Above any law and oversight:
Cheney ‘Authorized’ Libby to Leak Classified Information

Vice President Dick Cheney’s former chief of staff, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, testified to a federal grand jury that he had been “authorized” by Cheney and other White House “superiors” in the summer of 2003 to disclose classified information to journalists to defend the Bush administration’s use of prewar intelligence in making the case to go to war with Iraq, according to attorneys familiar with the matter, and to court records.

Posted by: b | Feb 9 2006 22:50 utc | 3

Rolling Stone: God’s Senator – Who would Jesus vote for? Meet Sam Brownback
Frightening, the American OBL? Worse.

Posted by: b | Feb 9 2006 23:57 utc | 5

If Dr. Jones’s work ever breaks into the mainstream media, and the rest of the country reacts the way the Utah County audience reacted, traditional political divisions will evaporate like steel beams exploded with thermite, and the whole lot of them, the Democrats and the Republicans, will be swept away, along with the military-industrial complex that has apparently managed to subvert the constitution of these United States and to con the American public, mesmerized by the shock of 9/11 and hypnotized by spell-binding incantations of freedom and patriotism, into going along with their mad plans for world domination.
Interesting Review

Posted by: DM | Feb 10 2006 2:22 utc | 7

@TTGVWYCI
Dunno.
One comment in the review that interested me was: –
These are hardcore leftists who refuse to even entertain the question of whether science supports the conclusion that the planes brought the towers down. “Too many people would have to know about it for them to get away with it,” one friend said. “They’re not that smart,” said another. “It’s just not plausible,” said a third.
Even for hardcore “progressives” (many on MoA) — the “cognitive dissonance” of MIHOP/LIHOP is a little too hard to swallow. I also suspect that this subject has contributed to the schisms and drifting away of many former posters – fed up with the tin-foilers at MoA who continually broach this subject.
For me, 9/11 is the issue of our times. Some questions are:- can we corner the ‘truth’ of the matter, and just how vicious will it get.

Posted by: DM | Feb 10 2006 4:00 utc | 9

Once upon a time .. (Juan Cole)

Posted by: DM | Feb 10 2006 6:42 utc | 11

While the White House toots its own horn all over the headlines about the (manufactured) story of how they heroically foiled a Los Angeles terrorist plot (that would have paralysed that fair city and brought America to its knees by… um… knocking over a downtown building, apparently), less favourable revelations about the “heckuva job” they are doing seem to be drowned out.

Posted by: Monolycus | Feb 10 2006 10:00 utc | 13

The article posted by DM (Jones on the WTC demolition) makes two points – neither of them new – ::
Mostly, they /the audience/ looked like a cross-section of average middle-Americans.  But by the end of the evening, it is no exaggeration to say that most had become political radicals, not of the left and the right, but of the right and the wrong. 
I have read several times that revealing what happened on sept. 11 could or would destroy America. Visions go from apocalyptic – killers in the streets – to the milder, imprison them all. Those who consider not only what the people would do but what the Gvmt. would do consider the revelation would only make things worse. They may be right.
Happily, most (as far as I can see) sept. 11 activists are not aware of this dimension, or are and don’t care — what is right .. and let the cards fall where they may.. They are motivated by outrage and a sense of justice. (Though some just hate Republicans!)
My vision is that revealing Sept. 11 would not create a rift between two sections or some kind of ‘civil war’ scenario, as both sheeples and establishment hangers-on would quickly accept the new situation. They would claim previous blindness and ignorance and so forth and would be ‘outraged’ in turn.
I might be wrong.
Immediate danger from abroad is slim: no-one is going to use the revelation to their own ends in spectacular ways, and the Arab street would be kept in check. Everyone would collaborate to smooth things over as best as possible, mostly be keeping a low profile. I guess the plans are already laid out – everyone knows already, its the emperor without clothes. It would be said that this was an internal American matter, and no one should interfere.
Re. this aspect I am more confident of my judgment.
The important question is: could American society and political structure deal with a new framework that destroys all the old divisions and institutions (Gvmt, left-right, etc.)? Would it be possible, after scapegoating and horrors were over – to return to some semblance or ‘normalcy’ (the pre-existing state of affairs), within the current structures, that is, to forget, really, the difference between right and wrong (quoting the words in the article), and continue with, for example, a democratic attempt to integrate left and right, free marketeers with socialists, the arms industry with organic vegetable growers, the displaced blacks from N O with property developers ?
Would it? I guess that most of those who have thought about it would answer NO.
Even if only as a hypothetical exercise – imagination of aleternative realities is vital – people should think about this.
No space for the second point.

