“Investigations Involving the Internet and Computer Networks.”
The US Justice Department has published a guide for investigating computer crimes and handling digital evidence, titled “Investigations Involving the Internet and Computer Networks.”
The 137-page PDF file covers tracing Internet addresses and other issues involving e-mail, Web sites, instant messages, chat rooms, denial of service attacks, and other digital topics.
The guide is one of several involving digital issues in production at the department, and others will cover digital crime scene investigations, courtroom presentation of digital evidence, forensic examination of digital evidence, etc.
A recent report in the January newsletter of The Marine Corp Center for Lessons Learned found the following: Marines deployed in Afghanistan are not getting adequate nutrition.
As a result, “many Marines and soldiers lost 20 to 40 pounds of bodyweight during their deployment,”. It adds that at least one solider was evacuated because of malnutrition and a 60-pound weight loss.
PDF report: Medical Support of Operations in a High Altitude, Mountainous Environment: Quick Look Report 1-25
KSFO’s Rodgers: Left-wing websites are “full of bovine excrement”
On the January 25 edition of KSFO’s Morning Show, hosts Melanie Morgan and Lee Rodgers continued their discussion of a debunked accusation, first made by InsightMag.com, that “researchers connected to” Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) have said that Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) “spent at least four years in a so-called Madrassa, or Muslim seminary, in Indonesia.” Rodgers acknowledged that the story had been “discredited” by CNN but in turn purported to discredit CNN by claiming that the network is “the propaganda mouthpiece for the political left. They’re the Democratic Party’s Al Jazeera.” Morgan then said that “certain left-wing websites seem to believe that they can fit the facts to their agenda, and their agenda is to destroy us personally and to get us fired and thrown of the air.” Rodgers added that the “left-wing websites” are “full of bovine excrement” and they “lie in their teeth just for the fun of it,” to which Morgan replied, “Exactly.”
STAYING ON MESSAGE, WHATEVER THE QUESTION
Elias Buchwald, a founder of Burson Marsteller, recently ran a four-day training session for 17 high-level Israeli spokespersons from government agencies. The session was organized by 5W Public Relations, the American Jewish Congress and the Israeli Foreign Ministry. “We want Americans to relate to Israel emotionally, not just impersonally,” Buchwald said. “The point should be ‘Israel has what you like’ by using warm, evocative and colorful language.” Reporter Gary Rosenblatt summarized Buchwald’s advice as “keep it short, make it direct, and no matter what the question, know beforehand what message you want to get across and stick with it.” The media consul at the Israeli consulate in New York, David Saranga, described Israel’s PR problem as being that “Americans miss the human face of Israel, they perceive of us as militaristic and very religious but they miss the lens of culture [and] education”.
SOURCE: The Jewish Week, January 19, 2007
Editorials, Opinion Pieces Address Health Care Proposal Announced by President Bush in State of the Union Address
Access this story and related links online:
Baltimore Sun: The Bush health insurance proposal “would almost certainly destroy the fragile structure through which most Americans get health insurance in hopes of luring the working poor into the private market, where they would have no advantage of group pricing and no coverage for pre-existing conditions,” a Sun editorial states. The proposal is a “missed” opportunity for health care reform, the editorial states (Baltimore Sun, 1/24).
28 Senators Vote to Repeal Minimum Wage. 2008 Elections, Anyone?
by Mike Hall, Jan 25, 2007
Maybe in 1938, the idea of a federal minimum wage was controversial. But not so much so that a majority of the House and Senate couldn’t approve the Fair Labor Standards Act that set the federal minimum wage at 25 cents an hour.
So in 2007, how can anyone with a shred of common sense, let alone an ounce of empathy for men and women who bust their tails day in and day out for $5.15 an hour, say it’s time to scrap the federal minimum wage?
Yesterday, 69 years after the minimum wage was first established, 28 U.S. senators did just that when they voted “yes” on an amendment from Colorado Republican Wayne Allard that would have scrapped the federal minimum wage. (Click here to see the 28 senators who voted for the Allard amendment. They should be ashamed of themselves and if they are your lawmakers, let them know how wrong they were.)
We’re not making this up. Here’s what Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) had to say about the Allard amendment that was offered to the Senate bill (S. 2) to raise the federal minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25 an hour:
On the Allard amendment, members should understand what the effect of the Allard amendment is, and that is effectively to repeal the minimum wage for any states among the 50 states. That effectively is what the Allard amendment does.
Allard hid the repeal behind the “state flexibility” mask, claiming states should be allowed to set their own rates, without a federal floor, because of different costs of living and differing economies. The amendment would nullify the federal minimum wage standard in the 45 states that have their own minimum wage law, and allow the five states that don’t—Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and Tennessee—to opt-out of any federal minimum wage increase by passing a minimum wage law providing at least $5.15 an hour.
