“If you want America to be a hegemonic power in the Middle East, you’re out of step with the American people. We’re not going to fight it out with Iran for the next 30 years to see who the big shit — I’m sorry — the big name is on the block.”
Dodd introduces bill to cap U.S. troop levels in Iraq
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Connecticut, is hoping to become a strong voice against President Bush's plan to increase U.S. troops in Iraq.
The presidential candidate introduced legislation Tuesday that put a limit on the number of troops in Iraq at about 132,000.
My initial reaction is that this legislation has a better chance of passing than does Senator Kennedy’s legislation denying funding for a troop escalation (which Senator Dodd also supports) and also has a much better chance of surviving the sure veto. This legislation has the potential to attract more Republicans who have become disillusioned about Iraq.
Obama takes 1st step in presidential bid
Obama announced his intentions to file a presidential exploratory committee on his Web site. He said he would announce more about his plans in his hometown of Chicago on Feb. 10.
"I didn't expect to find myself in this position a year ago," Obama said in a video posting. "I've been struck by how hungry we all are for a different kind of politics. So I spent some time thinking about how I could best advance the cause of change and progress we so desperately need.
"The decisions that have been made in the past six years have put our country in a precarious place," he said.
WSJ via HuffPo:A group of more than 50 active-duty military officers will deliver a petition to Congress on Tuesday signed by about 1,000 troops calling for an end to the U.S. occupation of Iraq. "Any troop increase over here will just produce more sitting ducks, more targets," said Sergeant Ronn Cantu, who is serving in Iraq.
Under the 1988 Military Whistleblower Protection Act, active duty military, National Guard, and Reservists may communicate with any member of Congress without fear of reprisal, even if copies of the communication are sent to others.
Will Cheney accuse them of undermining the troops as well?
The legislation requires the Congress to vote before the President escalates troop levels in Iraq.
The legislation claims the people’s right to a full voice in the President’s plan to send more troops into the Iraq civil war. It says that no funds can be spent to send additional troops to Iraq unless Congress approves the President’s proposed escalation of American forces.
The Iraq War Resolution of 2002 authorized a war against the regime of Saddam Hussein because he was believed to have weapons of mass destruction and an operational relationship with Al Qaeda, and was in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolutions.
The mission of our armed forces today in Iraq no longer bears any resemblance to the mission authorized by Congress.
Iraq has descended into civil war and sectarian violence continues to escalate. …
President Bush should not be permitted to increase the number of United States troops in harm’s way in the civil war without a specific new authorization from Congress.
December 1970. P.L. 91-652 — Supplemental Foreign Assistance Law. The Church-Cooper amendment prohibited the use of any funds for the introduction of U.S. troops to Cambodia or provide military advisors to Cambodian forces.
December 1974. P.L. 93-559 — Foreign Assistance Act of 1974. The Congress established a personnel ceiling of 4000 Americans in Vietnam within six months of enactment and 3000 Americans within one year.
June 1983. P.L. 98-43 — The Lebanon Emergency Assistance Act of 1983. The Congress required the president to return to seek statutory authorization if he sought to expand the size of the U.S. contingent of the Multinational Force in Lebanon.
June 1984. P.L. 98-525 — The Defense Authorization Act. The Congress capped the end strength level of United States forces assigned to permanent duty in European NATO countries at 324,400.
November 1993. P.L. 103-139. The Congress limited the use of funding in Somalia for operations of U.S. military personnel only until March 31, 1994, permitting expenditure of funds for the mission thereafter only if the president sought and Congress provided specific authorization.
On Sunday, January 14th, Senator John Edwards will speak at Riverside Church in Harlem in honor of Martin Luther King, Jr. In his address, Edwards will speak about the the Iraq war escalation. Watch the video for a preview.
“ Members of Congress have a right to express their views, and express them forcefully. But those who refuse to give this plan a chance to work have an obligation to offer an alternative that has a better chance for success. To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.”
America is Ready for Change
By Lawrence J. Korb, Brian Katulis
November 8, 2006
When the new Congress takes office in January, it will be time to get serious about America's strategy in Iraq. It's time to change course.
That's why today we ask the president, his handpicked Iraq Study Group (led by former Secretary of State James Baker and former Indiana congressman Lee H. Hamilton), and congressional leaders to consider our reasoned, pragmatic plan to strategically redeploy our military forces in Iraq and around the region to fight our terrorist enemies in the most effective and most lethal fashion possible.
