Frankly, I don't understand why even right-wing, fundamentalist, Social Darwinian, oil executives like Bush.

That explains why for a moment it appeared that GWB was making a choice to support a democracy over a dictatorship when he signed a MOU with the Indian PM. It was quite surprising at the time, and I almost lauded him for this act. Of course it was a charade.

Count on the GOP to support a dictator over a democracy always, and never mind their leaders' high falutin proclamtions to the contrary.

... I read this, and my first thought was "so what?" I just don't care anymore. I can't be surprised anymore, so why even play pretend at indignation? *shrug* I've hit my bullshit quota, and that's that.

Congress should keep in mind that vasectomies are only reversible 70% of the time....and full castrations, never.

Indeed we do. We now have a president whose standard operating procedure is to keep Congress in the dark about anything that might cause him even the mildest inconvenience. Even if it's something that Congress really ought to know about in order to do its job.

But Congress IS doing it's job. Under Article II of the Constitution, it is the job of the President George W Bush to do foreign policy, NOT the Congress. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, it would be wrong to involve Congress in a foreign policy question when the constitution delegated that power to the President.

“The U.S. is looking forward to eating (radioactive) Indian mangoes.”

Even if this Congress was informed, what would it have done? Absolutely nothing. Perhaps, Specter could provide some guidelines on how to pass a law that allows the President to inform the congress, if he chooses to or feels like it!

This Congress would have done nothing. Let us take stock of the performance of this administration:

Between 2001 - 2006,
- North Korea has more nuclear capability in 2006 than in 2001.
- Iran (potentially) has more nuclear capability in 2006 than in 2001.
- Pakistan has more nuclear capability (uranium bombs, and an upcoming plutonium facility) in 2006 than in 2001.
- India has inked a treaty with the US to further its nuclear capabilities.

North Korea, and Pakistan are known, proven peddlers of nuclear technology, as well as missile technology.

Boy, this gang of republicans, are very "security" minded. Aren't they?

Kari

Who cares as long as they don't set off any of their new bombs on oil or gas fields!

Kevin - you are sure leaders in the House and Senate were not briefed?

If Congress ever started to do its job, George Bush would be in serious trouble.

He is in serious trouble...

And so are you...
And so am I...
And so is every person on this planet.

Global warming is heating things up faster than postulated.

Wait until the hurricane season gets a going...

It is going to make the rancorous nonsense going down in the Middle East look like child's play.

We can never win the GWOT so long as we continue to support Pakistan.

It sure seems as if the Bushistas do not want to win the GWOT.

It is a tragedy that we are supporting a dictator in Pakistan. It is a tragedy that the Pakistanis do not have the rights we do. It is also a tragedy that democracy would likely only bring about a stronger radical Islam in Pakistan, as the majority of the people there love bin Laden and hate the U.S. (elections empowered Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Hamas in Palestine, and we should not be surprised if the Pakistanis don't elect a Hamid Karzai clone). It is also a tragedy that the overthrow of the dictator we support would likely bring a Taliban-like regime into power. But foreign policy is not about making a perfect decision. Foreign policy is about making the best decision possible out of various flawed possibilities.

The Democrats claim they are alliance builders, and claim they will win the War on Terror this way. If the Democrats attack Bush for supporting dictatorships (or at least looking the other way on nuclear development by dictatorships that side with the U.S. in the War on Terror), then the Democrats limit themselves, at least in terms of principle, to only building alliances with democracies. If it is possible to win the War on Terror that way, then so be it, but the Democrats may want to consider just how much they want to limit our diplomatic options in a war with a hostile enemy that does not fear retaliation (as many radical Islamists believe God will deliver them victory), that is willing fight for decades, and that murdered thousands of our fellow Americans on the single bloodiest day on U.S. soil since the Civil War.

Maybe congress could make a deal with him.

He has to tell Congress about intelligence on Pakistan in a timely manner and he gets something he wants, say a 10th and 11th supreme court justice with guaranteed confirmation. The founding fathers saw the need for a little give and take. It's the way the constitution works.

not illegally invading other countries based on false pretenses and manipulated intelligence will also help us win the so-called war on terror.

I'm surprised an intellectual giant like brian forgot to mention that, too.

Brian:

Let's not forget that Benazir Bhutto was elected Prime Minister of Pakistan. They elected a woman, a corrupt woman, but its something we aren't willing to do yet.

We don't have to accept a Pakistani-Indian arms race for the sake of a fake hunt for Osama_been_forgotten. Bush of course has chosen that course for us, and Congress will let him get away with it unchallenged.

I've always been surprised Pakistan's nuclear capabilities haven't generated more concern than they have. While Iran and Korea are obvious worries they have, for better or worse, "stable" regimes. It's unlikely if either was replaced it would be with a kookier regime than they already have. Pakistan, on the other hand, has a well developed nuclear capability, a proven willingness to export that technology, and is held together by an unpopular dictator who has survived no less than 3 assassination attempts. If he were replaced it would be either by a hopelessly corrupt and inept democracy or by Taliban-like Muslim fanatics. I don't know what GWB or any other president could do about it (Clinton couldn't stop it either) but it doesn't make for restful sleeps.

Brian

You are full of unadulterated shit.

Pakistan's ISI set up the Taliban in Afghanistan to wage a proxy war against the West - to placate Pakistan's extremists, and deflect their criticism of the Mushtarraf regime.

For the same reason, Mushtarraf keeps AQ Khan safe from harm, even though he illegally sold nuclear technology to Libya, Iran, Qatar, and Yemen.

For the same reason, Mushtarraf also kept the US from using Pakistan as a staging ground for our war on Afghanistan.

For the same reason, Mushtarraf also protects Osama bin Laden, by actively NOT seeking his capture, and preventing US troops from operating in Pakistan.

