gzqofrszhzk gwwicmqua xtpinuascqe

Has anyone bothered to read the Student Resource Sheets on the Scholastic Page? #1 explains uncritically that “The dictatorial government of Saddam Hussein was overthrown in 2003, following an invasion led by the United States. U.S. Government believed that Hussein had been developing weapons of mass destruction that he planned to use against America and other targets. The Iraqi government became a transitional democracy in 2004. In 2005, Iraq held its first election since Hussein’s downfall, electing Jalal Talabani president. A new constitution was written and approved later in 2005. Coalition forces still maintain a presence in the country, battling insurgents who want the United States to pull out.”

Sheet #1’s only illustrations are maps, with one notable exception: next to the map of the US is the famous photo of George Bush, bullhorn in hand, standing on the smoking grave of 2500 citizens and vowing to get the people responsible for the attacks. The picture is not captioned. The text at that point reads, “As part of the ‘War on Terror,’ President Bush has led the United States into Afghanistan and Iraq and reorganized the national government in an attempt to combat terrorist activity.”

On Sheet #2, the 9/11 Commission is described as being “created by congressional legislation and chartered by President Bush.”

That’s just a taste. So many, many lies of omission, all carefully slanted to make President Pet Goat look good.

Yes, I read them thorugh thoroughly. Note the second paragraph–these are some of the countrie s involved. Iran, Iraq, Syria? Where is Saudi Arabia? NADA!

We need someone to organize a boycott of the advertisers who are paying for this trash. Moveon.com, where are you?

Everyone should sell off any Disney stock they may have in their portfolio.

Sheet #1’s only illustrations are maps, with one notable exception: next to the map of the US is the famous photo of George Bush, bullhorn in hand, standing on the smoking grave of 2500 citizens and vowing to get the people responsible for the attacks. The picture is not captioned. The text at that point reads, “As part of the ‘War on Terror,’ President Bush has led the United States into Afghanistan and Iraq and reorganized the national government in an attempt to combat terrorist activity.”

On Sheet #2, the 9/11 Commission is described as being “created by congressional legislation and chartered by President Bush.”

That’s just a taste. So many, many lies of omission, all carefully slanted to make President Pet Goat look good.

Ah ha, so he is an Ahmad Chalabi of Iran

Got it

Wonder how much property & other assorted forms of capitalist wealth his family was “separated from” when the Shah was overthrown

Once again the true colors of ReThuglican behavior are revealed

“…Democrats are for people, Republicans are for things…” – Oilfieldguy

Reposted from previous thread, mostly because you should really be calling up this guy and asking WHY liberal bloggers are not being permitted to take part in the Kean conference call…

After searching for a while, I finally came up with a phone number for ABC/Disney’s corporate PR department. They referred me to someone else, Kevin Brockman, who is VP for Publicity for ABC… here is his phone number

1 818 460 6655

Thanks, Paul!

Also: Got this from a friend of mine. Copy and paste and spread the word:

On September 10 and 11, ABC is planning to air a “docudrama” called “The Path to 9/11″, billed by writer Cyrus Nowrasteh as “an objective telling of the events of 9/11″ — and which goes to great lengths to absolve Bush of any blame for 9/11. (In other words, no scenes showning Condi Rice refusing to show Bush the infamous August 6, 2001 PDB entitled “Bin Laden Determined To Attack US”.) The film is even being promoted by ABC to Scholastic as a teaching tool, complete with a lesson plan: http://content.scholastic.com/…..jsp?id=415

What Mr. Nowrasteh isn’t telling you is that he is a conservative operative of long standing, and that this production is being heavily promoted among right-wing circles. Rush Limbaugh and other right-wing radio hosts talk it up non-stop, and the only media people getting preview copies are those who are known to be aligned with the conservative movement.

Even with ABC’s determination to keep the respectable press from finding out the full details of this production, word of its contents has leaked out. We already know of several big fat lies in the first half of the production, lies apparently made up by Mr. Nowrasteh and/or his conservative friends — lies that Richard Clarke has pointedly debunked: http://thinkprogress.org/2006/…..lasts-abc/

Tell ABC to drop this piece of junk from its schedule: http://thinkprogress.org/tellabc

While you’re at it, let Scholastic know that they’ve been conned into accepting a right-wing tissue of lies as a “lesson plan”: http://www.scholastic.com/cust…..ct_us.htm, or 1-800-724-5627.

