As a part of a larger article, the below portion indicates Mrs. Sheehan has already talked to the President in 2004. I guess once wasn't enough for her. And now she's part of an anti-war group... not surprising, but pretty pathetic. Why or how we got to Iraq no longer matters unless you just want to point a finger at someone. But sure, you're free to protest the occupation of Iraq, no matter how stupid it makes you look or how disrespecting it is to others, unless obscene.
If it was me, right now I'd be protesting the war not because of how "immoral" war is, but because we're not taking a healthy portion of the oil. I mean, everyone expected us to take it, so why not? Yeah I know. But in other news, some Generals expect the occupation to continue for at least another 4 years, so that Halliburton stock should be looking good.
________
Gold Star Families for Peace, an antiwar group co-founded by Ms. Sheehan, began running a television ad in Boise on Tuesday that featured her directly addressing Mr. Bush.
In it, she says: 'You were wrong about the weapons of mass destruction. You were wrong about the link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. You lied to us, and because of your lies, my son died.'
In his remarks to reporters, Mr. Bush reiterated his support for Ms. Sheehan's right to protest. He noted that he had met with her in June 2004, and that he had sent his national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, and his deputy chief of staff, Joe Hagin, to meet with her this month in Crawford.
Ms. Sheehan has said that Mr. Bush was disrespectful to her in their 2004 meeting because he called her 'Mom' throughout the session.
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
Friday, August 19, 2005
U.S. senator calling for Iraq pullout by end of 2006
U.S. senator calling for Iraq pullout by end of 2006
"Setting a clear time frame could also undercut the insurgents, he said.
'Most importantly, it provides an answer to the terrorists' very effective argument when they say, `Come to Iraq and fight the American occupation',' Feingold said."
----
You sir, U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, are an idiot. And if you aspire to be elected President, look elsewhere. I seriously hope this guy isn't considered to be a frontrunner for Democrats... yes, based on this lone quote. Republicans and Democrats should unite against this guy's proposal, and then tar and feather the guy so that he might think before he speaks next time.
"Setting a clear time frame could also undercut the insurgents, he said.
'Most importantly, it provides an answer to the terrorists' very effective argument when they say, `Come to Iraq and fight the American occupation',' Feingold said."
----
You sir, U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, are an idiot. And if you aspire to be elected President, look elsewhere. I seriously hope this guy isn't considered to be a frontrunner for Democrats... yes, based on this lone quote. Republicans and Democrats should unite against this guy's proposal, and then tar and feather the guy so that he might think before he speaks next time.
Thursday, August 18, 2005
DeLay and the Mob
It's official: Congressman, lobbyist have parted ways, DeLay's spokesman says
Let's break this down a little...
DeLay had a relationship with Abramoff, DeLay called him his dearest friend at one time. Abramoff appears to have paid for some of DeLay's travel expenses (aka vacations). Abramoff is associated with organized crime. Abramoff and his partner in crime, Adam Kidan, were charged with defrauding Boulis of $60 million. Boulis got gunned down in an ambush afterwards.
DeLay claims that he did not know that his dearest friend paid for some of those vacations. BS. Oh yeah, he also says to blame the democrats... pathetic. It wreaks of a cover-up. I mean, even Rader, the BTK killer, fooled his family, so it's not impossible that DeLay just didn't know this side of Abramoff. So why not just say that... unless he did know and possibly some proof of it.
It's one thing to not know your friend is a murderer, it's another to not know he paid for your vacation. If I paid for a friend's vacation, I'd be sure to let them know I did it. And for a lobbyist to pay for something of DeLay's, expecting favortism, they'd want to make sure they were properly credited.
But then, you can't expect DeLay to admit that he knew the mobster paid for the travelling, because that would make it too easy for the ethics investigation. And if the ethics investigation reveals a close relationship, then they could potentially investigate the extent of DeLay's contacts with the mob.
So, this ethics investigation regarding travel expense payments could potentially open up a very large can of worms for DeLay and maybe other members of Congress. After all, if the mob had influence with DeLay, surely there are others in their pocket for unsavory purposes.
______
"It's official: Congressman, lobbyist have parted ways, DeLay's spokesman says
By WILLIAM C. MANN Associated Press Writer
(AP) - WASHINGTON-As a legal morass deepens for one-time superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, Rep. Tom DeLay, one of the most powerful men in Congress, is doing some damage control to distance himself from a man he once placed among his 'dearest friends.'
DeLay's spokesman says their relationship no longer exists.
Abramoff is free under $2.5 million (�‚�2 million) bond on six federal charges of conspiracy and wire fraud in the purchase of a casino boats. He is spending a few days at his home in Washington's Maryland suburbs before he is to return to Florida on Aug. 29 to file a plea.
Until last year, Abramoff was among Washington's premier lobbyists, a man whose telephone calls always would be answered. Now he is at least a sidelines figure in an investigation of a street shooting in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, that police said had the trappings of an organized crime murder. His lawyer said Tuesday that Abramoff would be glad to be interviewed by police investigating the killing.
