From The Denver Post By Felisa Cardona on July 11, 2008:
It was Sen. John McCain's staff who asked security at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts to remove people holding protest signs at the venue -- not U.S. Secret Service agents, who were not involved in Carol Kreck's ouster from the galleria.
A video of the incident circulating widely on the Internet shows a DCPA security guard saying that he was told by the Secret Service to remove Kreck, who was holding a paper sign that said "McCain = Bush."
But Thursday, after two days of being vilified by bloggers, letter writers and others, the Secret Service emphatically denied involvement.
"Contrary to some recent reporting, the Secret Service had no involvement in Ms. Kreck being removed from the area," said Malcolm D. Wiley Sr., spokesman for the Secret Service. "It was not done at our request or suggestion. Any assertion to the contrary is inaccurate and inconsistent with our established policies and procedures."
EVERY PICTURE TELLS A STORY...
McBush - McSame - HE'S THE SAME AS BUSH
BUT WHEN THE POLICE OR ANY SO-CALLED AUTHORITY TRIES STOP FREE SPEECH - THE PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS STRIKE BACK and PREVAIL...
FOR LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL...
Have a great weekend...
Love & Light
ShareRove Ignores Subpoena, Refuses To Testify
AP | BEN EVANS | July 10, 2008 at 12:18 PM
WASHINGTON — Former White House adviser Karl Rove defied a congressional subpoena and refused to testify Thursday about allegations of political pressure at the Justice Department, including whether he influenced the prosecution of a former Democratic governor of Alabama.
Rep. Linda Sanchez, chairman of a House subcommittee, ruled with backing from fellow Democrats on the panel that Rove was breaking the law by refusing to cooperate _ perhaps the first step toward holding him in contempt of Congress.
Lawmakers subpoenaed Rove in May in an effort to force him to talk about whether he played a role in prosecutors' decisions to pursue cases against Democrats, such as former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman, or in firing federal prosecutors considered disloyal to the Bush administration.
Rove had been scheduled to appear at the House Judiciary subcommittee hearing Thursday morning. A placard with his name sat in front of an empty chair at the witness table, with a handful of protesters behind it calling for Rove to be arrested.
A decision on whether to pursue contempt charges now goes to the full Judiciary Committee and ultimately to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
House Republicans called Thursday's proceedings a political stunt and said if Democrats truly wanted information they would take Rove up on an offer he made to discuss the matter informally.
The House already has voted to hold two of President Bush's confidants in contempt for failing to cooperate with its inquiry into whether the administration fired nine federal prosecutors in 2006 for political reasons.
The case, involving White House chief of staff Josh Bolten and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, is in federal court and may not be resolved before Bush's term ends in January.
The White House has cited executive privilege, arguing that internal administration communications are confidential and that Congress cannot compel officials to testify.
Rove says he is bound to follow the White House's guidance, although he has offered to answer questions specifically on the Siegelman case _ but only with no transcript taken and not under oath.
Democrats have rejected the offer because the testimony would not be sworn and, they say, could create a confusing record.
Rove has insisted publicly that he never tried to influence Justice Department decisions and was not even aware of the Siegelman prosecution until it landed in the news.
Siegelman _ an unusually successful Democrat in a heavily Republican state _ was charged with accepting and concealing a contribution to his campaign to start a state education lottery, in exchange for appointing a hospital executive to a regulatory board.
He was sentenced last year to more than seven years in prison but was released in March when a federal appeals court ruled Siegelman had raised "substantial questions of fact and law" in his appeal.
Siegelman and others have alleged the prosecution was pushed by GOP operatives _ including Rove, a longtime Texas strategist who was heavily involved in Alabama politics before working at the White House. A former Republican campaign volunteer from Alabama told congressional attorneys last year that she overheard conversations suggesting that Rove pressed Justice officials in Washington to prosecute Siegelman.
The career prosecutors who handled Siegelman's case have insisted that Rove had nothing to do with it, emphasizing that the former governor was convicted by a jury.
IF BUSH, CHENEY & ROVE CAN BREAK THE LAW, NOT ONCE, NOT TWICE BUT HUNDREDS OF VIOLATIONS WITHOUT BEING PROSECUTED, THEN EVERY AMERICAN CAN SAY FUCK YOU TO THE JUDGE, FUCK YOU TO THE COP ON THE STREET AND FUCK YOU TO THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THERE IS NO JUSTICE FOR ALL...
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! TELL THE JUDGE FUCK YOU!!!! TELL THE COP FUCK YOU!!!! IF THERE IS ONLY SELECTED JUSTICE THEN THERE IS NO JUSTICE... IF COP OR JUDGE REPLIES WITH THE CRAP - "THEY ARE YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, SO CHANGE IT WITH A VOTE!" BULLCRAP!!! READ THE FUCK'N DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE:
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn(sic), that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.