Posted by: Noisette | Feb 10 2006 16:30 utc | 15

My own thoughts on the collapse of the towers is that it actually would have been the right thing to do in that situation.
The first attack was a large bomb in the basement designed to make one tower fall over and crash into the one beside it. Now, if it were my job to prevent such a terrible thing from happening in the future I would pre-position charges in both towers so that I could do a controlled demolition. This would be good planning and greatly appreciated. After all, if you could save one building and all of its occupants by doing a controlled demolition on the other damaged tower you would be a hero.
As for this ever becoming public knowledge, I think most people already suspect there is something fishy about it but don’t trust themselves to ever say so. We could get past it but it just will never come out. There is no medium for that.

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 10 2006 17:10 utc | 17

Nuclear War against Iran

The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages.
Coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in “an advanced stage of readiness”.
Various military exercises have been conducted, starting in early 2005. In turn, the Iranian Armed Forces have also conducted large scale military maneuvers in the Persian Gulf in December in anticipation of a US sponsored attack.
Since early 2005, there has been intense shuttle diplomacy between Washington, Tel Aviv, Ankara and NATO headquarters in Brussels.
In recent developments, CIA Director Porter Goss on a mission to Ankara, requested Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan “to provide political and logistic support for air strikes against Iranian nuclear and military targets.” Goss reportedly asked ” for special cooperation from Turkish intelligence to help prepare and monitor the operation.” (DDP, 30 December 2005).
In turn, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has given the green light to the Israeli Armed Forces to launch the attacks by the end of March:

All top Israeli officials have pronounced the end of March, 2006, as the deadline for launching a military assault on Iran…. The end of March date also coincides with the IAEA report to the UN on Iran’s nuclear energy program. Israeli policymakers believe that their threats may influence the report, or at least force the kind of ambiguities, which can be exploited by its overseas supporters to promote Security Council sanctions or justify Israeli military action.
(James Petras, Israel’s War Deadline: Iran in the Crosshairs, Global Research, December 2005)

The US sponsored military plan has been endorsed by NATO, although it is unclear, at this stage, as to the nature of NATO’s involvement in the planned aerial attacks.

Via Today in Iraq

Posted by: b | Feb 10 2006 18:53 utc | 19

While I was typing, it seems that b has put his finger on the issue of our immeadiate times.

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 10 2006 19:16 utc | 21

Appreciate the comments on MIHOP.

Posted by: DM | Feb 10 2006 21:15 utc | 23

maybe part of the context of goss’ policies/concerns should be expanded to include an accounting of the ever growing chatter surrounding the overall 911 truth movement. this is, after all, the so-called age of information & information wants to be free. so they say.

Posted by: b real | Feb 10 2006 21:30 utc | 25

Oops. I meant to say,
“This kernel, that the buildings were pre-mined, allows a more reasonable explanation of the whole event — it does not require us to assume that the entire attack was run and orchestrated domestically.”