The victim was Konstantinos 'Gus' Boulis, whom Abramoff and a colleague are charged with defrauding in the $147.5 million (�‚�119.8 million) sale of SunCruz Casinos in 2000. Abramoff and Adam Kidan, his business partner are accused of pocketing $60 million (�‚�48.73 million) from the deal. Boulis was gunned down in an ambush some months later.
Abramoff also is a major figure in a House of Representatives ethics investigation of DeLay, which the Texas congressman requested, to determine the truth of allegations that Abramoff or his clients paid some of DeLay's overseas travel expenses in contravention of House rules.
DeLay has said he did not know that the expenses were paid by Abramoff, whom he once described as 'one of my closest and dearest friends.'
Not any more.
'There is no relationship between Mr. Delay and Mr. Abramoff,' DeLay spokesman Ben Porritt said Tuesday. 'Any mention would be in the past tense.'
Porritt blamed politics for the continuing connection in the news media between the two.
'We feel this is an ongoing effort by the political left,' he said. 'Those on the political left target Mr. DeLay because he is capable and effective in delivering the conservative message.'
DeLay, second in power only to Speaker Dennis Hastert in the House, often has used the charge that he was under political attack to divert stories about his relationship with Abramoff since the disgraced lobbyist began to become a liability several months ago.
Last March, as allegations of misconduct began to be aired both in Texas and in the Congress, DeLay said he had not been found to be breaking the rules but that anyway, the Democrats were responsible.
'All they can do is try to tear down the House and burn it down in order to gain power,' DeLay said."
Let's break this down a little...
DeLay had a relationship with Abramoff, DeLay called him his dearest friend at one time. Abramoff appears to have paid for some of DeLay's travel expenses (aka vacations). Abramoff is associated with organized crime. Abramoff and his partner in crime, Adam Kidan, were charged with defrauding Boulis of $60 million. Boulis got gunned down in an ambush afterwards.
DeLay claims that he did not know that his dearest friend paid for some of those vacations. BS. Oh yeah, he also says to blame the democrats... pathetic. It wreaks of a cover-up. I mean, even Rader, the BTK killer, fooled his family, so it's not impossible that DeLay just didn't know this side of Abramoff. So why not just say that... unless he did know and possibly some proof of it.
It's one thing to not know your friend is a murderer, it's another to not know he paid for your vacation. If I paid for a friend's vacation, I'd be sure to let them know I did it. And for a lobbyist to pay for something of DeLay's, expecting favortism, they'd want to make sure they were properly credited.
But then, you can't expect DeLay to admit that he knew the mobster paid for the travelling, because that would make it too easy for the ethics investigation. And if the ethics investigation reveals a close relationship, then they could potentially investigate the extent of DeLay's contacts with the mob.
So, this ethics investigation regarding travel expense payments could potentially open up a very large can of worms for DeLay and maybe other members of Congress. After all, if the mob had influence with DeLay, surely there are others in their pocket for unsavory purposes.
______
"It's official: Congressman, lobbyist have parted ways, DeLay's spokesman says
By WILLIAM C. MANN Associated Press Writer
(AP) - WASHINGTON-As a legal morass deepens for one-time superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, Rep. Tom DeLay, one of the most powerful men in Congress, is doing some damage control to distance himself from a man he once placed among his 'dearest friends.'
DeLay's spokesman says their relationship no longer exists.
Abramoff is free under $2.5 million (�‚�2 million) bond on six federal charges of conspiracy and wire fraud in the purchase of a casino boats. He is spending a few days at his home in Washington's Maryland suburbs before he is to return to Florida on Aug. 29 to file a plea.
Until last year, Abramoff was among Washington's premier lobbyists, a man whose telephone calls always would be answered. Now he is at least a sidelines figure in an investigation of a street shooting in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, that police said had the trappings of an organized crime murder. His lawyer said Tuesday that Abramoff would be glad to be interviewed by police investigating the killing.
The victim was Konstantinos 'Gus' Boulis, whom Abramoff and a colleague are charged with defrauding in the $147.5 million (�‚�119.8 million) sale of SunCruz Casinos in 2000. Abramoff and Adam Kidan, his business partner are accused of pocketing $60 million (�‚�48.73 million) from the deal. Boulis was gunned down in an ambush some months later.
Abramoff also is a major figure in a House of Representatives ethics investigation of DeLay, which the Texas congressman requested, to determine the truth of allegations that Abramoff or his clients paid some of DeLay's overseas travel expenses in contravention of House rules.
DeLay has said he did not know that the expenses were paid by Abramoff, whom he once described as 'one of my closest and dearest friends.'
Not any more.
'There is no relationship between Mr. Delay and Mr. Abramoff,' DeLay spokesman Ben Porritt said Tuesday. 'Any mention would be in the past tense.'
Porritt blamed politics for the continuing connection in the news media between the two.
'We feel this is an ongoing effort by the political left,' he said. 'Those on the political left target Mr. DeLay because he is capable and effective in delivering the conservative message.'
DeLay, second in power only to Speaker Dennis Hastert in the House, often has used the charge that he was under political attack to divert stories about his relationship with Abramoff since the disgraced lobbyist began to become a liability several months ago.
