BREAKING: Atty General Shopping

Washington Insiders have confirmed that the White House is shopping around for "possible" canditates.  Also, a real good source told me more emails are coming out and they believe the Attorney General will be gone by the end of the week.....start circulating that resume my friend!

technorati tags:Attorney, General, Gonzolaz, Resign, Removed, Fired

Blogged with Flock

President's Speech: Something Missing

Here is the following, in its whole, the speech President Bush made marking the start of the fifth year of the Iraq war.  See if you can find something that stands out.....because its NOT there!

 
     THE PRESIDENT:  Good morning.  Four years ago today, coalition forces 
  launched Operation Iraqi Freedom to remove Saddam Hussein from power.  They 
  did so to eliminate the threat his regime posed to the Middle East and to the 
  world.  Coalition forces carried out that mission with great courage and 
  skill.  Today the world is rid of Saddam Hussein and a tyrant has been held to 
  account for his crimes by his own people. 
   
  
  
 
     Nearly 12 million Iraqis have voted in free elections under a democratic 
  constitution that they wrote for themselves.  And their democratic leaders are 
  now working to build a free society that upholds the rule of law, that 
  respects the rights of its people, that provides them security and is an ally 
  in the war on terror. 
   
  
  
 
     At this point in the war, our most important mission is helping the Iraqis 
  secure their capital.  Until Baghdad's citizens feel secure in their own homes 
  and neighborhoods, it will be difficult for Iraqis to make further progress 
  toward political reconciliation or economic rebuilding, steps necessary for 
  Iraq to build a democratic society. 
   
  
  
 
     So with our help, Iraq's government is carrying out an aggressive plan to 
  secure Baghdad.  And we're continuing to train the Iraqi security forces so 
  that they ultimately take full responsibility for the security of their own 
  people. 
   
  
  
 
     I've just received an update on the situation from Iraqi Prime Minister 
  Maliki.   My conversation with the Prime Minister followed a briefing earlier 
  this morning that included Secretary Rice and Secretary Gates, along with 
  General Petraeus and Ambassador Khalilzad, who participated by video 
  conference from Iraq. 
   
  
  
 
     Prime Minister Maliki and General Petraeus emphasized that the Baghdad 
  security plan is still in its early stages, and success will take months, not 
  days or weeks.  Yet, those on the ground are seeing some hopeful signs.  The 
  Iraqi government has completed the deployment of three Iraqi army brigades to 
  the capital, where they've joined the seven Iraqi army brigades and nine 
  national police brigades that were already in the area. 
   
  
  
 
     The Iraqi government has also lifted restrictions that once prevented 
  Iraqi and coalition forces from going into areas like SadrCity.  American and 
  Iraqi forces have established joint security stations.  Those stations are 
  scattered throughout Baghdad and they're helping Iraqis reclaim their 
  neighborhoods from the terrorists and extremists. 
   
  
  
 
     Together, we've carried out aggressive operations against both Shia and 
  Sunni extremists; carried out operations against al Qaeda terrorists.   We've 
  uncovered large caches of weapons and destroyed two major car bomb factories 
  that were located on the outskirts of Baghdad. 
   
  
  
 
     I want to stress that this operation is still in the early stages, it's 
  still in the beginning stages.  Fewer than half of the troop reinforcements we 
  are sending have arrived in Baghdad.  The new strategy will need more time to 
  take effect.  And there will be good days, and there will be bad days ahead as 
  the security plan unfolds. 
   
  
  
 
     As we help the Iraqis secure their capital, their leaders are also 
  beginning to meet the benchmarks they have laid out for political 
  reconciliation.  Last month, Iraq's Council of Ministers approved a law that 
  would share oil revenues among Iraqi people.  The Iraqi legislature passed a 
  $41 billion budget that includes $10 billion for reconstruction and capital 
  improvements.  And last week, Prime Minister Maliki visited Ramadi, a city in 
  the Sunni heartland, to reach out to local Sunni tribal leaders. 
   
  
  
 
     There's been good progress.  There's a lot more work to be done, and 
  Iraq's leaders must continue to work to meet the benchmarks that have set 
  forward. 
   
  
  
 
     As Iraqis work to keep their commitments, we have important commitments of 
  our own.  Members of Congress are now considering an emergency war spending 
  bill.  They have a responsibility to ensure that this bill provides the funds 
  and the flexibility that our troops need to accomplish their mission.  They 
  have a responsibility to pass a clean bill that does not use funding for our 
  troops as leverage to get special interest spending for their districts.  And 
  they have a responsibility to get this bill to my desk without strings and 
  without delay. 
   
