In the pants on fire department, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says she doesn't recall seeing this memo from Richard Clarke in January, 2001, describing the severity of the al-Qaeda threat.

In it, Clarke advocates for a principal level review of Al Qaeda threat, calling Al Qaeda "not some narrow, little terrorist issue" but a "transnational challenge."

Update: Hillary weighs in on Condi issue.

Update: The hostage who was shot has died. She was 16 and her name was Emily Keyes. The gunman killed himself. The question now is why did the cops rush in?

Update: It's over. The gunman's dead.

*******
Is this Columbine redux?

One person has been brought out on a gurney at the scene of a hostage standoff at a high school in Bailey. Two girls were being held by a gunman there. Jefferson County spokesperson Jackie Kelley said the parents of the two students being held have not yet been notified.

"We have almost no information on this suspect," she said. We don't know who he is or what he wants."

Columbine expert and author Dave Cullen is following events closely and made a google map. This is in a county close to Jefferson where Columbine is situated, but here's the key difference: The perp is reported to be a parent, not a student:

The ACLU puts the lie to Republican spin on S. 2453, the National Security Surveillance Act (Received by e-mail, it's not up on their website yet, so I don't have a link.)

First, the background:

On Monday, Senator John Sununu (R-NJ) distributed a press release heralding an .agreement reached between the White House and Senators Larry Craig (R-ID), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and himself on S. 2453, the National Security Surveillance Act. These three senators had previously raised concerns about legislation on the NSA warrantless surveillance program.

In his release, Senator Sununu said the bill, "protects the rights afforded to citizens in the Constitution." Nothing could be further from the truth - the bill would authorize what the president has admitted and then some-- more wiretapping of Americans without court oversight of individual wiretaps than has ever been approved in US history. The press release goes on to spin three areas in which the new bill is a supposed win.

Here is the ACLU's breakdown of the Republican rhetoric and the reality of what the bill would do:

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

WaPo columnist David Ignatius pens a column entitled The Big Question the Dems are Ducking:

This should be the Democrats' moment, if they can translate the national anger over Iraq into a coherent strategy for that country. But with a few notable exceptions, the Democrats are mostly ducking the hard question of what to do next. They act as if all those America-hating terrorists will evaporate back into the sands of Anbar province if the United States pulls out its troops. Alas, that is not the case. That is the problem with Iraq -- it is not an easy mistake to fix.

Here is David Ignatius' problem, his support for the Iraq Debacle in 2003:

My own gut tells me that this is a war worth fighting. But I'm bothered that America still hasn't had the kind of broad national debate that would provide a solid foundation of public support for sending U.S. troops into battle.

No credibility. More on the flip.

Christy at Firedoglake is following the CIPA/Graymail hearing in Scooter Libby's case today.

BREAKING: Suspicious package found at Federal courthouse where Libby hearing was to have been held this morning. MSNBC reports that Fitz had arrived for the hearing along with his team, and they were all evacuated outside the building along with everyone else. Judges have been moved to the federal courthouse across the street. Team Libby had not yet arrived. The hearing will clearly be delayed, if not rescheduled altogether. More as I get it.

The Military Commissions bill must be rejected. There is no reason Congress has to pass it before it adjourns. Here is a sign-on letter for you to fax to your Senator. Some of the language is taken from a letter that 13 groups sent to Sen. McCain this weekend urging him to clarify ambiguities in the War Crimes definitions, but this letter addresses the overall bill and urges Members to vote "no" on final passage.

Please, flood your Senators' offices with objections to the bill moving forward.

Dear Senator:

We are writing to strongly encourage you to reject the "compromise" Military Commissions Act of 2006 and to vote no on final passage of the bill. More than anything else, the bill compromises America's commitment to fairness and the rule of law.

For the last five years the United States has repeatedly operated in a manner that betrays our nation's commitment to law. The US has held prisoners in secret prisons without any due process or even access to the Red Cross and has placed other prisoners in Guantanamo Bay in a transparent effort to avoid judicial oversight and the application of US treaty obligations.

There's a federal terrorism trial going on in Albany, NY I've written about a few times. It is US v. Aref, which came about as a result of an FBI sting involving Yassin M. Aref and Mohammed M. Hossain, two members of an Albany mosque.