Last March, as allegations of misconduct began to be aired both in Texas and in the Congress, DeLay said he had not been found to be breaking the rules but that anyway, the Democrats were responsible.
'All they can do is try to tear down the House and burn it down in order to gain power,' DeLay said."
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Sen. Biden Says Bush Should Fire Rumsfeld
Sen. Biden Says Bush Should Fire Rumsfeld
"Sen. Biden Says Bush Should Fire Rumsfeld
By RANDALL CHASE Associated Press Writer
(AP) - DOVER, Del.-President Bush needs to fire Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and level with the American people about the situation in Iraq, said U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, who is testing the political waters for a possible White House run in 2008.
Following up on remarks he made Sunday, Biden said the Bush administration is downplaying expectations in Iraq, and that he wouldn't be surprised if a partial withdrawal of U.S. troops is announced before parliamentary elections scheduled for December.
But the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said a premature withdrawal of U.S. troops would be unwise, given that the biggest problem in Iraq, as he sees it, is 'the lack of order.'
Biden disputed administration claims that more than 175,000 Iraqis have been trained to take over security duties from U.S. troops."
______
The article continues with more anti-this and anti-that stuff. In short, as much as I'd like to see a reasonable democrat in the white house, if they're just going to spew anti-stuff... then no thanks, because that's brainless. For crying out loud, take a stand on something and push ideas forward! Stop sitting back and being an armchair quarterback, do something or offer an alternative. Is this so difficult to learn?
I mean come on... Kerry puts up his Vietnam experience at the forefront... that was stupid/needless. I mean, everyone already knew about it, and if not, it would have mentioned anyway. Not making it an issue and leaving it and its medals uncontested would have been more powerful. But, at least that part of the campaign wasn't anti. And how about the flip flopping record and its feeble defense. Yeah, sure, there were good points, and despite all the negatives, it was a close race.
Ok, there are some lessons that should have been learned. Like, figure out where you stand on issues, passionately believe that view, and stick with it. And probably more importantly, promote your own ideas on how something should, or should have, been handled. Don't nominate someone who can't readily admit to believing in God, who doesn't appear to conceal it or acts like he's worried about the atheist vote (Kerry fumbled along a question regarding religious beliefs, I began to wonder if he actually believed in God for a bit before he finally said otherwise). Leave negative campaign to commercials and press, but when you speak, rise above that and project your views.
There's more lessons than this, but if Biden is testing the waters, then I'm cold. I'm getting sick of hearing what's wrong with the US and everything else. It's time for a positive voice. A Democrat Reagan would be great because he inspired hope and gave us strength, that, more than anything, is why so many loved him. If a Republican comes along first who can inspire, and the Democrats continue the anti campaign, then I'll probably vote Republican. Democrats need to get their crap together, it's getting pathetic and shameful. Yeah, even though I'm more in line with Dems than Repubs, I'll go Repub if they can deliver.
"Sen. Biden Says Bush Should Fire Rumsfeld
By RANDALL CHASE Associated Press Writer
(AP) - DOVER, Del.-President Bush needs to fire Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and level with the American people about the situation in Iraq, said U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden, who is testing the political waters for a possible White House run in 2008.
Following up on remarks he made Sunday, Biden said the Bush administration is downplaying expectations in Iraq, and that he wouldn't be surprised if a partial withdrawal of U.S. troops is announced before parliamentary elections scheduled for December.
But the senior Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said a premature withdrawal of U.S. troops would be unwise, given that the biggest problem in Iraq, as he sees it, is 'the lack of order.'
Biden disputed administration claims that more than 175,000 Iraqis have been trained to take over security duties from U.S. troops."
______
The article continues with more anti-this and anti-that stuff. In short, as much as I'd like to see a reasonable democrat in the white house, if they're just going to spew anti-stuff... then no thanks, because that's brainless. For crying out loud, take a stand on something and push ideas forward! Stop sitting back and being an armchair quarterback, do something or offer an alternative. Is this so difficult to learn?
I mean come on... Kerry puts up his Vietnam experience at the forefront... that was stupid/needless. I mean, everyone already knew about it, and if not, it would have mentioned anyway. Not making it an issue and leaving it and its medals uncontested would have been more powerful. But, at least that part of the campaign wasn't anti. And how about the flip flopping record and its feeble defense. Yeah, sure, there were good points, and despite all the negatives, it was a close race.
Ok, there are some lessons that should have been learned. Like, figure out where you stand on issues, passionately believe that view, and stick with it. And probably more importantly, promote your own ideas on how something should, or should have, been handled. Don't nominate someone who can't readily admit to believing in God, who doesn't appear to conceal it or acts like he's worried about the atheist vote (Kerry fumbled along a question regarding religious beliefs, I began to wonder if he actually believed in God for a bit before he finally said otherwise). Leave negative campaign to commercials and press, but when you speak, rise above that and project your views.
There's more lessons than this, but if Biden is testing the waters, then I'm cold. I'm getting sick of hearing what's wrong with the US and everything else. It's time for a positive voice. A Democrat Reagan would be great because he inspired hope and gave us strength, that, more than anything, is why so many loved him. If a Republican comes along first who can inspire, and the Democrats continue the anti campaign, then I'll probably vote Republican. Democrats need to get their crap together, it's getting pathetic and shameful. Yeah, even though I'm more in line with Dems than Repubs, I'll go Repub if they can deliver.
