More war in the works??

January 22, 2006
More War in the Works?
By Paul Craig Roberts
2006 is a dangerous year for Americans. The Bill of Rights and Americans’ civil liberties are being sacrificed on the altar of unaccountable executive power, as is the separation of powers, the foundation of our constitutional system.

The Supreme Court is being packed with a majority that favors more expansive executive rule.

The economy is in danger as the real estate boom unwinds and reduces the asset base of consumer demand.

Political money scandals and evidence of Republican vote fraud in the 2004 presidential election threaten to undermine confidence in American democracy, which President Bush is committed to export by force of arms to the world.

The Republican plan for amnesty for millions of illegal aliens looms as the final blow to US borders and the concept of US citizenship.

Perhaps the greatest threat of all is Israel’s determination to attack Iran, either directly or indirectly through its surrogate, the Bush administration.

Read more.

"Columnist Mentions Election Book Ignored By Most Newspapers"

Columnist Mentions Election Book Ignored By Most Newspapers
By Dave Astor
Published: January 23, 2006 2:28 PM ET

NEW YORK Mark Crispin Miller says most general-circulation newspapers haven’t reviewed his “Fooled Again” book, which alleges that the 2004 election was stolen. But Creators Syndicate columnist Paul Craig Roberts gave the three-month-old book a positive mention in a piece dated last Thursday.

“Miller describes considerably more election fraud than voting machines programmed to count a proportion of Kerry votes as Bush votes,” wrote Roberts, a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury under President Reagan. “Miller reports incidences of intimidation of, and reduced voting opportunities for, poorer voters who tend to vote Democrat.”

Roberts added: “Some of Miller’s evidence is circumstantial. However, he documents widespread Republican dirty tricks and foul play. The media’s indifference to a stolen election burns Miller as much as the stolen election itself.”

The columnist — a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal and a former contributing editor of the National Review — also discussed rumors that voting machines were hacked. “The pre-election statement by Diebold’s CEO that he would work to deliver the election to Bush was apparently no idle boast,” said Roberts. “In five states where the new ‘foolproof’ electronic voting machines were used, the vote tallies differed substantially from the exit polls. Such a disparity is unusual. The chances of exit polls in five states being wrong are no more than one in one million.”

Read more.

DOJ = KKK

Mark,

Here is “Exhibit A” in your case presenting strong evidence the reactionary Bush administration won’t do anything to promote the hallmark of representative democracy and concept of “one person, one vote.” Bush is murdering democracy, one voting case at a time, one state at a time, to cement his rule.

A patriot

Politics Alleged In Voting Cases
Justice Officials Are Accused of Influence

By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, January 23, 2006; A01

The Justice Department’s voting section, a small and usually obscure unit that enforces the Voting Rights Act and other federal election laws, has been thrust into the center of a growing debate over recent departures and controversial decisions in the Civil Rights Division as a whole.

Many current and former lawyers in the section charge that senior officials have exerted undue political influence in many of the sensitive voting-rights cases the unit handles. Most of the department’s major voting-related actions over the past five years have been beneficial to the GOP, they say, including two in Georgia, one in Mississippi and a Texas redistricting plan orchestrated by Rep. Tom DeLay (R) in 2003.

The section also has lost about a third of its three dozen lawyers over the past nine months. Those who remain have been barred from offering recommendations in major voting-rights cases and have little input in the section’s decisions on hiring and policy.

Read more.

The book never came

Has anyone had a similar experience?

Mark –

I ordered a copy of “Fooled Again” from Amazon.com around the second week of November and was expecting it to arrive before Thanksgiving Break. When it still had not arrived by the second week of December, I contacted the bookseller and gave them hell. The bookseller was very apologetic and said they had mailed it the same week I had ordered it. I assured them that it had never arrived and they gave me a refund. I didn’t think anything of it, but am letting you know just in case you get other reports.

I bought my copy from my local bookseller – I was happy to see that the little bookstore had it in stock and the owner knew exactly where to find it when I asked.

Cindy
Bloomington, Indiana

Durbin holds out hope!

