30 Kids Left Behind After Immigration Raid

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050729/ap_ … s_children

Fatwa against Terrorism
U.S. Muslim Scholars To Forbid Terrorism
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 02082.html

If they are really guilty of planting the bombs that didn’t go off in London, they should be put to death as an example for anybody who dares to engage in similar terrorist activities. The Muslim community should also set a huge rally against terrorism in London to dissociate themselves from those criminals who are giving the religion of Islam a bad name. If what the British officers are saying is true, those guys were let in Britain when their own countries couldn’t offer them similar opportunities for work, housing, and in some cases the freedom to worship their own religion, ..etc.. I’m SO mad..

The August Harper’s has a blockbuster cover story about how the election went amok in Ohio and how the “servile press” refuses to even countenance using the word “stolen” … I’m about to read it … their website is still back on the July issue. This is the magazine that scooped the Savings & Loan fiasco before it hit the mainstream and many other issues. Maybe the mainstream will sit up (give their eyes a rest from following Paris Hilton and Brad Pitt) and take notice. This could be fun….

(cover illustration is of the Hear No Evil/See No Evil/Speak No Evil chimps … nice touch.)

_______________________________________
A Concerned North American

Here’s an interesting bit of science:

Team finds neutrinos emitted from Earth

07/28/2005

The Asahi Shimbun

KAMIOKA, Gifu Prefecture–Neutrinos, the ghostly particles that could hold the key to unlocking the mysteries of the universe, have been detected for the first time emitting from Earth, a research team in Japan said Wednesday.

The KamLAND (Kamioka Liquid scintillator Anti-Neutrino Detector) facility here detected the neutrinos from the energy source that triggers volcanic activities and geological movements, the team said.

The international team of researchers, led by Atsuto Suzuki, a physics professor at Tohoku University, says the discovery will help scientists understand the thermal energy and components at the Earth’s interior.

The findings will be published in the magazine Nature.

Neutrinos, which do not carry electrical charges and can pass through great distances of matter, are considered one of the fundamental particles that make up the universe.

Previous studies detected neutrinos only from space.

The Earth’s crust and mantle are believed to have high temperatures because of heat emitted when radioactive elements, such as uranium and thorium, break down and transform.

In theory, neutrinos are emitted during this process. But previous devices failed to detect such neutrinos.

For example, the KamLAND’s predecessor, the Kamiokande, collected light emitted from neutrinos as they fell from the universe. The facility was developed by Masatoshi Koshiba, professor emeritus at the University of Tokyo who won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2002.

The Kamiokande used huge amounts of water for detection. But the KamLAND facility, operated by Tohoku University, uses a special oil that can detect low-energy neutrinos that escaped its predecessor.

Suzuki’s group weeded out the “false signal” neutrinos, and concluded that five to 54 neutrinos derived from Earth were among 152 observed at the KamLAND facility between May 2002 and October 2004.

The KamLAND started operating in 2002 and is located at a depth of about 1,000 meters.(IHT/Asahi: July 28,2005)

IRA to abandon armed campaign, but won’t disband

CTV.ca News Staff

The Irish Republican Army announced Thursday it will abandon its “armed campaign” against British rule and resume disarmament, but it will not disband.

Northern Ireland had been on edge awaiting the long-anticipated declaration that is designed to revive the Northern Ireland peace process.

The IRA, which has observed a cease-fire since 1997, said in its lengthy statement that it would leave behind all armed activity effective at 4 p.m. local time (11 a.m. ET).

The outlawed guerilla group said it would now pursue its aims through politics.

“The leadership of Oglaigh na hEireann (IRA) has formally ordered an end to the armed campaign,” the IRA said in a statement seen by Reuters.

“This will take effect from 4 p.m. this afternoon. All IRA units have been ordered to dump arms. All volunteers have been instructed to assist the development of purely political and democratic programmes through exclusively peaceful means.”

The IRA’s political ally Sinn Fein had made a call back in April for the guerrillas to end armed struggle but the IRA had failed to respond until now.

The guerilla group is now appealing to Britain and Northern Ireland’s Protestant majority to accept its new position as sufficient to renew negotiations on power-sharing.

