The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has released documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act from the Department of Defense, which confirm the military's surveillance of organizations working to repeal the Military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell Policy

story here.


Whoa! Did you see that?! Looks like my Federal Tax filing for this year just shredded itself and jumped into the trash can! What a country!

I wanted to add this in the comments to Blicero's important post below, but I can't paste into Haloscan from my computer. I'm just adding another excerpt from the "transcript" of the "President's" "meeting" with the students at Johns Hopkins.

---------

Q Thank you, Mr. President. It's an honor to have you here. I'm a first-year student in South Asia studies. My question is in regards to private military contractors. Uniform Code of Military Justice does not apply to these contractors in Iraq. I asked your Secretary of Defense a couple months ago what law governs their actions.

THE PRESIDENT: I was going to ask him. Go ahead. (Laughter.) Help. (Laughter.)

Q I was hoping your answer might be a little more specific. (Laughter.) Mr. Rumsfeld answered that Iraq has its own domestic laws which he assumed applied to those private military contractors. However, Iraq is clearly not currently capable of enforcing its laws, much less against -- over our American military contractors. I would submit to you that in this case, this is one case that privatization is not a solution. And, Mr. President, how do you propose to bring private military contractors under a system of law?

THE PRESIDENT: I appreciate that very much. I wasn't kidding -- (laughter.) I was going to -- I pick up the phone and say, Mr. Secretary, I've got an interesting question. (Laughter.) This is what delegation -- I don't mean to be dodging the question, although it's kind of convenient in this case, but never -- (laughter.) I really will -- I'm going to call the Secretary and say you brought up a very valid question, and what are we doing about it? That's how I work. I'm -- thanks. (Laughter.)

Yes, ma'am.

It's worth pointing out once again that it doesn't really matter whether Bush's approval rating is 38% or 36% or 3%. The "president" is a massively developmentally disabled person who was installed in the White House in a coup. Every time sound is emitted from the rot-hole between his beak-nose and drool-coated chin, it is a huge embarrassment to our country. From Q&A at Hopkins SAIS yesterday (by the way, I heard the audio on Malloy and this prose is heavily airbrushed):

THE PRESIDENT: Thanks for the question. I would encourage those of you studying here to be a part of policymaking for our government. It's -- it is a high honor to serve your country. And my first advice is, never use force until you've exhausted all diplomacy. I -- my second advice is, if you ever put anybody in harm's way, make sure they have got all the support of the government. My third advice is, don't make decisions on polls. Stand your ground if you think what you're doing [is] right.

Much of my decision about what we're discussing these days was affected by an event. Look, I -- during the 2000 campaign, I don't remember ever discussing with people what -- could I handle war, or could my opponent handle war. The war wasn't on our mind. War came unexpectedly. We didn't ask for the attack, but it came. And so much of the statements I make and have made since that war were a result of that attack.
...
Now, if you're going to be the President or a policymaker, you never know what's going to come. That's the interesting thing about the world in which we live. We're a influential nation, and so, therefore, many problems come to the Oval Office. And you don't know what those problems are going to be, which then argues for having smart people around. That's why you ought to serve in government if you're not going to be the President. You have a chance to influence policy by giving good recommendations to the President.
...
I want you to understand this principle, and it's an important debate and it's worth debating here in this school, as to whether or not freedom is universal, whether or not it's a universal right of all men and women. It's an interesting part of the international dialogue today. And I think it is universal. And if you believe it's universal, I believe this country has -- should act on that concept of universality. And the reason I do is because I do believe freedom yields the peace.
...
But if you don't believe it's universal, I can understand why you say, what's he doing, why is he doing that? If there's no such thing as the universality of freedom, then we might as well just isolate ourselves and hope for the best.

And so -- anyway, kind of rambling here.
...
By the way, if you're studying how to achieve diplomatic ends, it might be worthwhile noting -- I think at least -- with the United States being the sole interlocutor between Iran, it makes it more difficult to achieve the objective of having the Iranians give up their nuclear weapons ambitions.
...
The doctrine of prevention is to work together to prevent the Iranians from having a nuclear weapon. I know -- I know here in Washington prevention means force. It doesn't mean force, necessarily. In this case, it means diplomacy. And by the way, I read the articles in the newspapers this weekend. It was just wild speculation, by the way. What you're reading is wild speculation, which is -- it's kind of a -- happens quite frequently here in the nation's capital.
...
Well -- (laughter) -- I take protest seriously. I mean, I -- by the way, I get protested all the time. (Laughter.) And I welcome it. I think this is the great thing about a democracy. There needs to be an outlet. If people feel like their government is not listening to them or doesn't agree with them, there ought to be an outlet for their discontent.
...
A while ago at a press conference, I remember uttering one wonderful piece of wisdom, it's like a dog chasing his tail. It actually didn't fly that good. But, nevertheless, my point -- (laughter.)
...
Q First let me say, thank you very much for being here and thank you for taking questions. I know we appreciate that. I'm a second-year master's student studying international energy policy.

THE PRESIDENT: International?

Q Energy policy.

THE PRESIDENT: Oh, good.

It goes on and on. Enough.

And while we're at it, I caught this great candid shot of former Fla. Sec. of State Katherine Harris:

Since George Bush believes, as he told Bob Woodward, that it doesn't matter what we do today because soon we'll all be dead, he presumably is unaware of important events that occurred in the past.

The idea, after all, that past events are worth remembering and considering cannot make sense to a nihlist death-worshipper who dismisses his own existence with the assurance that it will soon be over.

Being told to think about what many of us feel obliged to remember, Bush can only respond by asking, "Who cares? The people you're talking about, they're all dead!"

Surely Bush and his cabal of sycophantic priests, cronies, collaborators, and procurators have not paused to consider the significance of what happened in Jerusalem 1,976 years ago today.

Is it worth remembering this for other than ironic purposes? Has someone new shown his face in Washington? When and how will that sick city finally be destroyed?

From the Gospel According to St. Luke (19:28-44):

And when he had thus spoken, he went before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,

Saying, Go ye into the village over against you; in the which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither.

And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him.

And they that were sent went their way, and found even as he had said unto them.

And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?

And they said, The Lord hath need of him.

And they brought him to Jesus: and they cast their garments upon the colt, and they set Jesus thereon.

And as he went, they spread their clothes in the way.

And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the mighty works that they had seen;

Saying, Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord: peace in heaven, and glory in the highest.

And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.

And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry out.

And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept over it,

Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes.

For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side,

And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation.