I have a real difficult time knowing who to believe. Bush has paid the media to present his point of view. This tactic used to be called propaganda when it referred to Communists. Communists were supposed to be the ones who wanted to take over the entire world and force their form of government on everyone.
Today it's America doing the very same thing.
It's not difficult to find an ever growing list of Bush lies.
If you can provide me with a similar list of lies told by Ahmadinejad, I'd love to read it.
The issue here is credibility and who has the biggest history of lying. Unfortunately, a pack of lies is what got us where we are in Iraq today. To me, it looks like Bush is trying the very same tactics to get us into a war with Iran.
Although Ahmadinejad is a terrible, psychotic, murderous, dangerous individual, Bush is the person who has the five-year history of lying to the American people and to the world.
Quite frankly, if I were the president of Iran and saw my neighbor, Iraq, invaded based on a pack of lies, I believe I'd want to flex my muscles and try to scare the USA into backing off and not attacking my citizens as they did in Iraq.
Israel has nuclear weapons (that I believe WE paid for). The USA has nuclear weapons. Why is that okay?
The real threat is Korea, but Bush is too much of a coward and doesn't have the courage to address that threat.
The propaganda machine of George W. Bush has cast Syria in a very negative light, yet Syria was responsible for saving American lives the other day by thwarting a terror attempt.
That, in and of itself, in addition to Bush's refusal to get the Taliban that were in plain view the other day, has me questioning every single word that comes out of this lying president's mouth.
Yes, I'll say it again. He is a liar. A LIAR! Maybe in your neck of the woods, lying is an accepted form of communication. Where I come from, it does nothing but destroy credibility and create distrust in the person who is doing the lying. You can respond with all the snappy **you hate bush** and **you're on the side of the terrorists** comebacks you want (seems to be the usual conservative talking point response), but the bottom line is he is a chronic liar. I don't hate Bush, but I sure as heck don't like (or trust) liars.
You'd rather root for nuclear war than to see
nm
Xcuse me? We Texans know how to say nuclear.
If it were supposed to be pronounced "nook-u-ler" it would be spelled nuculer. Maybe he can't read either, but the thing is, when you are commander in chief, in charge of overseeing the manufacture, storage, sale, trade, proliferation/nonproliferation and deployment of nuclear WMDs, it is a bit unnerving that the pres cannot even manage to say the word correctly, in spite of the criticism he has received about this over the years. Makes him look like he is, shall we say, uneducated on the subject, defiant and a bit on the stubborn side. Some of us have the sense to be embarassed for him and for ourselves, since he represents our nation.
SP: Build 45 more nuclear plants.
I am so sure.
Chinese to inspect our cargo for nuclear material
Looks like the foxes are now in charge of the henhouses.
http://www.nysun.com/article/29714
March 23, 2006 Edition > Section: National > Printer-Friendly Version
America Hires Chinese Firm To Inspect Cargo For Nuclear Material
BY TED BRIDIS - Associated Press March 23, 2006 URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/29714
WASHINGTON (AP) - In the aftermath of the Dubai ports dispute, the Bush administration is hiring a Hong Kong conglomerate to help detect nuclear materials inside cargo passing through the Bahamas to the United States and elsewhere.
The administration acknowledges the no-bid contract with Hutchison Whampoa Ltd. represents the first time a foreign company will be involved in running a sophisticated U.S. radiation detector at an overseas port without American customs agents present.
Freeport in the Bahamas is 65 miles from the U.S. coast, where cargo would be likely to be inspected again. The contract is currently being finalized.
The administration is negotiating a second no-bid contract for a Philippine company to install radiation detectors in its home country, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. At dozens of other overseas ports, foreign governments are primarily responsible for scanning cargo.
While President Bush recently reassured Congress that foreigners would not manage security at U.S. ports, the Hutchison deal in the Bahamas illustrates how the administration is relying on foreign companies at overseas ports to safeguard cargo headed to the United States.
Hutchison Whampoa is the world's largest ports operator and among the industry's most-respected companies. It was an early adopter of U.S. anti-terror measures. But its billionaire chairman, Li Ka-Shing, also has substantial business ties to China's government that have raised U.S. concerns over the years.
