Jane Harman, RAND Corp. and H.R. 1955

[reprehensor]

Run time: 07:35 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9fyZ62U8fc   Posted on YouTube: November 21, 2007 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: November 24, 2007 By DU Member: reprehensor Views on DU: 10467

 
Amy Goodman's Democracy NOW! covers H.R. 1955, a bill which passed through the House without debate;

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1955

Oct 23, 2007: This bill passed in the House of Representatives by roll call vote. The vote was held under a suspension of the rules to cut debate short and pass the bill, needing a two-thirds majority. The totals were 404 Ayes, 6 Nays, 22 Present/Not Voting.

It now sits in the Senate, waiting for a vote. Democracy NOW! is among the few alternative media sites covering the bill in a critical light;

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/20/1458214

A little-noticed anti-terrorism bill quietly making its through Congress is raising fears of a new affront on activism and constitutional rights. The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act was passed in an overwhelming 400 to six House vote last month. Critics say it could herald a new government crackdown on dissident activity and infiltration of universities under the guise of fighting terrorism. The bill would establish two government-appointed bodies to study, monitor and propose ways of curbing what it calls homegrown terrorism and extremism in the United States. The first body, a National Commission, would convene for eighteen months. A university-based "Center for Excellence" would follow, bringing together academic specialists to recommend laws and other measures.

Writer Jessica Lee covers the troubling aspects of this bill in this lengthy report;

http://www.indypendent.org/2007/11/19/bringing-the-war-on-terrorism-home-congress-considers-who-to-‘disrupt’-radical-movements-in-the-united-states/">Bringing the War on Terrorism Home: Congress Considers How to ‘Disrupt’ Radical Movements in the United States

A tendentious title, but a troubling bill. In a recent Subcommittee Hearing, two witnesses, (one a former RAND employee), gave testimony that prompted me to write this open letter to Rep. Harman;

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=2303535

If that Subcommittee Hearing is any indication of what's coming down the pipe in relation to the Bill, then it is bad business for anyone opposed to Imperialism, and Globalization. Watching Rep. Reichert gloat about cracking down on the Seattle WTO protest should be enough to give one pause...

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/index.php?main_page=product_video_info&products_id=202123-1

I should note that Dennis Kucinich had the guts to vote against this Bill. Right again, Dennis!

[balantz]

1. Petition the Senate

on H.R. 1955: http://www.petitiononline.com/19551959/petition.html

[Bolo Boffin]

2. Finally, reprehensor, you CT guys have figured out what the bill is actually doing.

I suppose congratulations are in order. Now we can keep a close eye on this to make sure civil rights ARE being honored in these commissions, as the bill requires both commissions to do.

However, your defense of the manifestly wrong website Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth is misguided. People who put crap like that out there do assist in the radicalization of extremist terrorists. If they were pushing the truth, that would be one thing. But telling lies about 9/11 is the same to me as shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Richard Gage and his party of charlatans and snake oil salesmen should be held to account.

[MrMickeysMom]

14. Gobble, gobble, gobble... who knows what is true? This turkey seems to...

Really, bolo, go pound some stuffing. Your interpretation of whose civil rights would be trampled on is so finite. On the one hand, if citizens begin to be even more closely monitored through legislated thought control and you happen to acknowledge that these amendment rights are being trampled (QUALIFIER: SOMETHING ABOUT WHICH YOU AGREE), hey... you're with that one!

However, travel anywhere outside of that agreement... whoa... that's too loony and conspiratory. Your are so chaffed by those "manifestly wrong websites"). Wow. I wonder what other ones fall into this category, so I can avoid that free speech and provocative intercourse.

Maybe if everyone heeds your distinguished interpretation of what is and is not in question, we'll know the answer to those questions.

Hey, y'all.. are you in question about what is truth? Ask Bolo! :headbang:

[Bolo Boffin]

21. I do have a problem with snake oil salesmen whose lies are being used

to recruit and radicalize terrorists in the Middle East.

It's like calling "Fire" in a crowded theater. If there actually is a fire, you're a hero. If there is not a fire, you should be punished.

Richard Gage and his fellow liars should be punished.

[Junkdrawer]

27. "Richard Gage and his fellow liars should be punished."....

Want some more rope? :shrug:

[Bolo Boffin]

29. People who falsely yell "fire" in a crowded theater should be punished.

That is what Richard Gage's lies are doing. They should be punished.