Looks like the War on Terror is over… well, not really. Now, we are to call it the ’struggle against terrorism’, or something to that effect. I wonder if this helps or hurts the western understanding of the concept of Jihad in Islam. After all, war and struggle are two different things. The Whitehouse is trying to make a distinction, I think. The new phrase appears to be more politically correct: “a global struggle against violent extremism”. Honestly, I think it is an improvement and much more exact. Violent extremism is a real problem, and although terrorism is a form of violent extremism, you don’t need one to have the other. On the other hand, by shifting gears, this new ’struggle’ will allow the DOD and other agencies better control over anti-terrorism operations. If it’s a war, it’s a military issue. Any thoughts?

Anyway,

Washington recasts terror war as ’struggle’
By Eric Schmitt and Thom Shanker The New York Times
WEDNESDAY, JULY 27, 2005

WASHINGTON The Bush administration is retooling its slogan for the fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups, pushing the idea that the long-term struggle is as much an ideological battle as a military mission, according to senior administration and military officials.

In recent speeches and news conferences, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the country’s top military officer have spoken of “a global struggle against violent extremism” rather than “the global war on terror,” which had been the catchphrase of choice.

Administration officials say the earlier phrase may have outlived its usefulness, because it focused attention solely, and incorrectly, on the military campaign.

General Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the National Press Club on Monday that he had “objected to the use of the term ‘war on terrorism’ before, because if you call it a war, then you think of people in uniform as being the solution.”

He said the threat instead should be defined as violent extremism, with the recognition that “terror is the method they use.”

Although the military is heavily engaged in the mission now, he said, future efforts require “all instruments of our national power, all instruments of the international communities’ national power.” The solution is “more diplomatic, more economic, more political than it is military,” he concluded.

Administration and Pentagon officials say the revamped campaign has grown out of meetings of President George W. Bush’s senior national security advisers that began in January, and it reflects the evolution in Bush’s own thinking nearly four years after the Sept. 11 attacks.

Rumsfeld spoke in the new terms on Friday when he addressed an audience in Annapolis, Maryland, for the retirement ceremony of Admiral Vern Clark as chief of naval operations. Rumsfeld described America’s efforts as it “wages the global struggle against the enemies of freedom, the enemies of civilization.”

The shifting language is one of the most public changes in the administration’s strategy to battle Al Qaeda and its affiliates, and it tracks closely with Bush’s recent speeches emphasizing freedom, democracy and the worldwide clash of ideas.

“It is more than just a military war on terror,” Steven Hadley, the national security adviser, said in a telephone interview. “It’s broader than that. It’s a global struggle against extremism. We need to dispute both the gloomy vision and offer a positive alternative.”

The language shift also comes at a time when Bush, with a new appointment for one of his most trusted aides, Karen Hughes, is trying to bolster the State Department’s efforts at public diplomacy.

Lawrence Di Rita, Rumsfeld’s spokesman, said the change in language “is not a shift in thinking, but a continuation of the immediate post-9/11 approach.”

“The president then said we were going to use all the means of national power and influence to defeat this enemy,” Di Rita said. “We must continue to be more expansive than what the public is understandably focused on now: the military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

By stressing to the public that the effort is not only military, the administration may also be trying to reassure those in uniform who have begun complaining that only members of the armed forces are being asked to sacrifice for the effort.

New opinion polls show that the American public is increasingly pessimistic about the mission in Iraq, with many doubting its link to the counterterrorism mission. Thus, a new emphasis on reminding the public of the broader, long-term threat to the United States may allow the administration to put into broader perspective the daily mayhem in Iraq and the American casualties.

Douglas Feith, the under secretary of defense for policy, said in an interview that if America’s efforts were limited to “protecting the homeland and attacking and disrupting terrorist networks, you’re on a treadmill that is likely to get faster and faster with time.” The key to “ultimately winning the war,” he said, “is addressing the ideological part of the war that deals with how the terrorists recruit and indoctrinate new terrorists.”

Who’s Taking Blame for Christian Violence?
by Calvin White | Toronto Star

Now that imams in Britain and Canada are standing up and publicly condemning terrorist acts as anti-Muslim and against the teachings in the Qur’an, I wonder if pressure might be put on Christian leaders to take a similar stand.

Contrary to what some might like to insist, Christianity is not the religion of “an eye for an eye” but it is the religion of Jesus, who refined those earlier directions and distilled the ten commandments into two. One was to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” Pretty definitive isn’t it? As is the edict of turning the other cheek.

Jesus expected to be betrayed. He expected to be arrested by the authorities. There was no exhortations to prepare for battle. There was no bloody attempt to stop the proceedings.