Li Ka-Shing is pretty close to a lot of senior leaders of the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party, said Larry M. Wortzel, head of a U.S. government commission that studies China security and economic issues. But Wortzel said Hutchison operates independently from Beijing, and he described Li as a very legitimate international businessman.
One can conceive legitimate security concerns and would hope either the Homeland Security Department or the intelligence services of the United States work very hard to satisfy those concerns, Wortzel said.
Three years ago, the Bush administration effectively blocked a Hutchison subsidiary from buying part of a bankrupt U.S. telecommunications company, Global Crossing Ltd., on national security grounds.
And a U.S. military intelligence report, once marked secret, cited Hutchison in 1999 as a potential risk for smuggling arms and other prohibited materials into the United States from the Bahamas.
Hutchison's port operations in the Bahamas and Panama could provide a conduit for illegal shipments of technology or prohibited items from the West to the PRC (People's Republic of China), or facilitate the movement of arms and other prohibited items into the Americas, the now-declassified assessment said.
The CIA currently has no security concerns about Hutchison's port operations, and the administration believes the pending deal with the foreign company would be safe, officials said.
Supervised by Bahamian customs officials, Hutchison employees will drive the towering, truck-like radiation scanner that moves slowly over large cargo containers and scans them for radiation that might be emitted by plutonium or a radiological weapon.
Any positive reading would set off alarms monitored simultaneously by Bahamian customs inspectors at Freeport and by U.S. Customs and Border Protection officials working at an anti-terrorism center 800 miles away in northern Virginia. Any alarm would prompt a closer inspection of the cargo, and there are multiple layers of security to prevent tampering, officials said.
The equipment operates itself, said Bryan Wilkes, a spokesman for the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration, the agency negotiating the contract. It's not going to be someone standing at the controls pressing buttons and flipping switches.
A lawmaker who helped lead the opposition to the Dubai ports deal isn't so confident. Neither are some security experts. They question whether the U.S. should pay a foreign company with ties to China to keep radioactive material out of the United States.
Giving a no-bid contract to a foreign company to carry out the most sensitive security screening for radioactive materials at ports abroad raises many questions, said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
A low-paid employee with access to the screening equipment could frustrate international security by studying how the equipment works and which materials set off its alarms, warned a retired U.S. Customs investigator who specialized in smuggling cases.
Money buys a lot of things, Robert Sheridan said. The fact that foreign workers would have access to how the United States screens various containers for nuclear material and how this technology scrutinizes the containers _ all those things allow someone with a nefarious intention to thwart the screening.
Other experts discounted concerns. They cited Hutchison's reputation as a leading ports company and said the United States inevitably must rely for some security on large commercial operators in the global maritime industry.
We must not allow an unwarranted fear of foreign ownership or involvement in offshore operations to impair our ability to protect against nuclear weapons being smuggled into this country, said Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., a member of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. We must work with these foreign companies.
A former Coast Guard commander, Stephen Flynn, said foreign companies sometimes prove more trustworthy _ and susceptible to U.S. influence _ than governments.
It's a very fragile system, Flynn said. Foreign companies recognize the U.S. has the capacity and willingness to exercise a kill switch if something goes wrong.
A spokesman for Hutchison's ports subsidiary, Anthony Tam, said the company is a strong supporter in port security initiatives.
In the case of the Bahamas, our local personnel are working alongside with U.S. customs officials to identify and inspect U.S.-bound containers that could be carrying radioactive materials, Tam said.
However, there are no U.S. customs agents checking any cargo containers at the Hutchison port in Freeport. Under the contract, no U.S. officials would be stationed permanently in the Bahamas with the radiation scanner.
The administration is finalizing the contract amid a national debate over maritime security sparked by the furor over now-abandoned plans by Dubai-owned DP World to take over significant operations at major U.S. ports.
Hutchison operates the sprawling Freeport Container Port on Grand Bahama Island. Its subsidiary, Hutchison Port Holdings, has operations in more than 20 countries but none in the United States.
Contract documents, obtained by The Associated Press, indicate Hutchison will be paid roughly $6 million. The contract is for one year with options for three years.
The Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration is negotiating the Bahamas contract under a $121 million security program it calls the second line of defense. Wilkes, the NNSA spokesman, said the Bahamian government dictated that the U.S. give the contract to Hutchison.
It's their country, their port. The driver of the mobile carrier is the contractor selected by their government. We had no say or no choice, he said. We are fortunate to have allies who are signing these agreements with us.
Some security experts said that is a weak explanation in the Bahamas, with its close reliance on the United States. The administration could insist that the Bahamas permit U.S. Customs agents to operate at the port, said Albert Santoli, an expert on national security issues in Asia and the Pacific.
Why would they not accept that? said Santoli, a former national security aide to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif. There is an interest in the Bahamas and every other country in the region to make sure the U.S. stays safe and strong. That's how this should be negotiated.
Flynn, the former Coast Guard commander, agreed the Bahamas would readily accept such a proposal but said the U.S. is short of trained customs agents to send overseas.
Contract documents obtained by the AP show at least one other foreign company is involved in the U.S. radiation-detection program.
A separate, no-bid $4 million contract the Bush administration is negotiating would pay a Manila-based company, International Container Terminal Services Inc., to install radiation detectors at the Philippines' largest port.
The U.S. says the Manila company is not being paid to operate the radiation monitors once they are installed. But two International Container executives and a senior official at the government's Philippine Nuclear Research Institute said the company will run the detectors on behalf of the institute and the country's customs bureau. U.S. officials said they will investigate further how the Filipinos plan to use the equipment.
March 23, 2006 Edition > Section: National > Printer-Friendly Version
U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel Paper on Nuclear Aims Called Dishonest
By Dafna Linzer Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, September 14, 2006; A17
U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document outrageous and dishonest and offering evidence to refute its central claims.
Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements. The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.
The IAEA openly clashed with the Bush administration on pre-war assessments of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents.
After no such weapons were found in Iraq, the IAEA came under additional criticism for taking a cautious approach on Iran, which the White House says is trying to build nuclear weapons in secret. At one point, the administration orchestrated a campaign to remove the IAEA's director general, Mohamed ElBaradei. It failed, and he won the Nobel Peace Prize last year.
Yesterday's letter, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post, was the first time the IAEA has publicly disputed U.S. allegations about its Iran investigation. The agency noted five major errors in the committee's 29-page report, which said Iran's nuclear capabilities are more advanced than either the IAEA or U.S. intelligence has shown.
Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that incorrect, noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring.
When the congressional report was released last month, Hoekstra said his intent was to help increase the American public's understanding of Iran as a threat. Spokesman Jamal Ware said yesterday that Hoekstra will respond to the IAEA letter.
Rep. Rush D. Holt (D-N.J.), a committee member, said the report was clearly not prepared in a manner that we can rely on. He agreed to send it to the full committee for review, but the Republicans decided to make it public before then, he said in an interview.
The report was never voted on or discussed by the full committee. Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), the vice chairman, told Democratic colleagues in a private e-mail that the report took a number of analytical shortcuts that present the Iran threat as more dire -- and the Intelligence Community's assessments as more certain -- than they are.
Privately, several intelligence officials said the committee report included at least a dozen claims that were either demonstrably wrong or impossible to substantiate. Hoekstra's office said the report was reviewed by the office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence.
Negroponte's spokesman, John Callahan, said in a statement that his office reviewed the report and provided its response to the committee on July 24, '06. He did not say whether it had approved or challenged any of the claims about Iran's capabilities.
This is like prewar Iraq all over again, said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherry-picked and a report that trashes the inspectors.
The committee report, written by a single Republican staffer with a hard-line position on Iran, chastised the CIA and other agencies for not providing evidence to back assertions that Iran is building nuclear weapons.
It concluded that the lack of intelligence made it impossible to support talks with Tehran. Democrats on the committee saw it as an attempt from within conservative Republican circles to undermine Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who has agreed to talk with the Iranians under certain conditions.
The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a onetime CIA officer and special assistant to John R. Bolton, the administration's former point man on Iran at the State Department. Bolton, who is now ambassador to the United Nations, had been highly influential during President Bush's first term in drawing up a tough policy that rejected talks with Tehran.
