Senate.

But monitors of government secrecy maintain that the vice president is flouting his own president’s authority in this matter.

“It undermines oversight of the classification system and reveals a disdain for presidential authority,’’ Steven Aftergood, director of the Project on Government Secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists, said today. “It’s part of a larger picture of disrespect that this vice president has shown for the norms of oversight and accountability.’’...

Follow link for the full story

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_th....t_.html

When this is combined with Dodgy Dick Cheney's new system of vetting all laws before they go to the President you can perhaps see why even stallwart republicans are aghast at what is seen by them as being a secret shadow government running America.

Quote[/b] ]Cheney aide is screening legislation

Adviser seeks to protect Bush power

By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff  |  May 28, 2006

WASHINGTON -- The office of Vice President Dick Cheney routinely reviews pieces of legislation before they reach the president's desk, searching for provisions that Cheney believes would infringe on presidential power, according to former White House and Justice Department officials.

The officials said Cheney's legal adviser and chief of staff, David Addington , is the Bush a dministration's leading architect of the ``signing statements" the president has appended to more than 750 laws. The statements assert the president's right to ignore the laws because they conflict with his interpretation of the Constitution.

The Bush-Cheney administration has used such statements to claim for itself the option of bypassing a ban on torture, oversight provisions in the USA Patriot Act, and numerous requirements that they provide certain information to Congress, among other laws.

Previous vice presidents have had neither the authority nor the interest in reviewing legislation. But Cheney has used his power over the administration's legal team to promote an expansive theory of presidential authority. Using signing statements, the administration has challenged more laws than all previous administrations combined.

``Addington could look at whatever he wanted," said one former White House lawyer who helped prepare signing statements and who asked not to be named because he was describing internal deliberations. ``He had a roving commission to get involved in whatever interested him."

Knowing that Addington was likely to review the bills, other White House and Justice Department lawyers began vetting legislation with Addington's and Cheney's views in mind, according to another former lawyer in the Bush White House.

All these lawyers, he said, were extremely careful to flag any provision that placed limits on presidential power.

``You didn't want to miss something," said the second former White House lawyer, who also asked not to be named.

Cheney and Addington have a long history. Addington was a Republican staff member on the congressional committee investigating the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980s, while Cheney was the ranking GOP House member. When Cheney became defense secretary under President George H. W. Bush , he hired Addington as Pentagon counsel.

After Cheney became vice president in 2001, he again hired Addington as counsel. Addington played a major role in shaping the administration's legal policies in the war on terrorism, including a 2002 memo arguing that Bush could authorize interrogators to bypass anti torture laws. In October, when Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis ``Scooter" Libby , was indicted for perjury and resigned, Cheney replaced Libby with Addington...

http://www.boston.com/news....slation Follow link for full story

This inevitably leads to the question voters considering voting republican must ask themselves:

"With an untrustworthy NeoConMan entryist group in control of the US Republican party, engaged in removing all oversight and safeguards over government, how can any one feel safe to vote republican?"

Kind Regards Walker

[Akira 0]

Two more journalists down and one critically wounded...71 in all.

Add to that 2400+ American soldiers.

Happy Memorial Day.

[Nemesis6 0]

Way to piss on Memorial Day, there.

[billybob2002 0]

Two more journalists down and one critically wounded...71 in all.

Add to that 2400+ American soldiers.

Happy Memorial Day.

You probably do not care how many active duty service personnel died from accidents and other non-hostile action during the period between 1980 and 2002. Just more politics I guess.

Anyway, "Happy" Memorial Day...

[Nemesis6 0]

Two more journalists down and one critically wounded...71 in all.

Add to that 2400+ American soldiers.

Happy Memorial Day.

You probably do not care how many active duty service personnel died from accidents and other non-hostile action during the period between 1980 and 2002. Just more politics I guess.

Anyway, "Happy" Memorial Day...

I thought about mentioning that, but you said it. He doesn't care.