The US (Bush) does not call Mushtarraf on these things, because a strong Pakistan means an eventual thermonuclear war in southeast asia, which means, China, and India, and Pakistan, will not challenge US economic hegemony.

If the Democrats attack Bush for supporting dictatorships (or at least looking the other way on nuclear development by dictatorships that side with the U.S. in the War on Terror), then the Democrats limit themselves, at least in terms of principle, to only building alliances with democracies

Most progressives here understand perfectly well why democracy promotion in the middle east is idiotic (from a US-centric viewpoint). They were also largely against the idea of invading and occupying a major middle east country just because it was ruled by an "evil dictator."

You might want to google the Camp David Accords and the Oslo Accords if you want to see what types of things Democratic politicians are likely to do with dictators and strong men.

George W Bush is a Jew (who pretends to be a Christian)!

This partly explains the weirdness of the man. It also explains why he never acts like a Christian.

Here, have a look at him praying at the Wailing Wall.

He could be praying to Allah, but it doesn't look like it. And what is that funny cap thing on his head?

Yes, Bush is a Jew, he has Jews all through his family tree.

For example, Levi Pierce and his mother Barbara Pierce (Levi and Barbara are related) are both Jews.

Pierce is an Americanization of the Jewish name Perez/Peretz/Peres. The name is of Hebrew origin. According to Genesis 38, Pharez (the spelling Perez is also used (in the First Book of Chronicles)) was a son of Judah born to Tamar (who incidentally, was Judah's daughter in law (Judah, the father of the Jews, was a dirty old man)).

In case you are interested Levi and Barbara Pierce are related as follows:

Thomas Holbrook (d. 1677) m. Jane Powys
.John Holbrook m. Elizabeth Stream
|.Hannah Holbrook m. Ephraim Pierce
| .Ephraim Pierce m. Mary Low
|  .Mial Pierce m. Judith Round
|   .Nathan Pierce m. Lydia Martin
|    .Isaac Pierce m. Anna Fitch
|     .LEVI PIERCE m. Betsey Slade Wheeler
|      .Elizabeth Slade Pierce m. Courtland Philip Livingston Butler
|       .Mary Elizabeth Butler m. Robert Emmet Sheldon
|        .Flora Sheldon m. Samuel Prescott Bush
|         .Prescott Sheldon Bush m. Dorothy Walker
|          .GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH m. Barbara Pierce
|           .GEORGE W. BUSH, US President
.Thomas Holbrook m. Jane Kingman
 .Peter Holbrook m. Alice Godfrey
  .Sylvanus Holbrook m. Naomi Cook
   .John Holbrook m. Zilpah Thayer
    .John Holbrook m. Rhoda Thayer
     .John Holbrook m. Mercy Hill
      .Chloe Holbrook m. James Pierce
       .Jonas James Pierce m. Kate Pritzel
        .Scott Pierce m. Mabel Marvin
         .Marvin Pierce m. Pauline Robinson
          .BARBARA PIERCE

Doesn't that make BUSH's mother his cousin?

In the 2004 US election you got to choose between the Jew Kerry and the Jew Bush.

Some choice,... like the choice between the front side of a piece of paper, or the back side.

So the result of the election has already been decided before you get to "choose".

I would rather have the Iranian type of election.

For more see:

BUSH IS NO CONSERVATIVE (nor Christian, but is a Jew).

eventual thermonuclear war in southeast asia, which means, China, and India, and Pakistan, will not challenge US economic hegemony.

This is where you lost me. It seems clear from Bush's performance at the G8 summit, that it would be generous to assume that Bush's foreign policy, per nation/region, can usually fit on a bumper sticker. If I could sum up Bush's policy toward Pakistan, it would something like this:

"We both like to play dress-up, so that's cool. He's my Pakistan man on the inside, and sheeet."

It's amazing thewatcher can watch anything with his head so far up his Aryan arse.

Of course, he just might be describing his intestinal movements for our benefit.

i would like to interject some comments.

but why?

this has become a know-nothing site.

slide into the ooze, folks. that is where the bushits want you. and you will go willingly.

burp!

nut says:

Brian

You are full of unadulterated shit.

I disagree. His shit is definately adulterated.

So, floopmeister. You think that Bush being a secret Jew is of absolutely no interest to anyone, and has absolutely no bearing on anything at all, least of all any bearing on his position regarding the shitty little country? That's right, I guess. Could you verify this for me.

Of course, Bush being a secret Jew, is of much interest to many people, even if you want to keep it hushed up.

The link above to a photo of him praying at the Wailing Wall has the wrong address (actually, someone "accidentally" removed the photo that was there).

Do you reckon Bush's grandaddy, Prescott Sheldon Bush, looks Jewish?

Watcher - why don't you shuffle back to Stormfront and preach to the converted, boyo.

Your sort of pitiful conspiracy mongering, based on racialist nonsense, is useful primarily to those who want to tar any criticism of the policies of Israel (the state) as anti-semitism. It makes you a 'useful idiot' for exactly that which you claim to despise.

Frankly, the racial interpretation of history is precisely the philosophy for those spat out, bypassed and left behind by History - it's nothing more than a philosophical aspirin for the fringe dwelling underclass, the losers and dregs, of Western society.

BTW - I broke my own rule even referring to a nutter like yourself. I won't make that mistake again.

Good bye.

I'm bored, so I'll bite.

Will Smith, Big Jew

Sharon Stone, Bigger Jew

Jewy Jew, Jew Jew, Jew, Jewy Jew.

...why even play pretend at indignation? *shrug* I've hit my bullshit quota, and that's that.

Yup. Another outrage against democracy, sane governance and peace in the world.

Just throw it on the pile.

The wife is always the last one to know.

