• Categories

  • The Golden Rule

    “That which is hateful to you do not do to another ... the rest (of the Torah) is all commentary, now go study.”

    - Rabbi Hillel
  • Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Remember to click "manage" to set your preferences, such as daily or immediate and the time of delivery.

  • Subscribe Via Email

  • Blog Stats

  • Note on Older Videos

    Videos posted between 2008 and 2010 are not showing up because the coding used to embed the videos no longer work. Lockerz (who bought Vodpod) has shut down. If anyone has the time to look up the coding (youtube url) and put that link in the comment section of the post, I'd appreciate it. Thanks for understanding. More info: Note on Older Videos Posted on Dandelion Salad by Lo
  • Lists of posts and videos

    Dandelion Salad Videos

    Dandelion Salad Posts

    Don’t Enlist, But Don’t Just Take My Word For It by Lo
    Please pass this on to anyone you know who may be considering enlisting as a soldier (mercenary).

  • Amendment I

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
  • Disclaimer:

    The views and/or opinions posted on all the blog posts and in the comment sections are of their respective authors, not necessarily those of Dandelion Salad.

    All content has been used with permission from the copyright owners, who reserve all rights, and that for uses outside of fair use (an excerpt), permission must be obtained from the respective copyright owner.

  • Proud Member of The Internet Defense League

    The Internet Defense League

  • US Deaths in Afghanistan: Obama vs Bush. Click here to learn more.

Sen. Mike Gravel on Immigration (video)


On C-SPAN’s ‘Washington Journal’ Mike shares his opinion on illegal immigration, and his solution to such.

Olbermann: Making the Iraq surge work: You quit counting the dead + Worst Person (videos)

Dandelion Salad

clyde1952 The title pretty much speaks for itse…

The title pretty much speaks for itself. With twice as many more people being killed in Iraq this year than last, you simply quit counting some of them so you can tell your “intellectually incurious” disciples the surge is working. And an Iraq government official watches cartoons on the flatscreen TV we bought him.

Is Keith Olbermann wearing a toupee?

A buddy of Tom Delay says so. Find out for yourself in tonight’s worst person segment, Friday August 31, 2007. Also, we have Oddball and Newsmakers. Viewers of Countdown are the number three newsmakers for making Keith number one last night.

Secret Report: Corruption is “Norm” Within Iraqi Government By David Corn

Dandelion Salad

By David Corn

08/31/07 “
The Nation
As Congress prepares to receive reports on Iraq from General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador Ryan Crocker and readies for a debate on George W. Bush’s latest funding request of $50 billion for the Iraq war, the performance of the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has become a central and contentious issue. But according to the working draft of a secret document prepared by the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, the Maliki government has failed in one significant area: corruption. Maliki’s government is “not capable of even rudimentary enforcement of anticorruption laws,” the report says, and, perhaps worse, the report notes that Maliki’s office has impeded investigations of fraud and crime within the government.

The draft–over 70 pages long–was obtained by The Nation, and it reviews the work (or attempted work) of the Commission on Public Integrity (CPI), an independent Iraqi institution, and other anticorruption agencies within the Iraqi government. Labeled “SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED/Not for distribution to personnel outside of the US Embassy in Baghdad,” the study details a situation in which there is little, if any, prosecution of government theft and sleaze. Moreover, it concludes that corruption is “the norm in many ministries.”

The report depicts the Iraqi government as riddled with corruption and criminals-and beyond the reach of anticorruption investigators. It also maintains that the extensive corruption within the Iraqi government has strategic consequences by decreasing public support for the U.S.-backed government and by providing a source of funding for Iraqi insurgents and militias.

The report, which was drafted by a team of U.S. embassy officials, surveys the various Iraqi ministries. “The Ministry of Interior is seen by Iraqis as untouchable by the anticorruption enforcement infrastructure of Iraq,” it says. “Corruption investigations in Ministry of Defense are judged to be ineffectual.” The study reports that the Ministry of Trade is “widely recognized as a troubled ministry” and that of 196 corruption complaints involving this ministry merely eight have made it to court, with only one person convicted.

The Ministry of Health, according to the report, “is a sore point; corruption is actually affecting its ability to deliver services and threatens the support of the government.” Investigations involving the Ministry of Oil have been manipulated, the study says, and the “CPI and the [Inspector General of the ministry] are completely ill-equipped to handle oil theft cases.” There is no accurate accounting of oil production and transportation within the ministry, the report explains, because organized crime groups are stealing oil “for the benefit of militias/insurgents, corrupt public officials and foreign buyers.”

