Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Secret Service to Release Logs on Abramoff Visits

washingtonpost.com
Secret Service to Release Logs on Abramoff Visits
Associated Press

The Secret Service has agreed to turn over White House visitor logs that will show how often Jack Abramoff, the convicted former lobbyist, met with Bush administration officials -- and with whom he met.

U.S. District Judge John Garrett Penn approved an agreement last Tuesday between the Secret Service and Judicial Watch, a public interest group, that requires the agency to produce records of Abramoff's visits from Jan. 1, 2001, to the present.

Judicial Watch filed suit in February after the Secret Service did not respond to its request under the federal Freedom of Information Act.

Abramoff once was one of the city's most successful lobbyists. He represented Indian tribes in their dealings with Washington politicians.

He pleaded guilty in January in Washington to federal charges stemming from an investigation into his ties with members of Congress and the Bush administration. He also pleaded guilty to fraud charges in Miami concerning a multimillion-dollar purchase of the SunCruz Casinos gambling fleet in 2000.

Administration officials have refused to say how many times Abramoff, who raised at least $100,000 for President Bush's reelection, has been to the White House. Bush has said he does not know Abramoff.

The visitor logs are to be delivered to Judicial Watch by May 10.


Read More...

Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell Wins GOP Nomination for Ohio Governor

ABC News
Blackwell Wins GOP Nod for Ohio Governor
Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell Wins GOP Nomination for Ohio Governor
By JULIE CARR
The Associated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell won the GOP nomination for governor Tuesday after campaigning as the best candidate to deliver his party from a year of political scandals and infighting.

With more than half of precincts reporting, Blackwell had 257,531 votes, or 55 percent, compared with 208,481, or 45 percent, for Attorney General Jim Petro.

The gubernatorial primary was seen as a test of voter dissatisfaction that could foreshadow the party's prospects in November.

"The Republicans have a problem," said Carl Rullmann, a GOP voter who said he supported Blackwell.

Two other states also held primaries Tuesday, including North Carolina, where the district attorney prosecuting the Duke University rape case fought off two challengers, and Indiana, where congressional incumbents easily won their party nominations.

Blackwell's prominence as a leading black voice in the GOP could be pivotal to Republicans. He is the first black candidate to run for governor in Ohio. His ads sought to taint Petro with connections to the state's investment in rare coins that went awry and to tie him to Gov. Bob Taft, who pleaded no contest to four ethics violations last year involving a failure to report free golf outings and gifts.

Petro hammered Blackwell as a hypocrite who opposes abortion and gambling even though some of his multimillion-dollar stock portfolio is invested in those interests.

The GOP disunity may have turned off some voters.

"I saw a lot of backstabbing, name-calling, character assassination. I don't go for that kind of stuff," said James Martin, 66, leaving a polling place in the Cleveland suburb of Strongsville. He said the negative campaigning influenced his choice in the Republican primary, but he would not say who that was.

The Ohio scandals also emboldened Democrats who hope to end the Republicans' 15-year hold on the governor's office.

The winner of the primary will face Democratic U.S. Rep. Ted Strickland in November. Strickland is viewed as the Democrats' best chance to regain some control over a state government where Republicans control all three branches, as well as statewide offices and a majority of congressional seats.

Strickland handily defeated a former state legislator for the nomination. With 60 percent of precincts reporting, he had 331,823 votes, or 78 percent.

Republicans targeted the House seat Strickland leaves open as one of its best shots nationally to gain a Democratic congressional spot. They have been helped by the fact the Democrats' leading candidate must run as a write-in due to a filing mistake. National Democrats and Republicans have spent roughly $1 million in the race, more than they have for any primary in the past decade.

Ohio's U.S. Senate race will also be closely watched in the fall, but incumbent Sen. Mike DeWine and his Democratic rival, U.S. Rep. Sherrod Brown, easily emerged from the primary.

In North Carolina, the allegations against Duke athletes turned what might have been a low-key election into a referendum on Mike Nifong's performance.

In unofficial results, Nifong had 45 percent of the vote, with challenger Freda Black close behind with about 42 percent. There are no Republicans running in the general election, and Nifong needed only 40 percent of the vote to avoid a runoff.

In Indiana, all nine congressional incumbents advanced to the November election. Most challengers were short on money and party support. Sen. Richard Lugar, one of the most popular politicians in state history, had no Republican opposition.



Read More...

Federal Study Finds Accord on Warming

The New York Times
Federal Study Finds Accord on Warming
By ANDREW C. REVKIN

A scientific study commissioned by the Bush administration concluded yesterday that the lower atmosphere was indeed growing warmer and that there was "clear evidence of human influences on the climate system."

The finding eliminates a significant area of uncertainty in the debate over global warming, one that the administration has long cited as a rationale for proceeding cautiously on what it says would be costly limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases.

But White House officials noted that this was just the first of 21 assessments planned by the federal Climate Change Science Program, which was created by the administration in 2002 to address what it called unresolved questions. The officials said that while the new finding was important, the administration's policy remained focused on studying the remaining questions and using voluntary means to slow the growth in emissions of heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide.

The focus of the new federal study was conflicting records of atmospheric temperature trends.

For more than a decade, scientists using different methods had come up with differing rates of warming at Earth's surface and in the midsection of the atmosphere, called the troposphere. These disparities had been cited by a small group of scientists, and by the administration and its allies, to question a growing consensus among climatologists that warming from heat-trapping gases could dangerously heat Earth.

The new study found that "there is no longer a discrepancy in the rate of global average temperature increase for the surface compared with higher levels in the atmosphere," in the words of a news release issued by the Commerce Department and approved by the White House. The report was published yesterday online at climatescience.gov.

The report's authors all agreed that their review of the data showed that the atmosphere was, in fact, warming in ways that generally meshed with computer simulations. The study said that the only factor that could explain the measured warming of Earth's average temperature over the last 50 years was the buildup heat-trapping gases, which are mainly emitted by burning coal and oil.

All other industrial powers except Australia have accepted mandatory restrictions on such gases under the Kyoto Protocol, but efforts to extend and expand that treaty face hurdles.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations body that conducts an exhaustive periodic review of causes and impacts of warming, has just finished reviewing drafts of its next assessment, to be published next year.

Scientists involved in that effort, while refusing to comment on specific findings, said that research since the last assessment, in 2001, had generated much greater certainty that humans are the main force behind recent warming, and that much more warming is in store unless emissions are curtailed.

Michele St. Martin, a spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said, "We welcome today's report" and added that it showed that President Bush's decision to focus nearly $2 billion a year on climate monitoring and research was "working."

Thomas Karl, the director of the National Climatic Data Center in the Commerce Department and the lead editor of the report, said it was not simply a review of existing work but also, by forcing scientists with differing views to meet repeatedly, resulted in breakthroughs.

"The evidence continues to support a substantial human impact on global temperature increases," Dr. Karl said.

John R. Christy, an author of the new report whose analysis of satellite temperature records long showed little warming above Earth's surface, said he endorsed the conclusion that "part of what has happened over the last 50 years has clearly been caused by humans."

But Dr. Christy, who teaches at the University of Alabama, Huntsville, said the report also noted that computer simulations of the climate system, while good at replicating the globally averaged temperature changes, still strayed in projecting details, particularly in the tropics.

This implied that the models remained laden with uncertainties when used to study future trends, he said.

Dr. Christy also said that even given what the models projected, it would be impossible to slow warming noticeably in the coming decades. Countries would be wise to seek ways to adapt to warming, he added, even as they seek new sources of energy that do not emit heat-trapping gases.



Read More...

10 Country Poll: Fox, BBC, Al Jazeera most trusted

Reuters
Fox, BBC, Al Jazeera most trusted: poll
By Jeffrey Goldfarb

LONDON (Reuters) - One-quarter of consumers abandoned a news source over the past year because they lost trust in its reporting, according to a new survey that also found the BBC, Fox News and Al Jazeera the most trusted brands in their respective home regions.

Results of a poll of more than 10,000 adults in 10 countries by the British Broadcasting Corporation, Reuters Group Plc and The Media Center were released on Wednesday, with an additional finding that media worldwide were trusted by an average of 61 percent of respondents compared with 52 percent who said they trusted their governments.

"National TV is still the most trusted news source by a wide margin, although the Internet is gaining ground among the young," said Doug Miller, president of London-based research firm GlobeScan, which conducted the polling.

"The jury is still out on blogs," he added. "Just as many people distrust them as trust them."

The survey confirmed that media consumption is shifting online for younger generations, as 19 percent of those aged 18 to 24 named the Internet as their most important source of news compared with 9 percent overall.

Seventy-two percent of all respondents said they followed the news closely, including 67 percent of those 18 to 24 years old.

Asked to name the news source they most trusted, without any prompting, 59 percent of Egyptians said Al Jazeera, 52 percent of Brazilians said Rede Globo, 32 percent of Britons said the BBC, 22 percent of Germans said ARD and 11 percent of Americans said Fox News, each leading their respective nations.

The most trusted news brands globally were the BBC, Britain's publicly funded broadcaster, and CNN, which is owned by the world's biggest media conglomerate, Time Warner Inc..

Three Internet portals -- Google, Yahoo and Microsoft/MSN -- received the next highest trust ratings across the 10 countries, when respondents were prompted with 16 different brand names.

Although trust in media has grown in most countries over the past four years, the survey found, 28 percent of people across the 10 countries either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the statement: "In the past year I have stopped using a specific media source because it lost my trust."

