Two Prosecutors Faulted Trials for Detainees - New York Times: "By NEIL A. LEWIS | Published: August 1, 2005
WASHINGTON, July 31 - As the Pentagon was making its final preparations to begin war crimes trials against four detainees at Guant'namo Bay, Cuba, two senior prosecutors complained in confidential messages last year that the trial system had been secretly arranged to improve the chance of conviction and to deprive defendants of material that could prove their innocence.
The electronic messages, obtained by The New York Times, reveal a bitter dispute within the military legal community over the fairness of the system at a time when the Bush administration and the Pentagon were eager to have the military commissions, the first for the United States since the aftermath of World War II, be seen as just at home and abroad.
...
Captain Carr's e-mail message also said that some evidence that at least one of the four defendants had been brutalized had been lost and that other evidence on the same issue had been withheld. The March 15, 2004, message was addressed to Col. Frederick L. Borch, the chief prosecutor who was the object of much of Captain Carr's criticism.
The second officer, Maj. Robert Preston, also of the Air Force, said in a March 11, 2004, message to another senior officer in the prosecutor's office that he could not in good conscience write a legal motion saying the proceedings would be "full and fair" when he knew they would not. ...
Sunday, July 31, 2005
The Truth About Abu Ghraib: facts have grown harder to ignore: Bush admin gotten away with their stonewalling largely because of Republican Congress
The Truth About Abu Ghraib: "Friday, July 29, 2005; Page A22
FOR 15 MONTHS now the Bush administration has insisted that the horrific photographs of abuse from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq were the result of freelance behavior by low-level personnel and had nothing to do with its policies. In this the White House has been enthusiastically supported by the Army brass, which has conducted investigations documenting hundreds of cases of prisoner mistreatment in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but denies that any of its senior officers are culpable. For some time these implacable positions have been glaringly at odds with the known facts. In the past few days, those facts have grown harder to ignore.
The latest evidence has emerged from hearings at Fort Meade about two of those low-level Abu Ghraib guards who are charged with using dogs to terrorize Iraqi detainees. On Wednesday, the former warden of Abu Ghraib, Maj. David DiNenna, testified that the use of dogs for interrogation was recommended by Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, the former commander of the Guantanamo Bay prison who was dispatched by the Pentagon to Abu Ghraib in August 2003 to review the handling and interrogation of prisoners. On Tuesday, a military interrogator testified that he had been trained in using dogs by a team sent to Iraq by Gen. Miller.
In statements to investigators and in sworn testimony to Congress last year, Gen. Miller denied that he recommended the use of dogs for interrogation, or that they had been used at Guantanamo. 'No methods contrary to the Geneva Convention were presented at any time by the assistance team that I took to [Iraq],' he said under oath on May 19, 2004. Yet Army investigators reported to Congress this month that, under Gen. Miller's supervision at Guantanamo, an al Qaeda suspect named Mohamed Qahtani was threatened with snarling dogs, forced to wear women's underwear on his head and led by a leash attached to his chains -- the very abuse documented in the Abu Ghraib photographs.
...
The White House and Pentagon have gotten away with their stonewalling largely because of Republican control of Congress. When the Abu Ghraib scandal erupted, GOP leaders such as Sen. John W. Warner (Va.) loudly vowed to get to the bottom of the matter -- but once the bottom started to come into view late last year, Mr. Warner's demands for accountability ceased. Mr. Rumsfeld and other senior officials have never been the subject of an independent investigation. A recommendation by the latest Army probe that Gen. Miller be reprimanded for his role in the Qahtani interrogation was rejected by Gen. Bantz Craddock of Southern Command.
FOR 15 MONTHS now the Bush administration has insisted that the horrific photographs of abuse from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq were the result of freelance behavior by low-level personnel and had nothing to do with its policies. In this the White House has been enthusiastically supported by the Army brass, which has conducted investigations documenting hundreds of cases of prisoner mistreatment in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but denies that any of its senior officers are culpable. For some time these implacable positions have been glaringly at odds with the known facts. In the past few days, those facts have grown harder to ignore.
The latest evidence has emerged from hearings at Fort Meade about two of those low-level Abu Ghraib guards who are charged with using dogs to terrorize Iraqi detainees. On Wednesday, the former warden of Abu Ghraib, Maj. David DiNenna, testified that the use of dogs for interrogation was recommended by Maj. Gen. Geoffrey D. Miller, the former commander of the Guantanamo Bay prison who was dispatched by the Pentagon to Abu Ghraib in August 2003 to review the handling and interrogation of prisoners. On Tuesday, a military interrogator testified that he had been trained in using dogs by a team sent to Iraq by Gen. Miller.
In statements to investigators and in sworn testimony to Congress last year, Gen. Miller denied that he recommended the use of dogs for interrogation, or that they had been used at Guantanamo. 'No methods contrary to the Geneva Convention were presented at any time by the assistance team that I took to [Iraq],' he said under oath on May 19, 2004. Yet Army investigators reported to Congress this month that, under Gen. Miller's supervision at Guantanamo, an al Qaeda suspect named Mohamed Qahtani was threatened with snarling dogs, forced to wear women's underwear on his head and led by a leash attached to his chains -- the very abuse documented in the Abu Ghraib photographs.
...
The White House and Pentagon have gotten away with their stonewalling largely because of Republican control of Congress. When the Abu Ghraib scandal erupted, GOP leaders such as Sen. John W. Warner (Va.) loudly vowed to get to the bottom of the matter -- but once the bottom started to come into view late last year, Mr. Warner's demands for accountability ceased. Mr. Rumsfeld and other senior officials have never been the subject of an independent investigation. A recommendation by the latest Army probe that Gen. Miller be reprimanded for his role in the Qahtani interrogation was rejected by Gen. Bantz Craddock of Southern Command.
Iraq's Child Prisoners - vestigation suggests there are up to 107. ... Witnesses claim some are also being subjected to rape and torture
Iraq's Child Prisoners - [Sunday Herald]: "raq's Child Prisoners | By Neil Mackay
A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture
It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
In another witness statement, passed to the Sunday Herald, former prisoner Thaar Salman Dawod said: “[I saw] two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and [a US soldier] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners. The prisoners, two of them, were young.
It’s not certain exactly how many children are being held by coalition forces in Iraq, but a Sunday Herald investigation suggests there are up to 107. ...
Proof of the widespread arrest and detention of children in Iraq by US and UK forces is contained in an internal Unicef report written in June. The report has – surprisingly – not been made public. A key section on child protection, headed “Children in Conflict with the Law or with Coalition Forces”, reads: “In July and August 2003, several meetings were conducted with CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) … and Ministry of Justice to address issues related to juvenile justice and the situation of children detained by the coalition forces … Unicef is working through a variety of channels to try and learn more about conditions for children who are imprisoned or detained, and to ensure that their rights are respected.”
A Sunday Herald investigation has discovered that coalition forces are holding more than 100 children in jails such as Abu Ghraib. Witnesses claim that the detainees – some as young as 10 – are also being subjected to rape and torture
It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
In another witness statement, passed to the Sunday Herald, former prisoner Thaar Salman Dawod said: “[I saw] two boys naked and they were cuffed together face to face and [a US soldier] was beating them and a group of guards were watching and taking pictures and there was three female soldiers laughing at the prisoners. The prisoners, two of them, were young.
It’s not certain exactly how many children are being held by coalition forces in Iraq, but a Sunday Herald investigation suggests there are up to 107. ...
Proof of the widespread arrest and detention of children in Iraq by US and UK forces is contained in an internal Unicef report written in June. The report has – surprisingly – not been made public. A key section on child protection, headed “Children in Conflict with the Law or with Coalition Forces”, reads: “In July and August 2003, several meetings were conducted with CPA (Coalition Provisional Authority) … and Ministry of Justice to address issues related to juvenile justice and the situation of children detained by the coalition forces … Unicef is working through a variety of channels to try and learn more about conditions for children who are imprisoned or detained, and to ensure that their rights are respected.”
After exploiting "phobias" or dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning,": rendition is a per se violation of the U.S. Torture Statute
Newsweek: " Exclusive: Secret Memo—Send to Be Tortured | Aug. 8, 2005 issue -
An FBI agent warned superiors in a memo three years ago that U.S. officials who discussed plans to ship terror suspects to foreign nations that practice torture could be prosecuted for conspiring to violate U.S. law, according to a copy of the memo obtained by NEWSWEEK. The strongly worded memo, written by an FBI supervisor then assigned to Guantanamo, is the latest in a series of documents that have recently surfaced reflecting unease among some government lawyers and FBI agents over tactics being used in the war on terror. This memo appears to be the first that directly questions the legal premises of the Bush administration policy of "extraordinary rendition"—a secret program under which terror suspects are transferred to foreign countries that have been widely criticized for practicing torture.
In a memo forwarded to a senior FBI lawyer on Nov. 27, 2002, a supervisory special agent from the bureau's behavioral analysis unit offered a legal analysis of interrogation techniques that had been approved by Pentagon officials for use against a high-value Qaeda detainee. After objecting to techniques such as exploiting "phobias" like "the fear of dogs" or dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning," the agent discussed a plan to send the detainee to Jordan, Egypt or an unspecified third country for interrogation. "In as much as the intent of this category is to utilize, outside the U.S., interrogation techniques which would violate [U.S. law] if committed in the U.S., it is a per se violation of the U.S. Torture Statute," the agent wrote. "Discussing any plan which includes this category could be seen as a con-spiracy to violate [the Torture Statute]" and "would inculpate" everyone involved.
An FBI agent warned superiors in a memo three years ago that U.S. officials who discussed plans to ship terror suspects to foreign nations that practice torture could be prosecuted for conspiring to violate U.S. law, according to a copy of the memo obtained by NEWSWEEK. The strongly worded memo, written by an FBI supervisor then assigned to Guantanamo, is the latest in a series of documents that have recently surfaced reflecting unease among some government lawyers and FBI agents over tactics being used in the war on terror. This memo appears to be the first that directly questions the legal premises of the Bush administration policy of "extraordinary rendition"—a secret program under which terror suspects are transferred to foreign countries that have been widely criticized for practicing torture.
In a memo forwarded to a senior FBI lawyer on Nov. 27, 2002, a supervisory special agent from the bureau's behavioral analysis unit offered a legal analysis of interrogation techniques that had been approved by Pentagon officials for use against a high-value Qaeda detainee. After objecting to techniques such as exploiting "phobias" like "the fear of dogs" or dripping water "to induce the misperception of drowning," the agent discussed a plan to send the detainee to Jordan, Egypt or an unspecified third country for interrogation. "In as much as the intent of this category is to utilize, outside the U.S., interrogation techniques which would violate [U.S. law] if committed in the U.S., it is a per se violation of the U.S. Torture Statute," the agent wrote. "Discussing any plan which includes this category could be seen as a con-spiracy to violate [the Torture Statute]" and "would inculpate" everyone involved.
Rape cases in US prisons number in the thousands - 42% involve d prison staff abuse of inmates
Rape cases in US prisons number in the thousands - Yahoo! News: "Fri Jul 29, 8:59 PM ET
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Nearly 2,100 incidents of rape and other sexual violence were recorded in US prisons in 2004, US justice authorities said.
The Department of Justice said that the highest rate of prison rape and other forced sexual acts was in state-run juvenile prisons, and that the largest portion involved prison staff abuse of inmates.
...
Of the 7,000 investigations completed by the department, about one-third of cases, or about 2,100, were substantiated, the report said.
Nearly 42 percent of reported cases of sexual violence involved prison staff abuse of inmates, while 37 percent was inmate-on-inmate violence.
Males comprised 90 percent of inmate-on-inmate violence.
The report also noted that sexual violence in state-run youth prison facilities was 10 times higher than that in adult prisons.
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Nearly 2,100 incidents of rape and other sexual violence were recorded in US prisons in 2004, US justice authorities said.
The Department of Justice said that the highest rate of prison rape and other forced sexual acts was in state-run juvenile prisons, and that the largest portion involved prison staff abuse of inmates.
...
Of the 7,000 investigations completed by the department, about one-third of cases, or about 2,100, were substantiated, the report said.
Nearly 42 percent of reported cases of sexual violence involved prison staff abuse of inmates, while 37 percent was inmate-on-inmate violence.
Males comprised 90 percent of inmate-on-inmate violence.
The report also noted that sexual violence in state-run youth prison facilities was 10 times higher than that in adult prisons.
Reforming [US] Food Aid: set up just as much to help U.S. business: vast majority must be spent on American producers
MoJo Blog: Reforming Food Aid: "Reforming Food Aid
... But they rarely mention food aid, where the U.S., which contributes 56 percent of the world's total, far outstrips all other nations. And, according to a recently published report by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, perhaps that's for good reason. According to the report, the U.S. approach to food aid, while adequate at stemming famine in targeted emergencies, does far more harm than good in the long run. And there's a sadly predictable cause: the programs are set up just as much to help U.S. business as they are to prevent starvation.
The vast majority of government funds allotted to purchase food aid must be spent on American producers. So even if another country—perhaps one closer to the famine site— can produce cheaper food, their products are locked out. Local producers in poorer countries have less incentive to grow sustenance crops, and instead produce crops for export that are priced beyond the reach of domestic markets. It’s a policy that produces subsistence and dependence rather than food independence. The report has a few suggestions that might clear up the mess—but as long as the programs are run as a backdoor subsidy program to U.S. farmers, change will be a tough row to hoe."
... But they rarely mention food aid, where the U.S., which contributes 56 percent of the world's total, far outstrips all other nations. And, according to a recently published report by the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, perhaps that's for good reason. According to the report, the U.S. approach to food aid, while adequate at stemming famine in targeted emergencies, does far more harm than good in the long run. And there's a sadly predictable cause: the programs are set up just as much to help U.S. business as they are to prevent starvation.
The vast majority of government funds allotted to purchase food aid must be spent on American producers. So even if another country—perhaps one closer to the famine site— can produce cheaper food, their products are locked out. Local producers in poorer countries have less incentive to grow sustenance crops, and instead produce crops for export that are priced beyond the reach of domestic markets. It’s a policy that produces subsistence and dependence rather than food independence. The report has a few suggestions that might clear up the mess—but as long as the programs are run as a backdoor subsidy program to U.S. farmers, change will be a tough row to hoe."
