Federal Probe Has Edged Closer to Former Majority Leader

washingtonpost.com
Federal Probe Has Edged Closer to Former Majority Leader
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer

The pending resignation of former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), once one of the most powerful lawmakers in Washington, comes amid a federal criminal investigation that already has reached into his inner circle of longtime advisers.

DeLay faces a trial later this year on money-laundering charges in Texas that stems from an October 2005 indictment related to corporate contributions to state elections in 2001 and 2002. Since then, two former aides and one of his most prominent contributors have pleaded guilty in a separate federal probe to crimes including conspiracy; wire, tax and mail fraud; and the corruption of public officials.

The picture appeared to darken further last week. DeLay's former chief of staff Edwin A. Buckham, the lawmaker's closest political and spiritual adviser, was described in court documents filed by the Justice Department as someone who collaborated with the others -- Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff, former DeLay deputy chief of staff Tony Rudy and former DeLay aide Michael Scanlon. They arranged payments, trips and favors that the department's investigators charged were part of an illegal conspiracy, according to the documents.

DeLay himself was formally designated as "Representative #2" in the documents, a title that cannot be considered a good omen. The lawmaker designated in the same documents as Representative #1 -- Rep. Robert W. Ney (R-Ohio) -- has been cited by the Justice Department as having received "things of value" for performing official acts.

Ney has not been formally named a target of the probe and denies wrongdoing, but he agreed last October to sign a Justice Department document waiving the expiration of the statute of limitations on any alleged crimes.

DeLay and Buckham also have not been accused of wrongdoing by federal prosecutors, and they have both asserted their innocence. But some of DeLay's official actions in Congress clearly fall within the scope of the continuing investigation: Last week's guilty plea by Rudy cites as part of the evidence of conspiracy a letter that DeLay wrote on behalf of an Abramoff client and legislation that DeLay supported on behalf of a client of Abramoff's firm.

DeLay has assembled a substantial legal team to fight back, and he has a defense fund -- financed largely by corporations with business before Congress -- that contained more than $600,000 at the end of last year, based on the cumulative record of its receipts and contributions. But contributions to the fund dropped from $318,000 to $181,500 between the third and fourth quarters of 2005.

DeLay, who is withdrawing from his reelection bid, also is entitled under federal election rules to convert any or all of his remaining campaign funds to his legal expenses, whether or not he resigns, is indicted or loses the election. Election lawyers say one advantage of bowing out of the election now is that the campaign cash can be converted to pay legal bills immediately, instead of being drained in the course of a bid to stay in office.

As of Feb. 15, when his campaign filed its most recent report with the Federal Election Commission, DeLay had $1,295,350 on hand. But that was two weeks before the Texas primary in which DeLay bested three Republican rivals to win renomination, and the pot of money available to DeLay now may be considerably less.

By stepping aside so early in an election year, a lawmaker "wouldn't be spending to be reelected" and could transfer the funds immediately to fend off any federal charges, said Skadden, Arps lawyer Kenneth A. Gross, a former head of the FEC's enforcement division. The last lawmaker to gain the FEC's formal approval for such a transfer was Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), who resigned last November after pleading guilty to evading taxes and accepting bribes.

Cunningham and DeLay shared a major contributor, Brent Wilkes, whose actions figured in the probe that led to Cunningham's eight-year prison term. Wilkes flew DeLay on his corporate jet at a time when he was seeking government contracts for his computer software firm, although no evidence has emerged that DeLay provided favors for Wilkes.

The central legal challenge for DeLay is more likely to arise from the work of the federal task force, made up of FBI and tax agents, Interior Department investigators, and prosecutors from the Justice Department's public integrity unit. A grand jury subpoena issued by the FBI in February for records of the U.S. Family Network, a nonprofit group formed by Buckham, specifically asked for any documents related to DeLay; his wife, Christine; Buckham's lobbying firm; Rudy; and a variety of contributors to the group from among Abramoff's client list.

Database editor Derek Willis contributed to this report.

Read More...

Summary only...

Homeland Security Official Resists Extradition on Charge Involving Internet and Sex

The New York Times
Official Resists Extradition on Charge Involving Internet and Sex
By MICHAEL JANOFSKY

WASHINGTON, April 5 — The Department of Homeland Security's deputy press secretary appeared in a Maryland state court on Wednesday and refused extradition to Florida, where he faces charges of using the Internet to seduce someone he thought was a 14-year-old girl.

The press official, Brian J. Doyle, was arrested Tuesday night in his home in Silver Spring, Md., after nearly a month of computer contact with a Polk County detective who was posing as a teenager. Mr. Doyle now faces 23 counts of using a computer to seduce a child and transmission of harmful material to a minor. Under Florida law, each count is a third-degree felony that carries a five-year prison term.

Mr. Doyle's lawyer, Barry Helfand, said his client would remain in the Montgomery County Detention Center, where he is being held on a fugitive warrant, until a hearing set for May 4. Mr. Helfand said he needed time to discuss the case with Mr. Doyle and would "most likely" return to ask the court to release Mr. Doyle to allow him to turn himself in to the authorities in Florida, where he would be formally charged. Mr. Doyle, 55, who has no prior criminal record, according to the Maryland law enforcement authorities, joined the department last year after working several years for the Transportation Security Administration. From 1975 to 2001, he worked on the Washington news desk for Time magazine.

As Mr. Doyle was placed on administrative leave on Wednesday, Representative Peter T. King, a New York Republican who is chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said the committee would investigate the Homeland Security Department's hiring and security clearance policies.

Mr. Doyle's arrest "raises serious concerns about the department's hiring policies and, more important, its security clearance practices," Mr. King said in a statement.

"I am concerned," he continued, "that D.H.S.'s security clearance procedures and controls on misuse of electronic equipment do not meet the standards of other national security agencies."

The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, called the charges "very serious allegations" and promised the administration's full cooperation with investigators.

Mr. Doyle came to the attention of the Florida authorities on March 12, when the Polk County detective, posing as a teenage girl online, was contacted by him on the computer, according to an account provided by the sheriff's office.

Mr. Doyle told the detective online that he worked for the Department of Homeland Security and, in later contacts, provided the numbers of his office telephone and his government-issued cellphone, the sheriff's office said.

Over time, the authorities said, Mr. Doyle sent the detective "hard-core pornographic movie clips" and used the chatroom service of AOL and his telephones "to have explicit sexual conversations." The sheriff's office said some of the exchanges "are too extraordinary and graphic for public release."

Read More...

Summary only...

"Pork" funds teapot museum, arctic games, water-free urinals

Reuters
"Pork" funds teapot museum, arctic games
By Andy Sullivan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Lobbying scandals and a staggering federal budget deficit haven't dampened Congress' appetite for questionable pet projects, as lawmakers will spend a record $29 billion on "pork" this year, a watchdog group said on Wednesday.

