by TChris

What an embarrassment.

An apparel merchandiser for President Bush's re-election campaign sold fleece pullovers with a Bush-Cheney logo that were made in Myanmar, even though the United States [in legislation signed by George Bush] has banned imports from that country, campaign and company officials said yesterday.

Oops.

Reporters are eagerly waiting to learn the origin of Kerry's campaign apparel. Stay tuned.

by TChris

Earlier this year, TalkLeft called attention to the California Youth Authority's dismal treatment of incarcerated children. Here's the first person account of a young man who entered the system at age 10 and stayed for five years on a two year sentence.

When they put me in YA, they didn't sit down with me and say, 'We're feeling what you're going through, we want to help you.' It wasn't like that. What they did was lock me up, throw me in the cage, take me to the psychologist, he diagnosed me as crazy, and they gave me drugs. That was the solution.

The purpose of YA is to rehabilitate you. But they didn't rehabilitate me, and they don't rehabilitate other people. There are people who work for YA that are more criminally minded than the young people in there. You've got staff sleeping with wards, you've got staff secretively bringing drugs for wards. Some staff would beat up wards.

When you are in that predicament it seems hopeless. There was a sense of hopelessness in everybody. Everybody was gang banging. You're in an atmosphere where you have to protect yourself, where you had to become somebody that you weren't.

California would benefit by listening carefully to kids like J.T.

by TChris

Former White House counterterrorism coordinator Richard A. Clarke reveals in a new book that Donald Rumsfeld advocated bombing Iraq the day after the attack on the World Trade Center. Never mind the absence of any connection between Iraq and the World Trade Center attack. Never mind that counterterrorism experts reminded Rumseld that Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, not Iraq.

Clarke, who is expected to testify Tuesday before a federal panel reviewing the attacks, said Rumsfeld complained in the meeting that "there aren't any good targets in Afghanistan and there are lots of good targets in Iraq."

Well, if that's where the "good" targets are, who cares whether they're the right targets?

Clarke also accuses the Bush administration of turning a blind eye to terrorism during the first months of Bush's presidency. As TalkLeft reported yesterday, his accusation is supported by testimony soon to be provided by President Clinton's Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and national security adviser, who repeatedly warned the incoming Bush team (including Condoleezza Rice) that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the country. An administration fixated on Saddam Hussein and tax cutting paid scant attention to the Al Qaeda warnings.

Bump and Update: The Washington Post has this article in which the Government claims that the papers were so sensitive it preferred to drop charges rather than allow them to become public at hearings. Yee's lawyer sees it differently:

"Chaplain Yee has won. . . . The Army's dismissal of the classified information charges against him represents a long-overdue vindication. We reject the notion that security concerns played any role in this decision."

So does Sisyphus Shrugged:

The Army had to delay Captain Yee's hearing five times while they tried to figure out whether the papers he held were classified. Now the papers are so classified they'd rather let him get away with stealing them than let anyone read them. I buy this. Sure I do.

************
Original Post 3/19 5:35 pm

CNN reports that the U.S. military dismissed all charges Friday against Army Muslim Chaplain James Yee. Details here.

Capt. James J. Yee, the Guantanamo Bay Muslim chaplain spent 76 days in solitary confinement, often in leg irons and manacles prior to his release from custody last December. He was charged with mishandling classified information, adultery with another officer and keeping pornography on his government laptop.

Details of a deal in which the most serious charges would be dismissed were leaked to the media a few days ago. According to CNN, however, the Government dropped all charges.

We think this clears Captain Yee for an honorable discharge. More egg on the Administration's face.

The Tribunal by criminal defense attorney Peter Robinson

When attorney Kevin Anderson decides to uproot his family and move them to Holland, he expects a fantastic job prosecuting war criminals at the United Nations Tribunal. But when he gets there, he is thrown into the defense of a notorious Serbian warlord accused of ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. Kevin faces a suspicious client, a self-righteous prosecutor, and hostile judges. When his spunky 11 year-old daughter, Ellen, is kidnapped, Kevin is plunged into a battle to win his client's freedom, and to save his daughter's life.

As the trial progresses, Kevin fends off not only the prosecution, but the American CIA and forces of the Serbian government, all who have a stake in the outcome. From the bulletproof courtroom to the streets of Sarajevo, Kevin scrambles to find the truth and preserve his integrity. While Kevin is fighting for his client; his daughter is fighting for her life. It all comes down to the verdict. Can Kevin obtain justice for his client --and for his daughter--at the Tribunal?

There are a lot of reasons to buy the April issue of Vanity Fair, including the article on political bloggers --but the best reason is the article on Neil and Sharon Bush--we could not put it down. Trust us, it's not a soap opera, but a bubble bath. It's not online, and unfortunately, we don't have the energy to retype it. Even Lloyd Grove barely manages to scratch the surface in this Daily Dish column:

• Both Sharon and Neil (who last weekend married Houston socialite Maria Andrews) spoke at length to reporter Vicky Ward about their train wreck of a marriage, the role of the first President Bush in their divorce, and the lawsuit that Andrews' ex-husband, Thomas Andrews, has filed against Sharon for claiming that Maria's young son is actually Neil's. Ward reveals that:

• Neil suggested divorce in a May 2002 E-mail: "We're almost out of money and I've lost my patience for being compared to my brothers, for being put down for my inability to make money, and tired of not being loved."

