Nasty Letters To Crooked Politicians

As we enter a new era of politics, we hope to see that Obama has the courage to fight the policies that Progressives hate. Will he have the fortitude to turn the economic future of America to help the working man? Or will he turn out to be just a pawn of big money, as he seems to be right now.

Sunday, October 31, 2004

Woman Beater John Fund's book on voter fraud is a fraud...This guy is such a moral cripple.

John Fund's book on voter fraud is a fraud ... [Media Matters for America]: "John Fund's book on voter fraud is a fraud

In his recent book Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Democracy (Encounter Books, September 2004), Wall Street Journal op-ed columnist and author John Fund uses distortions and half-truths to impugn Democrats who, he states in his introduction, 'figure prominently in the vast majority of examples of election fraud described in this [Fund's] book.'

Fund has made numerous media appearances to promote his book. In October alone, he appeared on FOX News Channel's Special Report with Brit Hume, CNN Daybreak, twice on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, twice on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews, and on National Public Radio's The Tavis Smiley Show. Numerous conservative columnists have promoted the book, including George F. Will, Michelle Malkin, Jonah Goldberg, and R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.

Following are some of the false or unfounded claims in their order of appearance in Stealing Elections.

CLAIM: '[E]very single recount of the votes in Florida determined that George W. Bush had won the state's twenty-five electoral votes and therefore the presidency.' (p. 28)

FACT: A post-election study revealed several plausible scenarios in which then-Vice President Al Gore would have won Florida.

As Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted (here, here, and here), the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center (NORC) studied Florida's disputed ballots and concluded that Gore emerged the winner in at least four recount scenarios. The NORC study was sponsored by news organizations including The Associated Press, The New York Times, and CNN, as well as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post Co., and Tribune Publishing (which owns the Chicago Tribune, the Orlando Sentinel, and the South Florida Sun-Sentinel). According to a November 12, 2001, Washington Post article on the NORC's findings: '[I]f Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins."

Link...Read the rest of it...

Wash. Post ignored own polling data to suggest ... [Media Matters for America]

Wash. Post ignored own polling data to suggest ... [Media Matters for America]In its October 31 lead editorial, titled "The Osama Surprise," The Washington Post predicted that the recently released taped message from Osama bin Laden would "shift voters" toward President George W. Bush: "Maybe it [bin Laden videotape] was meant to shift voters away from the president on Tuesday; more likely it will do the opposite."

But the Post's own polling data suggests that, if there has been any shift in voter preferences since the release of the bin Laden tape on October 29, it has been in the direction of Senator John Kerry, not Bush. The last Post poll conducted entirely before the bin Laden tape aired (released October 29) gave Bush a three-point advantage, 50 percent to Kerry's 47 percent. The Post's most recent poll, conducted from October 27-30, showed Kerry and Bush tied at 48 percent. That's a three-point shift in Kerry's favor.

Sinclair's Dirtbags with Porn Ties?

Guardian Unlimited | US elections 2004 | Voters claim abuse of electoral rolls

Guardian Unlimited | US elections 2004 | Voters claim abuse of electoral rolls: "The allegations, which come just two days before Americans go to the polls in one of the most tightly contested elections in a generation, threaten to plunge Tuesday's count into a legal minefield and overshadow even the elections of 2000.

The claims come as both Republicans and Democrats put in place up to 2,000 lawyers across the country to challenge attempts to manipulate the vote in swing states.

Although allegations of misconduct have been levelled at both parties recently, the majority of complaints that have been identified in The Observer' s investigation involved claims against local Republicans."

(Fucking GoPpiG Thugs Know They Have a LOOSER with Dumbya...bastards...)

Saturday, October 30, 2004

From the Vote-To-Impeach Organization: Don't Let GoPpIg Thugs Do This Again...

Ramsey Clark Launches On-Line Reporting System
for Election Fraud, Misconduct and Disenfranchisement

Please Forward and Circulate

Dear VoteToImpeach / member,

We are urgently asking you to forward this email to a friend or family member and encourage as many people as possible, in every state, city and town, to participate in the emergency mobilization to report on election day misconduct, fraud or voter disenfranchisement.

We have set up an on-line reporting form on our web site so that people around the country can directly report any evidence and eyewitness reports of attempts to intimidate or turn away voters by the legions of Bush-employed "voter registration challengers" who are being placed in neighborhood polling stations in urban areas around the country on November 2.

The form on the web site is simple to use. It asks people to report about 1) misconduct by Bush’s so-called "registration challengers" at polling places, and 2) people being turned away at polling places, and 3) large numbers of people leaving polling places before they voted due to long lines and delays created by the "registration challengers."

We will take eyewitness reports and other testimony of election-day misconduct to the House Judiciary Committee for review and action. The House Judiciary Committee is the appropriate legislative body to initiate the impeachment process.

"If widespread voter interference or vote fraud is traceable to high officials, it will be an important element in the impeachment struggle." stated Ramsey Clark in a message on October 28, 2004 announcing the election day on-line reporting system of criminal conduct by the Bush administration and its operatives.

Click here to report election misconductStealing the election by disenfranchising the African-American community and intimidating elderly poll workers, and through the employment of other insidious methods, is another gross violation of the Constitution and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The goal of the Bush team is not only to turn away individual voters but to create delays and long lines that would cause many other would-be voters to give up in their attempt to cast a ballot.

Please join in this historic effort. Send this email to everyone you know and urge them to go to web site and report election day misconduct.

donate boxWe hope you can help with this important initiative. There are VoteToImpeach/ImpeachBush members in every state and cities large and small across the country. If you can contribute to this effort, please click here for access to the online donation form on the secure server, where you can also obtain information to write a check.

And if you or your friends or family have not yet voted to Impeach Bush - be sure to do so now. Simply visit where you can cast your vote to Impeach George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft.

Together we can fight to stop a stolen election!

Michael : Mike's Message : Mike's Latest News

100,000 War Crimes

Bob Dreyfuss 10/29/04 -- The staggering research reported in the British journal Lancet shows the magnitude of the Bush administration’s war crimes: 98,000 Iraqi civilians dead, including 40,000 children. And that’s not even counting Fallujah.The number of deaths is particularly shocking because the researchers measured deaths in the 18 months after March 2003 in comparison to a similar period before March 2003. But it’s been widely reported the under sanctions deaths in Iraq were already very high, including among children—so the post-March ’03 increase is even more significant.The researchers didn’t include Fallujah because the number of deaths there were so high they didn’t want that city’s dead to skew their national sample, measured in 808 Iraqi households in 33 clusters spread across Iraq.Newsday, reporting the study, notes :The most common causes of death before the invasion of Iraq were heart attacks, strokes and other chronic diseases. However, after the invasion, violence was recorded as the primary cause of death and was mainly attributed to coalition forces—with about 95 percent of those deaths caused by bombs or fire from helicopter gunships.I guess I don’t think most Americans care a lot about dead Iraqis. I hope I’m wrong. The researchers deliberately released their report on the eve of the U.S. elections in the hope that it would have the greatest impact. Two more American soldiers died yesterday in combat, bringing the total of American dead to 1,106. That the ratio is 100 to 1 won’t change most American minds, I don’t think. But in a close election, if it affects one of a hundred American voters, it can make a difference. It should.
Dreyfuss Report at
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Friday, October 29, 2004

Bush Seeks Limit to Suits Over Voting Rights

Bush Seeks Limit to Suits Over Voting Rights:
"WASHINGTON -- Bush administration lawyers argued in three closely contested states last week that only the Justice Department, and not voters themselves, may sue to enforce the voting rights set out in the Help America Vote Act, which was passed in the aftermath of the disputed 2000 election.
Veteran voting-rights lawyers expressed surprise at the government's action, saying that closing the courthouse door to aspiring voters would reverse decades of precedent.

Since the civil rights era of the 1960s, individuals have gone to federal court to enforce their right to vote, often with the support of groups such as the NAACP, the AFL-CIO, the League of Women Voters or the state parties. And until now, the Justice Department and the Supreme Court had taken the view that individual voters could sue to enforce federal election law."

(This is a glimpse into what the bastard GopPiG thugs want to do to us--Put everything they can in the hands of their own power mongers like John AssKrak, defeated ex-senator and hated idealogue.) *aj*

From F.A.I.R. Media Advisory Group:

Missing the Evidence on Missing Explosives Reports ignore videotapes that debunk administration claims
October 29, 2004
When the New York Times reported on Monday (10/25/04) that over 300 tons of high-explosive materials appeared to be missing from an Iraqi weapons facility, it was no surprise that the Bush administration and conservative pundits would quickly challenge the story. But recent reporting has taken this spin as proof that the facts of the story are in dispute-- eventhough new evidence disproves the administration's rebuttals.

