After Hours

General discussion

Locked

CodeWarriorz Thoughts

By codewarrior.wins ·
Tags: Off Topic
blog root

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

"Get any Sleep?" - Bush the F'ing idiot seems amused a woman has to work three jobs

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">DUBYA: There's a certain comfort to know that the promises made will be kept by the government. <br />MS. MORNIN: Yes. <br />DUBYA: And so thank you for asking that. You don't have to worry. <br />MS. MORNIN: That's good, because I work three jobs and I feel like I contribute. <br />DUBYA: You work three jobs? <br />MS. MORNIN: Three jobs, yes. <br />DUBYA: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doin' that. Get any sleep?<br />-- Dubya takes pride in the fact that in America, this woman has to work three jobs to stay afloat (By the way, the bit that is crossed out is a bit of conversation that never happened, but ended up in the official White House transcript anyway), Omaha, Nebraska, Feb. 4, 2005 <br />
<br />
<a href="http://mp3.dubyaspeak.com/uniquely_american.mp3">http://mp3.dubyaspeak.com/uniquely_american.mp3</a>
</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/get-any-sleep-bush-fing-idiot-seems.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

Bush Wants Answers on Iranian Leader's Past

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-063005usiran_lat,0,2127396.story?coll=la-home-headlines">Bush Wants Answers on Iranian Leader's Past</a>Bush Wants Answers on Iranian Leader's Past
<br />By Tyler Marshall and Paul Richter, Times Staff Writers
<br />
<br />
<br />WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration today demanded that the Iranian government clarify the role of President-elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the 1979 storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the prolonged hostage crisis that followed.
<br />
<br />The administration also pledged to conduct its own investigation into Ahmadinejad's past after several of the 52 Americans held hostage in the embassy said in tough, unequivocal statements that they had recognized the next Iranian leader as one of their captors.
<br />
<br />However, at least two other former hostages said they were unable to recall the president-elect as a participant in their ordeal.
<br />
<br />"The Iranian government ... has an obligation to speak definitively concerning these questions that have been raised in public," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack told reporters.
<br />
<br />Both McCormack and White House spokesman Scott McClellan said that the United States would launch its own efforts to determine Ahmadinejad's precise role in the crisis.
<br />
<br />"I think the news reports and statements from several former American hostages raise many questions about his past," McClellan told reporters. "We take them very seriously and we are looking into them to better understand the facts."
<br />
<br />The 444-day ordeal of the Americans held captive in the Tehran embassy marked one of the most searing and emotional collective public experiences in recent American history, an incident that still weighs heavily on the Iranian-American relationship.
<br />
<br />The two countries have had no formal diplomatic ties since the takeover despite the passing of more than a quarter-century. It was not clear how the new allegations might affect the struggle within the Bush administration over how to deal with Tehran.
<br />
<br />Questions about Ahmadinejad's role in the embassy takeover caught the public eye this week with the release of photographs taken during the hostage crisis that shows someone of similar appearance to Ahmadinejad among the captors. In an Associated Press dispatch Wednesday, five former hostages said they were certain the person in question was Ahmadinejad; two, William J. Daugherty and Don A. Sharer, repeated those contentions today in television interviews.
<br />
<br />Reached by The Times later today at his home in Savannah, Ga, Daughtery said he was "absolutely" sure that Ahmadinejad was among the group of older, more experienced Iranians who supervised the detention of the hostages in the first days after the embassy takeover.
<br />
<br />In those first days, the hostage-takers brought various dignitaries to observe the hostages, including the papal nuncio, the International Committee for the Red Cross and the Palestinian Liberation Organization representatives.
<br />
<br />"They were escorted by people who were obviously the leaders and this guy was among them," Daughtery said. "His hatred came through. You could tell from his whole manner that he was more or less repulsed by the fact that we were alive."
<br />
<br />However, two other former hostages reached by The Times today said they were not able to place Ahmadinejad in the embassy.
<br />
<br />"I saw the picture and I don't remember him, but they didn't actually introduce themselves to me," said John Limbert, a former hostage who now heads the American Foreign Service Assn. in Washington, which represents about 26,000 active and retired U.S. diplomats. "I heard what my colleagues said. They certainly seem certain and I respect their opinion, but I just don't remember that face. I can't look at him and say, 'I saw him there.' "
<br />
<br />It is widely known that Ahmadinejad belonged to a pro-regime student group called the Office to Foster Unity that was initially formed to consolidate the revolution's following among skeptical university students and later plotted the embassy's seizure in November 1979.
<br />
<br />In Tehran, two of Iran's most prominent former hostage-takers said today that Ahmadinejad was definitely not among the students when they stormed the U.S. Embassy. They said, however, that the president-elect had attended some meetings at which students plotted the takeover.
<br />
<br />"He was only there in the first couple of planning sessions," said Elaheh Mojarradi, a former hostage-taker. "Not the actual event."
<br />
<br />Mojarradi met her husband, fellow student hostage-taker Mohsen Mirdamadi, during the takeover. For the couple, like many of their revolutionary colleagues, the hostage crisis was the beginning of a life of privilege and power. Mirdamadi became a prominent reformist lawmaker, head of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, and a close aide to President Mohammad Khatami.
<br />
<br />Within Iran, no notable stigma is attached to former hostage-takers. On the contrary, they went on to become top officials and legislators in the parliament. The student's spokeswoman, Massoumeh Ebtekar, became vice president for the environment. She was the first woman in the Islamic Republic to be named to the presidential cabinet.
<br />
<br />The students matured along with the revolution, and some eventually became voices of reform and moderation against Iran's hardliners. As the decades passed, Mirdamadi and his wife evolved into outspoken critics of Iran's hardline clerics. Mirdamadi was the director of a reformist newspaper, Norouz, which was shut down by the regime.
<br />============SNIP=================
<br />WE DEMAND ANSWERS ABOUT <strong>YOUR </strong>PAST GEORGIE PORGIE!</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/bush-wants-answers-on-iranian-leaders.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