SO ITS YOUR RIGHT... IT YOUR DUTY!!!!
NO JUSTICE!!!! - NO PEACE!!!! MAYBE ITS TIME FOR ANOTHER REVOLUTION - ITS OUR RIGHT! ITS OUR DUTY!!!
AND JUSTICE FOR ALL
Share
America has a Double Standard When It Comes to Kids. Victims if Prostitutes, Terrorists if They Are Caught Fighting the US
by Dave Lindorff
Double standards when it comes to children are pretty appalling--especially when it comes to "our" kids vs. "their" kids, but here in America they aren't limited to just right-wingers.
Take reaction to the US Supreme Court's latest ruling that you cannot execute rapists--even those who rape children--on the theory that only killing someone justifies execution.
Politicians who make their careers by promoting state sponsored murder have been quick to condemn this latest "liberal outrage" by calling for more laws that would make execution the punishment for raping a child (admittedly a monstrous crime).
"Anybody in the country who cares about children should be outraged that we have a Supreme Court that would issue a decision like this," says Republican Alabama Attorney General Troy King, who said the court's 5-4 decision makes America "a less safe place to grow up."
Even Barack Obama has weighed in, along with John McCain, in condemning the court's decision, saying that states should be free to pass death statutes for child rape.
Texas Republican Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst, supporting death for "repeat child molesters," says, "Our top priority remains protecting our most precious resource -- our children." (Huh? I thought in Texas it was oil.)
Then there's the FBI's latest sweeping busts of child prostitution rings, which rescued 21 juveniles from sex-selling rings. In announcing the arrests of some 300 people, FBI Director Robert Mueller said, "Our top priority in these cases has always been to identify children victims and move swiftly to remove them from these dangerous environments."
"These kids are victims," said Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. "They lack the ability to walk away. This is the 21st-century slavery."
The question is, where are Mueller and Allen and these allegedly concerned politicians when it comes to children who are forced or lured into fighting against the US, whether in Afghanistan or Iraq? Where are they when those children are captured by US military forces and incarcerated with adult captives in hell-holes like Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, or Guantanamo, where there was a special children's section called Camp Iguana? I certainly haven't heard a word from either Obama or that famous POW McCain in defense of America's child war prisoners.
Take Omar Khadr, shot and then captured and tortured by US forces at the tender age of 15 in 2002 in Afghanistan and held for six years in Guantanamo. Last week, I reported on his story and on plans to try him by military tribunal as a terrorist because he had dared, allegedly, to toss a grenade at US Special Forces troops who had called in an air strike on him and several adult fighters, killing one US soldier (at least one witness to the incident, a US soldier, says it was not Khadr who three the grenade). Nobody's saying that Khadr was a victim. Nobody's saying that he "lacked the ability to walk away" from the Taliban forces that his father and older brothers had him join at the age of 14 a year before. Nobody's saying he should be "identified" and "removed from these dangerous environments."
Nobody in government or in child protection organizations is even investigating to see if Khadr, as a 15-year-old captive, was tortured! Indeed, the US has been blocking both Khadr's military defense attorney and his Canadian lawyer (Khadr is a Canadian citizen) from getting military records giving the details of his capture and subsequent treatment.
Canadian journalist Chris Cook reports that the Canadian government actually argued in Canadian court against releasing the US reports in its possession claiming to do so might "upset relations" between Canada and the United States. (The Canadian Supreme Court in May rejected that pathetically subservient claim by a 9-0 vote, ordering full disclosure.)
The thing is, Khadr is just one of at least 2500 children who have been captured and held as "enemy combatants" by the US in the Bush/Cheney so-called "War" on Terror.
Like child prostitutes, these captives, if they were even actually involved in operations against the US (who would know, since they've never been given hearings in court, and since in many cases the evidence, such as it is, against them is the result of torture, either of the children themselves, or of others), are at worst child soldiers, who cannot be held responsible for their actions. Indeed, under the UN Charter and the Geneva Convention, as amended by a protocol signed by the US in 2002, any of them who, at the time of their capture, were under 18, as was Khadr, are to be considered not POWs or "enemy combatants," but rather victims, who need care and treatment.
Aside from Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who has filed an article of impeachment against President Bush, charging him with a war crime for holding these children, and for authorizing rules of engagement that have encouraged the killing of children as young as 14, who are "presumed" to be combatants, and for the six other members of the House who have co-signed his impeachment bill (Rep. Robert Wexler, D-FL, Rep. Barbara Lee, D-CA, Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-CA, Rep. Tammy Baldwin, D-WI, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-NY, and Rep. Sam Farr, D-CA), no members of Congress have called for the protection of children captured or held by US military forces.
Their, and the American public's "concern" for the welfare of children is narrowly limited to those who are lured or forced into prostitution. That's it.
