 |
||||
|
|
October 28, 2005A Grave Indictment, but Grave Questions RemainFinally, the blog item we've all been waitiing for. I just posted this at my ""Capital Games" column at www.thenation.com. Share your take on the indictments below, and specualte away now that we have facts to speculate about. If a senior White House official leaks classified information that identifies an undercover CIA officer to reporters in order to undermine a critic of the administration, he is not entitled to lie about it to FBI agents and a grand jury charged with the task of determining if such a leak violated the law. That was special counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's message, as he held a dramatic press conference at the Justice Department to explain the five-count indictment his grand jury issued against I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney. "This is a very serious matter," he insisted. The indictment charged Libby with two counts of making false statements to the FBI, two counts of committing perjury (by lying twice to the grand jury) and one count of obstruction of justice. All these charges referred to Libby's account of how he came to learn of Valerie Wilson, the undercover CIA official who was married to former ambassador Joseph Wilson, a White House critic, and who was outed in a July 14, 2003 Bob Novak column. During interviews with FBI agents and in his testimony before the grand jury, Libby--who, before the Novak column was published, told Judith Miller of The New York Times and Matt Cooper of Time that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA--repeatedly claimed that he was merely passing along information he had heard from other reporters. For instance, on March 5, 2004, Libby, answering questions about a July 12, 2003 conversation with Cooper, told the grand jury, All I had was this information that was coming in from the reporters....I said, reporters are telling us that [about Valerie Wilson's employment at the CIA]. I don't know if it's true. I was careful about that because among other things, I wanted to be clear I didn't know Mr. Wilson. I don't know--I think I said, I don't know if he has a wife, but this is what we're hearing. On March 24, 2004, Libby, in another appearance before the grand jury, said, All I had was that reporters are telling us that, and by that I wanted them to understand it wasn't coming from me and that it might not be true....So I wanted to be clear they [the reporters to whom he spoke] didn't, they didn't think it was me saying it. I didn't know if it [the information about Valerie Wilson] was true, and I wanted them to understand that. But, according to the indictment, Libby had actively gathered information on Joseph Wilson and his wife after newspaper stories appeared about a trip that Joseph Wilson had taken to Niger for the CIA in February 2002, during which he had concluded that the allegation that Iraq had been shopping there for weapon-grade uranium was highly dubious. In May 2003, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, using Wilson as a source, wrote about this trip without naming Wilson. The Washington Post did the same the following month. And on July 6, 2003, Wilson published an op-ed piece in the Times describing his mission to Niger and his findings, which undercut the Bush administration's use of the Niger allegation in making a case for war. In late May 2003--after the first Kristof column and before Wilson went public with his op-ed--Libby asked Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman for information on the unnamed ambassador's trip to Niger. Grossman ordered the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research to prepare a report on the ambassador and the trip and subsequently told Libby that Wilson had been the ambassador. On June 9, 2003, according to the indictment, classified CIA documents that covered Wilson and the Niger trip (without mentioning Wilson by name) were faxed from the CIA to Libby. Two or three days later, Grossman told Libby, the indictment says, that "Wilson's wife worked at the CIA." About that time, Libby spoke with a senior CIA officer, who also informed Libby that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA. Also about the time, the indictment states, Cheney told Libby that Wilson's wife was employed at the CIA in the counterproliferation division. This is an intriguing fact. Usually in Washington, principles ask their subordinates to dig up information for them. Apparently, Cheney was doing his own fact-finding on the Wilson front. The indictment does not explain what Cheney was up to or why. It notes that "Libby understood that the Vice President had learned this information from the CIA." Cheney had a back-channel behind his back-channel (Libby). Libby was not done gathering information on Joseph and Valerie Wilson. On or about June 14, 2003--still weeks before Wilson's op-ed article appeared--Libby, according to the indictment, met with a CIA briefer and "discussed with the briefer, among other things, 'Joseph Wilson' and his wife 'Valerie Wilson' in the context of Wilson's trip to Niger." (Fitzgerald's use of quotation marks in this passage of the indictment suggests he has notes from this meeting.) Libby, as depicted in the indictment, was aware of the sensitive nature of the material he had collected on the Wilsons. When an assistant asked if information on Wilson's trip could be shared with the press to rebut the charge that Cheney had sent Wilson to Niger (an allegation never made by Wilson, who had said that his trip was a response to a request that had come to the CIA from Cheney's office), Libby told his aide that he could not talk about this topic on a nonsecure telephone line. Yet days later--on June 23, 2003--Libby met with Judy Miller and told her that Wilson's wife might work at the CIA. And the day after Joseph Wilson's op-ed piece appeared, Libby had lunch with White House press secretary Ari Fleischer and informed him that Wilson's wife worked at the CIA, adding that this was not widely known. That week, Libby twice more discussed Valerie Wilson with Miller. And on July 10 or 11, 2003, Libby, according to the indictment, spoke to a senior White House official--identified as "Official A" and possibly White House aide Karl Rove--who told Libby that earlier in the week he (Official A) had discussed Wilson's wife and her CIA employment with Novak, who would be writing a column about her. If the indictment is correct, Libby was not only in the loop regarding Valerie Wilson and her connection to the CIA; he had helped to create it. Yet Fitzgerald's indictment quotes Libby declaring over and over he only had heard--and passed along--scuttlebutt received from other reporters. To prop up this cover story, Libby told the FBI agents that it had been NBC News' Tim Russert who had said to him that Valerie Wilson worked at the CIA and that "all the reporters knew it." Russert told the grand jury that he had not discussed Wilson's wife with Libby and that in this particular conversation Libby had complained to him about an MSNBC reporter (who goes unnamed in the indictment). Libby appears to have concocted a rather clumsy cover story, especially in that he pointed to a specific reporter as his source--Russert--for the information on Valerie Wilson that he shared with Miller and Cooper. A reasonable assumption is that even if Libby was not a source for the Novak column that identified Valerie Wilson, he was attempting to distance himself--and perhaps Cheney--from the administration's effort to find and leak information on Wilson and his wife (even if it might be classified) to undercut Wilson's criticism. During the press conference, Fitzgerald noted that Libby was the first official who talked to a reporter about Valerie Wilson when he discussed her with Miller on June 23, 2003. Fitzgerald's indictment of Libby seems rather tight. Libby said he knew nothing about Wilson's wife except what he had heard from reporters. Fitzgerald has compiled what looks like solid evidence that Libby was actively collecting information on Joseph Wilson and his wife. And if this case goes to trial, possible witnesses for the prosecution include Russert, Fleischer, Grossman, Libby's principle deputy, a CIA briefer, Official A, and Cheney. Libby could be sentenced up to 30 years if found guilty of all counts. Libby, the first senior White House official to be indicted since the Ulysses Grant administration, is in serious legal trouble. Is anyone else? Fitzgerald's grand jury expired on Friday. But he has asked the presiding judge to keep a grand jury available for him because he has not completed his investigation. His probe, he said at the press conference, is "not quite done." Then he quickly added, "But I don't want to add to a feverish pitch. It's very, very routine that you keep a grand jury available for what you might need." He noted that the "substantial bulk of the work" has been completed. But he said, "Let's let the process take place." How to read this? Not over, but mostly finished. Fitzgerald seemed a man who was rather close to the end of a long and tough endeavor, and he yielded no hint of any indictments to come. He certainly did not signal or say, "Stay tuned." Does that mean this leak investigation could end only with Libby indicted--not for participating in the leak but for lying about his pre-leak actions? That's possible. And Fitzgerald, sticking to the rules of grand jury investigations, refused to reveal any information about the case that was not included in the indictment. Who were Novak's sources for the leak? Fitzgerald wouldn't say. Is Official A a new name for Mr. X--the term used by reporters to refer to Novak's original source? Fitzgerald didn't say. Might Rove be Official A? Fitzgerald didn't say. Why did the leak refer to Valerie Wilson by her maiden name of Plame? Fitzgerald didn't say. What sort of cooperation did Fitzgerald receive from Novak (who presumably spilled all to Fitzgerald, otherwise he would have landed in the slammer like Miller)? Fitzgerald didn't say. Was Cheney in cahoots with Libby regarding the latter's false testimony? Fitzgerald didn't say. How much damage was done to the CIA and its operations by the leak? Fitzgerald didn't say. What about George W. Bush? What did he know about Rove's involvement in the leak and when did he know it? No reporter at the press conference even asked about this. Fitzgerald did not share much beyond the information he had to disclose in order to indict Libby. He did declare that "the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified...but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community" and that "her cover was blown" by the Novak column. (So much for the goofy rightwing conspiracy theory that I colluded with Joseph Wilson after the Novak column to out Valerie Wilson as an undercover CIA operative. If you don't know about that, don't ask.) And he passionately countered the pre-indictment criticism from Republicans and others who argued that bringing perjury and obstruction of justice charges--rather than accusing anyone of violating the Intelligence Identities Protection Act or other laws that apply to leaking classified information--would be a cheap shot or an act of prosecutorial overreaching. He explained that he and his investigators were assigned the job of investigating the unauthorized disclosure of classified information and determining if any laws--not one particular statute, such as the Intelligence Identities Protection Act--were violated. In such an inquiry, he said, "fine distinctions" are critical, and consequently, it is "important that the witnesses who come before a grand jury, especially the witnesses who come before a grand jury who may be under investigation, tell the complete truth." In this probe, that included Libby. Fitzgerald indicated he had considered the possibility of charging leakers with violating the Espionage Act, which makes it a crime for government officials to disseminate classified information--to unauthorized individuals. Using the Espionage Act in this manner, some media and legal experts have claimed, would lead to an Official Secrets Act, but Fitzgerald said he didn't accept that analysis. Still, he called this act "a difficult statue to interpret." And he chose not to indict anyone--yet--for violating it. He also defended his choice to pursue Miller and Cooper and to seek Miller's imprisonment, citing a special need for their testimony. ("I do not think that a reporter should be subpoenaed anything close to routinely," he said.) When asked about detractors who have accused him of being partisan, he replied, "for which party?" Fitzgerald knows far more than what is in the Libby indictment. But the American public may never learn what he has uncovered. There might be no further indictments, and Fitzgerald dismissed the idea of writing a final report. He said that he does not have the authority to issue such a document--and that he does not believe a special counsel should have that authority. Independent counsels used to have the obligation to craft a final report that detailed their investigation and findings and explained decisions to prosecute and not prosecute. But the independent counsel law expired, and Fitzgerald is operating as a special counsel pursuant to Justice Department rules that do not provide for the production of a final report and that do compel prosecutors to keep grand jury material that is not used for an indictment or trial confidential. Feeling the reporter's pain, Fitzgerald remarked, "I know that people want to know whatever it is we know....We just can't do that....We either charge someone or we don't talk about them." Which means that after the government has paid for a two-year investigation, the public may be left in the dark about much of what happened in the leak case. The leakers may never be held accountable. Rove's role, Bush's knowledge, Cheney's potential involvement--all of that could remain a secret, even though Fitzgerald has apparently dug deep and unearthed much of the tale. When a reporter asked Fitzgerald if he had learned how Washington works, he replied, "Yes," and said no more. The Libby indictment does stand as a significant development. Libby was an influential aide for an influential veep in an administration that has often been accused of lying to get its way--such as during the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. And he has been charged with putting himself above the law and undermining an investigation initiated by his administration's Justice Department. On January 22, 2001, Bush, while swearing in the new White House staff, said, "We must remember the high standards that come with high office. This begins with careful adherence to the rules. I expect every member of this administration to stay well within the boundaries that define legal and ethical conduct. This means avoiding even the appearance of problems. This means checking and, if need be, double-checking that the rules have been obeyed. This means never compromising those rules....We are all accountable to one another. And above all, we are all accountable to the law and to the American people." Libby, who quickly resigned after the indictment was released, has fallen. But Rove, who also leaked classified information by passing information on Wilson's wife to Cooper and Novak, has violated White House rules and Bush's self-proclaimed standards, if not the law itself. He has not been held accountable yet, and that task may be beyond Fitzgerald's reach. Nor have Bush and Rove explained why the White House misled the public when it denied Rove and Libby were involved in the leak. Neither have accepted responsibility for that. As for Libby, Bush, in a brief statement, said he was "saddened" by the news of his indictment. He said nothing about the ethical standards of his White House. In politics and policy, lying is not always illegal. And it's easy to see why officials in this White House might think they can escape being held accountable for prevaricating. But Libby seems to have lied to the wrong guy in the wrong forum. "Truth is the engine of our judicial system," Fitzgerald declared while explaining the gravity of the Libby indictment. And this is a grave indictment. It just doesn't answer many grave questions that still remain in the CIA leak affair. Posted by David Corn at October 28, 2005 08:06 PM |
|
|
"HUBRIS is a bold and provocative book that will quickly become an explosive part of the national debate on how we got involved in Iraq." --Tom Brokaw |
Comments
This sucks. We deserve to know more. But unlike Ken Starr, who was bloviating in his driveway every morning and having his lawyers leak every night, Patrick Fitzgerald follows the law to the letter, as painful as that is for so many of us. We can only hope that someday we may know the truth.
Posted by: Martha at October 28, 2005 08:20 PM
Jeanne,
Thanks for the link at 155 on the previous post.
The tragic state of partisan politics at the state level. As a Compassionate Buckeye, I had a bad feeling about the vote count in Ohio. Having been the object of non-political intimidation on the job based on false accusations, I can only imagine how much political intimidation of state and local employees took place in recent months. I had a friend who was an independent pharmacist several years ago and he almost went bankrupt because the state computers were in such bad shape and the state Medicaid program was slow in reimbursing him for Medicaid cases. In the 70's and 80's, I had another friend whose spouse worked in the state auditorճ office. Every payday he was required to donate money to the flower fund if he wanted to keep his job or ever be promoted. The committee used the flower fund in order to re-elect the state auditor. When I applied for a job after college graduation, the Republican interviewers told me that I would not get picked since I was a Democrat. Also in the 70's, the Democratic legislature would invite the Republican Welfare Director to attend hearings at the state capitol and then let him sit until later in the evening and then badger. He eventually died of a heart attack. As you can see, I have trouble believing the Republican Secretary of State in Ohio when he says that all of the votes were counted accurately. I know how easy it would be to hide bogus vote counts, especially in a computer system, especially in OHIO. I also got a bad feeling when the exit polls were not accurate. The science is too refined for so many of the exit polls to be wrong again. Finally, I had a touch of Deja Vu when the cameras were brought into the White House on election night to show the Bush clan assuring everyone that the votes would go their way. They were just too smug and over-confidant. I DID NOT TRUST HIM THAT NIGHT ANYMORE THAN I TRUSTED HIM in 2000 ago when he got off the phone with his brother and said he would win in FLORIDA.
Anyone who has taken a science class should understand the principle of significant digits and margin of error. In a system that is so imperfect and prone error whether it be innocent or not, should have a scientifically defined margin of error. Any vote within the margin of error should be declared a tie and a run-off election held strictly with the two most popular candidates with no other issues or referendum to could the day. All scientists should have seen the vote in Florida in 2000 as a dead heat and either the electoral vote split between the 2 candidates or they should call for a run-off election. I called the Jim Bohannon Radio show in November, 2004 and posed the question that an election just like exit polls have a margin of error of 2 to 4 % and the votes in Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2004 were scientific dead heat and the only way to decide would be a fun-off election. Jim Bohannon poo pooed the idea saying that there was no margin of error in elections. To my surprise, Michael Crichton (Jurassic Park author) the guest that evening, came to my defense and agreed that even elections have margins of error of up to 4%especially when there have been so many problems with vote counts in the past.
I have no doubt that the fix was in in Ohio.
Vote2Win Campaign may turbocharge voter registration & paper trails:
I would like to see this type of Press Release ASAP as we move to get more citizens to register and vote and to provide paper trails for all votes cast next year.
Citizen Change, a non-profit, non-partisan organization started in July, 2004, by entertainment mogul Sean Ґ. Diddy Combs in order to encourage young people to participate in the 2004 presidential election process, launched its new and improved model for 2005. The Vote or Die campaign successfully helped register millions of new voters. Being the latest recipient of an extreme Makeover, it will morph into a turbo-charged phase two entitled: Vote2Win. This could be the sequel with no equal. The first of several new public service announcements (PSA) will show Vote or die shirts and clothing being removed to reveal tattoos and/or undershirts displaying the new Vote2Win logo. The change from a somewhat negative self-defeating logo to a more positive proactive approach will help to emphasize the fact that all Americans will win if we all register and vote. We are not just proud to be an Americans, we are proud to act like an Americans.
