Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act

Bush To Criminalize Protesters Under Patriot Act: "By Patriot Daily | News Clearinghouse | 1-13-6

George Bush wants to create the new criminal of 'disruptor' who can be jailed for the crime of 'disruptive behavior.' A 'little-noticed provision' in the latest version of the Patriot Act will empower Secret Service to charge protesters with a new crime of 'disrupting major events including political conventions and the Olympics.'

The Secret Service would also be empowered to charge persons with 'breaching security' and to charge for 'entering a restricted area' which is 'where the President or other person protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily visiting.' In short, be sure to stay in those wired, fenced containments or free speech zones."
...
What are the rules of engagement for "disruptors"?

Some Bush Team history of their treatment of disruptors provide some clues on how this administration will treat disruptors in the future.

(1) People perceived as disruptors may be preemptively ejected from events before engaging in any disruptive conduct.
...
(2) Bush Team may check its vast array of databanks to cull out those persons who it deems having "disruptor" potential and then blacklist those persons from events.
...
(3) The use of surveillance, monitoring and legal actions against disruptors.
...
So now the Patriot Act, which was argued before enactment as a measure to fight foreign terrorists, is being amended to make clear that it also applies to American citizens who have the audacity to disrupt President Bush wherever his bubble may travel. If this provision is enacted into law, then Bush will have a law upon which to expand the type of people who constitute disruptors and the type of activities that constitute disruptive activities. And, then throw them all in jail. ...

Judge Samuel Alito for Supreme Court: A Hearing About Nothing [... a propaganda event. ed.]

A Hearing About Nothing: "By E. J. Dionne Jr. | Friday, January 13, 2006; Page A21

A listless intellectual fog had fallen over the Senate hearing room on Tuesday, the first full day of questioning for Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. before the Judiciary Committee. ...

The senator was expressing frustration over a process that doesn't work. It turns out that, especially when their party controls the process, Supreme Court nominees can avoid answering any question they don't want to answer. Senators make the process worse with meandering soliloquies. But when the questioning gets pointed, the opposition is immediately accused of scurrilous smears. The result: an exchange of tens of thousands of words signifying, in so many cases, nothing -- as long as the nominee has the discipline to say nothing, over and over and over.

Alito, an ardent baseball fan, established himself as the Babe Ruth of evasion. ...

That was just one of many evasions. When Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked if "the president has the power to curtail investigations, for example, by the Department of Justice," Alito replied: "I don't think the president is above the law." A fine sentiment that didn't answer the question. Leahy asked yesterday if Congress could strip courts of their authority to rule on cases involving the First Amendment. Alito didn't have a view.

When Biden asked Alito about John Yoo's expansive reading of presidential power, Alito said he had not read the former Justice Department official's recent book, even though Yoo's views have long been well known.

And there was something odd about the gap in Alito's memory concerning his membership in Concerned Alumni of Princeton, a right-wing group whose publications said some rather unpleasant things about blacks, women and gays. Alito didn't remember anything, but if he did remember something, his membership might have been related to Princeton's decision to throw the ROTC off campus ...

U.K. Men Charged With Bush-Blair Memo Leak ... of Bush's suggestion to bomb Al-Jazeera's headquarters

FOXNews.com - U.S. & World - U.K. Men Charged With Bush-Blair Memo Leak: "Tuesday, January 10, 2006

LONDON — A judge on Tuesday ordered two British men to stand trial on charges of leaking a government memo in which President Bush reportedly suggested to British Prime Minister Tony Blair bombing the headquarters of the Arab satellite news channel Al-Jazeera.
...

The Daily Mirror reported the memo revealed details of a conversation between Bush and Blair at the White House on April 16, 2004. According to the newspaper, Blair argued against Bush's suggestion to bomb Al-Jazeera's headquarters in Doha, Qatar. The Daily Mirror said its sources disagreed on whether Bush's suggestion was serious.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan called the newspaper's claims "outlandish and inconceivable." Blair has said he had no information about any proposed U.S. action against Al-Jazeera.

