Valerie Plame believed Iraq was trying to acquire Nuclear Weapons in Dec 2002

Nuclear. More than ten years of sanctions and the loss of much of Iraq's physical nuclear infrastructure under IAEA oversight have not diminished Saddam's interest in acquiring or developing nuclear weapons. Iraq's efforts to procure tens of thousands of proscribed high-strength aluminum tubes were of significant concern. All intelligence experts agreed that Iraq remained intent on acquiring nuclear weapons and that these tubes, if modified, could be used in a centrifuge enrichment program. Most intelligence specialists assessed this to be the intended use, but some believed that these tubes were probably intended for use as casings for tactical rockets.

I assume you know what Brewster-Jennings (firm outed by Pincus), did... if not, check it out... it will surprise you.

A Must Have for all Plamegate watchers (From John Batchelor and Red State)
What we do not know now about the Wilsons
By: John Batchelor · Section: Diaries

What we do not know now about the Wilsons.
1. Who at the CIA tasked Joe Wilson to go to Niger in February 2002? Was it Alan Foley, then head of the CIA's Weapons Intelligence, Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Center? Was Wilson tasked in coordination with the State Department's African Affairs Bureau or Bureau of Intelligence and Research?

2. What did Wilson tell US Ambassador to Niger Owens-Kilpatrick about his trip when he was in Niger? What are the ambassador's notes from the conversations? Did Wilson speak of Mrs. Wilson to the ambassador? Has Wilson communicated with the ambassador since February 2002? Does the State Department have contemporary diaries or notes from Wilson's communications with the Ambassador?

3. Who in March 2003 at the CIA interviewed Joe Wilson upon his return from Niger, and where is the report? Why wasn't Wilson asked by the CIA interviewers to sign a confidentiality agreement about his report?

4. Prior to President Bush's January 2003 State of the Union Speech, who did Joe Wilson tell about his February, 2002 Niger trip? What journalists? What former members of government? What officials at the Democratic Party?

5. Did Joe Wilson discuss his 2002 Niger trip with the editors of the San Jose Mercury priory to publishing an October 2002 piece warning of Saddam Hussein's WMD threat if Iraq is invaded? What notes do the San Jose Mercury editors have of the conversations?

6. Following the President's State of the Union Speech January 2003, Wilson says that he telephoned a complaint about the speech to William Mark Bellamy at the State Department's African Affairs Bureau: did Bellamy know at the time of Mrs. Wilson's employment?

7. Mr. and Mrs. Wilson attended a Senate Democratic Party Committee meeting in early May, 2003: Who invited Joe Wilson to speak on Iraq? Who did Wilson speak with in addition to Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times?

8. Wilson breakfasted with Nicholas Kristof of the NYT on May 3, 2003: Did Mrs. Wilson attend the breakfast? Did Mrs. Kristof attend the breakfast? Any other attendees? What was discussed? Where are Kristof's notes from the breakfast? Was this the first occasion Wilson and Kristof had discussed WMD, Niger, Iraq? If Mrs. Kristof was present, where are her notes? If Mrs. Wilson was present, did she discuss her employment at the CIA since 1985?

9. A year earlier, in Nicholas Kristof's May 14, 2002 column, he mentions mother-daughter day at the CIA and small African countries in the same light-hearted paragraph. Did Nicholas Kristof or his wife, the New York Times journalist Sheryl Wu Dunn, speak with either Mr. or Mrs. Wilson before May 2003?

10. At the May 3, 2003 breakfast, if Mrs. Wilson was not present, was her employment discussed? What did Wilson tell the Kristof(s) was the reason for his trip to Niger? Did Mrs. Kristof (a WMD reporter along with co-author Judy Miller for the New York Times in 1998) ever meet or communicate with Mrs. Wilson subsequent to Mr. Kristof breakfasting with Joe Wilson? Were there subsequent meetings or communications between May 3 and May 6, 2003? If so, where are Kristof's notes?

11. Prior to Nicholas Kristof's June 13, 2003 column about forged Niger documents, did Joe Wilson convey to Mr. or Mrs. Kristof evidence of his February 2002 Niger trip that support the column's since unproved conclusion that Wilson exposed the forgeries during his February 2002 Niger trip?