At a press conference featuring real pigs, Citizens Against Government Waste highlighted projects it said were especially egregious: $1 million for water-free urinals, $500,000 for a North Carolina teapot museum and $100,000 for a boxing club in Nevada.

Others included $550,000 for the Museum of Glass in Washington state, $250,000 for the National Cattle Congress in Iowa and $500,000 for the Arctic Winter Games in Alaska.

The group's annual report, known as the "Pig Book," covers the fiscal year ending September 30, during which the U.S. government could rack up a deficit of around $400 billion.

Lawmakers seeking to boost their re-election prospects include spending measures for their home districts in the massive spending bills that keep the government running.

Such "earmarks" are often added at the last stages of the legislative process to bypass the normal scrutiny applied to federal spending.

"We're not saying all these projects are bad. We are saying they haven't gone through a legitimate process," said Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain, a longtime critic of Congress' free-spending ways.

ALASKANS BENEFIT MOST

The watchdog group said the total number of pork-barrel earmarks in the 2006 budget declined 29 percent to 9,963, but their total cost increased 6 percent to $29 billion.

However, the House Appropriations Committee says spending on these special projects declined to about $17 billion this fiscal year, down $2.8 billion from the previous year.

The group's figures could be higher because it includes as "pork barrel" spending any projects passed by Congress that have not been requested by the president.

The money is not distributed evenly across the country. While Alaska took home $490 per capita in pork spending, lawmakers from Georgia only wrangled $12 per citizen, according to the group's report.

Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens was for the fifth year in a row responsible for the most amount of pork -- a total of $325 million last year, the group said.

A Stevens spokeswoman declined comment.

Stevens was at the center of a nasty Senate fight last year when some senators publicly ridiculed his "bridge to nowhere" that connected the port town of Ketchikan to a neighboring island populated by 50 people. The $223 million for the quarter-mile (0.5-km) bridge was removed from a spending bill.

Citizens Against Government Waste touts itself as "America's number one taxpayer watchdog." But it accepts corporate contributions, and an offshoot of the group has lobbied on behalf of special interests including the tobacco industry.

(Additional reporting by Richard Cowan)

Read More...

Summary only...

House panel backs help for telcos on TV service

Reuters
House panel backs help for telcos on TV service
Jeremy Pelofsky

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Legislation designed to help telephone companies such as AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications roll out subscription television service faster won approval from a U.S. House of Representatives panel on Wednesday.

The House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on telecommunications and the Internet voted 27-4 to allow companies to apply for a nationwide license to offer video service, instead of the current process in which they must negotiate with thousands of cities for individual licenses.

AT&T and Verizon, the two largest U.S. telephone carriers, are expanding into subscription television service and have complained it would take them years to get the necessary licenses, making it harder to compete against cable companies.

The future of the legislation was unclear because of the short legislative session this year, as well as because of divisions among lawmakers, network providers and Internet content companies.

Democrats offered numerous amendments, including provisions aimed at preventing Internet service providers from favoring certain content over others and require new video providers to build out their service to ensure poor areas are not left out.

Most were defeated by the Republicans who have a majority on the panel, including the Internet neutrality amendment. But lawmakers approved by voice vote a provision requiring high- speed Internet providers to sell the service without tying it with voice or other products.

The bill would also empower the Federal Communications Commission to enforce its principles that call on Internet service providers to permit consumers unfettered Internet access and allow them to run any Internet-based applications.

FIGHT OVER INTERNET SERVICE

AT&T and Verizon have pledged that consumers would be able to surf anywhere they want on the Internet, but also want to offer private Internet-based services that offer faster download speeds for products such as movies.

"The principles are vague and unenforceable," said Rep. Edward Markey, the top Democrat on the panel. "The FCC principles do not encompass the nondiscriminatory protections that the Internet has always had and desperately needs in order to ensure its continued vibrance."

The amendment failed by a vote of 23-8, with several Democrats voting against it and one Republican voting yes.

"It is my view that the pipe owner should not decide what the (Internet) content is and the speed of that content into my home," said Rep. Heather Wilson, a New Mexico Republican.

Content companies, such as Amazon.com Inc., fear network providers such as AT&T and Verizon would use those private networks to favor their own services or partners over rivals, leaving the public a narrower Internet pipe.

"I don't think the dire predictions that are discussed by them are necessarily realistic," said Rep. Charles Bass, a New Hampshire Republican.

The subcommittee did agree to add a provision to the bill that would permit the FCC to impose fines of up to $500,000 for violating its principles.

The measure would also permit local authorities to collect up to 5 percent of gross revenue from cable services and the bill's sponsors said state and local authority over public rights-of-way would be preserved.

The panel also turned aside an attempt to limit foreign ownership of licenses for subscription television service.

Read More...

Summary only...

New 9/11 dustup: LMDC blasted in bank bldg. demolition plan switch

nydailynews.com
New 9/11 dustup
LMDC blasted in bank bldg. demolition plan switch
Daily News Exclusive
By GREG B. SMITH
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER

Federal environmental officials and local residents are blasting the state agency in charge of Ground Zero for suddenly altering plans for the demolition of the highly contaminated Deutsche Bank building, the Daily News has learned.

The angry notice from the Environmental Protection Agency comes just days before contractors are supposed to begin cleansing the structure of a toxic brew of asbestos, lead, cadmium, dioxin and other poisons deposited after the 9/11 collapse of the twin towers.

The feds are upset that a subcontractor assigned to the tricky demolition job made "significant changes" to the debris removal plan that could affect "public safety, health and the environment."

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-Manhattan), local residents and other elected officials also are upset at the Lower Manhattan Development Corp., which oversees Ground Zero, for what they termed a "dangerously inadequate" demolition plan.

Said Kimberly Flynn of the 9/11 Environmental Action group: "Now the toxic tower is coming down - imminently - but we do not yet have an EPA-approved demolition plan in place."

The floor-by-floor demolition is scheduled to begin next month. Its $46 million cost has risen to $52 million due to increased insurance requirements, state officials said.

Before a single brick can be removed, however, the building's interior must be cleansed, a process expected to begin during the next two weeks.

In several letters over the past month, the EPA has been seeking explanations for "significant differences" from the original approved demolition plan.

In a March 20 letter, the EPA noted five unapproved additions by John Galt Co., the subcontractor responsible for the toxic cleanup and the demolition: a concrete crushing machine on the upper floors, construction of a chute through which crushed concrete would plummet to the ground, a five-story buffer zone between the toxic cleanup and the actual demolition, use of a floating "roof" as the work progresses and the use of debris as fill material at the site.

Pat Evangelista, the EPA official in charge of the Ground Zero cleanup, warned the LMDC that the added techniques "will of course have an impact on potential releases of contaminants." He said additional information and analysis was "essential to our ongoing responsibility to protect public health and the environment."

EPA spokeswoman Mary Meeks said yesterday that the agency had received an LMDC response and was reviewing it.

