************************************************************

ATTENTION!!!

************************************************************

WALTER REED ARMY HOSPITAL HAS BEEN PRIVATIZED!

IAP Worldwide Services, which is run by two ex-Halliburton employees, is now in charge of running Walter Reed Hospital. No oversight required. Just another segment of our lives here in America privatized. If you see a pattern, you are probably right on. First a big mess-up that is sure to demand our attention, then poof! it is privatized. Many of the employees who saw what was about to happen left Walter Reed before it became fact.

Some day, when you have a moment, check out just how much of our country has been sold or privatized. Have you driven the NJ Turnpike lately? It is now foreign-owned.

The Poverty Business

How U.S. Companies Extract Profits from the Working Poor

Buzzflash, May 14, 2007

In recent years, a range of businesses have made financing more readily available to even the riskiest of borrowers. But this remaking of the marketplace for low income consumers has a dark side: innovative and zealous firms have lured unsophisticated shoppers by the hundreds of thousands into a thicket of debt from which many never emerge. "People are being encouraged to live beyond their means by companies that are preying on low income consumers," says Jacob S. Hacker, a political scientist at Yale.

Do you remember the Johnny Carson bit about the TV loan sharks? Here was the pitch: No credit? We don't care. Bad credit? We don't care. Miss a payment? NOW WE CARE! Or the easy "Pay day loan"? All these gaffs need to be outlawed.

************************************************************

A word from the Human Rights Watch Backgrounder

April 2003

According to the latest statistics from the U.S. Department of Justice, more than two million men and women are now behind bars in the United States. The country that describes itself as the "land of freedom" incarcerates a higher percentage of its people than any other country. The human costs--wasted lives, wrecked families, troubled children--are incalculable, as are the adverse social, economic, and political consequences of weakened communities, diminished opportunities for economic mobility, and extensive disenfranchisement.

************************************************************

************************************************************

Wait!

Stuff is happening faster than I can write this blog.

Apparently, as of June 1^st, Timothy Griffin resigned.

Wow!

Who could write better script?

************************************************************

A Farewell to Falwell

by Christopher Hitchens

Slate Magazine--Posted Wednesday, May 16, 2007, 12:46 pm

Jerry Falwell's foul rantings prove you can get away with anything if you have "Reverend" in front of your name.

The discovery of the carcass of Jerry Falwell on the floor of an obscure office in Virginia has almost zero significance, except perhaps for two categories of the species labeled credulous idiot. The first such category consists of those who expected Falwell (and themselves) to be bodily raptured out of the biosphere and assumed into the heavens, leaving pilotless planes and driverless trucks and taxis to crash with their innocent victims as collateral damage. This group is so stupid and uncultured that it may perhaps be forgiven. It is so far left behind that almost its only pleasure is to gloat at the idea of others being abandoned in the same condition.

The second such category is of slightly more importance because it consists of the editors, producers, publicists, and a host of other media riffraff who allowed Falwell to prove, almost every week, that there is no vileness that cannot be freely uttered by a man whose name is prefaced with the word “Reverend.” Try this: call a TV station and tell them that you know the Antichrist is already on earth and is an adult Jewish male. See how far you get. Then try the same thing and add that you are the Rev. Jim Bob Vermin. Why, Reverend, come right on the show! What a fool Don Imus was. If he had paid the paltry few bucks to make himself a certified clergyman, he could be jeering and sneering to the present hour.

Falwell went much further than his mad 1999 assertion about the Jewish Antichrist. In the time immediately following the assault by religious fascism on American civil society in September 2001, he used his regular indulgence on the airwaves to commit treason. Entirely exculpating the suicide murderers, he asserted that their acts were a divine punishment of the United States. Again, I ask you to imagine how such a person would be treated if he were not supposedly a man of faith.

************************************************************

So how’s that surge workin’ for ya?

************************************************************

Did You Know...

Voter Fraud Complaints by GOP Drove Prosecutor Dismissals?

Of the 12 U.S. attorneys known to have been dismissed or considered for removal last year by the White House, five were identified by Karl Rove or other administration officials as working in districts that had been targeted by the GOP for aggressive investigation and prosecution of election law violations. Four of those five were replaced.

NEW YORK--Monday, May 7, 2007:

RFK Jr. and Greg Palast discuss Rove and the Missing e mails:

Voting rights attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called for prison time for the new US Attorney for Arkansas, Timothy Griffin and investigation of Griffin’s former boss, Karl Rove, chief political advisor to President Bush.

“Timothy Griffin,” said Kennedy, “who is the new US attorney in Arkansas, was actually the mastermind behind the voter fraud efforts by the Bush Administration to disenfranchise over a million voters through ‘caging’ techniques--which are illegal.”

Kennedy based his demand on the revelations by BBC reporter Greg Palast in the new edition of his book, Armed Madhouse. On one page of the book, Palast reproduces a copy of a confidential Bush Cheney campaign e-mail, dated August 26, 2004, in which Griffin directs Republican operatives to use the ‘caging’ lists.

http://www.gregpalast.com/rfk-rove-and-roves-brain-should-be-in-jail-not-in-office/

This is one of the e-mails subpoenaed by Congress but supposedly “lost” by Rove’s office. Palast obtained 500 of these, fifty with ‘caging’ lists attached.

‘Caging’ lists are “absolutely illegal” under the Voting Rights Act, noted Kennedy on his Air America program, Ring of Fire. The 1965 law makes it a felony crime to challenge voters when race is a factor in the targeting. African American voters comprised the bulk of the 70,000 voters ‘caged’ in a single state, Florida.

Palast wrote in his book, “Here’s how the scheme worked. The Bush campaign mailed out letters,” particularly targeting African American soldiers sent overseas. When the letters sent to the home addresses of the soldiers came back “undeliverable” because the servicemen were in Baghdad or elsewhere, the Republican Party would, “challenge the voter’s registration and thereby prevent their absentee ballots being counted.”

The Republicans successfully challenged “at least one million” votes of minority voters in the 2004 election.

Kennedy, a voting rights attorney, fumed, “What Griffin did was absolutely illegal and he should be in jail. Instead, Griffin was rewarded with the US Attorney’s office.”

Kennedy has called on the Senate and House Judiciary Committees to expand their investigations of the firing of US Attorneys to include a probe of their replacements, especially Griffin, as well as Rove’s knowledge of the caging operation.

In preparation for just such an investigation, Kyle Sampson, former aide to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, wrote a confidential e-mail, dated December 19, 2006, outlining a strategy to stall Congress from questioning the propriety of the Griffin appointment. “We should gum this to death,” wrote Sampson, “Ask the senators to give Tim a chance...then we can tell them we’ll look for other candidates, ask them for recommendations, evaluate the recommendations, interview their candidates, and otherwise run out the clock. All of this should be done in ‘good faith,’ of course.”

Sampson has since resigned.

Palast said, “Just as Rove is known as ‘Bush’s brain,’ Griffin is ‘Rove’s Brain.’ I’m flattered by his ‘review.’”

Palast first reported on the caging list operation for BBC Television’s premier current affairs show, Newsnight, in 2004. In a February 7, 2007, e-mail obtained by subpoena from Rove’s office, Griffin boasted that, “No national media picked up the BBC story.”

Griffin sent his remarks to Monica Goodling, Senior Counsel to Attorney General Gonzales. She has since resigned and invoked the Fifth Amendment rather than answer Congressional questions.

Griffin and Rove refused several requests from Palast and BBC to respond to charges of illegal, racial ‘caging’ of voters. However, a Republican spokeswoman, while admitting the lists could be used to challenge soldiers’ votes, said that was ‘not the purpose’ for gathering the lists.

************************************************************

Do any of you remember the good old days when Helen Thomas sat in a front row seat during the Kennedy press conferences? He always broke into the soap opera, “As The World Turns.” Remember? Kennedy used to call on Helen when it was time for some comic relief as our country faced extremely serious times. What I remember most is how respectful Kennedy was to Helen. Where is Helen today? Why, Helen has been relegated to a seat in the back. Bush can’t deal with Helen; she is just too sharp.