The list goes on: “Anticorruption cases concerning the Ministry of Education have been particularly ineffective….[T]he Ministry of Water Resources…is effectively out of the anticorruption fight with little to no apparent effort in trying to combat fraud….[T]he Ministry of Labor & Social Affairs is hostile to the prosecution of corruption cases. Militia support from [Shia leader Moqtada al-Sadr] has effectively made corruption in the Ministry of Transportation wholesale according to investigators and immune from prosecution.” Several ministries, according to the study, are “so controlled by criminal gangs or militias” that it is impossible for corruption investigators “to operate within [them] absent a tactical [security] force protecting the investigator.”

The Ministry of the Interior, which has been a stronghold of Shia militias, stands out in the report. The study’s authors say that “groups within MOI function similarly to a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) in the classic sense. MOI is a ‘legal enterprise’ which has been co-opted by organized criminals who act through the ‘legal enterprise’ to commit crimes such as kidnapping, extortion, bribery, etc.” This is like saying the mob is running the police department. The report notes, “currently 426 investigations are hung up awaiting responses for documents belonging to MOI which routinely are ignored.” It cites an episode during which a CPI officer discovered two eyewitnesses to the October 2006 murder of Amer al-Hashima, the brother of the vice president, but the CPI investigator would not identify the eyewitnesses to the Minister of the Interior out of fear he and they would be assassinated. (It seemed that the killers were linked to the Interior Ministry.) The report adds, “CPI investigators assigned to MOI investigations have unanimously expressed their fear of being assassinated should they aggressively pursue their duties at MOI. Thus when the head of MOI intelligence recently personally visited the Commissioner of CPI…to end investigations of [an] MOI contract, there was a clear sense of concern within the agency.”

Over at the Defense Ministry, the report notes, there has been a “shocking lack of concern” about the apparent theft of $850 million from the Iraqi military’s procurement budget. “In some cases,” the report says, “American advisors working for US [Department of Defense] have interceded to remove [Iraqi] suspects from investigations or custody.” Of 455 corruption investigations at the Defense Ministry, only 15 have reached the trial stage. A mere four investigators are assigned to investigating corruption in the department. And at the Ministry of Trade, “criminal gangs” divide the spoils, with one handling grain theft, another stealing transportation assets.

Part of the problem, according to the report, is Maliki’s office: “The Prime Minister’s Office has demonstrated an open hostility” to independent corruption investigations. His government has withheld resources from the CPI, the report says, and “there have been a number of identified cases where government and political pressure has been applied to change the outcome of investigations and prosecutions in favor of members of the Shia Alliance”-which includes Maliki’s Dawa party.

The report’s authors note that the man Maliki appointed as his anticorruption adviser–Adel Muhsien Abdulla al-Quza’alee–has said that independent agencies, like the CPI, should be under the control of Maliki. According to the report, “Adel has in the presence of American advisors pressed the Commissioner of CPI to withdraw cases referred to court.” These cases involved defendants who were members of the Shia Alliance. (Adel has also, according to the report, “steadfastly refused to submit his financial disclosure form.”) And Maliki’s office, the report says, has tried to “force out the entire leadership of CPI to replace them with political appointees”–which would be tantamount to a death sentence for the CPI officials. They now live in the Green Zone. Were they to lose their CPI jobs, they would have to move out of the protected zone and would be at the mercy of the insurgents, militias, and crime gangs “who are [the] subjects of their investigations.”

Maliki has also protected corrupt officials by reinstating a law that prevents the prosecution of a government official without the permission of the minister of the relevant agency. According to a memo drafted in March by the U.S. embassy’s anticorruption working group-a memo first disclosed by The Washington Post–between September 2006 and February 2007, ministers used this law to block the prosecutions of 48 corruption cases involving a total of $35 million. Many other cases at this time were in the process of being stalled in the same manner. The stonewalled probes included one case in which Oil Ministry employees rigged bids for $2.5 million in equipment and another in which ministry personnel stole 33 trucks of petroleum.