Germans were unique in the survey for naming newspapers more than TV as their most important news source, by a margin of 45 percent to 30 percent.

Among South Koreans, who have a comparatively low trust of media in general, 34 percent said the Internet was their most important source of news compared with 9 percent worldwide.

More than 1,000 people were surveyed in March and April in each of the United Kingdom, United States, Brazil, Egypt, Germany, India, Indonesia, Nigeria, Russia and South Korea.

Reuters is a global news and information provider and The Media Center is a nonprofit think tank that researches media-related issues.



Read More...

US finance sector puts Web pricing in crosshairs

Reuters
US finance sector puts Web pricing in crosshairs
By Kristin Roberts

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. financial sector, a powerful force in Washington, may be gearing up to jump into a Capitol Hill fight over the future of the Internet and stop an effort it says could add billions in costs just to maintain current offerings.

The issue is "net neutrality" -- a battle so far contained between high-speed Internet broadband operators and companies with online product offerings, such as Amazon.com.

Broadband providers such as AT&T Inc., BellSouth Corp. and Verizon Communications want to expand from flat pricing and also sell tiers of service based on the speed, reliability and security of the bandwidth used.

While those providers have said they would not block access to the open Internet, companies that sell products or services online want Congress to adopt stricter safeguards to ensure they are not pushed into a slower lane of the Internet if they do not pay more for dedicated network service.

For the financial services sector, which is expected to spend $117 billion on information technology this year, tiered pricing could add billions more in expenses to maintain online banking services and other Web offerings, according to a memo circulating among financial services lobbyists. Those costs could hit the bottom line or be passed on to customers.

But it's a fight the financial sector almost missed.

"Net neutrality is an issue that (financial services) firms ignore at their peril," Philip Corwin, a partner at Washington law firm Butera & Andrews, wrote in the memo.

"If the industry does not engage quickly, it may find that the matter has been decided without its input and that the fallout will affect the industry's cost structure and customer relations for years to come," he added.

The net neutrality issue is embedded in a debate over legislation aimed at easing the path for phone carriers to get into the video business and compete with cable companies.

Legislation has been proposed in the House and Senate, and is being considered in commerce, but not banking, committees.

A Senate measure would require further study of the issue.

A Republican-led bill moving through the House would preserve the ability to surf on the open Internet, but it does not specifically bar Internet service providers from charging new fees to assure reliable service to business users.

Corwin argues that would give Internet service providers a green light to impose big new fees on financial companies.

But phone companies on Tuesday told Reuters the issue has nothing to do with financial services, and action by Congress could hurt consumers and deter investment in new networks.

"If anything is going to halt necessary investments in next generation networks it will be Congress dictating business models to companies," said AT&T spokeswoman Claudia Jones.

"The finance community should be wary of wolves in sheep's clothing who are attempting to codify the status quo to their own benefit and to the detriment of consumers everywhere."

LATE-STAGE STRATEGY

Many in the financial services sector seem to have awakened late to the issue and are now trying to catch up.

"I think it caught a lot of people off guard, honestly," said one bank lobbyist.

The House is expected to consider its bill next week and the Senate Commerce Committee plans to mark up its legislation next month, but large differences between the bills could prevent any legislation from passing this year.

The Corwin memo urged the financial industry to get the Senate Banking Committee and House Financial Services Committee involved, which could slow the progress of legislation.

It also said the industry should prepare bills and push their introduction to assure the continuation of flat high-speed Internet pricing for online financial services.

While the financial industry has plenty of muscle, it may be too late for that strategy, some lobbyists said.

Instead, they may wait for legislation to get to conference, where House and Senate negotiators work out their differences. In that environment of closed-door bargaining, banks and credit unions might be able to secure the net neutrality language they seek, lobbyists said.

The National Association of Federal Credit Unions, America's Community Bankers, American Bankers Association and Independent Community Bankers of America, among other financial lobbyists, say they are monitoring the issue.

But telephone carriers rejected the concerns. They said the legislation is about allowing phone companies to offer video and moving to tiered pricing so those who use little bandwidth do not subsidize those who use a lot.

"Net neutrality is not about being neutral, it is about companies that benefit from selling video on the Internet and their potential advertisers looking to have the cost of the bandwidth they use paid by the consumer," said Bill McCloskey, BellSouth spokesman.

(Additional reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky)



Read More...

US unveils strategy to combat terrorist travel

Reuters
US unveils strategy to combat terrorist travel
By David Morgan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Bush administration does not have enough intelligence analysts to track the movements of terrorists and lacks the ability to distribute classified data about suspicious travelers to U.S. customs and immigration officials, a government report released on Tuesday shows.

The 45-page unclassified report, entitled National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel, provides an overview of U.S. efforts to control terrorist movements around the world and prescribes steps to further improve travel security both at home and abroad.

The National Counterterrorism Center, which wrote the strategy, submitted a classified version to Congress in February as a part of congressionally mandated intelligence reforms enacted in 2004.

More than four years after the September 11 attacks, the strategy document said the Bush administration still needs to ensure that "an appropriate number of intelligence analysts" are dedicated to the problem of global terrorist mobility.

It said greater analytical capability was needed to provide the Department of Homeland Security and FBI with more "actionable leads" from government immigration systems designed to identify suspect travelers before they reach the United States.

The Bush administration is facing a general shortage of intelligence analysts. The problem has been most acute among analysts with counterterrorism experience because of increasing demand from several agencies including the CIA, FBI, Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Counterterrorism Center, which is the U.S. clearinghouse for terrorism-related intelligence.

The document called specifically for more resources for the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, an obscure agency that conducts analysis of clandestine terrorism travel and helps to coordinate U.S. government efforts to counter terrorist movements.

The strategy report also urged the administration to grant "appropriate security clearances" to customs, immigration, border patrol and consular officials so they can receive classified information on travelers with potential ties to terrorism. The government needed to "establish the required technical infrastructure" to support the data flow, it said.

"We've really got to increase the intelligence gathering and information sharing about terrorist traveling and terrorist mobility ... both in the United States and overseas," said Army Gen. Jeffrey Schloesser, who is the National Counterterrorism Center's operational planning director.

He declined to speak in detail.

The report also underscored Washington's need to persuade foreign countries to tighten immigration laws and join international efforts to crack down on passport forgery and illicit travel networks used by terrorists.


Read More...

Tuesday, May 02, 2006

How Many More?

ReadTheOpEdPage.com
How Many More?
Richard Kuper

On May 1, 2003, when President Bush declared "Mission Accomplished," 140 brave US Citizens had given their lives in the invasion of Iraq.

Three years later, the mission is clearly not accomplished, and now more that 2,400 brave US Citizens have given their lives in the invasion of Iraq.

On June 28, 2005, George W. Bush said: "The Sacrifice in Iraq has been worth it."

Has it really?

How many more must die because of this mistake?

Saddam Hussein did not attack the US on 9/11/01. Osama bin Laden was behind that attack.

It has been 1,688 days (more than 4 1/2 years) since George W. Bush said he would catch Osama bin Laden "Dead or Alive!"

When will the war on terrorism actually begin?

Read More...

Mission Accomplished

Huffington Post
Mission Accomplished
Joseph A. Palermo

Karl Rove once said that he ran television campaigns as if the people watching had the sound turned off on their TV monitors. In other words, only the visuals matter. Three years ago, on May 1, 2003, the Bush production company devoured some of America's most powerful national and cultural signifiers, not just for crass political gain, but to inspire and enthrall the populi.

It was a circus without the bread. Here are a few examples:

1). The aircraft carrier. This mighty vessel evokes the surrender of the Japanese on September 14, 1945 to General Douglas MacArthur. The USS Abraham Lincoln is named after the first GOP president, and Bush sought to capture some of the earthy glow of the Great Emancipator. (The USS John F. Kennedy need not apply.) The enormous ship is also a symbol of America's projection of power in the world, with its connotations of conquering oceans, tackling the frontier, and technological innovation.

2). The flight suit. Bush donned the one-piece jump suit instead of the business suit he normally wears to symbolize adventure, danger, "Top Gun," masculinity, and virility. Benito Mussolini wore similar get ups for the same effect. The helmet and the codpiece, the parachute and the dog tags, cast Bush in a Bonapartist light: the General who mixes with his troops, inspiring them with his charismatic leadership. Past presidents who began their careers in the military, such as the Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, made it a point never to wear their uniforms out of respect for the civilian nature of the presidency.

3). Bush as the flier. As the pilot (or co-pilot) Bush is part of the mission, risking his life for the cause. It's tricky business landing a jet aircraft on such a thin floating platform filled with explosive ordnance. He's our military commander. The costume evokes the patriot, helmet stuffed under his arm, returning from a dangerous mission. He's in charge. He's the Commander-in-Chief. Il Duce also flew planes. This spectacle was not Michael Dukakis in a tank!

4). The jet aircraft. This technological marvel harkens back to the Wright Brothers, and fulfills the dream of flight humans had pondered for centuries. Our leader was soaring like a bird in the sky with the help of American technological know-how. He conquered the air. Most people don't get the opportunity to do that; he must be a hero, a risk-taker. After all, the flyboys are the most glamorous in all of the U.S. military.

5). The adoring crowd. The smiling, waving, hugging, ethnically and racially diverse U.S. sailors aboard the aircraft carrier told America: "Our brave men and women protecting our nation obviously adore Bush, so should we!" Team Bush used these military personnel as cheesy, but effective, stage props.