Even as Jesus was brutalized while carrying his own crucifixion cross and being nailed onto the timbers, there was no violent counterforce from his disciples. Not even an outcry.

No matter where one reads in the accounts of Jesus, the only conclusion one can come to is that Jesus was about love.

So where are the Christian leaders when it comes to violent actions by our Western leaders? Where are the televangelists, who every Sunday take over the airwaves to trumpet the message of Jesus, when it comes to taking on bunker busting bombs and mass carnage?

Where are they when it comes to the death penalty prevalent in the majority of American states?

When President George Bush insists that billions of dollars need to continue flowing to the war effort in Iraq which leads to more American body bags and Iraqi graves, why is there no outcry? Why don’t the Christian leaders stand up and challenge those decisions, and passionately assert that Jesus would have sought another way of solving the problems?

In this time when Christianity is on the rise all over America, when there is a growing surge in extolling Christian values, why is it that when the born-again Bush says it’s better to fight “them” over there than on American soil, no concerted group of leaders stands up and yells that he’s got it wrong?

Like Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair is also born again.

Yet, their combined leadership has been responsible for excruciating death and injury to innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq.

They both claim a righteousness in their policies of destruction. They were even counseled by their secular allies not to resort to the carnage. Where was the equal pressure from the Christian leadership?

Interesting, isn’t it, that Muslim fanatics use the idea of holy jihad and rewards in paradise to recruit their dupes into terrible acts of destruction, and in Christian circles there is the solemn assembling for prayer and seeking of blessings for the troops and leaders in their mission of war.

Interesting, isn’t it, that polling clearly indicates the Christian right in America is emphatically against bad language on TV and in the movies, horrified by Janet Jackson’s bare nipple — but drawn with considerable relish to violence in the same media.

The additional galling irony of Jesus being emblazoned on the foreheads of those in command of the sharpest swords is that Jesus was also all about intelligence. He was all about deeper understanding, about using insight and keenness of mind to solve problems. Think of how the Pharisees tried to trick him by holding up different sections of the law to trip him up.

His disciples picking corn, for instance, and thus working, on the Sabbath. Jesus answered that the Sabbath was for man and not the other way around. There was the adulteress brought before him to be stoned; he responded that any without sin might cast the first stone.

What kind of insight have Bush and Blair employed? What intelligence, what deeper understanding is demonstrated by the tactic of blast and shoot with as much technologically advanced weaponry as is available?

What compassion, what recognition of common humanity is shown when the biggest concern is how to pad the soldiers with as much body Kevlar and the humvees with as much armour as possible so they can kill all the easier without casualties — and thus retain the support of the home front.

How do our current religious leaders think Jesus would react to the concept of collateral damage?

Calvin White is a freelance commentator and poet who lives in British Columbia.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0726-32.htm

The right thing to do is pull out of the illegal settlements. Sharon is doing what really amounts to a minimum of what should be done. Not all settlements are being returned to the Palestinians, the wall is still being built, and on and on. I found this article to be interesting because it shows the type of internal opposition that he faces. Imagine what would happen if he did a complete withdrawal. He’d be dead most likely, and who knows what would take his place. This could help explain his procrastination on the issue. But then again, maybe not…

Jewish militants put death curse on Sharon–report

JERUSALEM, July 26 (Reuters) - Jewish ultranationalists put a death curse on Ariel Sharon, saying only God could breach the heavy security around the Israeli prime minister, the Ynet Web site reported on Tuesday.

“It’s preferable that God, rather than a mortal, kills him because his bodyguards are just too good,” Ynet quoted one of the participants at a “Pulsa Denora,” an ancient Jewish ceremony which it said was held at a cemetery at the weekend.

Jewish ultranationalis cast a similar religious curse against Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin before ultranationalist assassin Yigal Amir gunned him down at a peace rally in 1995.

Israel’s Shin Bet security agency has tightened security round Sharon since he initiated a plan to withdraw next month from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank, parts of occupied lands that the Palestinians want for a future state.

The Pulsa Denora ceremony involves the reading by candlelight of medieval mystical texts. According to Ynet, 20 men attended the ceremony at a cemetery in the northern town of Rosh Pina, all but one dressed in black.

I found this in my AOL news this morning. I guess this falls in the science category. Nothing really to debate, I just thought this was interesting. This finding could have some future implications for human health issues.