[fascisthunter]

35. That Would Only Apply to a Circumstance

in which there needed an immediate need to evacuate to safety without folks being trampled on. That's why when someone yells "fire", they are punished. You want folks to be punished for something much more benign. What are you afraid is going to happen due to Richard Cage's words? If he is lying, people should prove it.

[Bolo Boffin]

36. Nope.

It also applies to a situation where there is no fire, and someone causes a stampede by falsely yelling "fire." In fact, that's the main reason such speech is not protected by the First Amendment.

People have proven that Gage lied.

http://911guide.googlepages.com/evidence

Gage uses as a primary source the movie 911 Mysteries. Eight different clips he shows from this film.

http://www.911mysteriesguide.com/

When people publish out-and-out lies about an event like 9/11, and others uses those lies to incite people to acts of terror, the liars should be punished.

[fascisthunter]

39. what "stampede"... stop conflating

you still haven't proved any lies. And since when do liars get punished? That's just crazy.

[Bolo Boffin]

41. The classic example of "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

Nothing is being conflated here. You've misunderstood the example. Shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater is only wrong if there is no fire. No one can be held accountable for actually warning people of danger. That's just stupid.

The example is about a lie purposely told. People who purposely tell lies get punished all the time. If they do so under oath, it's called perjury. If they do so and they are exposed, they suffer societal scorn and loss of reputation.

Yes, I have proven that Richard Gage lies. Please check out that link I provided. Gage purposefully altered a controlled demolition video. He removed the sounds of explosions to make that clip sound like actual footage of the towers and Building 7. He is a LIAR.

[freedom fighter jh]

42. Where does Gage "incite people to acts of terror"?

The only thing I've seen him call for is a new investigation.

[Bolo Boffin]

44. Please demonstrate an ability to read, thank you. n/t

[freedom fighter jh]

53. A sarcastic remark is no substitute for an answer.

I can see nothing in what Gage is doing that in any way incites terrorism.

If you've already explained it, please indulge me and repeat, because I don't see it.

Unsupported references to "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" don't suffice.

[Bolo Boffin]

54. An question based on a blatant misunderstanding isn't one I feel the need to answer. n/t

[MrMickeysMom]

60. Unless...

It's a question put forth by someone who really doesn't have an argument, but a need to be heard...

There are folks who stoke the fires of false arguments for the sake of having someone to talk to. For those that practice this behavior, they may get some pretty steady feedback for while, but ultimately disgust when someone asks them a question they then interpret as, "an question based on blatant misunderstanding".

:boring:

[Bolo Boffin]

69. What does your "fascinating" expose of such a person have to do with me? n/t

[freedom fighter jh]

65. OK, you're right; I misread your earlier comment. Now please explain to me . . .

. . . how anyone might use anything Gage has said to incite people to acts of terror.

I am unable to make the connection.

[Bolo Boffin]

70. Gage's comments exonerate the actual people who did this crime.

Some people in this world, sad to say, hate Israel and the United States. These people are looking for any excuse, valid or not, to attack us and them. Whether they are our puppet or we are theirs in their mind doesn't matter to this hatemongers.

For these people, Gage's disinformation is a bonanza. He claims that the United States participated in the attacks so that they could invade Iraq. People who believe the United States to be in the thrall of Israel can make the next step on their own: The Jews carried out 9/11 and framed Muslims for the attacks so that they could conquer the Middle East. Gage's message fits as snugly into this argument as the knife in O.J.'s hand.

[freedom fighter jh]

76. I see. You don't attribute "the next step" to Gage, but you do . . .

. . . lay responsibility for it at his door.

I don't like that Gage's message can be used to blame the Jews for 911. But what someone can twist his words into does not seem a basis to stifle discussion.

[Bolo Boffin]

79. If what Gage was saying was the truth, who could blame him at all?

It is because what he is saying is lies and disinformation that I have a problem.

I have a firm suspicion that the SWC doesn't attribute the next step to Gage or any other 9/11 Truth site either. I also think that shutting down 9/11 Truth sites is far down the list of concerns for this commission. It's more about websites that would actually post videos of Nick Berg's execution and boast about doing more of the same. Gage is a fraud, but he doesn't approach that level of malevolence by any stretch of the imagination.

[MrMickeysMom]

31. So, you're afraid of an independent investigation? Who's the snake oil salesman?

Gage is asking- No, he's demanding of Congress a truly independent investigation.

