Tuesday, August 31

The So-Called Liberal Media

by justmy2 @ 8/31/2004 01:55:00 PM

The So-Called Liberal Media is at it again.

It is amazing how much tv executives are like lemmings. Fox News gets high ratings and everyone tries to be more like them instead of attempting to set themselves apart. I guess they didn't notice that the reason Fox beats them to a pulp in the ratings race daily is that they are different. If they think they will increase their ratings by copying the Fox format, they are sadly mistaken. Those viewers are not coming back. Even more amazingly, they turn off the viewers that actually like balance in their newscasts. CNN and MSNBC have simply turned a bad situation into an outright disaster. I have some advice for the suits in Atlanta and New York. When you are in a hole, stop digging.

Monday, August 30

Delegate Gives 'Purple Heart Band-Aids'

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 11:50:00 PM

Apparently, the party that thinks they have a monopoly on their support for veterans, doesn't mind mocking them...

"Convention-goers were handed bandages with purple hearts on them Monday night by a GOP delegate in a swipe at Democratic nominee John Kerry's war record.

The bandages were handed out by Morton Blackwell, a longtime GOP activist from Virginia, with the message: 'It was just a self-inflicted scratch, but you see I got a Purple Heart for it.'"

They should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. Once again, where is our Commander-in-Chief while our military's honor continues to be disparaged? Is it now ok to simply mock the Purple Heart, awarded to hundreds of thousands of veterans during this nation's history, because you dislike one man?

President Bush admits his campaign is behind Swift Boat ads?

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 09:24:00 PM

Andrew Sullivan catches the President in a moment of candor:

I loved Bush's comment yesterday about the smear-ad: 'I can understand why Senator Kerry is upset with us. I wasn't so pleased with the ads that were run about me. And my call is get rid of them all, now.' 'Us'?? I thought Bush had nothing to do with it."

Freudian Slip???

You can't make this stuff up. Part II

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 09:01:00 PM

I guess the idea is attack anyone who disagrees with you, regardless if there is one iota of truth related to the attack.
Josh Marshall provides another demostration of the White House's audacity.

You can't make this stuff up

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 08:48:00 PM

Apparently, running one of the most succesful hedge funds in the history of the world, doesn't pay enough?

Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert - having already enraged some New Yorkers with his remarks about local office-holders' 'unseemly scramble' for federal money after 9/11 - yesterday opened a second front. On 'Fox News Sunday,' the Illinois Republican insinuated that billionaire financier George Soros, who's funding an independent media campaign to dislodge President Bush, is getting his big bucks from shady sources. 'You know, I don't know where George Soros gets his money. I don't know where - if it comes overseas or from drug groups or where it comes from,' Hastert mused. An astonished Chris Wallace asked: 'Excuse me?' The Speaker went on: 'Well, that's what he's been for a number years - George Soros has been for legalizing drugs in this country. So, I mean, he's got a lot of ancillary interests out there.' Wallace: 'You think he may be getting money from the drug cartel?' Hastert: 'I'm saying I don't know where groups - could be people who support this type of thing. I'm saying we don't know.'"

That is definitely a new one. The man third in line for the Presidency has just accused a US citizen financing his support for John Kerry with drug money. Classic.

There are a lot of things "we don't know" about many politicians, but a reasonable person will not simply go on national television and make nonsensical allegations and justify it playing dumb because that is called "slander". This is not a radical author, a filmmaker, or a musician...the is the Speaker of the House!!!

I guess we are at the point now where anyone can say anything about anyone else simply by saying "I don't know if it is true" or "some people say". Where are the real journalists?
Food for thought...

Newspaper Editors Not For Truth

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 08:35:00 PM

I am far removed for my journalism classes, but I don't seem to remember this lesson::

[Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard] Downie Jr. said he believes the Swift Boat Veterans coverage had been fair and properly scrutinizing. 'We have printed the facts and some of those facts have undermined Kerry's opponents,' he said. 'We are not judging the credibility of Kerry or the (Swift Boat) Veterans, we just print the facts.'

So if someone signed an affidavit John Kerry had just landed on aircraft carrier in San Diego and pronounced Mission Accomplished in Vietnam to demonstrate his ability to be Commander-in-Chief and had pictures to prove it, the editor of the Washington Post would print it because it is not his job to judge the credibility of his newspaper's sources?

What a silly man? Judging the credibility of the information in his newspaper is not only one of his jobs, it just might be one of his most important jobs. If he really believes this, don't be surprised to see a Jack Kelly/Jayson Blair type situation at the Post very soon.

Newspaper Editors For Truth

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 08:31:00 PM

If we could only find more newpaper editors like Jim Boyd who actually edit, as opposed to spell and grammar check.


by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 08:09:00 PM

Oh, what a tangled web we weave.

A pretty stunning admission for the man who declared Iraq the "central front" in the War on Terror and promptly declared "Mission Accomplished" after defeating a two-bit dictator with no reasonable semblance of a military.

"In an interview on NBC-TV's ``Today'' show broadcast to coincide with Monday's start of the Republican National Convention in New York, Bush said retreating from the war on terror ``would be a disaster for your children.'''

...When asked ``Can we win?'' the war on terror, Bush said, ``I don't think you can win it. But I think you can create conditions so that the - those who use terror as a tool are - less acceptable in parts of the world.''

Food for thought, as always, I will allow you to do the cooking...

Don't Mess with the CIA

by justmy2 @ 8/30/2004 07:56:00 PM

There is an old saying that I have heard. Don't mess with Texas. I think that should be revised to don't mess with the CIA. This Administration has attempted to out CIA agents and lay the blame for all "miscalculations" in Iraq squarely at the feet of the CIA. It looks like the chickens may be coming home to roost. At this point, that is just a guess, but I believe there is much more to this story than we know at this point. The real question is whether we will ever hear it.

The ongoing probe into a mole or moles in the Pentagon, has certainly heated up over the past few days. I am by no means an expert on this subject, but I highly recommend following this story closely. It could provide the final piece of the puzzle to what really happened in the run-up to the War on Iraq. In addition, it certainly will provide fodder to those who believe in conspiracy theories, for better or worse.

For more information, I highly recommend reading Juan Cole's take on the situation, and Josh Marshall's reporting is also a good source.

Friday, August 27

Remind me again why we have discussed Vietnam for the past three weeks?

by justmy2 @ 8/27/2004 12:34:00 AM

A brief reminder of events occuring in the 21st century, courtesy of The Daily Kos:

It happened this week almost without notice: The number of Americans killed in Iraq during 2004 now exceeds the number killed in 2003.

More remarkably, the 488 killed thus far this year died in just 239 days (2.04 daily average), while the 482 killed last year died during fully 287 days (1.68 daily average), which means that not only has 2004 been bloodier than 2003 in absolute terms, but in relative terms as well.

Thursday, August 26

If you can't stand the heat...

by justmy2 @ 8/26/2004 11:05:00 PM

get out of the kitchen

Florida Ballot Confusion Continues

by justmy2 @ 8/26/2004 10:43:00 PM

Buried in the Monday edition of the Washington Post, was this little tidbit:

Palm Beach County has introduced an absentee ballot that requires voters to indicate their choices by connecting broken arrows, sparking criticism that it is even more confusing than the infamous "butterfly ballot" used in the 2000 election.

Theresa LePore, the elections supervisor who approved the 2000 butterfly ballot, opted for a ballot design for the Aug. 31 primary that asks voters to draw lines joining two ends of an arrow. LePore said she selected the ballot after tests showed it was easier for voters.

..."People do the crazier things when they're asked to connect the arrows," said Stephen Ansolabehere, former director of the Voting Technology Project, a collaboration between the California and Massachusetts institutes of technology.

If at first you do succeed, try, try again, and again, and again.

What is so difficult about a name and a check box, or filling in a circle? Why do they continue to over engineer what should be a simple process? Too much time on their hands at best. I don't want to think about the more nefarious reasons.

Does he read the bills he signs?

by justmy2 @ 8/26/2004 09:24:00 PM

Just wondering...

Today, the Washington Post has a story about the President codemning ads by certain outside groups:

"The president said he wanted to work together [with McCain] to pursue court action to shut down all the ads and activity by these shadowy 527 groups," White House press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters on Air Force One after Bush spoke to McCain by telephone from the presidential jet Thursday morning.

Ok, tell me again, who signed the law making these groups legal?

Oh...the same person threatening to shut take legal action against them...

TAPPED, one of the best blogs out there, provides more flip-flop evidence, via America Coming Together

Here is the good part...

From CBS's Face the Nation, March 5, 2000:

BORGER: ...do you think you should stop these ads?

Gov. BUSH: You know, let me--let me say something to you. People have the right to run ads.They have the right to do what they want to do, under the--under the First Amendment in America. (emphasis added)

I guess it is only ok if you are a republican....

Pants on Fire!!!

by justmy2 @ 8/26/2004 08:32:00 PM

John O'Neill wrote the book currently attacking John Kerry. Should you believe him? Absolutely not, if you have any self respect. I can't speak for the other veterans speaking against Kerry (although their story continues to fall apart), but it is obvious that O'Neill has serious issues.

I guess you want some evidence...

First, he attacked John Kerry for saying he was in Cambodia during the war. He said no one was allowed in Cambodia. Well, here is what he said himself on to President Nixon, as reported by CNN.

But in 1971, O'Neill said precisely the opposite to then President Richard Nixon.

O'NEILL: I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water.
NIXON: In a swift boat?
O'NEILL: Yes, sir."

Ok, define the word "in". That has to be tough to defend. Here is his attempted defense, in a chat on Washingtonpost.com today, when asked about the contradiction.

