CIA to Force Terrorists to Run for Office

Thanks to the ingenuity of Presidential hopefuls Mike Huckabee and Rudy Giuliani, the CIA has a new enhanced interrogation method. Suspected terrorists will be forced to board a bus and live the sleepless campaign life.

HUCKABEE (on CNN): I’m finding just out how long I can go sleep deprived. You know, running for office is sort of like being waterboarded, I think.

RUDY GIULIANI: And I see, when the Democrats are talking about torture, they’re not just talking about even this definition of waterboarding, which again, if you look at the liberal media and you look at the way they describe it, you could say it was torture and you shouldn’t do it. But they talk about sleep deprivation. I mean, on that theory, I’m getting tortured running for president of the United States. That’s plain silly. That’s silly.

Crank up the straight talk bus, there are terror plots to uncover. What happens if a suspected terrorist chokes on the entrée on the rubber chicken circuit? Who will give them the Heimlich maneuver? Will it be Rudy or Mike?

A lesson here is don't discount the power of American innovation from our Presidential hopefuls. They just helped the CIA enhance their interrogation methods. A big round of applause for the boys, and make it extra loud and long. We can't have them snagging a nap...

No Shoe Banging Yet Between U.S. and Iran

As the Bush and Olmert administrations escalate their actions against an Iranian nuclear weapon threat, those darned Persians don't always play along. Iran postponed its talks with Iraq and U.S. officials, scheduled for Friday. Did it have anything to do with the Kuwaiti official's remarks on Tuesday?

Persian Gulf nations believe Israel will strike at Iran's nuclear facilities rather than allow Teheran to develop nuclear weapons capabilities, Reuters quoted a senior Kuwaiti adviser as saying Tuesday. "I believe in something on the same Iraqi [Osirak reactor] model... We are assuming in the Gulf that Israel will take it out," Sami Alfaraj told Reuters.

What else happened recently that highlighted the Iranian threat?

1. U.S. Undersecretary of State Nick Burns said the United States sees "no need at all" for Iran to build additional nuclear power plants.

2. Reports of Iran's using advanced carbon centrifuge technology raised eyebrows.

3. The Iranian regime continues to pose a serious threat to the security of the United States, Europe and Israel, one "that needs to be countered," Deputy US Treasury Secretary Robert M. Kimmitt told members of the Anti-Defamation League's National Executive Committee in Palm Beach, Florida, on Friday.

4. Iran's space program could be used to deliver ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads.

5. The Iranians are able to move secretly money around to fund their illicit activities and sponsor international terror. A Treasury official noted, "they do so through an array of deceptive practices specifically designed to evade detection from the international community. Such deceptive practices are specifically designed to evade the risk-management controls put in place by responsible financial institutions."

6. The U.S. is the reasonable party because we will meet with Iranians anywhere and anytime. Treasury representatives met with them last month on their terror financing. Apparently the Iranians found the Treasury logic difficult, "We know they are funneling money to terror and WMD because there is no evidence of it."

7. Israel's Mossad spy agency estimates Iran will develop a nuclear weapon within three years and continue to provide rockets to regional armed groups, a newspaper reported.

8. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will visit Iraq for two days in early March. Will the U.S. pull an Aristide on him? Will Mahmoud pull a Khrushchev and bang his shoe on the podium? Surely there will be fireworks, more likely sooner than later.

Jolting Joe Lieberman Punctuates U.S.'s Three Year Talk on Torture with Exclamation (no) Mark!

In 2005 stories broke of secret U.S. prisons and heavy handed interrogation techniques. An analysis of torture in the Melbourne Journal of International Law speaks of torture as a hidden practice.

Three years later, Independent Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman weighed in on the matter, as a solid proponent of torture that doesn't leave a mark:

You want to be able to use emergency tech to try to get the information out of that person," Lieberman said. Of course, Lieberman believes such authority has limits. He does not believe the president could authorize having hot coals pressed on someone's flesh to obtain that information.

The difference, he said, is that waterboarding is mostly psychological and there is no permanent physical damage. "It is not like putting burning coals on people's bodies. The person is in no real danger. The impact is psychological."

And how would Joe know? It's time for every person who voted to keep waterboarding in the President's arsenal to undergo the practice. The world might respect us again if the 45 Senators, who voted to keep simulated drowning available, would take a ride on the waterboard. After George W. uses his veto pen, give him a similar dunking using water from the Potomac. It's called leadership by example, because if we do it to others, they'll surely do it to our soldiers and citizens.

Free to Be Treated Like a Fucking Idiot

The White House has utter contempt for the average American. They believe you have no brain and will swallow the swill Dana Perino and George W. Bush regularly dish out. But yesterday they made a most distasteful stew.

The rule of law, cited by President Bush in Katrina's aftermath via his "zero tolerance" admonishment, does not apply to the White House or corporations breaking the law in conjunction with "his orders". When President Bush was inaugurated he promised to run an ethical administration, "to maintain the highest standards of integrity in Government as we serve the American people."

