Happy anniversary, Mr. President.

Salon points out:

We know we're a little early, but as George W. Bush settles into the first full day of his five-week vacation in Crawford, Texas, we want to be the first to wish him a happy anniversary. It was four years ago this week, also in the midst of a Crawford vacation, that Bush received the presidential daily briefing that warned, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US."

What's in store this year?

By noemail@noemail.org (Sid the Fish). [Sid's Fishbowl]

Four years! Hope this 5 week trip is more productive than the one in 2001. It would almost HAVE to be.  10:47:32 PM    

Steve Cobble: Shrub as Millstone.

Paul Hackett ran against the war. He ran against Bush. He ran against Republican corruption and abuse of power.

And he ran 25 points ahead of either Gore or Kerry in this district.

Everyone thought this was a hopeless quest. Let me quote from my just-arrived 2006 Almanac of American Politics:

"The contest to replace Portman in the House almost certainly was decided by the June 14 Republican primary...Democrats nominated Iraq war veteran Paul Hackett, but the August 2 general election in this heavily Republican district was expected to be a mere formality."

That "mere formality" turned out to be only 3,500 votes, just 3% short, and leading much of the night...in Cincinnati, for crying out loud.

The truth, though little reported, is that most Americans no longer trust Bush; most Americans no longer believe that Iraq is part of the "global war on terror" (or whatever fake name they've pinned on it this week); most Americans now think we rushed to war, and that we were misled into war.
George W. Bush--and his war of choice--have been hitting record lows lately.

Kudos to Paul Hackett for having the guts to speak truth to power.

[The Huffington Post | Raw Feed]

This is sending shivers into some Republicans. Do they continue to drink the koolaid and potentially lose because they are too close to Bush on these issues? Or do they stop drinking, stand up to power and risk getting their knees figuratively broken by thugs like Delay? What a Hobson's choice?  10:41:06 PM    

Flu pandemic: lethal yet preventable. New Scientist Aug 3 2005 8:48PM GMT [Moreover Technologies - moreover...]

Isn't computer modeling fun? The difference between a few hundred deaths and the deaths of 2 BILLION people is how fast the disease is attacked with less than 50 people are infected. And this is based on an infected person only infecting 2 others. If it is 4 or 10, we have no real ope. As if we would have some hope anyway. So we need 3 million does of a drug to slow down the spread. And we currently have 120,000. Boy, I do love computer models. I hope their is a really bad assumption in there or we may not be worrying about how crappy this Administration is. We will be daling with a world where 1/4 of its inhabtants no longer exist. That will really change the economics of things for the survivors.  10:28:30 PM    

Do married couples have a right to contraception?

Roberts Says "No" :

The article approvingly quoted from a dissenting opinion by Justice Hugo Black in a 1965 court decision, in which the majority held that a Connecticut law forbidding the use of contraceptives was unconstitutional. Black's opinion, as cited in the draft, complained that the court had used "a loose, flexible, uncontrolled standard for holding laws unconstitutional." The draft article said that "the broad range of rights which are now alleged to be 'fundamental' by litigants, with only the most tenuous connection the to Constitution, bears ample witness to the dangers of this doctrine." The draft released from Roberts's files at the archive does not have his name on it, but a memo to Roberts from Bruce Fein, who then worked in the Justice Department, offers suggested changes on "your draft." Fein said in an interview yesterday that "my judgment is yes, that John wrote it."