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Transcript Suggests CIA Involved in Abuse: Iraqi general killed with an electrical cord, restrained headfirst inside a sleeping bag
Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Transcript Suggests CIA Involved in Abuse: "Thursday July 28, 2005 12:46 PM
DENVER (AP) - A National Guardsman testifying at a hearing for U.S. soldiers accused of killing an Iraq general said he saw classified U.S. personnel beat prisoners with a sledgehammer handle and mock the general's death, according to a transcript. The transcript, obtained by The Denver Post, includes an exchange during the hearing that suggests the CIA was involved.
Sgt. 1st Class Gerold Pratt of the Utah National Guard said he saw unidentified U.S. personnel use the 15-inch wooden handle to hit prisoners.
...
The Army said Mowhoush died of asphyxiation from chest compression. Documents in the case said he was killed with an electrical cord, and a Pentagon investigation reportedly says a soldier sat on Mowhoush as he was restrained headfirst inside a sleeping bag.
Previous testimony indicated the Iraqi general's body was badly bruised and he may have been severely beaten two days before he was suffocated. ...
DENVER (AP) - A National Guardsman testifying at a hearing for U.S. soldiers accused of killing an Iraq general said he saw classified U.S. personnel beat prisoners with a sledgehammer handle and mock the general's death, according to a transcript. The transcript, obtained by The Denver Post, includes an exchange during the hearing that suggests the CIA was involved.
Sgt. 1st Class Gerold Pratt of the Utah National Guard said he saw unidentified U.S. personnel use the 15-inch wooden handle to hit prisoners.
...
The Army said Mowhoush died of asphyxiation from chest compression. Documents in the case said he was killed with an electrical cord, and a Pentagon investigation reportedly says a soldier sat on Mowhoush as he was restrained headfirst inside a sleeping bag.
Previous testimony indicated the Iraqi general's body was badly bruised and he may have been severely beaten two days before he was suffocated. ...
Thrid Bush administration official disclosed in the Case of C.I.A. Officer's Leaked Identity
Case of C.I.A. Officer's Leaked Identity Takes New Turn - New York Times: "By DOUGLAS JEHL | Published: July 28, 2005
WASHINGTON, July 26 - In the same week in July 2003 in which Bush administration officials told a syndicated columnist and a Time magazine reporter that a C.I.A. officer had initiated her husband's mission to Niger, an administration official provided a Washington Post reporter with a similar account.
The first two episodes, involving the columnist Robert D. Novak and the reporter Matthew Cooper, have become the subjects of intense scrutiny in recent weeks. But little attention has been paid to what The Post reporter, Walter Pincus, has recently described as a separate exchange on July 12, 2003.
In that exchange, Mr. Pincus says, 'an administration official, who was talking to me confidentially about a matter involving alleged Iraqi nuclear activities, veered off the precise matter we were discussing and told me that the White House had not paid attention' to the trip to Niger by Joseph C. Wilson IV 'because it was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, an analyst with the agency who was working on weapons of mass destruction.'"
WASHINGTON, July 26 - In the same week in July 2003 in which Bush administration officials told a syndicated columnist and a Time magazine reporter that a C.I.A. officer had initiated her husband's mission to Niger, an administration official provided a Washington Post reporter with a similar account.
The first two episodes, involving the columnist Robert D. Novak and the reporter Matthew Cooper, have become the subjects of intense scrutiny in recent weeks. But little attention has been paid to what The Post reporter, Walter Pincus, has recently described as a separate exchange on July 12, 2003.
In that exchange, Mr. Pincus says, 'an administration official, who was talking to me confidentially about a matter involving alleged Iraqi nuclear activities, veered off the precise matter we were discussing and told me that the White House had not paid attention' to the trip to Niger by Joseph C. Wilson IV 'because it was a boondoggle arranged by his wife, an analyst with the agency who was working on weapons of mass destruction.'"
Ex - Abu Ghraib Warden: Boss Urged Dog Use - ''We understood that he was sent over by the secretary of defense,''
Ex - Abu Ghraib Warden: Boss Urged Dog Use - New York Times: "By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS | Published: July 28, 2005
FORT MEADE, Md. (AP) -- The use of dogs during interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq was recommended by the commander of the Guantanamo Bay detention center during a visit in 2003, the former warden of Abu Ghraib said.
''We understood that he was sent over by the secretary of defense,'' Maj. David Dinenna testified Wednesday during a hearing for two Army dog handlers accused of prisoner abuse.
Dinenna also testified that teams of trainers were sent to Abu Ghraib from Guantanamo Bay to try to incorporate certain interrogation techniques in Iraq.
The defense maintains the use of unmuzzled dogs to intimidate Abu Ghraib inmates was sanctioned high up in the chain of command and was not just a game played by two rogue soldiers, as the government claims.
''They did what they were instructed to do,'' defense attorney Harvey J. Volzer said.
...
One interrogator, Staff Sgt. Christopher S. Aston, testified that the only clear instruction about how dogs were to be used during interrogations at Abu Ghraib came from Col. Thomas M. Pappas, the highest-ranking military intelligence officer at the prison. Pappas said dogs could be used, but only if they were muzzled, Aston said. ...
FORT MEADE, Md. (AP) -- The use of dogs during interrogations at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq was recommended by the commander of the Guantanamo Bay detention center during a visit in 2003, the former warden of Abu Ghraib said.
''We understood that he was sent over by the secretary of defense,'' Maj. David Dinenna testified Wednesday during a hearing for two Army dog handlers accused of prisoner abuse.
Dinenna also testified that teams of trainers were sent to Abu Ghraib from Guantanamo Bay to try to incorporate certain interrogation techniques in Iraq.
The defense maintains the use of unmuzzled dogs to intimidate Abu Ghraib inmates was sanctioned high up in the chain of command and was not just a game played by two rogue soldiers, as the government claims.
''They did what they were instructed to do,'' defense attorney Harvey J. Volzer said.
...
One interrogator, Staff Sgt. Christopher S. Aston, testified that the only clear instruction about how dogs were to be used during interrogations at Abu Ghraib came from Col. Thomas M. Pappas, the highest-ranking military intelligence officer at the prison. Pappas said dogs could be used, but only if they were muzzled, Aston said. ...
Wednesday, July 27, 2005
Senate's Republican leader Frist pulls defense bill after tyring to block amendments setting standards for military-prisoner interrogations
KR Washington Bureau | 07/26/2005 | Frist pulls defense bill to avoid votes on treatment of detainees: "Tue, Jul. 26, 2005 | Frist pulls defense bill to avoid votes on treatment of detainees | By James Kuhnhenn | Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON -The Senate's Republican leader on Tuesday derailed a bipartisan effort to set rules for the treatment of enemy prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other military detention camps by abruptly stopping debate on a $491 billion defense bill.
The unusual move came after senators, including several leading Republicans, beat back an effort by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to block amendments setting standards for military-prisoner interrogations and delaying base closings scheduled for approval later this year. The White House had threatened to veto the defense-spending legislation if it contained either of those provisions.
Rather than risk debate and votes on those amendments, Frist, R-Tenn., simply pulled the bill from consideration. The bill would have set defense spending levels for fiscal year 2006, which begins Oct. 1, and it includes authority to spend $50 billion on military operations in Iraq.
'It just doesn't make sense to leave defense authorization,' said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leading sponsor of the interrogation-standard amendment. 'We need to make sure that every member of the Department of Defense understands the procedures that are being used in interrogation and we don't have a repetition of Abu Ghraib,' he said, referring to the prison in Iraq that became synonymous with detainee abuse."
...
But on Monday, McCain, Graham and Warner submitted an amendment that would have required that the U.S. Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation cover prisoners in military custody.
The three, together with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, also introduced an amendment that would prohibit cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners and would require the United States to abide by the Geneva Convention and other international agreements on the treatment of prisoners.
The two amendments likely would have received substantial Democratic support and had a strong chance of passing in the Republican-controlled Senate.
WASHINGTON -The Senate's Republican leader on Tuesday derailed a bipartisan effort to set rules for the treatment of enemy prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and other military detention camps by abruptly stopping debate on a $491 billion defense bill.
The unusual move came after senators, including several leading Republicans, beat back an effort by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist to block amendments setting standards for military-prisoner interrogations and delaying base closings scheduled for approval later this year. The White House had threatened to veto the defense-spending legislation if it contained either of those provisions.
Rather than risk debate and votes on those amendments, Frist, R-Tenn., simply pulled the bill from consideration. The bill would have set defense spending levels for fiscal year 2006, which begins Oct. 1, and it includes authority to spend $50 billion on military operations in Iraq.
'It just doesn't make sense to leave defense authorization,' said Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a leading sponsor of the interrogation-standard amendment. 'We need to make sure that every member of the Department of Defense understands the procedures that are being used in interrogation and we don't have a repetition of Abu Ghraib,' he said, referring to the prison in Iraq that became synonymous with detainee abuse."
...
But on Monday, McCain, Graham and Warner submitted an amendment that would have required that the U.S. Army Field Manual on Intelligence Interrogation cover prisoners in military custody.
The three, together with Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, also introduced an amendment that would prohibit cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment of prisoners and would require the United States to abide by the Geneva Convention and other international agreements on the treatment of prisoners.
The two amendments likely would have received substantial Democratic support and had a strong chance of passing in the Republican-controlled Senate.
JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERALs on interrogation techniques ... technique 36 would constitute torture under international and U.S. law
Balkinization: "Wednesday, July 27, 2005 | The JAG Memos on Military Interrogation and OLC’s Legal Analysis | Marty Lederman
1. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 5, 2003.
...
Subject: Final Report and Recommendations of the Working Group to Assess the
Legal, Policy and Operational Issues Relating to Interrogation of Detainees
Held by the U.S. Armed Forces in the War on Terrorism (U)
...
2. (U) Several of the more extreme interrogation techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law and the UCMJ (e.g., assault). Applying the more extreme techniques during the interrogation of detainees places the interrogators and the chain of command at risk of criminal accusations domestically. ...
3. ... Other nations may disagree with the President's status determination regarding the Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) detainees; they may conclude that the detainees are POWs entitled to all of the protections of the Geneva Conventions. Treating OEF detainees inconsistently with the Conventions arguably "lowers the bar" for the treatment of U.S. POWs in future conflicts. Even where nations agree with the President's status determination, many would view the more extreme interrogation techniques as violative of other international law (other treaties or customary international law) and perhaps violative of their own domestic law. ...
...
5. (U) Finally, the use of the more extreme interrogation techniques simply is not how the U.S. armed forces have operated in recent history. We have taken the legal and moral "high-road" in the conduct of our military operations regardless of how others may operate. Our forces are trained in this legal and moral mindset beginning the day they enter active duty. ...
JACK L. RIVES, Major General, USAF, Deputy Judge Advocate General.
2. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 6, 2003
...
... Approving exceptional interrogation techniques may be seen as giving official approval and legal sanction to the application of interrogation techniques that U.S. Armed Forces have heretofore been trained are unlawful. ...
...
c. Page 68, add the following new paragraphs after the sixth full paragraph:
(U) Several of the exceptional techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law and the UCMJ (e.g., assault). ...
3. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 6, 2003.
...
... More broadly, while we may have found a unique situation in GTMO where the protections of the Geneva Conventions, U.S. statutes, and even the Constitution do not apply, will the American people find we have missed the forest for the trees by condoning practices that, while technically legal, are inconsistent with our most fundamental values? ...
...
MICHAEL F. LOHR, Rear Admiral, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Judge Advocaate General.
5. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, March 3, 2003.
...
4. (U) The OLC opinion states further that customary international law cannot bind the U.S. Executive Branch as it is not part of the federal law. As such, any presidential decision made in the context of the ongoing war on terrorism constitutes a "controlling" Executive act; one that immediately and automatically displaces any contrary provision of customary international law. This view runs contrary to the historic position taken by the United States Government concerning such laws and, in our opinion, could adversely impact DOD interests worldwide. On the one hand, such a policy will open us to international criticism that the "U.S. is a law unto itself." On the other, implementation of questionable techniques will very likely establish a new baseline for acceptable practice in this area, putting our service personnel at far greater risk and vitiating many of the POW/detainee safeguards the U.S. has worked hard to establish over the past five decades.
---
6. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, March 13, 2002.
...
2. (U) Page 24, second paragraph, last sentence: delete.
Rationale: this sentence is not true. There are domestic limits on the President's power to interrogate prisoners. One of them is Congress's advice and consent to the US ratification to the Geneva Conventions that limit the interrogation of POWs. The willingness of the Executive, and of the Legislative Branch, to enforce those restrictions is a different matter.
...
17. (U) Page 75, first paragraph, in the discussion re technique 36: Rewrite 3rd to last and penultimate sentences to read, "The working group believes use of technique 36 would constitute torture under international and U.S. law and, accordingly, should not be utilized. In the event SECDEF decides to authorize this technique, the working group believes armed forces personnel should not participate as interrogators as they are subject to UCMJ jurisdiction at all times."
1. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 5, 2003.
...
Subject: Final Report and Recommendations of the Working Group to Assess the
Legal, Policy and Operational Issues Relating to Interrogation of Detainees
Held by the U.S. Armed Forces in the War on Terrorism (U)
...
2. (U) Several of the more extreme interrogation techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law and the UCMJ (e.g., assault). Applying the more extreme techniques during the interrogation of detainees places the interrogators and the chain of command at risk of criminal accusations domestically. ...
3. ... Other nations may disagree with the President's status determination regarding the Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) detainees; they may conclude that the detainees are POWs entitled to all of the protections of the Geneva Conventions. Treating OEF detainees inconsistently with the Conventions arguably "lowers the bar" for the treatment of U.S. POWs in future conflicts. Even where nations agree with the President's status determination, many would view the more extreme interrogation techniques as violative of other international law (other treaties or customary international law) and perhaps violative of their own domestic law. ...
...
5. (U) Finally, the use of the more extreme interrogation techniques simply is not how the U.S. armed forces have operated in recent history. We have taken the legal and moral "high-road" in the conduct of our military operations regardless of how others may operate. Our forces are trained in this legal and moral mindset beginning the day they enter active duty. ...
