by TChris

Karl Rove, we're told, strives to turn a politician's weaknesses into strengths. George Bush has given him plenty to work with.

One presidential weakness has been an inability to obey the law or to respect fundamental human rights. And so his administration has whisked people away to secret prisons in foreign lands, all the while (for the sake of national security) refusing to acknowledge that it has done so. Until now.

Now the president wants to turn his use of secret detentions (probably accompanied by torture) into a virtue. He did it to protect us. So why isn't national security imperiled by yesterday's admission that his administration has held detainees in secret prisons? All fourteen detainees just happen to have exhausted their intelligence value in the same week, and so they're off to Guantanamo. Fourteen bad guys had to be hidden away to protect us, but now it's time to bring them out into the open so they can go on trial before one of the sham tribunals the president wants the legislature to endorse.

Why the sudden reveal of the gang of fourteen? The president's party is in danger of losing complete control of the government. It's time to convince the public that the president has saved our hides from dangerous terrorists. Hauling the evildoers to Guantanamo -- sort of a terrorist perp walk, without the cameras -- shows us that all the human rights violations, all the law-breaking, was worth it.

Don't think about it too hard, and maybe you'll believe that lawless presidential behavior is good for a democracy.

TChris wrote earlier today about why Congress should reject gutting FISA. A bipartisan group of senators has sent a letter to Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-PA) urging him to hold additional hearings before taking action on legislation regarding the NSA warrantless electronic surveillance program. In their letter, Senators Craig, Durbin, Sununu, Feingold, Murkowski, and Salazar express serious concerns about Specter's bill to authorize the NSA program:

We believe that additional information is necessary before the Senate can responsibly consider legislation that would dramatically alter FISA and significantly expand the surveillance authority of the executive branch. ... We are concerned by provisions in the newest version of your bill that suggest that the executive branch could conduct wiretaps and physical searches without the court orders currently required by FISA, and that would amend FISA to authorize "program warrants." In addition, we believe that Congress needs far more information about the newest section of your bill, which contains numerous complex amendments to FISA that appear to rewrite that law significantly.

You can read the entire letter here. I also recommend the ACLU's statement today opposing amending FISA.

I happened to catch some of Bush's speech Monday while waiting for my flight to take off. My response to President Bush: I'll take a chance a terrorist with a bomb is seated next to me. Stop the insane airport security measures.

I'm no statistician but I'll bet I had a one thousand time greater chance of dying in a car crash driving back from Aspen on Monday than I did of being on a flight yesterday with a terrorist onboard poised to commit mayhem.

How absurd has flying become? Let me describe my morning yesterday. I drove to the airport and headed to the departure level where Denver's nice police officers let you leave your car running at the curb while you get out and hand your bag to the skycap for checking. Normally, particularly with Frontier, there's no waiting. Monday, the line was so long there were ropes corralling people. Why? Because everyone is checking luggage now that you can't bring anything from toothpaste to shampoo on board. There was no way could I leave my car unattended at curbside so long, not to mention I'd miss my flight, so I headed to valet parking.

by TChris

In February 2002, the president said that there were thousands of al Qaeda terrorists "still roaming around" and "we're going to be steady and relentless until we achieve the objective of getting the al Qaeda killers and bringing them to justice." Having failed to attain that objective, the president has flip-flopped, essentially declaring victory in the war against al Qaeda.

The White House today released an updated version of its plan for combating terrorism that focused more on decentralized networks of extremists than on Al Qaeda ...

Osama bin Laden is evidently no longer a person of great interest to the president.

Corrente Wire excerpts a terrific article in Foreign Affairs that poses the rarely asked question:

If it is so easy to pull off an attack, and the terrorists are so demonically competent, why have they not done it?

Is the war on terror a scam?

The New York Times reports that Republicans will abandon immigration reform in favor of concentrating on anti-terror laws.

With Congress reconvening Tuesday after an August break, Republicans in the House and Senate say they will focus on Pentagon and domestic security spending bills, port security legislation and measures that would authorize the administration's terror surveillance program and create military tribunals to try terror suspects.

"We Republicans believe that we have no choice in the war against terror and the only way to do it is to continue to take them head-on whether it is in Iraq or elsewhere," said Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader.

I smell a rat. I wouldn't put it past Sensenbrenner to sneak the worst parts of H.R. 4437, which passed the House but not the Senate, into new legislation tagged as national security legislation. To get around what they call "amnesty" they'll just leave out the guest worker provisions.