On October 28, ABC affiliate KSTP released footage that was shot by its embedded reporters on April 18, 2003, showing members of the 101st Airborne Division searching the Al Qaqaa bunkers. Clearly visible on the tape are containers marked with labels that indicate the barrels contained the high explosives in question. ABC World News Tonight broadcast the footage on October 28, noting that soldiers opened the bunkers that had been sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), discovered the high explosives, and then left those bunkers open and unguarded.

Given that the tape was shot nine days after the fall of Baghdad, it would appear to prove that at least some of these explosives were looted afterthe U.S. invasion-- a scenario that is consistent with statements from Iraqi officials and witnesses to the looting (Agence France Presse,10/27/04; New York Times, 10/28/04). As ABC's Martha Raddatz put it, "It is the strongest evidence to date the explosives disappeared after the U.S. had taken control of Iraq.

"On the other hand, on the same day the Pentagon released satellite images that they claim show vehicles near some of the bunkers at the Al Qaqaa site on March 17, 2003. That would seem to be an attempt to bolster the administration's claim that the explosives were removed by Saddam Hussein prior to the U.S. invasion, though there is no evidence that the trucks did anything at all with the explosives in question.

Indeed, the fact that trucks were in the vicinity of bunkers that contained large amounts of battlefield weapons (in addition to the high explosives) just before a war seems hardly newsworthy. Certainly the presence of trucks near the bunkers does nothing to undermine the footage of explosives in the bunkers days later. But despite their dubious relevance, the Pentagon images-- along with theWhite House's continued criticism of Kerry for bringing up the issue at all-- seemed to leave some news outlets uncertain about the facts. A subhead above a Los Angeles Times story read, "Reporters Taped Troops Apparently Finding Munitions. A Pentagon Photo Implies Otherwise."

The actual article, however, noted that the Pentagon photo implied very little: "The photograph reveals little about the fate of the 377 tons of explosives, part of an estimated 600,000 tons of explosives believed to have been scattered throughout Iraq at the time." And even though ABC's network newscast had broadcast the KSTP footage, ABC's Ted Koppel reached a very different conclusion on the Nightline broadcast later that evening (10/28/04). Koppel explained that "a friend" in the military had reminded him that he was actually at Al Qaqaa during the war, and that "my friend, the senior military commander, believes that the explosives had already been removed by Saddam's forces before we ever got there.

The Iraqis, he said, were convinced that the U.S. was going to bomb the place." For some reason, the theory advanced by his military friend was apparently more credible to Koppel than the television footage ABC had aired hours earlier that debunked his thesis. Instead of reporting on this newly discovered footage from Al Qaqaa, theWashington Post (10/29/04) pursued a different angle: "This week's assertions by Sen. John F. Kerry's campaign about the few hundred tons said to have vanished from Iraq's Qaqaa facility have struck some defense experts as exaggerated." The story's point, that the invasion allowed vast quantities of weapons to be looted all over Iraq, would hardly seem to undermine Kerry's critique of the Bush administration. Ignoring the evidence released the day before that explosives were on site after the fall of Baghdad, the Post instead reported that "Pentagon officials, reconstructing a timeline of what might have occurred at Qaqaa, believe they have narrowed the window for the disappearance to a two-month period between mid-March 2003, when the IAEA verified its seals were still in place, and May 2003, when U.S. military search teams arrived at the site and found it had been looted, stripped and vandalized."

If the Pos thad reported on the KSTP footage, though, the paper would have been able to shut much of the Pentagon's "window." Not surprisingly, Fox News Channel continued to aggressively challenge the explosives story, even after the KSTP footage surfaced. On Special Report (10/28/04), anchor Brit Hume told viewers that "officials cite further evidence the material had been moved before U.S. troops arrived"--apparently a reference to the inconclusive Pentagon satellite images. Special Report did not even mention the KSTP footage. But Fox campaign reporter Carl Cameron claimed that the news of the day was damaging to the Kerry campaign, since "the Iraqi explosives may have disappeared before the invasion, undercutting Kerry's attack on the president."

Cameron added, "The Democrat hoped the explosive story would be explosive. But the president is already calling it a dud, accusing Kerry of saying anything to get elected."

The Los Angeles Times followed a similar tack with an article (10/29/04) headlined "Munitions Issue Cuts Both Ways." The only evidence the paper found to support the idea that the issue would be harmful to Kerry were the claims of White House strategist Karl Rove, Bush communications director Nicolle Devenish and George W. Bush.That the subject of a scandal gets to decide how important it is is an odd notion-- but many journalists* seemed to put more faith in administration pronouncements than in videotaped evidence.

(Excuse me, but everyone already knows the media and elGeneralissimo Chimpers are lying through their teeth. What is surprising is that Ted Koppel would join the chorus, when the video evidence is so clear. Why is it that you have to CATCH this stinkin' lyin' bastard every time before the buck stops somewhere else. Fuck Bush. 3 more days of this and he will be a footnote except to all the tens of thousands of lives he has destroyed with his lust for power and the oil...the oil he could never coax out of the filthy, dusty west Texas desert, but thought he could steal from the Iraqi people. This is what former administrations did to the American Indians...Steal their land and its resources and just relocate the 'natives' or 'savages' somewhere else.

Lying, shifty eyed, mother fuckers...the Bush Cabal will go down in history as THE WORST OF THE WORST. Let's hope it is all over for them in three days. Or it will be ALL OVER for the world's oldest functioning democracy.


But then, all great countries have fallen after their failure to gain empires and the destruction of their armed forces. Every one. Who is to think America should be left out?)*aj*

"The O'Sexxxy Factor" -Great Video On The Polluted Mind of a Bully, Bill O'Really

You Mean Osama BinLaden Is Still Making Political Statement? On America's Newshour?

t r u t h o u t - William Rivers Pitt | Osama's Election Editorial: "So the bastard is still alive.

He isn't dead of kidney failure or rotting in a cave somewhere in the Hindu Kush. He wasn't smoked out of his hole, and he in no way appeared to be on the run. The images broadcast on every American television station in the last few hours showed a man apparently in good health, clothed in traditional white and wrapped in a golden robe. His hands were steady and his voice was clear. From all appearances, Osama bin Laden is tanned, rested and ready.

In as much as it is possible for a wanted mass murderer to have a conversation with the American public, this is what we are seeing tonight. Osama bin Laden directed his message not at the Muslim world, not at the American government, but at the people gearing up to vote for a President on Tuesday. "You American people, my speech to you is the best way to avoid another conflict about the war and its reasons and results," said bin Laden. A lot of people thought the capture of bin Laden would be the 'October Surprise' to affect the vote. Instead, we got, hard as it is to believe, an election editorial from Osama, who remains alive and free. As far as October surprises go, this one is completely off-the-grid strange.

For the first time, bin Laden openly took responsibility for the attacks of September 11. "We fought you because we are free...and want to regain freedom for our nation. As you undermine our security, we undermine yours," he said. "To the U.S. people, my talk is to you about the best way to avoid another disaster. I tell you: Security is an important element of human life and free people do not give up their security."

Bin Laden attempted to explain his reasons for the 9/11 attacks, stating that the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 lit his homicidal fuse. "I will tell you the reasons behind these incidents," he said. "I will be honest with you on the moment when the decision was taken. We never thought of hitting the towers. But after we were so fed up, and we saw the oppression of the American-Israeli coalition on our people in Palestine and Lebanon, it came to my mind and the incidents that really touched me directly goes back to 1982:. When the US permitted the Israelis to invade Lebanon with the assistance of the 6th fleet. In these hard moments, it occurred to me so many meanings I can't explain, but it resulted in a general feeling of rejecting oppression, and gave me a hard determination to punish the oppressors. While I was looking at the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it came to my mind to punish the oppressor the same way and destroy towers in the U.S. to get a taste of what they tasted, and quit killing our children and women."

While candidates Bush and Kerry were careful to avoid using the video as a club to batter each other, their surrogates have already taken to the airwaves to spin this event for one or the other. At first blush, it is difficult to imagine how bin Laden's entrance into this voting season helps the election prospects of Mr. Bush. The videotape was first broadcast by the al Jazeera network, which is based out of Qatar. According to CNN, the U.S. Ambassador to Qatar attempted to stop Al Jazeera from broadcasting the tape. That, as much as the actual content of the tape, speaks to how nervous the re-appearance of bin Laden makes the Bush administration.