************************************************************

Proof of Ohio Election Fraud Exposed

t r u t h o u t | Report

By William Rivers Pitt

Wednesday December 15, 2004

Among activists and investigators looking into allegations of vote fraud in the 2004 Presidential election, the company always mentioned was Diebold and its suspicious electronic touch screen voting machines. It is Diebold that has multiple avowed Republicans on its Board of Directors. It was Diebold that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bush’s election campaign. It was Diebold CEO Walden O’Dell who vowed to deliver Ohio’s electoral votes to Bush.

As it turns out, everyone was looking the wrong way. The company that requires immediate and penetrating scrutiny is Triad Systems.

Triad is owned by a man named Tod Rapp, who has also donated money to both the Republican Party and the election campaign of George W. Bush. Triad manufactures punch card voting systems, and also wrote the computer program that tallied the punch card votes cast in 41 Ohio counties last November.

Given the ubiquity of the Triad voting systems in Ohio, the allegations that have been leveled against this company strike to the heart of the assumed result of the 2004 election.

Earlier this week, the allegations against Triad were first raised by Green Party candidate David Cobb, who testified at a hearing held in Columbus, Ohio by Rep. John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. In his testimony, Cobb stated:

Mr. Chairman, though our time is limited, I must bring to the committee's attention the most recent and perhaps most troubling incident that was related to my campaign on Sunday, December 12, about a shocking event that occurred last Friday, December 10.

A representative from Triad Systems came into a county board of elections office unannounced. He said he was just stopping by to see if they had any questions about the upcoming recount. He then headed into the back room where the Triad supplied Tabulator (a card reader and older PC with custom software) is kept. He told them there was a problem and the system had a bad battery and had "lost all of its data." He then took the computer apart and started swapping parts in and out of it and another "spare" tower type PC also in the room. He may have had spare parts in his coat as one of the BOE people moved it and remarked as to how very heavy it was. He finally reassembled everything and said it was working but to not turn it off.

He then asked which precinct would be counted for the 3% recount test, and the one which had been selected as it had the right number of votes, was relayed to him. He then went back and did something else to the tabulator computer.

The Triad Systems representative suggested that since the hand count had to match the machine count exactly, and since it would be hard to memorize the several numbers which would be needed to get the count to come out exactly right, that they should post this series of numbers on the wall where they would not be noticed by observers. He suggested making them look like employee information or something similar. The people doing the hand count could then just report these numbers no matter what the actual count of the ballots revealed. This would then "match" the tabulator report for this precinct exactly. The numbers were apparently the final certified counts for the selected precinct.

Triad is contracted to do much of the elections work in this county and elsewhere in Ohio. This included programming the candidates into the tabulator, and coming up with the rotation of candidates in the various precincts (that is, the order in which a candidate is first changed between precincts). They also have a technician in the office on election night to actually run the tabulator itself.

Triad also supplies the network computers on which all of the voter registration information and processing is kept for the county.

It was unusual for the computers to be taken apart. At least one member of the Board of Elections was told the tabulator was in pieces when he called to check on the office.

The source of this report believes that the Triad representative was "making the rounds" of visiting other counties also before the recount. This person also stated they would not pass on the suggestion of the "posted" hidden totals, and would refuse to go along with it if it were suggested by the others in the office at the time.

The source of this information believes they could lose their jobs if they come forward.

The source of this information is named Sherole Eaton, Hocking County deputy director of elections. She has since written and signed an affidavit describing her experience with the Triad representative, the text of which is here:

On Friday, December 10, 2004, Michael from Triad called in the AM to inform us that he would be in our office in the PM on the same day. I asked him why he was visiting us. He said, "to check out your tabulator, computer, and that the attorneys will be asking some tricky questions and he wanted to go over some of the questions they may ask." He also added that there would be no charge for this service.

He arrived at about 12:30PM. I hung his coat up and it was very heavy. I made a comment about it being so heavy. He, Lisa Schwartze and I chatted for a few minutes. He proceeded to go to the room where our computer and tabulation machine is kept. I followed him into the room. I had my back to him when he turned the computer on. He stated that the computer was not coming up. I did see some commands at the lower left hand of the screen but no menu. He said that the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone. He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. My main concern was: what if this happened when we were ready to do the recount. He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his offices to get information to input into our computer. Our computer is fourteen years old and as far as I know had always worked in the past. I asked him if the older computer, that is in the same room. could be used for the recount. I don't remember exactly what he said but I did relay to him that the computer was old and a spare. At some point he asked if he could take the spare computer apart and I said "yes." He took both computers apart. I don't remember seeing any tools and he asked Sue Wallace, Clerk, for a screwdriver. She got it for him. At this point I was frustrated about the computer not performing and feared that it wouldn't work for the recount. I called Gerald Robinette, board chairman, to inform him regarding the computer problem and asked him if we could have Triad come to our offices to run the program and tabulator for the recount. Gerald talked on the phone with Michael and Michael assured Gerald that he could fix our computer. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to count. I told him, Good Hope 1 #17. He went back into the tabulation room. Shortly after that he stated that the computer was ready for the recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up.

Before Lisa ran the tests, Michael said to turn the computer off. Lisa said, "I thought you said we weren't supposed to turn it off." He said turn it off and right back on and it should come up. It did come up and Lisa ran the tests. Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotarien, what the tests mean, etc. No advice on how to handle the attorneys but to have our Prosecuting Attorney at the recount to answer any of their legal questions. He said not to turn the computer off until after the recount.

He advised Lisa and me on how to post a "cheat sheet" on the wall so that only the board members and staff would know about it and what the codes meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM.

My faith in Triad and the Xenia staff has been nothing but good. The realization that this company and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I'm being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I'm bringing this forward is to, hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing.

Further buttressing Eaton’s claim is an addendum to a previous affidavit filed by Evelyn Roberson who, you may recall, was involved in the Greene County recount action that was summarily shut down by Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell. Her addendum reads as follows:

Addendum to Declaration of Evelyn Roberson dated December 12, 2004

Re: Incidents of December 10, 2004

This is to add to the approximately 1:15 p.m. portion of the visit with the Deputy Director of Elections Lyn McCoy with respect to the following comment:

She said they would have their computer technician check over their computers on Monday in case they had been tampered with.

The addition is that Lyn McCoy also mentioned to me at the same time that her computer technician was with Triad.

I declare under penalty of perjury the forgoing is true and correct.

Dated: December 14, 2004

Evelyn Roberson

Original versions of these documents should be available later on Wednesday on the website of Rep. Conyers.

Conyers, upon hearing these allegations, sent a letter to both the FBI Special Agent in Charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor. The text of that letter is as follows:

December 15, 2004

As part of the Democratic staff's investigation into irregularities in the 2004 election and following up on a lead provided to me by Green Party Presidential Candidate, David Cobb, I have learned that Sherole Eaton, a Deputy Director of Board of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, has first-hand knowledge of inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering in the Ohio presidential election in violation of federal and state law.

I have information that similar actions of this nature may be occurring in other counties in Ohio. I am therefore asking that you immediately investigate this alleged misconduct and that, among other things, you consider the immediate impoundment of election machinery to prevent any further tampering.

On December 13, my staff met with Ms. Eaton who explained to them that last Friday, December 10, Michael Barbian, Jr., a representative of Triad GSI unilaterally sought and obtained access to the voting machinery and records in Hocking County, Ohio, modified the computer tabulator, learned which precinct was planned to be the subject of the initial test recount and made further alterations based on that information, and advised the election officials how to manipulate the machinery so that the preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. Ms. Eaton first relayed this information to Green Party representatives, and then completed, signed and notarized an affidavit describing this course of events, a copy of which is attached.

The Triad official sought access to the voting machinery based on the apparent pretext that he wanted to review some "legal questions" the officials might receive as part of the recount process. At several times during this visit, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad's offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. I have subsequently learned that Triad officials have been, or are in the process of intervening in several other counties in Ohio: Greene and Monroe, and perhaps others.

