Here’s a 30 second movie submitted to the Bush in 30 seconds contest.
Bush Sucks And We Can Prove It
(Thanks, Peter!)
Bush Sucks Movie From SFSU Students
9 Replies
Category Archives: Shrub Watch
Tommy Franks Predicts Martial Law In The U.S. — Doubts The World Will Ever Have Peace
Why is this “Shrub Watch?” Because Tommy Franks works for the Shrub and embodies many Shrub Administration ideals. With that in mind, the contents of his interview for Cigar Aficionado are quite disturbing indeed.
Hey predicts that, after a WMD attack on us or one of our allies, our Constitution will be discarded.
Ha! As if our Constitution has even survived 911 to begin with…
Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack
By John O. Edwards for NewsMax.com.
Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.
Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men
Vice Chairman Of The U.S. Joint Chiefs Of Staff Says That Osama Bin Laden Is No Longer Target Of War On Terror
From the “what the hell are you talking about?” file, this news is just in from the Shrub Administration: Bin Laden’s No Longer Enemy #1.
That means that this “War On Terror” now officially has nothing to do with 911 (as if it ever was).
All you have to do is “take yourself out of the picture,” and our Army will stop chasing you!
What a great deal!
U.S. General Says Bin Laden ‘Out of the Picture’
By Yousuf Azimy for Reuters.
A senior U.S. general said on Friday that al Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden (news – web sites) had “taken himself out of the picture” and that his capture was not essential to winning the “war on terror.”
General Peter Pace, vice chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at U.S. military headquarters just north of Kabul that the 11,500-strong U.S.-led force hunting al Qaeda and Taliban militants was not focusing on individuals.
“He (bin Laden) has taken himself out of the picture,” Pace told reporters after visiting U.S. troops serving in Afghanistan (news – web sites).
“It is not an individual that is as important as is the ongoing campaign of the coalition against terrorists,” he said.
America’s new ambassador to Kabul Zalmay Khalilzad said earlier this week that the U.S. military would “redouble” its efforts to find bin Laden and other al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.
While appearing to contradict this, Pace, added: “That is not to say that we would not be glad to capture Osama bin Laden today or tomorrow.”
What The Shrub Can Learn From The Gropinator — Oops, I Mean Governator
This one’s a little late getting up, but better late than never.
Recall Lessons for the President
By Howard Fineman for Newsweek.
It would be nice to think that the ending of Election Day here will bring peace to the politics of California, and to the country. It would be nice, but wrong. Don’t expect an end to partisan rancor, voter anger and alienation, here or elsewhere. This state’s political warfare will resume long before Governor-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger actually takes office. And the same forces that are shaking Sacramento could materialize on the doorstep of the house at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave…
But in an odd but important way, the Arnold victory could be an ominous message for President Bush. There is a straight line of voter protest running from Ross Perot through John McCain and on to the Internet-based campaigns of Wesley Clark and even Howard Dean. To some extent, all were or are powered by a sense of voter alienation from the centers of authority in government politics-whether those center are in Sacramento or Washington, D.C. The bigger and more remote the government, the more ignored and misunderstood the voters feel.
Re: CIA Leak Investigation — Shrubsters Will “Organize” Notes Before Handing Them Over To Justice Dept.
Bush Aides Will Review Leak Notes
By David Jackson for the The Dallas Morning News.
White House lawyers will review phone logs and other records supplied by presidential aides before turning the documents over to the Justice Department officials conducting the investigation into who leaked a CIA undercover operative’s identity, officials said Monday.
The disclosure inspired new Democratic calls for an independent inquiry.
“To allow the White House counsel to review records before the prosecutors would see them is just about unheard of in the way cases are always prosecuted,” said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., speaking on NBC’s Today show. “And the possibility of mischief, or worse than mischief, is very, very large.”
Bill Moyers On The Insider Business Deals Between Shrub Administration Officials And Iraqi Reconstruction Companies
Specifically, between Douglas Feith, the Undersecretary of Defense and several companies (many related to his “former” business associate Marc Zell), including: Zell, Goldberg and Company, Diligence, New Bridge Strategies, Barber, Griffith and Rogers, SAIC (courtesy of current Shrub Administration Official and former SAIC Senior Vice President Ryan Henry), and The Iraqi International Law Group.
This story aired on NOW With Bill Moyers on November 14, 2003.
This story, “Cash and Carry,” was Produced by Katie Pitra, features correspondent Roberta Baskin, and was Edited by Alison Amron.
This incredible segment documents the direct connections between the Shrub Administration and the main two or three companies that are profiting directly from the Iraqi reconstruction.