Posted by: jonku | Feb 10 2006 22:04 utc | 27

Yes, Debs:
It seems we are lurching forthright towards fascism here. I see it as a crisis in the capital/money structure. The elites need their endless growing profits and it’s getting harder and harder to do that without “undue” violence, as we reach natural limits to growth. The governing class knows that the best way to herd the sheeple is with ideological methods. But now things are getting too extreme for that to work, so a stronger hand of government is needed to keep the herd together.
But countries have descended into fascism without their own 9-11, or Reichstag fire. So, in a way, the particular “theatrics”, if you will, or pathology, of each case is not that important.
At this point, what seems important is studying how countries emerge from the darkness of totalitarian rule. The worst cases only emerge shattered after total war has left little alternative. The best cases seem to need considerable internal repression and suffering of the populace before they are willing to cast the dreams spun by the elite from their eyes, face reality and organize. Think of “los desaparacidos” in Argentina, and the mothers who gather, to this day, in the central square waiting for justice of some sort to come.
Well, here we are, standing naked, up to our waists in the ocean of freedom; the tide sucks rapidly out, and we stare with fear and trepidation into the growing maw of the perfect Hokusai wave that amasses before our eyes, looms above us, as if frozen in time and space, and threatens to engulf us all.

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 10 2006 22:08 utc | 29

@Pearl Harbor-
It wasn’t until after 9-11 that I first heard the LIHOP theory of Pearl Harbor. I asked my mother (b. 1932, Brooklyn, NY; sorry mom!), a basic liberal dem who is largely in the dark about the machinations of government, if she had ever heard about this. She didn’t bat an eye, “Oh yes, everyone knew that was what happened, but of course the government refused to admit it.”
As far as vexing your mind with the various theories about 9-11, which can be wearisome and unsatisfying, I suggest adopting the longer horizon IHOP view of things: namely, when in doubt, go to the International House of Pancakes and have something good and tasty to eat. I find it most comforting 😉

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 10 2006 22:22 utc | 31

DoS does raise an interesting point. That would actually be good disaster planning given the ’93 attempt.
What were they trying to do? Topple the towers. One alone, falling in any direction would be far more destructive than the best case scenario – which actually happened. And which, given the physics, could ONLY have happened through a controlled demolition.
I thought that day that it looked like any other demo I’ve ever seen on the evening news, but it WAS easier to think that it was as was described. Once I stumbled into this place, however…
Within days, I had mentioned the demo-ness of the event to a co-worker and he said the buildings were designed to do that. That always rang hollow given that fires do not burn evenly and nothing within would, even under normal cicumstances, burn hot enough to melt the steel.
One must also consider the angle of impact and the spread of the fuel – which also does not burn hot enough to melt steel (I was unsure of this @ the time) – in respect to the weakness of the structure. They both would be assymetrical in respect to the exterior and interior steel frame and so the collapse would be too.
When mentioned to my co-worker, he replied that the towers were designed to collapse that way. Perhaps he was correct…
And if so, when was this done after ’93? Given that it wouldn’t be prudent to announce to the world and ‘terrorists’ that such a contingency was in place – wouldn’t le grand fomage know? Cliton or Bush?

Posted by: gmac | Feb 11 2006 0:37 utc | 33

from comments at Left Coaster

Goddam, it’s hilarious. Check out Mediamatters – it looks like Fox is playing a clip from the disaster flick Independence Day to illustrate how the Library Tower would look when blown up by, get this, aliens! So, illegally wiretapping America to spaceship calls has saved us from being invaded by ET! Thank God Almighty Dear Leader has saved us!

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 11 2006 1:50 utc | 35

Okay, now I feel an irresistable need to go get some pancakes!
See you all soon.