6). The "Mission Accomplished" banner. Spelling out "Mission Accomplished" behind the President gave America what it loves most: Winners! Bush declared himself a winner. He was a winner over the Congress, over the weak-kneed Democrats, over the "liberal" media, over his doubters from the United Nations, the European Union, the Organization of American States, the Islamic Conference, the Arab League, the Organization of African Unity, the Non-Aligned Nations, China, Russia, Germany, France, Pope John Paul, and 15 million protesters worldwide. Bush Wins! We are Winners!

(Later, when we learned the "mission" was not "accomplished," the Bush spinmeisters claimed that it was those stupid, over-excited sailors who were responsible for putting up the banner. The White House subsequently rescinded this false story, but not before the passing of several news cycles.)

7). The deep blue sea background. The watery horizon stretched out over the distance on a stunning California day. The cameras faced out to sea so viewers wouldn't see the San Diego coastline. Adventure and danger loom out in the vast oceans. It takes a strong, courageous man to explore them. (Even though the ship was only about ten nautical miles away from the shore.) "There's our Leader out at sea with the boys!"

8). The invocation of great war presidents of the past. Bush declared: "In the battle for Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." He claimed his "preventive" war on Iraq was akin to the defeat of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War Two, and that it "affirmed" Franklin Roosevelt's Four Freedoms, "asserted" the Truman Doctrine, and evoked "Ronald Reagan's challenge to an evil empire." Not only had the Bush TV producers hijacked the nation's dominant symbols of patriotic duty and sacrifice, but they also wrapped them up in a semiotic package with moments of presidential greatness from our history. The implication was clear: Bush embodied Roosevelt, Truman, and Reagan.

9). The linkage of everything back to 9-11. In his "Mission Accomplished" speech, Bush exploited, as he always does, the trauma the nation experienced with the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. He tapped into the memory of this generation's Pearl Harbor and the solidarity Americans felt following that day of infamy.

10). The control of images. The event itself had more planning than a Superbowl half-time show. The former ABC television producer, Andrew Sforza, who had become Bush's Leni Riefenstahl, arranged all of the details: the multiple camera angles, the lighting, the staging of the sailors, the direction of each shot, the mise en scène, nothing was left to chance. Sforza had a team of nearly one hundred production technicians on the ship preparing (or "advancing") for the President's triumphal landing. Sforza, who is famous for contracting expensive lighting rigs from Europe set on barges that bathed the Statue of Liberty in light as a backdrop for one of Bush's photo-ops, hired associate producers, set builders, grips, lighting and sound specialists, assistant directors, and managers who worked with the major television networks to provide direct feeds and other accommodations. Sforza's set designers dictated the specific colors each of the lines of sailors would wear, the colors of the air deck smoke that was used, the monumental music played. They also made sure there were plenty of black, Latino, and female faces in the frame.

Naturally, the corporate media swooned over their leader's performance. Chris Matthews on MSNBC's Hardball held forth breathless fawning commentary of the event while the caption shot across the screen: "Why are the Democrats raining on Bush's parade?" Said Matthews: "We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as a president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical . . . Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president." Matthews' comments were consistent with other media commentators' enthusiasm across the board. The astute political observer, MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, referred to Bush as "a great man" a half dozen times during the aircraft carrier stunt. Wolf Blitzer, Brian Williams, Bob Schieffer, Joe Klein, David Sanger, and the other dominant voices of the esteemed worlds of mainstream journalism and punditry fell over themselves to honor our hero-leader, Bush the Younger, (Bush the Magnificent!), in his most heroic hour.

I leave you with a quotation from Joe Scarborough that captures the élan of those heady days so long ago when the Iraq war smelled like victory to the mightiest minds of our political discourse. On April 10, 2003, the day after the statue of Saddam Hussein was toppled in Firdos Square, Scarborough remarked: "I'm waiting to hear the words, 'I was wrong,' from some of the world's most elite journalists, politicians and Hollywood types. . . . Maybe disgraced commentators and politicians alike, like [Tom] Daschle, Jimmy Carter, Dennis Kucinich and all those others, will step forward tonight and show the content of their character by simply admitting what we know already: that their wartime predictions were arrogant, they were misguided and they were dead wrong. Maybe, just maybe, these self-anointed critics will learn from their mistakes. But I doubt it. After all, we don't call them 'elitists' for nothing."

Read More...

Sour news for GOP in poll

USA TODAY
Sour news for GOP in poll
By David Jackson, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — Six months before Republicans try to hold on to control of Congress in the fall elections, a new poll shows President Bush has slid to the lowest approval rating of his presidency, and a majority of voters say they'll vote for Democrats in November.

A USA TODAY/Gallup Poll taken Friday through Sunday found Bush's approval rating at 34%, two points under his previous low. He also received the lowest ratings of his presidency on his handling of the economy, energy and foreign affairs. He tied his previous low on Iraq: 32%.

The poll showed Democrats leading 54%-39% among registered voters who were asked which party they would prefer in a congressional race.

POLL RESULTS:Text of all questions, responses

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the president is not focused on polls but "on achieving results for the American people."

A spokesman for the House Republicans' campaign committee, Carl Forti, said unhappiness with Bush doesn't doom the GOP's 29-seat House majority because "President Bush is not on the ballot."

Forti also noted that the poll showed 59% of respondents said their own representative deserves to be re-elected. However, poll data show that's the lowest percentage since 1994, when Republicans won control of Congress from the Democrats.

Sarah Feinberg, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said voters are linking Bush's problems to his GOP colleagues: "The American people want change."

Since 1950, there have been six times when presidents had Gallup approval ratings below 50% in the spring as their party sought to keep control of Congress. The president's party lost House seats in all six years, ranging from five in 1968 to 54 in 1994.

A 15-seat switch in November would give the Democrats a majority in the House. A six-seat switch would give Democrats control of the Senate.

The poll comes as the Iraq war and a sharp increase in gasoline prices have contributed to public uneasiness.

Bush has repeatedly said he does not pay attention to opinion polls. At a fundraiser last week for Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., he said he wants congressional colleagues "who don't listen to polls and focus groups but stand strong for what they think we're doing right."

Contributing: Jim Drinkard



Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-01-gallup-poll_x.htm




Read More...

Around the World, Warmer Temperatures Mean More Infections; Malaria, Lyme Disease and Even Rare Shellfish Disease Spreading

ABC News
Around the World, Warmer Temperatures Mean More Infections
Malaria, Lyme Disease and Even Rare Shellfish Disease Spreading
By JOY VICTORY

April 25, 2006 — - At first glance, an outbreak of diarrhea among passengers on board a cruise ship in Alaskan waters in the summer of 2004 seemed to be relatively harmless.

Health officials theorized it might be the Norwalk virus, a bug that often affects people living in close quarters, such as in nursing homes, hospitals and cruise ships. While certainly annoying, Norwalk usually doesn't cause serious illness.

But then the lab reports started trickling in, and it showed that indeed a more serious problem was at hand -- many of the afflicted the passengers had eaten raw oysters raised in Alaska that were infected with a type of cholera-like bacteria, Vibrio parahaemolyticus, that normally grows on shellfish harvested in much warmer waters.

The finding not only signaled a dangerous new risk to the Alaskan seafood industry, it also highlighted how surprisingly and directly global warming can affect human health, particularly in terms of infectious diseases, experts say.

"Depending on the warming trend that unfolds in the years ahead, we have to accept that habitats will change ... new bugs can be expected to settle in. Every organism will find a niche," said epidemiology professor Colin Soskolne, of the University of Alberta in Canada. "With the tampering of the environment, we really can't predict with much certainty exactly what those changes will be."

Not Safe for Consumption

Global warming is caused by an increase in carbon dioxide and other industrial and auto emissions, which trap heat in the atmosphere and increase air and water temperatures.

While he has personally noticed Alaska's shrinking glaciers and ice floes, global warming wasn't on the mind of Dr. Joseph McLaughlin as he investigated the cruise ship disease outbreak.

He simply wanted to know why the oysters were suddenly at risk -- before this outbreak, no seafood in Alaska had ever tested positive for Vibrio because the ocean water was simply too cold for the bacteria to multiply.

But that was no longer true: An analysis showed that Alaskan water was no longer as chilly as it once was, giving Vibrio a new home up north.

"There's a sort of threshold level, above which concentrations of Vibrio in oysters become (accumulated) enough to cause illness in humans," said McLaughlin, a medical epidemiologist with the Alaska Department of Health and Social Services in Anchorage. "That temperature is about 15 degrees Celsius. What we found was that 2004 was the first summer on record during which the temperature exceeded that."

Or as McLaughlin said in a report published in the New England Journal of Medicine last October: "Rising temperatures of ocean waters seem to have contributed to one of the largest known outbreaks of V. parahaemolyticus in the United States."

The warmer water is unlikely to go away. Buoys placed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association in 1976 have detected a steady annual increase of .4 degrees in the Gulf of Alaska, he said.

"We're not talking about a little bay in Prince William Sound," McLaughlin said.

Thankfully, the state health department got the word out about the outbreak and advised oyster farm owners to keep oysters deep enough where they would not be exposed to water any warmer than about 15 degrees C.

It is just one of the many ways that Alaskans have had to adapt to documented changes in the climate and environment, McLaughlin said. But it serves as a strong warning signal.

"We thought this was probably the best example of the potential of global warming impacting human health, as far as available evidence goes," McLaughlin said.