JACK L. RIVES, Major General, USAF, Deputy Judge Advocate General.
2. DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 6, 2003
...
... Approving exceptional interrogation techniques may be seen as giving official approval and legal sanction to the application of interrogation techniques that U.S. Armed Forces have heretofore been trained are unlawful. ...
...
c. Page 68, add the following new paragraphs after the sixth full paragraph:
(U) Several of the exceptional techniques, on their face, amount to violations of domestic criminal law and the UCMJ (e.g., assault). ...
3. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, February 6, 2003.
...
... More broadly, while we may have found a unique situation in GTMO where the protections of the Geneva Conventions, U.S. statutes, and even the Constitution do not apply, will the American people find we have missed the forest for the trees by condoning practices that, while technically legal, are inconsistent with our most fundamental values? ...
...
MICHAEL F. LOHR, Rear Admiral, JAGC, U.S. Navy, Judge Advocaate General.
5. DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, March 3, 2003.
...
4. (U) The OLC opinion states further that customary international law cannot bind the U.S. Executive Branch as it is not part of the federal law. As such, any presidential decision made in the context of the ongoing war on terrorism constitutes a "controlling" Executive act; one that immediately and automatically displaces any contrary provision of customary international law. This view runs contrary to the historic position taken by the United States Government concerning such laws and, in our opinion, could adversely impact DOD interests worldwide. On the one hand, such a policy will open us to international criticism that the "U.S. is a law unto itself." On the other, implementation of questionable techniques will very likely establish a new baseline for acceptable practice in this area, putting our service personnel at far greater risk and vitiating many of the POW/detainee safeguards the U.S. has worked hard to establish over the past five decades.
---
6. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
Washington, DC, March 13, 2002.
...
2. (U) Page 24, second paragraph, last sentence: delete.
Rationale: this sentence is not true. There are domestic limits on the President's power to interrogate prisoners. One of them is Congress's advice and consent to the US ratification to the Geneva Conventions that limit the interrogation of POWs. The willingness of the Executive, and of the Legislative Branch, to enforce those restrictions is a different matter.
...
17. (U) Page 75, first paragraph, in the discussion re technique 36: Rewrite 3rd to last and penultimate sentences to read, "The working group believes use of technique 36 would constitute torture under international and U.S. law and, accordingly, should not be utilized. In the event SECDEF decides to authorize this technique, the working group believes armed forces personnel should not participate as interrogators as they are subject to UCMJ jurisdiction at all times."
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Abu Ghraib Dog Tactics Came From Guantanamo: Further Links Procedures at 2 Facilities [... or low level soldiers invent the same torture techniques?!]
Abu Ghraib Dog Tactics Came From Guantanamo: "Testimony Further Links Procedures at 2 Facilities | By Josh White | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, July 27, 2005; Page A14
Military interrogators at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq learned about the use of military working dogs to intimidate detainees from a team of interrogators dispatched from the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to court testimony yesterday.
One interrogation analyst also testified that sleep deprivation and forced nudity -- which were used in Cuba on high-value detainees -- later were approved tactics at Abu Ghraib. Another soldier said that interrogators would regularly pass instructions to have dog handlers and military police 'scare up' detainees as part of interrogation plans, part of an approved approach that relied on exploiting the fear of dogs.
...
"We have taken the legal and moral 'high-road' in the conduct of our military operations regardless of how others may operate," Air Force Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives wrote in a Feb. 5, 2003, memo. "We need to consider the overall impact of approving extreme interrogation techniques as giving official approval and legal sanction to the application of interrogation techniques that U.S. forces have consistently been trained are unlawful."
Military interrogators at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq learned about the use of military working dogs to intimidate detainees from a team of interrogators dispatched from the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, according to court testimony yesterday.
One interrogation analyst also testified that sleep deprivation and forced nudity -- which were used in Cuba on high-value detainees -- later were approved tactics at Abu Ghraib. Another soldier said that interrogators would regularly pass instructions to have dog handlers and military police 'scare up' detainees as part of interrogation plans, part of an approved approach that relied on exploiting the fear of dogs.
...
"We have taken the legal and moral 'high-road' in the conduct of our military operations regardless of how others may operate," Air Force Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives wrote in a Feb. 5, 2003, memo. "We need to consider the overall impact of approving extreme interrogation techniques as giving official approval and legal sanction to the application of interrogation techniques that U.S. forces have consistently been trained are unlawful."
Judiciary Democrats seek investigation into why probe took so long; Sixty-seven days ? [for Justice to direct FBI to investigate CIA leak]
The Raw Story | Judiciary Democrats seek investigation into why probe took so long; Sixty-seven days?: "Judiciary Democrats seek investigation into why probe took so long; Sixty-seven days?
RAW STORY
Michigan Democrat John Conyers and nine Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee issued a letter to the U.S. Inspector General calling for an investigation into a 12-hour delay between the Justice Department learning of the outing of a CIA agent and telling the White House to preserve documents, RAW STORY has learned.
Perhaps more significantly, however, Judiciary Democrats point to the 67 day gap between the time the CIA called the Justice Department to investigate the CIA outing and the time that the Justice Department directed the FBI to investigate the matter.
'It appears the now infamous 12 hour delay the Justice Department granted the White House before issuing an order to preserve documents was not an isolated instance,' Conyers remarked. 'I received information from the Central Intelligence Agency indicating a pattern of foot dragging by the Justice Department before it would commence a criminal investigation, or even respond to CIA requests.'"
RAW STORY
Michigan Democrat John Conyers and nine Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee issued a letter to the U.S. Inspector General calling for an investigation into a 12-hour delay between the Justice Department learning of the outing of a CIA agent and telling the White House to preserve documents, RAW STORY has learned.
Perhaps more significantly, however, Judiciary Democrats point to the 67 day gap between the time the CIA called the Justice Department to investigate the CIA outing and the time that the Justice Department directed the FBI to investigate the matter.
'It appears the now infamous 12 hour delay the Justice Department granted the White House before issuing an order to preserve documents was not an isolated instance,' Conyers remarked. 'I received information from the Central Intelligence Agency indicating a pattern of foot dragging by the Justice Department before it would commence a criminal investigation, or even respond to CIA requests.'"
Monday, July 25, 2005
John Bolton, R.I.P.: If Bolton intentionally misled the Senate in his questionnaire, he's toast ... source that Miller is protecting?
RAGGED THOTS: John Bolton, R.I.P.: "Saturday, July 23, 2005 |
John Bolton will never be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Whether he should be or not is no longer the question. Whether the 'temperament' charges against him were fair or if he was just a victim of Chris Dodd's pro-Cuba fetish doesn't matter.
...
Then, as Josh Marshall points out, as part of her confirmation hearings for a State Department public relations position, Karen Hughes was, by law, obligated to answer a questionnaire, that among other things, asked whether there were any legal proceedings to which she might be a be part of: She admitted that she had testified before Fitzgerald's grand jury. Marshall points out, Bolton answered "no" on the questionnaire -- though, it turns out he also testified before the grand jury on the contents of the Plame memo.
If Bolton intentionally misled the Senate in his questionnaire, he's toast. End of story. But, that's relevant to the big picture.
The key is revealed in Clemons' latest post: He asserts that Bolton was a major source for NYT's Judith Miller, currently incarcerated for refusing to surrender a source's name to the Fitzgerald grand jury. Now, one has to toss in a couple of caveats here: Steve, of course, has to depend on an anonymous source that somehow "knows" that Bolton was an anonymous source for many of Miller's stories.
...
John Bolton will never be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
Whether he should be or not is no longer the question. Whether the 'temperament' charges against him were fair or if he was just a victim of Chris Dodd's pro-Cuba fetish doesn't matter.
...
Then, as Josh Marshall points out, as part of her confirmation hearings for a State Department public relations position, Karen Hughes was, by law, obligated to answer a questionnaire, that among other things, asked whether there were any legal proceedings to which she might be a be part of: She admitted that she had testified before Fitzgerald's grand jury. Marshall points out, Bolton answered "no" on the questionnaire -- though, it turns out he also testified before the grand jury on the contents of the Plame memo.
If Bolton intentionally misled the Senate in his questionnaire, he's toast. End of story. But, that's relevant to the big picture.
The key is revealed in Clemons' latest post: He asserts that Bolton was a major source for NYT's Judith Miller, currently incarcerated for refusing to surrender a source's name to the Fitzgerald grand jury. Now, one has to toss in a couple of caveats here: Steve, of course, has to depend on an anonymous source that somehow "knows" that Bolton was an anonymous source for many of Miller's stories.
...
Senate Committee chairman rejects the existence of climate change, demanded private information from researchers with contrary conclusion
Hunting Witches: "Hunting Witches | Saturday, July 23, 2005; Page A16
'THIS IS HIGHLY usual,' declared a spokesman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee when asked this week whether the request by committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) for information from three climate scientists was out of the ordinary. He and his boss are alone in that view. Many scientists and some of Mr. Barton's Republican colleagues say they were stunned by the manner in which the committee, whose chairman rejects the existence of climate change, demanded personal and private information last month from researchers whose work supports a contrary conclusion. The scientists, co-authors of an influential 1999 study showing a dramatic increase in global warming over the past millennium, were told to hand over not only raw data but personal financial information, information on grants received and distributed, and computer codes.
Rep. Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Science Committee, has called the investigation 'misguided and illegitimate.' Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts, one of the targets, calls it 'intrusive, far-reaching and intimidating.' Alan I. Leshner, chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said that although scientists 'are used to answering really hard questions,' in his 22 years as a government scientist he never heard of a similar inquiry, which he suspects could 'have a chilling effect on the willingness of people to work in areas that are politically relevant.'"
'THIS IS HIGHLY usual,' declared a spokesman for the House Energy and Commerce Committee when asked this week whether the request by committee Chairman Joe Barton (R-Tex.) for information from three climate scientists was out of the ordinary. He and his boss are alone in that view. Many scientists and some of Mr. Barton's Republican colleagues say they were stunned by the manner in which the committee, whose chairman rejects the existence of climate change, demanded personal and private information last month from researchers whose work supports a contrary conclusion. The scientists, co-authors of an influential 1999 study showing a dramatic increase in global warming over the past millennium, were told to hand over not only raw data but personal financial information, information on grants received and distributed, and computer codes.
Rep. Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Science Committee, has called the investigation 'misguided and illegitimate.' Raymond S. Bradley of the University of Massachusetts, one of the targets, calls it 'intrusive, far-reaching and intimidating.' Alan I. Leshner, chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said that although scientists 'are used to answering really hard questions,' in his 22 years as a government scientist he never heard of a similar inquiry, which he suspects could 'have a chilling effect on the willingness of people to work in areas that are politically relevant.'"
Child Abuse at Abu Ghraib ... there isn't even an inkling of this in the US Mainstream media
Watching The Watchers || Child Abuse at Abu Ghraib: "By ~A!, Section News | Posted on Sat Jul 23, 2005 at 12:13:27 PM EST
Data is emerging, no matter how the administration attempts to hide it, that the new photos and video of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison include the torture of children.
Norway's Prime Minister's office says it plans to address the situation with the U.S. "in a very severe and direct way."
...
While there isn't even an inkling of this in the US Mainstream media, all over the world people are beginning to read about the US abusing children at Abu Ghraib.
Der Spiegel
The Sunday Herald in Scotland has a piece on the abuse of children at the notorious prison:
From Iraq's Child Prisoners, written one year ago:
It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
Data is emerging, no matter how the administration attempts to hide it, that the new photos and video of abuse at Abu Ghraib prison include the torture of children.
Norway's Prime Minister's office says it plans to address the situation with the U.S. "in a very severe and direct way."
...
While there isn't even an inkling of this in the US Mainstream media, all over the world people are beginning to read about the US abusing children at Abu Ghraib.
Der Spiegel
The Sunday Herald in Scotland has a piece on the abuse of children at the notorious prison:
From Iraq's Child Prisoners, written one year ago:
It was early last October that Kasim Mehaddi Hilas says he witnessed the rape of a boy prisoner aged about 15 in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. “The kid was hurting very bad and they covered all the doors with sheets,” he said in a statement given to investigators probing prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib. “Then, when I heard the screaming I climbed the door … and I saw [the soldier’s name is deleted] who was wearing a military uniform.” Hilas, who was himself threatened with being sexually assaulted in Abu Graib, then describes in horrific detail how the soldier raped “the little kid”.
2,000 vets call for release of more Abu Ghraib photos, called for a commission to investigate torture allegations
The Raw Story | 2,000 vets call for release of more Abu Ghraib photos: "RAW STORY | Monday, 25 July, 2005
Veterans for Common Sense (VCS), a nonpartisan veterans' organization with 12,000 members, called for a commission to investigate torture allegations today, in response to the Pentagon refusal to release photos and videos from Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, the group said in a release Monday. Details follow.
In an open letter, signed by more than 2,000 veterans and supporters (including 5 flag-rank officers and more than 200 commissioned officers), the veterans urged Congress and the President to "commit -- immediately and publicly -- to support the creation of an independent commission to investigate and report on the detention and interrogation practices of U.S. military and intelligence agencies deployed in the war on terror." ...
Veterans for Common Sense (VCS), a nonpartisan veterans' organization with 12,000 members, called for a commission to investigate torture allegations today, in response to the Pentagon refusal to release photos and videos from Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay, the group said in a release Monday. Details follow.
In an open letter, signed by more than 2,000 veterans and supporters (including 5 flag-rank officers and more than 200 commissioned officers), the veterans urged Congress and the President to "commit -- immediately and publicly -- to support the creation of an independent commission to investigate and report on the detention and interrogation practices of U.S. military and intelligence agencies deployed in the war on terror." ...
Sunday, July 24, 2005
CIA's Tenet was 'furious' over [Plame CIA] leak, Schumer says
Buffalo News - CIA's Tenet was 'furious' over leak, Schumer says: "By DOUGLAS TURNER | News Washington Bureau Chief | 7/23/2005
Former agency chief called Justice Dept. to investigate
WASHINGTON - Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., revealed Friday that two years ago he discussed the blown cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame with then CIA director George Tenet and that Tenet 'was furious.'
