Marc Perkel Rantz

What Conservatives think about the Debate

I'm posting this whole article from the National Review in case they try to pull it or change it. Sure answers the question on who won the debate.

by Jay Nordlinger. National Review Managing Editor.

I thought Kerry did very, very well; and I thought Bush did poorly — much worse than he is capable of doing. Listen: If I were just a normal guy — not Joe Political Junkie — I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate, I would. If I were just a normal, fairly conservative, war-supporting guy: I would vote for Kerry. On the basis of that debate.

And I promise you that no one wants this president reelected more than I. I think that he may want it less.

Let me phrase one more time what I wish to say: If I didn't know anything — were a political naïf, being introduced to the two candidates for the first time — I would vote for Kerry. Based on that infernal debate.

As I write this column, I have not talked with anyone about the debate, and I have listened to no commentary. I am writing without influence (which is how I try to do my other criticism, by the way). What I say may be absurd in light of the general reaction — but so be it.

I'd like to share with you some notes I made during the debate. You may recall that I offered similar scribbles from the two conventions.

Bush "won the stride." By that I mean that he crossed the center of the stage first, to shake his opponent's hand. In 1980, Reagan strode over to shake Carter's hand — and utterly surprised him. Carter was sunk almost from that moment.

Kerry must be darned tall — he made Bush look pretty short. Same as the Bush 41-Dukakis gap? Not sure.

As he began, Kerry spoke clearly, and at a nice pace. He was disciplined about the clock. I wasn't nuts about those double fists he made — but he relaxed them as the evening wore on.

Kerry went right to the alliances. He emphasized the importance of such relationships. At least you can't accuse him of succumbing to Republican mockery on the subject, of shucking this core conviction of his.

Bush, throughout the evening, as Kerry spoke, had that pursed and annoyed look. I think it must have driven many people crazy. (I happen to love his whole battery of looks — but I'm weird.) Also, the president did his eye-closing thing, just a little. Could have been worse.

Furthermore, Bush sounded very Texan — I mean, extremely. More Texan, more drawly, more twangy than usual. I think the more tired he is — and, as a rule, the later in the day it is — the more Texan he sounds.

He was right to say that the enemy understands what is at stake in Iraq — bingo. In fact, Bush was never stronger than in the opening rounds of the debate.

Kerry was smart to mention all those military bigwigs who support him. We conservatives roll our eyes when we hear this; sure, Kerry can roll out about ten; we can roll out about ten thousand. But this support for Kerry will be news to many Americans.

The senator seemed to rattle the president, about 15 minutes in — and he stayed rattled. Also, the president was on the defensive almost all the time. Rarely did he put Kerry on the defensive. Kerry could relax, and press.

I was hoping that Bush would put Kerry on trial — make him the issue. Sure, Bush is the incumbent. But it can be done.

Kerry was effective in talking about parents who have lost sons or daughters in the war. Bush was fairly good, later, too — but not quite as good, I thought. (These are all "I thoughts.")

Although the two candidates had the same amount of time, Kerry got many, many more words in. And they weren't rushed words. Kerry spoke at a good, measured pace all through.

Bush said, "We're makin' progress" a hundred times — that seemed a little desperate. He also said "mixed messages" a hundred times — I was wishing that he would mix his message. He said, "It's hard work," or, "It's tough," a hundred times. In fact, Bush reminded me of Dan Quayle in the 1988 debate, when the Hoosier repeated a couple of talking points over and over, to some chuckles from the audience (if I recall correctly).

Staying on message is one thing; robotic repetition — when there are oceans of material available — is another.

When Kerry said that our people in the military didn't have enough equipment, Bush was pretty much blasé. He showed no indignation. He might have said, "How dare you? How dare you contend that I am leaving our fighting men and women defenseless!"

I hate to say it, but often Bush gave the appearance of being what his critics charge he is: callow, jejune, unserious. And remember — talk about repetition! — I concede this as someone who loves the man.

When he talked about Iraq, he ran the risk of sounding Pollyanna-ish — a little head-in-the-sand-ish. Bush is not. But he might have left that impression.

And why didn't he do more to tie the Iraq war to 9/11? To the general War on Terror? Why didn't he remind people that this is a war of self-defense — that, after 9/11, we couldn't go back to the days of episodic strikes, and law enforcement, and intelligence gathering?

And why didn't he shove Kofi Annan down Kerry's throat? "My allegiance is not to Mr. Annan; my allegiance is to the American people. The secretary-general has called our war illegal. Nuts to him."

Kerry kept mentioning Bush's father — how good he was, as compared with 43. Why didn't Bush let loose the significant fact that Kerry voted against the 1991 Gulf War?

When it came time to mention our allies in the Iraq campaign, Bush mentioned only Blair and the Polish premier. That made it seem like a pathetically short list — no Italy, no Spain, no Australia.

In fact, it was Kerry who had to bring up Australia!

When Moderator Lehrer and Kerry were talking about American casualties, Bush might have brought up the 9/11 casualties — and the casualties we might have incurred had we not acted against Saddam Hussein. "We ran the risk of suffering a lot more deaths if we had let Saddam remain in power."

Look, I'm not Monday-morning quarterbacking here. This is not simple esprit d'escalier. This is all basic.

Bush could have mentioned that Saddam was a great harborer and funder of terrorists. He let Kerry get away with saying that Iraq and terror had nothing to do with each other.

Why did Bush keep requesting a special 30 seconds to say the same thing over and over?

Kerry used Secretary Powell against Bush repeatedly, and effectively — same as he used 41 against him. Bush never parried.

I'm thinking that Bush didn't respect Kerry enough. That he didn't prepare enough. That he had kind of a disdain for the assignment — "For gooness' sake, the American people are with me. They know I'm doin' the necessary. They're not going to dump me for this phony-baloney."

Well, they may opt for the phony-baloney.

I had a feeling that, as the debate progressed, Kerry felt very lucky to be hit with so little. To be relatively untouched.

On other occasions, Bush has been extremely persuasive in talking about the "risks of action" versus the "risks of inaction." Could have used that — to remind people of the choices he faced.

I have a feeling that Bush could have done just the same — exactly the same, no better, no worse — with zero preparation. With no practice at all. Just wingin' it.

Kerry said, "I've never wavered in my life." That's ridiculous. Who doesn't waver in his life?

Strangely enough, it was Bush who got bogged down in detail — trying to remember detail — not Kerry, who was good on generalities (as well as details).

So when Bush talks about Iran and North Korea, he gets all ally-loving and anti-unilateralist? He gets all, "Be my guest, Jacques and Gerhard"? Bush may be right; and he may have been trying to show his flexibility; but I think this can confuse the average voter.

And his answer on North Korea is to tout Jiang Zemin, that beast? (At least Scowcroft and Eagleburger should be proud.)

From this debate, you would never know that Kerry is one of the most famous, or infamous, doves and lefties in American politics — lefter than Ted Kennedy, lefter than Hillary. He seemed positively Pattonesque, at times. So now he praises Ronald Reagan! A fabulously disingenuous performance.

Toward the end, Bush mentioned SDI (though weakly). Hurrah.

His pronunciation of "Vladimir" was priceless.

His pronunciation of "mullahs" as "moolahs" was a little less fun — more silly.

Ah, so it's Kerry who mentions George Will! And favorably!

Oh, Bush could have killed Kerry on the Patriot Act. Just killed him. Didn't happen.

Kerry's closing statement was superb — couldn't have made better use of his time. You almost didn't recognize the Massachusetts liberal we have known for 30 years.

Bush was weary — harmfully weary, I think. He let a million opportunities go by. You can't exploit them all, no. We all kick ourselves, after some public performance. But Kerry, it seemed to me, let not one opportunity go by. And he perceived some that I hadn't caught.

Yeah, he screwed up a couple of times: got the "break it, buy it" line wrong; said "Treblinka" instead of "Lubyanka." But that was small beer.

And you know what? The worst thing about Kerry is not that he is inconsistent; not that he is a flip-flopper. The worst thing about him is that he is a reflexive leftist, who has been wrong about nearly everything important his entire career. Nuclear freeze, anybody? Solidarity with the Sandinistas?

This is a man who called the Grenada invasion — carried out by his now-hero Reagan — "a bully's show of force against a weak Third World nation." His view of Grenada was no different from Ron Dellums's.

Friends, I have no doubt that this little reaction column of mine will disappoint many of you. I'm sorry. I have called George W. Bush a Rushmore-level president. I believe history will bear that out; and if it doesn't, history will be wrong. I think that Bush's reelection is crucial not only to this country but to the world at large. I not only think that Bush is the right man for the job; I have a deep fondness — love, really — for the man, though I don't know him.

But tonight (I am writing immediately post-debate) did not show him at his best. Not at all. He will do better — I feel certain — in subsequent debates. I also worry that they count less.

Kerry stood straight - Bush Slumped

Bush is shorter than Kerry - but he was even shorter tonight because Kerry stood straight up and Bush was slumping. Bush was so out of it that he couldn't even stand up - and it was a reflection of where he was emotionally. Kerry hicked his ass and you could see it in how they stood up.

Kerry was strong and decisive - Bush was week and stupid. He studdered - he stumbled - he was clueless. He was fumbling through his notes looking for answers and came across as clueless. Kerry succeded in making Bush look stupid.

Objective tests as to who won the debate

Of course the real test is to see how it affects the polls. But as far as testing it right now - the instant polls are strongly in favor of Kerry. But one of the tests too is that the Kerry people are happy and the Bush people are unhappy. And I think that's probably the best test that we have in the 90 minutes since the debate ended.

And - it looks like even Fox News is conceding that Kerry won. And when they got it - I think everyone got it.

There's 2 more presidential debates - a town hall debate - and one on the economy and domestic issues. This is the one where they were on Bush's turf. It's up hill for Bush now.

Kerry won it - big time!

I was really nervous about this one - but Kerry really won it. Even the coverage on Fox News showed that Kerry was the clear winner. Bush supporters are clearly depressed and Kerry supporters are clearly elated.

Kerry was no Clinton - or even a Reagan for that matter. But - as I saw on democratic underground.com - Bush looked like a toad sucking lemons.

I can't help to think that the undecided voters are swinging towards Kerry - and that Kerry will win the real test of who won the debate - who gains in the polls.