One year ago the Center for American Progress issued its first report calling for a responsible exit from Iraq as part of a balanced global strategy to make Americans safer. We reiterated that call six months later as subsequent events only underscored the need to act on our proposals. Today, the situation in Iraq is even more dire.
Violence in Iraq is spiraling out of control as it turns inward, with sectarian killings surpassing deaths from terrorist bombings and militias splintering the country. Squabbling among Iraqi leaders makes matters worse. America simply must adjust to the grim realities on the ground.
The Bush administration's mistakes in Iraq - invading for the wrong reasons and without enough troops to secure the country - have left us with no good options. It's understandable that a growing number of Americans are calling for an immediate withdrawal, but we believe that would only further destabilize Iraq and much of the Middle East. Accordingly, we are calling for a comprehensive strategic redeployment from Iraq by the end of 2007 that will:
- Restore the strength of U.S. ground troops.
- Exercise a strategic shift to meet global threats from Islamist extremists.
- Prevent U.S. troops from being caught in the middle of a civil war in Iraq.
- Avert mass sectarian and ethnic cleansing in Iraq.
- Provide time for Iraq's elected leaders to strike a power-sharing agreement.
- Empower Iraq's security forces to take control.
- Get those Iraqis fighting to end the occupation to lay down their arms.
- Motivate the U.N., global, and regional powers to get more involved in Iraq.
- Give the U.S. the moral, political, and military power to deal with Iran's attempt to develop nuclear weapons.
- Prevent an outbreak of isolationism in the United States.
The end goals of this strategic shift are clear, but to accomplish it the United States must implement a policy of strategic redeployment that:
- Reduces U.S. troops to 60,000 by the end of 2006 and to zero by the end of 2007, while redeploying troops to Afghanistan, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf.
- Engages in diplomacy to resolve the conflict within Iraq by convening a Geneva Peace Conference modeled on the Dayton Accords.
- Establishes a Gulf Security initiative to deal with the aftermath of U.S. redeployment from Iraq and the growing nuclear capabilities of Iran.
- Puts Iraq's reconstruction back on track with targeted international funds.
- Counters extremist Islamic ideology around the globe through long-term efforts to support the creation of democratic institutions and press freedoms.
Only after the United States has set the conditions for redeployment out of Iraq in order to engage the global strategic threats our nation faces can Americans rest assured that they will be safer. For more details on the report, please see our executive summary, the full report, and related materials gathered by the Center for American Progress elsewhere on our website.
Strategic Redeployment 2.0: Read the executive summary and full report here (PDF)
Senate To Deny Pensions To Convicted Lawmakers:
"“Members of Congress convicted of serious crimes would lose their taxpayer-paid pensions, sometimes totaling more than $100,000 a year, under a measure unanimously approved by the Senate Friday.”"
The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in
Iraq.
An Air Force staff sergeant who posed nude for Playboy magazine has been relieved of her duties while the military investigates, officials said Thursday.
In February's issue, hitting newsstands this week, Michelle Manhart is photographed in uniform yelling and holding weapons under the headline "Tough Love." The following pages show her partially clothed, wearing her dog tags while working out, as well as completely nude.
snip
"Of what I did, nothing is wrong, so I didn't anticipate anything, of course," Manhart, 30, told The Associated Press. "I didn't do anything wrong, so I didn't think it would be a major issue."
The BRAD BLOG:
"Newly added to the previously known allegations of Voter Fraud --- when Coulter used her realtor's address instead of her own on her Voter Registration Application --- is the allegation by the Palm Beach Police Department that Coulter seems to also have given that same, incorrect address when applying for a driver's license after moving to the tony Sunshine State 'hood, where her fellow GOP propagandist Rush Limbaugh has recently had his own troubles following the rule of law.
The allegation concerning Driver's License Fraud would be yet another third degree felony, according to the Palm Beach Police Department report!"
OK. He has worked on the Green party campaign for the Governor, the Lamont campaign for Senate, and does a lot of Blogging and work as an indie Journalist. Apparently he is perceived as a serious enough threat to our paranoid Governor Jodi Rell that he was arrested at her innaugural prade.
Activist Arrested At Inauguration Parade:
"HARTFORD, Conn. -- Gov. M. Jodi Rell's security detail only watched when a woman left the sidewalk and quickly walked toward Rell during the inaugural parade Wednesday. The woman shook Rell's hand and melted into the crowd.
But a slightly built man who jumped off a mountain bike and ran into the parade route ahead of Rell was intercepted by a state trooper and arrested by a Hartford police officer.
