By: Sibel Edmonds  

Just when information from terrorism suspects needed urgent translation right after the Sept. 11 attack, the FBI unit that did that work deliberately slowed down to create a backlog that might win the unit more money and staff.

That's what a former translator who worked at the FBI tells Ed Bradley on 60 Minutes this Sunday, Oct. 27, at 7 PM, ET/PT.

Sibel Edmonds, hired as a translator of Turkish and other Middle Eastern languages after Sept. 11, has filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the FBI, which she claims fired her for bringing the corruption to light. "Let the documents pile up so we can show it and say that we need more translators and expand the department", Edmonds says one of her supervisors urged.

By: Mudpie  

The purpose of this chronology is to show plainly and clearly that:

1. President George W. Bush did indeed have material non-public knowledge of adverse financial conditions at Harken Energy Co. prior to the sale of his Harken stock and therefore violated 15 USC § 78u-1, insider trading of securities based upon material non-public information.
   
   
2. The Securities and Exchange Commission was indeed aware of Bush's insider trading violation and chose to stand down.
   
   
3. While serving on the Board of Directors at Harken Energy Company, George W. Bush's performance, motives and ethics were no different than those of the corporate executives and officers of Enron, Worldcom, or any other national corporation being criticized by Bush for doing what he did.
   
   
4. The Aloha Petroleum sale was an act of fraud and Bush was in a position to know it and prevent it.
   
   
5. George W. Bush sought business dealings with people strongly connected to and involved with BCCI, the empire of fraud and crime.
   

By: Mark Wilkinson  

Tens of thousands of anti-war protesters marched peacefully on the White House on Saturday to express opposition to a possible U.S. attack on Iraq, some chanting slogans accusing President Bush of planning genocide.

Thousands more people took part in anti-war demonstrations in San Francisco, Berlin, Amsterdam, and other cities.

"This is going to be an ugly, unnecessary fight. Most of the world is saying 'no' to it", civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson told the crowd at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial in Washington. "Pre-emptive, one-bullet diplomacy, we cannot resort to that."

From:  

The penultimate Idiots before the elections has brought us a curiously low turnout of campaign-related idiocy. But it's okay, because our old friend George W. Bush is back in charge, crashing into the list three times this week. Unfortunately he can't quite squeeze into the top spot - that's reserved for the White House and their interesting email forwarding policies. The Tennessee Republican Party (3) are indulging in arch-hypocrisy this week, Scott Jensen and Steven Foti (5) are key members of the party of law and order, and Rita Cosby (8) has some kind words for a serial killer. Finally, Dennis Cleary (10) is a candidate that literally everyone loves to hate.

By: Mary McGrory  

Is the presidency of the United States a part-time job? You might think so, given the hours George W. Bush has been putting in lately.

For the past two weeks he has been careening about the countryside through 13 states, plugging Republicans down to the state senate level (Pennsylvania) and swooping down on states where he isn't even needed (Maine). He is raising millions of dollars for candidates and raising alarms about Saddam Hussein and the awful prospect that the Democrats might prevail in the November elections.

Here is a commander-in-chief with one war in progress and another in the making. Supposedly grave decisions have to be made - as they always are on The West Wing - on both fronts. But the President has other fish to fry - namely, Democrats.

By: Paul Kienitz  

Saddam Hussein is many things, but one thing he is not is an Islamist. He has no ideological common ground with those who base their politics on fundamentalist Moslem religion - the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Ayatollahs of Iran, the Saudi Arabian factions that provided most of the manpower for the September 11 attack, and most of the Middle East's major terrorist groups. In Iraq, the Islamist faction is, as far as we can tell, the one major organized force opposing Saddam Hussein for reasons other than ethnic division.

The Bush administration has allowed itself to indulge in a Bay of Pigs fantasy in which the Iraqi people, somehow prompted by an outside invasion and yet more bombing, spontaneously rise up to throw off the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. This fantasy has, of course, gotten us in trouble many times before. At present, the signs point much more toward bitter resistance by the Iraqi people to any American incursion. But if there is any chance of such an uprising being successful, then a revolt under the banner of Islamism probably maximizes its chances. Not despite, but because of, the fact that typical Islamists tend to be more anti-Western than the current Iraqi regime is.