Of course, we should not be surprised at this double standard. Most of these same politicians are also quick to support laws that take young children from poor (and usually minority) urban backgrounds who commit violent crimes and have them tried, and punished, as adults. Again, these children are as much victims as the kids who become child prostitutes, but there's no love lost on them by these "child welfare" charlatans.
posted on www.SmirkingChimp.com - June 26, 2008
GREAT ARTICLE....
ShareA great comedian who always made us laugh at ourselves while seeing the truths about our politics, our religions, our morals and our culture...... I will never forget the GREAT GEORGE CARLIN.... G-d Bless his Soul...
My thoughts and prayers go out to his family and friends....
Sharefunny as s.... but sad...
Remember "D" means forward and "R" means backwards....
SO VOTE "D" ACROSS THE BOARD!!!
HAVE A GREAT WEEK.....
ShareHistory repeating itself?
Lesson to be learned?
Does McCain, the next Bush, really care?
On another note: Regarding the economic depression and surge in oil and gas prices we're experiencing... The Pundits don't elaborate, but the truth is-- its all related to the War in Iraq. The billions and billions spent and will be spent has undermined the liquidity of our nation. Those same billions placed back here would certainly change and create a positive economy in a New York minute. Also since the enormous federal deficit created by this lame war, the dollar is worth crap; hence the real cause of the surge of oil prices and gas. Since the dollar is linked to oil, when the dollar falls, the price of oil will obviously goes up... So the answer to immediately save our dismal economy is simple - GET THE FUCK OUT OF IRAQ!!!!
HAVE A NICE WEEKEND...
AND HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!!!!!
LOVE & LIGHT
ShareRepublicans Block Extra Taxes On Oil Companies
by H. JOSEF HEBERT | June 10, 2008
posted on the Huffington Post
WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a proposal Tuesday to tax the windfall profits of the largest oil companies, despite pleas by Democratic leaders to use the measure to address America's anger over $4 a gallon gasoline.
The Democratic energy package would have imposed a tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies and given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that the bill's supporters argue has added to the crude oil price surge.
"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and want Congress to do something about oil company profits and "an orgy of speculation" on oil markets.
But Republicans argued the Democratic proposal focusing on new oil industry taxes is not the answer to the country's energy problems.
"The American people are clamoring for relief at the pump," said Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., but if taxes are increased on the oil companies "they will get exactly what they don't want. The bill will raise taxes, increase imports."
The Democrats failed, 51-43, to get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster and bring the energy package up for consideration.
Separately, Democrats also failed to get Republican support for a proposal to extend tax breaks for wind, solar and other alternative energy development, and for the promotion of energy efficiency and conservation. The tax breaks have either expired or are scheduled to end this year.
The tax provisions were included in a broader $50 billion tax measure blocked by a GOP filibuster threat. A vote to take up the measure was 50-44, short of the 60 votes needed.
The windfall profits bill would have imposed a 25 percent tax on profits over what would be determined "reasonable" when compared to profits several years ago. The oil companies could have avoided the tax if they invested the money in alternative energy projects or refinery expansion. It also would have rescinded oil company tax breaks _ worth $17 billion over the next 10 years _ with the revenue to be used for tax incentives to producers of wind, solar and other alternative energy sources as well as for energy conservation.
The legislation also would:
_Require traders to put up more collateral in the energy futures markets and open the way for federal regulation of traders who are based in the United States but use foreign trading platforms. The measures are designed to reduce market speculation.
_Make oil and gas price gouging a federal crime, with stiff penalties of up to $5 million during a presidentially declared energy emergency.
_Authorize the Justice Department to bring charges of price fixing against countries that belong to the OPEC oil cartel.
Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has acknowledged that Americans are hurting from the high energy costs but strongly opposes the Democrats' response and has ridiculed those who "think we can tax our way out of this problem."
"Republicans by and large believe that the solution to this problem, in part, is to increase domestic production," McConnell said.
A GOP energy plan, rejected by the Senate last month, calls for opening a coastal strip of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska to oil development and to allow states to opt out of the national moratorium that has been in effect for a quarter century against oil and gas drilling in more than 80 percent of the country's coastal waters.
GREAT ARTICLE!!!!
AS THEY SAY SHAME ON THEM ONCE SHAME ME TWICE.... SEE WHAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE DONE TO AMERICA AFTER EIGHT YEARS:
CORRUPTION...
BANKRUPT OUR GOVERNMENT...
CONTINUATION OF A WAR BASED ON LIES...
A FAILED ECONOMY...