12. Wilson told the same falsehoods about discovering the forged documents in Niger (documents that did not come into CIA hands until October 16, 2002) not only to Kristoff, but also to Walter Pincus of the Washington Post, who published on June 12, 2003, and John B. Judis and Spencer Ackerman of the New Republic, who published June 30, 2003. Did Pincus, Judis or Ackerman speak to Wilson about his connection to the CIA, about his wife's employment? Did they research background on Wilson to substantiate his later proved false statements that the Vice President's office had sent him to Niger, that he had discovered the forgeries, that he knew the Vice President was deceiving the public about Niger and uranium?

13. Wilson appeared on Meet the Press on the day of his New York Times op-ed, July 6, 2003 in order to repeat falsehoods about his Niger trip: did host Andrea Mitchell know of Wilson's wife's employment at the time?

14. What editor handled Wilson for his op-ed at the New York Times for his July 6, 2003 article? Where are the editor's notes of communications before publication? Did the editor challenge the ambiguous suggestion in the piece that Wilson's February 2002 Niger trip exposed the forged Niger documents? Did Wilson communicate with Mr. or Mrs. Kristof prior to the publication of his op-ed? Did Wilson communicate with State or CIA prior to publication

15. What did CIA determine Mrs. Wilson status to be in February 2002, in May 2003, in June 2003, in July 2003?

16. Wilson has remarked that he has French mining and investment interest in Africa as playing clients of his consultations. Mrs. Wilson has said that Joe Wilson has French clients? What clients? Has Joe Wilson ever worked for or consulted for the French uranium mining firm Cogema? Do Wilson's present or past clients have interest in the two uranium mine locations in Niger? Wilson has mentioned he has had gold mining clients in Niger: what clients, what connection to other mining interests in Niger? What fees have these clients paid Joe Wilson coterminous with his 1998, 1999, 2002 visits to Niger?

17. Has Joe Wilson been under oath for the Fitzgerald investigators? Has he been questioned by the FBI investigators for Fitzgerald? Did he name the neighbors that the FBI questioned about Mrs. Wilson in October 2005? What neighbors?

18. The day of the Novak column, July 14, 2003, did Wilson communicate with State? With CIA? With French mining interests?

19. Has Mrs. Wilson been under oath about her contacts on the day of the first Novak column, July 14, 2003? Does she have a contemporary diary of events such as February and March 2002, such as the Kristoff breakfast on May 3, 2003? Or on May 6, 2003? Or on the day of the David Corn Nation blog mention, July 16, 2003?

20. Was CIA permission required to photograph the Wilsons for January 2004 Vanity Fair?

21. Who are Joe Wilson's paying clients since 2001? Any uranium mining interests in Gabon, Namibia, Canada, Russia, as well as Niger? And does Fitzgerald have the list? And has Wilson ever been in contact with clients who represent any of the following states looking to purchase yellowcake: Iraq, Iran, North Korea, PRC, Libya, Syria, Egypt, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia, especially with regard Niger or Gabon uranium mines?
http://john-batchelor.redstate.org/story/2005/11/25/15825/422

Nov 25th, 2005: 01:58:25

DEMOCRATS ARE SHILLS FOR FRENCH GOVERNMENT

There is a lenghty article which will flesh out the background to what Plame likely new: The French were trying to secure the Euro and were willing to attack US currency by circulating false info. as a sting for the BUsh Administration. The problem for the French was that the sting worked too well. Plame having her husband Joe Wilson declare false intelligence was the second installment of the French attempt to derail US policy in Iraq. ( It didn't work) and now rhe indictment of Libby is the third attempt by France to reach into the domestic political scene to impugn president Bush.

See this link:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1526045/posts#comment?q=1

Article ( warning long, but enlightening):

Completing the French Connection(The reasoning behind the forged Niger Documents)
Self | 21 November, 2005 | Paperjam

Posted on 11/21/2005 9:34:19 AM EST by paperjam

Completing the French Connection

(The reasoning behind the forged Niger Documents)

On January 2, 2001 the Niger Embassy in Rome was broken into. A short time later the home of Aarfou Mounkaila, the second secretary, was also broken into and ransacked. Both incidents were reported to the Italian Carabinieri and since nothing of importance seemed to be missing, the stories received scant attention. However, we now know that the incidents were very important as the break-ins were the source of forged documents that reportedly detailed attempts by Iraq to purchase 500 tons of Yellow Cake uranium. President Bush mentioned it his State of the Union address in January, 2003 and set off a firestorm of heated debate ever since. This single item is a hot point of contention used by those against the war to infer that Bush lied to the Americans and to the world in the run up to the war with Iraq over weapons of mass destruction (WMD.)