Posted by: jonku | Feb 11 2006 2:30 utc | 37

On a more serious note, and in the vein of my previous Iran link, there is this: The Grand Chess Game, scroll down if you need to, and below that an article from Voltaire Network by Thierry Meyssan. I like Voltaire because they often review articles from the whole gamut of political views and include synopses of each. The western articles stick out as the most highly propagandized, inaccurate, and filled with lies, as well as most likely to conflate the ruling class with the national interests.
Anyway, I am putting all this information into my brain about Iran and I am a little confused to say the least. There is the “We don’t have enough soldiers, so we will just nuke ’em” point of view. Alternatively, there is the “We’ll just capture the westernmost strip of Iran which has all the oil” view, then there is the “this is all bluster because the US is really powerless” viewpoint.
There is the controversy over nuclear power and weapons. There is the Russian uranium refining theory. And there is the oil bourse theory. If the oil bourse was really the issue, then why are they threatening it with a hard line on nuclear issues. Just give in and open the bourse. Then revisit the nukes two years down the line when you have a stronger hand.
There are Russia’s interests, and China’s interests, and questions even about Iran’s interests. There is the theory that the cartoon brouhaha helps the US by bringing Europe into its camp. There is the alternate theory that the cartoon brouhaha hurts the US alliance by upping the potential cost of a conflict with an already inflamed muslim world–in other words, Muslims are immunizing themselves from western aggression by becomming more militant in response.
So, I don’t want to type a lot tonight, but all I am saying is all of these theories are often mutually exclusive and contradictory. How does everyone else see it?

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 11 2006 4:47 utc | 39

@ Malooga
About the same. When we all get carried away we need to remember a few basic things.
Firstly people such as Bliar and Dubya aren’t mates. Mainchancers don’t have friends they only have unrealised oppotunities (aquaintances) and realised opportunities (ex-acquaintances).
That’s important because at time like this we need to remember that the things Bliar considers important for himself and the poms may not be high on Dubya’s priorities.
Same goes for internal politics too. Cheney probably rates anything that diverts your money to Halliburton #1 priority whereas Dubya probably rates the needs of Mobil Exxon or Carlyle higher.
Everyone’s thrown balls into the air to keep the evil bubbling along and a final decision won’t be made until they can discern some shape to it all.
We gotta remember these guys face the same conundrum as any stick-up artists. The more the merrier but of course that doesn’t apply to the divvy up of the loot. So they will try and create a few more circumstances like the cartoons bizzo. “hell maybe we can get the Scandi’s and most of the rest of Nato, bar the slimy Brits, and the two-timing French, for free” is probably the re-curring thought running through Cheney’s head.
Also gotta remember whether the deal is to stop the bourse or just keep control of oil in USuk hands, bluff is still the preferred option. Many of you probably haven’t noticed but Bliar has just taken a real hammering in a by-election.
This in Scotland not England, a decade ago in Scotland; voting for limp-wristed liberals was the equivalent of siding with the factory foreman. Bliar will be shitting hisself because he won’t want to scuttle away yet, apparently he needs more cash in the bag.
Though he realises Gordon Brown, his anointed successor can’t just sit his hands either. If Brown doesn’t grab the job soon someone else will snatch it from under brown-nose Brown’s nose. If this war bizzo keeps up for much longer the rest of the mainchancers in Brit labour will have Bliar’s kneecaps for castanets.
The repugs must be in the same sort of shithole in the US. You can be sure the media won’t be trumpeting it from the rooftops, but everybody’s favourite focus groups will be telling them people think repugs stink worse’n garbage-guts Cheney’s farts.
Since no one appears to want to come up with an alternative to the other faction of the demopublican party, eventually people will firm up to vote for what they imagine to be the least worst, Harry Reid’s recrudescent replica republicans.
It’s been too long since K St had a serious chat with some of those old boys.
So apart from Hilary’s love affair with the conservative NY jewish voters, it’s gonna be tough to know what the rest of them will want before they whine and bitch about realising it’s a sad business to have to “show some leadership” and give the sheeple what they need and not what they ‘think’ they want.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Feb 11 2006 9:18 utc | 41

I’m very fond of pancakes myself. But it won’t do you know.
The shit we see going down has to stop NOW.
Sept. 11 represents some kind of opportunity.
Some kind.
That is what I have to believe anyway, even if it is irrational.

