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

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 9:41:25 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

That's exactly what IS going on.

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 1:31:52 PM
From: paret	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

David Frost joins al-Jazeera TV BBC News UK ^ \| Friday, October 7th 2005 \| BBC News Veteran UK broadcaster Sir David Frost is to join Arabic-language TV station al-Jazeera, the network has confirmed. Sir David is to appear on al-Jazeera International, the pan-Arab news network's new English-language channel, due to be launched next spring. The Qatar-based channel said Sir David, who broadcast his final Breakfast with Frost programme for the BBC in May, would be among the "key on-air talent". Sir David was quoted as saying he felt "excitement" about his new role. "Most of the television I have done over the years has been aimed at British and American audiences," he said. Distinguished career "This time, while our target is still Britain and America, the excitement is that it is also the six billion other inhabitants of the globe." David Frost and Tony Blair on the Breakfast with Frost set Frost's interview shows have attracted world leaders Sir David notched up 500 editions of Breakfast with Frost before bowing out. An al-Jazeera statement called Sir David "the only person to have interviewed the last seven presidents of the United States and the last six prime ministers of the United Kingdom". It said: "(He) has joined the line-up of key on-air talent at the new 24-hour English language news and current affairs channel." Launched in 1996, al-Jazeera is best known outside of the Arab world for carrying exclusive al-Qaeda messages. Sir David first came to prominence on television in the early 1960s, when he presented the satirical BBC show That Was the Week that Was. Channel expansion He presented a series of news and current affairs programmes in the UK and America. Frost's interviews with Richard Nixon after Watergate were revealing, much acclaimed and achieved the largest audience for a news interview in history. He worked for ITV breakfast station TV-am in the 1980s before rejoining the BBC in 1992. Last month al-Jazeera launched a children's channel as part of its expansion plans. It also has a sports channel and one dedicated to covering live events without a presenter.

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 2:27:06 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Press slow to follow trail of probe into Steele theft By Jennifer Harper THE WASHINGTON TIMES October 7, 2005 It took the New York Times 16 days to acknowledge the theft of the personal credit report of Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele, Maryland Republican, by a pair of operatives working for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, led by Sen. Charles E. Schumer of New York. Yesterday, the Times addressed the fraudulent act in an A-section news story -- on page 28 -- headlined "Democrats are on defensive in Maryland state race," leading with the fact that Republicans are hoping to "exploit potential legal problems that Democrats are now suddenly facing in that race." The clandestine nature of the theft has a whiff of Watergate to it, but not the press coverage to match. The two staffers used Mr. Steele's Social Security number to obtain the records, reportedly seeking evidence of damaging debts. The first black elected to statewide office in Maryland, Mr. Steele is expected to run for the U.S. Senate next year. The incident -- the subject of a felony investigation by the FBI and the U.S. attorney's office in Washington -- took place in July and first was reported Sept. 20 by the Associated Press. To date, the theft has been covered by only four major dailies -- The Washington Times, The Washington Post, the Baltimore Sun and Newsday -- along with Roll Call, the Daily Standard, the weekly Montgomery County Gazette and McClatchey News Service. There have been no splashy investigations on broadcast networks or news channels, and limited editorial indignation over press indifference. "Maryland is not, say, New York or California. Perhaps news editors reason that most Americans haven't heard of Mr. Steele," Brent Baker of the Media Research Center (MRC) said yesterday. The center has tracked such selective coverage elsewhere; an online poll of MRC readers, for example, found that 93 percent agreed the mainstream news "applied a liberal double-standard in their coverage of Bill Bennett and his abortion comments." Meanwhile, quips like "Creditrategate" and "Chuckaquiddick" have surfaced among Web loggers. Syndicated columnist Michelle Malkin called the theft "Democratic dumpster diving," while Investor's Business Daily theorized that a "media firing squad" would have assembled if staffers for Sen. Bill Frist, Tennessee Republican, had snitched personal information from Sen. Barack Obama, Illinois Democrat. Blair Lee, a political analyst for Maryland-based WBAL Radio and the Gazette, called it "Steelegate," asking, "The media is all over this illegal act, right? Wrong. So far, the media's take has been: (1) hey, the two defendants are only in their 20s (like that's relevant?) and (2) everybody in politics does this kind of stuff." An online Carolina Journal editorial noted, "The media have a long history of playing defense attorney for Democrats and prosecutor for Republicans," calling the dearth of Steele coverage "a good example." The theft drew only a single editorial from The Post on Sept. 23, which observed that Republicans were also guilty of "political dirty tricks."

