The Talk Show American

THE TALK SHOW AMERICAN: 01/22/2006 - 01/29/2006

Saturday, January 28, 2006

Saddam ordered WMD strike on Israel

The former deputy of the Iraqi air force, General Georges Sada, revealed on Saturday that that former dictator of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, ordered him during the first Gulf War to bomb Israeli population centers with chemical weapons.

The ousted dictator, said Sada in recently published book, Saddam's secret's, ordered 96 Russian fighter jets to be armed with chemical weapons and sent to bomb Israel.

According to Sada, who recently served as a national security advisor to the temporary prime minister and was in the midst of a book tour in the US, said he succeeded in convincing Hussein to reconsider his order.

Sada said he convinced Saddam to abort the mission by telling him that the Iraqi pilots could not complete the mission with the equipment at their disposal, and that the Israelis had radar that could detect them before they reached their target.

In his book, which was written four years ago, Sada also claims that Iraq's chemical weapons were taken to Syria aboard civilian Iraqi "Boeing" airplanes just prior to the US invasion.

The 65-year-old Sada said that 56 flights of this type took place, but went largely unnoticed because they were flying under the guise of humanitarian aid.

Prior to the second Iraq war Israel warned that Iraq was moving chemical weapons from its territory into Syria.

Iran warns US, Britain of reprisals

Iran's Revolutionary Guards chief Saturday warned the United States and Britain that Iran would respond with its missiles if attacked, a clear threat to Israel, which lies within easy range of such a launch.

"The world knows Iran has a ballistic missile power with a range of 2,000 kilometers (1,300 miles)," Gen. Yahya Rahim Safavi said on state-run television.

Iran's improved version of Shihab-3 missile can strike more than 2,000 kilometers (1,300 miles) from their launch site, putting Israel and US forces in the Middle East in easy range.

"We have no intention to invade any country. We will take effective defense measures if attacked," he said. "These missiles are in the possession of the Guards."

The Guards were equipped with the missiles in July 2003.

"We are producing these missiles and don't need foreign technology for that," he said. Iran announced last year that it had fully developed solid fuel technology for missiles, a major breakthrough that increases their accuracy.

Iran's Revolutionary Guards are a separate organization from the regular armed forces.

Founded after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Guards have their own air, naval and ground components.

Safavi also accused US and British intelligence services of provoking unrest in the oil-rich southwestern Iran and providing bomb materials to Iranian dissidents. He said the US and Britain were behind bombings January 21 that killed at least nine people in the southwestern city of Ahvaz, near the southern border with Iraq where 8,500 British soldiers are based.

"Foreign forces based in Iraq, especially southern Iraq, direct Iranian agents and give them bomb materials," he said.

Safavi said Iran was monitoring dissidents and their alleged links with the US and British forces.

"We are aware of their meetings in Kuwait and Iraq," he said. "We warn them (US and Britain), especially the MI-6 and CIA, that they refrain from interfering in Iran's affairs."

NSA Spying: Why Is There Confusion?

by Jim Kouri, CPP

The President possesses broad constitutional powers to take military
action in response to the terrorist attacks on the United States on
September 11, 2001. Congress has acknowledged this inherent executive power
in both the War Powers Resolution and the Joint Resolution passed by
Congress on September 14, 2001, immediately following Al-Qaeda attacks in
New York and Washington.


The President has constitutional power not only to retaliate against
any person, organization, or State suspected of involvement in terrorist
attacks on the United States, but also against foreign States suspected
of harboring or supporting such organizations.


The President may deploy military force preemptively against terrorist
organizations or the States that harbor or support them, whether or not
they can be linked to the specific terrorist incidents of September 11.


The resolution passed by congress on September 14, 2001 appears to
clearly define Commander-in-Chief's powers to wage war against terrorists.
Part of any military action is the gathering of intelligence including
intelligence obtained through electronic intercepts.


Here is the exact language of the September 14 resolution:


"To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those
responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.


"Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were
committed against the United States and its citizens;


"and Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that
the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect
United States citizens both at home and abroad;


"and Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and
foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence;


"and Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary
threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States;


"and Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to
take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against
the United States:


"Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled."


The Federal Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) understandably is a
vital part of intelligence gathering and law enforcement. It provides
mandatory provisions to insure the legality of the surveillance in order
to avoid the tainting of evidence gathered for a criminal prosecution.


However, in a time of war, the end users of the electronic surveillance
intercepts are not the prosecutors and the courts but the US forces
deployed to combat terrorism. Besides branches of the US Armed Services,
such forces may include agents with the Central Intelligence Agency, the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Homeland Security,
the National Security Agency, and members of Joint Terrorism Task Forces
who represent federal, state and local law enforcement agencies and
departments.


If one looks at the term "war on terrorism" as simply symbolic and
comparable to the "war on poverty" or the "war on drugs," then one would
have an argument that NSA surveillance operation require FISA warrants.
Those labeling the NSA spying as Illegal, are those who tend to view
terrorism as a criminal justice problem. They want suspected terrorists to
have constitutional protections such as access to attorneys, Fifth
Amendment protections against self-incrimination, and the like.


Those who view the "war on terrorism" as a war -- which is stipulated
in the congressional resolution of September 14, 2001 -- believe enemy
combatants are not entitled to constitutional protections. Once an
American citizen consorts with the enemy in this war -- terrorists and
nations that harbor and support terrorism through financing and materials --
he or she should be designated an "enemy combatant."

HAMAS: What does their charter say?

By Laura Mansfield

Yesterday the people of �Palestine� elected HAMAS to lead them.

Why am I concerned? If we listen to the words of our leaders, we are supposed to believe that Islam is a religion of peace. And HAMAS is the �Islamic Resistance Movement�, defining itself as a Muslim group. So we should be able to assume that HAMAS is a peaceful organization.

Right?

Wrong.

Let�s start with the HAMAS slogan:

Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Qur�an its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.

Jihad is its path? Does that sound peaceful to you?

Let�s take a look at this in more depth.

�In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate��

Those are the opening words of �Al Fatah�, the opening surah or chapter in the Qu�ran. They are also the opening words of the Hamas Charter, making it very clear that Hamas is at its deepest roots, an Islamic organization. Of course, that comes as no surprise to those who are familiar with HAMAS. After all, the official name of HAMAS is the �Islamic Resistance Movement�.

The closing lines of the Introduction to the HAMAS charter say:

�Allah has decreed: Lo! I very shall conquer, I and my messenger, lo! Allah is strong, almighty.�

If anyone has any doubts about the peaceful nature of HAMAS, those doubts should be gone by the time you reach that point in the charter.

Bin Laden declared his Jihad against the United States in his famous fatwa in 1996. But nearly eight years ago, in 1988, the HAMAS charter declared Jihad against Israel:

�the Islamic Resistance Movement erupted in order to play its role in the path of its Lord. In so doing, it joined its hands with those of all Jihad fighters for the purpose of liberating Palestine.

HAMAS wastes no time making its stance against Israel clear in the Introduction to its Charter:

Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors.

HAMAS is quite open and proud of its link to the Muslim Brotherhood. Its charter explicitly states the following:

The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era. It is characterized by a profound understanding, by precise notions and by a complete comprehensiveness of all concepts of Islam in all domains of life: views and beliefs, politics and economics, education and society, jurisprudence and rule, indoctrination and teaching, the arts and publications, the hidden and the evident, and all the other domains of life.

Diversity doesn�t seem to be a strong point of HAMAS. Article four of their Charter defines those welcome to join the group:

The Movement welcomes all Muslims who share its beliefs and thinking, commit themselves to its course of action, keep its secrets and aspire to join its ranks in order to carry out their duty.

It appears that being Muslim is a requirement for membership.

The Charter makes it clear what kind of government it wants established in Palestine:

As the Movement adopts Islam as its way of life, its time dimension extends back as far as the birth of the Islamic Message and of the Righteous Ancestor. Its ultimate goal is Islam, the Prophet its model, the Qur�an its Constitution. Its special dimension extends wherever on earth there are Muslims, who adopt Islam as their way of life; thus, it penetrates to the deepest reaches of the land and to the highest spheres of Heavens.

It�s rather ironic that an organization that wishes to establish an Islamic state, with the Qu�ran as its Constitution, should come to power in a democratic election. Under Islamic law, democracies are not allowed. Islamic shari�a insists that laws must be handed down from Allah, and must not be made by man. The ruler of an Islamic state, or its Caliph, must be a direct biological descendent of the Prophet Mohamed in order to attain legitimacy.