John E. O'Neill: I lied to no one. You quote the first half of the statement but ignore the following sentence. I clearly said that I was on the Cambodian border. I was on a canal system known as Bernique's Creek located about 100 yards south of the Cambodian border from which it would have been very difficult to get into Cambodia at least from a boat.

I never went to Cambodia

Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say he doesn't know that saying "I never went to Cambodia" is directly contradictory with the term "in". Let's see if he has ever said he wasn't on the border. I'll give you two guesses, and the first one doesn't count.

From This Week on ABC last Sunday:

JOHN O'NEILL: The whole country's watching him avoid the question. You asked about Cambodia. How do I know he's not in Cambodia? I was on the same river, George. I was there two months after him. Our patrol area ran to Sedek, it was 50 miles from Cambodia. There isn't any watery border.

Whoops....doubles whoops...super whoops. And oh, by the way, unless our system of measurement changed, 50 miles is a little bit more than 100 yards, but who's counting.

They say lies will always catch up with you. It looks like the race has ended.

If this isn't enough for you, see this site which goes through even more misleading statements, to be generous, from Mr. O'Neill.

At the very least, this witness has been impeached.

CNN needs to send it reporters back to journalism school

by justmy2 @ 8/26/2004 07:47:00 PM

Here is one of CNN's anchors yesterday.

O'BRIEN: All right, we are listening to Max Cleland, former senator from Georgia and former Lieutenant Jim Rassmann, a former Green Beret whose life was saved by John Kerry in the Mekong Delta in 1969. Although, that is a point of dispute, given what has all transpired here with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Well, was his life saved or not. How can a reputable anchor person sit on TV and say "that is a point of dispute".? If someone is drowning, and someone pulls that person out of the water, what else would it take to "save someone's life?"

If these are the best journalists in the country, our media has being severely problems.

Click here for the full rundown...

Sunday, August 22

Commenting and Trackback added

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 10:01:00 PM

In an effort to continue improving this site, I have added what I believe is a simpler commenting interface, as well as the ability to Trackback my posts. I have linked to many others bloggers, and I would like to support them. Trackbacks will make this much easier to do. I have also heard that it has been somewhat annoying to login each time a comment is entered, and I have hopefully alleviated that problem. Please let me know your thoughts or issues.

My advice to the Kerry Campaign

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 09:04:00 PM

Who am I to provide free advice but it seems to me that this would satisfy the questions of both campaigns?

"We appreciate the opportunity to discuss John Kerry's war record. We understand that this is important to the American people and we would like to ask the Bush campaign to commit to 30 minutes of the first debate to discuss our military records. The American people deserve to understand how we both served our country during that era. Until then, we will be focusing on discussing current issues relevant to American lives."

No bluster, simple and to the point.

Was John Kerry Karl Rove's preferred nominee?

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 08:31:00 PM

Politics is an extremely interesting animal. As I watched the 2003 Democratic Presidential primaries, it seemed utterly amazing to me that the Bush campaign went on an all-out assault against Howard Dean before a single vote was cast. I remember saying to myself, pre-blog :), thou protesteth too much. If you had a candidate that you were positive you could beat, in the lead of your opponent's primary process, why would you be on TV daily trying to assure his demise. It just didn't make sense.

At that time, John Kerry was about as far behind as you could get. He was essentially out of the race.

All of a sudden, the media began discussing the unelectability of Howard Dean. Then, John Kerry won the Iowa Primary, quickly followed by "The Scream".

Wham, bang, boom. John Kerry is the Democratic nominee.

Immediately, the Republicans had what appeared to be over 20 years of established opposition research and quickly attempted to define John Kerry, and did that somewhat successfully. We now have what appears to be an organized campaign to completely destroy John Kerry.

I ask this simple question. Did the Bush/Cheney campaign get exactly the candidate they wanted, and was the media an unwilling, possibly willing, accomplice? The Democratic primary voters may have bit hook line and sinker.

Who knows what a Dean, Edwards, or Clark candidacy would have looked like, but it seems to me as an independent observer that it is entirely possible Karl Rove and Co. may have preferred Kerry over all other candidates.

Obviously, this is no more than a theory, but I would be interested to hear your thoughts.

Google selects their candidate?

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 05:55:00 PM

Has Google selected their candidate for the 2004 election? The evidence is as follows:

1) Search for "John Kerry" in Google News and see what comes up? (It would be nice if someone could cache the page for future reference)

2) A Bush campaign volunteer and advisor was forced to resign late last night. The Bush campaign quickly removed his name from their website. Fortunately, the Google cached version of the webpage showed the advisor's name last night. This afternoon , the cached version has been removed and the new page, with no reference to the advisor, is the only version remaining on Google. (Any Google experts out there to determine if this is reasonable in such a short period of time?) See here for the full story.

3). Google will not allow a satirical set of playing cards parodying the Bush Administration to be on their site because they apparently violated a policy. The story is in today's Washington Post.

Google may be all the buzz on Wall Street these days, but retiree Arthur Rowse of Chevy Chase won't be buying shares. He's fed up with the search-engine behemoth after being told it won't take his ads because Google says he's against a group "protected by law." Specifically, the Bush administration.

...When Rowse first tried to put an ad on Google nearly a year ago, the company e-mailed him saying, "The product you are selling is okay to advertise on Google, but your website contains content that advocates against the government and individuals. If you remove all commentary on your site that advocates against the government and individuals, your ad will then be in compliance with our guidelines."

...Last week he called Google and was told the policy stood -- even though he noticed other Google ads advocating against the president's policies. On Friday, for example, The Washington Post's Web site carried one saying, "George Bush's Time Is Up. ACT For the Good of the Nation! The clock is ticking."

Food for thought. You do the cooking...

Update: As a few commenters have stated, Googlebombing is relatively easy to do. I am simply pointing out the convergence of these three items today. I doubt that Google would be so blatantly obvious if they actually were rooting for a candidate. However, this does show the power of what has become a quasi-utility. As I said, food for thought...

Update: Here is a great link that gives a great explaination of why the reasons for certain types of results when searching Google News. Interesting stuff.

Unfair and Unbalanced

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 09:46:00 AM

It continues to amaze me that Fox News denies they have an agenda. I report, you decide.

On the 12:00 AM headlines segments, the lead story was about the new internet ad posted on John Kerry's website, showing John McCain denouncing George Bush in the 2000 campaign for attacking McCain's service in Vietnam.

The video shown in the background was of a 2004 Bush Campaign rally, showing Bush shaking hands.

The second story was about a Chicago newpaper editor, who backed up John Kerry's story regarding his Vietnam service and called recent ads dishonest.

The video played in the background was the Swift Boat Veteran For Truth advertisement shown currently in 3 states.

To recap, 2 stories supporting John Kerry, 2 videos supporting George Bush.

BTW-I am yet to see a story about George Bush with a John Kerry campaign rally being played in the background.

An Olympic Thought

by justmy2 @ 8/22/2004 12:03:00 AM

The Iraqi soccer team won another match today. It will be interesting to see what they will do if they get a platform to speak. I think back to 1968 in Mexico City and remember the political statement made by African-American athletes within a worldwide venue. Will these athletes make a political statement should they win a medal.

It is definitely something to watch for after reading the statements they made earlier this week.

Friday, August 20

If at first you don't succeed, move the goalposts

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 11:30:00 PM

From today's LA Times:

Having failed to find banned weapons in Iraq, the CIA is preparing a final report on its search that will speculate on what the deposed regime's capabilities might have looked like years from now if left unchecked, according to congressional and intelligence officials.

The CIA plans for the report, due next month, to project as far as 2008 what Iraq might have achieved in its illegal weapons programs if the United States had not invaded the country last year, the officials said.

I was planning on writing a sarcastic entry about the obvious political motivation of this effort. However, I think this fellow blogger says it best.

In further news:

- The United States Legal Commission today announced a report projecting what the United States and the world would have looked like, had the Supreme Court not awarded the Presidency to George W. Bush in the Florida election.

- The National Budget Office today announced a report projecting the total U.S. deficit and national debt -- had Mr. Bush's tax cuts not taken force and the congressional members of the GOP actually worked to reduce the size of government.

- A National Defense Space Progam taxpayer-funded study goes on to project what the Department of Defense needs might have been, had a hostile alien force from planet Kyron landed on earth fifty years ago and assumed human form. The report is being used to request additional funding for the Space Missile Defense initiative.

Having your cake and eating it too

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 11:25:00 PM

The current Administration would like us to believe that it is only a coincidence that the people responsible for the current swift boat ads happen to be financed by their supporters, have the same objectives, have visited the White House, are being promoted in Florida by their campaign, and campaign members appear in the Swift Boat ads. However, they categorically deny that there is any collaborative relationship between the campaign and the SBVFT 527 organization.

On the other hand, when one Al Qaeda member passed through Baghdad a few years ago, the administration claimed that constituted, without a doubt, a definitive tie between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, a collaborative relationship if you will.

Food for thought, you do the cooking.

No Need to Worry, My Accountant Handles That

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 08:03:00 PM

Audit Shows $8.8B Missing in Iraq

A soon-to-be-released audit will show that at least $8.8 billion in Iraqi money that was given to Iraqi ministries by the former U.S.-led authority there cannot be accounted for, FOX News has confirmed.

And three senators want to know where the cash is.

The draft audit by the Coalition Provisional Authority's inspector general chastises the CPA — formerly led by L. Paul Bremer — for "not providing adequate stewardship" of at least $8.8 billion from the Development Fund for Iraq. The audit is not expected to be released for at least two or three more weeks, possibly longer.

One of the main benefactors of the Iraq funds was Texas-based firm Halliburton, which was paid more than $1 billion of that money to bring in fuel for Iraqi civilians. The monitoring board said it had not been given access to U.S. audits of contracts held by Halliburton.

No, your kidding? Some things are just so hard to believe...

