Bush ex-strategist says loses faith in president

Reuters
Bush ex-strategist says loses faith in president
By Randall Mikkelsen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The chief strategist of George W. Bush's 2004 re-election campaign said he had lost faith in the U.S. president over Iraq and other issues, in a high-level rupture of Bush's famously loyal inner circle.

Matthew Dowd, a polling expert who switched parties to become a Republican and also served as a senior strategist in Bush's 2000 presidential campaign, told The New York Times in an interview on Sunday that Bush must face up to Americans' growing disillusionment with the war.

Dowd said he had found himself agreeing with calls by Democratic Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, Bush's opponent in 2004, for a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq.

"If the American public says they're done with something, our leaders have to understand what they want," Dowd said. "They're saying, 'Get out of Iraq.'"

He also cited the administration's bungled handling of the response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and Bush's refusal to meet Cindy Sheehan, who had lost a son in Iraq, while she was leading a protest outside Bush's Texas ranch.

"I had finally come to the conclusion that maybe all these things along do add up," Dowd said. "That it's not the same, it's not the person I thought."

Although some other administration officials have expressed similar views over the years, the Times said Dowd is the first member of Bush's inner circle to break so publicly with him.

Dowd said he had been attracted to Bush by his ability as Texas governor to work across party lines but Bush had failed to do the same as president and had become isolated with his views hardening. The Times said Dowd was speaking out partly in an effort to get through to Bush.

"I really like him, which is why I'm so disappointed in things," Dowd said. "I think he's become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in."

SHARED SACRIFICE

He said Bush had failed to call for a shared sacrifice among Americans after the September 11 attacks and followed a divisive political strategy.

Dowd helped develop Bush's successful re-election strategy of rallying his Republican "base" but sounded a different note in the Times interview.

"I think we should design campaigns that appeal not to 51 percent of the people," he said, "but to bring the country together as a whole."

White House counselor Dan Bartlett said Dowd's criticism reflects the U.S. debate over the war.

"This war is a complicated and difficult one and it brings out emotions in people from both sides of the aisle, even those who work closely for the president, and the president respects his position," Bartlett said on CBS television's "Face the Nation."

"Obviously, we disagree with him as far as him (Bush) being too insular or him bringing the troops home," Bartlett said. "What troubles me is that there is a perception that this president doesn't understand the difficulties of this war ... there's nothing that weighs more heavily on his mind."

The Times said Dowd acknowledged that the expected deployment to Iraq of his oldest son, Daniel, an Army intelligence specialist, was a factor in his changed view of Bush.

Dowd said he now wanted to "do my part in fixing fissures that I may have been a part of."

The Times said Dowd cited Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois as the only 2008 presidential candidate who appeals to him but said the idea of mission work also was attractive as a way to "re-establish a level of gentleness in the world."

Read More...

Summary only...

White House rejects Senate compromise on firings

Reuters
White House rejects Senate compromise on firings
By Stuart Grudgings

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House dismissed on Sunday a possible U.S. Senate compromise to allow testimony by officials over the firing of federal prosecutors, which has embroiled President George W. Bush's administration in controversy and led to calls for his attorney general to quit.

Republican Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania and Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York said an agreement was possible under which White House aides such as Bush's chief political strategist Karl Rove could testify without being under oath.

Critics charge that the dismissals of the eight U.S. attorneys were politically motivated, with White House involvement.

"I think that Chuck Schumer and I may have come to agreement here ... on a very important issue -- and that is the way to get the White House officials coming up (to testify)," Specter, the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

Schumer and Specter said an oath might not be needed because perjury laws already required truthful testimony, but that a transcript of any testimony was essential.

Bush has vowed to oppose any attempt to compel aides to give sworn testimony, offering instead that they talk with lawmakers behind closed doors without a transcript.

White House counselor Dan Bartlett rejected the compromise, saying the senators were trying to "cobble together a proposal through sound bites on a Sunday show. What we have in writing from them is far different than that type of proposal."

Some Republicans have joined Democrats in calling for the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales over the firings of the eight U.S. attorneys, which would be a major blow for Bush as he struggles with public discontent over the war in Iraq.

Critics accuse the Bush administration of dismissing the officials to make room for its allies or because it felt some were too tough on Republicans and too easy on Democrats.

The administration contends the dismissals were justified, mainly on performance grounds or policy differences.

But newly disclosed documents also show loyalty was a factor, and Gonzales' former chief of staff, Kyle Sampson, told Congress on Thursday that the attorney general had been involved in the firings. Gonzales, who said on Friday he did not recall being involved in talks on dismissing individual federal prosecutors, faces what many see as a make-or-break appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee this month.

"There are so many misstatements out there and so many contradictions that whatever happens in his testimony, I don't think he can continue as attorney-general," said Schumer.

Specter said Gonzales needed to explain the apparent contradiction between his version of his involvement in the firings and that of Sampson.

"If he has reason to apologize to the American people then he should," Specter said.

Bartlett accused Democrats of dragging out the controversy for political reasons, calling it "inexplicable" that they were refusing to bring forward the date of Gonzales' testimony from mid-April.

"Nothing has emerged in this testimony or in the documents that have been released that any sort of political or wrongdoing has taken place ... I think it makes you ask the question what the Democrats are really up to," he said on the same CBS show.

Despite Bush's unwavering support for Gonzales, there are signs that conservative opinion is turning against the attorney general. The influential conservative magazine The National Review last week added its voice to calls for his resignation.

The Washington Post reported on Sunday that about one-third of nearly four dozen attorney jobs that have changed hands during Bush's second term had been filled by trusted administration insiders. It said the appointments, while not illegal, appeared to alter a long-standing culture of autonomy for the nation's chief prosecutors.

(Additional reporting by Paul Eckert)

Read More...

Summary only...

Schwarzenegger's state-board picks raise charges of cronyism; His dentist and former chiropractor are among those with roles on oversight panels.

latimes.com
Schwarzenegger's state-board picks raise charges of cronyism
His dentist and former chiropractor are among those with roles on oversight panels.
By Peter Nicholas
Times Staff Writer

SACRAMENTO — A rash of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's appointees to state boards are facing complaints that they are unqualified, beholden to the industries they oversee or otherwise mired in conflicts of interest.

Schwarzenegger has installed longtime friends and political associates on several boards, giving rise to criticism that he is practicing cronyism while failing to adequately vet people who oversee billions of dollars' worth of economic activity and other public matters.

Last month, Schwarzenegger appointed his dentist to the state dental board. His former chiropractor now chairs the chiropractic panel.

Watchdog groups say the governor misunderstands the boards' purpose, which is to safeguard the public.

The chiropractic panel's primary role is to protect Californians from incompetence or fraud, according to its mission statement.

But when Schwarzenegger was asked recently about turmoil on the board, he said, "What is important to us is: Does the chiropractic board represent the chiropractors?"

Julianne D'Angelo Fellmeth, director of the Center for Public Interest Law at the University of San Diego law school, was taken aback. "If he really believes that, that is extremely troubling," she said.

Political patronage is not uncommon; elected officials often use their appointment powers to reward trusted friends. It is unclear how many such appointments Schwarzenegger has made, but he came into office on promises to change how state business was done, and had proposed abolishing 88 state panels that still exist.

