Wednesday, December 20, 2006

Pictures of Bill

For all of the people who want to see the face behind the puppy...

Sunday, January 22, 2006

From The Ratpuppy: New Shell, Same Game...

In his defense of spying on Americans in violation of the FISA law, Cheney on Friday stated: "it is, I'm convinced, one of the reasons we haven't been attacked in the past four years,"

But he forgets the fact that almost as many Americans have died in battle overseas since then, as were lost on that fateful day four years and 4 months ago.

It seems like he is trying to tell us that it is better to see Americans die "over there" than it is over here.

Americans are dying in larger numbers with each passing week.

And 9/11 did not create the 12,000-20,000 wounded American veterans with missing limbs, blindness or other permanent head injuries.

9/11 also did not cause the slaughter of 50-100,000 innocent Iraqi men, women and children, whose only crime was living in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Since the first of the year, we have lost three military helicopters in Iraq and now are only a few hundred unfortunate souls away from matching the 9/11 death toll, (if you aren't counting deaths due to "accidents," or the individual suicides of soldiers thrown into this meat-grinder.)

Is this how we honor and support our soldiers overseas? Should we just sit back, shut up and watch them die?

In our time we can see how history repeats itself as unwelcome American occupiers are being attacked and killed as surely as the French Resistance attacked the German occupiers during the Second World War.

If you don't believe that the Iraqis see the US as an unwelcome occupier consider this:
The British Ministry Of Defense conducted a poll of the Iraqi people in August 2005 in which 45% believed that attacks against Anglo-American troops were justified, 82% were "strongly opposed" to Coalition troop presence and 67% feel less secure because of the occupation.

What part of 'Iraq wants us out NOW,' do the neo-cons in the White House so miserably fail to understand?

How did we come to this point?

Let's remember some of the lies that we were told by Slippery George in the lead-up to the war:

On January 29, 2003, Bush announced in a State of the Union Address before Congress that Saddam had "25,000 liters of anthrax; enough doses to kill several million people..." and "...materials sufficient to produce 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin; enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure..." and "...the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX agent..."

In this address, Bush also stated that Hussein had "upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents..." and "several mobile biological weapons labs," and a "design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb."

As well as the now infamous claim that: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Bush never let Congress investigate or interview the sources of these wild tales as he demanded authority from the Congress to act against Iraq and remove Hussein. (Of course, Congress didn't provide the oversight needed either.)

Bush stated that he would exercise all options to avoid conflict as he ordered the UN inspectors out of the country, because they were embarrassing his plans for conquest. Iraq was cooperating, they were letting the inspectors go wherever they wanted to, and it was becoming obvious on the eve of war, that Iraq had not rebuilt the munitions that the weapons inspectors destroyed 13 years earlier.

Then Bush attacked Iraq.

It wasn't because Iraq was ever a genuine threat to the United States, and we were never told that we would force George Bush's sick brand of "democracy" down their throats no matter how hard the Iraqi people wanted to find their own way, and build their own government.

9/11 left 2,986 families devastated. Their Thanksgivings will never be as bright with a needlessly empty seat at the table.

And it appears that Bush will not rest until another 2,986 families will be forced to endure their Thanksgivings in the same manner as the living victims of 9/11.

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Marueen Dowd - Googling Past The Graveyard

From Maureen Dowd of the New York Times

"I don't like the thought of Dick Cheney ogling my Googling..."

Sunday, January 15, 2006

Russian Official Claims Condi's Problem is Lack of Sex

In a Pravada interview last Wednesday, Vladimir Zhirinovsky, the leader of Russia's Liberal and Democratic party, made the following statement in the wake of being lectured by Rice in relation to Russia's dispute with the Ukraine over gas supplies.

"Condoleezza Rice released a coarse anti-Russian statement. This is because she is a single woman who has no children. She has lost her reason because of her advanced single status. Nature takes it all [her reason].

"Such women are very rough. They are all workaholics, public workaholics. They can be happy only when they are discussed and written about everywhere: "Oh, Condoleezza, what a remarkable woman, what a charming Afro-American lady! How well she can play the piano and speak Russian! What a courageous, tough and strong female she is!