Genetics Leave Felines Without Sweet Tooth
By PAUL ELIAS, AP

SAN FRANCISCO (July 25) - Cats are notoriously finicky eaters, as millions of pet owners can attest. Now, there’s a scientific theory explaining, at least in part, why cats have such snobby eating habits: genetics.

Researchers at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia and their collaborators said Sunday they found a dysfunctional feline gene that probably prevents cats from tasting sweets, a sensation nearly every other mammal on the planet experiences to varying degrees.

Researchers took saliva and blood samples from six cats, including a tiger and a cheetah and found each had a useless gene that other mammals use to create a “sweet receptor” on their tongues. The gene in question does not produce one of the two vital proteins needed to form the receptors.

“Because cats can’t taste sweets, they’re cranky,” joked Joseph Brand, Monell’s associate director and an author of the paper being published Sunday in the inaugural issue of the Public Library of Science’s journal Genetics.

The Public Library of Science aims to make such research freely available online and was launched out of frustration with rising subscription costs of prestigious research print journals, some of which cost more than $11,000 a year.

Instead of charging a subscription fee, the nonprofit organization charges authors $1,500 per paper submitted.

Brand said the “pseudogene” in cats is probably a big reason why they are carnivores that get by on a high-protein, “Atkin’s-like” diet.

“Its sense of taste has driven it to become a meat eater,” Brand said. “Losing their sweet receptor has probably changed their dietary habits.”

Brand said the paper is a culmination of a lingering question that nagged at him since he visited the Philadelphia Zoo with a colleague 25 years ago to watch the feeding habits of big cats.

All mammals have receptor cells on their tongues that send taste signals to the brain to process. The receptor cells are clustered together as taste buds. Each human taste bud is comprised of 50 to 100 receptor cells representing the five major taste sensations: salty, sour, sweet, bitter and umami, the taste of the food additive MSG and fermented soy products, among other foods.

Most mammals’ sweet receptors are created by two proteins, one of which cats are missing.

The study was paid for, in part, by the research arm of the pet food giant Mars Inc., which is looking to make better-tasting cat food. The company has the rights of first refusal to commercialize the discovery published Sunday, Brand said.

Brand said the discovery could help veterinarians treat ill cats.

“Everyone knows that cats are finicky,” said Brand, who owns two cats. “And one big issue is how to make food palatable enough for a sick cat to eat.”

The research team also received funding from the National Institute of Health, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the National Science Foundation. Brand declined to say how much the project cost.

The nonprofit Monell center studies the senses of smell and taste and has produced a number of scientific breakthroughs, including a study to be published this year showing that gay men sense body odor differently than straight men.

Researchers said that beyond improving the taste of cat food, the study will help scientists better understand food-related diseases such as diabetes in humans _ and how diet influences evolution.

“This may have implications for all sorts of medical conditions,” said Dr. Alan Hirsch, founder of the Smell and Taste Treatment and Research Foundation in Chicago. Hirsch, who was not affiliated with the study, said that the study suggests obesity and related diseases such as diabetes are caused by more than simply overindulging a sweet tooth.

“Even in the absence of the taste for sweets, cats still get heavy,” Hirsch said.

7/25/2005 01:39:37

Poll: Americans Say World War III Likely

By WILL LESTER, Associated Press Writer
Sat Jul 23, 8:04 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Americans are far more likely than the Japanese to expect another world war in their lifetime, according to AP-Kyodo polling 60 years after World War II ended. Most people in both countries believe the first use of a nuclear weapon is never justified.

Those findings come six decades after the United States dropped atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The war claimed about 400,000 U.S. troops around the world, more than three times that many Japanese troops and at least 300,000 Japanese civilians.

Out of the ashes, Japan and the United States forged a close political alliance. Americans and Japanese now generally have good feelings about each other.

But people in the two countries have very different views on everything from the U.S. use of the atomic bomb in 1945, fears of North Korea and the American military presence in Japan.

Some of the widest differences came on expectations of a new world war.

Six in 10 Americans said they think such a war is likely, while only one-third of the Japanese said so, according to polling done in both countries for The Associated Press and Kyodo, the Japanese news service.

“Man’s going to destroy man eventually. When that will be, I don’t know,” said Gaye Lestaeghe of Freeport, La.