Fillibustering Alito: What’s At Stake
Too late to fillibuster Alito? Not if what Senator Dick Durbin says is true.
BRAD BLOG Guest Blogger Pokey Anderson, co-host of “The Monitor”, a weekly news and analysis show at KPFT Radio in Houston helps compile the case, and the facts on which Democrats must build a case for keeping Alito off the bench.
As we have previously opined, Democrats will be making a huge mistake by voting “NO”, but failing to back up their “convictions” with a fillibuster. Such an action would be both a political mistake, which their base will not likely forget come the mid-term elections, as well as a mistake for the good of the country, which will pay the price for such a lack of backbone for decades to come…

On denial

Paul Lehto on those who need to call us “bat shait [sic] crazy”:
Given the near universal treatment by the parties and the press on both the Left and the Right that fancy themselves “responsible,” can we now “understand” (as in “able to explain, without justifying”) why the Soviets placed dissidents in mental hospitals? Here’s why: If you challenge beliefs that are very widespread and fundamental then the system can not deal with it, and concludes that the dissident must be crazy and in need of hospitalization.
And then, once hospitalized, as a matter of true fact (‘ve represented people and gotten them out of mental hospitals) as a patient any anger you may show, or questioning of one’s status, or refusal to accept one’s “disagnosis”, or “uppity” behavior generally is then regarded as simply more evidence of a deteriorating mental condition and “decompensation” of the mental patient.

The perfect Catch-22 occurs when you are wrongly diagnosed with a particular mental condition (or if you are not even mentally ill at all) in which case one’s failure to fully accept the lie of your diagnosis or else making the decision to challenge the terms of your detention is simply cause to send you back to the mental hospital for even more intensive “treatment.”

That being said, it’s really not all that bad in talking to people. Almost all of those “against” us are totally unprepared with facts, they counter mainly with belief. There are also many people ready to listen and who are in fact listening, and many more who will look at you and wonder why it took you so long to figure it all out.

But for those other many who find their fundamental beliefs challenged by information about the abysmal state of our elections, you will find those person’s minds running away from a fair analysis of the information presented about as fast as most people would run away from a mental hospital stay. As I like to say, our system will not be preserved by maintaining a panglossian confidence in it, our system, like freedom itself, is maintained by being vigilant and skeptical in its defense.

American Gestapo

What BushCo wants, according to the fine print (Sec. 605) of the new PATRIOT Act, is a permanent Praetorian Guard, or Cheka, or Gestapo. It’s all too easy to come up with apt historical analogies–but not with any from this nation’s history.
“A permanent police force, to be known as the ‘United States Secret Service Uniformed Division,'” empowered to “make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence” (what is “an offense against the United States?), “or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony” (what are “reasonable grounds”?).
I’m not making this up. See the text and URL below.
What will it take to get the press to notice this?
MCM



SEC. 605. THE UNIFORMED DIVISION, UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE.

(a) In General- Chapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 3056 the following:

`Sec. 3056A. Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service Uniformed Division

`(a) There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division’. Subject to the supervision of the Secretary of Homeland Security, the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall perform such duties as the Director, United States Secret Service, may prescribe in connection with the protection of the following:

`(1) The White House in the District of Columbia.

`(2) Any building in which Presidential offices are located.

`(3) The Treasury Building and grounds.

`(4) The President, the Vice President (or other officer next in the order of succession to the Office of President), the President-elect, the Vice President-elect, and their immediate families.

`(5) Foreign diplomatic missions located in the metropolitan area of the District of Columbia.

`(6) The temporary official residence of the Vice President and grounds in the District of Columbia.

`(7) Foreign diplomatic missions located in metropolitan areas (other than the District of Columbia) in the United States where there are located twenty or more such missions headed by full-time officers, except that such protection shall be provided only–

`(A) on the basis of extraordinary protective need;

`(B) upon request of an affected metropolitan area; and

`(C) when the extraordinary protective need arises at or in association with a visit to–

`(i) a permanent mission to, or an observer mission invited to participate in the work of, an international organization of which the United States is a member; or

`(ii) an international organization of which the United States is a member;

except that such protection may also be provided for motorcades and at other places associated with any such visit and may be extended at places of temporary domicile in connection with any such visit.


`(8) Foreign consular and diplomatic missions located in such areas in the United States, its territories and possessions, as the President, on a case-by-case basis, may direct.

`(9) Visits of foreign government officials to metropolitan areas (other than the District of Columbia) where there are located twenty or more consular or diplomatic missions staffed by accredited personnel, including protection for motorcades and at other places associated with such visits when such officials are in the United States to conduct official business with the United States Government.

`(10) Former Presidents and their spouses, as provided in section 3056(a)(3) of title 18.

`(11) An event designated under section 3056(e) of title 18 as a special event of national significance.

`(12) Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and, within 120 days of the general Presidential election, the spouses of such candidates, as provided in section 3056(a)(7) of title 18.


`(13) Visiting heads of foreign states or foreign governments.

`(b)(1) Under the direction of the Director of the Secret Service, members of the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division are authorized to–

`(A) carry firearms;

`(B) make arrests without warrant for any offense against the United States committed in their presence, or for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing such felony; and

`(C) perform such other functions and duties as are authorized by law.

`(2) Members of the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall possess privileges and powers similar to those of the members of the Metropolitan Police of the District of Columbia.