One difference in the way the two incursions were handled: A state police intelligence unit had previously identified the man, Ken Krayeske, as a political activist and potential threat.
Hartford Det. Jeff Antuna wrote in his report that Krayeske hp/2007/01/0drew his attention by rapidly riding up to the parade route near Bushnell Park, dumping his bike and running to a position in front of Rell.Photograph provided by State Police? Huh??? According to the Hartford police officers report the State had given the local Hartford police photographs of activists that might be considered threats to "Her Excellency" Governor Jodi Rell.
"I immediately recognized the accused as Kenneth Krayeske from the photograph provided by the state police," Antuna wrote.
A state police detective intercepted Krayeske. When Antuna grabbed his arm, police said, Krayeske pulled away.
His lawyer says Krayeske apparently came to the attention of state police by heckling Rell during a campaign stop in Glastonbury last year over her refusal to debate his candidate, Clifford Thornton.
"Are there little circles of law-enforcement officers who have lists of who is naughty and who is nice?" asked Krayeske's lawyer, Norm Pattis. "What is the criteria for inclusion?"
Nancy Mulroy, a Hartford police spokeswoman, played down the list, saying Krayeske was arrested for his actions.
"List or no list, if you rush off a bike and start charging toward the governor during a processional parade, you are going to be arrested," Mulroy said. "In this day and age, when security is a very serious matter, you cannot expect to act like that and not have to face the consequences. Our job was to protect the governor, and we took it seriously."Whoa! He was charging at our Governor? This seems to match the arrest report filed by the officer on the scene dug up and posted at The Courant website. (h/t to Journalist, radio host, and Blogger Colin McEnroe)
According to The Courant article there was a witness to back up the police version of the arrest. Eliot Streim:
Streim, a Hartford lawyer who was watching the parade with a colleague, said police did not intercept Krayeske as he ran into the parade route. On the contrary, Krayeske photographed the governor without incident and was detained by police only after Rell had passed by, Streim said.
OK... Someone is lying, and the only one I can see with nothing to gain or lose here is the Lawyer/witness. Can Krayeske shed any light on what he was doing at the parade? Take a look:
It is bad enough that this guy got arrested for taking pictures, but what is a really scary thought is that Connecticut now has a "LIST" of potential dangegerously threatening people that seems to include peaceful activists like Bloggers, Journalists, campaign volunteers, and obviously photographers.
So now we have a "List", an apparently ginned up arrest, spying on peaceful political activists... And yes he is your typical peaceful activist. Ctnewsjunkie fills in some of Kreyeske's info:
Krayeske was working as a freelance photojournalist at the time of the arrest Wednesday. He also runs a Web site The 40 Year Plan. He was previously arrested in 2003 for demonstrating against the war. In 2004 Krayeske worked on Ralph Nader's presidential campaign and in 2005 he traveled to Syria to report on the war. He has also contributed stories and photos to ctnewsjunkie.com
Now to the last little part in this story: What helped to get all of Connectucut's various secret and not so secret policing efforts and attention and put him on the "LIST". According to Maura at MLN:
Paz makes note in his article of this comment that Ken wrote at Connecticut Local Politics:
Whose going to protest the inaugural ball Jan. 3 with me? No need to make nice after watching this documentary about CJTSPaz hasn't yet connected this comment to the aspect of this whole outrage that I think is nearly as interesting as the revelation that CTIC has a list of political activists deemed troublesome to Rell -- the fact that the bond for Krayeske was set at the absurdly high level of $75,000.
Since Ken couldn't make this bond, he was kept in lockup all afternoon and night...and then mysteriously sprung without having to make bond at all, simply on promise to appear, at 1:00 AM.
Rell's inaugural ball, which Ken commented at CLP that he'd like to protest, ended at 1:00 AM.
The Day has a bit more on this from Krayeske's lawyer today:
Pattis called the police department's version "ridiculous," accusing them of "lying and making it up as they go along."
Equally important, he said, is the question of the surveillance and whether Krayeske and other political activists and freelance journalists are being investigated and monitored.
The number of other people on the list and their identities were not available Friday.
"It's not a crime in this country to be a political activist, at least not yet," Pattis said. "It's not apparent that Mr. Krayeske broke any law, it's not apparent that he did anything that any of the rest of us are not allowed to do. This is sort of, police state run riot."
A spokesman for the governor's office declined to comment Friday.
