Big Telecom

Richard Noggin Saturday: The Great Debate

We have two noggins today:

THIS IS ONLY A TEST! EAS Nationwide Test

THIS IS ONLY A TEST!

Reminder: Wednesday November 9, 2011 at 2pm FEMA will conduct a national test of emergency alert system. I’ve seen conflicting reports of how long this test will be, from 3 minutes to 30 secs. You will get this alert test from just about every source you can imagine, TV, Radio, Sirens etc. You can read more on the FEMA web-site.

While thinking on this for some time now, I remembered something I wrote and posted on my old blog ‘Not Another CONspiracy’. It was during the time of digital television conversion from analog signals. I now wonder if this might actually happen.

The digital ‘Big Switch’

Friday, December 19, 2008

As in, on and off switch

Think about this- They are able to control your access on the internet, what is to stop that from happening via television. Enter ‘The Big Switch’.

Once the all digital television cable network is up and running, they will CONtrol it. What you receive may become location specific, or geo tagged. When they have full control over the entire network you may not even know what is happening on the west coast if you live on the east coast. You may not be able to read or see information from around the globe, which is already happening in many areas.

Worst case scenario: They will control what all 300 million plus Americans will see simultaneously.

Your signal is digital, there will be NO analog signal for you to fall back on to confirm what you are seeing. There will be no communication allowed from one geo location to the other. Under their discretion you will not be able to contact your friend on the west coast from the east coast to confirm if what you are seeing is actually happening on the west coast. With no news from the outside how are you to decide what is true or false. How will you know if the attack on America soil is real, or just Hollywood make believe.

The other side of this is, if something were to happen in your area, they will control what information you receive. Will it be the truth? They already CONtrol the information you receive at this very moment. Who’s to say they wont go one step further and Make it. You can expect digital blackouts in your future.

Follow @BuelahMan

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

9/11 – 10 Years later and still PISSED OFF

What can I say that hasn’t been said other than I’m still highly ‘pissed off’.

I guess what pisses me off the most is the ignorance that ‘still’ prevails even when shown the evidence. I knew on that day back in 2001 after seeing the taped replays on television. Planes did not do this to the world trade center. A plane did not crash into the pentagon. Flight 93 did not crash, it was shot down. WTC-7 did not collapse due to fire and debris from towers 1 & 2.

Over the years, the biggest smoking gun in my eyes was the collapse of WTC Building 7, which if you recall was reported collapsing prior to the actual collapse. At 5:08pm EDT WTC 7 is shown standing during a report from BBC World (UK) on the right, and can be viewed in the Summary Video of Key Events on 9/11/2001. WTC 7 didn’t collapse until later that day. At 5:20:33 pm EDT on September 11, 2001, World Trade Center 7 started to collapse which can also be viewed in the summary above.

In the segment from the summary above marking the collapse at 5:23pm WTC 7 collapse – CBS (USA), the on air reporter [ the cover up begins ] tries to convince you that it was all a mistake from the earlier BBC report by stating, "This is some of the problems with technology, and that is the pictures advance the facts" It appears the other way around to me. The facts advanced the pictures. Who had foreknowledge WTC building 7 was coming down ?

So yeah, I’m still pissed off !

I would like to thank Internet Archive for including the footage of the aforementioned BBC report of WTC 7 collapsing before it happened in their series; Understanding 9/11 A Television News Archive. They know something was afoot like many of us.

On a side note, I found this an interesting read – 9/11: The day we lost our privacy and power

Follow @BuelahMan

If you like what you see here at The Revolt, please subscribe via Email subscription or by the RSS Feed button found on the upper right hand corner of this page and/or hit the Share Button at the bottom of the post to share via various means.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Can you Hear me now / Emergency Communication

How would you communicate with those around you should your cellphone quit working ?

Recently in the snooze we saw an example of government control over cellphone use. The San Francisco Police Department [SFPD] and the Bay Area Rapid Transit System [BART] admitted they shut off cell service to subway stations in San Francisco. They did this in an attempt to stop a planned protest by disabling the protesters ability to communicate on mobile phones.

What would you do in this situation in your area, should they decide to cut cell or regular phone service for some reason or another ?

Here are a few things you can do on the local level.

[1] – Remember the days gone by of CB radio. I personally have a Citizens Band radio although I dont use it much anymore, but should the need arise, it’s there and can reach out a couple of miles. Far enough to stay in touch with family and friends should the need arise.

[2] Along the same lines are the compact two way radios / walkie talkie. I have a set which at one time was used to talk to my sister at her house next door, and when I was snow skiing or hiking the trails with friends. Now granted this was only for basic communication, but it got the job done.

[3] Here is one not many think about. Do you have a notebook or laptop computer ? Is it able to connect to the internet wirelessly. If so, should the need arise, you could text or talk to others in your general area via an ad-hoc or peer-to-peer link. Much in the way your laptop communicates with a wireless router or switch, it could also communicate with other laptops or notebooks set up to do so wirelessly. I suppose this might work with cell phones as well.

Of course all of the above is provided you still have electricity. If it goes out, do you have other means to generate power for you devices? Batteries, generator, power converter/inverter.

All of the above would be good for short term. What or how would we communicate if down time lasted for months ? I guess verbally and with only those in you general / local area. Just something to think about.

Follow @BuelahMan

If you like what you see here at The Revolt, please subscribe via Email subscription or by the RSS Feed button found on the upper right hand corner of this page and/or hit the Share Button at the bottom of the post to share via various means.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

According to Uncle Sam’s Accountants…

                             http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/

These are the figures for U.S. Trade per Country….

Call me crazy– but first : I don’t believe ‘all’ the figures
and secondly I just keep thinking ‘ what exactly did we trade for that couldn’t of been produced here?”

And why the hell do we trade with our enemies???? To win their hearts and minds…?  How about winning your own citizens hearts and minds so they can get back to work, make a liveable wage, stay healthy… and pay into their own systems .

B’Man’s Hypocrite Watch: Marsha Blackburn – Shill For Big Meds and The Health Insurance Industries

Dear BuelahMan (real name):

What a pleasure to hear from you. Thank you for contacting me to share your support for a national health insurance plan. Hearing from constituents on issues of concern is important to me and our office as we work to represent our district.