`(c) Members of the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division shall be furnished with uniforms and other necessary equipment.

`(d) In carrying out the functions pursuant to paragraphs (7) and (9) of subsection (a), the Secretary of Homeland Security may utilize, with their consent, on a reimbursable basis, the services, personnel, equipment, and facilities of State and local governments, and is authorized to reimburse such State and local governments for the utilization of such services, personnel, equipment, and facilities. The Secretary of Homeland Security may carry out the functions pursuant to paragraphs (7) and (9) of subsection (a) by contract. The authority of this subsection may be transferred by the President to the Secretary of State. In carrying out any duty under paragraphs (7) and (9) of subsection (a), the Secretary of State is authorized to utilize any authority available to the Secretary under title II of the State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956.’.

(b) Amendment to Table of Sections- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 203 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 3056 the following new item:

3056A. Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service Uniformed Division.

(c) Conforming Repeal to Effectuate Transfer- Chapter 3 of title 3, United States Code, is repealed.

(d) Conforming Amendments to Laws Affecting District of Columbia- (1) Section 1537(d) of title 31, United States Code, is amended–

(A) by striking `and the Executive Protective Service’ and inserting `and the Secret Service Uniformed Division’; and

(B) by striking `their protective duties’ and all that follows and inserting `their protective duties under sections 3056 and 3056A of title 18.’

(2) Section 204(e) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act (sec. 6–1304(e), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `section 202 of title 3, United States Code, or section 3056′ and inserting `sections 3056 or 3056A’.

(3) Section 214(a) of the State Department Basic Authorities Act (sec. 6–1313(a), D.C. Official Code) is amended by striking `sections 202(8) and 208 of title 3′ and inserting `section 3056A(a)(7) and (d) of title 18′.

(e) Additional Conforming Amendments-

(1) Title 12, United States Code, section 3414, `Special procedures’, is amended by striking `3 U.S.C. 202′ in subsection (a)(1)(B) and inserting `18 U.S.C. 3056A’.

(2) The State Department Basic Authorities Act of 1956 is amended–

(A) in the first sentence of section 37(c) (22 U.S.C. 2709(c)), by striking `section 202 of title 3, United States Code, or section 3056 of title 18, United States Code’ and inserting `section 3056 or 3056A of title 18, United States Code’;

(B) in section 204(e) (22 U.S.C. 4304(e)), by striking `section 202 of title 3, United States Code, or section 3056 of title 18, United States Code’ and inserting `section 3056 or 3056A of title 18, United States Code’; and

(C) in section 214(a) (22 U.S.C. 4314(a)), by striking `sections 202(7) and 208 of title 3, United States Code’ and inserting `subsections (a)(7) and (d) of section 3056A of title 18, United States Code’.

(3) Section 8D(a)(1)(F) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended by striking `section 202 of title 3′ and inserting `section 3056A of title 18′.


(4) Section 8I(a)(1)(E) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended by striking `section 202 of title 3′ and inserting `section 3056A of title 18′.
America has never had a federal police force, but hidden in the new “Patriot” Act is language that creates just such a beast.

SEC. 605. THE UNIFORMED DIVISION, UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE.

There is hereby created and established a permanent police force, to be known as the `United States Secret Service Uniformed Division’.

The Secret Service, Uniformed Division will not operate solely in DC, but anywhere former Presidents travel, or foreign dignitaries, or even “as the President, on a case-by-case basis, may direct.” #8

A federal police force, directed by the President. Is this not the Gestapo all over again?

If the new “Patriot” Act passes, the new SSUD federal police can show up at:

(11) An event designated.. as a special event of national significance.
(12) Major Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates and, within 120 days of the general Presidential electionÅ 

A federal goon squad on hand to arrest any ‘disruptors’ during the next Presidential ElectionÅ  how can you look in the mirror and tell yourself that there’s hope for 2008? Or is that just an excuse to continue doing nothing right now?

Note: This bill comes up in two weeks, to date only myself and Kurt Nimmo have written about it. I’ve written Democracy Now, CommonDreams, etcÅ  nobody wants to touch it.

Please do what you can to break this story
….
http://www.benfrank.net/blog/

Is David Horowitz behind the red-baiting at UCLA?


Bruin Alumni Association Targets ‘Radical’ Faculty
By Malcolm Maclachlan
Capitol Weekly
(published January 17th, 2006)

An organization calling itself the “Bruin Alumni Association” that has no official affiliation with the University of California has published an online list of UCLA professors it deems “radical.”? The Association also posted an online offer to pay students for evidence proving that instructors have been espousing left-wing views in class, in violation of University of California rules.