Dean Crushes Blitzer On Abramoff ... Objective journalism at its finest

Past Peak: Dean Crushes Blitzer On Abramoff: "January 08, 2006 | Dean Crushes Blitzer On Abramoff Politics -- Video

BLITZER: Should Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, who's now pleaded guilty to bribery charges among other charges, a Republican lobbyist in Washington — should the Democrats who took money from him give that money to charity or give it back?

DEAN: There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff. Not one. Not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican, every person under investigation is a Republican, every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money, and we've looked through all those FEC reports to make sure that's true.

BLITZER: [Stammering] But through various Abramoff-related organizations, and outfits, a bunch of Democrats did take money that presumably originated with Jack Abramoff.

DEAN: That's not true either. There's no evidence for that either, there's no evidence...

BLITZER: What about Senator, what about, what about, what about Senator Byron Dorgan?

DEAN: Senator Byron Dorgan and some others took money from Indian tribes. They're not agents of Jack Abramoff. There's no evidence that I've seen that Jack Abramoff directed any contributions to Democrats. I know the Republican National Committee would like to get the Democrats involved in this. They're scared. They should be scared. They haven't told the truth, and they have misled the American people, and now it appears they're stealing from Indian tribes. The Democrats are not involved in this.

BLITZER: [Long pause, apparently getting direction in his earpiece] [Sigh] Unfortunately, we, uh, Mr. Chairman, we've got to leave it right there.

I love how Blitzer says that money donated by Indian tribes 'presumably originated with Jack Abramoff,' with absolutely no evidence or basis in fact. Objective journalism at its finest."

Behind the Eavesdropping Story, a Loud Silence - Despite this stonewalling ... New York Times

Behind the Eavesdropping Story, a Loud Silence - New York Times: "By BYRON CALAME | Published: January 1, 2006

THE New York Times's explanation of its decision to report, after what it said was a one-year delay, that the National Security Agency is eavesdropping domestically without court-approved warrants was woefully inadequate. And I have had unusual difficulty getting a better explanation for readers, despite the paper's repeated pledges of greater transparency.

For the first time since I became public editor, the executive editor and the publisher have declined to respond to my requests for information about news-related decision-making. My queries concerned the timing of the exclusive Dec. 16 article about President Bush's secret decision in the months after 9/11 to authorize the warrantless eavesdropping on Americans in the United States.

I e-mailed a list of 28 questions to Bill Keller, the executive editor, on Dec. 19, three days after the article appeared. He promptly declined to respond to them. I then sent the same questions to Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher, who also declined to respond. They held out no hope for a fuller explanation in the future.

Despite this stonewalling, my objectives today are to assess the flawed handling of the original explanation of the article's path into print, ...

The Mounting Powers of Secrecy - New York Times

The Mounting Powers of Secrecy - New York Times: "The Mounting Powers of Secrecy | Published: December 29, 2005

The open government law that guaranteed greater freedom of information to the public will soon be 40 years old and desperately in need of legislative overhaul, thanks to the Bush administration. The White House's sweeping enlargement of agency powers has already nearly doubled the rate of newly classified documents to 15 million a year. At the same time, the administration has choked back the annual volume of documents declassified for public access, from 200 million in 1998 to 44 million lately.

At the heart of this thickening veil are direct presidential orders and former Attorney General John Ashcroft's blanket assurance of legal defense to any agency erring on the side of secrecy in sealing off documents. This reversed the Clinton administration's 'presumption of disclosure' when it came to public requests. The 9/11 commission has already pointed out that this general retreat from the intent of the law hardly discourages terrorists; in fact, it was the government's internal failure to share information that contributed to that tragedy." ...

NY Times held off publishing for a year at request of White House ...

At the Times, a Scoop Deferred: "By Paul Farhi |`Washington Post Staff Writer | Saturday, December 17, 2005; Page A07

The New York Times' revelation yesterday that President Bush authorized the National Security Agency to conduct domestic eavesdropping raised eyebrows in political and media circles, for both its stunning disclosures and the circumstances of its publication.

In an unusual note, the Times said in its story that it held off publishing the 3,600-word article for a year after the newspaper's representatives met with White House officials. It said the White House had asked the paper not to publish the story at all, 'arguing that it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny.' ...