The governor's office says all appointees are carefully screened. Criminal histories, civil suits, driving records and relevant news stories are thoroughly reviewed before appointments are made, a Schwarzenegger spokesman said.

"The governor has appointed more than 3,000 people to agencies, boards and commissions since taking office," said Aaron McLear, Schwarzenegger's press secretary. "We try to identify the most talented people willing to serve, and to recruit candidates from both inside and outside government."

On the state chiropractic panel, friends of the governor face complaints that they're protecting the profession at the public's expense.

Board Secretary Franco Columbu, a chiropractor, was best man at the governor's wedding. Chairman Richard H. Tyler, the governor's former chiropractor, is another longtime associate; he greeted Schwarzenegger at the airport when the bodybuilder arrived in the U.S. in 1968. As chairman, Tyler plays a major role in setting the board's agenda.

Allegations that the board has abused its power were the focus of a three-hour hearing Wednesday in the Legislature. Lawmakers examined whether board members voted to endorse a chiropractic treatment because they wanted to protect a chiropractor facing criminal charges in San Joaquin County.

"This appears to have been an attempt to influence the judicial process," Assemblyman Mike Eng (D-Monterey Park), who co-chaired the hearing, said afterward.

Eng said in an interview Friday that he intended to ask the governor to fire Tyler, Columbu and another board member.

At a recent meeting, the board ejected from the room its state-appointed attorney, Jana Tuton, who has questioned the legality of its actions. But first, Shawn Steele, a former Republican Party chairman who represents chiropractors in his private legal practice, briefly joined members on the dais, according to Tuton.

The public law center's Fellmeth, who has studied the board's minutes and reviewed tapes of previous meetings, said board members are "helping the wrong people. They're trying to help [chiropractors]. They should be trying to help the public."

In addition, e-mails among board members show board business being conducted in secret, in violation of California's open meetings law, according to legislative and board staff.

Legislative staff identified seven e-mails from August to December 2006 in which board members appeared to have violated the requirement that board business be done in public. Topics discussed in the e-mails include licenses for graduates of a Florida chiropractic college and agenda items for meetings.

On Oct. 3, Columbu sent an e-mail to five other panel members regarding a board matter. He received a response two days later from Tuton telling him that e-mails involving board business "can be a violation" of the law.

Schwarzenegger has taken no action to discipline the board.

"The governor feels the board is taking appropriate measures to ensure these mistakes won't happen again," McLear said.

He was referring to Tyler's pledge at the legislative hearing that board members would not interfere with disciplinary actions against chiropractors, would delegate personnel matters to the staff's executive director and would receive training on the open meetings law.

Another of the governor's choices appears to be struggling to win confirmation.

In February, Schwarzenegger named his appointments secretary, Timothy A. Simon, to the Public Utilities Commission, which regulates the multibillion-dollar telecommunications and energy industries. The governor's staff issued a news release in which Schwarzenegger said Simon's background in business and financial services were "fantastic" assets.

Left unmentioned was Simon's tangled financial and personal history. He had been in bankruptcy for four years at the time of the appointment (he has since repaid his debts).

In 2001, a judge signed a restraining order forcing Simon to keep away from a man who said Simon was harassing him. The man was dating Simon's ex-wife. The same year, Simon's attorney submitted a brief in Simon's divorce case that said he was facing "extraordinary consumer debt" fed partly by credit card use.

In 2005, while Simon was still in bankruptcy, his ex-wife said in a court filing that he was driving expensive cars and taking vacations in Vietnam, China, the Caribbean and Mexico.

The Schwarzenegger administration "should have been more careful when they considered him," said Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland). The Senate has 11 months to confirm Simon.

McLear countered: "We did a full vetting. It didn't turn up anything that said he was less than qualified to serve the people of California."

Simon did not return repeated telephone calls seeking comments.

The presence of a governor's friends and associates on state boards can raise alarms simply because they might have access to the administration that other Californians lack.

Schwarzenegger named his dentist, John Bettinger, to the state Dental Board in February. That upset some hygienists, whose interests sometimes clash with those of the dentists who employ them. Hygienists fear that Bettinger's presence could give dentists an extra dose of political clout.

Hygienists want their own regulatory board — something Schwarzenegger vetoed last year. This year, hygienists are sponsoring a similar effort — and they are worried that the Dental Board will persuade the governor to kill the proposal again.

Tricia Osuna, a hygienist and former member of the board, complained about the Bettinger appointment last month in a letter to a fellow hygienist.

"This unusually close relationship creates a fertile environment for ... favoritism," Osuna said, "and unprecedented access to the executive branch."

Some of Schwarzenegger's nominations have proved untenable.

Last year, the governor named Kim Blackseth, a quadriplegic, to the state Building Standards Commission, which approves building codes.

At his Senate confirmation hearing last month, a parade of advocates for the disabled testified that Blackseth, a private consultant on disability issues, had been helping employers bypass laws that ensure access for the disabled.

Blackseth sent a letter to the Senate saying it was "unfathomable" to him that he was not representing "the disabled community."

Still, facing rejection by the Senate, he left the board.

peter.nicholas@latimes.com

Read More...

Summary only...

Hear No See No Speak No ...

Read More...

Summary only...

Deadliest bomb in Iraq war kills 152

Reuters
Deadliest bomb in Iraq war kills 152
By Mussab Al-Khairalla

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - The Iraqi government raised the death toll on Saturday from a truck bomb in the town of Tal Afar to 152, making it the deadliest single bombing of the four-year-old war.

Interior Ministry spokesman Brigadier Abdul Kareem Khalaf said 347 people were wounded in Tuesday's attack on a Shi'ite area. There was another truck bomb in the mixed northwestern town on Tuesday, but it was small.

Khalaf said 100 homes had been destroyed in the main blast, which officials have blamed on al Qaeda. The explosion left a 23-meter (75-ft)-wide crater.

"It took us a while to recover all the bodies from underneath the rubble of the homes ... what did they achieve by using two tons of explosive to kill and wound 500 in a residential area?" Khalaf asked at a news conference.

The past week has been the bloodiest in Iraq since the government launched a security crackdown in Baghdad in February aimed at halting the country's slide toward civil war.

Bombings blamed on Sunni Islamist al Qaeda have killed 400 people in Shi'ite areas across the country in the past week.

Car bombs killed nine people on Saturday, police said.

Officials had earlier this week said 85 people died in the Tal Afar bombing, which triggered reprisal attacks by gunmen and police in a Sunni neighborhood of the town hours later.

Officials said earlier up to 70 were killed in the revenge attacks, but Khalaf put the number at 47. He said most of the attackers were police. Much of the force is made up of Shi'ites.

Only a year ago President Bush held up Tal Afar as a beacon of hope for Iraq after al Qaeda militants were ousted in a U.S. offensive a year earlier.

Newly appointed U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker reiterated Washington's support for Maliki's government.

"He (Bush) has been very clear and very determined that he will continue his full support for the government and the people," Crocker said in his first news conference.

"We've seen encouraging signals of progress but we have to keep moving forward."

BLAST OUTSIDE HOSPITAL

In Baghdad, a car bomb outside a hospital in a Shi'ite stronghold killed five people and wounded 22, police said. Four people were killed and 20 wounded by a car bomb in the Shi'ite city of Hilla, south of Baghdad.

