<xmp> <body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d11782355\x26blogName\x3dConnecticutBLOG\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dSILVER\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-5344443236411396584', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script> </xmp>

Saturday, July 02, 2005

BREAKING NEWS: Matt Cooper's source in Valerie Plame CIA case WAS Karl Rove

Lawerence O'Donnell for MSNBC has reported on the McLaughlin Group Friday night that the Time Magizine documents will show that Karl Rove was the source for Matt Cooper in the Valerie Plame CIA case.
Here is the transcript of O'Donnell's McLaughlin Group remarks:

"What we're going to go to now in the next stage, when Matt Cooper's e-mails, within Time Magazine, are handed over to the grand jury--the ultimate revelation, probably within the week of who his source is. "I know I'm going to get pulled into the grand jury for saying this but the source of...for Matt Cooper was Karl Rove, and that will be revealed in this document dump that Time magazine's going to do with the grand jury."

Other panelists then joined in discussing whether, if true, this would suggest a perjury rap for Rove, if he told the grand jury he did not leak to Cooper.
If you want to catch The McLaughlin Group, you'll have to catch it on PBS on Sunday and not NBC because tennis is on during it's time slot. I'll make sure I'll record it and post the video tomorrow.

UPDATE: O'DOnnell has reconfirmed Rove as the source and is talking about it on his blog.

I revealed in yesterday's taping of the McLaughlin Group that Time magazine's emails will reveal that Karl Rove was Matt Cooper's source. I have known this for months but didn't want to say it at a time that would risk me getting dragged into the grand jury.

McLaughlin is seen in some markets on Friday night, so some websites have picked it up, including Drudge, but I don't expect it to have much impact because McLaughlin is not considered a news show and it will be pre-empted in the big markets on Sunday because of tennis.

Since I revealed the big scoop, I have had it reconfirmed by yet another highly authoritative source. Too many people know this. It should break wide open this week. I know Newsweek is working on an 'It's Rove!' story and will probably break it tomorrow.
Someone is in trouble but you have to ask yourself, if it was Rove, who else in the White House knew about this? Other people MUST of known it was Rove or gave him the green light to "out" Plame. Rove and others in the White House told the FBI under questioning that they had nothing to do with the leak so did Rove commit prejury? If other people in the White House knew Rove was the source of the leak and kept it quiet, wouldn't that be obstruction of justice? Didn't the Republicans try to impeach another President because of prejury?

Oh my, this is going to get very interesting REAL soon.

Eniment Domain fallout continues

Here's an interesting article from today's New London Day.
For opponents of the U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding this city's seizure of houses for economic development, the silver lining might be even bigger than the cloud.

The response to the court's decision, which reinforced the right of cities to turn over private homes to a private developer to generate more taxes, has been bursts of outrage from people –– conservative and liberal –– across the country, and efforts by some of their elected representatives to curtail the government's ability to take land.

“This is disappointing,” said Nancie G. Marzulla, president of the Washington-based lobbying organization Defenders of Property Rights. “But we have been thrilled to see people in Congress who were never talking about property rights all of a sudden saying, ‘We've got to do something.' We've just got to make sure they do the right thing.”

The House of Representatives voted Thursday to prevent the use of certain federal funds in any projects that use eminent domain to give property to private developers solely for the purposes of economic development –– not for less controversial public uses, like the building of schools and roads or clearing of blighted areas.

Marzulla said her organization supports altering the law to require “no net loss” of property in takings, meaning the government would have to give up land in order to take more.

The group believes it is a policy that could help prevent lengthy disputes like that between the New London Development Corp. and the Fort Trumbull homeowners led by Susette Kelo, by making eminent domain a less feasible and attractive option for planners.
Although it's great that Congress is taking up this issue, you have to wonder where were the policy makers when this case was tied up in court for the last seven years. They could of propose a bill which restricting eniment domain laws a long time ago but as with everything, people in Congress only move when a topic becomes newsworthy and picks up the public's attention.

Meanwhile, as lawmakers from across the country and the political spectrum railed against injustice and vowed to outlaw the actions in the Fort Trumbull case, David Goebel, the chief operating officer of the New London Development Corp., let out an exasperated sigh.