The goal of Vote2win is to get corporations, organizations, and celebrities to donate prizes to be given away after the 2005 general election. The items could have limited costs to the donors but could greatly improve their public image. Who would not want to participate in a campaign to get all citizens to vote? What voter would not want to win dinner with Steve Martin, or an autographed book from Steven King, a cameo appearance on the Daily Show or perhaps on the West Wing or SNL, or how about playing a criminal or a victim on CSI? Citizens who vote in the next election would use the control number from their election machine receipt to register by mail or on a Web site after they vote and be entered in a fun, inspiring Vote2Win sweepstakes. Besides encouraging all Americans to register and vote, the campaign would put ongoing pressure on all localities to adopt voting systems with paper trails. It does not make any sense that ATM and lottery systems have processed trillions of transactions worldwide for decades and been accurate to the penny and Americans still do not have a voting process is just as accurate and open to audits. Having a more reliable election system would encourage even more people to vote and accept the outcome. We plan to replace the Red and Blue map of America with an Orange and Green map. Orange will be used to identify those counties that do not have paper trails on at least 90% of their voting machines and Green will be used for those counties that have met the 90% goal.
Posted by: MnMnM at October 28, 2005 08:34 PM
Mr. David Corn,
Another great post!
Thanks
Kirk
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 08:40 PM
ah..good spinnen Corn...but, you didn't get the hook...and almost everything you predicted...in you July 15th article and in this blog just didn't pan. It's what you get for buying a sale of rotten goods. This is probably the worst case scenario for Wilson, I look forward to the civil suit, if he is dumb enough to do it, especially discovery!
Posted by: mary mapes at October 28, 2005 08:57 PM
How do you know Grossman was the Undersecretary involved? I thought everyone else was speculating about his identity (Was it Bolton?, etc).
Posted by: Speed King at October 28, 2005 08:57 PM
As David illuminates, there is much we don't know -- and may never know. But, we do know that Scooter Libby's stories did not hold up to Fitzgerald's scrutiny. I think we can safely say that Libby engaged in a CRIMINAL campaign to hide/conceal evidence and to attempt to pass the blame on to others. I think Libby's indictment shows that there are others -- the VEEP included -- that knew that Libby was lying to protect himself. Now, we have to find out why they tolerated Libby's lies.
I am going to go nuts reading and listening to all the yammering from certain quarters that Democrats in Congress never do anything. The yammerers should keep in mind that the opposition party does not have the power to hold hearings officially, they cannot subpoena witnesses or any material. I wish it were not so...but that is the reality. That does not mean the Dems will do nothing. Waxman and Kennedy, among others, are already making statements and calling for new hearings.
But, the other reality is this: The thugs in the White House are counting on the Republican-controlled Congress to continue to ignore their constitutional duty to oversee the executive branch. Face it folks, the fascist-loving, lockstep lemmings who put this gang in the WH (twice) will have to turn on them before anything substantive changes.
But, I will remain hopeful that Fitzgerald has much more in the works...
Posted by: micki at October 28, 2005 09:01 PM
From previous thread (and still off-topic):
Tim: So just because he couldn't find the WMDs, means Saddam didn't have them?"
You're changing the subject.
You had said: "There was evidence that said Saddam may have not had WMDs, but there was FAR more evidence that claimed he did have WMDs."
You made a claim about the preponderance of evidence. But according to the best information available at the time, Blix's findings, there was no evidence that Iraq had WMDs.
And lo and behold, Blix was right. But then, you just can't trust them Euro types, can ya Bubba.
Now run along. You're boring me.
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 09:06 PM
Gee David, you must be very relieved that the grand jury indicted Irvin and not you.
Clifford May must be pretty discouraged that his blockbuster scoop has come to nothing. Must be some sort of liberal conspiracy.
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 09:11 PM
Oh so Bush, should believe Blix when the previous adminstration thought Iraq had WMDs, as well as 7 other countries??
Actually no, Blix did not have the best information at the time. The best info at the time was from the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world.
Hans Blix also said this:
"I've never maintained that the [Bush] administration deliberately misled" the public, said Blix, who headed the inspection team before the US-led military action in Iraq. ''I think they misled themselves, that we can see. And then they misled the world."
Speaking at The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University
David Kaye, who headed the Iraq Survey Group also has defended Bush, saying, it was right for Bush to act off of the intelligence presented to him.
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 09:25 PM
Mary Mapes: This is probably the worst case scenario for Wilson, I look forward to the civil suit, if he is dumb enough to do it, especially discovery!
Care to explain? I'm especially eager to know why this is bad for Wilson. And it seems to me that the discovery process will be a great opportunity to pull the lid off this cesspool.
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 09:31 PM
Micki,
Several pundits and conservatives have complained that it is not Fitzgerald's job to determine whther our lock-step march to WAR was based on a conspiracy of lies. That job belongs to Congress.
Guess who controls Congress?
The White House WHIGged when it should have WHAGged. The existence of the White House Iraq Group proves what their real motives were. After all of the rehetoric and promises after 911, it should have been the White House Anti-terrorist Group (WHAG). Again all citizens have been betrayed by the deadly abuse of power by
Libby, et. al.
Based on the jobs Libby may be offered by the private sector, the indictments may actually be a plus considering who he might be working for. Halliburton is always in need of people who are not afraid to perjure themselves.
Posted by: MnMnM at October 28, 2005 09:34 PM
Everybody would have gone to war with the bad intell, just nobody not one BUT Bush started a war on the lies about mushroom cloud and lies about yellow cake.
But Bush should never be held to account because everybody else would have done the same thing?
Do you not hear how ridiculous that sounds?
Bush never lied, everybody else would have and if all else fails David Kay defended the Coward from Crawford.
I am sold.
For sure, especially if Kay said so.
You like to throw around personal attacks I have yet to see on one by blog from any troll?
Don't be scared, come on down. It is set-up for cowards and I have a post especially for you!
Come on now, nothing to be all scared about. I will not attack you personally because you are not bright enough to catch my humor. HA!
capt meanie!
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 09:39 PM
Capt wrote:
"Everybody would have gone to war with the bad intell, just nobody not one BUT Bush started a war on the lies about mushroom cloud and lies about yellow cake."
Capt you Moron, Bush didn't know the intel was bad. The intelligence given to Bush indicated Iraq had WMDs, and indicated Iraq sought uranium from Niger, as the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the indepedent bipartisan Silberman/Rob WMD commission concluded, which YOU CAPT will not accept, since it doesn't fit your pre-conceived notions about Bush.
But Bush should never be held to account because everybody else would have done the same thing?
Do you not hear how ridiculous that sounds?
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 09:47 PM
Tim L: Actually no, Blix did not have the best information at the time. The best info at the time was from the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world.
False again. Even in the 1990s, the intelligence agencies were trying to infiltrate the inspection teams precisely because they had the best access to the Iraqi facilities. Read the 9/02 Time magazine interview with Ritter that was linked to in the previous thread.
Besides, it's now obvious that Blix had the best information. He's been proven right.
"I think they misled themselves, that we can see. And then they misled the world."
Indeed they did mislead the world.
David Kaye, who headed the Iraq Survey Group also has defended Bush, saying, it was right for Bush to act off of the intelligence presented to him.
Yet another loser. I clearly remember him arguing with Ritter before the war, claiming Ritter was dead wrong. As head of the postwar inspection regime, Kaye had more than ample opportunity prove himself right. Instead he's had to gorge on crow.
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 09:49 PM
capt,
they're not trolls or fanatics or stupid.
they just need help understanding why they are in the position they are, defending the dogs of war.
just keep talking to them, they've been here so long, i think they're begining to like us.
Posted by: ripple at October 28, 2005 09:51 PM
Capt, you know how rediculous YOU SOUND!?!?
All's I read from you is how bad Bush is, how he lies about this or that, but you can provide any verifiable proof!! You never talk about ideas. It's all Bush hatred.
Hell, Kerry probably could have won if the Left would of spent time debating the merits of the Iraq war, then trying to discredit Bush. Your arguements could have been:
The Iraq war was a war of choice, and Iraq was not an imminent threat. Or, we shouldn't have invaded Iraq, because they didn't attack us. Those 2 arguements might have landed Kerry in the WH. But instead, you Leftists were trying to descredit Bush, which obviously didn't work and was debunked by the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the indepedent bipartisan Silberman/Rob WMD commission.
But see, you Leftists can't win in the arena of ideas, so the only way you can win is to descredit or criminalize republicans.
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 09:53 PM
Drewp, Bush did mislead thew world, but it was unintentional, not intentional.
There is a HUGE difference between intentionally misleading someone (lie), and unintentionally misleading someone (mistake).
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 09:57 PM
Capt,
I think ripple is right. Let's be really nice to Tim L.
Tim, no one is going to hurt you. Ok? Step away from your keyboard. It's ok, Tim. Think nice thoughts, like Bush being out of the White House.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 28, 2005 09:59 PM
"the arena of ideas"
is that where ideas are slaughtered for the Emperor?
I know your Emperor doesn't like ideas but subjecting them to the Arena is a little harsh don't you think Tim?
were you just saying something about sounding stupid?
Posted by: ripple at October 28, 2005 10:00 PM
Breakthrough for Tim!
Bush did mislead the world!
wow, we're proud of you man, keep it up.
Maybe soon, the motive will also be clear to you.
Posted by: ripple at October 28, 2005 10:02 PM
Karl Rove was Senior Advisor to the President up until February 2005 when he became the Deputy Chief of Staff of the United States (COSTUS) Did he have Top Secret clearance before that appointment? Even if he did, just having Top Secret clearance does not give him the authority to look at every Top Secret document that exists, it should be limited to a "need to know basis." He also probably violated the Privacy Act by divulging Plames's name.
It is a crime to violate any citizen's Privacy by divulging information to groups or individuals without a need to know or without the appropriate clearances. Whenever any agency . . . fails to comply with any other provision of this section, or any rule promulgated thereunder, in such a way as to have an adverse effect on an individual [the individual may bring a civil action]." 5 U.S.C. ? 552a(g)(1)(D).
Posted by: MnMnM at October 28, 2005 10:04 PM
golly, if their were such innocent reasons for misinterpreting the intelligence, WHY is Scooter looking at 5-30 for lying about trashing the Wilsons? Oh,and cheney mentioned it to him, but i'm sure he said ,"Don't tell Judy!" And Scoot said,"don't you forget, W. doesn't know anything about it.Oh, but Carl spoke with Novak today."
I think Kathleen has it right. We need to to get the list of all on the committee and start sending postcards to those that can open Phase 2 that Roberts delayed till after the election. Also send cards to Kucinich"s committee to open the investigation. Fitz suggested or implied that the Congress can issue investigative reports,he must charge or hush. Kathleen, i hope you continue to push. Peace
Posted by: Dubendorf at October 28, 2005 10:08 PM
#2
MnMnM,
Thanks for the post. I felt so betrayed by the past 2 elections. This administistration took my voice away. I will never, ever forgive them for that. And what is even worse is that they took my son and daughters vote away.
How many people voted for the first time in the 2004 election and had the vote stolen from them? They were denied one of the most precious rights in America. It doesn't matter how you voted in 2000 and 2004. It didn't count.
What the White House doesn't understand is, it isn't about winning. It's about serving the nation honorably.
PS. And to thing these pieces of....are claiming they want democracy in Iraq.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 28, 2005 10:10 PM
Tim L: "Drewp, Bush did mislead thew world, but it was unintentional, not intentional.
There is a HUGE difference between intentionally misleading someone (lie), and unintentionally misleading someone (mistake)."
You sound like Scotty McClueless when he slips into robot mode.
You're simply choosing to ignore the points I made about Bush's Oct. '02 speech, the Downing St. memo (a denial by Blair hardly proves it was fraudulent), and everything else I listed.
You obviously have no interest in the truth. In that sense, Bush represents you perfectly, and I suppose that's why you support him in the face of all reason. You're two of a kind.
Now bugger off.
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 10:11 PM
Dubendorf, did you see the news today?? Libby got indicted because he lied to prosecutors and the FBI, it had absolutely nothing to do with the Iraq war.
Dubendorf, I'm glad you're eager to see phase 2 completed of the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, but let me ask you something just to make sure you're consistent.
Did you accept the conclusions of phase 1, which blame the failure to find WMDs on the CIA and other intelligence agencies around the world?? Now in order for there to have been an intelligence failure to find WMDs, that means the intelligence must have been wrong.
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 10:14 PM
Late Friday, three people close to the investigation, each asking to remain unidentified because of grand jury secrecy, identified Rove as Official A
Posted by: MnMnM at October 28, 2005 10:16 PM
Drewp, I haven't ignored anything. What was wrong with Bush talking about Iraq in the spring of 02 when he was planning on creating a war resolution later that year?
The DSM is NOT a real document. Didn't you criticize Bush for using that forged Italian document that claimed Hussein was seeking yellow cake uranium from Niger?? How do we know the DSM is the EXACT same thing the REAL document said?
And let me ask you this, why didn't Kerry go forward with trying to impeach Bush with the DSM? You know why, because he called for an invasion of Iraq in 1998! God you Leftists are such hypocrites!
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 10:19 PM
Sending postcards to washington is better than emails or letters. No envelopes cause they are rerouted to check for foul play. for a quarter you can get a stamped generic at the post office. Since our elected representatives refuse to comment or tell the truth,INVESTIGATE. It is a shame that gov't has to come to a halt to investigate itself so often. I'd rather they did the countries business but they're criminals goddammit. americas potential is there but not with the current crop(and thats not limited to repugs).
Posted by: Dubendorf at October 28, 2005 10:22 PM
Tim L,
I don't want your head to explode but look what was on Fox News.
Morris: Libby Indictment Implicates Cheney
On Fox News, former presidential advisor Dick Morris says todayճ events donմ bode well for Dick Cheney:
JOHN GIBSON: How bad is this damage? And what does the president need to control it, Dick?
DICK MORRIS: Well, it depends on whether we are just talking about Libby. If the prosecutor is happy with an indictment of him, a conviction, and that scalp on the wall is sufficient for him, then it just goes away. Itճ one bad chapter and it passes.
But it is very possible that the prosecutor looks up the food chain to Vice President Cheney. These investigations have a way of rising. And according to the terms of the indictment, Cheney told Libby about Valerie Plame and then Libby lied to the grand jury about how he found about it, saying that he got it from a reporter. Well, if thatճ the case, the vice president knew that Libby was lying.
And it wasnմ like his grand jury was secret. It was all over the place, you could read it in any newspaper. So my question is, why didnմ the vice president say anything? Why didnմ he speak up? And when youղe out there committing perjury and your boss is silent, and your boss knows that youղe doing that, itճ [the silence is] a subtle signal from your boss to say, "I appreciate it."
Posted by: Jeanne at October 28, 2005 10:23 PM
has any leftist ever said the intelligence was good? i sit in rural america, at the time i only had cable and MSM, and i knew the intelligence was not a slam dunk. Tim, I,too. must refrain from futher discourse with a troll for it cheapens the site when we hear dogma instead of serious consideration.Oh Scooter, the President didn't mean anything personel when he said he didn't like leakers. He meant he wanted any democrats in his administration to come forward.outahere
Posted by: Dubendorf at October 28, 2005 10:33 PM
The Prosecutor Never Rests and that is never the whole story. Headlines are screaming "Cheney Adviser Indicted in CIA Leak Probe" while under the radar US forces in Iraq reach 161,000, highest level of the war it is no wonder that Al-Jazeera: The new power on the small screen has more credibility than the MSM as Bush Heads to Camp David to Ponder Nominee to hide from the press and nurse a bottle of Jack Daniels leaving all of us to wonder What If? and ponder the real success from stuffing the ballot boxes in Iraq as Sunni-Shiite Warfare breaks out in Southeast Baghdad .
It is the same old story It Ain't The Crime. It's the Cover-up and as the leader of the "free world" it is past the Time for Dubya to Get His Act Together. A real leader does not have to be forced to do the right thing especially when A Tough Investigation Is Also Praised as Nonpartisan and whoever the other leaker named 'Official A' stands out in indictment, now we know Bush has been lying like an Ari pull string action figure and so At end of difficult week, Bush seeks to bolster war support hoping to change the subject to his other failures as a distraction but the ink is dry on the Libby indictment even though a more recent failure has a big problem because Two Months Later, Katrina Survivors are Losing the Battle and the world is watching. It is more a case that the world sees At the White House, the Spin Doctor Is Ill and there is just no medicine for this kind of a failure.