Everyone who enters into public service for the United States has a duty to the American people to maintain the highest standards of integrity in Government.

Fast forward seven years to find his Press Secretary, whining about unfair treatment by Congress, trying to compel testimony on an issue of concern, the firing of numerous state Attorney Generals. Recall Alberto Gonzales, the government's Justice Chief who couldn't recall virtually anything on the witness stand? He must've been hanging out too long around the tattered purple couch in the White House basement. And what was in that smoke that gave Alberto fuzzy memories? Whatever it was, it made Dana bitchy. Consider her words in her public whining:

This action is unprecedented, and it is outrageous. It is also an incredible waste of time – (Dis)

The absurdity and unfairness of the vote, arbitrarily designated Mr. Bolten -- in his official, not personal, capacity -- as the “Custodian of Records” for documents (Whine)

This is as a blatant sop to the far left and shameful behavior by House Democrats. (Liberal, commie, pinko, tin foil hat wearing)

It is astonishing and deeply troubling that after months of delay on passing a bill that will help our intelligence professionals monitor foreign terrorists who want to kill Americans, the House has instead turned its attention to the silly, pointless, and unjust act of approving these contempt resolutions. (Look over there! Danger Will Robinson!)

Throughout history, the Executive and Legislative Branches frequently have had disputes. In every other instance, the two Branches worked out their disagreements without either the House or Senate ever approving a resolution holding any White House officials -- let alone the Chief of Staff and Counsel to the President -- in contempt under its statutory contempt power. (No previous White House claimed executive privilege for its staffers, when the President wasn't involved in the actual decision, as Bush claims)

If the House Democrats try to bring a civil case in federal court, they will be met with opposition at the courthouse door and at every step of the way. (Remember George Wallace?)

So if the Democrats choose to press this dispute, we are confident that the Administration will prevail against this unprecedented and wholly unwarranted vote of contempt. (Not only did I throw down the gauntlet, I pissed to mark my territory. It's harder to cover a big area without a penis.)

Well Dana, if George Bush has nothing to hide, why not give Congress its witnesses? They'll just testify the White House behaved admirably. Isn't that the same logic foisted on Americans interested in protecting their privacy rights? We shouldn't fear spying, unless we have something to hide. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. It applies to both openness and rule of law. George Bush said, "I think there ought to be zero tolerance of people breaking the law during an emergency." Zero tolerance should be zero tolerance.

Oh Dana, you now have the worldwide credibility of Condi Rice. Look for your Chevron supertanker soon. Remember, it doesn't turn on a dime.

Freedom to Spy Illegally with Little Consequence

While Congress works to implement President Bush's telecom immunity, a different corporate spying event came to an end. Hewlett-Packard settled with the victims of its illegal spying venture, reporters with BusinessWeek and the New York Times. The article says the agreement came not as the result of a lawsuit.

What happened on the criminal side of the judicial aisle? Four felony charges dwindled to three misdemeanors. The judge dismissed the Board Chair's case, the person who orchestrated the illegal monitoring.

Both corporations and the government seem to have the ability to spy on citizens with little to no accountability. Now that's what I call freedom, the freedom to be monitored.

Free Markets Aren't Free!

It seems holders of energy supplies aren't free to sell them as they wish. Venezuela and Russia have been "warped by the politics of energy," according to U.S. Secretary of State, Condi Rice. Venezuela took offense to court actions by Exxon/Mobile to cut them off as a customer, while Russia offered a vague threat in response to NATO missile defense systems in old Eastern block countries. Vladimir Putin warned that Russia "cannot theoretically exclude" the possibility of training its missiles on Ukraine if the latter joined the NATO military alliance and hosted US missile defense assets.

"The unhelpful and really, I will use a different word, reprehensible rhetoric that is coming out of Moscow is unacceptable, and it's not helpful to a relationship that actually has some positive aspects," Ms Rice told a Senate committee hearing.

"Cannot theoretically exclude" is "reprehensible rhetoric"? Please, Ms. Rice. Just say, it's America's oil and we'll our missiles wherever we gosh darned please! Your boss would, at least behind closed doors...

Freedom to Weaponize Space

The Bush White House staked its claim to space weapons years ago. That pesky United Nations, led by Russia and China, wants to ban such weapons. So, George Bush and his mouthpiece, Dana Perino, offered some babble about the challenges of verification.

The White House responded to the proposal on Tuesday afternoon, saying it opposed any treaty that sought “to prohibit or limit access to or use of space.” Dana M. Perino, the White House press secretary, said such a treaty would also be impossible to enforce. “Any object orbiting or transiting through space can be a weapon if that object is intentionally placed onto a collision course with another space object,” she said in an e-mail message. “This makes treaty verification impossible.”

Why are weapons treaties verifiable on earth but not in space? How many treaties do we have? What are the current methods for verification? It doesn't seem a stretch to apply our worldly experience to the heavens. So far two countries know how to intentionally place objects onto collision courses with other space objects, the U.S. and China. One wants a treaty ban, while the supposed peace loving democracy does not. Strange days, indeed...