Mosquitoes and Ticks Spreading

Across the world, another microscopic bug, malaria, has caused havoc in the lowlands of Africa. It is transmitted by mosquitoes, which thrive in hot, damp areas near stagnant bodies of water.

Until recently, the mile-high city of Nairobi, Kenya, was relatively free of the disease.

But now Nairobi, despite its elevation and climate, is in the midst of a malaria outbreak.

And like the Alaskan bacterial outbreak, warmer temperatures are to blame, say scientists with the University of Michigan, the University of Hawaii, the University of Barcelona in Spain and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

In their report, published in last month's Proceedings of the National Academies of Science, they determined that the mosquitoes were thriving in part because it was steadily getting warmer in East Africa's higher altitudes.

This comes as no to surprise to public health researcher Dr. Paul Epstein, the associate director of the Center for Health and the Global Environment at Harvard Medical School and a medical doctor trained in tropical public health.

Along with mosquito-borne diseases like malaria, yellow fever and West Nile virus, tick-borne diseases also are an increasing problem, he said.

When winters are milder, more deer ticks reproduce year-round, transmitting infections such as Lyme disease and Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Lyme disease cases increased from 11,700 cases in 1995 to 21,304 cases in 2005. This year could be a bad one for diseases spread by warm weather-loving insects -- 2005 was the warmest year in the last 100 years, said NASA scientists.

This not only causes more biting bugs to flourish, it also indirectly impacts humans' health in other ways. For example, when trees are weakened by drought, such as what's happening in pine forests from Alaska to Arizona, beetles eat the bark, weakening the trees even more and making them prone to wildfires, Epstein said.

And those wildfires not only release more harmful carbon dioxide and soot into the atmosphere, they trigger another major health effect of global warming: asthma.

Ragweed Loves Carbon Dioxide

For years, doctors have noted an increase in asthma and allergies.

While no one can link the increase directly to global warming, Epstein has strong evidence: When ragweed -- one of the most allergenic plants on the planet -- is grown in a carbon dioxide-rich environment, it grows 10 percent faster than normal, but produces 60 percent more pollen.

While that's good for the plants, it's bad for people. Most people are allergic to something, and often it is plant pollen. In children especially, being exposed to an allergen can trigger a dangerous asthmatic response, or inflammation of the lungs.

"As we see the seasons change and warmer weather has an earlier arrival in the spring, we're beginning to see shifts in asthma and allergies," Epstein said.

What's worse, he said, is that the tiny dust particles emitted from diesel fuel attach to plant pollens, and these diesel particles further irritate the lining of the lung.

Though there haven't been published studies showing that the rise in asthma cases is tied to global warming, Epstein said it is.

"We're seeing it and we're all experiencing it," he said.




Read More...

16,000 Species Said to Face Extinction

ABC News
16,000 Species Said to Face Extinction
Conservation Groups: Polar Bears, Hippos Among 16,000 Species Threatened With Extinction
By SAM CAGE
The Associated Press

GENEVA - Polar bears and hippos are among more than 16,000 species of animals and plants threatened with global extinction, the World Conservation Union said Tuesday.

According to the Swiss-based conservation group, known by its acronym IUCN, the number of species classified as being in serious danger of extinction rose from about 15,500 in its previous "Red List" report, published in 2004.

The list includes one in three amphibians, a quarter of the world's mammals and coniferous trees, and one in eight birds, according to a preview of the 2006 Red List. The full report is published later this week.

"Biodiversity loss is increasing, not slowing down," said Achim Steiner, the conservation group's director general. "The implications of this trend for the productivity and resilience of ecosystems and the lives and livelihoods of billions of people who depend on them are far-reaching."

The Red List classifies about 40,000 species according to their risk of extinction and provides a searchable online database of the results. The total number of species on the planet is unknown, with 15 million being the most widely accepted estimate. Up to 1.8 million are known today.

People are the main reason for most species' decline, mainly through habitat destruction, according to IUCN.

Polar bears are threatened by global warming and melting ice caps, because they are conditioned for the icy environment and depend on Arctic ice floes for hunting seas. They are predicted to suffer a 30 percent population decline in the next 45 years.

The hippopotamus population in war-ravaged Congo, meanwhile, has plummeted by 95 percent, mainly because of unregulated hunting for meat and ivory in their teeth.

"Regional conflicts and political instability in some African countries have created hardship for many of the region's inhabitants, and the impact on wildlife has been equally devastating," said Jeffrey McNeely, chief scientist at IUCN.

Freshwater fish have suffered some of the most dramatic population declines because of human activities that damage their habitat, like forest clearance, pollution and water extraction. In the Mediterranean, more than half of the 252 endemic species are threatened with extinction. Seven species, including two relatives of carp, are already extinct, IUCN said.

The conservation union warned that the decline in wetlands and freshwater ecosystems will also damage supplies for humans of food, clean drinking water and sanitation.

Other species threatened with extinction include desert gazelles, ocean sharks and Mediterranean flowers, IUCN said.

Some 784 are listed as extinct only a small increase from 2004 while 65 are found only in captivity. But the situation looks a little brighter for some others, such as the white-tailed eagle and Indian vultures.

"Reversing this trend is possible, as numerous conservation success stories have proven," Steiner said. "Biodiversity cannot be saved by environmentalists alone it must become the responsibility of everyone with the power and resources to act."

On the Net: http://www.iucnredlist.org




Read More...

10 States, in Challenge to U.S., Plan Suit to Force Better Mileage Rules for S.U.V.'s

The New York Times
10 States, in Challenge to U.S., Plan Suit to Force Better Mileage Rules for S.U.V.'s
By DANNY HAKIM

ALBANY, May 1 — Ten states, including California and New York, plan to file suit this week to force the Bush administration to toughen mileage regulations for sport utility vehicles and other trucks.

The suit, which the states are to announce on Tuesday, contends that the administration did not do a rigorous enough analysis of the environmental benefits of fuel economy regulations, as required by law, before issuing new rules last month for S.U.V.'s, pickup trucks and minivans. The suit will also claim that the government did not consider the impact of gasoline consumption on climate change when devising the new rules.

While the states have initiated a number of suits over Washington's environmental policies, the new suit is the first to take aim at federal fuel economy regulations. With gasoline reaching $3 a gallon in many parts of the country, there has been a broad outcry for action but little consensus on what to do.

Senate Republicans have proposed a $100 rebate to help taxpayers pay gas bills, a proposal that has been met with criticism even from the right, while President Bush has asked for Congressional authority to revise mileage regulations for passenger cars. He already has the authority to do so for S.U.V.'s and other trucks.

California will be lead plaintiff in the suit, which also includes Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont, as well as New York City and the District of Columbia. Many of the same states have teamed up in other environmental suits against the administration, though with mixed success; a recent suit against the Environmental Protection Agency over power plant emissions was dismissed.

"It's disappointing when you see power exercised to benefit the auto industry rather than consumers or environmental challenges," said Bill Lockyer, the attorney general of California, discussing the Bush administration's fuel economy rules.

The attorney general of Massachusetts, Thomas F. Reilly, said in a statement, "At a time when we are all facing a gas crisis, the Bush administration is pushing for fuel economy standards that appear to be authored by the oil and auto industries."

Rae Tyson, a spokesman for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, said he could not comment on the suit because he had not seen it. But Mr. Tyson defended the regulations and said, "There's no question the analysis was rigorous."

Several top Democrats, and also some Republicans, including Senator John McCain of Arizona, have called for tougher mileage requirements for S.U.V.'s, which must meet less stringent fuel economy guidelines because they are classified in the same category as light trucks, instead of with passenger cars .

Late last year, the Bush administration unveiled the first broad overhaul of mileage regulations for S.U.V.'s, pickup trucks and minivans since the rules were created in the 1970's. Currently, each automaker's annual production of passenger cars must average 27.5 miles a gallon, while light trucks, which include S.U.V.'s, must average 21.6 miles a gallon in 2006 models.

The administration's new system would take the single truck category and break it up into a number of smaller categories with varying requirements. Government officials predict that overall truck fuel economy will rise to 24 miles a gallon by 2011, though it will depend on the sales mix among S.U.V.'s and other trucks.

Automakers have said the new regulations are tough enough.

Jennifer Moore, a spokeswoman for the Ford Motor Company, referred to a previous company statement that commended the traffic safety agency for creating a new regulatory system that would "pose significant challenges" but also be "more equitable to every automaker."

An overdependence on sales of large S.U.V.'s like Hummers, Chevrolet Suburbans and Ford Explorers is seen as among the reasons General Motors and Ford, the last two American-owned automakers, are suffering steep losses and closing plants.

Environmentalists say the Bush administration's new truck fuel economy system will not do enough to curb oil consumption and adds uncertainty to a complex system already characterized by loopholes.

In setting the standards, the administration "looked high gas prices, oil addiction and global warming squarely in the eye and blinked," said Daniel Becker, the director of the global warming program at the Sierra Club.

The administration is, however, closing one loophole, an exemption that has left the largest S.U.V.'s, including the Hummer H2, outside the regulatory system.

But the administration's rules are considerably less daunting than new California global warming emissions regulations that would force steeper fuel economy increases on vehicles sold there. New York is planning to pass similar air-quality rules. The industry is challenging the state rules in court, and the administration has strongly opposed the movement by states to regulate global warming emissions.

Mr. Tyson, of the traffic safety agency, said many other factors were considered in addition to the price of gas, including "the ability of industry to be able to meet the standard."

"You can't propose something that's not technically feasible for them to achieve," he added.





Read More...