  
  
 
     It can be tempting to look at the challenges in Iraq and conclude our best 
  option is to pack up and go home.  That may be satisfying in the short run, 
  but I believe the consequences for American security would be devastating.  If 
  American forces were to step back from Baghdad before it is more secure, a 
  contagion of violence could spill out across the entire country.  In time, 
  this violence could engulf the region.  The terrorists could emerge from the 
  chaos with a safe haven in Iraq to replace the one they had in Afghanistan, 
  which they used to plan the attacks of September the 11th, 2001.  For the 
  safety of the American people, we cannot allow this to happen. 
   
  
  
 
     Prevailing in Iraq is not going to be easy.   General Petraeus says that 
  the environment in Iraq is the most challenging that he has seen in his more 
  than 32 years of service.  He also says that he has been impressed by the 
  professionalism and the skill and determination of our men and women in 
  uniform.  He sees in our troops "a true will to win and a sincere desire to 
  help our Iraqi partners achieve success." 
   
  
  
 
     Four years after this war began, the fight is difficult, but it can be 
  won.  It will be won if we have the courage and resolve to see it through. 
  I'm grateful to our servicemen and women for all they've done and for the 
  honor they brought to their uniform and their country.  I'm grateful to our 
  military families for all the sacrifices they have made for our country.  We 
  also hold in our hearts the good men and women who've given their lives in 
  this struggle.  We pray for the loved ones they have left behind. 
   
  
  
 
     The United States military is the most capable and courageous fighting 
  force in the world.  And whatever our differences in Washington, our troops 
  and their families deserve the appreciation and the support of our entire 
  nation. 
   
      Thank you. 
   
      END 
      11:38 A.M. EDT 
   
  
  

 
  
Well, what would it be my friends?  SHOULD have been in the very first paragraph. 
 
  
.
  
.
  
.
  
.
  
.
  
.still no?
  
.
  
.
  
.
  
.
  
.WMD!  Weapons of Mass Destruction, Mushroom Cloud, Biological and Chemical Weapons, ANY of these would have been correct (as well as all of them). 
  

technorati tags:Bush, Speech, Something, Missing

Blogged with Flock

White House Now Issuing "Hopes"

Today, White House Spokesman Tony Snow, when asked wether embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez would stay on during the entire Bush term, Tony issued a weak little "Well, we hope so." Now, since members of the Cabinet, after confirmed by the Senate, serves at the pleasure of the President (although I'm sure right about now, that phrase sends chills down his back as many times as we have heard it in the past few days), then either Bush and/or the rest of the Cabinet (or majority) do NOT have confidence in him anymore OR they are worried about impeachment of Gonzalez. The "Texas Click" finally seems to be thinning....rather rapidly.

technorati tags:Gonzales, Alberto, Attorney, General, Impeachment, Prosecutors

Blogged with Flock

A Constitutional Question: Someone Please Clarify

Since the major news broke Monday about Sibel Edmond's case (that, I mind you, is extremely explosive, but nevertheless it has been blacklisted my every major TV, Print, and Internet (with the exception of Raw Story, LOVE YA!), I have been thinking (and you don't understand, when I set my mind to think about an issue, I try to see it from every possible angle, which can be time consuming, and in the midst of my thinking (which can be dangerous sometimes :-D) a Constitutional question came up about Sibel Edmonds and similar Whistleblowers cases concerning Congress. It is my understanding that Congress (The House of Representatives as well as the Senate) is one of three EQUAL branches of Government. It is also my understanding that it is the Constitutional requirement, in which they all take a vow to protect and defend, to have oversight of the Executive Branch, the second Separate but Equal Branch of Government who, if I'm not mistaken, has a wide scope in the control of ALL Classified Information, and the third Separate but Equal Branch being the Judicial System, basically being an arbitrator and interpreting the laws, as well as the Constitution, and making sure justice is administered. In Edmonds case, it seems that there has been a total breakdown (but there is a light at the end of the tunnel still burning bright) of the system. The Executive Branch, through then Attorney General John Ashcroft, eventually placed three separate rarely used "State Secret Privilege" to issue a gag order and deny her the Justice she is entitled to, as an American Citizen who has valiantly served her country, under our Constitution. Before we go any further, I would like to divert your attention to the State Secret Privilege for a minute. This privilege, conferred onto the Executive Branch by the Judicial Branch is not even a law, but an interpretation of a case, to be specific United States v. Reynolds. Since the Wikipedia article explains it much better than I ever could, and any Wikipedia article is copyright free, so here it is in full (its short, don't worry):

United States v. Reynolds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United States v. Reynolds, 345 U.S. 1 (1953) is a landmark legal case in 1953 that saw the creation of the State Secrets Privilege, an unofficial but judicially-recognized extension of presidential power.

