A tail dragging romp through the swamps of the world
1. All right, here are the rules.
2. We have to post these rules before we give you the facts.
3. Players start with eight random facts/habits about themselves.
4. People who are tagged need to write their own blog about their eight things and post these rules.
5. At the end of your blog, you need to choose eight people to get tagged and list their names. Don’t forget to leave them a comment telling them they’re tagged, and to read your blog.
They have taken the link down, this is their reply to my email:And I can verify that, in fact, the link has been removed. For that I will commend the Canadian Embassy in Washington D.C. for quickly taking appropriate action once they were made aware of the problem.
Dear Ms (snip)
Thank you for your email regarding a post made this week in the blog
"Right Wing Girl" and the our article about the Canadian Angels website
from a 2006 edition of the Connect2Canada newsletter.
Our mention of Canadian Angels was made over a year ago. We have now
removed that reference to the Canadian Angels site from the
Connect2Canada website and newsletter and will not make future references
to it.
Thank you again for your message. We very much value the feedback of
Connect2Canada members.
Regards,
Bernard Etzinger
Connect2Canada team
Canadian Embassy, Washington, DC
And if you listen carefully, you can almost hear the growing whine of "censorship" from the Canadian dumbfuck-o-sphere. Just wait for it -- you know it's coming.Yup. Count on it. I've already read one apologist for GOTR's hate-filled rant. It's an excuse - not a reason. I don't care what motivates Wendy Sullivan. She singled out a societal group and spewed unsubstantiated, unrestrained hatred on them from her own public forum. Any attempt to paint her as a victim is simply buying into her viral behaviour.
In a few short days, President Bush will celebrate his 61st Birthday. Don't miss out on this opportunity to wish the President a Happy Birthday by signing the RNC's eCard today.Extra speshul! And then it was followed by this:To make this an extra special birthday on July 6, Mrs. Bush will be presenting our President with this birthday wish from supporters like you.
And if you can, I hope you will consider celebrating President Bush's birthday with a gift our entire Party can share. Your secure online donation of $61 (or whatever you can afford) will help keep the RNC's preparations for electing more Republicans in the 2007-2008 election cycle on track.Hmmm. Then this.
P.S. This is your last chance to join the First Lady in making this an extra special birthday celebration for our President - please take a moment to sign the Birthday eCard today.What to say, what to say?
Two boys named Alistair Butt, one from Saskatchewan and one from Ontario, were stopped while trying to board flights last week because their name matches a name that appears on a no-fly list.But nobody will tell anybody which list these names are actually on.The Ontario boy, a 15-year-old from the Ottawa-area town of Orléans, was trying to check in to an Air Canada flight from Montreal to St. John's when he was told he couldn't board.
The Saskatoon boy, who's 10, was also told he couldn't get on an Air Canada flight, although it is not clear what airport he was stopped at.
Both boys were eventually allowed to board, once they were cleared by security after long delays, but their families fear they will face the same problem every time they try to fly.
"Canada is telling him he's guilty until proven innocent every time he flies," the Ontario boy's mother, Heather Butt, told CBC News.
Heather said an airline official at the airport could not say what no-fly list her son's name is on, and how to get it off.
"We said, 'What do we do?' and then, much to our amazement, she said we could possibly change our child's name," Heather said.
Transport Canada won't confirm if the boys are on a United States no-fly list, an airline no-fly list or Canada's new no-fly list, which went into effect on June 18.Because if it's one way to defend a fucked-up process it's by keeping everything about it secret.Canada's list, believed to contain fewer than 1,000 names, is operated by Transport Canada. All domestic airline passengers' names are checked against a list of people deemed to be threats.
The list is not be available to the public, which means those on it will only find out when they try to travel.
Transport Canada advises families to appeal
Allan Kagedan, a Transport Canada spokesman, advised the Butt families to appeal to the organizations operating all three lists.
"You can approach all three, I suppose, and they can guide you in terms of doing what's needed to try to avoid problems in the future," he said.