Is HAMAS likely to be a viable and trustworthy partner in the �Peace Process� with Israel? Not very likely, based on the following passage in their charter, which comes from the Hadith, which document the sayings and teachings of the Prophet Mohamed:

The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!

The Jews will hide behind the rocks and trees and the rocks and trees will call out to the Muslims that the Jew is hiding there and ask the Muslim to kill the Jew? In case this doesn�t make clear the stance of HAMAS towards the peace process, the following excerpt from article 13 of their Charter makes their position crystal clear:

There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad.

How does HAMAS feel about the United States? They make that clear in article 22 of the Charter:

The enemies have been scheming for a long time, and they have consolidated their schemes, in order to achieve what they have achieved. They took advantage of key elements in unfolding events, and accumulated a huge and influential material wealth which they put to the service of implementing their dream. This wealth [permitted them to] take over control of the world media such as news agencies, the press, publication houses, broadcasting and the like.

[They also used this] wealth to stir revolutions in various parts of the globe in order to fulfill their interests and pick the fruits. They stood behind the French and the Communist Revolutions and behind most of the revolutions we hear about here and there. They also used the money to establish clandestine organizations which are spreading around the world, in order to destroy societies and carry out Zionist interests.

Such organizations are: the Freemasons, Rotary Clubs, Lions Clubs, B�nai B�rith and the like. All of them are destructive spying organizations.

They also used the money to take over control of the Imperialist states and made them colonize many countries in order to exploit the wealth of those countries and spread their corruption therein. As regards local and world wars, it has come to pass and no one objects, that they stood behind World War I, so as to wipe out the Islamic Caliphate

It goes on to say:

The forces of Imperialism in both the Capitalist West and the Communist East support the enemy with all their might, in material and human terms, taking turns between themselves.

That doesn�t leave much room for negotiating with the United States. The United States has officially designated HAMAS as a terrorist organization.

In fact, on March 23, 2004, following the death of HAMAS �spiritual leader� Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, HAMAS released a statement explicitly threatening attacks against the United States:

"The Zionists didn't carry out their operation without the consent of the terrorist American administration, and it must bear responsibility for this crime," the statement said.

A few days later, HAMAS backed off these statements, saying that it would focus its efforts on Israel instead.

HAMAS propaganda is being taught to youth in many mosques in this country, and many prominent Muslim leaders in the US have strong ties to HAMAS, and are openly supportive of the organization.

The people of Palestine freely elected HAMAS to lead them. That is their right.

The people of the United States need to read the HAMAS Charter, and understand what HAMAS stands for.

Over $150 million in US aid is slated to be dispensed to Palestine in 2006.

Do we want $150 million of our tax dollars being controlled by HAMAS?

Is it even legal, given the US laws regarding funding of terrorist organizations?

Read the Hamas Charter Here !

Black American Singer/Songwriter Lloyd Marcus Speaks About MLK Day

My Good Friend Lloyd Marcus Sent this Letter to the Editor of Washington Times :

Celebrating minority excellence and brotherhood between the races would be the perfect tribute to Martin Luther King. This embodies his famous dream. But characterless politicians and activists exploit our annual national MLK holiday as an opportunity for extortion and promotion of their religion of victimization.

Oprah Winfrey is the most influential woman in American media. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, another black woman, could become the next president of the United States. Yet, every MLK Day, the usual suspects attempt to sell the lie that minority opportunity and race relations in America have not progressed beyond the 1950s.

Such rhetoric is divisive and poisonous to our youth. As a black American, I find this extremely offensive. A more productive approach to honoring MLK would be to use the occasion of his birthday to showcase minority achievements, higher test scores, random acts of kindness and brotherhood between the races.

Such examples are more prevalent than the negatives. Sadly, for those with selfish agendas, the truth threatens their livelihood. Good people, let's focus on the positive steps we are making, moving closer to the fulfillment of Martin Luther King's dream.

LLOYD MARCUS
Deltona, Fla.

Listen to Lloyd's Music Here !

Lloyd wrote and sings the closing medley here on Talk Show America. I would especially recommend "United We Stand" written and sung by Lloyd Marcus as a tribute to our nation after 9/11. Other songs worthy of your support include "Welcome Home Brother", a tribute to Vietnam Vets, "WWII Medley" a tribute to WWII Vets using songs from that era, and "It's About Love", a song Lloyd dedicated to Terry Schiavo. These songs and many more PATRIOTIC songs are on his album "United We Stand" , I HIGHLY RECOMMEND buying the album folks, Lloyd is a great guy and a staunch patriot !

"When the lord made Lloyd, I think he broke the mold, a great song writer, a great talent and a TRUE PATRIOT, God Bless him".


J.R.

Ann Coulter 'Jokes' That a Supreme Court Justice Should Be Poisoned

Universal Press Syndicate columnist Ann Coulter "joked" during a Thursday speech that liberal Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens should be poisoned. "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said at Philander Smith College in Little Rock, Ark. "That's just a joke, for you in the media."

She made other "off-color" jokes about liberal Supreme Court justices that made the audience "squeal," according to an article today in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.

She hailed the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court, suggesting that now there might be a fair vote on abortion.

New-home sales log another record in 2005

December increase defied economists' expectation of a decline

New-home sales for all of 2005 climbed to an all-time high, marking the fifth year in a row of record sales.

The Commerce Department reported Friday that sales of new single-family homes clocked in at 1.28 million units last year, representing a 6.6 percent increase over last year�s 1.20 million units, the previous all-time high.

Sales of new homes as well as existing homes � the biggest chunk of the housing market � have logged records five years running.

In December, new-home sales rose 2.9 percent from November�s pace � defying analysts� expectations for sales to go down last month.

The roaring housing market has helped to underpin consumer spending and bolster overall economic growth. Looking ahead, economists expect the housing market will slow this year, and there have been increasing signs that the market is starting to lose steam.

The National Association of Realtors, in a report Wednesday, said that sales of existing homes fell by 5.7 percent in December, marking the third straight monthly decline � something that had not occurred since early 2002.

For all of 2005, however, existing-home sales hit a record high of 7.072 million units, up 4.2 percent from 2004.

Ready for $262/barrel oil?

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

That's the message from two of the world's most successful investors on the topic of high oil prices. One of them, Hermitage Capital's Bill Browder, has outlined six scenarios that could take oil up to a downright terrifying $262 a barrel.

The other, billionaire investor George Soros, wouldn't make any specific predictions about prices. But as a legendary commodities player, it's worth paying heed to the words of the man who once took on the Bank of England -- and won. "I'm very worried about the supply-demand balance, which is very tight," Soros says.

"U.S. power and influence has declined precipitously because of Iraq and the war on terror and that creates an incentive for anyone who wants to make trouble to go ahead and make it." As an example, Soros pointed to the regime in Iran, which is heading towards a confrontation with the West over its nuclear power program and doesn't show any signs of compromising. "Iran is on a collision course and I have a difficulty seeing how such a collision can be avoided," he says.

To come up with some likely scenarios in the event of an international crisis, his team performed what's known as a regression analysis, extrapolating the numbers from past oil shocks and then using them to calculate what might happen when the supply from an oil-producing country was cut off in six different situations. The fall of the House of Saud seems the most far-fetched of the six possibilities, and it's the one that generates that $262 a barrel.

More realistic -- and therefore more chilling -- would be the scenario where Iran declares an oil embargo a la OPEC in 1973, which Browder thinks could cause oil to double to $131 a barrel. Other outcomes include an embargo by Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez ($111 a barrel), civil war in Nigeria ($98 a barrel), unrest and violence in Algeria ($79 a barrel) and major attacks on infrastructure by the insurgency in Iraq ($88 a barrel).

Regressions analysis may be mathematical but it's an art, not a science. And some of these scenarios are quite dubious, like Venezuela shutting the spigot. (For more on Chavez and Venezuela, click here.)

Energy chiefs at the World Economic Forum in Davos downplayed the likelihood of a serious oil shortage. In a statement Friday, Shell's CEO Jeroen Van der Veer declared, "There is no reason for pessimism." OPEC Acting Secretary General Mohammed Barkindo said "OPEC will step in at any time there is a shortage in the market." But then no one in the industry, including Van der Veer, foresaw an extended run of $65 oil -- or even $55 oil -- like we've been having.