Officer cleared in Rocha shooting
News 8 Austin | Officer cleared in Rocha shooting
I'm sorry, but this is such BS. Since when does fighting with someone who is resisting arrest equate to a justifiable murder? Does a reasonable police officer in similar circumstances do the same? I should hope not. And if she's going to get away with murder, then at least take her off the streets, make her a pencil pusher so she doesn't overreact again and kill another person.
_________
Wednesday August 17, 2005
Officer cleared in Rocha shooting
Updated: 8/16/2005 10:21 PM
By: James Keith
A Travis County grand jury has issued a no bill in the investigation of Austin Police Officer Julie Schroeder. That means she will not face criminal charges from local government for shooting and killing 18-year-old Daniel Rocha in June.
Frustrated protesters expressed their disappointment in the decision outside the Travis County Justice Complex Tuesday evening.
Rocha's mother, Daniela Rocha, says Tuesday's news doesn't soften the pain her family has encountered the past two months.
'My world is shattered right now. I don't know how to handle myself right now, it's very sad. Every day that goes by it's day by day. My daughter, my son, all three of us are going through a difficult time,' Rocha said.
Tuesday, the Travis County District Attorney's office released stacks of documents related to the Rocha investigation.
In it was a statement from Schroeder describing what happened. She said, 'Rocha and I are on the ground and we are fully engaged in a fight, I would describe it as a fight and wrestling match. His arms are on the inside of me and I could feel him grabbing at my vest and waist.' Schroeder added, 'I was scared for my life and my boss' life. I was worried about Rocha using my Taser and using it on my boss and taking his gun. I have been in a number of fights before and never have I felt this scared and afraid. Instinctively, I grabbed for my gun and shot him once. Self-preservation took over.'
The documents don't give insight into only Officer Schroeder's point of view. There are also several statements from witnesses.
One witness said, 'Detective Walker asked me if I saw a fight or struggle. No, I saw the officer holding the man with one hand, the left, and she had her gun with her right. All I could see was his shoulder that she had him by. Then her gun fired once. She was standing up, kind of hunched over and he was already on the ground.'
One of Rocha's former teachers offered a character description of the teenager.
'Rocha would always say, 'No cop is going to take anything from me or take me down. I ain't going to jail.' I started to think he was serious about his big money business and was worried that he may put up a good fight should someone try to stop him. I tried to counsel Rocha and he didn't care about what I had to say or even about himself,' she said.
Austin Police Chief Stan Knee says while some people might be upset by the reports and the grand jury's decision, they should trust that his department is acting properly.
'It has been difficult for the department being scrutinized every which way, is in fact at times very difficult, but the character of this department is that we expect to continue to work hard to make the city safe,' Knee said.
The Austin Police Department's internal affairs investigation into the Rocha shooting is ongoing. Knee expects it to be wrapped up in four to six weeks.
The Department of Justice is also continuing its investigation"
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Al-Zawahri: what a rip-off merchant
spiked-politics | Article | Al-Zawahri: what a rip-off merchant
I was just telling a coworker the other day that maybe the reason terrorists saw an opening for an attack in the USA, was because we had all these "experts" telling everyone that we were and to expect one. So the terrorists heard that we were ripe an attack inside the states and so they went ahead and gave us our prophecy.
A win-win situation for the schemers (security experts and terrorists), a big fat loss for the rest of us. The only thing I'm not sure about is if the anti-terror security experts who were publicly saying the USA is a big fat unsecure target, did so with the hope that they would get more money or prestige after terrorists followed through with the open invitation.
------
August 2005
Al-Zawahri: what a rip-off merchant
The al-Qaeda deputy is only parroting what’s been said on a thousand lefty blogs since 7/7.
by Brendan O'Neill
Someone should have Ayman al-Zawahri, lieutenant to Osama bin Laden, done for plagiarism. There's nothing remotely original in his statement about the London attacks. Instead he has ripped off sentiments already expressed by scaremongering politicians and in handwringing newspaper editorials here in Britain since the 7/7 attacks. He 's only doing what al-Qaeda bosses have consistently done since 9/11: taking the West's own fear and loathing and throwing it back at us in a supposedly scary, finger-wagging statement to camera.
Al-Zawahri 'blames Blair for bombs', says a BBC headline. 'Blair has brought you destruction in central London', said al-Zawahri. Where could he have got an idea like that? He might have seen it on the front cover of the New Statesman (or on the NS website if he's having trouble getting hold of the paper copy), which recently said 'BLAIR'S BOMBS': 'Blair brought home to this country his and Bush's illegal, unprovoked and blood-soaked adventure in the Middle East.'
Or if al-Zawahri prefers a right-wing read, he might have seen Thatcher's old friend Max Hastings say in the Daily Mail that the bombs were Blair's fault - they were 'the price for being America's foremost ally, for joining President Bush's Iraq adventure', a price which 'was always likely to be paid in London, in innocent blood'. Labour politicians and prestigious think-tanks have also said it, and have made headlines around the world. It has been said that al-Qaeda types like to surf the net (in the absence of having much else to do), in which case al-Zawahri might have got his 'Blair is to blame' line from any number of anti-war blogs or websites.