He would not confirm which list contains the Alistair Butt name.
Air Canada said it's working hard to prevent delays to passengers and stressed that both boys were eventually allowed on their flights.What security? This gives the facade of security while providing nothing."We regret any inconvenience, but security must remain of paramount concern," the airline said in a statement.
Question to Air Canada, Transport Canada and the Minister of Public Safety: Do you clowns truly believe that someone intent on bringing down an aircraft, who is known enough to authorities to appear on a secret list, is likely to check in using their true identity?
Update: As Darren points out, if by changing his name Alistair Butt gets his name taken off the no-fly list, that is all any potential terrorist has to do.
As I said above, there is no security here. Not only would this not withstand a Charter challenge, it could conceivably provide cover for someone actually intent on bringing down an aircraft.
As opposed to the other 364 days When the Natives do absolutely nothing except smoke, drink and fuck their daughters. This Friday will mark the Native Day of Action(tm) here in Canada. It's their chance to whine and complain that us white guys who pay 45% in income tax to support their smoking, drinking and daughter-fucking are ripping them off.If I have to explain to you that this is racist hate mongering, then perhaps you're here by accident.
A Little TLC for Troops Fighting the TalibanYeah, interesting initiative, but the organizer is a hate-spewing racist. Canadian values? Makes you wonder if the Canadian Embassy in Washington really knows who they're dealing with.
“When the leader of the Opposition is able to stand in uniform and serve his country, then I will care about his opinion of the performance of the minister of National Defence.”
People are talking a lot about who will replace O'Connor. But what about Harper saying that unless you've served in the military you are incompetent to comment, advise or critique the military? That statement certainly limits the pool Harper has to work with. Prentice, Day, Strahl, Bernier, and the rest are out based on Harper's qualifications.In fact, that eliminates Harper himself, but that's pretty much beside the point.
Media diversity is the cornerstone of democracy. But media ownership is more highly concentrated in Canada than almost anywhere else in the industrialized world. Almost all private Canadian television stations are owned by national media conglomerates and, because of increasing cross-ownership, most of the daily newspapers we read are owned by the same corporations that own television and radio stations.Send a pre-formatted message to the Canadian Radio and Telecommunications Commission by going here. It will only take a minute and with enough input, it will make a difference.This means a handful of Big Media Conglomerates control what Canadians can most readily see, hear and read. It means less local and regional content, more direct control over content by owners and less analysis of the events that shape our lives. It also means less media choice for Canadians and fewer jobs for Canadian media workers.
We must also be wary of the impacts mergers have on the diversity and neutrality of new on-line media. We need to reverse this trend before big media gets even bigger!
Go. You've spent enough time here. Go now.
A defiant Gordon O'Connor said yesterday he has no intention of quitting as Defence Minister, and warned his critics not to assume he is about to turfed from the portfolio in a widely expected cabinet shuffle.I'll take July 20th."I can assure you of one thing: I'm not retiring and I'm not resigning," Mr. O'Connor told reporters at a military conference in Kingston. "And if you want to run a pool, go ahead. You're going to lose."
The minister told the conference he expects to deliver the government's long-awaited policy paper, which will include elements of the government's current policy in support of the Afghanistan mission, by the end of the summer."Long awaited". As in, way overdue. What's the rush, Gordo? You've only been promising it since the summer of 2006.
The G&M, undeterred by O'Connor's statement, went on to speculate on the possible choices to fill the MND role when O'Connor is turfed this summer. Oh... how do we know that? Well this is pretty telling:
Prime Minister Stephen Harper refused to respond last week when he was asked about a potential realignment of the cabinet and whether it would involve Mr. O'Connor. But neither did Mr. Harper jump to express continued confidence in his Defence Minister, who has been criticized for his handling of several files, including the treatment of detainees and the payment of funeral costs for soldiers killed in the line of duty.And why don't we pour a little gasoline on that fire.