The LMDC contended the chute was in the original plan and would obviously require concrete crushing equipment. The use of debris as fill is "environmentally appropriate," and the "floating roof" was previously discussed, the LMDC added.

The demolition has been plagued with problems. The first firm hired was booted when its demolition plans weren't approved by the EPA and other officials.

Federal regulators cited one contractor after a worker fell off a scaffold last December and are now investigating a second accident two weeks ago when a worker fell 400 feet into a sub-basement.

Also within the last month, workers found bits of human bone inside the building believed to be from victims of the 9/11 attacks.

Read More...

Summary only...

An Amazing Time for Revelations! HAD ENOUGH?

huffingtonpost.com
An Amazing Time for Revelations!
Carl Jeffers

Over the last week to ten days, all of us have been treated to some of the most astounding series of revelations and statements that we have heard from any Administration within a similar period of time. Although the President’s approval ratings continue to drop, the administration is still lucky that some of these statements and revelations have remained somewhat below the radar screen for many Americans.

But with so many of these statements within such a short period of time, the questions is - how long before the luck runs out?

The series of events commenced with the President’s press conference that was stunning in its content. Let’s examine some of the President’s statements. First, President Bush said that “we got the Patriot Act passed over the objection of the Democrat leadership in the Senate” - WRONG! That statement is simply untrue. Democrats didn’t hold up passage of the Patriot Act - Republicans did. In fact, Democrats didn’t have enough power or votes to hold it up. It was the concerns and reservations of Republicans that held up the Patriot Act, including their own James Sensenbrenner ® Ohio, who vetoed the 90 day extension Democrats and Republicans had compromised on and insisted on only a 30 day extension. The President’s statement seems intended only to play the “patriotism card” again, on a subject the President has insisted should be spared any partisan political jockeying. And then there’s Katrina and the 11,000 trailers in Oklahoma that were needed in New Orleans. The President said “I told Chertoff to do something with them.” Are you kidding me? Chertoff (Director - Homeland Security), needs an order to do something with them. Let’s see. We have 12,000 people being evicted from hotels in the Gulf region, and we have 11,000 unused available trailers sitting idly by in another state just needing to be transported. You do the math. That is not leadership.

As to Iraq, the President said “Every war plan looks good on paper until you meet the enemy.” Our problem was that we didn’t even have a plan on paper for the aftermath of the invasion or for the implementation of the goals of our military action - goals which we seem to change every week. The President also said “THEY want to hit us again.” But THEY didn’t hit us the first time. The people we are fighting in Iraq, and indeed, their former leader, Saddam Hussein, had nothing to do with hitting us on 9/11, and I defy anyone now to explain how the war in Iraq is going after the “people who brought down the buildings” on 9/11 - the people who the President said would hear from “all of us soon.” And to wrap up the press conference, the President said it “would be up to the next President” to determine when the troops would come home - he also passed on the budget deficit problem to the next President to solve as well. It should come as no surprise that many would surmise that this information would have been even more helpful had it been revealed prior to the 2004 Presidential election.

Days later, the announcement was made that Andrew Card, the President’s Chief of Staff, would be leaving as a response to constant demands, mostly from within Republican and conservative ranks, for a shake-up in the Administration. But Andrew Card didn’t send troops to Iraq, didn’t respond or fail to respond to Katrina, and didn’t manage the Dubai Ports deal. What’s more, rather than bringing in outside new blood, the President is replacing him with Joshua Bolton, an insider at the White House perhaps as close to the President as Card.

Now we hear rumors that press secretary Scott McClellan and Treasury Secretary John Snow may be leaving. McClellan presents the same problem as Andrew Card, being primarily a decision defender rather than a decision maker. Now as to John Snow, his leaving won’t make much difference as he seems to have disappeared a year ago Christmas and hasn’t been heard from since.

Next, we learn that the day the Supreme Court decided the 2000 Presidential election in favor of the Bush campaign, Dick Cheney called William Cohen, Bill Clinton’s Secretary of Defense, and told Cohen he wanted a “briefing on one country and one country only. I want to know what’s going on in Iraq and I don’t care about anywhere else.” As I have said for two years, Iraq was on the neo-cons’ agenda long before 9/11 and 9/11 moved it to the front page.

Then, we learned that in a January 2003 meeting between President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, the President indicated that he was “determined to invade Iraq without a second resolution” (which he promised to get) and regardless of the findings of the UN Weapons Inspection Team (which he was prepared to ignore). Furthermore, he even suggested sending a plane up with UN ensignia on it hoping Saddam would shoot it down to give us a publicly justifiable excuse to invade Iraq. And the President gave Tony Blair our invasion date, even before Colin Powell made his presentation to the UN designed to present a last chance for Saddam to avoid war - under the circumstances a rather tall order. And this past weekend, Sec of State Condoleeza Rice acknowledged that we “have made thousands of tactical mistakes” in the war in Iraq, and as General Tony Zinni promptly pointed out on Meet The Press, “tactical mistakes are mistakes made by military personnel,” what we made were “strategic mistakes,” which are made by the leaders of the government.

And for breaking news, Rep Tom Delay has announced he will resign his House seat by mid-June rather than “allow liberal Democrats to steal the seat.” His reference to someone else “stealing” suggests he hasn’t read his own indictment as clearly as he might have.

And Republicans want to build a 700 mile wall along the border to keep out immigrants. But since Americans don’t want these jobs, we’ll have to hire illegal immigrants to build the wall to keep them out. No wonder most Americans think the country is on the wrong track.

The list goes on, but I think you get the idea. In fact, the best way to sum all of this up is to quote the suggested fall campaign theme for the Democrats that was made not by Ted Kennedy, not by Nancy Pilosi, and not by Howard Dean - No, this suggested theme came from none other than Newt Gingrich - HAD ENOUGH?

Read More...

Summary only...

Big Gain for Rich Seen in Tax Cuts for Investments

The New York Times
Big Gain for Rich Seen in Tax Cuts for Investments
By DAVID CAY JOHNSTON

The first data to document the effect of President Bush's tax cuts for investment income show that they have significantly lowered the tax burden on the richest Americans, reducing taxes on incomes of more than $10 million by an average of about $500,000.

An analysis of Internal Revenue Service data by The New York Times found that the benefit of the lower taxes on investments was far more concentrated on the very wealthiest Americans than the benefits of Mr. Bush's two previous tax cuts: on wages and other noninvestment income.

When Congress cut investment taxes three years ago, it was clear that the highest-income Americans would gain the most, because they had the most money in investments. But the size of the cuts and what share goes to each income group have not been known.

As Congress debates whether to make the Bush tax cuts permanent, The Times analyzed I.R.S. figures for 2003, the latest year available and the first that reflected the tax cuts for income from dividends and from the sale of stock and other assets, known as capital gains.

The analysis found the following:

¶Among taxpayers with incomes greater than $10 million, the amount by which their investment tax bill was reduced averaged about $500,000 in 2003, and total tax savings, which included the two Bush tax cuts on compensation, nearly doubled, to slightly more than $1 million.