"This is the only way to satisfy her female needs. She derives pleasure from this. If she hasn't found a man by her side by her age, such a man will never appear. Even if she had an entire selection of men to choose from, she would remain single because her soul and heart have hardened. Like Napoleon, Genghis Khan, Tamerlane, or Alexander the Great of Macedon, Ms. Rice needs to fight and release tough public statements on a global scale. She needs to be on top of the world.

"Ms. Rice was always interested in Russia. Now she needs to prove that she actually has some insight into Russia. Her number one goal is to observe America's interest. If Russia rises, it means that the U.S. falls. Europe has united, China is growing rapidly and Russia possesses immense power in terms of energy resources. There is nothing the U.S. administration can do about it.

"The United States is experiencing a crisis of ideological and moral values. Americans talk about good family values, but the actual state of things is disastrous. That's why they need to protect themselves with such public personalities as Condoleezza Rice, who get pleasure from provoking political commotion.

"The civilized world needs to think about ensuring that single politicians are not allowed to stay in power. This was a common practice in the Soviet political system. The matter of international relations is very subtle and exquisite. A single word or phrase may play an extremely important role in politics. This is not the place where one can sublimate personal sexual problems.

"Complex-prone women are especially dangerous. They are like malicious mothers-in-law, women that evoke hatred and irritation with everyone. Everybody tries to part, as quickly as possible, with such women. But a mother-in-law is better than a single, childless political persona.

"This is really scary. Ms. Rice's personal complexes affect the entire field of international politics. This is an irritating to everyone, especially for the Eastern and the Islamic worlds. When they look at her, they go mad."

"Condoleezza Rice needs a company of soldiers. She needs to be taken to barracks where she could be satisfied. On the other hand, she can hardly be satisfied because of her age. This is a mental complex. She needs to return to her university and teach students. She could also use some psychological analysis.

"The true reason of Ms. Rice's attack on Russia is simple. Condoleezza Rice is a very cruel woman, offended by a lack of attention from men. Releasing such stupid remarks gives her the feeling of being fulfilled. This is the only way for her to attract men's attention," Vladimir Zhirinovsky said.

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Bush Authorized Illegal Spying Before 9/11

The Lies of the Bush Administration just keep on coming...

Bush Authorized Domestic Spying Before 9/11
By Jason Leopold
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Friday 13 January 2006

The National Security Agency advised President Bush in early 2001 that it had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups, according to a declassified document.

The NSA's vast data-mining activities began shortly after Bush was sworn in as president and the document contradicts his assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups.

Bush Should be Impeached for Illegal Wiretaps

New Zogby Poll Shows Majority of Americans Support Impeaching Bush for Wiretapping

Friday, January 13, 2006

From Faux News:

This is an actual screen capture from a Fox News broadcast...

The text states: "Will Vicious Dems Pay For Driving Alito's Wife To Tears?"

We are talking about a LIFETIME appointment here!!! And the lie-and-deny Neo-CONS want us to think only about how the poor little wifey cried???

How many tears will she shed for the women who will have to return to back-street abortions and coat hangars when Alito overides Roe v. Wade???

Did she cry for the little 10 year old girl that Alito ruled could be strip-searched?

Did you see how Alito ran out of the Senate chamber after the last hearing, leaving his wife far behind to fend for herself???

Give me a F**CKING break!!!

Open Letter to Norm Coleman

My ‘roomie’ Bill sent a letter to Republican Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota just before the Christmas holiday stating his expectations for a full and honest investigation of Slippery George’s allegedly illegal spying on people within the United States without obtaining warrants from the FISA court as required by law.

Here you can read Coleman’s reply, as well as our latest response to him.

We hope every patriotic American is making their will known in no uncertain terms to their elected representatives. I know someone like Coleman is probably just praying for this to go away… (This and Jack Abramoff…) But we all need to keep hammering them on this over and over again, and reminding them that they have a duty to their constituents first, until they start taking action.

If American citizens don’t start forcing their elected representatives to defend the Constitution, who will?

Anyway I think this is a good example of how to keep a communication on point, and respectful without being a fool about it.

Back the Attack, Until Freedom’s Enemies Crack!

Molly the Boston Terrier

First, from Norm Coleman to us:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning Congressional hearings into the National Security Agency's (NSA) wiretap program.

Senator Arlen Specter (R-PA) has announced that the Judiciary Committee will hold hearings to determine whether there was a statutory or legal basis for such a program, whether there was judicial review, the scope of the NSA intercepts, and what was done with that information. I support such an action because I believe we need to ensure that this program, aimed at protecting our national security, does not violate our Constitutional rights.