It's clear that there is very, very little wiggle room, and that most consumers, including those in the United States, have acceded so far to the new reality of $60 or even $70 oil. And as Soros points out, the White House has its hands full in Iraq and elsewhere.

Although there are long-term answers like ethanol, what's needed is a crash conservation effort in the United States. This doesn't have to be command-and-control style. Moral suasion counts for a lot, and if the president suggested staying home with family every other Sunday or otherwise cutting back on unnecessary drives, he could please the family values crowd while also changing the psychology of the oil market by showing that the U.S. government is serious about easing any potential bottlenecks.

Similarly, he could finally get the government to tighten fuel-efficiency standards and encourage both Detroit and drivers to end decades of steadily increasing gas consumption. These kinds of steps would create a little headroom until new supplies do become available or threats like Iran's current leadership or the Iraqi insurgency fade.

It's been done it before. For all the cracks about Jimmy Carter in a cardigan and his malaise speech, America did reduce its use of oil following the price shocks of the 1970s, and laid the groundwork for low energy prices in the 1980s and 1990s.

Friday, January 27, 2006

Republicans Clear the Way for Alito Vote

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito enjoys sufficient bipartisan support to surmount any Senate filibuster attempt by minority Democrats, Senate leaders said Friday.

A final vote making the New Jersey jurist the nation's 110th Supreme Court justice is scheduled for Tuesday, hours before President Bush gives his State of the Union address to Congress and the nation.

Democrats and Republicans alike said the 55-year-old conservative jurist will get more than the 60 votes need to cut off debate on the Senate floor Monday.

"Everyone knows there are not enough votes to support a filibuster," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said Friday. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., said the same thing on Thursday. "A bipartisan majority will vote to confirm Judge Alito as Justice Alito," Frist said.

Alito's supporters already have those commitments, with 53 of the Republicans' 55-member majority and three Democrats _ Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Tim Johnson of South Dakota and Ben Nelson of Nebraska _ already publicly supporting his confirmation as the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., also announced Friday he is "leaning in favor of voting for" the conservative judge. "It is clear to me that a majority of the American people and the people I represent support his confirmation," he said after meeting with Alito in his office.

Senior Republican Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska also threw his support to Alito. Stevens said he closely monitored Alito's commitment during his confirmation hearings to "respect" past rulings when it comes to Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's landmark abortion rights decision.

"As I vote to confirm his nomination, I do so under the assumption that Judge Alito will uphold this commitment," said Stevens, who supports abortion rights.

Reid, who will vote on Monday with Democrats who want to filibuster Alito and against confirmation on Tuesday, said those votes are "an opportunity to people to express their opinion on what a bad choice it was to replace Sandra Day O'Connor."

As the floor debate ensued Friday, the leaders of the filibuster attempt _ Massachusetts Sens. Edward Kennedy and John Kerry _ were trying to drum up support in their caucus for blocking Alito.

They were counting senators like Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Dick Durbin of Illinois and Debbie Stabenow on their side. Other senators, including ranking Judiciary Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Charles Schumer of New York, head of the Senate Democrats' fundraising arm, did not say Thursday whether they supported the effort.

"There's some division in our caucus," Kennedy conceded. "It's an uphill climb at the current time, but it's achievable."

Kerry, in a 27-minute Senate speech after returning from an economic conference in Switzerland, urged Democrats to take a stand. "This is a fight worth making, because it is a fight for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court," he said.

Asked if the administration was taking Kerry's call for a filibuster seriously, White House press secretary Scott McClellan chuckled on Friday and said: "I think it was a historic day yesterday. It was the first ever call for a filibuster from the slopes of Davos, Switzerland."

Republicans immediately began criticizing Democrats for even considering a filibuster.

"Continuing to threaten a filibuster, even after it is crystal clear that Democrats don't have the necessary votes to sustain their obstruction, is needless, strange and at odds with many of their fellow Democrats," said Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.

FOX News Poll: Bin Laden Will Be Caught

According to a FOX News poll, Americans think Al Qaeda is weaker today than it was a year ago, and more than half think the terrorist network's leader Usama bin Laden will be caught. A clear majority of the public approves of the job the government is doing protecting the country from terrorism, although most Americans believe it is likely there will be another terrorist attack in the near future.

The new poll finds that almost half of Americans (46 percent) think Al Qaeda is weaker today than it was a year ago, and just over half (52 percent) think the group is weaker than it was immediately after the September 11 attacks. About a third think Al Qaeda is stronger today than in the past

By a 56 percent to 31 percent margin, the public thinks bin Laden ultimately will be captured or killed.

FOX News Poll: The Threat From Iran

If Iran were to obtain nuclear weapons, an overwhelming 91 percent of Americans say they are concerned it would sell them to terrorists, including 68 percent that say they are very concerned.

In addition, eight in 10 Americans are concerned Iran would use nukes to attack a neighboring country (54 percent very concerned), and 73 percent are concerned it would attack the United States (47 percent very concerned).

Iran tops the list when respondents are asked to say which country � without being read a list � poses the greatest immediate danger to the United States. Today a 28 percent plurality says Iran, up from 18 percent a year ago. North Korea, which was first on last year�s list, comes in second this time around at 17 percent, down from 26 percent (January 2005). Iraq (16 percent) and China (14 percent) are other common mentions.

Opinion Dynamics Corporation conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News on January 24-25.

Over half of Americans think Iran is either an immediate (16 percent) or near-term threat (40 percent) to the United States, while about a third (34 percent) think it is more likely to be a long-term threat. Few think Iran does not pose a threat at all (7 percent).

Most of the public believes Iran wants to use uranium enrichment for military purposes (82 percent) rather than for the peaceful purposes it claims (8 percent). Furthermore, 68 percent believe Iran currently has a nuclear weapons program, up from 60 percent a year ago (January 2005).

By a wide margin, Americans think Iran is more of a threat to the world than Iraq was before the United States took military action there. Nearly half (47 percent) think Iran is more of a threat than Iraq was, while 25 percent think less of a threat and 19 percent the same.

If diplomacy fails, 59 percent support using "whatever military force is necessary," to keep Iran from getting nuclear weapons; however, when presented with specific military options support drops. Some 51 percent support using only air strikes, and 46 percent support using air strikes and ground troops.

A 54 percent majority is confident in the ability of the Bush administration to handle the situation with Iran, while slightly fewer (46 percent) are confident in the ability of the United Nations to handle Iran.

Alito filibuster sought by Kerry

Democratic Sen. John Kerry is trying to mobilize support for a filibuster to block nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court, according to CNN.

The Massachusetts senator is making phone calls to Senate colleagues to prevent Republicans from getting the 60 votes they need to overcome a filibuster attempt, reports CNN congressional correspondent Ed Henry.

Kerry, in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum, already has the support of his state's senior senator, Democrat Edward Kennedy.

Yesterday, Kerry urged a group of Democratic senators to join him in the filibuster attempt, although some senior party members worry the move could backfire

Responding to Kerry's call for a filibuster, Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., declared during floor remarks today, "This isn't going to happen."

"I know people get desperate fearing something is going to happen to their liberal agenda," he said, "... but nowhere did our founding fathers say that to approve a judge you had to have a super majority."

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has said that if the Democrats decide to filibuster, he would employ the "nuclear option" to ban the procedure, which requires a majority vote in the Republican-controlled Senate.

ACLU: Don't Bar Terrorist Sympathizers

The American Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal lawsuit seeking to strike down a provision of the Patriot Act that prevents foreigners who endorse terrorism from entering the U.S.

The suit was filed in Federal District Court in Manhattan on behalf of a prominent Muslim scholar, Tariq Ramadan, and three national organizations of academics or writers who have invited him to speak to their members.

Ramadan, a Swiss citizen, has been denied a United States visa since July 2004, when he was about to move with his family to Indiana to take up a tenured professor's position at the University of Notre Dame, the New York Times reports.

At the time, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security, Russ Knocke, cited the Patriot Act clause as the reason Ramadan's visa was canceled.

The provision bans foreigners who "endorse or espouse terrorist activity or persuade others" to support terrorism.
The ACLU suit seeks a declaration that the Patriot Act provision at issue is unconstitutional. It also seeks a court order preventing the government from relying on the provision to exclude Ramadan or any other foreign national.