And in another memo obtained by The Nation–marked “Secret and Confidential”-Maliki’s office earlier this year ordered the Commission on Public Integrity not to forward any case to the courts involving the president of Iraq, the prime minister of Iraq, or any current or past ministers without first obtaining Maliki’s consent. According to the U.S. embassy report on the anticorruption efforts, the government’s hostility to the CPI has gone so far that for a time the CPI link on the official Iraqi government web site directed visitors to a pornographic site.

In assessing the Commission on Public Integrity, the embassy report notes that the CPI lacks sufficient staff and funding to be effective. The watchdog outfit has only 120 investigators to cover 34 ministries and agencies. And these investigators, the report notes, “are closer to clerks processing paperwork rather than investigators solving crimes.” The CPI, according to the report, “is currently more of a passive rather than a true investigatory agency. Though legally empowered to conduct investigations, the combined security situation and the violent character of the criminal elements within the ministries make investigation of corruption too hazardous.”

CPI staffers have been “accosted by armed gangs within ministry headquarters and denied access to officials and records.” They and their families are routinely threatened. Some sleep in their office in the Green Zone. In December 2006, a sniper positioned on top of an Iraqi government building in the Green Zone fired three shots at CPI headquarters. Twelve CPI personnel have been murdered in the line of duty. The CPI, according to the report, “has resorted to arming people hired for janitorial and maintenance duty.”

Radhi al-Radhi, a former judge who was tortured and imprisoned during Saddam Hussein’s regime and who heads the CPI, has been forced to live in a safe house with one of his chief investigators, according to an associate of Radhi who asked not to be identified. Radhi has worked with Stuart Bowen Jr., the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, who investigates fraud and waste involving U.S. officials and contractors. His targets have included former Defense Minister Hazem Shalaan and former Electricity Minister Aiham Alsammarae. And Radhi himself has become a target of accusations. A year ago, Maliki’s office sent a letter to Radhi suggesting that the CPI could not account for hundreds of thousands of dollars in expenses and that Radhi might be corrupt. But, according to the US embassy report, a subsequent audit of the CPI was “glowing.” In July, the Iraqi parliament considered a motion of no confidence in Radhi-a move widely interpreted as retaliation for his pursuit of corrupt officials. But the legislators put off a vote on the resolution. In late August, Radhi came to the United States. He is considering remaining here, according to an associate.

Corruption, the report says, is “one of the major hurdles the Iraqi government must overcome if it is to survive as a stable and independent entity.” Without a vigorous anticorruption effort, the report’s authors assert, the current Iraqi government “is likely to loose [sic] the support of its people.” And, they write, continuing corruption “will likely fund the violent groups that our troops are likely to face.” Yet, according to the report, the U.S. embassy is providing “uncertain” resources for anticorruption programs. “It’s a farce,” says a U.S. embassy employee. “There is a budget of zero [within the embassy] to fight corruption. No one ever asked for this report to be written. And it was shit-canned. Who the hell would want to release it? It should infuriate the families of the soldiers and those who are fighting in Iraq supposedly to give Maliki’s government a chance.”

Beating back corruption is not one of the 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for Iraq and the Maliki government. But this hard-hitting report-you can practically see the authors pulling out their hair-makes a powerful though implicit case that it ought to be. The study is a damning indictment: widespread corruption within the Iraqi government undermines and discredits the U.S. mission in Iraq. And the Bush administration is doing little to stop it.

Copyright © 2007 The Nation
FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

U.S. Obsessed With Using Force By Reason Wafawarova

Dandelion Salad

By Reason Wafawarova
08/31/07 “The Herald

SINCE the United States assumed global leadership from Britain at the end of the Second World War; when it emerged as the biggest beneficiary of the war, a development that saw it declare the era of “the American century”, Washington has been obsessed with using force to thwart small countries.

In fact, the US emerged as a superpower that is scared of small countries. While this statement might seem contradictory, political analyses of US behaviour over the past 62 years proves otherwise.

During this period the US, among many other invasions went into Cuba, Grenada, Panama, Mexico, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Iraq (twice) and Afghanistan.

It also sponsored and armed reactionary rebels in their CIA engineered proxy wars in Angola, Mozambique, Afghanistan, Congo and Nicaragua, to mention just a few countries.

The Americans also led embargo campaigns on Iraq, Iran, Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea and Zimbabwe.

The US portrays more concerns and worries about the behaviour of small states than it has about its more powerful rivals like India, China or the European Union.

When Ronald Reagan was asked to justify his administration’s trade embargo against Nicaragua in 1985 he said, “the policies and actions of Nicaragua constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”

Does this quotation ring a bell to Zimbabweans?