Columnist resigned after ...he took payments from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for writing columns favorable to his clients

Columnist Admits Being Paid, Resigns From Cato Institute… | The Huffington Post: "New York Times | ANNE E. KORNBLUT | Posted December 17, 2005 12:05 AM | READ MORE: Jack Abramoff

WASHINGTON, Dec. 16 - A senior scholar at the Cato Institute, the respected libertarian research organization, has resigned after revelations that he took payments from the lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for writing columns favorable to his clients.

The scholar, Doug Bandow, who wrote a column for the Copley News Service in addition to serving as a Cato fellow, acknowledged to executives at the organization that he had taken money from Mr. Abramoff after he was confronted about the payments by a reporter from BusinessWeek Online. ...

New York Times admits it held [warantless] domestic spying story for a full year

The Raw Story | New York Times admits it held domestic spying story for a full year:RAW STORY | Print This | Email This

On the second page of a report which reveals the White House engaged in warantless domestic spying, the New York Times reveals that it held the story for a full year at the request of the Bush Administration, RAW STORY can reveal.

The Times also reveals that senior members of Congress from both parties knew about Bush's decision to spy on Americans who were making international calls or emails without warrants.

Further, the Times notes that they have omitted information in the article they did write, agreeing with the Bush Administration that the information could be useful for terrorists. Excerpts from the Times' article follow. ...

Congress Researchers say Environmental Protection Agency skewed its analysis of air pollution legislation to favor President Bush's plan

Print Story: Congress Researchers Fault EPA Studies on Yahoo! News: "By JOHN HEILPRIN, Associated Press WriterFri Dec 2, 5:08 PM ET

Researchers who work for Congress say the Environmental Protection Agency skewed its analysis of air pollution legislation to favor President Bush's plan.

EPA's analysis 'works in favor of' Bush's plan by overstating some costs of competing bills, said a report Friday by the Congressional Research Service. The 2002 Bush plan, dubbed 'Clear Skies,' remains stalled in Congress."
...
But the agency overestimated costs of installing the high-tech controls for mercury and assumes natural gas will more plentiful and available at cheaper prices than the Energy Department estimates, according to congressional researchers James McCarthy and Larry Parker. ...

95 per cent US dailies ignored Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death

NEWSWATCH INDIA: � 95 per cent US dailies ignored report on torture of Iraqi prisoners: "

Military autopsy reports provide indisputable proof that detainees are being tortured to death while in US military custody. Yet the corporate media of the United States (US) is covering it with the seriousness of a garage sale for the local Baptist Church, media research organisation Project Censored has said.

According to Prof Peter Phillips, director, Project Censored, a press release on these deaths by torture was issued by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on October 25, 2005 and was immediately picked up by Associated Press (AP) and United Press International (UPI) wire services, making the story available to the US corporate media. A thorough check of Nexus-Lexus and Proquest electronic data bases, using the keywords ACLU and autopsy, showed that at least 95 per cent of the daily papers in the US didn't bother to pick up the story.

The Los Angeles Times covered the story on page A-4 with a 635-word report headlined 'Autopsies Support Abuse Allegations.' Fewer than a dozen other daily newspapers including: Bangor Daily News, Maine; Telegraph-Herald, Dubuque Iowa; Charleston Gazette; Advocate, Baton Rouge; and a half dozen others actually covered the story.

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Seattle Times buried the story inside general Iraq news articles. USA Today posted the story on its website. MSNBC posted the story to its website, but apparently did not consider it newsworthy enough to air on television.

'The Randi Rhodes Show,' on Air America Radio, covered the story. AP/UPI news releases and direct quotes from the ACLU website appeared widely on Internet sites and on various news-based listservs around the world, including Common Dreams, Truthout, New Standard, Science Daily, and numerous others, Phillips said.

What little attention the news of the US torturing prisoners to death did get has completely disappeared as context for the torture stories now appearing in corporate media. A Nexus-Lexus search November 30, 2005 of the major papers in the US using the word torture turned up over 1,000 stories in the last 30 days. None of these included the ACLU report as supporting documentation on the issue.