Mr. O'Connor came to the defence of the Afghan mission in his speech yesterday to the conference on "stability operations," insisting the Afghan army was making such great strides that he could foresee the day when it could take over much of the combat mission now being handled by Canada's 2,500 troops based in Kandahar.Yeah?Yet at the same time, Mr. O'Connor was blunt in his assessment of the long-term prospects for Afghanistan, using the kind of unsubtle language that has got him into political hot water before. "Afghanistan has always been a land of instability," he said in response to a conference questioner, adding later, that "I think the area is always going to be unstable."
He said the security situation along the border with Pakistan remains difficult to police, in part because there are millions of ethnic Pashtuns in both countries. "There is a steady stream of insurgents coming across the border," he said.
Later, he tried to temper those comments when asked about them by reporters. "What I'm saying is that Afghanistan is in an unstable region and there will always be challenges to Afghanistan. Our job and NATO's job is to try and create a state that is stable enough to handle its own affairs so it can govern efficiently."
That's not the same mission we were all told about. We were told that the mission was to transform Afghanistan, and now O'Connor is telling us that isn't possible. We've been saying that all along.
Gordon. Pack your kit. Steve is going to fire you.
Two senior cabinet members, Industry Minister Maxime Bernier and Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, have been touted as the most likely successors to Mr. O'Connor at Defence.And why Maxime "deregulate everything" Bernier?
Mr. Bernier's name has been cited by Conservatives who believe a Quebec minister would make the best spokesman for the mission when the Quebec-based Royal 22nd Regiment deploys to Kandahar.Wow. What a reason! OK, so why does Stockwell Day get consideration?
Mr. Day, meanwhile, is seen by many Tories as a surprise success because he has avoided major public pitfalls in a portfolio plagued with tricky issues and bad news, including a spate of RCMP controversies.That's because Day is off in la-la-land pursuing his superstitious beliefs, making things up about people and failing to provide accurate answers on anything and everything. He has only avoided the public pitfalls because he runs and hides when things get tough and the news media has been giving him a free ride. If his feet had been held to the fire when he screwed up, or if others within his portfolio screwed up, he'd be in the same boat as O'Connor right now.
It doesn't really matter. They're all a bunch of boobs. O'Connor is a liability in his present seat, so it doesn't really matter who they put in the seat.
In any case, watch the calendar and watch O'Connor. And watch the defence policy paper take even longer.
"6. Do you think Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was directly involved in planning, financing, or carrying out the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001? 50% say "stop fucking asking that already," the other half is divided into "yes, I am dumber than fucking horseshit" (41%) and "[blank stare]" (9%). The number of shit-dumb Americans has increased by 5 percentage points over the last three years."I'm guessing the 22% who thought the Amazon was located in Africa or the 3% who thought it was in North America, make up the bulk of the 26% of the people who still back Bush.
Was it a good ride? Not the cruise; the last seven years.There is something strange about this discussion, and it takes me a few moments to realize exactly what it is. All the tropes conservatives usually deny in public--that Iraq is another Vietnam, that Bush is fighting a class war on behalf of the rich--are embraced on this shining ship in the middle of the ocean. Yes, they concede, we are fighting another Vietnam; and this time we won't let the weak-kneed liberals lose it. "It's customary to say we lost the Vietnam war, but who's 'we'?" Dinesh D'Souza asks angrily. "The left won by demanding America's humiliation." On this ship, there are no Viet Cong, no three million dead. There is only liberal treachery. Yes, D'Souza says, in a swift shift to domestic politics, "of course" Republican politics is "about class. Republicans are the party of winners, Democrats are the party of losers."
The panel nods, but it doesn't want to stray from Iraq. Robert Bork, Ronald Reagan's one-time nominee to the Supreme Court, mumbles from beneath low-hanging jowls: "The coverage of this war is unbelievable. Even Fox News is unbelievable. You'd think we're the only ones dying. Enemy casualties aren't covered. We're doing an excellent job killing them."