Just sayin'
capt
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 10:39 PM
Tim: "Drewp, I haven't ignored anything. What was wrong with Bush talking about Iraq in the spring of 02 when he was planning on creating a war resolution later that year?"
Nonsequitur. I was talking about his inclusion, omission, and inclusion again in his speeches of the charge that Saddam had tried to buy uranium.
Tim: "The DSM is NOT a real document."
If you're trying to say that the DSM is the minutes of a meeting, you're right. But so what? They were written by a British government official. Only Blair has disputed their accuracy, and of course he would.
"Tim: didn't you criticize Bush for using that forged Italian document that claimed Hussein was seeking yellow cake uranium from Niger?? How do we know the DSM is the EXACT same thing the REAL document said?
See above.
Tim: "And let me ask you this, why didn't Kerry go forward with trying to impeach Bush with the DSM? You know why, because he called for an invasion of Iraq in 1998! God you Leftists are such hypocrites!"
Do you even understand how the impeachment process works?
Posted by: Drewp at October 28, 2005 10:40 PM
"5-30 for lying about trashing the Wilsons?"
Do not forget AND $1.25 million in fines. Parking tickets to the elite but . . .
capt
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 10:42 PM
You guys think that Bush plans when he goes to Camp David. No. No. He dances the night away.
Dancing Bush
Posted by: Jeanne at October 28, 2005 11:10 PM
Why did Libby lie and not tell the truth? Was he afraid of being charged with outing a covered agent or was he covering up a conspiracy that may have included Cheney? Libby was a lawyer and he knew when he lied to the FBI and the Grand Jury those were serious crimes in their own right and that he had left such a trail of evidence behind him he knew his lies would likely be found out. Either lied because he outed Plame in a way that made him susceptible to prosecution or he was lying to coverup something bigger. My money is on the latter. Libby was Cheney's creature. I think LIbby did it to coverup something bigger that involved Cheney.
Posted by: Alvord at October 28, 2005 11:19 PM
Drewp wrote:
Well this is from Factcheck.org, a non-partisan research institute
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bushs 16 words well founded.
A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from a number of intelligence reports, a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bushs 16 words a lie, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .
Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.
"If you're trying to say that the DSM is the minutes of a meeting, you're right. But so what? They were written by a British government official. Only Blair has disputed their accuracy, and of course he would."
So, how do we know that what was written, was accurate?? We don't, so we can only speculate.
Also too, if the DSM was the defenitive proof that verifies Bush lied, then how come you and others on the Left believed Bush lied before you knew about the DSM??
Would that be a lie, for believing something that hasn't been proven yet!?!?
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 11:22 PM
#11 Oh. Shit. O. Deer.
Fergitabout the private sector...Libby is a Columbia University Law School issue, Yale grad...bush may pick him as his next SCOTUS nominee.
Happy Halloween! Did I scare you??!!
Posted by: micki at October 28, 2005 11:30 PM
Timo -- calm down. You are making greater fools out of your chosen leaders because you are making a fool out of yoursel... ......oh nevermind. Get some sleep.
Posted by: micki at October 28, 2005 11:32 PM
David what a great post, appreciate your insights. I watched the press conference on Cnn and there were a few things that stood out for me.
1. If the american public has a "right to know", and this investigation is to "vindicate the serious breach of the public's trust". Why in the hell do we not have the right to a FULL REPORT, from Fitzgerald??? WHY???
2. Fitzgerald made it clear that his investigation would NOT be investigating ALL of the false pre-war intelligence, as many of us had hoped. He made it crystal clear that this was the job of our congress. This is why I continue to PUSH HARD for PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE TO BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY.
3. As I watched the press conference on Cnn the screen was often divided into three sectiions. With Cheney's speech and the staged military presence behind him, Bush in another screen, and Fitzgerald in the other screen.
This certainly seemed to be an obvious effort to undermine Fitzgerald's one and only press conference. Bush who has been continually saying he supports the way in which Fitzgerald is conducting the investigation and Fitzgerald's integrity, and his commitment to follow the letter of the law.
Bush has also repeated that he could not comment on an ongoing investigation. And then he chose that moment to address the nation about what at that time. Why was the screen divided into three. How completely inappropriate.
MORE OF KARL'S WORK, I GUESS.
4. Fitzgerald does appear to be a straight shooter. Although it really bothered me when he advised the public to ..."STEP BACK...TAKE A DEEP BREATH...AND LET THE PROCESS TAKE PLACE"..
Why in the hell should we trust any process at this point...we have watched this administration LIE this country into a unnecessary war which has resulted in tens of thousands of deaths, divulge the identity of an undercover agent, jeopardize national security...
.TAKE A DEEP BREATH.. TAKE A DEEP BREATH ..easy for Fitzgerald or any of us to say. I dare him to say TAKE A DEEP BREATH to people who have lost family members due to the use of all of THE false intelligence that Joe Wilson was attempting to tell the truth about.
I believe we should be pushing harder than ever for what Fitzgerald referred to as "truth that is the engine of our judicial system" I will change that just a little to THE "SUPPOSED" TRUTH THAT IS THE ENGINE OF OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.
WE NEED TO PUSH HARDER NOW... FOR THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. WE OWE THIS TO ALL OF THOSE WHO HAVE LOST FAMILY MEMBERS, INCLUDING IRAQI'S, TO OUR DEMOCRACY, AND TO THE TRUTH...
.
Posted by: kathleen at October 28, 2005 11:36 PM
Jeepers!
I can't even go on VACATION!!!
Y'all just ignore Timmy, 'less you want some cheap sport. He's about as capable as a bowling ball of learning from the facts.
He's got his "Bunnypants Uber Alles!" underoos on again...
sigh...
Came inside for a night in Beautiful Eagle, CO. Snow tonight and tomorrow... Aspen should be lovely...gotta drink one for Hunter at the Woody Creek tavern tomorrow.
Robert S. and Saladin and Family...I can't tell you what lingering warm feeling I have.
I'll tell you personal-like should I get the chance.
My sister and I are sharing the HONEYMOON Hot-Tub Suite!!!
How'd they KNOW we're from Kentucky?!!!
Later Y'all!
-T
Posted by: Hajji at October 28, 2005 11:37 PM
I am mad as hell.
Here's this man, Fitzgerald, telling us today how important it is for "us" to know who leaked. he said "we" needed to get to the bottom of this. Yet, at the end of the day, only he, the perpetrators and the grand jury know what really happened. The rest of "us" are left in the dark and soldiers still die for a lie. With little more information than we had yesterday, we have to continue in this guessing game; what really happened? Why is it important for Fitzgerald to know while we cannot be included? Doesn't he work for "us?" Aren't we the people that need to know?
I want Cheney's testimony, I want Rove's, I want Bush's testimony and I want to know, since they did not lie enough to be charged, what "truths" did they tell?
In other words, who knew what when?
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 28, 2005 11:40 PM
"I think Libby did it to coverup something bigger that involved Cheney"
I think so too. That is why Miller sat in jail until "the aspens turned together" it takes about that long to fake up the lies to cover for Rove and president Cheney.
I guess Kerry was spot on when he said this is the lyingest bunch of low-life say anything jerks.
Libby did win an award! The first White House staffer to be indicted in 130 years. The last guy was indicted then pardoned by President Grant.
Most every other president had the good sense to fire their criminals BEFORE they were indicted or pardoned them before a conviction could be brought.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 11:40 PM
#22 Dubendorf..thanks for taking up the cry for IMPLEMENTING PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE. Patrick Fitzgerald made it crystal clear that ALL of the false pre-war intelligence is not his job to thoroughly investigate.
#25 Tim L ....How could PHASE I of that investigation come to any clear conclusions. When the WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP AND THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS WERE COMPLETELY OFF LIMITS TO PHASE I OF THE INVESTIGATION?
The american people are under the FALSE ASSUMPTION THAT ALL OF THE PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE AND ALL OF THOSE WHO CREATED AND DESSIMINATED IT HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED.
CALL...WRITE...VISIT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES AND ALL OF THOSE ON THE COMMITTEE INCLUDING SENATOR PAT ROBERTS SENATOR ROCKERFELLER, DEMANDING THAT PHASE II BE IMPLEMETED IMMEDIATELY
Posted by: kathleen at October 28, 2005 11:46 PM
The grand jury is right and Fitzgerald was right to wait. If he has and is going to use the information from the Italian investigation Fitzgerald would be stepping on their toes if he made public the contents of their report before they make it public.
Fitzgerald has expanded the scope to include who and where the faked up Niger documents came from. That will be made public if not by Fitzgerald then from the Italian report.
I still see a very merry Fitzmas in store for all.
Nobody can undo the VP's COS lying more than once to the grand jury. This is the administration on trial and the buck stops at Bunnypants whether he likes it or not. He is either in control of his staff and his underlings or he is not. The fact that he knew what was happening and did nothing is an indictment of the whole Bush lie machine of which he is at the helm. He micro-manages everything and nobody breaks ranks so this was all done at Bush's instruction or he does not control his people.
Everybody see it and knows what's up.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 28, 2005 11:54 PM
Capt you Moron, Bush didn't know the intel was bad. Cheney did Tenet did and when Dufus found out that the intel was bad, did he fire anyone? Bush couldn't even fire Libby today. And tim, you keep calling him your president?The intelligence given to Bush indicated Iraq had WMDs, and indicated Iraq sought uranium from...
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 28, 2005 11:54 PM
Well, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence examined the intelligence from the US and other agencies around the world, and came to the conclusion that the intelligence did indicate that Iraq had WMDs. Plus, there's also the Silberman/Rob WMD commission which came to the same conclusion.
It's funny you should bring up the White House iraq Group, I would think that a leftist would be even more skeptical about them than then CIA or other world intelligence agencies because they were from the White House.
Kathleen, here's something to think about. Pretend that the US did not have intelligence indicating Iraq had WMDs, but just the other countries, such as France, Russia, Australia, Britain, China, Egypt and Jordan, would you believe these countries that Iraq had WMDs if the US didn't believe it?
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 11:55 PM
ArtJunky, Cheney and Tenet did not think the intelligence was bad, but answer my question to Kathleen in post 46. Would you believe other countries that claimed Iraq had WMDs, if the US didn't?
Posted by: Tim L at October 28, 2005 11:57 PM
Capt wrote:
"The grand jury is right and Fitzgerald was right to wait. If he has and is going to use the information from the Italian investigation Fitzgerald would be stepping on their toes if he made public the contents of their report before they make it public."
As it has already been proven, those forged Italian documents were not the basis for the Bush administration believing Iraq sought uranium from Niger. British and US intelligence was their basis.
Capt wrote:
"He is either in control of his staff and his underlings or he is not."
"He micro-manages everything and nobody breaks ranks so this was all done at Bush's instruction or he does not control his people."
Wait a minute! I thought Cheney ran the show, or is it Rove!?!?
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:07 AM
...Pretend that the US did not have intelligence indicating Iraq had WMDs, but just the other countries, such as France, Russia, Australia, Britain, China, Egypt and Jordan, would you believe these countries that Iraq had WMDs if the US didn't believe it?
That's not what happened but Dufus was just fine accepting crappy intel from Britain and putting it in King Georges speech, taking it out and then putting it back in for his nation presentation to the nation.
Remember Powell's speech to the UN? A lot of liberals changed their minds because of him. Guess who was feeding him "intel?" Mr. Lies...Scooter-boy himself.
Never fired! Doesn't it bother you that even after all the mistakes, nobody has been fired?
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:09 AM
AND THOUSANDS HAVE DIED BECAUSE OF THESE MISTAKES!!!
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:11 AM
Intel from 6 other countries besides Britain. I think Tenet should have been fired.
And answer my question, don't avoid it.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:12 AM
And why?
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:13 AM
The intel was wrong...nobody fired? Cheney was down at the pentagon an unpresedented 10 times. They created an Special ops inside the pentagon to "filter" intelligence. Cheney set the filter and he got just what he was trying to get.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:16 AM
It's a hypothetical question. Pretend that Clinton, or Gore or Kerry were president. Now lets say that a year or so after 9/11, that the countries of Britain, Russia, Australia, France, China, Egypt and Jordan all said Iraq possesed WMDs, but the US government did not believe it.
But would you believe it still?
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:16 AM
The intel was wrong...nobody fired? Cheney was down at the pentagon an unprecedented 10 times. They created an Special ops inside the pentagon to "filter" intelligence. Cheney set the filter and he got just what he was trying to get.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:17 AM
That's not what the 2 bipartisan investigatins found.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:19 AM
Libby: The War Party's Kamikaze
Why did Scooter lie and so badly?
by Justin Raimondo
"It's not over."
Out of Fitzgerald's hour-long press conference, these three words had the most resonance. Before we get into that, however, let's look at the man who has come out from behind the screen of this very closely-held investigation.
Fitzgerald's debut at the press conference put on display a character who might have been imagined by a novelist. He seems to embody the principle of justice: the clear concise nature of his speech, his narrow application of his mandate [.pdf], his adamant refusal to be drawn into politics of any sort. If this is the man the White House thought they were going to characterize as partisan, they had better go back to the drawing board.
*****end of clip*****
Antiwar.com is not for trolls or mindless drone bees walking like so many lemming to the Cliff (not May). HA!
I think Justin ROCKS!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:25 AM
Trying to find excuses? Sorry. Your president is a Dufus that shouldn't have gone into Iraq. He should have done what HE PROMISED TO CONGRESS and tried to make inspections work. Is that what Dufus did? Nope! He thumbed his nose at the experts and all those countries that you listed and went to war without them.
Now Iraq is broke. WHO DO YOU BLAME?
Would I trust other countries' intel over ours? Now I would. See, the problem with your little point is that you think that we would have done exactly the same thing. You think that somehow we would be in the same predicament that we find ourselves here today. When in fact, we wouldn't have tried to sell a war because we knew, Rice knew, Powell knew and G. H. Bush knew that Saddam was contained. And all the people that you pretend are so upstanding were calling for this war before the towers fell were saying..."We just need a new pearl harbor." PNAC Project for a New American Century.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:29 AM
Rethinking Failed Policies
by Rep. Ron Paul
We have been warned. Prepare for a broader war in the Middle East, as plans are being laid for the next U.S.-led regime change Рin Syria. A UN report on the death of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri elicited this comment from a senior U.S. policymaker: "Out of tragedy comes an extraordinary strategic opportunity." This statement reflects the continued neoconservative, Machiavellian influence on our foreign policy. The "opportunity" refers to the long-held neoconservative plan for regime change in Syria, similar to what was carried out in Iraq.
This plan for remaking the Middle East has been around for a long time. Just as 9/11 served the interests of those who longed for changes in Iraq, the sensationalism surrounding Hariri's death is being used to advance plans to remove Assad.
Congress already has assisted these plans by authorizing the sanctions placed on Syria last year. Harmful sanctions, as applied to Iraq in the 1990s, inevitably represent a major step toward war since they bring havoc to so many innocent people. Syria already has been charged with developing weapons of mass destruction based on no more evidence than was available when Iraq was similarly charged.
*****end of clip*****
A bit from a real conservative GOP politician. There is a link to watch the speech on video and Rep. Ron Paul is not the worst speaker I have ever heard.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:30 AM
Capt, I doubt Rep. Ron Paul would appreciate you calling him a GOPher.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:35 AM
American Soldiers
2,254 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bushճ evil lies.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 12:37 AM
'Plame-gate' & Myth of the Renegade Aide
By Robert Parry
October 27, 2005
One of the common myths of official Washington is that most political scandals result from overly aggressive aides operating out of control Рthe Watergate "third-rate burglary" or Iran-Contraճ "men of zeal" Рwith top officials getting in trouble only later by trying to cover the mess up.
But the reality Рwhich is relevant again amid the probe into the outing of a CIA officer Рis that a principal official is almost always lurking somewhere in the background of the original crime, sending signals or pulling strings with the expectation that, if caught, a subordinate will take the fall.
So now, much like the historical arguments over whether the Watergate break-in was approved by Richard Nixon or which Iran-Contra dealings were green-lighted by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, the new question is whether Dick Cheney and George W. Bush winked at their top aides leaking the identity of Valerie Plame as retaliation for her husband exposing a deception used to take America to war in Iraq.
The "Plame-gate" probe has focused on Vice President Cheneyճ chief of staff I. Lewis Libby and President Bushճ deputy chief of staff Karl Rove. Based on whatճ now publicly known, it appears that Libby and Rove at minimum misled investigators about how they learned of Plameճ identity and how they disseminated that information.
Yet while special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald examines whether Libby and Rove committed crimes, official Washington has mostly averted its eyes from a potentially bigger question: Did their superiors, Cheney and/or Bush, encourage or order the leak?