Some question whether that war has arrived, with fighting dragging on in
Afghanistan and Iraq as part of the U.S. campaign against terrorism.

“I feel like we’re in a world war right now,” said Susan Aser, a real estate agent from Rochester, N.Y.

The Japanese were less likely than Americans to expect a world war, less worried about the threat from North Korea and less inclined to say a first strike with nuclear weapons could be justified.

“The Japanese people take peace for granted,” said Hiroya Sato, 20, of Tokyo. “The Japanese people are not interested in things like war.”

President Truman decided to try to end the war by dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima on Aug. 6, 1945, and on Nagasaki three days later.

The first two atomic bombs killed tens of thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki; thousands more gradually died with severe radiation burns. Those bombings led to Japan’s announcement on Aug. 15 that it would surrender.

Two-thirds of Americans say the use of atomic bombs was unavoidable. Only 20 percent of Japanese felt that way and three-fourths said it was not necessary. Just one-half of Americans approve of the use of the atomic bombs on Japan.

Bob Garapedian, an 81-year-old retiree from Colchester, Conn., was preparing to fly fighter planes over the planned invasion of Japan when the war ended. Asked whether using the atomic bomb was appropriate, he said without hesitation: “Absolutely!”

But military instructor Hugh “D.J.” Carlen, who lives near Fort Knox, Ky., said: “I don’t think we really needed to do it. We darn near had the country starved to death. We could have effected a blockade.”

Skepticism about the bombings is widespread in Japan.

“I often hear the bombings were not necessary,” said Toyokazu Katsumi, a 27-year-old engineer from Yokohama. “They just wanted to experiment with them.”

For 63-year-old Masashi Muroi of Tokyo, the attacks with atomic bombs “were mass, indiscriminate killings and perhaps violated international law.”

For younger people, World War II is something seen only on newsreel footage, in the movies and in history books. For those who lived through it, the memories are vivid.

Hideko Mori, a 71-year-old Tokyo housewife, said that as a child in Nagano in central Japan, she and her neighbors had to take refuge to avoid American air raids.

“Around the time I was in the 5th grade, when we went to school, instead of attending classes, we plowed the school grounds and planted potatoes and pumpkins, and we dug up bomb shelters,” she said.

People in both countries overwhelmingly perceive the other country favorably now.

Four in five Americans have an upbeat view of Japan and two-thirds of Japanese feel that way about the U.S. But older people were not quite as enthusiastic.

“I dislike the Japanese military, but not the Japanese people,” World War II veteran William Aleshire, 84, of Peachtree City, Ga., said during a recent visit to a war memorial in Washington.

Some of the good feelings may stem from the close cooperation between the U.S. and Japan in postwar rebuilding and from America’s financial support.

During the years when American troops occupied Japan, economic reforms enabled Japanese farmers to own their own land. With U.S. help, Japan grew into an economic power.

“The Americans contributed so much to the reconstruction of Japan after the war. I think their influence was very significant and positive,” said 62-year-old Yasuzo Higuchi of Tokyo. “Even now, because of their presence in our country, North Korea can’t attack us.”

Americans’ good will about the Japanese extends to their government, with six in 10 in the U.S. regarding it as trustworthy. But more than half of the Japanese distrust Washington.

Asked whether a first strike with nuclear weapons ever could be justified, a majority in both countries said no. But Americans were twice as likely as the Japanese to think such a strike might be justified in some circumstances.

Since the war, the U.S. military presence in Japan has come to be accepted in most of Japan, but stirs resentment on the island of Okinawa.

The Japanese are evenly split on whether the U.S. troops should stay or go, the polling found. Three-fourths of Americans said this country should keep its military in Japan.

“Any country that will allow us to keep a base there as a forward lookout post, I think we ought to do it,” said Wade Hill, a copier technician who lives near Dallas. “We need a buffer zone.”

The strongest rivalry between the U.S. and Japan now is economic. The presence of Americans products has increased in Japan, though Tokyo continues to have a large trade surplus with Washington.

Japanese are most likely to name the U.S. as the most important country for their economy, possibly a reflection of the success among Americans for Japanese automobiles and electronics. Americans were most likely to name China as most important for the U.S. economy.

Trade tensions have increased between the United States and China after America ran up a $162 billion deficit with China last year, the largest ever with a single country.

Some see economic competition as the most important battle between countries these days.