The Project Censored director wondered, 'How can the American public understand the gravity of the torture that is currently being committed in our name when the issue is being reported with no reference to the extent to which these crimes against humanity have gone? Has the Internet become the only source of real news for mainstream Americans while the corporate media only tells us what they want us to know?'" ...

Pentagon is paying millions more ...for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism....

U.S. Is Said to Pay to Plant Articles in Iraq Papers - New York Times: "By JEFF GERTH and SCOTT SHANE
Published: December 1, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 30 - Titled "The Sands Are Blowing Toward a Democratic Iraq," an article written this week for publication in the Iraqi press was scornful of outsiders' pessimism about the country's future.

"Western press and frequently those self-styled 'objective' observers of Iraq are often critics of how we, the people of Iraq, are proceeding down the path in determining what is best for our nation," the article began. Quoting the Prophet Muhammad, it pleaded for unity and nonviolence.

But far from being the heartfelt opinion of an Iraqi writer, as its language implied, the article was prepared by the United States military as part of a multimillion-dollar covert campaign to plant paid propaganda in the Iraqi news media and pay friendly Iraqi journalists monthly stipends, military contractors and officials said.
...
Even as the State Department and the United States Agency for International Development pay contractors millions of dollars to help train journalists and promote a professional and independent Iraqi media, the Pentagon is paying millions more to the Lincoln Group for work that appears to violate fundamental principles of Western journalism. ...

Morley Safer, one of the real old timers of CBS, once again bemoaning the almost total loss of freedom in reporting on these invasions and occupations

None Dare Call It Censorship by Jack D. Douglas: "

All serious and intelligent journalists today know that the U.S. government has massive media management brigades to carefully control what Americans see in the media and, thus, what they are very likely to believe about things of which they have no direct experience, such as high-level politics, finance and foreign affairs. They also know that the government is extremely effective in secretly censoring the news by using devices such as 'embedded reporting' in nations like Afghanistan and Iraq which the U.S. government invades, occupies, and governs.

Yesterday I saw Morley Safer, one of the real old timers of CBS, once again bemoaning the almost total loss of freedom in reporting on these invasions and occupations. As he said, in Vietnam, U.S. and other national reporters could hop a ride on U.S. or other vehicles to cover anything they wanted to cover, which led directly to their exposing the Big Lies of the U.S. military and politicians about what was going on there. In Iraq and Afghanistan the reporters are 'in-bedded' (as I call it) with the military to prevent such free lancing and the soaring dangers of guerilla attacks almost totally prevents their even trying to circumvent the official censorship. Of course, none dare call it censorship for fear of being fired and ostracized to Alaska, so he did not use that forbidden word." ...

Ain't no free speech allowed in Dubya's America

Capitol Hill Blue: Ain't no free speech allowed in Dubya's America: "By DOUG THOMPSON | Nov 24, 2005, 07:10

In George W. Bush’s America, protest and free speech are illegal acts. Just ask those arrested Wednesday for staging a peaceful protest against the Iraq war near the President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas.

Camping on the same land that antiwar mom Cindy Sheehan used to stage her highly-publicized protest in August, the activists quickly ran afoul of a new county law, hastily passed at the White House's orging, prohibiting public gatherings.

That’s right. The public no longer has a right to protest the President’s policies on public land near the President’s home in Crawford.

“The ordinance was very plainly meant to prevent people from protesting in front of Bush's ranch,” Dave Jensen, a 54-year-old former Marine told reporters. “We feel that's a First Amendment issue. It's intentionally designed to curtail freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.”

But the First Amendment doesn’t mean much to cops in Texas or the Bush administration as a dozen protestors, including Daniel Ellsberg of Pentagon papers fame along with the sister of Cindy Sheehan.

Such arrests, says Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, is just another example of how the Bush administration seeks to stifle debate on the Iraq war." ...

Majority Believe White House Misleads Public, Poll Shows

WSJ.com - Majority Believe White House Misleads Public, Poll Shows: "THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE | November 23, 2005

A majority of U.S. adults believe the Bush administration generally misleads the public on current issues, while fewer than a third of Americans believe the information provided by the administration is generally accurate, the latest Harris Interactive poll finds.