I am trying to stay with this story as I do the show. I now have the police report on the arrest of Ken Krayeske. The information about him seems to have come, at least partly, from the Connecticut Intelligence Center, a creature of Homeland Security.And like the typical GOP low-life she personifies Jodi Rell will likely do nothing and say nothing about this until everyone dogpiles on her. She would prefer to just try and sweep it under the rug. What she didn't count on was that not only has the Blogosphere latched on to this, BUT the MSM has grabbed this one early and has done a lot of digging as well.
Here is its stated purpose. I fail to see how it includes monitoring members of the Green Party:
* Connecticut Intelligence Center
The DEMHS Statewide Anti-Terrorism Task Force is now co-located with the FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force, in an effort to streamline investigations and response to terrorism-related allegations and incidents. A key component of this investigative and law enforcement asset created in 2005 is the Connecticut Intelligence Center ("CTIC"), a multi-agency collaborative operation that includes representatives of the FBI, DEMHS, Connecticut State Police, municipal law enforcement agencies and the U.S. Coast Guard.
CTIC collects, analyzes and disseminates both criminal and terrorism related intelligence to all law enforcement agencies in Connecticut. Serving as a statewide central resource to affect intelligence sharing, CTIC also acts to identify emerging threats and trends. CTIC produces a number of intelligence reports and bulletins, including the CTIC Weekly Briefing and has conducted three seminars for state and local law enforcement professionals. The seminars have helped increase the knowledge of local law enforcement professionals in dealing with terrorist prevention and incidents.
Rep. Mike Lawlor (D-East Haven) and CO-Chair of the Judiciary Committee had this to say (Courtesy of Spazeboy.net) at a Capitol briefing:
Part 1 (Length 09:00):
Lawlor is correct:
"This type of conduct, which I guess you could categorize as "bushist" for a want of a better expression in this day and age will not be tolerated in this state."
"That, to me, reeks of secret police..."
"This is clearly an attempt to intimidate a journalist"..."This is the result of the emergence Bloggers on the political scene"..."This not traditional journalism, its different, slightly more in your face, and appropriately so, because a lot of people can't get away with what they used to in the good old days, not the politicians, not the police, and a lot of other people, and I think this is healthy for the process."..."I think this motivated more by politics than law enforcement"
I scoped the area because I hoped to snap some photos of Rell during the inaug. I want file shots so when I report on her governance, I can have fresh images for the loyal viewing audience. Unfortunately, according to Mr. Harris, I won't have much access:
Q: "Are you going to ask for copies of that list and are you going to make it public?"
A: "Absolutely. We will get to the bottom of this and we will do it publicly."
Colin McEnroe just posted this on his blog. Seems like the events surrounding the arrest of Ken Krayeske is going to turn into a full-scale investigation. McEnroe just posted this letter Gov. Rell sent to
Department of Public Safety Commissioner Leonard Boyle.
January 8, 2007
Commissioner Leonard Boyle
Department of Public Safety
1111 Country Club Road
Middletown, Connecticut 06457
Dear Commissioner Boyle:
I am writing with regard to the incident last week involving Kenneth Krayeske which led to his arrest by the Hartford Police Department.
I recognize that security assessments are by necessity comprehensive, and I understand that our State and local law enforcement agencies must work together and share information. Law enforcement agencies also have the difficult job of assessing the information they receive. Nonetheless, I was disturbed to read in media reports allegations regarding the existence of a list of individuals.
It is my expectation that all State Police information is maintained in strict compliance with federal law. In this environment of heightened security, the use of information must be balanced with the individual rights of our citizens. In providing security and protection, we cannot permit the rights of individuals to be trampled.
The parade was a public event, and moreover an event at which public participation was invited. People also have a right to protest – and that right is one of the fundamental freedoms of our state and nation.
Most importantly, security procedures must be uniform and consistent in order to safeguard both the people and places of Connecticut as well as our basic freedoms.
Accordingly, I am requesting that you review the circumstances of this incident. Specifically, I would like to know how this individual came to the attention of State Police and the circumstances under which his name and photo were provided to the Hartford Police Department.
In addition, I am requesting that you evaluate existing procedures to ensure that information gathered by the State Police is reliable and reported to other law enforcement agencies in a responsible manner.
Sincerely,
M Jodi Rell
GOVERNOR
The events surrounding freelance journalist Ken Krayeske's arrest is getting stranger by the second as the outrage mounts.
Update II: This one’s major. It turns out that Krayeske’s application for a grant from the SPJ’s Legal Defense Fund was published without his knowledge or consent. I feel like a rube for re-posting an excerpt, but I did so only because I know that many of us are interested in contributing toward the payment of his legal bills. All that’s left of this post is the info below, which is the only legit way to contribute to Ken Krayeske’s legal defense.