It should, given that both Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush have almost repeated it verbatim in their attempt to justify the so-called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act (2001), a sanctions law that bars multilateral lending institutions, with dealings with the US, from extending lines of credit to Zimbabwe.

It also bars American companies from trading with Zimbabwe.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

The War Criminal in the Living Room By Paul Craig Roberts

Dandelion Salad

By Paul Craig Roberts
08/31/07 “ICH

The media is silent, Congress is absent, and Americans are distracted as George W. Bush openly prepares aggression against Iran.

bullet US Navy aircraft carrier strike forces are deployed off Iran.

bullet US Air Force jets and missile systems are deployed in bases in countries bordering or near to Iran.

bullet US B-2 stealth bombers have been refitted to carry 30,000 pound “bunker buster” bombs.

bullet The US government is financing terrorist and separatist groups within Iran.

bullet US Special Forces teams are conducting terrorist operations inside Iran.

bullet US war doctrine has been altered to permit first strike nuclear attack on Iran and other non-nuclear countries.

Bush’s war threats against Iran have intensified during the course of this year. The American people are being fed a repeat of the lies used to justify naked aggression against Iraq.

Bush is too self-righteous to see the dark humor in his denunciations of Iran for threatening “the security of nations everywhere” and of the Iraqi resistance for “a vision that rejects tolerance, crushes all dissent, and justifies the murder of innocent men, women, and children in the pursuit of political power.” [President Bush Addresses the 89th Annual National Convention of the American Legion, August 28, 2007]. Those are precisely the words that most of the world applies to Bush and his Brownshirt administration. The Pew Foundation’s world polls show that despite all the American and Israeli propaganda against Iran, the US and Israel are regarded as no less threats to world stability than demonized Iran.

Bush has discarded habeas corpus and the Geneva Conventions, justified torture and secret trials, damned critics as anti-American, and is responsible, according to Information Clearing House, for over one million deaths of Iraqi civilians, which puts Bush high on the list of mass murderers of all time. The vast majority of “kills” by the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan are civilians.

Now Bush wants to murder more. We have to kill Iranians “over there,” Bush says, “before they come over here.” There is no possibility that Iranians or any Muslims who have no air force, no navy, no modern military technology are going to “come over here,” and no indication that they plan to do so. The Muslims are disunited and have been for centuries. That is what makes them vulnerable to colonial rule. If Muslims were united, the US would already have lost its army in Iraq. Indeed, it would not have been able to put an army in Iraq.

Meanwhile the US media focuses on whether Republican Senator Larry Craig is a homosexual or has offended gays by denying being one of them. The run-up for the public’s attention is why a South Carolina beauty queen cannot answer a simple question about why her generation is unable to find the United States on a map.

The war criminal is in the living room, and no official notice is taken of the fact.

Lacking US troops with which to invade Iran, the Bush administration has decided to bomb Iran “back into the stone age.” Punishing air and missile attacks have been designed not merely to destroy Iran’s nuclear energy projects, but also to destroy the public infrastructure, the economy, and the ability of the government to function.

Encouraged by the indifference of both the American media and Christian churches to the massive casualties inflicted on Iraqi civilians, the Bush administration will not be deterred by the prospect of its air attacks inflicting massive casualties on Iranian civilians. Last summer the Bush administration demonstrated to the entire world its total disdain for Muslim life when Bush supported Israel’s month-long air attack on Lebanese civilian infrastructure and civilian residences. President Bush blocked the attempt by the rest of the world to halt the gratuitous murder of Lebanese civilians and infrastructure destruction. Clearly, turning the Muslim Middle East into a wasteland is the Bush policy. For Bush, civilian casualties are a non-issue. Hegemony über alles.

The Bush administration has made its war plans for attacking Iraq and positioned its forces without any prior approval from Congress. The “unitary executive” obviously doesn’t believe that an attack on Iran requires the approval of Congress. By its absence and quietude, Congress seems to agree that it has no role in the decision.

In the improbable event that Congress were to make any fuss about Bush’s decision to attack yet another country, the State Department has devised legalistic cover: simply declare Iran’s military to be a “terrorist organization” and go to war under the cover of the existing resolution.

The “Iran issue” has been created by the Bush administration, not by Iran. Iran, like many other countries, has a nuclear energy program to which it is entitled as a signatory to the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty. Inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency have found no evidence of a nuclear weapons program in Iran.