Gunmen ambushed a vehicle carrying civilian workers employed at an Iraqi military base near Hawija, 70 km (45 miles) southwest of Kirkuk, killing eight and wounding two, police said. Four brothers were among the dead.

Amid fears the country is being dragged to the brink of all-out civil war, Shi'ite Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki called for restraint on Friday, urging Iraqis not to allow themselves to be divided by "evildoers".

President Jalal Talabani said the government was talking to armed groups, although he gave no details. Iraqi officials have said in the past negotiations have been held with Sunni Arab insurgents. Such talks have been preliminary.

"There are many armed groups that have started talks with the Iraqi government," Talabani told reporters without elaborating.

Before leaving Iraq last Monday at the end of his assignment, U.S. ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said U.S. and Iraqi officials had held contacts with Sunni Arab insurgent groups to build an alliance against al Qaeda.

Read More...

Summary only...

Program's Creator Is Hired to Assess It

washingtonpost.com
Program's Creator Is Hired to Assess It
Associated Press

The government contractor that set up a billion-dollar-a-year federal reading program for the Education Department and failed, according to the department's inspector general, to keep it free of conflicts of interest is one of the companies now evaluating the program.

Reading First, part of President Bush's signature No Child Left Behind education law, provides intense reading help to low-income children in the early elementary grades. RMC Research Corp. was hired to establish and implement the program starting in 2002, under three contracts worth about $40 million.

Recently, the Education Department's inspector general reported that RMC failed to keep the program free of conflicts of interest. For example, RMC did not screen subcontractors for relationships with publishers of reading programs.

Now, Reading First is in the midst of a congressionally mandated evaluation under a 2003 contract with a team that includes RMC, based in Portsmouth, N.H.

Lawmakers who have been investigating the Reading First program criticized the connection.

"If it's true that RMC was also hired to evaluate the effectiveness of the very program it was hired to help implement, then the conflict of interest could not be any clearer," Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the House education committee, said Friday.

"It's a classic case of the fox guarding the chicken coop," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.), who chairs the Senate education committee.

The inspector general found that federal officials intervened to influence state and local decisions about reading programs, a potential violation of the law.

RMC did not return calls seeking comment. Nor did Abt Associates, a contractor based in Cambridge, Mass., that hired RMC as a subcontractor.

Read More...

Summary only...

Inspector Lists Computers With Atomic Secrets as Missing

The New York Times
Inspector Lists Computers With Atomic Secrets as Missing
By MATTHEW L. WALD

WASHINGTON, March 30 — The office in charge of protecting American technical secrets about nuclear weapons from foreign spies is missing 20 desktop computers, at least 14 of which have been used for classified information, the Energy Department inspector general reported on Friday.

This is the 13th time in a little over four years that an audit has found that the department, whose national laboratories and factories do most of the work in designing and building nuclear warheads, has lost control over computers used in working on the bombs.

Aside from the computers it cannot find, the department is also using computers not listed in its inventory, and one computer listed as destroyed was in fact being used, the audit said.

“Problems with the control and accountability of desktop and laptop computers have plagued the department for a number of years,” the report said.

In January, Linton F. Brooks was fired as the administrator of the National Nuclear Security Agency, the Energy Department agency in charge of bombs, because of security problems. The agency was created in the 1990s because of security scandals.

When the most recent audit began, the Counterintelligence Directorate was unable to find 141 desktop computers. In some cases, documents were found indicating that the computers had been taken out of service.

Previous incidents of wayward computers have also involved nuclear weapons information. But the office involved in this breach has a special responsibility, tracking and countering efforts to steal bomb information. Its computers would have material on what the department knew about foreign operatives and efforts to steal sensitive information.

The report includes a response from the security agency that generally agrees with the findings. But the inspector general, Gregory H. Friedman, noted in his report that “the comments did not include planned corrective actions with target completion dates.”

A spokesman for the department, Craig Stevens, said Energy Secretary Samuel W. Bodman “recognizes that we need to manage this place better.”

The counterintelligence office was recently merged with the intelligence office to improve operations, Mr. Stevens said.

Read More...

Summary only...

A Bush Veto Would Avoid Accountability and Harm the Troops

Huffington Post
Lane Hudson
A Bush Veto Would Avoid Accountability and Harm the Troops

Both Houses of Congress have passed an emergency supplemental appropriations bill that contains benchmarks and goals for progress in Iraq as well as a timetable for redeployment of American troops in Iraq. This is about accountability that has so far been lacking in the Bush administration's execution of the Iraq War.

George Bush's threat to veto this accountability is embarrassing.
It sends a message to the world that his policy is to sustain a failed war policy that is further increasing instability in the region. It also signals to the nascent Iraqi government that we will prop them up, regardless of their unwillingness to assume responsibility for their own country.

It should further be said that the benchmarks and goals contained in the bill were originally suggested by Bush's own Department of Defense. Democratic Leadership simply placed those suggestions into law.

To veto the supplemental would serve only to avoid this accountability. For the past six years, George Bush has not had a Congress that was willing to hold him accountable for anything. Thankfully, the Democratic Congress has lived up to its responsibility to do what the Republican-led Congress wouldn't.

If Bush vetoes this bill, it will deny much needed funding to the troops. The military would not be able to afford to deploy new troops, effectively extending the already-extended tours of the men and women currently in Iraq. He should be mindful of this before acting grossly irresponsible and using his veto power.

Those of us on the Left should repeat this argument as often as possible. To repeat in much simpler terms, a veto avoids accountability and harms our troops.

Read More...

Summary only...

Major pet food recall expands to dry food

Reuters
Major pet food recall expands to dry food

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A major recall of pet food in North America has expanded to two more companies and now includes dry food for the first time, U.S. federal health authorities and the companies said.

The Food and Drug Administration said late on Friday it notified Hill's Pet Nutrition Inc. that tests had detected byproducts of a suspect chemical in the wheat gluten it used to make Prescription Diet m/d Feline dry food.

The FDA concluded earlier on Friday that melamine, a chemical used in fertilizers in Asia and forbidden in pet food, had been found in some wheat gluten used by a Canadian company at the center of the recall two weeks ago.

Ontario-based Menu Foods makes pet food sold under several popular labels. The FDA and Menu said the suspect wheat gluten came from a Chinese supplier, which was not identified.

Menu recalled certain batches of wet pet food in mid-March after the products were blamed for the deaths of at least 14 animals -- mostly cats.

The FDA, which is continuing its investigation, found that wheat gluten from the same company that supplied Menu Foods was used to make the Hill's product, the first time a dry food had been implicated.

Hill's, a unit of Colgate-Palmolive Co. based in Topeka, Kansas, has voluntarily recalled the product sold through veterinarians. The company confirmed the recall in a statement.

Separately, Nestle Purina PetCare Co. announced in a statement it was voluntarily recalling all sizes and varieties of its ALPO Prime Cuts in Gravy wet dog food with specific date codes.

Nestle Purina, based in St. Louis, said it learned on Friday that "some quantity" of wheat gluten from the same supply company linked to Menu and Hill's was used on a limited basis at one of its facilities.

No Purina brand dry pet foods were affected by the recall.

Read More...

Summary only...