Beyond the demonstrable fact that Mr. Wanted-Dead-Or-Alive is still upright and breathing, there is the scathing mockery bin Laden leveled at Bush, along with a back-handed thank-you to Bush for giving the 9/11 terrorists the time they needed to complete the attack. "We never thought that the high commander of the U.S. armies would leave 50,000 of his citizens in both towers to face the horrors alone," bin Laden said. "It appeared to him that a little girl's talk about her goat and its butting was more important than the planes and their butting of the skyscrapers. That gave us three times the required time to carry out the operations, thank God."

Once again, Bush's comments from March of 2002 rise again with the impact of a gut-punch. "So I don't know where he is," said Bush of bin Laden at the time. "Nor - you know, I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I... I truly am not that concerned about him." The fellow who orchestrated the massacre of 3,000 people, the fellow whom Bush said he wasn't concerned about, thanked Bush for giving him the time necessary to complete his wretched act. In the parlance of American youth, Bush got punked by the top terrorist on national television.

An issue which has already been pressing on this campaign season now resonates with new urgency. For the last several days, the Bush administration has been wrestling with the fact that nearly 400 tons of high explosives - the same kind of explosives used to bring down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, the same kind of explosives used to blow a hole in the USS Cole - walked away from a storage bunker in Iraq.

Videotape from a Minnesota news station, shot by embedded reporters during the invasion of Iraq, showed members of the 101st Airborne cutting the locks on the place. No troops stayed to guard the well-known bunker, however, because such duty was not a priority of Bush administration officials handing out marching orders to the troops. Bush's own weapons inspector, David Kay, was appalled at what he saw on the Minnesota news station's footage of the opening of the bunker. "When you break into it, you own it," said Kay. "It's your responsibility to secure it."

Thanks to the disastrous Iraq invasion, and the continuing debacle that is the occupation, Iraq is now a place where al Qaeda terrorists may operate freely. How much of the missing explosives in question have fallen into the hands of bin Laden loyalists? How much of the thousands of tons of explosives and weaponry that went similarly unguarded by American forces all across Iraq have likewise found their way into al Qaeda hands? The re-emergence of Osama bin Laden makes these questions all the more pressing.

How all of this will shake out among the American electorate remains to be seen. Perhaps the American people, upon seeing a healthy bin Laden again on their televisions, will be reminded of Bush's failure to capture or kill him and punish Bush at the polls. Perhaps they will be angered that bin Laden dared to throw his two bloody cents into the political conversation and side with Bush over Kerry. Perhaps the only absolute conclusion to draw from all this is the one that almost certainly occurred to every American who tuned into the broadcast.

The bastard is still alive.
ElGeneralissimo Chimpo Gives Us His Plan for the Future: Posted by Hello

Important Bananna Republic To Get International Election Monitoring!

Observers to monitor US election

With four days to go, the election appears too close to callHundreds of US government observers are being deployed across the country to ensure minority groups do not face discrimination during the election.
About three times as many staff will monitor proceedings as in the 2000 presidential election, which saw a row over voter eligibility in Florida.
Florida officials are also sending new ballot papers to thousands of postal voters whose forms never reached them.
The candidates are targeting key states in the last days before Tuesday's vote.
John Kerry is scheduled to spend the day in Florida, one of the battleground states that could be won by either him or George W Bush and that may affect the result of the election.
Staff from the civil rights division of the justice department will monitor voting procedures in eight Florida counties, including those hit by claims of disenfranchisement and confusing procedures in 2000.
"This president believes the buck stops everywhere but with the president of the United States." Senator John Kerry
On the Kerry campaign trail
The day at-a-glance In total, 840 federal observers and more than 250 civil rights personnel will be at work in 25 states, including some like Pennsylvania and Ohio where the result is also expected to be close, the justice department announced.
They will be checking, among other things, that voters are not being challenged unfairly because of their race or language ability.
Large numbers of people have registered as new voters for this election - Republicans have concerns that some are fraudulent applications and Democrats want to ensure that their supporters are allowed to vote.
New ballot papers are being sent out in the heavily Democratic Broward county in Florida, though election officials there said initial fears that 58,000 forms had gone missing were inflated. But between 10,000 and 15,000 ballots are being resent.
Star power
High-profile supporters of both candidates will take the stage again on Friday to rally support for Mr Bush or Mr Kerry.
Former President Bill Clinton begins a three-state tour for Mr Kerry, while Hollywood star and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will be with President Bush.

(What a cruel and unjust embarassment this WH pResident has been for America. Our collective face turns RED whenever we think how he got into office.)*aj*

This is War

t r u t h o u t - Bush Supporter Points Gun to Head of Kerry Demonstrator: " An anti-John Kerry demonstrator was charged with felony aggravated assault with a gun for allegedly pointing a weapon at the head of a Kerry supporter.
Michael Garone, 52, was released from jail Tuesday on his on recognizance.
Garone and others were holding anti-Kerry signs at a street corner Monday in Vero Beach when Trevor Pickering drove up and said 'Go Kerry,' according to an arrest affidavit.
Pickering argued with the anti-Kerry protesters, and then got out of the car and knocked a sign out of the hands of one of the demonstrators.
'That's when (Garone) walked up to my car and stuck a gun to my head,' Pickering said. 'I said 'I'm sorry' and 'Please don't kill me,' drove away and called the cops.'
Garone denied pointing the gun at anyone.
Vero Beach is about 65 miles north of West Palm Beach. "

Thursday, October 28, 2004

Disclaimer: (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Nasty Letters to Crooked Politicians has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of any article nor is Nasty Letters to Crooked Politicians endorsed or sponsored by the originators.)




The Bush administration is pushing the theory that the 380 tons of explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa storage facility before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Administration spokesman Dan Senor said on CNN that "there's a very high probability that those weapons weren't even there before the war."[1]

For days, this theory has been in direct conflict with a Pentagon official, who told the Associate Press on Monday, "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."[2]

Now, video shot in Iraq by a Minneapolis news team provides further proof that the administration's theory is bogus. After the invasion - on April 18, 2003 - the Minneapolis ABC news crew was stationed just south of the Al Qaqaa facility.[]3 That day, they drove 2 to 3 miles north with the 101st Airborne Division. There, "members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labeled 'explosives.'"[4] Some of the boxes were marked "Al Qaqaa."[5] One soldier told the crew: "we can stick [detonation cords] in those and make some good bombs."[6] Watch the video:


1. "Paula Zahn Now," CNN, 10/26/04,
2. "380 tons of explosives missing in Iraq," Associated Press, 10/25/04,
3. "5 EYEWITNESS NEWS video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq,", 10/28/04,
4. Ibid,
5. Ibid,
6. Ibid,

Doofus Dumbya Lies Again. Kerry Must Stop Calling the Lies by Nice Names...BUSH LIES...PEOPLE DIE--PERIOD!

Missing explosives at Al Qaqaa: Bush caught in another Iraq war lie:
"By Patrick Martin
28 October 2004
Use this version to print Send this link by email Email the author

The Bush administration's political fortunes have been dealt a serious blow, only a week before the presidential election, with the revelation October 25 that 400 tons of extremely powerful explosives some potentially usable in detonators for nuclear weapons have gone missing in Iraq.
A joint investigation by the New York Times and CBS News found that the huge stockpile of high-powered explosives, of three types known by their abbreviations as HMX, RDX and PETN, has disappeared from one of Saddam Hussein's largest conventional weapons depots, at Al Qaqaa, 30 miles south of Baghdad. The facility was captured by US forces during the invasion of Iraq, but not carefully inspected until May 27, 2003, when US agents found that all of the explosive materials had been removed.

Nearly three weeks ago, on October 10, the US puppet government in Baghdad reported the disappearance of the explosives in a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the chief nuclear weapons inspection agency of the United Nations. IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei presented the letter to the UN Security Council, but the US and UN officials concealed the news until after the Times article was published Monday. (According to an editorial in the Wall Street Journal, a rabidly pro-Bush media outlet, the administration knew of the disappearance from October 15.)

The letter to the IAEA from Mohammad J. Abbas, an official of the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology, gave the quantities of missing explosives as 215 tons of HMX, 156 tons of RDX and 6 tons of PETN. The substances are the most lethal non-nuclear explosives used in making armaments. "


The president demonstrates his proposal for a faith-based approach to Head Start.

Wednesday, October 27, 2004

Eminem Uncensored--Click Below--RealPlayer or Windows Media

EminEm's censored Video---the UNCENSORED VERSION <----CLICK HERE

Flash Presentation: How elGeneralissimo Chimpers Will Leave You With 40 Years of RIGHT-WING SCOTUS!


Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Bush's Kerry Comments Go Unchecked (Another FUCKING LIE from your COMMANDER IN THIEF)
October 26, 2004

George W. Bush's new claims about Kerry "flip-flopping" on the war in Afghanistan quickly moved yesterday from the campaign trail to the nightly news.

But some journalists who repeated Bush's charges made no effort to examine the truth behind Bush's claims-- claims which turn out, like many other Bush lines of attack, to be deceptive. Bush charged that while Kerry now criticizes how the administration managed the search for Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora, Kerry made comments at the time that were much different. "In the fall of 2001," Bush charged, "on national TV, he said this about Tora Bora: 'I think we've been doing this pretty effectively and we should continue to do it that way.'

At the time, the senator said about Tora Bora, 'I think we've been smart. I think the administration leadership has done it well, and we are on the right track.'

"But Bush is taking Kerry's words grossly out of context.

Both comments he cited came from an appearance on CNN's Larry King Live (12/14/01). When a viewer asked "why they don't use napalm or flame-throwers on those tunnels and caves up there in Afghanistan,"

Kerry replied: "Well, I think it depends on where you are tactically. They may well be doing that at some point in time. But for the moment, what we are doing, I think, is having its impact and it is the best way to protect our troops and sort of minimalize the proximity, if you will. I think we have been doing this pretty effectively and we should continue to do it that way."In other words, Kerry was suggesting that napalm and flame-throwers might be ill-suited for the mission to find Osama bin Laden.

Bush is incorrect (A FUCKING LIAR*) in saying that the other quote was "about Tora Bora" ;in fact, that comment came in response to this question from host LarryKing: "Senator Kerry-- and this is for all of you-- how goes it so far in Afghanistan, in your opinion?" A moment's thought reveals the absurdity of comparing one assessment of the situation in Afghanistan-- made shortly after the capture of Kabul, when it was believed that bin Laden was surrounded and would soon be captured-- with an assessment made later, after bin Laden had slipped away to parts unknown.

Unfortunately, some journalists covering the Bush campaign appearance passed along his allegations, but failed to inform viewers about their accuracy. CNN's John King (<---FUCKING IDIOT*)(10/25/04) talked up the Bush campaign strategy, noting that "another part of their strategy to keep voters moving from Bush to Kerry is to make the case that Senator Kerry has been inconsistent on Iraq."

As evidence, King explained that "as part of that message today, one of Senator Kerry's arguments on the campaign trail has been that the United States military let Osama bin Laden away at Tora Bora-- let him escape from Tora Bora, Afghanistan. Senator Kerry says that isproof that Mr. Bush has mismanaged the war on terrorism. President Bush today in his speech is quoting something very different Senator Kerry said back in the fall of 2001."

He then quoted from Bush's speech, but failed to provide the context of Kerry's statements, made on his own network. NBC Nightly News correspondent David Gregory (10/25/04) also failed to challenge Bush's claims, opting instead to explain Bush's strategy to NBCviewers: "The president also took aim today at one of Kerry's main attacks, that the administration let Osama bin Laden get away during the war in Afghanistan. Today, the Bush campaign tracked down an interview Kerry gave at the time, praising the effort to find bin Laden at ToraBora. The president quoted Kerry's words." Unfortunately, Gregory did not compare Bush's description of Kerry's words with Kerry's actual remarks.

ACTION: Please contact CNN and NBC News and remind them how critical it is to check the accuracy of charges made in the closing days of the presidential campaign.

CONTACT:CNN, Wolf Blitzer Reports

NBC Nightly News
Phone: (212) 664-4971 As always, please remember that your comments have more impact if you maintain a polite tone.

Please send a copy of your correspondence to

Molly Ivans

AlterNet: Election 2004: Clueless People Love Bush: "Oh, you sweet, innocent, carefree citizens in non-swing states. You have no idea how much fun and slime you are missing.
In the swingers, wolves stalk us mercilessly (as the pro-wolf lobby points out indignantly, no one has ever been killed by wolves on U.S. soil, but try arguing that in the face of the relentless new TV ad campaign). Breaking news everywhere � 380 tons of high explosives in Iraq left unattended, stock market down to year's low, leading economic indicators down, more tragedy in Iraq, the Swift Boat Liars are back, more Halliburton scandal, George Tenet says the war in Iraq is 'wrong' � it feels like you're dodging meteorites here in the Final Days."

Moon Over Kerry

Is Sun Myung Moon, self-proclaimed Messiah, True Father, and major media magnate, out to get John Kerry? Award-winning investigative producer Robert Parry thinks so, and recently laid out his case in a detailed report, Kerry Attacker Protected Rev. Moon.

As I reported last week (Stolen Honor: the Moon Connection), Carlton Sherwood, producer of the controversial anti-Kerry film "Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal," wrote an investigative book in the 1980s looking into the activities of Sun Myung Moon and followers in the Unification Church. In "Inquisition: The Prosecution and Persecution of Reverend Sun Myung Moon," Sherwood concluded that Moon and his associates "were and continued to be the victims of the worst kind of religious prejudice and racial bigotry this country has witnessed in over a century."

But, as was revealed in "The Resurrection of Reverend Moon," my 1992 documentary for the PBS Frontline series, there is ample reason to question Sherwood's conclusions, since evidence exists that Moon subsidized the book – promising to purchase 100,000 copies of Inquisition – and that he played a role in the creation of it. A letter, addressed to Moon from his aide James Gavin, stated that Gavin had reviewed the "overall tone and factual contents" of Inquisition before publication and had suggested revisions.

"Mr. Sherwood has assured me that all this will be done when the manuscript is sent to the publisher," Gavin wrote. "When all of our suggestions have been incorporated, the book will be complete and in my opinion will make a significant impact. In addition to silencing our critics now, the book should be invaluable in persuading others of our legitimacy for many years to come."

It's therefore fair to ask, as Parry does, whether or not "Sherwood's longstanding ties to Moon's organization raise other troubling questions." Although Sherwood and his publisher deny any impropriety, it is undeniable that the book was part of a successful campaign to rehabilitate Moon following his 1982 conviction for tax law violations and to muzzle his critics.

Meanwhile, the purported Messiah was taking other media measures to help himself and a wide range of conservative pals, spending literally billions of dollars on a variety of print and video outlets – most notably the daily Washington Times, created in 1982 as an amplifier for conservative voices. As a result, Moon was able to gain access at the very highest levels of the U.S. government – including to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, who accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from Moon's organization for giving speeches after leaving the White House.

As quid for a presumed subsequent quo, Moon's newspaper regularly promoted numerous conservative causes, including that of the "contra" rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's leftist Sandinista government. His organization and the Reagan-Bush team also cooperated in covering up evidence of a contra-connected drug smuggling ring.

That same contra-cocaine-connection was the subject, in 1986, of a Senate investigation by – you guessed it – John Kerry. Soon Kerry found himself under the microscope of the Washington Times, as the newspaper attacked his probe for being "extensive, expensive, in vain," as one headline put it.

Later, in front page articles, the Times accused Kerry's staff of obstructing justice because the investigation allegedly interfered with federal government efforts to get at the truth. "Congressional investigators for Sen. John Kerry severely damaged a federal drug investigation last summer by interfering with a witness while pursuing allegations of drug smuggling by the Nicaraguan resistance, federal law enforcement officials said," one of the articles reported.

Kerry's investigation concluded that "individuals who provided support for the contras were involved in drug trafficking, the supply network of the contras was used by drug trafficking organizations, and elements of the contras themselves knowingly received financial and material assistance from drug traffickers ... In each case, one or another agency of the U.S. government had information regarding the involvement either while it was occurring or immediately thereafter."

But the New York Times (and other mainstream media) didn't take Kerry's findings any more seriously than the Washington Times. Newsweek summed up the prevailing wisdom, calling Kerry a "randy conspiracy buff."

Years later, of course, the CIA's own inspector general corroborated Kerry's findings, reporting that both contras and contra-related entities had become involved in the cocaine trade during the 1980s, and that incriminating information known to the Reagan-Bush administration was withheld from Congress.

The Latest In Bush Dodge: The 'splosives wuz never there, Lucy!