Griswold v. Connecticutt is the first ruling that laid out a broad right to privacy, the same right used to justify Roe v. Wade. A simple libertarian reading of the Constitution says that the government only has those rights specifically granted to it, any other rights remain to the people. Hence, the first question you have to ask when the government passes a law which infringes on some right is not "Do you have some right granted to you?" but "Does the government have some specific right to infringe on a citizen's rights?" That is why the 9th amendment was passed, and without the 9th amendment, the constitution wouldn't have been ratified. So you don't ask, does the public have a right to privacy?, but does the government have a right to infringe a person's privacy? "Privacy" is not code for abortion. It's protection against government databases, or government access to private databases like those of your insurance agent, your bank, or your credit card company. Should the government be able to track your internet usage and credit card receipts and derive your movement patterns and track you through your day? That's what I'm talking about in terms of privacy. The decision in Griswold goes beyond the simple libertarian position above. It argues that, while a right to privacy is not specifically laid out, the Bill of Rights does grant various aspects of personal privacy, and the 9th amendment simply fills in the gaps, including to medical privacy and privacy between married couples. If this right to privacy is not protected by the Courts it is an invasion not just of that right, but of any other right not protected in specific terms. Freedom to travel without internal passports, a right not to have our DNA preserved and sorted through by government agencies, and so on and so forth. These are problems unimaginable by the founding fathers, but the principles that drove them drive us still. No one can doubt that the spirit that demanded the Bill of Rights, including an amendment forbidding the quartering of soldiers in people's homes without permission, would have opposed the government's intrusion into the bedroom. At least, I thought no one could. Turns out, our next supreme court justice might think that, unless someone is ready to filibuster him or a few Republicans are ready to vote against him. Here's hoping.

- Josh Rosenau [Thoughts from Kansas]

This is right on. The question is not whether there is a right to privacy in the Consitution. It is whether there is a compelling need for the government to have that information. Is there a compelling need for the government to know whether a man and a woman are using contraceptives? How about if they use condoms? How about if they are not married and having sex? How about what types of underwear they wear? Or if they have ever bought any porn? Or ever seen any? How about if it is just racy? What about living wills or do not resusitate requests? Who decides what the compelling reason is? A majority? 2/3rds?

The 9th amendment prevents the government from having any rights that are not explicitly stated in the Constitution or other Amendments. What is the compelling government role for knowing if a married couple uses contraceptive? What is the government's role in such moral issues, ones that take place between consenting adults? Well, I guess many Republicans will be certain to tell us, as they destroy another one of the Bill of Rights.  10:18:12 PM    

Boston airport tries to kill free WiFi node. Continental offers free wireless in its lounge. The agency running Logan Airport sells it for $7.95 a day, and doesn't like competition. [CNET News.com]

Let's see. Free vs. $7.95. Which do you think is better for the consumer? Which do you think this Administration will pick? I guess it depends on whether Continental or Logan Airport gave more money to the Republicans. That should be easy to figure out.  10:05:34 PM    

It's That Pesky Prisoner Abuse Scandal Again... [CommonDreams NewsWire]

Read about why the Administration does not want an amendment to the military spending bill that would require them to follow the Army manual when it comes to prisoners. What worked during WWII and such apparently is not good enough for today's military. This administration appaerntly wants free rein to be able to place prisoners into stress positions and beat them, or to put them into sleeping bags and suffocate them, or to use sledge hammers to break their bones, or to hang them by their wrists and crush their legs. And these are just the ones we know about. this Administration is also trying to prevent us from getting details of such things as rape because it might be a violation of the prisoner's privacy. As though killing them is not an invasion of their privacy!  10:01:45 PM    

Collapse of Antarctic Ice Shelf Unprecedented.

The Antarctic Peninsula is undergoing greater warming than almost anywhere on Earth, a condition perhaps associated with human-induced greenhouse effects. According to the cover article published in the August 4 issue of the journal Nature, the spectacular collapse of the Antarctica's Larson B Ice Shelf, an area roughly the size of Rhode Island, is unprecedented during the past 10,000 years.

[Science Blog - Science News Articles from Medicine, Space, Physics and More]

But then this is just a normal variation in temperature, right? It has nothing to do with huamn-derived exhaust? Somehow, I just do not see how these guys can keep ignoring the truth. But, as is mentioned below, this is the first post-modern Administration, which makes its own reality. I'm sure lemmings feel they make their own reality also, right u to the moment they hurl themselves over the cliff.  9:52:46 PM    

HOW SGT. 1ST CLASS MICHAEL PRATT blew the whistle....

HOW SGT. 1ST CLASS MICHAEL PRATT blew the whistle .

The Army captain appeared confused. "You're using 'sledgehammer' figuratively?" he asked the enlisted soldier sitting before him. "No sir," the soldier replied, lifting his hands about 15 inches apart. "The handle of a sledgehammer, about this big . . . to assault the detainees with." For Sgt. 1st Class Michael Pratt it would have been far easier to look away.

See here and here for background. It's grand to see that almost no one has linked to this story (two little-known blogs at the time I post this). (I can't help noticing no one linked to either of my previous two posts on the story, either.)