Having already written Patrick Leahy on the subject, I posted a comment and was asked to reiterate today under an active thread, so here goes. I’ll put this in words a nonlawyer can grasp.

The EPA move is important not just environmentally but for the light it throws on the “unitary executive theory,” which looks more and more like a pastiche of pretexts for a number of Bushevik aims, including to ensure secrecy, that what happens in the executive branch stays there, sort of a Las Vegas theory of the presidency.

Here’s my note to Leahy:

Dear Senator Leahy,

I have no stake in this outrage other than that of an ordinary citizen … all right, so I’m an attorney. But I urge your staff to “blow the whistle” on another secretive evasive action by the Environmental Protection Agency (”EPA”) under color of yet another eerie memo prepared by the Attorney General’s Office of Legal Counsel (”OLC”).

All the materials are linked to at http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/090406B.shtml, which sets out the story. I reviewed the September 23, 2005 OLC memo and the amicus brief filed on behalf of plaintiff Erickson.
The issue is whether whistleblower protections under the Clean Water Act (”Act”) permit a right of action against the EPA pursuant to the right of action established under the Act or whether, instead, these protections succumb to sovereign immunity. While OLC finds words to pick on, the memo never address the catchall “and any other requirement, whatsoever” in section 1323(a), which broadly waives soverign immunity. The words are simply ignored.

Worse yet, as the amicus brief notes, sovereign immunity was addressed in the No FEAR Act of 2002, of which the OLC memo makes no mention.

Were this a lawfirm opinion and I on the firm’s opinion committee I would never let something like this out of the shop. Of course the memo would not have seen the light of day but for FOIA. It is at best a bad brief. But then this administration furthers secrecy secretly, working the dark side if you will.

Although it sounds in Eleventh Amendment terms — Hello! States’ rights for the federal executive?? — the tactic smacks of the unitary executive theory.

I hope this note does some good.

Best,

This morning I read the EPA response brief. It is no better than the OLC memo: it too omits to mention the No FEAR Act. Astonishing!

Here’s what’s up with the 11th Amendment: SCOTUS under Rehnquist began reading it to imply a broad state sovereign immunity that could be overridden only if Congress included certain “magic words” in its protective legislation. On this basis the Court threw out lawsuits against states.

In the present case EPA, with no constitutional leg to stand on, argued that the same standard should apply for federal agencies facing whistleblower suits. This is another bid for judicial activism by our “conservatives” who, as they say, “don’t legislate from the bench.” ;-) (Reason: They legislate from the Oval Office.)

Under Article I of the Constitution Congress can make all laws “necessary and proper” to carry out its substantive legislation. The No FEAR Act falls under this authority. EPA never discusses this detail.

The President, as we all know now, must faithfully execute what Congress enacts. As we also know, this one thinks he has a broad loophole through that detail. So I looked for a signing statement on the No FEAR Act. (They’re here.) None turned up. They’re making this up as they go along. No surprise there either.

The Las Vegas theory is gaining ground from at least two other angles:

1. The 2004 SCOTUS decision upholding Cheney’s secret Energy Task Force defeated an attempt to open the doors to the OVP.

2. Garcetti v. Ceballos, decided this May, denied employees first amendment rights for what they say as part of their jobs.

Garcetti registers the changing character of the Court. It went 5-4. Alito was in the majority. Last year O’Connor authored a 5-4 decision encouraging whistleblowers to report sex discrimination in schools.

All these moves are of course in step with other secrecy measures such as Bush’s order denying security clearance to investigators of DOJ’s back-up for warrantless wiretaps.

Apart from the secrecy aspect, this move will further demoralize professional civil servants who don’t get the Bush-Cheney religion, continuing what has already famously occurred at CIA. The same is true at the Civil Rights Division.

The face of the unitary executive is rapidly that of a chimp.

Please keep this case in your sights and try to bring it to others’ attention. I come at it with no more than constitutional common sense, and I’ve only looked at the items noted here, but it does not take much to see the outrage.