Tenet promptly called the Justice Department to demand an investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak, Schumer said at a hearing held by House and Senate Democrats."
Former agency chief called Justice Dept. to investigate
WASHINGTON - Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., revealed Friday that two years ago he discussed the blown cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame with then CIA director George Tenet and that Tenet 'was furious.'
Tenet promptly called the Justice Department to demand an investigation into who in the Bush administration leaked Plame's identity to columnist Robert Novak, Schumer said at a hearing held by House and Senate Democrats."
Saturday, July 23, 2005
White House Aims to [Republican] Block Legislation that would bar the military from engaging in 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' of detainees
White House Aims to Block Legislation on Detainees: "By Josh White and R. Jeffrey Smith | Washington Post Staff Writers | Saturday, July 23, 2005; Page A01
The Bush administration in recent days has been lobbying to block legislation supported by Republican senators that would bar the U.S. military from engaging in 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' of detainees, from hiding prisoners from the Red Cross, and from using interrogation methods not authorized by a new Army field manual.
...
It was the second time that Cheney has met with Senate members to tamp down what the White House views as an incipient Republican rebellion. ...
...
The threat was a veiled reference to legislation drafted by McCain and being circulated among at least 10 Republican senators, Senate aides said. ...
The Bush administration in recent days has been lobbying to block legislation supported by Republican senators that would bar the U.S. military from engaging in 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment' of detainees, from hiding prisoners from the Red Cross, and from using interrogation methods not authorized by a new Army field manual.
...
It was the second time that Cheney has met with Senate members to tamp down what the White House views as an incipient Republican rebellion. ...
...
The threat was a veiled reference to legislation drafted by McCain and being circulated among at least 10 Republican senators, Senate aides said. ...
Sodomizing Children. For Freedom: "we're talking about rape and murder here," ... 'can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.'
Daily Kos: Political Analysis and other daily rants on the state of the nation.: "Sodomizing Children. For Freedom. | by Hunter | Fri Jul 22nd, 2005 at 17:02:20 PDT
Following up on Kos' post, below; we already have some idea of what the Abu Ghraib images in question show, though we don't know precisely which ones are in the queue to be released. The images, according to those lawmakers who have seen them, paint a picture of torture at Abu Ghraib far, far worse than most Americans have yet been willing to admit. Via the Boston Herald, May 8th, 2004:
Signaling the worst revelations are yet to come, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said the additional photos show 'acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.' [...]
The unreleased images show American soldiers beating one prisoner almost to death, apparently raping a female prisoner, acting inappropriately with a dead body, and taping Iraqi guards raping young boys, according to NBC News.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the scandal is 'going to get worse' and warned that the most 'disturbing' revelations haven't yet been made public.
'The American public needs to understand, we're talking about rape and murder here,' he said. 'We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience; we're talking about rape and murder and some very serious charges.'
And from investigative reporter Seymour Hersh:
The women were passing messages saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened'. Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking."
Following up on Kos' post, below; we already have some idea of what the Abu Ghraib images in question show, though we don't know precisely which ones are in the queue to be released. The images, according to those lawmakers who have seen them, paint a picture of torture at Abu Ghraib far, far worse than most Americans have yet been willing to admit. Via the Boston Herald, May 8th, 2004:
Signaling the worst revelations are yet to come, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said the additional photos show 'acts that can only be described as blatantly sadistic, cruel and inhuman.' [...]
The unreleased images show American soldiers beating one prisoner almost to death, apparently raping a female prisoner, acting inappropriately with a dead body, and taping Iraqi guards raping young boys, according to NBC News.
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina said the scandal is 'going to get worse' and warned that the most 'disturbing' revelations haven't yet been made public.
'The American public needs to understand, we're talking about rape and murder here,' he said. 'We're not just talking about giving people a humiliating experience; we're talking about rape and murder and some very serious charges.'
And from investigative reporter Seymour Hersh:
The women were passing messages saying 'Please come and kill me, because of what's happened'. Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking."
Thursday, July 21, 2005
Memo with Plame's name marked secret: rules are clear: "revealing it to someone ... is a violation"
CNN.com - Memo with Plame's�name marked secret - Jul 21, 2005: "Administration officials questioned about State Dept. document |
Thursday, July 21, 2005; Posted: 11:20 p.m. EDT (03:20 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A classified State Department memorandum that has been the subject of questioning in a federal leak probe identifies a CIA agent by name in a paragraph marked "S" for secret, sources told CNN Thursday.
...
Plame is mentioned by her married name, Valerie Plame Wilson, in the memo dated June 10, 2003, said two government sources who have seen the document.
The paragraph, they said, did not indicate that she was undercover or that her identity was protected.
Nevertheless, a former homeland security adviser to President Bush said the rules on such matters are clear.
"Anything in a paragraph marked 'secret' needs to be deemed secret, and revealing it to someone without proper security clearance or without a need to know is not authorized and is a violation," said Richard Falkenrath, a CNN security analyst who has not seen the memo.
Thursday, July 21, 2005; Posted: 11:20 p.m. EDT (03:20 GMT)
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A classified State Department memorandum that has been the subject of questioning in a federal leak probe identifies a CIA agent by name in a paragraph marked "S" for secret, sources told CNN Thursday.
...
Plame is mentioned by her married name, Valerie Plame Wilson, in the memo dated June 10, 2003, said two government sources who have seen the document.
The paragraph, they said, did not indicate that she was undercover or that her identity was protected.
Nevertheless, a former homeland security adviser to President Bush said the rules on such matters are clear.
"Anything in a paragraph marked 'secret' needs to be deemed secret, and revealing it to someone without proper security clearance or without a need to know is not authorized and is a violation," said Richard Falkenrath, a CNN security analyst who has not seen the memo.
[leak of CIA agent] Plame's Identity Marked As Secret:
Plame's Identity Marked As Secret: "Memo Central to Probe Of Leak Was Written By State Dept. Analyst | By Walter Pincus and Jim VandeHei | Washington Post Staff Writers | Thursday, July 21, 2005; Page A01
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked '(S)' for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.
...
The memo may be important to answering three central questions in the Plame case: Who in the Bush administration knew about Plame's CIA role? Did they know the agency was trying to protect her identity? And, who leaked it to the media?
Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. Only two sentences in the seven-sentence paragraph mention Wilson's wife.
A classified State Department memorandum central to a federal leak investigation contained information about CIA officer Valerie Plame in a paragraph marked '(S)' for secret, a clear indication that any Bush administration official who read it should have been aware the information was classified, according to current and former government officials.
Plame -- who is referred to by her married name, Valerie Wilson, in the memo -- is mentioned in the second paragraph of the three-page document, which was written on June 10, 2003, by an analyst in the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), according to a source who described the memo to The Washington Post.
...
The memo may be important to answering three central questions in the Plame case: Who in the Bush administration knew about Plame's CIA role? Did they know the agency was trying to protect her identity? And, who leaked it to the media?
Almost all of the memo is devoted to describing why State Department intelligence experts did not believe claims that Saddam Hussein had in the recent past sought to purchase uranium from Niger. Only two sentences in the seven-sentence paragraph mention Wilson's wife.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
"misguided and illegitimate [GOP] investigation." of three scientists who have charted Earth's rapid warming in recent decades.
GOP Chairmen Face Off on Global Warming: "GOP Chairmen Face Off on Global Warming
Public Tiff Over Probe of Study Highlights Divide on Issue
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 18, 2005; Page A04
House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.) has demanded that another senior Republican, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (Tex.), call off his investigation of three scientists who have charted Earth's rapid warming in recent decades.
The unusual public tiff between two powerful GOP lawmakers highlights the sharp divide that drives the nation's climate change debate. Barton, along with President Bush and many other House Republicans, opposes mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions and questions the science underlying such efforts. Boehlert, who backs limits on carbon dioxide pollution, said he fears such attacks could chill future scientific inquiry.
In a sharply worded letter sent last week, Boehlert called Barton's probe into the findings of Michael E. Mann, Raymond S. Bradley and Malcolm K. Hughes a "misguided and illegitimate investigation." Mann will direct the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University as of next month, Bradley is a geosciences professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and Hughes is a professor at the University of Arizona's Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research.
Public Tiff Over Probe of Study Highlights Divide on Issue
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 18, 2005; Page A04
House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-N.Y.) has demanded that another senior Republican, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Joe Barton (Tex.), call off his investigation of three scientists who have charted Earth's rapid warming in recent decades.
The unusual public tiff between two powerful GOP lawmakers highlights the sharp divide that drives the nation's climate change debate. Barton, along with President Bush and many other House Republicans, opposes mandatory curbs on greenhouse gas emissions and questions the science underlying such efforts. Boehlert, who backs limits on carbon dioxide pollution, said he fears such attacks could chill future scientific inquiry.
In a sharply worded letter sent last week, Boehlert called Barton's probe into the findings of Michael E. Mann, Raymond S. Bradley and Malcolm K. Hughes a "misguided and illegitimate investigation." Mann will direct the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University as of next month, Bradley is a geosciences professor at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and Hughes is a professor at the University of Arizona's Laboratory of Tree-Ring Research.
Classified State Department memo will make it harder for officials ... to claim they didn't realize the identity of CIA officer Plame was sensitive
www.AndrewSullivan.com - Daily Dish: "
The government memo cited in today's Wall Street Journal seems to support the idea that Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent was indeed regarded as sensitive within the government, despite some assertions that her cover was no big deal any more. (Her company's cover was another matter entirely). Money quote from the WSJ:
A classified State Department memo that may be pivotal to the CIA leak case made clear that information identifying an agent and her role in her husband's intelligence-gathering mission was sensitive and shouldn't be shared, according to a person familiar with the document... The memo's details are significant because they will make it harder for officials who saw the document to claim that they didn't realize the identity of the CIA officer was a sensitive matter. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, may also be looking at whether other crimes -- such as perjury, obstruction of justice or leaking classified information -- were committed... The paragraph in the memo discussing Ms. Wilson's involvement in her husband's trip is marked at the beginning with a letter designation in brackets to indicate the information shouldn't be shared, according to the person familiar with the memo. Such a designation would indicate to a reader that the information was sensitive. The memo, though, doesn't specifically describe Ms. Wilson as an undercover agent, the person familiar with the memo said."
The government memo cited in today's Wall Street Journal seems to support the idea that Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent was indeed regarded as sensitive within the government, despite some assertions that her cover was no big deal any more. (Her company's cover was another matter entirely). Money quote from the WSJ:
A classified State Department memo that may be pivotal to the CIA leak case made clear that information identifying an agent and her role in her husband's intelligence-gathering mission was sensitive and shouldn't be shared, according to a person familiar with the document... The memo's details are significant because they will make it harder for officials who saw the document to claim that they didn't realize the identity of the CIA officer was a sensitive matter. Patrick Fitzgerald, the special prosecutor, may also be looking at whether other crimes -- such as perjury, obstruction of justice or leaking classified information -- were committed... The paragraph in the memo discussing Ms. Wilson's involvement in her husband's trip is marked at the beginning with a letter designation in brackets to indicate the information shouldn't be shared, according to the person familiar with the memo. Such a designation would indicate to a reader that the information was sensitive. The memo, though, doesn't specifically describe Ms. Wilson as an undercover agent, the person familiar with the memo said."
Monday, July 18, 2005
Large Volume of F.B.I. Files Alarms U.S. Activist Groups: 12-- pages on ACLU, 2,400 pages on Greenpeace
Large Volume of F.B.I. Files Alarms U.S. Activist Groups - New York Times: "By ERIC LICHTBLAU | Published: July 18, 2005
...
The F.B.I. has in its files 1,173 pages of internal documents on the American Civil Liberties Union, the leading critic of the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, and 2,383 pages on Greenpeace, an environmental group that has led acts of civil disobedience in protest over the administration's policies, the Justice Department disclosed in a court filing this month in a federal court in Washington.
...
But officials at the two groups said they were troubled by the disclosure.
"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U. "Why would the F.B.I. collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"
...
In all, the A.C.L.U. is seeking F.B.I. records since 2001 or earlier on some 150 groups that have been critical of the Bush administration's policies on the Iraq war and other matters. ...
...
"If the F.B.I. has taken the time to gather 2,400 pages of information on an organization that has a perfect record of peaceful activity for 34 years, it suggests they're just attempting to stifle the voices of their critics," Mr. Passacantando said.
Greenpeace was indicted as an organization by the Justice Department in a highly unusual prosecution in 2003 after two of its protesters went aboard a cargo ship to try to unfurl a protest banner. A federal judge in Miami threw out the case last year.
...
The F.B.I. has in its files 1,173 pages of internal documents on the American Civil Liberties Union, the leading critic of the Bush administration's antiterrorism policies, and 2,383 pages on Greenpeace, an environmental group that has led acts of civil disobedience in protest over the administration's policies, the Justice Department disclosed in a court filing this month in a federal court in Washington.
...
But officials at the two groups said they were troubled by the disclosure.
"I'm still somewhat shocked by the size of the file on us," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the A.C.L.U. "Why would the F.B.I. collect almost 1,200 pages on a civil rights organization engaged in lawful activity? What justification could there be, other than political surveillance of lawful First Amendment activities?"
...
In all, the A.C.L.U. is seeking F.B.I. records since 2001 or earlier on some 150 groups that have been critical of the Bush administration's policies on the Iraq war and other matters. ...
...
"If the F.B.I. has taken the time to gather 2,400 pages of information on an organization that has a perfect record of peaceful activity for 34 years, it suggests they're just attempting to stifle the voices of their critics," Mr. Passacantando said.
Greenpeace was indicted as an organization by the Justice Department in a highly unusual prosecution in 2003 after two of its protesters went aboard a cargo ship to try to unfurl a protest banner. A federal judge in Miami threw out the case last year.
Reporter Says He First Learned of C.I.A. Operative From Rove
Reporter Says He First Learned of C.I.A. Operative From Rove - New York Times: "By LORNE MANLY and DAVID JOHNSTON | Published: July 18, 2005
Matthew Cooper, a reporter for Time magazine, said the White House senior adviser Karl Rove was the first person to tell him that the wife of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was a C.I.A. officer, according to a first-person account in this week's issue of the magazine.