Like you, I am concerned about the tens of millions of Americans who currently do not have health insurance.  Today, more than 41 million Americans are either without health care or participate in a basic system that provides only marginal coverage.  As a result of a myriad of state regulations and our tax code, many small businesses cannot afford to offer health insurance and many individuals cannot afford to purchase health insurance. Additionally, people often fear leaving their current job with employer-based health insurance due to the lack of portability and the limited number of affordable insurance options either for individuals or in the small business market.

Also, the rising cost of healthcare is a troubling problem.  According to the most recent Medicare trustees report, total Medicare expenditures are estimated to be 3.2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2006, reaching 11.0 percent in 2080.  With our rapidly aging society, costs can be expected to increase as more individuals join the Medicare program.  Without some true reform, the high cost of health care and the difficulties in obtaining health insurance will continue.

While I understand your desire for health care coverage for all Americans, I do not support a universal government run health care plan.  A system like this would take away the ability for you to make decisions about your own health care and put it in the hands of government bureaucrats.  The best way to expand health care coverage is by giving the individual the power to choose a medical option with his or her own insurance, not by having a government official tell us what procedures are allowed and refuse to provide additional treatments.  As the 111th Congress begins, I will continue to push for reforms that will lower costs and increase health care options for all Americans.

Please be assured of my continued commitment to ensuring Americans have access to health insurance. Congress must do more to expand high quality health care and make it more available and affordable for working families. Our nation must move from today’s bureaucracy-driven, heavily regulated health care system to a new patient-centered system of consumer choice and free-market competition. As your Representative, I am committed to making sure that all of Tennessee’s families have access to affordable, high quality health care, and I will continue to work hard so that this goal can be realized.

Please know that I appreciate both your interest and time in contacting us on this issue. As the discussion moves forward on this and other issues, please feel free to visit our website at www.house.gov/blackburn where you can sign-up for our email update, learn about constituent services, and find the latest legislative news and critical information that affects and concerns the people of Tennessee.

Sincerely,

Marsha Blackburn

Member of Congress

MB/sm

The above was a response to my letter to Mrs Blackburn telling her unequivocally how America must implement a Single-payer, not-for-profit healthcare system, basically just like the one she is on (or is available via her job and my tax money). One like Medicare, but better… improved… yes, just like hers.

Mrs Blackburn says, “I am concerned about the tens of millions of Americans who currently do not have health insurance”, but has the same old bullshit caveat that says, “While I understand your desire for health care coverage for all Americans, I do not support a universal government run health care plan.”

Notice how she shifted the subject to something that I didn’t ask for. The Socialism Bogey Man syndrome that Mrs Blackburn apparently thinks that her constituents agree with. Forgive me, Mrs Blackburn, but you are a hypocrite and a callous, evil, non-caring one, at that.

When you say, “ system like this would take away the ability for you to make decisions about your own health care and put it in the hands of government bureaucrats,” you are bald-faced lying about the subject, or are too stupid to understand the system that is being asked for. But not only that, you have an office in Jackson, TN (I live about 1.5 hours from there), and you have the audacity to describe some bogey man when your very own constituents are suffering from the control of the Insurance Companies, HMO’s and just bad medicine practiced down here. Believe me, I have so many horror stories to tell about the healthcare down here, that your idiotic talking point regurgitation is seen for what it is… a big pile of bullshit.

You simply do not “Get It”, Mrs Blackburn, and I find it amazing that these people elected you again. There isn’t enough Big Money here to be the culprit, so it must be the stupidity and gullibility of the people in SW TN that got you elected. This very response proves to me that you are clueless about this situation.

But I found a long time ago that all one has to do is “Follow the Money, honey” and I followed yours to right here.

You are only fooling the most ignorant, Marsha. But there are more of us awakening to you and your corrupt cronies. It is but a matter of time before enough of us see that Big Banking and Big Meds are your coffers (not to mention Big Telecom which you helped to protect from their illegal wiretapping). No, Marsha. We know precisely who you are and who you represent.

It ain’t Tennesseans, that is for damned sure.

Click to Enlarge to see where Marsha gets her dough. Any surprises here?

The Two Party Paradigm Fooled America AGAIN

I know I ruffle feathers by taking to task those who have fallen for the Two Party system. It is even sadder when it is my dearest friends, but I can’t let you all off the hook just quite yet.

I want people to remember what I tell them here and I will record it for the future “I told you so”, but let me tell you what will NOT happen under an Obama presidency (as opposed to what you “hope” will happen). None of this is rocket science.

Obama will NOT change the economy or affect the global financial meltdown. We are doomed for we are devaluing the dollar to nothing and all he cares to do is jump-start the same old-same old credit laden system that has caused the collapse in the first place.

Obama will NOT hold the telecom industry or the previous administration accountable for the illegal wiretapping of America. Consequently, he WILL carry forward with the over-reaching powers he inherited without much of a squeak from the electorate.

Obama will NOT roll back the Patriot Act or any of the executive powers eked out by Bush/Cheney. He will not prosecute the current traitor in chief for his law breaking and war crimes.

Obama will NOT stop off-shore oil drilling, even though we know that the oil companies have untold millions of acres to drill right now and aren’t.

Obama will NOT stop America’s hegemony and Imperialization. He will NOT dismantle outdated weaponry, but will consider adding more, newer nukes. He will NOT hesitate to preemptive attack a sovereign country (like Pakistan) or anywhere else (much like his twin, W).

Obama will NOT stop the Zionist control of our foreign policy. He has flipped from wanting peace for Palestine, to making sure he backs Israel’s crazies to the hilt. Wanting Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff is proof of this and the continuance of the Empire (Rahm is a known war-monger, as is Biden).

Obama will NOT shut down the socialism for Wall Street, all the while denying socialistic values for the American public. He voted FOR the bailout, remember.

Obama will NOT get us single payer, not-for-profit, Universal Healthcare. He is too indebted to the Insurance companies.

Obama will NOT bring any more equal rights for minorities, as much as you folk want to believe he will. Never forget who got him to this position and it wasn’t black folk. What Obama was able to do was pacify many whites (just not the diehard racist bastards), but he will be much more “conservative” on social issues and much more liberal with military might issues. To the contrary of what we need in this nation right now.

Obama will NOT make all your problems go away in any issue. He will NOT make your life nice and cozy, for his economic strategy is going to be hugely expensive and he won’t cut the military budget that is bleeding us dry.

Obama will NOT fully bring our troops out of Iraq or Afghanistan. His play on words has Progressives “hoping” for this “change”, but he is clear that he will keep troops there, no matter what Iraq has to say about it.

