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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (329665)	3/21/2007 6:48:57 AM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574981

Politics over competence, again. Why I Was Fired By DAVID C. IGLESIAS Albuquerque WITH this week’s release of more than 3,000 Justice Department e-mail messages about the dismissal of eight federal prosecutors, it seems clear that politics played a role in the ousters. Of course, as one of the eight, I’ve felt this way for some time. But now that the record is out there in black and white for the rest of the country to see, the argument that we were fired for “performance related” reasons (in the words of Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty) is starting to look more than a little wobbly. United States attorneys have a long history of being insulated from politics. Although we receive our appointments through the political process (I am a Republican who was recommended by Senator Pete Domenici), we are expected to be apolitical once we are in office. I will never forget John Ashcroft, then the attorney general, telling me during the summer of 2001 that politics should play no role during my tenure. I took that message to heart. Little did I know that I could be fired for not being political. Politics entered my life with two phone calls that I received last fall, just before the November election. One came from Representative Heather Wilson and the other from Senator Domenici, both Republicans from my state, New Mexico. Ms. Wilson asked me about sealed indictments pertaining to a politically charged corruption case widely reported in the news media involving local Democrats. Her question instantly put me on guard. Prosecutors may not legally talk about indictments, so I was evasive. Shortly after speaking to Ms. Wilson, I received a call from Senator Domenici at my home. The senator wanted to know whether I was going to file corruption charges — the cases Ms. Wilson had been asking about — before November. When I told him that I didn’t think so, he said, “I am very sorry to hear that,” and the line went dead. A few weeks after those phone calls, my name was added to a list of United States attorneys who would be asked to resign — even though I had excellent office evaluations, the biggest political corruption prosecutions in New Mexico history, a record number of overall prosecutions and a 95 percent conviction rate. (In one of the documents released this week, I was deemed a “diverse up and comer” in 2004. Two years later I was asked to resign with no reasons given.) When some of my fired colleagues — Daniel Bogden of Las Vegas; Paul Charlton of Phoenix; H. E. Cummins III of Little Rock, Ark.; Carol Lam of San Diego; and John McKay of Seattle — and I testified before Congress on March 6, a disturbing pattern began to emerge. Not only had we not been insulated from politics, we had apparently been singled out for political reasons. (Among the Justice Department’s released documents is one describing the office of Senator Domenici as being “happy as a clam” that I was fired.) As this story has unfolded these last few weeks, much has been made of my decision to not prosecute alleged voter fraud in New Mexico. Without the benefit of reviewing evidence gleaned from F.B.I. investigative reports, party officials in my state have said that I should have begun a prosecution. What the critics, who don’t have any experience as prosecutors, have asserted is reprehensible — namely that I should have proceeded without having proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The public has a right to believe that prosecution decisions are made on legal, not political, grounds. What’s more, their narrative has largely ignored that I was one of just two United States attorneys in the country to create a voter-fraud task force in 2004. Mine was bipartisan, and it included state and local law enforcement and election officials. After reviewing more than 100 complaints of voter fraud, I felt there was one possible case that should be prosecuted federally. I worked with the F.B.I. and the Justice Department’s public integrity section. As much as I wanted to prosecute the case, I could not overcome evidentiary problems. The Justice Department and the F.B.I. did not disagree with my decision in the end not to prosecute. Good has already come from this scandal. Yesterday, the Senate voted to overturn a 2006 provision in the Patriot Act that allows the attorney general to appoint indefinite interim United States attorneys. The attorney general’s chief of staff has resigned and been replaced by a respected career federal prosecutor, Chuck Rosenberg. The president and attorney general have admitted that “mistakes were made,” and Mr. Domenici and Ms. Wilson have publicly acknowledged calling me. President Bush addressed this scandal yesterday. I appreciate his gratitude for my service — this marks the first time I have been thanked. But only a written retraction by the Justice Department setting the record straight regarding my performance would settle the issue for me. David C. Iglesias was United States attorney for the District of New Mexico from October 2001 through last month.

To: combjelly who wrote (329665)	3/21/2007 12:57:23 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574981

"Pretty darn close. When burned in a modern furnace, there isn't anything left but the mineral content. And that is generally less than one percent." Generally less than 1%? Are you sure about your numbers? Wyoming coals have 9-15% ash content, smtc.uwyo.edu Illinois Coal #6 has 19% ash: fpl.fs.fed.us And what is the ash content of goals burning in China and Russia? And I am not talking about up to 50% moisture content that likely is included in your raw mining number. Again, the data for carbon emissions are collected from UN reports on fuel usage, so I would be very careful to question their data. Therefore, my number, 3-4% of human contribution relative to currently assumed natural CO2 flux, stands. I am not saying that this is a negligible number, but it is quite short of producing prehistorical levels of 6000ppm. "By the mid-1800s, coal production was exceeding 100 million tons a year. And that was about the time the LIA was ending" So, LIA was already "ending", and temperatures started to decline before humans started to add 0.03% of C to global natural carbon flux? Please, give me a break... Me: "what is the ground of your belief that the oceans are still sinking the carbon dioxide?" You: "What is the basis of your belief that it isn't?" I asked first. I mentioned Takahashi, which implies the 35-years of research and mapping of oceans with sources and sinks of CO2, based on measurements in differences in partial CO2 pressure and diffusion across "stagnant layer". Please answer my question first. Before I proceed with writing another dissertation about caveats of estimating average of a product of several rapidly fluctuating fields, I need to know your take on this matter. - Ali