| ★阿修羅♪ > 戦争72 > 620.html ★阿修羅♪ |
|
| Tweet |
(回答先: イラン攻撃阻止が狙いではないかRe: ロンドン攻撃の標的はネタニヤフ 投稿者 World Watcher 日時 2005 年 7 月 25 日 07:30:32)
ヤタニヤフはホテルにいて、事前に事件のことを知っていたわけですから、ロンドン攻撃の標的はヤタニヤフではないと私も思います。
アメリカ国内では今、ジョン・ボルトンの国連大使任命や保守派・ジョン･ロバーツの最高裁判事への指名、それに「ダウニング・ストリート･メモ」の開示などをめぐって、民主党議員達がブッシュ政権に強く批判の矢を向けています。特にリベラルな地域・サンフランシスコ･ベイエリアの人々は大変怒っています。
バーバラ･リーは、「ダウニング･ストリート･メモに対するこちら側からの質問に対してこたえてもらうよう、強くブッシュ政権に圧力をかけていく」といっていました。
7月23日（土）に行われたベイエリアの町、オークランドにおけるバーバラ・リー議員の「タウン･ミーティング」には多くの人々が集まり、「ブッシュを追い出そう！」と声を上げていました（この日は全米８ヵ所で同様のタウンミーティングが行われました）。
バーバラ・リーは純粋にこのような言動を行っているのだと思いますが、民主党（その中のドンはジェイ･ロックフェラー？）内には次の政権を狙った駆け引きもあって、World Watcherさんがおっしゃるように、ロシアとイランの利害関係、及びCIA内部の分裂というのもあるのかなと思いますが・・・。
「オークランド･トリビューン」紙より記事を貼り付けます。
Liberal Bay Area can't expect to like choice
By Josh Richman, STAFF WRITER
Article Last Updated: 07/21/2005 07:10:48 AM
Face it: Many Bay Area residents would hate almost anybody President Bush would consider nominating to the U.S. Supreme Court.
So as the region moves through a summer of protests, rallies, news releases and hot rhetoric aplenty, University of California, Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law Professor Jesse Choper suggests a reality check.
"Most of the Bay Area didn't vote for him (Bush), and that really is the bottom line. It's not his job to make the Bay Area happy — that would be betraying the people who elected him," said Choper, a U.S. Supreme Court expert who clerked for former Chief Justice Earl Warren. "That's called democracy. I didn't vote for him, but I'm not unhappy. What do people expect?"
Bush is a social conservative, and the Bay Area is perhaps the nation's foremost liberal bastion. Bush would not name a clearly pro-choice, pro-gay rights, pro-affirmative action or generally pro-liberal justice, and liberals can't stall a confirmation until 2009.
Santa Clara University School of Law professor Gerald Uelmen said the region
"just has to accept the fact this president's going to appoint a conservative, and hope for the best."
"If we're going to get a conservative, let's get one who's bright, who's a good lawyer, who's respected as a lawyer and as a judge ... and I think that's what we got" in federal appeals court Judge John G. Roberts Jr., Uelmen said.
Choper agreed: "His credentials are remarkable. They don't get any better."
UC-Hastings College of the Law professor Vikram Amar, who clerked for Justice Harry Blackmun, said Roberts is neither "as good as could be hoped for" by Bay Area liberals nor "as bad as could be feared."
Someone like Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez — a minority, and with a record on the bench showing at least some support for protecting legal abortion — might have placated some local liberals, Amar said, even though many opposed his confirmation as attorney general due to his White House counsel work on issues such as terrorism prisoners' treatment and executive privilege.
Retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor earned a 99-0 confirmation vote in 1981 partly as the first woman ever nominated and partly by positioning herself from the get-go as a moderate conservative. But Choper said expecting Bush to name another O'Connor echoes those who expected this president's father to name another Thurgood Marshall to the bench in 1991; they got Clarence Thomas.
"Every one of those people on this short list save one — and that was the attorney general, who was uncertain — are tried-and-true conservatives," Choper said.
Still, some local groups are girding for battle.
Berkeley-based online fund-raising and organizing powerhouse MoveOn.org already has its members petitioning senators to oppose confirmation of "a right-wing lawyer and corporate lobbyist" such as Roberts.
The San Francisco-based Sierra Club says it's still checking Roberts' environmental stances but frets about a 2003 ruling "where he strongly implied that Congress does not have the constitutional authority to protect certain species under the Endangered Species Act" and a 2004 ruling in which he "upheld a decision by the Bush administration to ignore the public health impacts of toxic pollution from copper smelters."
San Francisco "Rally to Protect the Supreme Court" for 5:30 p.m. Tuesday — 30 minutes before the nominee's name was to be announced — saying no matter who Bush picked, PPGG would demand to know the nominee's stances on civil liberties, medical privacy and women's health, including the landmark 1973 Supreme Court abortion decision Roe v. Wade.
