[plschwartz]

CB
Steve Job

[Ciberblade]

nope, he got out and started pixar animation studio

[eggplant43]

chatterbox

Gagging the Fuzz, Part 6

The Park Service formally terminates its truth-telling police chief.

By Timothy Noah

Posted Monday, July 12, 2004, at 5:47 AM PT


The National Park Service formally terminated Teresa Chambers on July 9. Chambers is the Park Police chief who was canned this past December for answering truthfully some questions posed to her by a Washington Post reporter about how budget constraints had forced a reduction in police patrols in parks and on parkways around Washington, D.C. For months prior to that interview, we now know from an affidavit Chambers filed June 28, Chambers had been harassed by her two superiors, National Park Service Director Fran Mainella and Deputy Director Don Murphy, over her refusal to disguise within the Park Service and its parent agency, the Interior Department, these patrol reductions. (The reductions were potentially embarrassing because the Bush White House doesn't want to admit, even to itself, that it's not putting its money where its mouth is on homeland defense.) The National Park Service put Chambers on administrative leave for her sins. The expectation was that it would fire her. Now it has.

The timing is significant. Earlier that day, Chambers had filed a motion with the Merit Systems Protection Board, which adjudicates whistleblower complaints by federal workers, urging the MSPB to reinstate her in her job pending its final ruling and to prevent the Park Service from formally dismissing her. The Park Service responded within hours by firing Chambers before the MSPB could rule on her motion, thereby mooting it.

The MSPB will still rule, however, on whether the Park Service's firing constitutes illegal retaliation against a whistleblower, which clearly it does. Chambers, alas, will have to proceed without the help of the Office of Special Counsel, a federal agency that argues whistleblower complaints before the MSPB. The OSC agreed to take Chambers' case in February, but for inexplicable reasons it failed to act within the customary 120 days. "We just continued to give them extensions," Chambers told Chatterbox. After "about three weeks," however, Chambers decided to file her own complaint, as the law allows. The June 28 affidavit and the July 9 motion were both part of that effort. As is usual under such circumstances, the OSC will now withdraw from the case.

Chambers says she has no idea why the OSC moved so slowly on so simple a case: "I know the investigator was very thorough." But Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a private advocacy group that has been publicizing Chambers' case, notes pointedly that the special counsel, Scott Block, is "a recent Bush appointee." Insinuation: Politics inspired foot-dragging. But Chatterbox has to believe that the net political effect of Chambers' case—particularly her abrupt firing last week, which leaves her without a salary—will be political embarrassment for the Bushies. Maybe it's time for candidate John Kerry to start talking up the Park Police chief's firing as an example of the Bush administration's willful blindness toward the consequences of its policies and its viciousness toward those who won't play along.

Teresa Chambers Archive:
April 14, 2004: "Gagging the Fuzz, Part 5"
March 25, 2004: "Gagging the Fuzz, Part 4"
Feb. 19, 2004: "Gagging the Fuzz, Part 3"
Jan. 12, 2004: "Gagging the Fuzz, Part 2"
Dec. 30, 2003: "Gagging the Fuzz"

Timothy Noah writes "Chatterbox" for Slate.

Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2103739/

[xico]

National Security Archive Update, July 13, 2004

U.S. Nuclear War Plans A "Hazard to Ourselves as Well as Our Enemy"

Overkill Problem Led Top Commanders to Complain About the SIOP's Destructiveness

THE CREATION OF SIOP-62

http://www.nsarchive.org

For more information
Contact: William Burr
202/994-7032

Washington D.C., 13 July 2004 - The U.S. included so many nuclear weapons in its first missile-age plan for nuclear war that top military commanders called it a "hazard to ourselves as well as our enemy," according to newly declassified documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

Under the first Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), prepared during 1960, a Russian city the size of Nagasaki--devastated in 1945 with a twenty kiloton bomb--would receive three 80 kiloton weapons. President Dwight D. Eisenhower, then leaving office, along with Navy leaders and White House Science Adviser George Kistiakowsky, was deeply critical of the SIOP's overkill. Eisenhower was later reported to have said that the plan "frighten[ed] the devil out of me." Incoming Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara soon decried the "fantastic" levels of fallout that attacks on a multitude of Soviet targets would produce.