“You know, you can't worry about what you can't control,” he said when a reporter called to ask about the House and Senate bills, and what effect they might have on the corporation's ability to finish its project at last.

Congressional leaders are “running on emotion,” Goebel said, and “not checking the facts” as they rush to condemn the NLDC's work.

“Not a one of them has come down to New London and seen the way it is,” he said. “Not a one. It ain't fair, but there's nothing we can do about it.”

But despite the entreaties of municipal officials, many of whom strongly support the use of eminent domain as a rare but necessary development tool for cities and towns, politicians are hearing the voices of voters, said Howard Reiter, the head of the political science department at the University of Connecticut.

There is “a strange alliance of liberals and conservatives in Congress now,” Reiter said. “On the one hand conservatives are very concerned about property rights, and on the other, liberals are concerned that poor people are being uprooted.”

The usual characters seemed to be borrowing each other's scripts, Reiter said, including the dissenting Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who called the logical end of the majority's opinion “perverse.”

O'Connor “used populist rhetoric,” Reiter said. “I didn't hear a lot of conservatives yelling class warfare, the way they do whenever Democrats talk about this.”

Republicans want to pass a law in which no federal funds can be used to lack a person's land for economic development while Democrats want to take a more cautious approach and pass a law that will respect the rights of homeowners and the respect the need for economic development. Although you have to be very careful when you propose bills based in the emotions of the people (remember when emotions ran high by the religious right in Congress in the Terri Schiavo case), I think at this point, the homeowners in New London would be happy with any law that would save their homes.

Joyrider wants charges dropped: no federal charges filed?

The stolen airplane saga continues in Danbury.

Philippe Patricio wants the charges against him dismissed by entering an alcoholic program. The 20 year old Bethel resident exposed the lack of security at Danbury Airport by stealing a airplane while intoxicated and flying around the Danbury and Westchester County area for three hours before finally landing at Westchester County Airport.

"We'd like the charges to go away," Camacho said outside the courtroom. "This really is a misdemeanor situation that's being made into a felony situation because of 9-11."

Patricio allegedly stole a single-engine Cessna June 22 from the Danbury airport, and, with two 16-year-olds as passengers, took a ride before landing at Westchester County Airport in New York. Patricio did not have a license to operate the plane.

He stoled a plane on government property, flew the plane without a license (which must be a violation of some federal law) and was lucky not to have killed anyone because when he finally landed the plane, he had less than five gallons of fuel left. How can this NOT be considered a felony situation? And where are the federal charges?

The two felony charges Patricio faces are possession of stolen property and reckless endangerment. On Thursday, he was arrested on a third misdemeanor charge for resisting arrest.

When making the bail argument, Ribeiro told Lust his client is not a danger to the community.

"There's no crimes of anger. There's no crimes of violence. He's a success story . . .," Ribeiro said.

"You say you don't believe he's a danger to the community. I have some concerns about that, given the charges," Lust said.

"The fact of the matter is, there's no destruction of property. There's been no one injured in this matter," Ribeiro replied.

"Thank God," Lust replied.

Thank God...I couldn't agree more.

Friday, July 01, 2005

Is Nancy Johnson missing?

Well, according to Americans United to Protect Social Security she certainly is missing when it comes to taking a stance on Social Security.

Rep. Bob Beauprez of Colorado will be confronted by waffles, be it breakfast, lunch or dinner. Rep. Nancy Johnson of Connecticut will see her face plastered on an oversize milk carton. When Rep. Jerry Weller of Illinois marches in a parade, he'll be tailed by someone in a duck costume.

As House Republicans move ahead with plans to vote on Social Security changes this summer, a Democratic opposition group will use the July Fourth recess to pressure GOP lawmakers it believes are undecided about the legislation or susceptible to criticism from their constituents.

The tactics will be far removed from the customs and decorum normally observed on the House floor.

"Beauprez is planning to run for governor; he cares about people all over the state. ... Bring waffles to all events," reads a plan drafted by Americans United to Protect Social Security, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press.

"Johnson is missing when it comes to defending Social Security. She refuses to take a stand. ... Major tactics: milk carton _ 'Where is Johnson?' 'Johnson Missing,'" it also says.

The plan adds: "July 2-4, tailing Weller with duck costume (as in, stop 'ducking' the issue) at public events/parades."