Join them as they connect the dots and talk to several of these people first hand. (Many would not return their phone calls, but others were very up front and matter-of-fact about it.)
I’ve taken screen grabs of many of the diagrams and things and transcribed information straight from the program for your convenience.
Here’s some technical information about getting quicktime going to watch these movies.
Bill Moyers – Cash and Carry – Complete (Small – 36 MB)
Bill Moyers – Cash and Carry – Part 1 of 3 (Small – 12 MB)
Bill Moyers – Cash and Carry – Part 2 of 3 (Small – 14 MB)
Bill Moyers – Cash and Carry – Part 3 of 3 (Small – 11 MB)
Below: Roberta Baskin
Here’s Bill Moyers’ Introduction:
“Welcome to NOW. The news from Iraq just keeps coming. A secret CIA report this week warns that ‘more and more Iraqis believe the U.S. could actually lose the war.’ American troops have started using Vietnam-like tactics, hitting back at suspected enclaves without proof that they’re harboring insurgents. And American authorities are now limiting press access to both troops and independent contractors in Iraq…
As you know, there’s a big debate over those billion dollar contracts being handed out to rebuild Iraq. Some Democratic Presidential candidates say the government is playing favorites. Defenders of the process, however, say “nonsense.”…
..it’s not easy to sort out the facts because the whole process in shrouded in buracracy and secrecy. One thing is certain, a lot of people in Washington and Baghdad look upon what’s happening as a modern equivalent of a gold rush. They’re not shy about promoting their political connections to get to the front of the line.”
Here’s Roberta Baskin’s opening:
“Here beneath Iraq’s landscape lies a vast ocean of oil. The second largest oil reserve in the world with over 100 billion barrels of crude ready to be tapped. When America invaded Iraq last March, troops raced first to secure the rich fields of Kier Cook (sp). So with vast reserves just waiting, why is the U.S. Government paying the Halliburton Corporation $2.65 per gallon to ship gasoline into Iraq from Kuwait, when one investigation discovered it could be done for less than a dollar a gallon.
The price difference alone is costing tax payers as much as a 100 million dollars. When we asked Halliburton about this discrepancy, they wouldn’t tell us. And even a United States Congressman (Henry Waxman D-CA) can’t find out why.
‘Why are we paying $1.65 a gallon more? Is it because Halliburton is gouging the public? Is it because the Kuwaitis are overcharging Halliburton? Is it because there’s a culture where they don’t care what they pay because the tax payers are going to pay the bill so there’s no reason for them to want to hold down the costs?’ (Waxman) …
‘If the evidence of what Halliburton has been charging for gasoline to be brought into Iraq is emblematic of anything, it’s emblematic of no oversight, no transparency, and fleecing of the tax payers.’ (Waxman)…
Just as the war started, Halliburton was awarded a no bid 7 billion dollar contract to repair Iraq’s oil industry…Halliburton proved itself after the first Gulf war, putting out the fires in the oil fields. The Pentagon has said it didn’t want to waste time finding someone new if Saddam burned the oil fields again, but Waxman says it’s a prime example of what’s wrong with the secrecy surrounding the government’s contracts, because in the initial 87 billion dollar Iraq aid package there was another 2 billion dollars for Halliburton. And when Waxman started asking, he says neither the goverment nor the company seemed to know whay the 2 billion dollars was there or what it was for.
‘We’ve got billions here, billions there. As one senator once said “A billion here, a billion there, it starts adding up into real money.” ‘ (Waxman)…
Who is Mark Zell?
Mark Zell is the principal of “Zell, Goldberg and Company,” which assists American companies in connection with Iraqi reconstruction projects.
From Roberta Baskin:
“And just who at the firm can connect you to the American Government? None other than Marc Zell. A former law partner of Douglas Feith. Who’s Douglas Feith? Undersecretary of Defense. One of the handful of advisors who, long before September 11, championed the campaign to get rid of Saddam Hussein. Now Douglas Feith is the man in charge of the Pentagon’s reconstruction of Iraq.
To sum up, Marc Zell is one well connected middleman standing right between the people to give the contracts and the people who want them. We asked to interview him about all this, but our calls were not returned.”
More from Roberta Baskin:
“But even at the war’s front lines, middlemen are busy making their deals. Marc Zell also works with a different firm called “The Iraqi International Law Group,” which very much wants to be “your professional gateway to the new Iraq.” Who’s in charge of that gateway? A man named Salem Chalabi.