YOU, Incorporated

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.worldnewsstand.net/law/U-Inc.htm">YOU, Incorporated</a>Have you ever wondered why all legal documents such as your driver license, credit cards, utility bills and other legal and business documents depict your name in all capital letters?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />"In order to rightly comprehend a thing, inquire first into the names, for rightful knowledge of things depends upon their names.?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />You have been deceived and betrayed! Suffice it to say that you have been swindled, out of nothing less valuable, than your birthright and your sovereignty... simply through the largely overlooked, corruption of your name.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Your name is a legal expression of who you are. How it is written has legal and lawful significance. ?John Henry Doe? signifies a true name written in accordance with the rules of English grammar and prescriptions of law, ?JOHN HENRY DOE,? on the other hand, does not. A harmless variant of the original? Just for clarity or readability?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A variant of the true name, yes ? but the correct and operative term is corruption, and it's anything but harmless or insignificant. Don't let anyone confuse into thinking that they do this for reasons of clarity. If that were the case they surely would print EVERYTHING in capital letters. Studies have shown that text written in ALL CAPS is very hard to read. No, it's not for clarity and readability. What then?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Names of men and women appearing in ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS, even abbreviated versions (with/without initials, etc.) of the true names, are corporate/corporately "colored" renditions of a true name. Colored refers to the fact that they are fictitious, "having the appearance." They do not identify the "being," the real person, you, associated therewith; such construct of names represent property, specifically intellectual property... YOUR PROPERTY. It is unfortunate that this fact is overlooked by almost everyone in society, EXCEPT, the "legal masters" whose existence is predicated upon its exploitation.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A review of government correspondence from such agencies as the IRS, banks and courts, etc., deal with you exclusively through corrupted versions of your true name. These organizations insist on dealing with YOU only via an ALL-CAPS corruption of your true name. The military also designates its personnel exclusively in all-capital letters.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Names constructed outside the bounds of English grammar and the prescriptions of law are corporate/corporately colored trade names. Legally speaking, there is a term that identifies such constructs/entities: ?ens legis,? defined as follows:
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />?Ens Legis. L. Lat. A creature of the law; an artificial being, as contrasted with a natural person. Applied to corporations, considered as deriving their existence entirely from the law.? - Blacks Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, 1951, ?Blacks 4th.?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A "trade name" can also be trademarked, service-marked, and copyrighted by the owner for the purpose of restricting others from unauthorized use and unjust enrichment at the expense of the owner who invested in and built up the good name and reputation (good will) of a "trade name." Statutory entities must follow statutory law in such matters. Living, breathing, flesh-and-blood men and women, on the other hand, need only claim/assert their "copyright" under the common law.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />?Common Law. As distinguished from law created by enactment of legislatures, the common law comprises the body of those principles and rules of action, relating to the government and security of persons and property, which derive their authority solely from recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs; and, in this sense, particularly the ancient, unwritten law of England.? Blacks 4th
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Meet Your CORPORATION
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Proper names, set in all-capital letters, such as the one appearing on your driver license, are "trade names" and signify "artificial persons." They are no different from that of a corporate/corporation name that signifies a legal entity separate and distinct from it?s owners, such as General Motors or General Electric.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />The corporate or industrial community uses this all-capital name exclusively when conducting business with you. Via this name ? and solely because of this special name, all manner of goods and services are conveyed and transmitted for your benefit by all artificial-person entities ens legis in the industrial community.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Such can interface with your ?straw man?s? all-caps TRADE NAME because all involved/interested parties are artificial persons. Your alter-ego straw man is defined as a ?front,? a third party put up in name only for the purpose of taking part in the transaction, i.e., a mere nominal party in a transaction. The legal term describing such an entity is ?strramineus ****,? a Latin term defined as follows;
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />?A man of straw, one of no substance, put forward as bail or surety.? Blacks 1st
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />When your true name, written in accordance with the rules of English grammar and the prescriptions of law, is corrupted into an all-capital-letters format, a mutant straw man is created. The new all-caps name is a legal entity (corporate/corporately colored) distinct from you, and is the only type of ?person? with whom government, courts, tax agencies/agents, courts, banks, etc. will, in fact, can do business.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Consider the fact that when some corporate/governmental entity is coming after you for payment you will never see your true name listed as the account holder (initial letters only capitalized) in the caption of their legal briefs, only the TRADE NAME of your straw man. Why? This is the only way they can do business-and that is exactly and only what it is; business.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />The people of the world have been politically and financially ravaged because they do not know of their alter-ego, public-persona STRAW MAN. By undertaking the process of reclaiming your intellectual property all-caps straw-man TRADE NAME, you can use the straw man for your own benefit.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Analyzing the Obvious
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A landmark Supreme Court case of 1795, which has never been overturned, Penhallow v. Doane?s Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54), defines governments succinctly:
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />?governments are corporations.? Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary-having neither actuality nor substance-is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. thereof, can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them. One might immediately dispute this statement by pointing out that people are acted upon by agents of the government and are regulated, fined, imprisoned, plundered, brutalized, and killed by government officials everyday. True, but let us step back from the fray and take in the whole macrocosm that we call ?modern civilization.?
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Surety
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />?Surety A person who is primarily liable for the payment of another?s debt or the performance of another?s obligation.? Blacks 7th
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Without informing YOU, the sovereign, you can be treated as the equivalent of your artificial STRAW MAN through suretyship, once your signature has been affixed to a contract. By simply identifying yourself as ?authorized representative? such designation properly gives sufficient notice that you are not a surety for the all-caps STRAW MAN
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />How do you take back the ownership and responsibility for the strawman? File your UCC-1 claim on the CORPORATION that carries your name in their ledgers and take control of your Treasury Direct Account. You are considered a citizen of a Federal territory because of Fourteenth Amendment citizenship. Since you have not objected to your status as a subject of the Federal jurisdiction, you may be presumed to be content with your Federal citizenship.
<br />
<br />
</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/you-incorporated.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