Going Negative

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 01:32:00 AM

The DailyKos demonstrates once points out a key difference between the two current presidential campaigns.

Which campaign is the sunny optimist campaign, and which one is running a relentlessly negative campaign?

It is interesting to see that the same campaign the state John Kerry is running from his Senate record, has very little conspicuous information on their front page regarding the President's four years in office.

Food for thought, you do the cooking.

Keith Olbermann on Michelle Malkin:

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 01:15:00 AM

When a former Sportcenter anchor says you made a fool of yourself on national TV, you have problems.

"Waste of lives, money and effort"

by justmy2 @ 8/20/2004 12:03:00 AM

And it took him this long to figure this out?

TONY Blair's former envoy to Iraq yesterday admitted the war may prove to be a "waste of lives, money and effort".

In an astonishing admission, top diplomat Sir Jeremy Greenstock said if the situation in the country did not improve within 18months, military intervention would be seen as a mistake.

He said: "If Iraq in 2006 looks very little better than under Saddam, then the whole thing was a waste of lives, money and effort."

Thursday, August 19

Sensitivity Training

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 11:51:00 PM

I am eagerly awaiting the Vice-President's statement on the former General's sensitivity.



What‘s it say to North Korea when we pull the troops out of there, after—you know, and what‘s it say to the South Koreans? Those sort of sensitivities I don‘t think were really considered, or may have been considered and just ignored, in coming up with the final plan of what—you know, the final plan has yet to see what exactly is going to happen and how it‘s going to transpire.


Silly Five-Star General making "sensitivity" part of the war on the axis of evil...The Vice-President must have some harsh words for him....

We are the Iraqi Soccer Team, and we don't approve this message

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 11:40:00 PM

As we have seen recently, certain campaigns are not concerned with the truth

Iraqi midfielder Salih Sadir scored a goal here on Wednesday night, setting off a rousing celebration among the 1,500 Iraqi soccer supporters at Pampeloponnisiako Stadium. Though Iraq -- the surprise team of the Olympics -- would lose to Morocco 2-1, it hardly mattered as the Iraqis won Group D with a 2-1 record and now face Australia in the quarterfinals on Sunday.

Afterward, Sadir had a message for U.S. president George W. Bush, who is using the Iraqi Olympic team in his latest re-election campaign advertisements.

..."Iraq as a team does not want Mr. Bush to use us for the presidential campaign," Sadir told SI.com through a translator, speaking calmly and directly. "He can find another way to advertise himself."

And here is the kicker, pardon the pun...

...In fact, Manajid says, if he were not playing soccer he would "for sure" be fighting as part of the resistance.

"I want to defend my home. If a stranger invades America and the people resist, does that mean they are terrorists?" Manajid says. "Everyone [in Fallujah] has been labeled a terrorist. These are all lies. Fallujah people are some of the best people in Iraq."

With ad participants like these...you know the rest.

Zell Miller - The Ultimate Flip-Flopper

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 11:25:00 PM

Sen. Zell Miller, a Georgia Democrat who gave the keynote speech at Bill Clinton's 1992 nominating convention, will do the same thing for President Bush at the Republican National Convention.

Uniter, Not a Divider Part III

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 01:31:00 AM

Nick Confessore demostrates the President's shrinking constituency

[Other commentators] had exactly the same reaction I did to yesterday's release of poll data on the Jewish vote; to wit, that Karl Rove's plan to slice off segments of the Democratic vote didn't seem to be working too well. Marshall throws some additional wood on the fire. According to this poll, John Kerry leads George W. Bush 70 to 30 among Hispanic voters nationally, which if I'm not mistaken is about 5 points less than Bush got in 2004. (Note that if the GOP can't move those numbers over the long term, they're screwed as a national political party. Of course the numbers will move, but it must be disquieting that even Bush, a Republican who made such an effort to connect personally and culturally with Hispanics, is having this problem.) Meanwhile, Bush is doing dismally among Muslim voters -- even worse than among black voters -- who supported him in considerable numbers in 2000 and who conservative strategists like Grover Norquist had hoped to bring into the GOP coalition on the basis of Muslims cultural conservatism.

Is this really a dare the President should be making?

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 01:25:00 AM

Bring It On Part II

The last time Bush issued a public dare, it didn't turn out so great. But here was Bush yesterday: "We want to continue to perfect this system, so we say to those tyrants who believe they can blackmail America and the free world: you fire, we're going to shoot it down."

Cutting off your nose to spite your face

by justmy2 @ 8/19/2004 12:06:00 AM

I continue to say I won't discuss this, but this issue continues to be in the news. If anyone still puts any credence into the nonsense being discussed about John Kerry's military record, they are simply unwilling to face facts. How much proof does anyone need that the attacks are politically motivated. Kerry's attackers, as you see below, are even willing to dishonor their own records and the Navy itself simply to attack John Kerry. It is beyond all belief. Can we begin to discuss real issues at some point?

Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?

Records Counter A Critic Of Kerry

"Newly obtained military records of one of Sen. John F. Kerry most vocal critics who has accused the Democratic presidential candidate of lying about his wartime record to win medals contradict his own version of events. "

In newspaper interviews and a best-selling book, Larry Thurlow, who commanded a Navy Swift boat alongside Kerry in Vietnam, has strongly disputed Kerry's claim that the Massachusetts Democrat's boat came under fire during a mission in Viet Cong-controlled territory on March 13, 1969. Kerry won a Bronze Star for his actions that day.

But Thurlow's military records, portions of which were released yesterday to The Washington Post under the Freedom of Information Act, contain several references to "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire" directed at "all units" of the five-boat flotilla. Thurlow won his own Bronze Star that day, and the citation praises him for providing assistance to a damaged Swift boat "despite enemy bullets flying about him."

...Last month, Thurlow swore in an affidavit that Kerry was "not under fire" when he fished Lt. James Rassmann out of the water. He described Kerry's Bronze Star citation, which says that all units involved came under "small arms and automatic weapons fire," as "totally fabricated."

"I never heard a shot," Thurlow said in his affidavit, which was released by Swift Boats Veterans for Truth. The group claims the backing of more than 250 Vietnam veterans, including a majority of Kerry's fellow boat commanders.

A document recommending Thurlow for the Bronze Star noted that all his actions "took place under constant enemy small arms fire which LTJG THURLOW completely ignored in providing immediate assistance" to the disabled boat and its crew. The citation states that all other units in the flotilla also came under fire.

Wednesday, August 18

Freedom of the Press at its finest?

by justmy2 @ 8/18/2004 10:49:00 PM

Do you consider this going overboard?

August 18, 2004
"In a discussion with Scott Bleier of Hybrid Investors Mike Norman, a Fox News contributor and Fox reporter Terry Keenan the four were on the subject of Iraq and al Sadr. Cavuto asked about al Sadr What if we killed the guy Keenan responded that would be a big plus. Then Cavuto do you believe the market would take off if he was outta there.

COMMENT: Here is the anchor of a cable news network beamed across the planet, talking about how the US stock market would be better off if we killed someone. What have we come to? What must people in other countries think What must kids and teenagers right here at home think? What kind of message does it send when one sees a TV anchor ponder what would happen if we "killed the guy." I think this kind of talk is way beyond professional -- barbaric comes to mind. I'm embarrassed for us as a nation. "

Monday, August 16

And as long as we are talking about our Constitutional rights...

by justmy2 @ 8/16/2004 08:46:00 PM

Not to be outdone by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement authorities, federal law enforcement officials have decided
desperate times, call for desparate measures

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has been questioning political demonstrators across the country, and in rare cases even subpoenaing them, in an aggressive effort to forestall what officials say could be violent and disruptive protests at the Republican National Convention in New York.

F.B.I. officials are urging agents to canvass their communities for information about planned disruptions aimed at the convention and other coming political events, and they say they have developed a list of people who they think may have information about possible violence. They say the inquiries, which began last month before the Democratic convention in Boston, are focused solely on possible crimes, not dissent, at major political events.

But some people contacted by the F.B.I. say they are mystified by the bureau’s interest and felt harassed by questions about their political plans.

“The message I took from it,” said Sarah Bardwell, 21, an intern at a Denver antiwar group who was visited by six investigators a few weeks ago, “was that they were trying to intimidate us into not going to any protests and to let us know that, ‘hey, we’re watching you.’ ”

The unusual initiative comes after the Justice Department, in a previously undisclosed legal opinion, gave its blessing to controversial tactics used last year by the F.B.I in urging local police departments to report suspicious activity at political and antiwar demonstrations.

The bulletins that relayed that request detailed tactics used by demonstrators - everything from violent resistance to Internet fund-raising and recruitment.

In an internal complaint, an F.B.I. employee charged that the bulletins improperly blurred the line between lawfully protected speech and illegal activity.

But the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy, in a five-page internal analysis obtained by The New York Times, disagreed.

The office, which also made headlines in June in an opinion - since disavowed - that authorized the use of torture against terrorism suspects in some circumstances, said any First Amendment impact posed by the F.B.I.’s monitoring of the political protests was negligible and constitutional.

Potential Voter Intimidation in Florida

by justmy2 @ 8/16/2004 08:30:00 PM

Will Floridians let this happen again?

Bob Herber provides a reason to believe the more things change, the more they stay same

Florida State police officers have gone into the homes of elderly black voters in Orlando and interrogated them as part of an odd "investigation" that has frightened many voters, intimidated elderly volunteers and thrown a chill over efforts to get out the black vote in November.

The officers, from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, which reports to Gov. Jeb Bush, say they are investigating allegations of voter fraud that came up during the Orlando mayoral election in March.

...The state police officers, armed and in plain clothes, have questioned dozens of voters in their homes. Some of those questioned have been volunteers in get-out-the-vote campaigns.