¶These taxpayers, whose average income was $26 million, paid about the same share of their income in income taxes as those making $200,000 to $500,000 because of the lowered rates on investment income.

¶Americans with annual incomes of $1 million or more, about one-tenth of 1 percent all taxpayers, reaped 43 percent of all the savings on investment taxes in 2003. The savings for these taxpayers averaged about $41,400 each. By comparison, these same Americans received less than 10 percent of the savings from the other Bush tax cuts, which applied primarily to wages, though that share is expected to grow in coming years.

¶The savings from the investment tax cuts are expected to be larger in subsequent years because of gains in the stock market.

The Times showed the new numbers to people on various sides of the debate over tax cuts. Stephen J. Entin, president of the Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation, a Washington organization, and other supporters of the cuts said they did not go far enough because the more money the wealthiest had to invest, the more would go to investments that produce jobs. For investment income, Mr. Entin said, "the proper tax rate would be zero."

Opponents say the cuts are too generous to those who already have plenty. Representative Charles B. Rangel of New York, the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, said after seeing the new figures that "these tax cuts are beyond irresponsible" when "we're in a war; we haven't fixed Social Security or Medicare; we've got record deficits."

Because of the tax cuts, even the merely rich, making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, are falling behind the very wealthiest, particularly because another provision, the alternative minimum tax, now costs many of them thousands and even tens of thousands of dollars a year in lost deductions.

About 3.5 million taxpayers filing their returns for last year are being hit by the alternative tax. But that figure will balloon this year to at least 19 million taxpayers, making as little as about $30,000, unless Congress restores a law that limited its effects until now, according to the Tax Policy Center in Washington, a joint project of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, whose estimates the White House has declared reasonable.

The tax cut analysis was based on estimates from a computer model developed by Citizens for Tax Justice, which asserts that the tax system unfairly favors the rich. The group's estimates are considered reliable by advocates on differing sides of the tax debate. The Times, which also did its own analysis, asked the group to use the model to produce additional data on the effect of the investment tax cuts on various income groups. The analyses show that more than 70 percent of the tax savings on investment income went to the top 2 percent, about 2.6 million taxpayers.

By contrast, few taxpayers with modest incomes benefited because most of them who own stocks held them in retirement accounts, which are not eligible for the investment income tax cuts. Money in these accounts is not taxed until withdrawal, when the higher rates on wages apply.

Those making less than $50,000 saved an average of $10 more because of the investment tax cuts, for a total of $435 in total income tax cuts, according to the computer model.

During last week's debate on whether to restore limits on the alternative minimum tax or make permanent the cuts in investment income taxes, House leaders chose as their spokesman Representative David L. Camp, a Michigan Republican. He said Republicans favored continuing investment tax cuts because that would help more people and would especially benefit those making less than $100,000.

"Nearly 60 percent of the taxpayers with incomes less than $100,000 had income from capital gains and dividends," he said on the House floor.

But I.R.S. data show that among the 90 percent of all taxpayers who made less than $100,000, dividend tax reductions benefited just one in seven and capital gains reductions one in 20.

Mr. Camp, who had said in an interview that his figures were correct, said Monday through a spokesman that he had been misinformed by the staff of the House Ways and Means Committee. But his office said he supported making the investment tax cuts permanent because cutting these rates was "good policy and good for our economy."

President Bush, in his budget, urged Congress to make permanent the reduced taxes on investment income. He also proposed limiting the effects of the alternative minimum tax through next year, saying a permanent solution "is best addressed within the context of fundamental tax reform."

The Congressional Budget Office estimated that making the investment tax cuts permanent would cost the government $197 billion over 10 years. But advocates of eliminating taxes on investments say there is no cost to the government because lowering taxes on such income encourages more investment, which should lead to more and higher-paying jobs. Taxes on wages from those jobs should more than offset the tax savings to investors, said Mr. Entin, an advocate of eliminating taxes on most investment income as a way of promoting economic growth.

However, the Congressional Research Service, an arm of Congress that analyzes issues, concluded in a January report that lower taxes on investment income may translate into lower savings because people need fewer investments to earn the same after-tax income. In another report, the research service showed how lower taxes on investment income can encourage investment outside the United States, creating jobs, but not for Americans.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, which advocates for the poor, and several mainstream policy research organizations say the investment tax cuts will have insignificant positive effects and may even damage long-term economic growth by contributing to soaring budget deficits. In an era of budget deficits, "the net effect is a wash or may even be negative," said Robert Greenstein, the executive director of the center.

There have been three tax cuts for individuals under President Bush. The top tax rate on compensation was trimmed twice and is now 35 percent, from 39.6 percent when President Bush took office. Most compensation also faces a 1.45 percent Medicare tax, which is matched by the employer, making the effective federal tax rate on high earners 37.9 percent.

Then, the top rate for most investment income was reduced to 15 percent in 2003, from the 39.6 percent for dividends and 20 percent for profits on asset sales that were in effect when Mr. Bush took office.

A result is that the wealthiest Americans now pay much higher direct taxes on money they work for than on money that works for them.

Read More...

Summary only...

Agencies Not Protecting Privacy Rights, GAO Says

washingtonpost.com
Agencies Not Protecting Privacy Rights, GAO Says
By Robert O'Harrow Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer

Government agencies that use private information services for law enforcement, counterterrorism and other investigations often do not follow federal rules to protect Americans' privacy, according to a report yesterday by the Government Accountability Office.

The Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and two other agencies examined by the GAO spent about $30 million last year on companies that maintain billions of electronic files about adults' current and past addresses, family members and associates, buying habits, personal finances, listed and unlisted phone numbers, and much more.

But those agencies often do not limit the collection and use of information about law-abiding citizens, as required by the Privacy Act of 1974 and other laws. The agencies also don't ensure the accuracy of the information they are buying, according to the GAO report. That's in part because of a lack of clear guidance from the agencies and the Office of Management and Budget on guidelines known as "fair information practices," the report said.

At the same time, the contractors are not bound by those "fair information practices," and they often don't comply with all of them, the report said. Companies do not notify individuals when information is collected, for instance. They limit individuals' access to records about themselves, and they generally do not have provisions for correcting mistakes, the report said.

"The nature of the information reseller business is essentially at odds with the principles," the report said. "Resellers make it their business to collect as much personal information as possible."

The 83-page report, the subject of a congressional hearing yesterday, was spurred in part by massive security breaches reported last year by ChoicePoint Inc. and LexisNexis in which sensitive files involving almost 200,000 people were sold to fraud artists.

It highlights a difficult truth about the government's increasing reliance on information services: By outsourcing the building of rich dossiers, the government is sidestepping checks on surveillance approved in the wake of domestic spy scandals involving the FBI, Army and other agencies in the 1960s and 1970s.

The report recommends that Congress consider requiring private information contractors to "more fully adhere" to fair information practices.