Ramadan, the author of some 20 books on Islamic theology, filed a new visa application on September 16 after receiving invitations for speaking engagements in the U.S. When interviewed in December in Switzerland by agents of the Homeland Security and State Departments, Ramadan said, he was questioned about his views of the war in Iraq.

"I told them what I have said many times publicly, that I think the war was a mistake and illegal," he told the Times. "I think the resistance is legitimate but the means they are using are not."

He claims "there is nothing in my record supporting terrorism.�

But some critics say he espouses moderate views in Europe while embracing more militant views when addressing Muslims in the Arab world, according to the Times.
Homeland Security�s Knocke declined to comment on the lawsuit, but noted that the criteria for revoking visas included "public safety and national security risks.�

Democrats Byrd, Johnson Support Alito

Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito picked up two new Democratic supporters alongside liberal critics Thursday, and Republicans began calling for the Senate to end its debate and vote to confirm him.

"Senate Democrats should stop their foot-dragging on the vote for Judge Alito to become Justice Alito," said Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee. Democrats Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Tim Johnson of South Dakota announced their support for the conservative judge.

The New Jersey jurist's confirmation as the nation's 110th justice is assured, with all of the 55 Republicans except Olympia Snowe of Maine, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island and Ted Stevens of Alaska having announced their support. In addition, Democrats Byrd, Johnson and Ben Nelson of Nebraska also are voting for him to be the replacement for the moderate Sandra Day O'Connor on the nine-member Supreme Court.

"My considered judgment from his record, from his answers to my questions, and from his obvious intelligence and sincerity, leads me to believe him to be an honorable man who loves his country, loves his Constitution and will give of his best. Can we really ask for more?" said Byrd, the senior Democrat in the 100-member Senate.

Byrd, Nelson, Johnson and other Democratic senators are calling for their party not to filibuster, the only weapon the minority party has left to try and stop Alito.
Democrats have not agreed to a time for a final vote, although Republicans are pushing for the 55-year-old judge from the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to be confirmed before Bush's State of the Union on Tuesday. Aides are discussing holding a test vote on Monday with a final vote possibly on Tuesday.

Alito "understands the role of a judge is not to advance a personal and political agenda," President Bush said Thursday at the White House. "He is a decent man. He's got a lot of experience and he deserves an up-or-down vote in the Senate."

Iraqi General: Bin Laden Visited Baghdad

The Iraqi general who served as a top lieutenant to Saddam Hussein said Thursday that he personally witnessed Osama bin Laden inspecting Iraqi air force facilities in Baghdad.

Speaking in halting English, former Iraqi Gen. Georges Sada described the bin Laden visit to ABC Radio's Sean Hannity.

"I can make sure one thing - I know - I have seen by my eyes. It was in '84, '85, Osama bin Laden himself was coming to Iraqi air force headquarters."

Gen. Sada explained: "At that time he was looking for contracts to build air fields in Iraq."

The top Hussein lieutenant said he had no idea if the visit was part of any alliance between bin Laden and the Iraqi dictator.
Bin Laden's 1984 trip to Baghdad has never before been revealed, though a 1998 visit during which the al Qaeda chief allegedly met with Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz was reported by the Weekly Standard two years ago.

In an interview that appeared in Thursday's New York Sun, Gen. Sada confirmed that Saddam had spirited his weapons of mass destruction out of the country before the U.S. invaded in March 2003.

"Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming," he told the Sun. "They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians.�

Gen. Sada's allegations are detailed at length in his newly released book, "Saddam�s Secrets.�

Thursday, January 26, 2006

Poll: Only 16% definitely back Hillary

The latest national survey does not bode well for New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, should she seek the presidency in 2008.

A Gallup poll for CNN and USA Today reveals 51 percent of Americans say they would absolutely not vote for Mrs. Clinton for president, with only 16 percent definitely backing her. Another 32 percent say they'd consider voting for the Democrat.

Thus, committed anti-Hillary voters outnumber pro-Hillary voters by 3-1.

The figures are impacting talk radio today, as conservative host Rush Limbaugh pointed out it is not inevitable that Mrs. Clinton will be president.

"I don't think it's written in the clouds, written in stone, written in the beach," said Limbaugh. "Hillary is not going to president. The Republican nominee will be, and that is why, folks, we have to be careful about who's nominated on our end."

He was responding to a concerned caller who said, "She is something to be afraid of, and fear has to motivate people."

The senator is especially unpopular among men, according to the Gallup poll, with 60 percent saying they'd definitely oppose Hillary for president, with 62 percent opposition from men 50 and over.

Among women, 22 percent say they're solid in backing Clinton, but just 11 percent of men agree. Only 14 percent of white Americans are committed supporters, with 28 percent of non-whites in the Democrat's fold.

Perhaps the worst harbinger is that even among self-proclaimed liberals, only 33 percent say they'd definitely vote for her.

Just last week, a Diageo/Hotline survey showed Hillary losing to Arizona. Sen. John McCain 52 to 36 percent in a hypothetical matchup.

Rumsfeld Says Military Not Overextended

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on Wednesday disputed reports suggesting that the U.S. military is stretched thin and close to a snapping point from operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, asserting "the force is not broken."

"This armed force is enormously capable," Rumsfeld told reporters at a Pentagon briefing. "In addition, it's battle hardened. It's not a peacetime force that has been in barracks or garrisons."

Rumsfeld spoke a day after The Associated Press reported that an unreleased study conducted for the Pentagon said the Army is being overextended, thanks to the two wars, and may not be able to retain and recruit enough troops to defeat the insurgency in Iraq.

Congressional Democrats released a report Wednesday that also concluded the U.S. military is under severe stress.

Reports suggesting that the U.S. military is close to the breaking point "is just not consistent with the facts," he said.

In an apparent shot at the Democratic Clinton administration, Rumsfeld said a number of components of the armed forces were underfunded during the 1990s, "and there were hollow pieces to it. Today, that's just not the case."

He said there were over 1.4 million active U.S. troops, and some 2 million � counting National Guard and Reserve units � of which only 138,000 people were in Iraq.

"Do we still need more rebalancing? You bet," Rumsfeld said.

The secretary suggested he was not familiar with reports suggesting an overburdened military. But, he said, "It's clear that those comments do not reflect the current situation. They are either out of date or just misdirected."

Study: Army Stretched to Breaking Point ?

Stretched by frequent troop rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has become a "thin green line" that could snap unless relief comes soon, according to a study for the Pentagon.

Andrew Krepinevich, a retired Army officer who wrote the report under a Pentagon contract, concluded that the Army cannot sustain the pace of troop deployments to Iraq long enough to break the back of the insurgency. He also suggested that the Pentagon's decision, announced in December, to begin reducing the force in Iraq this year was driven in part by a realization that the Army was overextended.

As evidence, Krepinevich points to the Army's 2005 recruiting slump � missing its recruiting goal for the first time since 1999 � and its decision to offer much bigger enlistment bonuses and other incentives.

"You really begin to wonder just how much stress and strain there is on the Army, how much longer it can continue," he said in an interview. He added that the Army is still a highly effective fighting force and is implementing a plan that will expand the number of combat brigades available for rotations to Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 136-page report represents a more sobering picture of the Army's condition than military officials offer in public. While not released publicly, a copy of the report was provided in response to an Associated Press inquiry.

Illustrating his level of concern about strain on the Army, Krepinevich titled one of his report's chapters, "The Thin Green Line."

He wrote that the Army is "in a race against time" to adjust to the demands of war "or risk `breaking' the force in the form of a catastrophic decline" in recruitment and re-enlistment.

Col. Lewis Boone, spokesman for Army Forces Command, which is responsible for providing troops to war commanders, said it would be "a very extreme characterization" to call the Army broken. He said his organization has been able to fulfill every request for troops that it has received from field commanders.

Tehran Hails Hamas Victory

The government of maniacal Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is hailing Wednesday's election victory by the terrorist group Hamas, which won a majority of seats in the Palestinian parliament.

Foreign ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi faxed a statement to journalists, saying: "The Islamic republic of Iran congratulates Hamas and all the Palestinian soldiers and the great Islamic people."

In quotes picked up by Al Jazeera, Asefi praised Palestinian voters for choosing "to continue the struggle and resistance against occupation."

The Arab News network noted that Iran is a vocal supporter of Hamas - as well as the Palestinian resistance group Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah.