The congressmen targeted are all members of the House Ways and Means Committee, which will be the first panel in the House to review the legislation. Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., the committee's chairman, expects a vote before Congress takes its summer recess at the end of the month.

Interview with Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy

Hats off to Genghis Conn and the crew at Connecticut Local Politics who just finished an excellent interview with Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy.

I'll post my comments on the intrerview later today. Until then, please go to their site and read the transcript.

Congress moves to dilute eminent domain ruling

John Conyers and Tom Delay working together on a bill to stop local government from taking an individual's property for business purposes? Thank goodness I was sitting when I read this article.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, led a team of GOP House members and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., headed a Democratic group that will jointly fight to deny federal money to any project in which economic development triggered government to exercise its power of eminent domain.

Conyers - who said with a laugh, "When I see myself voting the same way as Tom DeLay, I carefully reconsider what I've done" - recalled how government often took the homes of lower-income minority group members to build glittery urban projects. DeLay saw a need to stop courts from overreaching, and to protect property owners from government intrusion.

They have a powerful weapon. Their bill could result in staggering losses to cities and states that depend on Community Development Block Grants and other Washington money. The Senate is considering similar legislation.

This flurry of legislative action - an unusually quick, bipartisan response to a court ruling - is aimed at easing the impact of last Thursday's 5-4 Supreme Court decision in the Kelo vs. City of New London case.

The court said the government could seize a home, small business or private property and transfer it to another private interest if that transfer would help the community's economic development.
Seeing all this bipartisan love leaves you to wonder where was Congress for the last seven years when Susette Kelo needed help? I guess better late than never.
"Who's Tom DeLay?" Kelo asked Thursday when told about the bill.
Then she chuckled. "We've been waiting for help for seven years, and no one other than the Institute for Justice [which argued her case] helped us," she said. "So I'm grateful."

Thursday, June 30, 2005

Is Diane Farrell in campaign mode?

After her statement on President Bush's Tuesday night address and mentioning Chris Shays support for the war, it might seem like Farrell might be gearing up to take on Shays again in the 4th district although she hasn't declared that she is running yet.
Selectwoman Diane Farrell is keeping quiet on her plans to run for higher office next year despite making a statement regarding the president's Tuesday night speech. Last year, Farrell lost a close race to U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4, and intends to leave her current office this fall after four years. While many people have speculated what her plans are for the 2006 election, which features both federal and state positions, Farrell has not announced her plans. Questions, however, may be stirred after Farrell sent a news release Tuesday in advance of the president's speech that night about the war in Iraq. In the release, Farrell calls for the president to be honest with the American people about the war and also quoted Shays as saying that the American people are "hungry for honesty."

Farrell hasn't said one way or another if she is going to run against Shay's but their is speculation that she will make an announcement within the next couple of weeks.
When asked if she plans to run against Shays again, Farrell would not say yes or no. "I'm not saying one way or another at this point," she said. "My concerns are about his decision to support the war." Adam Wood, Farrell's campaign manager from last year who sent the release, deferred questions about her potential candidacy to Farrell. Several sources, however, say there may be an announcement within the next two weeks about Farrell's potential campaign, but it will not be a specific campaign announcement.

If I was a betting man, I'd put my money on Farrell challenging Shays again. The last election ended with Shays winning by a small margin and with polls showing public dissaproval of Republicans in Congress, Farrell might have a chance to unseat Shays.

Free transportation to BRAC meeting July 6 in Boston

The Norwich Bulletin has all the details.

President's Immigration plan caused an increase in illegal immigrants

So Mayor Boughton can now thank the President and the Republican party for his problems.

The Bush administration's guest worker plan has actually helped fuel illegal immigration because some believed President Bush is offering amnesty, according to a watchdog group's analysis of a government poll of immigrants detained by the Border Patrol.

The survey, some of the results of which were obtained, analyzed and released Tuesday by Judicial Watch, found that 63 percent of more than 800 immigrants arrested along the nation's southern border said they had heard from the Mexican government or media that Bush was offering amnesty. Forty-five percent said they attempted to cross the border based on those beliefs. Eighty percent said they wanted to apply for amnesty.