Speaking of soldier killed in Iraq, here's one from one of the soldiers who died there. He died because of an accident -

Beaupre, 30, of Bloomington, Ill., was killed March 20 in a helicopter crash in Kuwait. Here's his letter -

Quote[/b] ]Mom & Dad,

Well if you are reading this, then things didn't go well for me over in Iraq. I'm sorry for the pain that I have caused you because of this. Please do not be upset with the Marine Corps, the military, the government, or the President. It was my choice to go into the military. The President and my higher commanders were just doing what they thought was best. Realize that I died doing something that I truly love, and for a purpose greater than myself. There is a paragraph that I read from time to time when I lose focus. "War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself." John Stewart Mill Now there is a little Marine Corps bravado in there, but I do believe in the basic premise. I want you to know that I could not have asked for better parents, or a better family. ..... I'll never forget that one of my friends in elementary school said that if he could trade places with one person, he'd trade places with me because of my parents and home life. I truly feel that I've had a blessed life thanks to you two. Please give my love to Alyse & Ryan, Kari & Matt & the girls, Chris & Brandy, and everyone else in the family.

All my love,

Ryan

This man, among many, should be commemorated.

There are more available here.

[shinRaiden 0]

Alrighty, you want to hijack Memorial Day, try this Jihad on for size.

CBS news about CBS News

Quote[/b] ]

Two members of a CBS News team, veteran cameraman Paul Douglas, 48, and soundman James Brolan, 42, were killed and correspondent Kimberly Dozier, 39, was seriously injured Monday when the U.S. Army unit in which they were embedded was attacked.

A U.S. soldier was also killed in the attack, and six others were wounded.

Dozier was in critical condition at a U.S. military hospital in Baghdad and underwent two surgeries for injuries from the bombing. Doctors successfully removed shrapnel from Dozier's head but her more serious injuries are to her lower body, reports CBS News correspondent David Martin.

The CBS crew was on a patrol with the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, when their convoy was hit. They were reporting a "routine" story, covering American troops for Memorial Day. The trio was only planning to be out for a few hours, in order to get back to the CBS Baghdad bureau in time to edit their piece.

Dozier, Douglas and Brolan got out of their armored vehicle in the Karada neighborhood of Baghdad when the U.S. troops they accompanied stopped to inspect a checkpoint manned by the Iraqi army. That's when a nearby car packed with explosives detonated. Douglas and Brolan died at the scene.

Paragraph one : The holy establishment of progressive journalism embodied in the venerable mantle of CBS was viciously attacked by indirect agents of TB/BA.

Paragraph two : Anonymous collateral damage of marginal note other than numerical reference for future statistical exploitation by the enlightened media.

Paragraph three : Only medical status of enlightened media personel is relevant, medical status of anonymous collateral damage is irrelevant to the target audience.

Paragraph four : Beg pardon, but since when is combat routine? We know the news is manufactured, but when the automations assume their little artifical constructed reality is reality then we get the problems we have now.

Paragraph five : A lot of good their private body armor and the possibly uparmored vehicle did for them dismounted. Let's see them hang a body/vehicle armor story off this one.

CBS Statement

Quote[/b] ]"This is a devastating loss for CBS News," said Sean McManus, President, CBS News and Sports.

I'm sure it is. How about you start with "This is a devastating loss for their families"? So the first item of concern is for your own business affairs? That's noblely considerate of you thank you very much.

Quote[/b] ]"Kimberly, Paul and James were veterans of war coverage who proved their bravery and dedication every single day.

... who happened to be tagging along with real veterans who go out in front and earn their honor in service every day for a lot longer than the media does.

Quote[/b] ]They always volunteered for dangerous assignments and were invaluable in our attempt to report the news to the American public.

Reporting is nice and all, but the Prime Directive has done as much harm or more than it has done good. Those who do something rather than just observe it imho earn the greater commendation.

Quote[/b] ]Our deepest sympathy goes out to the families of Paul and James,

Ok, now we get to the pertinent concerns

Quote[/b] ]and we are hoping and praying for a complete recovery by Kimberly.

BWAH-BWAH-BWAH!!!111 Radical Right-Wing fundamentalist religion alert!!!111 We can't have public mention of prayer since that philosophically upsets the balance of rational reason and fairness, plus we all know GWB has sold his soul to the devil since that's what we want to believe, oops, there's faith raising its ugly little head again.