What follows next is a story that would put the Bond 007 story writers to task, as we now have the clearest picture yet of what happened in the Niger document scandal, the major players involved and why. It’s a twisted story of OIL, MONEY, and POWER. But, it wasn’t the United States who made the grab for it, it was the French and I think the proof is right here in these pages.

Let us start out by thanking the Italian government for continuing to follow up on a story that seemed lost on most of us.............SNIP

In investigating the background of former US Ambassador, Joseph Wilson IV and the outing of his third wife Valerie Plame, I did what everyone did and used public information and his own words to look into his life. This is the very thing that led to the eventual outing of Valerie in the first place. Be that as it may, it seems that his second wife Jacqueline is quite a woman of mystery. Very little is known of her and it seems to all who look into her life that she shares one at least as intriguing as Valerie, at least that was before Valerie was outed as an agent in the employ of the CIA.

As a former French Diplomat, the last known location of his second wife Jacqueline was in Gabon under the employ of the President Omar Bongo's daughter, Pascaline Mferri Bongo. Between August and November 2000, she was paid $60,000 to write letters to the office of National AIDS policy at the White House. That’s quite a lot of money for simply writing a few letters. She’s reported to have worked for them at least through November of 2000 and is currently whereabouts unknown. I want to take this opportunity to remind everyone that Joseph Wilson IV was the US Ambassador to Gabon from 1992 to 1995.

In looking at the former French colony of Gabon, it turns out that Gabon is a pretty big oil producer in Africa. One of the oil companies in Gabon is a French oil company called Elf Aquitaine. SNIP......

On Sept. 24, 2000, in a little reported but monumentally significant event, Saddam Hussein demanded to be allowed to sell Iraqi oil in euros only. Iraq had also banned the United States, Japan, Britain and Switzerland from selling anything to Iraq under the Oil-For-Food scheme. The ban of sales under Oil-For-Food was viewed as punishment by Saddam for the continued sanctions but the changeover to the euro was seen by many as inexplicable as there seemed no clear beneficiary.

The UN Security Council’s Iraqi sanctions committee, known as “the 661 Committee,” created under the UN Security Council Resolution 661, initially balked at the changeover. However, one individual, French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte, Senior Diplomatic Adviser to President Chirac, pressed hard to permit the Iraqis to sell oil under the new currency. Finding no legal reason or precedent to prevent the denomination from dollars to euros the UN finally gave Iraq approval to sell oil for euros but only after November 6th, 2000. At the time, many financial experts believed that Iraq stood to lose millions in making the conversion.

However, the move had a tremendous effect on the Euro. Shortly after its initial launch, the euro was trading at around 80 cents to the dollar. Iraq’s denomination from the dollar to the euro in addition to huge sales under Oil-For-Food stabilized the currency on the world markets and provided a much needed underpinning for the currency. At the time, France ranked No. 1 among European countries doing business with Iraq, with over $1.5 billion in trade. From the beginning of the oil-for-food program in1996, France ranked third overall with $3.1 billion in trade. Iraq’s move to the euro smoothed out and even reversed its declining exchange rate. By 2001 the euro had gained 25% against the dollar to approximately USD$1.05 for one Euro.

SNIP...............

So what was real the purpose of the forged documents?

The forged Niger documents were to be used in a coordinated effort to keep the US out of Iraq and end the sanctions. France’s greatest fear was that the US might re-enter Iraq and re-denominate Iraqi oil back to dollars that Saddam had converted in September, 2000. After all, this is what provided the much needed underpinning for the valuation of the euro. It would also most likely mean an end the lucrative Oil-For-Food program. The billions of euros in trade enjoyed by European Union countries would come to an immediate and abrupt halt.

One of the final steps taken by France to outright delay if not prevent the inevitable war with Iraq was to threaten Turkey with a “No” vote for admission into the EU membership if they helped the Americans. France, Belgium, and Germany, also opposed NATO support for Turkey that would have allowed them to open their bases for use by American forces to enter Iraq from the north. This is a move seen by many as causing unnecessary American loses by eliminating the ability of Allied forces to attack from two fronts and quickening the pace that Saddam’s army’s could be defeated. It also greatly hindered the US forces ability to close the northern routes out of Iraq through Syria where many suspect the majority of WMD’s were moved to.