I asked Mr. Morales in a telephone conversation to tell me what criminal activity had taken place.

"I can't talk about that," he said.

I asked if all the people interrogated were black.

"Well, mainly it was a black neighborhood we were looking at - yes,'' he said.

He also said, "Most of them were elderly."

When I asked why, he said, "That's just the people we selected out of a random sample to interview."

A New Member of the Team

by justmy2 @ 8/16/2004 08:24:00 PM

JustMy2 would like to welcome its newest writer to the team, Coltrane. He has a sharp wit and his hand on the pulse on the community. I enjoy his humorous, yet strong opinions on a wide array of subjects and I hope you will as well. We promise we will shoot straighter than the current U.S. Olympic Men's Basketball team!! (although I guess that isn't saying much)

Let the fun begin....

Tom Ridge: "The Department of Homeland Security does not do politics"

by justmy2 @ 8/16/2004 08:16:00 PM

So, why exactly is the White House Chief Political Adviser sitting in on your meetings?

Sunday, August 15

More Presidential Forgetfulness on Larry King Live

by justmy2 @ 8/15/2004 04:03:00 PM

Short term memory lapse or rewriting history, you make the call...

KING: So is that what led you to say on that ship that the battle is over?
G. BUSH: No, I didn't say that. Now, let's be careful about that.
I went on that aircraft carrier to thank a crew.

What Bush himself said on the ship (Link):
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. "

That is one heck of a way to thank one crew. This crew single-handedly won the battle of Iraq...? Technically, he didn't say exactly what Larry King said, but it certainly is not a straight-forward answer.

Friday, August 13

It depends on the meaning of opposed....

by justmy2 @ 8/13/2004 01:05:00 PM

Dan Froomkin catches the President in at best a misstatement, and at worst, a outright prevarication

"'KING: You first were opposed to the 9/11 Commission and then changed. Why?
'G. BUSH: Not really.
'KING: You weren't opposed?
'G. BUSH: Well, I just wanted to make sure that it was done the right way. I felt like that -- one of my concerns was that it would usurp the Congress' need to fully investigate.'

But Bush's aides at the time made it very clear that he didn't support the establishment of a commission, and Bush himself had this to say in May, 2002: 'I, of course, want the Congress to take a look at what took place prior to September the 11th. But since it deals with such sensitive information, in my judgment, it's best for the ongoing war against terror that the investigation be done in the intelligence committee. There are committees set up with both Republicans and Democrats who understand the obligations of upholding our secrets and our sources and methods of collecting intelligence. And therefore, I think it's the best place for Congress to take a good look at the events leading up to September the 11th.' "

The Presidential MCI plan...Friends and Family tax dodging

by justmy2 @ 8/13/2004 10:10:00 AM

The President continues to stun me. Apparently he is calling many of his friends and family tax dodgers!!!

US President George W. Bush today said there was no point in taxing the rich because they just dodged their tax bill anyway.

"Real rich people figure out how to dodge taxes," he said during a campaign stop in suburban Washington.

...Mr Bush said: "You've got to be careful about this rhetoric, we're only going to tax the rich. You know who the - the rich in America happen to be the small business owners."

By the way....the statement about small business owners being the rich in America is in and of itself demonstrably false.

Click here to see another administration spin job debunked...

But data from the Internal Revenue Service and the Census Bureau suggest the vast majority of small businesses provide their owners with incomes far below the $200,000-a-year mark where Kerry says he would begin eliminating tax cuts.

...Their profits fall into a median range of $40,000 and $60,000, according to the National Federation of Independent Business, a leading advocate of the small-business community. That puts them just above U.S. median household income of $42,409.

"These are not rich people," said NFIB researcher Bruce Phillips. "Changing the tax cut for the wealthiest Americans, for the most part, doesn't apply to our membership."

Why is the Vice-President attacking the President's use of words?

by justmy2 @ 8/13/2004 01:07:00 AM

John Kerry on August 5:

'I believe I can fight a more effective, more thoughtful, more strategic, more proactive, more sensitive war on terror that reaches out to other nations and brings them to our side and lives up to American values in history. I lay out a strategy to strengthen our military, to build and lead strong alliances and reform our intelligence system. I set out a path to win the peace in Iraq and to get the terrorists wherever they may be before they get us.' (Kerry, 8/5/04)

President Bush in 2001:

'We help fulfill that promise not by lecturing the world, but by leading it. Precisely because America is powerful, we must be sensitive about expressing our power and influence. Our goal is to patiently build the momentum of freedom, not create resentment for America itself. We pursue our goals, we will listen to others. (Bush Remarks at USS Regan Ceremony, 3/4/01)

President Bush last week:

'Now, in terms of the balance between running down intelligence and bringing people to justice obviously is -- we need to be very sensitive on that.' (Bush Delivers Remarks at the Unity, Journalists of Color Conference, 8/6/04)

Vice President Cheney today:

'Senator Kerry has also said that if he were in charge he would fight a 'more sensitive' war on terror. America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being."

Thursday, August 12

Race and Politics

by justmy2 @ 8/12/2004 11:47:00 PM

Can't we all just get along?

A group financed by a major Republican contributor has begun running radio ads in about a dozen cities, many in battleground states, attacking Sen. John F. Kerry as "rich, white and wishy-washy" and mocking his wife for boasting of her African roots.

What exactly does this have to do with John Kerry's ability to be president? As far as I know, the President is "rich and white" and that apparently does not disqualify him. The people who put this out should be ashamed of themselves. It is a ridiculous ad and it should have never made it past the editing room floor. If someone put out this type of outrageous ad against President Bush, I would still call a spade a spade.

The 4th Column

by justmy2 @ 8/12/2004 11:28:00 PM

During the run up to the Iraq War, I was able to locate contradictory views on the internet and alternative media to the statements being made by the Administration when analyzing the case for war. However, it was much to difficult in my opinion. The NY Times recently plead guilty to making errors in their reporting prior to the war. (Interestingly, they dedicated less that 2000 words to this article on page A-10, while they dedicated over 7000 words to Jayson Blair's misdeeds on the front page. Food for thought...) Today, the Washington Post airs their dirty laundry.

"Here is an excerpt that I think demonstrates that they may still have a few lessons to learn, in what I considered a relatively good article worth reading.

Bush, Vice President Cheney and other administration officials had no problem commanding prime real estate in the paper, even when their warnings were repetitive. "We are inevitably the mouthpiece for whatever administration is in power," DeYoung said. "If the president stands up and says something, we report what the president said." And if contrary arguments are put "in the eighth paragraph, where they're not on the front page, a lot of people don't read that far.

Why is it inevitable? If so, will they have to write this article the next time a major long running story occurs. The media, especially the major outlets have tremendous power. It is the duty of good journalists to provide both sides of a story, regardless of the source. Yes, access comes at a price, but that price should not be credibility.

I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified

by justmy2 @ 8/12/2004 10:35:00 PM

Apparently, President Bush's recent nominee for CIA Director doesn't exactly have the greatest confidence in his abilities...

U.S. Congressman Porter Goss, President Bush's nominee for CIA director, could be his own worst enemy when it comes to making the case that he deserves to lead the U.S. intelligence agency.

"I couldn't get a job with CIA today. I am not qualified," the Florida Republican told documentary-maker Michael Moore's production company during the filming of the anti-Bush movie "Fahrenheit 9/11."

A day after Bush picked Goss for the top U.S. spy job, Moore on Wednesday released an excerpt from a March 3 interview in which the 65-year-old former House of Representatives intelligence chief recounts his lack of qualifications for employment as a modern CIA staffer.

...Moore told Reuters that Goss, who until Tuesday was chairman of the House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, granted an interview to two of his producers without first checking to see who they worked for.

"You'd think the person who was the head of the intelligence committee would ask a few more questions," said Moore.

Wednesday, August 11

The Ownership Society

by justmy2 @ 8/11/2004 06:43:00 PM

Kevin Drum has interesting take on the recent campaign strategy for the President. I am not sure if I agree that this issue is as black and white as he puts it, but I found the article persuasive. Any thoughts? (Remember your comments can be anonymous if you wish)

Here is an excerpt:

FDR dedicated the New Deal to "freedom from fear." He believed that government's role was not to provide handouts to the poor, but to provide a certain minimum level of security against the everyday catastrophes that ruin people's lives.

It is this minimum level of economic security that George Bush and modern movement conservatives want to abolish. In fact, it's the point of Bush's "ownership society": if everyone owns their own Social Security account, owns their own healthcare account, and owns their own college accounts, then the government no longer provides security against disaster. If you make a mistake, or if the market makes a mistake, you're screwed.

This is likely to be the eventual downfall of modern conservatism. Human beings have a deep desire for a certain minimum level of stability and security in their lives, and eventually they'll rebel against a party that refuses to acknowledge this. Life today is so much better than it was in the 30s that people have forgotten the basic New Deal ethos that made it that way. But if conservatives have their way, it won't be much longer before they start remembering.

Uniter, Not a Divider - Part II

by justmy2 @ 8/11/2004 06:39:00 PM

The Presidents continues to fulfill his campaign promise...

Rap and R&B stars Mary J Blige, Missy Elliot and Eve are recording a song to encourage voters away from President Bush in the run-up to the US election.

The trio are re-recording the 1960s hit Wake Up Everybody, which was used during the 1976 election to mobilise black voters to back Jimmy Carter.

Keep sovereignty alive...

by justmy2 @ 8/11/2004 06:33:00 PM

Reverand Jesse Jackson has a little fun with the President's verbal gymnastics last week.

BRENT MERRILL: As you saw today at the president's conference, the leader of the free world does not understand tribal sovereignty. What would you do in your estimation, Reverend, what would you do and how would you advise tribes to educate our folks, just exactly what tribal sovereignty is?