• A friend of Neil's, Jamal Daniel, bought Sharon and Neil a $380,000 cottage in Maine at Sharon's request: "Neil was embarrassed by Sharon's 'end runs' to friends, to ask for things."

• Sharon exploded when she found Neil and Maria at a smoothie shop, calling the Mexican-born Andrews a "Mexican whore" and "Mexican trash."

• After Sharon pulled some hair out of Neil's head, his lawyers accused her of practicing voodoo. But Sharon shot back: "I pulled Neil's hair out because I wanted to get it tested for cocaine, not because of voodoo."

• The former President Bush refused Sharon's request for a $467,000 loan to keep her Houston mansion, telling her to find something cheaper. "The divorce is final," the elder Bush wrote, "[and] the best thing for you to do is get on with your life. Close the unhappy chapter with Neil, find a job, and look to the future, not the past."

Really, there is so much more in the article, it's more than worth the price of the magazine.

by TChris

The Justice Department wants more money for its witness protection program so that it can protect "witnesses who give key testimony in terrorism cases."

It doesn't seem a bad deal to be a protected witness, if you don't mind a lifetime of obscurity. The U.S. Marshalls claim never to have lost a protected witness who "followed the rules," and the pay isn't bad.

Witness families are paid an average of about $60,000 a year until they get jobs in their new communities. The Marshals Service helps them find housing, work and schools for the kids, and taps into a secure national network of doctors and other professionals to provide various services. They help witnesses obtain new Social Security numbers, open bank accounts and find an appropriate church, synagogue or mosque.

by TChris

Reporters who attended a conference on media coverage of the war in Iraq confirmed the impression that many had before the war: "Competitive pressures and a fear of appearing unpatriotic discouraged journalists from doing more critical reporting during the run-up to the invasion."

Much of the criticism focused on a Sept. 8, 2002, New York Times article by Judith Miller and Michael Gordon, which said Iraq was importing aluminum tubes that could be used in centrifuges to enrich uranium, a critical step in making an atomic bomb.

The Times failed to consult experts who could have refuted the claim. When experts later confirmed that the tubes weren't used to make nuclear weapons, the Times buried the story.

by TChris

Editorial writers in the New York Times and Washington Post are unpersuaded by Justice Scalia's 21-page justification of his decision to sit in judgment of his hunting buddy's task force. The Post questions Justice Scalia's objectivity while defending itself from his charge that its editorial page had misleadingly described an oil company executive as an "oil company executive." The Times concludes that Justice Scalia "comes across as more concerned with defending his right to accept 'social courtesies,' like rides on the vice president's jet, than with protecting the Supreme Court's integrity.

TalkLeft recently gathered other editorials here.

The 9/11 Congressional panel will hear some troubling information next week from aides of former President Clinton:

Senior Clinton administration officials called to testify next week before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation — and how the new administration was slow to act.

They said the warnings were delivered in urgent post-election intelligence briefings in December 2000 and January 2001 for Condoleezza Rice, who became Mr. Bush's national security adviser; Stephen Hadley, now Ms. Rice's deputy; and Philip D. Zelikow, a member of the Bush transition team, among others.

Richard Clarke, Clinton's counterterrorism coordinator, whose book, Against All Enemies : Inside the White House's War on Terror--What Really Happened, is being released Monday, says:

...the warning about the Qaeda threat could not have been made more bluntly to the incoming Bush officials in intelligence briefings that he led. At the time of the briefings, there was extensive evidence tying Al Qaeda to the bombing in Yemen two months earlier of an American warship, the Cole, in which 17 sailors were killed. "It was very explicit," Mr. Clarke said of the warning given to the Bush administration officials. "Rice was briefed, and Hadley was briefed, and Zelikow sat in."

The White House does not dispute that it received the information. The dispute is over what was done with the information. The Clinton aides say the Bush administration sat on it and that terrorism was a low priority until Sept. 11. Bush says he made terrorism a top priority and followed through on Clinton's policies.

A Judge in Spain Friday found enough evidence linking three Moroccans to Spain's bombings to order them held without bond.

All three denied involvement and said they were sleeping at the time. One shouted his innocence in court. Another cried.

The Judge found no evidence to link an Algerian suspect to the bombings, and ordered him released. The two Indian men arrested last week were ordered held on charges of collaborating with a terrorist organization.

This apparently was a low-budget bombing--officials estimate it cost less than $1,000.00. The perpetrators used a stolen van and got the explosives for free.

A Spaniard arrested Thursday allegedly knew one of the Moroccans from a prior jail stay and provided the blasting caps as a favor.

Update: The Washington Post reports that the investigation is focusing on a terror cell in Tangiers.

by TChris

The Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in a case that asks whether reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in a public school violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by defining the United States as a nation "under God." The Ninth Circuit said that it does.

To better understand the controversy, read Elisabeth Sifton's article exploring the history of the Pledge and of the Founders' beliefs about the role of God in government. She explores flaws in the arguments advanced by both sides of the debate, and asks whether the debate itself sidesteps the real question: Do we need the Pledge at all? She also argues that the religious right will use a probable victory for the words "under God" as an opportunity to further religious encroachment into other aspects of government.

An interesting side note: Justice Scalia, who sees no reason to recuse himself from a case involving hunting buddy Dick Cheney's energy task force records, has recused himself from the Pledge case because he had criticized the lower court's opinion in a speech.