 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 12 Mar 08 - 11:34 PM As chairman, Conyers is taking the lead on a groundbreaking civil lawsuit in which the committee is asking a federal judge to force White House chief of staff Joshua Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers to comply with subpoenas the committee served as part of its investigation of the Bush administrationÕs firing of nine U.S. attorneys in 2006. ÒThe [administration] was thumbing their nose at the legal process,Ó Conyers said in an interview with Politico. ÒAs commander in chief, [Bush] thinks he is above the law.Ó Conyers says he ÒdidnÕt have any choiceÓ but to file the suit after Attorney General Michael Mukasey made it clear that the Justice Department would not prosecute the HouseÕs contempt charges against Bolten and Miers. Predictably, the suit has not gone over well with Republicans, who argue that the two aides are protected by executive privilege. One aide to House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) called the lawsuit nothing more than Òpandering to the left-wing fever swamps of loony liberal activists.Ó ConyersÕ determination to proceed is just the latest sign that he is not afraid to stir the pot. From his chairmanÕs perch, Conyers has launched an ambitious oversight agenda, holding hearings on the U.S. attorney firings, voting irregularities in several states and several other hot-button topics. He has been warmer than most House Democrats to the idea of exploring impeachment proceedings against Bush. Legislatively, he has introduced bills to ban racial profiling by law enforcement officers and to provide for universal health care. On the contentious issue of an update to electronic surveillance laws Ñ another key committee flash point Ñ Conyers has opposed granting retroactive immunity to the telecommunications companies that aided the government in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Conyers said he would be willing to reconsider his opposition if the Bush administration would make available full details of the program, something it has so far refused to do. ÒThere is no case in American jurisprudence in which it had been held that retroactive immunity would apply if you donÕt know what it was you were granting immunity for,Ó Conyers said. ... (WaPo) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: On War with Iran and Other Bush Possibles From: Amos Date: 12 Mar 08 - 02:01 PM Dan Froomkin, writing a lengthy opinion piece in the Washington Post provides sober food for thought on the possibility that the resignation of Admiral Wm Fallon is one of multiple indications that the Bushies want to resurrect the idea of warring on Iran. It is an interesting and thoughtful piece that touches as well on numerous other aspects of the Administrations current manuvers, including the veto of the anti-torture act. Too long to extract here, but strongly recommended reading. Five pages. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 12 Mar 08 - 11:31 AM Hey, even a chimp looks good once in agreat while, when just the right angle is taken. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: beardedbruce Date: 12 Mar 08 - 10:55 AM Amos, How DARE you print this pro-Bush propaganda! "The long-delayed document catalogs dozens of prewar assertions by President Bush and other administration officials that proved to be wildly inaccurate about Iraq's alleged stockpiles of banned weapons and pursuit of nuclear arms. But officials say the report reaches a mixed verdict on the key question of whether the White House misused intelligence to make the case for war. The document criticizes White House officials for making assertions that failed to reflect disagreements or uncertainties in the underlying intelligence on Iraq, officials said. But the report acknowledges that many claims were consistent with intelligence assessments in circulation at the time" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 12 Mar 08 - 10:48 AM "Just one year into his tenure as CENTCOM commander, Fallon resigned today, and you can read into it nothing more than a resignation in protest. Sure, he'll try to put a good face on it, as a loyal Admiral, and the Pentagon will insist that he was stepping aside to help the team. But that's not the case. The fact of the matter is that the war in Iraq has taken precedence over the war on terror, and the administration has put General Petraeus out there to make the case for our military policy, not his boss, Admiral Fallon. Who can forget the video of Petraeus saying he didn't know if the war in Iraq made America more or less safe? It was the one moment that crystallized the fact that Petraeus' responsibility began and ended at Iraq's borders. Yet, he was put out there as the face of our military policy -- a job which should have been Fallon's. The only reason -- ONLY reason -- that Fallon wasn't put out there was because he didn't believe Iraq was making America safer, and knew that Iraq was a drain on the war in Afghanistan. He wasn't going to put his neck out there and repeatedly shill for the administration. At the same time, like many brass, he was going to give his best shot, behind the scenes, to change the policy. Now, it's become clear that the policy won't change. So, today, Admiral Fallon essentially said, "Forget this. I'm out of here." Another voice of reason bites the dust." (Huffington Post) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 12 Mar 08 - 01:25 AM WASHINGTON, March 11 (Reuters) - U.S. President George W. Bush's fellow Republicans in Congress on Tuesday upheld his veto of a bill to ban the CIA from subjecting enemy detainees to interrogation methods denounced by critics as torture. A largely party-line vote of 225-188 in the Democratic-led House of Representatives fell short of the needed two-thirds majority to override the president. Bush maintains that the United States does not torture, but has refused to discuss interrogation techniques, saying that doing so could tip off terrorists. The CIA has acknowledged using a simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding on three terrorism suspects, including accused Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, but says it stopped using that method in 2003. Waterboarding has been condemned by many U.S. lawmakers, human rights groups and foreign countries as a form of torture. In voting to sustain Bush's veto, Rep. Pete Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican, attacked Democrats for failing to approve a stalled Senate-passed bill that would expand the government's ability to track foreign targets. "Rather than holding a vote to give terrorists our (interrogation) playbook, Congress should be voting to strengthen the intelligence community's ability to spy on them," Hoekstra said. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat, said Bush's veto had degraded the country's moral standing, undermined its international credibility and could expose U.S. military and intelligence personnel to the treatment. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Barry Finn Date: 11 Mar 08 - 06:02 PM They're translating the watered-down muffled sounds coming out of a water-boarded victims mouth. Glug, glug, glug = Gulag, gulag, gulag Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Mar 08 - 05:33 PM Last I head of them, their biggest inventory of Iraq contracting personnel were in translations, not interrogation. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Donuel Date: 11 Mar 08 - 04:58 PM Amos, Blackwater gets the most attention but Titan Inc. is the torure wing of private army contractors. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Donuel Date: 11 Mar 08 - 03:16 PM The Bush Tradgedy Check out this short video on Bush's favorite painting. http://www.slatev.com/?from=rss |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Mar 08 - 09:02 AM Editorial Radio Fear America Published: March 11, 2008 Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia read the funnies over the radio to cheer up New Yorkers during a newspaper strike. President Franklin Roosevelt gave "fireside chats" to bolster Americans during the depression. President Bush used his radio address on Saturday to try to scare Americans into believing they have to sacrifice their rights and their values to combat terrorism. ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Mar 08 - 10:43 PM Brattleboro votes to indict Bush March 5, 2008 By Susan Smallheer Herald Staff BRATTLEBORO Ñ Residents in this iconoclastic town cast a symbolic protest vote Tuesday, directing town officials to draw up indictment papers against President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney for violating their oath of office. The tally was 2,012 in favor to 1,795 against. It was the second southern Vermont town to adopt the anti-Bush resolution on Vermont's Town Meeting Day, as Marlboro voted earlier in the day 43-25 in favor, with three abstentions. Organizer Kurt Daims of Brattleboro said he was disappointed at the relatively close margin of victory, which came during exceptionally heavy voter turnout during Vermont's presidential primary. "It was a very difficult thing for the people of Brattleboro to do. I think it's brave for Brattleboro to do it. Brattleboro did just fine," Daims said. "But I'm disappointed. I was really hoping and expecting a wider margin," he said. Voters who were questioned after they voted said they recognized it as a protest vote, and a way of registering their frustration with the Bush administration and its controversial policies, most notably the invasion of Iraq. But Daims and other organizers said they hoped the Brattleboro vote would set an example for other towns and communities across the country to say no to the Bush presidency. Barry Aleshnik said the group had been contacted by towns across the country, and that a "Brattleboro template" was being drawn up to be distributed to interested communities. "We got a letter from south Jersey, saying that 'Brattleboro will be setting an example, and that it could set off a ripple effect across this angry nation,'" Aleshnik read. "We can be proud of Brattleboro for being a model of what needs to be done and what needs to be stated," Aleshnik said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Mar 08 - 05:51 PM LA Times: WASHINGTON -- After an acrimonious investigation that spanned four years, the Senate Intelligence Committee is preparing to release a detailed critique of the Bush administration's claims in the buildup to war with Iraq, congressional officials said. The long-delayed document catalogs dozens of prewar assertions by President Bush and other administration officials that proved to be wildly inaccurate about Iraq's alleged stockpiles of banned weapons and pursuit of nuclear arms. But officials say the report reaches a mixed verdict on the key question of whether the White House misused intelligence to make the case for war. The document criticizes White House officials for making assertions that failed to reflect disagreements or uncertainties in the underlying intelligence on Iraq, officials said. But the report acknowledges that many claims were consistent with intelligence assessments in circulation at the time. Because of the nuanced nature of the conclusions, one congressional official familiar with the document said: "The left is not going to be happy. The right is not going to be happy. Nobody is going to be happy." The report helps culminate a series of investigations that the committee has carried out in connection with the war in Iraq. The "statements report" was stalled repeatedly, in part because of the complexity of the task but also because of partisan disagreements among senators. The findings are likely to be a source of political discomfort for the White House by reviving the controversy over the Bush administration's case for war. That issue has largely faded from view on Capitol Hill at a time when the White House is sparring with Congress over other intelligence-related issues: CIA interrogation tactics and the scope of the government's wiretapping authority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Mar 08 - 02:55 PM Suit Escalates Battle Between Branches Escalating the years-long battle between the branches over the scope of executive power, the House Judiciary Committee filed suit today in federal court to force two White House officials to comply with subpoenas seeking documents and testimony on the firings of nine U.S. attorneys last year. The lawsuit could prove to be a key test of the scope of executive privilege, and of Congress' ability to make sure its subpoenas and contempt citations carry weight. The legislative and executive branches have fought on a variety of fronts since President Bush took office, with the administration arguing that long-eroded executive powers must be strengthened and members of Congress -- mostly Democrats -- complaining that their ability to conduct oversight has been weakened. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by the House General Counsel on behalf of the Judiciary panel, which issued contempt citations last year against White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers. The full House approved the citations last month. Bolten and Miers have both refused to cooperate with the committee's investigation of the prosecutor firings and other allegations of politicization at the Justice Department. The Bush administration has cited executive privilege in its decision not to make Bolten and Miers available for sworn testimony, though it has offered to let the two speak to the committee as long as their statements are not under oath and not transcribed. House Democrats have refused to take that deal. ... (WaPo 3-10-08) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Mar 08 - 02:52 PM An interesting analysis of the implications of Bill Foster's takeover of Hastert's Illinois seat in Congress from the WaPo blog department. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Mar 08 - 02:42 PM WASHINGTON -- A senior House Democrat has called for a wide-ranging federal investigation into Blackwater Worldwide, alleging that the private security contractor violated tax and labor laws by classifying its guards as independent contractors rather than company employees. Blackwater spokeswoman Anne Tyrrell said the charges are "completely without merit." "Blackwater's classification of its personnel is accurate, and Blackwater has always been forthcoming about this aspect of its business with its customer, the U.S. government," she said in an e-mailed statement on Monday. But Rep. Henry Waxman, who chairs the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, says Blackwater's claims on its business status "appear dubious." In letters sent Monday, Waxman asked the Internal Revenue Service and the Labor Department to investigate whether Blackwater defrauded the government of tax revenue and violated labor laws. Waxman also asked the Small Business Administration to determine whether Blackwater violated federal regulations by claiming it was eligible for small business preferences. "The implications of Blackwater's actions are significant," wrote Waxman, D-Calif., in a memorandum to his colleagues on the panel. "Committee staff have estimated that Blackwater has avoided paying or withholding up to $50 million in federal taxes by treating its guards as independent contractors rather than employees." Also, Waxman wrote, Blackwater's claim as a small business has earned it more than $144 million in contracts, despite being one of the largest private military contractors and receiving nearly $1.25 billion in federal business since 2000. ... (AP--March 10 2008) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 09 Mar 08 - 11:14 AM n the first insider account of Pentagon decision-making on Iraq, one of the key architects of the war blasts former secretary of state Colin Powell, the CIA, retired Gen. Tommy R. Franks and former Iraq occupation chief L. Paul Bremer for mishandling the run-up to the invasion and the subsequent occupation of the country. Douglas J. Feith, in a massive score-settling work, portrays an intelligence community and a State Department that repeatedly undermined plans he developed as undersecretary of defense for policy and conspired to undercut President Bush's policies. Among the disclosures made by Feith in "War and Decision," scheduled for release next month by HarperCollins, is Bush's declaration, at a Dec. 18, 2002, National Security Council meeting, that "war is inevitable." The statement came weeks before U.N. weapons inspectors reported their initial findings on Iraq and months before Bush delivered an ultimatum to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Feith, who says he took notes at the meeting, registered it as a "momentous comment." ... Excerpted from WaPo. It is significant, I think, that Bush was telling te NSC that was was "inevitable" in December 2002. i October 2002:, Bush said Iraq had a "massive stockpile" of biological weapons. But according to the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, the intelligence community had not reached such a conclusion, and CIA director George Tenet said a few weeks ago that the intelligence analysts had possessed "no specific information" on bioweapons stockpiles. UN inspectors went into Iraq to search for possible weapons violations from December 2002 into March 2003. Given that the question was so much in dialogue, why did he say "inevitable"? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 08 Mar 08 - 10:43 AM (AP) President George W. Bush said Saturday he vetoed legislation that would ban the CIA from using harsh interrogation methods such as waterboarding to break suspected terrorists because it would end practices that have prevented attacks. "The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror," Mr. Bush said in his weekly radio address taped for broadcast Saturday. "So today I vetoed it." The bill he rejected provides guidelines for intelligence activities for the year and has the interrogation requirement as one provision. It cleared the House of Representatives in December and the Senate last month. "This is no time for Congress to abandon practices that have a proven track record of keeping America safe," the president said. No comment could do this justice. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 06 Mar 08 - 04:10 PM A Detailed Analysis of W's Accomplishments, In PIctures. ;>) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 04 Mar 08 - 07:37 PM ÒI appreciate the fact that you really snatched defeat out of the jaws of those who were trying to defeat us in Iraq.ÓÐ George W. Bush to Lt. General Ray Odierno in the White House yesterday." Bush to a U.S. General, yesterday. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 04 Mar 08 - 02:19 PM EPA unions slam EPA chief Johnson They withdraw from council over policy issues like Calif. warming ruling msnbc.com updated 2:05 p.m. PT, Mon., March. 3, 2008 WASHINGTON - Unionized EPA workers are withdrawing from a cooperation agreement with the political appointees who supervise them over controversies including the agency's refusal to let California regulate greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Nineteen union local presidents representing more than 10,000 Environmental Protection Agency employees signed a letter to Administrator Stephen L. Johnson last Friday accusing him of "abuses of our good nature and trust." POsted by John H on a new thread, but I could not avoid including it here for continuity. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 04 Mar 08 - 09:52 AM This NEw York Times editorial analyzes the real cost of the Iraq invasion as above two trillion dollars>: $2,000,000,000. And it discusses some of what we could have done for that cost. and the nightmare quality of what we bought instead. Even a young mother knows better than to take a psychotic tantrum-prone child into a china shop. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 04 Mar 08 - 09:48 AM On border policy: "The evidence of this neurosis is visible at the border with Mexico, where the Department of Homeland Security has been rushing to reinforce an ineffective system of fencing and sensors, trucks and boots on the ground. The mission, imposed upon it by Congress after a wearying stalemate on immigration reform, is a mandate to do the impossible, at record speed and at record expense. This commitment to enforcement alone, without fixing legal immigration, was always Plan B. Even President Bush, the master of the botched federal initiative, predicted it would fail. He is looking unusually prescient. In Arizona, a 28-mile pilot project to build a "virtual fence" of sensors and cameras has fallen short of expectations. The problem, according to the Government Accountability Office, was too much haste and too little consultation with the Border Patrol. The main contractor, Boeing, rushed into the project with the wrong software. Its cameras couldn't focus on targets, and systems were confounded by innocuous things like rain. The Bush administration has confused things further by saying the system is working as planned — but won't be expanded. That is not necessarily good news along remote border areas in Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, where there is a lot of desert and mountains and where the alternative — pouring billions into building a real fence — is viewed as simply insane. No amount of fencing would seriously deter illegal crossers, border-town officials insist, and the effort actually makes things worse: You have to build roads to build the fence, and the new roads connect with old ones and vastly increase their usefulness to smugglers in cars and trucks. Mayor Ray Borane of Douglas, Ariz., said that people on the Mexican side have cut through his section of the fence with torches, welding on doors with their own locks, going in and out at will. "They cut holes in the thing like you wouldn't believe," he