President Bush has confirmed that he authorized the NSA to conduct wiretaps on persons with established links to terrorist groups. It is important to note that the wiretap authorizations were only for intercepting international calls and only from persons the government has a reasonable basis to conclude is affiliated with Al Qaeda or related terrorist groups.

Members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees were informed about and received regular updates on this program. In fact, Representative Jane Harman (D-CA), ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, stated that "I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to U.S. national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities." Additionally, the Administration has briefed key members of Congress on the program over a dozen times.

The President has maintained that he will continue to use the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court set up under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) whenever possible. However, the FISA did not anticipate a post 9-11 situation where speed and immediacy is needed for approvals for warrants. Lt. General Michael V. Hayden, Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence, has testified that without the NSA program, crucial information not otherwise available would have been lost because of the processes and requirements set up under the FISA process.

I will continue to follow this important issue. I appreciate hearing from you and hope you will not hesitate to contact me on any issue of concern to you.

Sincerely, Norm Coleman United States Senate

And here is our response to him:

Dear Honorable Senator Coleman,

Thank you for your timely response to my message requesting that you get to the bottom of the reasons for President Bush's authorization for the NSA to spy on persons within the United States in obvious violation of the law.

I have two simple questions that should really get to the heart of President Bush's activities as it regards its Constitutionality and legality.

The questions are: (1) What tools did President Bush require in order to protect Americans from terrorism that were not available to him under existing FISA law?

And (2) How do we know for a fact that President Bush never authorized spying on any person within the United States in violation of the "reasonable cause" standard required by law as he claims?

You state in your response "President Bush has confirmed that he authorized the NSA to conduct wiretaps on persons with established links to terrorist groups..." or "only from persons the government has reasonable basis to conclude is affiliated with Al Qaeda or related terrorist groups."

But FISA already allows for the monitoring of such individuals, so why did President Bush have to turn his back on the US Constitution and FISA, as you seem to be claiming? Please be specific in your response.

You also stated to me "Members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees were informed about and received regular updates on this program. In fact, Representative Jane Harman (D-CA), ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, stated, "I have been briefed since 2003 on a highly classified NSA foreign collection program that targeted Al Qaeda. I believe the program is essential to U.S. national security and that its disclosure has damaged critical intelligence capabilities." Additionally, the Administration has briefed key members of Congress on the program over a dozen times."

I do not understand how anyone could consider being told by the administration that it intended to break the law, then being threatened with prosecution if they spoke about it, remotely constitutes proper Congressional oversight. The fact that Representative Harman and others failed to report this alleged criminal activity does not excuse President Bush from his sworn duty to uphold the US Constitution. Not by a long shot.

I also fail to understand your reasoning when you state that "the FISA did not anticipate a post 9-11 situation where speed and immediacy is needed for approvals for warrants."

FISA currently allows criminal law enforcement agencies to conduct surveillance for up to 72 hours when "speed and immediacy is needed" before going before the court for approval. If the request passes the Constitutional requirement of "probable cause," a warrant is almost always approved within a matter of minutes.

And in a time of war, FISA extends this period to 15 full days. If your argument is that 72 hours wasn't enough time to perform surveillance before obtaining a warrant that normally is granted within one hour, then please explain to me why the Republican Congress failed to declare a state of war after 9/11, if it was so critical to ignore the Constitutional rights of privacy and due process under the law of persons within the United States in the name of the war on terrorism.

I also look forward to hearing Lt. General Hayden's specific explanation as to why he believes "the processes and requirements set up under the FISA process..." Made it impossible for him to obtain any information that he had a legal right to have.

In my opinion, you have not made a single statement of fact that explains why the Bush Administration or the NSA needed to eavesdrop on the private communications of persons within the United States without meeting the requirements of FISA and the US Constitution.

That brings us back to my original questions...

(1) What tools did President Bush require in order to protect Americans from terrorism that were not available to him under existing FISA law?

(2) How do we know that Bush never spied on any person within the United States in violation of the "reasonable cause" standard required under FISA as he claims?

Question number 2 comes into play because if President Bush had all of the tools he needed to conduct the surveillance necessary to defend America, as I have shown he did under existing law... Why would he turn his back on the US Constitution and existing federal law?