There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. §1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, "knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by...the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." 42 U.S.C. § 1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to "willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter" any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Second, the course of conduct would also appear to violate several provisions of Ohio law. No less than 4 provisions of the Ohio Revised Code make it a felony to tamper with or destroy election records or machines. Clearly, modifying election equipment in order to make sure that the hand count matches the machine count would appear to fall within these proscriptions.

Moreover, bringing in Triad officials into other Ohio Counties would also appear to violate Ohio Revised Code § 3505.32 which provides that during a period of official canvassing, all interaction with ballots must be "in the presence of all of the members of the board and any other persons who are entitled to witness the official canvass," given that last Friday, the Ohio Secretary of State has issued orders to the effect that election officials are to treat all election materials as if they were in a period of canvassing, and that "Teams of one Democrat and one Republican must be present with ballots at all times of processing."

It is important to recognize that the companies implicated in the wrongdoing, Triad and its affiliates, are the leading suppliers of voting machines involving the counting of paper ballots and punch cards in the critical states of Ohio and Florida. Triad is controlled by the Rapp family, and its founder Tod A. Rapp has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes. A Triad affiliate, Psephos corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.

Floridagate

The Presidential Election of 2000 was stolen by the Bush Cheney Campaign and the Florida GOP, Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris, County Election Officials, the U.S. Supreme Court, the Media, and Attorney General John Ashcroft.

The list below documents all of the crimes that were committed to steal the election. These were not isolated instances of carelessness--they were deliberate election fraud. We believe these crimes are so serious that they should be given a name: FLORIDAGATE.

FLORIDAGATE is the nation's biggest scandal since Watergate. So why isn't the mainstream media reporting the story? Because the media--especially the huge broadcast networks--were participants in the crime, and are now participants in the coverup. So is Attorney General John Ashcroft, who should be investigating these crimes. Meanwhile, Democratic leaders in Washington are afraid to demand a thorough investigation, because they know they would be viciously attacked by the Republican propaganda machine.

Read the Boston Statement detailing how Bush stole the presidency.

Bush Cheney Campaign and the Florida GOP

Absentee ballot law (FL GOP)--The Florida Republican Party sent a letter with Jeb's signature and the Florida state seal urging Florida Republicans to vote by absentee ballots. But Florida law (which was made even stricter in 1998) is not a "vote by mail" system voters must have a valid reason for voting by mail. The Republican Party was thus encouraging Republican voters to break the law.

Florida's absentee ballot laws were tightened because of the 1997 Miami absentee ballot scandal that resulted in the voiding of ALL absentees and the overturn of the election. The man who engineered that massive fraud--Mayoral candidate Xavier Suarez--played a key role in the GOP absentee effort in 2000.

Absentee Ballot Law, Voting Rights Act (FL GOP--Seminole County, Martin County)--With the active assistance of GOP Election Supervisors, FL GOP officials sent GOP operatives to illegally alter over 2,500 defective Republican absentee ballot applications, while at least 550 Democratic applications were ignored.

Conspiracy to Interfere with the Lawful Count of the Votes (Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris)–When the TV networks called Florida for Gore, Bush campaign spokes people (Rove, Matalin, etc.) went on TV to declare the results were wrong and would soon be changed. Was there already a plan to use state and local government powers to interfere with the lawful counting of votes?

FL Absentee Ballot Law--Pressured canvassing boards in Republican counties to violate Florida's election laws and count clearly illegal overseas Republican absentee ballots, while fighting to prevent Democratic counties from counting similar absentee ballots.

14th Amendment, Voting Rights Act--Forced hand counting of heavily Republican absentee ballots that the machines couldn't read while delaying and blocking hand counting of poll cast ballots in heavily Democratic counties that the machines couldn't read, thus treating ballots differently and discriminating against black voters.

* GOP Stalling Tactics in Palm Beach

On 11/21, organized a riot in Miami/Dade County that intimidated the canvassing board into stopping its hand count, and then assaulted Joe Geller, chair of the Dade County Democratic executive committee. This riot was paid for by the Bush recount committee.

Abuse of Congressional office for partisan politics; politicization of active duty military (Rep. Steve Buyer, Rep. Tillie Fowler, Michael Higgins, Rob Carter).

On 11/22, Rep. Buyer gave the Pentagon a list of active duty sailors whose ballots had been rejected as invalid, which was provided by Florida Republican operative Rob Carter. Buyer demanded their e mail addresses immediately. Buyer's aide Michael Higgins then contacted the sailors and put them in touch with Carter, who enlisted these sailors in a propaganda campaign to attack Vice President Al Gore as anti military, and to pressure county officials to count invalid ballots. Carter also supplied Rep. Tillie Fowler with stories from service members, which she used to denounce Gore at a rally.

FEC Disclosure--Failure to disclose how the $8 million the Bush campaign raised for its Florida recount effort.

IRS Disclosure--Failure to disclose the occupation and employer of thousands of recount donors.

Governor Jeb Bush--

Absentee Ballot Law--Letter sent by Florida Republican Party with Jeb's signature and the Florida state seal urged Florida Republicans to vote by absentee ballot, regardless of whether they had a valid legal reason for doing so.

Abuse of State Seal--Letter sent by Florida Republican party with Jeb's signature and the Florida state seal urging Florida Republicans to vote by absentee ballots.

Abuse of Office for Partisan Purposes; Interference with Administration of Elections--Jeb and his staff made 95 phone calls to Bush/Cheney Presidential campaign after Jeb said he'd recused himself; he visited the Bush/GOP headquarters in Tallahassee; he participated in at least 1 Bush strategy conference call; 6 of the 95 calls were on the day GOP thugs stopped the Miami Dade recount.

Abuse of Office for Partisan Purposes--Called special session of legislature to intimidate county officials and judges.

14th Amendment (Florida Legislature)--2001 Election Reform law perpetuates the election problems that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled to be in violation of the 14th Amendment.

Secretary of State Katherine Harris--Voting Rights Act Section 5 (Bucky Mitchell, Michael Cochran, Elaine Baxter). Misrepresentation of the felons list statute, failure to provide available documents directly relevant to the pre clearance review.

Voting Rights Act Section 5 (Clay Roberts, Bucky Mitchell)--Knowing failure to obtain pre clearance for significant changes in policies and procedures pursuant to the implementation of the felons list law which resulted in the removal of legal voters from the registration rolls in at least one of 5 pre clearance counties in Florida.

Disenfranchisement of Legal Voters--Knowingly purged felons from states where voting rights were automatically restored upon release, contrary to clear court rulings. Knowingly included non felons in its purge through its wide net policy (accepting a 90% name match in 1999, and an 80% match in 2000).

Ballot Design Law--Sent out a sample ballot design to county elections

supervisors that split the 10 Presidential candidates on the ballots onto 2 pages.

Uniform Administration of Election Law: Assistance to Voters--Failure to oversee training of poll workers to ensure proper assistance to voters.

Americans with Disabilities Act (Jeb Bush, Counties)--Failure to make voting machines fully accessible to the handicapped.

Mandatory Machine Recount Law--20 counties never did the mandatory machine recount as required by state election law.

Overseas Absentee Ballot Law--Allowed illegal overseas absentee ballots to be counted and included in the certified total.

Uniform Administration of Election Law--Coordination (conspiracy) between Harris lawyers and Bush/GOP lawyers; Deliberate misinterpretation of the law for partisan purposes.

Uniform Administration of Elections: Hand Recount Law--Inconsistent application of hand count law: accepted manual recounts from some counties, but denied Palm Beach permission to conduct hand count.

Use of Government Office for Politics--Allowed Republican operatives Andrew Goodman and J.M. Stipanovich to use her state computers and offices during the recount; Communications Director Donald Tighe admitted writing partisan speeches during the campaign.

These political activities were found on Harris' computer. 1) On 1/29/00, a speech written for a Republican meeting that declared: "We are READY TO LEAD!" 2) On 3/14/00, a set of campaign talking points for George W. Bush. 3) On 11/14/00, an examination of the campaign finances of FL Supreme Court Justice Barbara Pariente who was reviewing important election cases. 4) A list of contributors to Harris' 1998 Democratic opponent, Karen Gievers (undated).