Quote[/b] ]Countless men and women put their lives on the line, day in and day out, in Iraq and other dangerous spots around the world, and they deserve our utmost respect and gratitude for the work they do."

The last friggin line in the statement. Shows where their priorities are.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

I may be Aussie, but I know a damning comment when I see one. That ShinRaiden packs a punch.  

I've just got to say I'm a huge fan of the US military, and I don't like how those brave lads and ladies cop flak from an uncaring and unknowledgable media.

[ralphwiggum 6]

[herman01 0]

Nobody cares of all the Iraqis that have died due to the U.S. goverments decision to go to war. Oh well we don't have time to think of those people do we. They realy dont matter. For those who try diminish the value of those lost in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Remember that we did go to war over the deaths of over three thousand Americans and one county which had nothing to do with that event.

P.S. Ive served two tours in Iraq and in my opinion which is not blinded by nationlist idealogy is the fact that jounalist do more to defend my freedoms than I do. They are the only ones who can keep goverments in check. But I guess if you believe the elite politicians really care about us so much you can just keep on believing it. Its so easy to be an idiot to make a punching bag out the media. Its the oldest trick in the book of attacking the messenger. The truth is that there is huge disconnect in between the regular Iraqis and coalition forces and there has been no media outlet to cover this becuase it is so dangerous and many have died by both insurgent and coalition forces trying to do this.

[CameronMcDonald 146]

Woah, my bad. Remind me to read 153 pages worth of posts before I jump in, next time, eh?

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]He died because of an accident -

Beaupre, 30, of Bloomington, Ill., was killed March 20 in a helicopter crash in Kuwait. Here's his letter -

You certainly know that those letters are often written before troops arrive in the combat region, right ? You certainly do also know that the letters are crosschecked by your superiors and if the soldier himself is somewhat incapable of writing such letter he gets generous assistance by superiors aswell.

To bad not every innocent Iraqui who got shot, bombed, or pulverized by coalition forces got the chance to leave such letter.

They are the winners by number when it comes to blood...

Quote[/b] ]Alrighty, you want to hijack Memorial Day, try this Jihad on for size.

*snip nonsense*

It will be interesting for you what the person in question had to say before she found herself at the IED spot:

'Going to Iraq is like being flung into a pot of boiling water'

Quote[/b] ]Kimberley Dozier was seriously injured in a bombing in Iraq yesterday. Here, in an article from January, she describes how she faced the dangers of her beat

YOU know how they say a frog will let itself be boiled alive, sitting placidly in a pot of bubbling water, if you turn the heat up slowly enough? That used to be what Iraq was like for journalists. Over the past 2Ë years, the danger increased incrementally, with kidnappings, killings and bombings first hitting Iraqis, then soldiers, then contractors, missionaries and aid workers, before finally hitting us.

It took us a while to admit we were targets, and start to change the way we work — adding bodyguards, armoured vehicles, blast walls outside our hotels, and so on. But now going into Iraq is like being flung into a pot of water you can see boiling from a great height from far away. Inwardly, you’re screaming, “Arghh,†then you stifle it with a mental “Ulp.â€

Every time before I fly in I sleep with one eyeball peeled, staring at the alarm clock, counting the minutes until the plane takes off. Then I half-hold my breath until our plane touches the tarmac. Then there’s another slight breath-holding experience driving down the Airport Road, before finally arriving at our hotel.

My mood instantly changes. I see our Iraqi staff and some of the regular CBS “inmatesâ€, the translators make fun of how much my Arabic has deteriorated, we knock back strong coffee, and I get to work. There are always a couple of startled moments, when a distant or nearby bomb makes me jump. But I quickly forget where I am (or rather, that it bothered me).

The water’s toasty, verging on the scalding, but I’m fine.

That is, until I get myself and a cameraman, soundman and perhaps a producer invited on a trip across town with the US military, just like our ABC colleagues Bob Woodruff and Doug Vogt did [they were severely injured in an attack].