Update: Ken Krayeske posted a link to his site in the comments, which now has info on the legal defense fund that’s been set up for him by his attorney Norman Pattis:
if you wish to promote liberty, protect freedom of speech and stop false arrests of journalists and/or political activists, please help me out. You can make out checks to “Law Offices of Norman A. Pattis,” and in the memo line write “Ken Krayeske Legal Defense Fund.” Send the checks to
Ken Krayeske Legal Defense Fund
c/o Law Offices of Norman Pattis
649 Amity Road
Bethany, CT 06524
I repeat that this is the one and only certified way to contribute to my legal defense at this point and time. Thank you all in advance for your assistance, and I am humbled by the amount of emotional support I have received to this point.
Sen. Dodd announces 2008 bid: "Dodd, a 26-year Senate veteran, told the “Imus in the Morning” radio show he will file paperwork to establish a campaign committee later in the day.
“I know how to do this. I know what has to be done. I’m going to get out and make my case,” Dodd said. He described himself as a dark horse in a Democratic field dominated by Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama — neither of whom have yet entered the race.
“There’s a heightened sense of urgency about the condition of the country. But it isn’t just Iraq — there are problems here at home that are huge,” Dodd said. He said he planned to focus on issues like education, energy policy and health care in his campaign."
Civil Rights:
Dodd authored and successfully enacted landmark election reform legislation -- the "Help America Vote Act" -- following the 2000 presidential election to protect the voting rights of all Americans. This law has been called the most important civil rights legislation since the Voting Rights Act of 1965. It strengthens the voting rights of all Americans -- regardless of race, income, or disability -- to better ensure that their votes are counted.
Recognizing the important contributions made by African Americans to American life and history, Dodd co-authored a law to create the National Museum of African American History in Washington, DC.
Senator Dodd is the co-author with Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) of legislation to establish an Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Division at the Department of Justice. This division would be responsible for investigating and prosecuting long-unsolved civil rights crimes against Americanss successfully passed out of the Senate. The legislation passed the Senate in mid-2005.
Civil Liberties:
Dodd supports revisions to the USA PATRIOT Act that will strengthen our nation's ability to fight terrorism while preserving Americans' civil liberties, such as the right to privacy. He also is the author, with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN), of legislation that would strengthen freedom of speech and freedom of the press by limiting the ability of the federal government to prosecute citizens and journalists for speaking confidentially about abuses of power by government and corporate officials.
Iraq:
Washington, Dec 25 (Prensa Latina) Presidential hopeful Senator Christopher Dodd urged the US Administration to withdraw from Iraq.
The Des Moines Register of Iowa says Dodd, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, termed pointless the US strategy in Iraq and called for an immediate retreat.
''Any time you are chairman of a committee that oversees, arguably, the wealthiest sector of society, that's a significant opportunity to raise some real dough,'' said Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist from several presidential campaigns. ''But it's potentially a double-edged sword.''
The senator has accepted millions of dollars in contributions from Wall Street interests during his 25 years in the Senate, but his new chairmanship, plus his White House ambitions, have upped the ante.
''It's a tightrope walk when you're the chairman of a committee that regulates the industry that gives the most money to politics, in general,'' said Massie Ritsch, communications director of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan watchdog group. ''It has to be tempting to take a lot of money from this industry, because they want to give it so much.''...
Military Times: (h/t Hugh)
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation with Iraq?
Approve 35%
Disapprove 42%
No opinion 10%
Decline to answer 12%
TPM Election Central's Eric Kleefeld neatly rips this absurd argument to shreds (click through to read the whole thing and see the video of McCain making the claim):First, let's take a look at Connecticut's exit polls. They show that sending more troops had the support of — get this — 15% of voters! Meanwhile, 63% of voters said some or even all troops should be withdrawn, in complete opposition to Lieberman's real position.
Second, given the total number of people who cast their vote for Lieberman, it's nothing short of absurd to say that it's in any way indicative of anything national. According to the final results, a total of 563,725 people voted for Lieberman — in other words, just over half a million in a nation of 300 million people.
Finally, Lieberman won because he was able to misrepresent his views on Iraq, not because voters agreed with his actual views on the subject. Back in July, Lieberman actually said he thought we'd be able to draw down "significant" numbers of troops by now. What's more, Lieberman worked hard to blur the line between himself and Ned Lamont on the Iraq issue. In one ad, for instance, he spoke of wanting to "bring our troops home from Iraq."