The widows of 3 crew members of a B-29 Superfortress bomber that had crashed in 1948 sought accident reports on the crash, but were told that to release such details would threaten national security by revealing the bomber's top-secret mission.

In 2000, the accident reports were declassified and released, and were found to contain no secret information. They did, however, contain information about the poor state of condition of the aircraft itself, which would have been very compromising to the Air Force's case. Many commentators have alleged government misuse of secrecy in the landmark case.

Now, isn't it amazing how there were in fact no secrets in their, the government got this abusive privilege by covering up an embarrassing Air Force accident. Okay, back to my question: How can the Executive Branch of Government block Sibel Edmonds from speaking with any Member of Congress, especially the Intel Committee Members who would definitely have the clearance. Although she has talked some in classified sessions, that's the problem, Congress is being complicit in the cover up by not holding pubic hearings (yet!). And, if there is a Member of the House of Representatives who knows any of the gagged material that Sibel Edmonds cannot legally tell, he or she may reveal this information on the Floor of the House without fear of persecution, no matter what is said. So, I guess I'm asking am I right in all of my aspects of Constitutional analysis, since I am no Constitutional expert.

White House Says VETO for Whistleblower Protection

And of course, it is obviously to save their own embarrassment and possible criminal conviction of many in our Government, elected and un-elected, and that would just be too shameful for our Country (oh yeah, and its also to "protect certain US Business Interests" although I wonder if a majority of the citizens benefit from this "business protection" or if its the people with the money (DUH!)). I received this email from Sibel, and it is basically a statement issued by the Executive Office of the President Office of Management and Budget, stating all these unconvincing reasons why they disagree with the material of the bill and states that "senior advisers to the President will recommend a veto" which is basically a confirmation of a veto. Here is the text, in full:

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503



March 13, 2007

(House)

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

H.R. 985 – Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act of 2007

(Rep. Waxman (D) CA and 24 cosponsors)



The Administration supports accountability and transparency in the
implementation of Federal programs. However, the Administration
strongly opposes House passage of H.R. 985 because it could compromise
national security, is unconstitutional, and is overly burdensome and
unnecessary. Rather than promote and protect genuine disclosures of
matters of real public concern, it would likely increase the number of
frivolous complaints and waste resources. If H.R. 985 were presented
to the President, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the
bill.



H.R. 985 would expand, for the first time, whistleblower protections
to employees at national security agencies who disclose classified
information to Congress. H.R. 985 would permit an employee to make an
individualized determination – without further review and perhaps
without all relevant information – to disclose classified information.
Such an independent, uncoordinated decision to disclose classified
information could jeopardize not only national security programs, but
also the security of the people involved in such programs. The
President now has the necessary authority to control the circumstances
under which others receive classified and national security
information to ensure such information is not disclosed or used in a
way that would jeopardize national security. By vesting subordinate
Executive branch officials with a right to disclose classified
information outside of the Executive branch without receiving official
authorization from the President or his official designee, the bill
would impede the President's necessary coordination function. In
addition, in any litigation concerning a whistleblower, if the
government invokes the state secrets privilege, H.R. 985 would require
that the matter at issue be resolved in favor of the plaintiff. This
essentially would require the agency to choose between protecting
national security information in court or conceding lawsuits.
Finally, H.R. 985 would allow administrative and judicial review of
Executive branch security clearance determinations, a prerogative that
must be within the Executive branch's discretion for the protection of
national security programs and personnel.