Al-Zawahri also says that the war in Iraq is a war for oil, and demands that the West stop this 'robbing of our oil and resources'. Since when has al-Qaeda been interested in economics? This argument is taken verbatim from the anti-war movement in the West, which has been chanting the mantra 'It's all about oil!' for the past two years as a quick, easy (and some might say lazy) way of denouncing the war. Now al-Zawahri is milking this simplistic but wildly popular slogan for all its worth.
And what's this all about, the bit where al-Zawahri talks about Americans having to watch the 'losses you are having in Afghanistan and Iraq, in spite of all the media blackout'? This echoes an obsession of various anti-war websites recently, which have argued that the US military is 'blacking out' information about the true number of injuries and fatalities suffered by coalition forces in postwar Iraq.
Al-Zawahri also warns of more attacks against Britain. Perhaps he has heard of the 6,000 police officers that have been deployed to protect 'nervous London' (as one report described it) every Thursday since 7/7. Or he may have seen reports such as this one from two weeks ago: 'EXPERTS FEAR MORE ATTACKS IN LONDON.' 'I hate to be a pessimist', said one counterterrorism expert, 'but my expectation is that the two London attacks are an overture and worse is coming.' Al-Zawahri's warning of 'more destruction' in London is not evidence that he or any of his cronies are directly planning something, but rather suggests that they are tapping into our self-confessed 'pessimism' and 'nervousness' and winding us up some more.
This doesn't only suggest that al-Zawahri has not got an original thought in his head - it also reveals an essential truth about al-Qaeda. They feed off our fears. Far from being the terrible enemy we have been led to believe - who are planning a 'holocaust' against the West, as one particularly overexcited author has put it - al-Qaeda is a ragbag of deluded nihilists and opportunists who thrive on tapping into our doubt and uncertainty. We are scaring ourselves, and al-Qaeda bosses merely cheer along from the sidelines.
We pretty much wrote that script for al-Zawahri and he just read it back to us in a scary, shouty Middle Eastern voice, like a James Bond villain circa 1980. Come on, people, are we really scared of that?"
I was just telling a coworker the other day that maybe the reason terrorists saw an opening for an attack in the USA, was because we had all these "experts" telling everyone that we were and to expect one. So the terrorists heard that we were ripe an attack inside the states and so they went ahead and gave us our prophecy.
A win-win situation for the schemers (security experts and terrorists), a big fat loss for the rest of us. The only thing I'm not sure about is if the anti-terror security experts who were publicly saying the USA is a big fat unsecure target, did so with the hope that they would get more money or prestige after terrorists followed through with the open invitation.
------
August 2005
Al-Zawahri: what a rip-off merchant
The al-Qaeda deputy is only parroting what’s been said on a thousand lefty blogs since 7/7.
by Brendan O'Neill
Someone should have Ayman al-Zawahri, lieutenant to Osama bin Laden, done for plagiarism. There's nothing remotely original in his statement about the London attacks. Instead he has ripped off sentiments already expressed by scaremongering politicians and in handwringing newspaper editorials here in Britain since the 7/7 attacks. He 's only doing what al-Qaeda bosses have consistently done since 9/11: taking the West's own fear and loathing and throwing it back at us in a supposedly scary, finger-wagging statement to camera.
Al-Zawahri 'blames Blair for bombs', says a BBC headline. 'Blair has brought you destruction in central London', said al-Zawahri. Where could he have got an idea like that? He might have seen it on the front cover of the New Statesman (or on the NS website if he's having trouble getting hold of the paper copy), which recently said 'BLAIR'S BOMBS': 'Blair brought home to this country his and Bush's illegal, unprovoked and blood-soaked adventure in the Middle East.'
Or if al-Zawahri prefers a right-wing read, he might have seen Thatcher's old friend Max Hastings say in the Daily Mail that the bombs were Blair's fault - they were 'the price for being America's foremost ally, for joining President Bush's Iraq adventure', a price which 'was always likely to be paid in London, in innocent blood'. Labour politicians and prestigious think-tanks have also said it, and have made headlines around the world. It has been said that al-Qaeda types like to surf the net (in the absence of having much else to do), in which case al-Zawahri might have got his 'Blair is to blame' line from any number of anti-war blogs or websites.
Al-Zawahri also says that the war in Iraq is a war for oil, and demands that the West stop this 'robbing of our oil and resources'. Since when has al-Qaeda been interested in economics? This argument is taken verbatim from the anti-war movement in the West, which has been chanting the mantra 'It's all about oil!' for the past two years as a quick, easy (and some might say lazy) way of denouncing the war. Now al-Zawahri is milking this simplistic but wildly popular slogan for all its worth.
And what's this all about, the bit where al-Zawahri talks about Americans having to watch the 'losses you are having in Afghanistan and Iraq, in spite of all the media blackout'? This echoes an obsession of various anti-war websites recently, which have argued that the US military is 'blacking out' information about the true number of injuries and fatalities suffered by coalition forces in postwar Iraq.