If so, based on history, one of two outcomes would seem likely: either a constitutional crisis would result, with at least one of the top two U.S. executive officers implicated in a felony conspiracy, or a conveniently truncated investigation would follow, not getting much higher than Libby and Rove.
*****end of clip*****
I doubt the crimes will go any higher. Hard to say. I remember people said a third rate burglary would never take Nixon down. Nixon knew it was over when he lost his own parties support. Hard to say the GOPhers are in lock-step when they did not back the Miers mediocrity.
The funny thing is back in the early Է0ճ I would have supported Tricky Dick. I was so na?ve I was surprised to hear Dick curse on tape. I thought being a Quaker was a bit more reserved and far less foul mouthed.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:43 AM
ArtJunky wrote:
"Trying to find excuses? Sorry. Your president is a Dufus that shouldn't have gone into Iraq. He should have done what HE PROMISED TO CONGRESS and tried to make inspections work. Is that what Dufus did? Nope! He thumbed his nose at the experts and all those countries that you listed and went to war without them."
"When in fact, we wouldn't have tried to sell a war because we knew, Rice knew, Powell knew and G. H. Bush knew that Saddam was contained."
Actually, if we knew about the oil for food scandal, we could have contained Hussein. But, Hussein was trying to buy off UN weapons inspectors to lift the sanctions against him so he could restart his biological and chemical programs. Although he did not have WMDs at the time we invaded, he did have the intent and capability to make WMDs, according to Charles Dulfer, head of the Iraq Survey Group.
Inspections weren't working because Hussein was defying the inspectors. He was not allowing tenative inspections. There were several times where he would not let inspectors do their job at particular times. He and his sons did not follow Bush's ultimatum to leave Iraq within 48 hours.
Some of those countries helped us, but not all. He didn't thumb his nose at anyone. France and Russia would NEVER have agreed with the war, after all, they were PROFITING by keeping Hussein in power.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:44 AM
By what special power do you know what Rep. Ron Paul would like or not like?
Oh yeah, you just make up stuff to suit the moment.
Or maybe you could link me to his words on the subject?
Naw, I am pretty sure you are just spewing the made up stuff and calling it facts as always.
Tragic
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:45 AM
What's Happening in the Dugout
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 12:46 AM
Capt wrote:
"The funny thing is back in the early Է0ճ I would have supported Tricky Dick. I was so na?ve I was surprised to hear Dick curse on tape. I thought being a Quaker was a bit more reserved and far less foul mouthed."
I find this extremely hard to believe! Nowadays, you seem to believe every lie leveled against Bush under the sun. You believe the lies David Corn tells about Bush.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:48 AM
2,254 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bushճ evil lies.
And Dufus is getting a "media makeover." Wow, isn't his "suppot for the troops" heartwarming? Isn't that "resolve" to cover his mistakes encouraging?
Dufus and his merry men are trying to cover up their lies in an absurd and dishonorable distraction while Americans, innocent civilians die for those same lies/mistakes.
How much more "resolve" can this country take? How much will YOU, Tim, pay?
How old are you Tim? Signed up yet? Or, do you have better things to do? Remember, you can be as old as 43, I think, and still join. How about your kids (if you are that old) don't you think they should have their college money pulled until they serve in this war you approved of?
Is this mistake worth $10,000 to you? You're fine with paying my kids part of that, right?
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:49 AM
2,254 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bushճ evil lies.
And Dufus is getting a "media makeover." Wow, isn't his "suppot for the troops" heartwarming? Isn't that "resolve" to cover his mistakes encouraging?
Dufus and his merry men are trying to cover up their lies in an absurd and dishonorable distraction while Americans, innocent civilians die for those same lies/mistakes.
How much more "resolve" can this country take? How much will YOU, Tim, pay?
How old are you Tim? Signed up yet? Or, do you have better things to do? Remember, you can be as old as 43, I think, and still join. How about your kids (if you are that old) don't you think they should have their college money pulled until they serve in this war you approved of?
Is this mistake worth $10,000 to you? You're fine with paying my kids part of that, right?
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 29, 2005 12:49 AM
Calling All Infowarriors: Protest the Klan in Austin
ALEX JONES COMMENT:
The Klan's upcoming appearance in Austin to protest gay marriage is completely transparent. The organization is nothing more than a globalist tentacle set out to spread mindless and divisive hatred. Even if you are against gay marriage, the Klan's presence is bad news, immediately connecting their insane rhetoric with the arguments against same-sex marriage. So now, if you're against gay marriage, you will be portrayed as being "with the Klan."
I've protested these globalist puppets and their puppet masters at Klan rallies all across Texas, as I have protested against other divisive and racist groups and I would love to be there this weekend, bullhorn in hand, to give them a piece of my mind. Unfortunately, I have to attend a twice rescheduled family reunion occurring while the Klan is in Austin to spread their vile trash. I do wholeheartedly encourage each one of you out there to protest these New World Order henchmen and spread the truth. Bring your infowarrior weapons: your bullhorn, your pen, your video camera to combat their lies, their burning crosses, and their divide-and-conquer game plan.
Klan To Rally In Support Of Gay Marriage Amendment
POSTED: 10:45 am CDT October 25, 2005
AUSTIN, Texas -- The Ku Klux Klan plans to rally in Austin to support the gay marriage amendment set for the Nov. 8 ballot.
The rally planned on the steps of city hall the Saturday before the election will urge voters to favor proposition 2.
However, some who support proposition 2 don't welcome the KKK's assistance.
One such person is Pastor Ryan Rush of Bannockburn Baptist Church.
Rush said that a group that would come in that is characterized as hateful and bigoted is not welcome in this city. He said he doesn't want the Klan as a partner on any cause.
In a letter the Klan sent to the city, the group acknowledged that security will be an issue, noting the violence that erupted at a KKK rally and march to the capitol in Austin in 1983.
*****end of clip*****
Okay, who lives near enough to represent?
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:53 AM
Don't bother Capt, only 30% of Americans support gay marriage, which exemplifies how out of touch the far left is with America.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 12:58 AM
A Negligent President
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:04 AM
White House on the ropes - and a bigger fight ahead
Trial of Cheney aide will turn spotlight on case for war in Iraq
Another blow to administration's foundering second term
Julian Borger in Washington
Saturday October 29, 2005
The Guardian
It could have been worse for the Bush White House, but not very much worse.
Karl Rove has not been charged for leaking intelligence, but he remains the subject of an investigation that will continue to gnaw away at the administration's weakest point: its justification for going to war in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Lewis "Scooter" Libby has been indicted and will face trial for perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice. He is no mere extra in this drama. He is the right-hand man of the most powerful vice-president in modern American history, and he got himself in trouble trying to protect his boss over the critical issue of US pre-war intelligence on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
*****end of clip*****
Seems like the "get it" in the UK. It is always interesting to hear from a different perspective. Across the pond they have a better media, less mainstream and a little more independent in some ways more restricted in others. They seem to be more newsworthy these days.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 01:08 AM
THOU DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH.
I've been reading this post over 2 months and have read so many worst case scenarios that I half believed that there may be something too it. In various discussions on this site i have said that I would stand up and say wrong is wrong if there were indictments. LIBBY IS WRONG FOR TELLING LIES TO THE GRAND JURY. IT is clear now that he had no reason to lie. Fitzie's report does validate some of the right wings theories, but it does not validate hardly any of Mr Corn's posts at this site. IF OTHER CHARGES ARE FILED AT ANOTHER DATE THEN WE WILL RE-EVALUATE THE FACTS AT THAT TIME.
1-THERE WAS NO CHARGE OF "OUT TING AN UNDERCOVER AGENT", Fitzie said Libby PASSED ALONG CLASSIFIED INFORMATION. If there was a grand jury for every time that the press received "classified information" then WATERGATE investigation would be about who passed along "CLASSIFIED" FBI information to the press.
You LEFTIES were so quick to validate Mark Felt as a Hero, and he was because he exposed something that was clearly illegal, even if his motive was questionable-BEING PASSED OVER AS THE TOP FBI MAN BY NIXON,HE WAS NEXT IN THE HOOVER CHAIN OF COMMAND.
If you LEFTIES were intellectually honest then you would be celebrating Libby as you did FELT because he exposed a CORRUPT CIA agent and her husband,as they tried to intervene in a PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. Wilson clearly a pathological liar in the mold of the Clinton's. This whole episode was an orchestrated attack against BUSH, for KERRY, by the WILSON'S. DO you even question that WILSON worked on the Kerry campaign as an advisers. Wilson's story has more holes in it and as solid as a pair of FISH NET BLACK PANTYHOSE. But you lefties see the story as being SOLID AS A ROCK. You lefties must coincide today that this is much to do about NOTHING, as there are NO CHARGES RELATING TO WHAT YOU MAIN STREAM LEFTIST MEDIA CHARGED!!!!!! ROVE IS NOT GOING TO JAIL,at this time, AND I HOPE YOU DRIVE YOURSELVES CRAZY WAITING FOR THE NEXT INCITEMENT.
DAVID CORN, AND THE REST OF HIS COHORTS IN THE MAIN STREAM LEFTIST MEDIA, SHOULD KNOWN AS "CHICKEN LITTLE", BECAUSE FOR ALL OF THE CALLS OF "THE SKY IS FALLING", THERE IS PROOF OF ANYTHING BUT:
1- THEY ARE DELUSIONAL, AND
2- NO MATTER THE FACTS, THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO COMPREHEND WHAT HAS JUST HAPPENED, AND THEREFORE JUDGE THE CURRENT SITUATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR OWN ILLOGICAL REASONING!!!!
Posted by: trebeloc at October 29, 2005 01:10 AM
Getting worse for the White House
Leader
Saturday October 29, 2005
The Guardian
What is it about American presidents during their second terms? Not since Dwight Eisenhower nearly half a century ago has a two-term occupant of the White House not been hit by some sort of criminal investigation during his second period of office. Since Ike, every second term has turned sour in this way. Richard Nixon resigned because of Watergate, Ronald Reagan was undermined by Iran-Contra, and Bill Clinton was impeached for perjury in the Monica Lewinsky affair. Now it is George Bush's turn to see his presidency take a similar hit, with the indictment yesterday of Lewis Libby on charges of obstruction of justice, perjury and making false statements arising from the investigation into the leaking of the identity of a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame.
The good news for the administration is that the indictment is procedural rather than substantive. The bad news is that the whole affair always comes back to the way the administration tried to bulk up the case for an Iraq war, which continues to drain Mr Bush's domestic credibility. Even so, lying to investigators and in court are still serious charges with real legal and political menace. Whatever the outcome of the prosecution, the political damage to Mr Bush will continue as long as the case plays out. Mr Libby may not be a man with a high international profile. But he is a member of the absolute inner circle of a White House notorious for its tight control of decision-making. As a longtime aide and chief of staff for the past five years to Dick Cheney, one of the most powerful US vice-presidents of modern times, Mr Libby was one of the administration's big beasts. Losing a man described as Mr Cheney's alter ego drives a big hole in the team. But things could get even worse. Judging by the indictment, Mr Cheney is likely to have to give evidence in Mr Libby's trial. The Karl Rove investigation is not over yet. It's still tin hat time at the White House.
Mr Bush ought to have been out celebrating yesterday. The government reported the US economy growing by a buoyant 3.8% year-on-year to the third quarter. But the president has run out of luck for now. Already buffeted by Iraq, social security reform failure, Hurricane Katrina and the Harriet Miers debacle, Mr Bush now heads a White House under siege from Democratic and Republican critics alike. A man who prided himself as a good leader now sees his administration tainted by cronyism, incompetence and dishonesty. It has been the worst week of his presidency. Mr Bush will need more than luck to recover from it.
*****end of article*****
"A man who prided himself as a good leader now sees his administration tainted by cronyism, incompetence and dishonesty. It has been the worst week of his presidency"
Yep, I think they do "get it." The American MSM should be ashamed.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 01:14 AM
Why Is Bush So Stupid
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:20 AM
Indictment doesn't clear up mystery at heart of CIA leak probe
By Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - At the heart of Friday's indictment of a top White House aide remain two unsolved mysteries.
Who forged the documents that claimed Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium for nuclear weapons in the African country of Niger?
How did a version of the tale get into President Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, even though U.S. intelligence agencies never confirmed it and some intelligence analysts doubted it?
Former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who found no substance to the alleged deal during a CIA-sponsored trip to Niger, accused Bush in July 2003 of twisting the intelligence.
Shortly thereafter, the identity of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, a covert CIA officer, was leaked to journalists, igniting special counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald's probe.
The FBI has been investigating the clumsy forgeries, which first surfaced in Rome in October 2002, for two years, but has made little progress, four U.S. government officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the investigation continues. Those officials blame a lack of cooperation from Italy. A spokesman for the Italian Embassy in Washington denied that.
*****end of article*****
One of the most complete timelines I have seen starts where the clip ends. I spot checked a couple of dates, they are right on.
Hard to say what is really going on with the Italians. I have read and posted that they gave Fitzgerald their report (yet unpublished) then this stuff.
Time will tell. There is another shoe to drop.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 01:24 AM
Fitzgerald for president. Hoo-ha!
Posted by: Ted at October 29, 2005 01:24 AM
The article that I read about our stupid president did not post. I read the article on the Mothers against the Draft website.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:28 AM
Leak investigation not seen over
10/28/2005 @ 2:22 pm
Filed by Jason Leopold
In one of the boldest moves yet in the 22-month investigation into the outing of a covert CIA agent to a handful of top reporters covering the White House, Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is extending his probe and pursuing much more serious charges against senior White House officials, lawyers directly involved in the case told RAW STORY Friday.
While many people were left confused by news reports that said Rove wouldn't be indicted Friday, the lawyers said that Rove remains under intense scrutiny and added that Fitzgerald is betting on the fact that he can secure an indictments against him or other officials on charges of perjury, obstruction of justice, the misuse of classified information, and possibly other charges, as early as next week.
"This investigation is not yet over," one of the lawyers in the case said. "You must keep in mind that people like Mr. Rove are still under investigation. Rather than securing an indictment on perjury charges against Mr. Rove Mr. Fitzgerald strongly believes he can convince the grand jury that he broke other laws."
The lawyers said that in the past month Fitzgerald has obtained explosive information in the case that has enabled him to pursue broader charges such as conspiracy, and civil rights violations against targets like Rove. Rove could also provide information that would allow Fitzgerald to target additional officials.
Specifically, the lawyers said Fitzgerald is focusing on phony intelligence documents that led to the outing of Valerie Plame Wilsonճ identity: the documents that claimed Iraq was attempting to purchase yellow-cake uranium from Niger.
*****end of article*****
A bit more encouraging news on Rawstory.
Fitzgerald could be more pitbull than lap-dog.
I can hope until he says he is done. If every liar top to bottom is not taken down it will not be justice. Seems odd that so many of us pine for even a small measure of justice when the crimes are so much bigger?
Have we all fallen for the low expectations that this mendatious madmen have peddled? Have we all bought into just degrees of right and wrong. Dividing up the truth pie in pieces too thin to ever stand?
Fitzgerald made it clear he is serious and focused on his mission. If that is justice then he is the best man for the job. He does come across as apolitical and that word has been used by those who know him well.
There is no divorcing politics from politicians. I can only hope the liars insult his senses.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 01:36 AM
The article talked about the fact that the military cannot recruit medical professionals. The reason for Hitler Bush having such a difficult time with recruiting is that people do not trust him. He is a very reckless person.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:38 AM
Paradox
Louis Tice of the Pacific Institute in Seattle, Washington offers a paradox, "You give up control in order to be in control." Confident leaders do not have to rule by controlling and punitive threats. He also discusses Erickson's book, "Eight Stages of Human Development" regarding leadership. Leadership starts at the top with basic trust. A dishonest leader cannot be an effective leader. Controlling and punitive threats will have consequences and there will be a backlash against such a leader. People will subtly undermine the leader and in the end the leader is not in control and he or she remains in a constant state of fear. A fearful leader is an unstable leader. Good examples of fearful and unstable leaders are Napoleon and Hitler. We must be vigilant of such leaders, be it in the United States or in the world.
Please pay careful attention to Bush's behavior. You do not have to be a licensed psychiatrist or a Ph.D. psychologist to know that Bush is a very sick person. His increased temper tantrums, his abusive language, his flying all over the country, and his apparent alcoholism and drug intake are signs that Bush is losing it. We have in the WH a very unstable beast who could snap at any minute. We must never forget this psycho's depraved indifference in the murdering of human beings. Pray hard for this demented and deranged amoeba!