Among the allegations in Fleitz's Iran report is that ElBaradei removed a senior inspector from the Iran investigation because he raised concerns about Iranian deception regarding its nuclear program. The agency said the inspector has not been removed.
A suggestion that ElBaradei had an unstated policy that prevented inspectors from telling the truth about Iran's program was particularly outrageous and dishonest, according to the IAEA letter, which was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, the IAEA's director for external affairs and a former Hungarian ambassador.
Hoekstra's committee is working on a separate report about North Korea that is also being written principally by Fleitz. A draft of the report, provided to The Post, includes several assertions about North Korea's weapons program that the intelligence officials said they cannot substantiate, including one that Pyongyang is already enriching uranium.
The intelligence community believes North Korea is trying to acquire an enrichment capability but has no proof that an enrichment facility has been built, the officials said.
Please try to De-program
Please try to change your mind set from the negative programming of the campaign. The whole world is able to celebrate that America has chosen a man of integrity and intelligence to be our leader. Believe me things are going to be so much better now that we have at the helm a thinking person who has the people's interest as his guiding principle. Just as he surrounded himself with the best and brightest to organize and run an honorable and successful campaign, he will use those same resources to bring our nation to honor and success...President-elect Obama's success is all of our success
SCHIP program
First, let's get the story straight. Republicans are not voting against Childrens Health Care. The SCHIP program has been in effect for several years, and Republicans DID vote to start the program. And like most government-run programs it is wasteful and was not administered properly. Millions of illegals' children are enrolled in the program, taking funds that should go to American children. That is one of the things Republicans want watched before expanding the program. Expansion might not be necessary to the tune of 6 billion if the illegals got taken off. All the Republicans asked was that the Democrats extend the program for another 6 months as it stands now (they NEVER voted to stop it completely) and work on a solution to remove illegals and make sure no more illegals get on, etc. This has never been about voting against health care for children. They are not voting to stop SCHIP, just tighten it up. Of course, because of the liberal bias of media, all you see are headlines saying BUSH TO VETO CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN and REPUBLICANS WANT TO STOP CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE PLAN. Both of these are lies. The 'socialized medicine' comment, I believe, was directed toward the Democrat plan to stop all private health care and make the whole thing government run. And when they do that, the quality of health care will tank and the ability to get superior medical care for catastrophic incidents, high-risk surgery, etc., will drop dramatically. Ask Canada. Ask why Canadians come to the US for that kind of care? Because they don't want to be on government waiting lists for months/years. Do some research. It HAPPENS. Socialized medicine hurts the middle class and poor, because richer folks can still pay cash and get the higher standard of care. Believe me, folks, we don't need socialized medicine in this country.
As I have stated in other posts, tighten up the SCHIP program to exclude illegals and monitor the program properly so that it does what it is designed to do...provide health care for American children whose parents cannot afford to buy it. Look at all social programs here (fraught with waste), tighten them up, and prioritize. Put Childrens Health care at the top of the pile. Use common sense, like American families have to do inidividually. We know we can't provide everything for our families we would like to, so we have to prioritize, to make sure the most important things are taken care of first. Government should run the same way. If government is going to provide health care for kids (and I believe if we are going to have social programs that one should be FIRST), then do so, and make that the FIRST priority of social spending. If that cuts into lesser needed programs, so be it. First things first. If we do not start being fiscally responsible with spending, we are going to dig ourselves into a hole. The more people who get on assistance and do not pay into the tax system, the bigger the burden is on the rest of us who do have to work and pay taxes. Personally I think 35-40% off the top of my wages is enough. I think the government just has to prioritize and be more careful about the way they spend it.
Making Home Affordable will offer assistance to as many as 7 to 9 million homeowners, making their mortgages more affordable and helping to prevent the destructive impact of foreclosures on families, communities and the national economy.
The Home Affordable Refinance program will be available to 4 to 5 million homeowners who have a solid payment history on an existing mortgage owned by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Normally, these borrowers would be unable to refinance because their homes have lost value, pushing their current loan-to-value ratios above 80%. Under the Home Affordable Refinance program, many of them will now be eligible to refinance their loan to take advantage of today’s lower mortgage rates or to refinance an adjustable-rate mortgage into a more stable mortgage, such as a 30-year fixed rate loan.