JESSE JACKSON: The President explained. You just didn't understand. Sovereignty is sovereignty. You understand? It's like in sovereignity. If you are on a reservation, you have been soverized. Your Ph.D. is in soverbication. You understand? I don't think you understand.

BRENT MERRILL: You're right. I didn't understand that.

State of the Iraqi Union

by justmy2 @ 8/11/2004 12:40:00 AM

If a civil war breaks out in Iraq, I suspect all bets are off. Considering the source of this information, I would take this with a grain of salt, but it is worth noting.

"Al Jazeera reports that some Iraqi southern governorates will break away from the central government in Baghdad. Apparently this is why the southern Iraqi oil fields are no longer pumping oil to the southern terminal."

Al-Musawi said the interim government did not open communication channels with Iraqis, and used force against them instead.

"We support the unity of Iraq, when there is an Iraqi government that acknowledges all people's rights," al-Musawi said.

"The government should not make irresponsible decisions and attack our religion" he added.

Tuesday, August 10

General Frank's eVite

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 07:09:00 PM

And while we are discussing the former CENTCOM General, it was the General who apparently called for a now infamous aircraft carrier party.

Retired Gen. Tommy Franks tried to take the blame Monday for President Bush's much-criticized comments declaring an end to major combat in Iraq more than a year ago.

"That's my fault, that George W. Bush said what he said on the first of May of last year, just because I asked him to," said Franks, former commander of forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

..."On the first of May when Bush did what he did, I was proud of him because he did what I, as the commander, had asked him to do," Franks said in an appearance at the National Press Club. "So if there's a mistake there, it's mine, not a plot. So I thought I'd share that with you. "

Franks noted that the Bush administration has had limited success persuading other nations to participate in Iraq. Of some 160,000 foreign forces there now, about 140,000 are American.

My first thought when I read this was "Where is the follow up question, did you tell him to actually say the mission had been accomplished?" After a little research, I realized someone Ted Koppel actually did.

Here is a copy of a Nightline transcript where Franks says he thought the mission was accomplished last May.

KOPPEL: And I assume you didn't paint the banner that said "mission accomplished" either?

FRANKS: No, but I would have agreed with it, and as I looked at the president's comments on the 1st of May, I thought, "Good for him, good for him," and I appreciated that, that he did what he did. KOPPEL: Clearly, as we look back, the mission was not accomplished. A significant portion of the mission was accomplished, and as you suggest in your book, it was accomplished quickly, it was accomplished brilliantly, it was accomplished with far fewer forces than a lot of your colleagues in the Pentagon thought necessary.

FRANKS: Uh-huh.

KOPPEL: But the fact of the matter is, Phase Four of the war, which you describe as being the post-major combat phase, the phase that we're in right now, really hasn't gone well at all.

FRANKS: Oh, I guess it's eye of the beholder, Ted. I talk to a lot of people all over the country about the difference between hope and expectation. Gosh, I had a hope that the Iraqis would embrace a new government, would establish a new Iraq very quickly, and, but I never had that as an expectation.

I guess the expectation was, as the president said, it will take as long as it takes. And so I hoped it would be quick, but I expected that it might take much longer, perhaps three to five years.

Eye of the beholder? I would like to know exactly which "endstate objectives" (his words, from his war plan) have been accomplished other than Saddam Hussein being out of power, and I am even giving him the benefit of the doubt on that because it doesn't even seem like it would be a "Post-Hostility" objective.

Which leads to my second point...

He stated in his own war plan that Post-Hostility Operations were part of the mission. He expected three to five years of Post-Hostility operations but he felt it was a good idea to have the President go tell the country that the mission was accomplished?

What am I missing? Did that give the troops false hope, by providing them with a false sense closure?

I do not doubt the General's intentions. I am also very happy that General Franks served his country with distinction, but it appears that his judgement was seriously distorted by being involved with this administration. It is like the reverse Midas Touch.

General Franks may want to rethink his war plan....

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 06:56:00 PM

Spencer Ackerman pulls this gem from General Tommy Franks just released book.

Then I turned to reveal the next chart: PHASE IV: POST-HOSTILITY OPERATIONS. "As stability operations proceed, force levels would continue to grow--perhaps to as many as two hundred and fifty thousand troops, or until we are sure we've met our endstate objectives." [Emphasis added.]

--General Tommy Franks, in a briefing to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on his updated plan for an invasion of Iraq, February 1, 2002, according to Franks's memoir, American Soldier, p. 366

And when exactly does the Post-Hostility phase begin?

At any rate, we still only have about 150,00 troops on the ground. does anyone still believe civilian leadership in our government followed the advise of the military? If so, I have this bridge in Brooklyn that I am selling. I have no idea what the right number is, anywhere between 0 - 250,000, but I think the statements such as this one by Paul Wolfwitz should stop.

SEC. WOLFOWITZ: Well, I'm not sure where you get it because that's--you've said a lot. Let me start with something Bill Bradley said last night which simply falls. [sic] He said General Shinseki was fired. General Shinseki was not fired. General Shinseki served his full four years as chief of staff for the army. I think he also said that President Bush ignored the advice of his senior military advisor that we needed 300,000 troops in Iraq. I presume you're referring to General Shinseki. President Bush's senior military advisors for the war, were not the chief of staff of the army. They were the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Myers, and General Franks, the combatant commander in Iraq. And General Frank's requirement was exactly what he got and his estimate of what we needed postwar was about a quarter of what General Shinseki talked about in public.

Viva Las Vegas

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 06:40:00 PM

Let's get this straight...Information about surveillance of banks and financial buildings from 3-4 years ago...Raise the alert level.

Survelliance of casino 7 to 8 years ago...keep it hush hush...

When the Justice Department obtained two videos suggesting terrorists had cased Las Vegas casinos, the discussions didn't center on public alerts or heightened security. Rather, authorities worried about the effects on tourism and the casinos' legal liabilities, internal memos show.

The credibility gap continues to widen...

BTW-I have been in Las Vegas during national orange alerts. Interestingly enough, entrances to Excalibur and Luxor have been blocked off and there is a huge police presence. I always wondered why the increased security seemed to be isolated to so few hotels. Now I know, but I doubt the statement that no one knew.

"Man Kobe, in high school you were the man Kobe"

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 06:29:00 PM

Accuser Files Civil Suit Against Kobe Bryant

Woman Seeks Unspecified Amount In Monetary Damages

"The 20-year-old accuser in the Kobe Bryant case filed a civil suit Tuesday seeking an unspecified amount in monetary damages from the basketball star, saying that he has a 'history of committing similar violent sexual assault on females.'"

...After Plaintiff declined Defendant Bryant's offer to join him in his jacuzzi, Plaintiff attempted to leave the hotel room and Defendant Bryant blocked her exit from the room, asking her for a hug.

...After a short period of time kissing her, Defendant Bryant's voice became deeper and his acts became rougher as he started touching Plaintiff's breasts and groping her in her genital region and buttocks

....Defendant thereafter physically restrained Plaintiff with force and violence against her will by choking her with his hands around her neck while bending her over a chair in the hotel room.

Defendant Bryant pulled his pants down and lifted Plaintiff's skirt, pulling down Plaintiff's panties while continuing to restrain Plaintiff by physical force and a perceived threat of potential strangulation if she resisted his advances.

With (sic) she was bent over the chair and forced by Defendant Bryant to remain in that position, Defendant Bryant sexually assaulted and raped Plaintiff, by unlawfully and knowingly inflicting sexual intrusion and penetration of her vagina against her will and without her consent in violation of the laws of the State of Colorado, including in violation of C.R.S. 18-3-402(1)(a) and 4(a).

Those are pretty strong acccusations. It seems to me that these charges were filed to counteract the information that was made public by the judge last week regarding the defendant's sexual history. It is amazing how lawyers, on both sides, can bypass gag orders legally. It is obviously becoming increasingly obvious that it will be very difficult to find an untainted jury and the two sides are about to engage in an knock-down drag out fight for their client's reputations.

Case Closed - Swift Boat Allegations Debunked

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 06:19:00 PM

I stated in an earlier post that I wouldn't comment on this much. However, this has been a huge topic of discussion and a lot of mischaracterizations have been thrown around. Therefore, I thought think that it is only right to take a look at some independent sources to get to the bottom of the allegations.

Here are three great, thorough summaries of the charges. I have excerpted a few key statements from one piece.

Please feel free to pass the link to this post along to anyone who is looking for the real story instead of speculation.

Click here to read USA Today's demolition of the accusations here.

The attack on one of Kerry's chief arguments for replacing President Bush as commander in chief -- that he was tested under fire in Vietnam and served with distinction -- has become harshly controversial. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who chairs Bush's campaign in Arizona, says the ad is dishonest and has called on the president's campaign to disavow it. Retired Army general Tommy Franks, who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, told ABC's This Week on Sunday that Kerry is ''absolutely'' qualified to be commander in chief.

Who are these men who say Kerry didn't deserve the medals he received as a swift boat commander, a view sharply at odds with that of men who served under him? And why are they telling their stories now, more than 35 years later?

On its Web site (www.swiftvets.com), the group calls itself ''non-partisan.'' But public records show that two of its three main backers are longtime GOP contributors: Bob Perry, a Texas home builder who gave $100,000, and Harlan Crow, a Dallas real estate executive, who gave $25,000. The third major backer is John O'Neill, who put up $25,000 and is co-author of the group's book. The Texas lawyer was closely tied to Bush when he was Texas governor....

...none of the 13 men in the TV ad served on either of the two swift boats -- small, lightly armed patrol craft -- that Kerry commanded. Of the group's 254 members -- out of 3,500 swift boat sailors who served in Vietnam -- only one served under Kerry. The rest who did serve on Kerry's boats back his record.

