Will Cheney Take the Stand?

Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald submitted a court filing on Wednesday (not yet available on his website for the Plame case) in which he makes the assertion that VP Cheney would be a 'logical government witness' to determine Scooter Libby's state of mind at the time of Plame's outing.

The New York Times reports:

Fitzgerald said Cheney's ''state of mind'' is ''directly relevant'' to whether I. Lewis ''Scooter'' Libby, the vice president's former top aide, lied to FBI agents and a federal grand jury about how he learned about CIA officer Valerie Plame's identity and what he subsequently told reporters.

Libby ''shared the interests of his superior and was subject to his direction,'' the prosecutor wrote. ''Therefore, the state of mind of the vice president as communicated to (the) defendant is directly relevant to the issue of whether (the) defendant knowingly made false statements to federal agents and the grand jury regarding when and how he learned about (Plame's) employment and what he said to reporters regarding this issue.''

Cheney's office declined comment.

Libby told the agents and the grand jury that he believed he had learned from reporters that Plame is married to Wilson and had forgotten that Cheney had told him that in the weeks before Wilson's article was published.

In his grand jury testimony, Libby said Cheney was so upset about Wilson's allegations that they discussed them daily after the article appeared. ''He was very keen to get the truth out,'' Libby testified, quoting Cheney as saying, ''Let's get everything out.''
[...]
The fact that Cheney's notations [on his copy of Joseph Wilson's editorial] included a reference to Wilson's wife makes it ''more likely than not'' that the vice president and Libby discussed her shortly after Wilson's article was published -- and not weeks or months later as Libby told the grand jury, Fitzgerald wrote.

It appears that Libby's lies are piling up and Cheney may be the one to actually contribute to his successful prosecution in the end.

National Post Apologizes for Iran Badges Story

It's about time.

OTTAWA (Reuters) - A Canadian newspaper apologized on Wednesday for a story that said Iran planned to force Jews and other religious minorities to wear distinctive clothing to distinguish themselves from Muslims.

The conservative National Post ran the story on its front page last Friday along with a large photo from 1944 which showed a Hungarian couple wearing the yellow stars that the Nazis forced Jews to sew to their clothing.

The story, which included tough anti-Iran comments from prominent Jewish groups, was picked up widely by Web sites and by other media.

"Is Iran turning into the new Nazi Germany? Share your opinion online," the paper asked readers last Friday.

But the National Post, a long-time supporter of Israel and critic of Tehran, admitted on Wednesday it had not checked the piece thoroughly enough before running it.

"It is now clear the story is not true," National Post editor-in-chief Douglas Kelly wrote in a long editorial on page 2. "We apologize for the mistake and for the consternation it has caused not just National Post readers, but the broader public who read the story."

The story was based on a column by Iranian expatriate writer Amir Taheri, who said a law being debated by Iran's parliament would force Jews to sew a yellow strip of cloth to their clothes. Christians would wear a red strip while Zoroastrians would wear a blue one.

Iranian legislators dismissed the story.
link

No apology yet from PM Stephen Harper who said Iran is 'very capable' of such behaviour in reaction to the fake news story.

Maybe Douglas Kelly will think twice before he's asked to be a propaganda tool for the neocons again, but I doubt it.

See also: 'Fake but Accurate' by Justin Raimondo

Speaker Hastert is Under Investigation (Updated)

According to ABC News, House speaker Dennis Hastert is being investigated by the FBI:

The Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert, is under investigation by the FBI, which is seeking to determine his role in an ongoing public corruption probe into members of Congress, ABC News has learned from senior U.S. law enforcement officials.

Federal officials say the information implicating Hastert was developed from convicted lobbyists who are now cooperating with the government.

Part of the investigation involves a letter Hastert wrote three years ago, urging the Secretary of the Interior to block a casino on an Indian reservation that would have competed with other tribes.

The other tribes were represented by convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff who reportedly has provided details of his dealings with Hastert as part of his plea agreement with the government.