Funny because it's true,

http://thismodernworld.com/3006

What about this photo of him with Nixon. Looks Jewish to me.

And it wouldn't matter so much, if Bush didn't pretend to be a Christian/non-Jew.

watcher:

"It wouldn't matter so much ... "

You're so fucking full of shit.

Bob

watcher:

You know ... my guess is either that you're part Jewish yourself.

Or maybe you're gay. Or only have one testicle, I dunno.

In any case, you likely have something about yourself which you consider to be gravely flawed.

And all this Jew this, Jew that stuff is classic projective identification.

So clue us in watcher? What's *your* secret shameful flaw? Borderline mental retardation?

Enquiring minds wanna know.

Bob

watcher:

And floopmeister is spot on.

All you're doing is helping to justify Israeli paranoia.

Nice work, asshole.

Bob

watcher:

(Jesus Christ I must be fucking bored to death.)

What makes you think that Christians like to consider themselves "non-Jews"? They both share the Ten Commandments. They both like to go on about the Judeo-Christian tradition. Pope John Paul apologized for centuries of Catholic anti-semitism. Protestant fundamentalists are some of the strongest supporters of Zionism and Israel. Is Pat Robertson a "stealth Jew?" The young Josef Ratzinger was a member of Hitler Youth. Is Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) one, too?

Joe Lieberman (he sure looks Jewish, doesn't he?), in his book about the 2000 presidential campaign, talked about how warmly he and his wife were recieved in the southern states by all those Christian fundies. Are they all stealth Jews down there in Dixie as well?

Is there any spitting distance between Protestant neoconservatives and Jewish Likudnik Zionists?

What does *religion* or *ethnicity* have to do with any of this?

Bob

Similar to Malkin's frothing over the Times publishing an article about weapon's shipments to Israel.

Because she didn't previously know about these shipments, means no one knew and there for is a traitorous act perpetrated by the Times in informing what most people already knew.

Bob. What I have shown is that Jews are organized LIARS.

And yeah, it is good to point out these lies. I can only point them out, others have to judge what I say, for themselves.

I have also shown that Jews (you in particular) don't like having the LIES pointed out. You seem to get a little "scratchy."

So, thewatcher - you're saying Bush is related to Marty Peretz? That would explain a couple things.

Of course, once you trace family trees back over 2000 years, Bush is probably more closely related to you than he is to Marty Peretz. And you're probably related to Marty Peretz, too. But whatever.

Anyway, you're barking up the wrong tree. The problem isn't the kikes. It's the niggers, the micks, the spics, the wops and the chinks.

brooksfoe:

Hey! Who you callin' a Mick!

Bob

You prefer Paddy?

Oh, also, in deference to Pim Fortuyn, let us not forget to include the goatfuckers.

Around here it's the goddam coonass frog-redskin hybrids. God frowns on their sorry swamp huts with hurricane force winds and melting ice-caps. Anyone condoning public tit-jiggling, unintelligible jazz, and slimy vegetables will meet the same fate.

watcher:

> Bob. What I have shown

"Shown"? You haven't SHOWN jack shit, bro. You haven't
made a single argument that can't be slapped down with
garden-variety common sense or reputable sources.

In fact, you haven't even made what normal people would
call genuine arguments. You assert, you use circular
reasoning, you indulge in any number of fallacies of logic
and inference. Not an argument in the lot of it that would
pass muster from a second-tier highschool debate team coach.

> is that Jews are organized LIARS.

So Jews, as a group, are liars. Can you demonstrate
this without descending into circular reasoning?

Umm ... no you can't. All you can do is spew tautologies.

> And yeah, it is good to point out these lies.

Pointing out lies is not only good in itself, but it's also
kinda fun. That's why I take the time to respond to your posts.

> I can only point them out, others have
> to judge what I say, for themselves.

You're not "pointing out" anything. You're spewing
assertions and using bogus reasoning to attempt to get people
to question basic historical facts like, umm, the Holocaust.
Like, uhh, there were no death camps in Germany --> people
(not considering the difference between death camps and
forced labor, POW and concentration camps) believe there
were death camps in Germany == the Holocaust didn't happen.

That reasoning is so bad it's *comical*, bro.

> I have also shown that Jews (you in particular)
> don't like having the LIES pointed out.

I'm Irish, bro -- with eighths of Swedish, Danish and Welsh. But
you're calling me Jewish and that's supposed to be "pointing out
lies." See, because if I deny it, it automatically means it's true.

And, of course, the more I deny it, the truer it becomes :)

> You seem to get a little "scratchy."

Most normal people become offended by hatemongering.

I'm just a little more vocal about it than most :)

Bob

watcher:

See, the difference between you and I is that I'm a normal person and you're not. You have a terrible, shameful flaw -- either a grotesque physical deformity or a mental handicap. Maybe your penis is two inches long. Maybe you have brain lesion. Maybe you smell so bad, despite several showers a day, that you've never experienced physical intimacy with another human being. Maybe you're just a sociopath, otherwise normal but born without a conscience and thus incapable of feeling empathy.

What's this terrible, tragic and shameful flaw? Well, I have no idea, of course.

But I'm pretty certain you have one, and in your inner heart of hearts -- you consider yourself a freak of nature, undeserving of the gift of life.

Maybe you'd like to stick your head in an oven.

Maybe you fantasize about being made into soap and lampshades.

Bob

You are a funny/queer type guy Bob.

Not too bright,... but no ones perfect.

watcher, go sell crazy somewhere else. nobody here is buying.

The US-India Nuclear agreement can now be justified as a necessary and appropriate response to the Pakistani announcement. Oh, and by the way, General Electric is lobbying hard to build the Indian plants. This all seems orchestrated in some way to land contracts for GE and other US nuclear industry companies.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-07-18-voa60.cfm

The President knows Congress doesn't have to worry its pretty little head about silly things like atomic bombs in Pakistan. Why it has more important things to do like changing the contitution to outlaw gay marriage, passing tax cuts for the rich and passing earmarks for the administration's friends. Let the decider worry about atomic bombs in Pakistan. The big strong man has big shoulders. The pretty little Congress would just have vapors if it tried.