Then, with a judder, the panel runs momentarily aground. Rich Lowry, the preppy, handsome 38-year-old editor of National Review, announces, "The American public isn't concluding we're losing in Iraq for any irrational reason. They're looking at the cold, hard facts." The Vista Lounge is, as one, perplexed. Lowry continues, "I wish it was true that, because we're a superpower, we can't lose. But it's not."
As they bask in the delights of formal dining rooms, a multitude of bars and rich furnishings, their countrymen fight and die in a hellhole. A country is shattered beyond recognition. Countless thousands of people have died or have been displaced or simply rot in despair because of this luxury absorbing crowd.
They are not at war. They are playing at it. Suffering is the lot of others, be they Iraqis they care nothing for, or their own countrymen, separated by class and privilege. This is their war only in the sense that the American flag pin they wear on their formal dining attire is similar to the patch worn on the shoulder of some tour-extended, hapless grunt who only wants to get out of the whole mess alive.
It's clear now. These are the spawn of the Reagan Cold Warriors. Iraq is nothing more to them than a "redo". This is the make-up exam for the failure in Vietnam.
No matter what excuse they produce for invading and laying waste to Iraq, the real reason is now out there for all to see. The war in Iraq is being fought to even the score.
And, as in Vietnam, the privileged-class does none of the fighting. That falls to the "wasted" class. Nothing but movable pieces on a folding game board. The real war is the one they are waging on their own citizens as they exact a price for their sense of humiliation over Vietnam.
They are walking disasters; a waste of good air. May they choke on the failure they are about to perpetrate on themselves.
MORE, MORE!! Sadly, No!, Steynwatch and James Wolcott all have different cuts on the oceanic gathering of the worst of the right-wingers.
One of the biggest problems that the United States has today is that it has very few public intellectuals, as most other countries do. And most of the Americans who are standing in the position that public intellectuals hold in other countries -- namely, the pundit class -- are astonishingly second-rate. At their best, they're people like George Will and David Broder, who express themselves moderately but have never had a real idea in their entire lives. At their worst, they're abusive freakshows like Coulter and Christopher Hitchens.Then Jill points out the hypocrisy of one of the most vitriolic of that group, Ann Coulter, and the law Coulter recently ignored:
(a) Whoever, with intent that another person engage in conduct constituting a felony that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against property or against the person of another in violation of the laws of the United States, and under circumstances strongly corroborative of that intent, solicits, commands, induces, or otherwise endeavors to persuade such other person to engage in such conduct, shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half of the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the crime solicited, or both; or if the crime solicited is punishable by life imprisonment or death, shall be imprisoned for not more than twenty years. 18 U.S.C. § 373(a).You might feel Chet and Jill have identified Teh Stupid pretty well. Then along comes Mark Steyn who adds a dimension to the world of right-wing punditry that will leave you slack-jawed. In reference to the current Immigration Reform Bill before Congress: (Which has the right-wingers pissing themselves)
There's something creepy about a political class so determined to impose a vast transformative bill cooked up backstage in metaphorically smoke-filled rooms on a nation that doesn't want it. It's an affront to republican government and quasi-European in its disdain for the citizenry.Jesusfuckingchrist. Creepy? Ya think?!!
Same with the immigration bill. I think I say somewhere in my book ...Second-rate indeed.
Germany has barred the makers of a movie about a plot to kill Adolf Hitler from filming at German military site because its star Tom Cruise is a Scientologist, the defence ministry has said.Gee. That's too bad.Cruise, one of the film's producers, is a well known member of the Church of Scientology, which the German government does not recognise as a church and says is against the country's constitution. Berlin says it masquerades as a religion to make money, a charge Scientologist leaders reject.
Not that it matters all that much because I know four-fifths of diddly-squat about Scientology. Apparently the only way I would find out more is if I actually picked up the rags at supermarket checkout.