From the ACLU (received by e-mail):

[N]ext week Congress returns from recess, and at the top of their agenda is passing legislation that would attempt to retroactively legitimize President Bush's unconstitutional warrantless wiretapping program. Two similar bills are slated to be marked up in, and possibly voted out of, committee next week - Rep. Wilson's H.R.5825 in House Judiciary on Wednesday, September 6, and Sen. Specter's S.2453 in Senate Judiciary on Thursday, September 7.

As part of our effort to spread the word about these bills and the danger they pose to civil liberties, I'm asking for your help. My goal is to get as many people as possible talking about NSA next week, especially on Wednesday, September 6.

Bloggers can help get this issue back into the national consciousness. Here's how.

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

President Bush repeated today that:

"If we withdraw before the job is done, the enemy will follow us here,'' Bush said, attributing the line to Gen. John Abizaid, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq.

Two things. Who's they? And did Abizaid really say that? I seriously doubt it. I think that is another Bush lie.

Why would the Al Sadr's Mehdi army follow "us" home? Or the Badr Brigade? Or the Sunni insurgents? Why would these "terrorists" follow us home? As I understand it, the violence in Iraq is sectarian in nature. Why some folks believe Iraq is in a civil war. So, according to Bush, the "terrorists" will interrupt the violence in Iraq in order to follow us home? Does that make sense?

Well, General John Abizaid DID say this (as I stated before, I do not believe Abizaid said what Bush says he said):

I believe that the sectarian violence is probably as bad as I've seen it, in Baghdad in particular, and that if not stopped it is possible that Iraq could move toward civil war," Gen. John Abizaid testified at a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Bush is a moron and a liar. He is capable of saying stupidities like Bush's line. Abizaid, to now, has not shown himself to be that. I think Bush should stand bravely by his own stupidities without trying to foist them on General Abizaid.

by TChris

Some cab drivers terrorize their passengers with bad driving, but what evidence does Conrad Burns have to support his latest whacky accusation?

At the campaign event with [Laura] Bush, Burns talked about the war on terrorism, saying a "faceless enemy" of terrorists "drive taxi cabs in the daytime and kill at night."

Which cabbies are these, pray tell?

An Iraqi architect was denied permission to board a Jet Blue flight because of an inscription on his t-shirt:

Raed Jarrar was wearing a T-shirt that read We Will Not Be Silent in Arabic and English, when he was approached by security officers. The officers said the Arabic script was upsetting other passengers, and told Jarrar to either turn the shirt inside out or wear something else. Jarrar protested but finally wore a T-shirt provided by a Jet Blue employee.

Jet Blue's response:

A spokesman for Jet Blue says the airline is investigating to see if the security officers were with the airline, the Transportation Security Administration or the Port Authority. He also said the airline does not forbid Arabic T-shirts, but that it does take into account the concerns of its passengers.

[hat tip Patriot Daily.]

Raw Story reports there will be a press conference this afternoon at which Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, lawyers for the class action plaintiffs in the wiretap lawsuit against AT&T and Verizon will announce they are subpoenaing the Bush Administration and Verizon.

Mayer explained that the subpoena seeks to learn "whether the Bush administration has unlawfully targeted journalists, peace activists, libertarians, members of congress or generated an 'enemies list.'"

...The subpoenas come on the heels of two federal court decisions that were seen as blows to the Bush Administration warrantless spying program. Earlier this month, federal judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled the entire program unconstitutional and illegal; another federal judge in San Francisco rejected the Bush Administration's attempt to dismiss these lawsuits by claiming they breach national security.

Good news from Gaza. The two Fox News journalists kidnapped two weeks ago have been freed.

American correspondent Steve Centanni and cameraman Olaf Wiig of New Zealand were dropped off at Gaza City's Beach Hotel...Their captors, a previously unknown group calling itself the Holy Jihad Brigades, had demanded the release of all Muslims imprisoned by the U.S. by midnight Saturday in exchange for freeing the journalists. It was not immediately clear whether the kidnappers received anything in return for freeing the journalists.

The kidnappers' group affiliation is still being debated. The group identified itself as the Holy Jihad Brigades, but:

It also remained unclear whether the kidnappers were local militants, either with ties to Hamas or the rival Fatah movement, or sneaked into Gaza from outside. However, some Palestinian security officials said Sunday there were growing suspicions that the kidnappers were locals.

[hat tip Patriot Daily.]

Update: Here is the journalists' conversion video. Here's a video of Steve Centanni's first statement on release.