GSE lenders and servicers already have much of the borrower’s information on file, so documentation requirements are not likely to be burdensome. In addition, in some cases an appraisal will not be necessary. This flexibility will make the refinance quicker and less costly for both borrowers and lenders. The Home Affordable Refinance program ends in June 2010.
The Home Affordable Modification program will help up to 3 to 4 million at-risk homeowners avoid foreclosure by reducing monthly mortgage payments. Working with the banking and credit union regulators, the FHA, the VA, the USDA and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Treasury Department today announced program guidelines that are expected to become standard industry practice in pursuing affordable and sustainable mortgage modifications. This program will work in tandem with an expanded and improved Hope for Homeowners program.
With the information now available, servicers can begin immediately to modify eligible mortgages under the Modification program so that at-risk borrowers can better afford their payments. The detailed guidelines (separate document) provide information on the following:
Eligibility and Verification
Loans originated on or before January 1, 2009.
First-lien loans on owner-occupied properties with unpaid principal balance up to $729,750. Higher limits allowed for owner-occupied properties with 2-4 units.
All borrowers must fully document income, including signed IRS 4506-T, two most recent pay stubs, and most recent tax return, and must sign an affidavit of financial hardship.
Property owner occupancy status will be verified through borrower credit report and other documentation; no investor-owned, vacant, or condemned properties.
Incentives to lenders and servicers to modify at risk borrowers who have not yet missed payments when the servicer determines that the borrower is at imminent risk of default.
Modifications can start from now until December 31, 2012; loans can be modified only once under the program.
Loan Modification Terms and Procedures
Participating servicers are required to service all eligible loans under the rules of the program unless explicitly prohibited by contract; servicers are required to use reasonable efforts to obtain waivers of limits on participation.
Participating loan servicers will be required to use a net present value (NPV) test on each loan that is at risk of imminent default or at least 60 days delinquent. The NPV test will compare the net present value of cash flows with modification and without modification. If the test is positive – meaning that the net present value of expected cash flow is greater in the modification scenario – the servicer must modify absent fraud or a contract prohibition.
Parameters of the NPV test are spelled out in the guidelines, including acceptable discount rates, property valuation methodologies, home price appreciation assumptions, foreclosure costs and timelines, and borrower cure and redefault rate assumptions.
Servicers will follow a specified sequence of steps in order to reduce the monthly payment to no more than 31% of gross monthly income (DTI).
The modification sequence requires first reducing the interest rate (subject to a rate floor of 2%), then if necessary extending the term or amortization of the loan up to a maximum of 40 years, and then if necessary forbearing principal. Principal forgiveness or a Hope for Homeowners refinancing are acceptable alternatives.
The monthly payment includes principal, interest, taxes, insurance, flood insurance, homeowner’s association and/or condominium fees. Monthly income includes wages, salary, overtime, fees, commissions, tips, social security, pensions, and all other income.
Servicers must enter into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent on or before December 31, 2009.
Payments to Servicers, Lenders, and Responsible Borrowers
The program will share with the lender/investor the cost of reductions in monthly payments from 38% DTI to 31% DTI.
Servicers that modify loans according to the guidelines will receive an up-front fee of $1,000 for each modification, plus “pay for success” fees on still-performing loans of $1,000 per year.
Homeowners who make their payments on time are eligible for up to $1,000 of principal reduction payments each year for up to five years.
The program will provide one-time bonus incentive payments of $1,500 to lender/investors and $500 to servicers for modifications made while a borrower is still current on mortgage payments.
The program will include incentives for extinguishing second liens on loans modified under this program.
No payments will be made under the program to the lender/investor, servicer, or borrower unless and until the servicer has first entered into the program agreements with Treasury’s financial agent.
Similar incentives will be paid for Hope for Homeowner refinances.
Transparency and Accountability
Measures to prevent and detect fraud, such as documentation and audit requirements, will be central to the program.
Servicers will be required to collect, maintain and transmit records for verification and compliance review, including borrower eligibility, underwriting, incentive payments, property verification, and other documentation.