Ron, that was pretty funny.

Hey, I'm guilty of sometimes engaging trolls myself (like baiting Charlie yesterday), so don't mean to be hypocritical, but y'all, crazy-ass watcher would leave if people would stop responding to it. I'm just sayin'.

Hey Bob, on January 17, 1945, when the Germans evacuated Auschwitz, 67,012 prisoners remained (plus a few thousand in the camp hospital).

Now instead of killing all 67,012+ prisoners, the Germans left about 7,650 prisoners at Auschwitz to be liberated by the Soviets, and marched the other 60,000 to other camps in Germany.

Bob, why do you think the evil Nazis (who had been "mass-killing millions" of Jews) didn't bother to finish off this last bunch?

Bob, do you think that it is strange to leave some 70,000 witnesses to "genocide."

Bob, do you know what (the Jew) Elie Wiesel states in his book "Night" about the evacuation of Auschwitz?

"The choice was in our hands. For once we could decide our fate for ourselves. We could both stay in the hospital, where I could, thanks to my doctor, get him (his father) entered as a patient or nurse. Or else we could follow the others. 'Well, what shall we do, father?' He was silent. 'Let's be evacuated with the others,' I told him." Elie Wiesel, in his book "Night."

You get that Bob? Elie Wiesel says he was given the option of staying at the hospital, with his father registered as a patient, to await the Soviets, or join the evacuation with the "mass-murdering" Nazis.

And guess what Bob,... Elie the Wiesel chose to leave with the "mass-murdering" Nazis, taking his father with him.

Isn't that funny,... that the Jew Elie Wiesel (whose book describes horrendous Nazi "mass-killings" of Jews at Auschwitz) should choose to go with the very same Nazis that had been "mass-killing" Jews, rather than wait for the Soviets. Man those Jew-led Soviets must have been real killers.

Another strange thing about Elie Wiesel's account of life at Auschwitz in his book "Night" is that he never, not even once, mentions gas chambers. Why do you think that is Bob?

In his version of the fiction, the Jews were burnt alive in huge pits, with the fat from the bodies scooped up to make soap.

shortstop

The problem with watcher is he ruins any opportunity for any serious discussion of Israeli foreign policy.

I happen to think that the Lebanon war is a slow motion train wreck. You don't have to be anit-semitic to see that the Israeli government is not acting in anybody's best interests, including their own. Essentially they are punching a pillow. In the process they are killing a bunch of innocents and insuring another generation of hatred.

Anyway I wonder if the watcher shows up just to keep us from talking about Israeli actions. I would sure like to know who is paying him to push his poison.

There are other sites where you can engage in reasoned debate. Typically those sites require registration.

Ron Byers: "There are other sites where you can engage in reasoned debate."

Pity Jews no nothing of reasoned debate.

You implicitly criticize some of the above articles.

Rather than you folk producing another of your typically vague and often silly replies, why don't you produce a small list of the factual errors that you supposedly find in the articles.

So, you produce your list of factual errors and,...

then there really can be reasoned debate. All the evidence so far shows you will not bother,... surprise me.

You are the people who do not want reasoned debate, not me.

watcher, go away

Ron, that's what I was thinking. The watcher is a plant.

Now that we've figured that out, can we all just ignore him?

One-party government sucks.

The Pakistani plutonium reactor is more evidence that Bush doesn't even have a foreign policy to speak of. Because this is exactly the sort of thing one has a foreign policy for - to be a framework for dealing with stuff like this.

Really, this is the most scary single foreign-policy crisis that's occurred during Bush's Presidency. Pakistan producing 50 nukes a year is a much bigger deal than North Korea's more modest nuclear arsenal, and that in turn is a bigger deal than Iran's prospective nuclear program. And all of those dwarf the threat that Saddam or Al-Qaeda represented.

And their approach has been to hide it from the world and do close to nothing - maybe privately chide the Pakistani ambassador or something.

Well, I certainly vote for registering comments. What holds you back, Kevin?

The Cons keep talking about us Libs and the truth of the matter is this,28%of Americans have more money in the bank than they have common sense, but the 28% is still not enough to get your Cons re-elected that is the bright side.

They do have a foreign policy. Its aim to stretch the murder and mayhem as long as possible so that most of us can be made to shit in our pants and with extreme fear and loathing in our hearts vote for the Republicans.

All their actions can be explained by beautifully this single hypothesis. No complicated analysis is necessary.

The Washington Post wrote, Henry D. Sokolski, the Defense Department's top nonproliferation official during the George H.W. Bush administration, said... "What is baffling is that this information -- which was surely information that our own intelligence agencies had -- was kept from Congress,

Sokolski has presumably been out of government for 15 years, so his comments are guesses, albeit by an expert. It was my understanding that the House and Senate intelligence committees get copies of the same reports as the President does. So, some in Congress knew about Pakistan's plans.

The more important question is what would have been gained had Bush informed all of Congress (and thereby all the world). If early publicity would have deterred Pakistan from the project, then Bush blundered. Howver, that's not what Sokolski said.

It was my understanding that the House and Senate intelligence committees get copies of the same reports as the President does.

Your "understanding" is completely wrong. The President has access to far more data than the intelligence committees, and they see, essentially, only what he allows them to see. They have no independent intelligence-gathering capability of their own as the president does.

The more important question is what would have been gained had Bush informed all of Congress (and thereby all the world).