said." On climate change: The Bush administration has now provided the rationale for its lamentable decision to deny California permission to develop its own stricter rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. The explanation was full of holes, but it was not a total setback for those who want urgent action on global warming. The essence of the administration's reasoning was that California had failed to demonstrate "extraordinary and compelling" circumstances justifying stricter rules. To make that case, Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, was forced to argue that climate change gravely endangered not only California but the entire country. As hard as it is to believe, this was the first time that any senior administration official had explicitly conceded that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. Even more startling for an administration that has spent seven years in denial, Mr. Johnson acknowledged that "warming of the climate system is unequivocal," that man-made emissions are largely responsible and that the consequences could be devastating — more wildfires, more droughts, rising sea levels, more intense hurricanes, more outbreaks of insect-borne diseases. Given all that, one would assume that Mr. Johnson is at last ready to champion a national program of controls on greenhouse gas emissions, something the administration has long resisted. At the very least, he would now seem obliged to begin regulating greenhouse gases, at least from vehicles. The Supreme Court in effect ordered the E.P.A. to do just that last April, when it declared carbon dioxide a pollutant subject to regulatory control. Nearly a year has gone by, and Mr. Johnson has not announced any new regulations IF they can't deal with people, and they can't deal with the environment, what the hell good are they? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 03 Mar 08 - 12:51 PM The Senate now has a chance to redeem itself. Last week, the House approved a new $17 billion package of credits, spread over 10 years, to encourage the development of renewable energy sources and to promote energy-efficient buildings and appliances. As before, the House insisted that the credits be paid for by terminating an equivalent $17 billion in tax breaks over 10 years for oil and gas companies. And right on schedule, Senate Republicans began complaining that increasing industry's taxes would discourage investment in domestic oil and gas production. What will it take to wake the Senate up? It should be clear to even the most obtuse members that a country that consumes one-fifth of the world's oil but has only 3 percent of its reserves cannot possibly drill its way to energy independence. It should be equally clear that an industry whose five biggest producers generated $145 billion in profits last year can easily sacrifice $1.7 billion in annual tax breaks it does not need to help develop the cleaner fuels the country does need. If those arguments aren't enough, we offer the Senate some words from President Bush. In a 2005 address to the American Society of Newspaper Editors, Mr. Bush spoke forcefully of the need for an energy strategy that looked to the long term and emphasized conservation and renewable fuels. Of the oil and gas industry, he said pointedly: "I will tell you with $55 oil we don't need incentives to the oil and gas companies to explore. There are plenty of incentives. What we need is to put a strategy in place that will help this country over time become less dependent." The question for Mr. Bush and the Senate is clear: If that was true at $55 a barrel, why isn't it even more valid and urgent at $100 a barrel? (NYT) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 02 Mar 08 - 08:47 PM Will Police from Brattleboro, Vt., Arrest Bush and Cheney? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 01 Mar 08 - 02:02 PM Bush Aide Resigns After Admitting Plagiarism New York Times - 6 hours ago By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG WASHINGTON - A longtime aide to President Bush who wrote occasional guest columns for his hometown newspaper resigned on Friday evening after admitting that he had repeatedly plagiarized from other writers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 28 Feb 08 - 11:17 PM Until four months ago, Col. Morris D. Davis was the chief prosecutor at Guant‡namo Bay and the most colorful champion of the Bush administrationÕs military commission system. He once said sympathy for detainees was nauseating and compared putting them on trial to dragging ÒDracula out into the sunlight.Ó Then in October he had a dispute with his boss, a general. Ever since, he has been one of those critics who will not go away: a former top insider, with broad shoulders and a well-pressed uniform, willing to turn on the system he helped run. Still in the military, he has irritated the administration, saying in articles and interviews that Pentagon officials interfered with prosecutors, exerted political pressure and approved the use of evidence obtained by torture. Now, Colonel Davis has taken his most provocative step, completing his transformation from Guant‡namoÕs chief prosecutor to its new chief critic. He has agreed to testify at Guant‡namo on behalf of one of the detainees, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a driver for Osama bin Laden. Colonel Davis, a career military lawyer nearing retirement at 49, said that he would never argue that Mr. Hamdan was innocent, but that he was ready to try to put the commission system itself on trial by questioning its fairness. He said that there Òis a potential for rigged outcomesÓ and that he had Òsignificant doubts about whether it will deliver full, fair and open hearings.Ó ÒIÕm in a unique position where I can raise the flag and aggravate the Pentagon and try to get this fixed,Ó he said, acknowledging that he is enjoying some aspects of his new role. He was replaced as chief Guant‡namo prosecutor after he stepped down but is still a senior legal official for the Air Force. NY Times |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 28 Feb 08 - 10:37 PM The Air Force is tightening restrictions on which blogs its troops can read, cutting off access to just about any independent site with the word "blog" in its web address. It's the latest move in a larger struggle within the military over the value -- and hazards -- of the sites. At least one senior Air Force official calls the squeeze so "utterly stupid, it makes me want to scream." Until recently, each major command of the Air Force had some control over what sites their troops could visit, the Air Force Times reports. Then the Air Force Network Operations Center, under the service's new "Cyber Command," took over. AFNOC has imposed bans on all sites with "blog" in their URLs, thus cutting off any sites hosted by Blogspot. Other blogs, and sites in general, are blocked based on content reviews performed at the base, command and AFNOC level ... The idea isn't to keep airmen in the dark -- they can still access news sources that are "primary, official-use sources," said Maj. Henry Schott, A5 for Air Force Network Operations. "Basically ... if it's a place like The New York Times, an established, reputable media outlet, then it's fairly cut and dry that that's a good source, an authorized source," he said ... AFNOC blocks