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:45 AM
Capt, we are freakin doomed dude! I can't believe anyone is spending one line responding to that idiot.
Hajji, glad you and sis are well, we had a blast! Hope you make it back Cali way soon.
Posted by: Saladin at October 29, 2005 01:48 AM
Assessing the President
There are generals and church people who say that George W. Bush was chosen to be president by God. I cannot prove or disprove what people are saying. So, I offer you my assessment with some trepidation.
George W. Bush and his regime have been an experiment in mendacity with the American people. His disciples claim that he is the messianic messenger but his message has obfuscated the American people. His character lacks the probity to be a leader and his actions are more reflective of a nefarious person. George W. Bush expects Americans and the media to obsequious to what he says because he says it.
Before I accept the hyperbole that George W. Bush was chosen by God to be president and that God speaks to him, he must possess the virtues of my God which are humility, love, mercy, and patience. Personally, Mr. Bush does not possess any of these virtues. I see him more as a controlling, punitive, and vengeful person, totally lacking in compassion.
George W. Bush displays a depraved indifference toward the killing of living human beings.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:48 AM
Trebeloc: "If you LEFTIES were intellectually honest then you would be celebrating Libby as you did FELT because he exposed a CORRUPT CIA agent"
Corrupt CIA agent!?
Your pathology goes well beyond ideology. You're just outta your f***ing mind. Psycho, wacko, looney, bonkers, around the bend, rowing with one oar. You've completely lost touch. Get someone to throw you a line. Seek professional help. Good luck.
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 01:52 AM
From: WRH
Plame, Niger documents, and the Office of Special Plans
Concerning the origins of the forged Niger documents, Patrick Fitzgerald's office has recently received information and documents relating to this case from the Italian government. Yet there has been almost no investigation into some of the key players such as Rocco Martino, the Italian security consultant who attempted to sell the forged documents to a reporter in Rome in late 2002.
Rocco Martino has yet to be interviewed by the FBI because they claim that the Italian government has not allowed them to interview him, yet Mr. Martino has traveled to the United States twice in 2004 and still the FBI has not attempted to interview him.
Posted Oct 28, 2005 05:08 PM PST
Just as the FBI has not attempted to interview Dr. Philip Zack, the man actually caught on the security system entering the storage area where the anthrax used in the letters was kept.
Interesting how the FBI avoids interviewing people who really should be interviewed.
-------------
Perjury and obstruction of justice? Don't forget to slap him on the wrist. Bad boy!
Posted by: Saladin at October 29, 2005 01:54 AM
Corporations and Persons
I watched Television Ontario (TVO). The program title was "The Corporation - The Pathology of Commerce." The program mentioned that the Supreme Court ruled that a corporation is a person than surely a person is a person. The program highlighted a checklist for mental disorders. Since a corporation can be considered a person, the mental disorder checklist can be applied.
Here is the checklist.
1. Callousness toward people
2. Impersonal relationships with people
3. Disregard for the safety of others
4. Deceitfulness
5. Incapacity to experience guilt
6. Failure to comply toward social norms to benefit people
From the checklist corporations displayed a psychopathic mental disorder. If we use the same checklist for our two highest leaders, then we would have to conclude that george w. bush and dick chaney display the same mental disorder. It would be my perception that the above two men are unfit to be president and vice-president, respectively. They hold too much power for men who have a possible mental disorder.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 01:56 AM
Capt you can post as many "Mr. Rove is still under investigation" stories as you want to feed the psychosis of the left. You have been posting stories for months and they still are not true and full of speculation, not facts! I listened to the news conference today and the reporters wanted the SP to say that ROVE was still a target, but he didn't,and wouldn't.
Maybe capt can post the indictment and the SP's press conference where he said, we don't comment on people who are not indited, because they have committed no crime. A real journalist would report that fact, not the "speculation of lawyers". ALL WE HAVE BEEN HEARING FORM CAPT-CORN-AND MSM IS SPECULATION, AND IT WAS ALL WRONG!!!!!!!
BY THE WAY WHY DON'T WE SEE STORIES OF AMERICANS COMMENTING ON CASES GOING ON IN EUROPE, DOES THE EUROPEAN PRESS CALL FOR AMERICAN LAWYERS FOR COMMENT ON THEIR CASES, I DOUBT IT, NOT IF THEY ARE NOT TRAINED AND CERTIFIED IN EUROPEAN LAW! I COULD CARE LESS WHAT THE WORLD HAS TO SAY ABOUT AMERICA, MY NEIGHBOR HAS NO SAY ABOUT WHAT GOES ON IN MY HOUSEHOLD AND IF HE DOES WHO CARES, IT IS NONE OF HIS BUSINESS!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 02:00 AM
From the checklist corporations displayed a psychopathic mental disorder. If we use the same checklist for the MAIN STREEM MEDIA AND THE LEFTIES, then we would have to conclude that MAIN STREEM MEDIA AND THE LEFTIES display the same mental disorder. It would be my perception that NO MATTER THE FACTS, THEY ARE NOT ABLE TO COMPREHEND WHAT HAS JUST HAPPENED, AND THEREFORE JUDGE THE CURRENT SITUATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR OWN ILLOGICAL REASONING!!!!.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 02:06 AM
Everyone on this blog needs to go to www.factcheck.org, which is an indepedent non-partisan political fact checker.
In particular, the LIE that Bush lied about Iraq's WMDs, is addressed in this link:
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
The LIE that Bush lied about Iraq trying to seek uranium from Niger:
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:16 AM
SORRY tim l YOU CAME TO THE WRONG SITE FOR FACTS! ONly SPECULATION, CONJECTURE AND CONSPIRACY THEORY'S ARE ALLOWED ON THIS SITE, THEY WOULDNT BELIEVE THE TRUTH IF IT HIT THEM ON THE HEAD......THE CHICKEN LITTLES!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 02:28 AM
Iraq: Yellowcake Aside, How Real was the Rest?
Besides the intelligence the Administration knew was bad, it's worth examining the intel they assumed was good
Posted Wednesday, Jul. 16, 2003
The Niger yellowcake uranium imbroglio concerns a piece of intelligence Washington knew was bad that was nonetheless restated in President Bush's State of the Union address. A bureaucratic snafu, says the Bush Administration, and one which doesn't detract at all from the case for war; in fact it was hardly a significant part of that case in the first place. Indeed. But three months after taking control of Iraq, the deeper question looming on the horizon is less how one item of bad intelligence slipped into a keynote speech than how so much of the intelligence the Administration had believed was solid appears to have been rather liquid, even gaseous.
Secretary of State Colin Powell has attempted to ride out the yellowcake crisis by defending Bush and at the same time clearing his own name by making clear that he never repeated that particular untruth. Combining those two objectives can be tough. "At the time of the president's State of the Union, a judgement was made that was an appropriate statement for the president to make," he told reporters in South Africa last week, referring to the Niger allegation. "When I made my presentation to the United Nations and we really went through every single thing we knew about all of the various issues with respect to weapons of mass destruction, we did not believe that it was appropriate to use that example anymore. It was not standing the test of time. And so I didn't use it, and we haven't used it since." The test of time?! Exactly eight days passed between the president's speech and the secretary's UN presentation.
*****end of article*****
Right, so they had Libby smear Wilson because they had nothing to hide and were completely truthful about going to war when they KNEW by the time Powell lied to the UN.
They went to war anyway. That is where it becomes starting a war on a lie. Drunk on petty power and high on their own lies they knew Saddam was a paper tiger and that our military already owned the no fly zones. They were so excited about how well everything was going to go they thought they would never have to answer for their criminal acts.
Hell, I am glad they went after Joe Wilson. Imagine if they had just ignored him. Nobody would be in trouble for anything. The extent that the yellow-cake lie contributed to the run up to war would never have exposed who knew what and when.
Thank goodness for the arrogance. If they were as good as they were put up to be they would have never over-reached. If they had a ounce of humility they would not have tried to pull it off. If they had any discipline they would not have screwed up so badly.
This is the VPճ right hand man, his chief of staff. Not some flunky night shift reserve putting dog collars on prisoners. This is the first time in 130 years that a active working member of the White House staff has been indicted. The last guy was pardoned. Same is in store for Libby and any other indicted west wing employees.
If you read the actual indictment. It is well written and plain spoken and very clear. A guy that works next to the guy that is one breath from the highest office in our government walk into the grand jury and lied more than once. That is no small deal not matter how some try to minimize the level of this kind of a crime.
Add to that the Coward from Crawford moving the goal posts in some kind of macabre dance now exposed as knowing full well that two of these top aides in his administration were fully involved and he lies and has Scotty McClueless lie for him.
He has nothing left in the credibility department and his deficit spending is not limited to our tax dollars. He has spent political capital he never had. He is in a hole that his actions have written into history. He is a miserable failure and his presidency has turned into a miserable failure. He is a disgrace as a fake honest cowboy trying to seduce people like Old Dutch but he ends up coming across more like Baghdad Bob.
Time says he knew and they are right leaning partisans. Checkmate!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 02:30 AM
Treboloc-LMFAO!!!!
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:31 AM
From factcheck.org, and INDEPEDENT NON-PARTISAN SITE, unlike commondreams or the gaurdian UK
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
Two intelligence investigations show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said in his 2003 State of the Union Address.
Summary
The famous 16 words in President Bushs Jan. 28, 2003 State of the Union address turn out to have a basis in fact after all, according to two recently released investigations in the US and Britain.
Bush said then, The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa . Some of his critics called that a lie, but the new evidence shows Bush had reason to say what he did.
A British intelligence review released July 14 calls Bushs 16 words well founded.
A separate report by the US Senate Intelligence Committee said July 7 that the US also had similar information from a number of intelligence reports, a fact that was classified at the time Bush spoke.
Ironically, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who later called Bushs 16 words a lie, supplied information that the Central Intelligence Agency took as confirmation that Iraq may indeed have been seeking uranium from Niger .
Both the US and British investigations make clear that some forged Italian documents, exposed as fakes soon after Bush spoke, were not the basis for the British intelligence Bush cited, or the CIA's conclusion that Iraq was trying to get uranium.
None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldnt have been part of Bushs speech.
But what he said that Iraq sought uranium is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time. So Bush may indeed have been misinformed, but that's not the same as lying.
Analysis
The "16 words" in Bush's State of the Union Address on Jan. 28, 2003 have been offered as evidence that the President led the US into war using false information intentionally. The new reports show Bush accurately stated what British intelligence was saying, and that CIA analysts believed the same thing.
The Butler Report
After nearly a six-month investigation, a special panel reported to the British Parliament July 14 that British intelligence had indeed concluded back in 2002 that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy uranium. The review panel was headed by Lord Butler of Brockwell, who had been a cabinet secretary under five different Prime Ministers and who is currently master of University College, Oxford.
The Butler report said British intelligence had "credible" information -- from several sources -- that a 1999 visit by Iraqi officials to Niger was for the purpose of buying uranium:
Butler Report: It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999. The British Government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Nigers exports, the intelligence was credible.
The Butler Report affirmed what the British government had said about the Niger uranium story back in 2003, and specifically endorsed what Bush said as well.
Butler Report: By extension, we conclude also that the statement in President Bushs State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa was well-founded.
The Senate Intelligence Committee Report
The U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence reported July 7, 2004 that the CIA had received reports from a foreign government (not named, but probably Britain) that Iraq had actually concluded a deal with Niger to supply 500 tons a year of partially processed uranium ore, or "yellowcake." That is potentially enough to produce 50 nuclear warheads.
The Senate report said the CIA then asked a "former ambassador" to go to Niger and report. That is a reference to Joseph Wilson -- who later became a vocal critic of the President's 16 words. The Senate report said Wilson brought back denials of any Niger-Iraq uranium sale, and argued that such a sale wasn't likely to happen. But the Intelligence Committee report also reveals that Wilson brought back something else as well -- evidence that Iraq may well have wanted to buy uranium.
Wilson reported that he had met with Niger's former Prime Minister Ibrahim Mayaki, who said that in June 1999 he was asked to meet with a delegation from Iraq to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between the two countries.
Based on what Wilson told them, CIA analysts wrote an intelligence report saying former Prime Minister Mayki "interpreted 'expanding commercial relations' to mean that the (Iraqi) delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales." In fact, the Intelligence Committee report said that "for most analysts" Wilson's trip to Niger "lent more credibility to the original Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) reports on the uranium deal."
The subject of uranium sales never actually came up in the meeting, according to what Wilson later told the Senate Intelligence Committee staff. He quoted Mayaki as saying that when he met with the Iraqis he was wary of discussing any trade issues at all because Iraq remained under United Nations sanctions. According to Wilson, Mayaki steered the conversation away from any discussion of trade.
For that reason, Wilson himself has publicly dismissed the significance of the 1999 meeting. He said on NBCs Meet the Press May 2, 2004:
Wilson: At that meeting, uranium was not discussed. It would be a tragedy to think that we went to war over a conversation in which uranium was not discussed because the Niger official was sufficiently sophisticated to think that perhaps he might have wanted to discuss uranium at some later date.
But that's not the way the CIA saw it at the time. In the CIA's view, Wilson's report bolstered suspicions that Iraq was indeed seeking uranium in Africa. The Senate report cited an intelligence officer who reviewed Wilsons report upon his return from Niger:
Committee Report: He (the intelligence officer) said he judged that the most important fact in the report was that the Nigerian officials admitted that the Iraqi delegation had traveled there in 1999, and that the Nigerian Prime Minister believed the Iraqis were interested in purchasing uranium, because this provided some confirmation of foreign government service reporting.
"Reasonable to Assess"
At this point the CIA also had received "several intelligence reports" alleging that Iraq wanted to buy uranium from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and from Somalia, as well as from Niger. The Intelligence Committee concluded that "it was reasonable for analysts to assess that Iraq may have been seeking uranium from Africa based on Central Intelligence Agency reporting and other available intelligence."
Reasonable, that is, until documents from an Italian magazine journalist showed up that seemed to prove an Iraq-Niger deal had actually been signed. The Intelligence Committee said the CIA should have been quicker to investigate the authenticity of those documents, which had "obvious problems" and were soon exposed as fakes by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
"We No Longer Believe"
Both the Butler report and the Senate Intelligence Committee report make clear that Bush's 16 words weren't based on the fake documents. The British didn't even see them until after issuing the reports -- based on other sources -- that Bush quoted in his 16 words. But discovery of the Italian fraud did trigger a belated reassessment of the Iraq/Niger story by the CIA.
Once the CIA was certain that the Italian documents were forgeries, it said in an internal memorandum that "we no longer believe that there is sufficient other reporting to conclude that Iraq pursued uranium from abroad." But that wasn't until June 17, 2003 -- nearly five months after Bush's 16 words.
Soon after, on July 6, 2003, former ambassador Wilson went public in a New York Times opinion piece with his rebuttal of Bush's 16 words, saying that if the President was referring to Niger "his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them," and that "I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat." Wilson has since used much stronger language, calling Bush's 16 words a "lie" in an Internet chat sponsored by the Kerry campaign.
On July 7, the day after Wilson's original Times article, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer took back the 16 words, calling them "incorrect:"
Fleischer: Now, we've long acknowledged -- and this is old news, we've said this repeatedly -- that the information on yellow cake did, indeed, turn out to be incorrect.
And soon after, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice acknowledged that the 16 words were, in retrospect, a mistake. She said during a July 11, 2003 White House press briefing :
Rice: What we've said subsequently is, knowing what we now know, that some of the Niger documents were apparently forged, we wouldn't have put this in the President's speech -- but that's knowing what we know now.
That same day, CIA Director George Tenet took personal responsibility for the appearance of the 16 words in Bush's speech:
Tenet: These 16 words should never have been included in the text written
for the President.
Tenet said the CIA had viewed the original British intelligence reports as "inconclusive," and had "expressed reservations" to the British.
The Senate report doesn't make clear why discovery of the forged documents changed the CIA's thinking. Logically, that discovery should have made little difference since the documents weren't the basis for the CIA's original belief that Saddam was seeking uranium. However, the Senate report did note that even within the CIA the comments and assessments were "inconsistent and at times contradictory" on the Niger story.
Even after Tenet tried to take the blame, Bush's critics persisted in saying he lied with his 16 words -- for example, in an opinion column July 16, 2003 by Michael Kinsley in the Washington Post :
Kinsley: Who was the arch-fiend who told a lie in President Bush's State of the Union speech? . . .Linguists note that the question "Who lied in George Bush's State of the Union speech" bears a certain resemblance to the famous conundrum "Who is buried in Grant's Tomb?"