While the telephone survey of 1,011 U.S. adults indicates about 64% of Americans believe the Bush administration 'generally misleads the American public on current issues to achieve its own ends,' opinion on the topic is clearly divided along party lines. A large majority (68% to 28%) of Republicans say the Bush administration generally provides accurate information. However, even larger majorities of Democrats (91% to 7%) and Independents (73% to 25%) think the information is generally misleading. ...

Top 3 papaer make Just 36 requests Freedom of Information requests of the Pentagon between 2000 and February 2005

The Raw Story | Freedom of Information logs shed light on media's military curiosity: "John Byrne

A listing of all requests made of the Pentagon under the Freedom of Information Act since 2000, acquired by RAW STORY, provides new insight into the aggressiveness of American news agencies.

Under the Freedom of Information Act, the public can request records of government agencies. Records seen as jeopardizing national security or individual rights are typically exempted. All requests are public.

The request for a list of all who made inquiries of the Pentagon was filed by Michael Petrelis (http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/, a San Francisco-based activist and blogger. He provided a copy to RAW STORY, which will be released in full next week.

The Pentagon’s records reveal that the law is broadly used—more than 10,000 requests have been made since 2000. But they also illuminate a seeming dearth of curiosity by news organizations about the internal files of the U.S. military establishment.

This lack of curiosity appears particularly evident among the nation’s three largest newspapers.

In total, the three papers with daily circulations greater than one million--USA Today, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times -- made just 36 requests of the Pentagon between 2000 and February 2005. USA Today made nine; the Journal, six; and the Times, 21. ...

Five page memo, stamped Top Secret, alleging that President Bush had threatened to undertake military action against al-Jazeera

The Raw Story | UK press gags news outlets over minutes of meeting discussing al Jazeera bombing: "Larisa Alexandrovna

The Mirror, a UK publication which reported Tuesday on an alleged US plan to bomb an Arab TV station seen as anti-US, has been gagged from reporting any further on the memo and its contents by Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, RAW STORY has learned.

The publication reported on the contents of a five page memo, stamped Top Secret, alleging that President Bush had threatened to undertake military action against al-Jazeera, a TV station located in the country of Qatar. While al-Jazeera is seen by some in the Bush administration to be largely anti-West, Qatar is an American ally.

According to sources familiar with the case, it was the recent attack on Fallujah that had Bush concerned about what al-Jazeera might report." ...

Ex-Chief of Public TV Violated Federal Law - to combat what he saw as liberal bias! ... scathing report ... violated the Public Broadcasting Act

Report Says Ex-Chief of Public TV Violated Federal Law - New York Times: "By STEPHEN LABATON | Published: November 15, 2005

WASHINGTON, Nov. 15 - Investigators at the Corporation for Public Broadcasting concluded today that its former chairman repeatedly broke federal law and its own regulations in a campaign to combat what he saw as liberal bias.

A scathing report by the corporation's inspector general described a dysfunctional organization that violated the Public Broadcasting Act, which created the corporation and was written to insulate programming decisions from politics. ...

US Ranks 44th in Worldwide Press Freedom Index

OhmyNews International: "Nation's openness sinking after Sept. 11, northern Europe tops the list

The annual worldwide press freedom index from Reporters Without Borders shows the United States, which is supposedly spreading freedom and liberty throughout the world, is in a fast decline regarding the freedom of its own press.

The report ranked the United States in 44th place, an atomic drop from a favorable position of 22nd held last year, and from a handsome 17th place in 2002.

The organization mentioned that several journalists were expelled from the country since the terrorist attacks of 2001.
...
Repeated evidence of the media printing government propaganda and misleading information leading up to the U.S.-led Iraq invasion have surely made the decline of mainstream readers accelerate. ...

Maureen Dowd on Judith Miller [CIA leak, WMD promotion, Chalabi defender ...] ... Judy's stories about W.M.D. fit too perfectly with the White House

THE NEWS BLOG: "Let me put it this way, if anyone liked me like MoDo says she likes Miller, well, I'd have to check to see if I owed them child support.

" I've always liked Judy Miller. I have often wondered what Waugh or Thackeray would have made of the Fourth Estate's Becky Sharp.

The traits she has that drive many reporters at The Times crazy - her tropism [involuntary orientation by an organism or one of its parts that involves turning or curving by movement ... broadly : a natural inclination] toward powerful men, her frantic intensity and her peculiar mixture of hard work and hauteur - have never bothered me. I enjoy operatic types.

She never knew when to quit. That was her talent and her flaw. Sorely in need of a tight editorial leash, she was kept on no leash at all, and that has hurt this paper and its trust with readers. She more than earned her sobriquet "Miss Run Amok."

Judy's stories about W.M.D. fit too perfectly with the White House's case for war. She was close to Ahmad Chalabi, the con man who was conning the neocons to knock out Saddam so he could get his hands on Iraq, ..................

Even last April, when I wrote a column critical of Mr. Chalabi, she fired off e-mail to me defending him.

................... This cagey confusion is what makes people wonder whether her stint in the Alexandria jail was in part a career rehabilitation project.

................... But before turning Judy's case into a First Amendment battle, they should have nailed her to a chair and extracted the entire story of her escapade.

Judy told The Times that she plans to write a book and intends to return to the newsroom, hoping to cover "the same thing I've always covered - threats to our country." If that were to happen, the institution most in danger would be the newspaper in your hands. "

Ok, after calling her a drama queen and a whore, tropism being a fancy word for women who likes powerful men and fucks them, she then goes after her bosses for not supervising her and letting her hurt the paper.

Then she suggests that Miller's jail stint had other motives.

Then, finally, calls for her to be fired.

And Gail Collins might as well have cosigned it.

Why? It ran on the op-ed page, she's her nominal boss.

This is call putting your business in the street. This is the consensus opinion of the Times staff, except for the open hatred some folks had for Miller. ...

Hardball's pattern of misinformation and imbala ... [Media Matters]

Hardball's pattern of misinformation and imbala ... [Media Matters]: "Hardball panels skew right

A review of Hardball programming since July 2 revealed nine separate discussions of the Plame investigation with panels solely composed of Republicans, prominent conservatives, and journalists or political figures with no public partisan or ideological affiliation. By contrast, Media Matters found only one instance of a panel that was arguably skewed left: In a July 5 discussion on whether journalists should have federal protections against revealing their sources to prosecutors, Boston Globe columnist Tom Oliphant was paired with Barbara Cochran, president of the nonpartisan professional organization the Radio-Television News Directors Association. (Oliphant is occasionally paired with a conservative commentator on The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer -- here, for example.) The nine panels that skewed right are:

* July 15 (with NBC News chief White House correspondent David Gregory guest-hosting): Andrea Mitchell and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX);
* July 15: Washington Post correspondent Dana Milbank and National Review White House correspondent Byron York;
* July 21: Washington Post staff writer Jim VandeHei and Washington Times editorial page editor Tony Blankley;
* July 22: Hotline editor Chuck Todd and Weekly Standard staff writer Stephen F. Hayes;
* September 30: Todd and Hayes;
* October 6: Newsweek investigative correspondent Michael Isikoff, Washington Post national political editor John Harris, and Hayes;
* October 12: Republican attorney Victoria Toensing and former Kenneth Starr deputy independent counsel Sol Wisenberg;
* October 18: MSNBC contributor and former Republican presidential candidate Patrick Buchanan and former presidential adviser David Gergen;
* October 18: Newsweek political analyst Howard Fineman and Hayes."

Editor Says He Missed Miller 'Alarm Bells' - might have been more willing to compromise with Special Counsel given "details of Judy's entanglement"

Editor Says He Missed Miller 'Alarm Bells' - Yahoo! News: "By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press Writer 26 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The New York Times' Judith Miller belatedly gave prosecutors her notes of a key meeting in the
CIA leak probe only after being shown White House records of it, and her boss declared Friday she appeared to have misled the newspaper about her role.