Ever since its creation, the SIOP has been one of the U.S. government's deepest secrets. Even historical information about U.S. nuclear war plans has been hard to come by and documents once available become reclassified again. Today's posting includes never before published as well as previously declassified key documents from 1959-1961 on the history of SIOP-62 (for fiscal year 1962). Among the disclosures in the documents:

* the SIOP included preemptive and retaliatory options; preemption could occur if U.S. authorities had strategic warning of a Soviet nuclear attack;

* a full SIOP strike launched on a preemptive basis would have delivered over 3200 nuclear weapons to 1060 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and their allies in Asia and Europe;

* a full nuclear strike by SIOP forces on high alert, launched in retaliation to a Soviet strike, would have delivered 1706 nuclear weapons against a total of 725 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and allied states;

* targets would have included nuclear weapons, government and military control centers, and at least 130 cities in the Soviet Union, China, and their allies;

* the Marine Corp commandant complained that the SIOP provided for the "attack of a single list of Sino-Soviet countries" and made no "distinction" between those that were at war with the United States and those that were not;

* the Defense Department continues its long-standing pattern of overclassification and inconsistencies over the release of information on the SIOP.

Some evidence exists that after the Cold War ended, Strategic Air Command commander-in-chief General Lee Butler tried to curb what he saw as the SIOP's "grotesque excesses" by paring down the huge target lists. Security classification, however, hides whether General Butler's reforms took hold or whether the SIOP remains an instrument of overkill.

Please follow the link below:

http://www.nsarchive.org
_________________________________________________________
THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
_________________________________________________________
PRIVACY NOTICE
The National Security Archive does not and will never share the names or e-mail addresses of its subscribers with any other organization. Once a year, we will write you and ask for your financial support. We may also ask you for your ideas for Freedom of Information requests, documentation projects, or other issues that the Archive should take on. We would welcome your input, and any information you care to share with us about your special interests. But we do not sell or rent any information about subscribers to any other party.
_________________________________________________________
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THE LIST
You may leave the list at any time by sending a "SIGNOFF NSARCHIVE" command to <LISTSERV@HERMES.CIRC.GWU.EDU>.
You can also unsubscribe from the list anytime by using the following link:
<http://hermes.circ.gwu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=nsarchive&A=1>

[plschwartz]

The Newspaper
for and about
the U.S. Congress
Wednesday July 14, 2004



July 14, 2004

Nader angers CBC with demand for apology
By Hans Nichols and Peter Savodnik

Tensions between Ralph Nader and the Congressional Black Caucus flared again yesterday, after a letter from the independent presidential candidate to the caucus chairman, Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), demanded an apology for an “obscene racial epitaph” at a tense meeting last month.

Black lawmakers reacted to Nader’s letter with a combination of anger and disdain, questioning his mental health and accusing him of acute and advanced egomania.

“He ain’t playing with a full deck,” said Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.), a member of the caucus and vice chairman of the Democratic caucus.

file photo
Consumer advocate Ralph Nader

“I don’t think he gets it,” said Rep. Albert Wynn (D-Md.).

“The meeting was about strategy and the pragmatic planning to defeat [President] Bush,” said Wynn.

“We told him how at strategic level, his candidacy defeats a common a goal,” said Wynn, who criticized Nader for adopting a sanctimonious tone at the beginning of the meeting.

“We were particularly offended by Nader’s exhibitionism, his selfishness and egotism,” Wynn added.

Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-N.Y.) said, “If he didn’t understand what the meeting was about, not only is he an egotistical maniac, he’s dumber than I thought he was.”

Nader’s two-and-a-half-page letter, released to the media before many members of the caucus had a chance to see it, demanded an apology from Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.). Nader took umbrage at Watt’s choice of words. Watt, Nader alleged, called him “just another arrogant white man, telling us what we can do. It’s all about your ego, another [expletive] arrogant white man.”