This is not the more important question. Bush does not get to choose whether to inform Congress, but is required to do so by law. Moreover, your claim that informing Congress is tantamount to informing the world is, as ever for you, simply false.

"Global warming is heating things up faster than postulated.

Wait until the hurricane season gets a going..."

The hurricane season is already under way. Are we now seeing the true effects of global warming?

RULES OF PROCEDURE

for the

SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE

UNITED STATES SENATE

In carrying out this purpose, the Select Committee on Intelligence shall make every effort to assure that the appropriate departments and agencies of the United States provide informed and timely intelligence necessary for the Executive and Legislative branches to make sound decisions affecting the security and vital interests of the Nation. It is further the purpose of this resolution to provide vigilant legislative oversight over the intelligence activities of the United States to assure that such activities are in conformity with the Constitution and laws of the United States.

I guess the SIC is not doing their job.

Of course this way they can deflect the blame, which is one of the only things Democrats are good at.

Furthermore,

(c) The select Committee may be organized into subcommittees. Each subcommittee shall have a chairman and a vice chairman who are selected by the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the select Committee, respectively.

Sec. 3. (a) There shall be referred to the select committee all proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to the following:

(1) The Central Intelligence Agency and the Director of Central Intelligence.

(2) Intelligence activities of all other departments and agencies of the Government, including, but not limited to, the intelligence activities of the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and other agencies of the Department of Defense; the Department of State; the Department of Justice; and the Department of the Treasury.

(3) The organization or reorganization of any department or agency of the Government to the extent that the organization or reorganization relates to a function or activity involving intelligence activities.

(4) Authorizations for appropriations, both direct and indirect, for the following:

(A) The Central Intelligence Agency and Director of Central Intelligence.

(B) The Defense Intelligence Agency.

(C) The National Security Agency.

(D) The intelligence activities of other agencies and subdivisions of the Department of Defense.

(E) The intelligence activities of the Department of State.

(F) The intelligence activities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including all activities of the Intelligence Division.

Uh, Freedom Fighter, you might try actually reading that story you linked to. It does not say what you seem to think it says.

Smarter trolls, please. (Oh, and I guess I'll stop engaging them, per my lecture earlier!)

It is very clear to anyone with a brain, that this Administration hasn’t done squat to make this world any safer from terrorists since 9-11. Look, men armed with boxcutters are not going to bring American to it’s knees. Can we all agree on that?

However, after 9-11, it was very clear that the U.S. should place the highest priority on securing plutonium and other fissionable material, as that could very well place the American way of life at risk. Well, we haven’t. A new report says Bush and his bunglers haven’t done doodley to secure nuclear materials. They also let A.Q. Khan, the man who proliferated nuclear technology to Libya, North Korea and possibly Osama bin Laden remain a free man under “house arrest” in a mansion outside of Islamabad. Oooh, maybe we will subject him to the “comfy cushions” next? Why isn’t he being tortured to the point of insanity at Gitmo? If anyone deserves it, he does!!!

There is only one course of action for this country:

Impeach and imprison George W. Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney!

R.I.P Dog Snot Diaries

I guess the SIC is not doing their job.

Why, you're right, Jay. Guess it's time to let someone else run that committee, then, huh?

Under Article II of the Constitution, it is the job of the President George W Bush to do foreign policy, NOT the Congress.

Wrong. Substantive foreign policy powers in the Constitution are either Congressional (the power to declare war, the power the define and punish violations of "the law of nations", to regulate international trade, to govern immigration and naturalization, etc.) or shared (treaty power). Ministerial functions related to foreign affairs (receiving ambassadors, etc.) are executive powers, but that's hardly what is at issue here.

stefan wrote: This is not the more important question.

stefan, you're entitled to your opinion. I consider preventing nuclear proliferation more important than the date Congress learns of some problem.

Bush does not get to choose whether to inform Congress, but is required to do so by law.

What law is that? Can you provide a cite?

Moreover, your claim that informing Congress is tantamount to informing the world is, as ever for you, simply false.

I don't think Congress can keep a secret. They even leaked the vital fact that we were listening in on Osama bin Laden's cell phone.

Yes Alek, Democrat Senator Jay Rockefeller should step down.

Incidentally, you don't hear him screaming, that's because he knew about it.

"Life in Iraq was better under Saddam"
Stephen Kriz

Just a questions Mr. Kriz, should GW and Cheney be afforded the same due process you want for Gitmo detainees?

They even leaked the vital fact that we were listening in on Osama bin Laden's cell phone.

Yes, how else would an international terrorist ever have assumed that cell phone transmissions, which travel via non-secure radio waves, are not safe from being picked up technologically sophisticated intelligence agencies, without Congress telling him?

Communication intercepts was how Khalid Sheik Mohammed was captured. You know him, he planned 9/11. So apparently people who live in caves are not as sophisticated as you would assume. But thinks for reminding them.

What law is that? Can you provide a cite?

From the January 18, 2006 report by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service titled "Statutory Procedures Under Which Congress Is To Be Informed of U.S. Intelligence Activities, Including Covert Actions":

Under current statute, the President is to ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept “fully and currently informed” of U.S. intelligence activities, including any “significant anticipated intelligence activity.” According to legislative history, the term “fully and currently informed,” is intended to mean that complete and timely notice of actions and policies is provided, and that the committees will be informed of intelligence activities in such detail as the committees may require. Further, the Senate in report language said it expected the executive branch not to limit itself to providing full and complete information upon request from the committees, but to affirmatively keep the committees fully and currently informed.