I find it interesting that you equate this with yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater. I suspect I was correct to assume you pock mark seek this kind of attention in otherwise worthy threads of dialog.

Richard Gage and his fellow liars? Oh, thank you, thank you, captain bolo for your bold words. You must sell a lot of snake oil yourself. :P

Let us know where you came up with your kind of snake oil. I'll be the first to smear over so's I can determine truth from what is not- without the need to ever conduct any scientific independent investigations.

Boy, if that isn't fight the terror wars, then I don't know what is... :sarcasm:

[Junkdrawer]

16. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are NOT "manifestly wrong"...

and, as more and more time elapses between 9/11 and the present, my bet is that more and more engineers and architects will rally behind Richard Gage.

And your statement that "Richard Gage and his party of charlatans and snake oil salesmen should be held to account" is one of the more chilling things I've seen on DU for quite a while.

[Bolo Boffin]

20. The fuck they aren't.

Controlled demolition of the WTC towers and Building 7? Absolutely wrong. Gage has no evidence, so he has to distort and actually fabricate evidence to push that idiocy. And his lies are helping radical extremists recruit more people to their cause in the Middle East.

Re: chilling statements -- Did you try putting on a jacket?

[wildbilln864]

23. You don't know it's wrong!

An investigation is required!

[Junkdrawer]

26. I'm sorry but they have VERY valid arguments...and you know it...

It seems to me that, rather than allow a truly independent investigation, you are joining with those who would make all questioning illegal.

Who's hiding from the truth? :shrug:

BTW: Bluff and bluster doesn't impress me.

[Bolo Boffin]

28. The hell they do.

For example, Gage's use of an Oslo, Norway controlled demolition shows how he fabricates data to support his otherwise insupportable claims. From a great overview article:

Fake Demolition Audio

This example is used by Richard Gage of ae911truth.org in his slide presentation.

Start by visiting the ImplosionWorld Cinema. Choose the Philips building (top of the two rows, right-hand side) and watch the video. Pay particular attention when the timer gets past 10 seconds. You'll hear an explosion, see smoke shoot out from the centre base of the building, then hear another set of explosions, then the building falls. Repeat that a few times so you're familar with the timing.

Take a look at the same implosion from another angle. We don't have the same view of the base of the building this time, but you can still hear loud explosions before and after first smoke shoots out.

Now visit this page at the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

And isn't that strange? Now there's no explosions at all, and what's more you can hear the building fall before it actually happens. It appears this version of the video has either had the explosions removed and seen the rest of the collapse sound moved forward to cover it (which would explain the silent second or two at the end), or perhaps has had the complete audio track added from somewhere else.

Gage does crap like this all through his PowerPoint presentation. He misstates facts about the buildings, he asserts a list of controlled demolitions features by his own scant authority, he continually misstates the actual collapse times of 7 World Trade, he misrepresents source material like the NIST report...

He talks about finding no evidence of layered floors in parts of his speech, and then shows pictures of the "meteorites" from Ground Zero, chunks of, you guessed it, layered floors compressed together!

He uses a total of 8 clips from 911 Mysteries, the most shoddily written piece of lies and deceit yet produced by anyone in the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Richard Gage is a liar. His arguments are INVALID and based on false premises. He's literally out for a free lunch.

I fucking deny your false dichotomy, Junk. I don't join one tiny bit with people "who would make all questioning illegal." That's pretty insulting, and if you repeat such a scandalous charge, I will report you to the moderators for attacking me. Got it?

BTW: I don't give a fuck what bluff and bluster does for you. My argument is based on the truth. Defend some more liars, why don't you?

[MrMickeysMom]

33. :-)

"I don't join one tiny bit with people 'who would make all questioning illegal.' That's pretty insulting, and if you repeat such a scandalous charge, I will report you to the moderators for attacking me. Got it?"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Who even TALKS like that???

Oh, I forgot... (whew)

[Bolo Boffin]

37. It is against DU policy to attack people.

Saying that I am joining with people who promote such a heinous claim is an attack on me. I take this seriously, MMM.

[Junkdrawer]

46. You've make several tactical mistakes in this subthread...

I'm guessing you'll move now to have the mods delete the whole thing.

Down the memory hole...

[Bolo Boffin]

47. Please demonstrate any "tactical mistakes" you think I might have made.

So THIS is why people, when they can't deal with the evidence I present, start attacking me personally -- so that the moderators will delete the whole discussion.