The expanded definition of protected disclosures in H.R. 985 also
would upset the delicate balance between whistleblower protection and
the ability of Federal managers to manage the workforce by permitting
employees to bring a whistleblower complaint in response to almost
every adverse employment action. The existing protections guaranteed
by the Whistleblower Protection Act are sufficient to promote and
protect genuine disclosures of matters of public concern by offering
protection from adverse personnel actions to employees who report
government wrongdoing to those in a position to remedy the problem.
The proposed expansive definition has the potential to convert any
disagreement over an issue or contrary interpretation of a law between
employees, no matter how trivial or frivolous, into a whistleblower
disclosure. The proposed expansive definition also would permit
employees to impede legitimate investigations (even those by
Inspectors General) by arguing that such investigation itself was an
adverse action against the whistleblower. Instead of providing
further protection to those with legitimate claims, who are covered by
the existing law, the proposed definition likely will increase the
number of frivolous claims of whistleblower reprisal, compromise
legitimate investigations into wrongdoing, and create protections for
disgruntled employees whose jobs would not otherwise be secure.



H.R. 985 also would permit employees to engage in judicial forum
shopping in having their claims resolved. Whistleblowers already have
the right to seek corrective action for an unlawful personnel action
from the Merit Systems Protection Board, and are afforded judicial
review before the Federal Circuit. H.R. 985 would allow employees to
have their claims heard de novo in any federal district court, which
could result in two trials (rather than one) for each employee's
complaint, and might result in divergent local district court
interpretations and split circuit court decisions.



* * * * *


Well, Mr. President, may I ask if you and your Administration so disapprove of this bill, but you do support Whistleblower protection and Government transparency (which, I'm not sure if you've been notified, but your Administration has been the MOST non-transparent Administration in history, especially when it comes to National Security Whistleblower Sibel Edmond's case, who has been gagged with a state secrets gag order an unprecedented THREE times), then I ask that you and your Administration get in a little meeting and draw up COMPREHENSIVE National Security Whistleblower Protection as well as increased Government Transparency Bill, and release it for all of us to see who are pretty well informed of your antics in these issues, as well as other Professionals, and see if it musters up (I'm very doubtful though, but the offer is there).

A Drop of Water in the US-Iran Diplomatic Freeze

It seem's like maybe a DROP of water fell off the big ice block that is U.S.-Diplomatic relations. US and Iranian diplomatic enjoys spoke to each other directly, one-on-one, (if I'm not mistaken, the VERY frist time this has happened since the Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979) even though the talks were confined to Iraq's security, which U.S. officials say Iran is playing a huge role in supplying weapons to Iraqi Insurgents. This one on one session is a potentional HUGE breakthrough in US-Iranian relations (although, if you put it in the context of history, Japan was talking "peace" with us, even giving us a medal from their country, all the while planning, and finally executing the attack on Pearl Harbor, but, that is diplomacy for you) This conference happened in Baghgdad and gathered all the regional powers, and the US of course, and the conference's theme was "How to End Iraq's Violence." Here is a dencently lenghtly quote from the AP article:

The U.S. ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, said he exchanged viewswith Iranian delegates "directly and in the presence of others" at thegathering led by Iraq's neighbors and the five permanent members of theU.N. Security Council.

He declined to give details of the contacts - calling them only"constructive and businesslike and problem-solving" - but noted that heraised U.S. assertions that Shiite militias receive weapons andassistance across the border from Iran.

Thechief Iranian envoy, Abbas Araghchi, said he restated his country'sdemands for a clear timetable for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces,which he insisted have made Iraq a magnet for extremists from acrossthe Muslim world.

"Violence in Iraq is good for no country in the region," said Araghchi,deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, at apost-meeting news conference.

Araghchi said he did not meet privately with Khalilzad, but that alld ialogue "was within the framework of the meeting" - which he said had"very good interaction by all the delegations."

Even our Ambassador is quoted as agreeing that this is the first step in unfreezing relations (however, if you intend to get that Ice really melting, your going to have to bring how a big fire (and NO, I don't mean a bomb) and really start using the State Department for what it is for: diplomacy betweeen the US and ALL (Reminder to Secretary of State Rice as well as all those others that work there under her: ALL means talking to your enemies as well, infact, talking to your enemies, in my opinion, is more important than talking to old, rock solid allies).