In a dramatic e-mail, Executive Editor Bill Keller wrote Times' employees he wished he'd more carefully interviewed Miller and had "missed what should have been significant alarm bells" that she had been the recipient of leaked information about the CIA officer at the heart of the case.

"Judy seems to have misled (Times Washington bureau chief) Phil Taubman about the extent of her involvement," Keller wrote in what he described as a lessons-learned e-mail. "This alone should have been enough to make me probe deeper."

Keller said he might have been more willing to compromise with Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald "if I had known the details of Judy's entanglement" with Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby. ...

Curiously, America’s Greatest Newspaper (not!) has never mentioned the White House Iraq Group. Not once ...

The Grey Lady that did not bark in the night | CorrenteWire: "Submitted by lambert on Fri, 2005-10-14 23:18.

Curiously, America’s Greatest Newspaper (not!) has never mentioned the White House Iraq Group. Not once.

Why is this curious? Because to make the case for Bush’s war of choice in Iraq, the W.H.I.G. was tasked with fixing the facts and the intelligence around the policy through a disinformation campaign that involved more than 50 planted stories in the press. The W.H.I.G. membership? Karen Hughes, Andrew Card, Mary Matalin, James Wilkinson, Karl Rove—and “Scooter” Libby, the source Judy “Kneepads” Miller was, erm, “protecting.”

Why would the Times not cover this story? Why wouldn’t anyone else? Here are some theories, in increasing order of institutional corruption. ....

During the propaganda buildup for the invasion of Iraq, Judith Miller and the New York Times served as a key asset of the warfare state

AlterNet: Judith Miller, the Fourth Estate and the Warfare State: "By Norman Solomon, AlterNet. Posted October 17, 2005.

During the propaganda buildup for the invasion of Iraq, Judith Miller and the New York Times served as a key asset of the warfare state.

More than any other New York Times reporter, Judith Miller took the lead with stories claiming that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now, a few years later, she's facing heightened scrutiny in the aftermath of a pair of articles that appeared in the Times on Sunday -- a lengthy investigative piece about Miller plus her own first-person account of how she got entangled in the case of the Bush administration's "outing" of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent.

It now seems that Miller functioned with more accountability to U.S. military intelligence officials than to New York Times editors. Most of the way through her article, Miller slipped in this sentence: "During the Iraq war, the Pentagon had given me clearance to see secret information as part of my assignment 'embedded' with a special military unit hunting for unconventional weapons." And, according to the same article, she ultimately told the grand jury that during a July 8, 2003, meeting with the vice president's chief of staff, Lewis Libby, "I might have expressed frustration to Mr. Libby that I was not permitted to discuss with editors some of the more sensitive information about Iraq." ...

50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine

50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine: "50 False News Stories By Bush Propaganda Machine | A Strategy of Lies: How the White House Fed the Public a Steady Diet of Falsehoods | Earth Island.net | 11-10-3

Colonel Sam Gardiner (USAF, Ret.) has identified 50 false news stories created and leaked by a secretive White House propaganda apparatus.

Bush administration officials are probably having second thoughts about their decision to play hardball with former US Ambassador Joseph Wilson. Joe Wilson is a contender. When you play hardball with Joe, you better be prepared to deal with some serious rebound. ...
...
Gardiner's dogged research identified a long list of stories that passed through Rumsfeld's propaganda mill. According to Gardiner, "there were over 50 stories manufactured or at least engineered that distorted the picture of Gulf II for the American and British people." Those stories include:

The link between terrorism, Iraq and 9/11
Iraqi agents meeting with 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta
Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons.
Iraq's purchase of nuclear materials from Niger.
Saddam Hussein's development of nuclear weapons.
Aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons
The existence of Iraqi drones, WMD cluster bombs and Scud missiles.
Iraq's threat to target the US with cyber warfare attacks.
The rescue of Pvt. Jessica Lynch.
The surrender of a 5,000-man Iraqi brigade.
Iraq executing Coalition POWs.
Iraqi soldiers dressing in US and UK uniforms to commit atrocities.
The exact location of WMD facilities
WMDs moved to Syria.