Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MSI who wrote (18159)	12/23/2002 6:29:33 AM
From: KonKilo	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 93284

Say it ain't so, C-SPAN... centrexnews.com Here a recent report by Rep. Ron Paul, R-Tex, of a confrontation between himself and other members of Congress on the Iraqi war resolution, and the subsequent cover-up by C-Span, which usually documents Congressional hearings for the record: "The proposed resolution on the use of force mentioned the United Nations 25 times. That was considered safe. Not once did it mention the Constitution. I do not look to the UN to find the authority for this sovereign nation to defend herself. I look to the US Constitution. Article I, section 6, gives Congress (and only Congress) the authority to declare war. The ‘war power’ may not, and should not, be transferred from the ‘people's house’ to the president - the very transfer the White House's resolution attempted to achieve. Under US law, the president, as commander-in-chief, has the authority to execute a congressionally declared war. "It was almost noon on October 3, the second day of the hearings, when my turn came. Under the harsh glare of television lights, I offered a substitute amendment, that is, new language to entirely replace what was currently in the resolution to use force. ‘Mr. Chairman, my amendment is a clear-cut declaration of war.’ [Rep. Paul is opposed to the war in Iraq but was attempting to make Congress take responsibility for their warmongering through an open declaration of war.] "It was after that when the Chair [Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Il] stated that declaring war is ‘anachronistic, it isn't done anymore...’ It was a jaw-dropping admission...but there was more. The Chair went on to say that the Constitution has been ‘overtaken by events, by time’ and is ‘no longer relevant to a modern society.’ The Ranking Minority Member [Tom Lantos, D-Ca] called the declaration of war ‘frivolous and mischievous.’ "At least it was out in the open. Now surely the display of such disdain for their oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution’ would light up Capitol Hill switchboards with angry callers! Little did I know that no one was watching the hearings over C-SPAN – not a single person of what statistically is an audience of several million Americans – even heard those inflammatory comments. When my staff called C-SPAN to get a copy of the video record to document these outrageous statements, we were told ‘technical difficulties’ prevented that portion of the proceedings from being recorded, and that same portion of the proceedings was also the only part missing on the internal record the House makes of such official hearings." [End of Rep. Paul’s quote.] Obviously, the record was purged without all the participants’ knowledge or permission, which is a violation of open meeting laws. Rep. Hyde could have been removed from Congress based upon his direct violation of his oath of office and his order that the record be purged. When officials collude with others to cover up for improper or illegal acts, it is a conspiracy – which is clearly not a rare occurrence in Washington.

To: MSI who wrote (18159)	12/23/2002 1:01:44 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 93284

I'll take your word for it on the form #. It is extremely irritating to realize how that becomes lifelong censorship of criticism of anyone in gov't It is a bit irritating to realize the entire scope. I don't think many people realize the extent in time and breadth that it takes. Interesting thing about it, I had a talk with a security office on the issue of resumes. They know full well that they are rarely submitted for review. And they don't want them to be. They would be utterly swamped by resumes. They're quite happy knowing that should the day ever come that they want you, they can dig around and find resumes that were never submitted. Gotcha. If I ever get around to writing something, it will have absolutely nothing to do with any work I ever did or the work of anyone around me. I'll send a copy for pre-publication review along with a date that it will be released and let them try to stop me. Great PR for a, e.g., cooking French cuisine. I don't think you fully understand the Official Secrets Act. It's not as lopsided as it appears. It's tested in the courts and the British Courts do allow the release of government information over the objections of the government. I've seen that happen within the last year, but for the life of me I can't remember what the subject was. I'd bet that if someone in the US government did a dump onto a set of CDs with all the classified intelligence on Iraq and took it to CNN, there's a legal avenue for the government to stop the release. On the other hand, I'm not very keen with what Ashcroft has said about blindly supporting any FOIA refusals. That's completely contrary to the intent of the FOIA. But I also believe these are pendulums that swing to the left or right until someone smacks it back the other way because it's gone too far. In just a few weeks we'll be coming up on the 2nd anniversary of the EO that decided not to release Presidential papers. It's in direct violation of law. They'll come a time....... jttmab

To: MSI who wrote (18159)	12/23/2002 10:11:39 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

that becomes lifelong censorship of criticism of anyone in gov't That is SHEER UNADULTERATED CRAP and even you, in your partisan unhinged state, know it. I wrote some rather nasty things things about the previous CIC. jttmab has taken some serious swipes at the current one. Neither one of us has been visited by the Gestapo. Stick that in your BS and smoke it. The limitations on freedom of speech apply to classified matters, not to everything political. Next time put your brain in gear before operating that keyboard. In practice this means you cannot criticize anyone in gov't for any reason, for the rest of your life Bulls**t.