http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.php en-us Nucleus CMS v3.2 © Weblog http://backend.userland.com/rss http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.php/nucleus/nucleus2.gif http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.php http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=36 Video: Feingold Will Introduce Resolution To Censure President Bush

Video with full transcript.]]> Media http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=36 Mon, 13 Mar 2006 12:37:17 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=35 Face the Facts



911truthbristol ]]> Media http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=35 Sun, 12 Mar 2006 18:20:25 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=34 911 Loose Change Video

Dyaln Avery's documentary on 9-11. 1 hr 21 min.

See video here. ]]> Media http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=34 Sat, 11 Mar 2006 21:49:35 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=33 David Shayler Video

David Shayler introduces 911 Truth Bristol's ‘Face the Facts’ and explains why 911 is of vital importance today.

See video here. ]]> Media http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=33 Sat, 11 Mar 2006 21:42:35 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=32 Statement
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
"Wartime Executive Power and the NSA's Surveillance Authority II"
February 28, 2006

Harold Hongju Koh
Dean
Yale Law School

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.

In my career I've had the privilege of serving our government in both republican and democratic administrations, and I've also sued both republican and democratic administrations when I thought their conduct was unlawful. In my professional opinion, the NSA domestic surveillance program is as blatantly illegal a program as I've seen, and my reasons are given not just in my written testimony but also in two letters that were sent to you by myself and a number of constitutional law scholars and former government officials, as well as in the ABA taskforce report, for which I served as an adviser.Now, I say this fully aware of the ongoing threat from al Qaeda and the need for law enforcement officials to gather vital information. And, of course, in time of war our constitution recognizes the president as commander-in-chief. But the same constitution requires that the commander-in-chief obey the fourth amendment, which requires that any government surveillance be reasonable, statutorily authorized, supported except in emergencies by court ordered warrants, and based on probable cause.

The current NSA program is blatantly illegal because it lacks all of these standards, and the Supreme Court has never upheld such a sweeping, unchecked power of government to invade the privacy of Americans without individualized suspicion, congressional authorization or judicial oversight.

For nearly 30 years the FISA, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, has provided a comprehensive, constitutional, and using its words, exclusive framework for electronic surveillance. Under FISA executive officials can conduct electronic surveillance of Americans, but they can do so without a warrant for only three days, or in case of wartime, for 15 days, after a declaration of war.

After that they must either go to the special court for an order, or come to Congress for an amendment, or stand in violation of the criminal law. This was based on a simple logic. Before the president launches an extended domestic spying program his lawyers must get approval from someone who does not work for him, yet that's precisely what has happened here, what has not happened here.

Now, of course, I agree with Director Woolsey that we can and should aggressively fight terrorism, but fighting terrorism outside the law is deeply counter-productive. Under the ongoing program NSA analysts are increasingly caught between following orders and carrying out electronic surveillance that's facially illegal, and moreover evidence collected under the program will almost surely be challenged and it may prove inadmissible, making it far more difficult to prosecute terrorists.

With respect, none of the program's defenders has identified any convincing defense for conducting such a sweeping program without congressional authorization and oversight and judicial review.

And in my testimony I review and reject those defenses, including the extraordinary claim that you here in Congress enacted the use of force resolution to repeal the FISA which had in fact criminalized unauthorized, indefinite, warrantless, domestic wire tapping 23 years earlier.

Most fundamentally, my testimony rejects the radical view of unchecked executive authority that's offered by some of my fellow witnesses. That unilateral vision offends the vision of shared national security power that's central to what Justice Jackson called the equilibrium established by our constitutional system. Read literally, the president's reading of the constitution would turn this body into a pointless rubber stamp whose limited role in the war on terror would be enacting laws that the president could ignore at will and issuing blank checks that the president can redefine at will.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I've had a chance to look at the proposed bill to refine and amend the FISA. I don't think it will improve the situation. First, as you say, it is radically premature. Congress simply does not have enough information to conduct such a broad revision at this time. Second, remember that the president has refused for four years to operate within the FISA framework. Unless the president acknowledges that he must obey the FISA amendments, and agrees to operate within it, any new congressional action will be equally meaningless.

And, third, the proposal pre-authorizes programs, not particular searches, and a result it gives a general warrant to a significant number of unreasonable searches and seizures. This resembles the statutory version of the British general warrant that was used in the 1700s by the King. But it's precisely because English law did not protect our privacy that our colonial ancestor said that even when the president in wartime is our commander-in-chief, we have a right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures, and no warrant shall issue except on probable cause, and that persons are things to be seen being stated with particularity.

In summary, Mr. Chairman, for four years our government has been conducting an illegal program and now wants to rewrite the constitution to say that that program is lawful. This committee should reject those claims.

