Democrats Abroad New Zealand
12.31.2005
Heck of a Job, Bushie (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 30, 2005
A year ago, everyone expected President Bush to get his way on Social Security. Pundits warned Democrats that they were making a big political mistake by opposing plans to divert payroll taxes into private accounts.
A year ago, everyone thought Congress would make Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent, in spite of projections showing that doing so would lead to budget deficits as far as the eye can see. But Congress hasn't acted, and most of the cuts are still scheduled to expire by the end of 2010.
A year ago, Mr. Bush made many Americans feel safe, because they believed that he would be decisive and effective in an emergency. But Mr. Bush was apparently oblivious to the first major domestic emergency since 9/11. According to Newsweek, aides to Mr. Bush finally decided, days after Hurricane Katrina struck, that they had to show him a DVD of TV newscasts to get him to appreciate the seriousness of the situation.
A year ago, before "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" became a national punch line, the rising tide of cronyism in government agencies and the rapid replacement of competent professionals with unqualified political appointees attracted hardly any national attention.
A year ago, hardly anyone outside Washington had heard of Jack Abramoff, and Tom DeLay's position as House majority leader seemed unassailable.
A year ago, Dick Cheney, who repeatedly cited discredited evidence linking Saddam to 9/11, and promised that invading Americans would be welcomed as liberators - although he hadn't yet declared that the Iraq insurgency was in its "last throes" - was widely admired for his "gravitas."
A year ago, Howard Dean - who was among the very few prominent figures to question Colin Powell's prewar presentation to the United Nations, and who warned, while hawks were still celebrating the fall of Baghdad, that the occupation of Iraq would be much more difficult than the initial invasion - was considered flaky and unsound.
(More ... Heck of a Job, Bushie - New York Times) ¶ 11:03 0 comments
Published: December 30, 2005
A year ago, everyone expected President Bush to get his way on Social Security. Pundits warned Democrats that they were making a big political mistake by opposing plans to divert payroll taxes into private accounts.
A year ago, everyone thought Congress would make Mr. Bush's tax cuts permanent, in spite of projections showing that doing so would lead to budget deficits as far as the eye can see. But Congress hasn't acted, and most of the cuts are still scheduled to expire by the end of 2010.
A year ago, Mr. Bush made many Americans feel safe, because they believed that he would be decisive and effective in an emergency. But Mr. Bush was apparently oblivious to the first major domestic emergency since 9/11. According to Newsweek, aides to Mr. Bush finally decided, days after Hurricane Katrina struck, that they had to show him a DVD of TV newscasts to get him to appreciate the seriousness of the situation.
A year ago, before "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job" became a national punch line, the rising tide of cronyism in government agencies and the rapid replacement of competent professionals with unqualified political appointees attracted hardly any national attention.
A year ago, hardly anyone outside Washington had heard of Jack Abramoff, and Tom DeLay's position as House majority leader seemed unassailable.
A year ago, Dick Cheney, who repeatedly cited discredited evidence linking Saddam to 9/11, and promised that invading Americans would be welcomed as liberators - although he hadn't yet declared that the Iraq insurgency was in its "last throes" - was widely admired for his "gravitas."
A year ago, Howard Dean - who was among the very few prominent figures to question Colin Powell's prewar presentation to the United Nations, and who warned, while hawks were still celebrating the fall of Baghdad, that the occupation of Iraq would be much more difficult than the initial invasion - was considered flaky and unsound.
(More ... Heck of a Job, Bushie - New York Times) ¶ 11:03 0 comments
12.30.2005
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US intelligence service bugged website visitors despite ban
· Agency apologises for use of 'cookie' tracking files
· Exposure adds to pressure over White House powers
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Friday December 30, 2005
The Guardian
The intelligence service at the centre of the row over eavesdropping tracked visitors to its website, despite US government regulations. Monitoring files, known as "cookies", were discovered by a privacy activist at a time when the White House is on the defensive about its use of the National Security Agency to monitor the communications of US citizens.
Although the cookies were dismantled this week and the NSA issued an apology on Wednesday, the episode will add to pressure on the White House to engage in a national debate about its use of the agency, and its interpretation of the constitutional limits on George Bush's presidential powers.
The chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, Arlen Specter, confirmed this week that he intends to conduct hearings into President Bush's secret order in 2002 authorising the NSA to conduct email and telephone surveillance of US citizens without a court warrant. The hearings are expected to get under way next month.
"There likely will be a national debate about whether the president really has the kind of power he's been using," Mr Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, told reporters.
In a posting on his googlewatch.org website a privacy activist, Daniel Brandt, says he discovered that the NSA was using tracking devices when he logged on to the agency website on Christmas Day. He found the site was using two persistent cookies that would not expire until 2035, well beyond the life of most computers.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US intelligence service bugged website visitors despite ban) ¶ 22:09 0 comments
· Exposure adds to pressure over White House powers
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Friday December 30, 2005
The Guardian
The intelligence service at the centre of the row over eavesdropping tracked visitors to its website, despite US government regulations. Monitoring files, known as "cookies", were discovered by a privacy activist at a time when the White House is on the defensive about its use of the National Security Agency to monitor the communications of US citizens.
Although the cookies were dismantled this week and the NSA issued an apology on Wednesday, the episode will add to pressure on the White House to engage in a national debate about its use of the agency, and its interpretation of the constitutional limits on George Bush's presidential powers.
The chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, Arlen Specter, confirmed this week that he intends to conduct hearings into President Bush's secret order in 2002 authorising the NSA to conduct email and telephone surveillance of US citizens without a court warrant. The hearings are expected to get under way next month.
"There likely will be a national debate about whether the president really has the kind of power he's been using," Mr Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, told reporters.
In a posting on his googlewatch.org website a privacy activist, Daniel Brandt, says he discovered that the NSA was using tracking devices when he logged on to the agency website on Christmas Day. He found the site was using two persistent cookies that would not expire until 2035, well beyond the life of most computers.
(More ... Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | US intelligence service bugged website visitors despite ban) ¶ 22:09 0 comments
Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor (WashingtonPost.com)
Anti-Terror Effort Continues to Grow
By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 30, 2005; Page A01
The effort President Bush authorized shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, to fight al Qaeda has grown into the largest CIA covert action program since the height of the Cold War, expanding in size and ambition despite a growing outcry at home and abroad over its clandestine tactics, according to former and current intelligence officials and congressional and administration sources.
The broad-based effort, known within the agency by the initials GST, is compartmentalized into dozens of highly classified individual programs, details of which are known mainly to those directly involved.
GST includes programs allowing the CIA to capture al Qaeda suspects with help from foreign intelligence services, to maintain secret prisons abroad, to use interrogation techniques that some lawyers say violate international treaties, and to maintain a fleet of aircraft to move detainees around the globe. Other compartments within GST give the CIA enhanced ability to mine international financial records and eavesdrop on suspects anywhere in the world.
Over the past two years, as aspects of this umbrella effort have burst into public view, the revelations have prompted protests and official investigations in countries that work with the United States, as well as condemnation by international human rights activists and criticism by members of Congress.
Still, virtually all the programs continue to operate largely as they were set up, according to current and former officials. These sources say Bush's personal commitment to maintaining the GST program and his belief in its legality have been key to resisting any pressure to change course.
"In the past, presidents set up buffers to distance themselves from covert action," said A. John Radsan, assistant general counsel at the CIA from 2002 to 2004. "But this president, who is breaking down the boundaries between covert action and conventional war, seems to relish the secret findings and the dirty details of operations."
(More ... Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor) ¶ 20:23 184 comments
By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 30, 2005; Page A01
The effort President Bush authorized shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, to fight al Qaeda has grown into the largest CIA covert action program since the height of the Cold War, expanding in size and ambition despite a growing outcry at home and abroad over its clandestine tactics, according to former and current intelligence officials and congressional and administration sources.
The broad-based effort, known within the agency by the initials GST, is compartmentalized into dozens of highly classified individual programs, details of which are known mainly to those directly involved.
GST includes programs allowing the CIA to capture al Qaeda suspects with help from foreign intelligence services, to maintain secret prisons abroad, to use interrogation techniques that some lawyers say violate international treaties, and to maintain a fleet of aircraft to move detainees around the globe. Other compartments within GST give the CIA enhanced ability to mine international financial records and eavesdrop on suspects anywhere in the world.
Over the past two years, as aspects of this umbrella effort have burst into public view, the revelations have prompted protests and official investigations in countries that work with the United States, as well as condemnation by international human rights activists and criticism by members of Congress.
Still, virtually all the programs continue to operate largely as they were set up, according to current and former officials. These sources say Bush's personal commitment to maintaining the GST program and his belief in its legality have been key to resisting any pressure to change course.
"In the past, presidents set up buffers to distance themselves from covert action," said A. John Radsan, assistant general counsel at the CIA from 2002 to 2004. "But this president, who is breaking down the boundaries between covert action and conventional war, seems to relish the secret findings and the dirty details of operations."
(More ... Covert CIA Program Withstands New Furor) ¶ 20:23 184 comments
His Car Smelling Like French Fries, Willie Nelson Sells Biodiesel (NYTimes.com)
By DANNY HAKIM
Published: December 30, 2005
Willie Nelson drives a Mercedes.
But do not lose faith, true believers. The exhaust from Mr. Nelson's diesel-powered Mercedes smells like peanuts, or French fries, or whatever alternative fuel happens to be in his tank.
While Bono tries to change the world by hobnobbing with politicians and Sir Bob Geldof plays host to his mega-benefit concerts, Willie Nelson has birthed his own brand of alternative fuel. It is called, fittingly enough, BioWillie. And in BioWillie, Mr. Nelson, 72, has blended two of his biggest concerns: his love of family farmers and disdain for the Iraq war.
BioWillie is a type of biodiesel, a fuel that can be made from any number of crops and run in a normal diesel engine. If it sounds like a joke, a number of businesses, as well as city and state and county governments, have been switching their transportation fleets to biodiesel blends over the last year. The rationale is that it is a domestic fuel that can provide profit to farmers and that it will help the environment, though environmentalists are not universally enthusiastic about it.
"I knew we needed to have something that would keep us from being so dependent on foreign oil, and when I heard about biodiesel, a light come on, and I said, 'Hey, here's the future for the farmers, the future for the environment, the future for the truckers," Mr. Nelson said in an interview this month. "It seems like that's good for the whole world if we can start growing our own fuel instead of starting wars over it."
In some ways, it is a return to the origins of the diesel engine; some of Rudolf Diesel's first engines ran on peanut oil more than a century ago.
(More ... His Car Smelling Like French Fries, Willie Nelson Sells Biodiesel - New York Times) ¶ 19:34 0 comments
Published: December 30, 2005
Willie Nelson drives a Mercedes.
But do not lose faith, true believers. The exhaust from Mr. Nelson's diesel-powered Mercedes smells like peanuts, or French fries, or whatever alternative fuel happens to be in his tank.
While Bono tries to change the world by hobnobbing with politicians and Sir Bob Geldof plays host to his mega-benefit concerts, Willie Nelson has birthed his own brand of alternative fuel. It is called, fittingly enough, BioWillie. And in BioWillie, Mr. Nelson, 72, has blended two of his biggest concerns: his love of family farmers and disdain for the Iraq war.
BioWillie is a type of biodiesel, a fuel that can be made from any number of crops and run in a normal diesel engine. If it sounds like a joke, a number of businesses, as well as city and state and county governments, have been switching their transportation fleets to biodiesel blends over the last year. The rationale is that it is a domestic fuel that can provide profit to farmers and that it will help the environment, though environmentalists are not universally enthusiastic about it.
"I knew we needed to have something that would keep us from being so dependent on foreign oil, and when I heard about biodiesel, a light come on, and I said, 'Hey, here's the future for the farmers, the future for the environment, the future for the truckers," Mr. Nelson said in an interview this month. "It seems like that's good for the whole world if we can start growing our own fuel instead of starting wars over it."
In some ways, it is a return to the origins of the diesel engine; some of Rudolf Diesel's first engines ran on peanut oil more than a century ago.
(More ... His Car Smelling Like French Fries, Willie Nelson Sells Biodiesel - New York Times) ¶ 19:34 0 comments
Prisoners Move Begun by Clinton, Says Agent (SMH.com.au)
December 30, 2005
The CIA's controversial program of having terrorist suspects captured and questioned on foreign soil began under President Bill Clinton, a former US agent says.
Michael Scheuer, a 22-year veteran of the CIA who resigned last year, told yesterday's issue of the German newspaper Die Zeit that the US administration had been looking in the mid-1990s for a way to combat the terrorist threat and circumvent the cumbersome US legal system.
"President Clinton, his national security adviser Sandy Berger and his terrorism adviser Richard Clark ordered the CIA in the autumn of 1995 to destroy al-Qaeda," the newspaper quoted Mr Scheuer as saying.
"We asked the president what we should do with the people we capture. Clinton said, 'That's up to you."'
Mr Scheuer, who headed the CIA unit that tracked Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, said he developed and led the "renditions" program, which included moving prisoners without due legal process to countries with no strict human rights protections.
"In Cairo, people are not treated like they are in Milwaukee. The Clinton administration asked us if we believed that the prisoners were being treated in accordance with local law. And we answered, 'Yes, we're fairly sure."'
At the time, he said, the CIA did not arrest or imprison anyone itself.
"That was done by the local police or secret services," he said, adding that the prisoners were never taken to US soil. "President Clinton did not want that."
He said the program changed under Mr Clinton's successor, George Bush, after the attacks of September 11, 2001.
(More ... Prisoners move begun by Clinton, says agent - World - smh.com.au) ¶ 19:29 0 comments
The CIA's controversial program of having terrorist suspects captured and questioned on foreign soil began under President Bill Clinton, a former US agent says.
Michael Scheuer, a 22-year veteran of the CIA who resigned last year, told yesterday's issue of the German newspaper Die Zeit that the US administration had been looking in the mid-1990s for a way to combat the terrorist threat and circumvent the cumbersome US legal system.
"President Clinton, his national security adviser Sandy Berger and his terrorism adviser Richard Clark ordered the CIA in the autumn of 1995 to destroy al-Qaeda," the newspaper quoted Mr Scheuer as saying.
"We asked the president what we should do with the people we capture. Clinton said, 'That's up to you."'
Mr Scheuer, who headed the CIA unit that tracked Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999, said he developed and led the "renditions" program, which included moving prisoners without due legal process to countries with no strict human rights protections.
"In Cairo, people are not treated like they are in Milwaukee. The Clinton administration asked us if we believed that the prisoners were being treated in accordance with local law. And we answered, 'Yes, we're fairly sure."'
At the time, he said, the CIA did not arrest or imprison anyone itself.
"That was done by the local police or secret services," he said, adding that the prisoners were never taken to US soil. "President Clinton did not want that."
He said the program changed under Mr Clinton's successor, George Bush, after the attacks of September 11, 2001.
(More ... Prisoners move begun by Clinton, says agent - World - smh.com.au) ¶ 19:29 0 comments
12.29.2005
Bush Team Rethinks Its Plan for Recovery (WashingtonPost.com)
New Approach Could Save Second Term
By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 29, 2005; Page A01
President Bush shifted his rhetoric on Iraq in recent weeks after an intense debate among advisers about how to pull out of his political free fall, with senior adviser Karl Rove urging a campaign-style attack on critics while younger aides pushed for more candor about setbacks in the war, according to Republican strategists.
The result was a hybrid of the two approaches as Bush lashed out at war opponents in Congress, then turned to a humbler assessment of events on the ground in Iraq that included admissions about how some of his expectations had been frustrated. The formula helped Bush regain his political footing as record-low poll numbers began to rebound. Now his team is rethinking its approach to his second term in hopes of salvaging it.
The Iraq push culminated the rockiest political year of this presidency, which included the demise of signature domestic priorities, the indictment of the vice president's top aide, the collapse of a Supreme Court nomination, a fumbled response to a natural disaster and a rising death toll in an increasingly unpopular war. It was not until Bush opened a fresh campaign to reassure the public on Iraq that he regained some traction.
The lessons drawn by a variety of Bush advisers inside and outside the White House as they map a road to recovery in 2006 include these: Overarching initiatives such as restructuring Social Security are unworkable in a time of war. The public wants a balanced appraisal of what is happening on the battlefield as well as pledges of victory. And Iraq trumps all.
"I don't think they realized that Iraq is the totality of their legacy until fairly recently," said former congressman Vin Weber (R-Minn.), an outside adviser to the White House. "There is not much of a market for other issues."
(More ... Bush Team Rethinks Its Plan for Recovery) ¶ 22:19 0 comments
By Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 29, 2005; Page A01
President Bush shifted his rhetoric on Iraq in recent weeks after an intense debate among advisers about how to pull out of his political free fall, with senior adviser Karl Rove urging a campaign-style attack on critics while younger aides pushed for more candor about setbacks in the war, according to Republican strategists.
The result was a hybrid of the two approaches as Bush lashed out at war opponents in Congress, then turned to a humbler assessment of events on the ground in Iraq that included admissions about how some of his expectations had been frustrated. The formula helped Bush regain his political footing as record-low poll numbers began to rebound. Now his team is rethinking its approach to his second term in hopes of salvaging it.