Report faults Pentagon for weapons buying problems

Reuters
Report faults Pentagon for weapons buying problems
By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Defense Department has doubled its planned investment in new weapons from $750 billion in 2001 to $1.5 trillion this year, but it is not getting enough bang for its buck, congressional investigators said on Friday.

The Pentagon program "remains a high-risk area" dogged by cost overruns, schedule delays and performance gaps, said the Government Accountability Office, Congress' nonpartisan audit and investigative arm.

Development costs often overshoot estimates by tens or hundreds of million dollars, especially in programs that start with technology that is not yet mature, it said in its fifth annual assessment of selected weapons programs.

Despite the doubling of planned spending in major weapons systems since 2001, "unanticipated cost growth has reduced the return on this investment," GAO chief David Walker, who is the U.S. comptroller general, said in a cover letter to Congress.

"Not only is the buying power of the government reduced and opportunities to make other investments lost, but the warfighter receives less than promised," the GAO said. "The size and scale of current planned investment necessitate better results than we have seen in the past."

Among other problems, critical Defense Department personnel are rotated too frequently, the GAO report said.

The Defense Department withheld general comments on a draft of the report but made technical points on individual weapons programs.

Read More...

Summary only...

Pentagon war funds need not urgent: Congress memo

Reuters
Pentagon war funds need not urgent: Congress memo
By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army has enough money on hand to finance the Iraq war through most of July, according to a congressional study that challenges President George W. Bush's assertions that an infusion of funds is needed more urgently.

According to a Congressional Research Service memo dated March 28 and sent to the Senate Budget Committee, "The Army could finance the O&M (operations and maintenance) of both its baseline and war program ... through most of July 2007" by shifting around money in existing accounts.

The memo said it based its projections "using Army and other data."

That assessment was at odds with Bush and some of his war managers, who have said that Congress could undermine U.S. troops and the war in Iraq if it did not approve approximately $100 billion within weeks.

"The Democrats are distorting and hiding behind a CRS memo on the eve of Congress' spring vacation to distract from their failure to send the President a responsible bill he can sign," said White House spokesman Tony Fratto. "It's time for the Democrats to send the president a bill that funds the troops without forcing retreat, handcuffing our commanders, or adding billions of dollars in pork spending."

Fratto warned that a delay in funding was already affecting troops.

"Yesterday, the Department of Defense notified Congress that in order to meet the force protection needs of the Marine Corps and the Army, we are borrowing funds from other important Marine and Army procurement programs," Fratto said.

Bush requested the emergency funds in early February and Congress is in the process of writing bills providing more money for the war than the president requested.

But Democrats have added conditions to the money, including setting timetables for withdrawing all combat troops from Iraq. Bush wants the money without the conditions and has threatened to veto either bill passed by the Senate or the House of Representatives.

Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a House panel on Thursday that after April 15, without emergency funding, the Army would have to begin curtailing some troop training, which "could over time delay their ability to go back into combat."

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said that if the funds were not approved by May 15, the Army might have to extend some soldiers' tours, because other units would not be ready, and reduce equipment repair work, among other things.

TIME-CONSUMING PROCESS

If Congress sends Bush a bill that he vetoes, lawmakers would then have to go through a potentially time-consuming process of rewriting and passing a new war-funding bill.

The administration tried to turn up the pressure on Congress on Friday, when White House spokeswoman Dana Perino criticized lawmakers for taking a spring vacation without making adequate progress on the emergency war funds.

"Every day that the Congress fails to act on this request causes our military hardship and impacts readiness," Perino said.

But according to the memo, "the Army could finance its O&M expenses through the end of May by tapping $52.6 billion in O&M funding already provided by Congress."

Furthermore, with congressional approval, the Pentagon could temporarily transfer money out of other accounts, giving the Army "almost two additional months" to conduct its regular operations and the war.

Since invading Iraq in March 2003 to depose then President Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration has refused to include in annual budgets the full estimated cost of the war each year. Instead, it has submitted "emergency" requests that many lawmakers complained have made it difficult to do proper oversight of the war.

(Additional reporting by Kristin Roberts)

Read More...

Summary only...

TJX data breach: At 45.6M card numbers, it's the biggest ever

Computerworld
TJX data breach: At 45.6M card numbers, it's the biggest ever
Jaikumar Vijayan

March 29, 2007 (Computerworld) After more than two months of refusing to reveal the size and scope of its data breach, TJX Companies Inc. is finally offering more details about the extent of the compromise.

In filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission yesterday, the company said 45.6 million credit and debit card numbers were stolen from one of its systems over a period of more than 18 months by an unknown number of intruders. That number eclipses the 40 million records compromised in the mid-2005 breach at CardSystems Solutions and makes the TJX compromise the worst ever involving the loss of personal data.

In addition, personal data provided in connection with the return of merchandise without receipts by about 451,000 individuals in 2003 was also stolen. The company is in the process of contacting individuals affected by the breach, TJX said in its filings.

"Given the scale and geographic scope of our business and computer systems and the time frames involved in the computer intrusion, our investigation has required a substantial period of time to date and is not completed," the company said.

Framingham, Mass.-based TJX is the owner of a number of retail brands, including T.J.Maxx, Marshalls and Bob's Stores. In January, the company announced that someone had illegally accessed one of its payment systems and made off with card data belonging to an unspecified number of customers in the U.S., Canada, Puerto Rico and potentially the U.K. and Ireland.

At the time, TJX said it believed the intrusion took place in May 2006 but wasn't discovered until mid-December -- seven months later. A few weeks later, the company revised those dates and said that an investigation by IBM and General Dynamics, two companies it hired in the wake of the breach discovery, believed the intrusion may have taken place in July 2005.

Several banks and credit unions around the country and in the other affected regions had to block and reissue thousands of payment cards as a result of the breach.

In its filing, TJX confirmed that its systems were first accessed illegally in July 2005 and then on several occasions later in 2005, 2006 and even once in mid-January 2007 -- after the breach had already been discovered. However, no data appears to have been stolen after Dec. 18, when the intrusion was first noticed.

The systems that were broken into were based in Framingham and processed and stored information related to payment cards, checks and merchandise returned without receipts. The data breach affected customers of its T.J.Maxx, Marshalls, HomeGoods and A.J. Wright stores in the U.S. and Puerto Rico. Also affected were customers of its Winners and HomeSense stores in Canada and TK Maxx stores in the U.K.

It is hard to know exactly what kind of data was stolen because a lot of the information accessed by intruders was deleted by the company in the normal course of business. "In addition, the technology used by the intruder has, to date, made it impossible for us to determine the contents of most of the files we believe were stolen in 2006," the company said. It did not elaborate on the technology it was referring to.

Customer names and addresses were not included with any of the payment card data believed stolen from the Framingham systems, TJX said. Also, the company "generally" did not store Track 2 data from the magnetic stripe on the back of payment cards for transactions after September 2003, TJX said. Also by April 3, 2006, the company had begun to mask payment card PIN data and "some other portions of payment card transaction information" as well as check transaction information, the company said.

"We are continuing to try to identify information stolen in the computer intrusion through our investigation, but other than the information provided ... we believe that we may never be able to identify much of the information believed stolen," TJX said.

The company has so far spent about $5 million in connection with the breach, although it is hard to say what other costs may be incurred, the company warned. It cited several lawsuits that have been filed against it since the breach was announced. The company was sued recently by the Arkansas Carpenters Pension Fund, one of its shareholders, for its failure to divulge more details about the breach.