As an OPEC member, Iraq being tied to the euro was no small matter. All oil trade in the world is conducted in dollars. Additionally, two-thirds of all corporate transactions are conducted in dollars. This allows the United States to run huge deficits without much harm to its economy. However, should this situation be somehow ended, our national debts might become unserviceable. Rampant inflation would surely result and a devaluation of the dollar would fall to somewhere about 40% of its current value. While I am not steeped in macroeconomics, should this happen suddenly, the outlook for America would be catastrophic.

Since the war in Iraq, France has taken additional strides to increase usage of the euro in the worlds markets and to defeat the dollar further. They have opened trade with Iran, an OPEC member, who in 2002, Iran’s central bank shifted the majority of its reserve funds to euros in what many see as the first big step in converting fully to euros for their oil currency. They have also opened air travel with the Iranians after being suspended in 1997. French exports to Iran have increased 28.4 percent between 2002 and 2003.

Both Russia and China have begun to move their central reserve funds into euros as well. With corporations like Power Corp., and Hutchison-Whampoa controlling huge markets, France is pushing even harder to convince such corporations to conduct their business in euros instead of dollars.

The French have courted Venezuelan President Hugo Chaves, another OPEC member nation. The French oil giant Total, is working to develop the countries oil sands through a consortium called Sincor I and Sincor II. Chaves said in Paris that “Venezuela could double its output from 200,000 to 400,000 barrels a day after several billion dollars were invested.”

France has also gone after Algeria. As an OPEC member and a Mediterranean neighbor, Algeria is Europe’s third largest supplier of natural gas, just behind Russia and Norway. They are also in debt with France for billions. Using the carrot and stick approach, French Foreign Minister de Villipin flew to Algeria on 18 December, 2002 to offer debt conversion if trade and commerce were increased between the two nations. Final arrangements between the two nations were to be hammered out in a final 2003 agreement where more than $60 million in debts were forgiven. However, the country has been continually fighting an Islamic insurrection sparked after canceling parliamentary elections in 1992, a move then that was backed by France, frustrating further economic reforms.

Other activities to expand use of the euro over the dollar are going on daily. However, the main stream media has almost a complete blackout on the subject. I can only surmise that they are hoping for a gradual and subtle change. I just wonder when they expect to let the public in on the news.

As a Follow-up: Iraqi oil was re-denominated back to dollars on 5 June, 2003 after 10 million barrels of oil were offered to the highest bidder from tanks that had been sitting full for some time. The move was made to make room for oil to flow through the pipelines to the ports and restore Iraq’s oil production.

OPEC, in its April 14th 2002 meeting in Spain expressed interest in converting to euros in lieu of the dollar for trade in oil.

On December 7th, 2002 North Korea officially dropped the dollar and began using euros for trade.

Since 2003, the European Union has grown to 25 nation states. Together, they represent a free-trade-block of more than 455 million people who operate under the euro as the dominant currency for trade and commerce. Clearly, the euro is here to stay, but what is so difficult to predict is its future effect on international trade overall and the dollars position in the world as the dominant currency.