Take away the Debate Notes

Letter to the Editor

Having watched the debates I have a problem with the fact that the candidates had prepared notes to read answers from. Several times I saw that Mr. Bush was flipping through what was what we called when I was in school, a cheat sheet, with what seemed to be prepared answers on it, and he was reading from those notes. I didn't see Kerry doing that - but I assume that the rules allow him to do that as well.

I have a problem with that process because it allows other people behind the scenes to participate in a debate that is supposed to be a contest between two men. I would hope that in the upcoming debates that they would change the rules and take away the prepared notes. I want to see these men debate on their own rather than have the ability to read from a script. I want to see how they do on their own without the help of their support staffs.

--------------------

Clarification for the confused. Kerry had a notepad and was scribbling notes as Bush spoke. That's OK. Bush had a cheat sheet with answers written on them - I assume that - because he was writing nothing and reading a lot. If he wrote nothing and read a lot - that means that what he brought in already had things written on it. And he had pages of notes because you could see him filipping through them.

A Victoy against PayPal

I found a trick that worked for me to get my account closed and get my money back. I filed a complaint with TrustE and they acted - and it worked!

As you know - PayPal doesn't close accounts. They "Limit" the account forever. They steal your money for at least 180 days and often forever based on stories we have all heard. And by keeping the account open they still have access to your bank account, credit cards, and you are subject to their changing user agreement. I deciced to put and end to it.

Here's the link:

http://truste.org

Here is my complaint:

I have asked paypal to close my account and they have refused to do so. I want to close my account and terminate my user agreement with them. I have called them and I recorded the phone call of them refusing to close the account and terminate the user agreement.

Here is a link to the recording:

http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000394.html

I am not done with PayPal yet. It's not over until they change in a permant way. But for those of you with frozen and limited accounts - I suggest you do what I did - it worked for me. Victories come one step at a time. This is a step forward.

Democrats don't Hate Bush

Letter to the Editor

The press has been saying that Democrats hate Bush - but I don't think that's true. I think it's more accurate to say that a lot of people are ANGRY with Bush, but they don't hate him. I'm sure that are some people who hate Bush - like if you lost a child in Iraq who died because Bush lied - then you might hate Bush. Or - if your retirement got wiped out because it was all in Enron stock - you might hate Bush,

But for things like taking away civil liberties with the Patriot Act, people losing their jobs, turning the biggest surplus in the history of the world into the biggest deficit in the history of the world, or the rape, torture, and killings at Abu Ghraib prison - I think people are just angry with Bush about that.

So I don't think it's accurate to portray Democrats as people who hate. You have to take into account issues and real reason people might be angry about personal losses and the direction America is heading. I think the media should look closer to see if people really do hate Bush - or if they are just angry with him.

Carter fears Florida vote trouble

You won't see this story in the Republican controlled American press even though it's a story about comments make by and American president about American elections. This article comes from the BBC.

Former US president Jimmy Carter
Carter has monitored more than 50 elections worldwide
Voting arrangements in Florida do not meet "basic international requirements" and could undermine the US election, former US President Jimmy Carter says.

He said a repeat of the irregularities of the much-disputed 2000 election - which gave President George W Bush the narrowest of wins - "seems likely".

Mr Carter, a veteran observer of polls worldwide, also accused Florida's top election official of "bias".

His remarks come ahead of the first TV debate between Mr Bush and John Kerry.

They are expected to discuss the war on Iraq and homeland security during the programme on Thursday.

It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation
Jimmy Carter

Shaky confidence in Florida vote
Florida: Getting out the vote
Both men have cut back on their campaign touring to go behind closed doors and rehearse the arguments and techniques they will need during a series of three debates to be held over two weeks.

Each has held mock debates with aides standing in for their opponent.

Tens of millions of television viewers are expected to watch Thursday's head-to-head.

Mr Kerry, a debating champion at high school and college, will hope it can help him claw back a deficit in the polls variously put between 3% and 9%.

Florida vote

In an article in the Washington Post newspaper, Mr Carter, a Democrat, said that he and ex-President Gerald Ford, a Republican, had been asked to draw up recommendations for changes after the last vote in Florida was marred by arguments over the counting of ballots.

Mr Carter said the reforms they came up with had still not been implemented.

He accused Florida Secretary of State Glenda Hood, a Republican, of trying to get the name of independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader included on the state ballot, knowing he might divert Democrat votes.

He also said: "A fumbling attempt has been made recently to disqualify 22,000 African Americans (likely Democrats), but only 61 Hispanics (likely Republicans), as alleged felons."

Mr Carter said Florida Governor Jeb Bush - brother of the president - had "taken no steps to correct these departures from principles of fair and equal treatment or to prevent them in the future".

"It is unconscionable to perpetuate fraudulent or biased electoral practices in any nation," he added.

"With reforms unlikely at this late stage of the election, perhaps the only recourse will be to focus maximum public scrutiny on the suspicious process in Florida."

Is Alan Keyes Daughter a LESBIAN?

Perhaps so - check out this blog. This makes the race more interesting.

Cat Stevens was NOT on no fly list after all

As it turns out. His Islam name - Yusuf Islam - was not on the list. But a similar name - Youssouf Islam - was on the list.

None the less - the Bush administration still insists that Cat Stevens is a terrorist supporter and that the acted properly in deporting him for having a similar name to someone else on the list.

The solution - people with common names or names spelled similar to those who might be on a terrorost list - names like David Nelson - should change their name, or maybe just move to some other country and stay out of America. I don't know why people from free nations would want to visit this country anyway.

Earlier this week Colin Powell defended the deportation:

NEW YORK (AFP) - US Secretary of State Colin Powell defended a US decision to deny entry to British singer Yusuf Islam, formerly known as Cat Stevens.

"We have no charges against him," Powell told reporters at the foreign press center here. "We have nothing that would be actionable in our courts, or in the courts in the United Kingdom, I'm sure.

"But it is the procedure that we have been using to know who is coming into our country, know their backgrounds and interests and see whether we believe it is appropriate for them to come in," he said.

"With respect to Cat Stevens ... our Homeland Security Department and intelligence agencies found some information concerning his activities that they felt under our law required him to be placed on a watch list and therefore deny him entry into the United States," Powell said.

"In this instance, information was obtained that suggested he should be placed on the watch list and that's why he was denied entry into the country," he said.

-------

This is what happens when you suspend the constitution like the Bush administration has done.

So - now that we know that the problem was a spelling error - will they let Cat Stevens in now?

Put Saddam on the Ballot!

I say - Iraq should put Saddam on the ballot. I'd bet that if Saddam were on the ballot that he would win. Is Iraq better off today than it was before they were "liberated"? I don't think so. The just have a different brutal dictator. The torture and rape are still occurring - and more civilians are still being killed that WSaddam was killing. I would bet that if Saddam was on the ticket he would win. Iraqies would rather be persecuted by their own dictator than by a dictator from a foriegn occupier.

Cat Stevens go home!

Letter to the Editor

Singer Cat Stevens was "being followed by a Moonshadow" when his life became a "Wild World" - his plane was diverted to Maine and was denied entry into the United States for being on a government no fly list. Mr. Stevens will not be "Sitting" on the "Peace Train" once "Morning Has Broken". The government, acting "Crazy" like a "Hard Headed Woman" has detained Mr. Stevens in the "Foriegner Suite" because he "Can't keep it in" when it comes to his religious choices. He will be deported to some place like "Sweet Jamaica" before he spends "Another Saturday Night" in this country.

With the Patriot Act in place people like Stevens will no longer sing out if they want to sing out - and they will no longer be free if they want to be free. He will not find a new way and he definitely will not do it today. He might have got away with that when he was "Oh Very Young" but America is a different place today. We live in a world where we have surrendered our freedom for the illusion of security and concepts like peace, and freedom, and singing out, and speaking out, is no longer considered patriotic.

CBS News Coverage and False Stories

Letter to the Editor

It's important that when the news media makes a mistake that they should apologize for it and correct the story so the the viewing public knows the truth. This is especially true when the false story affects a sitting president. So I think it's about time that CBS News and the rest of the news media apologize for stories that turned out to be false and baseless. I therefore think it's about time the news media apologize to President Clinton for Whitewater - the Travelgate scandal - the haircut hoax - and comparing him to the movie "Wag the Dog" when he was trying to go after Osama bin Laden.

Finding Unity in Division

Letter to the Editor

America is a very divided and polarized nation and there's very few things we agree on anymore. Sometime one has to really search to find something that most people agree on when it comes to politics. But one thing I think most people can agree with is that the war in Iraq is every bit as legitimate as Bush's election.

The US Atrocities that Kerry was exposing

The Swift Boats Veterans for "Truth" have be running ads against Kerry because he accused US forces of committing attrocities in Vietnam - as if speaking out is some sort of crime.

The real crime was what was going on in Vietname at the time and the heros were the ones who were speaking out against it. Here is a picture from the My Lai Massacre.

This is what was going on in Vietnam in 1969. US soldiers were mass slaughtering women and children. It was wrong and John Kerry stood up and said it was wrong. The issue that these Bush stooges are running is the think about Kerry I like the most. It makes me want to support him even more.

When it comes down to it - the anti-war movement was right and the government was wrong. This is not what America stands for. This is a nation of peace. This photo and photos like it were what made me decide to oppose the war in the 1970s and burn my draft card.

The war in Vieynam was wrong - but the war in Iraq is even more wrong. In Vietnam they somewhat innocently blundered into the war. No one really intended from the beginning to get as involved as we did. But in Iraq Bush deliberately got us into an unprovoked war for fraudulent reasons. The Iraq war is far more wrong than Vietnam was.

An Introduction to the My Lai Courts-Martial
By Doug Linder

Two tragedies took place in 1968 in Viet Nam. One was the massacre by United States soldiers of as many as 500 unarmed civilians-- old men, women, children-- in My Lai on the morning of March 16. The other was the cover-up of that massacre.

U. S. military officials suspected Quang Ngai Province, more than any other province in South Viet Nam, as being a Viet Cong stronghold. The U. S. targeted the province for the first major U.S. combat operation of the war. Military officials declared the province a "free-fire zone" and subjected it to frequent bombing missions and artillery attacks. By the end of 1967, most of the dwellings in the province had been destroyed and nearly 140,000 civilians left homeless. Not surprisingly, the native population of Quang Ngai Province distrusted Americans. Children hissed at soldiers. Adults kept quiet.