Germany, it would seem on the face of it, might appear to be behaving in a somewhat intolerant manner, however, my personal inclination, given the history of that country's experience with fraud on a scale we still have difficulty imagining, gives them some latitude in dealing with such matters.
Maybe they're onto something.
The German government considers the Scientology organization a commercial enterprise with a history of taking advantage of vulnerable individuals and an extreme dislike of any criticism. The government is also concerned that the organization's totalitarian structure and methods may pose a risk to Germany's democratic society. Several kinds of evidence have influenced this view of Scientology, including the organization's activities in the United States.Hmmm... I'm leaning towards the Germans on this one.There are three notable American court cases involving Scientology that illustrate why Germany's concerns about this organization are justified. In the early 1980s, American courts convicted 11 top Scientologists for plotting to plant spies in federal agencies, break into government offices and bug at least one IRS meeting. In 1994, in a case involving Lawrence Wollersheim, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a California court's finding of substantial evidence that Scientology practices took place in a coercive environment and rejected Scientology's claims that the practices were protected under religious freedom guaranties. In September 1997, the Illinois Supreme Court found there was evidence enough to allege that Scientology had driven the Cult Awareness Network into bankruptcy by filing 21 lawsuits in a 17-month period. The court stated that "such a sustained onslaught of litigation can hardly be deemed 'ordinary', if [the Network] can prove that the actions were brought without probable cause and with malice."
Given the fact that Cruise has openly criticized Germany for the past ten years on their position, and the fact that the German government's stance on Scientology appears to be unmovable, one would be compelled to question the mindset of Cruise in even attempting to gain the cooperation of the German government in making a film using German government facilities.
Political?
Who knows? But Germany is not alone.
Germany, as well as Belgium, France, Great Britain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, Israel and Mexico, remain unconvinced that Scientology is a religion.
Actually, those countries view L. Ron Hubbards' brainchild as more akin to organized crime than a religion.
So, what looked like a funny story involving a narcissistic celebrity getting a pie in the face is actually a whole lot more. There are actually political issues here. It looks like Germany just got on Top Gun's "six".
Perhaps if we hooked Cruise up to a Mark Super VII Quantum E-meter we could determine what he is really up to.
I know what you're thinking. I'm not going there. Not for now anyway.
USNORTHCOM’s AOR includes air, land and sea approaches and encompasses the continental United States, Alaska, Canada, Mexico and the surrounding water out to approximately 500 nautical miles. It also includes the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida. The defense of Hawaii and our territories and possessions in the Pacific is the responsibility of U.S. Pacific Command. The defense of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands is the responsibility of U.S. Southern Command. The commander of USNORTHCOM is responsible for theater security cooperation with Canada and Mexico.The theater security cooperation occurs by way of both Canada's inclusion in NORAD and Bi-National Planning Group. Canada's deputy commander of NORAD is the head of the BNP and is responsible to both Canadian and US governments, has the deputy commander of NORTHCOM as a co-authority and both report to the commander of NORTHCOM/NORAD in their respective roles as deputy or vice commander of NORAD.
The U.S. Northern Command, the military command responsible for "homeland defense," has asked the Pentagon if it can establish its own special operations command for domestic missions. The request, reported in the Washington Examiner, would establish a permanent sub-command for responses to incidents of domestic terrorism as well as other occasions where special operators may be necessary on American soil.Domestic special operations missions?The establishment of a domestic special operations mission, and the preparation of contingency plans to employ commandos in the United States, would upend decades of tradition. Military actions within the United States are the responsibility of state militias (the National Guard), and federal law enforcement is a function of the FBI.
Employing special operations for domestic missions sounds very ominous, and NORTHCOM's request earlier this year should receive the closest possible Pentagon and congressional scrutiny. There's only one problem: NORTHCOM is already doing what it has requested permission to do.