Thank you.

Federation of American Scientists]]> News http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=32 Thu, 09 Mar 2006 14:07:53 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=31 Bennish's Dad Reports Death Threats Against Family

Mar 8, 2006 7:47 am US/Mountain

Note: this news item contains a video of Bennish

(AP) DENVER The father of a Colorado teacher who compared President Bush's State of the Union address to speeches made by Adolf Hitler said he and his family have received at least 12 death threats.
Jay Bennish is on paid leave from Overland High School in suburban Aurora while Cherry Creek School District investigates whether his Feb. 1 lecture violated a policy requiring that balancing viewpoints be presented in classes.

Bennish's father, John Bennish of Beverly Hills, Mich., told The Detroit News in Wednesday's editions that people have called his house threatening to kill him or his family.

He said he did not report the threats to police.

"This has been totally lopsided and one-sided," Bennish's father said of the news coverage of his son's lecture.

Jay Bennish has defended the lecture, saying he was trying to encourage his students to teach. He told reporters Tuesday that excerpts of a recording made by one of his students were unrepresentative of the full lecture.

"This is 20 minutes out of a 50-minute class. The rest of the class provides the balance," he said.

School district officials postponed a meeting with Bennish scheduled for Wednesday, citing phone calls "from people who have something they think may be pertinent to our investigation."

District spokeswoman Tustin Amole would not discuss the content of the calls but said they came after Bennish appeared on radio and TV.

Amole said Wednesday she did not know when the meeting would take place. She declined to say what disciplinary action Bennish might face if administrators conclude he broke any rules.

CBS Denver]]> News http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=31 Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:27:34 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=30 Contrarian Chronicles
The numbers behind the lies

By Bill Fleckenstein

Fun with numbers.

Corporate America likes to play that game, the better to boost stock prices. Folks might be surprised to learn that "Governmental" America also plays the game in its compilation of macroeconomic data. Beneath the surface are undesirable, sobering consequences for us all.Last weekend, the always-terrific Kate Welling published an interview with an economist named John Williams. It will be available on the free portion of her "pay" site via this link starting March 11. This article is the first one that I have seen in which all the flaws in the government data, pertaining to the Consumer Price Index, unemployment, Gross Domestic Product, etc., are disclosed in one piece by someone who's been following the data for a long time.

I have been aware of nearly all the statistical tricks used by the government since they were implemented. Nonetheless, seeing them collectively described in one article is incredibly sobering. Having said that, there is a bit more "black helicopter" insinuation and fewer data points than I would like to see in an article such as this. However, the main points are the math that most folks need to know, but likely do not.

Once you read it, think about it and understand it, you will see why so many thoughtful people -- like Jim Grant, Warren Buffett, Marc Faber, Bill Gross, Fred Hickey and Paul Volcker -- have grave concerns about the future of the dollar (due to the macro imbalances that exist today).

In fact, reading this article, you will conclude that there's no way out, short of running the printing presses. The problem with that end game: At some point, foreigners will revolt. One can only hope that, somehow, there will be a way out. But without an understanding of the issues, folks will have no way to react as events unfold, and adjust their assets as we get more clues as to how all this will play out.

Thus, I would encourage everyone to print out the article and read it as many times as necessary, in order to gain a full understanding of the issues. Since we don't know at what rate some of these problems will start to impact the markets, all we can do is be prepared -- by having our insurance policies (in the form of the metals and foreign currencies), and then being alert to signs that the beginning of a chain reaction may be under way. Meanwhile, to pique folks' interest in the article, I'm going to take the time to provide some "Cliffs Notes" here.

Jobs data don't count the down-and-out
Williams starts by discussing the headline economic data: "Real unemployment right now -- figured the way that the average person thinks of unemployment, meaning figured the way it was estimated back during the Great Depression -- is running about 12%. Real CPI right now is running at about 8%. And the real GDP probably is in contraction." (By "real," he means calculating the data the way they used to be calculated, not as inflation-adjusted.)

He then explains how the employment data are compiled, noting that 5 million chronically unemployed people are not included in the statistics. In fact, there are seven or eight different employment statistics. One called U-3 is the official one. The broadest one, U-6, currently shows unemployment as running around 8.4%. As he explains, the one that's the most historically consistent is running around 12%.

On the Potomac: Reverence for reverse-engineering
Williams differentiates between two data-manipulation practices. One is "systemic manipulations, where methodologies are changed." That's done in order to align the government's view of the world with the world, i.e., make things look better than they are. The second practice is out-and-out fudging of the data to produce whatever result is desired. Williams describes instances where various administrations have literally reverse-engineered the data to achieve that result (though politics is not the main purpose of the article).