Two hours of instruction on the rights of prisoners and a wallet-sized card "The Enemy is in Your Hands" seemed to have little impact on American soldiers fighting in Quang Ngai. Military leaders encouraged and rewarded kills in an effort to produce impressive body counts that could be reported to Saigon as an indication of progress. GIs joked that "anything that's dead and isn't white is a VC" for body count purposes. Angered by a local population that said nothing about the VC's whereabouts, soldiers took to calling natives "gooks."

Charlie Company came to Viet Nam in December, 1967. It located in Quang Ngai Province in January, 1968, as one of the three companies in Task Force Barker, an ad hoc unit headed by Lt. Col. Frank Barker, Jr. Its mission was to pressure the VC in an area of the province known as "Pinkville." Charlie Company's commanding officer was Ernest Medina, a thirty-three-year-old Mexican-American from New Mexico who was popular with his soldiers. One of his platoon leaders was twenty-four-year-old William Calley. Charlie Company soldiers expressed amazement that Calley was thought by anyone to be officer material. One described Calley as"a kid trying to play war." [LINK TO CHAIN OF COMMAND DIAGRAM] Calley's utter lack of respect for the indigenous population was apparent to all in the company. According to one soldier, "if they wanted to do something wrong, it was alright with Calley." The soldiers of Charlie Company, like most combat soldiers in Viet Nam, scored low on military exams. Few combat soldiers had education beyond high school.

Seymour Hersh wrote that by March of 1968 "many in the company had given in to an easy pattern of violence." Soldiers systematically beat unarmed civilians. Some civilians were murdered. Whole villages were burned. Wells were poisoned. Rapes were common.

On March 14, a small squad from "C" Company ran into a booby trap, killing a popular sergeant, blinding one GI and wounding several others. The following evening, when a funeral service was held for the killed sergeant, soldiers had revenge on their mind. After the service, Captain Medina rose to give the soldiers a pep talk and discuss the next morning's mission. Medina told them that the VC's crack 48th Battalion was in the vicinity of a hamlet known as My Lai 4, which would be the target of a large-scale assault by the company. The soldiers' mission would be to engage the 48th Battalion and to destroy the village of My Lai. By 7 a.m., Medina said, the women and children would be out of the hamlet and all they could expect to encounter would be the enemy. The soldiers were to explode brick homes, set fire to thatch homes, shoot livestock, poison wells, and destroy the enemy. The seventy-five or so American soldiers would be supported in their assault by gunship pilots.

Medina later said that his objective that night was to "fire them up and get them ready to go in there; I did not give any instructions as to what to do with women and children in the village." Although some soldiers agreed with that recollection of Medina's, others clearly thought that he had ordered them to kill every person in My Lai 4. Perhaps his orders were intentionally vague. What seems likely is that Medina intentionally gave the impression that everyone in My Lai would be their enemy.

At 7:22 a.m. on March 16, nine helicopters lifted off for the flight to My Lai 4. By the time the helicopters carrying members of Charlie Company landed in a rice paddy about 140 yards south of My Lai, the area had been peppered with small arms fire from assault helicopters. Whatever VC might have been in the vicinity of My Lai had most likely left by the time the first soldiers climbed out of their helicopters. The assault plan called for Lt. Calley's first platoon and Lt. Stephen Brooks' second platoon to sweep into the village, while a third platoon, Medina, and the headquarters unit would be held in reserve and follow the first two platoons in after the area was more-or-less secured. Above the ground, the action would be monitored at the 1,000-foot level by Lt. Col. Barker and at the 2,500-foot level by Oran Henderson, commander of the 11th Brigade, both flying counterclockwise around the battle scene in helicopters.

My Lai village had about 700 residents. They lived in either red-brick homes or thatch-covered huts. A deep drainage ditch marked the eastern boundary of the village. Directly south of the residential area was an open plaza area used for holding village meetings. To the north and west of the village was dense foliage [MAP].

By 8 a.m., Calley's platoon had crossed the plaza on the town's southern edge and entered the village. They encountered families cooking rice in front of their homes. The men began their usual search-and-destroy task of pulling people from homes, interrogating them, and searching for VC. Soon the killing began. The first victim was a man stabbed in the back with a bayonet. Then a middle-aged man was picked up, thrown down a well, and a grenade lobbed in after him. A group of fifteen to twenty mostly older women were gathered around a temple, kneeling and praying. They were all executed with shots to the back of their heads. Eighty or so villagers were taken from their homes and herded to the plaza area. As many cried "No VC! No VC!", Calley told soldier Paul Meadlo, "You know what I want you to do with them". When Calley returned ten minutes later and found the Vietnamese still gathered in the plaza he reportedly said to Meadlo, "Haven't you got rid of them yet? I want them dead. Waste them." Meadlo and Calley began firing into the group from a distance of ten to fifteen feet. The few that survived did so because they were covered by the bodies of those less fortunate.

What Captain Medina knew of these war crimes is not certain. It was a chaotic operation. Gary Garfolo said, "I could hear shooting all the time. Medina was running back and forth everywhere. This wasn't no organized deal." Medina would later testify that he didn't enter the village until 10 a.m., after most of the shooting had stopped, and did not personally witness a single civilian being killed. Others put Medina in the village closer to 9 a.m., and close to the scene of many of the murders as they were happening.

As the third platoon moved into My Lai, it was followed by army photographer Ronald Haeberle, there to document what was supposed to be a significant encounter with a crack enemy battalion. Haeberle took many pictures [HAEBERLE PHOTOS]. He said he saw about thirty different GIs kill about 100 civilians. Once Haeberle focused his camera on a young child about five feet away, but before he could get his picture the kid was blown away. He angered some GIs as he tried to photograph them as they fondled the breasts of a fifteen-year-old Vietnamese girl.

An army helicopter piloted by Chief Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson arrived in the My Lai vicinity about 9 a.m. Thompson noticed dead and dying civilians all over the village. Thompson repeatedly saw young boys and girls being shot at point-blank range. Thompson, furious at what he saw, reported the wanton killings to brigade headquarters [THOMPSON'S STORY].

Meanwhile, the rampage below continued. Calley was at the drainage ditch on the eastern edge of the village, where about seventy to eighty old men, women, and children not killed on the spot had been brought. Calley ordered the dozen or so platoon members there to push the people into the ditch, and three or four GIs did. Calley ordered his men to shoot into the ditch. Some refused, others obeyed. One who followed Calley's order was Paul Meadlo, who estimated that he killed about twenty-five civilians. (Later Meadlo was seen, head in hands, crying.) Calley joined in the massacre. At one point, a two-year-old child who somehow survived the gunfire began running towards the hamlet. Calley grabbed the child, threw him back in the ditch, then shot him.

Hugh Thompson, by now almost frantic, saw bodies in the ditch, including a few people who were still alive. He landed his helicopter and told Calley to hold his men there while he evacuated the civilians. Thompson told his helicopter crew chief to "open up on the Americans" if they fired at the civilians. He put himself between Calley's men and the Vietnamese. When a rescue helicopter landed, Thompson had the nine civilians, including five children, flown to the nearest army hospital. Later, Thompson was to land again and rescue a baby still clinging to her dead mother.

By 11 a.m., when Medina called for a lunch break, the killing was nearly over. By noon, "My Lai was no more": its buildings were destroyed and its people dead or dying. Soldiers later said they didn't remember seeing "one military-age male in the entire place". By night, the VC had returned to bury the dead. What few villagers survived and weren't already communists, became communists. Twenty months later army investigators would discover three mass graves containing the bodies of about 500 villagers.

II.

The cover-up of the My Lai massacre began almost as soon as the killing ended. Official army reports of the operation proclaimed a great victory: 128 enemy dead, only one American casualty (one soldier intentionally shot himself in the foot). The army knew better. Hugh Thompson had filed a complaint, alleging numerous war crimes involving murders of civilians. According to one of Thompson's crew members, "Thompson was so pissed he wanted to turn in his wings". An order issued by Major Calhoun to Captain Medina to return to My Lai to do a body count was countermanded by Major General Samuel Koster, who asked Medina how many civilians has been killed. "Twenty to twenty-eight," was his answer. The next day Colonel Henderson informed Medina that an informal investigation of the My Lai incident was underway-- and most likely gave the Captain "a good ass-chewing" as well. Henderson interviewed a number of GIs, then pronounced himself "satisfied" by their answers. No attempt was made to interview surviving Vietnamese. In late April, Henderson submitted a written report indicating that about twenty civilians had been inadvertently killed in My Lai. Meanwhile, Michael Bernhart, a Charlie Company GI severely troubled by what he witnessed at My Lai discussed with other GIs his plan to write a letter about the incident to his congressman. Medina, after learning of Bernhart's intentions, confronted him and told him how unwise such an action, in his opinion, would be.

If not for the determined efforts of a twenty-two-year-old ex-GI from Phoenix, Ronald Ridenhour, what happened on March 16, 1968 at My Lai 4 may never have come to the attention of the American people. Ridenhour served in a reconnaissance unit in Duc Pho, where he heard five eyewitness accounts of the My Lai massacre. He began his own investigation, traveling to Americal headquarters to confirm that Charlie Company had in fact been in My Lai on the date reported by his witnesses. Ridenhour was shocked by what he learned [RIDENHOUR'S STORY]. When he was discharged in December, 1968, Ridenhour said "I wanted to get those people. I wanted to reveal what they did. My God, when I first came home, I would tell my friends about this and cry-literally cry." In March, 1969, Ridenhour composed a letter detailing what he had heard about the My Lai massacre[LINK TO LETTER]and sent it to President Nixon, the Pentagon, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and numerous members of Congress. Most recipients simply ignored the letter, but a few, most notably Representative Morris Udall, aggressively pushed for a full investigation of Ridenhour's allegations.

By late April, General Westmoreland, Army Chief of Staff, had turned the case over to the Inspector General for investigation. Over the next few months, dozens of witnesses were interviewed. It became apparent to all connected with the investigation that war crimes had been committed. In June, 1969, William Calley was flown back from Viet Nam to appear in a line-up for identification by Hugh Thompson. By August, the matter was in the hands of the army's Criminal Investigation Division for a determination as to whether criminal charges should be filed against Calley and other massacre participants. On September 5, formal charges, included six specifications of premeditated murder, were filed against Calley.

Calley hired as his attorney George Latimer, a Salt Lake City lawyer with considerable military experience, having served on the Military Court of Appeals. Latimer pronounced himself impressed with Calley. "You couldn't find a nicer boy," he said, adding that if Calley was guilty of anything it was only following orders "a bit too diligently."