The Bush administration has brushed away this fact, which should be determining, just as the Bush administration brushed away the fact that weapons inspectors reported, prior to Bush’s invasion of Iraq, that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

The Bush administration managed to disrupt the work of the pesky IAEA weapons inspectors in Iran. Iran has been working successfully with the IAEA and has achieved what a senior IAEA official recently described as a milestone agreement. The Bush administration instantly went to work to discredit the agreement and unleashed its new lapdog, French President Nicolas Sarkozy, to threaten “the bombing of Iran.” [Iran risks attack over atomic push, French president says By Elaine Sciolino, International Herald-Tribune, August 27, 2007]

The Bush administration’s position is legally untenable and is really nothing but a contrived excuse to start another war. Bush claims that Iran, alone among all the signatories of the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, must be denied its right under the pact to develop nuclear energy, because Iran, along among all the other signatories, will be the only country able to deceive the IAEA inspectors and develop nuclear weapons. Therefore, Iran must be denied its rights under the agreement.

Bush’s position on the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is as legally untenable as his position on every other issue–the Geneva Conventions, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, habeas corpus, the constitutional separation of powers, and presidential signing statements that he cavalierly attaches to new laws in order to override the legislative power of Congress. Bush’s position is that the meaning of laws and treaties varies with his needs of the moment.

Bush has declared himself to be the “decider.” The “decider” decides whether Americans have any rights under the Constitution and whether Iran has any rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. As the “decider” has decided that Iran has no such rights, the “decider” decides whether to attack Iran.

No one else has any say about it. The people’s representatives are just so much chaff in the wind.

Whatever form of government Bush is operating under, it is far outside an accountable constitutional democratic government. Bush has transitioned America to Caesarism, and even if Bush leaves office in January 2009, the powers he has accumulated in the executive will remain.

Unless Bush and Cheney are impeached and convicted, there is no prospect of the US Congress and federal judiciary ever again being co-equal branches of government.


FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

False Expectations – Israel & Palestine (video)

Dandelion Salad


For more programs: http://www.linktv.org/originalseries

THIS EPISODE: Mosaic Intelligence Report – August 30, 2007: A document claiming to be Israel’s terms on which final status negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians can begin was leaked to the media.
The Bush Administration has decided to sponsor a conference in November to realize the President’s vision of a two-state solution.
The saber rattling between Syria and Israel has suddenly stopped
Are these signs of hope for the Middle East? Or will this be another dose of False Expectations?
Answer to these questions and more on Link TV’s Mosaic Intelligence Report.

Nader Calls on President Bush to Select New AG Who Respects the Constitution

Dandelion Salad

by Ralph Nader

August 30, 2007

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500

Dear President Bush,

As you evaluate candidates to replace Alberto R. Gonzales as Attorney General it would be appropriate for you to consider all the things Mr. Gonzales has done that have tarnished the reputation of the Justice Department and undermined the rule of law in our country. Mr. Gonzales will be spared from impeachment because of his resignation, but repairing the damage he has done to the integrity of the Justice Department can only begin if you rise above partisan and personal considerations in selecting his replacement. First and foremost, the next Attorney General must truly embrace the importance of the Constitution and the rights it establishes for the citizenry and the responsibilities it imposes on government employees.

The oath of office taken by Attorney General Gonzales and previous Attorneys General reads:

“I, (Name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” 5 U.S.C. §3331

When Mr. Gonzales was installed as the eightieth Attorney General of the United States on February 14, 2005, he said, “So, I rise today to reassure you that I understand the special role of this office, and to commit to do my best on behalf of the American people to fulfill the confidence and trust reflected in my appointment.” Unfortunately, Mr. Gonzales has shattered the trust and confidence that the citizens of the United States have in the Justice Department.

Mr. Gonzales repeatedly misled Congress — and the American people — and likely perjured himself, in seeking to cover up an astonishing array of policies and practices that contravened the Justice Department’s historic independence, violated core Constitutional protections and authorized violations of fundamental international proscriptions against torture and abuse. And, in his role as Attorney General and previously as White House Counsel, he played an instrumental role in advancing policies that shredded longstanding American civil liberties and human rights protections.

After reviewing the following questions and comments, even you might be willing to concede that Mr. Gonzales has shamed the Justice Department and darkened our country’s reputation.