"We weren't expecting him to nominate somebody who has a record of showing support for women's health and Roe v. Wade," PPGG spokesman Steve Smith acknowledged Wednesday. Yet he voiced regret that Bush "feels a need to placate his base" with so conservative a pick.
Some critics note Roberts has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia only since 2003, providing a scant judicial track record; for more ammo, they're quoting arguments he made as a lawyer for the government or in private practice.
For example, abortion rights groups cite a Supreme Court brief he wrote while President George H.W. Bush's deputy solicitor general, arguing Roe v. Wade "was wrongly decided and should be overruled." And a disability-rights group cites his successful argument in a case leading to the high court's narrower interpretation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
But Uelmen said this could be like implying criminal defense attorneys are pro-crime.
"The briefs a lawyer has written are the wrong place to look if you're looking for his personal views and attitudes," he said. "A lawyer, when he writes a brief, is presenting the views of his client in the strongest terms possible."
Amar said that's somewhat true, yet Roberts had some latitude in choosing and advising his clients.
"The thing I like least is how many press accounts are already talking as if we know what we need to know before we make up our minds about this guy," Amar said. "These are just tea leaves; he hasn't ever been forced to say what he thinks about the great constitutional questions of the day."
He hopes Judiciary Committee Democrats — notably Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Dick Durbin, D-Ill. — will ask those tough questions.
"He's a smart guy, probably smarter than almost all the senators, good with words ... Is the Senate up to the task of forcing answers when he doesn't want to give them?"
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Oakland, who as a House member has no direct say in Roberts' confirmation, issued a statement Tuesday saying she has "serious concerns" about his stances "on fundamental reproductive freedoms, civil rights, the separation of church and state and protecting the environment."
On Wednesday she said Bay Area people care about these important issues, "and it is not unreasonable to expect this president or any president to give us a Supreme Court nominee whose views on these issues are not divisive or out of the mainstream of judicial thought."
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Article Last Updated: 07/24/2005 02:33:59 AM
Lee pushes for truth on 'downing street' memo
By Michele R. Marcucci, STAFF WRITER
Congresswoman Barbara Lee worked an overflow crowd Saturday at the Grand Lake Theater in Oakland in an effort to gain support for an inquiry into pre-Iraq War intelligence.
"We're letting the president and the administration know that we want answers to the questions we asked in our letter," said Lee, referring to a previous letter on the so-called "Downing Street" memo.
"We're going to force them to answer the questions by any means necessary," she said.
Lee introduced a bill Thursday asking the Bush administration to release communications with British officials on Iraq in the months leading up to the war. The bill's 27 co-sponsors, all Democrats, include Rep. Fortney "Pete" Stark, D-Fremont, and Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma.
The memo and related materials purport to show that Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq based on fears the country was linked to terror and was developing weapons of mass destruction. But "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," according to a published version of the memo.
Lee said she and dozens of other members of Congress who signed Rep. John Conyers Jr.'s letter asking whether the memo was accurate never received a response from the administration.
Dozens of people spoke Saturday, many using the opportunity to voice their opposition to the Iraq War and the USA PATRIOT Act — a second version of which just passed the House of Representatives — and to vent still-simmering frustrations about the outcome of the 2000 presidential election and how many feel mainstream Democratic lawmakers have abandoned them and their causes.
"We need to oppose the war and to drive out Bush," said author Larry Everest
ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー
Lee presses for information about U.S. intelligence
Lawmaker backs bill to require release of communiques between London, administration
By Michele R. Marcucci, STAFF WRITER
Congresswoman Barbara Lee worked an overflow crowd Saturday at the Grand Lake Theater in Oakland in an effort to gain support for an inquiry into intelligence before the start of the Iraq War.
"We're letting the president and the administration know that we want answers to the questions we asked in our letter," said Lee, referring to a previous letter on the so-called "Downing Street memo."
"We're going to force them to answer the questions by any means necessary," she said.
Lee introduced a bill Thursday asking the Bush Administration to release communications with British officials on Iraq in the months leading up to the war. The bill's 27 co-sponsors, all Democrats, include Rep. Fortney "Pete" Stark, D-Fremont, and Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma.
The memo and related materials purport to show that Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq based on fears the country was linked to terror and was developing weapons of mass destruction. But "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," according to a published version of the memo.
Lee said she and dozens of other members of Congress who signed Rep. John Conyers Jr.'s letter asking whether the memo was accurate never received a response from the administration.
Dozens of people spoke Saturday, many using the opportunity to voice their opposition to the Iraq War and the USA PATRIOT Act — a second version of which just passed the House of Representatives — and to vent still-simmering frustrations about the outcome of the 2000 presidential election and how many feel mainstream Democratic lawmakers have abandoned them and their causes.
"We need to oppose the war and to drive out
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。