Avivan Litan, an analyst with Stamford,Conn.based Gartner Inc., expressed surprise at the scope of the breach. "I had heard rumors that it was bigger than CardSystems, but I was still somewhat shocked it was actually this big."

The number involved in the breach "makes this the biggest card heist ever," she said. "It proves there are still very sophisticated cybercriminals out there at large who have the potential to wreak havoc on pure-payment systems and who have already stolen millions of dollars from consumers and financial institutions," she said.

"If this isn't a wakeup call for stronger card and payment system security, I'm not sure what is," she said.

TJX's disclosure comes just days after six Florida residents were arrested for allegedly launching a multimillion-dollar statewide credit card fraud ring using information stolen from the company. Losses experienced by Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and other retailers because of the fraud have so far totaled at least $8 million.

Read More...

Summary only...

White House use of outside e-mail raises red flags

Computerworld
White House use of outside e-mail raises red flags
Todd R. Weiss

March 29, 2007 (Computerworld) For official government business, staff members in the Bush White House use government-issued e-mail accounts where all communications are then stored, archived and preserved for eventual inclusion in the National Archives.

But for several years, some high-ranking Bush staff members have also apparently been using outside e-mail accounts for nongovernmental, political communications. Those accounts, through the Republican National Committee (RNC) and the 2004 Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, allowed the officials to keep up with both their official and political responsibilities while not violating the Hatch Act. That law forbids many government officials from engaging in political activities from their workplaces.

While the focus of those particular incidents is on the White House, the issue is one that should be getting close scrutiny from businesses across the nation, experts said.

The concern is that if company communications are being conducted outside official corporate e-mail systems, there's no way to control their security, preservation or use, something that can leave companies vulnerable to a wide variety of legal problems and regulatory compliance issues.

In the White House case this week, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform sent letters Monday to the chairmen of the RNC and the former Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign committee, asking them to explain more about the use of the outside e-mail accounts. In the letters, Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) said his group wants to know what's been done to preserve the contents of the outside e-mail accounts used by government officials for possible review and to assure that "no e-mails involving official White House business have been destroyed or altered.

"Congressional investigations have revealed that White House officials have used nongovernmental e-mail accounts, including those maintained by the RNC, to conduct official White House business," the letters said. "The Committee has questions about who has access to these e-mail records and how the RNC protects them from destruction or tampering. The Committee also directs you to preserve all such records because of their potential relevance to congressional investigations. Such e-mails written in the conduct of White House business would appear to be govemmental records subject to preservation and eventual public disclosure."

The Oversight Committee first learned of the outside e-mail accounts during investigations of White House contacts with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, which found "that many of the e-mail exchanges between Jack Abramoff and White House officials were conducted via nongovernmental e-mail accounts. In at least one [incoming message to Abramoff], the e-mails indicate that these nonofficial accounts were being used because 'to put this stuff in writing in their [White House] e-mail system ... might actually limit what they can do to help us.'"

Waxman today sent a similar letter to White House Counsel Fred Fielding (download PDF), asking for "information and a briefing regarding the e-mail policies of the White House" next week.

White House records fall under the Presidential Records Act of 1978, which was established to govern and manage the collection and use of all presidential records.

White House spokesman David Almacy said the outside e-mail accounts were set up to allow legitimate political activities to be conducted by appropriate staff members without using White House accounts, which would be illegal under the Hatch Act. "It was specifically set up that way so that people weren't using their official accounts for political activities," he said. Only certain White House staff members have such outside accounts, including those who regularly communicate with outside political groups, he said.

The creation and use of the outside e-mail accounts has been reviewed by White House lawyers, he said.

Since 2004, e-mails to and from White House staff members sent through the RNC e-mail system are archived and saved, he said. White House staff members are not able to access other home or other personal e-mail accounts on their work-issued computers because access is blocked, he said. "The reason primarily is presidential records and security. We want to be able to control what people bring onto their [work] computers. From a presidential records perspective, this is something that we take very seriously," Almacy said.

The White House e-mail case should be a wake-up call for businesses that face similar situations, said John Alber, a technology lawyer at Bryan Cave LLP in St. Louis. The problem, he said, is that all business communications must be securely archived and stored in the event of lawsuits, government inquiries or other legal scenarios. When such records aren't tightly controlled, any large unsubstantiated gaps in the stored data can mean disaster in court, he said.

A major issue is that virtually every business is overwhelmed today by the volume of electronic records and communications, he said. His own law firm is experiencing 60% increases in e-mail storage requirements each year for its 800 attorneys and other staff members. "It is nowadays a de facto document repository," he said of the law firm's Microsoft Exchange server system. "It is often that [some legal documents] only exist in an e-mail repository right now in Exchange," which wasn't designed for the long-term storage and archiving of such documents.

"If companies aren't worried about this, they'd better get worried," Alber said. "It's truly important stuff. Everybody has this problem. It's simply because of the way we do business. Almost everybody's behind the curve."

Michele Lang, a staff attorney for legal discovery software vendor Kroll Ontrack Inc. in Eden Prairie, Minn., said "there are a whole bunch of lessons" for businesses to take away from the unfolding White House e-mail case.

"Corporate America is having this very same problem with employees using [free consumer e-mail accounts from] Google, Yahoo or Hotmail," Lang said. By doing so, those employees are often storing sensitive corporate information with free services that don't have the data security, compliance and archiving that companies should mandate, she said.

"That's a scary situation for corporate America. Definitely there are loads of landmines here for the government ... and for corporate America to navigate."

Read More...

Summary only...

Bedtime for Gonzo

Huffington Post
Paul Abrams
Bedtime for Gonzo

Although it may turn out that the US Attorney firings were "only" blatantly political, and not criminally corrupt, the lies are knee-jerk reactions of the Bush Administration, and its roots go deeply into the entire rightwing enterprise that has been created in the last 30 years. Why, one might ask, would they coverup "nothing"?

From their tin ear to the terrorism threat prior to 9/11, to the denial of the human contribution to global warming, and from the SwiftBoating of John Kerry to the "they will follow us home" claim for prolonging the war they lost in Iraq, the Bush Administration's addiction to lying (or, as his predecessor, Nixon, called it, "misspeaking") arises from two underlying contradictions in the radical rightwing playbook.

First, very much like Yasser Arafat who would say one thing in English for the world press, and another in Arabic for his constituents, the radical rightwing have one message for their own groups feeding their faithful the red meat of hatred of anything "foreign" or multilateral, scorn for anything scientific, and derision for anything that limits their vision of a unilaterally acting United States on the world stage or domestic policies that put the public interest over their private interests. Gingrich wanted to dismantle several US departments, and did cancel the Office of Technology Assessment whose role was to provide Congress the same factual understanding of technology as the Congressional Budget Office does for tax and budget policies. He also wanted social security and medicare to "wither on the vine". Bush et al. ignored Richard Clarke's warnings of a terrorist attack because taking that seriously would have meant dollars spent on personnel, and not on their big-technology purchases for Star Wars.