National Security Act of 1947, Secs. 501-503 [50 U.S.C. 413 - 413(b)]. In a change enacted as part of the fiscal year (FY) 1991 Intelligence Authorization Act (P.L. 102-88), Congress, for the first time, placed a statutory obligation upon the President to ensure that the congressional intelligence committees are kept fully and currently informed of United States intelligence activities, including any significant anticipated intelligence activity. Until 1991, the Director of Central Intelligence and the intelligence agency heads had been statutorily responsible for keeping the congressional intelligence committees fully and currently informed of such activities under changes enacted in 1980. See FY1981 Intelligence Authorization Act, Sec. 501(a) (P.L. 96-450). In enacting the FY 1981 Act, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) asserted that one of its principal goals was to modify the Hughes-Ryan Amendment of 1974, which required reports on CIA covert operations to as many as eight congressional committees, and substituting in its place a general provision requiring prior notice of covert operations and full access by the two intelligence committees to information concerning all intelligence activities. See S.Rept. No. 96-730, 96th Congress, 2nd sess., pp. 2-3 (1980).

I consider preventing nuclear proliferation more important than the date Congress learns of some problem.

This is not an either or problem. Failing to obey the law that requires Congress to be informed of intelligence does not by itself prevent nuclear proliferation.

What law is that? Can you provide a cite?

Moreover, again according to the CRS:

In Senate report language accompanying the FY1991 Intelligence Authorization Act (P.L. 102-88), the SSCI wrote, “The requirement to report significant anticipated activities means, in practice, that the committees should be advised of important new program initiatives and specific activities that have major foreign policy implications.” See S.Rept. No. 102-85, 102nd Congress, 1st sess., p. 32 (1991).

Your "understanding" is completely wrong. The President has access to far more data than the intelligence committees, and they see, essentially, only what he allows them to see. They have no independent intelligence-gathering capability of their own as the president does.

Posted by: Stefan on July 25, 2006 at 10:11 AM | PERMALINK

Stefan is correct. See Cheney, Libby Blocked Papers To Senate Intelligence Panel for examples.

A more recent example comes from Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.): Bush Is Pressed on Reporting Domestic Surveillance and Hoekstra Urges Bush to Impart Intelligence Details . A juicy quote from Hoekstra:

"I wanted to reinforce to the president and to the executive branch and the intelligence community how important, and by law the requirement, that they keep the legislative branch informed of what they are doing....It is not optional for this president or any president or people in the executive community not to keep the intelligence committees fully informed of what they are doing."

Communication intercepts was how Khalid Sheik Mohammed was captured. You know him, he planned 9/11. So apparently people who live in caves are not as sophisticated as you would assume. But thinks for reminding them.

Khalid Sheikh Muhammed was a mechanical engineer with a degree from the North Carolina Agricultural and State Technical University ('struth!) and after graduation worked for an electronics company specializing in communications equipment. It seems, therefore, that he would be aware that cell phones were not secure without Congress reminding him....

Dagger

Don't you understand, the President is Commander In Chief. He is fighting a war against a tactic. The war is eternal. His constitutional authority trumps any silly old law passed by Congress. The President doesn't have to give the Congress any intelligence information. If they don't like it they can suck air. If you don't believe me ask Dead Eye Dick.

computer hardware,办公设备,计算机硬件,打印机,复印机,投影机,传真机,一体机
办公设备,计算机硬件,打印机,复印机,投影机,传真机,一体机
复印机行业,复印机科学,复印机知识,复印机新闻,复印机测评
复印机资料
复印机相关资讯,fuyinji news
复印机,copier
复印机,copier
复印机产品
复印机
复印机学习
复印机博客
复印机
复印机网站
复印机,电脑硬件外设
复印机,copier
复印机博客
copier,复印机
复印机教育
复印机超市
各种品牌的复印机
复印机
传真机
收款机 pos
考勤机
投影机
复印机
打印机
一体机
碎纸机
品牌复印机,fuyinji,fyj
日本复印机,fuyinji,fyj
复印机
夏普复印机
理光复印机
佳能复印机
东芝复印机
富士施乐复印机
京瓷复印机
柯尼卡美能达复印机
松下复印机
复印机tags
办公硬件办公新闻
复印机传真机打印机一体机投影机收款机碎纸机考勤机多功能一体机工程复印机
夏普复印机东芝复印机京瓷复印机美能达复印机佳能复印机理光复印机三星打印机联想打印机爱普生打印机
三星传真机夏普传真机佳能传真机兄弟传真机松下传真机飞利浦传真机惠普打印机佳能打印机彩色打印机
松下一体机三星一体机联想一体机佳能一体机惠普一体机理光一体机理想一体机得宝一体机基士得耶一体机
东芝投影机索尼投影机日立投影机三洋投影机松下投影机夏普投影机三菱投影机3M投影机飞利浦投影机
海斯曼碎纸机科密碎纸机奥士达碎纸机密理碎纸机福尔特碎纸机多功能一体机激光打印机喷墨打印机HP一体机

复印机,夏普复印机,理光复印机,佳能复印机,,东芝复印机,富士施乐复印机,京瓷复印机,柯尼卡美能达复印机,松下复印机,复印机tags
办公硬件办公新闻,复印机,传真机,打印机,一体机,投影机,收款机,碎纸机,考勤机,多功能一体机,工程复印机
夏普复印机东芝复印机京瓷复印机美能达复印机佳能复印机理光复印机三星打印机联想打印机爱普生打印机
三星传真机夏普传真机佳能传真机兄弟传真机松下传真机飞利浦传真机惠普打印机佳能打印机彩色打印机
松下一体机三星一体机联想一体机佳能一体机惠普一体机理光一体机理想一体机得宝一体机基士得耶一体机
东芝投影机索尼投影机日立投影机三洋投影机松下投影机夏普投影机三菱投影机3M投影机飞利浦投影机
海斯曼碎纸机科密碎纸机奥士达碎纸机密理碎纸机福尔特碎纸机多功能一体机激光打印机喷墨打印机HP一体机

How can you quibble about the powers of our Lord Protectorate? He can disband Parliament at his discression.

brooksfoe: don't forget the bohunks!

kevin: um, shouldn't we lose Goebbels Jr. over here?