For those not familiar with "substitution," he explains the practice's evolution in the CPI calculations. The concept of substitution was a concoction of Alan Greenspan and Michael Boskin, who basically argued that if one item were too expensive, consumers would substitute that with a cheaper one. Williams' response: "The problem is that if you allow substitutions, you aren't measuring a constant standard of living. You're measuring the cost of survival. You can keep substituting down and have people buy dog food instead of hamburger. It happens. But that's not the original concept behind the CPI."

That ticking sound? Social Security
Williams says that the government's motive in all of this, if there is a motive (of the government collectively; don't picture a group of men cooking up something in a back room), is its desire to put a favorable spin on all the data.

Another motive? Transfer payments like Social Security are indexed to the CPI, and they would be far higher if the CPI were accurate. In fact, says Williams, if the "same CPI were used today as was used when Jimmy Carter was president, Social Security checks would be 70% higher." That's seven-zero.

Though Williams doesn't get much into hedonics, he does talk about the inflation-understating impact of geometric weighting versus arithmetic weighting in the CPI statistics: "Geometric weighting ... has the 'benefit' that if something goes up in price, it automatically gets a lower weight, and if it goes down in price, it automatically gets a higher weight."

Then for the ticking time bomb: Social Security. The proceeds from withholding do not go into a lockbox or trust fund. They are spent, thereby reducing the size of the stated deficit. More importantly, he notes that the government's accounting for the deficit doesn't include any accruals for Social Security or Medicare liability.

In fact, if that were done and the government used GAAP accounting, the deficits for 2003, 2004, and 2005 would each have been around $3.5 trillion. That's a trillion, not billion. In 2004 alone, the deficit on an accrual basis would have been $11.1 trillion, due to a huge one-time spike for setting up the Medicare drug benefits. In essence, as he points out, we're piling up additional liabilities in an amount roughly equivalent to our total GDP every three years.

Lots of these imbalances have existed for some time, and they haven't mattered. Such macro problems only matter when they matter. Once that point in time is reached, events have a way of swiftly getting completely out of control -- which is why one has to understand the nuances and be alert for potential signs of chain reaction, as I mentioned earlier.

Charge that Maybach to my imputed income
Returning to the subject of GDP, Williams illuminates a wrinkle that I had not known about, called "imputations": They are "an outgrowth of the theoretical structure of the national income accounts. Any benefit a person receives has an imputed income component. If you're a homeowner, the government assumes that you pay yourself rent on your house, so that's rental income. ... Imputed interest income, for instance, accounted for 21% of all personal interest income in 2002, and was growing at an annual rate of over 8%. Meanwhile, fully 62% of total rental income that year was the imputed variety."

He goes on to point out that folks really aren't doing that well, which is why their incomes aren't growing, which is why they've borrowed money. And that's why understanding the housing ATM is so important -- because as that sputters to a halt, folks will be stuck in the same place they were before (which precipitated the borrowing, i.e., not enough income growth). Only now, they're going to be stuck with incremental debt of their own creation.

What festers underneath the data
Next, he strings together the stock-market and housing bubble, for a summation of where we are: "When that (stock) bubble burst (in 2000), without a foundation of strong income growth, or a financially sound consumer, it triggered a recession that was a lot longer and deeper than the government would have you believe.

"In fact, I contend that what we are in now is a protracted structural change that goes back to the beginning of that 2000 recession, which eventually may be recognized as a double-dip downturn. We did have some recovery in 2003, but in 2005, you started to see signs of a downturn in a variety of leading indicators that I use."

That's not so far off from what I believe. In other words, if you really looked at the data and understood them, you'd see that what appears in the headline numbers is nowhere near what the real supporting data show. Our financial condition is a ticking time bomb. What none of us knows is when it implodes.

MSN Money]]> News http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=30 Tue, 07 Mar 2006 20:09:11 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=29 Disgusting GIs Kill Wounded Iraqi for Fun

Windows Media file.

Paul Joseph Watson's commentary here. ]]> Media http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=29 Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:12:02 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=28 Few critics on Capitol Hill seek to end NSA program
By John Diamond, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Despite widespread criticism of President Bush's warrantless surveillance program, even vociferous detractors in Congress stop short of calling for an end to the anti-terrorist eavesdropping.At issue for many Republicans and Democrats isn't the program itself, but how little the White House told Congress about it and how much it expands presidential power.

Republican senators such as Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are working with Democrats on bills that would put the secret program in line with laws protecting Americans from domestic spying. Legislation in the works includes proposals to subject the surveillance to regular congressional and judicial oversight.