On the other hand, the American people want almost none of that, and the rightwing knows it. Every time the rightwing has tried to be honest about their intentions, they lose. As proof of that observation, note that when they came after Social Security and Medicare in the '90s, they called it "saving" those programs, whereas in fact their proposals gutted them. (Frank Luntz, their wordsmithing guru, taught them to say, "we are just decreasing the rate of increase", but the truth they were proposing absolute decreases). They passed very few of the 9/11 Commission recommendations---because to do so would cost their patrons money---but they have learned the refrain that they care about the safety of the American people. Or, just recall John Bolton explaining why someone (himself) who proclaimed that it would be fine if the UN Secretariat's top floors were demolished, stated at a rightwing belief tank to establish his bona fides, ought to be UN Ambassador, as he tried to do at his confirmation hearing.

So, living with two truths (actually, two lies) is second nature to the radical rightwing. They cannot do what they want to do straightforwardly, and so they become trained dissemblers. With enough practice, they can do it and likely pass a lie detector test. Belief helps---they believe their cause is so just that any means employed is justifiable. Valerie Plame was "fair game". Terry Schiavo's dignity was also fair game. Lying about the impact of medicare reductions on the elderly---fair game. Taking us into Iraq to (they thought) bolster their domestic political power---fair game.

Mr. Gonzales's kneejerk reaction to deny the political nature of the dismissals was right out of their playbook. There is a suggestion in the blogs (BradsBlog) that these attorneys were replaced in states where they could make mischief in the 2008 elections (e.g., Arkansas and Hillary Clinton; New Mexico and Bill Richardson). Oh, did I forget to mention the Florida 2000 vote? Fair game.

What they are discovering, but not admitting, is that their beliefs do not overcome reality. Iraq, Katrina, Global Warming. Scooter Libby had his comeuppance. This time, it is Bedtime for Gonzo.

Read More...

Summary only...

Suicide bombers kill 130 in Iraq

Reuters
Suicide bombers kill 130 in Iraq
By Ahmed Rasheed

BAGHDAD, Iraq (Reuters) - Suicide bombers killed nearly 130 people in a crowded market in a Shi'ite district of Baghdad and a mainly Shi'ite town on Thursday, one of the bloodiest days in Iraq in months.

The upsurge in sectarian violence threatens all-out civil war and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a Shi'ite, called for restraint and urged Iraqis to work with security forces to prevent the violence spiraling out of control. Bombs earlier this week in northern Iraq sparked mass reprisal killings.

Two suicide bombers wearing vests packed with explosives killed 76 people in a market in the Shaab district of northern Baghdad, police and medical sources said, in what appeared to be the latest of a string of attacks on Shi'ite districts and towns blamed on al Qaeda. More than 100 were wounded.

"It is impossible to tell the exact number of dead because we are basically counting body parts," said a Health Ministry official in Baghdad, who asked not to be named.

Most of the victims were women and children, who had been out shopping in the crowded market before the start of the nightly curfew, he said.

At about the same time, three suicide car bombs exploded within minutes of each other in Khalis, 80 km (50 miles) north of Baghdad, killing 53 people and wounding 103, police said.

There has been a spike in bloodshed, particularly outside the Iraqi capital, in recent days. Violence between majority Shi'ites and minority Sunnis has killed tens of thousands in the past year.

On Tuesday two truck bombs killed 85 people in a Shi'ite area of Tal Afar in northern Iraq. In the hours after those blasts Shi'ite gunmen, including police, shot dead up to 70 Sunni Arab men in reprisal.

The top U.S. commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus, confirmed on Thursday police appeared to have carried out "retribution killings" after the bombings, which he blamed on al Qaeda. Iraq's Sunni vice-president urged the Shi'ite-led government to do more to purge the security forces of militias.

In Khalis, one car bomb exploded in a commercial area and a second at a police checkpoint leading to the police headquarters and court building, police said. A third bomber attacked police patrols rushing to the scene.

"It was a scene of horror. There were charred bodies and human remains scattered about," said one policeman who spoke on condition of anonymity.

MARKET BLAST

A survivor of the Shaab market blast in Baghdad, Wissam Hashim Ali, 27, told Reuters the market had been "very, very crowded" at the time of the blasts.

"I saw heads separated from the bodies and legs blown off," he said in hospital, where he was receiving treatment for his wounds.

Maliki's office said in a statement the prime minister condemned the bombs and called on Iraqis "not to let evil-doers have their way and to cooperate with security forces, who are determined to cleanse Iraq of terrorism".

New U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker told his swearing-in ceremony that "terrorists, insurgents and militias continue to threaten security in Baghdad and around the country" and called Iraq America's "most critical foreign policy challenge".

The U.S. Senate, following the House of Representatives, passed a war-funding bill on Thursday that sets a goal of withdrawing all U.S. combat soldiers from Iraq within a year.

President George W. Bush, who has vowed to veto the measure, is sending up to 30,000 additional troops to Iraq, most of them to support a major security crackdown under way in Baghdad, epicenter of the violence.

While this crackdown has succeeded in reducing the number of deaths in the capital, violence has surged elsewhere.

(Additional reporting by Dean Yates and Claudia Parsons in Baghdad)

Read More...

Summary only...

Ex-aide disputes Gonzales statements on firings

Reuters
Ex-aide disputes Gonzales statements on firings
By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales wrongly claimed he was not involved in the firing of federal prosecutors, his former chief of staff told Congress on Thursday.

Kyle Sampson also said he shared vital information with Justice Department colleagues about the dismissal of eight of the nation's 93 U.S. attorneys last year, despite assertions to the contrary by the attorney general.

"I never sought to conceal or withhold any material fact on this matter from anyone," Sampson, who helped orchestrate the ousters, told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

"Others in the department knew what I knew about the origins and timing of this enterprise," Sampson said.

The dismissals have triggered a firestorm, fanned by charges the firings may have been politically motivated, and calls for Gonzales to resign.

The administration contends the dismissals were justified, based largely on performance or policy differences. Newly disclosed documents also show loyalty was a factor.

While Sampson defended the firings overall, he voiced regret near the end of the all-day hearing about the ouster of one of the prosecutors, David Iglesias of New Mexico.

"In hindsight, I wish that the department hadn't gotten down this road at all," Sampson said. "That's one of the reasons I resigned" this month.

Iglesias was ousted largely for what now appear to be questionable complaints he inadequately pursued election fraud.

His dismissal came after Iglesias resisted what he described as pressure from two U.S. Republican lawmakers to bring charges in a probe involving New Mexico Democrats. The two lawmakers deny it.

GONZALES TO TESTIFY NEXT MONTH

Gonzales, in what could be a make-or-break bid to keep his job, is to appear before the committee next month.

President George W. Bush has voiced support for Gonzales, but also told him to go to Capitol Hill to ease concerns.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, after Sampson's testimony was completed, said, "The president continues to have confidence in the attorney general and believes he can overcome these challenges."

The investigation is part of a drive by the new Democratic-led Congress to increase oversight over how the administration operates.

At a March 13 news conference, Gonzales said, "The mistake that occurred here was that information that he (Sampson) had was not shared with individuals within the department who were then going to be providing testimony and information to the Congress."

Gonzales also had said he was not involved in discussions about the firings. But he sought to clarify his position after the recent disclosure of an internal document showed otherwise.

Subsequently, Gonzales said he was not involved in deliberations over which prosecutors should go, only getting involved at the end. U.S. attorneys serve at the pleasure of the president.