Was it arrogance? Was it laziness? OR was it for some other reason...

Was Bush casting a net of electronic surveillance so wide that he knew it would be seen as illegal? Was he targeting anyone who might just have been expressing their first amendment rights to protest or to speak freely in America? Is it possible he snooping on political opponents?

This is why we have a FISA court, with ALL of the tools that any President would ever need to target the bad guys. FISA is the law so that NO PRESIDENT can snoop on any person within the United States without demonstrating within 72 hours AFTER the surveillance has started: 1) Exactly who is being spied upon, and 2) What probable cause there is to conduct the search.

If you believe that President Bush would never spy on anyone illegally, just remember how many people never thought Nixon would either. His illegal spying was one of the three articles of impeachment presented against him before he resigned. And the FISA court was created in the wake of his resignation in order to prevent this very abuse today.

In addition, I recall that the Bush Administration specifically asked that warrant-less surveillance of persons within the United States be permitted as a condition of the PATRIOT act in 2001, and that the US Congress specifically DENIED him this authority at that time.

So the Congress of the United States has already specifically addressed this issue, and has specifically denied the President authority to conduct warrant-less searches of persons within the United States for ANY reason. PERIOD!!!

Be Reminded That:

FISA makes it a crime, punishable by up to five years in prison, to conduct electronic surveillance except as provided for by statute. The only defense is for law enforcement agents engaged in official duties conducting "surveillance authorized by and conducted pursuant to a search warrant or court order." [50 U.S.C. § 1809]

Your choice should now be crystal clear to you... Either you believe in the oath you took to defend the US Constitution, or you are a passive accomplice to high crimes and misdemeanors against the American People. There is no room on the fence in this matter in the mind of patriotic Americans.

I did not spend eight years in the uniform of my country, and in defense of the US Constitution abroad to live to see these concepts shredded, or to have anyone in my government attempt to claim the right to do so in my name.

Without a strict adherence to the US Constitution and the rule of American law, THERE IS NO AMERICA!!! Can't you SEE that???

If the NSA, FBI or Justice Department, following the letter of an illegal Presidential Executive Order, did in fact conduct electronic surveillance on any person within the United States without providing probable cause and obtaining a court order... Then the President is guilty of a felony under the law!!! PERIOD!

Remember that President Bush is not being honest if he is claiming that he has Congressional authority to bypass the FISA Court, when he specifically requested and was denied permission to conduct warrant-less surveillance on persons within the United States BY CONGRESS when he originally sought this exact power in the PATRIOT Act negotiations back in 2001.

It would be dishonest for anyone else to make that claim as well.

I will be contacting YOU in the near future to see what specific action YOU are taking as my representative in the Senate to investigate and prosecute these serious allegations of criminal activity by President Bush.

I would expect such an investigation at a minimum to determine the names of everyone within the United States that were spied upon and to determine if FISA Court-acceptable probable cause did exist for each case of this surveillance.


Your constituent

cc: Senator Dayton; Representative Gil Gutknecht

Monday, January 09, 2006

Lucifer Becoming Impatient With Cheney's False Alarms

It was revealed in a press announcement by his aides Richard Nixon and Adolph Hitler that, Lucifer, Lord of the Underworld, is becoming increasingly impatient with Vice President Dick Cheney's continued health.

He stated: "All of these numerous 'false alarms' are really setting off our timetable down here. We keep scheduling his reception at the 'very special corner' that we have created for him..."

"I guess we will have to be patient, but were not waiting until Hell freezes over!" The Lord of Darkness stated with an evil laugh.

The allegedly Damned Cheney could not be reached for comment after being wisked to an undisclosed location after his latest hospital visit.

New Links Between Abramoff and The White House

For those who think that these aren't links between Slippery Jack Abramoff and Slippery George Bush's White House...

Here is a first glimpse of what may be the tip of the iceberg...

Abramoff and Co. Logged Nearly 200 Contacts with Bush Administration in First 10 Months Alone

Or this one...

The Next Abramoff Shoe to Drop

Although the mainstream press is ignoring the story as desperately as they can, it is beginning to look as though the Republican White House is as up to it's ears in the stink of the Abramoff scandal as the Republican Congress is

US Homeland Security Now Opening Private Mail!


Retired Professor Confused, Angered When Letter From Abroad Is Opened


Don't forget to respond to the MSNBC poll...