Then it starts all over again — the eyeball glued to the clock all night. Then there’s the armoured car dash to our meeting point with the military (which often entails a round trip down the Airport Road, and you just know the insurgents know our cars by now,that they see us from their hiding places and say to themselves, “Oh, there go the Western TV journalists. We could go for them, but let’s see if we can get a Humvee instead.â€) Sometimes, the soldiers like to give journalists a hard time, saying things like, “Ma’am, if we’re hit by a bomb and we all get taken out, here’s how you operate the Humvee radio to call for help.†Thanks, guys.

But if you want to tell their story, you have to take their risks. If we, the journalists, are sitting in hot water, the troops are hopping around on Hell’s coals. It’s even worse for the Iraqi army and police. And then you’ve got the Iraqi people, who are not restricted to tours of duty and have no ticket out.

So yes, absolutely, journalists face awful, dangerous risks in Iraq. But it’s nothing compared to the people we cover.

Barking backwards now Shin ?

[shinRaiden 0]

Same page as Bals :

Quote[/b] ]...Here, in an article from January, she describes how she faced the dangers of her beat...

The point is that the comments I quoted are the immediate response of CBS News the media organization in relation to the attack. Your link is a file piece from several months ago not in relation to this specific attack and it's aftermath.

Furthermore, the article you cite shows that contrary to the impression from CBS's statement, the embedded journalists are well aware of there being more of a story than just themselves.

See the problem I was jabbing at as posted by Akira is that journalists being collateral damage in an attack on the US Military was the news item, and the status of the military personel involved was marginalized as an anonymous footnote. Based of off other embedded reports, I imagine that when she recovers Ms. Dozier will have far more to comment about those soldiers that she was with than her editors cared to elaborate on.

Now getting to real victims that are neglected and manipulated by all sides. First off CBS made no mention up or down as to the status of the Iraqi Army soldiers manning the checkpoint they were visiting. CBS made no mention of any civilian casualties immeditate to the bombing. CBS made no mention of the economic damage to people's livelyhood from the adjacent destoryed cars and whatever it was that we don't know about since it wasn't reported since the only news that mattered is that CBS is down two and a half reporters.

So first off, the MSM management has thrown any sense of objectivity out the window in their Entertainment Media focus, as it's evident that their priority is to report on themselves first, saleable news second, and real life is the filler for when they're getting clobbered in ratings at 2am sunday morning.

Akira started this topic branch here, he made no mention of Iraqi civilian relevance. I gave him a piece of my mind in response. Then you and Herman come along after the fact and try to write the civilians into the story, which CBS themselves never put in there in the first place. It's bad enough that too often their only recourse for their suffering is to say "Inshallah", but being exploited by both sides here adds insult to injury.

The hypocrisy is that those in support of the decision to go to war, and those opposed, both seek to exploit assumptions about the Iraqi civilians, and often don't admit to themselves of those purposes. You look at the indeterminate casualty counts and property damage and extrapolate it as evidence for your cause. I likewise in return. In chess that's making a stalemate. And CBS on the side is playing solitare. And what happens is the political manipulation on the right, and the media manipulation on the left, results in the deliberate lemmingization of the populace. I could go on and theorize that the evil intent is actually the fracturing of the populace rather than the homogenization, but that's a topic for discussion another day.

Now herman, the media can go both ways. They can build empires as well as destroy them. The press of Gutenberg printed Luther's theses as well as Goebbel's propaganda. To quote the esteemed journalist Peter Parker, "With great power comes great responsiblity." And I think you're wrong re 9/11 -> Iraq, but that's a philosophical arguement thats undebatable by both sides as it delves into unnegotiable dogma. Chew on this though, the truth is so bastardized by all sides that generally is whatever it's reported to be.