In December, Iran and Hamas issued a statement declaring that they represent a "united front" against Israel. Two months earlier, Ahmadinejad urged that Israel be "wiped off the map."
During a visit to Iran on Dec. 15, Hamas political chief Khaled Meshaal vowed to step up attacks against Israel if the Jewish state took military action against Iran over its nuclear weapons program.

"Just as Islamic Iran defends the rights of the Palestinians, we defend the rights of Islamic Iran. We are part of a united front against the enemies of Islam," Meshaal said.

"Each member of this front defends itself with its own means in its region," he explained. "We carry the battle in Palestine. If Israel launches an attack against Iran, we will expand the battlefield in Palestine."

Iraq Official: Saddam Moved WMD to Syria

The former number two official in Saddam Hussein's Iraqi air force claims the former Iraqi dictator moved weapons of mass destruction from Iraq to Syria in the months preceding the current Iraq war.

Georges Sada revealed the charges in an interview Wednesday with the New York Sun. They are detailed in his new book, "Saddam�s Secrets.�

"Saddam realized, this time, the Americans are coming," Sada told the Sun. "They handed over the weapons of mass destruction to the Syrians.�

The former Iraqi general said Special Republican Guard brigades loaded WMDs onto two converted Iraqi Airways planes.

He said he was told of the operation by two pilots that helped transport the materials. Sada says 56 flights were made, and were accompanied by a ground convoy of trucks carrying similar materials.
The Sun reports that the flights attracted scant international attention because they occurred at the same time that Iraq was sending relief to Syria for a dam collapse.


Sada�s claims echoed those made by Moshe Yaalon, Israel�s top general in Operation Iraqi Freedom. Yaalon told the Sun in December that Saddam had "transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria.�

According to the Middle East Quarterly, Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon issued a similar warning in a Dec. 23, 2002 television appearance on Israel�s Channel 2.
"Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria,� Sharon said.


Together, their claims challenge the conventional wisdom in the United States and Europe that pre-war intelligence estimates were incorrect in suggesting the mass-murdering Iraqi dictator either possessed or was close to possessing WMDs.


Even President Bush has conceded the point, telling Americans in a televised address in December, "It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong.�


Recent reports by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard have similarly challenged the conventional wisdom on Saddam�s relationships with al-Qaida.


Hayes is calling for the release of approximately 2 million unclassified documents recovered in Iraq from the Hussein regime. He claims the documents could prove Saddam maintained significant contacts with al-Qaida.


Sada�s and Yaalon�s claims will be even more difficult, if not impossible, to prove, but several U.S. Senators will try to get to the bottom of the claims. Sada is scheduled to meet with Senators Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., and James Inhofe, R-Okla., next week. Both are members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Bombing targeted Iranian president?

Report says Ahmadinejad canceled trip after security tip

Lebanon's al-Manar Television, run by the pro-Iranian Hezbollah terrorist group, announced today that President Ahmadinejad canceled his trip to Iran's southern city of Ahvaz on Monday after a security tip warning him Arab dissidents planned to assassinate him with a series of bombings.

Today, just minutes after 10 a.m. local time, two bombs exploded in Ahvaz, one outside a privately run bank, the other outside the city's Natural Resources Department.

Early reports indicated the attacks killed eight to 10 people, injuring dozens more. Ahmadinejad is known for his walks through the streets of the cities he visits, and the attacks were believed to be coordinated for his schedule locations.

Tehran claimed Ahmadinejad's visit to Ahvaz was canceled because weather reports had predicted sandstorms that would have wrecked his trademark walks through the streets to mingle with the local people.

As WorldNetDaily reported, on Dec. 15, gunmen ambushed Ahmadinejad's motorcade, leaving his driver and one of his bodyguards dead, however the hard-line leader escaped injury because he was not in the car at the time. Iran's state-controlled press reported "armed bandits and troublemakers on the Zabol-Saravan highway" had been responsible for the shoot-out.

Today, Iran's state-controlled press is blaming the bombings in Ahvaz on ethnic Arab extremists with links to foreign governments, including Britain, a charge London has denied.

Ahvaz has been rocked for months by protests and car bombings attributed to the city's large Arab population. The city is surrounded by Iran's southwestern province of Khuzestan, the location of most of Iran's oil reserves, estimated to be 10 percent of the world's total.

Arabs � a minority in Persian, Farsi-speaking Iran � are a substantial ethnic population in Khuzestan. Ahmadinejad's ultra-conservative government has caused unrest by floating a proposal to move non-Arabs into Khuzestan to dilute Arab influence there.

In recent weeks, expatriate Iranian pro-democracy groups in the United States and Europe have been calling for regime change in Tehran, arguing the Ahmadinejad's ultra-conservative regime has reversed important reforms instituted by the two previous presidents, Hashemi-Rafsanjani and Muhammad Khatami. The new administration has systematically replaced all top officials of the national and provincial governments with Revolutionary Guards militants, many of whom have intelligence or security backgrounds.

Iran races to defend nuke facilities

Digs network of tunnels to protect facilities from possible attacks by U.S., Israel

Iran is racing to dig a network of tunnels and upgrade its air defences to protect its nuclear facilities from possible attacks by America or Israel, it was reported yesterday.

Israel this week issued thinly-veiled warnings that it has drawn up plans for pre-emptive strikes against Iran. The United States insists it will not take the military option "off the table".

Seeking to avoid a repeat of Israel's 1981 air raid on Osiraq, Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor, Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued orders for the underground complexes to be completed by the beginning of July, Jane's Defence Weekly reported.

It said the network of facilities deep underground or in the sides of mountains has been built with help from North Korean designers.

Atomic inspectors discovered in 2003 that Iran was building a vast underground complex to enrich uranium near the town of Natanz.

But other facilities, such as the uranium conversion plant in Isfahan, are still above ground and exposed to attack.

Pat Leahy Labeled 'Abramoff Democrat'

While national Democrats are calling the Jack Abramoff lobbying imbroglio a "Republican scandal," top Vermont Democrat, Sen. Pat Leahy, is being labeled an "Abramoff Democrat" by home state critics.

The Vermont Guardian has uncovered thousands of dollars in contributions to Leahy by lawfirms linked to Abramoff - though the senator's spokesman says that any suggestion of a relationship to the disgraced Republican is ridiculous.

"It�s preposterous to even think that Jack Abramoff would do anything to support a progressive Democratic leader like Patrick Leahy," Ed Pagano, Leahy�s chief of staff, told the paper.

However, the Guardian says it has discovered that Leahy "received thousands of dollars from attorneys at Preston, Gates, Ellis, Meeds and Rouvelas, and Greenberg Traurig, the two high-powered legal firms where Abramoff hung his hat."

While Pagano said the donations were coincidental, Jim Barnett, executive director of the Vermont Republican Party, told the paper:
"Everyone knows that this is a process called bundling, and that Abramoff would walk into the firm and ask attorneys to donate $1,000, $500, or $250 to a campaign. This is Abramoff money and this is just an example of the utter hypocrisy that this issue only affects Republicans.

"Pat Leahy is an Abramoff Democrat,� Barnett insisted.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Iraq War Not Breaking the Bank



In fact, it�s one of the least expensive conflicts in our nation�s history.

Critics of the war in Iraq often complain about the �escalating cost
of the war.� Listening to them, you�d never know that the war is one of
the least expensive in American history.

Robert Whaples, professor of economics at Wake Forest University, has
measured the cost of each major American war up through the first Gulf
War. We took these costs and compared them to the cost of the Iraq war
and found that the Iraq experience has consumed a smaller percentage of
GDP (just 2 percent of one year�s wealth creation) than every other
American war except the first Gulf War (which measured just 1 percent of
GDP).

This stands in stark contrast to the Vietnam experience, which
opponents have often attempted to liken to the Iraq war. Vietnam comprised a
much heartier 12 percent of GDP at the time. Other conflicts, such as
World War II, took a remarkable 130 percent of a year�s GDP to see
through to success.

The work is not done in Iraq, and the financial costs will grow
beyond the $251 billion we have spent so far. The real cost, of course, is
in human lives, manifested in the debate about whether it is worth
losing a few thousand American lives in order to liberate 23 million people.
But the data are clear; any attempt to discredit this war based on its
effect on the U.S. economy is an unnecessary distraction.

Conservatives win in Canada

Conservative Stephen Harper pledged to quickly carry out his campaign promises to cut taxes, get tough on crime and repair strained ties with Washington after his party won national elections and ended 13 years of Liberal Party rule in Canada.

