SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (444308)8/17/2003 2:30:40 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Respond to of 769670
 
ROTFLOL... I have a dozen ways to make long distance calls. I use usadatanet. It works by dialing a local number and then it is 4.7 cents a minute 24/7 in state and out of state. I speed dial it and use it exclusively. That allows me to have a no charge long distance plans with my provider SBC. I can pay SBC something a month for equipment and wiring. That's a real bad deal.

There are local numbers to usadatanet over most of the country. Also a calling card and 800 service. It's strictly pay if you use.

Phone service is cheaper and the quality and options are superior. Suggestions otherwise are an idiot identification event cue.

And I have not even mentioned cell phones.

Reliability, As the power went off and on in Monroe for upto a few minutes at a time, My web server connected by DSL to the internet never lost connection. THAT WAS STUNNING.



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (444308)8/17/2003 2:33:33 PM
From: Skywatcher  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Another bonehead American play in Iraq>>>>
U.S. Apologizes for Baghdad Mosque Incident
By Richard A. Oppel Jr.
New York Times

Friday 15 August 2003

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Aug. 14 - The United States military apologized today for an incident that
deeply angered Iraqi religious leaders on Wednesday when soldiers in a helicopter forced down a
flag near a mosque in an overwhelmingly Shiite district of Baghdad. A large protest followed,
leading to the death of one Iraqi and the wounding of four others by American troops.


The flag episode outraged residents of Sadr City, a poor but fervent Shiite neighborhood in
northeast Baghdad. They poured out in droves on Wednesday to demonstrate against what they
considered the desecration of an important religious symbol.

At least 3,000 Iraqis joined the protest, said American officials, who added that the troops
opened fire during the demonstration after being attacked by small-arms fire and a
rocket-propelled grenade. The Iraqi who was killed had been operating the grenade-launcher, the
officials said.

American officials also said today that they were changing the way they set up temporary
checkpoints on roads and streets to make them more visible and apparent to Iraqi drivers, after
the deaths of at least nine Iraqis in the past several weeks who were gunned down at checkpoints
by American soldiers.

One such attack killed two Iraqi policemen who were responding to an emergency call but
were killed when they approached what the top American commander described today as a
"hasty traffic control point" - a temporary checkpoint typically set up in a matter of minutes.

Violence continued against occupation troops today as a British soldier was killed and two
were wounded near Basra after the ambulance in which they were traveling was attacked by a
command-detonated explosive.

"It was a marked ambulance," said Capt. Jeff Fitzgibbons, a military spokesman in Baghdad.
"Someone saw the red cross and decided to pull the trigger anyway."

Basra, a large city in southern Iraq dominated by Shiites, had been relatively peaceful until the
past week, when a dire shortage of gasoline and electricity led to riots. The unrest subsided after
British troops, who oversee that part of Iraq, dispensed fuel from their own reserves.

After the protest on Wednesday in Sadr City, Shiites warned that violence could result if
American troops did not adopt a less aggressive presence. Wednesday's bloodshed is expected
to be a major topic in Shiite mosques on Friday, the Muslim holy day.

"Any American soldier who comes to Sadr City, we will kill him," said Saleh Obeid, 50, a
fireman who works at the fire station near the mosque.

Accounts differed about what happened to prompt the demonstration: Shiites in Sadr City said
soldiers in the helicopter appeared to remove the flag intentionally from a tower near the mosque.
But American officials said downward rotor wash from the hovering helicopter stripped the flag
from the tower, something they described as apparently unintentional, but very regrettable.

"Apparently, the helicopter did either blow down the flag, or somehow, that flag was taken
down," Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the commander of ground troops in Iraq, said during a news
conference today.

"We are taking steps to ensure that that doesn't happen again," General Sanchez said.
"There is no policy on our part to fly helicopters up to communications towers to take down flags.
And my understanding at this point is that, in fact, there has been an apology issued by the
commander on the ground because of this incident that blew down that flag."

News agencies reported that an American commander in the area had distributed a letter
today vowing to punish the soldiers responsible as well as to reduce the presence of American
troops in the area. However, a military spokesman said he could not confirm the authenticity of
the letter.

General Sanchez also said today that military forces would improve the visibility of traffic
checkpoints so that "we have enough standoff so that people that are getting close to it will know
that it's there and can slow down and comply with the hasty checkpoint."