Posted by: Noisette | Feb 11 2006 9:48 utc | 43

Khuzestan, home to 90 per cent of Iran’s oil

Posted by: DM | Feb 11 2006 11:02 utc | 45

mallooga
think alll the contradictary positions possible. we imagine he monster of the empire as a monumental entity – but they aren’t. their cnfusion & their chaos – ironically along with their confidence would suggest withi their thinking rooms – different strategies are articulate then enunciated between minumum & maximum positions
at one time i thought it possible they had sense – that is they would not risk – ten divisions of the iranians fanning out into occupied iraq but i now think they are quite clearly insane & clearly think we are nincompoops & dumbkopfs (witness the placing the delay appointment, the permitting of frists waiver etc etc). i think they will attack iran with tactical nuclear devices – hoping to prove their insanity & lock the iranians into fear – a fear that might forestall larger military action. i now think they are made enough to do it & md anough to do it within the next two months
israeli analysts predict march & they seem to have a paranormal sense of when things go bad
i imagine they are underestimating the ability for anti empire forces to coalesce – which is what i think would happen not only in the middle east but elsewhere
perhaps from the 12 million who demonstrated against the iraq war will come warriors – perhpas thousands of them that will make this world the mad world the bush administration really wants

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 11 2006 15:00 utc | 47

Behold your (boy) King!

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 11 2006 17:31 utc | 49

re HR 4694

The co-sponsors are these 7 Democrats: Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, Barney Frank and James McGovern of Massachusetts, Henry Waxman and Bob Filner of California, Steve Israel of New York, and Tim Ryan of Ohio. [source]

to quote ole’ h.w. bush from the 1992 earth summit, “the american [economic] way of life is not negotiable”

Posted by: b real | Feb 11 2006 18:52 utc | 51

uncle scam. i’ve gotten lost for hrs on the internet following assessments of 9/11. most of the info presented in the movie i was familiar with but not all. i don’t believe the official story. but i’m not inclined to just say everything in the movie i’m convinced of. perhaps there are a few inaccuracies. but in general, the questions presented are on the right path. imho. did i already mention i’m looking forward to going to the fall conference in utah? just to be in the presence of thousands of people who agree w/me. i’ll get to feel mainstream for a couple days
it’s hard for me to get my mind around what may have happened w/all the people on the airplanes that disappeared.

Posted by: annie | Feb 11 2006 20:28 utc | 53

annie, I for one hope that your pieces fire well.
I guess you make them first, shape them, but they have to brought to a dry life through the kiln.
I don’t know much about it but it’s still great to hear about your work.

Posted by: jonku | Feb 12 2006 11:36 utc | 55

jonku
a,,ie knows it’s a little like creating a golem

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Feb 12 2006 16:01 utc | 57

Uncle Scam, I don’t watch movies about 9/11. I know (I think!) all the facts and so on that kind of propaganda attempt refers to. I made an exception for Michael Moore as it was mainstream so it acquires significance.
These are attempts to wake people up and convince as Americans don’t read, don’t listen to logic, aren’t interested in the rule of law, etc. (it is said). Visual narrative presentations – videos, movies – that move far away from rational analysis and by-pass the regular procedures that should exist or be implemented (e.g. forensic analysis, investigate the shorting of stocks, analyse pictures, arrest perps, to mention just a few…) seem, ultimately, the only way of ‘reaching’ people. In short, adopting the techniques of the ‘enemy’ and trying to do it better with less money and less possible venues. It is propaganda, persuasion, no doubt very well done, but to what effect?
Some pessimistic posts above – and I personally am not sure, my question is sincere.

Posted by: Noisette | Feb 12 2006 16:48 utc | 59

Seems we are getting spammed by a disgruntled disgrunt.