Harris claims Stipanovich and Goodman were "volunteers," but Goodman billed Harris $12,000 for his work, and Harris initially approved the bill (Palm Beach Post, 8/23/01).

Abuse of Discretion in Violation of Florida Supreme Court Order--The Florida Supreme Court ordered Harris to accept the Palm Beach recount until 9 a.m. on 11/27; she refused to accept them after 5 p.m. on 11/26.

Conflict of Interest; Use of Office for Political Gain--While overseeing the recount, Harris expressed interest in appointment as Ambassador under Bush.

Public Records--Reinstalled Windows and erased files on state computers used by Republican operatives Andrew Goodman and J.M Stipanovich.

County Election Officials--Voter Registration Law and Voting Rights Act. Failure to process thousands of voter registration forms before the election, including many from historically black colleges.

Absentee Ballot Law (Okaloosa)--Sent hundreds or thousands of absentee ballots to voters who did NOT request one.

Absentee Ballot Law (Bay)--Republicans turned in "handfuls" and in one case a suitcase full of absentee ballots in defiance of a law that provides people may submit no more than two absentee ballots other than their own or that of a family member.

Ballot design law (Palm Beach)--Butterfly ballot.

Sample ballot law (Duval)--Sample ballot differed significantly from actual ballot sample ballot listed 10 candidates on 1 page, while actual ballot spread candidates over 2 pages.

Voting Rights Act--Substandard voting machinery in predominantly minority precincts that produced ballot spoilage up to 40%; Failure to provide voter assistance in Spanish (Osceola County) and Creole (Miami Dade); reports of intimidation of minority voters.

Voting machine law (Punch Card)--Failure to properly maintain machines, including misalignment and accumulation of chads.

Election Day law--Closed polling places without notice; Turned away voters who were on line at 7 pm when polls closed.

Voting machine law (Miami Dade)--Use of malfunctioning voting machines.

Voting Machine Law (Optiscan).–Failure to provide machine readable pens.

Voting Machine Law (Palm Beach)--Misaligned ballots, as described by Rabbi Yellin; Use of malfunctioning voting machines in county elections office.

* Miami Herald 8/28/01: Democratic State Representative Calls for Criminal Investigation of Teresa Lepore.

Negligence (Palm Beach)--Failure to respond to complaints about confusing ballot and voting mistakes.

Intent of the voter--Nearly all counties failed to count machine unreadable votes where the intent of the voter was clear. This includes "write in overvotes" that must specifically be counted by law.

* Palm Beach Canvassing Board rejects dimpled ballots.

Mandatory machine recount law--20 counties never did the mandatory machine recount as required by state election law.

Racial Discrimination (Escambia)--Disabled optiscan technology that prevents errors on poll cast votes, but "duplicated" (fixed) absentee votes with errors.

Different Treatment of Machine Unreadable Ballots--Various Republican counties hand counted absentee ballots that could not be machine read (thus favoring Republicans), but refused to hand count poll cast ballots that could not be machine read (thus harming Democrats).

Ballot tampering--Estimated 7,100 ballots were destroyed in 11 counties.

Secret duplication of 10,000 optiscan unreadable absentee ballots in 26 heavily Republican counties in central and north Florida. These ballots favored George W. Bush by more than 2 to 1.

Fraud (Duval)--Republican elections supervisor John Stafford lied about the number of under and overvotes to the Gore campaign during the 72 hour window for requesting a recount, telling the Gore campaign there were only 2300 votes disqualified, when there were actually 27,000.

Recount law (Miami Dade)--Refusal to conduct hand count.

Absentee Ballot Law (Orange)--Refused to count stateside absentees postmarked before Election Day, while counting overseas absentees with no postmark or date.

Public Records Law (Palm Beach)--Destruction of computer records of 2000 Presidential votes.

U.S. Supreme Court--Conflict of Interest--Four members of the Supreme Court majority in Bush v. Gore had conflicts and should have recused themselves: O'Connor, Thomas, Scalia, and Rhenquist. In August 2001, three Justices recused themselves from the case of Napoleon Beazley, who was sentenced to death for the murder of the father of J. Michael Luttig, a well connected federal appeals court judge.

US Law on Emergency Injunctive Relief--Granted emergency relief to George W. Bush to stop the manual count of 60,000 uncounted votes as ordered by the Florida Supreme Court, on the theory that counting all of the votes would cause "irreparable harm" to Bush.

14th Amendment--In Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court declared the 14th Amendment prohibited variations in vote counting by county officials, contrary to all precedents and explicitly refused to set a precedent for future cases. In the same ruling, the Court accepted 2,490 overseas absentee ballots that were counted without any consistent standard and produced a net gain of 630 votes for Bush greater than his 537 vote margin of victory.

Presidential Elections; Appointment of Electors (3 USC Chapter 1 Section 5)--On December 12, 2000, the Supreme Court intentionally misrepresented the law as saying that Electors had to be chosen by December 12, when the true deadline was December 18.

Media--Corporate Contribution to Federal Campaign (FOX)

George W. Bush spoke by phone with his cousin John Ellis at FOX News shortly before FOX incorrectly projected Bush as the winner at 2 a.m. on Election Night, which prompted Al Gore to temporarily concede and defined him as the presumptive loser.

Corporate Contributions to Federal Campaign; Broadcast License Requirement to Serve the Public Interest (FOX, NBC, ABC, CBS)

The broadcast networks consistently ignored Bush's flaws and inconsistencies, while scrutinizing Gore's flaws and inconsistencies.

Corporate Contribution to Federal Campaign; Violation of Broadcast License (NBC/Jack Welch)

On Election Night, GE CEO Jack Welch reportedly ordered the network to call Florida for Bush, even though the results were too close to call.

* Rep. Henry Waxman's Repeated Requests for Videotapes Promised by NBC News President Andrew Lack.

Attorney General John Ashcroft--Failure to Investigate

DoJ has received THOUSANDS of complaints, but is investigating only 12. Complaints include serious allegations of fraud, such as pre punched ballots in heavily African American and Democratic precincts in Miami/Dade and Broward Counties.

Ring of Fire

With Bobby Kennedy and Mike Papantonio

broadcasting on Air America and NovaM

Touchscreen voting machines made 18,000 votes vanish in the midterm race to fill Katherine Harris' former Congressional seat. While Republican election officials refuse to act, a House committee is set to probe. John Bonifaz, legal director of the election integrity group Voter Action, has an update on his lawsuit for a re vote.

Kevin Phillips, former Republican strategist and premiere political analyst, as a two word summary of the Bush administration: "monumental incompetence". His latest bestseller is American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century.

Greg Palast, investigative journalist and Armed Madhouse author, ponders the U.S. media's failure to follow up on his dramatic Tim Griffin scoop. Palast discovered that Griffin ran a criminal voter suppression scheme for Rove.

American Theocracy

Black soldiers and the homeless targeted

BBC Television had exposed 2004 voter attack scheme by appointee Tim Griffin, a Rove aide

by Greg Palast

There’s only one thing worse than sacking an honest prosecutor. That’s replacing an honest prosecutor with a criminal.

There was one big hoohah in Washington as House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers pulled down the pants on George Bush’s firing of US Attorneys to expose a scheme to punish prosecutors who wouldn’t bend to political pressure.

But the Committee missed a big one: Timothy Griffin, Karl Rove’s assistant, the President’s pick as US Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas. Griffin, according to BBC Television, was the hidden hand behind a scheme to wipe out the voting rights of 70,000 citizens prior to the 2004 election.

Key voters on Griffin’s hit list: Black soldiers and homeless men and women. Nice guy, eh? Naughty or nice, however, is not the issue. Targeting voters where race is a factor is a felony crime under the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In October 2004, our investigations team at BBC Newsnight received a series of astonishing emails from Mr. Griffin, then Research Director for the Republican National Committee. He didn’t mean to send them to us. They were highly confidential memos meant only for RNC honchos.

However, Griffin made a wee mistake. Instead of sending the emails--potential evidence of a crime--to email addresses ending with the domain name “@GeorgeWBush.com” he sent them to “@GeorgeWBush.ORG.” A website run by prankster John Wooden who owns “GeorgeWBush.org.” When Wooden got the treasure trove of Rove ian ravings, he sent them to us.