As if speaking to reluctant Depression-era lawmakers wary of federal intrusion on the states, Kennedy explained the reason for a minimum wage floor:
The concept of the minimum wage was that it was going to be a minimum payment, a minimum standard. What was accepted at the time of the minimum wage is that in this country, we didn’t want to accelerate a rush to the bottom so that we would have competition in the various states to pay the lowest possible wages–sweat labor–in order to try to attract industries into those particular States, but to provide a minimum standard.
Here in the 21st century, that simple reasoning just didn’t penetrate the skulls of 28 U.S. senators—who by the way make $165,200 a year and almost annually vote to give themselves a pay raise.
Meanwhile, after 43 Republican senators yesterday maneuvered to kill a clean minimum wage bill with no tax giveaways to business, debate continues today on another Senate minimum wage bill that includes business tax cuts and other giveaways. A final vote likely won’t take place until next week, but we will give you an update tomorrow.
Right-wing blogs battle for troop surge using ‘NRSC Pledge’
Conservative bloggers have initiated a pledge to deny campaign funds to Republicans who vote against President Bush’s plan to send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq.
Led by Townhall’s Hugh Hewitt, “The NRSC Pledge” states that if the Senate passes any resolution critical of the troop increase, donors would not contribute to any Republican senator who voted for the resolution. They also would not contribute to the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) absent a commitment from Chairman John Ensign (R-Nev.) to not spend any committee money on those senators who are up in 2008.
As of Thursday afternoon, it had nearly 10,000 signatories.
A Democratic-led resolution criticizing Bush’s strategy was supported by Sens. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) has introduced a milder version. Hagel and Warner are both up in 2008, as are several other senators who have been critical of the troop “surge.”
Hewitt says the resolutions are equally damaging in that they both encourage the enemy.
In a post Thursday, he explained: “Because the troops and the war trump any partisan calculation, I have helped organize a campaign to alert Republican senators that a vote for the Warner resolution, or any other similar resolution, is a deal breaker for me. I will not contribute to any senator who so votes, and I will not work for any senator who so votes.”
Other conservative bloggers have joined the call, but some including John Hawkins at the Right Wings News are denouncing the pledge.
“If this catches on or even just makes a really big splash, you’re going to have people trying to do the exact same thing on amnesty, embryonic stem cells and who knows what other issues over the next two years,” Hawkins wrote.
The NRSC declined to comment.
– Aaron Blake
From: The Hill e-news
Progress Report: Debunking the Escalation Myths
Debunking the Escalation Myths
Nearly seventy percent of Americans oppose President Bush’s escalation plan, as do top military leaders, Bush’s staunchest international ally, and the Iraq Study Group. After four years in the shadows, Congress has begun to use its power as a co-equal branch of government to do something about the administration’s failed policies in Iraq. On Wednesday, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee passed a resolution condemning Bush’s escalation strategy. “It is not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq,” the resolution said, “particularly by escalating the United States military force presence.” The Senate will debate this measure along with several others next week, and a “vote could come as early as the week of Feb. 5.” Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE), who strongly opposes escalation, explained why a healthy debate on the issue is crucial: “I think all 100 senators ought to be on the line on this. What do you believe? What are you willing to support? What do you think?” Americans are mobilizing against the President’s plan. A protest rally has been planned for this weekend in Washington, D.C., while other groups such as Americans Against Escalation in Iraq plan to lobby members of Congress “who have spoken out against the war, but who have so far declined to pledge support for a resolution denouncing Bush’s plan to increase the number of troops.” In response, the White House and others have put out several myths they think will win support for their plan. The Progress Report debunks the right wing’s talking points:
MYTH #1 — OPPOSING ESCALATION UNDERMINES THE TROOPS: A recent Military Times poll of active-duty forces found 39 percent of those polled think troop levels should remain the same or should decrease. Only 38 percent support sending more troops into Iraq, with 13 percent supporting a complete withdrawal. “Our troops are on the Internet constantly,” Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) said recently. “They know very well there’s a debate going on in this country.” Yet the administration and its conservative allies continue to push the false premise that opposition to the administration’s failed policies — which once again became painfully evident last Saturday — means a lack of support for the troops. “In Iraq, all of this undermines the morale of the military and makes their task that much harder on the ground,” the Wall Street Journal’s conservative editorial page said about the ongoing debate. Vice President Cheney said of Senate passage of the anti-escalation resolution, “It would be, I think, detrimental from the standpoint of the troops.” Hagel hit back hard against the charges. “When I hear…impugning motives and patriotism to our country, not only is it offensive and disgusting but it debases the whole system of our country and who we are,” he said. “Can’t we debate the most critical issue of our time, out front, in front of the American people? They expect it. Are we so weak, we can’t do that?”