The Iraq push culminated the rockiest political year of this presidency, which included the demise of signature domestic priorities, the indictment of the vice president's top aide, the collapse of a Supreme Court nomination, a fumbled response to a natural disaster and a rising death toll in an increasingly unpopular war. It was not until Bush opened a fresh campaign to reassure the public on Iraq that he regained some traction.
The lessons drawn by a variety of Bush advisers inside and outside the White House as they map a road to recovery in 2006 include these: Overarching initiatives such as restructuring Social Security are unworkable in a time of war. The public wants a balanced appraisal of what is happening on the battlefield as well as pledges of victory. And Iraq trumps all.
"I don't think they realized that Iraq is the totality of their legacy until fairly recently," said former congressman Vin Weber (R-Minn.), an outside adviser to the White House. "There is not much of a market for other issues."
(More ... Bush Team Rethinks Its Plan for Recovery) ¶ 22:19 0 comments
12.28.2005
Bush's Envoy Sparks Another Diplomatic Indicent Over War Claims (Independent.co.uk)
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor
Published: 27 December 2005
The US ambassador in London has been forced into an embarrassing retreat after his embassy clarified comments he made denying that the United States was involved in removing terrorist suspects to Syria.
Robert Tuttle told Radio 4's Today programme last Thursday that there was no evidence that US forces had sent suspected terrorists for questioning in Syria, a practice known as "extraordinary rendition".
The US embassy issued a statement yesterday acknowledging that there had been claims that a suspect arrested in New York had been sent by the CIA for torture in Syria.
It is the second time in recent weeks that Mr Tuttle has had to correct misleading statements about the actions of US forces, and provoked a fresh outcry from Labour MPs over the practice of extraordinary rendition.
Andrew Mackinlay, a senior Labour member of the foreign affairs committee investigating the use of UK airports for rendition by the CIA, said: "It is troubling that they are contradicting their own assurances. We have no confidence in the denials that they have issued. Increasingly, a number of us ... don't believe what the US administration states any more. Nobody believes that this is not going on."
The US ambassador provoked the row after he said on the Today programme that he did not think there was any evidence of renditions of suspects for questioning to Syria.
Mr Tuttle said: "I don't think there is any evidence that there have been any renditions carried out in the country of Syria ... I think we have to take what the Secretary [Condoleezza Rice] says at face value ... she has said we do not authorise, condone torture in any way, shape or form."
Yesterday the embassy moved to correct his statement. A statement, read out on Radio 4, quoted an embassy spokeswoman as saying: "... the ambassador recognised that there had been a media report of a rendition to Syria but reiterated that the United States is not in a position to comment on specific allegations of intelligence activities that appear in the press."
(More ... Independent Online Edition > UK Politics) ¶ 11:12 0 comments
Published: 27 December 2005
The US ambassador in London has been forced into an embarrassing retreat after his embassy clarified comments he made denying that the United States was involved in removing terrorist suspects to Syria.
Robert Tuttle told Radio 4's Today programme last Thursday that there was no evidence that US forces had sent suspected terrorists for questioning in Syria, a practice known as "extraordinary rendition".
The US embassy issued a statement yesterday acknowledging that there had been claims that a suspect arrested in New York had been sent by the CIA for torture in Syria.
It is the second time in recent weeks that Mr Tuttle has had to correct misleading statements about the actions of US forces, and provoked a fresh outcry from Labour MPs over the practice of extraordinary rendition.
Andrew Mackinlay, a senior Labour member of the foreign affairs committee investigating the use of UK airports for rendition by the CIA, said: "It is troubling that they are contradicting their own assurances. We have no confidence in the denials that they have issued. Increasingly, a number of us ... don't believe what the US administration states any more. Nobody believes that this is not going on."
The US ambassador provoked the row after he said on the Today programme that he did not think there was any evidence of renditions of suspects for questioning to Syria.
Mr Tuttle said: "I don't think there is any evidence that there have been any renditions carried out in the country of Syria ... I think we have to take what the Secretary [Condoleezza Rice] says at face value ... she has said we do not authorise, condone torture in any way, shape or form."
Yesterday the embassy moved to correct his statement. A statement, read out on Radio 4, quoted an embassy spokeswoman as saying: "... the ambassador recognised that there had been a media report of a rendition to Syria but reiterated that the United States is not in a position to comment on specific allegations of intelligence activities that appear in the press."
(More ... Independent Online Edition > UK Politics) ¶ 11:12 0 comments
Global Eye: Gospel Truth (TheMoscowTimes.com)
By Chris Floyd
Published: December 23, 2005
Countless words of condemnation have been heaped upon President George W. Bush and his hard-right regime -- a crescendo growing louder by the day, with voices from across the political spectrum. But the most devastating repudiation of the regime's foul ethos was actually delivered almost 2,000 years ago by the man whose birth is celebrated at this season of the year.
We speak, of course, of Jesus of Nazareth, whose Sermon on the Mount called for a revolutionary transformation of human nature -- a complete overthrow of our natural instincts for greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement. This radical vision -- erupting in the turbulent backwater of a brutal world empire -- is the true miracle of Jesus' life, not the primitive fables about virgin births, magic tricks and corpses rising from the dead. The vision's living force sears through dogma, casts down the pomp of church and state, and gives the lie to every hypocrite who evokes Jesus' name in pursuit of earthly power.
Bush professes to believe that Jesus is the son of God, whose words are literally divine commands. Yet anyone who compares what Jesus really said to Bush's actions in power -- the abandonment of the poor, the exaltation of the rich; the dirty insider deals, the culture of corruption, the politics of smear and slander; the perversion of law to countenance murder, torture and predatory war -- can readily see that this profession of faith is a monstrous deceit. Bush, along with his politicized, pseudo-religious "base," may well believe that some divine being approves of their unbridled greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement; but this mythical godling in their heads has nothing to do with the man from Nazareth who, as Matthew and Luke tell it, went up into a mountain one day and began to preach ...
(More ... CONTEXT - This Week in Arts and Ideas from The Moscow Times) ¶ 11:09 0 comments
Published: December 23, 2005
Countless words of condemnation have been heaped upon President George W. Bush and his hard-right regime -- a crescendo growing louder by the day, with voices from across the political spectrum. But the most devastating repudiation of the regime's foul ethos was actually delivered almost 2,000 years ago by the man whose birth is celebrated at this season of the year.
We speak, of course, of Jesus of Nazareth, whose Sermon on the Mount called for a revolutionary transformation of human nature -- a complete overthrow of our natural instincts for greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement. This radical vision -- erupting in the turbulent backwater of a brutal world empire -- is the true miracle of Jesus' life, not the primitive fables about virgin births, magic tricks and corpses rising from the dead. The vision's living force sears through dogma, casts down the pomp of church and state, and gives the lie to every hypocrite who evokes Jesus' name in pursuit of earthly power.
Bush professes to believe that Jesus is the son of God, whose words are literally divine commands. Yet anyone who compares what Jesus really said to Bush's actions in power -- the abandonment of the poor, the exaltation of the rich; the dirty insider deals, the culture of corruption, the politics of smear and slander; the perversion of law to countenance murder, torture and predatory war -- can readily see that this profession of faith is a monstrous deceit. Bush, along with his politicized, pseudo-religious "base," may well believe that some divine being approves of their unbridled greed, aggression and self-aggrandizement; but this mythical godling in their heads has nothing to do with the man from Nazareth who, as Matthew and Luke tell it, went up into a mountain one day and began to preach ...
(More ... CONTEXT - This Week in Arts and Ideas from The Moscow Times) ¶ 11:09 0 comments
12.27.2005
Bush Presses Editors on Security (WashingtonPost.com)
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 26, 2005; Page C01
President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.
The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.
Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the United States without court orders.
But the meetings were confirmed by sources who have been briefed on them but are not authorized to comment because both sides had agreed to keep the sessions off the record. The White House had no comment.
(More ... Bush Presses Editors on Security) ¶ 19:12 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 26, 2005; Page C01
President Bush has been summoning newspaper editors lately in an effort to prevent publication of stories he considers damaging to national security.
The efforts have failed, but the rare White House sessions with the executive editors of The Washington Post and New York Times are an indication of how seriously the president takes the recent reporting that has raised questions about the administration's anti-terror tactics.
Leonard Downie Jr., The Post's executive editor, would not confirm the meeting with Bush before publishing reporter Dana Priest's Nov. 2 article disclosing the existence of secret CIA prisons in Eastern Europe used to interrogate terror suspects. Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, would not confirm that he, publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman had an Oval Office sit-down with the president on Dec. 5, 11 days before reporters James Risen and Eric Lichtblau revealed that Bush had authorized eavesdropping on Americans and others within the United States without court orders.
But the meetings were confirmed by sources who have been briefed on them but are not authorized to comment because both sides had agreed to keep the sessions off the record. The White House had no comment.
(More ... Bush Presses Editors on Security) ¶ 19:12 0 comments
Medicine: Who Decides? (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 26, 2005
Health care seems to be heading back to the top of the political agenda, and not a moment too soon. Employer-based health insurance is unraveling, Medicaid is under severe pressure, and vast Medicare costs loom on the horizon. Something must be done.
But to get health reform right, we'll have to overcome wrongheaded ideas as well as powerful special interests. For decades we've been lectured on the evils of big government and the glories of the private sector. Yet health reform is a job for the public sector, which already pays most of the bills directly or indirectly and sooner or later will have to make key decisions about medical treatment.
That's the conclusion of an important new study from the Brookings Institution, "Can We Say No?" I'll write more about that study another time, but for now let me give my own take on the issue.
Consider what happens when a new drug or other therapy becomes available. Let's assume that the new therapy is more effective in some cases than existing therapies - that is, it isn't just a me-too drug that duplicates what we already have - but that the advantage isn't overwhelming. On the other hand, it's a lot more expensive than current treatments. Who decides whether patients receive the new therapy?
(More ... Medicine: Who Decides? - New York Times) ¶ 13:50 0 comments
Published: December 26, 2005
Health care seems to be heading back to the top of the political agenda, and not a moment too soon. Employer-based health insurance is unraveling, Medicaid is under severe pressure, and vast Medicare costs loom on the horizon. Something must be done.
But to get health reform right, we'll have to overcome wrongheaded ideas as well as powerful special interests. For decades we've been lectured on the evils of big government and the glories of the private sector. Yet health reform is a job for the public sector, which already pays most of the bills directly or indirectly and sooner or later will have to make key decisions about medical treatment.
That's the conclusion of an important new study from the Brookings Institution, "Can We Say No?" I'll write more about that study another time, but for now let me give my own take on the issue.
Consider what happens when a new drug or other therapy becomes available. Let's assume that the new therapy is more effective in some cases than existing therapies - that is, it isn't just a me-too drug that duplicates what we already have - but that the advantage isn't overwhelming. On the other hand, it's a lot more expensive than current treatments. Who decides whether patients receive the new therapy?
(More ... Medicine: Who Decides? - New York Times) ¶ 13:50 0 comments
12.26.2005
CIA Covers Prove Thin (ChicagoTribune.com)
John Crewdson
Published December 25, 2005
The CIA's special operations teams that specialize in renditions are drawn from the agency's paramilitary unit, largely composed of former Special Forces personnel, plus career CIA intelligence officers and specialists in surveillance, communications and even behavioral sciences.
From Italian and Spanish police reports and court documents, the Tribune was able to identify the names, and in some cases the post office box addresses, used by 67 suspected CIA rendition specialists who registered at hotels in Milan and on the island of Mallorca.
Those post office boxes, in turn, led to scores of other names that share the same addresses, most of which are in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Some of the bogus identities appear to be inside jokes, with surnames such as "Grayman" and "Bland," or those of former CIA directors. One of the bogus identities is an apparent homage to Douglas Neidermeyer, the authoritarian ROTC commander in the movie "Animal House" who later is killed by his own troops in Vietnam.
A search of commercially available databases reveals no evidence that any of the named individuals ever has had a spouse, a residence, a telephone, a previous address, a mortgage, a credit history or a family.
Even though their listed birth dates place them in their 30s, 40s and 50s, none appears to have had a Social Security number before 1998.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA covers prove thin) ¶ 11:58 0 comments
Published December 25, 2005
The CIA's special operations teams that specialize in renditions are drawn from the agency's paramilitary unit, largely composed of former Special Forces personnel, plus career CIA intelligence officers and specialists in surveillance, communications and even behavioral sciences.
From Italian and Spanish police reports and court documents, the Tribune was able to identify the names, and in some cases the post office box addresses, used by 67 suspected CIA rendition specialists who registered at hotels in Milan and on the island of Mallorca.
Those post office boxes, in turn, led to scores of other names that share the same addresses, most of which are in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Some of the bogus identities appear to be inside jokes, with surnames such as "Grayman" and "Bland," or those of former CIA directors. One of the bogus identities is an apparent homage to Douglas Neidermeyer, the authoritarian ROTC commander in the movie "Animal House" who later is killed by his own troops in Vietnam.
A search of commercially available databases reveals no evidence that any of the named individuals ever has had a spouse, a residence, a telephone, a previous address, a mortgage, a credit history or a family.
Even though their listed birth dates place them in their 30s, 40s and 50s, none appears to have had a Social Security number before 1998.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA covers prove thin) ¶ 11:58 0 comments
CIA Team Traveled Italy in Style (ChicagoTribune.com)
By John Crewdson, Tribune senior correspondent.
Drew Crosby and Samuel Loewenberg contributed to this report from Madrid
Published December 25, 2005
MILAN, Italy -- When the CIA decides to "render" a terrorism suspect living abroad for interrogation in Egypt or another friendly Middle East nation, it spares no expense.
Italian prosecutors wrote in court papers that the CIA spent "enormous amounts of money" during the six weeks it took the agency to figure out how to grab a 39-year-old Muslim preacher called Abu Omar off the streets of Milan, throw him into a van and drive him to the airport.
First to arrive in Milan was the surveillance team, and the hotels they chose were among the best Europe has to offer. Especially popular was the gilt-and-crystal Principe di Savoia, with acres of burnished wood paneling and plush carpets, where a single room costs $588 a night, a club sandwich goes for $28.75 and a Diet Coke adds another $9.35.
According to hotel records obtained by the Milan police investigating Abu Omar's disappearance, two CIA operatives managed to ring up more than $9,000 in room charges alone. The CIA's bill at the Principe for seven operatives came to $39,995, not counting meals, parking and other hotel services.
Another group of seven operatives spent $40,098 on room charges at the Westin Palace, a five-star hotel across the Piazza della Repubblica from the Principe, where a club sandwich is only $20.
A former CIA officer who has worked undercover abroad said those prices were "way over" the CIA's allowed rates for foreign travel.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA team traveled Italy in style) ¶ 11:56 0 comments
Drew Crosby and Samuel Loewenberg contributed to this report from Madrid
Published December 25, 2005
MILAN, Italy -- When the CIA decides to "render" a terrorism suspect living abroad for interrogation in Egypt or another friendly Middle East nation, it spares no expense.
Italian prosecutors wrote in court papers that the CIA spent "enormous amounts of money" during the six weeks it took the agency to figure out how to grab a 39-year-old Muslim preacher called Abu Omar off the streets of Milan, throw him into a van and drive him to the airport.
First to arrive in Milan was the surveillance team, and the hotels they chose were among the best Europe has to offer. Especially popular was the gilt-and-crystal Principe di Savoia, with acres of burnished wood paneling and plush carpets, where a single room costs $588 a night, a club sandwich goes for $28.75 and a Diet Coke adds another $9.35.
According to hotel records obtained by the Milan police investigating Abu Omar's disappearance, two CIA operatives managed to ring up more than $9,000 in room charges alone. The CIA's bill at the Principe for seven operatives came to $39,995, not counting meals, parking and other hotel services.
Another group of seven operatives spent $40,098 on room charges at the Westin Palace, a five-star hotel across the Piazza della Repubblica from the Principe, where a club sandwich is only $20.
A former CIA officer who has worked undercover abroad said those prices were "way over" the CIA's allowed rates for foreign travel.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA team traveled Italy in style) ¶ 11:56 0 comments
CIA's Bungled Italy Job (ChicagoTribune.com)
Sloppy use of cell phones, other missteps help police unravel cleric's 2003 abduction
By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published December 25, 2005
MILAN, Italy -- The trick is known to just about every two-bit crook in the cellular age: If you don't want the cops to know where you are, take the battery out of your cell phone when it's not in use.
Had that trick been taught at the CIA's rural Virginia training school for covert operatives, the Bush administration might have avoided much of the current crisis in Europe over the practice the CIA calls "rendition," and CIA Director Porter Goss might not have ordered a sweeping review of the agency's field operations.
But when CIA operatives assembled here nearly three years ago to abduct an Egyptian-born Muslim preacher named Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, more familiarly known as Abu Omar, and "render" him to Cairo, they left their cell phone batteries in.