He has a famous uncle, Ahmed Chalabi. You see him there in Iraq, but before the war, this exile was hand picked by the planners in the Pentagon to shape the new government. When the war started, they air lifted Chalabi into the country with his own 700 man militia. At the center of all that planning, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. Whose old law partner, Marc Zell, now works with Ahmed Chalabi’s nephew, providing that gateway to the new Iraq.”
More from Roberta Baskin:
“And Chalabi isn’t the only member of the Iraqi leadership with close relatives lining up for those rebuilding contracts. The son of one Chalabi aid runs a phone company that is part of the group that won the contract to provide cell service to southern Iraq. Chalabi’s aid told the Los Angeles Times that he doesn’t understand what all the fuss over his son’s inside connections. Comparing his son to the Americans, he said “It didn’t stop Cheney from becoming the Vice President.”
More from Roberta Baskin:
“But these aren’t the only friends of government promoting their inside influence in what’s being called The Iraq Gold Rush. One firm was established just for that purpose: New Bridge Strategies…If you can’t find your way around Baghdad, Mike Baker will lend you a hand. He’s a former CIA officer and part of the management team [its CEO] for New Bridge Strategies Strategies and its sister company Diligence, a security firm. Both are staffed by old Washington hands and both are headquartered in the offices of Barber, Griffith and Rogers. The “Barber” in that title is Haley Barber, a former chairman of the Republican party and one of the highest paid lobbyists in Washington. He’s now the Governer-elect of Missippi.”
‘Newbridge Strategies is staffed by people that have a great deal of experience in Washington. Everyone from Joe Albot to Ed Rogers. They understand how the administration thinks.’ (Mark Baker)
“They should understand how the administration thinks. They used to be in it. Joe Albot ran George W. Bush’s campaign for President, and was then put in charge of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Mike Baker’s other collegue is this man, Ed Rogers. He served as a deputy assistant to the first President Bush. Here he is in Iraq with Mike Baker, posing in front of a tank outfitted in flak jackets and sporting a semi-automatic rifle.”
The Center For The Public Integrity has been trying to find out information about the nature of the work specified in some of these contracts, and is getting a lot of resistance.
More from Roberta Baskin:
“No one has tried harder to get at those details [of the deals] than the watchdog group the Center For The Public Integrity. In a six month investigation, the Center found that cozy insider relationships have become an accepted way of doing business in the fight against terrorism.”…
But skeptics might be more easily persuaded if the government didn’t shroud all this in so much secrecy. That secrecy makes it practically impossible to find out if those close to the administration are profiting off their inside information. And it makes it equally hard to find out if tax payers are getting their money’s worth…
For example, in the name of secrecy, the Pentagon redacted almost every page of this contract. They have made it impossible to answer questions about fees being charged, or the work being done, or even the total cost of the job. Just look at the blacked out sections of this deal with the defense contractor SAIC…
All we know for certain about the contractor SAIC is that the top people of this privately held Fortune 500 company are wired into the Pentagon. On the board are a retired general and a former Assistant Secretary of Defense. And then there’s Ryan Henry, he was SAIC’s Senior Vice President. Until, that is, he went through that revolving door into the Pentagon. Into the very office that now supervises his former company’s contract.”
Below: The blacked out numbers of the SAIC contract.
Below: Some Members Of Congress Are Trying To Get To The Bottom Of This
Below: Some Iraqi Native Businessmen Are Complaining They Can’t Compete With American Companies
Bill Moyers NOW On The Mistreatment Of Shrub War Veterans: Case Study – The Stiffler Family
This story aired on NOW With Bill Moyers on November 7, 2003.
This clip is exerpted from the complete feature, “Coming Home,” which was Produced by Dan Klein, features correspondent David Brancaccio, and was Edited by Amanda Zindman.
Jason Stiffler was manning a watch tower in Afghanistan when it fell out from under him. It’s still unclear whether it was an engineering failure, an attack, or friendly fire. Whatever the cause, he fell 25 feet and suffered seizures at the scene and eventually went into a coma. He suffered serious spinal cord injuries and other injuries. He was quadraplegic for some time after the accident, eventually regained limited use of his legs after months of physical therapy, although it still causes him great pain to move.
A year ago October, he was released from the hospital and placed on the Army’s temporary duty list, which meant he was now eligible for medical care and payments from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The Stifflers say they waited for promised phone call from the VA that never came. With his physical and mental condition deteriorating, Jason visited the regional VA hospital in Ft. Wayne, which had no record of him and was only able to offer limited assistance and care.
As David Brancaccio puts it: “Jason Stiffler, badly wounded veteran of America’s War On Terror, was on his own.”