I guess it's not very important. Read The Rest Scale: 5 out of 5.

- Gary Farber [Amygdala]

Yes, all it takes is one person to refuse to drink the koolaid. This man did just that and is one of those responsible for shedding light on an atrocity of our own making when people in command looked the other way. What is interesting is that the military has removed all the information from its web sites detailing just what if did in the days following the Iraqi general's death. Can anyone say coverup? And the fact that every time this soldier complained about abusive tactics, HE was the one investigated. With a crrew like this, it is amazing he was not somehow fragged by the other men.

It was only when he got back to his own chain of command that anyone listened. It shows that this disease did not infect every soldier but, the ability of a group to try and get away with such atrocities does indicate that there were those in command that should be complicit. Troops do not go off on these sorts of rampages without someone higher up being responsible, either overtly or not. Of course, in this Administration's world, incompetence results in promotion while telling the truth gets you fired. So perhaps we can get an idea of who was involved by seeing who got a promotion.  9:46:43 PM    

Who Will Benefit from Vista? Monitor Makers, For One. It's not uncommon for people to add more memory or a bigger hard drive for a new version of an operating system, but it appears that Microsoft's forthcoming version of Windows, Vista, will require users to buy new monitors too. There's some wiggle room there -- users won't need a new monitor per se, but if they don't already have a monitor that supports the DHCP copy protection that's becoming prevalent in TV and video, protected video they watch will be displayed at a lower quality. Most people don't feel too strongly about DRM because they don't really see its effect on them. They buy songs from iTunes, they play on their iPod, it's all good. But when they're confronted with an effect of DRM that hits their pocketbook like this, they'll notice, and they won't like it. So who does this DRM technology benefit, apart from monitor manufacturers, who should be in for a nice windfall? Somebody from Microsoft says "Digital outputs of any system need some form of copy protection, as without it, digital protection upstream has much less value." Why does anything "need" DRM? To sell more monitors? It's not to protect content's value, when DRM quite often makes things less valuable by reducing their flexibility and limiting their resale.

[Techdirt]

Don't you love it? Requiring people to buy thiings that actually allow them to do less. All so some comapnies can keep their bloated business plans going a little while longer. Sounds like a great reason to upgrade. Not.  6:30:47 PM    

Girl Who Threw Rock Escapes Jail and Felony Conviction.

Bump and Update: It's over. Prosecutors came to their senses and agreed to a deal:

Maribel Cuevas was ordered to meet with her young victim and talk about the fight under the deal - reached on the same day the girl was to stand trial. She did not have to plead guilty, and the charges will be dismissed if she stays in school and keeps out of trouble.

Now, if she can only get over the scars from a week in jail and a month of house arrest.

*********
Bump and Update from July 18: 11-year old Maribel Cuevas will be tried as an adult for throwing a rock in waterfight.

[TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime]

Although this is he way it should have been dealt with before involving several police cars and a helicopter, I wonder if she will still be charged for resisting arrest or if the cops will be unhppy that such a charge was dropped.   6:21:06 PM    

While I am not sure the Democratic leadership gets it yet, they will be much less destructive in power. Whereas every elected Republican President since Nixon has been embroiled in political scandal regarding events while they were in power, the lone Democratic Presidential scandal dealt with non-political events, most of which happened before before election. I'd rather take a guy who woulf lie about a blowjob than one who laughingly says 'Bring it on", sees 21 soldiers killed in 2 days and leaves for 5 weeks of vacation. Hell, I'd rather see a President with a ine of mistresses than one who believes torture is a necessary tool in the war. Personal scandal is to be wished for copared to political scandal. The scandals of sexual liasons does not result in people dying. The mega-scandals we have today do. ( And I feel that losing $9 billion dollars is a mega-scandal. I feel that failing to secure captured munitions dumps is a mega-scandal. I feel that fixing intelligence data around political ends is a mega-scandal. I feel that outing intelligence operatives for political ends is a mega-scandal. How many more are we going to see before all this is over?) IOKIYAAR  6:14:11 PM    

Arianna Huffington: The New Know-Nothings.

There's an old saying that when the facts are against you, argue the law. But the Bushies have gone one better: when the facts are against them, they argue the very existence of facts.