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 12 2006 17:52 utc | 61

Uncle $cam:
I finally got around to watching the video. There were a number of facts that I wasn’t aware of. I guess about 2-3 years ago I spent several days surfing all the 9-11 websites I could find and digesting as much as I could. So, in that way, I was impressed. The film makes a better case than Mike Ruppert does. Some of the facts presented were not documented well enough, or were glossed over too fast to absorb the impact. Particularly, I refer to the lack of evidence of a crash in Pennsylvania and the landing in Cleveland. More evidence needs to be marshalled to conteract the balance of MSM.
Again, understand that I am a MIHOP kind of guy, so I don’t need persuading. But I try and view this all from the opposite perspective to see what works and what doesn’t in converting others (for that is what all of this activity seeks to do).
As I watched the film, I couldn’t help but thinking how much the film would have benefited by a crack filmmaker like Michael Moore, or Oliver Stone, taking over the reins, and knowing what to emphasize and what to marginalize in a welter of evidence.
And so those questions grow: Why has the 9-11 truth movement not been able to convince and enlist the help of a major, or semi-major, filmmaker, to craft and publicize the information? Why has the movement been so unsuccessful at building any sort of mass movement. Thirty years ago, Ceasar Chavez captured the imagination of the country and galvanized public opinion over the conditions of grape-pickers and marginalized agricultural workers. The 9-11 truth movement is more concerned with arguing the merits this explosion or that explosion, getting lost in who is right about each and every point in the morass of evidence, rather that uniting on a single activist path. Where is the movement for transparency, and accountability, in government, especially as the Bushistas classify more and more? If the affairs of state were run transparently, and there was accountability, it would solve most of the problems we face.
What I am arguing is that convincing the populace that 9-11 was fishy isn’t enough; indeed, some might argue that the demoralizing effect of such a conversion might be counter-revolutionary. What is needed is a positive correcting response; a mass movement that gives people hope in the face of a faceless, all-powerful, and unaccountable nemesis. Absent that, it is hard to see the 9-11 truth movement going anywhere. The sheeple will gravitate to a postive stimuli; they just get uncomfortable and disoriented by strong negative stimuli.
Believe me, I wish it were as easy as just getting the film out without building a concomitant social movement. I wish it were so easy; but it isn’t. And you can’t ignore the laws of activism, as proven and expounded, through much sweat and suffering, by the likes of masters like Saul Alinsky.

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 12 2006 18:51 utc | 63

Thirty years ago, Ceasar Chavez captured the imagination of the country and galvanized public opinion over the conditions of grape-pickers and marginalized agricultural workers. The 9-11 truth movement is more concerned with arguing the merits this explosion or that explosion, getting lost in who is right about each and every point in the morass of evidence, rather that uniting on a single activist path.
public opinion towards the grape pickers wasn’t used to justify a war and change excecutive powers. the public was more accepting of the implications. for there to be any movement in the perceptions of 9/11 the public needs to accept certain truths. until then we will be marginalized as tin hatters. the plausibilty factor is a beginning. until recently there wasn’t even the beginning of a movement. for a few years it seems we heard very little. a movement is just getting some traction. as far as a mass movement, one of the 9/11 groups is seeking a membership goal of 100,000 by may.
those in the bay area can attend a Lecture: “9/11:� The Myth & the Reality”
by David Ray Griffin 7-9:00PM, Grand Lake Theater, 3200 Grand Avenue, Oakland.
scholars for truth
are seeking scholars w/affiliations to start organizing for more of these lectures across the country. patience, it’s happening. but a really good movie would go along way. maybe george clooney would be interested!

Posted by: annie | Feb 12 2006 20:46 utc | 65

in this pdf of face the nation dean calls cheney ‘the president” twice. saying he should step down if it’s true he told libby to leak the NIE report for political reasons.