Monday's vote showed that Canadians are weary of the Liberal Party's broken promises and corruption scandals. They were willing to give Harper a chance to govern despite concerns that some of his social views are extreme.

"Tonight friends, our great country has voted for change, and Canadians have asked our party to take the lead in delivering that change," Harper told 2,000 cheering supporters at his campaign headquarters in Calgary.

He said his new government - not likely to be sworn in for several weeks - would immediately move to cut the unpopular national sales tax from 7 percent to 6 percent, "reform the justice system to fight against crime and gangs," and begin to allocate $1,042 to Canadian families for each child they have needing daycare.

He also wants to introduce a federal accountability act that will monitor government spending in an effort to avoid the corruption scandals that have plagued the Liberals.

"We will do this because shuffling the deck in Ottawa is not good enough," he said. "We need to do this to make the system more accountable to you, the Canadian taxpayers."

Relations with the Bush administration will likely improve under Harper as his ideology runs along the same lines of many U.S. Republicans.

Harper has said he would reconsider a U.S. missile defense scheme rejected by the Liberal government of Prime Minister Paul Martin. He also said he wanted to move beyond the Kyoto debate by establishing different environmental controls, spend more on the Canadian military, expand its peacekeeping missions and tighten security along the U.S. border to prevent terrorists and guns from crossing.

Final results for the 308-seat House showed Conservatives with 124 seats; Liberals with 103; the Bloc Quebecois with 51, New Democratic Party with 29; and one seat to an Independent.

The Conservatives also earned 10 seats in Quebec, where they were virtually shut out in the last elections of June 2004. Harper said it was symbolic of the Quebecois desire for national unity as opposed to sovereignty for the French-speaking province.

"Our government will build a new and dynamic voice for federalism in Quebec," Harper said.

Alito wins committee approval

The Judiciary Committee favorably recommended Samuel Alito's Supreme Court nomination to the full Senate on a party-line vote Tuesday, moving the conservative jurist one step closer to joining the high court.

All 10 Republicans voted for Alito, while all eight Democrats voted against him. The partisan vote was almost preordained, with 15 of the 18 senators announcing their votes even before the committee's session began.

The full Senate expects to take a final vote on Alito's nomination before the end of the week. That vote is also expected to follow along party lines, with only one Democrat - Ben Nelson of Nebraska - coming out so far in support of Alito. Republicans hold the balance of power in the Senate 55-44, with one independent.

Senate Republicans say Alito is a good choice for the nation's highest court.

"Like America's founders, Judge Alito clearly believes in self-government, that the people and not judges should make law, and that judges have an important role but must know and stay in their proper place," said Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

FISA Fears Shielded 9/11 Plotters

Contrary to the claims of Bush administration critics, the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act has seriously hampered U.S. counterterrorism efforts - and actually helped to shield at least two key 9/11 plotters from detection by U.S. law enforcement.

The stunning analysis comes from former Reagan-era Justice Department official Victoria Toensing, who explains on OpinionJournal.com: "I have extensive experience with the consequences of government bungling due to overstrict interpretations of FISA."

As deputy assistant attorney general one of Toensing's chief responsibilities was the terrorism portfolio, which included working with FISA.

She recalled having to terminate a FISA wiretap in the midst of the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847, which ended in the murder of passenger-hostage Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem.

"We had a previously placed tap in the U.S. and thought there was a possibility we could learn the hostages' location," Toensing explained. "But Justice Department career lawyers told me that the FISA statute defined its 'primary purpose' as foreign intelligence gathering. Because crimes were taking place, the FBI had to shut down the wire."
Toensing notes that the vaunted FISA law became the basis for former Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick's notorious wall of separation in 1995 - which prohibited intelligence agencies from sharing information on terrorists with U.S. law enforcement.

She recalled that when "the wall" was finally removed in 2001 by the Patriot Act, the FISA appeals court upheld the new law's constitutionality with a ruling that characterized the rigid interpretation of the FISA statute as "puzzling."

"The court cited an FBI agent's testimony that efforts to investigate two of the Sept. 11 hijackers were blocked by senior FBI officials, concerned about the FISA rule requiring separation."

Toensing said that if intelligence agencies had been able to wiretap terrorists operating inside the U.S. as they do under the Bush program, "we could have detected the presence of Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi in San Diego, more than a year before they crashed American Airlines Flight 77 into the Pentagon."

Noting that FISA still requires that probable cause be established over that three day period, she offers the following example:

"Al Qaeda Agent A is captured in Afghanistan and has Agent B's number in his cell phone, which is monitored by NSA overseas. Agent B makes two or three calls every day to Agent C, who flies to New York."

That chain of facts, without further evidence, says Toensing, "does not establish probable cause for a court to believe that C is an agent of a foreign power with information about terrorism."

Bush Impeachment Probe Possible

According to Insight Magazine, the Bush administration is preparing for impeachment hearings.

Citing unnamed sources in the administration, Insight reports that hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee in February could serve as a preview for later impeachment proceedings.

The Judiciary hearings will investigate the legality of a controversial secret wiretapping program used by the administration. Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez is expected to testify.

The wiretapping program was authorized by secret order from President Bush in 2002. The order directed the National Security Agency to intercept communications to and from the United States that included at least one known or suspected terrorist.

The White House consulted with eight members of Congress on the program, including four Democrats.
Sources told Insight that the Judiciary probe will likely include Republicans unaware that they could be advancing a Democratic move toward eventual impeachment.

"Our arithmetic,� said the source, "shows that a majority of the committee could vote against the president. If we work hard, there could be a tie.�

President Bush struck back at critics of the program in a speech at Kansas State University Monday afternoon.

"If I wanted to break the law,� Bush asked, "why was I briefing Congress?

"Federal courts,� he said, "have consistently ruled that a president has authority under the Constitution to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance against our enemies. Predecessors of mine have used that same constitutional authority.�

Congress does not have the constitutional authority to limit presidential power derived from the Constitution itself. Only a constitutional amendment may limit the powers appropriated by the Constitution.

Gonzales: Media Misleading on Spying

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales defended the Bush administration's domestic spying program Tuesday and suggested that some critics and news reports have misled Americans about the breadth of the National Security Agency's surveillance.

Gonzales said the warrantless surveillance is critical to prevent another terrorist attack within the United States and falls within President Bush's constitutional authority and the powers granted by Congress immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

At a Georgetown Law School Forum, Gonzales said the nation needs "to remember that ... it's imperative for national security reasons that we can detect reliably, immediately and without delay" any al-Qaida related communication entering or leaving the United States.

Gonzales cautioned his listeners about critics and journalists who have mischaracterized details about the program. "Unfortunately, they have caused concern over the potential breadth of what the President has actually authorized," he said.
The attorney general's appearance at the law school is part of a campaign by the Bush administration to overcome criticism, often by attempting to redefine the program.

On Monday at Kansas State University, Bush said the program should be termed a "terrorist surveillance program" and contended it has the backing of legal experts, key lawmakers and the Supreme Court.

Last week, Gonzales sent leaders of Congress a 42-page legal defense of warrantless eavesdropping which suggests that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is unconstitutional if it prevents the NSA's warrantless eavesdropping.

Monday, January 23, 2006

U.S., Israel to attack Iran nukes 'before April'

Pre-emptive strike all but inevitable, say military, intelligence sources

A pre-emptive U.S. and Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities is nearly inevitable, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The incapacitation of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has made a pre-emptive attack on Iran more likely in the next nine weeks, Israeli sources tell the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by the founder of WND.

It was Sharon who vetoed the nearly unanimous recommendations of Israel's generals that a quick strike was the Jewish state's only chance at preventing Iran from building a significant nuclear arsenal.

Meanwhile, in Washington, there is growing concern that Iran's ultimate target is the U.S.

Earlier this month, Iran's Revolutionary Guards conducted a conference on the use of weapons of mass destruction � nuclear, chemical and biological. Included in those briefings were presentations on electromagnetic pulse weapons and other military technologies deemed to be under development for use against the U.S., rather than Israel or other enemies of the Islamic republic. Even one nuclear weapon, used in an EMP-style attack on the U.S., would prove catastrophic to the nation, a congressional panel studying the vulnerability of America to electro-magnetic pulse weapons concluded last year.