As pretty much every fact has turned against the administration in Iraq, the fallback position has increasingly become: well, who can really know anything? Everything is so complex. You've got Sunnis, you've got Shiites, you've got Kurds...the truth is...well, the truth is that we can't know the truth...so how can we be held accountable when nothing is really knowable?

Of course Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and their cohorts didn't invent this way of thinking. The funny thing is that the very people who claim to be moral absolutists from the heartland turn out to be arguing a variation of postmodernism -- an Eastern elitist linguistic theory laden with moral relativism.

Here's the short version of postmodernism, via Wikipedia (I know I'm distilling a bit, but this is not, after all, a peer-reviewed academic blog):

"In the broadest sense, denial of objectivity is held to be the postmodern position, and a hostility towards claims advanced on the basis of objectivity its defining feature... all standards are arbitrary and meaningless."

Sound like any defense secretaries you know?

If you want to know how postmodern poster boy Jacques Derrida would have sounded in a political context, check out Rumsfeldâo[dot accent]s answer at a recent DoD press briefing when asked about the number of Iraqi security forces that are ready to conduct operations on their own:

RUMSFELD: âo[ogonek]Trying to get a single, simple answer for a complex situation where you have, I'm going to guess, 15 or 20 different categories of Iraqi security forces that have different purposes, different training, different equipment -- so the number is 171,500 currently, last time I looked -- last week. But it's made up of apples and oranges. So it isn't useful to try to oversimplify.âo?

Of course not. It's way too complex, and way too impossible to know how many Iraqi security forces there really are.

Then we have another classic Rummy response Derrida would have been proud of, this one after Tim Russert asked him: âo[ogonek]Did you make a misjudgment about the cost of the war?âo?

RUMSFELD: âo[ogonek]I never estimated the cost of the war. And how can one estimate the cost in lives or the cost in money? I've avoided it consistently. And how can that be a misestimate? We've said that there are always going to be unknowns, that the battle was going to change, depending on what the enemy does and how they adjust and how we adjust...âo?

And of course there is this all-time great postmodernist Rummy riff:

"As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know."

But while Rumsfeld and his chums claim that nothing concrete is really knowable, they are -- somehow -- sure that we are winning. It's just that any fact or statistic that might disprove this assertion is dismissed as invalid in a complex, postmodern world. But if you set all facts aside, you will be totally certain that we're making progress.

Looking back, it's fascinating how sure they were back when they were lying about WMD. Then it was all about solid facts, and aluminum tubes, and Tenet saying "slam dunk" and Cheney saying "no doubt."

But now that all that has vanished, so too, it seems, has our ability to know anything about anything.

Bush claims he's going back to his ranch after his presidency, but perhaps a Distinguished Chair in Postmodernist Theory at an Ivy League university might be more appropriate.

Maybe it'll happen. Who can really know?

[The Huffington Post | Blog Picks Feed]

Sounds pretty close. Never let facts or reality get in the way. Do not even try to estimate something that might give you a result that you do not like. Science is only one of many ways of seeing the world, not an attempt to understand reality. Isn't it nice to have a country run by practioners of post-modernism. It now makes so much sense.  6:03:23 PM    

The board of The American Society of Journalists and Authors (ASJA) has voted unanimously to reverse an earlier decision to give its annual Conscience in Media award to jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller, E&P has learned.

The group's First Amendment committee had narrowly voted to give Miller the prize for her dedication to protecting sources, but the full board has now voted to overturn that decision, based on its opinion that her entire career, and even her current actions in the Plame/CIA leak case, cast doubt on her credentials for this award.

[snip]

The American Society of Journalists and Authors is a 50-year-old group of some 1,100 non-fiction independent writers. The earlier vote by its First Amendment committee had already prompted at least one member of that panel to quit her position.

Couldn't happen to a better 'reporter.'  5:56:16 PM    

Ecouraging the Sunnis to Become Involved in the New Iraq. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs - legs, heads - to make an omlette.

Sunni leader Adnan al-Dulaimi said U.S. soldiers handcuffed and blindfolded him. His grandson Mohemmed Adnan, 16, said one of the soldiers beat him and slammed his face against a wall.

Make mine pancakes.

Link.

