The Emperor Clearly has no Clothes but it seems that Nudity is now in Fashion.

On Dec. 3rd, the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) declassified a report that had been released to the current administration intelligence group as late as August of this year, that “with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program“. The next day, Tuesday the Prez stated that he was never forewarned of the current intelligence communities’ report on Iran. This coming out because the report was released to the administration in August, so what he’s saying is at no point in the last 3 months, did anyone let him know… “Uh W, there could be a chance that Iran hasn’t been working towards this nuke goal…” And during that same time, he continued to spout that the Iranians were hell bent on getting these weapons as well as we should be watching them to start WWIII (Bush speech Oct. 18th, 2007).

This intelligence report is now coming under fire from the GOP why? Well: 1) because it contradicts a 2005 report that stated Iran is 10 years from creating a nuke weapon and 2) because the GOP believe the NIE is now politicizing it’s reports (all of the sudden they are NOW favoring a political parties agenda… imagine that), OR 3) could it be that this contradicts the planned agenda and rhetoric the GOP has been throwing up all over America that Iran is a bigger threat than the reality?

The NIE defends it’s report (Vanee Vines, spokeswoman for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), defended the report, saying that each NIE is a “group exercise” involving the “entire intelligence community.”) and white house stands by the intelligence communities information (this time) as it’s a coordinated and group effort made up of many agencies and people, and NOT created by just a few political hacks that ignore real intelligence and like a bad reality show, edit together a report to fit their own storyline.

This Bushian etymology was tracked by Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post’s website and shows a time line of his public statements, and how they have evolved as the evolution of intelligence on Iran has come to light – some interesting changes in message can be noted around the time the new intelligence was presented to the administration:

March 31st 2007: “Iran is trying to develop a nuclear weapon…”

June 5th 2007: Iran’s “pursuit of nuclear weapons…”

June 19th 2007: “consequences to the Iranian government if they continue to pursue a nuclear weapon…”

July 12th 2007: “the same regime in Iran that is pursuing nuclear weapons…”

August 6th 2007: “this is a government that has proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon…”

Notice a pattern?

Then as Froomkin asserts around early August the rhetoric changes (McConnell, or someone, must have briefed him then, however, Bush only says that new information was available, however, he wasn’t told what it was):

August 9th: “They have expressed their desire to be able to enrich uranium, which we believe is a step toward having a nuclear weapons program…”

August 28th: “Iran’s active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons…”

October 4th: “you should not have the know-how on how to make a (nuclear) weapon…”

October 17th: “until they suspend and/or make it clear that they, that their statements aren’t real, yeah, I believe they want to have the **capacity**, the **knowledge**, in order to make a nuclear weapon.”

Before August 9th, it’s: Trying to develop, build or pursue a nuclear weapon.

After August 9th, it’s: Desire, pursuit, want…knowledge technology know-how to enrich uranium.

The National Intelligence Estimate this week talks of the Iranians suspending their nuclear weapons program in 2003, yet, still try to push the threat of Iran even though it’s become visible that his tone has changed and he may have lied to the general public about the threat of Iran…. sound familiar??? *Cough* Iraq…

It’s ultimately become clear though, (and if it hasn’t already) that this new information has irreparably damaged American credibility regarding international policy efforts. In my mind it looks like we have someone that has lied to the nation about the treat of violence from another nation, in a time where American resources are already drawn thin in areas of the world that are not immediately threating to home soil interests.

I knew one earlier president that lied and was impeached… he lied about the relationship between himself and an intern – something no where near the threat to civil liberties or American safety as would be lying about the threat of nuclear war.

Protect Your Internet Freedom

Please contact Congress through this web site. This is serious shite. Please spread the word.
Here are the Companies supporting this effort (http://www.itsournet.org/About_Us.php).

It’s Our Net

The giant phone and cable companies are trying to take control of the Internet away from the public and convert it into their own private, corporate network They’re boasting that they’ll create premium lanes on the Internet so that people who can pay get seen and those who can’t don’t. Tell Congress to keep the Internet open and free and to protect the rights of users to see what you want to see and go anywhere you want to go on the Internet just as you can today.

Consumers
If you are a consumer; a Mom looking for healthcare information to protect your family; a home-school parent using the Internet as part of your education plan; an email user staying in touch with your family and friends – you will have a degraded slower Internet experience with certain Web sites. Some Web sites will even be unavailable unless additional fees are paid.

Small Business
If you are a small business, you may not be able to survive online. If you are an aspiring entrepreneur, you may be impeded from providing and getting the word out of the “next big thing” on the Internet.

Schools & Churches
If you are a small non-profit organization, like a church or a school, you may not be able to get your messages out to congregants or student families without paying more.
This fall, if Congress does not act, all of those things could happen.

* How Did it Happen?
* What Happens if Congress Destroys Net Neutrality?
* What Should Congress Do?