Such an attack would not require Iran to use long-range or intercontinental ballistic missiles, which it does not possess. But a simple Scud missile, with a nuclear warhead, could be fired from offshore and detonated above the U.S. wreaking near total devastation on the country's technological, electrical and transportation infrastructure. It would also have the advantage of offering Iran a degree of plausible deniability, given that "terrorists" armed with one nuclear weapon could achieve the same results.

U.S. Navy seizes pirate ship off Somalia


The U.S. Navy boarded an apparent pirate ship in the Indian Ocean and detained 26 men for questioning, the Navy said Sunday.

The 16 Indians and 10 Somali men were aboard a traditional dhow that was chased and seized Saturday by the U.S. guided missile destroyer USS Winston S. Churchill, said Lt. Leslie Hull-Ryde of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command in Bahrain.

The dhow stopped fleeing after the Churchill twice fired warning shots during the chase, which ended 54 miles off the coast of Somalia, the Navy said. U.S. sailors boarded the dhow and seized a cache of small arms.

The dhow's crew and passengers were being questioned Sunday aboard the Churchill to determine which were pirates and which were legitimate crew members, Hull-Ryde said.

Sailors aboard the dhow told Navy investigators that pirates hijacked the vessel six days ago near Mogadishu and thereafter used it to stage pirate attacks on merchant ships.

The Churchill is part of a multinational task force patrolling the western Indian Ocean and Horn of Africa region to thwart terrorist activity and other lawlessness during the U.S.-led war in Iraq.

The Navy said it captured the dhow in response to a report from the International Maritime Bureau in Kuala Lumpur on Friday that said pirates had fired on the MV Delta Ranger, a Bahamian-flagged bulk carrier that was passing some 200 miles off the central eastern coast of Somalia.

Hull-Ryde said the Navy was still investigating the incident and would discuss with international authorities what to do with the detained men.

"The disposition of people and vessels involved in acts of piracy on the high seas are based on a variety of factors, including the offense, the flags of the vessels, the nationalities of the crew, and others," Hull-Ryde said in an e-mail.

Canadian Liberals face loss after 12 years in power

Canadian political leaders on Sunday made one last cross-country dash on the eve of an election expected to oust the ruling Liberals, move Canada to the right and improve ties with the United States.

With polls showing a steady lead of 7 to 12 percentage points, the Conservatives sounded increasingly confident, though it looked like they would fall short of a majority in Parliament and have to depend on other parties.

"After 13 years and four failed mandates, the era of Liberal arrogance is ending," local candidate Michael Smith told a Winnipeg rally as he introduced Conservative leader Stephen Harper, who made stops in Ontario, Manitoba and British Columbia on Sunday.

It is the second election in just 18 months and the third since late 2000. The Liberals -- who took power in late 1993 -- campaigned on their fiscal record, reminding people the economy was booming and trying to portray Harper as an extremist who wanted to scrap gay marriage and abortion.

But Prime Minister Paul Martin, who spent Sunday in British Columbia before flying to his home province of Quebec, seems likely to fall victim to voter fatigue with the Liberals and a major kickback scandal that hit his government shortly after he took power in December 2003.

"Only a new government can turn the page on the past 13 years of scandal and inaction and get on with addressing the real concerns of ordinary working people," Harper said. "We have an opportunity with a new government, and only a new government, to bring together East and West, English and French, city and country, new and old Canadians."

Some polls suggest the Liberals will get their lowest percentage of votes in any election since independence in 1867, even lower than the 28 percent they collected in 1984.

If Harper wins, it will be his reward for uniting Canada's two fractious right-wing parties at the end of 2003 and creating the Conservative Party.

Harper would be the first prime minister to have spent most of his life in the conservative Western province of Alberta. He promises to lower taxes, clamp down on crime, clean up government, cut health waiting times and return some power from the federal government to Canada's 10 provinces.

Michael Moore weighs in on Canada's election

Controversial American documentary filmmaker Michael Moore bemoaned an apparent right turn by liberal northern neighbor Canada in its upcoming general election.

"Oh, Canada -- you're not really going to elect a Conservative majority on Monday, are you? That's a joke, right? I know you have a great sense of humor, ... but this is no longer funny," Moore complained in a commentary on his website.

"First, you have the courage to stand against the war in Iraq -- and then you elect a prime minister who's for it. You declare gay people have equal rights -- and then you elect a man who says they don't," Moore moaned.

Conservatives led by Stephen Harper were ahead of Prime Minister Paul Martin's Liberals by a comfortable 10 to 12 points, polls showed Saturday, two days before Canadians go to the polls.

In "Bowling for Columbine," his documentary on gun violence in the United States, Moore heads north to Canada to flee the rise of conservatism on US soil.

"A man running the nation to the south of you is hoping you can lend him a hand by picking Stephen Harper, because he's a man who shares his world view. Do you want to help George Bush by turning Canada into his latest conquest?" Moore asked.

"Far be it from me, as an American, to suggest what you should do," he added. "I hope you don't feel this appeal of mine is too intrusive, but I just couldn't sit by, as your friend, and say nothing."

Iran warns against UN referral

Iran�s top nuclear official on Sunday warned Tehran would resume efforts to enrich uranium on an industrial scale if its case was reported to the UN Security Council, further raising the stakes in the crisis over its nuclear programme.

Tehran earlier this month moved to resume nuclear research, including some small-scale enrichment. But Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, which handles the nuclear issue, said in an interview with the Financial Times that a referral to the United Nations would force Tehran to broaden significantly the scale of such work.

�If the case goes to the Security Council, we�re obliged?.?.?.?to lift all voluntary measures,� he said, specifying that this included industrial-scale uranium enrichment.

The European Union and US have been pushing to get Iran�s case reported to the UN Security Council since Tehran announced it would restart its nuclear research two weeks ago. The US and European governments consider the move a breach of a 2004 agreement with Iran.

referral could come as soon as next week at an extraordinary session of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the governing board of the UN�s nuclear watchdog. Such a move could lead eventually to sanctions.

The US and EU argue that involving the Security Council would strengthen the IAEA�s hand. But Mr Larijani�s warning appears designed to show that greater diplomatic pressure would instead undermine both the IAEA�s work and attempts to curtail Iran�s programme.

Iran has always intended to develop industrial-scale uranium enrichment, which can be used for nuclear reactors or atomic weapons, but stopped all preparatory work during two-year talks with Europeans.

Nuclear experts say assembling enough centrifuges and preparing for industrial production could still take years.

Mr Larijani spoke at the start of a week of intense diplomacy. European officials will visit capitals represented on the 35-member IAEA governing board to lobby for an EU-backed resolution on referral.

Meanwhile, Mr Larijani is likely to be in Moscow to discuss a Russian proposal to find a compromise, an effort to forestall the Europeans or at least temper the tone of any IAEA resolution.

Legislators demand more action on Iran

As the Bush administration and its European allies pursue a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear standoff, some top legislators of both parties pressed Sunday for a more vigorous approach, including a possible military option.

"This is the most serious crisis we have faced, outside of the entire war on terror, since the end of the Cold War," said one, Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona. "A nuclear capability in Iran is unacceptable."

McCain was joined in his call for an accelerated approach on Iran by a senior Democrat, Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut.

"It's good that we're working with Britain, France and Germany," Lieberman said, listing the Europeans that have led U.S.-backed negotiations with Iran, "but their pace is too slow."

He called for the matter to be referred immediately to the United Nations Security Council, not first sent back to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog.

Lieberman, an intelligence committee member who is considered hawkish among Democrats, said not only that the United States should keep the military option on the table, but also that it had the military capability to continue fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq while launching a complex air attack on scores of Iranian nuclear targets.

"We've got to be prepared to take military action," he said on CBS-TV.

Both parties are internally divided on Iran. After the controversy over what critics said was the Bush administration's failure to secure adequate international backing to invade Iraq, some Republicans and Democrats now accuse it of relying too heavily on diplomacy.

Senator Hillary Clinton, Democrat of New York, contended last week that the administration was "downplaying" the Iranian threat. She and a fellow New York Democrat, Senator Charles Schumer, favor heavy pressure on China and Russia to end their reluctance to impose sanctions on Iran.

Reflecting the split among Republicans, Senator Pat Roberts of Kansas, the intelligence committee chairman, said Sunday that talk of the military option was premature, saying on CBS-TV that "at this particular time, I just do not think that is any kind of an alternative."