By Holden. [First Draft]

Well, at least he was not stuffed in a sleeping bag and beaten to death. Humiliating leaders works so well. Shaming the powerful is such a smart technique. I wonder in what other ways we are winning the hearts and minds.  5:55:44 PM    

Hey, You Can See The World Passing Us By From Here.

Toyota is developing 10 new hybrid electric models for sale worldwide by early in the next decade, the company's top North American executive said today.

[snip]

The hybrid push is a core goal of Toyota's competitive strategy as it looks to increase its overall share of the world's auto market to 15 percent, which would likely vault it past General Motors as the world's largest automaker.

Link.

By Holden. [First Draft]

Other countries will have already learned what needs to be done to move to a non-gasoline auto because that is where the world needs to go. In the US, we have a new energy bill that encourages hybrids until a small number are sold. So US manufacturers will only make that amount and no more. Short-term thinking will result in the same sort of debacle as the mid-70s oil embargo did. No more SUVs because the market moves away from them since gas will be too expensive. And the only real alternative will be hybrids, sold by foreign companies. Why can't they see it coming?

I believe they can but they know that the government will bail them out. After all, isn't it doing that with the airline industry? I have never bought a car without considering gas mileage. I still drive a stick for that reason. I have only owned one American car in my life because gas mileage is really of little concern o US manufacturers. I'll most likely move to a hybrid soon.  5:53:47 PM    

Where's ''Slam-Dunk'' Tenet These Days?. On Monday I commented on a NY Times story about a CIA agent who alleges that intelligence he reported regarding Iraq's abandonment of its nuclear weapons program was ignored by the leadership of the CIA.

Today we learn that the same agent is urging the FBI to investigate his allegations that CIA officials tried to force him to falsify intelligence about Iraq and fired him when he refused to do so.

By Holden. [First Draft]

Could get interesting. Disgruntled ex-employees are awfully hard to keep on the reservation. I wonder how much dirty laundry regarding the abuse of intelligence infomration will start coming out?  5:43:23 PM    

Not Newsworthy. While listening to Morning Sedition today I learned something from Gerald Posner that has somehow escaped the notice of our various media: the man who blew himself up in an Army mess hall shortly before Christmas killing 22 of Our Troops! was the son of a prominent Saudi diplomat and had entered Iraq on a Saudi diplomatic passport.

On December 21, a terrorist blew himself up in the U.S. military mess hall in Mosul, in northern Iraq. Twenty-two people were killed, including U.S. soldiers and contractors.

And now comes big news: The perpetrator was the oldest son of a diplomat from the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, our alleged ally in the War on Terror.

On Monday, the Saudi-owned daily Asharq Al-Awsat identified the butcher responsible: 20-year old Ahmad Sayyid Ahmad al-Ghamdi, a Saudi medical student.

The bomber acted as a member of Ansar al-Sunnah (Volunteers of Sunni Islam), one of the most violent terror groups in Iraq, and an al Qaeda ally.

The name "al-Ghamdi" should ring bells; the family is large, and three of its members were involved in the 9/11 assault.

The Saudi daily, and Western media, identified the Mosul bomber, and even said they had spoken with his father. But no one has mentioned who the father is: Sayyid al-Ghamdi, former head of the Saudi diplomatic mission in Sudan, a country ruled by an Islamist regime that once played host to Osama bin Laden himself.

Every picture tells a story, don't it?

By Holden. [First Draft]

So, in addition to providing almost all the 9/11 terrorists, Saudi Arabia provided the terrorist who blew up the mess hall. And the terrorist who did this is the son of the Saudi ambassador to Sudan, one of terrors main hideouts, where Osama has spent time. And the US response is .... Another fine example of moral clarity (see below). The Saudis are with us so nothing they do can be wrong, even when it comes to killing Americans. Ain't oil a wonderful maker of strange bedfellows? Saudis can kill Americans. No repercussions.   5:40:40 PM    

We Can Assume Intelligent Design Played No Role In Chimpy's Creation. Bush's mumblings regarding "intelligent design" has his official science advisor scrambling to explain the president's stupidity.

Mr. Bush's science adviser, John H. Marburger 3rd, sought to play down the president's remarks as common sense and old news.