By: Charles Sullivan  

We are living in unprecedented dangerous times. Unless we act forcefully, death will once more rain down from the skies of Iraq, likely resulting in the death of tens thousands of innocent people - many of them children.

The court appointed Bush regime is literally getting away with murder. Military spending usurps more than half of every American tax dollar. Important social programs at home and abroad have been suspended for lack of funds. A lunatic right-wing Attorney General has shredded the Constitution and suspended our hard won civil rights. We are living under the constant threat of endless war.

By: Jackson Thoreau  

The following is an open letter to U.S. Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas that was emailed to his office, other politicians, the media, and others this week...

Editorial from:  

So much for the idea that the fight to restore investor confidence is a bipartisan effort. In a bitter public session yesterday, the five commissioners of the Securities and Exchange Commission split along party lines in voting for a chairman of a new oversight board for the accounting profession. The three Republican commissioners, led by the chairman, Harvey Pitt, voted to appoint William Webster.

The new board, which has broad powers to set and enforce accounting standards, is the centerpiece of the corporate reform passed by Congress in the wake of the Enron and WorldCom scandals. Despite the accounting profession's complicity in these scandals and its sorry track record of policing itself, the Bush administration and many Republicans initially opposed an independent board. They only succumbed when rising investor anxiety threatened opponents of meaningful reform.

By derailing Mr. Biggs, the Republicans are seeking to undermine the effectiveness of a board they never wanted. By siding with his former clients in the accounting industry and with his Republican overseers, Mr. Pitt has again demonstrated that he is not suited to lead the SEC Maybe Mr. Webster will surprise us, but so far investors are the losers.

By: Ken Guggenheim  

The United States remains "dangerously unprepared" to deal with another major terrorist attack, said a report by former top government officials, academics, and business leaders.

"In all likelihood, the next attack will result in even greater casualties and widespread disruption to American lives and the economy" than the Sept. 11 attacks, said the task force chaired by former Sens. Gary Hart (D-CO), and Warren Rudman (R-NH). The report was released late Thursday.

Rudman and Hart had led a previous commission whose warnings in January 2001 of the likelihood of catastrophic terrorist attacks seemed prophetic eight months later. That commission, created by Congress, said the threat of international terrorism was growing and recommended creating a domestic security agency.

President Bush created a Homeland Security office shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks and has proposed creating a full Cabinet department, but Congress has not yet approved it.

By: Ryan Lizza  

...Bush made the case for Saddam Hussein's disarmament a few hours before his spokesman made the case for Saddam's assassination. It is precisely that sort of doublespeak that leads France and Russia in the Security Council and multilateralists in the Senate to distrust his intentions. They are not opposed to getting rid of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) - even if that means regime change - but they are opposed to Bush's preemption policy and his interest in regime change as a goal in and of itself.

The congressional resolution supported by Bush cites as reasons to attack Iraq, among other things, Saddam's attempted assassination of Bush's father, Iraq's repression of its civilians, and Saddam's failure to return property wrongfully seized from Kuwait. Biden and Lugar pared down their resolution so Iraq's WMD's would be the only reason for war. And when Colin Powell appeared before Biden's committee last week he seemed to endorse this approach. Semi-mockingly, John Kerry asked: "Are you telling me we're going to go to war because they haven't returned all the stolen property?" In reply, Powell conceded the Democrat's point: "Iraq has to be disarmed. That is the major problem." Biden and Lugar noted Powell's support in a press release Monday, saying their "thinking was sharpened" by his testimony.

Biden, who knows his resolution won't pass, is also registering his objections to Bush's attempt to enshrine preemption as formal U.S. policy. That's why he and his allies don't want any mention of regime change. "If the resolution goes for regime change, it is in violation of international law, and it would endorse preemption", says one Biden aide...

From:  

Ari Fleischer, in a bid to fend off the impact of Dana Milbank's devastating article on the big lies of George W. Bush, has taken the White House smearing of Milbank public, in a menacing letter to the Washington Post.