“I don’t think it will be like World War II,” said James DiVita of Sandusky, Ohio, who works in manufacturing. “It will be more of a silent takeover with dollars, buying up companies.”

The poll of 1,000 adults in the United States was conducted for the AP by Ipsos, an international polling company, from July 5-10 and the poll of 1,045 eligible voters in Japan was conducted for Kyodo by the Public Opinion Research Center from July 1-3. Each poll has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3 percentage points.

___

Associated Press writers Chisaki Watanabe and Aiko Hayashi in Tokyo, and AP’s manager of surveys Trevor Tompson contributed to this report.

On the Net:

An interactive detailing poll questions and responses is available at:

http://wid.ap.org/polls/japanus/index.html

Councillor who wanted to marry Clinton’s daughter

As Former US President Bill Clinton makes his first visit the country, one man will be hoping for a man-to-man talk with him.

Godwin Kipkemoi Chepkurgor, a nominated councillor in Nakuru, says he has some social business with Clinton that started in 2000, but of which the former American President has no clue. He seeks the former president’s only child’s hand in marriage.

Rest of the story can be read here:
http://www.eastandard.net/hm_news/news. … leid=25795

It’s REALLY funny.

The Associated Press
Friday, July 22, 2005; 3:22 PM

WASHINGTON — Former U.S. intelligence officers criticized President Bush on Friday for not disciplining Karl Rove in connection with the leak of the name of a CIA officer, saying Bush’s lack of action has jeopardized national security.

In a hearing held by Senate and House Democrats examining the implications of exposing Valerie Plame’s identity, the former intelligence officers said Bush’s silence has hampered efforts to recruit informants to help the United States fight the war on terror. Federal law forbids government officials from revealing the identity of an undercover intelligence officer.

Former CIA analysts, Larry Johnson, center, with former analyst and case worker, Col. W. Patrick Lang (ret.), left, and Jim Marcinkowski, right, testifies on Capitol Hill before a joint Senate and House committee, Friday, July 22, 2005, in Washington. The Democrats of the Senate Policy Committee and House Government Reform Committee held a hearing on the CIA leak and the national security implications of disclosing the identity of a covert intelligence officer. (AP Photo/Lawrence Jackson) (Lawrence Jackson - AP)
“I wouldn’t be here this morning if President Bush had done the one thing required of him as commander in chief _ protect and defend the Constitution,” said Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst. “The minute that Valerie Plame’s identity was outed, he should have delivered a strict and strong message to his employees.”

Rove, Bush’s deputy chief of staff, told Time magazine reporter Matthew Cooper in a 2003 phone call that former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s wife worked for the CIA on weapons of mass destruction issues, according to an account by Cooper in the magazine. Rove has not disputed that he told Cooper that Wilson’s wife worked for the agency, but has said through his lawyer that he did not mention her by name.

In July 2003, Robert Novak, citing unnamed administration officials, identified Plame by name in his syndicated column and wrote that she worked for the CIA. The column has led to a federal criminal investigation into who leaked Plame’s undercover identity. New York Times reporter Judith Miller _ who never wrote a story about Plame _ has been jailed for refusing to testify.

Bush said last week, “I think it’s best that people wait until the investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions. And I will do so, as well.”

Dana Perino, a White House spokesman, said Friday that the administration would have no comment on the investigation while it was continuing.

Patrick Lang, a retired Army colonel and defense intelligence officer, said Bush’s silence sends a bad signal to foreigners who might be thinking of cooperating with the U.S. on intelligence matters.

“This says to them that if you decide to cooperate, someone will give you up, so you don’t do it,” Lang said. “They are not going to trust you in any way.”

Johnson, who said he is a registered Republican, said he wished a GOP lawmaker would have the courage to stand up and “call the ugly dog the ugly dog.”

“Where are these men and women with any integrity to speak out against this?” Johnson asked. “I expect better behavior out of Republicans.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 01261.html

Now that a PERMANENT Patriot Act has passed congress, this means that the cops have EXTRAORDINARY powers that will not expire or have to be renewed by congress after the Iraq War ends. So if you ever get videotaped at an anti-war rally or tell your neighbor that Bush is a liar and presented false evidence to start a war with Iraq, the cops can bust down your door without a warrant or check your entire financial history WITHOUT approval from the courts. This is the same shit that the Germans had to put up with in 1938. Better watch out what you say in Rabbitstew, They could be generating a secret file on you at the FBI or CIA.