Meanwhile, the issue of the My Lai massacre had gotten the attention of President Nixon. Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird briefed Nixon at his San Clemente retreat. The White House proceeded with caution, sensing the potential of the incident to embarrass the military and undermine the war effort. The President characterized what happened at My Lai as an unfortunate aberration, as "an isolated incident."

In November, 1969, the American public began to learn the details of what happened at My Lai 4. The massacre was the cover story in both Time and Newsweek. CBS ran a Mike Wallace interview with Paul Meadlo. Seymour Hersh published in depth accounts based on his own extensive interviews. Life magazine published Haeberle's graphic photographs.

Reaction to the reports of the massacre varied. Some politicians, such as House Armed Services Subcommittee Chair L. Mendel Rivers maintained that there was no massacre and that reports to the contrary were merely attempts to build opposition to the Viet Nam war. Others called for an open, independent inquiry. The Administration took a middle course, deciding on a closed-door investigation by the Pentagon, headed by William Peers, a blunt three-star general.

For four months the Peers Panel interviewed 398 witnesses, ranging from General Koster to the GIs of Charlie Company. Over 20,000 pages of testimony were taken. The Peers Report criticized the actions of both officers and enlisted men. The report recommended action against dozens of men for rape, murder, or participation in the cover-up.

III.

The Army's Criminal Investigation Division continued its separate investigation. Most of the enlisted men who committed war crimes were no longer members of the military, and thus immune from prosecution by court-martial. A 1955 Supreme Court decision, Toth vs Quarles, held that military courts cannot try former members of the armed services "no matter how intimate the connection between the offense and the concerns of military discipline." Decisions were made to prosecute a total of twenty-five officers and enlisted men, including General Koster, Colonel Oran Henderson, Captain Medina. In the end, however, only few would be tried and only one, William Calley, would be found guilty. The top officer charged, General Samuel Koster, who failed to report known civilian casualties and conducted a clearly inadequate investigation was, according to General Peers, the beneficiary of a whitewash, having charges against him dropped and receiving only a letter of censure and reduction in rank. Colonel Henderson was found not guilty on all charges after a trial by court martial. Peers again expressed his disapproval, writing "I cannot agree with the verdict. If his actions are judged as acceptable standards for an officer in his position, the Army is indeed in deep trouble."

Captain Ernest Medina faced charges of murdering 102 Vienamese civilians. The charges were based on the prosecution's theory of command responsibility: Medina, as the officer in charge of Charlie Company should be accountable for the actions of his men. If Medina knew that a massacre was taking place and did nothing to stop it, he should be found guilty of murder. (Medina was originally charged also with dereliction of duty for participating in the coverup, but the offense was dropped because the statute of limitations had run.) Medina was subjected to a lie-detector test which tended to show he responded truthfully when he said that he did not intentionally suggest to his men that they kill unarmed civilians. The same test, however, tended to to show that his contention that he first heard of the killing of unarmed civilians about 10 to 10:30 A.M. was not truthful, and that he in fact knew non-combattants were being killed sometime between 8 A.M. and 9 A.M., when there would still have been time to prevent many civilian deaths. The prosecution, led by Major William Eckhardt, was unable, however, to get the damaging lie-detector evidence admitted. Medina's lawyer, flamboyant defense attorney F. Lee Bailey, conducted a highly successful defense, forcing the prosecution to drop key witnesses and keeping damaging evidence, such as Ronald Haeberle's photographs, from the jury. After fifty-seven minutes of deliberation, the jury acquitted Medina on all charges. (Months later, when a perjury prosecution was no longer possible, Medina admitted that he had suppressed evidence and lied to the brigade commander about the number of civilians killed.)

The strongest government case was that against Lt. William Calley. On November 12, 1970, in a small courthouse in Fort Benning, Georgia, young Prosecutor Aubrey Daniel stood to deliver his opening statement: "I want you to know My Lai 4. I will try to put you there." Captain Daniel told the jury of six military officers the shocking story of Calley's role in My Lai's tragedy: his machine-gunning of people in the plaza area south of the hamlet; his orders to men to execute men, women, and children in the eastern drainage ditch; his butt-stroking with his rifle of an old man; his grabbing of a small child and his throwing of the child into the ditch, then shooting him at point-blank range. Daniel told the jury that at the close of evidence he would ask them to "in the name of justice" convict the accused of all charges.

Daniel built the prosecution's case methodically. For days, the grisly evidence accumulated without a single witness directly placing Calley at the scene of a shooting. One of the early witnesses was Ronald Haeberle, the army photographer whose pictures brought home the horror of My Lai [TESTIMONY OF HAEBERLE]. Another was Hugh Thompson, My Lai's hero. Defense attorney Latimer's handling on cross of Haeberle, Thompson, and other witnesses led many courtroom observers to conclude that his glowing reputation was undeserved. His questioning of Haeberle, whose credibility was largely irrelevant, was pointless. His attempt to question Thompson's heroism "failed utterly," according to Richard Hammer, author of The Court-Martial of Lt. Calley.

In the second week of the trial Daniel began to call his more incriminating witnesses. Robert Maples, a machine gunner in the first platoon, testified that he saw Calley near the eastern drainage ditch, firing at the people below. Maples said that Calley asked him to use his machine gun on the Vietnamese in the ditch, but that he refused [TESTIMONY OF MAPLES]. Dennis Conti provided equally damning evidence. Conti testified that he was ordered to round up people, mostly women and children, and bring them back to Calley on the trail south of the hamlet. Calley, Conti said, told us to make them "squat down and bunch up so they couldn't get up and run." Minutes later Calley and Paul Meadlo "fired directly into the people. There were burst and shots for two minutes. The people screamed and yelled and fell." Conti said that Meadlo "broke down" and began crying [TESTIMONY OF CONTI].

The prosecution's final witness was its most anticipated witness. Paul Meadlo had been promised immunity from military prosecution in return for his testimony in the Calley case, but when he was called earlier in the trial, Meadlo had refused to answer questions about March 16, 1968, claiming his fifth amendment right not to incriminate himself. Daniel called Meadlo to the stand for a second time, and the ex-GI, who had lost a foot to a mine shortly after the massacre, limped to the stand in his green short-sleeve shirt and green pants. Judge Kennedy warned Meadlo that if he refused to answer questions, two U. S. marshals would take him into custody.
Meadlo said he would testify. He told the jury that Calley had left him with a large group of mostly women and children south of the hamlet saying, "You know what to do with them, Meadlo." Meadlo thought Calley meant he should guard the people, which he did. Meadlo told the jury what happened when Calley returned a few minutes later:

He said, "How come they're not dead?" I said, I didn't know we were supposed to kill them." He said, I want them
dead." He backed off twenty or thirty feet and started shooting into the people -- the Viet Cong -- shooting automatic. He was
beside me. He burned four or five magazines. I burned off a few, about three. I helped shoot ‘em.
Q: What were the people doing after you shot them?
A: They were lying down.
Q: Why were they lying down?
A: They was mortally wounded.
Q: How were you feeling at that time?
A: I was mortally upset, scared, because of the briefing we had the day before.
Q: Were you crying?
A: I imagine I was....

Daniel then asked Meadlo about the massacre at the eastern drainage ditch, and in the same almost emotionless voice, Meadlo recounted the story, telling the jury that Calley fired from 250 to 300 bullets into the ditch. One exchange was remarkable:

Q: What were the children in the ditch doing?
A: I don't know.
Q: Were the babies in their mother's arms?
A: I guess so.
Q: And the babies moved to attack?
A: I expected at any moment they were about to make a counterbalance.
Q: Had they made any move to attack?
A: No.

At the end of Meadlo's testimony, Aubrey Daniel rested the for the prosecution[MEADLO'S TESTIMONY].

The defense strategy had two main thrusts. One was to suggest that the stress of combat, the fear of being in an area thought to be thick with the enemy, sufficiently impaired Calley's thinking that he should not be found guilty of premeditated murder for his killing of civilians. Latimer relied on New York psychiatrist Albert LaVerne to advance this defense argument [LAVERNE TESTIMONY]. The second argument of the defense was that Calley was merely following orders: that Captain Ernest Medina had ordered that civilians found in My Lai 4 be killed and was the real villain in the tragedy.

On February 23, 1971, William Calley took the stand. He told the jury he couldn't remember a single army class on the Geneva Convention, but that he did know he could be court-martialed for refusing to obey an order. He testified that Medina had said the night before that there would be no civilians in My Lai, only the enemy. He said that while he was in the village, Medina called and asked why he hadn't "wasted" the civilians yet. He admitted to firing into a ditch full of Vietnamese, but claimed that others were already firing into the ditch when he arrived. Calley said, "I felt then--and I still do-- that I acted as directed, I carried out my orders, and I did not feel wrong in doing so" [CALLEY TESTIMONY].

Ernest Medina was called as a witness of the court. Medina directly contradicted Calley's testimony. Medina said he was asked at the briefing on March 15 whether "we kill women and children," and-- looking straight at Calley behind the defense table--he said to the GIs "No, you do not kill women and children...Use common sense." At the close of his testimony, Medina saluted Judge Kennedy, then marched past Calley's table without glancing at him [MEDINA TESTIMONY].

It was time for summations. George Latimer for the defense argued that Medina was lying about not giving the order to kill civilians, that Medina knew perfectly well what was going on in the village, and now he and the army were trying to make Calley a scapegoat[LATIMER SUMMATION]. Aubrey Daniel for the prosecution asked the jury who will speak for the children of My Lai. He pointed out that Calley as a U. S. officer took an oath not to kill innocent women and children, and told the jury it is "the conscience of the United States Army"[DANIEL SUMMATION].

After thirteen days of deliberations, the longest in U. S. court-martial history, the jury returned its verdict: guilty of premeditated murder on all specifications. After hearing pleas on the issue of punishment, jury head Colonel Clifford Ford pronounced Calley's sentence: "To be confined at hard labor for the length of your natural life; to be dismissed from the service; to forfeit all pay and allowances."

IV.

Opinion polls showed that the public overwhelmingly disapproved of the verdict in the Calley case [OPINION POLLS]. President Nixon ordered Calley removed from the stockade and placed under house arrest. He announced that he would review the whole decision. Nixon's action prompted Aubrey Daniel to write a long and angry letter in which he told the President that "the greatest tragedy of all will be if political expediency dictates the compromise of such a fundamental moral principle as the inherent unlawfulness of the murder of innocent persons" [AUBREY LETTER]. On November 9, 1974, the Secretary of the Army announced that William Calley would be paroled. In 1976, Calley married. He now works in the jewelry store of his father-in-law in Columbus, Georgia.