Even when not in use, a cell phone sends a periodic signal indicating its location, enabling the worldwide cellular network to know where to look for it in case of an incoming call.
Those signals allowed police investigating Abu Omar's mysterious disappearance to ultimately construct an almost minute-by-minute record of his abduction, and to identify nearly two dozen people as his abductors.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA's bungled Italy job) ¶ 11:53 0 comments
By John Crewdson
Tribune senior correspondent
Published December 25, 2005
MILAN, Italy -- The trick is known to just about every two-bit crook in the cellular age: If you don't want the cops to know where you are, take the battery out of your cell phone when it's not in use.
Had that trick been taught at the CIA's rural Virginia training school for covert operatives, the Bush administration might have avoided much of the current crisis in Europe over the practice the CIA calls "rendition," and CIA Director Porter Goss might not have ordered a sweeping review of the agency's field operations.
But when CIA operatives assembled here nearly three years ago to abduct an Egyptian-born Muslim preacher named Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, more familiarly known as Abu Omar, and "render" him to Cairo, they left their cell phone batteries in.
Even when not in use, a cell phone sends a periodic signal indicating its location, enabling the worldwide cellular network to know where to look for it in case of an incoming call.
Those signals allowed police investigating Abu Omar's mysterious disappearance to ultimately construct an almost minute-by-minute record of his abduction, and to identify nearly two dozen people as his abductors.
(More ... Chicago Tribune | CIA's bungled Italy job) ¶ 11:53 0 comments
12.24.2005
Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report (NYTimes.com)
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and JAMES RISEN
Published: December 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.
The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.
As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said.
The government's collection and analysis of phone and Internet traffic have raised questions among some law enforcement and judicial officials familiar with the program. One issue of concern to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has reviewed some separate warrant applications growing out of the N.S.A.'s surveillance program, is whether the court has legal authority over calls outside the United States that happen to pass through American-based telephonic "switches," according to officials familiar with the matter.
"There was a lot of discussion about the switches" in conversations with the court, a Justice Department official said, referring to the gateways through which much of the communications traffic flows. "You're talking about access to such a vast amount of communications, and the question was, How do you minimize something that's on a switch that's carrying such large volumes of traffic? The court was very, very concerned about that."
Since the disclosure last week of the N.S.A.'s domestic surveillance program, President Bush and his senior aides have stressed that his executive order allowing eavesdropping without warrants was limited to the monitoring of international phone and e-mail communications involving people with known links to Al Qaeda.
(More ... Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report - New York Times) ¶ 21:04 0 comments
Published: December 24, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 23 - The National Security Agency has traced and analyzed large volumes of telephone and Internet communications flowing into and out of the United States as part of the eavesdropping program that President Bush approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to hunt for evidence of terrorist activity, according to current and former government officials.
The volume of information harvested from telecommunication data and voice networks, without court-approved warrants, is much larger than the White House has acknowledged, the officials said. It was collected by tapping directly into some of the American telecommunication system's main arteries, they said.
As part of the program approved by President Bush for domestic surveillance without warrants, the N.S.A. has gained the cooperation of American telecommunications companies to obtain backdoor access to streams of domestic and international communications, the officials said.
The government's collection and analysis of phone and Internet traffic have raised questions among some law enforcement and judicial officials familiar with the program. One issue of concern to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which has reviewed some separate warrant applications growing out of the N.S.A.'s surveillance program, is whether the court has legal authority over calls outside the United States that happen to pass through American-based telephonic "switches," according to officials familiar with the matter.
"There was a lot of discussion about the switches" in conversations with the court, a Justice Department official said, referring to the gateways through which much of the communications traffic flows. "You're talking about access to such a vast amount of communications, and the question was, How do you minimize something that's on a switch that's carrying such large volumes of traffic? The court was very, very concerned about that."
Since the disclosure last week of the N.S.A.'s domestic surveillance program, President Bush and his senior aides have stressed that his executive order allowing eavesdropping without warrants was limited to the monitoring of international phone and e-mail communications involving people with known links to Al Qaeda.
(More ... Spy Agency Mined Vast Data Trove, Officials Report - New York Times) ¶ 21:04 0 comments
The Tax-Cut Zombies (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 23, 2005
If you want someone to play Scrooge just before Christmas, Dick Cheney is your man. On Wednesday Mr. Cheney, acting as president of the Senate, cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of legislation that increases the fees charged to Medicaid recipients, lets states cut Medicaid benefits, reduces enforcement funds for child support, and more.
For all its cruelty, however, the legislation will make only a tiny dent in the budget deficit: the cuts total about $8 billion a year, or one-third of 1 percent of total federal spending.
So ended 2005, the year that killed any remaining rationale for continuing tax cuts. But the hunger for tax cuts refuses to die.
Since the 1970's, conservatives have used two theories to justify cutting taxes. One theory, supply-side economics, has always been hokum for the yokels. Conservative insiders adopted the supply-siders as mascots because they were useful to the cause, but never took them seriously.
The insiders' theory - what we might call the true tax-cut theory - was memorably described by David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's budget director, as "starving the beast." Proponents of this theory argue that conservatives should seek tax cuts not because they won't create budget deficits, but because they will. Starve-the-beasters believe that budget deficits will lead to spending cuts that will eventually achieve their true aim: shrinking the government's role back to what it was under Calvin Coolidge.
True to form, the insiders aren't buying the supply-siders' claim that a partial recovery in federal tax receipts from their plunge between 2000 and 2003 shows that all's well on the fiscal front. (Revenue remains lower, and the federal budget deeper in deficit, than anyone expected a few years ago.) Instead, conservative heavyweights are using the budget deficit to call for cuts in key government programs.
(More ... The Tax-Cut Zombies - New York Times) ¶ 10:07 0 comments
Published: December 23, 2005
If you want someone to play Scrooge just before Christmas, Dick Cheney is your man. On Wednesday Mr. Cheney, acting as president of the Senate, cast the tie-breaking vote in favor of legislation that increases the fees charged to Medicaid recipients, lets states cut Medicaid benefits, reduces enforcement funds for child support, and more.
For all its cruelty, however, the legislation will make only a tiny dent in the budget deficit: the cuts total about $8 billion a year, or one-third of 1 percent of total federal spending.
So ended 2005, the year that killed any remaining rationale for continuing tax cuts. But the hunger for tax cuts refuses to die.
Since the 1970's, conservatives have used two theories to justify cutting taxes. One theory, supply-side economics, has always been hokum for the yokels. Conservative insiders adopted the supply-siders as mascots because they were useful to the cause, but never took them seriously.
The insiders' theory - what we might call the true tax-cut theory - was memorably described by David Stockman, Ronald Reagan's budget director, as "starving the beast." Proponents of this theory argue that conservatives should seek tax cuts not because they won't create budget deficits, but because they will. Starve-the-beasters believe that budget deficits will lead to spending cuts that will eventually achieve their true aim: shrinking the government's role back to what it was under Calvin Coolidge.
True to form, the insiders aren't buying the supply-siders' claim that a partial recovery in federal tax receipts from their plunge between 2000 and 2003 shows that all's well on the fiscal front. (Revenue remains lower, and the federal budget deeper in deficit, than anyone expected a few years ago.) Instead, conservative heavyweights are using the budget deficit to call for cuts in key government programs.
(More ... The Tax-Cut Zombies - New York Times) ¶ 10:07 0 comments
Mr. Cheney's Imperial Presidency (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: December 23, 2005
George W. Bush has quipped several times during his political career that it would be so much easier to govern in a dictatorship. Apparently he never told his vice president that this was a joke.
Virtually from the time he chose himself to be Mr. Bush's running mate in 2000, Dick Cheney has spearheaded an extraordinary expansion of the powers of the presidency - from writing energy policy behind closed doors with oil executives to abrogating longstanding treaties and using the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to invade Iraq, scrap the Geneva Conventions and spy on American citizens.
It was a chance Mr. Cheney seems to have been dreaming about for decades. Most Americans looked at wrenching events like the Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal and the Iran-contra debacle and worried that the presidency had become too powerful, secretive and dismissive. Mr. Cheney looked at the same events and fretted that the presidency was not powerful enough, and too vulnerable to inspection and calls for accountability.
The president "needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired, if you will, in terms of the conduct of national security policy," Mr. Cheney said this week as he tried to stifle the outcry over a domestic spying program that Mr. Bush authorized after the 9/11 attacks.
(More ... Mr. Cheney's Imperial Presidency - New York Times) ¶ 10:01 0 comments
Published: December 23, 2005
George W. Bush has quipped several times during his political career that it would be so much easier to govern in a dictatorship. Apparently he never told his vice president that this was a joke.
Virtually from the time he chose himself to be Mr. Bush's running mate in 2000, Dick Cheney has spearheaded an extraordinary expansion of the powers of the presidency - from writing energy policy behind closed doors with oil executives to abrogating longstanding treaties and using the 9/11 attacks as a pretext to invade Iraq, scrap the Geneva Conventions and spy on American citizens.
It was a chance Mr. Cheney seems to have been dreaming about for decades. Most Americans looked at wrenching events like the Vietnam War, the Watergate scandal and the Iran-contra debacle and worried that the presidency had become too powerful, secretive and dismissive. Mr. Cheney looked at the same events and fretted that the presidency was not powerful enough, and too vulnerable to inspection and calls for accountability.
The president "needs to have his constitutional powers unimpaired, if you will, in terms of the conduct of national security policy," Mr. Cheney said this week as he tried to stifle the outcry over a domestic spying program that Mr. Bush authorized after the 9/11 attacks.
(More ... Mr. Cheney's Imperial Presidency - New York Times) ¶ 10:01 0 comments
12.23.2005
Brown's Turf Wars Sapped FEMA's Strength (WashingtonPost.com)
Director Who Came to Symbolize Incompetence in Katrina Predicted Agency Would Fail
By Michael Grunwald and Susan B. Glasser
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 23, 2005; Page A01
On Sept. 15, 2003, one of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge's deputies lobbed a bureaucratic hand grenade across his desk. In a seven-page memo, the new department's undersecretary for emergency preparedness and response told Ridge that his organizational plan would cripple America's ability to respond to disasters.
The memo, like so many that flew around Washington during the largest government reshuffling in decades, involved turf: Ridge had decided to move some of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's preparedness functions to an office less than one-fifteenth its size. The writer warned that the shift would make a mockery of FEMA's new motto, "A Nation Prepared," and would "fundamentally sever FEMA from its core functions," "shatter agency morale," and "break longstanding, effective and tested relationships with states and first responder stakeholders."
The inevitable result, he wrote, would be "an ineffective and uncoordinated response" to a terrorist attack or a natural disaster.
The author was Michael D. Brown, who was FEMA's director as well as a Department of Homeland Security undersecretary. Two years later, Brown would lose both titles after Hurricane Katrina, when his prophecies of doom came true.
(More ... Brown's Turf Wars Sapped FEMA's Strength) ¶ 23:04 0 comments
By Michael Grunwald and Susan B. Glasser
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, December 23, 2005; Page A01
On Sept. 15, 2003, one of Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge's deputies lobbed a bureaucratic hand grenade across his desk. In a seven-page memo, the new department's undersecretary for emergency preparedness and response told Ridge that his organizational plan would cripple America's ability to respond to disasters.
The memo, like so many that flew around Washington during the largest government reshuffling in decades, involved turf: Ridge had decided to move some of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's preparedness functions to an office less than one-fifteenth its size. The writer warned that the shift would make a mockery of FEMA's new motto, "A Nation Prepared," and would "fundamentally sever FEMA from its core functions," "shatter agency morale," and "break longstanding, effective and tested relationships with states and first responder stakeholders."
The inevitable result, he wrote, would be "an ineffective and uncoordinated response" to a terrorist attack or a natural disaster.
The author was Michael D. Brown, who was FEMA's director as well as a Department of Homeland Security undersecretary. Two years later, Brown would lose both titles after Hurricane Katrina, when his prophecies of doom came true.
(More ... Brown's Turf Wars Sapped FEMA's Strength) ¶ 23:04 0 comments
Department's Mission Was Undermined From Start (WashingtonPost.com)
PRELUDE TO DISASTER : The Making of DHS
By Susan B. Glasser and Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A01
The Department of Homeland Security was only a month old, and already it had an image problem.
It was April 2003, and Susan Neely, a close aide to DHS Secretary Tom Ridge, decided the gargantuan new conglomeration of 22 federal agencies had to stand for something more than multicolored threat levels. It needed an identity -- not the "flavor of the day in terms of brand chic," as Neely put it, but something meant to last.
Neely hired Landor Associates, the same company that invented the FedEx name and the BP sunflower, and together they began to rebrand a behemoth Landor described in a confidential briefing as a "disparate organization with a lack of focus." They developed a new DHS typeface (Joanna, with modifications) and color scheme (cool gray, red and hints of "punched-up" blue). They debated new uniforms for its armies of agents and focus-group-tested a new seal designed to convey "strength" and "gravitas." The department even got its own lapel pin, which was given to all 180,000 of its employees -- with Ridge's signature -- to celebrate its "brand launch" that June.
"It's got to have its own story," Neely explained.
Nearly three years after it was created in the largest government reorganization since the Department of Defense, DHS does have a story, but so far it is one of haphazard design, bureaucratic warfare and unfulfilled promises. The department's first significant test -- its response to Hurricane Katrina in August -- exposed a troubled organization where preparedness was more slogan than mission.
(More ... Department's Mission Was Undermined From Start) ¶ 08:21 0 comments
By Susan B. Glasser and Michael Grunwald
Washington Post Staff Writers
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A01
The Department of Homeland Security was only a month old, and already it had an image problem.
It was April 2003, and Susan Neely, a close aide to DHS Secretary Tom Ridge, decided the gargantuan new conglomeration of 22 federal agencies had to stand for something more than multicolored threat levels. It needed an identity -- not the "flavor of the day in terms of brand chic," as Neely put it, but something meant to last.
Neely hired Landor Associates, the same company that invented the FedEx name and the BP sunflower, and together they began to rebrand a behemoth Landor described in a confidential briefing as a "disparate organization with a lack of focus." They developed a new DHS typeface (Joanna, with modifications) and color scheme (cool gray, red and hints of "punched-up" blue). They debated new uniforms for its armies of agents and focus-group-tested a new seal designed to convey "strength" and "gravitas." The department even got its own lapel pin, which was given to all 180,000 of its employees -- with Ridge's signature -- to celebrate its "brand launch" that June.
"It's got to have its own story," Neely explained.
Nearly three years after it was created in the largest government reorganization since the Department of Defense, DHS does have a story, but so far it is one of haphazard design, bureaucratic warfare and unfulfilled promises. The department's first significant test -- its response to Hurricane Katrina in August -- exposed a troubled organization where preparedness was more slogan than mission.
(More ... Department's Mission Was Undermined From Start) ¶ 08:21 0 comments
12.22.2005
Intelligent Decision (WashingtonPost.com)
EDITORIAL
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A28
THE DECISION this week by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III declaring unconstitutional the Dover, Pa., school board's advocacy of "intelligent design" is not binding on any other jurisdiction. In practical terms it doesn't matter even in Dover, where voters recently tossed out all but one of the school board members responsible for ensuring that high school biology students get advised of this "alternative" to classical evolutionary theory. It is nonetheless an important decision, both because it exhaustively documents how the theory of intelligent design is not science but cleverly repackaged creationism and because it rightly insists that such a religion-infused idea has no place in public schools. It therefore represents a model for judicial consideration of the proliferating effort to use intelligent design to undermine the teaching of biology.
Advocates of intelligent design don't talk about God, and they use scientific-sounding language. But Judge Jones's opinion, all 139 pages of it, makes abundantly clear that intelligent design -- which posits that the complexity of natural life shows distinctive elements of design -- is nonetheless religious at its core. While its partisans do not identify who the designer is, they offer a supernatural explanation for natural phenomena, which is an essentially nonscientific approach -- untested and indeed untestable. Their texts contain much of the same argumentation, some of it quite distortional of evolutionary theory and science, as earlier work on "creation science." And the school board adopted its policy of reading students a disclaimer that posed intelligent design as an alternative to evolution after hearings at which board members repeatedly expressed religious motivations -- a fact that some of them tried to obscure at trial. "It is ironic," Judge Jones wrote, "that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the [intelligent design] Policy."
(More ... Intelligent Decision) ¶ 19:25 0 comments
Thursday, December 22, 2005; Page A28
THE DECISION this week by U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III declaring unconstitutional the Dover, Pa., school board's advocacy of "intelligent design" is not binding on any other jurisdiction. In practical terms it doesn't matter even in Dover, where voters recently tossed out all but one of the school board members responsible for ensuring that high school biology students get advised of this "alternative" to classical evolutionary theory. It is nonetheless an important decision, both because it exhaustively documents how the theory of intelligent design is not science but cleverly repackaged creationism and because it rightly insists that such a religion-infused idea has no place in public schools. It therefore represents a model for judicial consideration of the proliferating effort to use intelligent design to undermine the teaching of biology.