Many of Kerry's critics commanded boats that went out on missions with Kerry. Others never met him. Most are still angry about Kerry's leadership of Vietnam Veterans Against the War after he returned home."

Click the link above for specific investigations into each person's claims. Here is an example.

Louis Letson, a doctor who says he treated Kerry. He says Kerry didn't deserve his first Purple Heart because he ''inadvertently wounded himself'' and ''there was no hostile fire.'' Medical records, however, note that Kerry was treated for shrapnel by J.C. Carreon, not Letson. Bill Zaladonis, who was on Kerry's boat at the time, says the men believed they were shooting at Viet Cong.

If that is not enough, Spinsanity details why nothing has been proven here.

And finally, FactCheck.org gives you a charge by charge account of the situation, if you still have reservations. .


Revolving Door

by justmy2 @ 8/10/2004 05:58:00 PM

Porter Goss is the current Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. This committee just happened to be responsible for oversight of the CIA during one of its largest failures ever as reported by the Senate Intelligence report

He is also the man who made the following statement about the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame last October

Rep. Porter Goss said Thursday that the uproar over allegations that White House officials purposely identified a covert CIA agent appears largely political and doesn't yet merit an investigation by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, which he chairs.

"Somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I'll have an investigation," Goss said.

If you are the President of the United States, what do you do?


President Bush on Tuesday nominated U.S. Rep. Porter Goss to lead the CIA, an intelligence agency that has been under fire and under the microscope since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

"He knows the CIA inside and out," Bush said of Goss, an eight-term Republican congressman from Florida, the House intelligence chief and a former CIA officer. "He is the right man to lead this important agency at this critical moment in our nation's history."

He may very well be the right guy for the job. However, questions like
"What did he do in his oversight position to demonstrate his leadership capabilities," must be asked.

'For the past seven-plus years, I have been working to refit the intelligence community for its future . . . to posture it for the days ahead. We have always worked hard on the committee to create a constituency for intelligence inside and outside of this institution. We have insisted that the committee be both supportive advocates and constructive overseers.'

The report on the bill by Goss' panel sharply criticized the CIA for 'ignoring its core missional activities' and having 'a dysfunctional denial of any need for corrective action.'

In an unusually frank letter, Tenet wrote Goss that his criticism was 'ill informed' and 'frankly absurd.'

Apparently, the former CIA Director isn't so sure he is the "right man"

Monday, August 9

Sovereignty in a nutshell

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 11:34:00 PM

I was watching the President's speech to The Unity Journalists of Color Conference on C-SPAN last week when I heard the following exchange:

"Q Good morning. My name is Mark Trahant. I'm the editorial page editor of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and a member of the Native American Journalist Association. (Applause.) Most school kids learn about the government in the context of city, county, state and federal. And, of course, tribal governments are not part of that at all. Mr. President, you've been a governor and a President, so you have a unique experience, looking at it from two directions. What do you think tribal sovereignty means in the 21st century, and how do we resolve conflicts between tribes and the federal and the state governments?

THE PRESIDENT: Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a -- you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities. "

Huh??? He actually followed this with a little more detail, but the snickers from the audience basically said it all. While this was somewhat rude, can you really blame them? Click here to hear it for yourself.

As a side note, it was interesting to see the comfort level of the President when he discussed immigration and diversity. I may not agree with everything he said, but he seemed genuinely comfortable with these subjects. The difference was absolutely stunning. His body language and speech patterns were visibly different. On most other subjects, he simply did not seem credible.

It has always seemed to me that when President tries to repeat Administration talking points and stay within the company line, he has acute communication issues. He looks like he is visibly trying to remember his lines. He certainly will not be a talk show host anytime in the near future. This can be an asset or a liability depending on your point of view. It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on the subject.

Things you have to believe to be a Republican today....

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 09:47:00 PM

This is more satire than proven facts, but I still tought I would pass it along...

Things you have to believe to be a Republican today....

Update: Someone asked me add the list here, and I am happy to oblige.

Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.

Trade with Cuba is wrong because the country is communist, but trade with China and Vietnam is vital to a spirit of international harmony.

A woman can't be trusted with decisions about her own body, but multi-national corporations can make decisions affecting all mankind without regulation.

The best way to improve military morale is to praise the troops in speeches while slashing veterans' benefits and combat pay.

If condoms are kept out of schools, adolescents won't have sex.

Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing health care to all Americans is socialism.

HMOs and insurance companies have the best interests of the public at heart.

Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools.

A president lying about an extramarital affair is an impeachable offense. A president lying to enlist support for a war in which thousands die is solid defense policy.

Government should limit itself to the powers named in the Constitution, which include banning gay marriages and censoring the Internet.

The public has a right to know about Hillary's cattle trades, but George Bush's cocaine conviction is none of our business.

Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness, and you need our prayers for your recovery.

You support states' rights, which mean Attorney General John Ashcroft can tell states what local voter initiatives they have the right to adopt.

What Bill Clinton did in the 1960s is of vital national interest, but what Bush did in the '80s is irrelevant.

What is the real purpose?

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 09:25:00 PM

Over and over, day and night, I hear media pundits stating terrorists want to "disrupt" the democratic process. If this is true, the obvious next question is what would be their intent. The answer is certainly not as black and white as the media attempts to portray with their daily drumbeat.

Here's is one person's view...

Anonymous, who published an analysis of Al Qaeda last year, called Through Our Enemies' Eyes, thinks it quite possible that another devastating strike against the US could come during the election campaign, not with the intention of changing the administration, as was the case in the Madrid bombing, but of keeping the same one in place. "I'm very sure they can't have a better administration for them than the one they have now," he said. "One way to keep the Republicans in power is to mount an attack that would rally the country around the president."

The full story has some interesting information. It is always good to search out both sides of the story. I am just here to help.

Food for thought...as always, it is up to you to do the cooking.

More on the leak of the Pakistani double agent

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 08:30:00 PM

Juan Cole, Billmon, and Kevin Drum all have their own take on this situation.

Billmon pulls this quote, which basically states it all.

"The whole thing smacks of either incompetence or worse," said Tim Ripley, a security expert who writes for Jane's Defence publications.

"You have to ask: what are they doing compromising a deep mole within al Qaeda, when it's so difficult to get these guys in there in the first place?

The articles go on to state British police were forced to serve arrest warrants while their investigations were still in progress, potentially ruining their ability to locate other potential suspects and limiting their ability to win convictions in the future.

We don't have all of the information yet, but the issue seems to become more suspect by the second.

See No Evil, Hear No Evil

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 07:44:00 PM

Before the Iraq Invasion, President Bush said:

"America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq."

Well, it looks like the government we installed did not get the message, and apparently, our government does not seem to care anymore. I wonder if anyone has told the President?

Ordered to just walk away

BAGHDAD -- The national guardsman peering through the long-range scope of his rifle was startled by what he saw unfolding in the walled compound below.

From his post several stories above ground level, he watched as men in plainclothes beat blindfolded and bound prisoners in the enclosed grounds of the Iraqi Interior Ministry.

He immediately radioed for help. Soon after, a team of Oregon Army National Guard soldiers swept into the yard and found dozens of Iraqi detainees who said they had been beaten, starved and deprived of water for three days.

In a nearby building, the soldiers counted dozens more prisoners and what appeared to be torture devices -- metal rods, rubber hoses, electrical wires and bottles of chemicals. Many of the Iraqis, including one identified as a 14-year-old boy, had fresh welts and bruises across their back and legs.

The soldiers disarmed the Iraqi jailers, moved the prisoners into the shade, released their handcuffs and administered first aid. Lt. Col. Daniel Hendrickson of Albany, Ore., the highest ranking American at the scene, radioed for instructions.

But in a move that frustrated and infuriated the guardsmen, Hendrickson's superior officers told him to return the prisoners to their abusers and immediately withdraw. It was June 29 -- Iraq's first official day as a sovereign country since the U.S.-led invasion.

...The U.S. Embassy in Iraq confirmed the incident occurred and disclosed for the first time that the United States raised questions about the June 29 "brutality" with Iraq's interior minister.

I am extremely proud of these soldiers who stood up for what is right. I am extremely ashamed of their "superiors", who were to worried about public relations.

Who do they work for again?

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 07:22:00 PM

Have you ever wondered why hecklers show up at Kerry/Edwards campaign events, but not at Bush/Cheney campaign events?

Survey says...

A Republican National Committee practice of having people sign a form endorsing President Bush or pledging to vote for him in November before being issued tickets for RNC-sponsored rallies is raising concern among voters.

When Vice President Dick Cheney spoke July 31 to a crowd of 2,000 in Rio Rancho, a city of 45,000 near Albuquerque, several people who showed up at the event complained about being asked to sign endorsement forms in order to receive a ticket to hear Cheney.

"Whose vice president is he?" said 72-year-old retiree John Wade of Albuquerque, who was asked to sign the form when he picked up his tickets. "I just wanted to hear what my vice president had to say, and they make me sign a loyalty oath."

Maybe he should read his own newspaper?

by justmy2 @ 8/09/2004 07:22:00 PM

Sebastian Mallaby in today's Washington Post writes a column comparing and contrasting facts about the two candidates for President

"Bush smashed the Taliban in Afghanistan, even though large parts of the Democratic foreign policy establishment opposed any strategy involving boots on the ground."

That would be a great point...if it were not a blatant contradiction of facts in the same edition of the Washington Post

Taliban Maintains Grip Rooted in Fear
In Afghan Mountains, U.S. Forces Face Elusive Foe Bent on Disrupting Elections

I am no rocket scientist, but my definition of "smashed" is a little different.

Feel free to read the entire article, but it would be nice if writers would do a little research if they plan on writing an article to 'lay out the facts'.

Just a thought...