sites by using Blue Coat software, which categorizes sites based on their content and allows users to block sub-categories as they choose. "Often, we block first and then review exceptions," said Tech. Sgt. Christopher DeWitt, a Cyber Command spokesman. As a result, airmen posting online have cited instances of seemingly innocuous sites -- such as educational databases and some work-related sites -- getting wrapped up in broad proxy filters. "A couple of years back, I fought this issue concerning the Counterterrorism Blog," one Air Force officer tells Danger Room. "An AF [Air Force] professional education course website recommended it as a great source for daily worldwide CT [counterterrorism] news. However it had been banned, because it called itself a blog. And as we all know, all blogs are bad!" (Wired.com) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 26 Feb 08 - 09:46 AM February 21, 2008, 3:02 pm Bush's Popularity: A (Really) New Low? By The Editorial Board of the NY Times The American Research Group, a well-known polling organization, released a pretty surprising poll yesterday putting President Bush's approval rating at a new low: just 19 percent. According to the poll, only 19 percent of the 1,100 people surveyed by telephone approved of the way Mr. Bush is handling his job as president, while 77 percent disapprove. That is a sharp drop from a month ago, when ARG reported that 34 percent of those surveyed approved, and below the 25 percent approval rating ARG reported last October. ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Donuel Date: 23 Feb 08 - 08:27 AM Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn now and them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 22 Feb 08 - 09:14 AM Against all odds, there is still hope that Congress will produce a halfway decent farm bill, one that increases spending for underfunded programs like food stamps and conservation while decreasing subsidies to rich farmers who have never had it so good. The reason for hope is President Bush, who has been on the right side of the farm issue from the beginning and is threatening to veto any measure that resembles the stinkers produced by the House and Senate last year. Skip to next paragraph The Board Blog Additional commentary, background information and other items by Times editorial writers. Go to The Board » Some legislators are now scrambling for a better version. Tinkering around the edges will not do it. Mr. Bush has two sound objections. First, the House and Senate bills, each costing about $280 billion over five years, are way over budget and include an array of gimmicky tax increases to make up the shortfall. Even worse, the bills perpetuate an unfair, wasteful program of price supports and direct payments. Half the subsidies would go to farmers in just seven states producing a handful of crops — corn, cotton, rice, soybeans and wheat; two-thirds of the nation's farmers would not benefit at all. Mr. Bush has complained in particular about provisions that allow subsidies to flow to farm families making as much as $2 million a year. Don't say I never included anything positive in this thread!!! A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 22 Feb 08 - 01:14 AM The House has approved contempt citations against two White House aides over their refusal to cooperate with an investigation into the firings of U.S. attorneys. The citations against White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet E. Miers came on a 223 to 32 vote. Most House Republicans walked off the floor in protest and refused to cast a final vote. The White House, which has refused to allow testimony from West Wing aides, condemned the House vote. The contempt citations followed allegations that the Bush administration was injecting politics into the Justice Department by dismissing nine federal prosecutors in 2006, a controversy detailed in a number of Post stories by reporter Dan Eggen and others. (WaPo) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 22 Feb 08 - 01:12 AM The sentencing of a California defense contractor closes another chapter in the long-running corruption case surrounding former Republican congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. Brent R. Wilkes was convicted of showering Cunningham with more than $700,000 in perks -- including $500,000 for a mortgage, $100,000 for a yacht he never purchased, submachine-gun shooting lessons and the services of two prostitutes during a stay at a Hawaiian resort. A federal judge yesterday gave Wilkes 12 years in prison for bribery, conspiracy and fraud. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 20 Feb 08 - 08:15 PM Barbara Boxer gave a heart-felt speech in defense of privacy to the Senate in relationship to the FISA bill. A good read. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 18 Feb 08 - 10:49 AM "President BushÕs mismanagement reaches far beyond Iraq. He has torn up international treaties, bullied and alienated old friends, and enabled old and new enemies. Before Americans choose a president they will need to know how he or she plans to rebuild AmericaÕs military strength and its moral standing and address a host of difficult challenges around the world. Here is our list of questions. It is by no means comprehensive...." (Click to see the whole essay, a good and interesting survey of important issues in the next Administration). (NYT) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 18 Feb 08 - 10:21 AM This month, the D.C. Circuit ruled that the E.P.A. had once again ignored the law by failing to require deep and timely reductions in mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants. Like most clean air cases, this one was mind-numbingly complex. The gist of it was that the E.P.A. Ñ seeking as usual to please industry Ñ had approved a weak set of regulations that would let many plants off the hook for emissions reductions that would be required under any honest reading of the law. The D.C. Circuit, by no means a radical group of judges, has become so exasperated that it has taken to quoting Lewis Carroll. In 2006, in a reference to ÒThrough the Looking Glass,Ó the court said that the E.P.A.Õs reading of the law would make sense Òonly in a Humpty Dumpty world.Ó This month, invoking ÒAlice in Wonderland,Ó the court said the agencyÕs reasoning recalled Òthe logic of the Queen of Hearts, substituting the E.P.A.Õs desires for the plain textÓ of the law.... (NYT Editorial) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 18 Feb 08 - 09:52 AM "...Does this endless presidency of loopholes and fine print extend even here? If you believe in the seamless mutuality of government and big business, come out and say it! There is a dictionary definition, one word that describes that toxic blend...YouÕre a fascist Ñ get them to print you a T-shirt with fascist on it! What else is this but fascism? Did you see Mark Klein on this newscast last November? Mark Klein was the AT&T whistleblower who explained in the placid, dull terms of your local neighborhood IT desk how he personally attached all AT&T circuits, everything, carrying every one of your phone calls, every one of your e-mails, every bit of your Web browsing into a secure room, room No. 641-A at the Folsom Street facility in San Francisco, where it was all copied so the government could look at it. Not some of it, not just the international part of it, certainly not just the stuff some spy, a spy both patriotic and telepathic, might be able to divine had been sent or spoken by or to a terrorist. Everything! Every time you looked at a naked picture. Every time you bid on eBay. Every time you phoned in a donation to a Democrat. ÒMy thought was,Ó Mr. Klein told us last November, ÒGeorge OrwellÕs Ô1984.