On the other hand, maybe everyone is so sick of Bush's mendacity, we need the distraction. After all, his grandfather laundered money for Hitler, and what could be more Jewish than that? (Jeez we're all going crazy, and the hurricanes haven't even started yet.)

It's the Enron presidency. Administration philosophy: if I wanna do it, who's to stop me? Bush has the psychology of a 19-year-old.

"Uh, Freedom Fighter, you might try actually reading that story you linked to. It does not say what you seem to think it says."

Uh, the point is: if you can't predict what will happen in the next week, why would anyone take your doomsday prediction 100 years down the line seriously?

"Smarter trolls, please. (Oh, and I guess I'll stop engaging them, per my lecture earlier!)"

Yes, please stick to fluff, you'll appear smarter.

I don't think Congress can keep a secret. They even leaked the vital fact that we were listening in on Osama bin Laden's cell phone.

Posted by: ex-liberal on July 25, 2006 at 11:01 AM | PERMALINK

A false assertion unsubstantiated by a "vital fact."

Osama Bin Laden and the Leak That Wasn't

File the Bin Laden Phone Leak Under 'Urban Myths'

The al Qaeda leader's communication to aides via satellite phone had already been reported in 1996 -- and the source of the information was another government, the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan at the time.

The second time a news organization reported on the satellite phone, the source was bin Laden himself.

On Leaks, Relying on A Faulty Case Study--Untrue Bin Laden Satellite Phone Story Still Has Currency With Media's Critics

In search of tossed lime:

> Well, I certainly vote for registering comments.
> What holds you back, Kevin?

Well, because as Kevin has said, it wouldn't really solve the
problem. Most of us have dynamic IPs; we get a new one everytime
we reboot or reconnect to our ISP, or even when opening a new
browser window into our currently connected ISP. And Kevin's
software can only ban posters (siteban) according to their IP.

Registration probably wouldn't solve sock puppetry either; blogs
with registration have a fixed userid, but allow one to change one's
username on the fly (at least that was the case on BlogForAmerica).
If you had a nospam email address, there'd be no way to link your
posts to your identity if you kept changing your username.

The only problem blog registration unequivocally
solves is handle spoofing; you can't hijack
someone else's name if it's already on the userlist.

And personally, I think handle spoofing is the least of our problems.

Bob

yet he was still captured by communique intercept. Maybe he didn't think we were doing it, until you let him know, huh?

Maybe he didn't think we were doing it, until you let him know, huh?

Maybe he was spending too much time scanning the NY Times for marching orders. He should have paid more attention to his security. We put his secret messages in the theater section because we all know he's a big gay.

Well, because as Kevin has said, it wouldn't really solve the problem.

Sure it would.

Most of us have dynamic IPs; we get a new one everytime we reboot or reconnect to our ISP, or even when opening a new browser window into our currently connected ISP. And Kevin's software can only ban posters (siteban) according to their IP.

Sure, but that's not a limitation on registration, that's a limitation on the current system without registration.

Registration probably wouldn't solve sock puppetry either; blogs with registration have a fixed userid, but allow one to change one's username on the fly (at least that was the case on BlogForAmerica).

Its not the case at dKos or a number of other registration-required blogs.

If you had a nospam email address, there'd be no way to link your posts to your identity if you kept changing your username.

I don't understand; if you have a displayed email address that is constant for the account, whether nospam or not, it provides a link back to the ID (of course, you could either list the ID, or just use one of the many systems where registration lets you use one username.)

The only problem blog registration unequivocally solves is handle spoofing; you can't hijack someone else's name if it's already on the userlist.

And personally, I think handle spoofing is the least of our problems.

Registration which requires a valid email address that must receive information required to activate the account cuts down automated spam, makes it take more work to avoid bans (you've got to set up a new account, from a new email address, and activate it) each time you get banned, etc.

It would help with the problem of anti-semite spew like "watcher", the problem of name spoofing, the problem of sock puppetry, and the problem of automated spam.

It was my understanding that the House and Senate intelligence committees get copies of the same reports as the President does. - ex-liberal

It was my understanding that you are an ignoramus, and this confirms it.

Re: the Pakistani plutonium breeder reactor or whatever it is: how about we just nuke New York ourselves and get it over with?

As referenced by the rules of the committee, The SIC has to do it's own homework and not just be spoon fed by the President.

Is Rockefeller doing that job?

"set up a new account, from a new e-mail address..."

They would just have their clerks at the Wannsee Villa set up new accounts while the Conference continues.

Yes Alek, Democrat [sic] Senator Jay Rockefeller should step down.

Um, I believe Pat Roberts is the Chairman of that committee.

Not that I necessarily disagree with you about Rockefeller - he's rolled over far too often.

cmdicely:

> Registration which requires a valid email address that must
> receive information required to activate the account cuts
> down automated spam, makes it take more work to avoid bans
> (you've got to set up a new account, from a new email
> address, and activate it) each time you get banned, etc.

Okay, I see what you're saying. Kevin's system (MoveableType) is
currently keyed on IP addresses (whether that's by software design
or Kevin's configuration I have no idea). If you made it keyed on
username instead, you'd solve these problems. A banned username
(with a new IP or not) could try to re-register, but would need to
get a confirmation email at new valid email address. The NYT fora
does it that way. The only caveat is that your registration email
should not be webmail, since hotmail, eudoramail, gmail -- tons of
others -- are no-brainers to acquire and in most cases instant access.

If Kevin did this, however -- he'd have to protect our
email addresses by hiding them. While most people have
made-up null addys to avoid spam, a few of us (like
yours truly) use our genuine email addresses and
like the potential of dialogue that comes from that.