[herman01 0]

Im without doubt that the story of CBS crew getting killed would draw more attention anyways. When soilders die in Iraq it always gets very little attention anyways becuase people are now numb to the news and it really doesent grab their attention. To include shins comment about goebbels propaganda, what do thing Rupert Murduchs empire is up to(which he is now courting Hillary Clinton becuase her strong chance to win the 2008 election, who I dislike Hillary very much also). Shin you also have a strongly biased and nationlistic point of view. How many more CIA people would have to come out saying that the country mislead to war in Iraq by the adminstration. I mean all you have do is label anybody who says the adminstraton did this is a partisan idealog. I have no hidden motives in my caring for the Iraqi people. I've seen all the destruction done firsthand and as human I care. Their people to me not just crazy muslims like many of my fellow country men see them. We haved a damned if we do and damned if we dont situation in Iraq. We leave chaos will overcome the weak central goverment, and we stay the indigenous will hate us more and more everyday.

[shinRaiden 0]

I said nothing at all in the last two comments about my personal inclinations one way or another in regards to your Vast Right Wing Conspiracy bogeyman, I was solely pointing out the damning myopias of the assumed objective media.

You're right that it's not news when a soldier dies or is wounded, and in all fairness the media has been quite generous in not distinguishing between combat and non-combat casualties. That's not right at all, I guess you couldn't see through my cynical sarcasm. Nor do I want it to be turned around and only reporting the soldiers, or just the Iraqis. Any one of those is only part of the story. What I was castigating was the assumption evidenced in the editing that the narrow sliver was the only story, or the only relevant one.

Your comment about Rupert Murdoch just furthers my point about the commercial media. He's a stereotypical capitalist in the socialist mindset, in that it's all about the bottom line profit margin for him. That's especially evident in his UK media dealings. In the US, he saw an economic opportunity to commercially exploit the significant demographic that was unsatisfied with the liberal MSM. That's what the Fox system is, look at their movies, tv networks, radio networks, and so on. It's merely an apolitical commercial enterprise.

Conversely on the other hand, the refusal of the MSM to comparatively balance their content with all sides further indicates their political agendas. Fox is too grandstandingly commericalized for me, and the MSM is to politically liberal as well.

Of course I have my biases, the point though is that I admit that I have them and explain the differences between proven historical events, interpretations, and policy analysis from them.

CIA people can say that Bush did it, that Clinton appointees did it, or that Space Aliens are to blame. The point is that it's all hearsay and uncorroborated without the evidence to back it up. External analysts can be cherrypicked to corroborate anything, the difference though is that they in no way reflect the intelligence assests, capabilities, or Official Position of the State of the United States of America. Just the other day there was one report suggesting that Russia hauled Iraq's nukes to Syria just so that they could make the US look bad. This is balanced by sworn testimony in court that Saddam's alleged victims are alive and quite well and the US has bribed the courts. If they've got any brains about them and were in a cleared position to know something, they'll remember that they're not supposed to talk to Joe Public about their matters. It's like Nuclear Diplomacy, if you say you have nukes that sets a precedent, likewise if you say you don't that's a precedent. But if you say "no comment" that officially closes the topic for discussion.

The fact of the matter is though that willful public discussion of classified matters involves a significant breach of protocol. Because of that, it's imperative that it be analyzed in a suitable fashion. On one hand the arguement as in the the ATT/NSA case is that it needs to be in the court of public opinion, the other arguement is that it must be behind closed doors, as evidenced by the ranking liberal Democrat members of the Select Commitees for Intelligence continue to stand by their decisions without comment. They argue on and on about the public matters, but they clam up in regards to the truely classified discussions. As you can see, there's an intractable impasse between those two positions, the resolution of which is both vital and delicate.

If on one hand you have a classified hearing to review classified content and events and their veracity, then that will not appease the demands for public justice no matter what, because there will be no explanations or 'democratic accountability'. On the other hand, with the mechanisms that have been established for the institutionalization of State Security matters, either those mechanisms would have to be undo or ignored, with complex legal entanglements of either chicken and egg scenarios, or the risk of further systemic legal ambivelence. It's not nearly the simple cut and dry issue that people would wish it to be.