Time Magazine to hand over Valerie Plame notes

Finally, we'll soon find out who in the White House leaked information about CIA operative Valerie Plame to the press. Although I do not agree that reporters give up their sources, this particular source did an illegal act and should be held accountable (most annoymous sources don't do anything illegal). If the source had any respect, he or she should of came forward and confessed which would of spared these reporters from all this leal action.

This will spare Anthony Miller from jailtime since Time Magazine is handing over the information but not The New York Times so it is unclear if Judith Miller will get off the hook as well.

Somewhere Joe Wilson is crossing his fingers and hoping that the person who leaked the information is Karl Rove.

From The Washington Post

Time Inc. announced today it will comply with a court order to hand over the notes of correspondent Matthew Cooper to a prosecutor investigating the leak of an undercover CIA operative's identity, and so avoid jail time for the magazine reporter.

In a statement issued by the magazine's editor-in-chief Norman Pearlstine, the magazine said the delivery of the confidential source documents "certainly removes any justification for incarceration."

The announcement came three days after the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by Cooper and Judith Miller of the New York Times and one day after a federal court judge repeated a threat to jail the two journalists for contempt for refusing to disclose their sources. The reporters told the judge yesterday they were prepared to spend four months in jail rather than answer questions about their confidential government sources.


Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher of the New York Times, issued a statement saying the newspaper was "deeply disappointed by Time Inc.'s decision to deliver the subpoenaed records." He noted that one of its reporters served 40 days in jail in 1978 in a similar dispute.

"Our focus is now on our own reporter, Judith Miller, and in supporting her during this difficult time," Sulzberger said.

Although Time said it would comply, the statement by the magazine and comments by the magazine's editor-in-chief following the announcement left no doubt the magazine strongly disagreed with the courts' orders.

Pearlstine told the Washington Post that the magazine felt it had no choice but to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court's decision. "As much as I'm a staunch defender of editorial independence, I don't believe there's anything in the Constitution that says journalists are above the law," he said. "The alternative to complying would be a kind of anarchy."

Many questions, few answers in plane theft

No federal charges filed, no one is saying how the person got into the airport or how he was able to steal the plane, and no word from Homeland Security.

Do you still feel safe?

From The Danbury News-Times
The investigation is still under way into how someone stole an airplane on the night of June 22 at Danbury Municipal Airport.

Meanwhile, workers welded a broken gate Wednesday at Arrow Aviation from where the plane was allegedly taken.

No one is saying for sure how Bethel resident Philippe Patricio and two young friends got onto the airfield.


Patricio was remanded into state custody without bail after his alleged joyride from Danbury to Westchester County Airport. The 20-year-old Patricio was charged with driving while intoxicated, possession of stolen property and reckless endangerment.

U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor said he hasn't filed any charges against anyone yet, "but there are potential violations of federal law."

O'Connor said those charges could be filed either in Connecticut or New York. He is working with state officials to see where they will be filed, if they're filed at all.

You would think that after the events of 9-11, the theft of an airplane alone would be a violation of some federal law and he would of been charged with some crime by now.

Wednesday, June 29, 2005

Valerie Plame source to be outed?

Someone at the White House is in some serious trouble.
Time magazine is considering turning over to federal prosecutors notes from a reporter who says he'll go to jail rather than divulge sources about the leak of an undercover CIA officer's name.

The possibility emerged Wednesday as reporters Matthew Cooper of Time and Judith Miller of The New York Times defied a judge who found them in contempt last October for refusing to disclose their sources in the leak of the identity of CIA officer Valerie Plame.

Things are going to get very interesting very soon.

Can "Big Al" save the sub base?

From the Record Journal

He's known as Big Al, the Sailor's Pal.

But next week, retired Navy Vice Adm. Al Konetzni just may be Connecticut's best friend.

Konetzni, who began his career as a submariner and retired last year as a highly decorated deputy and chief of staff for the Atlantic Fleet, will give part of the presentation to the base closing commission next week in defense of the submarine base in Groton.

A graduate of the Naval Submarine School who spent nearly 40 years in the Navy, Konetzni has been an outspoken advocate of the need for a larger submarine fleet. And that argument will play a key role in the ultimate decision to shut down the Groton base or keep it open.

While some military brass tend to quietly toe the line, Big Al — who has said he's proud of his nickname — made a name for himself by giving speeches, while still serving in the Navy, that were critical of efforts to scale back funding for shipbuilding, including submarines.