Obama will NOT roll back the gains in the Police State that the Bush Admin (and complicit congress) and will actually grow such a security force inside America.

Obama will NOT re-evaluate the 911 Commission report or have an independent board review all the discrepancies that are obvious (World Trade Center 7 fall wasn’t even addressed, not to mention many other issues swept under the rug).

As Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones of Prison Planet wrote yesterday:

We have tirelessly attempted to educate Americans about the two party monopoly and the fact that Democrats and Republicans serve the interests of the elite, not the people, and have for at least five decades since Kennedy was killed.

Obama is Coca-Cola and McCain is Pepsi – at the end of the day you’re still drinking the same beverage.

The two-party monopoly offers no solutions for the problems we face, in fact the two-party monopoly that you will be helping to maintain should you vote for either Obama or McCain – is the problem.

Stop falling for the same bait and switch trick again and again every eight years.

You sheople need to wake up to the game. You need to understand that we are being manipulated by the ruling class and it is ruining our country and our liberties. How you CAN’T see this is amazing, for every Party change that happens, it is the same shit over and over again.

When George W. Bush was elected, conservatives were in adulation and awe, confident that after eight years of federal government expansion under Clinton, Bush – complete with slick conservative rhetoric and promises of change – would shrink the size of government and restore dignity to the office of President.

Nearly eight years later and what have we witnessed, a record expansion in the size of government and an almost universal contempt for America around the world.

When Tony Blair swept into power with a landslide in the British general election in 1997, the country breathed a collective sigh of relief that this new young dynamo would put right years of Tory malfeasance and provide the “change” that everyone was crying out for.

When Blair left office in 2007 he had created a Socialist surveillance police state and eliminated a huge popular approval lead the Labour Party had enjoyed over the Tories, leaving most of the public once again to demand Conservative rule.

When are we going to wake up to the fact that voting in the lesser of two evils is not a solution?

When are we going to realize that participating in a rigged system, where our vote means virtually nothing anyway because it is counted by a completely compromised and hackable voting machine, not only fails to address any of our problems, but actually compounds them because of our passive obedience in participating in the phony virtual reality presented to us as “democracy”?

When are we going to realize that by continually electing Democrats and Republicans, we are voting away our own freedom as the march towards a new world order and an American police state proceeds no matter who takes office?

For an added bonus, watch this video where Peter Schiff lets us know how Obama’s financial policies will fail:

“Getting Americans spending and borrowing again, as Obama has urged, is not the cure, it is the disease… He’s going to try and create bigger government, borrow a lot more money from foreigners, and spend it on government programs designed to encourage even more consumption, and of course, he is going to raise taxes…”

Bush & Cheney still have until January!!

Bush and Cheney STILL have things they want to do!

R. Jeffrey Smith writes: “The White House is working to enact a wide array of federal regulations, many of which would weaken government rules aimed at protecting consumers and the environment, before President Bush leaves office in January. “The new rules would be among the most controversial deregulatory steps of the Bush era and could be difficult for his successor to undo. Some would ease or lift constraints on private industry, including power plants, mines and farms. “Those and other regulations would help clear obstacles to some commercial ocean-fishing activities, ease controls on emissions of pollutants that contribute to global warming, relax drinking-water standards and lift a key restriction on mountaintop coal mining. “Once such rules take effect, they typically can be undone only through a laborious new regulatory proceeding, including lengthy periods of public comment, drafting and mandated reanalysis. . . . “The burst of activity has made this a busy period for lobbyists who fear that industry views will hold less sway after the elections. The doors at the New Executive Office Building have been whirling with corporate officials and advisers pleading for relief or, in many cases, for hastened decision making.”

Emma Schwartz reports for ABC News: “Every administration tries to pass last minute rules in hopes of leaving a lasting mark. But experts say the Bush administration is expected to approve a greater number more quickly than previous administrations — something they said could lead to bad and costly policy. “‘The administration wants to leave a legacy,’ said Gary Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, which has been critical of these proposals. ‘But across the board it means less protection for the public.’ . . . “It wasn’t supposed to be this way. In May, Josh Bolten, then-head of the Office of Management and Budget, which oversees regulatory approval, issued a memo barring new proposals after June. It also required that all new regulations be completed by Nov. 1. proposed rule put forward by the National Marine Fisheries Service that would lift a requirement that environmental impact statements be prepared for certain fisheries-management decisions and would give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests. Pew Environment Group says the rule “threatens to completely undermine application of the law that protects ocean ecosystems.” OMB Watch reports: “In addition to the hundreds of thousands of public comments opposing the proposed rule, 80 members of Congress have also expressed their opposition, including a letter joined by 72 members of the House of Representatives. The letter states that the proposed rule fails to meet congressional intent made clear during the reauthorization of the [fisheries act]. Hundreds of scientists and environmental organizations have also signed on to oppose the rule.” Siobhan Hughes wrote about in the Wall Street Journal on Monday: “The Bush administration is moving to adopt rules that would loosen pollution controls on power plants, by judging the plants on their hourly rate of emissions rather than their total annual output, people familiar with the matter said. . . . “As long as a power plant’s hourly emissions stay at or below the plant’s historical maximum, the plant would be treated as if it were running more cleanly, even if its total annual emissions increased as plant operators stepped up operations.” “That hasn’t been the case. Many proposed regulations have yet to be finalized and new ones have already come out since the June deadline. “A spokesperson for OMB said in an email response that the Bolten memo ‘wasn’t intended to wholesale shut down work on important regulatory matters after November 1st, but to emphasize due diligence.’ “She added: ‘Ensuring the integrity of the process is important to the Administration.’”

Another example is something I’ve been calling attention to yet more examples of the Bush administration’s midnight rule-making for the past several months. For instance, back in May, Carol D. Leonnig wrote in The Washington Post in July: “Political appointees at the Department of Labor are moving with unusual speed to push through in the final months of the Bush administration a rule making it tougher to regulate workers’ on-the-job exposure to chemicals and toxins.”

Dina Cappiello wrote for the Associated Press just 10 days ago that Interior Department officials were rushing so hard to ease the endangered species rules before Bush leaves office that they were “attempting to review 200,000 comments from the public in just 32 hours.” And on Monday, And yet another one to add to the list. In today’s Post, The proposed sale, which includes famous areas in the Nine Mile Canyon region, would take place Dec. 19, a month before President Bush leaves office.” Tip of the Iceberg?Keep in mind that rule-making is by definition a public process. So what else is going on, beneath  the surface? I raised a slew of questions in that vein for

* Are appointees in federal agencies trying to cover their tracks? Are documents being properly retained?