Of bin Laden, Roberts said, "I don't think he's quite as relevant as he used to be." But bin Laden's threats to strike the United States again, he said, should be taken seriously.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz of Pakistan, who is in the United States for meetings with administration officials, insisted Sunday that his government had not been warned of an air attack Jan. 13 that killed at least 18 people but missed Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who is believed to have been the target.

Lieberman, an intelligence committee member who is considered hawkish among Democrats, said not only that the United States should keep the military option on the table, but also that it had the military capability to continue fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq while launching a complex air attack on scores of Iranian nuclear targets.

"We've got to be prepared to take military action," he said on CBS-TV.

Italian Official: World Must Confront Iran

Iran's nuclear program is testing the resolve of the international community, and the world needs a unified approach to the escalating diplomatic standoff, Italy's foreign minister said Friday.

"The international community must have a defined, very precise, very united strategy," Gianfranco Fini told The Associated Press.

Iran is facing possible referral to the U.N. Security Council for its refusal to give up its uranium enrichment program. The council has the power to impose economic and political sanctions.

European powers have drafted a resolution that calls for referring Iran to the 15-nation council but stops short of asking for punitive measures against Iran. The International Atomic Energy, the U.N. nuclear watchdog, will meet Feb. 2 to discuss the draft.

The United States accuses Tehran of seeking to build nuclear weapons. Tehran maintains the program is for generating electricity.

Joe Lieberman: U.S. Prepared for Iran Strike

Sen. Joe Lieberman said Sunday that the U.S. is prepared to deal with the Iranian nuclear crisis militarily - even if the war in Iraq continues to require a substantial American troop commitment.

"We have the most powerful military in the history of the world," Lieberman told CBS's "Face the Nation."

"We are capable, if necessary, of continuing to pursue our aims militarily in Iraq and Afghanistan and elsewhere and, if necessary, conduct a military attack on Iran."

Lieberman said the he hoped an attack on Iran, if it should come, would be carried out "with the assistance of our coalition allies in Europe."

But he noted that any assault on Iranian nuclear facilities "would be primarily an air attack. It's not going to involve massive use of ground forces."
Asked about reports that the U.S. would let Israel take the lead in any attack against Iran, the Connecticut Democrat told CBS:

"The United States is a strong enough country that we never want to be in a position to have to essentially contract out protection of our national security, vis-a-vis Iran, to another country like Israel."

He noted also the Israelis "don't have the same aircraft capacity that we do, capable of doing it."

Lieberman said that while the military option remains a last resort for the U.S., "I want the people who lead Iran to understand that it is on the table. We deem their pursuit of nuclear weapons to be dead serious."

Sunday, January 22, 2006

Ransom found on freed German hostage

Part of the ransom money alleged to have been paid by the German government to win the freedom of the Iraq hostage Susanne Osthoff last month was found on her after she was released, it was claimed yesterday.

The German magazine Focus said officials found several thousand dollars in the 43-year-old archaeologist's clothes when she took a shower at the German embassy in Baghdad after being freed on December 18.

The serial numbers on the bills matched those used to pay off her kidnappers, the magazine said.

Some analysts speculated, however, that the money could have been planted on her or given to her by her kidnappers. Ms Osthoff was unavailable for comment.

Speculation about the circumstances of her kidnapping and release has been rife in the German media.

Two days after her release, Germany freed a Hizbollah member jailed for life in 1985 for the murder of an American navy diver. Berlin has denied a connection between the two events.

Ms Osthoff caused a stir when she said in an interview last month that she did not believe that her kidnappers were criminals.

Zarqawi 'sleeps in suicide belt'

IRAQ�S most wanted man, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, goes to sleep every night wearing a suicide belt packed with explosives, according to a leading insurgent who met him two weeks ago.
�He never takes it off,� said Sheikh Abu Omar al-Ansari, leader of a Sunni resistance group called Jeish al-Taiifa al-Mansoura (Army of the Victorious Sect).



�He told me: �I would rather blow myself up and die as a martyr � and kill a few Americans along the way � than be arrested and humiliated by them�.�

His account, passed to The Sunday Times by a reliable intermediary, is the first description of Zarqawi in Iraq since Washington slapped a $25m bounty on his head, the same as the reward for the killing or capture of Osama Bin Laden.

The sheikh�s two-day meeting with the Jordanian-born Zarqawi provided a rare insight into the terrorist accused of masterminding the videotaped beheadings of western hostages � including Ken Bigley, the Liverpool-born engineer, in 2004 � and countless suicide bombings and assassinations.

�He is known by America and the world as the prince of beheadings, the murdering sheikh of innocents, the blood spiller,� said Ansari.

Israeli Hints at Preparation to Stop Iran

Israel's defense minister hinted Saturday that the Jewish state is preparing for military action to stop Iran's nuclear program, but said international diplomacy must be the first course of action.

"Israel will not be able to accept an Iranian nuclear capability and it must have the capability to defend itself, with all that that implies, and this we are preparing," Shaul Mofaz said.

His comments at an academic conference stopped short of overtly threatening a military strike but were likely to add to growing tensions with Iran.

Germany's defense minister said in an interview published Saturday that he is hopeful of a diplomatic solution to the impasse over Iran's nuclear program, but argued that "all options" should remain open.

Asked by the Bild am Sonntag weekly whether the threat of a military solution should remain in place, Franz Josef Jung was quoted as responding: "Yes, we need all options."

French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that France could respond with nuclear weapons against any state-sponsored terrorist attack.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Saturday that Chirac's threats reflect the true intentions of nuclear nations, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported.

"The French president uncovered the covert intentions of nuclear powers in using this lever (nuclear weapons) to determine political games," IRNA quoted Asefi as saying.

John Kerry: Give Iran Nuke Fuel

Sen. John Kerry was sharply critical of the Bush administration's handling of the war on terror during his appearance Sunday on ABC's "This Week."

But while he complained about White House bungling of the North Korea nuclear crisis, Kerry was curiously silent on Iran.

Why?

Probably because, had Kerry's previous advice on Iran been taken, the mullahs in Tehran would be even closer to obtaining nuclear weapons than they are now.

During his first debate against President Bush on Sept. 30, 2004, the Massachusetts Democrat actually said it would be a good idea for the U.S. to give Iran the fuel they needed to make a nuclear bomb.
The question from moderator Jim Lehrer: "Do you believe that diplomacy and sanctions can resolve the nuclear problems with North Korea and Iran?"

Kerry's answer:

"With respect to Iran, the British, French, and Germans were the ones who initiated an effort without the United States, regrettably, to begin to try to move to curb the nuclear possibilities in Iran. I believe we could have done better."

The top Democrat then urged:

"I think the United States should have offered the opportunity to provide the nuclear fuel. Test them. See whether or not they were actually looking for it for peaceful purposes. If they weren't willing to work a deal, then we could have put sanctions together."
Of course, with Iranian President Mahmoud Amhadinejad now threatening to "wipe Israel off the map" as he presses ahead with his country's nuclear program, it's clear Kerry's nuke fuel "test" would have been a staggering blunder.

No wonder he's stopped giving advice on how to handle the Iranian nuclear crisis.

John Kerry Touts Al Qaida Successes

In quotes sure to bring delight to Osama bin Laden and his followers, Sen. John Kerry said Sunday that the reason the U.S. homeland hasn't been attacked by al Qaida since 9/11 is because the terror group is having so much success against U.S. forces in Iraq.

"Many people surmise that one of the reasons we haven't been attacked here, is because they are being so successful at doing what they need to do to attack us in Iraq and elsewhere," the failed presidential candidate told ABC's "This Week."

Kerry was responding to comments Friday by chief White House advisor Karl Rove, who credited President Bush with "protecting America against attacks."

"He is winning the war against terrorism, promoting liberty in regions of the world that have never known it," Rove told a Republican gathering in Washington, D.C.

Rove complained that Democrats like Kerry still had "a pre-9/11 worldview."
On Thursday, bin Laden released an audiotaped message that seemed to echo comments by Bush administration critics, including Sen. Kerry.

Asked whether bin Laden had expressed "almost the same" sentiments that Kerry had in the past, "CBS Evening News" anchorman Bob Schieffer told WABC Radio's Mark Simone: "Well, he did. That's exactly right."

But Schieffer cautioned that he couldn't be sure whether bin Laden was consciously borrowing from Kerry.

"You can never know about things like that," the veteran newsman explained. "But [bin Laden's] people seem to have tremendous access. And television being what it is, and now with satellites and so forth, these things go all over the world. Perhaps he did."