Now to the average Canadian, the concept of the regular armed forces being used domestically isn't that much of leap of imagination. Under Canadian law the armed forces can be used for domestic law enforcement in aid to the civil powers, essentially as a posse comitatus. In the United States, use of the national armed forces in such a role is prohibited by the Posse Comitatus Act.
When NORTHCOM was established after 9/11 to be the military counterpart to the Department of Homeland Security, within its headquarters staff it established a Compartmented Planning and Operations Cell (CPOC) responsible for planning and directing a set of "compartmented" and "sensitive" operations on U.S., Canadian and Mexican soil. In other words, these are the very special operations that NORTHCOM is now formally asking the Pentagon to beef up into a public and acknowledged sub-command.Special activities, as William Arkin says, is a euphemism for covert operations and intelligence gathering. In the United States that job belongs to the FBI. In Canada it belongs to the RCMP and CSIS.NORTHCOM's compartmented and sensitive operations fall under the Joint Chiefs of Staff "Focal Point" program, a separate communications and planning network used to hide special operations undertaken by the Joint Special Operations Command, headquartered in North Carolina, and by CIA and other domestic compartmented activities.
Since 2003, the CPOC has had a small core of permanent members drawn from the operations, intelligence and planning directorates. In an emergency, the staff can be expanded. According to NORTHCOM documents, CPOC is involved in planning for a number of domestic missions, including:
-- Non-conventional assisted recovery -- Integrated survey programs -- Information operations/"special technical operations" -- "Special activities"
Non-conventional assisted recovery is the use of indigenous populations or surrogate forces, led by special forces to rescue hostages. Again, in the US that is an FBI function. In Canada it belongs to the RCMP.
All of this involves domestic intelligence gathering, covert operations and analysis. It includes operations in the United States which, unless specifically authorized by the Congress, would be illegal and, given NORTHCOM's area of responsibility, would include the same activities in Canada without necessarily notifying Canadian authorities.
Pehaps Gordon O'Connor can come out of his hole and explain what precisely is going on.
Environment Minister John Baird says the Conservative government won't dismiss a newly passed law requiring Canada to respect its emissions-cutting commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.Studying and developing?!But he says he's not putting forward a new environment plan either. Baird says the time for studying and developing new plans is over, and that the government is already moving on a "realistic" plan to tackle climate change.
He says the government will follow through with the "technical letter" of the bill, but won't waste another six months studying the issue and commissioning more reports.Six months? Is he trying to tell us the Conservative plan took six months? What happened? Did the package they opened at cabinet come without a green crayon?
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said his government's climate plan will curb greenhouse gases by 20 per cent by 2020, although three studies have debunked the plan since Baird released it in April.But if Steve says it's so, then it must be so... right?
That's what I thought
The United States is helping build a prison in Afghanistan to take some prisoners now at Guantanamo Bay, but the White House said Friday that it's not meant as an alternative to the detainee facility in Cuba.I wouldn't recommend eating that. Most of what comes out of the White House spin machine, as we are all aware, is utter horse shit.
The Bush administration has said it wants to close Guantanamo Bay and move terror suspects to prisons elsewhere. Senior officials have told The Associated Press a consensus is building among the president's top advisers on how to do it.In other words, they have no plan or, if they have a plan they're not telling.
The administration is looking to resolve the issue swiftly, White House deputy press secretary Dana Perino told reporters Friday, although she said there's no deadline set.Because deadlines are a terrible thing to waste. They create pressure... you know, to get things done.
At the White House, Perino said Mr. Bush has directed Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to work with her counterparts around the world to try to repatriate detainees to their home countries, make sure they are held safely and treated humanely and that they are not allowed to perpetrate acts of terrorism.So... send them to Afghanistan. Where torture and maltreatment are virtually unheard of.
A proposal gaining traction among Mr. Bush's top national security advisers would have some of the most dangerous suspects at Guantanamo transferred to one or more Defense Department facilities, including the maximum-security military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., officials say.That makes sense. Then there's the rest of it: charges, trials, legal counsel. You know, the stuff one would expect out of a country which makes loud noises about the rule of law being deficient when referring to other countries.
