It seems a videotape showing Hillary being intimately involved in an illegal campaign contribution has surfaced. Hmmmm. Perjury, campaign finance violations, it could be a few years in the pokey for Hillary. Bill will have to find a sympathetic ear for the duration. Darn.

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55320

There were lots of whites opposed to apartheid who defended their homes farms and ranches from attack. I guess if someone bursts into your house, with a machine gun you can read international law to them. And blog about it. But on the frontier you're kind of left to your own devices.

I can not believe how the Press is allowing the military, the Bush Administartion, and their supporters to use it to spew lies, again. But then again, since these Liers have been in office the Press has done their bidding. By Bush's own words, we are not and I repeat are not fighting Al Qaida in Iraq but since the majority of Americans want to disengage ourselves from their civil war, now everyone we fighting is Al Qaida. Give me a break.

I read somewhere that Al Qaeda was a name given by the CIA to spies it sent into either Russia or Afghanistan in the 1980's. If it's true it seems like a strange coincidence. I also saw a man who had been released from Guantanamo Bay saying that when he was tortured they only wanted him to confess to one thing - that he was a member of Al Qaeda -which he was not and never had been. Other inmates told him the same thing. It seems obvious why the US doesn't want to release the people still held in Guantanamo Bay: it's well known that they are mostly'low value' people who have, nevertheless, been tortured to make them confess to things that aren't true and who all have damming tales to tell. Strangely it seems that the top Taliban were released from Guantanamo long ago. Something about all of this just doesn't smell right and Glenn Greenwald is the only one to pick up on it. The mainstream media just plays along and never asks the questions most people want them to ask. It all just seems to be some geo-political game. I've believed for some time that the official line on all of this is a sham and that the truth is being buried deeper and deeper by the very people who should be trying to get at the truth.

One has degenerated to shrill whining proving that irony is not dead, the other spams links from WingNutDaily. This is truly pathetic.

Gary Kreep and the U.S. Justice Foundation (snicker)

CPAC: Judiciary Activists Attack 'Undermedicated, Psychotic Lefties'

While yesterday’s segment at CPAC devoted to judicial nominees – featuring Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania), who can count few fans at the event – was sparsely attended, even fewer showed up for today’s panel discussion on “judicial activism” instead of joining the crowds for Mike Huckabee and Wayne LaPierre of the NRA down the hall. Still, Jan LaRue of Concerned Women for America, Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, and a man named Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation did their best to keep the attention of the handful of conference-goers on the subject that was one of the most vigorously touted at last year’s CPAC.

The enemies remained the same: judges who “legislate from the bench” and believe in a “living Constitution” which they “write … at will,” and senators who opposed some of Bush’s extreme nominations or who participated in the “Gang of 14” deal that halted the march toward the “nuclear option,” which would have forced through a rule change eliminating filibusters on those nominations. Fitton said of the filibustered nominees that “liberals thought they were too conservative, and yes, too Christian.” LaRue described as “undermedicated” and “psychotic” Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, along with groups like People For the American Way that opposed confirmation of John Roberts and Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

The judicial heroes were also familiar: Roberts and Alito, whose successful appointment LaRue called the “biggest grassroots victory” in years; Justice Clarence Thomas, whom Fitton described as a model for “humble judges” who “restrain themselves.” In addition, Kreep singled out Janice Rogers Brown, perhaps the most radical of Bush’s appellate nominees, for her success in getting on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. According to Kreep, Brown was targeted because of her race by the Democratic Party, “one of the most racist” groups in country, which he said opposes any minority who doesn’t “kiss their tuckuses” and “say ‘yessa massa.’”

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/groups/united_states_j/

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=United_States_Justice_Foundation

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0492714/

that's about par for the course here.

This thread, originally inspired by reports of Gen. Odierno's Baghdad news conference, has so far ignored the other jaw-dropping aspect of the General's briefing.

Gen. Odierno expressed disappointment that most of the leaders of [whoever it was we were really fighting there] had fled. The general seems to think that this may be a consequence of comments about the forthcoming offensive by senior American officials in the press prior to the operation.

Really, you think? The administration that equates the revelation of the fact that we are intercepting terrorist communications illegally rather than legally, or that we imprison terrorists, or that we torture them, to the revelation of impending troop movements in the field turns out to think that, well, the revelation of impending troop movements in the field (or the disclosure of covert CIA identities) is just no big deal. Heckuva job, Generals!

Let Petraeus blame Al Qaida. That's a lost argument. And Bush's overuse of the words Al Qaida suggest that the invade-Iran coalition at the White House has also lost its argument.

Because whenever the invade-Iran coalition is winning, that's when we hear all the noise of Iranian belligerents arming Iraqi terrorists.

If Bush isn't trying to rile up American sentiment against Iran, I'll let him fight 2001 all over again.