Background on the complete video of the segment:
This story focuses on several families whose fathers put their lives on the line to go fight in Iraq, and were injured in combat. Upon returning home, they were given little or no medical or financial support whatsoever, and were told to seek handouts to get by.
Excerpt from David Brancaccio’s introduction:
..another young vet from the 101st airborne came home to a different kind of reception, one that was to leave him and his family nearly destitute.
Jason Stiffler followed a boyhood dream into the army at the age of 18. He was eager to defend his country. In return, he assumed it would take care of him.
“It was part of the agreement that we made on March 23, 01, when I signed up. I specifically remember that day because it was the first thing I asked. ‘If anything happens to me, will I be taken care of?’ Oh yeah, yeah, just sign right here.”…
“There was a timeframe when I wasn’t getting paid nothing.” (Stiffler)
“How did you make ends meet during that time?” (Brancaccio)
“You know what they told us? ‘Churches,’ ‘family,’ ‘friends,’ ‘welfare.'” (Stiffler)
Here’s some technical information about getting quicktime going to watch these movies.
The Story Of The Stiffler Family (Small – 10 MB)
Bill Moyers NOW On The Mistreatment Of Shrub War Veterans
This story aired on NOW With Bill Moyers on November 7, 2003.
This story, “Coming Home,” was Produced by Dan Klein and features correspondent David Brancaccio. It was Edited by Amanda Zindman.
This story focuses on several families whose fathers put their lives on the line to go fight in Iraq, and were injured in combat. Upon returning home, they were given little or no medical or financial support whatsoever, and were told to seek handouts to get by.
This is available in one big 38 MB clip and in three smaller clips for easier downloading off small connections. I’ve also transcribed portions and am including some info with the pictures.
I’ve also put up some clips of one of the families, the Stifflers, that was featured in this segment.
Here’s some technical information about getting quicktime going to watch these movies.
Bill Moyers On Mistreated Vets – Complete (Small – 38 MB)
Bill Moyers On Mistreated Vets – Part 1 of 3 (Small – 12 MB)
Bill Moyers On Mistreated Vets – Part 2 of 3 (Small – 16 MB)
Bill Moyers On Mistreated Vets – Part 3 of 3 (Small – 11 MB)
Excerpt from Bill Moyers’ introduction:
“In Iraq, for every soldier killed, 7 are wounded. 1,300 since May 1st. That’s twice as many as were wounded during the war itself. The New Republic reports that nearly every night, under the cover of darkness, ambulences meet C-17 and C-141 transport planes flying into Andrews airforce base to ferry the wounded to military facilities. The government hasn’t wanted us to see them, but that’s beginning to change as the numbers mount and as journalists keep insisting on knowing who are these wounded and what’s happening to them.”
Constitutionality of Secret 911 Cases Headed For The Supreme Court
Secret 9/11 Case Before High Court
By Warren Richey for The Christian Science Monitor.
It’s the case that doesn’t exist. Even though two different federal courts have conducted hearings and issued rulings, there has been no public record of any action. No documents are available. No files. No lawyer is allowed to speak about it. Period.
Yet this seemingly phantom case does exist – and is now headed to the US Supreme Court in what could produce a significant test of a question as old as the Star Chamber, abolished in 17th-century England: How far should a policy of total secrecy extend into a system of justice?
Secrecy has been a key Bush administration weapon in the war on terrorism. Attorney General John Ashcroft warns that mere tidbits of information that seem innocuous about the massive Sept. 11 investigation could help Al Qaeda carry out new attacks.
Yet this highly unusual petition to the high court arising from a Miami case brings into sharp focus the tension between America’s long tradition of open courts and the need for security in times of national peril. At issue is whether certain cases may be conducted entirely behind closed doors under a secret arrangement among prosecutors, judges, and docket clerks.
While secret trial tactics have reportedly been used by federal prosecutors to shield cooperating drug dealers, it’s unclear whether the high court has ever directly confronted the issue. But that may change if they take up MKB v. Warden (No. 03-6747).
This is among the first of the post-Sept. 11 terrorism cases to wend its way to the nation’s highest tribunal. There was no public record of its existence, however, until the appeal was filed with the clerk of the US Supreme Court.
A federal judge and a three-judge federal appeals-court panel have conducted hearings and issued rulings. Yet lawyers and court personnel have been ordered to remain silent.