Sounds like a tactic for people trying to stop an honest discussion of their position's many faults and flaws. Thanks for filling me in.

[Junkdrawer]

49. That's Limbaughesque...accuse others of your own tactics...

As for you mistakes:

When the C-Span video came out that conflates Richard Gage with online Jihadists, we were told that no one wants to silence Richard Gage and that we misrepresented those slides as an attempt to silence Gage, which the OCTers said was simply not true.

And now, here you are demanding that Gage be punished. Please, get your story straight.

[Bolo Boffin]

51. Jesus Christ, get a hold of yourself.

1. You said you were going to show my "mistakes" and you gave a single example. How droll.

2. Your account of the "C-Span video" is off. The video nor the SWC presentation "conflates" Richard Gage with online Jihadists. The AE911 site is listed in that presentation under 9/11 Disinformation sites, which it certainly is. Weitzman, the SWC speaker, didn't even allude to the site. He was using a much longer presentation than his five minutes would allow to cover adequately (I'd suspect it was a hour-long presentation), and he skipped past the slide to talk about something later in the presentation.

True to form, 9/11 CT advocates have seized hold of this two-second-long glimpse of the AE911 and blown it completely out of proportion, no doubt to capitalize on their having appeared on C-Span.

3. Who told you that no one wants to silence Richard Gage? Please provide documentation for that extraordinary claim. If Gage was talking actual facts, that would be one thing. If he was lying about something without any social concern (like if he cleans his office or not), that would be another thing as well.

But lies about 9/11 that are being used to radicalize extremists against the United States? That is another issue entirely.

4. Your attack of me as being "Limbaughesque" has been reported.

Talk to me about more of my "tactical mistakes."

[MrMickeysMom]

55. Nobody's attacking you, bolo...

that bloody stump is the result of your biting off your tail (tale?)

Get some help...

MMM

[Junkdrawer]

56. Oh my...you told Bolo to get help..He's gonna alert on you now for sure...

Oh, he can kick up dust, swear..

ask people to get help,

engage in evasion after evasion

But if anyone makes a statement that can be construed in ANY way as an insult, watch out!

[Bolo Boffin]

58. You are evading Post #28 and its evidence, Junk.

I haven't evaded anything yet.

[Junkdrawer]

59. Post #28 is one GIANT evasion of all the facts presented by ae911truth...

This not the space nor the forum for a complete discussion of that...

And, frankly, you don't impress me as one who is qualified to shine Gage's shoes, so I hereby leave you to do what you do best...

[Bolo Boffin]

71. Translation: Boloboffin busted Gage so badly Junk can't even attempt to put it all back together

I'm not qualified to shine Gage's shoes? I'm humble and lovable!

[Junkdrawer]

73. Tell you what: I'll post the link to Gage's talk...

http://www.911blogger.com/node/10025

You post the link to the refutation, and we'll let the readers decide...

Or is that screaming "Fire" in a crowded room?

[Bolo Boffin]

74. Let's take Gage's slide #17

I've already demonstrated one of Gage's most egregious lies -- the altering of the CD soundtrack.

I've also pointed out how Gage says there's no evidence of pancaking, and then actually shows that evidence in two of his slides (the "meteorites").

Let's look at a single slide, now, close to the beginning. In this slide, we begin to meet Building 7, the 47 story building that fell at 5:20 pm EDT on the day of the attacks.

Gage makes a colossal error in this slide, and I'm not sure whether he's intending to deceive or if he's just unable to comprehend spatial distances. He is a licensed, degreed, and practicing architect, so I would have thought he'd have spatial thinking down.

The main thing that Gage is stressing in this slide is how far Building 7 is from WTC 1. This is important because debris from WTC 1 damaged Building 7 very badly.

But Gage can't have that. He won't show you a single picture of this damage. In fact, this slide is being used to suggest no damage at all!

The Out-of-Scale Rendition

The rendition on the left of the slide is not to scale. He's taken it without citation, so I don't know where it's from. It resembles graphics done in the New York Times, but it could also be from the FEMA report.

Either way, Building 7 isn't close to its actual size.

Here's a scaled drawing of WTC 1 and 7, with Building 6 in between. It comes from the site Skyscraperpages.com:



Richard Gage is an architect. He should have instantly recognized that building 7 isn't tall enough in that drawing.