Not only does Fleischer fail to refute any of Milbank's charges. He also covers up Bush's lies with more lies - and spreads other lies about, who else, Bill Clinton. (When the Bush White House or any Republican outfit is backed into a corner, count on it to smear Bill or Hillary Clinton once again.)

In his report, Milbank nails no fewer than eight falsehoods that Bush has delivered lately - either outright whoppers or amazing one-sides stretches of the truth that are false. These range from statements about Iraq's direct military threat to the United States to statements about Bush Administration spending on education.

"The business of the journalist is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell the country for his daily bread... We are the tools and vassals of the rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities, and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."

- former New York Times editor John Swinton

President Bush won't discuss two big reasons he wants to invade Iraq.

By: Michael Kinsley  

So, why exactly is Iraq different from North Korea? Both are founding members of President Bush's "axis of evil", and both deserve that honor. North Korea has now admitted to a nuclear weapons development program on about the same timeline as what we only suspect about Iraq. So, why are we barely complaining in one case and off to war in the other?

Bush addressed this conundrum the other day. "Saddam Hussein is unique", he explained. "He has thumbed his nose at the world for 11 years... and for 11 years he has said, 'No, I refuse to disarm'." The North Koreans, by contrast, said, "Yes, we will disarm" - they promised to stop building nukes in exchange for help in developing peaceful nuclear power - and then they didn't do it. I guess that's a difference, but it sounds as if we're punishing Saddam for his honesty.

Bush's public case for going to war against Iraq is full of logical inconsistencies, exaggerations, and outright lies. It reeks of ex-post-facto: First came the desire, and then came the reasons. But this raises a troubling question, especially for opponents of Bush's policy: If his ostensible reasons are unpersuasive even to him, what are his real reasons? There must be some: Nobody starts a war as a lark. It would be easier to dismiss the whole exercise if there were an obvious ulterior motive. Without one, you are left wondering: "Am I missing something?"

By: Kenneth Chang  

Using a novel computing technique that resembles an elaborately staged billiards trick shot, IBM scientists have created what they say is not only the world's smallest logic circuit, but also possibly the smallest that could ever be made.

The entire circuit covers less than a trillionth of a square inch. The equivalent circuit made from state-of-the-art silicon transistors takes up 260,000 times as much space.

"News has become routine and cheap. It's becoming more standardized and homogenized... [The networks] are having to sell a new kind of hybrid product - news plus. News plus entertainment, news plus attitude, news plus opinion."

- President-in-Exile Al Gore

By: Paul Krugman  

The recent spate of articles about administration dishonesty mainly reflects the campaign to sell war with Iraq. But the habit itself goes all the way back to the 2000 campaign, and is manifest on a wide range of issues. High points would include the plan for partial privatization of Social Security, with its 2-1=4 arithmetic; the claim that a tax cut that delivers 40% or more of its benefits to the richest 1% was aimed at the middle class; the claim that there were 60 lines of stem cells available for research; the promise to include limits on carbon dioxide in an environmental plan.

More generally, Mr. Bush ran as a moderate, a "uniter, not a divider". The Economist endorsed him back in 2000 because it saw him as the candidate better able to transcend partisanship; now the magazine describes him as the "partisan-in-chief".

It's tempting to view all of this merely as a question of character, but it's more than that. There's method in this administration's mendacity.

For the Bush administration is an extremely elitist clique trying to maintain a populist facade. Its domestic policies are designed to benefit a very small number of people - basically those who earn at least $300,000 a year, and really don't care about either the environment or their less fortunate compatriots...

Can a sitting President be charged with plagiarism?

Editorial from:  

As President Bush wages his war against terrorism and moves to create a huge homeland security apparatus, he appears to be borrowing heavily, if not ripping off ideas outright, from George Orwell's 1984, the prophetic novel about a government that controls the masses by spreading propaganda, cracking down on subversive thought, and altering history to suit its needs.