1. Did Mr. Gonzales mislead Congress about his role in the firing of federal prosecutors?

Mr. Gonzales insisted that each of the attorneys had been fired for “performance” reasons and stated that, “I would never, ever make a change in a United States attorney for political reasons or if it would in any way jeopardize an ongoing serious investigation. I just would not do it.”1

The New York Times reported six of the eight prosecutors had, however, recently received good performance reviews between 2003 and 2006.2

Mr. Gonzales testified that “this focus has been on the eight United States attorneys that were asked to resign last December 7th and June 14th.”3

Published reports, however, show that D. Kyle Sampson, then Attorney General Gonzales’s chief of staff, considered more than two dozen U.S. attorneys for termination, according to lists compiled by him and his colleagues.4

2. Did Mr. Gonzales mislead Congress about whether the President could authorize warrantless wiretapping?

Mr. Gonzales said that “It is not the policy or the agenda of this president to authorize actions that would be in contravention of our criminal statutes.”5

The Washington Post reported, “In fact, the president did secretly authorize the National Security Agency to begin warrantless monitoring of calls and e-mails between the United States…”6

3. Did Mr. Gonzales mislead Congress on April 27, 2005, when he testified before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that “The track record established over the past three years has demonstrated the effectiveness of the safeguards of civil liberties put in place when the act was passed. There has not been one verified case of civil liberties abuse.”7

The Washington Post reported Mr. Gonzales was in possession of at least six FBI reports detailing unlawful surveillance, searches and improper use of national security letters.8

Later, again under oath, Mr. Gonzales testified that his statement had been truthful because they were not “intentional” abuses of the Patriot Act.9

4. Did Mr. Gonzales mislead Congress when on July 24, 2007 he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that the subject of an emergency meeting with the hospitalized then Attorney General John Ashcroft on March 10, 2004, was not the surveillance program, which allowed the National Security Agency (NSA) to eavesdrop on suspects in the United States without receiving court approval?

Mr. Gonzales said, “The disagreement that occurred, and the reason for the visit to the hospital, Senator, was about other intelligence activities. It was not about the terrorist surveillance program that the president announced to the American people.”10

A four-page memorandum dated May 17, 2006 from the National Intelligence Director’s office, obtained by The Associated Press, shows that the briefing was about the surveillance program.11

5. Did Mr. Gonzales mislead Congress when he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 18, 2007, about the appointment of “interim” U.S. Attorneys?

A provision quietly added to the Patriot Act in 2005 allowed the President to appoint “interim” U.S. attorneys for an indefinite period of time, without Senate confirmation. Mr. Gonzales testified under oath that “I am fully committed, as the administration’s fully committed, to ensure that, with respect to every United States attorney position in this country, we will have a presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed United States attorney.”12

The Washington Post reported, “Justice officials discussed bypassing the two Democratic senators in Arkansas, who normally would have had input into the appointment, as early as last August. By mid-December, [D. Kyle] Sampson [former chief of staff to Attorney Gonzales] was suggesting that Gonzales exercise his newfound appointment authority to put [Tim] Griffin in place until the end of Bush’s term.”13

President Bush, the next Attorney General must respect the Constitution and the rule of law.
Our country cannot afford and does not deserve an Attorney General who puts political loyalty above his sworn obligation to respect and defend civil liberties and civil rights.


Ralph Nader
P.O. Box 19312
Washington, DC 20036

1Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. January 18, 2007.
2Johnston, David. “Dismissed U.S. Attorneys Praised in Evaluations.” The New York Times. February 25, 2007. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/washington/25lawyers.html
3Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the House Judiciary Committee. May 10, 2007.
4Eggen, Dan and Amy Goldstein. “Justice Weighed Firing 1 in 4.” The Washington Post. May 17, 2007. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/
5Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. January 6, 2005.
6Leonnig, Carol D. “Gonzales Is Challenged on Wiretaps.” The Washington Post. January 31, 2006. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/
7Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. April 27, 2005.
8Solomon, John. “Gonzales Was Told of FBI Violations.” The Washington Post. July 10, 2007. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/
9Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. July 24, 2007.
10Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. July 24, 2007.
11The Associated Press. “Documents Dispute Gonzales’ Testimony.” The New York Times. July 26, 2007.
12Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. January 18, 2007.
13Eggen, Dan and John Solomon. “Firings Had Genesis in White House.” The Washington Post. March 13, 2007. Available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.