However, the Senate report confirmed that the CIA had reviewed Bush's State of the Union address, and -- whatever doubts it may have harbored -- cleared it for him.
Senate Report: When coordinating the State of the Union, no Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) analysts or officials told the National Security Council (NSC) to remove the "16 words" or that there were concerns about the credibility of the Iraq-Niger uranium reporting.
The final word on the 16 words may have to await history's judgment. The Butler report's conclusion that British intelligence was "credible" clearly doesn't square with what US intelligence now believes. But these new reports show Bush had plenty of reason to believe what he said, even if British intelligence is eventually shown to be mistaken.
Sources
President George W. Bush, State of the Union , 28 January 2003.
Chairman Lord Butler of Brockwell, Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destruction, 14 July 2004.
Report on the U.S. Intelligence Communitys Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq, Select Committee on Intelligence United States Senate, 7 July 2004.
Walter Pincus, CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report Of Uranium Bid , Washington Post, 12 June 2003.
Mohamed ElBaradei, The Status of Nuclear Inspections in Iraq: An Update , Statement to the United Nations Security Council by International Atomic Energy Agency Director General, 7 March 2003.
Joseph Wilson, What I Didnt Find in Africa, New York Times, 6 July 2003.
Joseph Wilson,The Official Kerry-Edwards BLOG: "Transcript of Chat with Ambassador Joe Wilson," 29 Oct 2003.
Michael Kinsley, "...Or More Lies From The Usual Suspects?," Washington Post, 16 July 2003: A23.
Ari Fleischer, Press Gaggle , 7 July 2003.
Ari Fleischer and Dr. Condoleeza Rice, Press Gaggle , 11 July 2003.
George Tenet, "Statement by George J. Tenet Director of Central Intelligence," Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), 11 July 2003.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:35 AM
Your pathology goes well beyond ideology. You're just outta your f***ing mind. Psycho, wacko, looney, bonkers, around the bend, rowing with one oar. You've completely lost touch. Get someone to throw you a line. Seek professional help. Good luck.- Drewp
DITTO FOR YOU.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 02:36 AM
Timmies must be robots.
No no no.
Timmies are gluttons for punishment. That's why they vote for Bush. That's why they're still here.
You seemed so concerned with the possibility that we think bush lied. Once again he is too amoral to lie. His reasons for war were personal, and for the people who pull his strings it was purely a war-profiteering opportunity.
So forget about factcheck.com and please wake up. That is unless you have an reasonsforbeinganamoralduschebagpresident.com you would like us to look at...
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 02:44 AM
Capt and others who have LIED about Bush lying, you may want to read this indepedent bipartisan commissions report on the intelligence failures of Iraq:
http://www.wmd.gov/report/report.html#part1
An "Intelligence Failure"
Overall Commission Finding
The Intelligence Community's performance in assessing Iraq's pre-war weapons of mass destruction programs was a major intelligence failure. The failure was not merely that the Intelligence Community's assessments were wrong. There were also serious shortcomings in the way these assessments were made and communicated to policymakers.
You may not want to read it, because it disputes the LIE that Bush lied. But have at it if you like!
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:47 AM
The 16 Words Weren't Just a Data Point
by Derrick Z. Jackson
IN THE incredible Shrinking War, impending planetary doom shrivels into dull data points. The White House is now frantically trying to convince Americans that President Bush did not conduct a mad experiment.
The experiment was Bush's State of the Union claim on Jan. 28 that ''the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.'' That sentence came in the homestretch of saying that Iraq was ''assembling the world's most dangerous weapons.'' The sentence was part of building the case that ''the gravest danger facing America and the world is outlaw regimes that seek and possess nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.''
Since then, it has been learned that Bob Joseph, a weapons expert for Bush's National Security Council was told by Alan Foley, a weapons expert at the CIA, that the uranium line should be taken out of the speech because it lacked credibility. Joseph got Foley to agree to pin the statement on British intelligence. This was despite the fact that Foley, according to news reports of a Senate closed-door hearing last week, told Joseph that the CIA warned the British that it doubted the credibility of that intelligence.
The intelligence has since been determined to be a forgery. On top of that, the White House, in an attempt at credibility control, last week released eight pages from last October's 90-page classified National Intelligence Estimate. The White House released the documents to show that most American intelligence agencies believed then that Saddam had a ''continuing'' and ''expanding'' nuclear weapons program.
But the report also included a major objection by the State Department that was buried in the annex of the report. State Department intelligence called the uranium claims ''highly dubious.'' An equally hard boomerang for the White House was the admission by administration officials that neither Bush nor National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice read the intelligence estimate in its entirety. Neither read the annex. A senior White House official told reporters that Bush was ''briefed'' on the report, but ''I don't think he sat down over a long weekend and read every word of it.''
*****end of article*****
Well of course Bush could not sit down and read it he does not read. He is read to. Who reads the annex? It was just starting a war. Jeeze, what kind of detail does that demand? He heard what he wanted to hear. Forget the facts, those messy facts. Next thing you know some over zealous prosecuter will be looking under rocks and calling the honest WH staff liars and perjurers.
See what happens when those darn details rear their heads? Trouble I tell you! What good is the truth anyway. All it does is cause trouble for liars and loyal law abiding staff.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 02:50 AM
Hey Ripple, check these websites out! This isn't a right wing or left wing website, it analyzes statements made by both parties and uses facts to back them up. It's a non-partisan, indepedent website. That probably won't go well with you guys, since you have a complete disregard for the facts, but I'm trying to help you.
In particular, the LIE that Bush lied about Iraq's WMDs, is addressed in this link:
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
The LIE that Bush lied about Iraq trying to seek uranium from Niger:
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:50 AM
That Capt and others here being called names the posters cannot even spell is telling.
This is not over. Not by a long chalk.
We were sold a lie, and even if Fitz doesn't bring it all to light, congress sure as hell should.
Ive yet to hear the fat lady sing.
Kerry is trying way to hard to stay in the middle. We need a bull dog like Dean. The media can turn up his volume again, it might just be welcomed this time.
I know I will not rest, nor let my legislators rest until this thing is taken to the max.
I know its a nest of snakes and lies, and lying snakes.
Time for the Country to know.
They can not shut all of us up.
I just keep coming back to "you can fool some of the people , some of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool All of the People All of the Time".
The truth will win out.
It behoves us to keep the media honest.
Only way I know of to do this is Meaningful campaign finance reform.
Aint all that popular, but its the only thing that is likely to save Democracy.
And, I DO see Democracy at serious risk
Take back those tax breaks for the wealthy, right the hell now, or we will participate in killing every social program we have. And add to the KILL THE POOR MENTALITY that so dominates not only the White House , but also Congress.
Laura said the survivors living in shelters were "better off". This is the closest I have seen anyone in power come to the French equilivalent "Let them eat cake".
Brown's dinner preempted helping the poor of NO.
What ever happened to Nobles Oblige?????
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 02:52 AM
Common Capt, you're not being fair! Common dreams is a left-wing anti-Bush website. Use non-partisan independent websites like www.factcheck.org. I don't use right-wing websites to defend my views.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:52 AM
Tim,
sorry, your links don't light.
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 02:56 AM
LEFTIES must be robots.
No no no.
LEFTIES are gluttons for punishment. That's why they vote for LEFTIES. That's why they're loseing their minds.
You showed NO CONSERN when CLINTON LIED ON THE STAND, UNDER OATH!I will say there is a possibility that bush lied, but it he could be was wrong and not lied, at the same time. Once again if he believed it was true, but turns out to be false (it has not been proven yet), you determine this to be a lie. His reasons for war were the same as Bill Clintons reasons why the official US GOVT policy was changed in 98 to "REGIME CHANGE", and for LEFTIES who's strings are pulled by the MAIN STREEM MEDIA and JOE WILSON use the war as an opportunity to "NIXON" Bush and "VIETNAM" the war in IRAQ.
DIDNT WORK FOR KERRY AND WONT WORK TODAY!!!!
So forget about factcheck.com and please wake up. That is unless you have an reasonsforbeinganamoralduschebagpresident.com you would like us to look at...
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 02:56 AM
His Word vs. That of Reporters and Officials
By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 29, 2005; Page A10
If this were a theater of war, the obstruction-of-justice case against I. Lewis Libby could be described as a pincer movement.
From one direction comes the testimony of three reporters whose accounts differ significantly from the word of Libby, who resigned yesterday as Vice President Cheney's chief of staff. From the other direction comes testimony from half a dozen Bush administration officials whose accounts also contradict his sworn statements.
In the center is Libby himself, along with the stack of statements that prosecutor Patrick J. Fitzgerald intends to use against him. A number of experienced lawyers said yesterday that the case, with its multiple witnesses, appears strong.
"It's going to be very difficult for Libby to defend himself here," said former CIA inspector general Jeffrey H. Smith.
*****end of article*****
Very difficult to defend himself because he is a liar. Being a liar is a prerequisite to work for a liar. They cannot have truthful people running around telling the truth. That would be crazy.
Birds of feather.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 02:57 AM
Titchiba, copy and paste
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 02:59 AM
CAPT GLAD YOU FINALY CAME TO OUR SIDE AND SAW THE CLINTONS FOR WHAT THE ARE!:
Very difficult to clinton YOURSELF because he is a liar. Being a liar is a prerequisite to work for a liar. They cannot have truthful people running around telling the truth. That would be crazy.
Birds of feather.
TELL ME WHICH IS WORSE,
1-A VICE-PRESIDENTS ADVISOR WHO LIES TO A GRAND JURY
OR
2-A SITTING PRESIDENT WHO LIES UNDER OATH AS HE IS DEFEDNDING HIMSELF IN A C0URT OF LAW?
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:04 AM
Capt wrote:
"They went to war anyway. That is where it becomes starting a war on a lie. Drunk on petty power and high on their own lies they knew Saddam was a paper tiger and that our military already owned the no fly zones. They were so excited about how well everything was going to go they thought they would never have to answer for their criminal acts."
You're lying about Bush again. Check this indepedent non-partisan website for the yellow cake uranium issue:
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Hell, I am glad they went after Joe Wilson. Imagine if they had just ignored him. Nobody would be in trouble for anything. The extent that the yellow-cake lie contributed to the run up to war would never have exposed who knew what and when.
Capt, you're lying about Bush again.
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:07 AM
Anti-war Ad Says Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice "Lied" About Iraq
We find some subtle word-twisting, and place the claims in context.
September 26, 2005
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:09 AM
After working two jobs, going to my daughter's Fall Festival (what we called "halloween carnival" before schools got too chickenshit to call them what they really are) and visiting with my parents, I settle down to listen to Green Day's American Idiot. I catch up with the news and let out a whoop and giggle my way over to the Cornblog.
Only when I get here, I see that the Bushbots are back and they've taken the joy out of your Fitzmas celebration.
I spend a lot of time reading the Reactionary morons at Realclearpolitics, Redstate and Powerline. Remember "keep your friends close and your enemies closer?" Temper that with Sun Tzu's "If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles."
To be honest, there isn't much to fear. Keep in mind that BTKTimmee is the one that isn't afraid of books and reading. He is not very well read; but he is semi-literate. That isn't to say that he's smart. We can only compare him to the pendejos that talk of sticking hotdogs up their wamms and eating them. They're all mental-midgets; BTKTimmee is just a tallish midget.
I've pwned Timmee since I've been here. Knocking him on his ass is just a matter of following his lameassed logic to its absurd conclusions (ie the original intent of the framers = rich white landowners being the only ones to vote, slavery is otay). He and most other reactionary ignoramuses rely on intellectually dishonest arguments and sources. Take his reliance on Rasmussen reports for poll data. Rasmussen took data from before the first Chimpy-Kerry debate and tried to pass it off as proof that Kerry got no bounce from the debates. To find that out, you had to read the fine print at the bottom of their website. That's what Franken calls lying with numbers. Gotta get the Truth tomorrow. Anyone seen it (Franken's new book) yet?
Scroll through the pinhead rants that the Timsies engage in and notice that their stupidity is pulled straight from the darker regions of their asses. No links or sources to back up their arguments. Ask them to cite their info and it leaves them limp and crying, whining like the braindead buttwipes that they've been their whole lives. Even when the shorter Timmiee tries to copy and paste entire volumes of the Encyclopedia Moronica, he cites stuff that is outdated and irrelevant.
I don't agree with most of the premises on which they base their idiocy; but I know that you could start from their pinhead positions and still make them look stooopid. I don't know how the hell Chimpy could let almost 3,000 of my friends die in New York and get away with it. I tend to believe in the Stupidity Paradigm because there is ample, incontrovertible evidence to back up that theory. Chimpy's brain is so shriveled from all of the dangerous chemicals that he has ingested over the years that he can't read the paper. He has to have the news of the day predigested and presented to him on DVD. What an Eeeeeediot!
The "official story of 911" that the Bushbots have had rammed up their arses is enough to make a case for Chimpy's incompetence. If they want to defend that record, far be it from me to deny them that craphole. Chimpy had a mandate to get the REAL terrorists in Afghanistan and he blew it. Now he's too big of a chickenshit loser to go after Osama in Pakistan. There's no denying the simple fact that Chimpy is a coward.
Iraq. They want to own Iraq and defend the lies that Cheney and Libby tried to press on the country, I couldn't give a damn. The press has reported it. Scott Ritter has been talking about it for years. Wilkerson didn't express his "opinion" of the efforts of Libby to get Powell to lie. He simply described the constant calls and attempts to interject intel into Powell's speech that was weak and later proven to be false. That's not an opinion. Those are facts. Wilkerson's speech (like John Danforth's and Scrowcroft's and every other educated wingnut's backstabbing) shows that the reactionaries are having to deal with this gang of uneducated chickenhawks and are growing tired of their bullshit. I like Wilkerson's speech especially because he doesn't mince words. He talks about the congame that the reactionaries have played. He reiterates Tommy Franks' quote about Doug Feith being the stupidest fucking man on the face of the planet. Miers. Feith. Chimpy. Rove. Stoopid is as stoopid does.
Rove, Hannity, Rush and other wingnut buttspeakers never graduated from college. President Cheney flunked out of Yale. These are the dimwits that the Grand Ol' Torturin' Party looks to for talking points. It's no wonder that the Bushbots come off as chickenhawk halfwits. Sun Tzu: "Therefore, if one is not fully cognizant of the dangers inherent in doing battle, one cannot fully know the benefits of doing battle."
As I mentioned before, if they want to own Iraq, that's fine with me. The majority of Americans are tired of their quagmire and the associated lies. Again, to quote Sun Tzu, "No nation has ever benefited from protracted warfare." Americans know that there was no plan for post-invasion Iraq.
If the electronic village idiots want to question Big Dawg's military record, let them compare Clinton's nation building and regime change done in Kosovo to the quagmire in Iraq. How many of our brave American troops died fighting in Kosovo? About 2000 less than have died so far in Chimpy's and Field Marshall von Rumsfeld's follies. What was the coalition that went into the Balkans like compared to the Coalition of the Paid off and Coerced in Iraq (and Poland, don't forget Poland. LOL)?
If they want to compare the number of Americans dead from terrorism, they can take Chimpy's numbers and add them to Reagan's numbers and never come close to the Americans that died from terrorism under every other American president. If they want to talk about Somalia, let's talk about Beirut, cut and run like a MoFo. If they want to talk about the mistakes of Clinton in dealing with Saddam. Show them the picture of Saddam shaking hands with Rumsfeld and the connections between Saddam's murderous ways and the blind eye that the Grand Ol' Torturing Party turned to Saddam. They were arming and training the terrorists (Osama and Saddam) while Big Dawg had to disarm and fight the assholes. If they want to talk of the necessity of invading Iraq to change them, what of Libya? the Eastern bloc countries? Did we have to invade East Germany or Poland to democratize them?
Clinton's record wasn't perfect; but it compares favorably to anything and everything that Chimpy has tried (except the number of indictments of White House officials). This is why less than 40% of Americans think that Chimpy is doing a bangup job and 60% think he's doing an upfuck job. What were Clinton's favorable numbers? Somewhere in the high 60's. Even Timmee's sham Rasmussen numbers show Chimpy's numbers at 40%, for the first time ever. How pathetic is that?
I'm a liberal. I don't shrink from that label. I don't shrink from a fight and the use of military under the right circumstances. Again with the Sun Tzu: " Warfare is a great matter to a nation; it is the ground of death and of life; it is the way of survival and of destruction, and must be examined."
The monkeybrained military avoiders (Cheney, Chimpy, who else?) don't know jack about warfare, and it shows!