(Abramoff scandal background)

I wonder if this is why Hastert ran to Bush to express outrage after Democrat William Jefferson's office was raided by the FBI on the weekend. What's in Hastert's office that he may be trying to hide?

Update: I had the feeling I should have added a question mark to my title. The DoJ is now denying that Hastert is under investigation.

Update: Sometimes the media can drive you absolutely nuts. Here's the latest:

Despite a flat denial from the Department of Justice, federal law enforcement sources tonight said ABC News accurately reported that Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert is "in the mix" in the FBI investigation of corruption in Congress.

Speaker Hastert said tonight the story was "absolutely untrue" and has demanded ABC News retract its story.

Law enforcement sources told ABC News that convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff has provided information to the FBI about Hastert and a number of other members of Congress that have broadened the scope of the investigation. Sources would not divulge details of the Abramoff’s information.

"You guys wrote the story very carefully but they are not reading it very carefully," a senior official said.
[...]
ABC’s law enforcement sources said the Justice Department denial was meant only to deny that Hastert was a formal “target” or “subject” of the investigation.

"Whether they like it or not, members of Congress, including Hastert, are under investigation," one federal official said tonight.
more...

Harper Has Another Public Tantrum

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is quickly becoming a national embarrassment. Right after he took office, he announced that all public statements by his ministers would be vetted through his office first and, further muzzling their ability to speak freely, he set a policy that would see them speaking only about his five priorities. There have been some who have not played by the rules but the rest of the lap dogs are following their master's wishes.

Earlier this month, when Harper realized that his choice to head the new Public Appointments Commission, Gwynn Morgan, would not be accepted, Harper decided to throw the baby out with the bathwater by killing the commission itself.

He also barred the press from covering the return of caskets of soldiers from Afghanistan, echoing a Bush policy. The family of one of those soldiers, Nichola Goddard, who was the most recent casualty in that war have decided to hold a very public funeral in Calgary on Friday in a clear statement of opposition to Harper's new policy.

Beyond that, he allowed a quick debate in parliament last week to discuss extending Canada's mission in Afghanistan but then promptly announced that if he didn't get his way - a two year commitment - he would extend the mission for one year, despite the outcome of the parliamentary vote.

Today, following the boycott of several Ottawa press people of his briefings due to Harper's decision to only call on those who would appear on a select list, he decided that 'the national media are biased against him' and 'he will avoid them from now on', choosing instead to take his propaganda campaign on the road to local media.

He told a London, Ont., TV station Wednesday that he is having problems with the media that a Liberal prime minister would never have to face.

So Harper says he will take his message out on the road and deal with the less hostile local media.

"Unfortunately the press gallery has taken the view they are going to be the opposition to the government,'' Harper told London's A-Channel.

"They don't ask questions at my press conferences now.

"We'll just take the message out on the road. There's lots of media who do want to ask questions and hear what the government is doing.''

Two dozen Ottawa reporters walked out on a Harper event this week when he refused to take their questions.

The prime minister does not want to hold press conferences unless his staff gets to pick which journalists ask questions.

The Ottawa press gallery has refused to play by those rules.

There's no doubt about it: this is a man with serious control issues who obviously needs therapy.

His 'all or nothing' method of dealing with issues is indicative of the mindset of many Conservatives who are only able to think in black and white terms, but this man is the Prime Minister of Canada. Imagine how this behaviour will affect Canadians in the days to come if his knee-jerk reactions continue to be the driving force behind his decisions. Can he actually be trusted to do what the leader of our country ought to do: apply rationality and an ability to compromise? Obviously, it appears he is incapable of such statesmanlike behaviour and that is a very dangerous proposition for Canadians.

We are fortunate that his is only a minority government, but the opposition parties must be far more forceful than they have been to this point if they intend to stop this man from destroying the very fabric of what Canada is: a country that expects its leader to emulate dignity, integrity and patience.