Bruce Springsteen criticises politicians for "criminal ineptitude" in their response to Hurricane Katrina in the southern United States

BBC NEWS
Rocker angry at Katrina response

Bruce Springsteen has criticised politicians for "criminal ineptitude" in their response to Hurricane Katrina in the southern United States.

The singer was performing at the Jazz and Heritage Festival in New Orleans, parts of which he had visited after they were devastated in the disaster.

"I saw sights I never thought I'd see in an American city," he said. "The criminal ineptitude makes you furious."

More than 1,300 people were killed across US states affected by Katrina.

The population of New Orleans fell from nearly 500,000 to less than 200,000.

Fans cried and embraced during poignant songs in Springsteen's set.

In one, How Can a Poor Man Stand Such Times and Live?, the lyrics referred to "bodies floating" in the street and levees which had "gone to hell".

Jazz influences

My City in Ruins, originally written for the singer's favourite town of Asbury Park in New Jersey, was dedicated instead to New Orleans.

And reflecting the city's jazz influences, he ended his performance with When The Saints Go Marching In.

Springsteen was joined on the bill at the festival by other high-profile acts including Bob Dylan, the Dave Matthews Band and Elvis Costello.

The annual event traditionally draws around 400,000 people and boosts the city's economy by up to $300m (£165m).

It is being held at a racetrack on the northern side of city that was underwater eight months ago and continues next weekend.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/entertainment/4961742.stm




Read More...

Bolivia's President Evo Morales has signed a decree placing his country's energy industry under state control

BBC NEWS
Bolivia gas under state control

Bolivia's President Evo Morales has signed a decree placing his country's energy industry under state control.

In a May Day speech, he said foreign energy firms must agree to channel all their sales through the Bolivian state, or else leave the country.

He set the firms a six-month deadline, but the military and state energy officials have already started taking control of the oil fields.

Brazil and Spain have both expressed concern at the move.

The main foreign oil firms operating in Bolivia are Brazil's Petrobras, the Spanish-Argentine company Repsol YPF, British companies British Gas and British Petroleum, France's Total, and the US Exxon Mobil Corporation.

The Brazilian government called the moves unfriendly and said their operations in Bolivia were under review.

The Spanish Foreign Ministry expressed its deep concern and said it hoped there would be authentic negotiations and dialogue, while Exxon Mobil said it was monitoring the situation very closely.

Bolivia has South America's second largest natural gas reserves.

But the country has suffered years of political crises over how to develop and profit from the industry.

High energy prices

Speaking at an oilfield in the south of the country, Bolivia's left-wing president called it an "historic day".

"The pillage of our natural resources by foreign companies is over," he declared.

The time has come, the awaited day, a historic day in which Bolivia retakes absolute control of our natural resources
Evo Morales
Bolivian President

He said the companies had six months to re-negotiate their contracts and urged them to "respect the dignity of Bolivians".

Foreign companies would receive 18% of oil and gas revenues during the transition period, reports said.

Vice President Alvaro Garcia said the military and officials from the state energy firm YPFB moved to take control of 53 energy installations - including gas fields, pipelines and refineries - immediately after the decree was signed.

There was no immediate word from the foreign energy companies themselves.

The firms will get less favourable terms but current high global energy prices may be an incentive to see if they can work with Mr Morales, the BBC's Americas editor Simon Watts says.

Friendly meetings

Mr Morales swept to victory as Bolivia's first indigenous president in January elections after vowing to "recover" the country's natural resources by renationalising them.

However, he has shown signs of pragmatism since coming to office, and has held friendly meetings with several oil bosses.

On a visit to Brazil in January he said renationalising the industry would not mean expelling foreign companies or expropriating foreign property.

"Foreign companies have every right to recover investments and make profits, but profits should be balanced," he told a press conference at the time.

Petrobras is one of Bolivia's largest foreign investors, controlling 14% of the country's gas reserves.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/4963348.stm


Read More...

Use of secret warrants increased last year

Reuters
Use of secret warrants up last year

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The number of court-approved warrants allowing the Bush administration to conduct intelligence searches and electronic surveillance inside the United States climbed 18 percent to 2,072 in 2005, the Justice Department said on Monday.

The administration also increased in its pursuit of business records and used secret subpoenas to get information on more than 3,000 people in the United States under separate provisions of the USA Patriot Act, which granted the government expanded police powers after the September 11 attacks.

The Justice Department released statistics on its use of secret warrants, business records and national security letters in a report to Congress dated April 28. A copy of the document was first reported by "Secrecy News," an e-mail newsletter published by the Federation of American Scientists.

The number of intelligence-related warrants approved last year by a secret federal court for surveillance and searches rose 318 from a total of 1,754 in 2004, a Justice Department spokeswoman confirmed.

The secret court, established in 1978 by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, made substantial modifications to 61 government warrant applications last year. But it denied no warrant application filed in 2005.

The increase in secret wiretaps and searches comes amid an expansion of domestic counterterrorism activities among federal agencies including the FBI.

But the warrants are not related to the domestic spying program that President George W. Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct soon after the September 11 attacks.

The NSA program allows the authorities to monitor the international e-mails and phone calls of U.S. citizens without obtaining warrants while in pursuit of al Qaeda suspects.

Administration officials have said warrantless surveillance is necessary because FISA warrant requirements are not flexible enough to contend with al Qaeda and other militant networks opposed to the United States.

Meanwhile, the Justice Department said the FISA court in 2005 also approved 155 warrants granting federal authorities access to business records under the Patriot Act.

Comparison figures for 2004 are classified. But Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the Senate intelligence committee last year that by March 30, 2005, the administration had used the authority only 35 times since the Patriot Act first came into force in 2001.

The Justice Department also said the government issued 9,254 secret national security letters in 2005 to gather information on 3,501 people, including U.S. citizens and residents. National security letters, authorized by the Patriot Act, allow the FBI to demand disclosure of personal information without the approval of a judge or grand jury.



Read More...

Europeans hold May Day protests

BBC NEWS
Europeans hold May Day protests

Many thousands of people have taken to the streets across Europe as part of traditional May Day protests.

Some 25,000 Russian trade unionists - and several thousand Communists - marched in Moscow for social welfare.

In Belarus, more than 1,000 opposition supporters held a show of defiance after the jailing of their leaders on Thursday over another protest.

While in Turkey, police clashed with at least 20 protesters who held a rally in an unauthorised area of Istanbul.

Tens of thousands of Germans meanwhile called on the government not to dilute peoples' rights as it tackles reforms.

"The government should not put in place anti-social policies," said Michael Sommer, president of the German Federation of Trade Unions (DGB), at a rally in Wolfsburg, home to the headquarters of car manufacturer Volkswagen.

Car workers for the Peugeot factory in the UK were attending the May Day rally in London to protest at plans to cut 2,300 jobs.

Elsewhere in the world:

* Union and civic leaders in Zimbabwe protest over worsening hardship under President Robert Mugabe, and ask police not to beat them

* Thousands of Iranian workers demonstrate in Tehran over the growing use of short-term employment contracts

* Police in the Philippines and Indonesia are put on high alert amid fears the rallies could turn into anti-government protests

* Cambodia briefly arrests labour head Chea Mony as hundreds attempt to defy a ban on marches in the capital Phnom Penh

Tear gas

Russian police spokesman, Viktor Biryukov, said trade unionists marched peacefully through central Moscow calling for a "social state," according to Itar-Tass news agency.

A smaller group of Communist Party supporters marched from Lenin monument on October Square to their usual rally spot at the Karl Marx statue. They chanted "Putin resign!", "Our Homeland is the USSR".



The May Day march in the Belarus capital, Minsk - sanctioned by the city's officials - was nominally used to call for an end to short-term labour contracts.

But the main focus of the protest was to call for the release of opposition leader Alexander Milinkevich and other activists who were jailed for up to 15 days last week.

"Freedom for Milinkevich!" marchers shouted as they passed along the approved route, the AFP news agency reported.

"Not all our friends are here today. Many are behind bars," Alexander Dobrovolsky of the United Civic Party told protesters. "We need solidarity to keep us together every day."

In Istanbul, Turkish police arrested at least 20 left-wing protesters who had gathered in the city's Taksim Square without a necessary permit, according to reports.

Television footage showed the protesters resisting arrest and fighting with police officers who tried to disperse them using tear gas and pepper spray.

Meanwhile, in the city's Kadikoy district, thousands gathered for an approved rally, organised by trade unions and civic organisations. A large rally was also being held in the capital Ankara.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4962504.stm




Read More...

Monday, May 01, 2006

The Shadow Government

The Huffington Post
Cenk Uygur
The Shadow Government

The Boston Globe is now reporting that the president believes he has the authority to disobey over 750 laws passed by Congress. And those are just the laws passed on his watch. As we've already seen with the FISA statute, the president also feels he has the right to ignore laws passed by previous administrations as well.

If the president feels he is free to ignore a great number of laws - and he is on the record as implementing that belief by disobeying some long established laws - there is a whole different government running the country than we think there is.

There is the government with the laws we think we have. And the government with the laws the president secretly says we have. This secret set of decisions on which laws will and won't be applied is what makes up the new shadow government.

The idea that the president would say he has the authority to ignore the strictures of laws passed by the United States Congress might seem like some sort of liberal exaggeration to some. It seems so outlandish. But don't take anyone's word for it, ask the administration -- they readily confirm it.

In fact, they're proud of it. They think they are reinstating the real executive powers of the presidency. Powers that the Courts or Congress have never agreed to and that are outside of the plain, or any reasonable, reading of the Constitution, but nonetheless, the administration believes is owed to them.