	"Mel Goodman: The argument should not be over the so-called sixteen words but ALL the words used to justify the war. There was a terrible campaign of deceit on the reasons to go to war and the intelligence community unfortunately cooperated in some ways with the administration. " This is so much horse puckey. President Bush listed eight very clear reasons for invading Iraq and they are described below: These reasons were laid out at the United Nations, in front of live cameras and broadcast to the world. None of them have a damn thing to do with Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame, yellow cake or Niger. They were spoken September 12th, 2002, before the State of the Union was given in January 2003 with the famous sixteen words. "Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped -- by the might of coalition forces and the will of the United Nations. To suspend hostilities, to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear, to him and to all. And he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations, and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge -- by his deceptions, and by his cruelties -- Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself." Reason Number 1: "In 1991, Security Council Resolution 688 demanded that the Iraqi regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the systematic repression of minorities -- which the Council said, threatened international peace and security in the region. This demand goes ignored. Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that Iraq continues to commit extremely grave violations of human rights, and that the regime's repression is all pervasive. Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape. Wives are tortured in front of their husbands, children in the presence of their parents -- and all of these horrors concealed from the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state. " Reason Number 2: "In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. Last year the Secretary General's high-level coordinator for this issue reported that Kuwait, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and Omani nationals remain unaccounted for -- more than 600 people. One American pilot is among them." Reason Number 3: "In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke this promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution 1373, Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. Iraq's government openly praised the attacks of September the 11th. And al Qaeda terrorists escaped from Afghanistan and are known to be in Iraq." Reason Number 4: "In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. Iraq has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge." Reason Number 5: "From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological weapons. After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. United Nations' inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons. And in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its nuclear program -- weapons design, procurement logs, experiment data, an accounting of nuclear materials and documentation of foreign assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon. Should Iraq acquire fissile material, it would be able to build a nuclear weapon within a year. And Iraq's state-controlled media has reported numerous meetings between Saddam Hussein and his nuclear scientists, leaving little doubt about his continued appetite for these weapons. " Reason Number 6: "Iraq also possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N. Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long-range missiles that it can inflict mass death throughout the region. " Reason Number 7: "In 1990, after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the world imposed economic sanctions on Iraq. Those sanctions were maintained after the war to compel the regime's compliance with Security Council resolutions. In time, Iraq was allowed to use oil revenues to buy food. Saddam Hussein has subverted this program, working around the sanctions to buy missile technology and military materials. He blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the United Nations, even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and to buy arms for his country. By refusing to comply with his own agreements, he bears full guilt for the hunger and misery of innocent Iraqi citizens." Reason Number 8: "In 1991, Iraq promised U.N. inspectors immediate and unrestricted access to verify Iraq's commitment to rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles. Iraq broke this promise, spending seven years deceiving, evading, and harassing U.N. inspectors before ceasing cooperation entirely. Just months after the 1991 cease-fire, the Security Council twice renewed its demand that the Iraqi regime cooperate fully with inspectors, condemning Iraq's serious violations of its obligations. The Security Council again renewed that demand in 1994, and twice more in 1996, deploring Iraq's clear violations of its obligations. The Security Council renewed its demand three more times in 1997, citing flagrant violations; and three more times in 1998, calling Iraq's behavior totally unacceptable. And in 1999, the demand was renewed yet again. As we meet today, it's been almost four years since the last U.N. inspectors set foot in Iraq, four years for the Iraqi regime to plan, and to build, and to test behind the cloak of secrecy." "We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein's regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime's good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take." "Delegates to the General Assembly, we have been more than patient. We've tried sanctions. We've tried the carrot of oil for food, and the stick of coalition military strikes. But Saddam Hussein has defied all these efforts and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction. The first time we may be completely certain he has a -- nuclear weapons is when, God forbids, he uses one. We owe it to all our citizens to do everything in our power to prevent that day from coming." "The conduct of the Iraqi regime is a threat to the authority of the United Nations, and a threat to peace. Iraq has answered a decade of U.N. demands with a decade of defiance. All the world now faces a test, and the United Nations a difficult and defining moment. Are Security Council resolutions to be honored and enforced, or cast aside without consequence? Will the United Nations serve the purpose of its founding, or will it be irrelevant?" Below is a list of recommended demands from the President to the Iraqi regime found in this speech. None of them seem unreasonable even today. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately and unconditionally forswear, disclose, and remove or destroy all weapons of mass destruction, long-range missiles, and all related material. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all support for terrorism and act to suppress it, as all states are required to do by U.N. Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will cease persecution of its civilian population, including Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, Turkomans, and others, again as required by Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will release or account for all Gulf War personnel whose fate is still unknown. It will return the remains of any who are deceased, return stolen property, accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait, and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues, as required by Security Council resolutions. If the Iraqi regime wishes peace, it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept U.N. administration of funds from that program, to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people. If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq. And it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis -- a government based on respect for human rights, economic liberty, and internationally supervised elections. The United States has no quarrel with the Iraqi people; they've suffered too long in silent captivity. Liberty for the Iraqi people is a great moral cause, and a great strategic goal. The people of Iraq deserve it; the security of all nations requires it. Free societies do not intimidate through cruelty and conquest, and open societies do not threaten the world with mass murder. The United States supports political and economic liberty in a unified Iraq.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.