* Are Bush political appointees working on last-minute reorganizations within the federal government?

* Are Bush loyalists burrowing into the civil service? Will political appointees engage in a last-minute flurry of hiring and promoting Bush loyalists into key civil service jobs? Will political appointees try to make the jump into the civil service?

Bush in the Rearview Mirror

“‘I would say that the most amazingly bankrupt line of argument that I’ve ever seen in this campaign has been the constant and heavily financed effort on the part of the Obama campaign to make George Bush John McCain’s running mate,’ Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, said in a conference call with reporters. “‘To me it’s outrageous. Everybody who knows John McCain, who has spent any amount of time following his life and times, knows that he has been probably one of the biggest flies in the ointment for the Bush administration on Capitol Hill when it comes to putting his country first.’”

Lauren Vernon writes for The Hill: “John McCain’s presidential campaign on Thursday said the Arizona senator would win the race for the White House if Democratic rival Barack Obama keeps seeking to link the GOP nominee to President Bush. “McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said the attempt of the Illinois senator’s campaign to link the current White House occupant to the new Republican standard-bearer is ‘a desperate attempt at the end of this campaign by Obama to try and stem the flow of people away from his campaign.’”

Gary Langer writes for ABC News: “For all the focus on the economy as John McCain’s greatest problem, there’s another right behind it: George W. Bush. . . . “Fewer than half of likely voters in the latest ABC News/Washington Post tracking poll, 47 percent, think McCain would lead in a new direction; 50 percent instead say he’d mainly continue on Bush’s path. McCain has not exceeded 48 percent ‘new direction’ all year, at a time when dissatisfaction with the country’s current course has hit record highs. “It matters: Among those who think McCain would lead in a new direction, 82 percent support him. But among those who think of him as Bush 2.0, 90 percent prefer Barack Obama instead — one of the starkest dividing lines between the two candidates. “Similarly, while McCain overwhelmingly is supported by the relatively few remaining Bush approvers, he loses Bush disapprovers — 72 percent of likely voters — by nearly a 3-1 margin, 71-27 percent.”

Michael Cooper and Dalia Sussman write in the New York Times about the latest New York Times/CBS News poll: “With just days until Americans choose a new president, the survey found them deeply uneasy about the state of their country. Eight-five percent of respondents said the country was pretty seriously off on the wrong track, near the record high recorded earlier this month. A majority said the United States should have stayed out of Iraq. And President Bush’s approval rating remains at 22 percent, tied for the lowest presidential approval rating on record (which was President Harry S, Truman’s rating, recorded by the Gallup Poll in 1952). “Mr. McCain’s renewed efforts to cast himself as the candidate of change have apparently faltered. Sixty-four percent of voters polled said Mr. Obama would bring about real change if elected, while only 39 percent said Mr. McCain would.”

Dave Montgomery writes for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram about how Texans are “joining the rest of the nation in registering sharp disapproval of his job performance as the nation’s chief executive, according to a newly released statewide poll. “Only 34 percent of Texans polled in a University of Texas survey approved of Bush’s handling of the presidency, with just under 10 percent approving ‘strongly.’ By contrast, 55 percent disapproved, with 38.7 percent strongly disapproving. “While the approval ratings are somewhat higher than national polls, the Texas findings reflect a significant downturn in popularity for a native son and former Texas governor who drew 61 percent of the Texas vote in his re-election victory over Democratic Sen. John Kerry four years ago. Throughout much of his two-term presidency, Texas has generally provided Bush with a safety net of robust support while he was losing favor elsewhere.”

“McCain . . . appears with the president only in commercials paid for and approved by Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama or the Democratic National Committee (DNC). McCain spends most of his days seeking as much distance between he and the president as he can find.” And Youngman notes that “the first lady isn’t the only current occupant of the White House getting in on the act. “Vice President Dick Cheney, who enjoys approval ratings lower than the president’s, is scheduled to attend a Victory rally in Wyoming on Saturday.”

Economy Watch

Alison Vekshin and Robert Schmidt

“The Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has asked Baroness Scotland to consider bringing criminal proceedings against Americans allegedly responsible for the rendition and abuse of Binyam Mohamed, when he was held in prisons in Morocco and Afghanistan. “The development follows criticism of US prosecutors by British judges who have seen secret evidence of torture committed against Mr Mohamed, including allegations his torturers used a razor blade to repeatedly cut his penis. The Attorney’s investigation is expected to include allegations that MI5 colluded in Mr Mohamed’s rendition. Mr Mohamed, 30, an Ethiopian national and British resident, was arrested in Pakistan in 2002, when he was questioned by an MI5 officer. “On Tuesday, Government lawyers wrote to the judges hearing Mr Mohamed’s case against the UK government in the High Court. In the letter they said ‘the question of possible criminal wrongdoing to which these proceedings has given rise has been referred by the Home Secretary to the Attorney general for consideration as an independent minister of justice’. Baroness Scotland has been sent secret witness statements given to the court and public interest immunity certificates for the proceedings.” And in news of another case,

Iraq Watch

Olivier Knox

Syria Comment blogger

Jonathan Karl reports for ABC News that Gen. David Petraeus “proposed visiting Syria shortly after taking over as the top U.S. commander for the Middle East. “The idea was swiftly rejected by Bush administration officials at the White House, State Department and the Pentagon. “Petraeus, who becomes the commander of U.S. Central Command (Centcom) Friday, had hoped to meet in Damascus with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Petraeus proposed the trip, and senior officials objected, before the covert U.S. strike earlier this week on a target inside Syria’s border with Iraq.” Glenn Greenwald points out, this is not the exclusive Karl claims. Joshua Landis writes that he “has been writing since August 2008 that Petraeus tried to go to Damascus in the fall of 2007, but was refused permission by the Vice President. It wasn’t the president. (That little bit of info is an SC exclusive told to me by a top intelligence officer.)” Ken Herman blogs for Cox News Service: “President Bush hasn’t held a news conference since July 15. And that one ended with this comment from Bush: ‘OK, I’ve enjoyed it. Thank you very much for your time. Appreciate it.’ “Apparently he didn’t enjoy it and appreciate all that much. He hasn’t had a news conference since then and generally has ignored questions lobbed his way at White House events. . . . “Can we expect a presidential news conference anytime soon?” Not likely. From yesterday’s press briefing > Q. “Dana, looking ahead to the election, you said a while back that the President was trying not to give any press conferences while the campaign was going on, to let the candidates sort of have their own spotlight. When will we hear from the President once the election is over?” :