This makes Nixon's imperial presidency look like child's play. In a democracy, we have a president who is literally saying he is above the law. There are 750 laws he does not have to faithfully execute.

Now, the media has a herculean task in front of it -- identify all the laws the president is actually breaking. He claims the right to break 750 of them, at least. We already know he's breaking one of them - the FISA statute on warrantless spying (which by the way was passed by a previous administration, so it is not even one of the 750 he claims the right to ignore).

Attorney General Gonzales has hinted in his testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee that there might be more laws the president is already violating, including warrantless spying on Americans in purely domestic communications.

Most of the implementation of these laws is done in secret under the guise (and sometimes reality) of national security. Though some are on domestic issues like affirmative action, which I can't imagine even this administration could argue is a national security matter. But the media now must pick through all these laws to uncover what is and is not being followed by this administration.

They must unearth what the shadow government is actually doing, not what we think they're doing based on laws we thought were being followed.

This is an extraordinary power grab. There is no precedent for it, or justification. It is grossly undemocratic. I cannot believe the President of the United States of America says he has the power to ignore laws passed by the people's representatives.

George Bush has crossed the Rubicon. These are not the powers of a president. They are the powers of a dictator. If that seems like an extreme statement, I assure you that it is not my words that are extreme but their actions. The words fit the gravity of the situation. As Sandra Day O'Connor warned recently on a similar issue:

"It takes a lot of degeneration before a country falls into dictatorship, but we should avoid these ends by avoiding these beginnings."

I do not subscribe to the school of thought that we are already at those ends. But we are also clearly past the beginning stages of this unprecedented power grab. And if we don't act soon on Justice O'Connor's warning, we might be at the end before we know it.

We have a president who says he doesn't have to follow all the laws of our democracy -- and who ironically claims to spread democracy throughout the world. We have a rubberstamp Congress that absolutely refuses to check this out of control president. We have an administration that assiduously avoids court review of its actions, as it continues to pack the court with right wing extremists (Sam Alito advocated using signing statements to exercise presidential power when he worked under Reagan, though even he didn't suggest going as far as this administration has).

Our final check in this democracy is the people. It might sound clichéd, but it is entirely true. But the people must have the right information so that they make the right decisions. This is where the press comes into play.

The media fell asleep at the wheel before the Iraq invasion and we had an electorate that believed Saddam Hussein was connected to the September 11th attacks against us. Forty percent of Americans still believed that going into the 2004 election and nearly ninety percent of our soldiers in Iraq still believe that today. If I believed Saddam had ordered 9/11, I'd want to attack Iraq, too.

Wrong information equals wrong decisions. People can't be blamed if they don't know. It is the job of the press to let them know. The 2006 elections are the last chance to check this imperial presidency. If the press fails our democracy at this critical juncture and the electorate doesn't know what we know by the time they step into that voting booth, we will have done great damage to our country and its principles.

We already know what laws this administration thinks it doesn't have to follow. Now, the press has six months to figure out exactly what laws they are and are not following in reality. We have six months to figure out what exactly this shadow government is up to.


Read More...

Terrorist Attacks Rose Sharply in 2005, State Dept. Says

washingtonpost.com
Terrorist Attacks Rose Sharply in 2005, State Dept. Says
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer

The number of terrorist attacks worldwide increased nearly fourfold in 2005 to 11,111, with strikes in Iraq accounting for 30 percent of the total, according to statistics released by U.S. counterterrorism officials yesterday.

Although only half of the incidents resulted in loss of life, more than 14,600 noncombatants were killed, a majority of them in Iraq alone and 80 percent in the Near East and South Asia. American nonmilitary deaths totaled 56.

The figures were compiled by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) and released with the annual State Department Country Reports on Terrorism.

Unlike those of previous years, the 2005 report included a "strategic assessment" of the war on terrorism, which concluded that while "al-Qaeda is not the organization it was four years ago," the group was "adaptive and resilient . . . and important members of its core cadre remained alive and were adjusting to our operational tempo."

"Overall," the 262-page report said, "we are still in the first phase of a potentially long war. The enemy's proven ability to adapt means we will probably go through several more cycles of action/reaction before the war's outcome is no longer in doubt. It is likely that we will face a resilient enemy for years to come."

The assessment was somewhat more grim than those offered by the White House in recent months. Although the struggle against global terrorism is far from over, President Bush said in a February speech at the Naval Academy that "we're winning."

The NCTC defines terrorist attacks as "premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets" but acknowledges that such terms are "open to interpretation." "Combatants" are defined as "military, paramilitary, militia, and police under military command and control in specific areas or regions where war zones or war-like settings exist."

Diplomats and other nonmilitary government "assets," as well as civilians, are considered noncombatants for counting purposes.

On the positive side, the report noted that al-Qaeda's leadership is "scattered and on the run," with its finances and logistics disrupted and its organizational networks increasingly decentralized.

But while Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, were said to be "frustrated" by their lack of direct control over terrorist operations, the fact that they remained at large allowed them to "symbolize resistance to the international community, demonstrate they retain the capability to influence events, and inspire actual and potential terrorists."

The apparent inability of bin Laden and Zawahiri to orchestrate large-scale attacks -- and al-Qaeda's increasing "emphasis on ideological and propaganda activity" -- was one of several emerging trends, said Henry A. Crumpton, State Department coordinator for counterterrorism, in a briefing.

The number of "high fatality incidents" around the world, excluding Iraq, was among the few statistics in the report that decreased from 2004 -- when attacks in places such as Russia and Madrid killed hundreds -- to 2005.

But in Iraq, such incidents -- defined as those resulting in 10 or more deaths -- increased from 65 to 150, with a doubling of fatalities. Overall, there were 3,500 attacks in Iraq, up from 866 in 2004.

Most fatalities were attributed to armed attacks and bombings. None occurred in the United States or used weapons of mass destruction, and "no attacks approached the sophistication of those on 9/11," the NCTC statistical analysis concluded.

But "2005 saw many attacks perpetrated by relatively unskilled operatives." The State Department report noted an increase in "small, autonomous cells and individuals [that] drew on advanced technologies and the tools of globalization such as the Internet, satellite communications, and international commerce."

These "micro-actors," the report said, "were extremely difficult to detect or counter." Increasing use of the Internet among individuals and small groups disposed to terrorist acts, such as last July's suicide bombings in the London transport system, no longer requires central leadership or on-the-ground training.

In addition to those trends, NCTC Deputy Director Russ Travers offered three reasons for the significant statistical increases in both attacks and fatalities. The 2004 report was initially assembled under a narrower definition of terrorism, confined to attacks involving citizens or territory of more than one country. In July, NCTC released revised 2004 figures compiled under the new definition, Travers said, but the hurried nature of the work and a lack of analysts at the then-fledgling NCTC meant that "we missed thousands of incidents."

"The bottom line is that 2005 is a far more comprehensive data set," Travers said, "and limits the comparability of 2004 and 2005." Travers also pointed out that the overall figure of 11,111 incidents includes acts by designated terrorist groups such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, and the Lord's Resistance Army in Uganda.

As in previous years, the report cited Iran as "the most active state sponsor of terrorism." This activity included the direct involvement of its intelligence service and Islamic Revolutionary Guard in planning and supporting terrorist acts, and Iran's backing and encouragement of terrorist groups operating in Syria and Lebanon and against Israel. In addition, the Revolutionary Guard was said to be "increasingly involved in supplying lethal assistance" to violent Shiite militias in Iraq.

There were no changes to last year's list of known terrorist groups or to the list of six countries considered "state sponsors" of terrorism: Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Cuba and Libya.

Libya, which has renounced weapons of mass destruction and terrorism, had made progress, Crumpton said, and "we're at the point right now of continuing our discussions, verifying some issues and moving forward." Only Iraq, which was removed last year, has ever been taken off the list.

Researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.


Read More...

Tens of Thousands in New York March Against Iraq War

The New York Times
Tens of Thousands in New York March Against Iraq War
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

Thousands of people marched through Lower Manhattan yesterday to demand America's withdrawal from Iraq, the latest in a series of antiwar protests held in New York City and around the country during the past several months.

The march came a day after the State Department reported that insurgent attacks on civilians in Iraq surged last year, accounting for nearly half of the people killed in terrorism attacks across the world. It also came near the end of the deadliest month for American forces in Iraq since last November.

"I don't think the message has really changed, but the magnitude of the participation has grown," said Donald Morrill, 50, a college professor who journeyed from Florida to take part in the demonstration.

Several local politicians participated, notably the Rev. Al Sharpton, and some national figures, too, including Cindy Sheehan, whose son died in Iraq and who has become a symbol of the antiwar movement.

Yesterday's protest drew added urgency from the administration's recent saber rattling over Iran, and signs opposing possible United States military action there were almost as common as those urging a withdrawal from Iraq. But as at previous Iraq-related protests, yesterday's demonstration encompassed an array of causes, from immigrants' rights to low-cost housing.

Mark Hallinan, 47, a priest at St. Ignatius Loyola Church on the Upper East Side, led a group of about a dozen people from his parish under the auspices of Pax Christi, a lay Catholic peace organization.

"We've seen the impact in so many ways," Father Hallinan said. "It's taking away money for education, for balancing the budget."

For others marching, the mere fact that the United States remained in Iraq was reason enough to protest, said Laurie Goodstein, a physician from Manhattan. Dr. Goodstein said she was meeting her parents — both in their 80's — at the march's end. "They've been going to protests all their lives," she joked, "but now they're too old to walk all the way."