Sorry, I'm still venting from the SCHIP garbage that was on today. They absolutely want to pass this immediately without looking at amendments, etc. They want an additional 11 million children covered ( nothing wrong with that) EXCEPT they want to put it on the smokers to pay for it. Now, with the way they are trying to get smokers to quit, I would think that's a stupid and absolutely wrong idea.
Like James Webb (NC) stated, "Do we really want an unhealthy habit to pay for a healthy habit?"What happens when the smokers quit because of all the taxes they have to pay to keep these programs going? Who is going to pay for it if every smoker quits? You have nothing to back it up. There would be a black hole and eventually, every citizen would have to pay for it.
I agree totally with his statements. Why is it they expect an unhealthy habit to cover healthy habits? It makes no sense. At least this rep has his head together, yet the others don't think about the future costs.
When are the American citizens going to wake up and start thinking for themselves? Why, oh why, do we keep voting in people who don't even think for themselves, just vote by party affiliation?
Glenn Beck stated we have to keep the phone lines to Washington and keep calling in to our reps to stop the nonsense (sp). I agree.
I watched the jerk put in the Senate by fellow voters from my state today and I had to turn him off (I didn't vote for him-he knows nothing). I am going to write to the newspapers in that area and ask them WHY did they vote for him? Betcha my answer will be "He gave us so much money to get our projects done." "He's the son of our late governor." "He's from our area." That's no reason to vote for somebody. If it is, then I must be totally wrong for voting the way I do. I vote who I think will do the best job, not if he's from our area. That's part of the problem with politics today.
I'll get off my now. Thanks for reading. I promise no more venting today.
The Other Big Brother The Pentagon has its own domestic spying program. Even its leaders say the outfit may have gone too far.
By Michael Isikoff Newsweek
Jan. 30, 2006 issue - The demonstration seemed harmless enough. Late on a June afternoon in 2004, a motley group of about 10 peace activists showed up outside the Houston headquarters of Halliburton, the giant military contractor once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. They were there to protest the corporation's supposed war profiteering. The demonstrators wore papier-mache masks and handed out free peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches to Halliburton employees as they left work. The idea, according to organizer Scott Parkin, was to call attention to allegations that the company was overcharging on a food contract for troops in Iraq. It was tongue-in-street political theater, Parkin says.
But that's not how the Pentagon saw it. To U.S. Army analysts at the top-secret Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA), the peanut-butter protest was regarded as a potential threat to national security. Created three years ago by the Defense Department, CIFA's role is force protection—tracking threats and terrorist plots against military installations and personnel inside the United States. In May 2003, Paul Wolfowitz, then deputy Defense secretary, authorized a fact-gathering operation code-named TALON—short for Threat and Local Observation Notice—that would collect raw information about suspicious incidents. The data would be fed to CIFA to help the Pentagon's terrorism threat warning process, according to an internal Pentagon memo.
A Defense document shows that Army analysts wrote a report on the Halliburton protest and stored it in CIFA's database. It's not clear why the Pentagon considered the protest worthy of attention—although organizer Parkin had previously been arrested while demonstrating at ExxonMobil headquarters (the charges were dropped). But there are now questions about whether CIFA exceeded its authority and conducted unauthorized spying on innocent people and organizations. A Pentagon memo obtained by NEWSWEEK shows that the deputy Defense secretary now acknowledges that some TALON reports may have contained information on U.S. citizens and groups that never should have been retained. The number of reports with names of U.S. persons could be in the thousands, says a senior Pentagon official who asked not be named because of the sensitivity of the subject.
CIFA's activities are the latest in a series of disclosures about secret government programs that spy on Americans in the name of national security. In December, the ACLU obtained documents showing the FBI had investigated several activist groups, including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals and Greenpeace, supposedly in an effort to discover possible ecoterror connections. At the same time, the White House has spent weeks in damage-control mode, defending the controversial program that allowed the National Security Agency to monitor the telephone conversations of U.S. persons suspected of terror links, without obtaining warrants.
Last Thursday, Cheney called the program vital to the country's defense against Al Qaeda. Either we are serious about fighting this war on terror or not, he said in a speech to the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. But as the new information about CIFA shows, the scope of the U.S. government's spying on Americans may be far more extensive than the public realizes.