[herman01 0]

The CIA officials are not of appoitee levels like George Tennet(who was awarded by Bush) and many of them served under the supervison of Bush Sr. They just love their country as I do and care. The CIA had such large fall out due the fact that these professionals knew how everthing was cherrypicked and when the Adminstration used the CIA as a punching bag it just added insult to injury to them. Once again you just try to neutralize these individuals as disgruntled partisans so you dont have to consider them in. Fox News is a propaganda source for this adminstration. That should be as clear as day. Adminstration officials almost exclusivly do their interviews on Fox News. I used to share almost the same views as you Shin and you obiviously a very intellgent person. I my views just have completly changed after serving in Iraq. Im not disgruntled either, I chose to re-enlist and I proud to serve and I think I can help soilders in a way that somebody else might not be able to. I just wish I could serve in a meaningful mission.

[miles teg 1]

ShinRaiden, while that was a long and well-worded response, it has little to do with Herman's statement as to an important role that an independent media is supposed to fulfill (keeping an eye out for government abuses at all levels of government). Granted the media is losing that independence due to monopolization of the media and ties to government affiliated industries, however at times they really do their jobs well in the American media at least. Essentially the American media is a mixed bag.

I personally have massive respect for Herman as he is lucky enough not to have gone through his Iraq experience without developing hatred for Iraqis and Muslims and without losing his critical thinking skills (skills that are important for a soldier but that often are lost in a military "YES SIR!" culture). While I was fortunate enough not to experience combat, I am also ex-military so likewise I understand the military point of view and the dangers and ethical challenges that soldiers face in Iraq.

To Herman: You seem like you have the rare ability to see both sides of this conflict. I would HIGHLY recommend that you might possibly use those skills to become a conflict anthropologist with a speciality in Middle East conflicts. That is what I do. I would be very interested in hearing more about your experiences in Iraq especially concerning the mindset of the Iraqis you met. Like you said, its incredibly difficult to find out this information due to the danger there to journalists roaming around on their own.

If you are interested I can also send you a proposal for non-violent alternative methods of counter-terrorism that I've been shopping around. Just PM me if you're interested.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[shinRaiden 0]

While in general the practice of public disclosure whistleblowing is ethically acceptable, I don't think we've got a sufficent grasp of what impact it has in cases where National Security is assumed. Note that I'm not advocating pro or con, I'm saying that it's a different and delicate can of worms.

A lot of our legal foundation is built on the assumption of implicit adherence to the rule of law, and when there's violation of law the resolution is in an orderly lawful manner. The complicating factor involving intelligence though is the premise assumes that the material in dispute is not available for public purview, and if it is, it is by attempting to resolve an illegal matter with an illegal action, rather than a legal one. The notion of State Secrets is derived from old English Law, and I don't know what kind of impact pervasive disregard for the formality of the legal process that this attitude would hold.

Workplace morale is not an excuse for tossing around classified materials. Neither is political disgruntlement. What I'd rather see would be something like an ombudsman that reports to the House and Senate Select Committees on Intelligence, independent of the Executive Branch, that could review complaints about abuses or misstatements in a secure manner. This would provide both recourse and security. In the case of other concerns about potential illegal abuses of power, Congress has the proven oversight capability in the case of Patriot Act review, Borders and Immigration control, and targeted international phone wiretaps. This oversight capability is exercisable in a secure and classified environment outside the public purview. If the notion of the heavily classified state is undemocratic, then there are legal recourses for changing that. Disregarding the legal options for vigilantism is hardly a socially harmoniously practical option.

At any rate, Joe Q Public is not privy to the actual raw data or interpretations that formed the basis of the intelligence leading to the Iraq situation. Therefore, commentary remains speculative hearsay in either direction. Person A says blah, Person B says blah, all we have is their statements. We have no proof of their credibility or relevance of their statements.

Furthermore, we can armchair quarterback in retrospect, but it's extremely difficult to roll back the clock and determine what precisely was known and assumed at a given time. To add to that is the assumption of probability. You can even make the arguement that a missle launch from central Iran resulting in a nuclear explosion is not proof that Iran has nukes and missles. Now the the probability may be varied between before and after the event, but it's not perfect. There's some chance it's inaccurate.

That's the political gamble in intelligence. Ultimately there is no perfect intelligence, you have to take a risk on what seems to be the most reliable, and what involves the best outcome. Furthermore, this game is left up to mere mortals, so there's a risk they may be wrong. Right or wrong though, there's an inherent catch 22, in that they can't admit to being right or wrong because that then reflects on what they knew and when they knew it, which is reflective of means and capabilities.