'Peace, order and good government' cannot be left in the hands of an impulsive man who refuses to think before he acts. As he attempts to behave like the strict disciplinarian father he believes himself to be, he finds himself acting as the petulant child he so opposes. That conflict runs deep. And, when it is present in a country's leader, what is needed is a system of checks and balances that ensure he will not be allowed to wreak havoc in what will hopefully be a very short stay at 24 Sussex Drive.

If Harper was paranoid about the national media being against him before this point, he's just ensured that his tantrum today will make that belief a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Democrats Take Action on Iran

With the very real possibility that the Bush administration will once again forego diplomacy and international laws, pushing America into another war, congressional Democrats have decided to take some preemptive action of their own.

Raw Story reports that some congressional Democrats will begin holding informal hearings today about the situation in Iran and Rep Ed Markey of Massachussets has written a letter to Bush, which he hopes others will sign, expressing concern over possible US nuclear strikes against Iran.

While we share your concern about Iran's irresponsible violations of its commitments under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and safeguards agreement which Iran signed with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), we do not believe that the U.S. should threaten to use nuclear weapons to resolve this crisis. We would also note that as the U.S. seeks to ensure strict Iranian compliance with its obligations under the NPT, we should keep in mind the fact that in connection with the 1995 NPT review conference, the United States issued a statement reaffirming earlier U.N. Security Council pledges that the U.S. "will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons except in the case of an invasion or any other attack on the United States, its territories, its armed forces or other troops, its allies, or on a State towards which it has a security commitment, carried out or sustained by such a non-nuclear-weapon State in association or alliance with a nuclear-weapon State." We are not aware of any subsequent statements changing this position.

The Democrats will also address the doctrine of preemptive war during their hearings. In my opinion, this letter by Markey doesn't go far enough. It should have included a statement against any type of preemptive attack, nuclear or non-nuclear.

The Washington Post reports today that Iran is seeking direct talks with the Bush administration, not only via the letter Iran's president sent to Bush this month, which was quickly rejected by Condi Rice who hadn't even received the full translation at the time she commented on it, but by sending word via other channels:

Laylaz and several diplomats said senior Iranian officials have asked a multitude of intermediaries to pass word to Washington making clear their appetite for direct talks. He said Ali Larijani, chairman of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, passed that message to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, who arrived in Washington Tuesday for talks with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley.

Iranian officials made similar requests through Indonesia, Kuwait and U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, Laylaz said. American intelligence analysts also say Larijani's urgent requests for meetings with senior officials in France and Germany appear to be part of a bid for dialogue with Washington.

"They've been desperate to do it," said a European diplomat in Tehran.

U.S. intelligence analysts have assessed the letter as a major overture, an appraisal shared by analysts and foreign diplomats resident in Iran. Bush administration officials, however, have dismissed the proposed opening as a tactical move.

Efforts at diplomacy are now identified as 'tactical move[s]', while the Bush administration prefers to let the EU3 handle any negotiations in a move that mirrors how it's handling relations with North Korea - expecting regional interests to determine the US response to the country targeted as another member of the so-called 'Axis of Evil'.

One would think that direct talks with countries determined to be such imminent threats would be desirable. Instead, the Bush administration will simply blame any failures of diplomacy with Iran and North Korea on the other countries involved in those talks while claiming that it has exhausted every possible avenue to resolve the conflicts - a transparent dismissal of personal responsibility that will be used to justify any coming attacks.

The international community needs to put more pressure on the United States government to directly involve itself in the process unless it wants to be left as the fall guy for Bush's next military misadventure.

Reporters With Backbones

Well, well, well...

OTTAWA—About two dozen journalists walked out on Stephen Harper yesterday after he refused to take their questions, the latest chapter in an unseemly spat between the Prime Minister and members of the national media.

Parliament Hill veterans described the scene of reporters boycotting a prime ministerial news conference as a first.

It resulted in Harper being forced to make his announcement on aid to Darfur to a small handful of reporters, photographers and camera operators outside the House of Commons.