Al-Zawahri also warns of more attacks against Britain. Perhaps he has heard of the 6,000 police officers that have been deployed to protect 'nervous London' (as one report described it) every Thursday since 7/7. Or he may have seen reports such as this one from two weeks ago: 'EXPERTS FEAR MORE ATTACKS IN LONDON.' 'I hate to be a pessimist', said one counterterrorism expert, 'but my expectation is that the two London attacks are an overture and worse is coming.' Al-Zawahri's warning of 'more destruction' in London is not evidence that he or any of his cronies are directly planning something, but rather suggests that they are tapping into our self-confessed 'pessimism' and 'nervousness' and winding us up some more.
This doesn't only suggest that al-Zawahri has not got an original thought in his head - it also reveals an essential truth about al-Qaeda. They feed off our fears. Far from being the terrible enemy we have been led to believe - who are planning a 'holocaust' against the West, as one particularly overexcited author has put it - al-Qaeda is a ragbag of deluded nihilists and opportunists who thrive on tapping into our doubt and uncertainty. We are scaring ourselves, and al-Qaeda bosses merely cheer along from the sidelines.
We pretty much wrote that script for al-Zawahri and he just read it back to us in a scary, shouty Middle Eastern voice, like a James Bond villain circa 1980. Come on, people, are we really scared of that?"
26 Years!
26 Years Later, DNA Clears Man of Rapes
This guy was wrongly convicted of being the, "Bird Road Rapist." What I'm wondering though, is what happened to the real rapist. Why did he stop, if he did (I haven't researched this), once this guy was on trial? Did he feel so guilty that he put an innocent behind bars that he changed his life, or just thought it was an opportune time to quit and get away with his crimes? Or maybe he continued, but decided to rape on another road... or maybe he was convicted on another rape. And lastly, will the police reopen the investigation, or did the case hinge on the faulty eyewittnesses?
-------
By JOHN PAIN Associated Press Writer
(AP) - MIAMI-A man who spent 26 years behind bars as Florida's 'Bird Road Rapist' was released from prison Wednesday after DNA evidence cleared him in two of the attacks and cast doubt on whether he was responsible for any of the crimes.
'Victory,' 67-year-old Luis Diaz said as he walked out of the courthouse a free man. He said he planned to spend time with his family, was not bitter about the time he lost and didn't blame prosecutors.
'They did their job. You have to respect that,' he said later at a news conference. Payment for his years in prison also wasn't on his or his family's mind - for now.
'He is our compensation right now,' said son Jose Diaz, 40, who was flanked by his brother and sister.
Circuit Judge Cristina Pereya-Shuminer threw out his five rape convictions at the request of both Miami-Dade County's chief prosecutor and lawyers for the Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization that works to get inmates exonerated via DNA.
About 30 relatives and friends in the courtroom stood and applauded after the judge said he was free to go. A handcuffed Diaz, dressed in a red jail jumpsuit, waved to his family and wiped his eyes with tissues.
Prosecutors stopped short of declaring Diaz innocent in all the rapes, instead citing the difficulty of retrying him after a quarter-century.
'It is impossible to ignore the difficulties inherent in retrying five very old cases even under the best of circumstances. Police investigators retire, memories fade, and victims move on with their lives,' the dismissal request said.
Diaz was convicted in 1980 and sentenced to life in prison for seven of 25 sexual assaults that occurred between 1977 and 1979 in the Bird Road area of Coral Gables, south of downtown Miami.
The Bird Road Rapist would attack young women drivers, signaling them to pull over by flashing his headlights and then forcing them to have sex at gunpoint.
Diaz was arrested after a victim who worked as a gas station attendant spotted a driver she said looked like her attacker. She gave police the license plate number, which led them to Diaz.
The convictions were based on identifications made by eight victims in all, even though some of them initially described a much heavier and taller Hispanic who spoke English. Diaz, a Cuban-American, spoke little English and, because of his work as a fry cook, smelled of onions - something no victim mentioned.
In 1993, two victims recanted their identification of Diaz, and those two convictions were thrown out. But five other convictions remained, until lawyers asked for DNA testing.
Evidence gathered from the two of the rape victims was discovered, and DNA testing of the semen conclusively excluded Diaz as the attacker in both cases. That, in turn, cast doubt on his other convictions.
Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, who was the county prosecutor when Diaz was convicted, did not return a call for comment Wednesday.
Defense attorney Roy Black, who represented Diaz at his trial, said he was thrilled.
'That Luis' innocence has finally been admitted is cause for celebration, but nothing can erase the 26 years he spent in prison, in horrible condition, separated from his family,' Black said in statement.
Barry Scheck, executive director of the Innocence Project, said the Diaz case demonstrates anew the need for police to improve the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.
He said three-quarters of the 160 prisoners who have been exonerated by post-conviction DNA in the United States had been convicted based on mistaken identification.
'This should be a landmark case in the history of eyewitness reform,' Scheck said. 'There are reforms police and prosecutors are using across the country that reduce error, protect the innocent and help apprehend the guilty.'"