Going back to the top here, there's the allegations that reports were cherry-picked to create artifical Intelligence. The only way to prove that is to analyze all the material presented and available, and correlate that with recorded administrative decisions, and corroborate that with real facts, not just observed facts. By that I mean to know what's really inside Saddam's mind, not just what has been seen out in the sand. It's like the philosophical logic puzzle, "which is harder, to prove God exists or to prove God doesn't exist". Same with WMD's, "which is harder, to prove there were WMD's, or if there never were WMD's".

Fox News is no more a propaganda mill than is CBS. I thought I made it clear that they are a commercial enterprise, with their primary focus of economically exploiting a market ignored by their commercial competition. It makes no sense for the Administration to hope that CBS would be a sympathetic medium for broadcasting their message. The fallacy is assuming that Fox or CBS is an astute and honorable beacon of independent journalsim. Neither is, they're both commercial hack's. The danger now is that with the MSM running off one way, and Fox the other, nobody is giving an objective reporting of "just the facts". What is reported is CBS's spin, or Fox's spin, and not the underlying data. Hence this whole arguement, started by CBS reporting on CBS, and marginalizing the related underlying stories.

Resolving this problem is far more difficult than the security problem. Reports suggest that traditional media sources such as newspapers and TV and radio are declining rapidly, and I'm not certain that they're being wholely replaced with alternate or new media. If they are, it is with hyper-abbreviated RSS feed headlines at best, or very narrowly focused topical blogs. This suggests a growing ambivelence towards the media establishment of either end of the spectrum. Fox's assumed success I think is due to a previously under-exploited market, not a 'new' market. There's a significant distinction there.

For me I aggregate the news in my head. I look at a cross-spectrum of a variety of media reports, and try to glean as much as possible the underlying data and develop my own conclusions. The two problems with that though is 1) there's probably stuff out there that I don't know I don't know; and 2) that's more effort and time than could be pessimisticly assumed from the general public.

[miles teg 1]

ShinRaiden, are you responding to me?  If so again you missed the point and wasted alot of time writing.  A massacre of civilians and other such war attrocities has NOTHING to do with national security other then conducting a cover-up in the belief that it will shield the American public from the ugliness of some of our military actions and thus help keep American public support for the war going.  In the Middle East, such attrocities are already taken for granted as they are readily reported by their local media.  In other words, they can keep trying to cover up such incidents, but they can't keep such incidents from the Arab media and these coverups just keep making our situation there worse and worse.

As for playing armchair quarterback,  you don't need to work in intelligence or even go to college for that matter to learn a tremendous amount about whats going on in Iraq if you use the internet to chat with Iraqis and pay attention to the English translations of some of the Arab newspapers.  You can also learn a tremendous amount about the perceptions, attitudes, and beliefs of Muslims by spending time on Islamic forums, chat rooms, or hanging around your local Islamic community. It just takes a little extra time and motivation.  Heck you don't even need to speak Arabic as there's tons of Arabs and non-Arab Muslims online that speak fairly good English.  

Most Americans sadly however are not willing to do that.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[EiZei 0]

Apart from looking at the calendar there's one sure way to tell it's an election year in the US..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5044428.stm

Quote[/b] ]

Bush calls for gay marriage ban

Mr Bush criticised rulings on the issue by "activist courts"

US President George W Bush has called for a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages.

Mr Bush used his weekly radio address to deliver a plea for the US Senate to formally define marriage as the union of man and woman.

He said the measure was needed because "activist courts" left no alternative.

An amendment stands little chance of being passed but analysts say Republicans see the issue as a vote winner in November's mid-term polls.

They say the president is seeking to switch the spotlight onto positive issues for his party in the wake of his slumping popularity - particularly over Iraq.

Wonder if they truly want it passed, no more pandering to the wackos and the log cabin types would find lying to themselves even harder.

[Balschoiw 0]

What´s the fuss about it anyway ?

If they want to marry, why not ?

We are in the 21st century, right ?