Gage also stresses that the buildings are 110 yards (100 meters) apart. As you can see above, 110 yards isn't a lot of distance to cover when the North Tower is almost a quarter of a mile high.

The Mislabeled Picture

On the right of the slide, Gage has a picture of Building 7 from the rubble of Ground Zero.



He says that this is in the area of WTC 1. I am assuming Gage believes that you can see a part of Building 6 beside still standing debris from the North Tower. That would put the camera at the red X in the map below:



However, anyone can recognize that at that angle, WTC 7 should have been flat to the perspective of the camera. It's not. It's much further off to the left of the camera. That means the camera is actually around the location of the green X, close to or actually on Church Street.

What Gage thinks is Building 6 is actually part of Building 4. You can even see Building 5 further down the street in the picture, beyond the flags.

So the picture is not taken in the area of WTC 1's collapse, but WTC 2, the first building to collapse on 9/11.

The Picture Was Taken Between Collapses

Now the real chicanery starts to come into focus.

The first thing to understand is that this picture was taken after the South Tower fell at 9:50 am EDT, but before the North Tower fell at 10:28 am EDT. WTC 7 didn't suffer very much damage at all until debris from the North Tower plowed into it.

Yet by posting this picture, Gage is giving the impression that the North Tower has already fallen, and there stands Seven World Trade, unscarred.

But wait, there's more! As you can see above, Gage says clearly that WTC 1 is 110 yards away from Building 7. But the picture is also labeled as being from the WTC 1 area.

The picture is not taken from 110 yards away, however, but from around 275 yards away. That's about two and a half times further away than the information on this slide. It gives a false impression of distance to the viewer of this slide, not to mention a false impression of debris stacked up in the Pile.

Just How Wrong Can One Person Be?

For an architect, that gross an error of scale is unconscionable. In fact, there are so many mistakes in this single slide that I'm going to list them all again.

* The use of a graphic without citation
* Use of an improperly scaled graphic
* Mistaking the location of the photograph
* Giving the misleading visual impression that 110 yards is much further that it actually was
* Giving the misleading visual impression of minor debris in the middle of the Pile
* Giving the misleading impression of the extent of damage to Building 7 from the North Tower collapse

Faced with this litany, we have a choice before us. Gage is either a clumsy fool or deliberately lying to us again.

No, that's not exactly right. There is a third choice here. It could be that there is a little bit of both going on.

[Junkdrawer]

75. Ah. so THAT's why building 7 collapsed symmetrically at near free fall speeds...

even though it was supported with 80+ huge vertical support beams spaced over the buildings rectangular footprint!

What a fool I've been.

Thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

77. Wow. Defending Gage's lies and disinformation with MORE disinformation!

That's an interesting approach. You don't try to refute anything I've said, you just pile on more crap.

Building 7 did not collapse asymmetrically.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRkQ7Tr9Q3o

It slumped to the south before the crushup began in earnest.

By the way, the only time you will ever see that particular clip in Gage's presentation? It's been trimmed to eliminate the southward slump. Only after it has disappeared into the dust does Gage show this clip. Tacky, tacky.

Building 7 did not collapse at freefall speeds. Building 7 didn't fall at near freefall speeds, either. It took building 7 18 seconds to collapse, according to seismic information.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G86yuunRBIw

Gage starts his count well after column 79 has failed and the east mechanical penthouse has fallen into the building (the actual start of the progressive collapse). He stops his count when WTC 7 falls behind buildings in his video, when WTC 7 has 29 more stories to fall. That's another blatant lie of Gage's.

Junk, I'm beginning to think you've brought a knife to a gun fight.

[Bolo Boffin]

57. Yes, you are attacking me by saying what you did.

Do not EVER think you can get away with saying lies about me.

[MrMickeysMom]

62. Well, how would I know they are LIES, bolo?

I don't know you to the point of calling you a liar.

However, I can scratch my ass and chew gum at the same time. That skill seems to qualify knowing someone is attention fishing for a tasty large mullets useing a guppy sized fish net.

You poor thing. Maybe some left-over turkey and rest is the best I can offer you, since you keep moving the boundaries of what HR 1955 means for those wanting government to perform in its rightful role in that matter.

Love and Kisses- MMM

[Junkdrawer]

43. "Richard Gage and his fellow liars should be punished."

And you can use profanity to call black white all day, but it doesn't make it so.