Prior to trial there were issues of warrantless NSA electronic surveillance. From a defense motion:

"The government engaged in illegal electronic surveillance of thousands of U.S. persons, including Yassin Aref, then instigated a sting operation to attempt to entrap Mr. Aref into supporting a nonexistent terrorist plot, then dared to claim that the illegal NSA operation was justified because it was the only way to catch Mr. Aref."

Fast-forward to today, the Government is about to call its final witness, a so-called terrorism expert named Evan F. Kohlmann. The Government's initial expert became unavailable so it hired Kohlman as a last-minute substitution.

by TChris

Fearful of being labeled "soft on terror," Senate Democrats continue to be timid in their opposition to the president's plan to give detainees sham trials before military tribunals. They need to wake up. Recent Republican changes in the bill endanger the rights of everyone.

The current definition of "enemy combatant," to whom the law would apply, broadens its reach from those who "engaged in hostilities against the United States" to those who "purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States." Material support is a vague concept that can be, and has been, applied to lawyers and interpreters assisting clients. Should lawyers who are United States citizens, acting within the boundaries of the United States and plainly protected by the Constitution, be subjected to trials before a military tribunal rather than a criminal court?

Another change undermines the meager progress that Republicans made to improve the bill. To avoid trials based on secret evidence, the bill gave suspects the right to "examine and respond to" the evidence. The latest version drops the word "examine," leaving suspects with the useless right to respond to evidence they aren't permitted to see.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

Barack Obama quoted Justice Brandeis:

Do you worry that people are piling too many expectations and hopes on you? Some people seem to say, "OK, there is an easy answer, it's Barack Obama."

I go back to the quote from the speech I just gave: Justice [Louis] Brandeis saying that "the most important office in a democracy is that of citizen." I come from a community-organizing background and a civil-rights background. I always believe that ultimately, if people are paying attention, then we get good government and good leadership. And when we get lazy, as a democracy and civically start taking shortcuts, then it results in bad government and politics.

Amen. More on the other side.

by TChris

This is good news, if the prediction is accurate:

Congress is unlikely to approve a bill giving President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program legal status and new restrictions before the November midterm elections, dealing a significant blow to one of the White House's top wartime priorities.

With domestic wiretapping off the table, those who care about their country can spend the rest of the week worrying about the administration's attempts to gut habeas corpus and build expensive fences.

Last week I was optimistic on Studio 60 and looking forward to the season premieres of Gray's Anatomy, Desperate Housewives.

What happened? Desperate Housewives was terrible -- over-playing the cliches by miles until it seemed like slapstick comedy. Studio 60 didn't move me last night, I didn't care for the musical number and I don't get what's so great about Harriet. She and Matt don't even have good chemistry. Brothers and Sisters was barely watchable despite Calista Flockhart, whom I really liked as Ally McBeal. It was excruciating watching Sally Field, a woman of tremendous talent, denigrated to the role of hapless, helpless aging, cheated-on mother.

What's left? Grey's Anatomy, my favorite show of last season, had a lackluster opener. Meredith and the doctor need to get it on quick, the suspense has turned to irritation, at least with me.

On September 22, an updated report by the Congressional Research Service was filed with Congress, The Cost of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Other Global War on Terror Operations Since 9/11. From the introduction:

Through FY2006, Congress has appropriated a total of about $437 billion for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans' health care for the three operations initiated since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) covering Afghanistan and other Global War on Terror (GWOT) operations, Operation Noble Eagle (ONE) providing enhanced security at military bases, and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), Iraq.

In the last week of September 2006, the House and Senate are slated to consider the conference versions of the FY2007 defense appropriations bill, H.R. 5631, and the national defense authorization bill (H.R. 6122/S. 2766), both of which include an additional $70 billion for war costs. .... The Administration is expected to submit a FY2007 supplemental for additional war costs some time next year.

If the FY2007 defense appropriation bill passes, total war appropriations for all three operations would reach about $507 billion. Another $2 billion is included in other appropriations bills for foreign and diplomatic operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and VA medical costs. In its July 2006 mid-session update, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) estimates that war funding in FY2007 will total $110 billion, including bridge funding. Based on this OMB projection, cumulative war funding for all of FY2007 would reach about $549 billion. OMB also assumes a $50 billion bridge fund for FY2008.