My Lai mattered. Two weeks after the Calley verdict was announced, the Harris Poll reported for the first time that a majority of Americans opposed the war in Viet Nam. The My Lai episode caused the military to re-evaluate its training with respect to the handling of noncombatants. Commanders sent troops in the Desert Storm operation into battle with the words, "No My Lais-- you hear?"

Election Choice - Success or Failure

Letter to the Editor

This election is about the future of America. Do we stick with failure - or do we go back to success? The Bush presidency has been a miserable failure. The war in Iraq is a failure. The Republican Congress is a failure. The economy is failing. Our schools are failing. The war on terrorism is failing. Bush has failed to capture Osama bin Laden. Society is falling apart. We have a failed president leading America down a failed path to a future of failure.

I say - lets turn our back on failure and take this country back to the path of success. Let's create jobs instead of lose jobs. Let's go back to surpluses instead of deficits. Let's have peace instead of war. This election is a choice between success and failure. It's time to elect a new president and a new congress and create a new future for this country.

Church of Reality opens Religion Discussion Forum

I have started a religion discussion forum for the Church of Reality. If you want to debate religion or learn how to spread the world about Reality then Click Here. And remember - Darwin loves you!

GOP wants Star Tribune to suspend poll

Are the Republicans manipulating polls? Do they believe that polling numbers influence the public? Is this why we see Bush ahead in the polls?

MINNEAPOLIS - The Star Tribune has declined to suspend its Minnesota Poll at the request of State Republican Party Chairman Ron Eibensteiner, who said the poll is "fatally flawed."

On Friday, Eibensteiner called on the newspaper to suspend the poll until after the Nov. 2 election.

Last week, Eibensteiner called for the Star Tribune to fire its pollster for what he said was years of overrepresenting Democrats and underrepresenting Republicans in the poll. Days later, a new Minnesota Poll of likely voters showed Democratic presidential challenger Sen. John Kerry leading President Bush among likely voters, 50 percent to 41 percent.

Since that poll, three others have shown a much smaller gap. A CNN-Gallup Poll released Monday shows the race as a tie, while a Minnesota Public Radio-Pioneer Press poll produced by the Mason Dixon research firm shows Bush ahead by two percentage points, 46 to 44.

Strategic Vision, a Republican-oriented national poll of likely voters, released the latest poll, showing Kerry ahead in Minnesota by three percentage points, 48 to 45.

Eibensteiner said the other polls "are one more piece of damning evidence showing that the Minnesota Poll is flawed and failing the voters of Minnesota."

The newspaper defended its poll.

"Our polling methodology is public and well-established, and the paper will continue to poll, report our results and publish other polls," Star Tribune Editor Anders Gyllenhaal said.

Last week, Gyllenhaal called the GOP's demand to fire its longtime pollster, Rob Daves, a personal attack that was "shameful and misdirected."

---

Information from: Star Tribune, http:// WWW.STARTRIBUNE.COM

Kerry needs to appeal to STUPID PEOPLE

I strongle suggest simplifying the messages. One line - easy to remenber. Hammer it! Hammer it! Hammer it!

BUSH = FAILURE

over and over and over and over.

Bush is doing this and it's working. Bush's messages are:

Kerry = flip-flop
Kerry will raise your taxes
Kerry is too weak to deal with terrorists

To counter that - these messages:

Bush = FAILURE (failed president)
Bush is dishonest (Bush is lying - stealing)
America is getting (will continue to get) worse under Bush

------------

The kerry campaign is making arguments that are too complex for the average stupid disinterested voter. The average voter has no idea who Haliburton is. They don't know the difference between voting for war authorization and voting to go to war. I get it - but I am not the average voter. It's time to start appealing to STUPID PEOPLE because Bush relates very well to stupid people. And stupid people are the ones who are going to determine the outcome of this election.

Please pass this on to the strategy folks in the Kerry campaign and to all Democrats.

Having said that - I'm glad I'm not the one running. ;)

Changing the Ecectoral College to Popular Vote

Congressman Brian Baird, D-Vancouver, wants to abolish the Electoral College in favor of a system where the president would be elected directly through a national vote. He is suggestion that they amend the Constitution to do this - but I think there might be a different way to achieve the same thing without changing the constitution.

The Constitution is implemented in federal law that gives the states control in how they choose their electors. I think that these federal laws can be changed in a way that would make it so that whoever wins the national popular vote wins all the national electors. This would make the popular vote and the electoral vote the same thing.

If Title 3 - Chapter 1 - Section - 1 were changed so as to require that the electors be selected not by the states according to their own rules - but by the states according to who wins the popular vote - then the electoral college would be preserved - but would more accurately reflect the will of the people.

I think this world work and be easier to pass than a Constitutional Amendment.

Judge orders US to find Bush Records

WASHINGTON (AP) - A federal judge has ordered the Pentagon to find and make public by next week any unreleased files about President Bush's Vietnam-era Air National Guard service to resolve a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by The Associated Press.

U.S. District Judge Harold Baer Jr. handed down the order late Wednesday in New York. The AP lawsuit already has led to the disclosure of previously unreleased flight logs from Bush's days piloting F-102A fighters and other jets.

Pentagon officials told Baer they plan to have their search complete by Monday. Baer ordered the Pentagon to hand over the records to the AP by Sept. 24 and provide a written statement by Sept. 29 detailing the search for more records.

``We're hopeful the Department of Defense will provide a full accounting of the steps it has taken, as the judge ordered, so the public can have some assurance that there are no documents being withheld,'' said AP lawyer David Schulz.

White House officials have said Bush ordered the Pentagon earlier this year to conduct a thorough search for the president's records, and officials allowed reporters to review everything that was gathered back in February.

Through a series of requests under the federal open records law and a subsequent suit, the AP uncovered the flight logs, which were not part of the records the White House released earlier this year.

Both Bush's and John Kerry's service records in Vietnam have become a major issue in the presidential race. New records that have surfaced in recent weeks have raised more questions.

Bush's critics say Bush got preferential treatment as the son of a congressman and U.N. ambassador. Critics also question why Bush skipped a required medical examination in 1972 and failed to show up for drills during a six-month period that year.

Bush has repeatedly said he fulfilled all of his Air National Guard obligations.

The future president joined the Texas Air National Guard in 1968, when he graduated from Yale. He spent more than a year on active duty learning how to fly and then mostly flew in the one-seat F-102A fighters until April 1972.

The pilot logs show a shift to flights in two-seat trainer jets in March 1972, shortly before Bush quit flying. Former Air National Guard officials say that could have been because F-102A jets were not available for Bush to fly or because of other reasons, such as concerns about Bush's flight performance.

Bush skipped his required yearly medical exam in 1972 in the months after he stopped flying in April. Bush has said he moved to Alabama to work on the unsuccessful Senate campaign of a family friend.

Bush never showed up for Guard service between late April and mid-October 1972. He won approval to train with an Alabama Air National Guard unit during September, October and November 1972, but more than a dozen members of the unit at that time say they never saw him there.

The only direct record of Bush appearing at the Alabama unit's base is a January 1973 dental exam performed at that base. Bush's Texas commanders wrote in May 1973 they never saw him between May 1972 and April 1973, a time when his pay records show he trained on 14 days.

Although military regulations allowed commanders to order two years of active duty for guardsmen who missed more than three straight months of drills, that never happened to Bush. Commanders had leeway at the time to allow guardsmen to make up for missed drills.

Vote for Bush - Die in Iraq

Bush will bring back the draft. If you are skilled and between the ages of 18 and 34 you get to go to Iraq to die for Bush's war.

Print this out and post it whereever youth can be found!

Selective Service eyes women's draft
The proposal would also require registration of critical skills

By ERIC ROSENBERG
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON BUREAU

WASHINGTON -- The chief of the Selective Service System has proposed registering women for the military draft and requiring that young Americans regularly inform the government about whether they have training in niche specialties needed in the armed services.

The proposal, which the agency's acting Director Lewis Brodsky presented to senior Pentagon officials just before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, also seeks to extend the age of draft registration to 34 years old, up from 25.

The Selective Service System plan, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, highlights the extent to which agency officials have planned for an expanded military draft in case the administration and Congress would authorize one in the future.

"In line with today's needs, the Selective Service System's structure, programs and activities should be re-engineered toward maintaining a national inventory of American men and, for the first time, women, ages 18 through 34, with an added focus on identifying individuals with critical skills," the agency said in a Feb. 11, 2003, proposal presented to senior Pentagon officials.

Brodsky and Richard Flahavan, the agency's director of public and congressional affairs, reviewed the six-page proposal with Pentagon officials responsible for personnel issues. They included Charles Abell, principal deputy undersecretary for personnel and readiness, and William Carr, deputy undersecretary for military personnel policy.

The agency officials acknowledged that they would have "to market the concept" of a female draft to Congress, which ultimately would have to authorize such a step.

Dan Amon, a spokesman for the Selective Service System, based in Arlington, Va., said that the Pentagon has taken no action on the proposal to expand draft registration.

"These ideas were only being floated for Department of Defense consideration," Amon said. He described the proposal as "food for thought" for contingency planning.

Navy Lt. Cmdr. Jane Campbell, a spokeswoman for the Defense Department, said the Pentagon "has not agreed to, nor even suggested, a change to Selective Service's current missions."

Nonetheless, Flahavan said the agency has begun designing procedures for a targeted registration and draft of people with computer and language skills, in case military officials and Congress authorize it.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Air Force Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, say they oppose a revival of the military draft, last used in 1973 as the American commitment in Vietnam waned, beginning the era of the all-volunteer force.

Mandatory registration for the draft was suspended in 1975 but was resumed in 1980 by President Carter after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. About 13.5 million men, ages 18 to 25, currently are registered with the Selective Service.

"I don't know anyone in the executive branch of the government who believes that it would be appropriate or necessary to reinstitute the draft," Rumsfeld said last month.

At present, the Selective Service is authorized to register only young men and they are not required to inform the government about any professional skills. Separately, the agency has in place a special registration system to draft health care personnel in more than 60 specialties into the military if necessary in a crisis.

Some of the skill areas where the armed forces are facing "critical shortages" include linguists and computer specialists, the agency said. Americans would then be required to regularly update the agency on their skills until they reach age 35.