Konetzni met with Connecticut's congressional delegation for the first time last Friday, along with two other consultants from The Washington Group, who also are helping to coordinate the presentation for the hearing July 6 of the independent Base Closure and Realignment Commission (BRAC).

"The Admiral is one of the nation's top experts on submarines," said Casey Aden-Wansbury, spokeswoman for Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn. "He brings a real weight and credibility to the important argument for the strategic value of submarines to our future security and for the critical role that the right bases, located in the right places such as New London, will play in realizing the full capability of our nation's submarine force."

Proposals to limit CT eminent domain laws killed by General Assembly

From Newsday
The state Senate and House of Representatives on Tuesday rejected Republican-sponsored proposals to limit Connecticut's eminent domain laws following last week's U.S. Supreme Court ruling allowing New London to take homes for a private development project.

The proposals, which were offered as amendments to legislation that details the two-year, $31.2 billion budget and other provisions, was killed on a mostly 22-11 party-line vote in the Senate.

The House of Representatives defeated a similar proposal 82-50.


The GOP proposal would have prevented a municipality or government agency from taking owner-occupied residential property with four or fewer units for a private development project.
"I just don't believe that we should be in the business of taking a family's home away from them for private interests," said Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield. "I don't believe we should stand up and say private corporate needs, private development needs, trump individual rights."


Democrats, who control the Senate, balked at the timing of the GOP proposal. Some Democratic lawmakers said it makes more sense to confront the issue next year in a regular session when legislators can get more public comment.

"We ought to study this more carefully so there are not unintended consequences," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn. He and other Democrats said the amendment raises more questions than it answers.

Republicans countered that the Senate, which was meeting in special session on Tuesday, has passed legislation before that hasn't gone through the regular public hearing process. They said the General Assembly should take action now to protect constituents.

"I would much rather err on the side of going too far to protect individual homeowners and property owners ... than protecting some government agency that wants to take their home because they have the authority, the awesome power to do so because of economic gain," said Sen. David Cappiello, R-Danbury.

Tuesday, June 28, 2005

President's speech (a.k.a anohter serving of kool-aid)

This is a real gem of a line from the President's speech tonight (prereleased excerpts)
"The terrorists can kill the innocent - but they cannot stop the advance of freedom. The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September 11 ... if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi ... and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden."

I don't know about you but I stopped drinking this President's kool-aid long time ago.
With Tuesday's attacks, Abu Musab Zarqawi, a Jordanian militant with ties to al-Qaida, is now blamed for more than 700 terrorist killings in Iraq.

But NBC News has learned that long before the war the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself -- but never pulled the trigger.


Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi's operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam.
No wonder the President's approval ratings are so low...1,700+ soilders (mostly kids under the age of 25) are dead and all we get is spin and 9-11 rhetoric. Shameless.

(thanks to Hunter from Dailykos for the hookup)

Gov Rell, Senator Dodd headline CT delegation at BRAC meeting

From The Norwich Bulletin

Gov. M. Jodi Rell and Sen. Christopher Dodd will lead the Connecticut delegation at the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission regional hearing July 6 in Boston.

The state submitted its list of participants and topics Monday to the BRAC Commission.

The hearing will be an opportunity for Connecticut to demonstrate how the Pentagon was flawed in its analysis that recommends closing the Groton submarine base.

The Connecticut delegation is scheduled to present its two-hour argument beginning at 9:30 a.m. July 6 in the Boston Convention Center.

Rell and Dodd will deliver the introductory remarks.


Subase Realignment Coalition members will discuss other considerations that have not been announced yet. And U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, R-2nd District, will deliver a summary of arguments against closing the sub base.

Brig. Gen. Thaddeus Martin, adjutant general of the Connecticut National Guard, will deliver the presentation on the 103rd Fighter Wing, Air National Guard, and Sen. Joseph Lieberman will make the closing remarks.


"We're all working together on this to present a well-focused, powerful argument, said Dennis Schain, spokesman for Rell. "The hearing is an opportunity to make a strong case, which we have, to reverse the Pentagon decision."

To express your opinion on the Department of Defense's proposed base closing and realignment recommendations, call:

U.S. Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, 1-800-334-5341.