Here is one more quote that the AP through in to give us ALL some hope (and when I say ALL, I mean everyone without the mentality of Ann Coulter "Let's invade their countires, kill their leader's and convert them to Christianity," you know, the normal people not a member of the American Enterprise Institute): "The discussions were limited and focused on Iraq and I don't want to speculate after that" Ambassador Khalilzad said."

technorati tags:Iran, US, Relations, Unfreezing, Iraq, Baghdad, Tehran, Khalilzad

Blogged with Flock

Open Letter to ANY Major Media Outlet

To whom it may concern:

There was a time in our history where the newspapers (and if there were the internet and such back then, I'm sure they would be included too) and later on, TV news stations, was the watchdog for the people, the one's who kept tabs on our Government and exposed the officials/agencies who did wrong. They used their first amendment right to the fullest, and it didn't matter what party the fallout of a story would effect. Today, I hate to say, the media are in the pockets of the very people they are supposed to be watching. The media still has a total blackout on the blockbuster story of the two FBI Whislteblowers coming foward, revealing that the FBI abused FISA warrents and confirmed the story of FBI Whistleblower Sibel Edmonds. Its amazing that no one will touch this story. I just want to know why!

Washington Rocked, Libby Convicted

Former Chief of Staff and National Security Advisor for Vice President Dick Cheney, "Scooter" Libby, has been convicted on 4 of the 5 charges stemming from the Valarie Plame Investigation, more on this story as it develops....

FBI Illegally Wiretaps Top US Officials, Sibel Edmonds Story is Confirmed

This is the news we have ALL been waiting for! It looks like the Sibel case is finally starting to roll at a faster and faster pace and we WILL NOT let it slow down. Below, I am THRILLED to bring you this Press Release sent to Off The Record from The National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. I have a feeling there are many federal officials (probably quite a few in the FBI) that are trembling in their boots right now:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE- March 5, 2007



Contact: Sibel Edmonds, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, sedmonds@nswbc.org or William Weaver, wweaver@nswbc.org







Two FBI Whistleblowers Confirm Illegal Wiretapping of Government Officials and Misuse of FISA



State Secrets Privilege Was Used to Cover Up Corruption and Silence Whistleblowers



The National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) has obtained a copy of an official complaint filed by a veteran FBI Special Agent, Gilbert Graham, with the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General (DOJ-OIG). SA Graham’s protected disclosures report the violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in conducting electronic surveillance of high-profile U.S. public officials.

Before his retirement in 2002, SA Gilbert Graham worked for the FBI Washington Field Office (WFO) Squad NS-24. One of the main areas of Mr. Graham’s counterintelligence investigations involved espionage activities by Turkish officials and agents in the United States. On April 2, 2002, Graham filed with the DOJ-OIG a classified protected disclosure, which provided a detailed account of FISA violations involving misuse of FISA warrants to engage in domestic surveillance. In his unclassified report SA Graham states: “It is the complainant’s reasonable belief that the request for ELSUR [electronic surveillance] coverage was a subterfuge to collect evidentiary information concerning public corruption matters.” Graham blew the whistle on this illegal behavior, but the actions were covered up by the Department of Justice and the Attorney General’s office.



Click here to read the unclassified version of SA Graham’s Official Report.



The report filed by SA Graham bolsters another FBI whistleblower’s case that became public several months after Graham’s official filing with the Justice Department in 2002. Sibel Edmonds, former FBI Language Specialist, also worked for the FBI Washington Field Office (WFO), and her assignments included the translations of Turkish Counterintelligence documents and audiotapes, some of which were part of espionage investigations led by SA Graham. After she filed her complaint with the DOJ-OIG and Congress, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Court proceedings in Edmonds’ case were blocked by the assertion of the State Secrets Privilege by then Attorney General John Ashcroft, and the Congress gagged and prevented from investigating her case through retroactive re-classification of documents by DOJ. To read the timeline on Edmonds’ case Click here.



Edmonds’ complaint included allegations of illegal activities by Turkish organizations and their agents in the United States, and the involvement of certain elected and appointed U.S. officials in the Department of State, Pentagon, and the U.S. Congress in these activities. In its September 2005 issue, Vanity Fair ran a comprehensive piece on Edmonds’ case by reporter David Rose, in which several former and current congressional and Justice Department officials identified former House Speaker Dennis Hastert as being involved in illegal activities with the Turkish organizations and personnel targeted in FBI investigations. In addition, Rose reported: “…much of what Edmonds reportedly heard seemed to concern not state espionage but criminal activity. There was talk, she told investigators, of laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder.” In January 2005, DOJ-OIG released an unclassified summary of its investigation into Edmonds' termination. The report concluded that Edmonds was fired for reporting serious security breaches and misconduct in the agency's translation program, and that many of her allegations were supported by convincing evidence.