Information services play an important but quiet role in homeland security and criminal investigations. ChoicePoint officials last year acknowledged that they serve in effect as a private intelligence service for the government.

Rep. Chris Cannon (R-Utah), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on commercial and administrative law, said the hearing was held because the ability of private information services to collect information and the government's use of those services have grown far beyond existing laws and oversight.

Peter Swire, a law professor at Ohio State University, said the information industry delivers information more efficiently than ever before, helping investigators in many ways. But he told the congressional panel that the government needs to ensure that the information it buys is accurate while giving people a chance to correct mistakes. "Accuracy that is good enough for marketing is not necessarily good enough to detain a suspect," said Swire, who served as the chief privacy counselor in the Clinton administration White House.

Read More...

Summary only...

Feingold Backs Legalizing Same-Sex Marriages

washingtonpost.com
Feingold Backs Legalizing Same-Sex Marriages
By Dan Balz
Washington Post Staff Writer

Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.), a prospective 2008 presidential candidate, said yesterday that he thinks bans on same-sex marriages have no place in the nation's laws.

Feingold said in an interview that he was motivated to state his position on one of the most divisive social issues in the country after being asked at a town hall meeting Sunday about a pending amendment to the Wisconsin state constitution to ban same-sex marriages.

Feingold called the amendment "a mean-spirited attempt" to single out gay men and lesbians for discrimination and said he would vote against it. But he went further, announcing that he favors legalizing same-sex marriages.

That puts him at odds with many prominent Democratic politicians who support gay rights but not same-sex marriage. Should Feingold decide to run for the party's presidential nomination in 2008, his position would put him to the left of many likely rivals.

"Obviously, it's a very difficult issue and evokes a lot of emotions," Feingold said in a telephone interview yesterday. "I think it's something ultimately that people throughout the country will accept, but it's not an easy issue." He accused the Bush White House and the Republican Party of using same-sex marriage as a wedge issue "to hurt Democrats who are against discrimination."

The Wisconsin senator said he is prepared to work with supporters of same-sex marriage to ensure that it is legal in the future.

"Further steps would be appropriate," he said, noting that his first priorities are to defeat the proposed Wisconsin amendment as well as a federal constitutional amendment that is expected to come to a vote in the Senate later this spring.

Read More...

Summary only...

Army criticized for $500 million security guard contracts

USA TODAY
Army criticized for $500 million security guard contracts

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Army spent nearly $500 million on no-bid contracts for private security guards, and also used contractors that hired people with criminal records, according to congressional investigators.

In a report, the Government Accountability Office said the Army awarded sole-source contracts to two Alaska Native firms that placed security guards at 46 different military installations around the country. Two other contractors were hired through competitive bidding.

"The Army's procedure for screening prospective contract guards is inadequate and puts the Army at risk of having ineligible guards protecting installation gates," GAO said. The report said 89 guards were hired at two bases even though they had criminal records, including assaults and other felonies. It did not specify which contractors hired those with criminal records.

The two firms given no-bid contracts were Chenega Integrated Systems and Alutiiq Security and Technology. They got the awards under a special Small Business Administration program. The two firms hired security subcontractors and provided guards to key Army installations including Fort Bragg in North Carolina, Fort Carson in Colorado, West Point in New York and Fort Knox in Kentucky.

In addition, GAO found that the Army does not adequately confirm that guards have been trained; that guards were certified by the contractor before training was finished; and that in one case a contractor falsified training records.

After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, active duty and reserve troops were sent to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, creating a need for military security guards at U.S. bases. Congress approved a waiver, effective through September 2007, allowing the use of private contractors to fill the guard positions.

The Army awarded $733 million for guards at 57 different installations, but about $238 million was awarded in competitive bidding contracts at 11 Army bases.

Philip Grone, deputy undersecretary of defense for installations, said continued wartime requirements for active duty and reserve troops will make it necessary to use more security guard contractors. He said the Army is putting out new competitive bid requests for security contracts, and has changed procedures to better monitor the screening and training of the guards.




Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-04-04-army-nobid-contracts_x.htm

Read More...

Summary only...

Oil is discovered in Vermont

Read More...

Summary only...

Hamas sets out stance to UN chief

BBC NEWS
Hamas sets out stance to UN chief
By Susannah Price
BBC United Nations correspondent

The new Hamas-led Palestinian government has told the UN it wants to live in "freedom and independence side by side with our neighbours".

The message came in the first official letter from new Palestinian Foreign Minister Mahmoud Zahar to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Hamas has consistently refused to recognise Israel's right to exist.

Mr Zahar said Israel's policies would diminish hopes for the achievement of peace based on a two-state solution.

The road map for peace, drawn up by the US, the UN, the EU and Russia, collectively known as the Quartet, refers to a two-state solution meaning an Israeli and a Palestinian state existing side by side in peace.

First contact

The letter from the new Palestinian foreign minister to the UN secretary general was the first contact between the two since the new Hamas cabinet was sworn in.

The minister, Mr Zahar, wrote that he hoped to work with the international community to enable Palestinians to attain what he termed "their rights to a fully independent state".

He also referred to what he called "Israel's illegal colonial policies" of seizing land and warned that such actions would diminish hopes for the achievement of a settlement based on a two state solution.

The so-called "two-state solution" is the ultimate goal of a peace plan drawn up by international mediators in the Quartet, which would lead to the existence of an Israeli and a Palestinian state.

However Hamas, which won elections in January, has refused to recognise Israel's right to exist despite calls by international mediators, including the UN, for it to do so.

The Quartet has called on the new Palestinian government to reverse this position, accept previous agreements and commit to the principles of non-violence.

Mr Zahar said his cabinet was ready for serious and constructive dialogue and that they wanted to live in peace and security with their neighbours.

A UN spokesman said the letter would be studied carefully.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/middle_east/4878042.stm

Read More...

Summary only...

Amnesty accuses US on rendition

BBC NEWS
Amnesty accuses US on rendition

Three Yemeni men allegedly abducted and mistreated by the US were probably held in eastern Europe, human rights group Amnesty International has said.

The report, based on interviews with former detainees, also links the US practice of "rendition" to the torture or ill-treatment of terror suspects.

Washington has insisted it would never send detainees to places where they would be at risk of torture.

The CIA said it was aware of the report but declined to comment.

Detailed testimony

The 15,000-word report provides detailed accounts of the experiences of three Yemeni men who claim to have been held in at least four different secret US prisons between October 2003 and May 2005.

The men were allegedly held for 13 months at a so-called "black site", a secret facility believed to be run by the CIA, before they were returned to Yemen, Amnesty said.

In their statements, they gave detailed descriptions of travel times, changing climates and daylight hours which, although not conclusive, Amnesty says suggests they were held in Djibouti, Afghanistan and somewhere in eastern Europe.

The BBC's Rob Watson says although the report is highly critical of the US approach to terrorism suspects, it does not contain any suggestion from the three men that they were tortured by their American captors.