Sampson said, "I don't think the attorney general's statement that he was not involved in any discussions about U.S. attorney removals is accurate."

He testified that Gonzales "was aware of this process from the beginning in early 2005. ... Ultimately he approved both the list and the notion of going forward and asking for these resignations." He said both Gonzales and former White House counsel Harriet Miers were directly involved in at least one of the reviews.

Congressional subpoenas have been authorized for Miers, Bush political adviser Karl Rove and other White House aides. The president has vowed to oppose any attempt to compel sworn testimony from them.

(Additional reporting by Tabassum Zakaria and James Vicini)

Read More...

Summary only...

Arab leaders urge Israel to take peace offer

Reuters
Arab leaders urge Israel to take peace offer
By Wafa Amr and Andrew Hammond

RIYADH (Reuters) - Arab leaders on Thursday endorsed a 5-year-old peace plan to end conflict with Israel, and the Israeli prime minister said he saw a "revolutionary change" in the Arab world.

The endorsement at a two-day Arab summit came amid a U.S. push to restart the Middle East peace process, and Washington described it as "very positive".

The Palestinian president warned of more violence if the "hand of peace" was rejected and the prime minister of Israel, which turned down the plan in 2002, described the summit as "a serious affair".

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Saudi Arabia, which hosted the summit, was the Arab country that would "eventually determine the Arabs' ability to reach a compromise with Israel", Israeli media quoted him as saying.

"This process has brought the influential countries in the Arab world to begin to realize that Israel is not the biggest of all their troubles. This is a revolutionary change in their perception."

Speaking at the end of the summit, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas urged Israel not to waste the chance for peace.

"I reiterate the sincerity of the Palestinian will in extending the hand of peace to the Israeli people ... We should not waste more chances in the history of this long and painful cause," Abbas told the closing ceremony in Riyadh.

The plan, endorsed in a general communique read at the end of the summit, offers Israel normal ties with Arab states in return for withdrawal from land seized in the 1967 war and the creation of a Palestinian state.

The summit also agreed to set up an Arab committee to follow up the initiative, headed by Saudi Arabia.

"The willingness of the Saudis to lead, to intervene is certainly interesting," Olmert said.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the Arabs should use the plan "as a point of active diplomacy and as a way of energizing the push for peace in the Middle East".

"UNPREDICTABLE REPERCUSSIONS"

Rejected by Israel when it was originally proposed at a Beirut summit in 2002, the plan faces important hurdles.

Israel objects to key points, including a return to 1967 borders, the inclusion of Arab East Jerusalem in a Palestinian state and the potential return of Palestinian refugees to what is now Israel.

But Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Israel was subjecting "not only the region but itself to dangers with unpredictable repercussions" if it ignored peace offers.

The summit came against a tense regional backdrop, amid a standoff between Iran and the west over Tehran's nuclear program.

The United States and other western countries accuse Iran of using its nuclear program, which Tehran says is designed only to produce electricity, as a cover for making nuclear bombs.

The summit warned of the danger of a nuclear arms race in the region, though it also stressed the right of every country to possess nuclear energy for peaceful uses.

(Additional reporting by Souhail Karam)

Read More...

Summary only...

Senate approves '08 goal to bring troops home

Reuters
Senate approves '08 goal to bring troops home
By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Senate on Thursday defied a veto threat by President George W. Bush and joined with the House of Representatives in backing a timetable for withdrawing American combat troops from Iraq.

In a mostly party-line 51-47 vote, the Democratic-controlled Senate told Bush to start withdrawing the troops this year with the goal of getting all combat soldiers out by March 31, 2008.

"The ball is in the president's court. We have done what we needed to do" by passing a bill with even more money for the troops and veterans than Bush requested, said House Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called the deadline legislation "well outside the mainstream." But she added, "If they want to compromise -- and I understand that the (House) speaker and the (Senate) majority leader said that they do -- then we're willing to talk to them on ways that their bills can be changed in order to get to the president's desk so that it doesn't meet his veto."

Democrats took control of Congress in January, after elections that largely focused on Republicans' handling of a war that has now claimed more than 3,200 American lives and at least 65,000 Iraqi soldiers and civilians.

The Senate vote marked progress for anti-war Democrats, who just two weeks ago mustered only 48 votes in a failed attempt to set identical deadlines.

Bush has argued that setting a deadline encourages the enemy to wait it out and hurts military commanders' flexibility. He has promised to veto any legislation that sets withdrawal timetables, which Democrats have attached to about $100 billion in war funds for the next six months.

COMPROMISE

Now, House and Senate negotiators will try to work out a compromise from their two bills. Their most notable difference is that the House bill contains a mandatory September 1, 2008, deadline for redeploying combat troops. The Senate's shorter timetable is a goal, not a requirement on Bush and is designed to win the support of centrist Democrats.

The House bill also requires Bush to certify that troops are properly trained, equipped and rested before being sent into combat. Democrats insist they are enforcing existing standards at a time when the military is stressed after four years of fighting. Republicans accuse them of trying to micromanage and choke off the war.

Democrats' moves to end the war through legislation kicked off another round of accusations from the White House and Congress over which would be to blame if money is not quickly delivered to the troops.

Speaking to reporters after meeting with House Republican leaders, Bush said, "We stand united in saying loud and clear that when we've got a troop in harm's way, we expect that troop to be fully funded."

Reid countered that Democrats were following through on voters' demands last November for better oversight of the war. He said if Bush vetoes whatever compromise the House and Senate craft, "I don't know if you can find any president who has done more to undermine the troops."

The House and Senate hope to negotiate a compromise bill by the week of April 16 and quickly pass it and send it on to Bush.

If Bush does veto the bill, Democrats are not expected to have the two-thirds support in the House and Senate to overturn him.

As a result, Congress quickly would have to come up with a new war-spending bill, with Democrats in a high-stakes gamble over whether to send Bush another bill with conditions on the duration of U.S. troops fighting in Iraq.

(Additional reporting by Caren Bohan and Susan Cornwell)

Read More...

Summary only...

The Politics of Attacking Al Gore

ABC News
The Politics of Attacking Al Gore
Column: Gore Goes to Washington to Speak on Warming; Capitol Quibbles While Ice Sheets Melt
By MATT CRENSON
The Associated Press

NEW YORK - Al Gore has taken some heat lately for spreading the word about global warming.

First there were the allegations by a conservative group, the day after Gore collected an Oscar for his movie "An Inconvenient Truth," that his Nashville mansion consumes more than 20 times as much electricity as the average American household. Then there were charges that zinc mining on Tennessee property owned by Gore tarnished his environmentalist credentials.

By the time he arrived on Capitol Hill this past week to testify about his signature issue, the barbs Gore's congressional adversaries hurled at him sounded relatively benign.

"It seems that everything is blamed on global warming," Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma complained. "How come you guys never seem to notice when it gets cold?"

He then confronted Gore with the number of record cold temperatures measured at U.S. weather stations during the month of January. (This would be the same January that was part of the warmest Northern Hemisphere winter on record.)

"We need to be deliberative and careful when we talk about so-called scientific facts," Republican Rep. Joe Barton of Texas lectured, before enumerating a list of things he believed Gore got wrong in the award-winning documentary.

One of the problems Gore, environmentalists and the scientific community have in conveying the seriousness of global warming is that its most severe effects to date have been felt in the polar regions, far from the places where most politicians and their constituents live.