The new procedures, he said, are an effort to ensure that "what you don't have is a vehicle
that's coming up to the checkpoint has no idea that it's there, and the first time it knows that the
checkpoint is there is when it starts getting warning shots."



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (444308)8/17/2003 2:37:11 PM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 769670
 
A Bigger, Badder Sequel to Iran-Contra
By Jim Lobe
The Inter Press Service

Wednesday 13 August 2003

The specter of the Iran-Contra affair is haunting Washington. Some of the people and countries
are the same, and so are the methods – particularly the pursuit by a network of well-placed
individuals of a covert, parallel foreign policy that is at odds with official policy.

Boiled down to its essentials, the Iran-Contra affair was about a small group of officials based in
the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) that ran an
"off-the-books" operation to secretly sell arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. The picture being
painted by various insider sources in the media suggests a similar but far more ambitious
scheme at work.


Taken collectively, what these officials describe and what is already on the public record
suggests the existence of a disciplined network of zealous, like-minded individuals. Centered in
Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith's office and around Richard Perle in the
Defense Policy Board in the Pentagon, this exclusive group of officials operates under the aegis
of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and Vice
President Dick Cheney.

This network includes high-level political appointees, such as Undersecretary of State John
Bolton, who are scattered around several other key bureaucracies, notably in the State
Department, the NSC staff, and most importantly, in Cheney's office.

Cheney, of course, has a direct link to Bush (and all the heads of agencies), while his powerful
chief of staff and national security adviser, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, also enjoys exceptional
access and influence. Indeed, the two men's frequent visits (as well as those of another DPB
member, former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich) to CIA headquarters before the Iraq
war have been cited by retired and anonymous intelligence officers as having actively intimidated
analysts who disagreed with the more sensational assessments about Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction and ties to al-Qaeda produced by Feith's office.


Oliver North and his cohorts used the proceeds to sustain the Nicaraguan contras –
U.S.-sponsored rebels fighting Managua's left-wing government – in defiance of both a
congressional ban and of official U.S. policy as enunciated by the State Department and
President Ronald Reagan. It was never clear whether Reagan understood, let alone approved, the
operation. As with Reagan, in this case, too, it is difficult to determine whether Bush – or even
his NSC director, Condoleezza Rice – fully understands, let alone approves, of what the hawks
are doing.

There was some hint of a parallel policy apparatus dating back just after the terrorist attacks of
Sept. 11, 2001. It was known early on, for example, that the Pentagon leadership, without notice
to the State Department, the NSC, or the CIA, convened its advisory DPB, headed by Richard
Perle, to discuss attacking Iraq within days of the attacks. The three agencies were also kept in
the dark about a mission undertaken immediately afterward by former CIA director and DPB
member James Woolsey to London to gather intelligence about possible links between Iraqi
president Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda, a move that suggested that the
CIA or the Pentagon's own Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) could not be trusted.

While Woolsey's trip recalls the more benign shenanigans of the Iran-Contra crowd, consider
some of the more recent press reports.

Item One: Iran-Contra alumnus and close Perle associate Michael Ledeen has renewed ties
with his old acquaintance, Manichur Ghorbanifar, an Iranian arms merchant who became the key
link between the NSC's Oliver North, the operational head of Iran-Contra, and the so-called
"moderates" in the Islamic Republic. But to what end?


It appears that certain elements in the Pentagon leadership, specifically Douglas Feith, are
trying to sabotage sensitive talks between Teheran and the State Department to promote
cooperation over al-Qaeda and other pressing issues affecting Afghanistan and Iraq.
The
Pentagon clique thinks Ledeen's old friend Ghorbanifar can help, according to Newsday, which
reported Friday that two of Feith's senior aides – without notice to the other agencies – have held
several meetings with the Iranian, whom the CIA has long considered "an intelligence fabricator
and nuisance."

Item Two: U.S. aircraft and Special Operations Forces (SOF) intercepted and destroyed a
residential compound and two small convoys that were heading from Iraq into Syria in mid-June,
killing as many as 80 civilians. They then subdued and arrested five Syrian guards across the
border, taking them back to Iraq, where they were held and interrogated for five days, despite
strong objections from the State Department.