Advocates of intelligent design don't talk about God, and they use scientific-sounding language. But Judge Jones's opinion, all 139 pages of it, makes abundantly clear that intelligent design -- which posits that the complexity of natural life shows distinctive elements of design -- is nonetheless religious at its core. While its partisans do not identify who the designer is, they offer a supernatural explanation for natural phenomena, which is an essentially nonscientific approach -- untested and indeed untestable. Their texts contain much of the same argumentation, some of it quite distortional of evolutionary theory and science, as earlier work on "creation science." And the school board adopted its policy of reading students a disclaimer that posed intelligent design as an alternative to evolution after hearings at which board members repeatedly expressed religious motivations -- a fact that some of them tried to obscure at trial. "It is ironic," Judge Jones wrote, "that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the [intelligent design] Policy."
(More ... Intelligent Decision) ¶ 19:25 0 comments
Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest (WashingtonPost.com)
Jurist Concerned Bush Order Tainted Work of Secret Panel
By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01
A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.
U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation.
Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterday that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.
Robertson, who was appointed to the federal bench in Washington by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and was later selected by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to serve on the FISA court, declined to comment when reached at his office late yesterday.
(More ... Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest) ¶ 08:23 0 comments
By Carol D. Leonnig and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 21, 2005; Page A01
A federal judge has resigned from the court that oversees government surveillance in intelligence cases in protest of President Bush's secret authorization of a domestic spying program, according to two sources.
U.S. District Judge James Robertson, one of 11 members of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, sent a letter to Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. late Monday notifying him of his resignation without providing an explanation.
Two associates familiar with his decision said yesterday that Robertson privately expressed deep concern that the warrantless surveillance program authorized by the president in 2001 was legally questionable and may have tainted the FISA court's work.
Robertson, who was appointed to the federal bench in Washington by President Bill Clinton in 1994 and was later selected by then-Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist to serve on the FISA court, declined to comment when reached at his office late yesterday.
(More ... Spy Court Judge Quits In Protest) ¶ 08:23 0 comments
Pirro Plans to End Senate Bid and Run for Attorney General (NYTimes.com)
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
Published: December 21, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec 21 - Jeanine F. Pirro, whose campaign to unseat Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has been struggling for months, plans to abandon the race and run for state attorney general instead, two senior Republican officials close to her campaign said today.
One of the officials, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject, said Mrs. Pirro would make the announcement as early as Thursday. Her campaign did not have an immediate comment on the matter.
The state's Republican Party has previously demanded that she quit the Senate race and run for attorney general instead, but Mrs. Pirro, the Westchester County district attorney, emphasized in an interview earlier this month that she makes up her own mind and stands by tough decisions.
"No one has ever told me what to do," Ms. Pirro said in the interview. "I think for myself. I make my own decisions. I appreciate people's input, but in the end, I decide on the course of action. I decide."
New York State Republican leaders had asked her to make a final decision about her political future before the end of the month. The New York Post reported today that Ms. Pirro would switch to the attorney general's race on Thursday or Friday.
(More ... Pirro Plans to End Senate Bid and Run for Attorney General - New York Times) ¶ 08:19 0 comments
Published: December 21, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec 21 - Jeanine F. Pirro, whose campaign to unseat Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York has been struggling for months, plans to abandon the race and run for state attorney general instead, two senior Republican officials close to her campaign said today.
One of the officials, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject, said Mrs. Pirro would make the announcement as early as Thursday. Her campaign did not have an immediate comment on the matter.
The state's Republican Party has previously demanded that she quit the Senate race and run for attorney general instead, but Mrs. Pirro, the Westchester County district attorney, emphasized in an interview earlier this month that she makes up her own mind and stands by tough decisions.
"No one has ever told me what to do," Ms. Pirro said in the interview. "I think for myself. I make my own decisions. I appreciate people's input, but in the end, I decide on the course of action. I decide."
New York State Republican leaders had asked her to make a final decision about her political future before the end of the month. The New York Post reported today that Ms. Pirro would switch to the attorney general's race on Thursday or Friday.
(More ... Pirro Plans to End Senate Bid and Run for Attorney General - New York Times) ¶ 08:19 0 comments
Judge Rejects Teaching Intelligent Design (NYTimes.com)
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: December 21, 2005
HARRISBURG, Pa., Dec. 20 - A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for a Pennsylvania school district to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology courses because it is a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity."
In the nation's first case to test the legal merits of intelligent design, the judge, John E. Jones III, issued a broad, stinging rebuke to its advocates and provided strong support for scientists who have fought to bar intelligent design from the science curriculum.
Judge Jones also excoriated members of the Dover, Pa., school board, who he said lied to cover up their religious motives, made a decision of "breathtaking inanity" and "dragged" their community into "this legal maelstrom with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."
Eleven parents in Dover, a growing suburb about 20 miles south of Harrisburg, sued their school board a year ago after it voted to have teachers read students a brief statement introducing intelligent design in ninth-grade biology class.
The statement said that there were "gaps in the theory" of evolution and that intelligent design was another explanation they should examine.
Judge Jones, a Republican appointed by President Bush, concluded that intelligent design was not science, and that in order to claim that it is, its proponents admit they must change the very definition of science to include supernatural explanations.
Judge Jones said that teaching intelligent design as science in public school violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits public officials from using their positions to impose or establish a particular religion.
(More ... Judge Rejects Teaching Intelligent Design - New York Times) ¶ 08:18 0 comments
Published: December 21, 2005
HARRISBURG, Pa., Dec. 20 - A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that it was unconstitutional for a Pennsylvania school district to present intelligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology courses because it is a religious viewpoint that advances "a particular version of Christianity."
In the nation's first case to test the legal merits of intelligent design, the judge, John E. Jones III, issued a broad, stinging rebuke to its advocates and provided strong support for scientists who have fought to bar intelligent design from the science curriculum.
Judge Jones also excoriated members of the Dover, Pa., school board, who he said lied to cover up their religious motives, made a decision of "breathtaking inanity" and "dragged" their community into "this legal maelstrom with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources."
Eleven parents in Dover, a growing suburb about 20 miles south of Harrisburg, sued their school board a year ago after it voted to have teachers read students a brief statement introducing intelligent design in ninth-grade biology class.
The statement said that there were "gaps in the theory" of evolution and that intelligent design was another explanation they should examine.
Judge Jones, a Republican appointed by President Bush, concluded that intelligent design was not science, and that in order to claim that it is, its proponents admit they must change the very definition of science to include supernatural explanations.
Judge Jones said that teaching intelligent design as science in public school violated the First Amendment of the Constitution, which prohibits public officials from using their positions to impose or establish a particular religion.
(More ... Judge Rejects Teaching Intelligent Design - New York Times) ¶ 08:18 0 comments
12.19.2005
Political Science: Book Review (NYTimes.com)
'The Republican War on Science,' by Chris Mooney
342 pp. Basic Books. $24.95.
Readers Forum: Book News and Reviews
Review by JOHN HORGAN
Published: December 18, 2005
Last spring, a magazine asked me to look into a whistleblower case involving a United States Fish and Wildlife Service biologist named Andy Eller. Eller, a veteran of 18 years with the service, was fired after he publicly charged it with failing to protect the Florida panther from voracious development. One of the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act, the panther haunts southwest Florida's forests, which builders are transforming into gated golf communities. After several weeks of interviews, I wrote an article that called the service's treatment of Eller "shameful" - and emblematic of the Bush administration's treatment of scientists who interfere with its probusiness agenda.
My editor complained that the piece was too "one-sided"; I needed to show more sympathy to Eller's superiors in the Wildlife Service and to the Bush administration. I knew what the editor meant: the story I had written could be dismissed as just another anti-Bush diatribe; it would be more persuasive if it appeared more balanced. On the other hand, the reality was one-sided, to a startling degree. An ardent conservationist, Eller had dreamed of working for the Wildlife Service since his youth; he collected first editions of environmental classics like Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring." The officials who fired him based their denial that the panther is threatened in part on data provided by a former state wildlife scientist who had since become a consultant for developers seeking to bulldoze panther habitat. The officials were clearly acting in the spirit of their overseer, Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, a property-rights advocate who has questioned the constitutionality of aspects of the Endangered Species Act.
This episode makes me more sympathetic than I might otherwise have been to "The Republican War on Science" by the journalist Chris Mooney. As the title indicates, Mooney's book is a diatribe, from start to finish. The prose is often clunky and clichéd, and it suffers from smug, preaching-to-the-choir self-righteousness. But Mooney deserves a hearing in spite of these flaws, because he addresses a vitally important topic and gets it basically right.
(More ... Book Review: 'The Republican War on Science,' by Chris Mooney - New York Times) ¶ 18:05 0 comments
342 pp. Basic Books. $24.95.
Readers Forum: Book News and Reviews
Review by JOHN HORGAN
Published: December 18, 2005
Last spring, a magazine asked me to look into a whistleblower case involving a United States Fish and Wildlife Service biologist named Andy Eller. Eller, a veteran of 18 years with the service, was fired after he publicly charged it with failing to protect the Florida panther from voracious development. One of the first species listed under the Endangered Species Act, the panther haunts southwest Florida's forests, which builders are transforming into gated golf communities. After several weeks of interviews, I wrote an article that called the service's treatment of Eller "shameful" - and emblematic of the Bush administration's treatment of scientists who interfere with its probusiness agenda.
My editor complained that the piece was too "one-sided"; I needed to show more sympathy to Eller's superiors in the Wildlife Service and to the Bush administration. I knew what the editor meant: the story I had written could be dismissed as just another anti-Bush diatribe; it would be more persuasive if it appeared more balanced. On the other hand, the reality was one-sided, to a startling degree. An ardent conservationist, Eller had dreamed of working for the Wildlife Service since his youth; he collected first editions of environmental classics like Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring." The officials who fired him based their denial that the panther is threatened in part on data provided by a former state wildlife scientist who had since become a consultant for developers seeking to bulldoze panther habitat. The officials were clearly acting in the spirit of their overseer, Secretary of the Interior Gale Norton, a property-rights advocate who has questioned the constitutionality of aspects of the Endangered Species Act.
This episode makes me more sympathetic than I might otherwise have been to "The Republican War on Science" by the journalist Chris Mooney. As the title indicates, Mooney's book is a diatribe, from start to finish. The prose is often clunky and clichéd, and it suffers from smug, preaching-to-the-choir self-righteousness. But Mooney deserves a hearing in spite of these flaws, because he addresses a vitally important topic and gets it basically right.
(More ... Book Review: 'The Republican War on Science,' by Chris Mooney - New York Times) ¶ 18:05 0 comments
Greens Want Block on Passing Spy Information to US (NZHerald.co.nz)
19.12.05 1.00pm
The Green Party has said New Zealand should stop sending information obtained by its spy base to the United States following revelations it could be misused.
US President George W Bush has admitted he allowed domestic eavesdropping without court approval following the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks.
The revelation in the New York Times caused outrage in the US, with both Democrats and Republicans calling for congressional investigations into the decision.
The Greens' security and intelligence spokesman Keith Locke said New Zealand should suspend the transfer of data intercepted by the Waihopai spy base to the US National Security Agency (NSA).
Waihopai is part of the NSA-run Echelon communications intelligence network.
"Morally we can't continue to send the NSA communications intercepted at Waihopai when we know that their contents will be used illegally by the Bush administration," Mr Locke said.
(More ... Greens want block on passing spy information to US - 19 Dec 2005 - National News) ¶ 14:19 0 comments
The Green Party has said New Zealand should stop sending information obtained by its spy base to the United States following revelations it could be misused.
US President George W Bush has admitted he allowed domestic eavesdropping without court approval following the September 11 2001 terrorist attacks.
The revelation in the New York Times caused outrage in the US, with both Democrats and Republicans calling for congressional investigations into the decision.
The Greens' security and intelligence spokesman Keith Locke said New Zealand should suspend the transfer of data intercepted by the Waihopai spy base to the US National Security Agency (NSA).
Waihopai is part of the NSA-run Echelon communications intelligence network.
"Morally we can't continue to send the NSA communications intercepted at Waihopai when we know that their contents will be used illegally by the Bush administration," Mr Locke said.
(More ... Greens want block on passing spy information to US - 19 Dec 2005 - National News) ¶ 14:19 0 comments
12.18.2005
Pushing the Limits of Wartime Powers (WashingtonPost.com)
By Barton Gellman and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 18, 2005; Page A01
In his four-year campaign against al Qaeda, President Bush has turned the U.S. national security apparatus inward to secretly collect information on American citizens on a scale unmatched since the intelligence reforms of the 1970s.
The president's emphatic defense yesterday of warrantless eavesdropping on U.S. citizens and residents marked the third time in as many months that the White House has been obliged to defend a departure from previous restraints on domestic surveillance. In each case, the Bush administration concealed the program's dimensions or existence from the public and from most members of Congress.
Since October, news accounts have disclosed a burgeoning Pentagon campaign for "detecting, identifying and engaging" internal enemies that included a database with information on peace protesters. A debate has roiled over the FBI's use of national security letters to obtain secret access to the personal records of tens of thousands of Americans. And now come revelations of the National Security Agency's interception of telephone calls and e-mails from the United States -- without notice to the federal court that has held jurisdiction over domestic spying since 1978.
Defiant in the face of criticism, the Bush administration has portrayed each surveillance initiative as a defense of American freedom. Bush said yesterday that his NSA eavesdropping directives were "critical to saving American lives" and "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." After years of portraying an offensive waged largely overseas, Bush justified the internal surveillance with new emphasis on "the home front" and the need to hunt down "terrorists here at home."
Bush's constitutional argument, in the eyes of some legal scholars and previous White House advisers, relies on extraordinary claims of presidential war-making power. Bush said yesterday that the lawfulness of his directives was affirmed by the attorney general and White House counsel, a list that omitted the legislative and judicial branches of government. On occasion the Bush administration has explicitly rejected the authority of courts and Congress to impose boundaries on the power of the commander in chief, describing the president's war-making powers in legal briefs as "plenary" -- a term defined as "full," "complete," and "absolute."
(More ... Pushing the Limits Of Wartime Powers) ¶ 21:01 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, December 18, 2005; Page A01
In his four-year campaign against al Qaeda, President Bush has turned the U.S. national security apparatus inward to secretly collect information on American citizens on a scale unmatched since the intelligence reforms of the 1970s.
The president's emphatic defense yesterday of warrantless eavesdropping on U.S. citizens and residents marked the third time in as many months that the White House has been obliged to defend a departure from previous restraints on domestic surveillance. In each case, the Bush administration concealed the program's dimensions or existence from the public and from most members of Congress.
Since October, news accounts have disclosed a burgeoning Pentagon campaign for "detecting, identifying and engaging" internal enemies that included a database with information on peace protesters. A debate has roiled over the FBI's use of national security letters to obtain secret access to the personal records of tens of thousands of Americans. And now come revelations of the National Security Agency's interception of telephone calls and e-mails from the United States -- without notice to the federal court that has held jurisdiction over domestic spying since 1978.
Defiant in the face of criticism, the Bush administration has portrayed each surveillance initiative as a defense of American freedom. Bush said yesterday that his NSA eavesdropping directives were "critical to saving American lives" and "consistent with U.S. law and the Constitution." After years of portraying an offensive waged largely overseas, Bush justified the internal surveillance with new emphasis on "the home front" and the need to hunt down "terrorists here at home."
Bush's constitutional argument, in the eyes of some legal scholars and previous White House advisers, relies on extraordinary claims of presidential war-making power. Bush said yesterday that the lawfulness of his directives was affirmed by the attorney general and White House counsel, a list that omitted the legislative and judicial branches of government. On occasion the Bush administration has explicitly rejected the authority of courts and Congress to impose boundaries on the power of the commander in chief, describing the president's war-making powers in legal briefs as "plenary" -- a term defined as "full," "complete," and "absolute."
(More ... Pushing the Limits Of Wartime Powers) ¶ 21:01 0 comments
12.17.2005
Reflections in the Evening Land (Guardian.co.uk)
The celebrated critic Harold Bloom, despairing of contemporary America, turns to his bookshelves to understand the trajectory of his country
Saturday December 17, 2005
The Guardian
Huey Long, known as "the Kingfish," dominated the state of Louisiana from 1928 until his assassination in 1935, at the age of 42. Simultaneously governor and a United States senator, the canny Kingfish uttered a prophecy that haunts me in this late summer of 2005, 70 years after his violent end: "Of course we will have fascism in America but we will call it democracy!"
I reflected on Huey Long (always mediated for me by his portrait as Willie Stark in Robert Penn Warren's novel, All the King's Men) recently, when I listened to President George W Bush addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Salt Lake City, Utah. I was thus benefited by Rupert Murdoch's Fox TV channel, which is the voice of Bushian crusading democracy, very much of the Kingfish's variety. Even as Bush extolled his Iraq adventure, his regime daily fuses more tightly together elements of oligarchy, plutocracy, and theocracy.