Posted by: annie | Feb 13 2006 2:06 utc | 67

Belated birthday to Bertolt Brecht
The exhibition “Bertolt Brecht Turns 100” premieres on February 10th

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Feb 13 2006 10:39 utc | 69

american dream cut short for two feds
Air Marshals Arrested On Drug Trafficking Charges

Two air marshals were arrested in connection with using their positions for drug trafficking, KPRC Local 2 [in houston,tx] reported Friday.
A tipster told FBI agents that the men, whose names were not released, were buying and selling drugs as they flew around the country as air marshals.
The federal government hired thousands of air marshals after Sept. 11, posting the undercover, armed agents on board random airplanes.
Because they carry guns, the marshals bypass metal detectors and X-ray machines.
…
Both men worked with other law enforcement agencies before becoming air marshals, sources told KPRC. One of them was a Drug Enforcement Administration agent until 2002, when he joined the air marshals.

Posted by: b real | Feb 13 2006 15:41 utc | 71

Abramoff’s Evangelical Soldiers
I read this stuff and realize we are fvcked. How do you go up against people who use the power of money and the Almighty for personal gain. This is quite disheartening to say the least.

The only Christian-right activist confirmed to be completely aware of Abramoff’s rip-off was Ralph Reed. He and Abramoff have a long and storied history together. When Abramoff chaired the College Republican National Committee in the early 1980s, Reed served as the organization’s executive director. They reunited in 1989, when Abramoff helped Reed organize the remains of Pat Robertson’s failed 1988 presidential bid into the Christian Coalition. In 1997, with the Christian Coalition under IRS investigation and Reed facing accusations of cronyism from the group’s chief financial officer, he left to start his own consulting firm, Century Strategies. Reed contacted Abramoff right away. “I need to start humping in corporate accounts,” Reed told him in 1998. “I’m counting on you to help me with some contacts.”
Though Abramoff apparently was not fond of Reed, he viewed him as useful. “I know you (we!) hate him [Reed], but it does give us good cover and patter to have him doing stuff,” he wrote in a February 14, 2002, e-mail to his business partner, Michael Scanlon. “Let’s give him a list of things we want…and give him some chump change to get it done.” Reed thus became Abramoff and Scanlon’s liaison to the Christian right, enlisting his evangelical allies into a web of shadowy casino hustles for “chump change.”

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 13 2006 20:00 utc | 73

from annie’s link
There’s nothing pulsing or sending out a signal, said Mr Darks, who has had a chip in his own arm.
Mr. Darks?…
Our dear leaders seem to have quite the twisted sense of humor.

Posted by: citizen | Feb 13 2006 21:29 utc | 75

DoS,
What makes you think it references only one thing?

Posted by: citizen | Feb 13 2006 22:07 utc | 77

okay, I’ll partially withdraw.
But since the Army has been occupying foreign countries since long before 1999, I’ll still have the double (entendre).

Posted by: citizen | Feb 13 2006 22:57 utc | 79

OT/OT:
This Year’s Valentine
by Philip Appleman
They could
pump frenzy into air ducts
and rage into reservoirs,
dynamite dams
and drown the cities,
cry fire in theaters
as the victims are burning,
but
I will find my way through blackened streets
and kneel down at your side.
They could
jump the median, head-on,
and obliterate the future,
fit .45’s to the hands of kids,
and skate them off to school,
flip live butts into tinderbox forests
and hellfire half the heavens,
but
in the rubble of smoking cottages
I will hold you in my arms.
They could
send kidnappers to kindergartens
and pedophiles to playgrounds,
wrap themselves in Old Glory
and gut the Bill of Rights,
pound at the door with holy screed
and put an end to reason,
but
I will cut through their curtains of cunning
and find you somewhere in moonlight
Whatever they do with their anthrax or chainsaws,
however they strip-search or brainwash or blackmail,
they cannot prevent me from sending you robins,
all of them singing: I’ll be there.

Posted by: beq | Feb 14 2006 11:55 utc | 81

another funny, for our German friends…
Do you speak English?

Posted by: dan of steele | Feb 14 2006 15:21 utc | 83

Syria switches to euro amid confrontation with US

Posted by: Malooga | Feb 15 2006 2:11 utc | 85