Peter Finn and Del Quentin Wilber write in The Washington Post: “A federal judge yesterday questioned the motives of Justice Department lawyers for withdrawing allegations linking a Guantanamo Bay detainee to a ‘dirty bomb’ plot in the United States shortly before they were required to hand over exculpatory evidence to the defense. “‘That raises serious questions in this court’s mind about whether those allegations were ever true,’ said U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who is overseeing a lawsuit brought by Binyam Mohammed, 30, a resident of Britain who is challenging his detention at the U.S. military facility in Cuba. Sullivan warned that ‘someone is going to rue the day those allegations were made’ if it turns out that the government had evidence that they were unfounded. . . . “Mohammed said the CIA rendered him to Morocco weeks after he was arrested in Pakistan in April 2002. His attorneys argue that the government’s allegations are based on confessions their client made after his detention and torture in Morocco, where, they say, he was slashed with razors. “‘He parroted what his torturers wanted him to say,’ said Zachary Katznelson, one of Mohammed’s attorneys. ‘All they have are Mr. Mohammed’s own words, and they were extracted at the tip of a razor blade.’ “The government said Mohammed voluntarily confessed to a number of terrorist crimes, including the dirty-bomb plot, in 2004 at Bagram air base in Afghanistan before his transfer to Guantanamo Bay. The government has never acknowledged that he was in Morocco.” Sam Youngman writes for The Hill: “While President Bush has conspicuously stayed on the sidelines in the final days until the election, others close to him are venturing out on behalf of embattled Republican candidates. “First Lady Laura Bush, always a popular draw for Republicans, was in Mississippi on Thursday to stump for Sen. Roger Wicker (R), and on Monday she will do the same for House candidate Brett Guthrie at a rally in Kentucky. “That the first lady is hitting the road while the president stays in Washington speaks volumes to this election season’s dilemma: Republican candidates have to run away from the administration and its policies while still looking for help in races that were considered runaways in once-reliably red states. . . . Jennifer Loven writes for the Associated Press: “Under fire from Democrats and Republicans alike, the White House on Thursday defended giving billions of bailout dollars to banks that plan to reward shareholders and executives — or even buy other banks. “Allowing banks to engage in such normal business activities actually could help loosen lending and revive the sagging economy, said Ed Lazear, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. He said the administration would not impose any conditions on banks beyond those required when Congress created the bailout program, which authorized the government to buy stock in financial institutions. . . . “Lazear was put before the cameras in the White House briefing room amid a rising chorus of complaints from lawmakers about the latitude that banks will have when they receive bailout money from Washington. “That bailout was originally sold by the administration as a plan for the government to purchase toxic mortgage-based assets from financial institutions, to get them off their books and inspire the resumption of normal lending. After passage, though, the administration decided the better course would be to devote $250 billion into buying ownership stakes in banks. “With taxpayers’ money flowing into their vaults, banks are going ahead with paying dividends to shareholders, giving bonuses to top executives and acquiring competitors. Lawmakers are asking why banks with the money to do those things need taxpayer-funded help.” this ad- titled Rearview Mirror – that the Obama campaign plans to air heavily in key battleground states this weekend. In the ad, images of Bush keep popping up in the rearview mirrors of a car as road signs outside highlight criticisms of McCain’s economic policy. CBS News: “‘Wonder where John McCain would take the economy? Look behind you,’ an announcer says as the spot opens. Onscreen, a man driving his car is shown looking in his rearview mirror, where he sees Mr. Bush’s face. Cappiello reported that — surprise! — the administration had concluded “that changes it wants to make to endangered species rules before President Bush leaves office will have no significant environmental consequences.” Juliet Eilperin writes: “The federal Bureau of Land Management is reviving plans to sell oil and gas leases in pristine wilderness areas in eastern Utah that have long been protected from development, according to a notice posted this week on the agency’s Web site. NiemanWatchdog.org back in June. Among them: * Are major contracts being let out that have long-term ramifications? And are any of those related to outsourcing? S heldon Alberts writes for the Canwest News Service that Republican presidential candidate John McCain’s camp responded furiously to a new ad from the Barack Obama campaign linking McCain to Bush. Juliet Eilperin wrote in The Washington Post in August that the new rules would “allow federal agencies to decide whether protected species would be imperiled by agency projects, eliminating the independent scientific reviews that have been required for more than three decades.” Juliet Eilperin wrote in The Washington Post: “The Bush administration is on the verge of implementing new air quality rules that will make it easier to build power plants near national parks and wilderness areas.”

No Presser for You

Perino: “You’ll probably hear from me that night, and then we’ll see after that.”

Q. “In terms of, you know, a press conference, obviously many of these questions were questions we’d love to direct to him.”

Perino: “How long have you covered the White House, this White House? Do we ever forecast when we’re going to have press conferences? No. And I really don’t think that’s going to change after November 4th. So you’ll just have to keep dressing up everyday, and then we’ll see.”

Outsource THIS, Rednecks

Ralph Nader has an excellent prescription for the outsourcing going on in America:

Outsource The CEOs

AT&T Owns the Democrats

So the Democratic National Convention has sponsors and guess who is providing the nice bags for all the bullshit trinkets that are given out? You guessed it. The same one that owns the Dems and has reason for paying them all off for their cover up of crimes they perpetrated with the most hated Republican president of all time.

Yes, people, this company owns the very ones you vote for and the hypocrisy in this bag is overwhelming to me. I suppose they will simply stuff them with $100 bills and hand them out in gratitude for the congressional complicity in the raping of America’s freedoms.

On another note, the convention is being held at the Pepsi Center. So who is advertising on the other side of the bag?

That is almost funny, if it wasn’t so infuriating.

h/t Glenn Greenwald

FISA Law: No Public Value

B’Man: I pointed out earlier that these Dems were complicit and following the money was the best course of action. However, Glenn Greenwald also notes that their complicity stems from even deeper motives (actually knowing about the illegal activity and NOT saying anything to begin with).