< >
In Iraq, 380 tons of powerful explosives have been looted and may have fallen into the hands of insurgents. In an effort to deflect blame, administration officials are pushing the theory that when "U.S. forces...reached the Al Qaqaa military facility in early April 2003, the weapons cache was already gone."[1] This theory is not credible.
According to an AP report, U.S. solders visited the Al Qaqaa in April 2003 and "found thousands of five-centimetre by 12-centimetre boxes, each containing three vials of white powder."[2] Officials who tested the powder said it was "believed to be explosives."[3] Yesterday, "an official who monitors developments in Iraq" confirmed that "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."[4] Thereafter, according to the official, "the site was not secured by U.S. forces."[5]
It makes sense that the explosives were there when the U.S. solders arrived because, as the LA Times notes, "given the size of the missing cache, it would have been difficult to relocate undetected before the invasion, when U.S. spy satellites were monitoring activity."[6]
1. "White House Downplays Missing Iraq Explosives," Los Angeles Times, 10/26/04,
2. "U.S. troops find signs of chemical readiness," Associated Press, 4/05/03,
3. Ibid,
4. "380 tons of explosives missing in Iraq," Associated Press, 10/25/04,
5. Ibid,
6. "White House Downplays Missing Iraq Explosives," Los Angeles Times, 10/26/04,
Visit for more about Bush Administration distortion.

It is not so much a "pattern" of lies, untruths, exaggerations, and bald-faced lies

that we put up with from both the media-whores and this creepy bunch of war criminals in our White House...but the fact that is that's ALL THAT YOU GET FROM THEM.


The New Yorker: The Talk of the Town:
"The Bush Administration has had success in carrying out its policies and implementing its intentions, aided by majorities, political and, apparently, ideological, in both Houses of Congress. Substantively, however, its record has been one of failure, arrogance, and, strikingly for a team that prided itself on crisp professionalism, incompetence. "

Monday, October 25, 2004

You Fucking Idiot Posted by Hello

Truly Unbelievable Incompetence: Bush: "Hire Me For Four More Of The Same" ROFL

John Kerry for President - Huge Cache of Explosives Vanished From Site in Iraq:
"The White House said President Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, was informed within the past month that the explosives were missing. It is unclear whether President Bush was informed. American officials have never publicly announced the disappearance, but beginning last week they answered questions about it posed by The New York Times and the CBS News program '60 Minutes.'
Administration officials said Sunday that the Iraq Survey Group, the C.I.A. task force that searched for unconventional weapons, has been ordered to investigate the disappearance of the explosives.
American weapons experts say their immediate concern is that the explosives could be used in major bombing attacks against American or Iraqi forces: the explosives, mainly HMX and RDX, could produce bombs strong enough to shatter airplanes or tear apart buildings.
The bomb that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 used less than a pound of the same type of material, and larger amounts were apparently used in the bombing of a housing complex in November 2003 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the blasts in a Moscow apartment complex in September 1999 that killed nearly 300 people.
The explosives could also be used to trigger a nuclear weapon, which was why international nuclear inspectors had kept a watch on the material, and even sealed and locked some of it. The other components of an atom bomb - the design and the radioactive fuel - are more difficult to obtain. "


Good Work By Fellow Blogger on "Disappearing" White House Webpages

THE BRAD BLOG: "White House Website Scrubbing: Far-Reaching, Systematic, in Violation of 'The Rule of Law'": "White House Website Scrubbing: Far-Reaching, Systematic, in Violation of 'The Rule of Law'
Meanwhile...the Mainstream Media would rather go Goose Hunting.
On Nov. 1, 2001 George W. Bush issued Executive Order #13233 which modified some of the measures of the 'Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978', instituted in the wake of the Nixon Administration's legal imbroglio over which Presidential documents were private and which were public. The PRA, according to the National Archives, 'changed the legal ownership of the official records of the President from private to public.'
In a bit of Orwellian irony that has now become all too recognizable for the Bush Administration, their Executive Order #13233 which modified that PRA, is not listed at all on the White House website page entitled "Executive Orders Issued by President Bush."

So Ralphy, The Supremes Caught You Bending Over In The Shower?!? All The MEN? Well now...

Have A Little Pie! Posted by Hello

FindLaw's Writ - Dean: The Coming Post-Election Chaos

FindLaw's Writ - Dean: The Coming Post-Election Chaos: "This next presidential election, on November 2, may be followed by post-election chaos unlike any we've ever known. Look at the swirling, ugly currents currently at work in this conspicuously close race. There is Republicans' history of going negative to win elections. There is Karl Rove's disposition to challenge close elections in post-election brawls. And there is Democrats' (and others) new unwillingness to roll over, as was done in 2000. Finally, look at the fact that a half-dozen lawsuits are in the works in the key states and more are being developed.

This is a climate for trouble. A storm warning is appropriate. In the end, attorneys and legal strategy could prove as important, if not more so, to the outcome of this election as the traditional political strategists and strategy.
Let's go over each factor that spells trouble - and see how they may combine. "
Link To FindLaw

Most 9/11 Families, Disenchanted with Bush Reticence, Want Kerry

BBC NEWS | The polarisation of the 9/11 families: "'I had trusted my government before. I thought they were doing their job and our families were safe and I wasn't now going to believe they were fixing things,' Mindy told me.

Anger sparked political activism and together with two other widows, Mindy and Lorie left their young children with relatives and started a regular eight hour commute to Washington.

The 'Jersey moms' banged on doors in the male-dominated bastion of the Capitol. The Bush administration had to give in and an independent 9/11 Commission was established. The women would spend the next two years harrying the White House to release documents and allow officials to testify.

Lorie van Auken's anger was fuelled when she realised - ahead of most of the public, that President Bush had failed in his pledge to 'smoke out' the man responsible for the death of her husband and deliver Osama Bin Laden to justice 'dead or alive'.

In December 2001 Bin Laden was allowed to escape at Tora Bora. The Bush administration was unwilling to put enough US boots on the ground, fearing casualties.

They relied instead on Afghan warlords. 'I was appalled at what happened, it was very upsetting,' says Lorie. 'It would've been important to have caught him, to have sent a message to al-Qaeda - cut it out,' agrees Mindy. 'Now it doesn't make any difference.' "

Link to whole story
For Bush, Bad News Is Bad News
Published: October 25, 2004
(H)ere's George W. Bush's problem. How does a president win re-election when all the news the voters are seeing is bad?

Polls show the president running even or slightly ahead of Senator John Kerry. But bad news is piling up like mounds of trash in a garbage strike, and that's never good for an incumbent.

The war in Iraq is a mind-numbing tragedy with no end in sight. Dozens of Iraqi army recruits were slaughtered Saturday in one of the deadliest attacks yet against the Iraqi security forces. Yesterday an American diplomat was killed in a mortar attack near the Baghdad airport.

The latest horrific video to come out of the war zone shows the kidnapped British-Iraqi aid worker, Margaret Hassan, trembling, weeping and begging for her life. "Please help me," she says. "This might be my last hours."

American troops have fought valiantly, but cracks in their resolve are beginning to show. "This is Vietnam," said Daniel Planalp, a 21-year-old Marine corporal from San Diego who was quoted in yesterday's New York Times. "I don't even know why we're over here fighting."

Here at home the stock market has tanked, in part because of record-high oil prices. The Dow Jones industrial average closed at its low for the year on Friday as world oil prices streaked ever higher. The cost of oil has jumped more than 75 percent in the past year. With the weather turning colder, the attention of homeowners - many of them voters - is being drawn to the price of home heating oil. What they're seeing is not pretty.

The Energy Department expects heating oil bills to increase nearly 30 percent this year, and that may be a conservative estimate. Thermostats across the country are heading down, down, down.

Republican campaign officials are worried about the dearth of good news. The flu vaccine shortage has led to price-gouging and long lines of sick and elderly patients, some of them on the verge of panic. Last week we learned that the index of leading economic indicators had moved lower in September, the fourth successive monthly decline, which could be an indication of a slowdown in economic growth.

The lead stories in The New York Times and The Washington Post on Friday were both about Iraq - and both were disheartening. The Times said senior American officials were assembling new information about the increasingly deadly Iraqi insurgency that showed "it has significantly more fighters and far greater financial resources than had been estimated."

The Post wrote that, according to a U.S.-financed poll, leaders of Iraq's religious parties are becoming the most popular politicians in the country, an extremely ominous development in the view of the Bush administration.

These are all stories with the potential to influence voters, and they are not being offset by other, more positive developments. The result has been high anxiety levels among Republican operatives.

"If you're asking me if there's a perfect storm of bad news occurring, the answer is no," said a G.O.P. campaign strategist, who asked not to be identified. "If you're asking if I'd like a little rosier scenario to be played out on the front pages and the nightly news, the answer of course would be yes."

Unable to counter the bad news with stories of major successes, the Bush campaign has turned almost exclusively to the so-called war against terror. The message in a nutshell: be very afraid.