Mr. Marburger said in a telephone interview that "evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology" and "intelligent design is not a scientific concept." Mr. Marburger also said that Mr. Bush's remarks should be interpreted to mean that the president believes that intelligent design should be discussed as part of the "social context" in science classes.

By Holden. [First Draft]

Most irrelevant job in the Bush Adminstration - Mr. Bush's science adviser. It may not even look good on his resume.  5:37:17 PM    

Side Trip Through Hell. So you think torturing detainees held at Guantanamo Bay is bad? What about torturing them during the trip there?

A 27-year-old Ethiopian man being held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay alleges that interrogators in jails through which he passed before reaching Cuba repeatedly abused him physically and psychologically, his attorney said Tuesday.

Benyam Mohammed alleged that the torture took place in Pakistan, Morocco and Afghanistan and that he was flown between those countries by American operatives, according to Clive Stafford Smith, a British human rights lawyer who said he represents about 40 Guantanamo Bay prisoners.

[snip]

Stafford Smith said Mohammed's case illustrates the U.S. policy of secretly sending suspected terrorists to "ghost prisons" in countries that permit torture. "The mindless hypocrisy of this is what angers the world," he said.

[snip]

He said he was questioned in Pakistan by FBI agents, who accused him of being a top official of al Qaeda and told him they were going to send him to Jordan. "The Arabs will deal with you," said an agent who called himself Chuck, according to the account.

Stafford Smith said Mohammed told him that in July 2002 he was turned over to Americans who put him on a military plane and flew him not to Jordan, but to Morocco. There, he said, U.S. officials told him they believed he was an accomplice of Jose Padilla, who is in U.S. custody in connection with an alleged plot to set off a radiological weapon known as a dirty bomb in the United States. Stafford Smith called those allegations "total nonsense" and said Mohammed denies knowing Padilla.

At a news conference on June 1, 2004, U.S. Deputy Attorney General James B. Comey Jr. said Padilla had an accomplice who had refugee status in Britain and was in custody, but Comey did not name the suspect.

Mohammed said he spent 18 months in Morocco, where he said he was beaten repeatedly and cut on his chest and genitals with a scalpel nearly monthly. "They cut all over my private parts; one of them said, it would be better just to cut it off, as I would only breed terrorists," Mohammed said, according to Stafford Smith's notes.

The lawyer said he had seen scars on Mohammed's body. "If the U.S. military can come up with a good explanation of how he got those scars, have at it," he said.

In January 2004, Mohammed said, he was flown to Afghanistan. He told his attorney that he was beaten in a prison there. Later he was taken to Bagram air base, where he was allowed to see the Red Cross.

By Holden. [First Draft]

Ahh. More wonderful torture and rendition stories. It no longer even matters if they are true because there are so many of them that have been corroborated. That is a consequence of behaving badly, such as torturing and humiliating the prisoners at Abu Ghraib. Now almost any story will be believed by many. Even cuttin a penis with a scalpel. 'Well, they might have done it.' So much for moral clarity. Unfortunately, it it truly of the 'You are with me or against me. Those not of the tribe are not human and can be dealt with as animals.' I'm not sure i want a country with that sort of moral clarity. I'm pretty sure the rest of the world does not want the last remaining superpower to have that sort of moral clarity. But then, a lot of Americans apparently want to return to the 1600 and pre-Enlightenment days.  5:36:19 PM    

Flashback to February and the release of Jose Canseco's book Juiced:

Canseco covers a wide range of topics but most notably name names. Canseco claims that he taught McGwire, Jason Giambi, Ivan [base "]Pudge[per thou] Rodriguez, Rafael Palmeiro, and Juan Gonzalez how to inject steroids. Furthermore, Canseco states that President George W. Bush, a former part owner of the Texas Rangers, was well aware of the steroid use on his team.

But whether they get caught leaking a CIA agent's name to the press or injecting steriods into their bodies, Chimpy stands by his lying friends.

'He's a friend,' the president said in a White House roundtable interview with several Texas reporters. 'He's testified in public, and I believe him.'

Citing Mr. Palmeiro's previous statements under the 'klieg lights' that he had not used steroids, the former Texas Rangers part-owner said: 'I believe him -- still do.'