VOA News - Bush Endorses the Creation of a New National Security Service

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-06-30-voa57.cfm">VOA News - Bush Endorses the Creation of a New National Security Service</a>U.S. President George Bush is endorsing almost all of the recommendations of a special panel that studied U.S. intelligence capabilities -- including the creation of a national security service within the FBI.
<br />
<br />The Bush's administration is implementing nearly all of the recommendations made by a presidential panel. The group investigated why the American intelligence community was wrong about Iraq's weapons programs, before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
<br />
<br />President Bush's primary justification for the invasion was the threat of then-Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. But none of those weapons have ever been found. The commission concluded American intelligence agencies were dead wrong in almost all of their judgments about Iraqi chemical and biological weapons. The Bush administration is now taking steps to improve intelligence gathering, according to White House Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend.
<br />
<br />White House Homeland Security Advisor Frances Townsend, "A stronger, more vibrant intelligence community produces better intelligence products upon which good decisions can be made. And so I think the steps that we are taking to strengthen the intelligence community help us to prevent terrorist attacks and thereby do keep the country safer."
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Nick Negroponte
<br />One of the main recommendations of the commission was the creation of a single director of national intelligence - to oversee all U.S. spy operations. That was implemented during the review - with the appointment and confirmation of Ambassador John Negroponte as the Director of National Intelligence.
<br />
<br />Another recommendation was the creation of a National Counter-Proliferation Center to manage the intelligence community's work in dealing with the threat of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.
<br />
<br />Federal Bureau of Investigation or FBI counterterrorism and intelligence operations will also be moved into a new unit.
<br />
<br />
<br />Robert Mueller
<br />FBI Director Robert Mueller says, "It pulls together the counterintelligence division, the counterterrorism division and the Directorate of Intelligence, enabling it to act together to develop intelligence and then to act on that intelligence, in consultation and with not only {the} Department of Justice, but also the Director of National Intelligence."
<br />
<br />Another change being made is at the Department of Justice, where the counterterrorism, espionage and intelligence units will be consolidated under a new Assistant Attorney General.
<br />
<br />
<br />Enter caption text here
<br />Alberto Gonzales, the U.S. Attorney General heads the Justice department comments, "We're confident that at the end of the day, the department, which has already made tremendous strides today in protecting America, will be an even better position to further protect America from additional terrorism."
<br />
<br />In addition, President Bush signed an executive order giving authorities the power to freeze the assets of eight foreign companies, which are allegedly involved in the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/voa-news-bush-endorses-creation-of-new.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