Individuals proficient in more than one critical skill would list the skill in which they have the greatest degree of competency.

PayPal to start fining their customers

If you buy a Playboy with your paypal debit card - PayPal might steal $500 from you.

PayPal to Levy Fines for Gambling, Porn

By Lisa Baertlein

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - PayPal, the online payments arm of eBay Inc. on Friday said it will soon fine people up to $500 for uses related to gambling, adult content or services, and buying or selling prescription drugs from noncertified sellers.

The new policy, which takes effect Sept. 24 and applies to both buyers and sellers, marks the first time PayPal has imposed fines for violations of its use policy, spokeswoman Amanda Pires said.

In addition to fines that could be applied to each violation, PayPal may take legal action to recover losses in excess of the fines, Pires said in an interview.

PayPal refuses to close my PayPal Account

In my continuing battle with PayPal I have sent them several emails demanding that they close my account and terminate the user agreement I have with them. They refuse to do so.

They have placed my account in a "Limited Status" which does not close the account. It gives them the ability to share my information according to their user agreement and to take money out of my account should they choose to do so.

Since they admit that they don't want to do business with me then they should close the account - but they worn't do that. They want to keep me under their user agreement and they want to maintain access to my checking account even after it's clear they won't do business with me.

After several emails from them I called them on the phone at their service center in Nebraska and talked to Dave and I recorded the phone call (1mb 9 minutes) so that everyone out there who has access to the Internet can listen to PayPal and experience what doing business is like in their own words.

After the phone call at the above link I got a call back from another person named Michele at PayPal - and - I recorded that phone call as well (3mb 25 minutes). This person is some higher up. In this phone call she admits that PayPal can still access my checking account. She admits that PayPal will retain access to my checking account forever - and she admits that PayPal still have access to all checking accounts that they have ever opened whether they were closed, linited, or locked.

This alll started on June 13th 2004 when Paypal limited my account and told me they were seizing my money for 180 days and that there was no appeal and that there was nothing I could do about it. However - they underestimated me and I had my money out in less that 2 weeks. Since then I've decided it's my mission to expose what scumbags PayPal is and to warn consumers about using them. I also intend to bring whatever heat I can on them to stop their unethical business practices.

For those of you who have questions about if it's legal to record this phone call, I will point out several things that make it legal.

First - They are in Nebraska - I am in California - so federal jurisdiction applies. That makes it one party consent.

Second - on the first phone call - the automated voice states clearly "This phone call may be recorded".

Third - I was talking to PayPal - not to individual persons at paypal. All the conversation is in the context of business.

Fourth - on the second conversation - they were recording me without giving me any type of verbal warning or otherwise that the call was being recorded. When I asked THEM if they were recording the call - they admitted that it might be. So on the basis that they record calls that they initiate without warning people they call that the call may be recorded they are consenting through their conduct and waiving any rights to notification themselves.

Fifth - They already know I record phone calls with them because I have already done it in the past and they have notes about this sort of thing in their computers on me.

Sixth - even if it were illegal - it's wrong for them to commit fraud - it's right for me to expose it - and if it turned out I were legally wrong I would appeal to a jury to override the law and find me innocent anyhow. They call it jury nullification - I call it jury empowerment. Besides - such a charge would give this issue the attention it needs to stop paypal from ripping people off.

Bush Family invests in India

Carlyle group [One of the Bush Family Businesses] set to invest $125 mn in India

The Carlyle Group plans to invest $125 million in India over the next 3-5 years. The venerable private equity investor has floated a $300-million Asia-focused fund, of which around 40% will be invested in India-driven companies.

Carlyle has till date invested around $25 million in India in various ventures like Usha Communications, SSKI, which owns the portal Sharekhan, and Educom.
The $125 million investment will exclusively be in IT and IT-enabled services. Said a Carlyle official, "It's not that we are not interested in other sectors, but the mandate of our fund has a clear focus on technology."

The official also added that the fund would also be cautious about investing in the telecom sector, though it didn't rule out that option.

"Though fewer deals were signed this year, they were big in size," said one VC.
VCs also argued that while most venture capital investment was coming in areas like IT and IT-enabled services, the potential of sectors like retail and media entertainment for attracting VC funding was quite high too. Said Reliance Entertainment's Amit Khanna, "Around $200 million worth of private equity have already been invested in the media and entertainment sector, and $100 million of such funding is expected over the next couple of years." This year's hit movie Saathiya was produced by a VC-funded company called Kaleidoscope Entertainment.

Venture capitalists also felt that given the current economic scenario, it was deemed safer to invest in mature companies in expansion stage, rather than startups. While the rate of return on startups was often 10 times of investment, that of expansion stage companies were around 5 times of investment. However, mature companies obviously had a lower risk profile.

As far as Carlyle is concerned, the group had last year done the final closure of a $600 million venture capital fund, Carlyle Venture Partners II LP in the US. The fund was the largest venture capital fund raised in 2002, according to VentureWire, an industry tracker. Earlier in the US, Prism Venture Partners raised a fund of $421 million and Centennial Ventures of Denver closed a $341 million fund. Carlyle group first raised $210 million in 1997.

Church of Reality Logos

For those of you who like my church of Reality - If you want to link to it - here's a logo you can use.

If it's real - we believe in it!

Church of Reality open Membership Email List

This is the first membership mailing of the Church of Reality - the religion I started besed on believing in everything that is real.

If you are getting this email it's because I added you to my Church of Reality mailing list. I'm starting to expand the Church of Reality web site and create some more useful content. If you don't want to be a member of this list - removal instructions are at the bottom of the page.

This list is an announce only list and I will keep the church spam down to a reasonable level.

It's time for me to make the Church of Reality a happening organization. I am still waiting for IRS approval - but the IRS is totally screwed up these days - like all other parts of the government - has fallen to almost dysfunctional. Bush has a lot of the IRS staff chasing terrorist funding and doesn't have the manpower to process not for profit orgs in a timely manner. It will probably take till 2005 before we get an answer on the 501(c)3 status. But - it's time to start moving to make something happen before then.

So - first thing is - spread the word. Here's the link to get people to join the list.

http://www.churchofreality.org/mailman/listinfo/membership

Feel free to pass this around and post this link on your web pages. I want to get as many interested people as possible.

With the election this year I am particularly frustrated with how much the masses can be persuaded to ignore reality. One of the goals of the Church of Reality is to raise reality to a higher level of consideration. Reality has become unimportant in the world and America has turned it's back of reality. I want to start a revolution to bring back reality into the daily lives of people and get them to ask the sacred question - "Is this Real?"

To that end this list is the first step in making that happen and the first mission is to grow this list. So - anything that any of you can do to help will be appreciated. After all - if they take away reality - what do we have left?

If for some reason any of you who I put in this list initially wants to unsubscribe - the information below will remove you from the list.

Thanks in Advance
Marc Perkel

Jesus vs Bush

Choice and Terrorism

Letter to the Editor

Vice President Cheney said last week that America will be move vulnerable to attack if we make the wrong choice this election. It's a statement I agree with - but not in the way Cheney thinks.

We were attached by Osama bin Laden who killed 3000 Americans on 9-11. In response - Bush and Cheney decided to attack Iraq that had nothing to do with it and let bin Laden get away. Now they talk about Osama bin Laden as if he doesn't matter.

And - it doesn't help thatBush's family are business partners with Osama bin Laden's family.

So - we have a choice between staying with the leaders who are going after the wrong enemy and someone who will go after bin Laden. The choice is clear. America will be safer with John Kerry as president.

North Korea Sets of Atmospheric Nuclear Test?

On September 9 a mushroom cloud about 3 miles wide appeared over North Korea. While the Bush controlled press await word form the Whitehouse for them to figure out how they are going to spin it - seems to me that there's only one thing that makes a 3 mile wide mushroom cloud. North Korea has tested a nuke by exploding it in the atmosphere.

Schwarzenegger Signs Bill Banning Sex with Corpses

hmmmmmm - is this Republicans trying to pose as compasionate conservatives? Also makes you wonder if anyone voted against this and why.

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Having sex with corpses is now officially illegal in California after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill barring necrophilia, a spokeswoman said on Friday.

The new legislation marks the culmination of a two-year drive to outlaw necrophilia in the state and will help prosecutors who have been stymied by the lack of an official ban on the practice, according to experts.

"Nobody knows the full extent of the problem. ... But a handful of instances over the past decade is frequent enough to have a bill concerning it," said Tyler Ochoa, a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law who has studied California cases involving allegations of necrophilia.

"Prosecutors didn't have anything to charge these people with other than breaking and entering. But if they worked in a mortuary in the first place, prosecutors couldn't even charge them with that," Ochoa said.

The state's first attempt to outlaw necrophilia, in response to a case of a man charged with having sex with the corpse of a 4-year-old girl in Southern California, stalled last year in a legislative committee.

Lawmakers revived the bill this year after an unsuccessful prosecution of a man found in a San Francisco funeral home drunk and passed out on top of an elderly woman's corpse.

The new law makes sex with a corpse a felony punishable by up to eight years in prison.

Bin Laden Still Free

Letter to the Editor

It's been 3 years since Osama bin Laden destroyed the World Trade Towers and killed 3000 people. Bush said that bin Laden was wanted "Dead or Alive" he was going to "Smoke him out". But now Bush says bin Laden has been "marginalized" and Bush says. "I truly am not that concerned about him." Bush has let him get away with murdering 3000 people and is no longer pursuing him. Yet America remains in terror of being attacked by bin Laden again.

Seems to me that if Bush were serious about terrorism - he'd be going after the terrorists. We need a president who knows who the real enemy is and will go after those who really did attack us. This is the third anniversary of both a tragedy and Bush's continuing failure to deal with it.

What is it like to be brainwashed?

This is what it's like. Here's a moonie that wrote me. This person has no idea she's brainwashed. Note - according to her - the Moonies are Republicans. Something I've known for years. Moomies hate paragraphs.

I get a lot of Moonie email like this and they all say I have no right to speak. I say - fuck them. Here's the letter. What do you think?