The other concern I have is with schemes to thwart spambots
by requiring users to enter a code displayed in graphics
rather than text (the usual modus operandi of HTTPS pages).
Lynx cannot work with those systems, and thus such a
beefed-up registration system would exclude yours truly.

Bob

The only caveat is that your registration email should not be webmail, since hotmail, eudoramail, gmail -- tons of others -- are no-brainers to acquire and in most cases instant access.

I don't have any real problem with that; sure, it can be circumvented if people go through the trouble of creating a new email account and going through the site registration process each time they get banned, but that, if nothing else, raises the cost of disruption high enough to discourage people who do it because its easy.

If Kevin did this, however -- he'd have to protect our email addresses by hiding them.

Sure, or by associating a user-configured displayed email address with an account, separate from the primary "administrative" email address.

The other concern I have is with schemes to thwart spambots by requiring users to enter a code displayed in graphics rather than text (the usual modus operandi of HTTPS pages). Lynx cannot work with those systems, and thus such a beefed-up registration system would exclude yours truly.

Yeah, I prefer an activation code (or a "default" password that is then reset to what the user wants to use) sent to an email address that must be used to activate the account.

I would not vote for registration.

If someone's posts bother you so, it's not that hard to ignore them.

Sock puppetry is not such a bad tactic in the current environment.

As the death toll from a scorching heat wave rose and record demand tested California's power supply . . .

GOP = Globalwarming On Parade

Thanks to conservatives, people are literally dying from global warming.

Stefan -- I think your post actually supports my point. The laws you quote require that the intelligence committies be kept informed, not the entire Congress. daggar's quote makes the same point.

As I said, I have no reason to believe that the intelligence committees were not kept informed of Pakistan's plans. Nobody has they weren't.

Stefan, you may be correct on your other point regarding who leaked OBL's cell phone. Regardless, I believe that information divulged to the entire Congress will be divulged.

Advocate, you've obviously have forgotten the "dust bowl" where record high temps and lack of rain almost wiped out the midwest.

And that's just one example of the earth's volatile climate.

You have a severe case of myopia or stupidity. I am not sure which.

Bush is once again coddling a viscious dicatator and helping that dictator to arm himself to the teeth - just like another Bush did with Saddam.

ex-liberal (aka, ex-realitybuff): I have no reason to believe that the intelligence committees were not kept informed of Pakistan's plans.

Since you wouldn't believe it if God himself told you it was true, this statement is drivel.

It sure seems as if the Bushistas do not want to win the GWOT.

If they did, what would they have left to scare us with? I been readin' them papers real close-like, and there aren't any other problems in the world...

Thank goodness there are no Islamofascist supporters of Al Qaida in Pakistan.

Choose one response...

It is better to ignore idiots like watcher because:

a) they are idiots
b) they are rethuglicans trying to hijack the thread
c) they are on drugs
d) they should be on drugs

机票|

href="http://www.boliway.cn/beijing/jipiao/index.html">北京机票

酒店
北京五星级酒店
北京四星级酒店
北京三星级酒店
北京酒店
如家快捷酒店
200元以下酒店
可上网酒店

Jay: Advocate, you've obviously have forgotten the "dust bowl" where record high temps and lack of rain almost wiped out the midwest. And that's just one example of the earth's volatile climate. You have a severe case of myopia or stupidity. I am not sure which.

Oh, gee. I feel better now. Thanks for that. I remember! The Dust Bowl nearly decimated the Midwest....The earth has volatile climates...I mean...Wow! Since these were such known factoids, that makes Hurricane Katrina response not only a huge fiasco but an avoidable failure! Bush did a heckuva job! Was he myopic and just stupid beyond belief or what? Thanks for that revelation. Got it. Bush is an incompetent idiot. Wow, the things I learn on blogs.

Jay: You have a severe case of myopia or stupidity.

You are looking in the mirror again, Jay.

Dust Bowl: The Dust Bowl was a series of dust storms in the central United States and Canada in the mid to late 1930s, caused by a massive DROUGHT and decades of inappropriate farming techniques. [emphases added]

Note to Jay: this was only one area of the US/Canada land mass - in other words, a LOCAL, not a GLOBAL phenomenon, and it involved DROUGHT, not WARMING; many areas of the world, and the US, have been affected by the current GLOBAL phenomenon, hence GLOBAL WARMING, not LOCAL DROUGHT.

And btw, the ill effects of the dust bowl was in large part the result of the actions of humans, just like GLOBAL warming, not simply the natural vagaries of climate, proving again your dishonesty, ignorance, stupidity, or all three.

Now, are you just stupid and ignorant, or a liar?

Didn't the US outsource its nuclear non-proliferation operation to India? I say we let them handle Pakistan.

The coward Jews, don't want to debate the issues, they want to control them.

They complain about a post or two that veers from the topic at hand and then fill an entire thread with a discussion of banning anyone who may voice an opinion they dislike.

Like I said, Jews are not interested in debating the issues at all, they are only interested in controlling the issues.

watcher:

You're absolutely correct.

You're a ThoughtCriminal.

If it were up to me you'd be gassed with Zyklon B :)

Bob

However, after 9-11, it was very clear that the U.S. should place the highest priority on securing plutonium and other fissionable material, as that could very well place the American way of life at risk. Well, we haven’t. A new report says Bush and his bunglers haven’t done doodley to secure nuclear materials. They also let A.Q. Khan, the man who proliferated nuclear technology to Libya, North Korea and possibly Osama bin Laden remain a free man under “house arrest” in a mansion outside of Islamabad. Oooh, maybe we will subject him to the “comfy cushions” next? Why isn’t he being tortured to the poin

If it were up to me you'd be gassed with Zyklon B :)

Unbelievable that someone would even joke about this.