A Bush campaign commercial released a few days ago shows wolves advancing menacingly toward the camera. A voice in the ad says, "Weakness attracts those who are waiting to do America harm."

At the same time, the Republican Party is doing what it can in key states to block as many Democratic votes as possible. Party officials have mounted a huge organized effort to challenge - some would say intimidate - voters in states like Ohio and Florida, in a bid to offset the effects of huge voter registration drives and a potentially heavy turnout of voters opposed to Mr. Bush and his policies.

Election officials in Ohio said they'd never seen such a large drive mounted to challenge voters on Election Day.

Voter suppression is a reprehensible practice. It's a bullet aimed at the very heart of democracy. But the G.O.P. evidently considers it an essential strategy in an environment with so little positive news.

E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-Mailed Articles
Columnist Page: Bob Herbert

Absurdly Germane: The New York Times and the Bush “disaster”

By Joseph Kay and Barry Grey
25 October 2004
Use this version to print Send this link by email Email the author

On October 17, the New York Times published its endorsement of Democrat John Kerry for president. The editorial’s main argument was that Bush had implemented a radical right agenda that undermined long-standing democratic processes at home and produced a foreign policy debacle in Iraq.

According to the Times, the presidential race “is mainly about Mr. Bush’s disastrous tenure.” The editors began their litany of Bush’s misdeeds by noting that “the Supreme Court awarded him the presidency.” This was a deliberate reminder of the illegitimate—from the standpoint of constitutional and democratic principles—pedigree of the administration.

This led to the newspaper’s first point in its political indictment: that Bush, who had lost the popular vote to Democrat Al Gore, “turned the government over to the radical right” and pursued a far-right agenda for which it had no popular mandate. The Times cited as prima facie evidence of this reckless course Bush’s appointment of John Ashcroft as attorney general.

Once in office, Bush “moved quickly to implement a far-reaching anti-choice agenda.” He “remained fixated on...fighting the right wing’s war against taxing the wealthy” and pursued “a systematic weakening of regulatory safeguards” on the environment.

The administration’s policy was characterized by “a Nixonian obsession with secrecy, disrespect for civil liberties and inept management...The Justice Department became a cheerleader for skirting decades-old international laws and treaties forbidding the brutal treatment of prisoners taken during wartime.”

The war in Iraq was launched on the basis of “misrepresentations,” including the two pieces of bogus evidence that Saddam Hussein was pursuing nuclear weapons. One [the allegation of Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium from Niger] was “the product of rumor and forgery,” while the other [the charge that aluminum tubes were procured to develop nuclear weapons] “had been thoroughly debunked by administration investigators.”

Taken on their face, the Times’ charges—all irrefutable—present a picture of an administration that functions as a criminal conspiracy, using secrecy and lies to undermine democratic rights, further enrich the most privileged social layers, and launch wars on false pretenses.

What the Times does not address is the most important question: how has such a government been allowed to carry through its radical agenda? There is a good reason for the newspaper’s silence on this matter—its own complicity.

On the eve of the 2004 election, the Times finds it expedient to remind us of the 2000 election crisis and its undemocratic resolution, implicitly placing a question mark on the legitimacy of the Bush administration. It has, however, remained remarkably silent on this critical political fact for four years.

At the time of Bush’s installation by the right-wing Supreme Court majority, which halted the counting of votes in Florida to ensure the accession of the Republican candidate, the Times was not so reticent. On the contrary, it endorsed the ruling and opposed any questioning of the legitimacy of the new administration.

In an editorial published December 13, 2000, one day after the Supreme Court ruling, it urged the American people to “respect the authority of the ruling and the legitimacy of the new presidency whether or not they agree with the court’s legal reasoning....Mr. Bush’s title to the office comes through the electoral count and through appropriate legal procedures that settled in his favor the official result of a messy Florida election.”

This set the tone for the next four years. During the first nine months of the administration, the newspaper sought to minimize the far-reaching character of Bush’s right-wing agenda, while going to great lengths to portray the semi-literate front-man for the most reactionary sections of the American ruling elite in the best possible light.

Two weeks into the Bush presidency, for example, the Times downplayed the significance of Ashcroft’s nomination as the country’s chief law enforcement official. In a February 2, 2001 editorial, the newspaper noted: “Mr. Ashcroft pledged at his [confirmation] hearings not to let his views interfere with his sworn duty to uphold the law and run the department in an unbiased way.” The editorial went on to express the hope that he would keep his word.
Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the newspaper intensified its efforts to boost Bush’s public image (and politically disarm the American people), at times going to absurd lengths to promote the myth of Bush as a mature and sober leader.

There was, for example, the October 12, 2001 editorial that followed one of Bush’s rare press conferences. At the news conference, held to outline the rationale for the war launched a few days before against Afghanistan, Bush gave a typically incoherent performance, riddled with contradictions and lies. The basic content, however, was ominously clear: Bush declared the attack on Afghanistan “the first battle in the war of the twenty-first century.”

Here is what the Times had to say in its editorial, headlined “Mr. Bush’s New Gravitas.” The president, the Times wrote, “seemed confident, determined, sure of his purpose and in full command of the complex array of political and military challenges that he faces in the wake of the terrible terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. It was a reassuring performance that should give comfort to an uneasy nation...[Bush] seemed to be a president whom the nation could follow in these difficult times...He was at once firm in his resolve to protect the nation and fatherly in his calm advice to get on with the life of the country as much as people can.”

The Times, of course, knew better. This was the same George Bush whom it now denounces as a liar and incompetent. But the newspaper, which fully supported the “war on terror” and its first installment, the invasion of Afghanistan, was not about to level with the American people, any more than the administration it was covering up for.

One could cite many more editorial testimonials for Bush, including pieces supporting Homeland Security terror alerts issued without any substantiation, and commentaries inveighing against “partisan” exploitation of Bush’s long-standing ties to Enron boss Kenneth Lay. Meanwhile, on its news pages, the newspaper systematically promoted the lies that were used to justify the invasion of Iraq. (See
“The New York Times and the road to war”.)

This policy of concealment and cover-up has continued up to the present. When Newsweek reported this summer that the administration was developing contingency plans to cancel the elections in the event of a terrorist attack, the Times first ignored and then dismissed (in a July 17 editorial) the enormous threat to democratic rights that these plans represented.
In light of this record, the Times’ October 17 indictment of the Bush administration constitutes a self-indictment—one that extends to the Democratic Party and the entire “liberal” establishment.


Sunday, October 24, 2004

Bush supporters are misinformed

by kos Fri Oct 22nd, 2004 at 17:39:23 GMT
What better example of the faith-based versus reality based community?
75% believe Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.
74% believe Bush favors including labor and environmental standards in agreements on trade.
72% believe Iraq had WMD or a program to develop them.
72% believe Bush supports the treaty banning landmines.
69% believe Bush supports the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
61% believe if Bush knew there were no WMD he would not have gone to war.
60% believe most experts believe Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.
58% believe the Duelfer report concluded that Iraq had either WMD or a major program to develop them.
57% believe that the majority of people in the world would prefer to see Bush reelected.
56% believe most experts think Iraq had WMD.
55% believe the 9/11 report concluded Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.
51% believe Bush supports the Kyoto treaty.
20% believe Iraq was directly involved in 9/11.

These people are definitely not part of the Reality Based Community.

We were tricked by George W. Bush

Click here:
Would Kerry Throw Us To The Wolves?
A misleading Bush ad criticizes Kerry for proposing to cut intelligence spending -- a decade ago, by 4%, when some Republicans also proposed cuts.
October 23, 2004
eMail to a friend
Summary: A new Bush ad claims Kerry supported cuts in intelligence “so deep they would have weakened America ’s defenses” against terrorists, and shows a pack of hungry-looking wolves preparing to attack. Actually, the cut Kerry proposed in 1994 amounted to less than 4 percent, as part of a proposal to cut many programs to reduce the deficit.
And in 1995 Porter Goss, who is now Bush’s CIA Director, co-sponsored an even strong deficit-elimination measure that would have cut CIA personnel by 20 percent over five years. When asked about that at his confirmation hearings he didn't disavow it.
Analysis: The Bush ad released Oct. 22 is called “wolves,” and is a direct appeal to fear.

Whoops! We Made A Little Bo-Boo!

The lying and corrupt sons of bitches squatting in our nation's White House would like you to forget the whole run up to their war in Iraq. They want you to blame it on the CIA. Blame it on the FBI. Blame it on Santa Claus...

Blame it on anyone except the vicious war criminal, George W Bush, who was never elected by the people. Blame it on anyone except the guy who twisted any information he received to relate it in some way to get his daddy's nemesis, Saddam Hussein.