AND AS THE OIL FUTURES SURGE AND GAS PRICES AT SKY HIGH RECORDS AND THE OIL COMPANIES ARE MAKING RECORD PROFITS - YET McSAME - McBUSH - McCAIN ALONG WITH HIS REPUBLICANS DON'T WANT CHANGE BECAUSE THEY WANT THE SAME OLD GAME TO REMAIN THE SAME - MORE FOR MILLIONAIRES AND MORE FOR THE OIL COMPANIES WHILE THE REST OF AMERICA PLUNGES TOWARD POVERTY.... AND THE AVERAGE AMERICAN SUFFERS MORE...
BECAUSE SIMPLY PUT - THE REPUBLICANS DON'T GIVE ONE FLYING FUCK ABOUT YOU, ME AND THE REST OF AMERICA - NEVER AND NEVER WILL...
REPUBLICANS = NARCISSISTIC
SO YES WE CAN!!!! NO MORE OF THE SAME GAME... NO MORE OF BUSH, THE REPUBLICANS & NO MORE SAME OLD CRAP THAT McCAIN WANTS TO MAINTAIN ... CAUSE ITS ALL THE SAME GAME!!!
MARK "D" IN NOVEMBER - AND OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT!!!!
ShareGREAT SPEECH!!!!
WHAT A GREAT VP SHE WOULD BE....
THE DREAM TICKET CAN BE....
OBAMA / CLINTON - THE ONLY TICKET WITH UNITY...
OBAMA / CLINTON 2008
THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT WILL BE
ONLY WITH UNITY!!!!
ShareWhat would be better then Karl Rove being caught with his pants down?
Since Karl Rove has been shitting all over us, what would be better then a little payback?
OKAY - HOW ABOUT A DEMOCRAT FUCKING A NEOCON FOR A CHANGE?
HOPE YOU ALL ENJOYED THE LAUGH!
POLITICS IS LIKE A CAR; "D" STANDS FOR FORWARD AND "R" MEANS BACKWARDS, SO THIS NOVEMBER VOTE FOR CHANGE! VOTE "D" ACROSS THE BOARD AND WE'LL MOVE FORWARD!!!!
Share
PART 1
PART 2
FREE ENERGY BEFORE VERY YOUR EYES!!!
TELL YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR NEIGHBORS, YOUR FAMILY....
YES THERE IS FREE ENERGY.... NO MORE LIES.... YOU HAVE THE TRUTH....
HAVE A GREAT WEEK
LOVE & LIGHT
Share
PART 1
PART 2
PART 3
PART 4
THERE IS FREE ENERGY... SO DEMAND IT... DON'T LET THEM LIE TO YOU.... THERE IS FREE ENERGY... DON'T BE FOOLED BY THEIR LIES..... AGAIN THERE IS FREE ENERGY...
SO TELL YOUR FRIENDS, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR ASSOCIATES... YOUR NEIGHBORS....
THERE IS FREE ENERGY SO DEMAND THE TRUTH.... DEMAND IT!!!!
HAVE A GREAT WEEKEND!!!!!
LOVE & LIGHT!!!!
ShareWhen one plays with words they can often distort the reality of their words.
Some examples:
When a suicide bomber enters an area where their intentional target of their offense is civilian including children, there are those that use the word “Militant” when there was nothing military about the act. There are those who would call it “Militant” when rockets are sent intentionally again toward civilians, but this act is surely not “Militant.” There are those who call them “Militants” when these so-called “Militants” hide behind civilians while firing rockets or mortars toward their intentional targets – again civilian. The correct word would obviously be “TERRORIST.”
When a group whether religious, ethnic or nationalistic elaborates its intention to control and implement their rule of law as well as authority where there is NO FREE SPEECH OR CIVIL RIGHTS is Fascist. Yet there are those who would like to use the word extremists to describe this group. So my question is – Why do they use “Moslem Extremists” when "IslamoFascist" is the correct one?
Why is it there some when using the word “Liberal” it’s a negative thing? The word “Liberal” means open to new things, new ideas, progress, embrace change and finally grow. And our world in its ever changing growth with changes is definitely based on the emphasis of being “Liberal.” And yet the word “Conservative” means to remain the same, restrictive, never grow and never progress contrary to the reality of our Earth. I would rather be “Liberal” and grow and progress like Mother Earth.
There are some who like to use the word “Undocumented” when someone breaks a law coming into the United States without a visa or legal allowance to enter and remain in this country. So to show the farce in using the word “Undocumented” instead of the correct word “Illegal,” when I get pulled over and do not have a driver license, I’ll tell the police officer that I am an “undocumented” driver. Maybe I should open a legal practice and tell the Bar Association that I am an "undocumented" lawyer, or perhaps I perform surgery without a license now, because I’m just an “undocumented” doctor. Hell, the drug smugglers are just smuggling “undocumented” narcotics… So lets call it what it is… If you break a law, your action is thus “illegal.” So if you illegally enter this country breaking the law then you’re “illegal.”
Well have an undocumented kind of weekend….
Love & Light
Share