U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, 1-800-225-5605.

U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons, 886-0139.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell, 566-4840.

Danbury Airport has a long history of complaints

The lack of security at Danbury Airport has been well known problem and for years and after 9-11 people who live in surrounding towns have increased their complaints to Mayor Boughton for years with no success.

Joe Leheny has lived next to Danbury Municipal Airport for 38 years. He has complained from time to time about engine noise and late-night, low-flying planes.

Now that a drunken Bethel man allegedly stole a plane from the airport and flew it around for a few hours, Leheny is questioning security at the small airport.

"I'm sorry that it happened. I would hope it won't happen again. But we live in a copycat world. When's the next drunk going to try it and crash into my house? You worry a little," Leheny said.

Airport neighbors, long at odds with Danbury airport administrators and City Hall over everything from engine noise to tree cutting, said their past complaints about security at the airport fell on deaf ears.


Sherman's group made a presentation to the Danbury Aviation Commission three years ago. One of the many issues discussed was what neighbors said was lax security at the airport.

Specifically, the neighbors said at the time the airport's perimeter fence was too low in places and a gate near a large, above-ground fuel tank was never locked.

"We made the warning and they ignored it. From what I hear, they are ignoring this warning. I want to see (Danbury officials) take responsibility for their airport," Sherman said. "We had a plane stolen. There is something wrong there. They have to stop burying their heads in the sand."

John Katz, a Ridgefield resident who serves on the board of the Wooster School, a private school next to the airport, said last week's incident underlines the city's poor management of the airport.

Unfortunately, it took a theft of a airplane by a 20 year old drunk kid for some politicians to raise a red flag and take a closer look at the problem in Danbury.
Prominent politicians Monday called for more investigations into the theft of an airplane from Danbury Municipal Airport last week, citing post-Sept. 11 security concerns.

U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays and U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton seek federal investigations into security at the nation's small airports.

"Danbury airport, and possibly other airports around the state, clearly have security issues and reviewing security in small airports is something we need to look at closely," said Shays, R-4th Dist.

Shays is preparing a letter to send to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Federal Aviation Administration, and plans to get the signatures of Connecticut's seven-member Congressional delegation.
As I stated in earlier posts, the lack of security at Danbury Airport is nothing new. Mayor Boughton was well aware of the situation as well as Rep. Nancy Johnson (Danbury is part of the 5th district), Gov. Jodi Rell (a resident of Brookfield which is next door to Danbury) and anyone who lives in Danbury area because problems and crashes at the airport have been in the news for years.

Although Mayor Boughton promises to investigate the matter but not everyone is confident that the mayor will follow through on the recommendations.

The mayor said the city will hire a consultant next month to do a top-to-bottom assessment of security of the small airport.

"We can always do more for security. We're not happy with someone sneaking into the airfield and stealing a airplane," Boughton said. "But we need a plan to do that. We are going to spend $25,000 on a consultant who studies airport security. He is going to review all of our practices and then make suggestions as to how we can improve security. We're responding in a measured, reasonable way."

Sherman, though, said Boughton has promised to do airport-related studies in the past but did not follow through.

"It sounds to me like fancy footwork. It's possible if the study is actually done, actually completed and reports something and the recommendations are sound and implemented, I would applaud that," he said. "But the reality is you don't need a study to see what some of the obvious problems are at the airport."

Monday, June 27, 2005

Back in town

I have one word for Connecticut...HOT!

Who turned on the furnace? I guess I was spoiled with the ocean breeze these last few days.

I've been out of town for awhile but I'm back and I'll be posting more on the Supreme Court decision on Eminet Domain Laws and reaction from Connecticut politicans including some very interesting backpeddling from Attorney General Richard Blumenthal that (check out the good posting from Connecticut Local Politics).

If you haven't done so already, help out Connecticut Local Politics and chime in on their poll concerning the Domain Law decision (while you're at it, take a sec and check out my poll also).

I'll be also posting about the airport situation in Danbury from last Thursday. Wait till you see my pictures of the place, it's VERY interesting. Funny how all the patriotic politcal Republicans who were so outspoken abou the so-called illegal immigration problem are suddenly very quiet about the lack of security at the airport that happened under their watch...

Till tomorrow...