The move is opposed by Cheney's office and the Justice Department, which argue that transferring prisoners to U.S. soil would give them undeserved rights and pose a threat to the United States.Why does that not surprise me? And that disclosure alone is reason enough to state that everything the White House press secretary said is an outright lie.
The White House said Friday that, like Vice President Dick Cheney's office, President Bush's office is not allowing an independent federal watchdog to oversee its handling of classified national security information. An executive order that Bush issued in March 2003 — amending an existing order — requires all government agencies that are part of the executive branch to submit to oversight. Although it doesn't specifically say so, Bush's order was not meant to apply to the vice president's office or the president's office, a White House spokesman said. [...] "Our democratic principles require that the American people be informed of the activities of their government," the executive order said. But from the start, Bush considered his office and Cheney's exempt from the reporting requirements, White House spokesman Tony Fratto said in an interview Friday.Let's get something clear. When an order is issued to include an entire organization or functional body, it includes all elements of that organization, unless specifically exempted. If Bush's Executive Order 13292 was written with the intention that the offices of the President and Vice President would be exempted from such oversight, it would have been a simple matter to add, perhaps right at the end, words to the effect, "The office of President and the office of Vice President are exempted from the provisions of this order."
Why didn't Gonzales act on Leonard's request? His aides assured reporters that Leonard's letter has been "under review" for the past five months—by Justice's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC). But on June 4, an OLC lawyer denied a Freedom of Information Act request about the Cheney dispute asserting that OLC had "no documents" on the matter, according to a copy of the letter obtained by NEWSWEEK. Steve Aftergood, the Federation of American Scientists researcher who filed the request, said he found the denial letter "puzzling and inexplicable"—especially since Leonard had copied OLC chief Steve Bradbury on his original letter to Gonzales. The FOIA response has piqued the interest of congressional investigators, who note Bradbury is the same official in charge of vetting all document requests from Congress about the U.S. attorneys flap.
Waxman told NEWSWEEK he now plans to investigate the handling of the issue by Justice as well as Cheney's refusal to comply with the executive order, which he called part of a "pattern" of stonewalling by the veep.That has been met with this kind of response from both Cheney and Bush spokes-people.
Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said, "We're confident we are conducting the office properly under the law." She also pointed to comments by White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino, who said that Bush, not the National Archives, was the "sole enforcer" of the executive order relating to classified information.Umm... No. Part 5 of Bush's Executive Order 13292 delegates enforcement, including the issuing of reports leading to sanctions, to the Archivist and the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office. Bush is not the "sole enforcer". He handed that job off to somebody else.
"In 2004, the Canadian actor Paul Gross starred in a made-for-TV drama entitled H2O. Gross plays Tom McLaughlin, the charismatic son of a murdered Canadian prime minister, who takes over Canada at the behest of a group of international financiers eager to sell our fresh water to an increasingly thirsty United States."
"A single act of trading water on a bulk basis would arguably transform the resource into a tradable good that was legally indistinguishable from softwood lumber, potash or oil, rendering subsequent attempts to prevent or limit further exports illegal. For this reason, it is imperative that Canada takes water off the free trade table, quickly and decisively -- now, before it's too late."
"On water, as on so many other issues, our conciliatory, don't-rock-the-boat approach to Canada-U.S. relations has failed. Unless we stand up for our own interests, Canadian fresh water could soon be irrigating crops, watering golf courses and filling backyard swimming pools in the south western United States.
It's time to dissuade Americans of the notion that we're going to rescue them from the consequences of their short-sighted, profligate ways by allowing them to mess with our environment, too. It's time to make it absolutely clear that bulk water exports are not covered by NAFTA. "
The so-called "Family Jewels" document overseas assassination attempts, domestic spying, kidnapping and infiltration of leftist groups from the 1950s to the 1970s, according to a summary posted on the Web site of the National Security Archive at George Washington University.