Blame it on anyone except the coward, George W Bush, who did anything and said anything to get AWOL in 1972. The coward who would not take his flight physical, unheard of for pilots to avoid their physicals in the TANG. I know. I am a pilot. The only reason you duck your physical, expecially when you have signed a contract with the TANG, a contract that will keep you out of Viet Nam if you follow it...a CONTRACT to do something you swore an oath to do.

Don't blame Bush. He doesn't believe what he doesn't want you to believe he doesn't believe he didn't do.

This little fraud is the worst monster on the planet, but still gets up on a stage, rolls up his sleeves like his arch-nememsis Dr. Howard Dean used to do, and chats up audiences of the sworn believers. He swears his soul to God, but pass the ammunition to the OTHER guy.

Just think about how corrupt this bastard and his whole cabal of criminal co-conspirators is, and has been, to the American public. My little blog here may only be read by six or eight hundred people in any given time. But they have the power to remember. They have the power to call a spade a spade, and remind their friends, families and co workers how important it is to have HONEST elected officials.

We can suffer the mistakes of HONEST officials. We can survive the mistakes of the heart made by ELECTED officials. But we must NEVER, NEVER, allow a man who has proven himself capable of lying through his teeth to the American people, after they were good enough to suffer his appointment to the highest office in the land by a conspiracy of criminal Supreme Court Judges...We must NEVER allow such a son of a bitch to remain in that office when he comes to us, hat in hand, begging for his job for four more years.

Anyone who would vote for this bastard becomes an ersatz war criminal...guilty by association...of the Iraqi devestation. Killers of women, children, elderly; burglers of history such as Donald Rumsfeld who declared "Democracy is messy. People can steal in a democracy."

No one of good conscience would align themselves with war criminals and conspirators to kill and maim the innocent.

No one of good conscience should vote for George W Bush.

A. J. Franklin

Rose Petals and Candies Thrown at 49 New Iraqi Army Recruits!

t r u t h o u t - 49 Iraqi Army Recruits Executed: " BAGHDAD, Iraq - A group of at least 49 soldiers of the new Iraq Army were ambushed and killed while on their way home after graduating from training, a U.S. military official said.
The soldiers appeared to have been forced to lie face down on the ground and then were shot dead at close range, Diyala province police chief Major General Waleed Khalid Abdul Salam told CNN.
An official with the 30th Brigade Combat Unit of the U.S. 1st Infantry Division said 49 bodies had been found.
Discovery of the soldiers' bodies was followed by news that a U.S. security official assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was killed by a mortar attack on a U.S. Army base near Baghdad airport.
The soldiers who died were surprised and captured Saturday on a road near the Iranian border, about 80 miles (130 km) east of Baghdad, Maj. Gen. Salam said. "

Shreveport Times Newspaper Says It All:

Jab Posted by Hello

Saturday, October 23, 2004

Fact check: Sinclair's A POW Story contained errors, only some of which were rebutted

On October 22 at 8 p.m. ET, Sinclair Broadcast Group aired a program titled A POW Story: Politics, Pressure and the Media that consisted of more than thirty minutes focused on Senator John Kerry's Vietnam War record, followed by less than four minutes purporting to examine President George W. Bush's service during the Vietnam era, and a final segment on the media. Parts of the anti-Kerry film Stolen Honor: Wounds That Never Heal, as well as segments from a pro-Kerry film titled Going Upriver: The Long War of John Kerry, were shown during the broadcast. Kerry attackers and the program's host, Jeff Barnd, made a number of factually false statements, some of which were rebutted by Kerry defenders while others were left uncorrected. The overwhelming evidence that Bush shirked his Texas Air National Guard duty was glossed over: Viewers were told only that questions remain about whether Bush completed his required service.

Sinclair opened and closed the broadcast with a patently false statement that was not rebutted: the assertion that the "news program" has generated enormous controversy. At the end of the program, Sinclair urged viewers to contact the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to express their view that it was appropriate for Sinclair to air this "news program." But it was not this program that generated such controversy. Rather, A POW Story apparently represented Sinclair's attempt to repair the damage wreaked on its stock price in the wake of an October 9 Los Angeles Times report that Sinclair was "ordering its stations to preempt regular programming just days before the Nov. 2 election to air a film [Stolen Honor] that attacks Sen. John F. Kerry's activism against the Vietnam War."

Following a massive grassroots advertiser boycott effort, threatened shareholder litigation, and numerous other actions taken to stop Sinclair from airing Stolen Honor, the company announced on October 19: "Contrary to numerous inaccurate political and press accounts, the Sinclair stations will not be airing the documentary 'Stolen Honor' in its entirety." Rather, the broadcast group, said, it would run A POW Story, "a news special [that] will focus in part on the use of documentaries and other media to influence voting, which emerged during the 2004 political campaigns, as well as on the content of certain of these documentaries."

Link to Fact Check Report...

'Newsday' to Endorse Kerry

By Joe Strupp

Newsday of Melville, N.Y., plans to endorse John Kerry in its Sunday edition, editorial page editor Jim Klurfeld revealed Friday, adding that the decision followed a discussion in which both candidates were found to have serious negatives.

This marks the fifth straight presidential election in which the paper has backed a Democrat since returning to endorsements in 1988 after a 16-year hiatus. "There was a feeling that the case against Bush was very strong. We felt that Bush had split the country further." Klurfeld told E&P Friday.

...Newsday also finalized plans to withhold endorsements in at least five of the 30 state legislative races within its circulation area because editors do not believe either candidate is worthy. "Either because the incumbent was too much a part of the problem or the challenger did not offer an alternative," Klurfeld explained. "We said the bar has to be set very high."

Bastard Bushites Try To Fuck-Over Dem Voters And STEAL ANOTHER ELECTION

The criminal conduct of the Bush administration seems boundless. Having intimidated Congress into supporting his war of aggression against Iraq and the simultaneous assault on civil liberties at home, the Bush team is organizing a massive intimidation campaign against voters in predominantly African American communities in urban areas in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and other swing states.

This effort - reminiscent of the disenfranchisement of voters that has been the ugly legacy of racism in this country - is plainly designed to steal the election.

“Republican Party officials in Ohio took formal steps yesterday to place thousands of recruits inside polling places on Election Day to challenge the qualifications of voters they suspect are not eligible to cast ballots,” reports the NY Times of October 23.

“Election officials in other swing states, from Arizona to Wisconsin and Florida, say they are bracing for similar efforts by Republicans to challenge new voters at polling places, reflecting months of disputes over voting procedures and the anticipation of an election as close as the one in 2000.

“Ohio election officials said they had never seen so large a drive to prepare for Election Day challenges. They said they were scrambling yesterday to be ready for disruptions in the voting process as well as alarm and complaints among voters. Some officials said they worried that the challenges could discourage or even frighten others waiting to vote.”

For the past 18 months, VoteToImpeach/ members have been active all over the country and have played a central role in exposing the criminal acts of Bush administration officials. The media has given increasing coverage to the grassroots movement for impeachment. Covering the recent Million Worker March at the Lincoln Memorial, the Washington Post reported, “From a podium on a wide granite landing on the memorial steps, former U.S. attorney general Ramsey Clark called for the impeachment of Bush for war crimes.”
It’s not just in the media, people all over the country are taking action. They are wearing the Impeach Bush t-shirts, carrying signs, and they are distributing the articles of impeachment on-line to friends who in turn are forwarding the message to other friends. This is a huge effort. You can join those who have Voted to Impeach at where you can also visit the Impeach Bush Resource Center and pick up t-shirts, bumper stickers and lawn signs that raise the powerful call for impeachment.

Please help with the costs of this tremendous effort - your contributions make the difference in the ability to spread this message far and wide. Make Bush and all those who are hoping to carrying out voter intimidation see the clear message from the people of the U.S. that not only will they not be intimidated, they demand he be held accountable for his criminal conduct.

You can make a donation now online through the secure server by clicking here, where you can also get information to write a check.There has never been a more urgent time to interject the impeachment issue than right now. Going through the run-up to the election process without vigorously raising the underlying issue of criminal conduct by high officials sets a dangerous precedent.

As Ramsey Clark wrote, “Only Impeachment Now Can Prevent Further Lawlessness by the Bush Administration And By Its Warning, Future Administrations. There will be more aggression before the November elections and more after, whatever the outcome, if the American people do not act now to impeach President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Powell, who has finally claimed he supported the war of aggression against Iraq and also who presented false information before the United Nations in its justification, Secretary Rumsfeld, and Attorney General Ashcroft, who has pervasively violated the Bill of Rights and appeased and condoned criminal acts by government, and other civil officers of the United States.”
Let’s all make a renewed commitment to spread the message of impeachment in the critical weeks to come. The people of this country have every right to insist that high officials who commit criminal acts be held accountable.