Another Former Veteran FBI Counterintelligence and Espionage Specialist at FBI Headquarters in Washington DC also filed similar reports with DOJ-OIG and several congressional offices regarding violations of FISA implementation and the covering up of several espionage cases involving FBI Language Specialists and public corruption cases by the Bureau. The cases reported by this whistleblower corroborate those reported by SA Graham and Sibel Edmonds. In an interview with NSWBC investigators the former FBI Specialist, who wished to remain anonymous, stated: “…you are looking at covering up massive public corruption and espionage cases; to top that off you have major violations of FISA by the FBI Washington Field Office and HQ targeting these cases. Everyone involved has motive to cover up these reports and prevent investigation and public disclosure. No wonder they invoked the state secrets privilege in Edmonds’ case.”



William Weaver, NSWBC Senior Advisor noted that,”These abuses of power are precisely why we must pay attention to whistleblowers. Preservation of the balance of powers between the branches of government increasingly relies on information provided by whistleblowers, especially in the face of aggressive and expanding executive power. Through illegal surveillance members of Congress and other officials may be controlled by the executive branch, thereby dissolving the matrix of our democracy. The abuse of two powers of secrecy, FISA and the state secrets privilege, are working hand in hand to subvert the Constitution. In an abominably perverse arrangement, the abuse of FISA is being covered up by abuse of the state secrets privilege. Only whistleblowers and the congressional and judicial oversight their revelations spawn can bring our system back into balance.”



Several civil liberties and whistleblowers organizations have joined Edmonds and NSWBC in urging congress to hold public hearing on Edmonds’ case, including the supporting cases of SA Graham and other FBI witnesses, and the erroneous use of state secrets privilege by the executive branch to cover up its own illegal conduct. The petition endorsed by these groups is expected to be released to public in the next few days.





About National Security Whistleblowers Coalition

National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), founded in August 2004, is an independent and nonpartisan alliance of whistleblowers who have come forward to address our nation’s security weaknesses; to inform authorities of security vulnerabilities in our intelligence agencies, at nuclear power plants and weapon facilities, in airports, and at our nation’s borders and ports; to uncover government waste, fraud, abuse, and in some cases criminal conduct. The NSWBC is dedicated to aiding national security whistleblowers through a variety of methods, including advocacy of governmental and legal reform, educating the public concerning whistleblowing activity, provision of comfort and fellowship to national security whistleblowers suffering retaliation and other harms, and working with other public interest organizations to affect goals defined in the NSWBC mission statement. For more on NSWBC visit www.nswbc.org



© Copyright 2006, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Information in this release may be freely distributed and published provided that all such distributions make appropriate attribution to the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.

# # # #

Prince Harry to be Targeted

This is thanks to the Druge Report:

"AL-QAEDA TARGET HARRY: Terror chiefs have vowed to target Prince Harry for kidnap or assassination when he fights in Iraq... Developing..."

More on this story as it becomes avaliable.

Blogged with Flock

U.S. Building 21st Century Nuke

It has now been told that the United States Government, while at the same time trying to get Iran and North Korea to "denuclerize", is developing a "21st century" upgraded version of the Nuclear Weapon (umm, btw, this is the VERY first time a new nuclear weapon has been make/investigated since the COLD WAR!).  The US claims this is not to boost its article, but to "replace" it...hmmm, wonder what the difference is, replace the older, less powerful bombs AND the new one OR the whole fleet of our nuclear weapons being bigger and bettter!

technorati tags:Nulcear, Weapons, US, Iran, North, Korea

Blogged with Flock

Army General Fired for Walter Reed Conditions

The following is quoted by CNN:

"Secretary of the Army Francis Harvey resigned Friday in the wake ofrecent reports of substandard conditions at Walter Reed Army MedicalCenter, a key facility treating troops wounded in Iraq."

However, from my military sources, it went just a little bit differently.  Infact, Army Francis Harvy did not OFFER his resignation, it was DEMANDED of him, and he was none too happy about it and did not believe he should take the fall for it (I mean come on people, he only RUNS the place, how could ANYTHING be HIS fault, HEH!).  If his resignation wasn't tendered, one would have been tendered for him, and if he refused to go along with that, he would have been publically fired.  More on this as it develops...........

technorati tags:Walter, Reed, Hopsital, General, Removed, Relieved, Resigned

Blogged with Flock

Anna Nicole Died of Pneumonia

Preliminary autopsy reports confirm that Anna Nicole infact died of Pneumonia, not a drug overdose as WIDELY reported in the press. The Press should be ashamed and apologize and her mother should surely say she's sorry! R.i.P Anna may you finally have peace!