...
In his article, Mr. Cooper also shared a memory that was not in his notes or e-mail messages: Mr. Rove's ending the phone call by saying, "I've already said too much."
Matthew Cooper, a reporter for Time magazine, said the White House senior adviser Karl Rove was the first person to tell him that the wife of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV was a C.I.A. officer, according to a first-person account in this week's issue of the magazine.
...
In his article, Mr. Cooper also shared a memory that was not in his notes or e-mail messages: Mr. Rove's ending the phone call by saying, "I've already said too much."
"Scooter" Lewis Libby of Cheney's office linked to Rove affair [exposing CIA operative]
The Globe and Mail: Cheney's office linked to Rove affair: "Sunday, July 17, 2005 Updated at 5:37 PM EDT
Washington — U.S. Vice-President Richard Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, was a source along with U.S. President George W. Bush's chief political adviser for a Time story that identified a CIA officer, the magazine reporter said Sunday, further countering White House claims that neither aide was involved in the leak."
...
Until last week, the White House had insisted for nearly two years that Mr. Libby and Mr. Rove had no connection to the leak. Ms. Plame's husband is Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, the top U.S. diplomat in Iraq at the start of the Persian Gulf War.
Washington — U.S. Vice-President Richard Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, was a source along with U.S. President George W. Bush's chief political adviser for a Time story that identified a CIA officer, the magazine reporter said Sunday, further countering White House claims that neither aide was involved in the leak."
...
Until last week, the White House had insisted for nearly two years that Mr. Libby and Mr. Rove had no connection to the leak. Ms. Plame's husband is Bush administration critic Joseph Wilson, the top U.S. diplomat in Iraq at the start of the Persian Gulf War.
Friday, July 15, 2005
3 top JAGs challenged interrogations policy
3 top JAGs challenged interrogations policy: "3 top JAGs challenged interrogations policy | Friday, July 15, 2005 | By Josh White, The Washington Post
They said tactics would be contrary to military doctrine, inflame public
WASHINGTON -- Three top military lawyers yesterday said they lodged complaints about the Justice Department's definition of torture and how it would be applied to interrogations of enemy prisoners captured by U.S. forces, the first time they have publicly acknowledged that they objected to the policy as it was being developed in early 2003.
At a Senate hearing yesterday, the judge advocate generals, or JAGs, for the Army, Air Force and Marines said they expressed their concerns as the policy was being hashed out at the Pentagon in March and April 2003."
They said tactics would be contrary to military doctrine, inflame public
WASHINGTON -- Three top military lawyers yesterday said they lodged complaints about the Justice Department's definition of torture and how it would be applied to interrogations of enemy prisoners captured by U.S. forces, the first time they have publicly acknowledged that they objected to the policy as it was being developed in early 2003.
At a Senate hearing yesterday, the judge advocate generals, or JAGs, for the Army, Air Force and Marines said they expressed their concerns as the policy was being hashed out at the Pentagon in March and April 2003."
Judith Miller is not protecting a noble whistleblower: ... we can assume she is protecting some politically motivated hatchet-man
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Forty-four government scientists have violated ethics rules on collaborating with pharmaceutical companies
Review Finds Scientists With Ties to Companies - New York Times:
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr. | Published: July 15, 2005
Forty-four government scientists have violated ethics rules on collaborating with pharmaceutical companies, a preliminary review by the National Institutes of Health shows.
Nine of the scientists may have violated criminal laws, the report said.
The review was outlined in a July 8 letter the agency's director, Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni, sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is investigating conflicts of interest by government researchers.
Because the N.I.H. is investigating 103 people who have been accused of ethics violations, Dr. Zerhouni had asked the committee to keep his letter confidential. But its leaders - Representatives Joe L. Barton, Republican of Texas and John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan - said in a statement yesterday that they were releasing it because of "the compelling public interest."
"The ethical problems are more systemic and severe than previously known," Mr. Barton said.
The institutes' review found that the 44 scientists had either failed to disclose income from outside work, had failed to get permission to consult or had done the work on government time rather than their own.
By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr. | Published: July 15, 2005
Forty-four government scientists have violated ethics rules on collaborating with pharmaceutical companies, a preliminary review by the National Institutes of Health shows.
Nine of the scientists may have violated criminal laws, the report said.
The review was outlined in a July 8 letter the agency's director, Dr. Elias A. Zerhouni, sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is investigating conflicts of interest by government researchers.
Because the N.I.H. is investigating 103 people who have been accused of ethics violations, Dr. Zerhouni had asked the committee to keep his letter confidential. But its leaders - Representatives Joe L. Barton, Republican of Texas and John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan - said in a statement yesterday that they were releasing it because of "the compelling public interest."
"The ethical problems are more systemic and severe than previously known," Mr. Barton said.
The institutes' review found that the 44 scientists had either failed to disclose income from outside work, had failed to get permission to consult or had done the work on government time rather than their own.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Congressman Peter King (R-NY): Tim Russert and the others ... they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove
News Hounds: Peter King (R-NY) is a Terrorist: "Reported by Melanie at July 13, 2005 10:45 PM"
I diverge from covering Fox to bring you this news:
Congressman Peter King (R-NY) said something on MSNBC's 'Scarborough Country' yesterday (July 12, 2005), that needs to be heard.
Per Editor and Publisher, King said:
And I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy [Joe Wilson] such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove. (Emphasis added.)
Peter King is a terrorist.
I diverge from covering Fox to bring you this news:
Congressman Peter King (R-NY) said something on MSNBC's 'Scarborough Country' yesterday (July 12, 2005), that needs to be heard.
Per Editor and Publisher, King said:
And I think people like Tim Russert and the others, who gave this guy [Joe Wilson] such a free ride and all the media, they're the ones to be shot, not Karl Rove. (Emphasis added.)
Peter King is a terrorist.
Republicans RNC put "top-10 Joseph Wilson lies" while White House claims it's improper to discuss it ...
The Raw Story | A rational voiceAboard Air Force One / En Route Indianapolis, Indiana / 11:55 A.M. EDT
...
MR. McCLELLAN: That's a nice try to keep bringing up questions relating to media reports about an ongoing investigation. As the President indicated yesterday, we are not going to prejudge an ongoing investigation based on media reports. The President directed the White House to cooperate fully, and that's what we've been working to do. And we will be more than happy to talk about the investigation after it is completed.
But the President -- I again made clear yesterday that when it comes to the President's confidence in Karl and his support for him, I made clear our views.
Q Does the President believe it's appropriate for the RNC to continue to weigh in on this matter? They put out another memo today, with a top-10 Joseph Wilson lies. If indeed it's an ongoing investigation and it's improper for the White House to discuss it, does he think it's proper for the Republican Party to weigh in on it?
...
Q Wilson was on the shows today. He basically said there was a massive cover-up being conducted by the White House, and that Rove should be fired. What do you say to Wilson?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President said we're not going to get into prejudging the outcome of an ongoing investigation, based on media reports and --
...
MR. McCLELLAN: That's a nice try to keep bringing up questions relating to media reports about an ongoing investigation. As the President indicated yesterday, we are not going to prejudge an ongoing investigation based on media reports. The President directed the White House to cooperate fully, and that's what we've been working to do. And we will be more than happy to talk about the investigation after it is completed.
But the President -- I again made clear yesterday that when it comes to the President's confidence in Karl and his support for him, I made clear our views.
Q Does the President believe it's appropriate for the RNC to continue to weigh in on this matter? They put out another memo today, with a top-10 Joseph Wilson lies. If indeed it's an ongoing investigation and it's improper for the White House to discuss it, does he think it's proper for the Republican Party to weigh in on it?
...
Q Wilson was on the shows today. He basically said there was a massive cover-up being conducted by the White House, and that Rove should be fired. What do you say to Wilson?
MR. McCLELLAN: The President said we're not going to get into prejudging the outcome of an ongoing investigation, based on media reports and --
Abu Ghraib Tactics Were First Used at Guantanamo: strongest indication yet that the abusive practices were not the invention of [low-level soldiers]
Abu Ghraib Tactics Were First Used at Guantanamo: "By Josh White | Washington Post Staff Writer | Thursday, July 14, 2005; Page A01
Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women's underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
The techniques, approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for use in interrogating Mohamed Qahtani -- the alleged '20th hijacker' in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- were used at Guantanamo Bay in late 2002 as part of a special interrogation plan aimed at breaking down the silent detainee."
...
The report's findings are the strongest indication yet that the abusive practices seen in photographs at Abu Ghraib were not the invention of a small group of thrill-seeking military police officers. The report shows that they were used on Qahtani several months before the United States invaded Iraq.
Interrogators at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, forced a stubborn detainee to wear women's underwear on his head, confronted him with snarling military working dogs and attached a leash to his chains, according to a newly released military investigation that shows the tactics were employed there months before military police used them on detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
The techniques, approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld for use in interrogating Mohamed Qahtani -- the alleged '20th hijacker' in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- were used at Guantanamo Bay in late 2002 as part of a special interrogation plan aimed at breaking down the silent detainee."
...
The report's findings are the strongest indication yet that the abusive practices seen in photographs at Abu Ghraib were not the invention of a small group of thrill-seeking military police officers. The report shows that they were used on Qahtani several months before the United States invaded Iraq.
[Plame] CIA agent's husband sees W. House giant cover-up on leak ... Rove [finally] shown as a source who identified the agent.
Excite News: "CIA agent's husband sees W. House cover-up on leak | Jul 14, 10:10 AM (ET) | By Sue Pleming
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The husband of a CIA agent whose identity was revealed amid debate over the Iraq war accused the White House on Thursday of being involved in a giant 'cover-up' in the scandal and said President Bush should fire his top aide Karl Rove.
Federal investigators are looking into who leaked the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose name appeared in a newspaper column in July 2003, and Rove has emerged as a source for at least one media report on the case.
'What this thing has been for the past two years has been a cover-up, a cover-up of the ... web of lies that underpin the justification for going to war in Iraq,' said Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, a former career foreign-service officer who held diplomatic posts in the first Bush administration and served in the Clinton White House.
'And to a certain extent, this cover-up is becoming unraveled. That's why you see the White House stonewalling,' Wilson said in an interview with NBC's 'Today' show.
Wilson has said repeatedly the leak was aimed at discrediting him for criticizing Bush's Iraq policy in 2003, after a CIA-funded trip in 2002 to investigate whether Niger helped supply nuclear materials to Baghdad.
Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, has been named by a Time magazine reporter as a source who identified the agent."
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The husband of a CIA agent whose identity was revealed amid debate over the Iraq war accused the White House on Thursday of being involved in a giant 'cover-up' in the scandal and said President Bush should fire his top aide Karl Rove.
Federal investigators are looking into who leaked the identity of covert CIA agent Valerie Plame, whose name appeared in a newspaper column in July 2003, and Rove has emerged as a source for at least one media report on the case.
'What this thing has been for the past two years has been a cover-up, a cover-up of the ... web of lies that underpin the justification for going to war in Iraq,' said Plame's husband, Joseph Wilson, a former career foreign-service officer who held diplomatic posts in the first Bush administration and served in the Clinton White House.
'And to a certain extent, this cover-up is becoming unraveled. That's why you see the White House stonewalling,' Wilson said in an interview with NBC's 'Today' show.
Wilson has said repeatedly the leak was aimed at discrediting him for criticizing Bush's Iraq policy in 2003, after a CIA-funded trip in 2002 to investigate whether Niger helped supply nuclear materials to Baghdad.
Rove, the White House deputy chief of staff, has been named by a Time magazine reporter as a source who identified the agent."
Wednesday, July 13, 2005
Republican Chief justice disqualifies entire Cuyahoga County court (all 34 Democrats} from hearing lawsuit alleging corruption by Republican party.
Cleveland.com: NewsFlash - Chief justice disqualifies entire Cuyahoga County court: "7/13/2005, 5:11 a.m. ET | The Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — All 34 judges on the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court have been disqualified by Ohio's chief justice from hearing a lawsuit alleging corruption by the Republican party.
Chief Justice Thomas Moyer said on Tuesday the unusual move was necessary to eliminate any perception of bias by the court system that's dominated by Democrats. Moyer is a Republican.
...
Hagan said Moyer's decision fits in with GOP efforts "to deep-six these issues and hope they go away" before the 2006 statewide elections.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — All 34 judges on the Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court have been disqualified by Ohio's chief justice from hearing a lawsuit alleging corruption by the Republican party.
Chief Justice Thomas Moyer said on Tuesday the unusual move was necessary to eliminate any perception of bias by the court system that's dominated by Democrats. Moyer is a Republican.
...
Hagan said Moyer's decision fits in with GOP efforts "to deep-six these issues and hope they go away" before the 2006 statewide elections.
Two former associates of Jack Abramoff, the embattled lobbyist, left the country Monday night en route to a new life in Israel.
Abramoff duo quits U.S.: "By Josephine Hearn
Two former associates of Jack Abramoff, the embattled lobbyist, left the country Monday night en route to a new life in Israel. The relocation comes as a Justice Department taskforce presses forward with an investigation into potential criminal wrongdoing stemming from Abramoff’s business dealings.
Sam Hook and his wife Shana Tesler both worked with Abramoff at the law firm, Greenberg Traurig. Hook served as the registered agent for Grassroots Interactive, a lobbying venture tied to Abramoff that has reportedly been subpoenaed by the Justice Department taskforce.
Tesler, a lawyer, worked with Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig and then followed him to the lobbying firm, Cassidy & Associates, after he was ousted from Greenberg following news reports of his questionable dealings with Indian gaming tribes.
Abramoff and public affairs consultant Michael Scanlon are the target of the Justice Department probe and two Senate investigations into allegations that they bilked tribes out of more than $60 million. A federal grand jury has been convened to consider possible criminal charges in the matter."
Two former associates of Jack Abramoff, the embattled lobbyist, left the country Monday night en route to a new life in Israel. The relocation comes as a Justice Department taskforce presses forward with an investigation into potential criminal wrongdoing stemming from Abramoff’s business dealings.
