Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 16:29 - Category: Unfiled ;
Sharon undergoing surgery in effort to stop internal bleeding in his brain; prime ministerial duties handed over to Olmert.
Even if he lives, he’ll no longer be able to be a politician. That means Netanyahu, who is even more right wing that Sharon, could win in the upcoming elections.
The entire political landscape in Israel has changed. Destination unknown.
Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 08:30 - Category: Unfiled ;
From American Prospect
This passage caught my eye in Sheryl Gay Stolberg’s piece assessing the response on Capitol Hill to Jack Abramoff’s plea yesterday:"While Mr. Abramoff is most closely linked to Republicans, even Democrats, many of whom also benefited from his largesse, acted skittish.
‘We’re talking about people who have longstanding careers in Congress who took contributions from somebody who knew somebody who knew somebody who knew Jack Abramoff,’ said a Democratic Congressional aide who insisted on anonymity so as not to drag his boss into the scandal. ‘Now they’re panicked. The hope is that this investigation will root out the wrongdoing without innocent people getting hit with the ricochet.’"
I’ve heard similar sentiments expressed by Democratic staffers about this scandal, and the reflexive nervousness is pretty revealing — not to say dispiriting. Obviously specific Democratic incumbents who’ve taken Abramoff money or have had staff go work for him are only being rational to worry about the fallout here. But surely the first priority of the minority party itself is to become the majority party. Hesitance and nervousness regarding an enormous and overwhelmingly Republican corruption scandal are hardly the emotions one should expect from Democrats.
Yet that’s what we’re getting. This certainly implies Congressional Democrats are afraid of becoming as embroiled in this as Republicans. We all know Congressional Democrats lack vertabrae, but this reaction isn’t cowardice, it’s fear. Instead of going for the jugular and ripping the Republicans to shreds, they’re timid, uncertain, and running for cover. Sounds like there’s serious Democratic involvement with Abramoff too. What other explanation is there?
Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 00:27 - Category: Unfiled ;
If you’re trying to find the Windows vulnerability patch at the original location, you can’t. It got pounded into oblivion by a zillion hits.
Fortunately, the patch has been mirrored and is available at Sunbelt and CastleCops
Here’s our original post. You NEED this patch if you run Windows.
Update:
Windows metafile hole requires unofficial patch (from the always useful Windows Secrets)
I don’t ordinarily publish a news update for every new Windows security threat that appears.
The new "WMF Metafile" vulnerability is different:
It can infect your PC if you merely view an image formatted as a Windows metafile on a Web page, in an e-mail attachment, or on your hard disk.
Every browser is vulnerable — IE, Firefox, Opera, and others — because the image is not being rendered by the browser. It’s rendered by Windows’ own Picture and Fax Viewer.
If your PC catches an infected metafile — perhaps through instant messaging or file-sharing software — the payload can run even if you don’t consciously open or view the image. Google Desktop Search, for example, causes the payload to be executed when the metadata of the image is accessed. If the image is an icon, merely displaying a file directory in certain views of Windows Explorer can silently execute a Trojan.
Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 00:09 - Category: Unfiled ;
Think Progress has a detailed rundown of Abramoff’s web of influence. This includes three Democratic senators.
Democrats who pretend Abramoff money is untainted because it didn’t come directly from Abramoff are naive - if not deliberately evasive.
Abramoff money funneled through one of his dummy corporations or given directly by a client because Abramoff told them to, is just as tainted as money he gave directly. Unless you believe he gave the money to Democrats with no expectation of influencing votes. In which case you probably believe in the tooth fairy too. Or are so partisan you can’t admit those on your side might be corrupt too.
Think Progess mentions these three Democratic senators:
Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND)
Contributions — Dorgan received nearly $95,000 from Abramoff’s clients
Saginaw Funding — Burns and Dorgan wrote letter on behalf of Abramoff clientsSen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
Contributions — Reid Received $66,000 From Abramoff’s Clients
Coushatta Campaign — Ensign and Reid lobbied on behalf of Abramoff clientSen. Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Contributions — Harkin received $21,000 from Abramoff’s partners and clients
Gifts — Harkin used Abramoff skybox
Was there more sleaze on the Republican side? Absolutely. But Democrats pretending they are completely untainted is just the same slimy evasion they accuse Republicans of doing. Nor will it help clean up the corruption.
Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 00:09 - Category: Unfiled ;
Bob Morris @ Jan 4th 2006 00:09 - Category: Anti-war ;
The Bush administration is facing new charges over its handling of pre-war intelligence, with a book alleging that the CIA ignored a mass of evidence gleaned from Iraqi weapons scientists, months before the 2003 invasion, that Saddam Hussein had abandoned his WMD programmes.
Subscribe