America, United States, Times Online, The Times, Sunday Times

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-1675983,00.html">America, United States, Times Online, The Times, Sunday Times</a>Defiant journalist ready for jail
<br />From James Bone in New York
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />A CELEBRATED reporter for The New York Times who refuses to reveal her sources is defiantly facing the possibility of prison over an article that she did not write.
<br />Judith Miller, 57, one of America?s most controversial journalists in recent years with a string of exclusives on Iraq?s supposed weapons of mass destruction, has one week to disclose her sources.
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />She was one of two journalists originally sentenced in October to up to 18 months in prison for contempt of court for refusing to co-operate with a grand jury investigating the public naming of a covert CIA employee.
<br />
<br />The other journalist, Matthew Cooper, of Time magazine, may be spared a prison sentence because his employer, itself facing daily $1,000 (?555) fines for contempt, reluctantly agreed yesterday to turn over his reporting notes to settle the case, a step that Mr Cooper had hoped that Time would not take.
<br />
<br />The magazine said: ?The same Constitution that protects the freedom of the press requires obedience to final decisions of the courts and respect for their rulings and judgments. That Time Inc strongly disagrees with the courts provides no immunity.?
<br />
<br />The New York Times said yesterday it was deeply disappointed by Time Inc?s decision. After a Supreme Court decision on Monday not to review the case, the two reporters face a crucial hearing on Wednesday.
<br />
<br />The case stems from an opinion piece in The New York Times in 2003 by Joe Wilson, a former US diplomat, who questioned President Bush?s assertion that Iraq had sought material for nuclear weapons in Africa. Mr Wilson said that he had found no such evidence on a mission to Africa for the CIA.
<br />
<br />One week later Robert Novak, a prominent conservative columnist, reported that two senior Administration officials had told him that Mr Wilson?s wife, Valerie Plame, was a CIA operative. A criminal investigation was undertaken to determine whether the leakers had broken the law by naming a covert CIA agent.
<br />
<br />Mr Cooper did not write about the controversy until after Mr Novak had named Ms Plame, and Ms Miller never wrote about the topic although she did doing some reporting on the story.
<br />
<br />Mr Novak, who has avoided the threat of jail, said this week that it was wrong for the Government to jail journalists. He promised to ?reveal all? once the case is closed. Journalists? organisations have said that the case will have a chilling effect on free speech, and The New York Times, in a leader column, opined: ?The jailing of reporters for pursuing the truth rings particularly medieval in this information age.? Ms Miller was part of a team that won a Pulitzer prize for reporting on al-Qaeda before the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Last month she broke the story that a memo cast doubt on Kofi Annan?s claims of ignorance in the scandal surrounding the UN Oil-for-Food programme in Iraq.
<br />
<br />Ms Miller insisted that she was ready to go to prison. She said: ?Journalists simply cannot do their jobs without being able to commit to sources that they won?t be identified.?
<br />
<br />
<br />
</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/america-united-states-times-online.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

Film Article | Reuters.com

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=filmNews&storyID=2005-06-30T1**702Z_01_N30556875_RTRIDST_0_FILM-PEOPLE-HARVEY-DC.XML">Film Article | Reuters.com</a>LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A British model turned Los Angeles bounty-hunter who inspired an upcoming movie has died of undetermined causes in Hollywood but the studio said on Thursday it planned to go ahead with its August release.
<br />
<br />Police said Domino Harvey, 35, was found in her Hollywood home late on Monday and pronounced dead at a nearby hospital. Police said there initial investigations showed was no evidence of foul play and indicated that Harvey had drowned in her bathtub.
<br />
<br />But coroner's official Lt. Fred Corral deferred pronouncing on the cause of death saying the coroner wanted blood and drug tests that would take eight to 10 weeks. Harvey was on bail at the time following an arrest in May on drug charges.
<br />
<br />Harvey, the daughter of late British actor Laurence Harvey and former Vogue model Pauline Stone, was educated at elite British schools, became a model, then a ranch hand and firefighter in San Diego, California.
<br />
<br />In 1994 she began working for a bail bonds agency in Los Angeles where she hunted down fugitive drug dealers and robbers.
<br />
<br />Her story inspired the movie "Domino," starring British actress Keira Knightley and directed by Tony Scott.
<br />
<br />"Domino never failed to surprise or inspire me over the last 12 years. She was a free spirit like no other I have ever known," Scott said in a statement.
<br />
<br />New Line Cinema, the movie's U.S. distributors, said it planed to go ahead with the Aug. 19 release of the film in the United States and that there no plans to change it because of Harvey's death.
<br />
<br />
<br />
</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/film-article-reuterscom.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