Saturday, August 7

I hope he doesn't flip-flop

by justmy2 @ 8/07/2004 01:09:00 AM

I am sure as a trusted adviser of the President, Dick Cheney provided him with input and will not change his mind. You see, Republicans never change their mind.

While he was defense secretary in 1992, Vice President Cheney said he would recommend a presidential veto of a bill that would have established a director of national intelligence with authority over the Pentagon's intelligence-collection activities.

Cheney's view then, spelled out in two letters on March 17, 1992, to the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, differs from the position President Bush took on Monday. Bush said he supports the creation of a single intelligence director, but with no authority over the Defense Department budget pertaining to intelligence.

They are getting good at leaking operatives names!

by justmy2 @ 8/07/2004 12:43:00 AM

Just yesterday, George Bush said:
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."

Freudian slip???

Pakistan: U.S. blew undercover operation

"The al-Qaida suspect named by U.S. officials as the source of information that led to this week's terrorist alerts was working undercover, Pakistani intelligence sources said Friday, putting an end to the sting operation and forcing Pakistan to hide the man in a secret location."

George Tenet is no longer around to fall on his sword. What are the chances any one will be held accountable?

Slim and none, and slim is in a undisclosed location with the Vice-President.

Karl Rove has let the dogs loose.

by justmy2 @ 8/07/2004 12:27:00 AM

They are getting really desperate.

I will not be saying a whole lot about the current brouhaha over John Kerry's military record. It doesn't really even deserve any discussion. But just in case anyone is wondering whether or not they should put a lot of trust in the latest round of stories about

Boston.com / News / Nation / Veteran retracts criticism of Kerry:

"But yesterday, a key figure in the anti-Kerry campaign, Kerry's former commanding officer, backed off one of the key contentions. Lieutenant Commander George Elliott said in an interview that he had made a ''terrible mistake' in signing an affidavit that suggests Kerry did not deserve the Silver Star -- one of the main allegations in the book. The affidavit was given to The Boston Globe by the anti-Kerry group to justify assertions in their ad and book.

Elliott is quoted as saying that Kerry ''lied about what occurred in Vietnam . . . for example, in connection with his Silver Star, I was never informed that he had simply shot a wounded, fleeing Viet Cong in the back.'

The statement refers to an episode in which Kerry killed a Viet Cong soldier who had been carrying a rocket launcher, part of a chain of events that formed the basis of his Silver Star. Over time, some Kerry critics have questioned whether the soldier posed a danger to Kerry's crew. Crew members have said Kerry's actions saved their lives.

Yesterday, reached at his home, Elliott said he regretted signing the affidavit and said he still thinks Kerry deserved the Silver Star. ''I still don't think he shot the guy in the back,' Elliott said. ''It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here.'"

BTW-If you want have any residual thoughts that these charges are legitimate, click here to eliminate any those as well.

In the end, these are guys that are still mad at John Kerry's actions after the war. This is not my area of expertise, so I will not be touching that issue with a ten foot pole. However, this seems awfully similar to the Clinton trooper story that came out once he became a true contender for the presidency. There is an industry on both sides to make a name for yourself by spreading salacious stories. Even if they are false, the publishers and authors get a ton of publicity. If John Kerry is elected, I suspect the level of vitriol will continue to be raised. And mark my words, those congressional hearings that no one seems willing to hold regarding current Adminstrations issues (Medicare scandal, War Profiteering, etc..), will quickly be resurrected and the dirt digging will begin. I don't know what it is going to take to bring this nation together.

Such a sad state of affairs....

Friday, August 6

"Dutch Boyd" - Con Artist?

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 11:56:00 PM

For those of you who watch The World Series of Poker on ESPN tuesday nights, "Dutch" Boyd is probably a familiar name to you. He is the one who does all of the chip tricks.

Well, he may have a few other tricks up his sleeve...:

"Russ 'Dutch' Boyd to Open a New Online Card Room

The former owner of the now defunct PokerSpot.com has announced plans to open another online card room, a move that is getting strange looks from much of the poker playing community.

This story begins on August 17, 2000, when a post from 'WJR' appeared on the poker newsgroup, rec.gambling.poker (RGP), stating that he was having trouble receiving his cashout from PokerSpot.com, a new online poker room. Shortly after, the post was replied to by Russ "Dutch" Boyd, CEO of PokerSpot. Boyd wrote, '...we did not receive your cashout request. I am not sure why, and we are still investigating, but we have no intention of keeping your money. This is a very isolated incident, and I think you'll find very few complaints regarding our customer service.'

Ahh, but as time would tell, this was not an 'isolated incident' and there were not 'very few complaints', there were many.

The posts on RGP started to build up. One after another complaining (and warning others) that their cashouts were not getting processed. And just as quickly as the complaints rolled out, so did the excuses from PokerSpot support, excuses like, 'We are reworking our entire cash out system, and this has delayed all cash outs by a week or two.'

One PokerSpot member, John Buchanan, who played under the username 'MS Sunshine', claimed that Russ Boyd and PokerSpot owed him and his wife 'over $56,000'.

What was going on at PokerSpot? Did Russ Boyd and company run off with the money? The players wanted to know.

In February of 2001, Russ Boyd finally came forward with another address to RGP:

'As many of you are aware, we've been faced with some recent problems at Pokerspot...Due to a situation with Net Pro Ltd., the company that until recently processed our credit card deposits, a large amount of our funds, which includes player funds, has been stalled." Boyd went on to say, "As far as money owed to players, Pokerspot will make good on all pending cashouts."

But PokerSpot never did "make good" on all pending cashouts as Boyd promised. Some that did receive checks were out of luck when they reported that their checks failed to clear the bank.

Rick James Dies at Age 56

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 11:36:00 PM

May he rest in peace...

Funk legend Rick James, best known for the 1981 hit 'Super Freak' before his career disintegrated amid drug use and violence that sent him to prison, died Friday at age 56.
James died in his sleep at his home near Universal City, publicist Sujata Murthy said. The singer lived alone and was found by his personal assistant, who notified police."

Robbing Peter to pay Paul

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 09:47:00 AM

A wise man once said choose your battles wisely. Here is just another reason to consider when you think about the cost/benefit analysis of the War on Iraq.

"There also is a growing shortage in the Army's Delayed Entry Program, which allows recruits to sign up months ahead of the time they are required to report to boot camp.
Because of an increased demand for recruits this year, the Army has been rushing delayed-entry soldiers into basic training ahead of schedule. That has depleted the pool of soldiers who would have reported next year and added to the burden for recruiters.
Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., says the signs point to difficult times ahead for the Army.

'This is not a good situation. The National Guard is not meeting its recruiting numbers, the active-duty Army is having to take unusual steps just to meet its numbers,' Thompson says. 'The practice of putting delayed-entry personnel in right now assures that after the election the numbers will not be met.'"

Thrown to the wolves

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 09:39:00 AM

It looks like Alan Keyes has decided to accept the GOP Senatorial nomination in Illinois. The fact that he is from Maryland, with no discernable link to Illinois, apparently is not a concern for him...right?

I wonder what Alan Keyes had to say back when Hillary Clinton attempted the same thing in the year 2000.Let's go to the video tape

"I deeply resent the destruction of federalism represented by Hillary Clinton's willingness go into a state she doesn't even live in and pretend to represent people there, so I certainly wouldn't imitate it."

But hey, that's history. Why think about what somebody said yesterday when you can look towards the future?

At any rate, this will be the first all African-American senate race in the history of our union, and that is by all means a good thing. And to top it off, Keyes is a great speaker, although he rarely says anything I remotely agree with, which means our fellow citizens in Illinois are in for a heck of a debate season. The GOP knows this race is over and they are in essence throwing some red meat to their conservative base. Keyes will be on TV a lot and give them another minority talking head for their national agenda. This has very little to do with Illinois. Obama is basically a lock at this point, but an uncontested race doesn't help anyone. At most, this will be a for Obama to polish his political skills.

Now I know why the terror alert level was raised

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 09:08:00 AM

You can not make this stuff up....:

"President Bush offered up a new entry for his catalog of 'Bushisms' on Thursday, declaring that his administration will 'never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people.'

Bush misspoke as he delivered a speech at the signing ceremony for a $417 billion defense spending bill.

'Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we,' Bush said. 'They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.' "

Turning the corner?

by justmy2 @ 8/06/2004 09:02:00 AM

The President in a recent speech said the country was "turning a corner". Well, unfortunately it looks like there is an 18 Wheeler barreling down that road we are merging on to....:

"U.S. employers added a paltry 32,000 workers to payrolls last month, the government said on Friday in a report far weaker than expected that will come as unwelcome news for President Bush ahead of the presidential election.

The Labor Department also cut its tally of job growth for May and June by a combined 61,000."

Keep in mind, during an economic recovery jobs have historically grown over 300,000 workers per month for a sustained period of time. In the Bush recovery, which is quickly becoming an oxymoron, this has only occurred twice. Add to that $45/barrel oil and the recent terror alerts, and you have all of the red flags for an economic tumble.

Time for some POTUS elixir...which rabbit will be pulled from the hat this time...

Wednesday, August 4

They Knew

by justmy2 @ 8/04/2004 10:04:00 PM

The most recent issue of In These Times apparently has the definitive proof of the misinformation campaign of the Bush Administration in the run-up to the Iraq War.

The link is apparently currently down, but
according to Eric Alterman, the story points out the following:

1. "Well before they made their declarations that Iraq had nuclear weapons, the Bush administration's own intelligence agencies, the IAEA and others warned the White House that the claim could not be substantiated. Nonetheless, President Bush and Vice President Cheney proceeded to repeatedly claim Iraq had nuclear weapons.

2. Before they made their claims that Iraq 'possesses' chemical and biological weapons, the Pentagon's intelligence agency told the White House the claim could not be supported, and the State Department's intelligence experts told Colin Powell not to make the claim in his key speech to the U.N. They ignored the warnings.