Sam Hook and his wife Shana Tesler both worked with Abramoff at the law firm, Greenberg Traurig. Hook served as the registered agent for Grassroots Interactive, a lobbying venture tied to Abramoff that has reportedly been subpoenaed by the Justice Department taskforce.
Tesler, a lawyer, worked with Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig and then followed him to the lobbying firm, Cassidy & Associates, after he was ousted from Greenberg following news reports of his questionable dealings with Indian gaming tribes.
Abramoff and public affairs consultant Michael Scanlon are the target of the Justice Department probe and two Senate investigations into allegations that they bilked tribes out of more than $60 million. A federal grand jury has been convened to consider possible criminal charges in the matter."
Guantanamo Bay interrogators degraded and abused a key prisoner : "wear a bra and had women's thong underwear placed on his head"
Excite News: " Report cites 'degrading' Guantanamo treatment | Jul 13, 4:32 PM (ET) | By Will Dunham
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Guantanamo Bay interrogators degraded and abused a key prisoner but did not torture him when they told him he was gay, forced him to dance with another man and made him wear a bra and perform dog tricks, military investigators said on Wednesday.
The general who heads Southern Command, responsible for the jail for foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, also said he rejected his investigators' recommendation to punish a former commander of the prison.
A military report presented before the Senate Armed Services Committee stated a Saudi man, described as the '20th hijacker' slated to have participated in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America, was forced by interrogators in late 2002 to wear a bra and had women's thong underwear placed on his head."
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Guantanamo Bay interrogators degraded and abused a key prisoner but did not torture him when they told him he was gay, forced him to dance with another man and made him wear a bra and perform dog tricks, military investigators said on Wednesday.
The general who heads Southern Command, responsible for the jail for foreign terrorism suspects at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, also said he rejected his investigators' recommendation to punish a former commander of the prison.
A military report presented before the Senate Armed Services Committee stated a Saudi man, described as the '20th hijacker' slated to have participated in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America, was forced by interrogators in late 2002 to wear a bra and had women's thong underwear placed on his head."
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
Conflict of interest? The consultants paid by the oil and gas industry are reducing a backlog of drilling permits
Salt Lake Tribune - Salt Lake Tribune Home Page: "07/09/2005 09:16:47 AM |
Oil industry providing workers for BLM office | Conflict of interest? The consultants are reducing a backlog of drilling permits | By Robert Gehrke | The Salt Lake Tribune
WASHINGTON - Consultants paid by the oil and gas industry have been volunteering to work for the Bureau of Land Management's Vernal office for the past five months, expediting environmental studies to keep pace with a glut of drilling requests in the region.
The arrangement alarms environmental groups, which say it creates a clear conflict of interest and could compromise the work they do.
'This is very troubling,' said Steve Bloch, an attorney with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. 'It's akin to the foxes guarding the henhouse. These are public lands and there clearly is a quid pro quo expected here, that there is going to be faster permitting, faster approval rates, and instead they really should be taking their time to make sure they're doing it right.' "
Oil industry providing workers for BLM office | Conflict of interest? The consultants are reducing a backlog of drilling permits | By Robert Gehrke | The Salt Lake Tribune
WASHINGTON - Consultants paid by the oil and gas industry have been volunteering to work for the Bureau of Land Management's Vernal office for the past five months, expediting environmental studies to keep pace with a glut of drilling requests in the region.
The arrangement alarms environmental groups, which say it creates a clear conflict of interest and could compromise the work they do.
'This is very troubling,' said Steve Bloch, an attorney with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. 'It's akin to the foxes guarding the henhouse. These are public lands and there clearly is a quid pro quo expected here, that there is going to be faster permitting, faster approval rates, and instead they really should be taking their time to make sure they're doing it right.' "
Robert Earl, who destroyed national security documents during the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal, is working as chief of staff to acting Deputy Defense Sec
Pentagon confirms Iran-Contra figure in senior job - Yahoo! News: "Mon Jul 11, 6:38 PM ET
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Robert Earl, who destroyed national security documents during the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal, is working as chief of staff to acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, the Pentagon said on Monday.
Earl destroyed and stole national security documents while working for Lt. Col. Oliver North during a secret arms deal with Iran in which the United States passed money from those weapons sales to Contra guerrillas in Nicaragua, according to a report to Congress by independent counsel Lawrence Walsh."
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Robert Earl, who destroyed national security documents during the 1980s Iran-Contra scandal, is working as chief of staff to acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England, the Pentagon said on Monday.
Earl destroyed and stole national security documents while working for Lt. Col. Oliver North during a secret arms deal with Iran in which the United States passed money from those weapons sales to Contra guerrillas in Nicaragua, according to a report to Congress by independent counsel Lawrence Walsh."
Monday, July 11, 2005
For ... two years, Bush admin said Karl Rove had nothing to do with the CIA leak and whoever did would be fired. -- Now silent on subject
ABC News: White House Won't Comment on Rove, Leak: "WASHINGTON Jul 11, 2005 — By PETE YOST Associated Press Writer
White House Won't Comment on Assertion That Rove Talked With Reporter About CIA Officer's Role
For the better part of two years, the word coming out of the Bush White House was that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a female CIA officer's identity and that whoever did would be fired."
But Bush spokesman Scott McClellan wouldn't repeat those claims Monday in the face of Rove's own lawyer, Robert Luskin, acknowledging the political operative spoke to Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, one of the reporters who disclosed Valerie Plame's name.
McClellan repeatedly said he couldn't comment because the matter is under investigation. When it was pointed out he had commented previously even though the investigation was ongoing, he responded, "I've really said all I'm going to say on it." ...
White House Won't Comment on Assertion That Rove Talked With Reporter About CIA Officer's Role
For the better part of two years, the word coming out of the Bush White House was that presidential adviser Karl Rove had nothing to do with the leak of a female CIA officer's identity and that whoever did would be fired."
But Bush spokesman Scott McClellan wouldn't repeat those claims Monday in the face of Rove's own lawyer, Robert Luskin, acknowledging the political operative spoke to Matthew Cooper of Time magazine, one of the reporters who disclosed Valerie Plame's name.
McClellan repeatedly said he couldn't comment because the matter is under investigation. When it was pointed out he had commented previously even though the investigation was ongoing, he responded, "I've really said all I'm going to say on it." ...
Karl ROVE was fired from the 1992 re-election campaign of Bush Sr. for allegedly leaking a negative story to NOVAK
BustBob.com :: view documents: "Karl Rove and Novak: They've Talked Before
Rove fired from Bush Sr's '92 campaign over leak to Novak. Karl Rove was fired from the 1992 re-election campaign of Bush Sr. for allegedly leaking a negative story about Bush loyalist/fundraiser Robert Mosbacher to Novak. Novak's piece described a meeting organized by then-Senator Phil Gramm at which Mosbacher was relieved of his duties as state campaign manager because 'the president's re-election effort in Texas has been a bust.' Rove was fired after Mosbacher fingered him as Novak's source.
...
(Sources: 'Karl and Bob: a leaky history,' Houston Chronicle, Nov. 7, 2003, ; 'Genius,' Texas Monthly, March 2003, p. 82; 'Why Are These Men Laughing,' Esquire, January 2003)"
Rove fired from Bush Sr's '92 campaign over leak to Novak. Karl Rove was fired from the 1992 re-election campaign of Bush Sr. for allegedly leaking a negative story about Bush loyalist/fundraiser Robert Mosbacher to Novak. Novak's piece described a meeting organized by then-Senator Phil Gramm at which Mosbacher was relieved of his duties as state campaign manager because 'the president's re-election effort in Texas has been a bust.' Rove was fired after Mosbacher fingered him as Novak's source.
...
(Sources: 'Karl and Bob: a leaky history,' Houston Chronicle, Nov. 7, 2003, ; 'Genius,' Texas Monthly, March 2003, p. 82; 'Why Are These Men Laughing,' Esquire, January 2003)"
Grand Jury Indicts Ky. GOP Chief, 2 Others
Guardian Unlimited | World Latest | Grand Jury Indicts Ky. GOP Chief, 2 Others: "Tuesday July 12, 2005 12:01 AM | By MARK R. CHELLGREN | Associated Press Writer
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) - A grand jury indicted Kentucky's Republican Party chairman and two state officials Monday on charges alleging they conspired to violate state personnel laws.
The allegations revolve around the state's Merit System jobs and whether a few Republican officials conspired to hire and fire employees based on their political views. Merit System rules prohibit such actions.
All three men indicted Monday have close ties to Gov. Ernie Fletcher.
FRANKFORT, Ky. (AP) - A grand jury indicted Kentucky's Republican Party chairman and two state officials Monday on charges alleging they conspired to violate state personnel laws.
The allegations revolve around the state's Merit System jobs and whether a few Republican officials conspired to hire and fire employees based on their political views. Merit System rules prohibit such actions.
All three men indicted Monday have close ties to Gov. Ernie Fletcher.
"Kill Jim Smith's Wife," ... but Rove's lawyer claims he Didn't Order the Murder Because He Didn't Mention Her Name?
If a Mob Boss Says to a Hit Man, "Kill Jim Smith's Wife," Can He Claim He Didn't Order the Murder Because He Didn't Mention Her Name? Apparently, That's Karl Rove's Thinking.
: "A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL | July 13, 2005We've warned BuzzFlash readers not to get too overjoyed about the reports of Karl Rove being nailed as one of the two people who outed Valerie Plame as a CIA operative specializing in tracking the illicit sales of WMD at a time that he was orchestrating the propaganda to start a war based on a nation possessing illicit WMD (which they didn't actually possess).
It is so monstrously treasonous -- such a big lie and betrayal -- that it is hard to believe.
But it is, apparently, true. "
There is no longer any question that top presidential adviser Karl Rove is a key player in the Valerie Plame case.
White House Briefing News on President George W Bush and the Bush Administration: "Plame, By Any Other Name | By Dan Froomkin | Special to washingtonpost.com | Monday, July 11, 2005; 1:21 PM
There is no longer any question that top presidential adviser Karl Rove is a key player in the Valerie Plame case.
...
But let's look at what we can conclude from all this:
� The latest news reports indicate that Rove is the source who Cooper was trying to protect until last week -- and that Rove tipped Cooper about Plame three days before Robert Novak published his now-famous column exposing Plame's identity.
� Fitzgerald has asserted in his court filings that testimony from Cooper and now-jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller is all he needs to wrap up his investigation into whether a crime was committed. So what Rove said about Plame would therefore appear to be either one of two things -- or the only thing -- that Fitzgerald is still trying to nail down.
� Rove and his lawyer's denials that he was involved in telling reporters about Plame now appear to be at best based on Clintonian hairsplitting about whether he literally used her name and identified her as covert or he simply described her as the CIA-employed wife of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, the administration critic that White House was eager to discredit at the time.
� President Bush and press secretary Scott McClellan's denials that Rove was involved in the Plame matter now appear to be at best based on the position that their responses to broad questions about Rove and Plame were met with narrowly constructed responses specifically about whether Rove leaked "classified information." Or is it possible Rove lied to them?
� And McClellan's frequent implication that, if Rove talked to reporters about Plame it was only after Novak's column had already come out, now appears suspect.
If Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, longtime friend and deputy chief of staff is actually indicted by Fitzgerald -- which now appears to be a possibility -- it would be an enormous blow to Bush's second term. Until Fitzgerald wraps up his highly secretive investigation, however, that's all just speculation.
...
So let's ask ourselves some more practical questions instead:
� Does Rove's current position pass the smell test?
� Taking into account Bush's previous statements about leaks, does this mean he now has no choice but to fire Rove?
� Did Rove keep all this from Bush?
� Or did Bush know, but chose to keep silent and do nothing?
For some quick background, here is what Rove has said directly about Plame:
As ABC News's The Note reported on Sept. 29, 2003, ABC News producer Andrea Owen and a cameraman approached Rove that morning as he walked toward his car.
Owen: "Did you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"
Rove: "No."
At which point, Rove shut his car door.
Then on August 31, 2004, Rove spoke to CNN's John King .
King: "Did someone in the White House leak the name of the CIA operative? What is your assessment of the status of the investigation, and can you tell us that you had nothing to do with. . . .
Rove: "Well, I'll repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name."
Here is McClellan in a Sept. 16, 2003 briefing :
"Q Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover a CIA operative. . . . Did Karl Rove do it?
"MR. McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous."
On Sept. 30, 2003 , Bush himself was asked if Rove had a role in the CIA leak.
"Listen, I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information," he said. "If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing."
And here is McClellan in an Oct. 7, 2003 briefing: "If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business. . . .
"If someone sought to punish someone for speaking out against the administration, that is wrong, and we would not condone that activity. No one in this White House would condone that activity. . . .
"It's absurd to suggest that the White House would be engaged in that kind of activity. That is not the way this White House operates."
There is no longer any question that top presidential adviser Karl Rove is a key player in the Valerie Plame case.
...
But let's look at what we can conclude from all this:
� The latest news reports indicate that Rove is the source who Cooper was trying to protect until last week -- and that Rove tipped Cooper about Plame three days before Robert Novak published his now-famous column exposing Plame's identity.
� Fitzgerald has asserted in his court filings that testimony from Cooper and now-jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller is all he needs to wrap up his investigation into whether a crime was committed. So what Rove said about Plame would therefore appear to be either one of two things -- or the only thing -- that Fitzgerald is still trying to nail down.
� Rove and his lawyer's denials that he was involved in telling reporters about Plame now appear to be at best based on Clintonian hairsplitting about whether he literally used her name and identified her as covert or he simply described her as the CIA-employed wife of Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, the administration critic that White House was eager to discredit at the time.
� President Bush and press secretary Scott McClellan's denials that Rove was involved in the Plame matter now appear to be at best based on the position that their responses to broad questions about Rove and Plame were met with narrowly constructed responses specifically about whether Rove leaked "classified information." Or is it possible Rove lied to them?
� And McClellan's frequent implication that, if Rove talked to reporters about Plame it was only after Novak's column had already come out, now appears suspect.
If Karl Rove, Bush's top political strategist, longtime friend and deputy chief of staff is actually indicted by Fitzgerald -- which now appears to be a possibility -- it would be an enormous blow to Bush's second term. Until Fitzgerald wraps up his highly secretive investigation, however, that's all just speculation.