At the age of 75, I wonder if the Democratic party ever again will hold the presidency or control the Congress in my lifetime. I am not sanguine, because our rulers have demonstrated their prowess in Florida (twice) and in Ohio at shaping voting procedures, and they control the Supreme Court. The economist-journalist Paul Krugman recently observed that the Republicans dare not allow themselves to lose either Congress or the White House, because subsequent investigations could disclose dark matters indeed. Krugman did not specify, but among the profiteers of our Iraq crusade are big oil (House of Bush/House of Saud), Halliburton (the vice-president), Bechtel (a nest of mighty Republicans) and so forth.
All of this is extraordinarily blatant, yet the American people seem benumbed, unable to read, think, or remember, and thus fit subjects for a president who shares their limitations. A grumpy old Democrat, I observe to my friends that our emperor is himself the best argument for intelligent design, the current theocratic substitute for what used to be called creationism. Sigmund Freud might be chagrined to discover that he is forgotten, while the satan of America is now Charles Darwin. President Bush, who says that Jesus is his "favourite philosopher", recently decreed in regard to intelligent design and evolution: "Both sides ought to be properly taught."
(More ... Guardian Unlimited Books | Review | Reflections in the Evening Land) ¶ 22:17 0 comments
Saturday December 17, 2005
The Guardian
Huey Long, known as "the Kingfish," dominated the state of Louisiana from 1928 until his assassination in 1935, at the age of 42. Simultaneously governor and a United States senator, the canny Kingfish uttered a prophecy that haunts me in this late summer of 2005, 70 years after his violent end: "Of course we will have fascism in America but we will call it democracy!"
I reflected on Huey Long (always mediated for me by his portrait as Willie Stark in Robert Penn Warren's novel, All the King's Men) recently, when I listened to President George W Bush addressing the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Salt Lake City, Utah. I was thus benefited by Rupert Murdoch's Fox TV channel, which is the voice of Bushian crusading democracy, very much of the Kingfish's variety. Even as Bush extolled his Iraq adventure, his regime daily fuses more tightly together elements of oligarchy, plutocracy, and theocracy.
At the age of 75, I wonder if the Democratic party ever again will hold the presidency or control the Congress in my lifetime. I am not sanguine, because our rulers have demonstrated their prowess in Florida (twice) and in Ohio at shaping voting procedures, and they control the Supreme Court. The economist-journalist Paul Krugman recently observed that the Republicans dare not allow themselves to lose either Congress or the White House, because subsequent investigations could disclose dark matters indeed. Krugman did not specify, but among the profiteers of our Iraq crusade are big oil (House of Bush/House of Saud), Halliburton (the vice-president), Bechtel (a nest of mighty Republicans) and so forth.
All of this is extraordinarily blatant, yet the American people seem benumbed, unable to read, think, or remember, and thus fit subjects for a president who shares their limitations. A grumpy old Democrat, I observe to my friends that our emperor is himself the best argument for intelligent design, the current theocratic substitute for what used to be called creationism. Sigmund Freud might be chagrined to discover that he is forgotten, while the satan of America is now Charles Darwin. President Bush, who says that Jesus is his "favourite philosopher", recently decreed in regard to intelligent design and evolution: "Both sides ought to be properly taught."
(More ... Guardian Unlimited Books | Review | Reflections in the Evening Land) ¶ 22:17 0 comments
Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts (NYTimes.com)
By JAMES RISEN and ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: December 16, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.
"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches."
Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.
According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and a judge presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence matters. Some of the questions about the agency's new powers led the administration to temporarily suspend the operation last year and impose more restrictions, the officials said.
The Bush administration views the operation as necessary so that the agency can move quickly to monitor communications that may disclose threats to the United States, the officials said. Defenders of the program say it has been a critical tool in helping disrupt terrorist plots and prevent attacks inside the United States.
(More ... Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts - New York Times) ¶ 10:44 0 comments
Published: December 16, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 15 - Months after the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush secretly authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.
Under a presidential order signed in 2002, the intelligence agency has monitored the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people inside the United States without warrants over the past three years in an effort to track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda, the officials said. The agency, they said, still seeks warrants to monitor entirely domestic communications.
The previously undisclosed decision to permit some eavesdropping inside the country without court approval was a major shift in American intelligence-gathering practices, particularly for the National Security Agency, whose mission is to spy on communications abroad. As a result, some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.
"This is really a sea change," said a former senior official who specializes in national security law. "It's almost a mainstay of this country that the N.S.A. only does foreign searches."
Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight.
According to those officials and others, reservations about aspects of the program have also been expressed by Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, the West Virginia Democrat who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, and a judge presiding over a secret court that oversees intelligence matters. Some of the questions about the agency's new powers led the administration to temporarily suspend the operation last year and impose more restrictions, the officials said.
The Bush administration views the operation as necessary so that the agency can move quickly to monitor communications that may disclose threats to the United States, the officials said. Defenders of the program say it has been a critical tool in helping disrupt terrorist plots and prevent attacks inside the United States.
(More ... Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts - New York Times) ¶ 10:44 0 comments
Bush Spying Claim Causes US Storm (news.BBC.co.uk)
Friday, 16 December 2005, 20:45 GMT
Allegations that President George Bush authorised security agents to eavesdrop on people inside the US have caused a storm of protest.
The New York Times says the National Security Agency was allowed to spy on hundreds of people without warrants.
The NSA is normally barred from eavesdropping within the US.
Republican Senator John McCain called for an explanation, while Senator Arlen Specter, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, said he would investigate.
"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Mr Specter, also a Republican, adding that Senate hearings would be held early next year as "a very, very high priority".
The allegations coincided with a setback for the Bush administration, as the Senate rejected extensions to spying provisions in the Patriot Act.
(More ... BBC NEWS | Americas | Bush spying claim causes US storm) ¶ 10:36 0 comments
Allegations that President George Bush authorised security agents to eavesdrop on people inside the US have caused a storm of protest.
The New York Times says the National Security Agency was allowed to spy on hundreds of people without warrants.
The NSA is normally barred from eavesdropping within the US.
Republican Senator John McCain called for an explanation, while Senator Arlen Specter, Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, said he would investigate.
"There is no doubt that this is inappropriate," said Mr Specter, also a Republican, adding that Senate hearings would be held early next year as "a very, very high priority".
The allegations coincided with a setback for the Bush administration, as the Senate rejected extensions to spying provisions in the Patriot Act.
(More ... BBC NEWS | Americas | Bush spying claim causes US storm) ¶ 10:36 0 comments
Patriot Act Renewal Fails in Senate (CNN.com)
GOP fights to save provisions before end-of-year deadline
Friday, December 16, 2005; Posted: 4:14 p.m. EST (21:14 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate on Friday rejected efforts to renew expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, dealing a major blow to President Bush and the Republican leadership.
Senators on both sides of the aisle argued that some of the act's provisions infringe on civil rights. The bipartisan group proposed a three-month extension to continue debate and amend certain provisions, but the Senate also rejected that proposal Friday.
The Senate needed 60 votes to override a filibuster and end debate, which is called "invoking cloture." Cloture would have brought the Patriot Act to a final vote, allowing the Senate to renew it by a simple majority.
But only 52 senators voted to cut off debate; 47 voted against cloture.
The move lays the groundwork for a high-stakes showdown.
(More ... CNN.com - Patriot Act renewal fails in Senate - Dec 16, 2005) ¶ 10:35 0 comments
Friday, December 16, 2005; Posted: 4:14 p.m. EST (21:14 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Senate on Friday rejected efforts to renew expiring provisions of the Patriot Act, dealing a major blow to President Bush and the Republican leadership.
Senators on both sides of the aisle argued that some of the act's provisions infringe on civil rights. The bipartisan group proposed a three-month extension to continue debate and amend certain provisions, but the Senate also rejected that proposal Friday.
The Senate needed 60 votes to override a filibuster and end debate, which is called "invoking cloture." Cloture would have brought the Patriot Act to a final vote, allowing the Senate to renew it by a simple majority.
But only 52 senators voted to cut off debate; 47 voted against cloture.
The move lays the groundwork for a high-stakes showdown.
(More ... CNN.com - Patriot Act renewal fails in Senate - Dec 16, 2005) ¶ 10:35 0 comments
12.16.2005
U.S. Ranks Sixth Among Countries Jailing Journalists, Report Says (NYTimes.com)
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: December 14, 2005
The United States has tied with Myanmar, the former Burma, for sixth place among countries that are holding the most journalists behind bars, according to a new report by the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Each country is jailing five journalists. The United States is holding four Iraqi journalists in detention centers in Iraq and one Sudanese, a cameraman who works for Al Jazeera, at the United States Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. None of the five have been charged with a specific crime.
This year, China topped the list of countries with the most journalists - 32 - in jail, many of them for activity on the Internet. This is the seventh year in a row in which China has led the list.
Fifteen of the Chinese journalists are being held under national security legislation for writing critically about the Communist Party online, the report said.
(More ... U.S. Ranks Sixth Among Countries Jailing Journalists, Report Says - New York Times) ¶ 08:12 0 comments
Published: December 14, 2005
The United States has tied with Myanmar, the former Burma, for sixth place among countries that are holding the most journalists behind bars, according to a new report by the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Each country is jailing five journalists. The United States is holding four Iraqi journalists in detention centers in Iraq and one Sudanese, a cameraman who works for Al Jazeera, at the United States Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. None of the five have been charged with a specific crime.
This year, China topped the list of countries with the most journalists - 32 - in jail, many of them for activity on the Internet. This is the seventh year in a row in which China has led the list.
Fifteen of the Chinese journalists are being held under national security legislation for writing critically about the Communist Party online, the report said.
(More ... U.S. Ranks Sixth Among Countries Jailing Journalists, Report Says - New York Times) ¶ 08:12 0 comments
12.12.2005
Hillary Clinton Crafts Centrist Stance on War (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 12, 2005; Page A01
At a time when politicians in both parties have eagerly sought public forums to debate the war in Iraq, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has kept in the shadows.
Clinton has stayed steadfastly on a centrist path, criticizing President Bush but refusing to embrace the early troop withdrawal options that are gaining rapid favor in her party. This careful balance is drawing increasing scorn from liberal activists, frustrated that one of the party's leading lights has shown little appetite to challenge Bush's policy more directly and embrace a plan to set a timetable for bringing U.S. forces home.
Clinton is confronting the Democratic Party's long-standing dilemma on national defense, with those harboring national ambitions caught between the passions of the antiwar left and political concerns that they remain vulnerable to charges of weakness from the Republicans if they embrace the party's base. But some Democrats say, the left not withstanding, her refusal to advocate a speedy exit from Iraq may reflect a more accurate reading of public anxiety about the choices now facing the country.
When Senate Democrats called on President Bush last month to explain the conditions and establish a schedule for withdrawing U.S. forces, Clinton offered backroom advice on the language but let others take the lead on the Senate floor. When Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) called for removing all U.S. troops from Iraq over the next six months, the New York senator told reporters she was opposed. When her advisers were later asked whether she supports a two-year phased withdrawal advocated by a liberal think tank and embraced by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, they demurred.
(More ... Hillary Clinton Crafts Centrist Stance on War) ¶ 21:49 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, December 12, 2005; Page A01
At a time when politicians in both parties have eagerly sought public forums to debate the war in Iraq, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has kept in the shadows.
Clinton has stayed steadfastly on a centrist path, criticizing President Bush but refusing to embrace the early troop withdrawal options that are gaining rapid favor in her party. This careful balance is drawing increasing scorn from liberal activists, frustrated that one of the party's leading lights has shown little appetite to challenge Bush's policy more directly and embrace a plan to set a timetable for bringing U.S. forces home.
Clinton is confronting the Democratic Party's long-standing dilemma on national defense, with those harboring national ambitions caught between the passions of the antiwar left and political concerns that they remain vulnerable to charges of weakness from the Republicans if they embrace the party's base. But some Democrats say, the left not withstanding, her refusal to advocate a speedy exit from Iraq may reflect a more accurate reading of public anxiety about the choices now facing the country.
When Senate Democrats called on President Bush last month to explain the conditions and establish a schedule for withdrawing U.S. forces, Clinton offered backroom advice on the language but let others take the lead on the Senate floor. When Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) called for removing all U.S. troops from Iraq over the next six months, the New York senator told reporters she was opposed. When her advisers were later asked whether she supports a two-year phased withdrawal advocated by a liberal think tank and embraced by Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean, they demurred.
(More ... Hillary Clinton Crafts Centrist Stance on War) ¶ 21:49 0 comments
Big Box Balderdash (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 12, 2005
I think I've just seen the worst economic argument of 2005. Given what the Bush administration tried to put over on us during its unsuccessful sales pitch for Social Security privatization, that's saying a lot.
The argument came in the course of the latest exchange between Wal-Mart and its critics. A union-supported group, Wake Up Wal-Mart, has released a TV ad accusing Wal-Mart of violating religious values, backed by a letter from religious leaders attacking the retail giant for paying low wages and offering poor benefits. The letter declares that "Jesus would not embrace Wal-Mart's values of greed and profits at any cost."
You may think that this particular campaign - which has, inevitably, been dubbed "Where would Jesus shop?" - is a bit over the top. But it's clear why those concerned about the state of American workers focus their criticism on Wal-Mart. The company isn't just America's largest private employer. It's also a symbol of the state of our economy, which delivers rising G.D.P. but stagnant or falling living standards for working Americans. For Wal-Mart is a huge and hugely profitable company that pays badly and offers minimal benefits.
Attacks on Wal-Mart have hurt its image, and perhaps even its business. The company has set up a campaign-style war room to devise responses. So how did Wal-Mart respond to this latest critique?
Wal-Mart can claim, with considerable justice, that its business practices make America as a whole richer. The fact is that Wal-Mart sells many products more cheaply than traditional stores, and that its low prices aren't solely or even mainly the result of the low wages it pays. Wal-Mart has been able to reduce prices largely because it has brought genuine technological and organizational innovation to the retail business.
(More ... Big Box Balderdash - New York Times) ¶ 21:46 0 comments
Published: December 12, 2005
I think I've just seen the worst economic argument of 2005. Given what the Bush administration tried to put over on us during its unsuccessful sales pitch for Social Security privatization, that's saying a lot.
The argument came in the course of the latest exchange between Wal-Mart and its critics. A union-supported group, Wake Up Wal-Mart, has released a TV ad accusing Wal-Mart of violating religious values, backed by a letter from religious leaders attacking the retail giant for paying low wages and offering poor benefits. The letter declares that "Jesus would not embrace Wal-Mart's values of greed and profits at any cost."
You may think that this particular campaign - which has, inevitably, been dubbed "Where would Jesus shop?" - is a bit over the top. But it's clear why those concerned about the state of American workers focus their criticism on Wal-Mart. The company isn't just America's largest private employer. It's also a symbol of the state of our economy, which delivers rising G.D.P. but stagnant or falling living standards for working Americans. For Wal-Mart is a huge and hugely profitable company that pays badly and offers minimal benefits.
Attacks on Wal-Mart have hurt its image, and perhaps even its business. The company has set up a campaign-style war room to devise responses. So how did Wal-Mart respond to this latest critique?
Wal-Mart can claim, with considerable justice, that its business practices make America as a whole richer. The fact is that Wal-Mart sells many products more cheaply than traditional stores, and that its low prices aren't solely or even mainly the result of the low wages it pays. Wal-Mart has been able to reduce prices largely because it has brought genuine technological and organizational innovation to the retail business.
(More ... Big Box Balderdash - New York Times) ¶ 21:46 0 comments
12.11.2005
Bush Presidential Library Destroyed by Flood
CRAWFORD, TEXAS--A tragic flood this morning destroyed the personal library of President George W. Bush.
The flood began in the presidential bathroom where both of the books were kept. Both of his books have been lost.
A presidential spokesman said the president was devastated, as he had almost finished coloring the second one.
The White House tried to call FEMA but there was no answer.
¶ 15:00 0 comments
12.10.2005
Clinton Says Bush Is 'Flat Wrong' on Kyoto (ABCNEWS.go.com)
By CHARLES J. HANLEY AP Special Correspondent
The Associated PressThe Associated Press
MONTREAL Dec 9, 2005 — Former President Clinton told a global audience of diplomats, environmentalists and others Friday that the Bush administration is "flat wrong" in claiming that reducing greenhouse gas emissions to fight global warming would damage the U.S. economy.
With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."
Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week U.N. climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.
Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.
"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," Clinton told hundreds of delegates, environmentalists and others. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."
(More ... ABC News: Clinton Says Bush Is 'Flat Wrong' on Kyoto) ¶ 09:59 0 comments
The Associated PressThe Associated Press
MONTREAL Dec 9, 2005 — Former President Clinton told a global audience of diplomats, environmentalists and others Friday that the Bush administration is "flat wrong" in claiming that reducing greenhouse gas emissions to fight global warming would damage the U.S. economy.
With a "serious disciplined effort" to develop energy-saving technology, he said, "we could meet and surpass the Kyoto targets in a way that would strengthen and not weaken our economies."
Clinton, a champion of the Kyoto Protocol, the existing emissions-controls agreement opposed by the Bush administration, spoke in the final hours of a two-week U.N. climate conference at which Washington has come under heavy criticism for its stand.