None of the three men were ever charged with any terrorism-related offence.

'Within the law'

The report also accused the US of using front companies to transfer individuals to countries where they have faced torture or ill-treatment.

Amnesty said it has records of nearly 1,000 flights, mostly using European airspace, which were made by planes that appear to have been permanently operated by the CIA through front companies.

It also said it had records of about 600 other flights made by planes confirmed as having been used at least temporarily by the CIA.

"The latest evidence shows how the US administration is manipulating commercial arrangements in order to be able to transfer people in violation of international law," said Amnesty International secretary general Irene Khan.

"It demonstrates the length to which the US government will go to conceal these abductions," she said in a statement.

The US government has said that the transfer of terror suspects is carried out according to US and international law.

However, Amnesty says the CIA is exploiting a loophole that allows private aircraft to land at foreign airports without having to inform local authorities - unlike government or military planes.

'Human rights violations'

Critics say it is difficult to prove the purpose of such flights and suggest the planes used by the CIA may have been simply carrying officials.

Amnesty said it has linked the aircraft to people who have been illegally transferred. It cites one plane known to have made over 100 stops at Guantanamo Bay.

The group warned that governments around the world may find themselves "complicit in serious human rights abuses" and urged them to take steps to prevent renditions.

Governments must insist that any aircraft used for an intelligence mission be declared a "state" flight and prohibit the use of airspace and airports for "renditions", it said.

It also urged governments to disclose the full extent of the practices and the fate of those whose whereabouts are still unknown.

Amnesty also called on the aviation sector to take steps to prevent "facilitating human rights violations", by ensuring they were aware of the end use of any aircraft they lease or operate.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4878096.stm

Read More...

Summary only...

Money: It's only paper

Reuters
Senate panel passes emergency funding bill
By Richard Cowan

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. Senate committee on Tuesday, ignoring skyrocketing federal budget deficits, piled money onto a spending bill for war and hurricane rebuilding to produce an election-year measure that would spend about $107 billion.

Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee also eagerly approved more federal aid for farmers, added $2.3 billion to fight a possible avian flu pandemic, voted to give more aid to the U.S. fishing industry hurt by Hurricane Katrina and spread dollars for other interests.

President George W. Bush had requested nearly $92 billion to feed U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, continue rebuilding Gulf Coast states hard hit by Hurricane Katrina and other storms last year and to increase foreign aid.

The move to boost the spending level above the administration's original request "is cause for serious concern," said Scott Milburn, spokesman for the White House Office of Management and Budget.

However, he welcomed the progress on moving the emergency spending measure forward.

Last month, the House of Representatives approved the Bush administration's request for the emergency funds for this fiscal year, which ends September 30.

But the Senate, which hopes to pass its version of the legislation in late April, jacked up the price tag significantly, leading one Republican Senate aide to say that it will make for "an interesting" Senate floor debate.

The budget-busting bill comes as many congressional Republicans are struggling to craft re-election campaigns on a platform of fiscal responsibility, even as Republicans have presided over a $3 trillion increase in U.S. debt since 2002.

The legislation could become even more bloated before the full Senate passes it, as senators indicated they might seek more money for projects ranging from levee rebuilding in New Orleans to aid for dairy farmers and veterans' health care.

ADDING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

Sen. Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat, said she would block Senate confirmation of all new presidential appointees until the administration comes forth with a $6 billion request for levee protection and coastal restoration in Louisiana.

Landrieu acknowledged that the Senate Appropriations Committee bill addressed some of her concerns by adding "several hundred million dollars" for flood control protections around New Orleans.

Landrieu also succeeded on Tuesday in doubling the panel's $600 million to build cottages for hurricane victims, instead of relying on trailers for temporary housing.

Like the House-passed measure, the Senate bill would give Bush his request for about $67 billion for the Defense Department to wage wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The money is in addition to the hundreds of billions being spent each year on Pentagon programs.

With the added money, the running tab for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would total nearly $400 billion, with more than three-quarters of that spent fighting in Iraq.

Mississippi was one of three southern states bearing the brunt of Hurricane Katrina's destruction last August and Appropriations Committee Chairman Thad Cochran, a Republican from that state, added storm funding to the legislation.

As passed by his committee, $24.4 billion would be added to about $70 billion already spent on disaster aid. The Bush administration had requested about $5 billion less.

Farm state lawmakers seized upon the emergency spending bill, winning about $3.8 billion in money to help farmers recover from flooding last spring in the northern plains, drought in the Midwestern Corn Belt, Gulf Coast flooding and higher fuel costs.

The panel also approved more than $1 billion in new money for the U.S. fishing industry that would rebuild storm-damaged marinas, ice houses and help buy new fishing equipment.

Sen. Robert Byrd, a West Virginia Democrat, complaining about "paper-thin port security," won an additional $648 million to increase U.S. port inspections, hire more inspectors and buy radiation-detection equipment. The legislation also would provide $35.6 million for improved mine safety following 16 coal mining deaths in Byrd's state this year.

Read More...

Summary only...

After Four and a Half Years, US readying new counterterror plan

Reuters
US readying new counterterror plan
By David Morgan

[Editor's note: File under "It's about time!!"]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Four and a half years after the September 11 attacks, the Bush administration is nearing completion of a government-wide strategic plan for the war on terror that would assign counterterrorism tasks to specific federal agencies and departments, officials said on Tuesday.

The plan is part of the administration's effort to bring greater integration and coordination to the counterterrorism activities of different agencies and departments including the CIA, FBI, Treasury Department, Pentagon and State Department.

Planning began late last summer under the direction of the National Counterterrorism Center, or NCTC, an entity created by the congressionally mandated intelligence reforms.

"This process is not a unilateral drafting exercise by NCTC. Instead, it is an interagency effort, involving hundreds of departmental planners working under our leadership," NCTC Director John Redd told the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.

A counterterrorism official who asked not to be identified said the plan was expected to be completed by June 30.

Redd told the House hearing the plan would involve setting "discrete tasks" for agencies and departments, which would then take on lead or support roles for different counterterrorism operations. Currently, the war on terror is being fought by different government agencies according to their own varied mandates for safeguarding the nation's security.

The planning comes as the post-September 11 priorities of the FBI and Pentagon have led those agencies to expand into overseas intelligence roles once filled solely by the CIA.

The Pentagon said last month it was placing special operations troops in U.S. embassies in about two dozen countries to gather information on potential terror threats.

A new strategic operational plan for the war on terror could mean a change of traditional U.S. government practices in noncombat zones overseas, where resident ambassadors have been viewed as wielding primary authority over all U.S. activities.

In combat zones such as Iraq, primary authority over counterterrorism operations rests with the Pentagon.

"There are gray areas," said Thomas O'Connell, assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict. "It would be quite a different issue if you were operating, let's say, in a Jordan -- how you might deal with that particular government -- as opposed to the problems that might be posed in a Somalia where there is no viable government," he told the House panel.

