Thursday, November 18, 2004

I wondered

If anyone else suspected this, now I know.

Tom Delay Tom Delay

Tom Delay Tom Delay

grabbing seats the sleazy way

Tom Delay Tom Delay

started a crime spree along the way

Tom Delay Tom Delay

return our money for the FAA

Tom Delay Tom Delay

did you cover your but today?

1212 and creeping

Is 3000 the magic number? At this rate, it shouldn't take long. Then there is Jeff Cole who had to have more than 80% of the skin on his leg removed.

The few, the battered, the skinned alive. But hey, how many tens of thousands of Iraqis didn't even get a mention in the newspaper. Cheer up Jeff, Rummy will have you back on the frontline in no time at all.

Tuesday, November 16, 2004

1200 marker passes quietly, draft in the crosshairs

It's official. 1200 dead American soldiers.

Apparently there has been a mission change. Moral clarity now dictates that it must be Operation Eternal Liberation. Take no prisoners! except the fungibles who are increasingly unwilling to go.

Where will we ever get a new crop of cold blooded killers? There is an eighteen year old man in Evergreen who has been feeding live kittens to his dogs, he should be in Iraq without body armor.

More likely we will just have to spin the wheel and hope that we don't get too many with a conscience.

Draft Gear Up?
Who Has To Register?
All male U.S. citizens and male aliens living in the U.S. between the ages of 18 and 25
Dual nationals of the U.S. and another country, regardless of where they live
Young men who are in prison or mental institutions do not have to regsiter while they are committed, but must do so if they are released and not reached age 26
Disabled men who live at home and can move about indiependently.
Contrary to popular belief, only sons and the last son to carry a family name must register and they can be drafted.
What Happens In A Draft
Congress would likely approve a military draft in a time of crisis, in which the mission requires more troops than are in the volunteer military.
Selective Service procedures would treat married men or those with children the same as single men.
The first men to be called up will be those whose 20th birthday falls during that year, followed by those age 21, 22, 23,24 and 25.
The last men to be called are 18 and 19 years of age.
Historical Facts
The last man to be drafted was in June 1973.
Number of Drafted for WWI : 2.8 million
Number of Drafted for WWII: 10 million
Number of Drafted for the Korean War: 1.5 million
Number of Drafted for the Vietnam War: 1.8 million
Source: Selective Service System


Message 6 of 434

Subject: Re: from a New Yorker
Msg # 59275
Date: 11/4/04 6:31 AM
Author: PVRadio

It is finally time for faith-based initiatives to come to the fore. The one true Lord, through his chosen one, President Bush, now finally has the power in Congress to pass the laws necessary to destroy the Godless Americans and rid our country of them once and for all. We can finally tell Catholics, Jews, Muslims, and the rest of the non-Evangelicals in this country die, as they are not the chosen ones in Jesus Christ our Saviors eyes. And we can also bring back slavery which will again bring America back to pre-eminance in the global markets with the free labor that slavery of the mud races can bring. God Bless America, and God Bless George Bush and the religious right! Amen.

via Maureen Farrell

DoNotConfirm Launched



Nurse Rached is giving me nightmares, this has probably been postponed to give George Bush time to ram "tort reform" through.

You've heard that we bought America from the Indians for a few beads and trinkets? Well, the American Chemistry Council bought the EPA to rent 60 babies for $970.00, a camcorder and some trinkets.

EPA is paying families in Jacksonville, Florida (Duval County) who “spray or have pesticides sprayed inside your home routinely” to study the resulting chemical exposure in their infant children. The study, called the Children’s Environmental Exposure Research Study or CHEERS, pays participating families $970 for participating throughout the entire two-year study period. Families who complete the study also get to keep the camcorder they are provided to record their babies’ behavior. In addition, families are given bibs, t-shirts and other promotional items. The families are recruited from public clinics and hospitals. EPA selects infants based upon pesticide residue levels detected in “a surface wipe sample in the primary room where the child spends time.”

“EPA seems to think that the problem with this study is one of public relations, not morality,” stated PEER Executive Director Jeff Ruch, whose organization is working with agency scientists who are questioning the ethics of the study. “Regardless of the number of reviews, paying poor parents to dose their babies with commercial poisons to measure their exposure is just plain wrong.”

According to published reports, the Bush Administration will soon announce their repeal of the Clinton-era rules against testing pesticides on humans. EPA wants to use CHEERS as the opening for a new policy on accepting testing on humans to determine pesticide toxicity.

[Is this more of that "culture of life"?]

“EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt is claiming an election mandate for the administration’s environmental policies, but I don’t remember President Bush campaigning for human experimentation on toddlers,” Ruch added.

Susan let's us know exactly how honest that research will be.


Former GOP congresswoman from Idaho, Helen Chenoweth-Hage must have thought that she entered the Twilight Zone when this happened. Strap on your tin hats, the ride is getting pretty bumpy!

[Thank-you Stephen, I am posting the entire email due to it's importance]

from the FAS Project on Government Secrecy
Volume 2004, Issue No. 100
November 14, 2004



Last month, Helen Chenoweth-Hage attempted to board a United
Airlines flight from Boise to Reno when she was pulled aside by
airline personnel for additional screening, including a pat-down
search for weapons or unauthorized materials.