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 7:10:25 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Motion to Quash Delay Indictment ................................................................ Blogs for Bush ^ \| October 7, 2005 \| Mark Noonan Tom Delay's attorneys have filed a motion to quash the indictment. It notes that the crime Tom Delay was charged with did not exist under Texas law and that subsequent to the indictment Ronnie Earle spent five days desperately trying to find a new charge - and a Grand Jury to bring the charge - against Tom Delay. What the motion to quash states is that Earle has engaged in prosecutorial misconduct - it charges Earle with coercing a grand jury into issuing an indictment, illegally discussing an ongoing grand jury deliberation with discharged members of another grand jury in order to ascertain what might be necessary to convince a grand jury to indict, illegally inducing a grand juror into speaking publicly about grand jury deliberations in order to bias a sitting grand jury, and submitting the opinions of former grand jurors as "additional information" to persuade a sitting grand jury to indict. Sounds to me like Ronnie Earle has bitten off more than he can chew - and Democrats around the country have once again fallen for a story of GOP corruption based upon nothing more than the ravings of a partisan hack. (Excerpt) Read more at blogsforbush.com ...

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 8:49:06 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

sacredcowburgers.com

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 11:39:36 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Your girl Mary Mapes wrote this: -- “And right now, on the Internet, it appeared everything was falling apart. I had a real physical reaction as I read the angry online accounts. It was something between a panic attack, a heart attack, and a nervous breakdown. My palms were sweaty; I gulped and tried to breathe. . . . The little girl in me wanted to crouch and hide behind the door and cry my eyes out." editorandpublisher.com

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/7/2005 11:58:11 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Administration: Rangel 'losing it' (McClellan doesn't disagree with Cheney portrayal of congressman) WorldNetDaily ^ \| 10/7/05 \| Les Kinsolving At today's White House press briefing, presidential press secretary Scott McClellan said President Bush "strongly supports" Vice President Cheney in his recent comments suggesting Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., is "losing it." WND asked McClellan about Cheney's remark to two talk-radio hosts, which he made while talking about Rangel having compared Bush to Bull Connor, the Alabama police commissioner whose resistance to civil rights made his name synonymous with Southern racism in the '60s. Cheney commented that Rangel "was so out of line, it almost struck me that Charlie was having some problem. Charlie is losing it, I guess." McClellan responded to the question about Rangel, saying, "The president strongly supports the vice president. The vice president strongly supports the president. I don't know that I could add anything to what he's already said."

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 12:57:55 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

DePaul Alum Todd Beamer-Does Ward Churchill think Todd was a "Little Eichmann?" Marathon Pundit ^ \| October 7, 2005 \| Marathon Pundit Heroic Todd Beamer was not in the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. But he led the famous "Let's Roll" charge into the cockpit of Flight 93, which crashed that same day in Pennsylvania after being hijacked by al-Qaida terrorists. He was a DePaul grad, earning his MBA from the Chicago school in 1993. So, does October 20 and 21 DePaul speaker Ward Churchill think Todd was a "Little Eichmann?"

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 7:16:12 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Al-Jazeera Finds Its English Voice Washington Post ^ \| 10/8/5 \| Howard Kurtz Al-Jazeera, which is launching an English-language network with Washington as a major hub, has landed its first big-name Western journalist: David Frost. And the veteran BBC interviewer says he's perfectly comfortable with the unlikely marriage. "I love new frontiers and new challenges," Frost said yesterday from London. He said the new network, al-Jazeera International, has promised him "total editorial control" and he had checked out the company with U.S. and British government officials, "all of which gave al-Jazeera a clean bill of health in terms of its lack of links with terrorism." But the Bush administration has repeatedly denounced al-Jazeera. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has accused the Qatar-based operation of promoting terrorism and "vicious lies" and has banned its reporters from Iraq. The State Department has complained about "false" and "inflammatory" reporting. Said Frost, who will host a weekly interview program: "For all the people who think it's anti-American, there are various countries in the Middle East who think it's too pro-Western. I would say the jury's out on al-Jazeera. Obviously, we all suffer from the handicap of not being able to sit there and watch in Arabic." The Thursday announcement of the hiring of Frost, who will continue to work for the BBC, comes as al-Jazeera is looking for a few good Americans -- anchors, correspondents and producers -- for the network as it prepares to launch early next year. From a nondescript office building on K Street, where an armed guard mans the lobby, staffers have been calling television agents about their clients. But a number of those approached, including several well-known personalities whose agent would not identify them by name, have quickly rebuffed the overture. "Some are a bit leery," said Nigel Parsons who is running al-Jazeera International. "There is an image problem to be overcome." (Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 7:19:11 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

BBC - al-Jazeera, Whats the Diff?