Most delegations appeared ready Friday to leave an unwilling United States behind and open a new round of negotiations on future cutbacks in the emissions blamed for global warming.
"There's no longer any serious doubt that climate change is real, accelerating and caused by human activities," Clinton told hundreds of delegates, environmentalists and others. "We are uncertain about how deep and the time of arrival of the consequences, but we are quite clear they will not be good."
(More ... ABC News: Clinton Says Bush Is 'Flat Wrong' on Kyoto) ¶ 09:59 0 comments
Democrats Consider Changes in Primaries (WashingtonPost.com)
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 9, 2005; Page A13
Democratic presidential candidates will face a revised calendar of primaries and caucuses in 2008, including new contests between the traditional opening states of Iowa and New Hampshire, based on new recommendations that will be considered by a Democratic National Committee panel tomorrow.
The commission faces a weekend deadline to approve a plan that responds to party criticisms that Iowa and New Hampshire have enjoyed their privileged positions for too long and that more demographic, geographic and economic diversity is needed to make the nominating process more representative.
A staff draft of the final report, which will be forwarded to DNC Chairman Howard Dean, began circulating yesterday. It appeared to be a compromise between proposals pushed by Southern and Western states for two to four contests between Iowa and New Hampshire and a proposal from protesting New Hampshire Democrats for additional contests immediately after the Granite State's primary.
The draft contains four principal recommendations, according to Democrats briefed on the plan, but the most significant calls for the addition of one or two caucuses during the eight-day gap between the Iowa and New Hampshire events and one or two primaries in the period after the New Hampshire primary and the date that formally opens the nominating process to other states.
That change would come with a recommendation to reaffirm the first-in-the-nation status of Iowa and New Hampshire and preserve Iowa's right to hold the first caucus and New Hampshire's right to stage the first primary.
(More ... Democrats Consider Changes in Primaries) ¶ 09:52 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 9, 2005; Page A13
Democratic presidential candidates will face a revised calendar of primaries and caucuses in 2008, including new contests between the traditional opening states of Iowa and New Hampshire, based on new recommendations that will be considered by a Democratic National Committee panel tomorrow.
The commission faces a weekend deadline to approve a plan that responds to party criticisms that Iowa and New Hampshire have enjoyed their privileged positions for too long and that more demographic, geographic and economic diversity is needed to make the nominating process more representative.
A staff draft of the final report, which will be forwarded to DNC Chairman Howard Dean, began circulating yesterday. It appeared to be a compromise between proposals pushed by Southern and Western states for two to four contests between Iowa and New Hampshire and a proposal from protesting New Hampshire Democrats for additional contests immediately after the Granite State's primary.
The draft contains four principal recommendations, according to Democrats briefed on the plan, but the most significant calls for the addition of one or two caucuses during the eight-day gap between the Iowa and New Hampshire events and one or two primaries in the period after the New Hampshire primary and the date that formally opens the nominating process to other states.
That change would come with a recommendation to reaffirm the first-in-the-nation status of Iowa and New Hampshire and preserve Iowa's right to hold the first caucus and New Hampshire's right to stage the first primary.
(More ... Democrats Consider Changes in Primaries) ¶ 09:52 0 comments
The Promiser in Chief - New York Times
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 9, 2005
Sometimes reconstruction delayed is reconstruction denied.
A few months after the invasion of Iraq, President Bush promised to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and economy. He - or, at any rate, his speechwriters - understood that reconstruction was important not just for its own sake, but as a way to deprive the growing insurgency of support. In October 2003 he declared that "the more electricity is available, the more jobs are available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become."
But for a long time, Iraqi reconstruction was more of a public relations exercise than a real effort. Remember when visiting congressmen were taken on tours of newly painted schools?
Both supporters and opponents of the war now argue that by moving so slowly on reconstruction, the Bush administration missed a crucial window of opportunity. By the time reconstruction spending began in earnest, it was in a losing race with a deteriorating security situation.
As a result, the electricity and jobs that were supposed to make the killers desperate never arrived. Iraq produced less electricity last month than in October 2003. The Iraqi government estimates the unemployment rate at 27 percent, but the real number is probably much higher.
Now we're losing another window of opportunity for reconstruction. But this time it's at home.
(More ... The Promiser in Chief - New York Times) ¶ 09:46 0 comments
Published: December 9, 2005
Sometimes reconstruction delayed is reconstruction denied.
A few months after the invasion of Iraq, President Bush promised to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure and economy. He - or, at any rate, his speechwriters - understood that reconstruction was important not just for its own sake, but as a way to deprive the growing insurgency of support. In October 2003 he declared that "the more electricity is available, the more jobs are available, the more kids that are going to school, the more desperate these killers become."
But for a long time, Iraqi reconstruction was more of a public relations exercise than a real effort. Remember when visiting congressmen were taken on tours of newly painted schools?
Both supporters and opponents of the war now argue that by moving so slowly on reconstruction, the Bush administration missed a crucial window of opportunity. By the time reconstruction spending began in earnest, it was in a losing race with a deteriorating security situation.
As a result, the electricity and jobs that were supposed to make the killers desperate never arrived. Iraq produced less electricity last month than in October 2003. The Iraqi government estimates the unemployment rate at 27 percent, but the real number is probably much higher.
Now we're losing another window of opportunity for reconstruction. But this time it's at home.
(More ... The Promiser in Chief - New York Times) ¶ 09:46 0 comments
12.08.2005
Canada Turns Climate Focus on US (news.BBC.co.uk)
By Tim Hirsch
BBC Environment Correspondent, Montreal
Canada's prime minister has urged the US to "listen to its conscience" and take further steps to reduce emissions linked to global warming.
Paul Martin was speaking at the UN climate change conference in Montreal, where talks on long-term strategies are reaching a critical stage.
It is not only the United States which has come under fire.
A British government minister has accused Saudi Arabia of using "outrageous" tactics to block progress.
Mr Martin, who is in the second week of his own campaign for re-election, formally opened the ministerial section of the conference on Wednesday.
His speech was clearly aimed at the United States, although he did not mention the country by name.
He told delegates from around 190 countries that "climate change is a global challenge that demands a global response, yet there are nations that resist...
"Well, it is our problem to solve. We are in this together."
(More ... BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Canada turns climate focus on US) ¶ 18:08 0 comments
BBC Environment Correspondent, Montreal
Canada's prime minister has urged the US to "listen to its conscience" and take further steps to reduce emissions linked to global warming.
Paul Martin was speaking at the UN climate change conference in Montreal, where talks on long-term strategies are reaching a critical stage.
It is not only the United States which has come under fire.
A British government minister has accused Saudi Arabia of using "outrageous" tactics to block progress.
Mr Martin, who is in the second week of his own campaign for re-election, formally opened the ministerial section of the conference on Wednesday.
His speech was clearly aimed at the United States, although he did not mention the country by name.
He told delegates from around 190 countries that "climate change is a global challenge that demands a global response, yet there are nations that resist...
"Well, it is our problem to solve. We are in this together."
(More ... BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Canada turns climate focus on US) ¶ 18:08 0 comments
Australia Leaves U.S. in the Cold at Climate Talks (ABC.net.au)
Last Update: Thursday, December 8, 2005. 2:24pm (AEDT)
Australia has broken ranks with the US at a key global climate change conference in Montreal, backing early negotiations for deeper cuts in greenhouse gases.
Ministers and representatives from 189 countries and entities are in Canada this week debating the shape of the Kyoto Protocol after the UN climate pact expires in 2012.
The US and Australia are not signatories to the agreement, which has set targets for industrialised countries to reduce carbon-based gases.
Australia and other countries have left the US isolated, endorsing a Canadian proposal for countries to hold talks over the next two years to find ways of curbing greenhouse gas emissions.
"The reality is that we can only make meaningful global greenhouse gas reductions if effective action is taken by all the major emitting countries," Environment Minister Ian Campbell said.
The conference is taking place under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the fruit of the 1992 Rio Summit.
(More ... Aust leaves US in the cold at climate talks. 08/12/2005. ABC News Online) ¶ 18:04 0 comments
Australia has broken ranks with the US at a key global climate change conference in Montreal, backing early negotiations for deeper cuts in greenhouse gases.
Ministers and representatives from 189 countries and entities are in Canada this week debating the shape of the Kyoto Protocol after the UN climate pact expires in 2012.
The US and Australia are not signatories to the agreement, which has set targets for industrialised countries to reduce carbon-based gases.
Australia and other countries have left the US isolated, endorsing a Canadian proposal for countries to hold talks over the next two years to find ways of curbing greenhouse gas emissions.
"The reality is that we can only make meaningful global greenhouse gas reductions if effective action is taken by all the major emitting countries," Environment Minister Ian Campbell said.
The conference is taking place under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the fruit of the 1992 Rio Summit.
(More ... Aust leaves US in the cold at climate talks. 08/12/2005. ABC News Online) ¶ 18:04 0 comments
Playwright Takes a Prize and a Jab at U.S. (NYTimes.com)
By SARAH LYALL
Published: December 8, 2005
LONDON, Dec. 7 - The playwright Harold Pinter turned his Nobel Prize acceptance speech on Wednesday into a furious howl of outrage against American foreign policy, saying that the United States had not only lied to justify waging war against Iraq but had also "supported and in many cases engendered every right-wing military dictatorship" in the last 50 years.
"The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them," Mr. Pinter said. "You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis."
Sitting in a wheelchair, his lap covered by a blanket, his voice hoarse but unwavering, Mr. Pinter, 75, delivered his speech via a video recording that was played on Wednesday at the Swedish Academy in Stockholm. Doctors told him several years ago that he had cancer of the esophagus and recently ordered him not to travel to Stockholm for the speech, his publisher said.
The playwright, known in recent years as much for his fiery anti-Americanism as for his spare prose style and haunting, elliptical plays like "The Caretaker" and "The Homecoming," was awarded the $1.3 million Nobel literature prize in October. In its citation, the Swedish Academy made little mention of his political views, saying only that he is known as a "fighter for human rights" whose stands are often "seen as controversial." It mostly focused on his work, saying that Mr. Pinter "uncovers the precipice under everyday prattle and forces entry into oppression's closed rooms."
(More ... Playwright Takes a Prize and a Jab at U.S. - New York Times) ¶ 17:51 0 comments
Published: December 8, 2005
LONDON, Dec. 7 - The playwright Harold Pinter turned his Nobel Prize acceptance speech on Wednesday into a furious howl of outrage against American foreign policy, saying that the United States had not only lied to justify waging war against Iraq but had also "supported and in many cases engendered every right-wing military dictatorship" in the last 50 years.
"The crimes of the United States have been systematic, constant, vicious, remorseless, but very few people have actually talked about them," Mr. Pinter said. "You have to hand it to America. It has exercised a quite clinical manipulation of power worldwide while masquerading as a force for universal good. It's a brilliant, even witty, highly successful act of hypnosis."
Sitting in a wheelchair, his lap covered by a blanket, his voice hoarse but unwavering, Mr. Pinter, 75, delivered his speech via a video recording that was played on Wednesday at the Swedish Academy in Stockholm. Doctors told him several years ago that he had cancer of the esophagus and recently ordered him not to travel to Stockholm for the speech, his publisher said.
The playwright, known in recent years as much for his fiery anti-Americanism as for his spare prose style and haunting, elliptical plays like "The Caretaker" and "The Homecoming," was awarded the $1.3 million Nobel literature prize in October. In its citation, the Swedish Academy made little mention of his political views, saying only that he is known as a "fighter for human rights" whose stands are often "seen as controversial." It mostly focused on his work, saying that Mr. Pinter "uncovers the precipice under everyday prattle and forces entry into oppression's closed rooms."
(More ... Playwright Takes a Prize and a Jab at U.S. - New York Times) ¶ 17:51 0 comments
12.07.2005
U.S. Defence of Tactic Makes No Sense Says Legal Expert (Guardian.co.uk)
Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Tuesday December 6, 2005
The Guardian
The robust defence of rendition offered yesterday by the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, marks the export to a European audience of a position on torture that is becoming increasingly uncomfortable for the Bush administration.
Ms Rice's arguments yesterday hinge on her insistence that rendition was a legitimate and necessary tool for the changed circumstances brought by the war on terror. "The captured terrorists of the 21st century do not fit easily into traditional systems of criminal or military justice," she said.
Ms Rice went on to note that the practice had been deployed "for decades" before the terror attacks of September 11 2001. "Its use is not unique to the United States, or to the current administration," she said.
However, her assurances that spiriting terror suspects away to clandestine prisons is a legitimate tactic did not carry much weight with human rights organisations or legal scholars yesterday.
They argued that the sole use of extraordinary rendition was to transport a suspect to a locale that was beyond the reach of the law - and so at risk of torture.
"The argument makes no sense unless there is an assumption that the purpose of rendition is to send people to a place where things could be done to them that could not be done in the United States," said David Luban, a law professor at Georgetown University who is presently a visiting professor at Stanford University.
"Rendition doesn't become a tool in the war against terror unless people are being sent to a place where they can be interrogated harshly."
(More ... Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | US defence of tactic makes no sense says legal expert) ¶ 22:31 0 comments
Tuesday December 6, 2005
The Guardian
The robust defence of rendition offered yesterday by the secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, marks the export to a European audience of a position on torture that is becoming increasingly uncomfortable for the Bush administration.
Ms Rice's arguments yesterday hinge on her insistence that rendition was a legitimate and necessary tool for the changed circumstances brought by the war on terror. "The captured terrorists of the 21st century do not fit easily into traditional systems of criminal or military justice," she said.
Ms Rice went on to note that the practice had been deployed "for decades" before the terror attacks of September 11 2001. "Its use is not unique to the United States, or to the current administration," she said.
However, her assurances that spiriting terror suspects away to clandestine prisons is a legitimate tactic did not carry much weight with human rights organisations or legal scholars yesterday.
They argued that the sole use of extraordinary rendition was to transport a suspect to a locale that was beyond the reach of the law - and so at risk of torture.
"The argument makes no sense unless there is an assumption that the purpose of rendition is to send people to a place where things could be done to them that could not be done in the United States," said David Luban, a law professor at Georgetown University who is presently a visiting professor at Stanford University.
"Rendition doesn't become a tool in the war against terror unless people are being sent to a place where they can be interrogated harshly."
(More ... Guardian Unlimited | The Guardian | US defence of tactic makes no sense says legal expert) ¶ 22:31 0 comments
Bush: 'I Know We're Going to Win' in Iraq (CNN.com)
Republicans react to Dean's comment comparing Iraq to Vietnam
Tuesday, December 6, 2005; Posted: 11:18 p.m. EST (04:18 GMT)
(CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday added his voice to Republican criticism of Howard Dean's statement that the United States cannot win the war in Iraq.
"I know we're going to win," Bush told reporters at the White House. "Our troops need to hear not only are they supported, but that we have got a strategy that will win."
Dean, the Democratic National Chairman, on Monday told a San Antonio, Texas, radio station that the United States appears to be making the same mistakes it made during the Vietnam War, and the idea that the war in Iraq can be won is "just plain wrong."
Dean drew parallels between the current administration's plan to turn security over to the Iraqis and efforts during the Vietnam War to give similar responsibilities to the South Vietnamese.
South Vietnam fell to the communists in 1975, two years after the U.S. withdrawal.
"I do not believe in making the same mistake twice, and America appears to have made the same mistake twice," Dean said during an interview with WOIA radio, adding that he wished Bush "had paid more attention to the history of Iraq before we had gotten in there."
(More ... CNN.com - Bush: 'I know we're going to win' in Iraq - Dec 6, 2005) ¶ 21:30 0 comments
Tuesday, December 6, 2005; Posted: 11:18 p.m. EST (04:18 GMT)
(CNN) -- President Bush on Tuesday added his voice to Republican criticism of Howard Dean's statement that the United States cannot win the war in Iraq.
"I know we're going to win," Bush told reporters at the White House. "Our troops need to hear not only are they supported, but that we have got a strategy that will win."
Dean, the Democratic National Chairman, on Monday told a San Antonio, Texas, radio station that the United States appears to be making the same mistakes it made during the Vietnam War, and the idea that the war in Iraq can be won is "just plain wrong."
Dean drew parallels between the current administration's plan to turn security over to the Iraqis and efforts during the Vietnam War to give similar responsibilities to the South Vietnamese.
South Vietnam fell to the communists in 1975, two years after the U.S. withdrawal.
"I do not believe in making the same mistake twice, and America appears to have made the same mistake twice," Dean said during an interview with WOIA radio, adding that he wished Bush "had paid more attention to the history of Iraq before we had gotten in there."
(More ... CNN.com - Bush: 'I know we're going to win' in Iraq - Dec 6, 2005) ¶ 21:30 0 comments
Voting Machines Under Scrutiny (WashingtonPost.com)
States Face a Jan. 1 Deadline to Meet Reliability Standards
By Brian Bergstein
Associated Press
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; Page A23
The potential perils of electronic voting systems are bedeviling state officials as a Jan. 1 deadline approaches for complying with standards for the machines' reliability.