If they want to bitch and whine about "criminalizing politics," they should discourage the governors of OH and KY from breaking so many laws. They should tell Frist to stop lying about what he knew about his seeing-eye trust. DeLay and Blount and every other Reactionary pol shouldn't have to run backwards and do backflips to get away from Abramoff. They should tell the Duke to stop ripping people off. Who was it that said that the difference between a thief and a Republican is that the thief doesn't expect you to thank him when he steals from you?
And if you want to paint Dems with the same broad brush, this is where I get off the fucking train. We have more Iraqi vets running in upcoming elections than the Reds do because these chickenhawk dumbasses have ruined our military. Just watch Hackett run in OH. He will destroy Sherrod Brown. and Dewine despite the swiftboating that he will receive.
Conyers, Slaughter, Nadler, Pelosi and others have called the GoOPers on their lying and cheating and lawlessness. They were on the right side of the Bolton issue, the DSM, the Energy Bill, the Bankruptcy Bill, Torture in the Military, fiscal responsibility and many other crappy pieces of legislation. They fought for us, the little guys. If you want to paint all of them as turncoats because of the likes of Joe Lieberman, that's fine. Go find yourself a better alternative. Period. Your alternative is this. If you think there's a third alternative, get out your spiffy little tinfoil hat; because you're in for a bumpyass ride.
As micki (echoing Scott Ritter) has said on numerous occasions, the dems will only fight as hard as they are prodded. And it is all beginning in the House. Remember that the Gingrich revolution was initiated in the House and leaked over into the Senate. It is our responsibility as citizens to kick congressional ass from sunup to sundown (and sometimes after sundown too).
Look at what Fitzie actually said in his press conference. It is staggering. He knocks down all of the reactionary cock and bull stories about Plame not being a covert agent. He knocks down all the rightwing intellectual dog chow about Mr. Corn being the one who outed Plame. He shows that it was Libby, Rove and Novak who were responsible for disclosing the sensitive classified status of Plame. Look at Libby's notes. They point at Cheney. This administration is rotten to its very core. The investigation is only getting started. The slime machine is gearing up to knock Fitzie down. He's slow-roasting this administration and I love it. I don't want him to indict the bunch only to have them resign, get replace by another bunch of shitheads and get pardoned by Chimpy. I like watching the slow grinding pain inflicted on the idiots that have been sheltered by the press for so many years.
Libby is just the tip of the iceberg. Fitzie knows what happened and he's going to pin his ears back and bear down on these punks like a pit bull in a lockjawed frenzy.
The Grand Ol' Spendin' Party is sick with the culture of corruption, unending, self-perpetuating law-breaking losers.
From Governors (OH, KY) to Congressmen (The Duke Cunningham, DeLay, Frist), to Abramoff, ad infinitum, ad nauseam.
The Cheney Administration has been on the receiving end of so many asskickings from Social Security, to Schiavo, to Iraq, to Katrina, to Miers, to Traitorgate. For the life of me, I've never understood how an uneducated hack like Rove could be considered a genius. As far as I can tell, his biggest skill is lying to the press. I never realized how easily impressed people were.
Let the Bushbot argue over and own the lies of Iraq intel. If they want to argue that the President of the United States is the biggest marinated mushroom in all Christendom, that's fine with me. Let him be the great white mushroom (kept in the dark, fed shit all day). That's also a measure of his stupidity and colossal incompetence. He doesn't seem to know Andy Card's ass from Condi's elbow. The Grand Ol' Torturin' Party is going to have to answer to Americans for their hypocrisy. As long as we choose to hold them accountable.
If you've made it this far through my paternalistic poopoo, you're either a masochist or someone who knows me well enough to know that I care about the well-being of the regular posters and readers of this blog. A few words of advice:
* enjoy Fitzmas, it ain't over till it's over (Woohoo!)
* if you're gonna go to all the trouble of linking facts for the Bushbots, demand that they reciprocate. They couldn't back up their talking points if the lives of their families depended on it.
* ask the dumber Timmiee to tell you about Bolton's Fixer at WINPAC. Fitzie's using that avenue to get at the lies that led to Rumsfeld's Follies in Iraq. Cheney hired Bolton for a reason: to feed the mushroom. LOL.
* Chimpy is the biggest misleader in the free world.
BUSH THE CANDIDATE PROMISED TO UPHOLD THE HONOR AND INTEGRITY AT THE WHITE HOUSE...
"I will swear to uphold the laws of the land. But I will also swear to uphold the honor and the integrity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God," said then-Governor George Bush [CNN, "Inside Politics," 8/11/00]
"Americans are tired of investigations and scandal, and the best way to get rid of them is to elect a new president who will bring a new administration, who will restore honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Burden of Proof," 9/15/00]
"Americans want to be assured that the next administration will bring honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Capital Gang," 8/13/00]
Where are those Timsies? Gotta love the lies guys. Clap louder. Morons.
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 29, 2005 03:10 AM
I REPEAT!
SORRY tim l YOU CAME TO THE WRONG SITE FOR FACTS! ONly SPECULATION, CONJECTURE AND CONSPIRACY THEORY'S ARE ALLOWED ON THIS SITE, THEY WOULDNT BELIEVE THE TRUTH IF IT HIT THEM ON THE HEAD......THE CHICKEN LITTLES!
YOU ARE SHOWING A PICTURE TO THE BLIND, TALKING TO THE DEAF, AND SOWING YOU PEARLS AMONG THE SWINE.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:12 AM
To the CornTims
Actually, I'm a bit left of Marx, and I enjoyed watching Clinton and pugs humiliate themselves. Why are you poor bushies obsessed with Clinton. It's over, you have your duschebag in office now and all you want to do is make references about what clinton did or what clinton said or what clinto believed. Shit, it history!
By the way Tim L. to continue arguing that the bipartisan senate intllegence report says blah blah blah, would indicate you're under the assumption that we have more faith in their "hallowed" words than we do bush's. Let's get it clear once and for all-- the failure of America's government is much larger than the executive branch. Fascism is the power of the corporation. The legislative branch is where the money is, that's where they LIVE man. You expect us to swallow the lies of those bloated pigs? You're as ate up as they are if that's the case. Fitzgerald might be the last bastion of dignity, if he fails we all fail. Including you.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:13 AM
So since Clinton is a liar it is okay that Bush is a liar?
Your moral compass is spinning, but your spin is all unspun here.
You are not fooling anyone. Neo-liberal relative morals and values and you are silly enough to commit such tripe to a post.
SCHWING AND A MISS!
You are, as always, completely clueless and continue to try to define others. Why would you think anubody did not raise hell when Clinton lied? He lied. About a BJ and cheating on his wife. Sorry, but to me that is really between them.
Bush lied about his intentions his reasons and the information he used to promote the idea of war then he started a war, on his word. On his lies.
2,012 deaths, of our troops to save us from nonexistent WMD's. Saddam did not even have unconventional weapons. Every single Bush supporter has blood on their hands that will never wash off.
You pro-war, hate filled supporters of a criminal enterprise cannot wrap your heads arouns the fact that pro-war is not pro-life, pro-war is not pro-troops and pro-war is not pro-American.
Pro-war is pro-death, pro-war is pro-destruction, pro-war is inhumane. Read a bible, any version. Read the words from a real (and the original) Christian. It is not just about the lies, it is about the lies that started a war. That is a very important issue and will reveal the character of our nation. Do we let warmonger hijack our economy, our industry, our government. Do we stand back and let them lie (because the other guy did). Do we stand and watch our rights freedom and liberty be diminished while the liars attack and smear citizens?
I do not think so.
So Bush never lied and if he did it is okay because Clinton lied. So Bush is so weak minded he though lying was okay. That make sense!
I am completely convinced!
Tragic as tragic can be.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 03:16 AM
Pande, all of your sites are liberal sites, so don't expect me to take you seriously. The only site I use is www.factcheck.org, which is a non-partisan indepedent site.
You are a hypocrite for saying that the other Tim used right wing sites to back up what he says, but you yourself use left wing sites!?!?
Check this sites out:
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
(Oh, and Libby wasn't even indicted on leaking lol)
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Anti-war Ad Says Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice "Lied" About Iraq
We find some subtle word-twisting, and place the claims in context.
September 26, 2005
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:17 AM
Ripple, both the Senate commission and the Silberman/Robb commission were bipartisan, so are you saying that you don't agree with those democrats that have exonerated Bush?
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:19 AM
"Actually, I'm a bit left of Marx.......
It's over, you have your duschebag in office now and all you want to do is make references about what clinton did or what clinton said or what clinto believed. Shit, it history! "
NOW YOUR TRUE COLORS SHOW,AND AT LEAST YOU HAVE ENOUGH COURAGE TO SAY WHO YOU ARE: AN ENEMY OF DEMOCRACY AND THE US.
THE REASON IM SO OBSESSED WITH CLINTON IS BECAUSE I VOTED FOR HIM, AND WAS ABLE TO PUT MY HONESTY BEFORE BLIND COMMITMENT TO A PERSON, AND BUSH IS INCLUDED! WRONG IS WRONG NO MATTER IF IT IS BUSH, CLINTON, OR MARX, BUT THE LEFT WILL IGNORE WHAT CLINTON DID AND THEN ACCUSE BUSH OF THE SAME THING. THE REASON I AM OBSESSED WITH CLINTON IS I LIKE TO POINT OUT THE HYPROCRACY OF THE LEFT!
AS FOR MARX....SHOW ME ONE EXAMPLE WHERE HIS THEORIES HAVE WORKED AS PROMISED....YOU CANT DO IT!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:21 AM
Tim needs professional help, forthwith.
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 03:22 AM
yes, that's what I'm saying. I don't need the party i vote for to think for me. You should try it sometime. It's quite liberating.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:22 AM
The whole PlameGate thing is much ado about very little.
Yes, lying under oath is a big deal. Libby should have resigned... and he did. Too bad the Democrats and Bill Clinton didn't think that resigning was the appropriate thing for someone who has committed perjury to do. But, the Dems only hold Republicans up to a high standard. I guess that is a complement.
Note also that the reason Libby was caught in a lie is because every single other White House staffer who was questioned, including Rove, contradicted Libby's testimony. There was no stonewalling here, no Rose Garden press conferences defending the person under indictment. Instead, the president let it be known that an indictment would need to be followed by a resignation.
Re Libby being the first White House official to be charged with a crime since the days of Grant, how about Watergate?
Libby was foolish to lie when it is evident that he broke no law. The law in question describes outing an agent as a crime when that agent is undercover, the people who out that agent know the agent is undercover and that blowing the cover will endanger the agent's life, and they do it anyway. Valerie Plame Wilson's neighbors knew she worked for the CIA. The woman posed with her husband in 'Vanity Fair' magazine, for criminy's sake. Her cover had been blown years earlier; that's why she worked in-house as a WMD analyst.
What does this so-called 'scandal' prove about Democrats and Republicans? About honesty?
All it proves is that the Democrats are more accomplished liars who, unlike the Republicans, rally around their fellow liars and deny the lie rather than forcing them to face the music.
If only Libby had uttered "Valerie Plame!" during moment of passion with Judy Miller. Then, he'd be in the clear. Wouldn't he?
Posted by: jgc at October 29, 2005 03:22 AM
No Capt, Bush never lied. 2 investigations prove he didn't lie, 2 investigations which you fail to accept!
Now Clinton DID lie!! It was PROVEN that he lied! Something you have failed to pin to Bush. It has been PROVEN that Bush did NOT LIE.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:25 AM
Capt, for you:
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:27 AM
No I can't Treb
It's a saying man, chill a little. I know the indictments have you guys worked into a tizzy, but it's kind of like a righty saying I'm a bit right of Genghis Kahn and a little left of Reagan.
It's a qualifier, I'm not going to give you any Marx tonight, so calm yourself down. By the way that enemy of democracy line is a load. I've never even experienced democracy, so I really don't have any strong opinions about it.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:29 AM
This blog was called the bushlies blog before David changed it to DavidCorn.com. He wrote a book that details lie upon lie upon lie.
You can come here to assert Bush never lied until the cows come home, it will never make the lie into the truth.
You are either being intentionally obtuse or you are just dropping by to derail the comments on the board as a game.
Have at it, have a field day. It must be liberating to be unencumbered by sense or sensibility, honor or honesty, manner or self-control. I really envy your complete denial of reality. I wish I could just ignore all that is wrong with our government and our once great nation and wear Rove-colored glasses. How nice it must be to see everything as fine and dandy as everything falls apart. A way to avoid responsibility for your world.
You are whistling past the grave yard.
"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one. " ~ Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 03:29 AM
Capt
I do when your links don't light. K?
Obvious leakers I tend to poke with sticks.
Copy/pasting is inherrently dangerous.
Im not a newbie.
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 03:30 AM
Ripple, the Silbermann/Robb commission was not run by politicians.
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html
Check it out!
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:31 AM
NEVER SAID THAT, "Bush never lied and if he did it is okay because Clinton lied."
MY POINT IS THE HYPROCRACY OF THE LEFT!
IF ONE IS BAD THEN THEY BOTH SHOULD BE BAD, BUT WE KNOW THAT CLINTON LIED UNDER OATH, AND THE LEFT JUSTIFED IT. BUSH REPEATED WHAT DEMOCRATS AND OTHERS SAID, THEY DIDNT MAKE THIS ALL UP IT WAS ALREADY OUT THERE, AND NOW HE IS THE LIAR!
JOE WILSON HAS LIED ALL OVER THE MEDIA, AND LEFTIST IGNORE IT. I HEARD A CLIP FORM WILSON TODAY WHERE HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT "THIS INDITMENT IS A STAIN ON THE WHITE HOUSE"....BUT LEFTIES CONSIDERED NONE OF THE CLINTON INDITMENTS AS SUCH. I KNOW OF AT LEAST 2 INDITMENTS ON THE CLINTON'S WHITE HOUSE,AND ONE WAS CONVICTED. I DONT BLAME INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY OR MAY NOT REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST, BUT THE PAPERS AND OTHER MEDIA SHOULD, AND THEY CONVIENTLY "DONT RECALL" VERY MUCH.....THEY LEARNED WELL FROM THE CLINTONS WHO THE MSM WORSHIP!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:31 AM
Capt, I don't need to assert Bush lied, because it has already been PROVEN TWICE that he didn't!
The BURDEN of PROOF is on you to come up with the documented proof he lied, which you have utterly failed to do.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:33 AM
'You Do the Dying, We'll Do the Talking'
by Mark G. Brennan
Those who most zealously support this latest American military action should practice what they preach. The hypocrisy has become mind numbing at this point. If the threat is imminent, take action to defend yourself, your family, your friends and ultimately your country. The usual excuses no longer apply. Sex is no longer an excuse as many patriotic American women have died in Iraq. Age is also an invalid excuse as one soldier who was 65 years old died and numerous soldiers approaching that age have paid the ultimate price. Only a despicable coward would ask others to make the ultimate sacrifice in a time of supposed imminent danger without reciprocating, despite the fact that he might be busy pumping out position papers on military tactics and otherwise pounding the drums of (other peoples) war. Claiming that "they volunteered" or "I have a family to take care of" does not absolve one of his duty to defend his patrimony. But duty in the minds of the writers at the Weekly Standard apparently means something else something that Taki hit squarely on the head "You do the dying; well do the talking."
As if the shirking of ones obligations is not bad enough, one writer, Kathleen Parker (whose war time experience includes writing "a syndicated column for Tribune News Services") appearing in the October 31, 2005 issue of the Standard does not condone the verbiage in a book written by one of the soldiers recently returned from Iraq. In her review of Love My Rifle More Than You: Young and Female in the U.S. Army by the "Arabic-speaking Army intelligence soldier" Kayla Williams, the duty-shirking Parker takes Williams book to task for its coarse language. Let me get this straight. The editors of the Weekly Standard cry incessantly that we invade and occupy Iraq, and that other Americans put their lives on the line everyday in a place that they would never choose to visit let alone live for extended and repeated tours of duty. Then, once the editors get their panties in such a twist they print an article complaining that "an almost 300-page book surely deserves more editing than the stall doors of public restrooms." In feebly attempting to empathize with Williams experience, Parker adds that "while I understand that war imposes certain hardshipsI found myself longing for a Baptist editor around page 42." I dont know Parkers personal military experience but I do know that she didnt learn of the hardships of the Iraq war from any first hand accounts by the likes of Max Boot or Bill Kristol. And it hardly matters. This waving of the white flag is typical of the "you go fight while I watch from back here" sentiment that suffuses all neocon scribblings on war.