The Pentagon, for its part, claims that it suspected senior Hussein officials of trying to make a
run for it on a smuggling route. But an expose last month by the New Yorker suggests that the
raid and arrests may have been part of a deliberate effort to inflame tensions with Damascus in
an effort to put an end to the remarkably close level of cooperation between Syria, the CIA and
the State Department in the campaign against al-Qaeda.

Item Three: The rightwing Washington Times reported on Friday that certain "high-level circles
within the administration" are hoping to persuade Chinese military officers to co-sponsor a coup
to overthrow North Korean leader Kim Jong Il. While it is not clear whether concrete action has
been taken, the paper noted that the Pentagon leadership disagrees strongly with the State
Department's efforts to use diplomacy and the promise of a non-aggression pledge to persuade
Kim to abandon his nuclear-weapons program.


Just before North Korea agreed to resume talks last week, Bolton delivered a blistering attack
on Kim in what was seen by analysts here as a deliberate act of provocation.

Item Four: Anonymous "senior administration officials" informed a prominent conservative
columnist of a covert CIA operative (whose name he then published) jeopardizing her career and
possibly exposing numerous ongoing covert actions and agents who worked with her. The agent
in question is the wife of Joseph Wilson, a retired career foreign service officer who publicly
exposed as a fabrication President George W. Bush's now-infamous assertion that Iraq had tried
to buy uranium yellowcake in Africa.


While some analysts have said the disclosure of his wife's identity, a felony under U.S. law,
was an attempt to discredit him, Wilson charged this week that the move "was clearly designed
to intimidate others from coming forward" with information that would expose the administration's
manipulation of intelligence.


No one knows yet whether such intimidation will work, but recently retired intelligence and
foreign service officials and military officers, and a growing number of anonymous active-duty
officials, have indeed been talking to the media about the shenanigans within the administration.
Recent stories expose a consistent pattern of manipulation and exaggeration of intelligence in
order to justify the war against Iraq and, more recently, efforts to hype evidence about the alleged
threat posed by Syria.

Newsday's disclosure that Feith's office has been used for secret contacts with Ghorbanifar
suggests that the work of this small group of officials goes well beyond assessing intelligence
and making policy recommendations. According to one career military officer who worked for
eight months in the Near East/South Asia bureau (NESA) in that office, the political appointees
assigned there and their contacts at State, the NSC, and Cheney's office tended to work as a
"network." Feith's office often deliberately cut out, ignored or circumvented normal channels of
communication both within the Pentagon and with other agencies.

"I personally witnessed several cases of staff officers being told not to contact their counterparts
at State or the (NSC) because that particular decision would be processed through a different
channel," wrote retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowsky last week. "What I saw was aberrant,
pervasive and contrary to good order and discipline."

In an interview with IPS, she insists that her views of Feith's appointees and operations were
widely shared by other professional staff. Quoting one veteran career officer "who was in a
position to know what he was talking about," Kwiatkowsky says, "What these people are doing
now makes Iran- Contra look like amateur hour."

CC



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (444308)8/17/2003 2:39:15 PM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 769670
 
Iran Contra Back in play without ONE PLAYER!
Poindexter Resigns but Defends Programs
Anti-Terrorism, Data Scanning Efforts at Pentagon Called Victims of Ignorance
By Bradley Graham
The Washington Post

Wednesday 13 August 2003

John M. Poindexter took issue yesterday with critics of his Pentagon efforts to develop new
data scanning systems and an online futures market for flushing out terrorists and predicting
Middle East developments, saying the programs had fallen victim to ignorance, distortion and
Washington's "highly-charged political environment."

In a letter of resignation ending a controversial 20-month Pentagon tenure, Poindexter pressed
his case for employing new technologies to discern terrorists' plans in such everyday
transactions as credit card purchases, travel reservations and e-mail. He said innovative
approaches are needed to overcome the historic barriers among U.S. intelligence agencies and
gain access to stores of information not available to the government.

Insisting he had been mindful of the privacy concerns that critics in Congress and elsewhere
raised about his work, the retired rear admiral cited the parallel efforts he made to study ways of
protecting the rights of U.S. and foreign citizens. But Poindexter complained that attempts to
explain his programs often proved fruitless. "Although we have tried to be very open about our
work, there is still a great deal of misunderstanding," he wrote.