Yesterday's demonstration began on Broadway, north of Union Square, where thousands of protesters of all ages gathered between 17th and 23rd Streets. About half past noon, they lurched into motion, heading south toward Foley Square near City Hall.

One group carried a daisy chain of hundreds of pictures of United States troops who died in Iraq, strung out over many blocks; others waved signs, slapped drums or simply enjoyed the pleasant weather.

By 2 p.m., the protesters' vanguard had reached Foley Square, but the rear of the column still stretched more than a mile back.

The participating groups — led by United for Peace and Justice, the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition and the National Organization for Women — set up more than a dozen tents in Foley Square, where T-shirts, pamphlets and petitions were distributed.

"We're here to deliver a message to the rest of the world that there are still Americans who strongly oppose these policies," said Daniel Einbender, 56, a musician and environmental educator from Wurtsboro, N.Y. "Someone asked me if I did it for love. I'm from the 60's, I'm one of those guys. I'm doing it out of habit. But it's a good habit."




Read More...

Powell advised Bush to send more troops to Iraq

Reuters
Powell advised Bush to send more troops to Iraq
By Vicki Allen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday defended the Bush administration's Iraq war planning after her predecessor, Colin Powell, said he had made a case to send more troops to deal with the war's aftermath.

Rice also said she did not "remember specifically" what instance Powell was referring to on his recommending to President George W. Bush that more troops be sent.

In an interview with a private British television station on Sunday, Powell said there had been debates about the size of the force and how to deal with the aftermath.

"I don't think we had enough force there to impose order," he said on ITV's Jonathan Dimbleby program.

"The aftermath turned out to be much more difficult than anyone had anticipated," said Powell, adding he had favored a larger military presence to deal with the unforeseen.

"I made the case to General (Tommy) Franks, to (Defense) Secretary (Donald) Rumsfeld and to the president that I was not sure we had enough troops," Powell said. But he said the military leaders felt they had the appropriate number.

Powell's comments come amid concern about the rising death toll in Iraq, which has been a factor in driving Bush's approval ratings to the lowest of his presidency.

Since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, the U.S. military death toll in Iraq has grown to 2,400. Iraqi military deaths are estimated at up to 6,370 and Iraqi civilian deaths at up to 38,600.

Rice, appearing on several Sunday talk shows, was responding to the Powell's comments that fanned the controversy over the administration's plans for the invasion's immediate aftermath. Critics say violence and looting set the stage for a bloody insurgency and sectarian killings over the last three years.

Asked on CNN's Late Edition if she remembered Powell's dissent, Rice said, "I don't remember specifically what Secretary Powell may be referring to, but I'm quite certain that there were lots of discussions about how best to fulfill the mission when we went into Iraq."

She said Bush relied on his military advisers, and that he "asked time and time again" whether everything needed to execute the plan was available, "and he was told 'yes'."

Rice added that there would have been "potentially a lot of problems with a very, very big footprint of coalition forces at the time of the liberation of Iraq."

On CBS' Face the Nation, she said, "I'm quite certain that there are things that, in retrospect, we would do differently. But that's the nature of any big complicated operation."

After the invasion, Rumsfeld said U.S. military commanders believed there were sufficient troops to contain insurgents and establish peace.

However, troop levels were later increased amid escalating violence and to establish security in time for elections.

Bush has not set a timetable for a U.S. withdrawal, saying American soldiers will pull out as Iraqi forces take over fighting Sunni rebels and sectarian violence which has pushed Iraq to the brink of civil war.

Rice praised progress made by Iraq's own forces. But to start withdrawing troops, she said on CNN, "We really do want it to be based on conditions on the ground; so do the Iraqis. If there is anything that they recognize, it's that they are not quite ready for these tasks. But they want to take that responsibility, and we should want them to take it.

(Additional reporting by Madeline Chambers in London)




Read More...

ID Law Stirs Passionate Protest in N.H.

washingtonpost.com
ID Law Stirs Passionate Protest in N.H.
With Costumes and Quotations, State Opposes Federal Plan
By David A. Fahrenthold
Washington Post Staff Writer

CONCORD, N.H. -- Those concerned about a new federal plan to overhaul the issuing of driver's licenses have two fairly distinct ways of showing it. One of them involves task forces, letter-writing and groups such as the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. The other involves protesters dressed like Nazis and politicians quoting Patrick Henry.

Anyone familiar with the revolution-tinged politics of New Hampshire can guess which one is happening here.

"The war on our civil liberties is actually begun," New Hampshire state Rep. Neal M. Kurk (R) told his colleagues recently, borrowing from Henry's famous "Liberty or Death" speech to condemn the license plan and the U.S. government in place of the British crown. He continued: "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?"

Now, this state legislature is poised to formally reject the new license rules, which are aimed at screening out terrorists and illegal immigrants, but have been criticized as a logistical nightmare and the beginning of a national ID card. As a political circus has unfolded here in Concord, everyone, including libertarians, evangelical Christians and state bureaucrats, has been paying attention.

"Everybody's watching," said Jim Harper at the Cato Institute in Washington, who objects to the new rules as a federal intrusion into personal privacy. His hope: "Even one state refusing to participate basically will cause the system to crumble."

The controversy in New Hampshire surrounds a federal law called the Real ID Act, which was approved last year after it was tacked on to a bill funding the war in Iraq and relief for tsunami victims. Its principal backer, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. (R-Wis.), said he wanted to close the kinds of loopholes that allowed some of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers to obtain official identification.

The bill requires states to check whether driver's license applicants are in the country legally, and to require documents showing their birth date, Social Security number and home address. The act also requires that states find a way to verify that the documents are valid.

The deadline is May 2008. If states cannot meet the new requirements by then, the bill says, their licenses may not be accepted as identification at airport security screenings, federal buildings and nuclear plants.

Groups of state-level officials have protested that the act requires sophisticated computer networks that don't exist now and that meeting the deadline could be overwhelmingly expensive or simply impossible.

For now, their criticism has been measured while they wait for the Department of Homeland Security to work out key details of the license plan. It's still unclear, for instance, whether drivers who have a license already will have to be rescreened, or whether there will need to be a single federal computer database containing everyone's license information.

New Hampshire, though, is not the waiting kind of state.

In January, several legislators here introduced a bill that called the Real ID measure "contrary and repugnant" to both the U.S. and New Hampshire constitutions, and vowed that "New Hampshire shall not participate in a national identification card system."

At first, the bill seemed destined to fail, voted down in committee. But then, in early March, Kurk stood up to defend it on the House floor, citing the new federal rules as the beginning of creeping federal intrusions.

"We care more for our liberties than to meekly hand over to the federal government the potential to enumerate, track, identify and eventually control," he said, before quoting Henry and his state's defiant motto, "Live Free or Die."

That brought the house down, and the bill up: State representatives voted 217 to 84 in favor.

Emboldened by that success, groups opposed to Real ID staged a rally last weekend in front of the statehouse where, according to a report in the Concord Monitor, some wore "666" on their foreheads -- indicating their belief that a national system of rules for driver's licenses is a step toward the "mark of the beast" prophesied in the Book of Revelation.

Lauren Canario dressed up in a Nazi-esque khaki uniform and helped run a fake checkpoint where she demanded people's identification.

Real ID "sounds a lot like the old Nazi movies, and we just wanted to illustrate that," she said in an interview last week.

Someplace else, a movement with this kind of stagecraft might be on the political fringe. Here, it has momentum: A spokeswoman for Gov. John Lynch (D) said this week that he will sign the anti-Real ID bill if it gets to him. And on Wednesday morning, a Senate committee unanimously approved the bill, electrifying its supporters in the audience. "This is a wave of freedom that's going to roll across the country," Joel Winters, a leader in the Real ID opposition movement, said afterward.

First, though, it has to roll across the full New Hampshire Senate. There, Senate President Theodore L. Gatsas (R) said he's worried about what will happen if the rest of the country doesn't follow New Hampshire's lead and his state's residents suddenly need a passport to get on domestic flights.

Arguments against the new federal licensing rules "are great things to say," said Gatsas. "But it's an awful jeopardy to put the state in."



Read More...

Antiwar Democrat Mounts a Major Challenge to Connecticut's 3-Term Senator

washingtonpost.com
Tough Primary Race Confronts Lieberman
Antiwar Democrat Mounts a Major Challenge to Connecticut's 3-Term Senator
By Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writer

NEW HAVEN, Conn. -- With his ruddy tan and dark gray suit, Ned Lamont is an antiwar liberal with a twist. Rather than targeting a Republican, the millionaire Greenwich businessman is challenging a fellow Democrat, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, one of President Bush's strongest supporters on the war in Iraq.

When Lamont announced his primary challenge in mid-March, he was viewed as the longest of long shots, a quixotic blueblood who was scratching a political itch. While many Connecticut Democrats had soured on Lieberman over his war stance, a poll showed that voters backed the three-term senator over Lamont by 5 to 1.

But in the space of six weeks, the newcomer has come on strong. Lamont raised $344,111 from 4,337 online donors and added $371,500 of his own money. He hired a staff of seasoned professionals and signed up several thousand volunteers. The 52-year-old cable television entrepreneur is blitzing the state, hitting as many as three events per evening.

Now, Lamont has turned the Democratic primary into a horse race, giving Lieberman his first real test since he joined the Senate 18 years ago, according to Democratic operatives and analysts in Connecticut. Party leaders were so rattled by the challenge that Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) called Lamont asking him to back off.