Just the type of thing a bank robber or any criminal would like to achieve: change the law after the crime… to FIT the crime. Both THUGS and Dems are a part of this coverup.

I think they’re simply waiting to see if the public’s interest will wane and we’ll see that tomorrow, because this bill has, quite literally, no public value for citizens or civil liberties. It is reverse engineering, though the type of thing that the Bush administration is famous for, and now the Democrats are doing — that is to change the law to conform to past conduct.

It’s what any criminal would love to do. You rob a bank, go to the legislature, and change the law to say that robbing banks is lawful. . . .

This is a very frightening bill. What people have to understand is that FISA itself is controversial. This court issued tens of thousands of warrants granted applications for surveillance without turning down any. Only recently did they turn down two. . . . What you’re seeing in this bill is an evisceration of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. It is something that allows the president and the government to go in to law-abiding homes on their word alone, their suspicion alone, and to engage in warrantless surveillance. That’s what the framers that drafted the Fourth Amendment wanted to prevent. . . .

Well, there’s no question in my mind that there is an obvious level of collusion here. We now know that Democratic leadership knew about the illegal surveillance program almost from its inception. Even when they were campaigning about fighting for civil liberties, they were aware of an unlawful surveillance program as well as a torture program. And ever since that came out, the Democrats have been silently trying to kill any effort to hold anyone accountable because that list could very well include some of their own members.

And, I’m afraid this is Washington politics at the worst. And, so, I think that what you’re seeing with this bill is not just caving in to a very powerful lobby, but also caving in to sort of the worst motivations on Capitol Hill since 9/11. You know, the administration was very adept at bringing in Democrats at a time when they knew they couldn’t refuse, to make them buy in to this program, and now that investment is bearing fruit.So, of course key Congressional Democrats who were made aware of these illegal torture and surveillance programs are going to protect the Bush administration and other lawbreakers. If you were Jay Rockfeller or Nancy Pelosi, would you want there to be investigations and prosecutions for torture programs that, to one degree or another, you knew about? If you were Jane Harman, wouldn’t you be extremely eager to put a stop to judicial proceedings that were likely to result in a finding that surveillance programs that you knew about, approved of, and helped to conceal were illegal and unconstitutional?

When President Bush and Vice President Cheney celebrated the signing of the new FISA bill at the White House along with Jay Rockefeller, Steny Hoyer and Jane Harman (see the wonderful photos here), they weren’t just celebrating with the political officials who helped protect them from consequences for illegal acts. They were celebrating with those who were participants in those acts, and who were therefore just as eager for immunity and an end to judicial proceedings as Bush officials themselves.

WTF Thursday: Obama Shows Where His Priorities Are

B’Man: And Barack’s priorities have ZERO to do with the American people… unless you consider Big Money the American People. I don’t know about you, but my obligation to Senator Obama is to hold that lying asshole accountable for stealing the votes with lies and deception. There is so little difference between McCain and Obama that I cannot believe that the Dems aren’t outraged at how they have been played by this man.

There is no amount of politcal maneuvering that makes this flip-flopping acceptable. There is no way that his indignant move to the right (he is not ‘center’ but has move hard right) is worth the flip-flop and the backstab to those who made him.

But Dems do not necessarily equal Progressives (which I consider myself and could never be a Democrat). It is totally unacceptable that this man is lying to us and shift-changing on the most important issue of the day. There is no amount of bullshit he can spew that will convince me that he simply did not cave on this and any asshole who wants to continue his defense is simply a fool.

He is screwing us, people. He has played America to the hilt. John Nichols lays it out well for us:

Obama Votes to Silence Debate and Pass FISA

By John Nichols, TheNation.com

Arizona Sen. John McCain did not bother to show up for Wednesday’s Senate votes on whether to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to absolve George Bush of responsibility for initiating an illegal warrantless wiretapping program and to provide retroactive immunity to the telecommunications corporations that violated the privacy of their customers in order to collaborate with a lawless president.

But that’s OK, because Illinois Sen. Barack Obama cast the votes that McCain would have.

In addition to joining the majority in a 69-28 Senate vote to pass legislation that the American Civil Liberties Union describes as “a Constitutional nightmare,” Obama voted to silence debate on the FISA bill.

While most Senate Democrats — including New York Sen. Hillary Clinton — opposed the FISA rewrite and voted to keep the debate open, the presumptive Democratic nominee for president sided with the Republicans in saying that the essential Constitutional questions raised by this legislation did not merit extended or thoughtful debate.

The cloture vote split 72 in favor of shutting down debate to 26 for keeping it open. Two senators — McCain and ailing Massachusetts Democrat Edward Kennedy — missed Wednesday’s session.

The “no” votes on cloture were cast by Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders and 25 Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, Obama’s Democratic colleague from Illinois, and Clinton, Obama’s primary competitor for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Leading the fight to keep the debate about the FISA rewrite open were Connecticut Democrat Chris Dodd and Wisconsin Democrat Russ Feingold, the two senators whom Obama promised earlier this year to work with in an effort to block this assault on the Constitution and corporate responsibility.

Said Feingold, “I sit on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, and I am one of the few members of this body who has been fully briefed on the warrantless wiretapping program. And, based on what I know, I can promise that if more information is declassified about the program in the future, as is likely to happen either due to the inspector general report, the election of a new president or simply the passage of time, members of this body will regret that we passed this legislation. I am also familiar with the collection activities that have been conducted under the Protect America Act and will continue under this bill. I invite any of my colleagues who wish to know more about those activities to come speak to me in a classified setting. Publicly, all I can say is that I have serious concerns about how those activities may have impacted the civil liberties of Americans. If we grant these new powers to the government and the effects become known to the American people, we will realize what a mistake it was, of that I am sure.”

Unfortunately, while Obama once promised to work with Feingold, he wasn’t listening on Wednesday when the Wisconsin senator explained to his colleagues that granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications corporations would effectively block the ability of Congress and the courts to address not just massive corporate wrongdoing but attacks on the privacy rights of Americans.

“If Congress short-circuits these lawsuits, we will have lost a prime opportunity to finally achieve accountability for these years of law-breaking,” said Feingold. “That’s why the administration has been fighting so hard for this immunity. It knows that the cases that have been brought directly against the government face much more difficult procedural barriers and are unlikely to result in rulings on the merits.”

Feingold was speaking the truth about a moment in which the ACLU said the Senate was on the verge of passing “an unconstitutional domestic spying bill that violates the Fourth Amendment and eliminates any meaningful role for judicial oversight of government surveillance.”