“The entire dockets for this case and appeal, every entry on them, are maintained privately, under seal, unavailable to the public,” says a partially censored 27-page petition asking the high court to hear the case. “In the court of appeals, not just the filed documents and docket sheet are sealed from public view, but also hidden is the essential fact that a legal proceeding exists.”…
The case is significant because it could force a close examination of secret tactics that are apparently becoming increasingly common under Attorney General Ashcroft. In September 2001, he ordered that all deportation hearings with links to the Sept. 11 investigation be conducted secretly. In addition, the Justice Department has acknowledged that at least nine criminal cases related to the Sept. 11 investigation were being cloaked in total secrecy.
MKB v. Warden is the first indication that the Justice Department is extending its total secrecy policy to proceedings in federal courts dealing with habeas corpus – that is, an individual’s right to force the government to justify his or her detention.
The case offers the Supreme Court an opportunity for the first time to spell out whether such secret judicial proceedings violate constitutional protections. It may also offer the first insight into how much deference a majority of justices is willing to grant the government in areas where the war on terrorism may tread upon fundamental American freedoms…
Federal judges have the authority to order sensitive documents or even entire hearings sealed from public view when disclosure might harm national security. Such rulings are usually issued after the judge has explained the need for secrecy in a decision available to the public.
In addition, judges can order that an individual be identified in public court filings only by a pseudonym or by initials, as happened when the MKB case arrived at the US Supreme Court.
What is highly unusual in MKB v. Warden is that lower court judges ordered the entire case sealed from the start – preventing any mention of it to the public.
In her petition to the court, Miami federal public defender Kathleen Williams says the judges’ actions authorizing the secrecy without any public notice, public hearings, or public findings amount to “an abuse of discretion” that requires corrective action by the justices.
“This habeas corpus case has been heard, appealed, and decided in complete secrecy,” Ms. Williams says in her petition.
A government response to the petition is due Nov. 5. It will mark the first time the Justice Department has publicly acknowledged the existence of the habeas corpus action. The justices are set to consider the case during their Nov. 7 conference.
Justice Department officials have defended the blanket secrecy policy, saying that public hearings and public dockets would undermine efforts to recruit detainees as undercover operatives to infiltrate Al Qaeda cells in the US. According to press reports, similar secret trial tactics have been used by federal prosecutors to shield cooperating drug dealers from mention in public court documents that might blow their cover and end their use as operatives in ongoing undercover narcotics sting operations.
Judge Blocks Abortion Ban Less Than An Hour After Shrub Signs Into Law
A nice accomplishment indeed, courtesy of the Center for Reproductive Rights.
Federal judge blocks late-term abortion ban
By the Associated Press.
A federal judge blocked implementation of a federal ban on certain late-term abortions Wednesday, less than an hour after President Bush signed the measure into law.
“Congress and the president ignored the Supreme Court and women’s health in enacting this law,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which filed the lawsuit to block the law.
“The Nebraska court’s order will protect doctors from facing prison for providing their patients with the best medical care.”
U.S. District Judge Richard Kopf issued a temporary restraining order, citing concerns that the law did not contain an exception to the ban for preserving the health of a woman seeking the abortion.
“While … Congress found that a health exception is not needed, it is, at the very least, problematic whether I should defer to such a conclusion when the Supreme Court has found otherwise,” Kopf said.
The judge stopped short of prohibiting the new law from being enforced nationwide…
Kopf did not immediately schedule the next hearing in the case, at which time he could decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction against implementation of the law.
The judge’s ruling followed a three-hour hearing in a lawsuit brought by abortion supporters trying to block the ban. The four doctors sought to block the ban of the procedure opponents call partial-birth abortion.
In making his ruling, Kopf referred to a legal challenge from Carhart that led to the U.S. Supreme Court overturning Nebraska’s partial-birth abortion ban in 2000. The high court said the Nebraska law and others like it were an “undue burden” on women’s rights.
“The Supreme Court, citing factual findings of eight different trial judges, appointed by four different presidents, and the considered opinion of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, has found a very similar law unconstitutional because it banned `partial-birth abortions’ with the requisite exception from the preservation of the health of the woman,” Kopf said…
Judge Kopf voiced his concerns at the start of the hearing. “It seems to me the law is highly suspect, if not a per se violation of the Constitution,” he said…
Kopf said he could find no record of a doctor who performs abortions in the second and third trimesters testifying before Congress on late-term abortions. “Isn’t that important if Congress was really interested in knowing about this procedure?” Kopf said.
The law also appears to have a “serious vagueness problem,” Kopf said.
Priscilla Smith, an attorney for the Center for Reproductive Rights, said that if the law is allowed to take effect “physicians across the country will risk imprisonment for providing abortion care in accordance with their best medical judgment.”