"Some of the party brass said, 'Ned, don't jeopardize a safe seat,' " Lamont recently told students at Southern Connecticut State University, who gathered for a meet-and-greet session. "But you're not going to lose a senator. You're going to gain a Democrat."

The race is one of the few in the country in which a well-established incumbent is being threatened by a challenger from his own party. It suggests that no member of the House or Senate can take reelection for granted, given the voter disenchantment with Iraq and a Congress weakened by a corruption scandal and a meager record of accomplishments.

"I'm not surprised that there's a primary challenge," Lieberman conceded. According to a February poll by Quinnipiac University, 61 percent of state voters said invading Iraq was the wrong thing to do. But the former Democratic vice presidential nominee said he will not back down from his position.

"It's one that I believe is in the best interests of the country," Lieberman said recently, after a trip to the Middle East. If he has put his job at risk, he said, so be it. "We're having a good healthy debate up here," Lieberman said.

Lamont asserts -- usually to a sea of nodding heads -- that the United States should continue providing support to the Iraqis, but that "our front-line military troops should begin to be redeployed and our troops should start heading home."

Voters greet him with a mixture of curiosity and relief. "This is the first I've heard of him," said Kylie Welsh, a 27-year-old student who said she is tired of Lieberman's pro-war views. "I need to do some more research, but I think it's time for somebody new."

Despite Lamont's strong early push, Lieberman enjoys major advantages, including national name recognition and a formidable fundraising ability. Lieberman entered politics in 1970 and served as a state senator and attorney general before winning election to the U.S. Senate in 1988. He was Al Gore's vice presidential running mate in 2000, and he waged an unsuccessful campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination four years later.

With nearly $4.8 million of campaign funds in the bank as of March 31, Lieberman rolled out two statewide ads about a week ago, including one that directly confronts the war. "I already know that some of you feel passionately against my position on Iraq," Lieberman says in the ad. "I respect your views, and while we probably won't change each other's minds, I hope we can still have a dialogue and find common ground on all the issues where we do agree."

Mild-mannered and thoughtful, Lamont has a pedigree that blends old money with noblesse oblige. His great-grandfather Thomas W. Lamont, a chairman of J.P. Morgan & Co., commuted to Wall Street by yacht and helped to negotiate the Treaty of Versailles. His family tree also includes Corliss Lamont, a socialist philosopher and civil libertarian, and an assortment of ministers and adventurers. Lamont served as a Greenwich selectman during the 1980s and lost a 1990 state Senate bid.

In his official biography, Lamont describes the lively, politically charged family dinner conversations that punctuated his childhood. "The underlying theme was public service," he recalled.

His main challenge is to get his name on the Aug. 8 Democratic ballot. Lamont has two ways of doing that: collect 15,000 voters' signatures or persuade 15 percent of the state's 1,608 Democratic delegates to support him at the party's May 20 nominating convention. Even Lieberman's camp has little doubt that Lamont will clear at least one of the hurdles.

Lieberman caused a stir recently by floating the possibility that he might enter the general-election race as an independent, were he to lose the Democratic primary. To do that, he would have to collect 7,500 signatures and file them by Aug. 9, a day after the primary. That means he would have to start the petition process even as he is campaigning for the Democratic nomination against Lamont.

But now Lieberman describes speculation of an independent candidacy as "greatly overblown." He said his focus is to win "a good solid victory at the convention."

Lamont said he supported Lieberman for years but that he grew irritated with the senator for supporting federal intervention in the Terri Schiavo right-to-die Senate debate. "To me, that was symbolic of someone who was fundamentally off," Lamont explained.

Then came Lieberman's Nov. 29 Wall Street Journal opinion piece, titled "Our Troops Must Stay." It scolded Democrats for focusing "on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq," instead of on how "we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead." The senator also took Democrats to task for saying the Bush administration has no strategy for victory in Iraq. "Yes, we do," Lieberman wrote.

The column was published shortly after Rep. John P. Murtha (Pa.), one of the Democrats' most respected voices on military issues, called the war "a flawed policy wrapped in illusion" and advocated that U.S. troops be withdrawn from Iraq. Lamont applauded Murtha's pronouncement as an opening for Democrats to start publicly criticizing the war, and was angered by Lieberman for chastising his own party.

Lieberman's op-ed piece became the focus of a rallying cry for disillusioned liberals, and Lamont participated in conversations around the state about a possible primary challenge. So did Lowell P. Weicker Jr., the former GOP senator and governor who is now a staunch antiwar independent. Weicker had been weighing his own challenge to Lieberman but, for now, says, "I want to do everything I can to help Ned Lamont win."

Nancy DiNardo, Connecticut's Democratic Party chairman, worries that the Lieberman-Lamont battle will detract from the primary showdown between two Democrats vying to challenge the state's popular Republican governor, M. Jodi Rell. "I think we should focus on beating Republicans," DiNardo said.

For the next three weeks, Lamont and Lieberman will be concentrating on wooing state delegates. Lamont has been greeted warmly at Democratic town committee meetings.

John McNamara, who heads the New Britain Democratic Town Committee with its 31 delegates, is a big Lamont booster. Lieberman, he said, has "been a good senator for most of 18 years." But McNamara prefers Lamont's stance on the war and likes his economic development ideas for Connecticut.

Lieberman showed his political resilience in Manchester, where earlier this year the Democratic Town Committee passed a resolution criticizing his war views. About two weeks ago, a majority of members supported the senator in an informal vote, which tested where delegates stand before the convention. Chairman Ted Cummings urged the town's 27 delegates to split their votes. "We have our self-respect to come to grips with," Cummings said after the meeting, according to local news reports. "Joe Lieberman ought to have to work."



Read More...

Sunday, April 30, 2006

Thousands rally against Darfur killing

Reuters
Thousands rally against Darfur killing
By Karey Wutkowski

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Thousands of Americans, led by religious leaders, entertainers and politicians, rallied on Sunday to urge the United States to halt "genocide" in Sudan's Darfur region.

"Darfur deserves to live. We are its only hope," Nobel Peace Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel told the crowd that converged on the National Mall in Washington, near the U.S. Capitol.

Other speakers at the rally included Washington's Roman Catholic Archbishop Theodore McCarrick, Illinois Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, and actor George Clooney, who visited Darfur last week.

"If we turn our heads and look away and hope that it will all disappear, then they will, all of them, a whole generation, and we will only have history to judge us," Clooney told the protesters.

Beating African drums and waving posters saying "Stop Genocide Now," the mostly white crowd had responded to a call from 160 religious, political and humanitarian organizations representing virtually all shades of U.S. opinion.

Smaller rallies also took place in 18 other U.S. cities, making this the largest public demonstration on the issue since the conflict in Darfur began three years ago.

"We know the march is not the beginning and end of it but it's an improvement," said Rabbi Shawn Zevit, director of outreach for the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation.

"It is a show of solidarity, given the United States is one of few countries trying to exert pressure. There is momentum right now and the feeling we can influence things," he said.

DEATH AND DISPLACEMENT

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice complained on the ABC's television show This Week that Washington was not getting enough support from some other members of the U.N. Security Council to take more decisive action against Sudan.

"We also do need more support, frankly, from members of the international community -- from China, from Russia," she said.

Arab militia, backed by the Sudanese government, have terrorized non-Arab tribes in the region in western Sudan over the past three years, murdering and raping tens of thousands, burning villages and driving more than 2 million people into squalid camps in Darfur and neighboring Chad.

Peace talks on the conflict in Abuja, Nigeria, which faced a deadline on Sunday to reach an agreement, appeared to be at an impasse, after two Sudan rebel groups said they would refuse to sign a proposed Darfur peace agreement in its current form.

"We are not going to accept this document for signature unless there are fundamental changes made to the document," Ahmed Tugod, the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) chief negotiator, told Reuters.

The African Union said it would not reopen substantial negotiations on the proposed text after Sunday, following two years of talks.

The government of Sudan has said it was ready to sign the agreement.

A faction of another rebel group, the Sudan Liberation Army, said it would not sign the proposed deal unless its demands were met in full.

The United States has labeled the violence in Darfur a genocide of the mainly African Muslim tribes by the government-backed militias known as Janjaweed.

President George W. Bush on Thursday issued an executive order freezing the assets of four Sudanese deemed to have posed a threat to the peace process in Darfur. But demonstrators called on the administration to do more.

Elamin Wadi, a refugee from Darfur who came to the United States in 2004, said: "We hope to send a message to the American government and then have the American government send a message to the Sudan government," he said.

Public pressure on Sudan has been building in recent months, with several universities and some states divesting assets from companies doing business with Sudan.

Jewish organizations had been particularly active in speaking out and some rabbis preached on the subject on Saturday. At B'nai Tzedek conservative congregation in Potomac, Maryland, just outside Washington, Rabbi Stuart Weinblatt told worshipers that Jews, as victims of the Nazi Holocaust, owed it to the world to stand up for the victims.



Read More...

You Can't Afford It!

Read More...

You Build Them, They'll Come

Read More...

Hand Over Your Wallet

Read More...

Pretend You Don't Know Me

Read More...

They've Just Shrunk A Bit Over The Last 5 Years

Read More...

Government Business: Jack Anderson Professional Files

Read More...

Cheap Chinese Arms Flood African Genocide Wars

Read More...

New Tony Snow Column

Read More...

The First Stone

Read More...