Across the country, officials are trying multiple methods to ensure that touch-screen voting machines can record and count votes without falling prey to software bugs, hackers, malicious insiders or other ills.
These are not theoretical problems -- in some states they have led to lost or miscounted votes.
One of the biggest concerns -- the frequent inability of computerized ballots to produce a written receipt of a vote -- has been addressed or is being tackled in most states.
An October report from the Government Accountability Office predicted that steps to improve the reliability of electronic voting "are unlikely to have a significant effect" in the 2006 off-year elections, partly because certification procedures remain a work in progress.
(More ... Voting Machines Under Scrutiny) ¶ 21:22 0 comments
By Brian Bergstein
Associated Press
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; Page A23
The potential perils of electronic voting systems are bedeviling state officials as a Jan. 1 deadline approaches for complying with standards for the machines' reliability.
Across the country, officials are trying multiple methods to ensure that touch-screen voting machines can record and count votes without falling prey to software bugs, hackers, malicious insiders or other ills.
These are not theoretical problems -- in some states they have led to lost or miscounted votes.
One of the biggest concerns -- the frequent inability of computerized ballots to produce a written receipt of a vote -- has been addressed or is being tackled in most states.
An October report from the Government Accountability Office predicted that steps to improve the reliability of electronic voting "are unlikely to have a significant effect" in the 2006 off-year elections, partly because certification procedures remain a work in progress.
(More ... Voting Machines Under Scrutiny) ¶ 21:22 0 comments
Democrats Fear Backlash at Polls for Antiwar Remarks (WashingtonPost.com)
By Jim VandeHei and Shalaigh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; Page A01
Strong antiwar comments in recent days by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean have opened anew a party rift over Iraq, with some lawmakers warning that the leaders' rhetorical blasts could harm efforts to win control of Congress next year.
Several Democrats joined President Bush yesterday in rebuking Dean's declaration to a San Antonio radio station Monday that "the idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong."
The critics said that comment could reinforce popular perceptions that the party is weak on military matters and divert attention from the president's growing political problems on the war and other issues. "Dean's take on Iraq makes even less sense than the scream in Iowa: Both are uninformed and unhelpful," said Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), recalling Dean's famous election-night roar after stumbling in Iowa during his 2004 presidential bid.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy withdrawal, combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party, congressional sources said.
(More ... Democrats Fear Backlash at Polls for Antiwar Remarks) ¶ 21:19 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, December 7, 2005; Page A01
Strong antiwar comments in recent days by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean have opened anew a party rift over Iraq, with some lawmakers warning that the leaders' rhetorical blasts could harm efforts to win control of Congress next year.
Several Democrats joined President Bush yesterday in rebuking Dean's declaration to a San Antonio radio station Monday that "the idea that we're going to win the war in Iraq is an idea which is just plain wrong."
The critics said that comment could reinforce popular perceptions that the party is weak on military matters and divert attention from the president's growing political problems on the war and other issues. "Dean's take on Iraq makes even less sense than the scream in Iowa: Both are uninformed and unhelpful," said Rep. Jim Marshall (D-Ga.), recalling Dean's famous election-night roar after stumbling in Iowa during his 2004 presidential bid.
Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), the second-ranking House Democratic leader, have told colleagues that Pelosi's recent endorsement of a speedy withdrawal, combined with her claim that more than half of House Democrats support her position, could backfire on the party, congressional sources said.
(More ... Democrats Fear Backlash at Polls for Antiwar Remarks) ¶ 21:19 0 comments
Skepticism Seems to Erode Europeans' Faith in Rice (NYTimes.com)
By RICHARD BERNSTEIN
Published: December 7, 2005
BERLIN, Dec. 6 - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did what was expected, many people in Europe said Tuesday, after her meetings with Chancellor Angela Merkel and other German officials. She gave reassurances that the United States would not tolerate torture and, while not admitting mistakes, promised to correct any that had been made.
She accompanied that with an impassioned argument for aggressive intelligence gathering, within the law, as an indispensable means of saving lives endangered by an unusually dangerous and unscrupulous foe.
Did anybody believe her on this continent, aroused as rarely before by a raft of reports about secret prisons, C.I.A. flights, allegations of torture and of "renditions," or transfers, of prisoners to third countries so they can be tortured there?
"Yes, I did," Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, a conservative member of the German Parliament, said in a telephone interview on Tuesday. "The thing I believe is that the United States does obey international law, and Mrs. Merkel said that she believes it too."
Not everybody here is of that view, to say the least. Indeed, it would be hard to imagine a more sudden and thorough tarnishing of the Bush administration's credibility than the one taking place here right now. There have been too many reports in the news media about renditions - including one involving an Lebanese-born German citizen, Khaled el- Masri, kidnapped in Macedonia in December 2003 and imprisoned in Afghanistan for several months on the mistaken assumption that he was an associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers - for blanket disclaimers of torture to be widely believed.
(More ... Skepticism Seems to Erode Europeans' Faith in Rice - New York Times) ¶ 21:16 0 comments
Published: December 7, 2005
BERLIN, Dec. 6 - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did what was expected, many people in Europe said Tuesday, after her meetings with Chancellor Angela Merkel and other German officials. She gave reassurances that the United States would not tolerate torture and, while not admitting mistakes, promised to correct any that had been made.
She accompanied that with an impassioned argument for aggressive intelligence gathering, within the law, as an indispensable means of saving lives endangered by an unusually dangerous and unscrupulous foe.
Did anybody believe her on this continent, aroused as rarely before by a raft of reports about secret prisons, C.I.A. flights, allegations of torture and of "renditions," or transfers, of prisoners to third countries so they can be tortured there?
"Yes, I did," Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg, a conservative member of the German Parliament, said in a telephone interview on Tuesday. "The thing I believe is that the United States does obey international law, and Mrs. Merkel said that she believes it too."
Not everybody here is of that view, to say the least. Indeed, it would be hard to imagine a more sudden and thorough tarnishing of the Bush administration's credibility than the one taking place here right now. There have been too many reports in the news media about renditions - including one involving an Lebanese-born German citizen, Khaled el- Masri, kidnapped in Macedonia in December 2003 and imprisoned in Afghanistan for several months on the mistaken assumption that he was an associate of the Sept. 11 hijackers - for blanket disclaimers of torture to be widely believed.
(More ... Skepticism Seems to Erode Europeans' Faith in Rice - New York Times) ¶ 21:16 0 comments
Not Guilty Verdicts in Florida Terror Trial Are Setback for U.S. (NYTimes.com)
By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: December 7, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 - In a major defeat for law enforcement officials, a jury in Florida failed to return guilty verdicts Tuesday on any of 51 criminal counts against a former Florida professor and three co-defendants accused of operating a North American front for Palestinian terrorists.
Sami al-Arian was accused of being a member of a terror group.
The former professor, Sami al-Arian, a fiery advocate for Palestinian causes who became a lightning rod for criticism nationwide over his vocal anti-Israeli stances, was found not guilty on eight criminal counts related to terrorist support, perjury and immigration violations.
The jury deadlocked on the remaining nine counts against him after deliberating for 13 days, and it did not return any guilty verdicts against the three other defendants in the case.
"This was a political prosecution from the start, and I think the jury realized that," Linda Moreno, one of Mr. Arian's defense lawyers, said in a telephone interview. "They looked over at Sami al-Arian; they saw a man who had taken unpopular positions on issues thousands of miles away, but they realized he wasn't a terrorist. The truth is a powerful thing."
Federal officials in Washington expressed surprise at the verdict in a case they had pursued for years.
(More ... Not Guilty Verdicts in Florida Terror Trial Are Setback for U.S. - New York Times) ¶ 21:12 0 comments
Published: December 7, 2005
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 - In a major defeat for law enforcement officials, a jury in Florida failed to return guilty verdicts Tuesday on any of 51 criminal counts against a former Florida professor and three co-defendants accused of operating a North American front for Palestinian terrorists.
Sami al-Arian was accused of being a member of a terror group.
The former professor, Sami al-Arian, a fiery advocate for Palestinian causes who became a lightning rod for criticism nationwide over his vocal anti-Israeli stances, was found not guilty on eight criminal counts related to terrorist support, perjury and immigration violations.
The jury deadlocked on the remaining nine counts against him after deliberating for 13 days, and it did not return any guilty verdicts against the three other defendants in the case.
"This was a political prosecution from the start, and I think the jury realized that," Linda Moreno, one of Mr. Arian's defense lawyers, said in a telephone interview. "They looked over at Sami al-Arian; they saw a man who had taken unpopular positions on issues thousands of miles away, but they realized he wasn't a terrorist. The truth is a powerful thing."
Federal officials in Washington expressed surprise at the verdict in a case they had pursued for years.
(More ... Not Guilty Verdicts in Florida Terror Trial Are Setback for U.S. - New York Times) ¶ 21:12 0 comments
Secretary Rice's Rendition (NYTimes.com)
EDITORIAL
Published: December 7, 2005
It was a sad enough measure of how badly the Bush administration has damaged its moral standing that the secretary of state had to deny that the president condones torture before she could visit some of the most reliable American allies in Europe. It was even worse that she had a hard time sounding credible when she did it.
Of course, it would have helped if Condoleezza Rice was actually in a position to convince the world that the United States has not, does not and will not torture prisoners. But there's just too much evidence that this has happened at the hands of American interrogators or their proxies in other countries. Vice President Dick Cheney is still lobbying to legalize torture at the C.I.A.'s secret prisons, and to block a law that would reimpose on military prisons the decades-old standard of decent treatment that Mr. Bush scrapped after 9/11.
Pesky facts keep getting in the way of Ms. Rice's message. Yesterday, the new German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said that Ms. Rice had acknowledged privately that the United States should not have abducted a German citizen, Khaled el-Masri, who says he was sent to Afghanistan and mistreated for five months before the Americans realized that they had the wrong man and let him go.
Pesky facts keep getting in the way of Ms. Rice's message. Yesterday, the new German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said that Ms. Rice had acknowledged privately that the United States should not have abducted a German citizen, Khaled el-Masri, who says he was sent to Afghanistan and mistreated for five months before the Americans realized that they had the wrong man and let him go.
(More ... Secretary Rice's Rendition - New York Times) ¶ 21:07 0 comments
Published: December 7, 2005
It was a sad enough measure of how badly the Bush administration has damaged its moral standing that the secretary of state had to deny that the president condones torture before she could visit some of the most reliable American allies in Europe. It was even worse that she had a hard time sounding credible when she did it.
Of course, it would have helped if Condoleezza Rice was actually in a position to convince the world that the United States has not, does not and will not torture prisoners. But there's just too much evidence that this has happened at the hands of American interrogators or their proxies in other countries. Vice President Dick Cheney is still lobbying to legalize torture at the C.I.A.'s secret prisons, and to block a law that would reimpose on military prisons the decades-old standard of decent treatment that Mr. Bush scrapped after 9/11.
Pesky facts keep getting in the way of Ms. Rice's message. Yesterday, the new German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said that Ms. Rice had acknowledged privately that the United States should not have abducted a German citizen, Khaled el-Masri, who says he was sent to Afghanistan and mistreated for five months before the Americans realized that they had the wrong man and let him go.
Pesky facts keep getting in the way of Ms. Rice's message. Yesterday, the new German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said that Ms. Rice had acknowledged privately that the United States should not have abducted a German citizen, Khaled el-Masri, who says he was sent to Afghanistan and mistreated for five months before the Americans realized that they had the wrong man and let him go.
(More ... Secretary Rice's Rendition - New York Times) ¶ 21:07 0 comments
U.S. Facing Pressure to Sign Up to Future Climate Protocols (Independent.co.uk)
By Andrew Buncombe in Montreal
Published: 05 December 2005
The United States will this week face intense lobbying in an effort to force concrete action from the Bush administration over climate change when ministers from around the world meet at a United Nations summit in Canada. A failure to obtain some concession from the US would lead to further condemnation of both President George Bush and Tony Blair, who has said he believes a legally-binding commitment is achievable.
When the talks on climate change opened last week, the US chief negotiator made clear the US would not be part of a binding agreement to cut emissions of greenhouse gases once the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012. "We would certainly not agree to the United States being part of legally binding targets and timetable agreement post-2012," said Harlan Watson.
But in this second week of talks, conducted by high-level ministers, the US will be strongly lobbied by conference hosts Canada and the EU, of which Britain currently holds the presidency. They believe that Mr Watson's initial flat-out refusal may have been a negotiating tactic and that the US could be persuaded to move from that position.
The talks are to discuss the second phase of the Kyoto protocol, established in 1997, which came into effect in February this year. Currently, 36 countries are bound to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by around 5.2 per cent below their 1990 levels by 2012.
Britain is on track to meet this target though not all of the 36 so-called "annex B" countries are.
The US - which contributes 25 per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions - is not part of the protocol but is at the conference as an observer, and a signatory to a UN climate change convention dating from 1992.
This week's talks in Montreal will focus on what happens after 2012.
Campaigners want to see agreement to a new round of negotiations on fresh emission reduction targets and a timetable to reach that commitment.
In advance of the conference, Mr Blair sounded optimistic. Speaking to the Confederation of British Industry last month, he said: "I believe there will be a binding international agreement to succeed Kyoto when it expires in 2012 that will include all major economies." But some campaigners believe that efforts to persuade the US to act are a waste of time while the current administration holds the White House. They also believe that both the US and Britain could seek to take credit for even the slightest - and essentially meaningless - undertaking from Washington.
They believe energy is better invested persuading countries such as South Africa to sign up to legally binding agreements.
Catherine Pearce, climate campaigner for Friends of the Earth International (FOEI), said: "The US is not going to move. If they are not going to sign up to Kyoto they are not going to sign up to legally binding targets...The worry is that if the US moves an inch then Canada and the EU will say we have done really well."
The Bush administration - which has repeatedly questioned the established science on climate change - rejected Kyoto on the grounds that it would be too damaging to the US economy. It is involved in other international negotiations on global warming, including one that looks at developing new technology to reduce greenhouse gases but does not set any targets.
Campaigners believe the attitude elsewhere in the US is different. They point out that a majority of Senators have called for mandatory limits on emissions and that more than 150 US mayors have pledged to reduce their cities' pollutants to match Kyoto's aims.
Critics of Mr Blair say he has retreated from previous commitments to be a global leader on climate change and that he changes his pitch depending on his audience. The WWF said he was "indistinguishable" from Mr Bush, after he last month insisted that "the blunt truth about the politics of climate change is that no country will want to sacrifice its economy in order to meet this challenge".
The United States will this week face intense lobbying in an effort to force concrete action from the Bush administration over climate change when ministers from around the world meet at a United Nations summit in Canada. A failure to obtain some concession from the US would lead to further condemnation of both President George Bush and Tony Blair, who has said he believes a legally-binding commitment is achievable.
When the talks on climate change opened last week, the US chief negotiator made clear the US would not be part of a binding agreement to cut emissions of greenhouse gases once the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012. "We would certainly not agree to the United States being part of legally binding targets and timetable agreement post-2012," said Harlan Watson.
But in this second week of talks, conducted by high-level ministers, the US will be strongly lobbied by conference hosts Canada and the EU, of which Britain currently holds the presidency. They believe that Mr Watson's initial flat-out refusal may have been a negotiating tactic and that the US could be persuaded to move from that position.
(More ... Independent Online Edition > Environment) ¶ 08:07 0 comments
Published: 05 December 2005
The United States will this week face intense lobbying in an effort to force concrete action from the Bush administration over climate change when ministers from around the world meet at a United Nations summit in Canada. A failure to obtain some concession from the US would lead to further condemnation of both President George Bush and Tony Blair, who has said he believes a legally-binding commitment is achievable.
When the talks on climate change opened last week, the US chief negotiator made clear the US would not be part of a binding agreement to cut emissions of greenhouse gases once the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012. "We would certainly not agree to the United States being part of legally binding targets and timetable agreement post-2012," said Harlan Watson.
But in this second week of talks, conducted by high-level ministers, the US will be strongly lobbied by conference hosts Canada and the EU, of which Britain currently holds the presidency. They believe that Mr Watson's initial flat-out refusal may have been a negotiating tactic and that the US could be persuaded to move from that position.
The talks are to discuss the second phase of the Kyoto protocol, established in 1997, which came into effect in February this year. Currently, 36 countries are bound to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by around 5.2 per cent below their 1990 levels by 2012.
Britain is on track to meet this target though not all of the 36 so-called "annex B" countries are.
The US - which contributes 25 per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions - is not part of the protocol but is at the conference as an observer, and a signatory to a UN climate change convention dating from 1992.
This week's talks in Montreal will focus on what happens after 2012.
Campaigners want to see agreement to a new round of negotiations on fresh emission reduction targets and a timetable to reach that commitment.
In advance of the conference, Mr Blair sounded optimistic. Speaking to the Confederation of British Industry last month, he said: "I believe there will be a binding international agreement to succeed Kyoto when it expires in 2012 that will include all major economies." But some campaigners believe that efforts to persuade the US to act are a waste of time while the current administration holds the White House. They also believe that both the US and Britain could seek to take credit for even the slightest - and essentially meaningless - undertaking from Washington.