The Association lists an advisory board of UCLA alumni that includes Senator and current Congressional candidate Bill Morrow, R-San Diego, former Congressman Jim Rogan, and former California Republican Party head Shawn Steel. The group’s founder is Andrew Jones, a 2003 UCLA graduate who has worked as a research assistant to David Horowitz, the right-wing commentator closely identified with criticizing universities for being too liberal.

The Web site, www.uclaprofs.com, lists 31 current and former professors in disciplines such as African-American studies, Chicano studies, education, history and political science. These names are linked to detailed profiles of professors and their activities. There is also a ratings system in which faculty are rated from one to five “black power” fists to indicate how radical they are.

Read more.

Students paid to spy on profs at UCLA

Published on Thursday, January 19, 2006 by the Guardian / UK
Rightwing Group Offers Students $100 to Spy on Professors
Republican graduate’s site prompts witch-hunt fears
31 academics listed as ‘worthy of scrutiny’

by Dan Glaister

It is the sort of invitation any poverty-stricken student would find hard to resist. “Do you have a professor who just can’t stop talking about President Bush, about the war in Iraq, about the Republican party, or any other ideological issue that has nothing to do with the class subject matter? If you help … expose the professor, we’ll pay you for your work.”

For full notes, a tape recording and a copy of all teaching materials, students at the University of California Los Angeles are being offered $100 (£57) – the tape recorder is provided free of charge – by an alumni group.

Lecture notes without a tape recording net $50, and even non-attendance at the class while providing copies of the teaching materials is worth $10.

But the initiative has prompted concerns that the group, the brainchild of a former leader of the college’s Republicans, is a witch-hunt. Several targeted professors have complained, figures associated with the group have distanced themselves from the project and the college is studying whether the sale of notes infringes copyright and contravenes regulations.

Read more.

Success in Washington state!

Update from Paul Lehto:

As some of you probably already know, by a 3-2 vote of the Snohomish County Council in WA state, the Sequoia touch screen voting machines here will be history as of September 2006, and we will vote by mail in Snohomish, like Oregon. Comments from council members focused on cost of compliance with a new state paper trail law, problems of secret vote counting, and maximizing the opportunity and convenience of voting. Because Yakima county also ditched its DREs made by Hart Intercivic, the only two counties that had DREs in 2004 have now dumped them and none have added DREs in polling places for nondisabled voters, so Washington is DRE-Free.

(Perhaps the fact that WA state is home to votersunite.org, one home for voteraction, Andy Stephenson’s home, bbv.org’s home, Bev Harris’s home, and the home of Lehto v. Sequoia litigation gives us a leg up on some states).

These touch screens are the same ones in our study that were shown to malfunction so “well” that for machines taken out service due to ‘malfunctions’ with less than 30 votes on them, fully 50% more votes for the Republican candidate for Governor in 2004 were recorded than for the Democratic gubernatorial candidate Christine Gregoire. This Republican electronic landslide also took place in a historically Democratic County and in the closest gubernatorial race in US History (around 100 votes in 3 million cast). Of course, the paper ballots that were hand recounted and constituted 68% of the electorate throughout the county showed Gregoire winning Snohomish county by 2000 votes, but the electronic votes that comprised 32% of the vote throughout the county had Republican Rossi winning by 8,500 votes, for a net Rossi victory of around 6500 votes. The chances that voters, randomly assigned to vote electronically or paper would separate out this way is one in well over a trillion. Political factors like “late surges” are usually called on to account for such discrepancies, but in this case we have irrefutable evidence that electronic error in the malfuntioning machines disproportionately favored one party over the other. The study and my lawsuit are collected at www.votersunite.org/info/lehtolawsuit.asp

Anyway, these Sequoia machines that did this will now be put out to pasture. Some of them apparently are headed to Florida. Others may be headed to your state.

John Gideon and I had a gentleman’s disagreement over my statement that Washington state is DRE-FREE except for disabled voting. After exchanging views with John, he is focusing on the threat that DREs can come back in early voting or in one of the 5 counties that have not yet decided to switch to mail in voting. But, as of the intent of WA counties right now, we are in fact DRE-FREE except where accessibility is truly an issue.

My attorney Randy Gordon was until recently a declared candidate in the 8th congressional district in WA state, but now that there are 4 strong candidates he dropped out in favor of helping out party unity (we have a very late primary in our state). In any case, we are talking settlement with sequoia where they would stipulate to our theories of the illegality of their systems under WA law (so they
could argue it was WA only) and in exchange we’d not take their money, which we weren’t after anyway. Summary judgment on the claim that their trade secrets have been waived by taking them into the public domain is also in the works.

So, that’s the update from here.

—Paul Lehto
Attorney at Law