How it happened
Last year, the phone and cable companies convinced the Federal Communications Commission and the Courts to change how the Internet is operated, making a few unelected officials responsible for a decision with billions of dollars of impact for millions of Internet consumers.
These decisions reversed the safeguards that made the Internet so great � the freedom known as �Net Neutrality,� which allows you to go anywhere you want to go on the Internet. The Internet was designed by American universities, and made available to the general public over an open platform that required phone and cable companies to treat all traffic in a neutral manner.

Now, however, the phone and cable companies boast that they will create premium lanes on the Internet for higher fees, and give preferential access to their own services and those VIPs who can afford to �pay to play.� They have already blocked certain services and have the power to block or degrade any service that competes with them:

* Do you want the phone and cable companies to block online movies or cheaper phone service over the Internet?
* Do you want the phone and cable companies to decide which blogs or political sites you can access?
* Do you want phone and cable companies to give preferential Internet access to companies who pay more for �premium� delivery?
* Do you want phone and cable companies to keep new innovations off the Internet?

If you answered no to any of these questions, then Congress needs to hear from you.

What Happens if Congress Destroys Net Neutrality?
If Congress caves in to the telephone and cable companies� power grab, they will use that power to dictate your content. The Net as we know it will be radically altered. Destroying Net Neutrality would result in:

* Discrimination � Phone and cable companies will be able to steer you to Web content and services that they own or have exclusive deals with.
* Higher Costs � If content providers are charged new fees to �ensure� that you can view their sites, they will pass these fees through to consumers like you and small businesses.
* Reduced Investment � Investors will have little reason to support new, Internet-based content and services if there is no guarantee they can even get on the net. Innovation will plummet.
* Compromised Global Competitiveness – The US will lose its lead on the Internet as innovation moves to more fertile, open markets overseas.

We need to keep the Internet as an open marketplace and not allow a few rich heavy-hitters that will dictate where you can go.

What Should Congress Do?
Congress needs to act to preserve Net Neutrality and the Internet as we know it. They should:

1. Re-establish basic safeguards that require broadband providers to treat all Internet traffic in a nondiscriminatory manner, without favoritism.
2. Prohibit tiering schemes that impose fees to �deliver� Internet content on top of the fees already paid to connect to the Internet.
3. Require strong federal enforcement, including penalties for violating these duties.

Everyone who uses the Internet will be affected if Congress gives in to the telephone and cable companies� demands. Please, take action today to preserve the open Internet:

* Join the Coalition Mailing List (“Sign Up for Email Alerts” at right)
* Tell Congress: Protect Our Internet!
* Spread the Word about Net Neutrality

By working together, we can save the Internet.

YouTube Rejected my video

I had uploaded a great compilation of videos I took for the recent UP Open match of Blake vs Federer. Apparently the United States Tennis Association has banned the use of this content on YouTube. This kind of censorship I can’t understand. I have always had a problem with organization’s “right” to retain usage and distribution of live entertainment or shows, even if the content is not for commercial or for-profit use. Yes, I took pictures and video of the tennis match however, in reviewing the USTA’s terms of use, there is no mention of use of material taken at the event for personal or non-commercial use. Therefore their request is over reaching.

Even bigger problem I have is that the USTA’s view on this censorship does not benefit them in the slightest. In fact any promotion of the USTA and its events should be considered positive in that Tennis is not a very popular sport in the US and promotions of such events would only result in spreading the excitement and viewership of the sport to only USTA’s gain.

Unfortunately, the USTA does not want me to promote the sport and thus they are only hurting themselves by blocking the use of my personal video of the match. Quite unfortunate, I think I’ll just play golf now…

Below is the message I received from YouTube, and I will repost the video shortly.

Dear Member:

This is to notify you that we have removed or disabled access to the following material as a result of a third-party notification by United States Tennis Association claiming that this material is infringing:

Blake vs Federer US Open 2006: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QaOXwsPWAGU

Please Note: Repeat incidents of copyright infringement will result in the deletion of your account and all videos uploaded to that account. In order to avoid future strikes against your account, please delete any videos to which you do not own the rights, and refrain from uploading additional videos that infringe on the copyrights of others. For more information about YouTube’s copyright policy, please read the Copyright Tips guide.

If you elect to send us a counter notice, to be effective it must be a written communication provided to our designated agent that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see 17 U.S.C. Section 512(g)(3) to confirm these requirements):

(A) A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.

(B) Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.

(C) A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.

(D) The subscriber’s name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriberis address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the service provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided notification under subsection (c)(1)(C) or an agent of such person.

Such written notice should be sent to our designated agent as follows:

DMCA Complaints
YouTube, Inc.
1000 Cherry Ave.
Second Floor
San Bruno, CA 94066
Email: copyright@youtube.com

Please note that under Section 512(f) of the Copyright Act, any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity was removed or disabled by mistake or misidentification may be subject to liability.

Sincerely,
YouTube, Inc.

Copyright © 2006 YouTube, Inc.