And we dug in, decoding, and mapping the voters on what Griffin called, “Caging” lists, spreadsheets with 70,000 names of voters marked for challenge. Overwhelmingly, these were Black and Hispanic voters from Democratic precincts.

The Griffin scheme was sickly brilliant. We learned that the RNC sent first class letters to new voters in minority precincts marked, “Do not forward.” Several sheets contained nothing but soldiers, other sheets, homeless shelters. Targets included the Jacksonville Naval Air Station in Florida and that city’s State Street Rescue Mission. Another target, Edward Waters College, a school for African Americans.

If these voters were not currently at their home voting address, they were tagged as “suspect” and their registration wiped out or their ballot challenged and not counted. Of course, these ‘cages’ captured thousands of students, the homeless and those in the military though they are legitimate voters. We telephoned those on the hit list, including one Randall Prausa. His wife admitted he wasn’t living at his voting address: Randall was a soldier shipped overseas.

Randall and other soldiers like him who sent in absentee ballots, when challenged, would lose their vote. And they wouldn’t even know it.

And by the way, it’s not illegal for soldiers to vote from overseas--even if they’re Black.

But it is illegal to challenge voters en masse where race is an element in the targeting. So several lawyers told us, including Ralph Neas, famed civil rights attorney with People for the American Way.

Griffin himself ducked our cameras, but his RNC team tried to sell us the notion that the caging sheets were, in fact, not illegal voter hit lists, but a roster of donors to the Bush Cheney reelection campaign. Republican donors at homeless shelters?

Over the past weeks, Griffin has said he would step down if he had to face Congressional confirmation. However, the President appointed Griffin to the law enforcement post using an odd little provision of the USA Patriot Act that could allow Griffin to skip Congressional questioning altogether.

Therefore, I have a suggestion for Judiciary members. Voting law expert Neas will be testifying today before Conyers’ Committee on the topic of illegal voter “disenfranchisement”--the fancy word for stealing elections by denying voters’ civil rights.

Maybe Conyers should hold a line up of suspected vote thieves and let Neas identify the perpetrators. That should be easy in the case of the Caging List Criminal. He’d only have to look for the guy wearing a new shiny lawman’s badge.

Read the full story, “Caging Lists: Great White Republicans Take Voters Captive” in Greg Palast’s Armed Madhouse: Sordid Secrets and Strange Tales from a White House Gone Wild. The new edition, with a new chapter on Theft of the Election, will be released April 24^th.

************************************************************

Discarded Computers and TV Sets

Discarded computers and T.V. sets leak toxic substances like lead and mercury into the air and water when dumped into landfills or burned. New laws require the manufacturers to do the recycling, according to Kate Sinding, senior attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council.

************************************************************

A Note from the Editor

Most of this issue is devoted to just some of the ways in which our democracy has been hacked. If you have an uncomfortable feeling by the time you reach this paragraph, so do I. If you have serious concern as to why our votes, or the methods by which we vote, have suddenly become problematic, so have I. If you have been wondering why the people did not rise up to protest these serious issues, so have I. At this juncture, l have concluded that, even though the people outnumber the criminals, we the people are not organized.

And now ...

Take another little piece of my mind:

Letters from Dot Calm to her representatives and senators

I hope these letters will inspire everyone reading this blog to GET INVOLVED! Please, my fellow Americans--write, call, fax and e-mail your elected officials with your concerns TODAY!

Gonzales and Card badger Ashcroft in ICU to OK domestic spying in breach of the Constitution

Senator Barbara Boxer

112 Hart Senate Office Bldg.

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator:

Forgive my recent flurry of correspondence, but many serious developments have been of concern to me. I’ve chosen to compose separate letters for each.

This correspondence addresses the potential breach or lapse of adherence to our Constitution. Because we are a nation of laws, this especially concerns me.

It seems that when then-Attorney General Ashcroft was ill in hospital and acting Attorney General James Comey was resistant to breaking the law, Counsel-to-the-President, Alberto Gonzales, and Chief of Staff, Andy Card, rushed directly to Ashcroft’s ICU bedside to convince him to sign into law an extension. The extension would allow this administration for the first time to spy on its own citizens. To Ashcroft’s credit, even though ill, he understood that such an extension would be in violation of the Constitution and refused to approve it. The President signed the extension without the Justice Department’s approval. It was a very contentious moment in our country’s history.

This incident resulted in mass resignations, beginning with Ashcroft. I commend these true Americans for holding the Constitution as more significant than their positions of employment! Too bad this dramatic conclusion to the incident was lost to the American people because of inaction by a crack press.

My letter merely acknowledges how frail the laws of our government can be without rules and the strictest adherence to them.

Respectfully,

Dot Calm

Touch-Screen Voting, Caging, and the Disenfranchisement of Disadvantaged Voters

Dear Senator

This letter addresses touch-screen voting in America. My research is primarily drawn from quotations in an article by Paul Lehto, dated May 17, 2007. The other observations are those of Jim March and Bev Harris. Both address concern for voting systems in this country today. They are neither uniform nor transparent. In fact, some resemble practices of third-world countries--or worse.

As we know, one of the first signs of a country spiraling into fascism is rigged elections. No republic, including ours, is immune. Lehto’s report starts by reminding us that, here in the U.S., each eligible voter has an inalienable right to vote.

He continues by saying, in the land of the free and the home of the brave, Congressional intent to eliminate Us the People from our elections by failing to secure and guarantee these basic rights to all Americans is unconscionable. Lehto then includes two familiar quotations. Many of us learned them in primary school.

"The liberties of a people never were, nor ever will be, secure when the transactions of their rulers may be concealed from them ..."--Patrick Henry

"Give me Liberty, or give me Death." --Patrick Henry

WE AMERICANS WILL NOT ALLOW LIBERTY TO BE WRESTED FROM US WITHOUT A STRUGGLE.

Lehto warns: a bipartisan Congress will, in the next few days, attempt to violate our #1 Inalienable Right. Having talked to many, I've not yet found an American who says this warning is not well taken. Although each person I've spoken to understands they are being cheated, they tend to think that other Americans won't listen either, or they think that Americans are too busy to preserve their own most basic rights.

But we are not ALL too busy; we are listening.

Are Americans, in fact, too lazy or stupid to defend their own freedoms anymore? Some say that a few words about their own history will cause them to give up their republic without so much as a fight, especially with an election law attorney writing las if he were Paul Revere. Does cynicism mean that Americans give up the fight for their rights on their own soil?

Perhaps some, but not all. Watch out for the Americans who are not willing to give up on this republic so easily. We are the ones to fear.

Nowadays, some say American attention spans are so short that they won't be able to finish an essay like this of just a few pages, even when told that Abe Lincoln's "government of the People, by the People, and for the People" depends on it. I'm told regularly to use extremely few words, and give a quick action request at the end, so that Americans can go back to their slumbers.

Although our public schools have been trashed, don’t sell Americans out too quickly. Once we realize what is going on, we will defend our republic. We’ve done it before; we will do it again.

But I don't believe the pessimists. I choose to address all of those who read this as concerned citizens, instead of addled consumers. I believe that Americans respond when they know what is at stake. The USA did not become the world's richest country and sole military superpower without good reason. They will read a few more paragraphs of context that help explain why this is so important before it is time to prove why our #1 Inalienable Right must be defended.

Americans by and large remember the sacrifices of citizens and soldiers over the generations millions of them who worked, fought, and died for the dream of American democracy -- and they will not allow democracy to slip away during our generation on our watch if they understand clearly what is at stake.

WALKING THE WALK

So, to be clear, please let me explain. As an offer of my own seriousness about this, let me simply say I don't particularly need this fight: I've been in the hospital several times in the last year for as long as a week, and though medical bills and devotion to this cause have emptied the savings, and although fatigue follows me daily, and I have two young children who demand my care.

Like Lehto, I too work at a disadvantage; mine is multiple sclerosis.

HAMMERTIME!