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 7:24:46 AM
From: paret	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

MUSLIM PROPAGANDA FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS: Muslims feel vindicated by report finding profiling by New Jersey anti-terror cops AP ^ \| 10/7/5 \| Wayne Parry Muslims say a federal report supporting charges that New Jersey counterterrorism officials were compiling reports on Muslims solely because of their religion confirms what they have been claiming for years. "This shouldn't surprise anyone," said Yaser El-Menshawy, chairman of the Majlis Ash-Shura of New Jersey, the state's council of mosques. "Although it's wrong and it's bad law enforcement, Muslims understand that we have fewer rights than anyone else right now. I'm sure people in law enforcement realize that and know they can get away with things with Muslims that they can't with any other group." The Institute for Intergovernmental Research, at the request of the U.S. Justice Department, reviewed a dispute in New Jersey over state counterterrorism investigators entering 140 reports into a law-enforcement database. Fearing they would be accused of racial profiling after being ordered by the federal government to halt the practice of targeting motorists based on race, New Jersey state police prohibited the state's Office of Counter-Terrorism from entering any more of their intelligence reports into the database. On Monday, state police yanked 14 troopers from the counterterror office, prompting acting Gov. Codey to intervene in what he called a turf war between state agencies, undoing some of the moves and stripping the state Attorney General's Office of much power over the anti-terror agency. The report, obtained by The Star-Ledger of Newark and The Record of Bergen County, found no specific terrorist or criminal activity that would justify including the individuals and organizations in the anti-terror database. It added that state police "acted responsibly in removing the 140 submissions" from the database. Auditors from the Florida-based Institute for Intergovernmental Research, which has several contracts to do similar review work for the Justice Department, met with representatives of New Jersey state police and the attorney general's office, who described the reports to them. The auditors did not view the actual reports because they do not have security clearance. The counterterrorism office has denied that the reports constituted profiling, claiming the documents were incomplete and that state police misunderstood how they were being compiled. Spokesmen for the state police, attorney general's office and counterterrorism office declined to comment on the report Friday. "How can American citizens be treated like this just because of their religion in the land of freedom?" asked Mohamed Younes, president of the American Muslim Union and an elder in Paterson's Muslim community. "This has been our biggest problem, and it is absolutely wrong."

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 7:30:32 AM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Norway school bans Star of David; teacher may fight ban YnetNews ^ \| 10.08.05 School head bans Jewish symbol 'for fear of provoking Muslim students'; teacher hires lawyers, vows to fight back Norway – A teacher working at an adult education center who has been told to stop wearing a Star of David because it "provokes the many Muslim students at the school" in 2004 is now considering legal action against the ban, the Norwegian television network NRK has reported. School head Kjell Gislefoss, said he thought that the Star of David can be seen to represent the State of Israel and is fearful of offending the school's Muslim students, citing immigrants from the Palestinian territories. "The Star of David would be a symbol for one side in what is perhaps the world's most inflamed conflict at the moment." "Many have a traumatic past that they have escaped and then we feel that if they are going to learn Norwegian then they can't sit an at the same time be reminded of the things they have traveled from," said Gislefoss. But Telhaug has vowed to stand up for his right to wear the Star and has hired lawyers ahead of a possible legal battle. Inge Telhaug told NRK that his right to freedom of speech was violated by the banning. "I can't accept this. It is a small star, 16 millimeters (0.6 inches) that I have around my neck, usually under a T-shirt. I see it as my right to wear it," Telhaug told NRK. Telhaug, who is not Jewish, teaches the Norwegian language and culture to new immigrants at the school. "I see it as the oldest religious symbol we have in our culture, because without Judaism there would be no Christianity," he said. The decision to ban the Jewish symbol from the school was slammed as "unacceptable" by head of local Education Association, Heidi Hauge Uldal.