-------------------

Hello. I just wanted to comment on your sight. I happen to know more about some of these religious organizations more than you do. In fact a lot more. I was searching the web (curiously) wondering what kind of things are said about "moonies" on the web. I happened to come upon your sight, which I think is (to say the least) very one sided. You may be a democrat, but that gives you no right to criticize a religion just because they are republicans. I have attended more organizations with the Unification Church, than I believe many have. Let me just say that, you've only heard half of what is said about the Unification Church and Theology. Let me tell you, Rev. Sun Myung Moon is definately not trying to "take over the world." Let me also ask you, have you ever even heard ANY of the Unification Theology? If so, I doubt you would be so negative about this religion. You have no idea how amazing this man is. You have absolutely NO idea how much heartache and suffering this man has gone through, to change the world, little by little. For example, did you know that he spent years and years in prison, being tortured immensly, with 1 cup of rice a day, and that he couldn't bare to watch the other prisoners starve, so he gave his tiny little cup to the others, and starved himself. Did you know that, when he was 16 he received a revelation from Jesus Christ Himself and spent many tearfilled days pondering over this revelation. Rev. Sun Myung Moon is not and evil villain trying to obtain the world. He is simply a humble man striving for world peace. You may think that I'm "brainwashed" and that Rev. Moon has me under "his spell" but let me just say that, if the world is so dumb as to ignore Our Savior once again then this world will surely parish. I have so much more that I want to share with you, and to spread my knowledge about Rev. Sun Myung Moon, but that would take me a month. I just wanted to say that, you shouldn't try to "brainwash" people, and make them think that "moonies" are "brainwashing" people. You should be mature enough to let everybody else in the world ponder on their own, and let them decide which path to take, and which religion to believe in. I just want to leave you with the Unification motto, "Live for the sake of others." Sincerely: Amy Shank

It's that he lied about it

Letter to the Editor

I remember when the Republicans were trying to get President Clinton kicked out of office saying, "it's not that he had sex with that woman - it's that he lied about it." Now we get to say the same thing. It's not that Bush has strings pulled to get him out of Vietnam - it's that he lied about it. It's not that he didn't show up for his national guard duty - it's that he lied about it. It's not that they didn't find weapons of mass destruction - it's that he lied about it. And - it's not that he got us into and unprovoked war against the wrong enemy that has crippled the economy and got 1000 soldiers killed - it's that he lied to get us in there.

Real Estate Bubble to Bust like Dot Coms did

Have you been wondering why real estate prices are so high? It's because of a huge amount of speculation in the market and cheap and easy to get loans.

First - the low interest rates are creating artificially high prices. When interest rates were 8% there was a limit to how much of a monthy payment someone could afford. But at 4% the same person can buy a house for almost twice as much for the same payment. Thus - real estate prices increase. Especially for people who are suckered into variable rate loans as low as 3%.

Because the market went up so fast banks started making loans with nothing down and bad credit - figuring the homes are going up so fast that the collateral will cover it. People are buying up homes like they were in 2000 day trading stock. It's called turn and burn. Your hairdresser might own 10 homes in different parts of the country. The bouy a house - sit on it for 6 months - and then sell it for 50 grand more than they paid for it. And it all works as long as prices continue to climb and it remains greed driven.

But this is artificial and at some point the reality will hit like it did for the artificially high dot com stocks. The greed driven market will turn fear driven and collapse extremely fast. And when it hits - real estate will drop to half price overnight - there will be huge losses - and banks will be stuck with property worth far less that the loans against it. And when that happens you'll see a huge banking collapse just like what happened in the 1980s under Reagan.

So - when you hear Bush say that home ownership is at it's highest level ever - this is why.

My accountant was telling me all about it because he's helping process a lot of these transactions for these people. At it all made sense. I had beeen confused about how it is with the deficit so high and economy so low - and real estate so high - how does anyone afford to buy a house? Well - now I know.

So - here's what the crash looks like. And it will be a small interest rate hike to will trigger it. Fear enteres the market. People realize the the rise is over and they start to sell. The houses sit on the market for some time and nothing sells - so people start lowering their price. Once the prices start going down everyone panics and all of a sudden - every turn and burn property is on the markey at the same time. While it sits there - they still have to make the payments on the property and quickly burn up the capital they have - often borrowed on credit cards - and then they can't make the payments anymore.

The homes get reposessed - but the banks can't sell them. Now not only is there a glut of turn and burn properties for sale - but there are forclosure sale properties on the market. And - as interest rates creep up - those people who got a 3% teaser loan that they could barely affors to pay are all of a sudden paying 6% and nearly double the payment. So home owners get hit as well.

With all the loan failures - the banks will start failing and torn to the federal government for yet another huge bailout. A government that already is setting records for deficit spending.

We still owe the money for the 1980s bailout of the Savings and Load industry. this collapse will be far bigger.

But - it won't happen till after the November election.

If you are playing this game - the time to get out is now.

My take on Kobe Bryant

Rape cases are difficult but I have some real problems with rape shield laws. I have seen both sides of the issue. Women who need the protection of the law - and women who lie about being raped for either money or to try to cover up infedelity. Most people are aware of real rapes and feel sorry for the women victims - as I do. But I have seen that the other side is extremely common.

Having said that - if I were on the jury and I were presented with the fact that the woman had sex with another man between the time she was raped and when she was examined by the police - I don't see how I could decide to convict.

Not only would I have a problem with her cerdibility - but how do you determine which sex act caused what results? Which sex act resulted in what?

The standard of the law is "beyond a reasonable doubt" which means that even if they convinced me that he probably did it - probably isn't good enough. And with the woman having sex with another man after the rape and before the medical exam - that's reasonable doubt. There was no case there - and it was properly dismissed.

Personally - I think the girl is lying. And I think she's in it for a buck. But that's just my opinion.

A little tip for those who are raped - go to the police first before having sex with someone else.

My 2 cents ....

Will America Collapse Economically?

Letter to the Editor

The numbers are out and at 422 billion dollars Bush has set a new record for deficit spending. But what is even scarier is the projections that in a decade that the annual deficit will be 2.2 trillion dollars a year. I don't believe that we will actually reach a 2.2 trillion dollar deficit (2200 billion dollars) because, like the World Trade Towers, the economy will totally colapse before then. If we are heading towards economic collapse - maybe it's time to change the direction of the country - elect a new leader - and put back in place the economy we had just 4 years ago when we had a surplus. It's time to get rid of Bush - tax the rich - and bring back peace and prosperity.

New Word: Extinctionist

I'm inventing a new word. The name for a religious belief that is the opposite of evolution. I call the Extinctionists. Evolutionists are people who believe that people and animals are evolving - and getting better. Evolving into something greater - improving.. But and Extinctionist is the exact opposite. Not only don't they believe in Evolution - but they envistion ultimate destruction. To them the end of the world is near - the end of time - and we cease to exist. They justify this position by expecting an afterlife - but if they are wrong - we merely cease to exist. We become extinct.

I have made the opposite choice - to evolve - to move forward towards a better tomorrow. Becuase after all - our existence is all we have and if we lose that - we lose everything. And if we make the wrong choices - we will merely cease to exist along with millions of other species who have failed to evolve. I say - the extinctionists are wrong. And that we should resist the direction the are trying to take us in.

Why we fear Bush

Letter to the Editor

People wonder why some of us are so dead set against a second Bush term. I can sum it up in a few sentences. When we look back at what happened in the last four years and seen America decline - we wonder if it's even repairable now. We fear that with four more years of Bush - there won't be anything left of this country. We feel that if Bush is reselected - that America as we know it will be gone. This country is in serious danger and if we don't turn it around - democracy as we have know it will be gone and all that will be left is war, debt, poverty, and lies. And that's not the kind of future that we can live with. That's why we oppose Bush.

Screwed by PayPal in small claims court

I got the decision in small claims court in the mail and I got screwed. The judge - who really wasn't a judge but a fill in lawyer - complained that the case was too complex for small claims court and recommended I hire a lawyer.

The decision: Defendant (PayPal) acted within the scope of contrace and no legislation was presented to override.

This was a dispute arising from PayPal not liking what I posted on my web site and deciding to cut me off and seize my money for 180 days. I did get my money back after recording a conversation I had with them and posting it on the internet.

Details are at this link.

The battle isn't over yet however. The problem is that PayPal is acting like a financial institution without the responsibilities of a bank. They are playing a game of legal fiction playinf fast and loose with people's money. I want to see what I can do to bring PayPal under the same rules as other financial institutions so they can't just decide to arbetrarilly decide to grab someon'e money just for any reason they want.

Who is the girly man?

Letter to the Editor

Arnold Schwarzenegger told the Republican convention "I saw tanks in the streets. I saw communism with my own eyes." and that as a child and that he left a "Socialist" country when he moved away in 1968.

The problem is that while what Arnold said was moving - the problem with it, like most Republican speeches, is that it just wasn't true. When Arnold was in Austria, the area of Styria and the neighboring province of Carinthia belonged to the British zone. The Soviets left Styria in July 1945.

Arnold also said: "As a kid, I saw the Socialist country that Austria became after the Soviets left". But when Arnold left in 1968, Austria was run by a conservative government headed by People's Party Chancellor Josef Klaus, a staunch Roman Catholic and a sharp critic of both the Socialists and the Communists ruling in countries across the Iron Curtain.

Arnold is trying to rewrite reality for the purpose of supporting a president who stands for the opposite of everything Arnold believes in. It was clear from the beginning that Arnold didn't want to support Bush but was pressured into it. There's a name Arnold gives people like him who can be pressured into lying. He calls them girly men!

Bob Dole withdraws $8000 week in cash?

Riggs Affair Sparks 'Suspicious Activity' Alert on Dole

WASHINGTON -- The Riggs National Bank scandal has led to unexpected fallout, including "suspicious activity reports" on former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole and former Defense Secretary Frank Carlucci, Friday's Wall Street Journal reported.

As often as once a week, Mr. Dole's assistant walks around the corner from his Pennsylvania Avenue office in Washington to a branch of Riggs Bank, where she withdraws as much as $8,000 in cash. For walking-around money, Mr. Dole keeps a wad of $100 bills in the breast pocket of his shirt. "I probably use a credit card four or five times a year," Mr. Dole confesses. "I don't even have a wallet."

Mr. Dole's affinity for cash was of no concern to anyone until recently, when federal regulators pawing through the books of scandal-tarred Riggs spotted the large withdrawals and called them to the attention of management. In short order, the bank filed "suspicious activity reports" on Mr. Dole and another prominent Washington figure, Mr. Carlucci, questioning whether the two men might have violated federal laws against money laundering.

The two aren't actually suspected by Riggs of wrongdoing, people familiar with the filings say. But the bank, a unit of Riggs National Corp. (RIGS), felt it had no choice but to file these reports because of the strict wording of the Bank Secrecy Act.