The Prime Minister's Office insists on choosing who gets to ask questions based on a list it compiles. Officials say they're merely trying to install some order to the often chaotic ritual of parliamentary news scrums.

Chaos vs Control. Wasn't that the eternal theme behind Get Smart? What's next? The Cone of Silence?

"It is unfortunate that a select group within the press gallery displays such hostility and exhibits disrespect toward the Prime Minister," said a Harper spokesman.

Shorter Harper spokesman: 'You bastards!'

Harper needs to learn that Canadians will not put up with a 'Father Knows Best' culture in government. His need for patriarchal control will indeed be rejected on all fronts. He is not Bush and this is not the United States.

Afghan Civilian Deaths to be Investigated

Following the deaths of at least 16 Afghan civilians in air raids by coalition forces on Monday, Afghanistan president Hamid Karzai has called for an investigation. Concerns by Afghans go much deeper than this tragedy, however:

"We do not like Taliban but we don't like foreign troops because we're shot by both sides," said Abdul Baqi at Mirwais Hospital in Kandahar, where 15 wounded Afghans were brought Monday after a raid on a meeting of Taliban leaders erupted into a firefight in the middle of the village of Azizi.

"We thought Canadians were our friends," he said.

Canadians were not involved in Monday's action, but few Afghans make a distinction between troops of the various western countries in the U.S.-led coalition.

Afghans feel caught in the middle, said Atta Mohammad, who was wounded in the fighting.

"I'm not concerned with Taliban. I'm not concerned with foreign troops," he said. "Who is responsible for me, that I'm being shot?"

So, while Canadians pump their chests and talk about how much the Afghans like having our troops over there, they need to remember there's a war going on and if bullets from foreign troops are killing innocent Afghans there ought not be any distinction made by the country of origin of the shooter.

Taliban sponsored violence has increased dramatically:

Between January and the end of April, suicide bombings killed 14 coalition and Afghan security forces members and wounded 33 others. The cost to civilians was nearly three times higher - at least 34 Afghans were killed and 93 wounded.

There is no doubt that many Afghans are extremely thankful that their country has been freed from the former Taliban government, but one can definitely appreciate the mixed feelings in the country after living with decades of war with no end in sight.

The Taliban has launched an intense attack this spring that has escalated the conflict to fierce proportions and the Afghans are literally caught in the crossfire. It's unclear how the new NATO mission will help to ease the enormous pressures faced by the people.

Canadian News Roundup

- Native protesters in Caledonia, Ontario have decided to take down their barricades in an effort to show the community that they mean no ill will to the residents, following a violent clash between native and non-natives on Monday. Negotiations over the land claim dispute will continue but could likely take years.

- A UN report by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights criticizes Canada over concerns about the lack of ineligibility for the Employment Insurance program (only 39% of the unemployed qualify), minimum wage rates, eviction procedures, and cuts to social assistance transfer payments - among other issues. There is no response yet from the Conservative government.

The Toronto Star has more:

Welfare benefits in most provinces have dropped in value in the past 10 years and often amount to less than half of basic living costs, a UN watchdog group charged yesterday.

The employment insurance program needs to be more accessible, minimum wages don't meet basic needs, and homelessness and inadequate housing amount to a "national emergency," says the UN body's report from Geneva.

Amen to that. As one of 'Canada's poor' (due to chronic illness), I can tell you that access to adequate housing is practically non-existent, especially in a city like Calgary that is booming due to the oil patch activity. The agency that handles low income housing for the city won't even tell apllicants how long the waiting list is because it's quite well-known that, even before the current boom hit, that list was 2+ years long. The welfare rate for an employable single person in Alberta is ~$400/month. The disability pension (AISH - Assured Income for the Severely Handicapped) offered by the Conservatives to the approximately 30,000 residents who qualify in Alberta was recently increased to $1000/month after being held at $855/month for well over a decade - much less than the actual costs of living in this province. There simply is no political will at the provincial or federal level to raise these standards. Collectively, poor and sick people have no voice and we certainly don't have the money or power to lobby politicians.