This guy was wrongly convicted of being the, "Bird Road Rapist." What I'm wondering though, is what happened to the real rapist. Why did he stop, if he did (I haven't researched this), once this guy was on trial? Did he feel so guilty that he put an innocent behind bars that he changed his life, or just thought it was an opportune time to quit and get away with his crimes? Or maybe he continued, but decided to rape on another road... or maybe he was convicted on another rape. And lastly, will the police reopen the investigation, or did the case hinge on the faulty eyewittnesses?
-------
By JOHN PAIN Associated Press Writer
(AP) - MIAMI-A man who spent 26 years behind bars as Florida's 'Bird Road Rapist' was released from prison Wednesday after DNA evidence cleared him in two of the attacks and cast doubt on whether he was responsible for any of the crimes.
'Victory,' 67-year-old Luis Diaz said as he walked out of the courthouse a free man. He said he planned to spend time with his family, was not bitter about the time he lost and didn't blame prosecutors.
'They did their job. You have to respect that,' he said later at a news conference. Payment for his years in prison also wasn't on his or his family's mind - for now.
'He is our compensation right now,' said son Jose Diaz, 40, who was flanked by his brother and sister.
Circuit Judge Cristina Pereya-Shuminer threw out his five rape convictions at the request of both Miami-Dade County's chief prosecutor and lawyers for the Innocence Project, a nonprofit organization that works to get inmates exonerated via DNA.
About 30 relatives and friends in the courtroom stood and applauded after the judge said he was free to go. A handcuffed Diaz, dressed in a red jail jumpsuit, waved to his family and wiped his eyes with tissues.
Prosecutors stopped short of declaring Diaz innocent in all the rapes, instead citing the difficulty of retrying him after a quarter-century.
'It is impossible to ignore the difficulties inherent in retrying five very old cases even under the best of circumstances. Police investigators retire, memories fade, and victims move on with their lives,' the dismissal request said.
Diaz was convicted in 1980 and sentenced to life in prison for seven of 25 sexual assaults that occurred between 1977 and 1979 in the Bird Road area of Coral Gables, south of downtown Miami.
The Bird Road Rapist would attack young women drivers, signaling them to pull over by flashing his headlights and then forcing them to have sex at gunpoint.
Diaz was arrested after a victim who worked as a gas station attendant spotted a driver she said looked like her attacker. She gave police the license plate number, which led them to Diaz.
The convictions were based on identifications made by eight victims in all, even though some of them initially described a much heavier and taller Hispanic who spoke English. Diaz, a Cuban-American, spoke little English and, because of his work as a fry cook, smelled of onions - something no victim mentioned.
In 1993, two victims recanted their identification of Diaz, and those two convictions were thrown out. But five other convictions remained, until lawyers asked for DNA testing.
Evidence gathered from the two of the rape victims was discovered, and DNA testing of the semen conclusively excluded Diaz as the attacker in both cases. That, in turn, cast doubt on his other convictions.
Former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, who was the county prosecutor when Diaz was convicted, did not return a call for comment Wednesday.
Defense attorney Roy Black, who represented Diaz at his trial, said he was thrilled.
'That Luis' innocence has finally been admitted is cause for celebration, but nothing can erase the 26 years he spent in prison, in horrible condition, separated from his family,' Black said in statement.
Barry Scheck, executive director of the Innocence Project, said the Diaz case demonstrates anew the need for police to improve the accuracy of eyewitness identifications.
He said three-quarters of the 160 prisoners who have been exonerated by post-conviction DNA in the United States had been convicted based on mistaken identification.
'This should be a landmark case in the history of eyewitness reform,' Scheck said. 'There are reforms police and prosecutors are using across the country that reduce error, protect the innocent and help apprehend the guilty.'"
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Watchdog Group Attacks School Bible Study
Watchdog Group Attacks School Bible Study:
The only thing more askew than the below article is the textbook used in the bible study class.
The Texas Freedom Network (www.tfn.org) has the report posted. Apparently, the people who published the text were seriously stupid or maybe just plain inept for the task.
One of things I found pretty amusing, that displays the ignorance and lack of scholorly ability of the author, is a passage that asks students to consider the use of single syllable (english) words as being typical for the Hebrews. Of course the original text wasn't monosyllabic, but it goes to show how focussed they are on the King-James version (interpretation) of the original texts. That's just one of far too many bumbles, like the big P of any written work... Plagiarism.
There's so many flaws with the text that people need to read this report before they defend its use. I mean, I'm a Christian, attended Christian schools, and would certainly hate to see Christianity disrespected. The textbook is a debacle, and its use makes Christians, especially conservative Protestants, look as ignorant as the text.
Now, this article puts an interesting spin on the situation. It glosses over the report by just stating some key items the author of the report listed in the introduction a part showing how the curriculum presents Christian faith claims as history. And even then the reporter can't even get that correct.
In short, the class concept is fine, but the text and its leanings are inappropriate for public schools. Here's the article, which needs some work itself:
------
"Monday, Aug. 1, 2005
Watchdog Group Attacks School Bible Study
By JIM VERTUNO Associated Press Writer
(AP) - AUSTIN, Texas-A religious watchdog group complained Monday that a Bible study course taught in hundreds of public schools in Texas and across the country promotes a fundamentalist Christian view and violates religious freedom.