But a senior State Department official said diplomats should continue to pull together counterterrorism operations in countries where U.S. troops are not deployed in combat.

"When you look at all instruments of statecraft and how that's pulled together, I think the ambassadors are uniquely poised," Henry Crumpton, the State Department's counterterrorism coordinator, told the committee.

He later told Reuters the planning discussion was "more about integration and coordination in the field than it is about basic authorities."

Read More...

Summary only...

Nuclear Power Plant loses keys to the plant

Yahoo! News
Nuke plant gets new locks after keys lost

German authorities are changing 150 locks at a nuclear power plant after its owner said they had lost keys to a security area, a ministry spokesman in the south western state of Baden-Wuerttemberg said on Monday.

Plant operator EnBW said that in spite of intensive searches and questioning it had not been able to recover 12 keys for its Philippsburg plant after discovering they were lost in March.

The environment ministry said EnBW informed it the keys were missing and the operator had put extra safety measures in place to control access to the secure area.

"This has never happened anywhere in Germany before," the ministry spokesman said. "The keys have simply disappeared."

Prosecutors have launched an investigation for theft.

Read More...

Summary only...

Senator Allen Wants to Tap Controversial General who described the war on terror as a Christian fight against Satan and said Muslims worship idols

Yahoo! News
Senator Wants to Tap Controversial General
By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

A Senate Republican wants an Army general who drew criticism for church speeches casting the war on terrorism in religious terms to lead the U.S. special operations command.

In a letter to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Sen. George Allen, R-Va., recommended Lt. Gen. William G. (Jerry) Boykin, currently the Pentagon's deputy undersecretary for intelligence, for the post in Tampa, Fla.

The current commander, Gen. Doug Brown, is retiring, and the Pentagon has not filled the job.

"I am told, and I believe it to be true, that no special operations officer currently on active duty is more highly respected or admired by his superiors, peers or subordinates alike, than Jerry Boykin," Allen wrote in the letter dated March 31 and obtained by The Associated Press.

Allen, a first-term Virginia senator and potential 2008 presidential candidate, does not serve on the Senate Armed Services Committee, which is in charge of approving Pentagon nominations. A spokesman for the senator said Boykin is one of Allen's constituents and that many people approached the senator and recommended the general.

Sen. John Warner, the Republican chairman of that committee and Virginia's senior senator, does not agree with Allen's suggestion.

"Senator Allen is entitled to his views. He did not consult with me on this matter, but this officer would not be among those whom I would recommend for this position," Warner said in a statement to the AP.

In 2003, Boykin gave speeches at evangelical Christian churches in which he painted the war on terror as a Christian fight against Satan and suggested that Muslims worship idols.

Boykin later apologized for his characterizations as conservatives rushed to defend him.

A Pentagon investigation the following year found that Boykin violated regulations by failing to make clear he was not speaking in an official capacity when he made the speeches, sometimes wearing his Army uniform. The probe also found Boykin violated Pentagon rules by failing to obtain advance clearance for his remarks.

In the letter, Allen said his confidence in Boykin's abilities overrides any concerns about what may surface during confirmation hearings should the administration nominate Boykin. Specifically, Allen mentioned the religious statements as well as U.S. interrogation policies at the Guantanamo Bay prison, Abu Ghraib in Iraq and elsewhere.

"Granted, these are issues which cause discomfort. But I firmly believe the nomination of General Boykin to be important enough to take a stand," Allen wrote.

The senator said his request to nominate Boykin is supported by "many of my colleagues here in the Senate" and those who have served with Boykin, given the general's extensive special operations resume, which includes the Army's Delta Force and service in the Somalia conflict.

Read More...

Summary only...

Iran Tests Second New Torpedo in Gulf

Yahoo! News
Iran Tests Second New Torpedo in Gulf

By NASSER KARIMI, Associated Press Writer

Iran successfully tested its second new torpedo in as many days Monday, the latest weapon to be unveiled during war games in the Gulf that the military said are aimed at preparing the country's defenses against the United States.

A spokesman for the elite Revolutionary Guards suggested the new, Iranian-made torpedo was more powerful and capable of going deeper than others in its arsenal.

Gen. Mohammad Ebrahim Dehghani told state television the ship-launched weapon can target submarines at any depth and is powerful enough to "break a heavy warship" in two. He did not give the name of the new torpedo or any details of its speed or range.

The torpedo was tested in the Straits of Hormuz, the narrow entrance of the Gulf and a vital corridor for oil supplies.

The United States said that while Iran may have made "some strides" in its military, it is likely to be exaggerating its capabilities.

"We know that the Iranians are always trying to improve their weapons system by both foreign and indigenous measures," Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said in Washington. "It's possible that they are increasing their capability and making strides in radar absorbing materials and technology."

But "the Iranians have also been known to boast and exaggerate their statements about greater technical and tactical capabilities," he said.

The Revolutionary Guards, the elite branch of Iran's military, have been holding their maneuvers — codenamed the "Great Prophet" — since Friday, touting what they call domestically built technological advances in their armed forces.

A day earlier, Iran announced it had tested a different new torpedo — the high-speed "Hoot," which means "whale." Iran said the Hoot, moving at up to 223 mph, was too fast for any enemy ship to elude. On Friday, it tested the Fajr-3, a missile that it said can avoid radars and hit several targets simultaneously using multiple warheads.

It has not been possible to verify Iran's claims for the new armaments. But the country has made clear it aims to send a message of strength to the United States amid heightened tensions over Iran's nuclear program.

A top Guards commander, Gen. Hossein Kargar, said Monday the maneuver aims at preparing the troops in case of attack by the United States — often referred to by Iran's clerical regime as "the global arrogance."

"Regarding the threats by the global arrogance, defensive preparation is a task of the armed forces," Kargar was quoted by the state news agency IRNA as saying.

Many in Iran worry over the possibility of U.S. military action in the escalating dispute over Iran's nuclear program, an option Washington has refused to rule out. The United States is pushing for U.N. sanctions against Iran, accusing it of seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Tehran denies the claim, saying its program aims to generate electricity, and it has so far rejected a demand by the U.N. Security Council that it give up uranium enrichment, a key part of the nuclear process that can produce either fuel for a reactor or material for a warhead.

Hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Monday the United States and Europe were "confused" if they thought they could stop Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Speaking after talks with Guinea's foreign minister, he said Iran would pursue its right to develop nuclear energy but vowed its program would be "transparent" and under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog.

More than 17,000 Revolutionary Guards forces, along with some 1,500 warships, boats and aircraft are taking part in the weeklong maneuvers in a 100,000 square mile area of the Gulf.

After decades of relying on foreign weapons purchases, Iran's military has been working to boost its domestic production of armaments. Since 1992, Iran has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, missiles and a fighter plane. It announced in early 2005 that it had begun production of torpedoes, though it was not clear if the ones tested during the maneuvers were the first to be put into action.