Õ And here I am, forced to connect the Big Brother machine.Ó And if thereÕs one thing we know about Big Brother, Mr. Bush, it is that he is Ñ you are Ñ a liar." Keuth Olberman. Full article here on MSNBC. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 18 Feb 08 - 09:47 AM Bush Turns US Soldiers into Murderers Afghanistan | Iraq | War by Robert Parry | February 13, 2008 - 9:22am By forcing repeat combat assignments to Iraq and Afghanistan Ð and by winking at torture and indiscriminate killings Ð George W. Bush is degrading the reputation of the U.S. military, turning enlisted soldiers and intelligence officers into murderers and sadists. ... Full editorial can be read here... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:57 PM From John Grisham, pot-boiler writer par excellence: "Grisham, who turned 53 on February 8 and still has the lanky look of an athlete who once chased a baseball career, is a big supporter of Hillary Clinton and says the Democrats have been outmaneuvered by the Republicans. "I think what the Republicans have done in past elections is brilliant. Because, they've convinced a lot of people to vote for them against their own economic self-interest, and they've done that by skillfully manipulating a handful of social issues, primarily abortion and gay rights and sometimes gun control," he says. "And the Republicans have used those to scare a lot of people into voting for Republican candidates. It's skillful manipulation." Grisham, who lives in the Charlottesville, Virginia, area, is so addicted to following the presidential race that he jokes he might need rehab. "My wife and I went out to dinner a couple of weeks ago, and we actually called somebody to find out if they had any results from the Nevada caucuses," he says, chortling almost sheepishly. "And I said this ought to tell us something: 'You know, we're in this thing way too deep.' "... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 16 Feb 08 - 02:49 PM Administration shuts down "best-of-web" economicindicators.gov Wed, 2008-02-13 21:29 Ü(From a list correspondent) http://freegovinfo.info/node/1627 Forbes has awarded EconomicIndicators.gov one of its 3Best of the Web2 awards. As Forbes explains, the government site provides an invaluable service to the public for accessing U.S. economic data: This site is maintained by the Economics and Statistics Administration and combines data collected by the Bureau of Economic Analysis, like GDP and net imports and exports, and the Census Bureau, like retail sales and durable goods shipments. The site simply links to the relevant department1s Web site. This might not seem like a big deal, but doing it yourself -- say, trying to find retail sales data on the Census Bureau1s site -- is such an exercise in futility that it will convince you why this portal is necessary. Yet the Bush administration has decided to shut down this site because of "budgetary constraints," effective March 1. Here's a cross-section of the data available: Advance Monthly Sales for Retail and Food Services | Advance Report on Durable Goods | Construction Put in Place | Corporate Profits | Current Account Balance (International Transactions) | Gross Domestic Product | Housing Vacancies and Homeownership | Manufacturer's Shipments, Inventories, and Orders | Manufacturing and Trade: Inventories and Orders | Manufacturing and Trade: Inventories and Sales | Monthly Wholesale Trade | New Residential Construction | New Residential Sales | Personal Income and Outlays | Quarterly Financial Report | Quarterly Services | Retail E-Commerce Sales | U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services | U.S. International Transactions | |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 14 Feb 08 - 11:09 PM WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The House voted Thursday to hold White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten and former White House lawyer Harriet Miers in contempt in its probe of the 2006 firings of U.S. attorneys. Former White House counsel Harriet Miers refused to appear at a hearing into the firings of U.S. attorneys. The House voted 223-23 to hold the two Bush aides in contempt of Congress. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called the move "a partisan, futile act" that would not be enforced by the Justice Department. And the chamber's Republican minority staged a walkout before the vote, demanding that Democratic leaders vote instead on a revision of federal surveillance laws. "We will not stand here and watch this floor be abused for pure political grandstanding at the expense of our national security," Minority Leader John Boehner said to jeers from Democrats. But Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-New York, said Congress has to uphold its authority against a White House that is refusing to cooperate with a congressional investigation. And Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said Congress has a right to hear from White House officials about the shakeup, which the Justice Department struggled to explain after it became public. "There was plenty of evidence in our report that showed and suggested there had been many lines crossed between appropriateness and inappropriateness, legality and illegality, and perhaps constitutional violations as well," Conyers said. Three Republicans who did not take part in the walkout -- including current presidential hopeful Ron Paul of Texas -- supported the resolution, while one Democrat, Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar, opposed it. The White House has insisted the firings were legal. But Democrats said the central questions behind the dismissals -- who decided the prosecutors should be ousted, and why -- remain unanswered. Miers and Bolten had refused to testify in the investigation, which stemmed from the Justice Department's dismissals of federal prosecutors in eight cities. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 14 Feb 08 - 03:36 PM "The USPTO is desperate to enact severe disincentives for appeals, which are on the rise due to increasingly unreasonable rejections by examiners, and will mushroom in number if and when the two-continuation limit takes effect. Last Summer USPTO Director Dudas published new Draconian appeal brief rules, i.e. rules that impose incredible formal requirements on briefs filed before the USPTO Board of Appeals. The actual effective date of the new appeal brief rules is very difficult, if not, impossible to calculate. Patent lawyers often find out after the fact that propsed rules have been made final on a certain day. This has to due with the complexities of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) under which the executive branch has rule making authority in areas permitted by statute. Unlike the illegal continuation limits, I don't see any legal impediments to the USPTO Director's enacting of the new Draconian appeal brief rules. They make the writing of the brief much more complex and require all sorts of admissions against interest which the USPTO will almost certainly use against the Appellants in regard to obviousness rejections. Technically any case that has been twice rejected can be appealed, whether or not there has been a final rejection. Therefore, the reason for this e-mail is to alert you to the fact that I could provide you with a list of current cases ...to appeal at this time, while we are still under the less stringent brief requirements. On the other hand, the client has no outstanding office actions (i.e. those that have not yet been responded to) you may choose to play out the string, and not file any pre-emptive appeals. The USPTO is getting so anti-patent that it is getting much more difficult to obtain U.S. patents, particularly ones with broad claims. " (Letter from a veteran Patent Attorney) A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Donuel Date: 13 Feb 08 - 08:20 PM I don't know that atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God. I bet GWB really believes this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 13 Feb 08 - 12:28 PM By MADDY SAUER Feb. 12, 2008 Font Size Share A Houston, Texas woman, who says she was gang-raped by her co-workers at a Halliburton/KBR camp in Baghdad, says 38 women have come forward through her foundation to report their own tragic stories to her, but that many cannot speak publicly due to arbitration agreements in their employment contracts. Photos Halliburton/KBR Employees: Company Covered Up Sex Assault and HarassmentJamie Leigh Jones is testifying on Capitol Hill this afternoon. She says she and other women are being forced to argue their cases of sexual harassment, assault and rape before secretive arbitration panels rather than in open court before a judge and jury. Jones returned from Iraq following her rape in 2005. She was the subject of an exclusive ABC News report in December which led to congressional hearings. After months of waiting for criminal charges to be filed, Jones decided to file suit against Halliburton and KBR. KBR has moved for Jones' claim to be heard in private arbitration, instead of a public courtroom, as provided under the terms of her original employment contract. Halliburton, which has since divested itself of KBR, says it is improperly named in the suit and referred calls to KBR. In arbitration, there is no public record or transcript of the proceedings, meaning that Jones' claims would not be heard before a judge and jury. Rather, a private arbitrator hired by the corporation would decide Jones' case. In fact, Tracy Barker, who says she was sexually harassed and sexually assaulted while working for Halliburton/KBR in Iraq, also recently tried to file suit against the companies. She was forced into arbitration last month. Jones will tell Congress today that she was not aware that when she signed her employment contract, she was effectively signing away her right to bring a lawsuit. (ABC News) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Feb 08 - 08:02 PM The US administration is pressing the 27 governments of the European Union to sign up for a range of new security measures for transatlantic travel, including allowing armed guards on all flights from Europe to America by US airlines. The demand to put armed air marshals on to the flights is part of a travel clampdown by the Bush administration that officials in Brussels described as "blackmail" and "troublesome", and could see west Europeans and Britons required to have US visas if their governments balk at Washington's requirements. According to a US document being circulated for signature in European capitals, EU states would also need to supply personal data on all air passengers overflying but not landing in the US in order to gain or retain visa-free travel to America, senior EU officials said. And within months the US department of homeland security is to impose a new permit system for Europeans flying to the US, compelling all travellers to apply online for permission to enter the country before booking or buying a ticket, a procedure that will take several days. The data from the US's new electronic transport authorisation system is to be combined with extensive personal passenger details already being provided by EU countries to the US for the "profiling" of potential terrorists and assessment of other security risks. Washington is also asking European airlines to provide personal data on non-travellers - for example family members - who are allowed beyond departure barriers to help elderly, young or ill passengers to board aircraft flying to America, a demand the airlines reject as "absurd". ... From http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/11/usa.theairlineindustry/print |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Feb 08 - 04:17 PM WASHINGTON — The Army is accustomed to protecting classified information. But when it comes to the planning for the Iraq war, even an unclassified assessment can acquire the status of a state secret. That is what happened to a detailed study of the planning for postwar Iraq prepared for the Army by the RAND Corporation, a federally financed center that conducts research for the military. After 18 months of research, RAND submitted a report in the summer of 2005 called "Rebuilding Iraq." RAND researchers provided an unclassified version of the report along with a secret one, hoping that its publication would contribute to the public debate on how to prepare for future conflicts. But the study's wide-ranging critique of the White House, the Defense Department and other government agencies was a concern for Army generals, and the Army has sought to keep the report under lock and key. A review of the lengthy report — a draft of which was obtained by The New York Times — shows that it identified problems with nearly every organization that had a role in planning the war. That assessment parallels the verdicts of numerous former officials and independent analysts. The study chided President Bush — and by implication Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who served as national security adviser when the war was planned — as having failed to resolve differences among rival agencies. "Throughout the planning process, tensions between the Defense Department and the State Department were never mediated by the president or his staff," it said. The Defense Department led by Donald H. Rumsfeld was given the lead in overseeing the postwar period in Iraq despite its "lack of capacity for civilian reconstruction planning and execution." The State Department led by Colin L. Powell produced a voluminous study on the future of Iraq that identified important issues but was of "uneven quality" and "did not constitute an actionable plan." Gen. Tommy R. Franks, whose Central Command oversaw the military operation in Iraq, had a "fundamental misunderstanding" of what the military needed to do to secure postwar Iraq, the study said. The regulations that govern the Army's relations with the Arroyo Center, the division of RAND that does research for the Army, stipulate that Army officials are to review reports in a timely fashion to ensure that classified information is not released. But the rules also note that the officials are not to "censor" analysis or prevent the dissemination of material critical of the Army. The report on rebuilding Iraq was part of a seven-volume series by RAND on the lessons learned from the war. Asked why the report has not been published, Timothy Muchmore, a civilian Army official, said it had ventured too far from issues that directly involve the Army. "After carefully reviewing the findings and recommendations of the thorough RAND assessment, the Army determined that the analysts had in some cases taken a broader perspective on the early planning and operational phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom than desired or chartered by the Army," Mr. Muchmore said in a statement. "Some of the RAND findings and recommendations were determined to be outside the purview of the Army and therefore of limited value in informing Army policies, programs and priorities." If the Army's policy is to tough out criticism rather than suppress it; and RAND's policy is to publish their research; then it seems likely that the policy of suppressing the information must have come from someone above the Army, no??? Who could that be??? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Feb 08 - 12:47 PM From a Roanoke, Va., paper: "Virginia Tech Professor Theodore Fuller made a compelling case regarding the negative way history is likely to judge the presidency of George W. Bush ("History will judge Bush harshly," Jan. 30). Consensus is building that the Bush tenure will rank among the worst ever. Counting the failures has become its own cottage industry. On my desk is a "George W. Bush Countdown Calendar," with each day until his term is over graced with another blunder, misstep, gaffe, inanity or lie -- the abuse du jour. Fuller's list includes the failure to bring the Iraq war to a successful conclusion, failure to reform Social Security, to maintain the strength of the dollar, to protect the prestige of America in the world. To these I add: Failure to adequately regulate the financial industry to prevent the subprime crisis that seems destined to hurl our nation into recession. Failure to capture or kill Osama bin Laden. Failure to provide a health care system that works for all Americans. Failure to reverse the widening gap between rich and poor. Failure to stem the influence of corporate wealth and power over our nation, its government and its citizens. Failure to adequately fund and provide a secure future for entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid. Failure to reduce our burgeoning trade deficit. Failure to improve the fuel economy of our nation's transportation network. Failure to maintain and rebuild our national infrastructure. Repairing the carnage will prove a daunting task for the next administration. ..." A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 11 Feb 08 - 09:53 AM Unworthy NomineesFrom THe NEw York TImes His nominations — of judges, top Justice Department officials and others — are stalled, (Bush) said, because of undue Senate delay. The real problem, of course, is that 15 months after American voters put the Democrats in control of the Senate, Mr. Bush is still trying to muscle far-right ideologues with troubling records into important positions. To hear Mr. Bush tell it, he has been the nation's meritocrat in chief. The man who brought us Alberto Gonzales to head the Justice Department and Michael Brown to run the Federal Emergency Management Agency said at the Thursday gathering that he had "nominated skilled and faithful public servants to lead federal agencies and sit on the federal bench." One of the most prominent people Mr. Bush is stomping his foot over is Steven Bradbury, his choice to head the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. Mr. Bradbury is best known for signing legal opinions that cleared the way for harsh interrogation techniques, and perhaps torture. He has also defended the administration's lawless domestic surveillance programs. Another of the unrequited, Hans von Spakovsky, a nominee to the Federal Election Commission, used his position in the Justice Department to put up barriers to voting by minority groups. He was instrumental in changing the focus of the voting section from defending voting rights to advancing a partisan agenda. And then there are the patently unsuitable judicial nominees. Richard Honaker, Mr. Bush's nominee for the District Court in Wyoming, is an extreme anti-abortion activist with troubling views on the role of religion in public life. ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 10 Feb 08 - 01:09 AM WASHINGTON Ñ President Bush often denounces the propensity of Congress to earmark money for pet projects. But in his new budget, Mr. Bush has requested money for thousands of similar projects. Presidential Projects He asked for money to build fish hatcheries, eradicate agricultural pests, conduct research, pave highways, dredge harbors and perform many other specific local tasks. The details are buried deep in the presidentÕs budget, just as most Congressional earmarks are buried in obscure committee reports that accompany spending bills. Thus, for example, the president requested $330 million to deal with plant pests like the emerald ash borer, the light brown apple moth and the sirex woodwasp. He sought $800,000 for the Neosho National Fish Hatchery in Missouri and $1.5 million for a waterway named in honor of former Senator J. Bennett Johnston, a Louisiana Democrat. At the same time, Mr. Bush requested $894,000 for an air traffic control tower in Kalamazoo, Mich.; $12 million for a parachute repair shop at the American air base in Aviano, Italy; and $6.5 million for research in Wyoming on the Òfundamental properties of asphalt.Ó He sought $3 million for a forest conservation project in Minnesota, $2.1 million for a neutrino detector at the South Pole and $28 million for General Electric and Siemens to do research on hydrogen-fuel turbines. The projects, itemized in thousands of pages of budget documents submitted last week to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, show that the debate over earmarks is much more complex than the Òall or nothingÓ choice usually presented to the public. The president and Congress both want to direct money to specific projects, but often disagree over the merits of particular items. The White House contends that when the president requests money for a project, it has gone through a rigorous review Ñ by the agency, the White House or both Ñ using objective criteria. Congressional leaders said they would focus more closely on items requested by the president this year. ÒThe executive branch should be held accountable for its own earmark practices,Ó said the House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio. Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California said Democrats agreed that Òthe large number of presidential earmarks deserve the same scrutiny and restraintÓ as those that originated in Congress. (NY Times 02-09-2008) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular views of the Bush Administration From: Amos Date: 09 Feb 08 - 04:24 AM Listen, the stakes in November are high,Ó Mr. Bush told the boisterous audience in Washington. ÒThis is an important election. Prosperity and peace are in the balance.Ó S )as reported in the NY Times) We should pay attention. Bush after all is the one who took prosperity and gave back recession; and who gave us less peace than we had, as well. A |