Disney dodges bullet with 'Roger Rabbit' verdict

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=filmNews&storyID=2005-06-29T080641Z_01_N29428393_RTRIDST_0_FILM-ROGERRABBIT-DC.XML">Film Article | Reuters.com</a>LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - The Walt Disney Co. must pay "Roger Rabbit" creator Gary Wolf at least $180,000 in underreported royalties, but the media giant prevailed on the larger issue of whether gross receipts must include the value of promotional deals.
<br />
<br />The 15-week jury trial in Los Angeles Superior Court could leave Wolf with as much as $400,000 in damages but not the $8 million he had sought by claiming that his 5% royalty extended to the noncash value of promotional tie-ins with McDonald's and other outlets.
<br />
<br />The case was closely watched in the entertainment industry because it could have profoundly altered the traditional notion that noncash promotional deals do not count toward gross receipts.
<br />
<br />Attorneys in the case declined comment on the verdict, which was returned late Monday.
<br />
<br />Before the trial, attorneys for Disney, led by Marty Katz of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, had turned back another claim that could have proved even more precedent-setting: that Disney owed Wolf a "fiduciary duty" over the reporting and payment of royalties, which could have made Disney liable for punitive damages in addition to any alleged underpayment.
<br />
<br />A separate appeals court ruling allowed Wolf to go to trial over the contract's definition of "gross receipts" and its reference to both cash paid to Disney and "all other considerations." Wolf believed the latter includes the cross-promotion deals worth at least $100 million.
<br />
<br />Wolf created Roger Rabbit and related characters in a 1981 novel and then licensed the merchandising, motion picture/television and other rights to Disney two years later. The novel was turned into the hit 1988 film "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," which won four Academy Awards and has grossed $330 million worldwide.
<br />
<br />The agreement was modified in 1989 after a dispute over auditing rights, the use of the characters at theme parks and other issues.
<br />
<br />As the trial got under way in March, Wolf's attorneys, including J. Larson Jaenicke and Michael Garfinkel of Rintala Smoot Jaenicke & Rees, also claimed that Disney underreported "Roger Rabbit"-related sales made by Disney and certain third parties. Jaenicke told jurors that the trial was about "self-serving, catch-me-if-you-can Hollywood accounting."
<br />
<br />Disney, in turn, said it had committed an accounting error by overpaying Wolf an estimated $500,000-$1 million, which the company wanted back.
<br />
<br /><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/disney-dodges-bullet-with-roger-rabbit.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

CNN.com - Novak: 'I will reveal all'? - Jun 30, 2005

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">CNN) -- Time Inc. announced Thursday it will turn over the subpoenaed records from journalist Matt Cooper regarding the leak of a CIA operative's name, following a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court not to hear an appeal in the case.
<br />
<br />Cooper, Time's White House correspondent, and New York Times reporter Judith Miller are facing up to four months in jail for refusing to reveal their confidential sources in the matter to a grand jury.
<br />
<br />Chicago Sun-Times columnist and CNN political analyst Bob Novak was the first to reveal the CIA employee's identity and CNN's Ed Henry spoke with Novak Wednesday about the ruling.