What a dream world the President lives in. Not only should Intelligent Design be taught in school but Palmeiro is steroid-free simply because he says so. No doubt there. a friend of his could not be uilty. Even when someone else said Palmeiro was and that Bush knew about it. To paraphrase what the recent Democratic candidate for a Congressional seat in Ohio said: I'd love to call it ignorance but that indicates a lack of education. That is not the case here so it must be stupidity. For sure when it comes to ID and continuing with steroid use in basevball, the one thing in his pre-government life he was halfway successful at, thanks to rich friends.  5:32:01 PM    

War Crimes. Responsibility for the torture killing of Iraqi General Abed Hamed Mowhoush can be traced directly through the chain of command to Donald Rumsfeld and ultimately George Bush. General Mowhoush was a prisoner of war, his detention and murder directly violated both the Geneva Conventions and the laws of the United States. The War Crimes Act of 1996 applies the death penalty to anyone responsible for the killing of a detainee. Cases like the one described at length by the Post today should send a chill up Chimpy's spine.

Iraqi Maj. Gen. Abed Hamed Mowhoush was being stubborn with his American captors, and a series of intense beatings and creative interrogation tactics were not enough to break his will. On the morning of Nov. 26, 2003, a U.S. Army interrogator and a military guard grabbed a green sleeping bag, stuffed Mowhoush inside, wrapped him in an electrical cord, laid him on the floor and began to go to work. Again.

It was inside the sleeping bag that the 56-year-old detainee took his last breath through broken ribs, lying on the floor beneath a U.S. soldier in Interrogation Room 6 in the western Iraqi desert. Two days before, a secret CIA-sponsored group of Iraqi paramilitaries, working with Army interrogators, had beaten Mowhoush nearly senseless, using fists, a club and a rubber hose, according to classified documents.

The sleeping bag was the idea of a soldier who remembered how his older brother used to force him into one, and how scared and vulnerable it made him feel. Senior officers in charge of the facility near the Syrian border believed that such "claustrophobic techniques" were approved ways to gain information from detainees, part of what military regulations refer to as a "fear up" tactic, according to military court documents.

The circumstances that led up to Mowhoush's death paint a vivid example of how the pressure to produce intelligence for anti-terrorism efforts and the war in Iraq led U.S. military interrogators to improvise and develop abusive measures, not just at Abu Ghraib but in detention centers elsewhere in Iraq, in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Mowhoush's ordeal in Qaim, over 16 days in November 2003, also reflects U.S. government secrecy surrounding some abuse cases and gives a glimpse into a covert CIA unit that was set up to foment rebellion before the war and took part in some interrogations during the insurgency.

The sleeping-bag interrogation and beatings were taking place in Qaim about the same time that soldiers at Abu Ghraib, outside Baghdad, were using dogs to intimidate detainees, putting women's underwear on their heads, forcing them to strip in front of female soldiers and attaching at least one to a leash. It was a time when U.S. interrogators were coming up with their own tactics to get detainees to talk, many of which they considered logical interpretations of broad-brush categories in the Army Field Manual, with labels such as "fear up" or "pride and ego down" or "futility."

Other tactics, such as some of those seen at Abu Ghraib, had been approved for one detainee at Guantanamo Bay and found their way to Iraq. Still others have been linked to official Pentagon guidance on specific techniques, such as the use of dogs.

By Holden. [First Draft]

So, we were involved in the torture and death of an Iraqi General who freely went to Americans. He was not captured in the firld but walked into an American post. And we ended up stuffing him in a sleeping bag and killing him. We tried to cover it up by saying he dies of natural causes (LIE). That he gave up loads of information (LIE).I guess Sipowitz would have been proud. More such stories will start appearing because they did happen and some people can no longer keep drinking the Bush koolaid.

This was how we treated one of the key intelligence assets we had in Iraq. We humiliated and killed him through torture. I wonder what we did to others who were not such high profile assets. Ones whose treatment could be more easily covered up. I am sure we will find out.

It is for reasons such as this that 3 Republicans want to add an admendment to the military budget bill stsating that the US will not engage in torture. And it is because of this that the Bush Administration refuses to agree and will veto the bill. They WANT to be able to torture, to kill prisoners if they have to. And what does the Bush Administration have to lose. If anyone gets caught it will only be the low level soldier who pays. Never the guys at the top because they are never responsible for anything.  5:27:30 PM