GoP*pIG Mother-Effers Start Beating Up On OHIO VOTERS--DEMS out in Force to Protect Voters

t r u t h o u t - BREAKING: GOP Moves to Crush Ohio Vote: " Election officials in other swing states, from Arizona to Wisconsin and Florida, say they are bracing for similar efforts by Republicans to challenge new voters at polling places, reflecting months of disputes over voting procedures and the anticipation of an election as close as the one in 2000. "

Minnesota senator closes Washington office, citing terrorist threat

By Ron Jorgenson and Patrick Martin
23 October 2004
Use this version to print Send this link by email Email the author

Senator Mark Dayton, a Democrat from Minnesota, announced October 13 that he was closing his Washington DC office and sending his office staff to locations away from Capitol Hill or back to Minnesota until after the November 2 general election, as a precaution against the threat of a terrorist attack on the US capital.

The Senate is in recess until after the election, in which one third of Senate seats are at stake, in addition to the White House and all seats in the House of Representatives. Dayton is not up for reelection until 2006, and his staff would normally keep regular business hours on Capitol Hill during the pre-election recess. But Dayton decided otherwise after a series of intelligence briefings about potential terrorist attacks on Washington.

At a press conference, he declared, “I take this step out of extreme, but necessary, precaution to protect the lives and safety of my Senate staff and my Minnesota constituents, who might otherwise visit my office in the next few weeks. I feel compelled to do so, because I will not be here in Washington to share in what I consider to be an unacceptably greater risk to their safety.”

The first-term senator was either denounced or ridiculed by Senate colleagues, local officials in Washington, and the media. He is the only senator to close his office in the Russell Senate Office Building, which is situated across the street from the Capitol. Republicans have denounced him as a “coward,” as “paranoid,” and for “caving in to terrorism” and “sending the wrong message.”
Democrats sounded off as well—particularly local officials in Washington, worried about the impact on tourism. Washington Mayor Anthony Williams, said, “I’m literally scratching my head trying to figure out what frequency he’s on.” Eleanor Holmes Norton, the congressional delegate from Washington, DC and a member of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, declared, “He’s damaged us. He’s unnecessarily panicked people across the United States.”
The Minneapolis Star-Tribune, a staunchly pro-Democratic paper, editorialized, “We join the Capitol Hill security chief, the Homeland Security leadership, the mayor of Washington and, apparently, every other member of Congress in scratching our heads at Mark Dayton’s preemptive shuttering of his Senate office. It doesn’t take perfect foresight to imagine what the principal judgment will be: In staking out this Cassandra’s position, Dayton has added considerably to unfortunate aspects of his reputation: loner, loose cannon, flake. It’s simply impossible to take Dayton’s alarm seriously in the absence of any other lawmaker or security official, so far, coming to a similar conclusion. Take it as political theater, it is farcical—and counterproductive.”

Dayton is hardly an eccentric or iconoclast, however. He is a multimillionaire scion of the family that founded Target Corporation, the second largest US retailer, and is in a position to receive information from high-level contacts within the US government and the corporate world about any possible “October surprise” attack on the US capital.

Despite the media onslaught, Dayton defended his position the following day, and added, “I would not advise someone to visit Capitol Hill between now and the election, out of extreme precaution. I would not bring my two sons to Capitol Hill between now and the election.”
According to Dayton’s account, the initial impulse for his decision came at a September 22 briefing on security in Iraq attended by 40 senators, as well as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other Pentagon officials. During the briefing, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist referred to an updated domestic threat assessment. When Dayton read the report the following day, he became alarmed at its “tone” and met with the Senate sergeant-at-arms to discuss it. He followed up by lobbying Senate leaders and spoke to Frist on three separate occasions, imploring him to call a special meeting of all 100 senators. Frist refused.

Frist’s office initially claimed the report Dayton cited had been issued in August and the Capitol’s security perimeter had been expanded as a result. Dayton’s office countered saying the report was dated September 15. Because the report is classified top secret, Dayton says he cannot divulge specifics. One Senate staffer told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that while no attacks on Capitol Hill were mentioned, the report did contain information concerning possible terrorist surveillance of the area.

The September 15 report was drawn up by a joint CIA-FBI agency called the Terrorist Threat Integration Center. The Washington Post said it described a worst-case scenario whereby Al Qaeda would use “weapons of mass destruction to launch multiple simultaneous attacks on the United States and overwhelm the US government.” The Post’s unnamed source said, “This scenario was way over the top,” and described it is as “fire and brimstone raining down from the skies” and “the continental US up in smoke.”

On the weekend prior to Dayton’s October 13 press conference, a new update was issued that supposedly reduced the threat outlined in the September 15 report. Dayton claims, however, that while less emphatic, the new analysis did not retract claims made in the original report.
Back in Minnesota on October 15, Dayton appeared on Minnesota Public Radio’s Midday program. Despite constant probes by the host and callers about his action, Dayton stubbornly defended the decision.

In attempting to defend himself against charges of cowardice when compared to his Senate counterparts who did not close their offices, Dayton made a telling observation. Despite the fact the Senate has a large volume of unfinished business—eight major appropriation bills remain uncompleted—this year is the “earliest we have closed the Senate in the four years since I’ve been a senator. Two years ago [during the 2002 election], we stayed until the 17th of October.”
The implication is that, far from upholding their motto of “not caving in to terrorists,” senators were clearing out of Washington under the cover of a pre-election recess, while leaving their staffs behind to face an ostensible terrorist threat.

Several other Democratic senators indicated that they had received the same high-level briefing about terrorist threats and found it equally disturbing, although they did not take the same action in regard to their Washington offices. Indiana Senator Evan Bayh called the briefing “hair-curling,” but said he disagreed with the conclusion Dayton drew from it.

Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia, the senior member of the Senate and an outspoken opponent of the Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq, defended Dayton’s action. “Senator Dayton took this precautionary step based on his conscience and his responsibility to his staff,” Byrd said. “I commend him.”

He added that intelligence and police officials had given repeated warnings about threats to Capitol Hill. “They have urged senators to be prepared to have their staffs work from alternate locations,” Byrd said. “Senators ought not take these warnings lightly. And those senators who put in place prudent security measures should not be mocked.”

There is more at issue, however, than attempts to ridicule Dayton for partisan purposes. The danger of a terrorist attack on the US Capitol cannot be separated from the political crisis of the Bush administration and growing concern in the White House and Republican Party that Bush could face defeat on November 2. Dragged down by the war in Iraq and the stagnating US economy, the Bush administration has only one card left to play—the “war on terror.”

It is not just a matter of ritualistically invoking the specter of September 11, as Bush and Cheney do in almost every campaign appearance. There is a growing danger that elements in the administration and the intelligence and national security apparatus will permit or directly engineer some new terrorist atrocity to try to stampede public opinion on the eve of the election, or even create the conditions where the election could be postponed or canceled.
Already during the summer, the head of the federal agency charged with assisting state election preparations sent a letter to Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge urging that the administration investigate its legal options for postponing or canceling the elections in the event of a major terrorist attack. The leaking of the letter touched off a public outcry, and the White House publicly repudiated the suggestion. But there is little doubt that contingency plans have been made for such an eventuality.

There are two additional reasons to take Dayton’s concerns seriously. Senate Democrats have already been targeted for one terrorist attack—the anthrax mailings in October 2001, sent to the offices of Tom Daschle, the Democratic leader, and Patrick Leahy, then chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Despite the Bush administration’s endless invocation of the “war on terror,” no arrests have been made and there has been little or no progress in investigating the anthrax attacks, in which five people died. What information has leaked out suggests that the perpetrators were right-wing individuals of US origin and that the spores involved in the attack were biologically identical to those manufactured at an army biological and chemical warfare unit in Utah.
Then there is the mysterious plane crash which killed Dayton’s Minnesota Senate colleague, Paul Wellstone. The liberal Democrat was in a tight race in October 2002 elections against Bush-designated Republican challenger Norm Coleman, but was pulling ahead in the polls by coming out against military intervention in Iraq. Next Monday a group that has privately investigated the crash will hold a press conference in Washington to voice its conviction that Wellstone’s death was a political assassination.

It would be foolish to believe that the Bush administration and the US government are incapable of such an action. On the contrary, Dayton’s action in closing his Senate office suggests that concern over potential political gangsterism by the Bush administration is mounting even at the highest levels of the US political establishment.