Miers In On 8/6/01 "Briefing" on Bin Laden Memo.

by Last Night in Little Rock

Editor and Publisher reports today that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers is in the photograph of the infamous August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing, and it was on the front page of yesterday's NY Times without a specific date.

E&P also reports the conflicting nature of how news outlets played the picture. AP sent it out with the correct date, and many papers apparently did not appreciate the date or the photograph. The Times downplayed the omission of the date as lacking significance. HA!

[TalkLeft: The Politics of Crime]

Yep, she might have been the one that handed the 'Osamma bin Laden determined to attack in US' memo to the President for him to ignore. I wonder if she will recuse herself from ay cases? I guess this will just make up for Abe Fortas.  11:09:34 PM    

Can Bill O'Reilly possibly be any more ignorant? Apparently not. Apparently his ignorance and arrogance know few bounds.

As evidence of this, on The O'Reilly Factor last night, he seemed to be claiming that it was the U.S. Army that committed the infamous Nazi war crime of the MalmÈdy massacre. This massacre occurred during the Battle of the Bulge on December 17, 1944, when elements of Waffen-SS Kampfgruppe Peiper fought the American 285th Field Artillery Observation Battalion and defeated the Americans after a brief battle. About 150 of the American P.OW.'s were disarmed and made to stand in a field near the crossroads. A tank and a truck pulled up, and an SS officer pulled out a pistol and started shooting prisoners, after which other German soldiers joined in with machine guns. No one knows why. Some American soldiers ran and managed to escape into the nearby woods, but around 72-84 of the prisoners were killed. Some of the prisoners feigned death, but German soldiers moved among the fallen, shooting or beating to death with rifle butts any who showed signs of life. An American patrol discovered the massacre that night, and news of it spread quickly among Allied troops and shocked the conscience of the civilized world; that is, until the liberation of the camps revealed the full extent of Nazi crimes to all. It also served as a rallying cry for U.S. troops as they drove back the Germans in the Bulge.

Via McCarthy.vg, here's the transcript of O'Reilly interviewing General Wesley Clark on October 3:

CLARK: No, I don't know what it's about, Bill. Because the United States Army that I served in proudly for 34 years, we did not beat up and torture prisoners.

O'REILLY: General, with all respect, there were atrocities in Vietnam.

CLARK: Yes. And they were trials and they were punished.

O'REILLY: And World War II and World War I and the Civil War and the Revolutionary War.

CLARK: They were not by the chain of command.

O'REILLY: Yes, they were.

CLARK: No, they weren't. No they weren't.

O'REILLY: Lieutenant Callie and Medina in Vietnam?

CLARK: They were not condoned by the chain of command. Those guys were court martialed.

O'REILLY: With all due respect...

CLARK: ... all the way up the chain of command.

O'REILLY: General, you need to look at the Malmady (ph) massacre in World War II and the 82nd Airborne.

However, as Crooks and Liars and McCarthy.vg have pointed out, the transcript has been edited. This is what O'Reilly really said:

General, you need to look at the Malmedy massacre in World War Two, and the 82nd Airborne that did it!

Yes, there was a little of Clark and O'Reilly talking at the same time, but it was quite obvious what O'Reilly said. Don't believe me? Fortunately, Jamie has kindly kept a video clip (on his blog) and nice MPEG that prove it. Watch them. There is no doubt.

The sad thing is, O'Reilly probably doesn't realize how idiotic his statement was and in his insufferable arrogance would probably would never admit it if his error were definitively pointed out to him. He probably thought that the MalmÈdy massacre was something different, perhaps Americans massacring German soldiers, but, through his mind-numbing ignorance ended up, in essence, accusing the U.S. Army of massacring its own men during the Battle of the Bulge in World War II!

How's that for supporting our troops? What a guy. - Orac [Respectful Insolence (a.k.a. "Orac Knows")]

What a lying hack! He should apologize to everyone for this gaff but i douby it will happen.  11:03:09 PM    

Bizarre proposed Indiana reproductive legislation. Mark Frauenfelder: Stefan Jones says: A proposed bill (PDF of text here) by Indiana Republicans would limit assisted reproduction services to people who have a "Gestational Certificate."

"It's probably not a surprise that only married heterosexuals would qualify, but the other information the bill suggests be collected reads like something from Eugenics manual:

Sec. 12.

(a) Before intended parents may commence assisted reproduction, the intended parents shall obtain an assessment from a licensed child placing agency in the intended parents' state of residence.

(b) The assessment must follow the normal practice for assessments in a domestic infant adoption procedure and must include the following information:

(1) The intended parents' purpose for the assisted reproduction.

(2) The fertility history of the intended parents, including the pregnancy history and response to pregnancy losses of the woman.

(3) An acknowledgment by the intended parents that the child may not be the biological child of at least one (1) of the intended parents depending on the type of artificial reproduction procedure used.

(4) A list of the intended parents' family and friend support system.

(5) A plan for sharing any known genetic information with the child.

(6) Personal information about each intended parent, including the following:

(A) Family of origin.

(B) Values.

(C) Relationships.

(D) Education.

(E) Employment and income.

(F) Hobbies and talents.

(G) Physical description, including the general health of the individual.

(H) Birth verification.

(I) Personality description, including the strengths and weaknesses of each intended parent.

"If this passes, expect follow-up legislation that bans turkey basters." Link [Boing Boing]

Yep, in Indiana it may soon be perfectly legal for an unmarried couple to screw as much as they want and have as many children as they want, but if you want to use assisted reproduction, you have to be married!! And, you have to pass a screening test as detailed above. Thiss is simply to prevent homosexuals from having children. See, they are not allowed to marry so they are not allowed to have children. Seems to me that this violates some part of the 14th Amendment but that will not stop these idiots. And what about a woman who wanted to implant some fetilzed embryos after her husband dies? Can;t do it. What a crock!!

My wife and I had trouble conceiving. It is one of the most wrenching things even a married couple can do. And these idiots want to make it even harder by requiring a state bureaucrat to decide if they can have a baby. Not adopt a baby but have one. So if the state agency decides they can not proceed because they do not meet curent adoption procedures, what then?? Why would the state only require this of married people requiring help but not of anyone else?What is the US coming to that this could even be considered? I expect it will not pass but you never know what loonies will do.  10:43:17 PM