<br />
<br />ED HENRY: Bob, first, what's your reaction to the Supreme Court saying they would not hear this case?
<br />
<br />BOB NOVAK: Well, I deplore the thought of reporters -- I've been a reporter all my life -- going to jail for any period of time for not revealing sources, and there needs to be a federal shield law preventing that as there are shield laws in 49 out of 50 states. But, Ed, I -- my lawyer said I cannot answer any specific questions about this case until it is resolved, which I hope is very soon.
<br />
<br />HENRY: In general, though, you believe in the principle of keeping the identity secret of confidential sources. Have you ever revealed the identity of one of your confidential sources?
<br />
<br />NOVAK: Well, people know -- who have read my column know there have been special case where I have. But the question of being coerced to by the government and being put in prison is, I think, something that should be protected by act of Congress.
<br />
<br />HENRY: In general, have you cooperated with investigators in this case?
<br />
<br />NOVAK: I can't answer any questions about this case at all.
<br />
<br />HENRY: OK. Now, just in general about the principle at stake here -- William Safire, fellow conservative, wrote an op-ed in The New York Times saying that at the very least, he believes that you owe your readers, and in this case, your viewers, some explanation. He said, "Mr. Novak should finally write the column he owes readers and colleagues perhaps explaining how his two sources, who may have truthfully revealed themselves to investigators, managed to get the prosecutor off his back." I think that's the question. Why sit that there are two reporters out there who may go to jail, Bob, but it doesn't appear that you are going to go to jail?
<br />
<br />NOVAK: Well, that's what I can't reveal until this case is finished. I hope it is finished soon. And when it does, I agree with Mr. Safire, I will reveal all in a column and on the air.
<br />
<br />HENRY: Do you understand why in general there's frustration among fellow journalist after 41 years of distinguished work, where you've always pushed and been a fierce advocate of the public's right to know, you're not letting the public know about such a critical case, and two people may go to jail.
<br />
<br />NOVAK: Well, they are not going to jail because of me. Whether I answer your questions or not, it has nothing to do with that. That's very ridiculous to think that I am the cause of their going to jail. I don't think they should be going to jail.
<br />
<br />HENRY: Yes. But I didn't say you were the cause. But there are some people...
<br />
<br />NOVAK: Yes, you do did.
<br />
<br />HENRY: No, but some people feel if you would come forward with the information that you have, that maybe they would not go to jail.
<br />
<br />NOVAK: But you don't know -- Ed, you don't know anything about the case. And those people who say that don't know anything about the case. And unfortunately, as somebody who likes to write, I'd like to say a lot about the case, but because of my attorney's advice I can't. But I will. And there might be some surprising things.
<br />
<br />HENRY: We'll all be waiting to hear that story finally told, Bob.
<br />
<br />==========SNIP======================
<br />I personally believe NOVAK should be on trial...after all,
<br />he was the rotten, slime covered pipe from which the information first leaked apparently from the article...
<br />
<br />PUT NOVAK ON TRIAL!</div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/cnncom-novak-i-will-reveal-all-jun-30.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