[Bolo Boffin]

45. Can't deal with the facts, eh?

Sorry. That's not my problem. I just showed you with links and all how Gage lied, and you punted to silly comments. You lose.

[Junkdrawer]

50. That's all you got? Gage silenced the real audio of controlled demolitions?

Man. he really must have you guys spooked!

[Bolo Boffin]

52. How quaint. You skipped #28's points, I reply to your evasion, and now "that's all I've got"?

That is most assuredly not "all" I have on Gage. That's one of the most egregious examples. That's one that so undeniable that you can't even try to rebut it. You have to punt to some lame excuse like "that's all you've got?"

Pathetic, Junkdrawer. Deal with Post #28 please. Your evasion games have been exposed.

ETA: Also, it's quite amusing to watch you shrug off Gage's alteration of that video. You honestly don't find that suspect? If it had been Ben Chertoff doing something like that, OH, the howls of protest around the September 11th forum and here!!

[Tom Joad]

3. Jane Harmen has long been known as a very pro-militarist/anti human rights

an extremist from Santa Barbara.

[JDPriestly]

9. Her district is west of Los Angeles -- Manhattan Beach, and thereabouts.

She does not represent Santa Barbara. Lois Capps represents Santa Barbara. http://www.house.gov/capps/23disrict/23.shtml

In October 2006, it was reported that Harman was under investigation by the Justice Department for allegedly (with the help of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) enlisting wealthy donors to lobby House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to retain Harman as the head Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. The investigation into the alleged campaign to support Harman for the leadership post began in mid-2005 after media reports said that Pelosi might name Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) to succeed Harman. In addition to investigating alleged calls made at Harman’s behest by wealthy Democratic Party contributors to Pelosi, the probe is also looking into whether, in exchange for help from AIPAC, Harman agreed to try to persuade the Bush Administration to go easy on AIPAC officials involved in a broader investigation. <1>

Harman responded to the announcement in a voicemail message stating that any investigation of her would be "irresponsible, laughable and scurrilous." A spokesman for AIPAC, a powerful Washington-based organization with more than 100,000 members across the U.S., denied any wrongdoing by the group and stressed that it did not even take sides between Harman and Hastings in regards to the committee assignment. <2>

. . . .

In November 2006, Speaker-elect Pelosi announced that she would not be choosing Harman for the top intelligence post. <4>

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Jane_Harman

[cosmicdot]

4. RAND Trustees

RAND Corporation Board of Trustees

Page last modified November 2007

Ann McLaughlin Korologos (Chairman), Former Secretary of Labor (1987 to 1989; From 1996 to 2000, she was the chair of the Aspen Institute)

Frank C. Carlucci (Vice Chairman), Former Secretary of Defense (Council on Foreign Relations connected; headed up the Carlyle Group http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frank_Charles_Carlucci_III

Lovida H. Coleman, Jr., Partner, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan LLP

Timothy F. Geithner, President and Chief Executive Officer, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Rita E. Hauser, President, The Hauser Foundation, Inc.

Karen Elliott House, Former Publisher, The Wall Street Journal; Former Senior Vice President, Dow Jones and Company, Inc.

Gen John W. Handy, USAF (Ret.); Executive Vice President, Horizon Lines, Inc.

Jen-Hsun Huang, President and Chief Executive Officer, NVIDIA Corporation

Paul G. Kaminski, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Technovation, Inc.; Former Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology (Director at DynCorp, another mercenary company involving former Enron Director Pug Winokur http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_G._Kaminski

Lydia H. Kennard, Former Executive Director of Los Angeles World Airports

Philip Lader, Chairman, The WPP Group; Former U.S. Ambassador to the Court of St. James (WPP Group includes such companies as Hill & Knowlton and Burson-Marsteller http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WPP_Group#WPP_companies

Peter Lowy, Group Managing Director, Westfield Group

Bonnie McElveen-Hunter, President and Chief Executive Officer, Pace Communications, Inc.; Former U.S. Ambassador to Finland

Ronald L. Olson, Partner, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP

Paul H. O'Neill, Former Secretary of the Treasury

Michael K. Powell, Former Chairman, Federal Communications Commission

Donald B. Rice, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer, Agensys, Inc.; Former Secretary of the U.S. Air Force (1989 to 1993.)