“Exclamations at the meeting descended into vituperative (e.g., Congresswoman [Carolyn] Kilpatrick’s [D-Mich.] tawdry, anatomical comment yelled loud enough so the press could hear it outside) and ending with the obscene racist epithet repeated twice by Yale Law School alumnus Congressman Melvin Watt of North Carolina,” Nader wrote Cummings.

As reported by The Hill, Kilpatrick told Nader to “get your *** out” at the June 22 meeting.

Caucus spokeswoman Candice Tolliver ruled out an apology. “It was a spirited exchange with the caucus,” Tolliver said. “We just share two different strategies, and that’s it.”

Black House members at the meeting had urged Nader to pull out of the presidential race so that votes wouldn’t be channeled away from Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), his party’s presumptive presidential nominee.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) dismissed the letter. “I’ll give as much consideration to that letter as constituents in my district will give him their vote,” he said.

Meanwhile, a left-leaning organization has accused a pro-business group headed by former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-Texas) of drumming up support for Nader’s candidacy.

John Stauber, executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy, said, “The Republican machine is mobilizing for Nader. Major Republican funders are sending checks to Nader, and a far-right industry-funded front group, Citizens for a Sound Economy [CSE], is organizing to get Ralph on the November ballot in a number of
swing states.”

CSE spokesman Chris Kinnan said the group’s local chapters have gotten involved to get Nader on state ballots. He said Nader’s candidacy “helps illuminate that Sen. [John] Kerry (D-Mass.) is running from his position. Kinnan added that CSE opposes Nader’s positions, but his run for the White House “furthers our issue agenda.”

© 2004 The Hill
733 Fifteenth Street, NW Suite 1140
Washington, DC 20005
202-628-8500 tel | 202-628-8503 fax

[bassetman]

Maybe the Republicans could have a primary, and I could vote for Quayle!

[Pacalis]

It appears to me that the Afro American organizations are in dire need of leadership. They are isolating themselves more and more , and they need to strike now , if they want themselves heard. You don't even hear about any candidate soliciting or worrying about obtaining the Black vote. You hear more about the Hispanic vote.

[bassetman]

I think the black vote is becoming more diverse as there gets to be more of a disparity in income levels. In other words there are Blacks making enough money, that becoming a Republican is more attractive. I don't know how true that is for many Hispanics yet.

Just a guess on my part.

[Pacalis]

Sounds reasonable to me. Hell, Don King is out stumping for G.W. , now that's saying something for the good ole G.O.P.

[bassetman]

Hehe, every black fighter Don King "helped" I believe is broke now! Maybe G W better keep his eye on those huge piles of money he has!

[Pacalis]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Hehe, every black fighter Don King "helped" I believe is broke now! Maybe G W better keep his eye on those huge piles of money he has!

Don's no dummy he recognizes a punch drunk , when he sees one.

[~Candy~]

Originally Posted by bassetman

Hehe, every black fighter Don King "helped" I believe is broke now!

Something to be said for wanting their own people to get ahead, huh?

[bassetman]

That must be it Candy!

[Ciberblade]

Court: New Jersey fans can sue if hit by ball at concession stands

Associated Press


NEWARK, N.J. - Baseball fans can sue if they are injured by a foul ball around the concession areas in New Jersey's minor league ballparks.

The state appeals court overturned an earlier ruling Monday, allowing a Newark man who was hit in the face by a ball while at a concession stand to sue the Newark Bears and the food service company at Bears and Eagles Riverfront Stadium.

The appellate panel said that while fans who attend sporting events assume some risk of balls flying into the stands, that standard should not apply while they are at concession areas.

The judges said fans in those areas should have more protection because they can "let down their guard."

Louis Maisonave, 46, had a bone in his face broken when he was struck by a ball during a Newark Bears game on Aug. 26, 1999, while standing in front of a vending cart.

James J. Horan, attorney for Gourmet Dining Services of South Orange, which provided concessions for the stadium, said the company is considering an appeal to the state Supreme Court.

[LANMaster]

yeah. people who go to concessions stands at the stadiums shouldn't expect that the players' balls are going to whack them in the face.