Value Judgment: Why is Bob Novak so angry? Plus, Wolf

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.valuejudgment.org/archives/000454.html">Value Judgment: Why is Bob Novak so angry? Plus, Wolf</a>
<br />It's the American public DUTY to keep up pressure on Robert Novak and his crime of exposing a CIA officer in conjunction with a "leak" within the Bush administration.
<br />
<br />Robert Novak should be tried for treason and if found guilty. KILLED.
<br />
<br />We can never know for sure how many where endangered or killed by that CIA leak. Keep in mind, you leak one person, you also leak those around that person by proxy.
<br />
<br />http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/10/24/cnna.leak/
<br />
<br />Former CIA operative, Larry Johnson:
<br />
<br />"...The problem with this is a lot of the damage that has occurred is not going to be seen. It can't be photographed. We can't bring the bodies out because in some cases it's going to involve protecting sources and methods. And it's important to keep this before the American people. This was a betrayal of national security..."
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />If you see Robert Novak in person, be sure to spit in his face.
<br />
<br />
<br />Posted by: Cowicide at December 10, 2004 12:45 PM </div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/value-judgment-why-is-bob-novak-so.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Collapse -

Is CNN wrong for keeping Bob Novak (a known taitor) on it's staff?

by codewarrior.wins In reply to CodeWarriorz Thoughts

<div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a href="http://www.bestandworst.com/75/traitor-rightwing-keeping-taitor-75724.html">Is CNN wrong for keeping Bob Novak (a known taitor) on it's staff?</a>YES/NO : NEWS RELATED :
<br />IS CNN WRONG FOR KEEPING BOB NOVAK (A KNOWN TAITOR) ON IT'S STAFF?
<br />serious ballot by weebles48
<br />ACTIVE Jun 21, 2005 - Jun 21, 2006
<br />--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<br />Bob Novak outed a CIA agent, ending her and her husband's chosen careers, endangering her, her family, all of the contacts she's ever worked with, and many of her fellow agents. It seems that this would mean he's working against an agent of his country and therefore a traitor. Yet CNN proudly diplays him on air and lets him express his warped opinions. </div><p><div class="blogdisclaim"><a href="http://codewarriorz.blogspot.com/2005/06/is-cnn-wrong-for-keeping-bob-novak.html">This post originally appeared on an external website</a></div>

Related Discussions

Related Forums