It isn't clear how many groups and individuals were snagged by CIFA's dragnet. Details about the program, including its size and budget, are classified. In December, NBC News obtained a 400-page compilation of reports that detailed a portion of TALON's surveillance efforts. It showed the unit had collected information on nearly four dozen antiwar meetings or protests, including one at a Quaker meetinghouse in Lake Worth, Fla., and a Students Against War demonstration at a military recruiting fair at the University of California, Santa Cruz. A Pentagon spokesman declined to say why a private company like Halliburton would be deserving of CIFA's protection. But in the past, Defense Department officials have said that the force protection mission includes military contractors since soldiers and Defense employees work closely with them and therefore could be in danger.
CIFA researchers apparently cast a wide net and had a number of surveillance methods—both secretive and mundane—at their disposal. An internal CIFA PowerPoint slide presentation recently obtained by William Arkin, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst who writes widely about military affairs, gives some idea how the group operated. The presentation, which Arkin provided to NEWSWEEK, shows that CIFA analysts had access to law-enforcement reports and sensitive military and U.S. intelligence documents. (The group's motto appears at the bottom of each PowerPoint slide: Counterintelligence 'to the Edge'.) But the organization also gleaned data from open source Internet monitoring. In other words, they surfed the Web.
That may have been how the Pentagon came to be so interested in a small gathering outside Halliburton. On June 23, 2004, a few days before the Halliburton protest, an ad for the event appeared on houston.indymedia.org, a Web site for lefty Texas activists. Stop the war profiteers, read the posting. Bring out the kids, relatives, Dick Cheney, and your favorite corporate pigs at the trough as we will provide food for free.
Four months later, on Oct. 25, the TALON team reported another possible threat to national security. The source: a Miami antiwar Web page. Website advertises protest planned at local military recruitment facility, the internal report warns. The database entry refers to plans by a south Florida group called the Broward Anti-War Coalition to protest outside a strip-mall recruiting office in Lauderhill, Fla. The TALON entry lists the upcoming protest as a credible threat. As it turned out, the entire event consisted of 15 to 20 activists waving a giant bush lied sign. No one was arrested. It's very interesting that the U.S. military sees a domestic peace group as a threat, says Paul Lefrak, a librarian who organized the protest.
Arkin says a close reading of internal CIFA documents suggests the agency may be expanding its Internet monitoring, and wants to be as surreptitious as possible. CIFA has contracted to buy identity masking software that would allow the agency to create phony Web identities and let them appear to be located in foreign countries, according to a copy of the contract with Computer Sciences Corp. (The firm declined to comment.)
Pentagon officials have broadly defended CIFA as a legitimate response to the domestic terror threat. But at the same time, they acknowledge that an internal Pentagon review has found that CIFA's database contained some information that may have violated regulations. The department is not allowed to retain information about U.S. citizens for more than 90 days—unless they are reasonably believed to have some link to terrorism, criminal wrongdoing or foreign intelligence. There was information that was improperly stored, says a Pentagon spokesman who was authorized to talk about the program (but not to give his name). It was an oversight. In a memo last week, obtained by NEWSWEEK, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England ordered CIFA to purge such information from its files—and directed that all Defense Department intelligence personnel receive refresher training on department policies.
That's not likely to stop the questions. Last week Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee pushed for an inquiry into CIFA's activities and who it's watching. This is a significant Pandora's box [Pentagon officials] don't want opened, says Arkin. What we're looking at is hints of what they're doing. As far as the Pentagon is concerned, that means we've already seen too much.