The Texas Freedom Network, which includes clergy of several faiths, also said the course offered by the Greensboro, N.C.-based National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools is full of errors and dubious research.
The producers of the Bible class dismissed the Texas Freedom Network as a 'far left' organization trying to suppress study of a historical text.
The National Council on Bible Curriculum Web site says its elective course is offered in high schools and junior highs by more than 300 school districts in 37 states.
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller said her group looked at the course after the Odessa school board voted in April to offer the class. It asked Southern Methodist University biblical scholar Mark A. Chancey to review the curriculum.
Chancey's review found that the course characterizes the Bible as inspired by God, that discussions of science are based on the biblical account of creation, that Jesus is referred to as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy, and that archaeological findings are erroneously used to support claims of the Bible's historical accuracy.
He said the course also suggests the Bible, instead of the Constitution, be considered the nation's founding document.
'No public school student should have to have a particular religious belief forced upon them,' the Rev. Ragan Courtney, pastor of The Sanctuary, a Baptist congregation in Austin, said at a news conference held by Texas Freedom Network.
Elizabeth Ridenour, president of the Bible class group, accused the Texas Freedom Network of censorship.
'They are actually quite fearful of academic freedom, and of local schools deciding for themselves what elective courses to offer their citizens,' she said in a statement.
According to the Texas Freedom Network, 52 Texas school districts offer the class. In Odessa, more than 6,000 people signed a petition in support before it was approved in April.
Although representatives of the Bible council have attended school board meetings in Odessa, superintendent Wendell Sollis said course materials have not yet been selected.
Miller said the Texas Freedom Network supports study of the Bible as a significant historical text, but not in a way that amounts to religious indoctrination.
2005-08-02T01:06:42Z
Copyright 2005
The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed."
The only thing more askew than the below article is the textbook used in the bible study class.
The Texas Freedom Network (www.tfn.org) has the report posted. Apparently, the people who published the text were seriously stupid or maybe just plain inept for the task.
One of things I found pretty amusing, that displays the ignorance and lack of scholorly ability of the author, is a passage that asks students to consider the use of single syllable (english) words as being typical for the Hebrews. Of course the original text wasn't monosyllabic, but it goes to show how focussed they are on the King-James version (interpretation) of the original texts. That's just one of far too many bumbles, like the big P of any written work... Plagiarism.
There's so many flaws with the text that people need to read this report before they defend its use. I mean, I'm a Christian, attended Christian schools, and would certainly hate to see Christianity disrespected. The textbook is a debacle, and its use makes Christians, especially conservative Protestants, look as ignorant as the text.
Now, this article puts an interesting spin on the situation. It glosses over the report by just stating some key items the author of the report listed in the introduction a part showing how the curriculum presents Christian faith claims as history. And even then the reporter can't even get that correct.
In short, the class concept is fine, but the text and its leanings are inappropriate for public schools. Here's the article, which needs some work itself:
------
"Monday, Aug. 1, 2005
Watchdog Group Attacks School Bible Study
By JIM VERTUNO Associated Press Writer
(AP) - AUSTIN, Texas-A religious watchdog group complained Monday that a Bible study course taught in hundreds of public schools in Texas and across the country promotes a fundamentalist Christian view and violates religious freedom.
The Texas Freedom Network, which includes clergy of several faiths, also said the course offered by the Greensboro, N.C.-based National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools is full of errors and dubious research.
The producers of the Bible class dismissed the Texas Freedom Network as a 'far left' organization trying to suppress study of a historical text.
The National Council on Bible Curriculum Web site says its elective course is offered in high schools and junior highs by more than 300 school districts in 37 states.
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller said her group looked at the course after the Odessa school board voted in April to offer the class. It asked Southern Methodist University biblical scholar Mark A. Chancey to review the curriculum.
Chancey's review found that the course characterizes the Bible as inspired by God, that discussions of science are based on the biblical account of creation, that Jesus is referred to as fulfilling Old Testament prophecy, and that archaeological findings are erroneously used to support claims of the Bible's historical accuracy.
He said the course also suggests the Bible, instead of the Constitution, be considered the nation's founding document.
'No public school student should have to have a particular religious belief forced upon them,' the Rev. Ragan Courtney, pastor of The Sanctuary, a Baptist congregation in Austin, said at a news conference held by Texas Freedom Network.
Elizabeth Ridenour, president of the Bible class group, accused the Texas Freedom Network of censorship.
'They are actually quite fearful of academic freedom, and of local schools deciding for themselves what elective courses to offer their citizens,' she said in a statement.
According to the Texas Freedom Network, 52 Texas school districts offer the class. In Odessa, more than 6,000 people signed a petition in support before it was approved in April.
Although representatives of the Bible council have attended school board meetings in Odessa, superintendent Wendell Sollis said course materials have not yet been selected.
Miller said the Texas Freedom Network supports study of the Bible as a significant historical text, but not in a way that amounts to religious indoctrination.
2005-08-02T01:06:42Z
Copyright 2005
The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