The WinVote Shuffle: Vendors, Testers, Certifiers, & the Creative Use of a Hammer

By Jim March and Bev Harris

A 52 year old carpenter from Arlington Virginia expressed frustration over losing his voting rights by taking a hammer to a voting machine. The WinVote machine succumbed to no less than an Estwing Supreme 22S, "the finest framing hammer known to mankind," according to Sabo. Arlington has been forcing its citizenry to vote on machines of questionable pedigree, which count votes in secret, prohibit citizen oversight and for added fun, feature wireless capability throughout Election Day.

This Sabo vs. WinVote episode has unraveled a veritable Conga line of finger pointing vendors, testers and certifiers, all shuffling away from answering tough questions about how this machine came to be capturing votes on Election Day at all.

Sabo's act of outrage exposes the broken foundation of current electoral processes, and if history is any indicator, such incidents will get worse.

THE DAY THE HAMMER MET THE VOTING MACHINE

On Nov. 7, 2006, Anthony Sabo came to his polling place and smashed a voting machine into scrap. The deed that resulted in the voting machine's demise he said, and still insists, was the theft of his vote inside the hidden workings of the machine.

Sabo's dismay was expressed in spectacular fashion, but one the prosecutor could not allow.

On May 8, 2007, Mr. Sabo was convicted of felony tampering with a voting machine or ballot containing device, a class 5 felony carrying up to 10 years in prison. The jury stopped a step short of nullification, handing Sabo a sentence of only 90 days in the county jail with a $2,500 fine. Contributing to their leniency was the fact that Mr. Sabo had gone out of his way to avoid any risk of harm to any human, and surrendered peacefully to the first officers on scene. Causing some jurors concern, though, was the fact that Sabo had done the deed late in the day when the machine contained votes; though officials claim the votes were recovered intact (if you trust that the votes were recorded accurately at all), the hammering they took may have put them at risk.

SECRET VOTE COUNTS UPSET CITIZENS

Sabo isn't the first American to get arrested for resisting a voting machine.

THE WOODLAND TEA PARTY

On May 20, 2004 a Teller, Colorado citizen named "Lotus" was sentenced to 10 days in jail and a $548 fine for throwing tea bags at a voting machine in an incident that has come to be known as the Woodland Tea Party.

THE ELECTION FRAUD WAR OF 1946 – THE "BATTLE OF ATHENS"

Fifteen hundred shots were fired before it was all over and the president's wife wrote it up in the newspaper.

U.S. Experiment Ready to Sail (Holt Bill out of committee):

The unwieldy 58 page (so far) bill which attempts to fix the follies produced by the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) has now left the House Administration Committee.

All proposed amendments by Republicans were rebuffed (some of them were pretty terrible) and one amendment offering voters the option to choose paper ballots was reportedly passed.

The bill will now lurch forward. Unfortunately, both the Democrat and the Republican parties are showing resistance to allowing any kind of citizen oversight whatsoever, as they jockey for position on how best to steer and control elections despite those pesky voters.

Politicians: Please! Please! Allow UNHAMPERED citizen oversight!

TO RECAP, FOR ANY OF YOU WHO MAY HAVE BECOME

DIZZIED BY ALL THE MANEUVERING:

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are designed to protect The People from being victimized by their own government.

To this end, The People (and not any Political Party) are explicitly given sovereignty over the government.

The representatives are to serve The People and The People are to choose their representatives.

Voting machines, which are the subject of HAVA and the Holt Bill, remove your votes from public counting and instead count them in secret.

The citizenry is currently forbidden to oversee or examine this secret counting process and the Holt Bill continues that state of affairs.

Thus, the citizenry is being deprived of the right to oversee its own government.

The Holt Bill adds new layers of complexity into the techno bazaar that HAVA created and invokes another spending spree.

Real progress involves counting votes in public with public oversight. It's just that simple.

Two voting products combine to steal our political privacy.

The government and some of its vendors can now access our secret ballot.

It's true: Two voting products are designed to be used together. When combined, these two products do away with the secret ballot. And this is already being used.

Because this secretive process is split between two products, the sales pitch on each product truthfully claims that privacy remains in place. What they DON'T MENTION is that when the products are used together, privacy evaporates.

The two products that combine to strip away our ballot privacy are:

1. Ballot marked vote tracker systems (VoteHere and, from reports we have received, Populex)

2. Image retaining vote counters (Diebold, Hart Intercivic)

Once the bar code containing embedded voter information is on the ballot, the image captured by the vote counter creates a computer file with both votes and voter tied information.

Persons inside government are in the best position to abuse this feature. In fact, government security experts already have ties to the ballot marked systems.

Current US Secretary of Defense and former CIA head Robert Gates has been on the advisory board of VoteHere.. Former US Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, also a former deputy director of the CIA and a long time Chairman of the Board at the Carlyle Group is on the advisory board for Populex. Surely, these two men know the implications of tracking votes.

The second biggest expenditure for the CIA during the 1980s was influencing foreign elections; as a Director of and Deputy Director of the CIA, surely they are aware of the benefits an unscrupulous individual could gain from producing giant vote databases that tie back to voters.

HERE’S HOW THESE TWO SYSTEMS STEAL YOUR POLITICAL PRIVACY

Step 1: Vote tracking system puts bar code on ballot which embeds a connector to your voter registration system ID. Sales pitch: "This allows voters to find out if their vote went through the system."

Your ID embedded in bar code

Step 2: Ballot counting device automatically takes digital photo of each ballot. These images are stored on the computer in ballot image directories.

Bar code embedded on ballot

With the vote tracking system, the digital image directories contain BOTH the bar code with your ID embedded AND the votes you cast.

Presumably there will be more later on how the ballot tracking systems work, and why their use is about to increase. Will you explore the dangers of allowing our vote secrecy to be stripped away by government insiders, private vendors, and proprietary trade secrets?

Some citizens think we should do away with the secret ballot. Do you?

Sincerely,

Dot Calm

Background:

Goodling Dismisses Voter Supression Tactic Of ‘Caging’ As Just ‘A Direct Mail Term’

As research director at the Republican National Committee, U.S. attorney Tim Griffin was involved in a plan to suppress Florida votes — primarily those of African American servicemembers — in the 2004 election. From the LA Times, 10/28/04:

The Bush campaign is planning an election day effort to disrupt ballot casting by African Americans by challenging voters whose names are on a “caging list,” according to a British news report.

Citing an internal GOP e mail with the subject line “caging,” the BBC reported Tuesday that Florida Republicans had a list of 1,886 names and addresses of voters in largely black and traditionally Democratic areas of Jacksonville. ¼

But African American leaders Wednesday called the list another “shameful” Republican effort to keep blacks from voting.

In her testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today, Monica Goodling — the Justice Department’s former White House liaison — tried to dismiss the voter suppression allegations against Griffin, a protege of Karl Rove, by calling caging just “a direct mail term.” Watch it:

Caging is not just a “direct mail term.” Suppressing votes on the basis of race is illegal under the federal Voting Rights Act.

Congressional sources told ThinkProgress that the White House decided to not put Griffin before the Senate Judiciary Committee for approval because it would bring up questions about the 2004 caging scheme.

Transcript:

GOODLING: Ok, and the last thing was the voter — the caging issue, which was a reference to Tim Griffin.

SANCHEZ: Can you explain what “caging” is? I’m not familiar with that term.

GOODLING: My understanding — and I don’t actually know a lot about it — is that it’s a direct mail term, that people who do direct mail, when they separate addresses that may be good versus addresses that may be bad. That’s the best information that I have, is that it’s a direct mail term used by vendors in that circumstance.

Continuity of Government: a Scary Bush Power Grab?

Dear Congressman:

I contacted your office early last week with a specific concern. I am merely following through with this correspondence. As you know, the concept of Continuity of Government Operations first arose during the Eisenhower presidency and continues until today in one form or another.

It has been my understanding the Executive Branch carries out laws passed by Congress. Our forefathers were indeed wise as they developed our Constitution so future presidents did not have or grab absolute power. Past presidents well understood this concept.