They believe energy is better invested persuading countries such as South Africa to sign up to legally binding agreements.
Catherine Pearce, climate campaigner for Friends of the Earth International (FOEI), said: "The US is not going to move. If they are not going to sign up to Kyoto they are not going to sign up to legally binding targets...The worry is that if the US moves an inch then Canada and the EU will say we have done really well."
The Bush administration - which has repeatedly questioned the established science on climate change - rejected Kyoto on the grounds that it would be too damaging to the US economy. It is involved in other international negotiations on global warming, including one that looks at developing new technology to reduce greenhouse gases but does not set any targets.
Campaigners believe the attitude elsewhere in the US is different. They point out that a majority of Senators have called for mandatory limits on emissions and that more than 150 US mayors have pledged to reduce their cities' pollutants to match Kyoto's aims.
Critics of Mr Blair say he has retreated from previous commitments to be a global leader on climate change and that he changes his pitch depending on his audience. The WWF said he was "indistinguishable" from Mr Bush, after he last month insisted that "the blunt truth about the politics of climate change is that no country will want to sacrifice its economy in order to meet this challenge".
The United States will this week face intense lobbying in an effort to force concrete action from the Bush administration over climate change when ministers from around the world meet at a United Nations summit in Canada. A failure to obtain some concession from the US would lead to further condemnation of both President George Bush and Tony Blair, who has said he believes a legally-binding commitment is achievable.
When the talks on climate change opened last week, the US chief negotiator made clear the US would not be part of a binding agreement to cut emissions of greenhouse gases once the Kyoto protocol expires in 2012. "We would certainly not agree to the United States being part of legally binding targets and timetable agreement post-2012," said Harlan Watson.
But in this second week of talks, conducted by high-level ministers, the US will be strongly lobbied by conference hosts Canada and the EU, of which Britain currently holds the presidency. They believe that Mr Watson's initial flat-out refusal may have been a negotiating tactic and that the US could be persuaded to move from that position.
(More ... Independent Online Edition > Environment) ¶ 08:07 0 comments
12.05.2005
The Joyless Economy (NYTimes.com)
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Published: December 5, 2005
Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.
Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?
Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.
I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special - in fact, a bit subpar - during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.
But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.
Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.
(More ... The Joyless Economy - New York Times) ¶ 21:32 0 comments
Published: December 5, 2005
Falling gasoline prices have led to some improvement in consumer confidence over the past few weeks. But the public remains deeply unhappy about the state of the economy. According to the latest Gallup poll, 63 percent of Americans rate the economy as only fair or poor, and by 58 to 36 percent people say economic conditions are getting worse, not better.
Yet by some measures, the economy is doing reasonably well. In particular, gross domestic product is rising at a pretty fast clip. So why aren't people pleased with the economy's performance?
Like everything these days, this is a political as well as factual question. The Bush administration seems genuinely puzzled that it isn't getting more credit for what it thinks is a booming economy. So let me be helpful here and explain what's going on.
I could point out that the economic numbers, especially the job numbers, aren't as good as the Bush people imagine. President Bush made an appearance in the Rose Garden to hail the latest jobs report, yet a gain of 215,000 jobs would have been considered nothing special - in fact, a bit subpar - during the Clinton years. And because the average workweek shrank a bit, the total number of hours worked actually fell last month.
But the main explanation for economic discontent is that it's hard to convince people that the economy is booming when they themselves have yet to see any benefits from the supposed boom. Over the last few years G.D.P. growth has been reasonably good, and corporate profits have soared. But that growth has failed to trickle down to most Americans.
Back in August the Census bureau released family income data for 2004. The report, which was overshadowed by Hurricane Katrina, showed a remarkable disconnect between overall economic growth and the economic fortunes of most American families.
(More ... The Joyless Economy - New York Times) ¶ 21:32 0 comments
Bush Seeking Compromise on CIA Torture Ban: Aide (Reuters.com)
Sun Dec 4, 2005 1:24 PM ET
By Mohammad Zargham
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House is seeking a compromise with a leading Senate Republican over its efforts to exempt the CIA from a proposed ban on torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, President George W. Bush's national security adviser said on Sunday.
"We are working hard in good faith on both sides to come up with an approach that can be supported by the president and the Congress, to both find a way to be aggressive in the war on terror and still comply with U.S. law," national security adviser Stephen Hadley said on "Fox News Sunday."
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, whose proposal for a ban on "cruel, inhumane and degrading" treatment of detainees was passed by the Senate in October over White House objections, said he would not compromise on torture.
Hadley's comments appeared to indicate the White House has softened its strong opposition to the blanket ban on degrading and inhumane treatment, which was passed by a 90-9 vote as an amendment to a $440 billion Pentagon funding bill.
The legislation was widely seen as a rebuke to the White House and an effort to repair the damage to the U.S. image caused by reports of prisoner abuse in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 21:22 0 comments
By Mohammad Zargham
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House is seeking a compromise with a leading Senate Republican over its efforts to exempt the CIA from a proposed ban on torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners, President George W. Bush's national security adviser said on Sunday.
"We are working hard in good faith on both sides to come up with an approach that can be supported by the president and the Congress, to both find a way to be aggressive in the war on terror and still comply with U.S. law," national security adviser Stephen Hadley said on "Fox News Sunday."
Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, whose proposal for a ban on "cruel, inhumane and degrading" treatment of detainees was passed by the Senate in October over White House objections, said he would not compromise on torture.
Hadley's comments appeared to indicate the White House has softened its strong opposition to the blanket ban on degrading and inhumane treatment, which was passed by a 90-9 vote as an amendment to a $440 billion Pentagon funding bill.
The legislation was widely seen as a rebuke to the White House and an effort to repair the damage to the U.S. image caused by reports of prisoner abuse in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
(More ... Politics News Article | Reuters.com) ¶ 21:22 0 comments
Documents Highlight Bush-Blanco Standoff (WashingtonPost.com)
By Spencer S. Hsu, Joby Warrick and Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 5, 2005; Page A10
Shortly after noon on Aug. 31, Louisiana Sen. David Vitter (R) delivered a message that stunned aides to Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D), who were frantically managing the catastrophe that began two days earlier when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast.
White House senior adviser Karl Rove wanted it conveyed that he understood that Blanco was requesting that President Bush federalize the evacuation of New Orleans. The governor should explore legal options to impose martial law "or as close as we can get," Vitter quoted Rove as saying, according to handwritten notes by Terry Ryder, Blanco's executive counsel.
Thus began what one aide called a "full-court press" to compel the first-term governor to yield control of her state National Guard -- a legal, political and personal campaign by White House staff that failed three days later when Blanco rejected the administration's terms, 10 minutes before Bush was to announce them in a Rose Garden news conference, the governor's aides said.
The standoff, illuminated among more than 100,000 pages of documents released Friday by Blanco in response to requests by Senate and House investigators, marks perhaps the clearest single conflict between U.S. and Louisiana officials in the bungled response to New Orleans's surrender to floodwaters and chaos.
While attention has focused on the performance of former Federal Emergency Management Agency director Michael D. Brown, and communications breakdowns that kept Washington from recognizing for 12 to 16 hours the scope of flooding that would drive the storm's death toll above 1,200, the clash over military control highlights government officials' lack of familiarity with the levers of emergency powers.
(More ... Documents Highlight Bush-Blanco Standoff) ¶ 20:58 0 comments
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 5, 2005; Page A10
Shortly after noon on Aug. 31, Louisiana Sen. David Vitter (R) delivered a message that stunned aides to Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco (D), who were frantically managing the catastrophe that began two days earlier when Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast.
White House senior adviser Karl Rove wanted it conveyed that he understood that Blanco was requesting that President Bush federalize the evacuation of New Orleans. The governor should explore legal options to impose martial law "or as close as we can get," Vitter quoted Rove as saying, according to handwritten notes by Terry Ryder, Blanco's executive counsel.
Thus began what one aide called a "full-court press" to compel the first-term governor to yield control of her state National Guard -- a legal, political and personal campaign by White House staff that failed three days later when Blanco rejected the administration's terms, 10 minutes before Bush was to announce them in a Rose Garden news conference, the governor's aides said.
The standoff, illuminated among more than 100,000 pages of documents released Friday by Blanco in response to requests by Senate and House investigators, marks perhaps the clearest single conflict between U.S. and Louisiana officials in the bungled response to New Orleans's surrender to floodwaters and chaos.
While attention has focused on the performance of former Federal Emergency Management Agency director Michael D. Brown, and communications breakdowns that kept Washington from recognizing for 12 to 16 hours the scope of flooding that would drive the storm's death toll above 1,200, the clash over military control highlights government officials' lack of familiarity with the levers of emergency powers.
(More ... Documents Highlight Bush-Blanco Standoff) ¶ 20:58 0 comments
12.04.2005
Most Americans Doubt Bush Has Victory Plan (TheGlobeandMail.com)
60% Oppose Early Iraq Pullout, Poll Finds
By STEVE HOLLAND
Friday, December 2, 2005 Page A20
Reuters News Agency with a report from AFP
WASHINGTON -- A majority of Americans doubt George W. Bush has a strategy for Iraq that will achieve victory, according to a new poll released after the U.S. President laid out his Iraq policy.
The CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll showed that 55 per cent do not believe the President has a plan that will achieve victory for the United States in Iraq, while 41 per cent think he does.
The survey was conducted by telephone among 606 Americans after Mr. Bush's televised speech at the U.S. Naval Academy early Wednesday, although CNN noted that only 10 per cent had seen it live and two-thirds had not heard or read news coverage about it.
It showed, however, that six in 10 Americans believe U.S. troops should not be withdrawn from Iraq until certain goals are achieved, while 35 per cent said they want a timetable.
(More ... The Globe and Mail: Most Americans doubt Bush has victory plan) ¶ 21:46 0 comments
By STEVE HOLLAND
Friday, December 2, 2005 Page A20
Reuters News Agency with a report from AFP
WASHINGTON -- A majority of Americans doubt George W. Bush has a strategy for Iraq that will achieve victory, according to a new poll released after the U.S. President laid out his Iraq policy.
The CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll showed that 55 per cent do not believe the President has a plan that will achieve victory for the United States in Iraq, while 41 per cent think he does.
The survey was conducted by telephone among 606 Americans after Mr. Bush's televised speech at the U.S. Naval Academy early Wednesday, although CNN noted that only 10 per cent had seen it live and two-thirds had not heard or read news coverage about it.
It showed, however, that six in 10 Americans believe U.S. troops should not be withdrawn from Iraq until certain goals are achieved, while 35 per cent said they want a timetable.
(More ... The Globe and Mail: Most Americans doubt Bush has victory plan) ¶ 21:46 0 comments
12.03.2005
Majority Say Wal-Mart Bad for America: Poll (Reuters.com)
Thu Dec 1, 2005 2:12 PM ET
By Emily Kaiser
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Some 56 percent of U.S. consumers think Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is bad for America, according to a Zogby International poll released on Thursday by one of the retailer's most vocal critics.
The national poll -- commissioned by WakeUpWalMart.com, a union-funded group that has been pressuring Wal-Mart to raise employee wages and benefits -- surveyed 1,012 randomly chosen adults on their attitudes toward the world biggest retailer.
Respondents were asked to choose which of two statements more closely fit their personal opinions.
The majority, or 56 percent, picked: "I believe that Wal-Mart is bad for America. It may provide low prices, but these prices come with a high moral and economic cost for consumers." Thirty-nine percent agreed that "Wal-Mart is good for America. It provides low prices and saves consumers money every day."
(More ... National, World and Business News | Reuters.com) ¶ 18:46 0 comments
By Emily Kaiser
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Some 56 percent of U.S. consumers think Wal-Mart Stores Inc. is bad for America, according to a Zogby International poll released on Thursday by one of the retailer's most vocal critics.
The national poll -- commissioned by WakeUpWalMart.com, a union-funded group that has been pressuring Wal-Mart to raise employee wages and benefits -- surveyed 1,012 randomly chosen adults on their attitudes toward the world biggest retailer.
Respondents were asked to choose which of two statements more closely fit their personal opinions.
The majority, or 56 percent, picked: "I believe that Wal-Mart is bad for America. It may provide low prices, but these prices come with a high moral and economic cost for consumers." Thirty-nine percent agreed that "Wal-Mart is good for America. It provides low prices and saves consumers money every day."
(More ... National, World and Business News | Reuters.com) ¶ 18:46 0 comments
Cities Voice Opposition to War in Iraq (FreeP.com)
Resolutions Part of the Trend, Experts Say
BY JOHN YAUKEY
Gannett News
2 December 2005
WASHINGTON -- Cities don't make foreign policy.
But that hasn't stopped dozens of towns from Berkeley, Calif., to Chicago to Cambridge, Mass., from passing resolutions calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
The resolutions typically note the growing U.S. military death toll, now more than 2,100, as well as the financial burden, approaching a quarter-trillion dollars. The Chicago City Council calculated it could pay more than 31,000 teachers for a year with its annual share of the war cost.
It's part of what polls indicate and social observers say is a growing antiwar sentiment among Americans now exhausted from the war, if not philosophically against it.
"I follow the news, and it's painful," said Michigan resident Deborah Regal, a member of the antiwar group Military Families Speak Out and the mother of a Marine in Iraq. "It just grinds you down to the point where you're very conscious of every day that passes because you know what the troops are going through."
Keenly aware of this, President George W. Bush sought to shore up support for the war Wednesday by outlining a 35-page plan for stabilizing Iraq and eventually withdrawing U.S. troops.
(More ... Cities voice opposition to war in Iraq) ¶ 18:42 0 comments
BY JOHN YAUKEY
Gannett News
2 December 2005
WASHINGTON -- Cities don't make foreign policy.
But that hasn't stopped dozens of towns from Berkeley, Calif., to Chicago to Cambridge, Mass., from passing resolutions calling for withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.
The resolutions typically note the growing U.S. military death toll, now more than 2,100, as well as the financial burden, approaching a quarter-trillion dollars. The Chicago City Council calculated it could pay more than 31,000 teachers for a year with its annual share of the war cost.
It's part of what polls indicate and social observers say is a growing antiwar sentiment among Americans now exhausted from the war, if not philosophically against it.
"I follow the news, and it's painful," said Michigan resident Deborah Regal, a member of the antiwar group Military Families Speak Out and the mother of a Marine in Iraq. "It just grinds you down to the point where you're very conscious of every day that passes because you know what the troops are going through."
Keenly aware of this, President George W. Bush sought to shore up support for the war Wednesday by outlining a 35-page plan for stabilizing Iraq and eventually withdrawing U.S. troops.
(More ... Cities voice opposition to war in Iraq) ¶ 18:42 0 comments
Greenspan Warns of 'Painful' Adjustments for Economy (USATODAY.com)
Posted 12/2/2005 9:43 AM Updated 12/2/2005 11:57 AM
By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan expressed concerns Friday that America's failure to deal with its exploding budget deficit and worldwide efforts to erect trade barriers could disrupt the global economy.
Speaking at an economic conference in London, Greenspan said that so far the United States has had no problem financing its current account trade deficit, which last year hit a record $668 billion, because of the flexibility of the American economy.
But he said such flexibility would be threatened by rising protectionism, which would increase barriers to the flow of goods and investments across the U.S. border. He also worried about the harm that could be done if the United States and other nations do not get their budget deficits under control.
"If ... the pernicious drift toward fiscal instability in the United States and elsewhere is not arrested and is compounded by a protectionist reversal of globalization, the adjustment process could be quite painful for the world economy," Greenspan said in his prepared remarks, which were released in Washington.
The London speech represented the second warning Greenspan delivered Friday on the threats posed by rising budget deficits. In an earlier speech, he had said that there could be severe consequences for the U.S. economy if policymakers do not attack a federal budget deficit that is projected to soar with baby boomer retirements.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Greenspan warns of 'painful' adjustments for economy) ¶ 12:43 0 comments
By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON — Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan expressed concerns Friday that America's failure to deal with its exploding budget deficit and worldwide efforts to erect trade barriers could disrupt the global economy.
Speaking at an economic conference in London, Greenspan said that so far the United States has had no problem financing its current account trade deficit, which last year hit a record $668 billion, because of the flexibility of the American economy.
But he said such flexibility would be threatened by rising protectionism, which would increase barriers to the flow of goods and investments across the U.S. border. He also worried about the harm that could be done if the United States and other nations do not get their budget deficits under control.
"If ... the pernicious drift toward fiscal instability in the United States and elsewhere is not arrested and is compounded by a protectionist reversal of globalization, the adjustment process could be quite painful for the world economy," Greenspan said in his prepared remarks, which were released in Washington.
The London speech represented the second warning Greenspan delivered Friday on the threats posed by rising budget deficits. In an earlier speech, he had said that there could be severe consequences for the U.S. economy if policymakers do not attack a federal budget deficit that is projected to soar with baby boomer retirements.
(More ... USATODAY.com - Greenspan warns of 'painful' adjustments for economy) ¶ 12:43 0 comments