The program lets the National Security Agency (NSA) intercept — without a court-approved warrant — international communications with one end in the USA and one party suspected of ties to al-Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist group. Bush authorized the program shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Since the program was disclosed in December, Bush has argued that his constitutional powers as commander in chief allow him to pursue, without explicit congressional permission, an enemy operating inside U.S. borders.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan has said the administration will consider congressional proposals as long as they do not restrict the government's power to spy on terrorists. Initially, the administration's position was that no congressional involvement was needed.

Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., said in an interview that the challenge is not to halt the surveillance but to "get it right." Kennedy helped write the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which limits domestic spying and requires court-approved warrants for such activity. Kennedy said the Bush administration should have sought congressional approval for warrantless surveillance.

By ordering the program without specific congressional approval, Kennedy said, Bush is jeopardizing prosecutions of captured terrorists who could claim the evidence against them was collected illegally.

Other Democrats, including Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, have had similar measured reactions. Feingold has criticized Bush's handling of the program, but he said in a Senate floor speech last month that fighting terrorism requires the use of wiretaps.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., who has advocated appointment of a special prosecutor to determine whether Bush committed an impeachable offense in going around the FISA law, has not called for stopping the surveillance. Nadler, whose district includes the site of the World Trade Center, destroyed in the 9/11 attacks, says he would at least consider amending the FISA law "to permit what they are doing."

The American Civil Liberties Union and other legal and civil liberties groups have not been so reserved in their reaction to the program.

Several legal challenges are pending, including one filed by the ACLU. Last month, the American Bar Association urged Bush to suspend domestic surveillance of terrorism suspects until it is explicitly authorized by Congress.

USA Today]]> News http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=28 Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:06:12 -0700 http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=27 New Jersey bill aims to stamp out Internet forum anonymity

RAW STORY
Published: March 6, 2006

A bill introduced in the New Jersey Assembly would require websites to collect and make available the legal names and physical addresses of anyone posting on an Internet forum.The law aims to prevent "false or defamatory messages" from being protected by anonymity.

Specifically, it requires that the legal names and addresses of anyone posting a defamatory message must be made available to any parties who claim to have been damaged.
Advertisement

The full text of the law follows:
#

A1327

Sponsored by: Assemblyman PETER J. BIONDI District 16 (Morris and Somerset)

SYNOPSIS

Makes certain operators of interactive computer services and Internet service providers liable to persons injured by false or defamatory messages posted on public forum websites.

CURRENT VERSION OF TEXT

As introduced.

An Act concerning the posting of certain Internet messages and supplementing chapter 38A of Title 2A of the New Jersey Statutes.

Be It Enacted by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

1. As used in this act:

"Information content provider" means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development of information provided through the Internet or any other interactive computer service.

"Interactive computer service" means any information system, service, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides service to the Internet.

"Internet" means the international computer network of both federal and non-federal interoperable packet switched data networks.

"Internet service provider" or "provider" means any person, business or organization qualified to do business in this State that provides individuals, corporations, or other entities with the ability to connect to the Internet through equipment that is located in this State.

"Operator" means any person, business or organization qualified to do business in this State that operates an interactive computer service.

1.

The operator of any interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish, maintain and enforce a policy to require any information content provider who posts written messages on a public forum website either to be identified by a legal name and address, or to register a legal name and address with the operator of the interactive computer service or the Internet service provider through which the information content provider gains access to the interactive computer service or Internet, as appropriate.
2.

An operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider shall establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.
3.

Any person who is damaged by false or defamatory written messages that originate from an information content provider who posts such messages on a public forum website may file suit in Superior Court against an operator or provider that fails to establish, maintain and enforce the policy required pursuant to section 2 of P.L. , c. (C.) (pending before the Legislature as this bill), and may recover compensatory and punitive damages and the cost of the suit, including a reasonable attorney's fee, cost of investigation and litigation from such operator or provider.
4.

This act shall take effect on the 90th day following enactment.

STATEMENT

This bill would require an operator of any interactive computer service or an Internet service provider to establish, maintain and enforce a policy requiring an information content provider who posts messages on a public forum website either to be identified by legal name and address or to register a legal name and address with the operator or provider prior to posting messages on a public forum website.

The bill requires an operator of an interactive computer service or an Internet service provider to establish and maintain reasonable procedures to enable any person to request and obtain disclosure of the legal name and address of an information content provider who posts false or defamatory information about the person on a public forum website.

In addition, the bill makes any operator or Internet service provider liable for compensatory and punitive damages as well as costs of a law suit filed by a person damaged by the posting of such messages if the operator or Internet service provider fails to establish, maintain and enforce the policy required by section 2 of the bill.

Raw Story]]> News http://kurtnimmo.com/nucleus/adenews.phpindex.php?itemid=27 Mon, 06 Mar 2006 16:03:03 -0700