Chenoweth-Hage, an ultra-conservative former Congresswoman (R-ID),
requested a copy of the regulation that authorizes such pat-downs.

"She said she wanted to see the regulation that required the
additional procedure for secondary screening and she was told that
she couldn't see it," local TSA security director Julian Gonzales
told the Idaho Statesman (10/10/04).

"She refused to go through additional screening [without seeing the
regulation], and she was not allowed to fly," he said. "It's
pretty simple."

Chenoweth-Hage wasn't seeking disclosure of the internal criteria
used for screening passengers, only the legal authorization for
passenger pat-downs. Why couldn't they at least let her see that?
asked Statesman commentator Dan Popkey.

"Because we don't have to," Mr. Gonzales replied crisply.

"That is called 'sensitive security information.' She's not
allowed to see it, nor is anyone else," he said.

Thus, in a qualitatively new development in U.S. governance,
Americans can now be obligated to comply with legally-binding
regulations that are unknown to them, and that indeed they are
forbidden to know.

This is not some dismal Eastern European allegory. It is part of a
continuing transformation of American government that is leaving
it less open, less accountable and less susceptible to rational
deliberation as a vehicle for change.

Harold C. Relyea once wrote an article entitled "The Coming of
Secret Law" (Government Information Quarterly, vol. 5, no. 2,
1988) that electrified readers (or at least one reader) with its
warning about increased executive branch reliance on secret
presidential directives and related instruments.

Back in the 1980s when that article was written, secret law was
still on the way. Now it is here.

A new report from the Congressional Research Service describes with
welcome clarity how, by altering a few words in the Homeland
Security Act, Congress "significantly broadened" the government's
authority to generate "sensitive security information," including
an entire system of "security directives" that are beyond public
scrutiny, like the one former Rep. Chenoweth-Hage sought to

The CRS report provides one analyst's perspective on how the secret
regulations comport or fail to comport with constitutional rights,
such as the right to travel and the right to due process. CRS
does not make its reports directly available to the public, but a
copy was obtained by Secrecy News.

See "Interstate Travel: Constitutional Challenges to the
Identification Requirement and Other Transportation Security
Regulations," Congressional Research Service, November 4, 2004:

Much of the CRS discussion revolves around the case of software
designer and philanthropist John Gilmore, who was prevented from
boarding an airline flight when he refused to present a photo ID.
(A related case involving no-fly lists has been brought by the

"I will not show government-issued identity papers to travel in my
own country," Mr. Gilmore said.

Mr. Gilmore's insistence on his right to preserve anonymity while
traveling on commercial aircraft is naturally debatable -- but the
government will not debate it. Instead, citing the statute on
"sensitive security information," the Bush Administration says the
case cannot be argued in open court.

Further information on Gilmore v. Ashcroft, which is pending on
appeal, may be found here:


Efforts by the Transportation Security Administration to
investigate air marshals for talking to the press or the public
"were appropriate under the circumstances," the Department of
Homeland Security Inspector General said last week, and did not
constitute a "witch hunt."

However, "air marshals from two locations said that they were
threatened with arrest and prosecution if they were found to have
released sensitive security information (SSI), even though release
of SSI is not a prosecutable offense," the Inspector General said.

In a related overstatement, Federal Air Marshal Service policy says
that "employees who release classified information or records in
any form without authority from the Classified Documents Custodian
are in violation of United States Code and are subject to arrest
and prosecution," the DHS Inspector General (IG) noted.

But "We question the legal accuracy of this policy statement, which
seems to criminalize all releases of classified information," the
IG wrote.

The unauthorized disclosure of classified information is a criminal
offense only in certain narrowly defined circumstances.

See "Review of Alleged Actions by TSA to Discipline Federal Air
Marshals for Talking to the Press, Congress, or the Public," DHS
Inspector General Audit Report, November 2004:


Secrecy News has a big hole in its budget for the coming year. Can
you help?

If you have learned something useful, valuable or interesting from
Secrecy News over the past year, then please consider supporting
this publication and the work of the FAS Project on Government

Donations may be made online here (click "donate now" and make sure
to designate your contribution for "Secrecy News"):

Or mail a check payable to the Federation of American Scientists

Secrecy News
Federation of American Scientists
1717 K Street NW, Suite 209
Washington, DC 20036

Secrecy News is written by Steven Aftergood and published by the
Federation of American Scientists.

To SUBSCRIBE to Secrecy News, send email to
with "subscribe" in the body of the message.

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a blank email message to

OR email your request to

Secrecy News is archived at:

Secrecy News has an RSS feed at:

Monday, November 15, 2004


Not really, but she gives a graven idol worshipper the history lesson of her life.

Here's how she finishes it off:

The argument that we should "look away" or "ignore" the posting of the 10 Commandments is unreasonable, from my point of view. Should we allow people to be naked in public and ask those who are offended to merely "look away" or "ignore" them?

It's our job as citizens to know and understand our rights, priviledges and limits as citizens. Sometimes it takes more than common sense. Sometimes it requires us to delve deeply into these issues and understand their complexities and realities. Our founders made these decisions for very important reasons. Reasons that today are more important than ever.

Carla XXXX
(location withheld)


Remember when the best darn Sec Def ever said they were fungible? 1194 to date, sure to break 1200 way too soon let's us know that he meant it.