After more than 50 years of some form of Continuity of Government Operations, today it is dramatically changed. This president has usurped the role of Congress and completely empowered himself should a catastrophic emergency arise.

I find this new interpretation of Continuity of Government Operations disturbing. Congress has always had an essential role in the governance of the United States. The reason, I believe, is the effort and opinions of so many Americans working for the good of our country. I am, therefore, extremely uncomfortable witnessing an erosion in the precepts of Continuity of Government Operations in what appears to be the power grab our forefathers so diligently planned against.

Please investigate this latest interpretation of Continuity of Government Operations and explain why I should not be concerned.

Respectfully,

Dot Calm

Background:

May of 2007, President Bush signs an Executive Order that made significant changes to the official Continuity Of Government policy.

Continuity Central reported:

"The Directive slipped out relatively unnoticed by the mainstream media, yet it has important and positive implications for the future resiliency of public sector operations in the United States. The concepts of a National Continuity Coordinator and a centrally directed National Continuity Implementation Plan are to be welcomed in principle and are something which other countries should look seriously at emulating."

"Earlier in the year the World Economic Forum called for such a position to be set up in every government in its ‘Global Risks 2007’ report. This championed the appointment of ‘Country Risk Officers’ who would provide a focal point in government for mitigating global risks across departments, learning from private sector approaches and escaping a ‘silo based’ approach."

"Two years ago, the Business Continuity Institute also called for the creation of such a position within the UK government. In a statement published in March 2005, the BCI said: “Encouraging good business continuity management is an area where government could contribute – not only giving direct leadership on the huge risks such as terrorism, but also helping to coordinate and communicate low cost commonsense best practice. The Business Continuity Institute calls for the appointment of a government minister to promote the establishment of a business continuity management culture in the UK."

What you'll see in this Presidential directive goes far beyond disaster preparations. Most people have never heard of CoG. It comes as a big surprise when they first hear about it, and shock later sets in once they've had a chance to see the details.

For your consideration, I present here the basics.

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

Also known as:

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD 20

Click here to read supporting documents

Subject: National Continuity Policy

Purpose

(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency.

Definitions

(2) In this directive:

(a) "Category" refers to the categories of executive departments and agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;

(b) "Catastrophic Emergency" means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

(c) "Continuity of Government," or "COG," means a coordinated effort within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic Emergency;

(d) "Continuity of Operations," or "COOP," means an effort within individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary Mission Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack related emergencies;

(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers among the branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;

(f) "Executive Departments and Agencies" means the executive departments enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C. 104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the United States Postal Service;

(g) "Government Functions" means the collective functions of the heads of executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation, presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the legislative and judicial branches;

(h) "National Essential Functions," or "NEFs," means that subset of Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported through COOP and COG capabilities; and

(i) "Primary Mission Essential Functions," or "PMEFs," means those Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an emergency.

Policy

(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of National Essential Functions under all conditions.

Implementation Actions

(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its consequences.

(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of

the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;

(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining the trust and confidence of the American people;

(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;

(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people, property, or interests;

(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic consequences of an attack or other incident;

(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems; and

(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.

(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National

Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day to day forum for such policy coordination.

(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and

responsibilities in support of the Federal Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall

continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies, and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.

(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not later than 90 days after the date of this directive.

(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of

the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.

(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the delivery of essential services during an emergency.

(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP) and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:

(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours after COOP activation;

(b) Succession orders and pre planned devolution of authorities that ensure the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in advance in accordance with applicable law;

(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and official access to them must be provided;

(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary for continuity operations on an emergency basis;

(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support connectivity between

and among key government leadership, internal elements, other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;

(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations; and

(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.

(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions (COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness levels, focusing

on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments and agencies shall comply with the requirements and

assigned responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.

(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:

(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and the execution of continuity budgets;

(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget requests; and

(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this directive.

(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:

(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President;

(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation, and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to the President; and

(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the National Continuity Coordinator.

(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:

(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT, and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and

(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four categories of executive departments and agencies.

(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:

(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity operations and activities;

(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and agencies;

(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to the President through the APHS/CT;

(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 of December 17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an

official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;

(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators;

(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators; and

(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop, implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications architecture.

(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's continuity of government.

(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.

(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized emergency and shall:

(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level, as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;

(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all conditions;

(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with this directive;

(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and communications systems; and

(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security roles and responsibilities

General Provisions

(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate

support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.

(21) This directive:

(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the availability of appropriations;

(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense, to the commander of military forces, or military command and control procedures; and

(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the United States, its

agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.

(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

Signed by:

GEORGE W. BUSH

Edited on Wed May 23 07 03:46 PM by IDemo

Shadow Government

The concept first arose with President Eisenhower during the "duck and cover" era of the Cold War. Every president since, including Carter and Clinton, has issued one or more "Continuity of Government Operations" statements in one form or another. The first time that actions were actually taken under its umbrella, however, was immediately following the events of September 11, 2001. Bush admitted the action six months later. Key congressional leaders had not been informed until then.

Bill Clinton issued Presidential Decision Directive 67, which replaced the Bush (41) Administration's NSD 69 "Enduring Constitutional Government" of 02 June 1992, which in turn succeeded NSD 37 "Enduring Constitutional Government" of 18 April 1990 and NSDD 55 "Enduring National Leadership" of 14 September 1982. The latest "COG" (Continuity of Government) exercise, from Bush junior, states: "Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked."

Why would the latest continuity statement in a series of such statements stretching across half a century be cause for alarm if none of the others have caused a constitutional crisis so far? Excepting the fact that the source of the the Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD 20 is one who can hardly open his mouth (perhaps even to brush his teeth) without wreaking havoc on people and principles, what exactly causes us to fear for the worst this time around? Could it mean that something big is up, and the BFEE is feeling the need to shield itself with absolute power in the face of a looming catastrophe?

Bush shrugged off his responsibility as Commander in Chief by announcing the creation of a new “War Czar,” but within a week he issued a national security directive that would, in the event of a catastrophic attack on the federal government, assign the responsibility of running a shadow government to the White House, not the Department of Homeland Security. Why would he shirk responsibility for conducting the war "over there" one week, and completely empower himself for the one over here the next?

4,000 No-Bid Contracts for Katrina

Dear Senator:

I am following up the May 25^th call to your office regarding 4,000 no-bid contracts that were awarded after Hurricane Katrina.

After a thirty year career in contracts for the government, my husband retired, satisfied he did his best to save our government money. I felt satisfied that our government’s assets were in trusted hands.

It is with great dismay that I hear today that over 4,000 contracts were awarded after Hurricane Katrina as no bid! I find that astounding.

Will you please investigate this situation? Four thousand no-bid contracts represent a great deal of tax payer money changing hands. I would like to know to whom these contracts were awarded and for what service. Wouldn’t you?

Sincerely,

Dot Calm

The Federalist Papers

The Federalist Papers were written and published during the years 1787 and 1788 in several New York State newspapers to persuade New York voters to ratify the proposed constitution. They consist of 85 essays outlining how this new government would operate and why this type of government was the best choice for the United States of America. The essays were signed PUBLIUS. The authors of some papers are under dispute, but the general consensus is that Alexander Hamilton wrote fifty two, James Madison wrote twenty eight, and John Jay contributed the remaining five. The Federalist Papers remain today as an excellent reference for anyone who wants to understand the U.S. Constitution. The following is attributed to Alexander Hamilton.

To the People of the State of New York:

ASSUMING it therefore as an established truth that the several States, in case of disunion, or such combinations of them as might happen to be formed out of the wreck of the general Confederacy, would be subject to those vicissitudes of peace and war, of friendship and enmity, with each other, which have fallen to the lot of all neighboring nations not united under one government, let us enter into a concise detail of some of the consequences that would attend such a situation.