- PM Stephen Harper announced $40 million in aid for Darfur.

Last week, the UN's Security Council voted unanimously yesterday to begin the process of establishing a UN peacekeeping force to end the slaughter of civilians in the Darfur region of Sudan. Mr. Harper has said previously that Canadian troops wouldn't be required but that Canada would send logistical support along with Western allies.

Because Harper's government has recently extended Canada's committment to the war in Afghanistan, we don't have any troops to send on a peacekeeping mission to Darfur. That is a national shame.

Some two million children face starvation and disease in Darfur, according the the CEO of UNICEF. A paltry contribution of $40 million without the presence of an adequate number of peacekeeping forces in the region to ensure the aid will actually be delivered to the people is nothing but a crass political move by Harper.

Random News & Views Roundup

- The tense situation in Caledonia, Ontario around a disputed first nations land claim became exponentially worse on Monday when natives and non-natives came to blows:

The native protesters had briefly dismantled their barricade earlier in the day as a sign of goodwill after the province pledged to indefinitely halt development on a plot of disputed land.

But hundreds of town residents turned up and barred access to the site. The scene turned ugly when a van driven by a Six Nations protester tried to force its way through the locals, prompting a fist fight.

"They're instigating, [they're] a bunch of irate radicals," said Janie Jamieson, a spokeswoman for the native protesters.

CBC has video. The status of the negotiations is now in question.

- Fierce fighting against the Taliban in Afghanistan on Monday claimed the lives of at least 16 innocent civilians, including women and children, when the US decided to send air strikes into the village of Azizi. The Pentagon's response? "Regrettable". What's really regrettable is that 'Operation Enduring Freedom' is actually 'Operation Enduring War with no end in sight'.

Local anger, though, was vented on the allied attackers. Attah Mohammad, 60, said: “Oh my God, they killed my kids.” His silver beard was streaked with tears and his hands were covered in blood. “God may take revenge on them. They took everyone from me,” he said, his voice crackling with emotion.

Haji Ikhalf, 40, a villager, said Taleban fighters had taken shelter in a religious school. When the bombing started, they fled into family homes. “Then those homes were bombed. I saw 35 to 40 dead Taleban and around 50 dead or wounded civilians,” he said.

Zurmina Bibi, who was caught in the fighting with her family, cradled her wounded eight-month-old baby as she said that ten people were killed in her home. “There were dead people everywhere,” she wailed.

The death toll seemed certain to rise, with many villagers unable to get to the hospital in Kandahar. Ambulances were denied access to the area.

- Seymour Hersh weighs in on the NSA domestic spying program and Wired has published documents related to the lawsuit filed by the Electronic Frontier Foundation against AT&T which explain the technological intricacies of the phone records collection methods by the NSA.

- It seems MSNBC has now come out of the closet and is jumping on the 'Rove will be indicted soon' bandwagon along with truthout's Jason Leopold.

MSNBC's David Shuster declared Monday evening that Karl Rove's legal team expects Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald to announce a decision "at any time" in the ongoing CIA leak investigation and that new documents put Cheney's former chief of staff in the hot seat.

As always, stay tuned...

- Drudge was forced to pull his story about Howard Dean's supposed attempts to stop NOLA mayor Ray Nagin from being re-elected. Drudge made racist claims against Dean and his so-called 'secret operatives' and the 'white' donors like Democratic Sen Ben Nelson of Florida who reportedly gave money to Nagin's opponent's campaign.

DNC: DRUDGE IS DEAD WRONG, WE DID NOT PICK LANDRIEU OVER NAGIN

The Democratic National Committee strongly denies it placed political operatives in the city of New Orleans to work against the reelection efforts of incumbent Democrat Mayor Ray Nagin.

Well-placed DRUDGE REPORT sources claimed DNC Chairman Howard Dean made the decision to back mayoral candidate and sitting Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu (D-LA).

The DNC says the report is "unequivocally and absolutely false."