But Obama did not want to hear it.

B’Man: So, when this man tells us one thing, then shifts 180 degrees, does that piss you off, or will you (just like a Bushie would do) just wave it off as some unknown strategic manipulation that will enable him to go after them after he is elected?

If so, I have a bridge in Jersey I’d like to sell you.

Let me tell you what this old redneck wants from someone who touts ‘change’ as his big “difference”.

I want FUCKING CHANGE!

Must Avoid TV: When Olbermann Became Owned

He used to put on a decent show. He would rave and rant at the right times. He made it “acceptable” to accuse the President of his shenanigans and evil-doing. He helped many Americans realize that the Right has taken over, by brute force, the airways and mindset of the American people, even though many Americans knew these things to be against their core values and beliefs.

Keith used to help me to feel like we had hope that the political movement “could” be changed. That maybe, just maybe, someone from the progressive side of the political spectrum could actually become a voice again. But, slowly and surely, he has become owned by “them” and I feel he has either been told something that changed his mind or he is a flip-flopper on one of the most crucial things happening today in Washigton.

I have found myself becoming less attentive to his show and over the last week or so have not really watched at all. Why? Because he has fallen for the Obama rhetoric and has totally capitulated on a Special Comment regarding the telecom immunity deal that Obama now flip-floppingly supports (his flip-flops are becoming quite regular now).

So Keith has decided that it isn’t so bad now that Obama has capitulated to Big Telecom’s influence and has decided that Mr Obama simply knows something the rest doesn’t and that stopping the civil court process will enable a super-secret Criminal attack when Obama wins. Its all planned and we should believe that they will be held accountable in the future. Just elect him to get it done, I suppose (the carrot dangles before the Progressives, again).

Keith, who still holds some of my admiration, has become just another TV personality. You know, the kind that you can’t trust for anything truthful, but will be controlled by other rationale. They all seem to do it. I still hold out hope for Bill Moyers.

Glenn Greenwald took Keith to task about this and Olbermann replied… thing is, with Glenn, you better have your shit together, for he will proverbially spank you if you bullshit him. I recommend everyone subscribing to his blog.

In his Kos reply, Olbermann pronounces that my piece yesterday was “simplistic and childish” but then adds the standard dismissive Journalist defense: “I don’t know much about Mr. Greenwald and I didn’t read his full piece.” He says that he refrained from criticizing Obama’s support for the FISA bill in reliance on John Dean’s comments, and “John Dean is the smartest person I’ve ever met” and “John Dean is worth 25 Glenn Greenwalds” — so that settles that (for what it’s worth, I also have a high opinion of Dean’s legal acumen; hosted his appearance at FDL’s Book Salon; don’t disagree with him about this bill at all; have communicated with him about many issues; and he has said many complimentary things about my work in the past, so waving the flag of Dean’s Unassailable Authority establishes nothing).

Olbermman then denies that he was justifying Obama’s support for the FISA bill but then goes on to do exactly that:

Seriously, there is little in the polls to suggest McCain has anything to run with other than terror . . . . So why hand them a brick to hit him with — Obama Voted Against FISA — if voting Aye enhances his chances of getting himself his own Attorney General to prosecute FISA.

How can Olbermann accuse me of distorting his commentary and deny that he’s rationalizing Obama’s support for the bill and then write the above — which does nothing but justify Obama’s support for the bill? That’s exactly the mentality I was criticizing yesterday — that Obama should be excused for supporting this assault on core Constitutional liberties and the rule of law because doing so is necessary to avoid appearing Weak on Terrorism. That’s the behavior which Obama has repeatedly vowed to reject, and it’s that precise mentality that has to be extinguished, not perpetuated.

Isn’t it amazing how Keith finds himself in such a mixed up conundrum? I call it hypocrisy.

to give Obama a pass on his support for such a heinous bill — one which Dean himself describes as a grave assault on the Constitution — based on this imagined secret plan for the Good that Obama is harboring is to illustrate exactly the sort of blind faith in political leaders that is so dangerous. That’s been the Right’s mentality to excuse every last thing Bush does:

It may look to you like Bush is breaking the law or doing something wrong, but he’s a Good person and so we can trust in him that he’s doing it for our own Good, even when he doesn’t tell us why he’s doing it and even when he keeps his real motives a secret. He probably has a good reason for doing these things and we don’t need to know what that is. Besides, we’re facing such an extreme crisis that it’s more important to support him than criticize him even when we don’t understand why he’s doing something and even when we don’t know what it is that he’s doing.

No political leader deserves that sort of blind faith — not Bush and not Obama.

There is so much more in Glenn’s article, but let me finish with the following observation that I totally agree with. I am sick and tired of hearing about chnage in how leadership operates. I want to SEE IT IN ACTION!

As he mentions in his Kos diary, Olbermann had the vocally pro-Obama Markos Moulitsas on his show on Monday night and tried to get Markos to embrace this excuse for Obama. Markos rejected it emphatically:

OLBERMANN: But to the point of the Constitution, John Dean made a fascinating point on this news hour on Friday. He read this bill and he knows a little something about the Constitution, too. He says it’s so sloppily written that nothing in there would rule out later criminal liabilities for the telecom companies.Could that be, actually, what Obama is counting on, just sort of cede this civil action stuff which is basically in lieu of sending these people to jail and just concentrate on, you know, closing up whatever perceived weakness there is of the Democrats being soft on counterterror and, in fact, just hold a bigger punch back until after the election?

MOULITSAS: Well, if that’s the strategy, he has said nothing to indicate that and this is not the sort of thing that I think you have to keep quiet and secretive. I mean, if that’s his strategy, he can say, “This is a bill that’s flawed,” but, really at the end of the day he has a chance to stand for the Constitution and to show that he will protect it against forces that seek to undermine it and he will show that he has, like I said before, that he is a leader and will take the mantle of leadership on this issue and take control of the Democratic Party.

Markos — who observed: “I don’t think he’s going to lose any support, I mean, let’s be honest. I mean, it’s either Obama or John McCain” — nonetheless added:

I think what’s at stake, though, is a lot of the intensity of support for Barack Obama. And he spent the last two years telling us how he’s going to be the leader of the free world, not to mention the Democratic Party and this nation . . . . I don’t want to hear him talk about leadership. I don’t want to hear him talk about defending the Constitution; I want to see him do it.