The reports are the latest strange fallout from the Riggs affair, which has reverberated through Washington in unexpected ways since the bank got into trouble with regulators this year for overlooking signs of suspicious activity by Saudi diplomats and foreign despots. The scandal has provoked a minor diplomatic crisis for the State and Treasury departments as Riggs, which has long had a lock on the diplomatic market in Washington, starts to shed all of its embassy accounts to get out from under a regulatory cloud and sell itself to PNC Financial Services Group Inc. (PNC).

To some observers, these headaches suggest flaws in the government's system for monitoring suspicious activity, which generates more than 200,000 filings annually -- many of which go unread. Many banks dislike the process for suspicious activity reports, or SARs, and avoid customers who may force the banks to get more involved with it even if the customers aren't suspicious characters.

The case of Messrs. Dole and Carlucci illustrates what can happen, as Riggs had to file the reports whether it wanted to or not.

Wall Street Journal Staff Reporter Glenn R. Simpson contributed to this report.

Zell Miller's Military Record

So - after all the chest beating and chalenging Chris Mathews to a duel - what's the story on his military record? Anyone know?

Two Anti-Kerry Vets Tapped for VA Panel

Bush Administration Appoints Two Veterans in Anti-Kerry Ads to VA Advisory Panel

WASHINGTON Sept. 3, 2004 — Two former Vietnam prisoners of war who appear in ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry were appointed by the Bush administration to a panel advising the Department of Veterans Affairs.

The former POWs in the ad, Kenneth Cordier and Paul Galanti, serve on the VA's 12-member Former POW Advisory Committee. VA Secretary Anthony Principi appointed Cordier in 2002 and Galanti in 2003.

Cordier said the VA panel has nothing to do with the Bush campaign or the anti-Kerry group. "It's totally apolitical, and we meet twice a year to bring to the secretary's attention problems from around the country in VA hospitals," he said.

Cordier and Galanti appear in an anti-Kerry ad saying their Vietnamese captors used news of anti-war protests, such as ones Kerry organized, to taunt the prisoners. Cordier also was a member of a Bush campaign veterans' committee but quit earlier this month after that role was revealed.

VA spokesman Phil Budahn said Principi did not know about or encourage the veterans' appearance in the anti-Kerry ad. Budahn said federal regulations bar advisory committee members from engaging in political activity while performing their committee duties, but there are no other restrictions on their activities when not working on committee business.

Kerry has labeled the group running the ads, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a front for the Bush campaign. Kerry's campaign complained to the Federal Election Commission that the veterans' group was illegally coordinating its attacks with the Bush campaign.

More than $100,000 of the group's initial funding came from Houston-area homebuilder Bob J. Perry, a longtime donor to Bush and other Texas Republicans. A Bush campaign lawyer also advised the Swift boat group and was dropped from the campaign staff after his role became public.

Bush and his campaign have denied any coordination with Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

Cordier said he got involved with the group because of his continuing outrage over anti-Vietnam war activists like Kerry. He said he got in touch with one of its leaders, John O'Neill, who later commanded the same Swift boat Kerry had overseen.

Cordier said he doesn't remember his Vietnamese captors specifically mentioning Kerry but he does remember them playing a tape of an address by anti-war activist Jane Fonda.

Cordier and Galanti are longtime friends and prominent former Vietnam POWs with long-standing Republican ties. Cordier said he suggested Galanti contact O'Neill.

Galanti coordinated Arizona Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign in Virginia four years ago and was a member of the same VA advisory panel when Bush's father was president. Cordier gave $2,000 to Texas Republicans in 2000 and 2001.

The anti-Kerry group's ads have accused Kerry of lying to get some of the five medals he won as a Swift boat commander in Vietnam.

Navy documents and other servicemen who witnessed the incidents contradict the group's claims, and the group has not offered any documentary proof of its claims that Kerry lied about his medals. Kerry himself has given differing accounts of some incidents, however, and his past claim to have been in Cambodia on Christmas 1968 is not substantiated by any documents so far.

Navy records also show most of the anti-Kerry group's members were not in Vietnam at the same time as Kerry. The group has not released a membership list but did criticize Kerry in a May letter signed by 238 members.

Only 101 names on the letter match names of officers or enlisted men on the rolls of Kerry's units in Vietnam when he was there, from November 1968 through March 1969.

Van Odell, an enlisted man in Kerry's unit and a member of the group, said Swift Boat Veterans for Truth never claimed to be exclusively made up of veterans who served with Kerry. Finding such vets is difficult because Kerry was only in Vietnam for about four months, Odell said.

"It's hard to be there when he was," Odell said. "He was in and out so fast."

Before volunteering for Swift boat duty on Vietnam's rivers, Kerry served about a year on a Navy frigate offshore in the Gulf of Tonkin.

At least 30 men on the list, including one who appears in an anti-Kerry ad, served in Kerry's former Swift boat unit a year after Kerry left Vietnam, the records show.

Shelton White appears in the group's first ad, which claims it is quoting those who served with Kerry. In the ad, White says "John Kerry betrayed the men and women he served with in Vietnam." Navy records show White served in Kerry's former unit, Coastal Division 11, from November 1969 to March 1970 a full year after Kerry left.

Odell said White was referring to Kerry's anti-war activities after Kerry returned to the United States.

Curveball - He's Back!

Ahmed Chalabi - code named by the CIA "curveball" continues to live up to his name. First he was the guy who brought Bush a lot of the misinformation he was looking for to justify the war in Iraq. He seemed destined to be Bush's hand picked leader of Iraq but then the relationship fell through and he became a spy for Iran. A warrant was issued for his arrest. Now he's back - as a member of the US controlled Iraqi Parliment.

It turns out that Iraq's self government is partially Bush cornies who we have installed to pretend to be the government of the people so as to create an illusion of democracy under American occupation.

Here's the story.

How Goes the Iraq War?

Here's a chart of Bush's success in Iraq.

Kerry FINALLY Kicking ASS!!!

I think Bush is in for a bigger fight than the Republicans realize. Here it is 30 minutes later and he's taking Bush on big time. Good to hear him bring this back from the GOP fantasy to reality.

Bush's Speech was Lame

Letter to the Editor

GOP conventions have sure changed over the years. There's a lot of things you don't hear about anymore that the Republicans used to at least give lip service to. What you don't hear is the words Balanced Budget anymore. They no longer talk of Paying off the National Debt, Where is the Social Security Lock Box. We are not debating what we are going to do with the surplus like we were 4 years ago. The only new idea he introduced was federal funding of churches.

In spite of all the talk of terrorism and 9-11 - not once did Bush mention the name of Osama bin Laden. That tells me that Bush isn't serious about getting the guy who actually attacked America. We have a president who can't identify the enemy.

He talks about our soldiers confronting terrorists - but the terrorists aren't in Iraq and never were. Our soldiers were sent to fight in the wrong country. All in all - Bush's speech was pretty weak compared to the other speaker like Democrat Zell Miller and the pro-choice liberal Republicans who dominated the GOP convention. If this is a poker game - Bush is playing with an empty hand.

Daily Show Clip - Bush Words

Here's a Daily Show Clip in Real format called Bush Words. It covers the lies on the war on terror.

The War in Iraq is Wrong

Letter to the Editor

Zell Miller gave a hell of a speech except that it is based on a false set of facts. After all the chest pounding is over, the fact is that America is not safer because we went to war with Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 or terrorism. The 9-11 terrorist was Osama bin Laden and he's still free and safe. There were no weapons of mass destruction. We went to war based on a lie and the rest of the world knows it. Bush and Cheney lied and Americans died because we sent our soldiers to attack the wrong enemy.

It takes more than just raw aggression to win the war on terror. You have to have a little wisdom so that when you start a war - you correctly identify the enemy. I too believe that we need to be aggressive on the war on terror - but - let's not waste out military capital by going to war with the wrong guy. We need a president who isn't more loyal to the Saudi Royal Family than he is to the 9-11 survivors. And I find it amazing that a war hero like Kerry has to defend himself for the attacks of draft dodgers over his military record. We need someone who will fight smart and not just fight hard - and Bush is not smart.

Moore laugh$ off McCain In$ult

This is a funny one. McCain just gave Moore a free plug. Now lots more people will see the movie. You would think the McCain would have at least WATCHED the movie before criticizing it. But Bush sucked him into giving the speech because as dumb as Bush is - he's smarter than McCain. Bush probably said "Sure John - you plug me this time an in 2008 you can be president."

What a sucker - here's the story.

Michael Moore is eating up the abuse he's been getting at the Republican National Convention. The "Fahrenheit 9/11" director is still blowing kisses to Arizona Sen. John McCain, who scorned the anti-Bush crusader as "a disingenuous filmmaker" during his speech Monday night.

"Thank you, John McCain," said Moore, who is covering the convention for USA Today. "The film's doing $120 million right now. When McCain mentions it, I have a chance to do $150 million.

"I felt bad that McCain got set up by the Bush people to comment on a film he hasn't seen," Moore told us. "Anytime McCain wants a screening, I'd be happy to do that because I think he'd like it." (McCain's camp had no immediate comment.)

Swift Boat Vet Got $40M Contract From Bush

Article from the MisLeader

The Bush White House has denied any connection to the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth - the group that has been airing factually unsupportable smear ads against Sen. John Kerry's war record. But a new report today shows that one of the key accusers in the smear ads was a lobbyist for a company that recently received a massive federal contract from the Bush administration.

As the Washington Post reports, Rear Admiral William L. Schachte Jr., the man who claims Kerry was not under fire when he received his first Purple Heart, is a top lobbyist for a defense contractor that recently won a $40 million grant from the Bush administration. According to a March 18 legal filing by Schachte's firm, Blank Rome, Schachte was one of the lobbyists working for FastShip's effort to secure federal contracts. On Feb. 2, FastShip announced the Bush administration had awarded it $40 million.

Schachte has other connections to the Bush administration. The Washington Post notes David Norcross, Schachte's colleague in the Washington office of Blank Rome, is chairman of this week's Republican convention in New York. Records show that Schachte gave $1,000 to Bush's 2000 and 2004 campaigns. Additionally, Schachte helped organize veterans' efforts against Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and for Bush in the 2000 South Carolina primary.

This is not the first member of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth who has been revealed to be connected to the President. The Bush-Cheney campaign's top outside lawyer was forced to resign after he admitted providing legal services to the veterans group. The Bush-Cheney campaign's veterans adviser was also featured in one of the smear ads.