...
So let's ask ourselves some more practical questions instead:
� Does Rove's current position pass the smell test?
� Taking into account Bush's previous statements about leaks, does this mean he now has no choice but to fire Rove?
� Did Rove keep all this from Bush?
� Or did Bush know, but chose to keep silent and do nothing?
For some quick background, here is what Rove has said directly about Plame:
As ABC News's The Note reported on Sept. 29, 2003, ABC News producer Andrea Owen and a cameraman approached Rove that morning as he walked toward his car.
Owen: "Did you have any knowledge or did you leak the name of the CIA agent to the press?"
Rove: "No."
At which point, Rove shut his car door.
Then on August 31, 2004, Rove spoke to CNN's John King .
King: "Did someone in the White House leak the name of the CIA operative? What is your assessment of the status of the investigation, and can you tell us that you had nothing to do with. . . .
Rove: "Well, I'll repeat what I said to ABC News when this whole thing broke some number of months ago. I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name."
Here is McClellan in a Sept. 16, 2003 briefing :
"Q Now, this is apparently a federal offense, to burn the cover a CIA operative. . . . Did Karl Rove do it?
"MR. McCLELLAN: I said, it's totally ridiculous."
On Sept. 30, 2003 , Bush himself was asked if Rove had a role in the CIA leak.
"Listen, I know of nobody -- I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information," he said. "If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action. And this investigation is a good thing."
And here is McClellan in an Oct. 7, 2003 briefing: "If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates, that's not the way this President expects people in his administration to conduct their business. . . .
"If someone sought to punish someone for speaking out against the administration, that is wrong, and we would not condone that activity. No one in this White House would condone that activity. . . .
"It's absurd to suggest that the White House would be engaged in that kind of activity. That is not the way this White House operates."
Sunday, July 10, 2005
Stop This Bill: Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005 takes the evisceration of habeas review to a whole new level
Stop This Bill: "Sunday, July 10, 2005; Page B06
CONGRESS HAS a novel response to the rash of prisoners over the past few years who have been exonerated of capital crimes after being tried and convicted: Keep similar cases out of court. Both chambers of the national legislature are quietly moving a particularly ugly piece of legislation designed to gut the legal means by which prisoners prove their innocence.
Habeas corpus is the age-old legal process by which federal courts review the legality of detentions. In the modern era, it has been the pivotal vehicle through which those on death row or serving long sentences in prison can challenge their state-court convictions. Congress in 1996 rolled back habeas review considerably; federal courts have similarly shown greater deference -- often too much deference -- to flawed state proceedings. But the so-called Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005 takes the evisceration of habeas review, particularly in capital cases, to a whole new level. It should not become law.
...
It gets worse. The bill, pushed by Rep. Daniel E. Lungren (R-Calif.) in the House and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) in the Senate, would impose onerous new procedural hurdles on inmates seeking federal review -- those, that is, whom it doesn't bar from court altogether. It would bar the courts from considering key issues raised by those cases and insulate most capital sentencing from federal scrutiny. It also would dictate arbitrary timetables for federal appeals courts to resolve habeas cases. This would be a dramatic change in federal law -- and entirely for the worse.
CONGRESS HAS a novel response to the rash of prisoners over the past few years who have been exonerated of capital crimes after being tried and convicted: Keep similar cases out of court. Both chambers of the national legislature are quietly moving a particularly ugly piece of legislation designed to gut the legal means by which prisoners prove their innocence.
Habeas corpus is the age-old legal process by which federal courts review the legality of detentions. In the modern era, it has been the pivotal vehicle through which those on death row or serving long sentences in prison can challenge their state-court convictions. Congress in 1996 rolled back habeas review considerably; federal courts have similarly shown greater deference -- often too much deference -- to flawed state proceedings. But the so-called Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005 takes the evisceration of habeas review, particularly in capital cases, to a whole new level. It should not become law.
...
It gets worse. The bill, pushed by Rep. Daniel E. Lungren (R-Calif.) in the House and Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) in the Senate, would impose onerous new procedural hurdles on inmates seeking federal review -- those, that is, whom it doesn't bar from court altogether. It would bar the courts from considering key issues raised by those cases and insulate most capital sentencing from federal scrutiny. It also would dictate arbitrary timetables for federal appeals courts to resolve habeas cases. This would be a dramatic change in federal law -- and entirely for the worse.
Matt Cooper's Source - Karl Rove
Matt Cooper's Source - Newsweek National News - MSNBC.com:What Karl Rove told Time magazine's reporter. | By Michael Isikoff | Newsweek | July 18 issue -
It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation ..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]" and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.
...
... Rove's words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.
...
... Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. (Cooper later included the essence of what Rove told him in an online story.) The e-mail characterizing the conversation continues: "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger ... "
Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative. Nonetheless, it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published.
It was 11:07 on a Friday morning, July 11, 2003, and Time magazine correspondent Matt Cooper was tapping out an e-mail to his bureau chief, Michael Duffy. "Subject: Rove/P&C," (for personal and confidential), Cooper began. "Spoke to Rove on double super secret background for about two mins before he went on vacation ..." Cooper proceeded to spell out some guidance on a story that was beginning to roil Washington. He finished, "please don't source this to rove or even WH [White House]" and suggested another reporter check with the CIA.
...
... Rove's words on the Plame case have always been carefully chosen. "I didn't know her name. I didn't leak her name," Rove told CNN last year when asked if he had anything to do with the Plame leak. Rove has never publicly acknowledged talking to any reporter about former ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife. But last week, his lawyer, Robert Luskin, confirmed to NEWSWEEK that Rove did—and that Rove was the secret source who, at the request of both Cooper's lawyer and the prosecutor, gave Cooper permission to testify.
...
... Cooper wrote that Rove offered him a "big warning" not to "get too far out on Wilson." Rove told Cooper that Wilson's trip had not been authorized by "DCIA"—CIA Director George Tenet—or Vice President Dick Cheney. Rather, "it was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd [weapons of mass destruction] issues who authorized the trip." Wilson's wife is Plame, then an undercover agent working as an analyst in the CIA's Directorate of Operations counterproliferation division. (Cooper later included the essence of what Rove told him in an online story.) The e-mail characterizing the conversation continues: "not only the genesis of the trip is flawed an[d] suspect but so is the report. he [Rove] implied strongly there's still plenty to implicate iraqi interest in acquiring uranium fro[m] Niger ... "
Nothing in the Cooper e-mail suggests that Rove used Plame's name or knew she was a covert operative. Nonetheless, it is significant that Rove was speaking to Cooper before Novak's column appeared; in other words, before Plame's identity had been published.
Three weeks before London bombings, a Senate committee cut the budget for rail and mass transit security in this country by one-third.
America's vulnerable railways - The Boston Globe - Boston.com - Op-ed - News: "By Thomas Oliphant | July 10, 2005
FEW OUTSIDE the usual band of lobbyists and inside players noticed, but just three weeks ago, a Senate committee cut the budget for rail and mass transit security in this country by one-third.
This action by the Senate's appropriators, reducing next year's budget to $100 million from $150 million this year, might have made some sense if there were evidence that it would have no impact on security.
However, the opposite is the case and has been for more than three years of inexcusable neglect and conniving between the Bush administration and its corporate buddies.
...
Biden recently cited a study by the Naval Research Laboratory that estimated as many as 100,000 people in a densely populated area could die within 30 minutes if a single, 90-ton freight car carrying chlorine were punctured.
Against industry (shipping as well as manufacturing) opposition and Bush's indifference, Biden and Markey have pushed separate legislation ideas that would give the government authority to reroute shipments of these extremely dangerous substances around major metropolitan areas and to force other security improvements on the profit-crazed industry.
FEW OUTSIDE the usual band of lobbyists and inside players noticed, but just three weeks ago, a Senate committee cut the budget for rail and mass transit security in this country by one-third.
This action by the Senate's appropriators, reducing next year's budget to $100 million from $150 million this year, might have made some sense if there were evidence that it would have no impact on security.
However, the opposite is the case and has been for more than three years of inexcusable neglect and conniving between the Bush administration and its corporate buddies.
...
Biden recently cited a study by the Naval Research Laboratory that estimated as many as 100,000 people in a densely populated area could die within 30 minutes if a single, 90-ton freight car carrying chlorine were punctured.
Against industry (shipping as well as manufacturing) opposition and Bush's indifference, Biden and Markey have pushed separate legislation ideas that would give the government authority to reroute shipments of these extremely dangerous substances around major metropolitan areas and to force other security improvements on the profit-crazed industry.
Firm Tied to Convict Aided [financed mortgage] Rep. Cunningham [under suspicion for house sale to defense contractor ..]
Firm Tied to Convict Aided Rep. Cunningham: "By SETH HETTENA | The Associated Press | Saturday, July 9, 2005; 12:08 AM
SAN DIEGO -- A company linked to a New York businessman who was convicted in a bid-rigging scheme helped Rep. Randy 'Duke' Cunningham finance his Arlington, Va., condominium, court records show.
Coastal Capital financed the $150,000 mortgage on Cunningham's two-bedroom condominium, according to records on file with the Arlington, Va., Circuit Court. In 2003, Coastal Capital financed $1.1 million in mortgages toward the purchase of Cunningham's seven-bath home in Rancho Santa Fe.
Coastal Capital is run by the nephew and daughter of Thomas T. Kontogiannis, a Long Island developer who pleaded guilty in October 2002 in a bid-rigging, bribe and kickback scheme involving New York City school computer contracts worth millions of dollars.
SAN DIEGO -- A company linked to a New York businessman who was convicted in a bid-rigging scheme helped Rep. Randy 'Duke' Cunningham finance his Arlington, Va., condominium, court records show.
Coastal Capital financed the $150,000 mortgage on Cunningham's two-bedroom condominium, according to records on file with the Arlington, Va., Circuit Court. In 2003, Coastal Capital financed $1.1 million in mortgages toward the purchase of Cunningham's seven-bath home in Rancho Santa Fe.
Coastal Capital is run by the nephew and daughter of Thomas T. Kontogiannis, a Long Island developer who pleaded guilty in October 2002 in a bid-rigging, bribe and kickback scheme involving New York City school computer contracts worth millions of dollars.
The Army claims to have disciplined Sgt. Thomas Kelt for recruiting violations, who has since been promoted.
KHOU.com | News for Houston, Texas | Local News: "Army disciplines recruiter with promotion | 10:10 AM CDT on Friday, July 8, 2005 | By Mark Greenblatt / 11 News
Less than two months ago, what the 11 News Defenders discovered caused a nationwide scandal and a temporary shutdown of all Army recruiting.
The Army claims to have disciplined Sgt. Thomas Kelt for recruiting violations, who has since been promoted.
A Houston soldier, Sgt. Thomas Kelt, told at least one young man to show up for recruitment or face being locked up. Following that incident, the Army promised to take a tough stance, but you might not believe what happened next.
The Army shut down all recruiting in the country for one day to re-educate recruiters on ethics. And as for Sgt. Kelt, officials promised 'swift ... corrective action.'
The 11 News Defenders discovered Kelt was transferred to a neighboring recruiting office where the army turned recruiter Kelt into a supervisor, as the station's new commander."
Less than two months ago, what the 11 News Defenders discovered caused a nationwide scandal and a temporary shutdown of all Army recruiting.
The Army claims to have disciplined Sgt. Thomas Kelt for recruiting violations, who has since been promoted.
A Houston soldier, Sgt. Thomas Kelt, told at least one young man to show up for recruitment or face being locked up. Following that incident, the Army promised to take a tough stance, but you might not believe what happened next.
The Army shut down all recruiting in the country for one day to re-educate recruiters on ethics. And as for Sgt. Kelt, officials promised 'swift ... corrective action.'
The 11 News Defenders discovered Kelt was transferred to a neighboring recruiting office where the army turned recruiter Kelt into a supervisor, as the station's new commander."
This is worse than Watergate: administration revealing C.I.A. officer's identity smacks of desperation ... wonder just what else might have been done
We're Not in Watergate Anymore - New York Times: "By FRANK RICH | Published: July 10, 2005
WHEN John Dean published his book 'Worse Than Watergate' in the spring of 2004, it seemed rank hyperbole: an election-year screed and yet another attempt by a Nixon alumnus to downgrade Watergate crimes by unearthing worse 'gates' thereafter. But it's hard to be dismissive now that my colleague Judy Miller has been taken away in shackles for refusing to name the source for a story she never wrote. No reporter went to jail during Watergate. No news organization buckled like Time. No one instigated a war on phony premises. This is worse than Watergate.
...
But the most important difference between the Bush and Nixon eras has less to do with the press than with the grave origins of the particular case that has sent Judy Miller to jail. This scandal didn't begin, as Watergate did, simply with dirty tricks and spying on the political opposition. It began with the sending of American men and women to war in Iraq.
Specifically, it began with the former ambassador Joseph Wilson's July 6, 2003, account on the Times Op-Ed page (and in concurrent broadcast appearances) of his 2002 C.I.A. mission to Africa to determine whether Saddam Hussein had struck a deal in Niger for uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons. Mr. Wilson concluded that there was no such deal, as my colleague Nicholas Kristof reported, without divulging Mr. Wilson's name, that spring. But the envoy's dramatic Op-Ed piece got everyone's attention: a government insider with firsthand knowledge had stepped out of the shadows of anonymity to expose the administration's game authoritatively on the record. He had made palpable what Bush critics increasingly suspected, writing that "some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
...
... The administration had ignored all reports, not just Mr. Wilson's, that this information might well be bogus. But it still didn't retract Mr. Bush's fiction some five weeks after the State of the Union, when Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, announced that the uranium claim was based on fake documents. Instead, we marched on to war in Iraq days later. ...
...
The Niger uranium was hardly the only dubious evidence testifying to Saddam's supposed nuclear threat in the run-up to war. Judy Miller herself was one of two reporters responsible for a notoriously credulous front-page Times story about aluminum tubes that enabled the administration's propaganda campaign to trump up Saddam's W.M.D. arsenal. ....
...