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 7:40:26 AM
From: paret	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Hiding the Cisneros Report Hillary Clinton's lawyer is staying very busy. Friday, October 7, 2005 The Wall Street Journal © 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. (excerpt) What don't David Kendall, the law firm of Williams & Connolly, and clients such as Hillary Rodham Clinton want the public to know? We'd have thought that question would be on more Washington lips as the report of Independent Counsel David Barrett languishes under seal at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Mr. Barrett is the fellow who began investigating a tax-fraud case involving former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Henry Cisneros but expanded his probe to include alleged abuses by the Clinton Justice Department and IRS. Yet instead of exhibiting any curiosity, the press corps is again writing its semi-annual stories about the costs of keeping Mr. Barrett's office open. The fact is that Mr. Barrett would love to close up shop if only Democratic lawyers and the judges of the so-called "special division" that oversees his work would let him. Readers may recall the last iteration of this drama in April, when Senators Byron Dorgan, John Kerry and Richard Durbin attached an amendment to a war appropriations bill that would have stopped funding Mr. Barrett's office. We pointed out that this would have returned control of the Barrett probe to one of the very departments implicated--Justice--and, happily, the amendment was killed. Now a new report from the Government Accountability Office is being used as an excuse for still more complaints about the Barrett probe. We agree it's high time it finished, but this isn't possible until somebody puts a stop to delaying tactics by lawyers for those named in the report. (Mr. Cisneros himself long ago pleaded guilty, and was pardoned by Bill Clinton in 2001.)

To: Bill who wrote (706221)	10/8/2005 2:58:19 PM
From: paret	Respond to of 769670

Reasonable Democrats: Increasingly rare breed WorldNetDaily ^ \| 108/05 \| Henry Lamb It is quite amusing to watch Nancy Pelosi grab every possible opportunity to stand in front of a TV camera to bemoan what she calls the Republicans' "culture of corruption." Pelosi and the rest of the Democrat leadership are trying desperately to smear President Bush and the Republican party with charges of corruption in relation to the spurious allegations that Tom DeLay and Senator Bill Frist may have done something wrong. It's strange that during the Clinton years, Pelosi didn't say a thing about the "culture of corruption" that permeated the entire Clinton administration. In fact, the Democrat leadership made a point of standing for a photo op with the president who had defiled the White House with his sexcapades and lied under oath to a grand jury and to the American people. Where was the outcry about the "culture of corruption" surrounding Hillary's campaign financing in 2000? Where was the outcry about the "culture of corruption" surrounding Enron's influence over the Commerce Department's support for the horrendous fraud that ultimately toppled the company? Where was the outcry about the last-minute pardons or any of the events in one of the nation's most scandal-ridden, corrupt administration? The same Democrat leaders who now bay like Georgia hounds about allegations of corruption were then silent in the face of genuine corruption. What hypocrisy! The Democrat leadership has no agenda other than bashing President Bush and all Republicans. Their strategy seems to be that if they can sling enough mud at the Republicans, they will regain control of the government by default. Fortunately, not all Democrats are cast in the same mold as their current leadership. The nation benefits when different philosophies and conflicting ideas meet in honest debate, where resolution is the result of compromise and a final public vote. The recent passage of the Threatened and Endangered Species Recovery Act provides a great example of how Democrats and Republicans can disagree, respectfully, and still produce a policy result that is acceptable to proponents on both sides of the argument. The bill was co-sponsored by Republican Rep. Richard Pombo, and Democrat Rep. Dennis Cardoza, both from California. On final passage (229-193), 36 Democrats voted for the bill, and 34 Republicans voted against it. Throughout the floor debate, members of Congress on both sides expressed appreciation to their opponents for the civility of the debate and the spirit of compromise that prevailed as the bill made its way through committee and to ultimate passage. When good ideas are ignored simply because they come from a member of the opposite party, America is the loser. When the quest for power supersedes the quest for good public policy, the power seekers betray the trust of their electors – and should be replaced. With elections barely a year away, the Democrat leadership appears to have little thought about good public policy. Instead, their only focus appears to be bashing everything Republican. Major policy questions must be addressed during the remaining months of this congressional session. Congress must increase access to energy resources and remove the unnecessary regulatory obstacles to building new refineries and new power plants. Congress must decide the nation's appropriate role in rebuilding the Gulf Coast. Congress must deal with the crucial constitutional question of when it may be appropriate for the federal government to take control from state and local government in response to crises, whether natural or man-made. And there is a war under way – that must be won. If the Democrat leadership is, in fact, the "loyal" opposition, they have a duty to participate in civil debate on all these issues. Nancy Pelosi's boycott of the Katrina inquiry and the rush by the Democrat leadership to blame Bush for all that went wrong in Katrina's aftermath illustrate the difference between "loyal" opposition and opportunistic obstructionists whose quest is regaining power. The people who elected the Democrat leadership -- and all Americans -- deserve better representation. There are many responsible Democrats who really want to participate in the process, not obstruct it. These are the people voters should find, between now and the next election. After all, it is the voters who determine the quality of leadership in Congress.