The five-page letter, submitted yesterday and made available to The Washington Post, provided
Poindexter's first opportunity to address critics after being ordered by Pentagon officials last
autumn to avoid public comment because, he was told, he had become too much of a "lightning
rod."

Senior defense officials reported Poindexter's intention to resign his post as head of the
Pentagon's Office of Information Awareness two weeks ago. The news followed Poindexter's
involvement in an ill-fated plan to launch an online futures market for betting on Middle Eastern
developments that was advertised as a vehicle for profiting on assassinations and other terrorist
acts. For months before that, he had been embroiled in another controversy over a computerized
surveillance plan to scour travel, financial, medical and other databases to penetrate terrorist
networks.

His departure was demanded by lawmakers who questioned his judgment as well as his regard
for privacy issues, and who argued that Poindexter's history as a central participant in the
Iran-contra affair of the 1980s made him a poor choice to manage such a politically sensitive
project.

"I was not anxious to come back into government," Poindexter wrote his boss, Anthony Tether,
director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), "but in discussions with
you and others concluded that was probably the best way to explore research and development
of information technologies and concepts to help solve the enormous problems of combating
terrorism." He added that he had wanted to step down "for months now" but had stayed longer at
Tether's request.

"I regret we have not been able to make our case clear and reassure the public that we do not
intend to spy on them," he wrote, adding that he had "done all that I can do under the
circumstances" and so would be leaving on Aug. 29.

The letter contained no acknowledgement of personal error. In the case of the futures trading
plan, he said, an unauthorized decision by an outside contractor -- the small California firm Net
Exchange -- to post "some extremely bad examples" on the program's Web site gave critics
ammunition to distort the effort as a proposed market in terrorism. The examples included the
possibility of betting on the assassination of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat or the overthrow of
Jordan's monarchy.

"In the highly-charged political environment of Washington, positions on highly complex issues
are taken and debated using glib phrases, 'sound bites' and symbols," said Poindexter, who
turned 67 yesterday. "I doubt that many people have read our report to Congress to get a
balanced view of what we have been trying to do."

A DARPA spokesman said the agency had no comment on the resignation or on the future of
Poindexter's programs. That future remains clouded by a provision in the Senate's version of the
2004 defense appropriations bill, which would eliminate funding for a number of Poindexter's
programs. The House version has no such provision, so the matter will be decided this autumn in
conference.

Getting the DARPA job in January 2002 had been something of a comeback for Poindexter. He
was national security adviser to President Ronald Reagan during the Iran-contra scandal, in
which sales of arms to Iran were used to finance rebels fighting in Nicaragua at a time such
assistance was banned by Congress.

Poindexter was convicted in 1990 on five felony counts, including lying to Congress, destroying
documents and obstructing congressional inquiries into the affair.
Although the conviction was
overturned in 1991 -- on grounds that Poindexter had been granted immunity from prosecution as
a result of his testimony before Congress -- it still troubled many in Congress.

JUST ANOTHER FELON IN THE WHITE HOUSE>>>>>>AND THERE ARE MORE!

CC



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (444308)8/18/2003 6:14:54 AM
From: JDN  Respond to of 769670
 
Dear Pat: I think your comment as to companies is highly unfair. If you were to say unregulated companies will seek to find the most EFFICIENT method of delivering their goods and services I would agree with you. One thing that has made the USA the most PRODUCTIVE NATION on earth (it wasnt always that way you know-as recently as the late 50's early 60's everyone looked to Japan and Germany as they were rebuilt with the most modern at the time methods after WWII) is the fact UNREGULATED companies were able to invest in modern technology to COMPETE as they were NOT price control protected as are many overseas.
As to the phone service, actually the ONLY reason you are paying more is because you have MORE SERVICES. If you have purely the old wire to house system and use phone cards for long distance you are paying MUCH LESS then in the past. Now if you are like me with computer hookups, multiple cellular phones etc etc. Yep, you got all the costs you mention.
As to energy, IMHO the only regulation we ought to have is for SAFETY. Why should it take 15 YEARS to get permission to build a nuclear power plant? Who in their right mind would invest that much time and money PURELY for a study? jdn