1984 was intended as a warning about the evils of totalitarianism - not a how-to manual. We're a long way from resembling the kind of authoritarian state Orwell depicted, but some of the similarities are eerie.

"Vice President Dick Cheney swung through Colorado Springs last weekend. Though he was quick to correct himself, Sen. Wayne Allard introduced Cheney as 'the President of the United States'."

- photo caption

News Analysis from:  

It may come off to some Americans as a horribly tragic and tasteless pun that the assault weapon allegedly used by the assumed sniper in the Metro DC area was manufactured by a firearms firm called Bushmaster. After all, although BuzzFlash took Bush to task for toadying up to the NRA and opposing a measure that might have prevented serial shootings in the future, we would never accuse Bush of being associated with the gun company that manufactured the sniper's assault gun.

Yet, the odd thing is that there is a Bush connection to Bushmaster. It is a connection that is darkly symbolic of the White House's craven subservience to the gun lobby. You see, Richard E. Dyke, the owner of Bushmaster Firearms, was the chief fundraiser for Bush in Maine, where Bushmaster is located, until July of 1999.

Mr. Bush's supporters, such as Dyke and the gun lobby, endanger the lives of everyday Americans and law enforcement officials. Bush opposes pro-law enforcement, crime prevention, and crime solving legislation that could help curtail future sniper attacks because the gun lobby told him to. He hangs out with the likes of Mr. Bushmaster, and we assume, still accepts his blood money.

By: Arianna Huffington  

The Bush team's ridiculous and wildly inflammatory anti-drug ads are still running in heavy rotation. You know the ads I'm talking about - the ones where innocent-looking, middle-class teens admit their culpability for the consequences of the drug trade. "I helped blow up buildings", says one doe-eyed youth.

So if that is legitimate logic, and our President says that it is, I wonder if we might turn the tables on him by starting a little ad campaign of our own to sabotage another misguided Bush campaign: the War on Conservation.

The thought occurred to me after the startling announcement that the administration was taking precious time off from an actual, necessary war - the one on terrorism - to sue the state of California for daring to require that carmakers put more energy-efficient models on the road.

"Money doesn't talk, it swears."

- Bob Dylan

Stolen from:  

The November 5 elections are shaping up to be a huge win for the Democratic Party, but as we learned in the Florida recount, don't count your ballots until the chads are hatched.

You know the stakes.

You know that, left unchecked, Bush will finish out his term systematically dismantling fifty years of social progress. You know that the next two weeks will determine the fate of labor rights, social security, medicare, progressive taxation, and any meaningful protection of the environment or regulation of global capitalism. But consider this:

"There needs to be a focused, coalition effort in the region against peace... I mean, against terror for peace."

- President Weak & Stupid

By: Katherine van Wormer  

Dry drunk is a slang term used by members and supporters of Alcoholics Anonymous and substance abuse counselors to describe the recovering alcoholic who is no longer drinking, one who is dry, but whose thinking is clouded. Such an individual is said to be dry but not truly sober. Such an individual tends to go to extremes.

It was when I started noticing the extreme language that colored President Bush's speeches that I began to wonder. First there were the terms: "crusade" and "infinite justice", that were later withdrawn. Next came: "evil doers", "axis of evil", and "regime change", terms that have almost become clichés in the mass media. Something about the polarized thinking and the obsessive repetition reminded me of many of the recovering alcoholics/addicts I had treated. (A point worth noting is that because of the connection between addiction and "stinking thinking", relapse prevention usually consists of work in the cognitive area.) Having worked with recovering alcoholics for years, I flinched at the single-mindedness and ego- and ethnocentricity in the President's speeches. (My husband likened his phraseology to the gardener character played by Peter Sellers in the movie: Being There.) Since words are the tools, the representations, of thought, I wondered what Bush's choice of words said about where he was coming from. Or where we would be going.

"Republicans are running as supporters of a war President, and it is much more effective for them to do that than to rest on Mr. Bush's record. It is, in truth, the most dismal record of any President in memory."

- Anthony Lewis, New York Review of Books

Site content © 2001-2002 J. Mekus - - except wherein noted.
All rights reserved.