3. A month after top members of Bush's own party, including Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), admitted there was no intelligence proving an Iraq-al Qaeda connection, President Bush began telling the country that 'you can't distinguish between Saddam and al Qaeda.' He and other officials proceeded to ignore key warnings from terrorism and intelligence experts that there was no connection, and continued to assert there was. Vice President Cheney, when called onto the carpet, even began referring to documents previously discredited by the Pentagon to claim his Iraq-al Qaeda assertions were accurate. Even today, after the 9/11 Commission has definitively shown there was 'no credible evidence' of an Iraq-al Qaeda collaboration, the administration continues to assert there is 'overwhelming evidence' proving their case. They have provided no evidence. "

I will withhold final judgment until I can read the final story for myself. But, I thought it had enough potential to pass along and allow you to make your own judgement.

Will the media also let the CIA Operative leaker out of the bag?

by justmy2 @ 8/04/2004 09:53:00 PM

Fresh from the DRUDGE REPORT 2004

"Ala. Senator Shelby Leaked Classified Info To FOX NEWS, Feds Say... MORE... Shelby 'divulged classified intercepted messages to the media when he was on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence'... WASH POST reporting Thursday: 'Fox News chief political correspondent Carl Cameron confirmed to FBI investigators that Shelby verbally divulged the information to him during a June 19, 2002, interview, minutes after Shelby's committee had been given the information in a classified briefing'..."

I wonder if this causes any consternation for the White House. If Fox News reporters are willing to give up their sources, the White House must really wonder what others have said in their grand jury testimony.

The skeptic in me says this story was leaked as a preemptive strike to limit questions if and when the CIA leak investigation turns up empty.

I suspect we shall soon see.

Timeline of All Terror Alerts

by justmy2 @ 8/04/2004 03:31:00 AM

The Administration has placed themselves in a Catch 22. If they raise the alert level, people question their credibility. If they fail to raise the threat level, people will call for their impeachment should something occur. The saddest part of the story is they could have avoided the credibility gap.

Andrew Card, the White House Chief of Staff, stated "From a marketing point of view you don't introduce new products in August" in 2002. Karl Rove told Congressional Republican's to focus on the impending war during that same election cycle. Add, Secretary Ridge's blatant campaigning during the most recent terror announcement, and one begins to think we may be Charlie Brown to the Administration's Lucy flat on our back once again.

Obviously, I hope this is not the case, but take a look at this timeline I located demonstrating the correlation between terror alerts and Administration issues.

Timeline of Terror Alerts


January 10, 2002 - George W. Bush, answering reporters' questions in the Oval Office regarding his close relationship with Ken Lay, head of the controversial Enron, claims that he barely knew him: "I got to know Ken Lay when he was the head of the—what they call the Governor's Business Council in Texas. He was a supporter of Ann Richards in my run in 1994 [italics Chatterbox's]. And she had named him the head of the Governor's Business Council. And I decided to leave him in place, just for the sake of continuity. And that's when I first got to know Ken. …"

Many see Bush's answer as less than sincere.

February 5, 2002 - Angry lawmakers to subpoena Ken Lay over Enron scandal. Journalist enquire about Lay's close connections to the Bush administration

February 12, 2002 - Attorney General John Ashcroft on Tuesday called on "all Americans to be on the highest state of alert" after an FBI warning of a possible imminent terrorist attack.


May 22, 2002 -- Bush goes on the record as opposing the formation of an independent commission to look into why 9/11 happened.

Mr. Bush's comments come after a two-day hearing on Capitol Hill with FBI director Robert Mueller and the agent who wrote the so-called "Phoenix memo" last summer warning about that Arab students training at U.S. aviation schools were linked to a militant Muslim group.

Same day:

The Senate Governmental Affairs Committee votes to issue subpoenas to the Bush administration for information on its contacts with bankrupt energy trader Enron Corp.

May 24, 2002 -- Railroad and other transit systems across the country received a Transportation Department warning based on "an unconfirmed, uncorroborated report", and were told to "remain in a heightened state of alert". Earlier this week, the government issued warnings about the Statue of Liberty and the Brooklyn Bridge, leading to tightened security at an around those New York City locations.


September 20, 2002 -- In the wake of damaging Congressional 9/11 inquiry revelations, President Bush reverses course and backs efforts by many lawmakers to form an independent commission to conduct a broader investigation than the current Congressional inquiry.

The White House also refuses to turn over documents showing what Bush knew before 9/11.

September 20, 2002 -- Relatives of 9/11 victims grill the Bush Administration over their reluctancy to get to the bottom of it. Source

September 21, 2002 -- The Pentagon completes and delivers to President Bush a highly detailed set of military options for attacking Iraq, said the New York Times, quoting Pentagon and White House officials on Saturday.

The president has options now, and he has not made any decisions," states Ari Fleischer.

September 23, 2002 -- Former Vice President Al Gore warns that President Bush's doctrine allowing for a "pre-emptive" strike against Iraq could create a global "reign of fear."

September 23, 2002 -- Victory for German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and his ruling coalition came after a campaign in which he emphasized his strong opposition to a US war with Iraq.

September 24, 2002 -- Based on a review of intelligence and an assessment of threats by the intelligence community, as well as the passing of the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks and the disruption of potential terrorist operations in the United States and abroad, the Attorney General in consultation with the Homeland Security Council has made the decision to return the threat level to an elevated risk of terrorist attack, or "yellow" level.


February 6, 2003 -- Powell pleads with the UN Security Council for a first strike against Iraq. Source

February 9, 2003 -- Citing credible threats that al Qaeda might be planning attacks on American targets, the U.S. government raised the national color-coded threat level Friday to orange, indicating a "high" risk of a terrorist attack. Source

Note: In what has become since an object of jokes and derision, the Department of Homeland Security urged citizens to stock up on plastic sheets and duct tape "in case of a chemical attack."

Note 2: Also keep in mind that they raised the alert level quickly after numerous anti-war organizations declared their intention to march against the plans to invade Iraq. In New York city, where nearly one million citizens voiced their opposition to the war plans, the level was placed in heightened orange alert just on time for the massive demonstrations of February 15, 2003.


May 20, 2003 -- The United States raises the nation's terror threat level Tuesday, saying the U.S. intelligence community believes al Qaeda has entered an "operational period worldwide" and might attack within the US.


July 25, 2003 -- After the Bush administration delayed its publication for months, Congress releases its 9/11 findings. The government also deletes 28 pages of the report believed to detail Saudi funding of members of Al Qaeda in the Untied States prior to Sept. 11.

July 28, 2003 -- US troops charged with beating Iraqi POWs.

15 US soldiers die over 8 days in Iraq.

July 29 -- Department of Homeland Security issues a warning about the possibility of suicide attacks on airplanes.


August 18, 2003 -- President Bush admits that major combat operations are continuing in Iraq. On May 1, Bush went on national TV to proclaim the end "major combat operations."

September 4, 2003 -- Both The New York Times and Vanity Fair start investigating the very damaging allegations that Top White House officials personally approved the evacuation of dozens of influential Saudis, including relatives of Osama bin Laden, from the United States in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks when most flights were still grounded, a former White House adviser said today.

September 5, 2003 -- A Department of Homeland Security advisory warns that al Qaeda is working on plans to hijack airliners flying between international points that pass near or over the continental United States.

December 18, 2003 -- 9/11 Chair Thomas Kean says the attacks were preventable.

Dec. 19 2003 -- A federal appeals court ruled the government can not detain U.S. citizen Jose Padilla indefinitely without pressing charges against him or allowing him access to the courts.

Same day -- The Wall Street Journal reports that auditors at the Pentagon are accusing Halliburton of refusing to hand over internal documents related to allegations that the oil service company overcharged the U.S. government in iraq.

Same day -- David Kay quits, having found no WMDs.

Dec. 21, 2003 -- Ridge raises the terror threat level just in time for the holidays.


February 6, 2004 -- CIA Director George Tenet Thursday said Iraq never posed an imminent threat to the United States.

February 7, 2004 -- Tom Ridge raises the terror alert.


March 15, 2004 -- Military families say bring the troops home.

March 16, 2004 -- Dems call for probe on Medicare cost cover-up.

March 17, 2004 -- Condoleeza opts of 9/11 Commission hearings.

March 17, 2004 -- Tom Ridge raises threat level to elevated.


March 30, 2004 -- Rice continues to refuse to testify publicly in front of 9/11 Commission.

April 1, 2004 -- US contractors killed and mutilated in Iraq. Medical evacuations in Iraq hit 18,000. Bush refuses to release Clinton papers to 9/11 Commission. And Richard Clarke is all over the news.

April 2, 2004 -- A bulletin sent from the FBI & Homeland Security warn of terrorists that may try to bomb buses and rail lines in major U.S. cities this summer.


May 18, 2004 -- Colin Powell tells Meet the Press that he was deliberately mislead about WMD information. Powell's aide tries to cut him off mid-air.

May 18, 2004 -- Newsweek reports that President Bush's top lawyer warned two years ago that Bush could be prosecuted for war crimes as a result of how his administration was fighting the war on terror.

The 9/11 Commission begins another round of hearings in NYC.

May 19, 2004 -- Nothing but bad news about prisoner abuse in Iraq, including breaking news that the Pentagon was told about the abuses back in November. Senate Armed Forces Committee holds hearings.

May 20, 2004 -- United States goes on Orange Alert.


July 6, 2004 -- Kerry names Edwards as his running mate.

July 8, 2004 -- Tom Ridge announces a terror alert.

July 11, 2004 -- Senior White House officials discuss how to delay elections.

Food for thought....You do the cooking...

Comments are welcome as always....