James E. Rohr, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, The PNC Financial Services Group

James F. Rothenberg, President, Capital Research and Management Company

Donald Tang, Vice Chairman, Bear Stearns & Co.; Chairman and President, Bear Stearns International; Chairman, Asia Society, Southern California

James A. Thomson, President and Chief Executive Officer, RAND Corporation

Marta Tienda, Maurice P. During '22 Professor in Demographic Studies and Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs, Princeton University
Trustee Emeritus

Harold Brown, Partner, Warburg, Pincus and Company; Counselor, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS, another mil-industrial-corporation complex 'think tank')

http://www.rand.org/about/organization/randtrustees.html

[NoGodsNoMasters]

5. This is repulsive.

Moreover it highlights the schizophrenia of the right. The far right fetishizes Americanism, or what it perceives to be Americanism, while in the same breath denouncing nearly everything our founding fathers stood for. Jefferson is rolling in his grave.

[balantz]

6. I'd like to know if Congress is asleep, or playing with their ipods,

or what the hell they're doing when these CRITICAL ISSUES are presented to them? Only Kucinich and a few others appear to have actually read this, or perhaps there are a good number of Democrats in The House who think their constituents deserve this kind of unconstitutional treatment by this administration.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

7. Their intentions couldn't be more clear...

[EVDebs]

8. Text of HR 1955

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1955

"(3) HOMEGROWN TERRORISM- The term `homegrown terrorism' means the use, planned use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual born, raised, or based and operating primarily within the United States or any possession of the United States to intimidate or coerce the United States government, the civilian population of the United States, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

Hmmm. Grover Norquist's famous quote of what the GOP is all about comes immediately to mind.

"Norquist is famous for his widely quoted comment that he wants to shrink government "down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub."

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Grover_Norquist

[MrMickeysMom]

32. Grover Norquist and the Christian Coalition must have an NSA file too?

I mean, there he was, banding together with other neo conservative christians like the Mensheviks after the Russian Revolution.

I wonder who can be more guilty of terrorism under an enforced HR 1955? Those who demand an independent 911 investigation or those who wanted to overthrow Clinton in the 90's?

This is stunning.

[EVDebs]

80. I thought the irony was overwhelming so I posted this. Unbeliveable, huh ? nt

[Kurovski]

10. K&R. (nt)

[JohnyCanuck]

11. K&R

[Orwellian_Ghost]

12. Required viewing

Very interesting video.

Note who was originally targeted. Not foreign terrorists but domestic activists.

[bbgrunt]

13. NO presidential candidate will get my vote without leading

an effort against this bill.

[Gonnuts]

15. We CAN'T WAIT ...

We can't wait until AFTER this comes into being before we demonstrate or partition, we have to contact ALL the Senators NOW and stop this thing.

Out of all the legislation ever written this has to be the most scary. It makes me wonder if any of the legislators ever read these bills? Do they just read the headline and like Pavlov's dogs see the words "Homeland Security" and "terrorism" and react? This is insanity! And to think that they passed this bill with NO discussion!? WTF? "Fast tracked" it because they deemed it bill that "didn't need discussion"?

It's times like these that make me want to throw my arms up and say "Fuck it" and think about moving to a saner society. This can't be happening here, but it is and it's like being in a nightmare that keeps getting worse that you're unable to wake-up from.

[cynthia]

17. Only 6 voted against

Nay HI-1 Abercrombie, Neil
Nay IL-12 Costello, Jerry
Nay TN-2 Duncan, John
Nay AZ-6 Flake, Jeff
Nay OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis
Nay CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana

I see the problem is not allowing debate. How can the rest know what they are voting for if the dissenters are not allowed to say anything?

[radhika]

18. DiFi views Jane Harman as her Successor

I am burned out trying to influence my Senator Dianne Feinstein in a positive way - Boxer is ususally fine. Believe me, we CA progressive pound on her phones and mailbox relentlessly. The CA Dem Party scuttlebutt is that DiFi will not run for another term in 2012 and thinks Lady Jane would be an excellent successor for her reign as California Senator. Obviously Jane is busy proving herself ready for that role.

[balantz]

19. author deleted

[mod mom]

22. UFB and from our own side as well. rec'd

[scarletwoman]

24. k&r People need to be aware of this shit. (nt)

[Selatius]

25. A round of applause to the six who actually voted against this bill! Here is the roll call:

Nay HI-1 Abercrombie, Neil
Nay IL-12 Costello, Jerry
Nay TN-2 Duncan, John
Nay AZ-6 Flake, Jeff
Nay OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis
Nay CA-46 Rohrabacher, Dana

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2007-993&sort=vote

[MrMickeysMom]

34. Here, here!

:applause:

There are at least 6 left who have some integrity. Kucinich doesn't surprize me.