Political pressure didn't force Mr. Ashcroft to relinquish control of the Wilson investigation to a special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, until Dec. 30, 2003, more than five months after Mr. Novak's column ran. ...
...
... That the Bush administration would risk breaking the law with an act as self-destructive to American interests as revealing a C.I.A. officer's identity smacks of desperation. It makes you wonder just what else might have been done to suppress embarrassing election-season questions about the war that has mired us in Iraq even as the true perpetrators of 9/11 resurface in Madrid, London and who knows where else.
IN his original Op-Ed piece in The Times, published two years to the day before Judy Miller went to jail, Mr. Wilson noted that "more than 200 American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq already," before concluding that "we have a duty to ensure that their sacrifice came for the right reasons." As that death toll surges past 1,700, that sacred duty cannot be abandoned by a free press now.
WHEN John Dean published his book 'Worse Than Watergate' in the spring of 2004, it seemed rank hyperbole: an election-year screed and yet another attempt by a Nixon alumnus to downgrade Watergate crimes by unearthing worse 'gates' thereafter. But it's hard to be dismissive now that my colleague Judy Miller has been taken away in shackles for refusing to name the source for a story she never wrote. No reporter went to jail during Watergate. No news organization buckled like Time. No one instigated a war on phony premises. This is worse than Watergate.
...
But the most important difference between the Bush and Nixon eras has less to do with the press than with the grave origins of the particular case that has sent Judy Miller to jail. This scandal didn't begin, as Watergate did, simply with dirty tricks and spying on the political opposition. It began with the sending of American men and women to war in Iraq.
Specifically, it began with the former ambassador Joseph Wilson's July 6, 2003, account on the Times Op-Ed page (and in concurrent broadcast appearances) of his 2002 C.I.A. mission to Africa to determine whether Saddam Hussein had struck a deal in Niger for uranium that might be used in nuclear weapons. Mr. Wilson concluded that there was no such deal, as my colleague Nicholas Kristof reported, without divulging Mr. Wilson's name, that spring. But the envoy's dramatic Op-Ed piece got everyone's attention: a government insider with firsthand knowledge had stepped out of the shadows of anonymity to expose the administration's game authoritatively on the record. He had made palpable what Bush critics increasingly suspected, writing that "some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."
...
... The administration had ignored all reports, not just Mr. Wilson's, that this information might well be bogus. But it still didn't retract Mr. Bush's fiction some five weeks after the State of the Union, when Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, announced that the uranium claim was based on fake documents. Instead, we marched on to war in Iraq days later. ...
...
The Niger uranium was hardly the only dubious evidence testifying to Saddam's supposed nuclear threat in the run-up to war. Judy Miller herself was one of two reporters responsible for a notoriously credulous front-page Times story about aluminum tubes that enabled the administration's propaganda campaign to trump up Saddam's W.M.D. arsenal. ....
...
Political pressure didn't force Mr. Ashcroft to relinquish control of the Wilson investigation to a special prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald, until Dec. 30, 2003, more than five months after Mr. Novak's column ran. ...
...
... That the Bush administration would risk breaking the law with an act as self-destructive to American interests as revealing a C.I.A. officer's identity smacks of desperation. It makes you wonder just what else might have been done to suppress embarrassing election-season questions about the war that has mired us in Iraq even as the true perpetrators of 9/11 resurface in Madrid, London and who knows where else.
IN his original Op-Ed piece in The Times, published two years to the day before Judy Miller went to jail, Mr. Wilson noted that "more than 200 American soldiers have lost their lives in Iraq already," before concluding that "we have a duty to ensure that their sacrifice came for the right reasons." As that death toll surges past 1,700, that sacred duty cannot be abandoned by a free press now.
Rove’s Lawyer Lies To Bloomberg: Rove did not reveal any confidential information ... but Coopers' email show otherwise
Think Progress � July 3, 2005: Rove’s Lawyer Lies To Bloomberg: "
Here’s what Karl Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin told Bloomberg News on July 3, 2005:
[Karl Rove] did nothing wrong, did not disclose Plame’s identity, and did not reveal any confidential information.
According to TIME reporter Matt Cooper’s e-mail, here is what Karl Rove told him sometime before July 11, 2003:
[I]t was, KR [Karl Rove] said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip.
This was before the Novak column appeared on July 14. At that time, the fact that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA was confidential information.
(On other occasions, Luskin has said Rove never “knowingly” disclosed classified information. But he did not use that qualifier with Bloomberg News.)"
Here’s what Karl Rove’s lawyer, Robert Luskin told Bloomberg News on July 3, 2005:
[Karl Rove] did nothing wrong, did not disclose Plame’s identity, and did not reveal any confidential information.
According to TIME reporter Matt Cooper’s e-mail, here is what Karl Rove told him sometime before July 11, 2003:
[I]t was, KR [Karl Rove] said, wilson’s wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip.
This was before the Novak column appeared on July 14. At that time, the fact that Joe Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA was confidential information.
(On other occasions, Luskin has said Rove never “knowingly” disclosed classified information. But he did not use that qualifier with Bloomberg News.)"
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
New York Daily News - Home - Daily News Exclusive: Juan Gonzalez - The war's littlest victim
New York Daily News - Home - Daily News Exclusive: Juan Gonzalez - The war's littlest victim: "He was exposed to depleted uranium. | His daughter may be paying the price.
Guardsman Gerard Darren Matthew, sent home from Iraq with mysterious illnesses, holds baby daughter, Victoria, who has deformed hand. He has tested positive for uranium contamination.
In early September 2003, Army National Guard Spec. Gerard Darren Matthew was sent home from Iraq, stricken by a sudden illness.
One side of Matthew's face would swell up each morning. He had constant migraine headaches, blurred vision, blackouts and a burning sensation whenever he urinated.
The Army transferred him to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington for further tests, but doctors there could not explain what was wrong.
Shortly after his return, his wife, Janice, became pregnant. On June 29, she gave birth to a baby girl, Victoria Claudette.
The baby was missing three fingers and most of her right hand.
Matthew and his wife believe Victoria's shocking deformity has something to do with her father's illness and the war - especially since there is no history of birth defects in either of their families.
They have seen photos of Iraqi babies born with deformities that are eerily similar.
In June, Matthew contacted the Daily News and asked us to arrange independent laboratory screening for his urine. This was after The News had reported that four of seven soldiers from another National Guard unit, the 442nd Military Police, had tested positive for depleted uranium (DU).
The independent test of Matthew's urine found him positive for DU - low-level radioactive waste produced in nuclear plants during the enrichment of natural uranium. ...
Guardsman Gerard Darren Matthew, sent home from Iraq with mysterious illnesses, holds baby daughter, Victoria, who has deformed hand. He has tested positive for uranium contamination.
In early September 2003, Army National Guard Spec. Gerard Darren Matthew was sent home from Iraq, stricken by a sudden illness.
One side of Matthew's face would swell up each morning. He had constant migraine headaches, blurred vision, blackouts and a burning sensation whenever he urinated.
The Army transferred him to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington for further tests, but doctors there could not explain what was wrong.
Shortly after his return, his wife, Janice, became pregnant. On June 29, she gave birth to a baby girl, Victoria Claudette.
The baby was missing three fingers and most of her right hand.
Matthew and his wife believe Victoria's shocking deformity has something to do with her father's illness and the war - especially since there is no history of birth defects in either of their families.
They have seen photos of Iraqi babies born with deformities that are eerily similar.
In June, Matthew contacted the Daily News and asked us to arrange independent laboratory screening for his urine. This was after The News had reported that four of seven soldiers from another National Guard unit, the 442nd Military Police, had tested positive for depleted uranium (DU).
The independent test of Matthew's urine found him positive for DU - low-level radioactive waste produced in nuclear plants during the enrichment of natural uranium. ...
Monday, July 04, 2005
Revealed: grim world of new Iraqi torture camps
Revealed: grim world of new Iraqi torture camps: "By Peter Beaumont | 07/03/05 'The Observer'
Secret torture chambers, the brutal interrogation of prisoners, murders by paramilitaries with links to powerful ministries... Foreign affairs editor Peter Beaumont in Baghdad uncovers a grim trail of abuse carried out by forces loyal to the new Iraqi government
The video camera pans across Hassan an-Ni'ami's body as it is washed in the mosque for burial. In life he was a slender, good-looking man, usually dressed in a dark robe and white turban, Imam at a mosque in Baghdad's Adhimiya district and a senior official of the Muslim Clerics Association.
When I first interviewed him a year ago he was suspected of contacts with the insurgency. Certainly he supported resistance to US forces.
More recently, an-Ni'ami had dropped out of sight. Then, a little over a month ago, relatives say, paramilitary police commandos from 'Rapid Intrusion' found him at a family home in the Sha'ab neighbourhood of northern Baghdad. His capture was reported on television as that of a senior 'terrorist commander'. Twelve hours later his body turned up in the morgue.
What happened to him in his 24 hours in captivity was written across his body in chapters of pain, recorded by the camera. There are police-issue handcuffs still attached to one wrist, from which he was hanged long enough to cause his hands and wrists to swell. There are burn marks on his chest, as if someone has placed something very hot near his right nipple and moved it around.
A little lower are a series of horizontal welts, wrapping around his body and breaking the skin as they turn around his chest, as if he had been beaten with something flexible, perhaps a cable. There are other injuries: a broken nose and smaller wounds that look like cigarette burns. "
Secret torture chambers, the brutal interrogation of prisoners, murders by paramilitaries with links to powerful ministries... Foreign affairs editor Peter Beaumont in Baghdad uncovers a grim trail of abuse carried out by forces loyal to the new Iraqi government
The video camera pans across Hassan an-Ni'ami's body as it is washed in the mosque for burial. In life he was a slender, good-looking man, usually dressed in a dark robe and white turban, Imam at a mosque in Baghdad's Adhimiya district and a senior official of the Muslim Clerics Association.
When I first interviewed him a year ago he was suspected of contacts with the insurgency. Certainly he supported resistance to US forces.
More recently, an-Ni'ami had dropped out of sight. Then, a little over a month ago, relatives say, paramilitary police commandos from 'Rapid Intrusion' found him at a family home in the Sha'ab neighbourhood of northern Baghdad. His capture was reported on television as that of a senior 'terrorist commander'. Twelve hours later his body turned up in the morgue.
What happened to him in his 24 hours in captivity was written across his body in chapters of pain, recorded by the camera. There are police-issue handcuffs still attached to one wrist, from which he was hanged long enough to cause his hands and wrists to swell. There are burn marks on his chest, as if someone has placed something very hot near his right nipple and moved it around.
A little lower are a series of horizontal welts, wrapping around his body and breaking the skin as they turn around his chest, as if he had been beaten with something flexible, perhaps a cable. There are other injuries: a broken nose and smaller wounds that look like cigarette burns. "
Saturday, July 02, 2005
MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove [Bush's Brain] as Source in Plame Case {outing of CIA agents, federal offense]
MSNBC Analyst Says Cooper Documents Reveal Karl Rove as Source in Plame Case: "By E&P Staff | Published: July 01, 2005 11:30 PM ET
NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.
Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:
'What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.
'And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury.'"
NEW YORK Now that Time Inc. has turned over documents to federal court, presumably revealing who its reporter, Matt Cooper, identified as his source in the Valerie Plame/CIA case, speculation runs rampant on the name of that source, and what might happen to him or her. Tonight, on the syndicated McLaughlin Group political talk show, Lawrence O'Donnell, senior MSNBC political analyst, claimed to know that name--and it is, according to him, top White House mastermind Karl Rove.
Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's remarks:
'What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury, the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is.
'And I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury.'"
Friday, July 01, 2005
Sen. Thune in Classic GOP Connundrum: Did He Approve Loans for Bankrupt Crony Or Was He Totally Incompetent?
Pensito Review � Sen. Thune in Classic GOP Connundrum: Did He Approve Loans for Bankrupt Crony Or Was He Totally Incompetent?: "Posted July 1st, 2005 by Jon
A reversal of fortunes for a used car dealer in the upper Midwest is about to cause serious blowback on South Dakota’s freshman U.S. senator, John Thune.
First, Dan Nelson Automotive was cited by the attorney general in Iowa for consumer fraud, predatory lending and other things that shady used car dealers are known to do. Now the company has filed for bankruptcy, claiming to have debts of about $30 million, with assets of about $6 million.
According to Thunewatch.com and published newspaper reports, the auto dealer’s largest creditor is “Sioux Falls-based Metabank, which is owed more than $28 million.”
Turns out, the dealership’s owner - Dan Nelson - is a friend of Sen. Thune, and has been a contributor to Thune’s various political races over the years.
Also turns out - and here’s the beauty part - prior to running for the senate in 2004, Thune sat on the board of directors for the bank during the period in which it gave the loans to the auto dealer, despite evidence that the company was in financial difficulties. In fact, Thune sat on the Audit Committe for the bank.
So, once again, we find a Republican in the now classic GOP connundrum: Did Sen. Thune tacitly approve loans to bail out a crony - or he was totally incompentent in his role as overseer of the bank’s fiduciary responsibilities?"
A reversal of fortunes for a used car dealer in the upper Midwest is about to cause serious blowback on South Dakota’s freshman U.S. senator, John Thune.
First, Dan Nelson Automotive was cited by the attorney general in Iowa for consumer fraud, predatory lending and other things that shady used car dealers are known to do. Now the company has filed for bankruptcy, claiming to have debts of about $30 million, with assets of about $6 million.
According to Thunewatch.com and published newspaper reports, the auto dealer’s largest creditor is “Sioux Falls-based Metabank, which is owed more than $28 million.”
Turns out, the dealership’s owner - Dan Nelson - is a friend of Sen. Thune, and has been a contributor to Thune’s various political races over the years.
Also turns out - and here’s the beauty part - prior to running for the senate in 2004, Thune sat on the board of directors for the bank during the period in which it gave the loans to the auto dealer, despite evidence that the company was in financial difficulties. In fact, Thune sat on the Audit Committe for the bank.
So, once again, we find a Republican in the now classic GOP connundrum: Did Sen. Thune tacitly approve loans to bail out a crony - or he was totally incompentent in his role as overseer of the bank’s fiduciary responsibilities?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)