Fox New Program on Obama - Sunday night 10/12
HELLO EVERYONE: IMPORTANT INFORMATION!! > > SEAN HANNITY, OF HANNITY & COLMES ~ FOX NEWS, IS GOING TO AIR A VERY > IMPORTANT DOCUMENTARY ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, SUNDAY NIGHT AT 9:00 PM. HE > STATED ON THE AIR THIS EVENING THAT NO ONE IN THE NEWS MEDIA WAS WILLING > TO DO THIS. HANNITY IS GOING BACK TO OBAMA'S EARLIER DAYS, SHOWING EVEN > THEN HIS TIES TO RADICAL PROFESSORS, FRIENDS, SPIRITUAL ADVISERS, Etc., > HE STATED THIS EVENING THAT HE WILL SHOW IN DETAIL HIS TIES TO REV. > WRIGHT FOR 20+ YRS (which we all > know) HOW HE WAS PARTICIPATING WITH THIS MAN, AND NOT FOR THE REASONS HE > STATES! HE HAS UNCOVERED MORE OF OBAMA'S RADICAL LEADERS AND WE WILL SEE > THINGS THAT NO ONE IN THE MEDIA IS WILLING TO PUT OUT THERE.&nb sp; THIS > WILL BE A NIGHT THAT YOU WILL KNOW MORE ABOUT OBAMA THAN EVER BEFORE. > HANNITY IS VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS PROGRAM AND ASKED THAT EVERYONE > PLEASE, PLEASE WATCH~~ SUNDAY NIGHT, 9 PM. > > HANNITY IS DETERMINED THIS INFORMATION BE PUT OUT THERE BECAUSE AS > AMERICAN'S, WE STILL DO NOT KNOW ABOUT OBAMA!! WAKE UP AMERICA !! THIS > IS SERIOUS,EVERYONE. I KNOW MOST OF YOU WATCH FOX NEWS, AND YOU KNOW WHO > YOU ARE VOTING FOR, BUT IF YOU CAN, PLEASE PASS THIS ON TO EVERYONE YOU > KNOW. THIS IS CRITICAL FOR OUR COUNTRY. MY PRAYER IS
THAT WE, ALONG WITH > SEAN HANNITY, WILL REACH SOMEONE/ANYONE BEFORE NOV. 4th. WE MUST NOT > GIVE UP!!! the only thing I can find is a scholarship program
for students with good grade, which I am in no way opposed to. This is different than guaranteeing a free ride to anyone.
On 2/16 on history channel a program about Lincoln
Think its called Stealing Lincolns body. Looks interesting.
U.S. program unveils man behind Iraq weapons story
Thu Nov 1, 7:12 PM ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) - An Iraqi defector made up his claim that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons, a threat cited by the Bush administration as a key reason for the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the U.S. news program "60 Minutes" said on Thursday.
Rafid Ahmed Alwan, codenamed "Curve Ball" in intelligence circles, claimed to be a chemical engineering expert but was instead an accused thief and a mediocre student, the program said. He arrived at a German refugee center in 1999.
"To bolster his asylum case and increase his importance, he told officials he was a star chemical engineer who had been in charge of a facility at Djerf AL Nadaf that was making mobile biological weapons," "60 Minutes" said in a statement.
President George W. Bush and senior U.S. officials argued that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was harboring weapons of mass destruction that threatened the security of the United States.
But no such weapons have been found and what was supposed to have been a short U.S. engagement in Iraq is now in its fifth year, with more than 3,800 U.S. soldiers and tens of thousands Iraqis killed.
"60 Minutes" said it found an arrest warrant for Alwan in relation to a theft from the Babel television production company in Baghdad where he once worked. It said he studied chemical engineering at university but got low marks.
The report, a culmination of a two-year investigation by journalist Bob Simon, is due to be broadcast on the CBS network on Sunday.
"The (then) CIA director George Tenet gave Alwan's information to Secretary of State Colin Powell to use at the U.N. in his speech justifying military action against Iraq," "60 Minutes" said.
That was, the program said, despite a letter from German intelligence officials saying that although Alwan appeared to be believable, there was not evidence to verify his story.
"Through a spokesman, Tenet denies ever seeing the letter," "60 Minutes" said.
"Alwan was caught when CIA interrogators were finally allowed to question him and confronted him with evidence that his story could not be as he described it," the program said.
"Weapons inspectors had examined the plant at Djerf al Nadaf before the fall of Baghdad and found no evidence of biological agents."
marks the location of current message within thread
Sorry, I'm still venting from the SCHIP garbage that was on today. They absolutely want to pass this immediately without looking at amendments, etc. They want an additional 11 million children covered ( nothing wrong with that) EXCEPT they want to put it on the smokers to pay for it. Now, with the way they are trying to get smokers to quit, I would think that's a stupid and absolutely wrong idea. 
![Reuters](http://l.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/us/nws/p/reuters120.gif"){kind=small}