That is precisely the point, and of course those who believe in defending core constitutional liberties shouldn’t remain quiet when any politician — including Obama — takes actions to erode them.

Richard Noggin’ Saturday: Steny Hoyer

Richard Noggin Saturday: Alberto GonzoClone

LATE BREAKING Richard Noggin Addition:

As of 10PM last night, this prick took over as Dickhead of the week.

The Political “Scribe” has been “scribbled” off the Redstate Revolt Honor Roll and added to the lying, Yankee Asshole Roll. 

Hey, Schumer and Feinstein: Are you happy you have endorsed and enabled Mr Gonzales’ Clone of Lying Scumbaggery? When I saw Mr Mukasey make these remarks, tear up and quiver his lip, I didn’t feel his “pain”… I felt outrage. I felt outrage because I know that what he is saying is a downright lie meant to mislead Americans and play on our Patriotic sympathies.

Then, knowing that Mukasey was the Richard Noggin of this week, I read Glenn Greenwald’s piece and understand that I cannot put it any better way:

Michael Mukasey has conclusively proven himself to be an exact replica of Alberto Gonazles — slavishly loyal to every presidential whim and unbound by even the most minimal constraints of truth while serving those whims. Speaking in San Fransisco this week, Mukasey demanded that the President be given new warrantless eavesdropping powers and that lawbreaking telecom be granted amnesty. To make his case, Mukasey teared up while exploiting the 3,000 Americans who died on 9/11 and said this:

Officials “shouldn’t need a warrant when somebody with a phone in Iraq picks up a phone and calls somebody in the United States because that’s the call that we may really want to know about. And before 9/11, that’s the call that we didn’t know about. We knew that there has been a call from someplace that was known to be a safe house in Afghanistan and we knew that it came to the United States. We didn’t know precisely where it went.“

At that point in his answer, Mr. Mukasey grimaced, swallowed hard, and seemed to tear up as he reflected on the weaknesses in America’s anti-terrorism strategy prior to the 2001 attacks. “We got three thousand. . . . We’ve got three thousand people who went to work that day and didn’t come home to show for that,” he said, struggling to maintain his composure.

At the time of the attacks, Mr. Mukasey was the chief judge at the federal courthouse a few blocks away from the World Trade Center.These are multiple falsehoods here, and independently, this whole claim makes no sense. There is also a pretty startling new revelation here about the Bush administration’s pre-9/11 failure that requires a good amount of attention.

Even under the “old” FISA, no warrants are requiredwhere the targeted person is outside the U.S. (Afghanistan) and calls into the U.S. Thus, if it’s really true, as Mukasey now claims, that the Bush administration knew about a Terrorist in an Afghan safe house making Terrorist-planning calls into the U.S., then they could have — and should have — eavesdropped on that call and didn’t need a warrant to do so. So why didn’t they? Mukasey’s new claim that FISA’s warrant requirements prevented discovery of the 9/11 attacks and caused the deaths of 3,000 Americans is disgusting and reckless, because it’s all based on the lie that FISA required a warrant for targeting the “Afghan safe house.” It just didn’t. Nor does the House FISA bill require individual warrants when targeting a non-U.S. person outside the U.S.

They perpetually lie about issues that are key fear factor points for Americans. Then, this nasty little man, who obviously misled congress during hearings, plays on emotions of people with clear lying intent. Make no mistake that he knows exactly what is legal and what is not.

But he didn’t stop there, he is insisting that the Telecom Companies being protected:

Mukasey was even more dishonest in demanding amnesty for lawbreaking telecoms. According to today’s admiring Wall St. Journal Editorial, this is what Mukasey said on that subject:

The AG also addressed why immunity from lawsuits is vital for the telecom companies that cooperated with the surveillance after 9/11. “Forget the liability” the phone companies face, Mr. Mukasey said. “We face the prospect of disclosure in open court of what they did, which is to say the means and the methods by which we collect foreign intelligence against foreign targets.” Al Qaeda would love that.

Mike Mukasey was a long-time federal judge and so I feel perfectly comfortable calling that what it is: a brazen lie. Federal courts hear classified information with great regularity and it is not heard in “open court.” There are numerous options available to any federal judge to hear classified information — closed courtrooms, in camera review (in chambers only), ex partecommunications (communications between one party and the judge only). No federal judge — and certainly not Vaughn Walker, the Bush 41 appointee presiding over the telecom cases — is going to allow “disclosure in open court of . . . . the means and the methods by which we collect foreign intelligence.” And Mukasey knows that.

Worse, FISA itself (50 USC 1806(f)) explicitly provides that telecoms are permitted to present any evidence in support of their defenses in secret (both in camera and ex parte) to the judge and let the judge decide the case based on it. Just go read 50 USC 1806(f)of FISA; it’s as clear as day. In fact, it doesn’t merely permit, but explicitly requires, the federal judge to review evidence in secret whenever the Attorney General requests that (“the United States district court in the same district . . . shall, notwithstanding any other law, if the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States, review in camera and ex parte the application the application, order, and such other materials relating to the surveillance.”).

But Mukasey also lies about what Americans want, and especially what New Yorkers want:

Michael Mukasey can cry all he wants about the 9/11 attacks. But neither he nor the rest of the Bush administration are the proprieters of those attacks. There were millions of New Yorkers in Manhattan on 9/11 other than Michael Mukasey, who lived and worked there for a long time. Neither Mike Mukasey nor his tearful pleas for unchecked government surveillance power and the erosion of the rule of law are representative of them.

To the contrary, the substantial majority of New Yorkers — and huge majorities of Manhattanites– vehemently reject the Bush/Cheney agenda of dismantling our constitutional framework and basic safeguards in the name of these sorts of fear-mongering and manipulative appeals. Unlike Mukasey and other Bush followers, most New Yorkers have ceased quivering in fear long ago — if they ever did — and have had their resolve to defend our basic constitutional liberties strengthened, not obliterated, as a result of the 9/11 attack and the subsequent, self-serving exploitation of it by Mukasey’s White House bosses. And under no circumstances do Mukasey’s tears provide license for this tidal wave of lies in defense of presidential lawlessness, from our nation’s highest “law enforcement officer.”

The Boehner Crybaby routine is old and tired, Mike. It may play with the assembled crowds within the 31% that worships your King, but the rest are wise to the foolishness.

Investigate. Impeach.