The rest? Sold out... or didn't even fucking read the damned language.

[Bolo Boffin]

38. It just doesn't do what 9/11 CT advocates are screaming about.

That's why most didn't bother to read it. The proof of the pudding is in the recommendations the commission makes to the Congress, and that won't happen until the commission concludes its report.

And that won't happen until the commission goes over the findings of the study group and combines it with their own findings.

And that won't happen until the study group submits its findings to the commission.

And that won't happen until the study group is set up with members and funded.

And that won't happen until the commission is set up and funded.

And THAT won't happen until the President signs the bill into law.

And THAT won't happen until the House and the Senate vote on the bill's final form.

And THAT won't happen until the House and the Senate agree on the bill's final form.

And THAT won't happen until the Senate passes their version of the bill.

And THAT won't happen until the bill comes out of a Senate sub-committee.

And THAT won't happen until the bill gets ASSIGNED to a Senate sub-committee.

Maybe, just maybe, we have time to breathe here.

:eyes:

[Usrename]

68. Do you know what fascism is?

Why would you want to trade freedom and liberty for totalitarianism?

I might be willing to bet that you're also one of those folks who can't tolerate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Hugo Chavez.

What is it that you think you know, that the 9/11 truth movement doesn't understand? You do know that a lack of certain evidence is in itself evidence. Like missing fingerprints might indicate that a murder weapon has been wiped clean.

What happened to the evidence of Saudi and Pakistani involvement in the 9/11 plot? Surely you must be aware that this evidence is being suppressed. Aren't you? What is YOUR personal truth theory about that?

[Bolo Boffin]

72. Why would I want to trade freedom and liberty for totalitarianism? What?

Are you serious? This bill doesn't do anything like that.

You are aware that you asked me if I wanted to live under totalitarianism and then you defended Hugo Chavez, right? If you can tolerate that fellow, you should go live in Venezuela and find out what totalitarianism really looks like. I promise to be right at the border to welcome you back.

[noise]

30. Declassify the evidence

All Congress has to do is vote to declassify 9/11 evidence and they could dispel the so called conspiracy theories. Is Congress emboldening terrorists by refusing to declassify 9/11 evidence? The secrecy seems to encourage the radical extremist propaganda mill.

I get it. We are supposed to trust members of Congress simply because they hold elected office. Power=trust. It makes sense. And the 'experts' who will study this issue, they too deserve unqualified trust simply because they are chosen by Congress.

It's all so transparent and honest. :sarcasm:

[fascisthunter]

40. Kick and Recommended (nt)

[lovuian]

48. its not terrorists Its US citizens protesting this

government
make all the rules you want but you can't jail millions

[bjobotts]

61. Can't trust these people, no matter their intention, they always corrupt it.

[noise]

63. Harman was on the Joint Inquiry

What did Harman learn in closed session testimony during the Joint Inquiry hearings? Could she be considered an accessory after the fact?

ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT - Whoever, knowing that an offense has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact; one who knowing a felony to have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists the felon in order to hinder the felon's apprehension, trial, or punishment. U.S.C. 18

LINK

Does suspicion only apply to citizens? Is the patriotism of government officials off the table?

[natrat]

64. your democratic party at work--complete indefensible frauds

[gulfcoastliberal]

66. Proof of too many dems engaged in corrupt & treasonous activities.

Here they are, shepherding along a bill to destroy free expression.

[gulfcoastliberal]

67. Will not ONE SINGLE DEMOCRAT in the senate oppose this?

Feingold? Kerry? Kennedy? Byrd?

Will not ONE senator filibuster, use procedural tactics, etc to stop this capstone in the *co totalitarian foundation?

[autorank]

78. Reprehensor, good for you and Lee - you're carrying the ball on this!

Kudos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reprehensor has been around the various internets like a cyber Paul Revere sounding the alarm.

Shame on the agents of plutocracy in the House for their betrayal of process (no debate) and
principle (the United States Constitution).

Sorry I've been doing aerobics since Thanksgiving and failed to show up on time;)

[KewlKat]

81. K

Kicking