As Gore mentioned on Capitol Hill, in just the last few months a number of scientific studies have documented alarming environmental changes at both poles. The sea ice layer on the Arctic Ocean has shrunk so dramatically that scientists expect it to disappear completely during the summer months by mid-century. Scientists have seen glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica suddenly accelerate, increasing the rate at which they dump icebergs into the sea and contributing to the rise of the world's seas.

As part of an effort to draw attention to the poles, on March 1 the world's scientific community kicked off the International Polar Year, an intensive research effort and public awareness campaign focused on the Arctic and Antarctic.

"We're seeing the poles change faster than we had anticipated, than we as scientists could have imagined," said Robin Bell, a Columbia University geophysicist who chaired the U.S. national committee for the International Polar Year.

A few years ago scientists felt pretty confident that if anything, the polar ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica would grow due to global warming. Their calculations indicated that any melting would be more than offset by a warming-induced increase in snowfall over the South Pole.

Minds started changing in February 2002, when scientists watched in amazement as a Rhode Island-sized chunk of floating ice on Antarctica's coast disintegrated into icebergs and simply drifted away. Around the same time they noticed that Greenland's already growing output of ice into the North Atlantic had increased dramatically, doubling over the decade that ended in 2005.

"We were much more optimistic about the ice sheets a few years ago than we are now," said Penn State glaciologist Richard B. Alley.

Research is starting to help scientists understand what's going on with surging glaciers. One recent study used images from a NASA satellite to track gigantic sub-glacial lakes in Antarctica as they filled with water and then drained. The pools of liquid water presumably act as lubrication between the ice and the land underneath, making the glaciers above them flow much more quickly than they otherwise would. But exactly how remains a mystery.

"We can't predict what this ice stream is going to do based on these measurements, but this is a major step in that direction," said Robert Bindschadler, a NASA scientist who worked on the project.

In "An Inconvenient Truth," Gore dramatically illustrated what the cities of Miami, Calcutta, Shanghai, Beijing and New York might look like in 2100 if the Greenland ice sheet were to melt, raising sea level by 20 feet.

He capped that section of his presentation with a chilling thought: "Think of the impact of a couple hundred thousand refugees," Gore says in the film, conjuring images of New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. "And then imagine 100 million."

Gore's political adversaries have criticized him for evoking such a catastrophic future.

"Nearly every significant statement that Vice President Gore makes regarding climate science and climate policy is either one-sided, misleading, exaggerated, speculative or wrong," said Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute who holds degrees in government and political science.

Lewis contends that there is no scientific evidence to support the notion that melting glaciers could raise sea levels by 20 feet during our lives or those of our children.

That's true, strictly speaking. The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recently projected a sea-level rise of between 7 and 23 inches by 2100 a far cry from 20 feet. But those projections explicitly omit any consideration of melting in Antarctica and Greenland, citing the lack of reliable scientific knowledge on the topic.

Yes, it's true: There are some things about global warming that scientists don't understand. But Alley, who has a doctoral degree is in geology, was willing to offer some educated speculation.

"I don't think anyone has come up with anything that would allow you to lose a whole ice sheet in decades," he said.

But, he added, global temperatures could easily be warm enough by 2100 to make the collapse of one or both ice caps an inevitability at some point after that.

So while its true that our children needn't worry about catastrophic sea level rise, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren may not be so lucky.

Read More...

Summary only...

My National Security Letter Gag Order

washingtonpost.com
My National Security Letter Gag Order

It is the policy of The Washington Post not to publish anonymous pieces. In this case, an exception has been made because the author -- who would have preferred to be named -- is legally prohibited from disclosing his or her identity in connection with receipt of a national security letter. The Post confirmed the legitimacy of this submission by verifying it with the author's attorney and by reviewing publicly available court documents.

The Justice Department's inspector general revealed on March 9 that the FBI has been systematically abusing one of the most controversial provisions of the USA Patriot Act: the expanded power to issue "national security letters." It no doubt surprised most Americans to learn that between 2003 and 2005 the FBI issued more than 140,000 specific demands under this provision -- demands issued without a showing of probable cause or prior judicial approval -- to obtain potentially sensitive information about U.S. citizens and residents. It did not, however, come as any surprise to me.

Three years ago, I received a national security letter (NSL) in my capacity as the president of a small Internet access and consulting business. The letter ordered me to provide sensitive information about one of my clients. There was no indication that a judge had reviewed or approved the letter, and it turned out that none had. The letter came with a gag provision that prohibited me from telling anyone, including my client, that the FBI was seeking this information. Based on the context of the demand -- a context that the FBI still won't let me discuss publicly -- I suspected that the FBI was abusing its power and that the letter sought information to which the FBI was not entitled.

Rather than turn over the information, I contacted lawyers at the American Civil Liberties Union, and in April 2004 I filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the NSL power. I never released the information the FBI sought, and last November the FBI decided that it no longer needs the information anyway. But the FBI still hasn't abandoned the gag order that prevents me from disclosing my experience and concerns with the law or the national security letter that was served on my company. In fact, the government will return to court in the next few weeks to defend the gag orders that are imposed on recipients of these letters.

Living under the gag order has been stressful and surreal. Under the threat of criminal prosecution, I must hide all aspects of my involvement in the case -- including the mere fact that I received an NSL -- from my colleagues, my family and my friends. When I meet with my attorneys I cannot tell my girlfriend where I am going or where I have been. I hide any papers related to the case in a place where she will not look. When clients and friends ask me whether I am the one challenging the constitutionality of the NSL statute, I have no choice but to look them in the eye and lie.

I resent being conscripted as a secret informer for the government and being made to mislead those who are close to me, especially because I have doubts about the legitimacy of the underlying investigation.

The inspector general's report makes clear that NSL gag orders have had even more pernicious effects. Without the gag orders issued on recipients of the letters, it is doubtful that the FBI would have been able to abuse the NSL power the way that it did. Some recipients would have spoken out about perceived abuses, and the FBI's actions would have been subject to some degree of public scrutiny. To be sure, not all recipients would have spoken out; the inspector general's report suggests that large telecom companies have been all too willing to share sensitive data with the agency -- in at least one case, a telecom company gave the FBI even more information than it asked for. But some recipients would have called attention to abuses, and some abuse would have been deterred.

I found it particularly difficult to be silent about my concerns while Congress was debating the reauthorization of the Patriot Act in 2005 and early 2006. If I hadn't been under a gag order, I would have contacted members of Congress to discuss my experiences and to advocate changes in the law. The inspector general's report confirms that Congress lacked a complete picture of the problem during a critical time: Even though the NSL statute requires the director of the FBI to fully inform members of the House and Senate about all requests issued under the statute, the FBI significantly underrepresented the number of NSL requests in 2003, 2004 and 2005, according to the report.

I recognize that there may sometimes be a need for secrecy in certain national security investigations. But I've now been under a broad gag order for three years, and other NSL recipients have been silenced for even longer. At some point -- a point we passed long ago -- the secrecy itself becomes a threat to our democracy. In the wake of the recent revelations, I believe more strongly than ever that the secrecy surrounding the government's use of the national security letters power is unwarranted and dangerous. I hope that Congress will at last recognize the same thing.

Read More...

Summary only...