War between the States, in the first period of their separate existence, would be accompanied with much greater distresses than it commonly is in those countries where regular military establishments have long obtained. The disciplined armies always kept on foot on the continent of Europe, though they bear a malignant aspect to liberty and economy, have, notwithstanding, been productive of the signal advantage of rendering sudden conquests impracticable, and of preventing that rapid desolation which used to mark the progress of war prior to their introduction. The art of fortification has contributed to the same ends. The nations of Europe are encircled with chains of fortified places, which mutually obstruct invasion. Campaigns are wasted in reducing two or three frontier garrisons, to gain admittance into an enemy's country. Similar impediments occur at every step, to exhaust the strength and delay the progress of an invader. Formerly, an invading army would penetrate into the heart of a neighboring country almost as soon as intelligence of its approach could be received; but now a comparatively small force of disciplined troops, acting on the defensive, with the aid of posts, is able to impede, and finally to frustrate, the enterprises of one much more considerable. The history of war, in that quarter of the globe, is no longer a history of nations subdued and empires overturned, but of towns taken and retaken; of battles that decide nothing; of retreats more beneficial than victories; of much effort and little acquisition.

In this country the scene would be altogether reversed. The jealousy of military establishments would postpone them as long as possible. The want of fortifications, leaving the frontiers of one state open to another, would facilitate inroads. The populous States would, with little difficulty, overrun their less populous neighbors. Conquests would be as easy to be made as difficult to be retained. War, therefore, would be desultory and predatory. PLUNDER and devastation ever march in the train of irregulars. The calamities of individuals would make the principal figure in the events which would characterize our military exploits.

This picture is not too highly wrought; though, I confess, it would not long remain a just one. Safety from external danger is the most powerful director of national conduct. Even the ardent love of liberty will, after a time, give way to its dictates. The violent destruction of life and property incident to war, the continual effort and alarm attendant on a state of continual danger, will compel nations the most attached to liberty to resort for repose and security to institutions which have a tendency to destroy their civil and political rights. To be more safe, they at length become willing to run the risk of being less free.

The institutions chiefly alluded to are STANDING ARMIES and the correspondent appendages of military establishments. Standing armies, it is said, are not provided against in the new Constitution; and it is therefore inferred that they may exist under it.1 Their existence, however, from the very terms of the proposition, is, at most, problematical and uncertain. But standing armies, it may be replied, must inevitably result from a dissolution of the Confederacy. Frequent war and constant apprehension, which require a state of as constant preparation, will infallibly produce them. The weaker States or confederacies would first have recourse to them, to put themselves upon an equality with their more potent neighbors. They would endeavor to supply the inferiority of population and resources by a more regular and effective system of defense, by disciplined troops, and by fortifications. They would, at the same time, be necessitated to strengthen the executive arm of government, in doing which their constitutions would acquire a progressive direction toward monarchy. It is of the nature of war to increase the executive at the expense of the legislative authority.

The expedients which have been mentioned would soon give the States or confederacies that made use of them a superiority over their neighbors. Small states, or states of less natural strength, under vigorous governments, and with the assistance of disciplined armies, have often triumphed over large states, or states of greater natural strength, which have been destitute of these advantages. Neither the pride nor the safety of the more important States or confederacies would permit them long to submit to this mortifying and adventitious superiority. They would quickly resort to means similar to those by which it had been effected, to reinstate themselves in their lost pre eminence. Thus, we should, in a little time, see established in every part of this country the same engines of despotism which have been the scourge of the Old World. This, at least, would be the natural course of things; and our reasonings will be the more likely to be just, in proportion as they are accommodated to this standard.

These are not vague inferences drawn from supposed or speculative defects in a Constitution, the whole power of which is lodged in the hands of a people, or their representatives and delegates, but they are solid conclusions, drawn from the natural and necessary progress of human affairs.

It may, perhaps, be asked, by way of objection to this, why did not standing armies spring up out of the contentions which so often distracted the ancient republics of Greece? Different answers, equally satisfactory, may be given to this question. The industrious habits of the people of the present day, absorbed in the pursuits of gain, and devoted to the improvements of agriculture and commerce, are incompatible with the condition of a nation of soldiers, which was the true condition of the people of those republics. The means of revenue, which have been so greatly multiplied by the increase of gold and silver and of the arts of industry, and the science of finance, which is the offspring of modern times, concurring with the habits of nations, have produced an entire revolution in the system of war, and have rendered disciplined armies, distinct from the body of the citizens, the inseparable companions of frequent hostility.

There is a wide difference, also, between military establishments in a country seldom exposed by its situation to internal invasions, and in one which is often subject to them, and always apprehensive of them. The rulers of the former can have a good pretext, if they are even so inclined, to keep on foot armies so numerous as must of necessity be maintained in the latter. These armies being, in the first case, rarely, if at all, called into activity for interior defense, the people are in no danger of being broken to military subordination. The laws are not accustomed to relaxations, in favor of military exigencies; the civil state remains in full vigor, neither corrupted, nor confounded with the principles or propensities of the other state. The smallness of the army renders the natural strength of the community an over match for it; and the citizens, not habituated to look up to the military power for protection, or to submit to its oppressions, neither love nor fear the soldiery; they view them with a spirit of jealous acquiescence in a necessary evil, and stand ready to resist a power which they suppose may be exerted to the prejudice of their rights. The army under such circumstances may usefully aid the magistrate to suppress a small faction, or an occasional mob, or insurrection; but it will be unable to enforce encroachments against the united efforts of the great body of the people.

In a country in the predicament last described, the contrary of all this happens. The perpetual menacings of danger oblige the government to be always prepared to repel it; its armies must be numerous enough for instant defense. The continual necessity for their services enhances the importance of the soldier, and proportionably degrades the condition of the citizen. The military state becomes elevated above the civil. The inhabitants of territories, often the theatre of war, are unavoidably subjected to frequent infringements on their rights, which serve to weaken their sense of those rights; and by degrees the people are brought to consider the soldiery not only as their protectors, but as their superiors. The transition from this disposition to that of considering them masters, is neither remote nor difficult; but it is very difficult to prevail upon a people under such impressions, to make a bold or effectual resistance to usurpations supported by the military power.

The kingdom of Great Britain falls within the first description. An insular situation, and a powerful marine, guarding it in a great measure against the possibility of foreign invasion, supersede the necessity of a numerous army within the kingdom. A sufficient force to make head against a sudden descent, till the militia could have time to rally and embody, is all that has been deemed requisite. No motive of national policy has demanded, nor would public opinion have tolerated, a larger number of troops upon its domestic establishment. There has been, for a long time past, little room for the operation of the other causes, which have been enumerated as the consequences of internal war. This peculiar felicity of situation has, in a great degree, contributed to preserve the liberty which that country to this day enjoys, in spite of the prevalent venality and corruption. If, on the contrary, Britain had been situated on the continent, and had been compelled, as she would have been, by that situation, to make her military establishments at home coextensive with those of the other great powers of Europe, she, like them, would in all probability be, at this day, a victim to the absolute power of a single man. 'T is possible, though not easy, that the people of that island may be enslaved from other causes; but it cannot be by the prowess of an army so inconsiderable as that which has been usually kept up within the kingdom.

If we are wise enough to preserve the Union we may for ages enjoy an advantage similar to that of an insulated situation. Europe is at a great distance from us. Her colonies in our vicinity will be likely to continue too much disproportioned in strength to be able to give us any dangerous annoyance. Extensive military establishments cannot, in this position, be necessary to our security. But if we should be disunited, and the integral parts should either remain separated, or, which is most probable, should be thrown together into two or three confederacies, we should be, in a short course of time, in the predicament of the continental powers of Europe our liberties would be a prey to the means of defending ourselves against the ambition and jealousy of each other.

This is an idea not superficial or futile, but solid and weighty. It deserves the most serious and mature consideration of every prudent and honest man of whatever party. If such men will make a firm and solemn pause, and meditate dispassionately on the importance of this interesting idea; if they will contemplate it in all its attitudes, and trace it to all its consequences, they will not hesitate to part with trivial objections to a Constitution, the rejection of which would in all probability put a final period to the Union. The airy phantoms that flit before the distempered imaginations of some of its adversaries would quickly give place to the more substantial forms of dangers, real, certain, and formidable.

PUBLIUS.

The next post will be devoted entirely to just how much of this country is foreign owned. It will be shocking.