Iran bought three Russian Kilo-class submarines in the 1980s and has since said it is producing its own smaller-sized subs, at least two of which are believed to have been built and put in the country's fleet.

The United States and its Western allies have been watching in Iran's progress in missile capabilities with concern. Iran already possesses the Shahab-3 missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and hitting U.S forces in the Middle East and Israel.

Ali Ansari, an Iran specialist at Britain's Royal Institute for International Affairs, cautioned that there is likely "a little bit of bluster" in Iran's claims for its new weapons.

"They're trying to impress," he told The Associated Press. They aim to "prove to the West that they can hit Israel and close the Straits of Hormuz. They're saying if you hit us, then we can hit back."

Iran's leaders also want to reassure Iranians the country can defend itself. "There's a lot of worry (among the public) over what direction the country is taking, and they want to show that Iran can hold its own against the U.S."

Read More...

Summary only...

DeLay Will Not Seek Re-election to Congress

The New York Times
DeLay Will Not Seek Re-election to Congress

WASHINGTON, April 3 — Representative Tom DeLay will announce on Tuesday that he will not seek re-election and will leave Congress within months, Congressional aides said Monday.

The aides said Mr. DeLay, a Texas Republican who has been swept into an election-year lobbying scandal, was calling Congressional leaders Monday night to inform them of his plans.

Mr. DeLay, 58, an 11-term congressman, stepped down temporarily as the House majority leader last fall after his indictment in Texas on campaign-related charges of money laundering.

In January, he said he was stepping aside from the job permanently to avoid becoming a political liability as Republicans face a determined Democratic challenge to their majority in the midterm elections.

The news of Mr. DeLay's decision broke on television stations about 10 Monday night. An article on the Time magazine Web site, based on an interview with Mr. DeLay earlier in the day, said he had "vowed to pursue an aggressive speaking and organizing campaign aimed at promoting foster care, Republican candidates and a closer connection between religion and government."

Read More...

Summary only...

America's war on the web

sundayherald.com
America's war on the web

While the US remains committed to hunting down al-Qaeda operatives, it is now taking the battle to new fronts. Deep within the Pentagon, technologies are being deployed to wage the war on terror on the internet, in newspapers and even through mobile phones. Investigations editor Neil Mackay reports.

IMAGINE a world where wars are fought over the internet; where TV broadcasts and newspaper reports are designed by the military to confuse the population; and where a foreign armed power can shut down your computer, phone, radio or TV at will.

In 2006, we are just about to enter such a world. This is the age of information warfare, and details of how this new military doctrine will affect everyone on the planet are contained in a report, entitled The Information Operations Roadmap, commissioned and approved by US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld and seen by the Sunday Herald.

The Pentagon has already signed off $383 million to force through the document’s recommendations by 2009. Military and intelligence sources in the US talk of “a revolution in the concept of warfare”. The report orders three new developments in America’s approach to warfare:

Firstly, the Pentagon says it will wage war against the internet in order to dominate the realm of communications, prevent digital attacks on the US and its allies, and to have the upper hand when launching cyber-attacks against enemies.

Secondly, psychological military operations, known as psyops, will be at the heart of future military action. Psyops involve using any media – from newspapers, books and posters to the internet, music, Blackberrys and personal digital assistants (PDAs) – to put out black propaganda to assist government and military strategy. Psyops involve the dissemination of lies and fake stories and releasing information to wrong-foot the enemy.

Thirdly, the US wants to take control of the Earth’s electromagnetic spectrum, allowing US war planners to dominate mobile phones, PDAs, the web, radio, TV and other forms of modern communication. That could see entire countries denied access to telecommunications at the flick of a switch by America.

Freedom of speech advocates are horrified at this new doctrine, but military planners and members of the intelligence community embrace the idea as a necessary development in modern combat.

Human rights lawyer John Scott, who chairs the Scottish Centre for Human Rights, said: “This is an unwelcome but natural development of what we have seen. I find what is said in this document to be frightening, and it needs serious parliamentary scrutiny.”

Crispin Black – who has worked for the Joint Intelligence Committee, and has been an Army lieutenant colonel, a military intelligence officer, a member of the Defence Intelligence Staff and a Cabinet Office intelligence analyst who briefed Number 10 – said he broadly supported the report as it tallied with the Pentagon’s over-arching vision for “full spectrum dominance” in all military matters.

“I’m all for taking down al-Qaeda websites. Shutting down enemy propaganda is a reasonable course of action. Al-Qaeda is very good at [information warfare on the internet], so we need to catch up. The US needs to lift its game,” he said.

This revolution in information warfare is merely an extension of the politics of the “neoconservative” Bush White House. Even before getting into power, key players in Team Bush were planning total military and political domination of the globe. In September 2000, the now notorious document Rebuilding America’s Defences – written by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a think-tank staffed by some of the Bush presidency’s leading lights – said that America needed a “blueprint for maintaining US global pre-eminence, precluding the rise of a great power-rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests”.

The PNAC was founded by Dick Cheney, the vice-president; Donald Rumsfeld, the defence secretary; Bush’s younger brother, Jeb; Paul Wolfowitz, once Rumsfeld’s deputy and now head of the World Bank; and Lewis Libby, Cheney’s former chief of staff, now indicted for perjury in America.

Rebuilding America’s Defences also spoke of taking control of the internet. A heavily censored version of the document was released under Freedom of Information legislation to the National Security Archive at George Washington University in the US.

The report admits the US is vulnerable to electronic warfare. “Networks are growing faster than we can defend them,” the report notes. “The sophistication and capability of … nation states to degrade system and network operations are rapidly increasing.”

T he report says the US military’s first priority is that the “department [of defence] must be prepared to ‘fight the net’”. The internet is seen in much the same way as an enemy state by the Pentagon because of the way it can be used to propagandise, organise and mount electronic attacks on crucial US targets. Under the heading “offensive cyber operations”, two pages outlining possible operations are blacked out.

Next, the Pentagon focuses on electronic warfare, saying it must be elevated to the heart of US military war planning. It will “provide maximum control of the electromagnetic spectrum, denying, degrading, disrupting or destroying the full spectrum of communications equipment … it is increasingly important that our forces dominate the electromagnetic spectrum with attack capabilities”. Put simply, this means US forces having the power to knock out any or all forms of telecommunications on the planet.

After electronic warfare, the US war planners turn their attention to psychological operations: “Military forces must be better prepared to use psyops in support of military operations.” The State Department, which carries out US diplomatic functions, is known to be worried that the rise of such operations could undermine American diplomacy if uncovered by foreign states. Other examples of information war listed in the report include the creation of “Truth Squads” to provide public information when negative publicity, such as the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, hits US operations, and the establishment of “Humanitarian Road Shows”, which will talk up American support for democracy and freedom.

The Pentagon also wants to target a “broader set of select foreign media and audiences”, with $161m set aside to help place pro-US articles in overseas media.

Read More...

Summary only...