MYTH #2 — PROGRESSIVES DON’T HAVE A PLAN: “It’s the only game in town,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) said of escalation. Cheney claimed “the critics have not suggested a policy.” Tony Snow added, “If you’ve got a better proposal that will achieve success in Iraq, help Iraqis get swiftly into the lead, and will demonstrate support for American forces, let us hear it.” Listen closely, Tony. Over a year and a half ago, the Center for American Progress released a responsible Iraq strategy that called for comprehensive strategic redeployment. The strategy, which was updated in May 2006, calls for reducing U.S. troops to 60,000 in six months and to zero in eighteen months, while redeploying troops to Afghanistan, Kuwait, and the Persian Gulf to contain the threat of global terror networks. The plan also calls for engaging in diplomacy to resolve the conflict within Iraq by convening a Geneva Peace Conference, establishing a Gulf Security initiative to deal with the aftermath of U.S. redeployment from Iraq, and putting Iraq’s reconstruction back on track with targeted international funds. The American public and the Iraqi public support phased withdrawal.
MYTH #3 — WE OWE THE PRESIDENT ONE LAST SHOT: “Our country is pursuing a new strategy in Iraq,” Bush said during his State of the Union address, “and I ask you to give it a chance to work.” “I think it deserves a chance to see if it will work,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said. “We should do everything in our power to help make it work,” Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said, “and that begins by giving it a chance and not criticizing it before the strategy even has a few days to work out.” This talking point ignores the fact that similar strategies have been tried — and failed — twice before. During the last six months, the United States has increased — or “surged” — the number of American troops in Baghdad by 12,000, yet the violence and deaths of Americans and Iraqis has climbed alarmingly, averaging 960 a week since the latest troop increase. This past summer, Bush announced a major effort to secure Baghdad, stating at a news conference that thousands of U.S.-led coalition troops would be moved into the city. Violence intensified throughout the country, and U.S. deaths in Iraq spiked.
MYTH #4 — HAGEL IS THE ONLY CONSERVATIVE CRITIC: The White House is trying to downplay the growing discontent among conservatives about Bush’s policies. Fox News’ Chris Wallace asked Cheney recently if they were losing the support from conservatives. “Well, I don’t think Chuck Hagel has been with us for a long time,” Cheney said. Asked for a comment on the escalation resolution, Tony Snow said there had been “no real surprises” because Hagel voted for it, ignoring the fact that Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) was the only member of the Foreign Relations Committee to express support for the president’s plan. Other influential conservative voices — including those of Sens. John Warner (R-VA), Norm Coleman (R-MN), Sam Brownback (R-KS) — have said they will not support the plan.
From: Center for American Progress Action Fund
Congress responds to Bush’s Iraq plea
Helen Thomas: WASHINGTON — President Bush picked Iraq as his preemptive battleground nearly four years ago and now is asking a war-weary country to give his military escalation a chance to work.
Complete article at:
Helen Thomas is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org .
Borowitz Report – State of the Jihad Shocker
Andy in Seattle Sunday Night!
7:30 PM at the Moore Theater
Andy performs for one night only on Sunday, January 28 at 7:30 at the Moore Theater in Seattle. Ticket information at www.themoore.com .
And now, breaking news:
Bin Laden’s State of the Jihad Address Short on Specifics
Critics Blast Laundry List of Vague Threats
Al-Qaeda terror mastermind Osama bin Laden delivered his annual State of the Jihad address last night and immediately faced criticism that the speech was short on specifics and little more than a laundry list of vague threats.
Speaking from his cave in an undisclosed location in the mountainous region between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the world’s most wanted man began his address with an upbeat assessment of the global jihad against the infidels.
“Friends, terrorists, extremists, and madmen,” Mr. bin Laden began. “The state of the jihad is strong.”
The al-Qaeda leader’s fifty-minute address was interrupted by applause at least thirty-five times, usually when Mr. bin Laden punctuated his remarks by saying “Death to America.”
Mr. bin Laden sounded themes that were familiar to audiences of previous State of the Jihad addresses, such as his warning that “Al-Qaeda must become less dependent on foreign sources of chaos.”
As is his tradition, he also used the address to acknowledge several “heroes of the Jihad,” including one terrorist, Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Muhajir, who risked his life by pulling another terrorist out of the path of a charging donkey.
But the al-Qaeda kingpin was in for some blistering criticism in the official response to the State of the Jihad address, which this year was delivered by opposition lunatic Hassan el-Medfaii.
“What we heard tonight was little more than ‘stay the course,’” said Mr. el-Medfaii. “As a madman, I had to ask, ‘where’s the beef?’”
Elsewhere, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) bowed out of the 2008 presidential race, stating, “I decided to run for president before I decided against it.”
three to see
David Horsey: some have even gone over to the other side
Trouble Town (Lloyd Dangle): cut off funding
TeeVee News(Steve Beckley): The new confidence men