DNC Communications director Karen Finney explained: "The DNC does not as a policy get involved in Democratic primaries... The only thing that the DNC did was a campaign helping ensure that displaced voters had an opportunity to vote."

The DRUDGE REPORT takes chairman Dean and his spokesman at their word.

That's because Drudge doesn't want to get his ass sued over the racist lies he published.

Update: Amid Taheri Press Release on Iranian Badges Story

Last Friday, Canada's National Post newspaper ran two stories about what they proclaimed to be a shocking new development in Iran: the passing of a law that would require non-Muslims to be identified with coloured badges.

The front page story 'Iran Eyes Badges for Jews' was written by Chris Wattie. The second, 'A Colour Code for Infidels', by Amid Taheri. (You can read about the debunking and the fallout here and here.

Amid Taheri has now issued a press release, standing by his story:

Regarding the dress code story it seems that my column was used as the basis for a number of reports that somehow jumped the gun.
As far as my article is concerned I stand by it.
The law has been passed by the Islamic Majlis and will now be submitted to the Council of Guardians. A committee has been appointed to work out the modalities of implementation.
Many ideas are being discussed with regard to implementation,
including special markers, known as zonnars, for followers of
Judaism, Christianity and Zoroastrianism, the only faiths other than Islam that are recognized as such.
[...]
I do not know which of these ideas or any will be eventually adopted. We will know once the committee appointed to discuss them presents its report, perhaps in September.

Interestingly, the Islamic Republic authorities refuse to issue an
official statement categorically rejecting the concept of dhimmitude and the need for marking out religious minorities.
I raised the issue not as a news story, because news of the new law was already several days old, but as an opinion column to alert the outside world to this most disturbing development.

This, however, is what Taheri originally wrote in his National Post article:

The law mandates the government to make sure that all Iranians wear "standard Islamic garments" designed to remove ethnic and class distinctions reflected in clothing, and to eliminate "the influence of the infidel" on the way Iranians, especially, the young dress. It also envisages separate dress codes for religious minorities, Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, who will have to adopt distinct colour schemes to make them identifiable in public. The new codes would enable Muslims to easily recognize non-Muslims so that they can avoid shaking hands with them by mistake, and thus becoming najis (unclean).

The new law, drafted during the presidency of Muhammad Khatami in 2004, had been blocked within the Majlis. That blockage, however, has been removed under pressure from Khatami's successor, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

The new law replaces the one passed in 1982 dealing with women's clothes.
[...]
Religious minorities would have their own colour schemes. They will also have to wear special insignia, known as zonnar, to indicate their non-Islamic faiths. Jews would be marked out with a yellow strip of cloth sewn in front of their clothes while Christians will be assigned the colour red. Zoroastrians end up with Persian blue as the colour of their zonnar. It is not clear what will happen to followers of other religions, including Hindus, Bahais and Buddhists, not to mention plain agnostics and atheists, whose very existence is denied by the Islamic Republic.

So, despite Taheri's claims in his press release that 'Many ideas are being discussed with regard to implementation', his article was not so ambiguous. Stating that 'Religious minorities would have their own colour schemes' speaks for itself. What Taheri told the world was not his opinion. He stated it as fact.

As I noted, this story how now been widely debunked by many officials of organizations who would rightly be concerned with the passage of such a law. Taheri provides absolutely no evidence to back up his claims. If he is so sure of his supposed facts, why can't he or anyone else provide an actual copy of this supposed law? That would go far to prove his credibility. Instead, he now blames others of 'jumping the gun', when it was actually he who did so by composing a news story based on what came across as actual facts - not his opinions.

The Financial Times adds this information about Taheri:

A contributor to various newspapers including the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal and Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, a leading Arabic-language newspaper, Mr Taheri is an opponent of talks between the US and Iran.

He wrote in the New York Post last month the US should “go for regime change in Tehran” as the only way to stop Iran’s drive to “dominate the region and use it as the nucleus of an Islamic superpower which would then seek global domination”.

That says it all.