*****end of article*****
Not a great piece but worth a skim. A nearly complete understanding of the chicken-hawks and armchair generals.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 03:38 AM
Im completely capable of retyping a url that interests me.
But these leakers........not so much.
My time on this earth is finite, Ill not waste a single second on dim wits.
Works for me so far.
Corky is way more circumspect than I.
Bless his heart.
Me , I wish to kick ass and take names, Patience has never been my strong suit.
Corky writes well reasoned letters to legislators, I am more apt to cuss at em and make demands. Corky is right. I know this. But....I do not posess this mans patience.
Probably never will.
I tend to think we both have our place in the process.
And neither of us is Right or Wrong.
We just both care.
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 03:38 AM
Treboloc, doesn't surpise me one bit!
A New York Times reporter was at the Dem convention last year and interviewed anonymously 353 journalists who they supported for president. Journalists station in Washington supported Kerry 12 to 1 over Bush, New York 3 to 1 for Kerry.
And the media isn't liberal!?!? LMFAO!
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:38 AM
HOW HONEST ARE YOU CAPT?
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU POSTED IN YOUR OWN WORDS OR SOMEONE ELSE'S IN THE LAST MONTH THAT ROVE WOULD BE INDITED TODAY?
DID YOU LIE, ARE WERE YOU MIS-INFORMED?
I WOULD NOT DARE CALL YOU A LIAR, BUT IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES YOU CALL BUSH A LIAR FOR THE SAME OFFENSE. I KNOW, "BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED", BUT IT IS THE SAME THING THEORETICALLY.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:40 AM
Martha mentioned how the nitty-gritty details of this sorry, sordid BushCo.tale may never see the light of day.
"THIS SUCKS." Yes, "this sucks" was at least a minor thrust of the Ken Starr investigation-- an investigation to the tune of a zillion dollars.
It seems highly improbable to me that more details of this Washington behind-the-scenes ditty will not see the light of day.
With million dollar book deals, and 15 minutes of Andy W. fame-- a few tongues may be wagging at some future point.
Much is known about Clinton's genitals. Did we really want to know? But little things like this eventually do surface. I think mucho, mucho, mucho details will be known as this big story unfolds.
If Dubya was smart ( that's a big if--isn't it), he would nominate Fitzgerald to the Supreme Court. I was really impressed with, Fitzgerald.
It's really sad that Dubya's nominee was eaten alive by the right-wing sharks. I highly doubt now whether she views Dubya as the most intelligent person she has known.
Oh! Someone should check and see whether Libby will still be receiving a pay check. As of last week former FEMA head, Michael Brown, was still receiving a pay check.
Being an official in the Bush administration is like hitting the lotto. The fringe benefits are great.
Something is really, really stinking in Washington:
BUSH BEANS
LIBBY BEANS
Ryan McCord
Posted by: Ryan McCord at October 29, 2005 03:42 AM
Treboloc, I honestly am coming to realize that maybe Capt doesn't know what a "lie" is. He thinks a lie is "saying things that are untrue".
He completely disregards whether the person knew what they said was true or not.
It's funny how all these leftists call Bush a liar, when in reality, these leftists are the liars. 2 investigations prove Bush did not lie.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:43 AM
Look Treb, I'll do it again just for you. Clinton bad. Bush bad.
Clinton behavior leads to Bush behavior.
Both bad = not good for us
Tim L.
I know where I stand. I don't need other people to tell me where to look for a better stand. I hated bush the day I heard he was up against McCain. I've hated ihm for so long it wouldn't matter if he didn't lie. I don't care if he lied or not. He is an anti-christ piece of shit, and I inherently distrust everything that comes out of his puppet mouth. The only moment he ever made me yield my hatred for him was when he stood on that pile of buildings, and promised that the people who knocked them down would soon hear from all of us. He actually made me want to believe him for a second. Of course, we know he LIED about that though don't we Tim. Before you get put up some facts about how we ran the taliban off, or a website detailing how he never promised to kill the evil-doers, just think about that first debate with kerry. The piece of shit actually said I don't think about Osama, he doesn't take up any of my time. My hatred for him is only magnified by the one lie he told when I dropped my expectation of what he really is.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:43 AM
ripple
TAKE AS MUCH TIME AS YOU NEED TO PROVIDE THAT INFO ON MARX. YOU WILL PROABLY WILL NEED ANOTHER LIFETIME BECAUSE IT HASNT HAPPENED YET, AND THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ONE IN OPERATION NOW!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:43 AM
I hated bush the day I heard he was up against McCain. I've hated ihm for so long it wouldn't matter if he didn't lie. I don't care if he lied or not.
CAPT, CORN, AND LEFTIS COULD NOT HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER. THIS, IN MY ESTIMATION ,IS THE OPINION OF THE WHOLE LEFT WING .
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 03:46 AM
post 120 treb. i suggest not holding your breath.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:47 AM
Honesty is a quality hard to come by these days treb. It feels good, although it can be hard to make friends.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:49 AM
Ripple, exactly what I expected, you're blinded by your hatred for Bush, which prevents you from looking at the facts objectively, just like most leftists on this blog.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 03:49 AM
no man, I'm not blinded by my hatred. It just keeps me warm.
Treb, honesty is a hard quality to find now days. I wouldn't exactly compliment the entire LEFT with such praises. There may be a few though that deserve it. That Paul Hackett guy is retty honest.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 03:54 AM
Iraq war is likely to go on trial along with Libby
Washington -- Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald did a meticulous job Friday, in a 22-page indictment, a nine-page press release and a 75-minute news conference, of portraying Lewis "Scooter" Libby as a serial liar who recklessly mishandled national security secrets.
As lawyers focus on the narrow legal question of whether Libby did everything Fitzpatrick alleges, much of the nation will be focused on whether those same attributes can be used to describe the way the Bush administration led the nation to war.
It is a question that simmered in left-wing circles in 2003 before the war began, and it became a campaign issue during John Kerry's unsuccessful presidential bid in 2004. It is the subject of speeches, blogs and books ("The Lies of George W. Bush,'' "The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq,'' "Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them.'')
*****end of article*****
David’s book gets a mention! Too cool for school!
From the last paragraph:
"Not only was America misled into war, but a Nixonian effort to silence dissent has now left Americans wondering whether they can trust anything this administration has to say," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass
Some Americans Mr. Kerry, most of us do not have to wonder about a thing.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 03:56 AM
capt
CAN I GET A RESPONSE FOR #129?
I'LL TAKE AN ESTIMATE ON THE # OF STORIES/TIMES.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 04:00 AM
Clinton lied about sex.
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 04:10 AM
What has Dubya lied about???
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 04:12 AM
What I don't understand about the trolls is why do they CARE if we think Bush lied or not? (They evidently care deeply, else they wouldn't bother posting so much about it.) Their party/political movement already controls the White House, Congress, the federal judiciary, many state governments, the McMedia, and--most importantly--the voting machines. They don't NEED us to agree with them, so why are they obsessed with defending their Dear Leader?
Baffled in the swamps of Arkansas, Ivory Bill Woodpecker
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 04:12 AM
Who has never lied about sex?!
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 04:12 AM
and............for how long?
Posted by: titchaba at October 29, 2005 04:13 AM
You know Laura Bush lies everytime she says she enjoyed that very much. Everyone lies about sex.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 04:14 AM
Keep your head down IvoryBill, there's some republicans in the crowd tonight. They might want to put you back on the exticnt list so they can develop your swamp into a giant neon Bush didn't Lie sign.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 04:17 AM
"They don't NEED us to agree with them, so why are they obsessed with defending their Dear Leader?"
1- TO EXPOSE THE LIES OF THE LYING LIARS AND THE LIES THEY TELL, AND TO EXPOSE THE The Lies of David Corn.
2- ALSO TO GIVE A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE EVENTS THAT ARE GONIG ON TODAY. I KNOW THAT THE HARDCORE LEFTIES WILL NOT BELIEVE US, BUT IM SURE THAT THERE ARE OPEN MINDED PEOPLE ON THIS SITE WHO MAY BE PERSUADED BY THE TRUTH.
3- TO BE A LIGHT SHINNING IN THE DARKNESS THAT IS DAVIDCORN.COM
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 04:20 AM
Ivory Bill Woodpecker,DONT YOU BELIEVE IN FREEDOM OF SPEECH?
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 04:22 AM
Ripple, don't worry about me. The great and fearsome alligators of my swamp home are my friends and they think trolls are yummy. Also, I have engaged the services of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, who also find a swampy environment congenial. If any evade the reptiles, they will face a detachment of temporally and dimensionally displaced Obsidian Order agents who have coinvinced themselves that I am an ancient avian deity of their world.
Of course it is the trolls' right to post here, but I still don't understand why they waste the effort. I don't waste time posting on Elephascist sites--"Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig."
By the way, Driftglass (driftglass.blogspot.com) slams Chimpy and company all the time. Maybe the trolls should go set him straight. For us non-trolls, he's a fun read.
Secure in the swamps of Arkansas, Ivory Bill Woodpecker
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 04:52 AM
"Convinced", dangit!
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 04:53 AM
Oh yeah, Ripple, among my reptilian guardians I forgot the cottonmouths. "Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes?"
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 04:55 AM
Now that's some WMD, and you'll need it.
Next thing they'll be saying is you need liberat'n.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 05:07 AM
And...what about Naomi?
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 05:11 AM
HERE IS A FACTUAL STORY FROM A RIGHT WING CONSERIVITIVE. SEE HOW CONSERVITIVES THINK Perjury is a serious crime, EVEN WHEN WE ARE THE ONES WHO ARE INDITED, AND EVEN WHEN IT IS ONLY ABOUT SEX"
WE CALL A SPADE A SPADE EVEN WHEN WE LOOK IN THE MIRROR!
FROM NEWSMAX.COM
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/10/28/170047.shtml
Krauthammer: 'What Didn't Happen Today?'
Syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer - who is credited with calling for and predicting the Harriet Miers Supreme Court nomination withdrawal Рwas left puzzled by Fridays indictment of Lewis "Scooter Libby in the CIA Leak probe.
"Whats most interesting about the case is what really didn't happen today, Krauthammer told Fox News.
"You did not hear about [Karl] Rove, you did not hear about the [CIA Leak] outing,he said. "That is significant."
Krauthammer was quick to assert that he does consider the Libby indictment "a very big deal, a position consistent with past political scandals.
Perjury is a serious crime, Krauthammer said. "I thought the same when President Clinton committed perjury before his impeachment. He said it seemed odd that the special prosecutor would spend two years of investigation in this case that led only to Libby's indictment with no mention of the one topic everyone was talking, writing and reading about: the identity leak of a supposedly covert CIA official.
"What we have now is the usual Washington story Рone that seeks to make a crime about denying a crime.
Krauthammer said Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's claim Friday that the investigation into Rove's involvement in the case "isn't over seems strange.
"You would think that either the prosecutor has something on Rove, or he doesn't ,he said. "Either review it or not. Don't keep a cloud hanging over the White House gratuitously on the belief that something might be out there.
As for the dead-on prediction that Miers would withdraw her nomination citing "executive privilege, Krauthammer had some advice for the president.
"I think the president has to go with excellence, Krauthammer said. "It wasn't Miers'slack of intelligence that led to all the backlash; it was her lack of experience. It wasn't her fault.
"Bush has to go with a conservative, a proven one, like Michael McConnell or Michael Luttig.
Asked if he is sure Bush will go with one of those two judges, Krauthammer laughed, adding a reference to the recent World Series.
"If I'm that smart, how come I picked the Astros in six?", he asked.
The Chicago White Sox swept the Houston Astros in four straight games to with the 2005 World Series.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:18 AM
YOU CANT HANDEL THE TRUTH!
Steven Reich, a New York attorney and former senior associate counsel to President Bill Clinton, said Fitzgerald has his reasons for not charging anyone with the leak. "Either he thought there was not a crime, or he thought he couldn't prove it. No one will know which but him," he said.
http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/10/28/155207.shtml
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:23 AM
Libby Lawyer Plans Lack-Of-Memory Defense
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051029/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cia_leak_investigation
KNOWN TO YOU LEFTIES AS THE CLINTON DEFENCE
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:25 AM
Fitzgerald repeatedly emphasized that neither Libby nor anyone else was charged with the actual "outing" of a covert CIA agent
http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1001391960
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:30 AM
Headline--
Troll quotes cripple and midget; somehow yet again perplexed by the spector of Slick Willie.
Fears all the unknown variables of the mean prosecutor. Rationalizes the fall of the Republican party with "it's not a crime to lie about something that's not a crime". More mediocrity to come, that can be assured.
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 05:37 AM
Patrick Fitzgerald Press Conference Transcript
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_102805/content/patrick_fitzgerald_press_conference_transcript.guest.html
EDUCATE YOURSELF, BECAUSE CORN WAS AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE AND HE CONTINUES TO IGNORE THE WORDS OF FITZGERALD!
FITZGERALD: I would say that about anyone in this room who has nothing to do with the offenses.
We make no allegation that the vice president committed any criminal act. We make no allegation that any other people who provided or discussed with Mr. Libby committed any criminal act.
But as to any person you asked me a question about other than Mr. Libby, I'm not going to comment on anything.
Please don't take that as any indication that someone has done something wrong. That's a standard practice. If you followed me in Chicago, I say that a thousand times a year. And we just don't comment on people because we could start telling, "Well, this person did nothing wrong, this person did nothing wrong," and then if we stop commenting, then you'll start jumping to conclusions. So please take no more.
FITZGERALD: And as frustrating as that may be for the public, that is important because, the way our system of justice works, if information is gathered about people and they're not charged with a crime, we don't hold up that information for the public to look at. We either charge them with a crime or we don't.
FITZGERALD: Let me talk you through what the indictment alleges.
The indictment alleges that Mr. Libby learned the information about Valerie Wilson at least three times in June of 2003 from government officials.
Let me make clear there was nothing wrong with government officials discussing Valerie Wilson or Mr. Wilson or his wife and imparting the information to Mr. Libby.
But in early June, Mr. Libby learned about Valerie Wilson and the role she was believed to play in having sent Mr. Wilson on a trip overseas from a senior CIA officer on or around June 11th, from an undersecretary of state on or around June 11th, and from the vice president on or about June 12th.
FITZGERALD: At the end of the day what appears is that Mr. Libby's story that he was at the tail end of a chain of phone calls, passing on from one reporter what he heard from another, was not true.
It was false. He was at the beginning of the chain of phone calls, the first official to disclose this information outside the government to a reporter. And then he lied about it afterwards, under oath and repeatedly.
FITZGERALD:Let's let the process take place. Let's take a deep breath and let justice process the system.
FITZGERALD: I'm not making allegations about anyone not charged in the indictment.
Now, let me back up, because I know what that sounds like to people if they're sitting at home.
We don't talk about people that are not charged with a crime in the indictment.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:45 AM
"The Unknown Variables" would be a great name for a rock band! (Acronym: WBAGNFARB; from Dave Barry's blog)
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 05:46 AM
ripple
PERSONAL ATTACKS ARE NOT A VERY CONVINCING ARGUMENT!
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 05:48 AM
"The Personal Attacks" WBAGNFARB!
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 05:56 AM
WBAGNFARB
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN,CAN YOU ENLIGHTEN ME?
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 06:03 AM
SORRY, I GOT IT, JUST A LITTLE SLOW I HAD TO HAVE SOMEONE READ 161 FOR ME
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 29, 2005 06:04 AM
Later, 'gators. I must get back to work now.---IBW
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 06:41 AM
Those trees won't peck themselves, you know. ;)
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 06:43 AM
Tim L
answer my question, don't avoid it - did bush or did bush not go on tv in front of everybody and claim that flight77 was highjacked and crashed into the pentagon?
Posted by: James Ha at October 29, 2005 07:55 AM
Libby and Rove are touted as brilliant strategists. To think that Libby has acted stupidly in perjuring himself and obstructing justice is just plain foolish. They have been strategizing their response to this investigation for months. The primary mistake they made was to believe they would never get caught. Given a choice between losing Libby or Rove, Libby is obviously less necessary as an administration aide. While Cheney can operate without Libby, Bush cannot operate without his brain, Rove.
Two considerations:
1) Regardless of the prosecutor's passion for the need for truth, the indictments brought against Libby are less severe than say, espionage or treason or conspiracy to mislead the country or murder for profit through military manipulation, and therefore, carry less penalties. Plus, it is easy to foresee a plea bargain and a pardon for "misguided loyalty."
2) A conspiracy charge, which would inherently mean others were involved, would lead to too many questions regarding the basis for the war.
Not being a brilliant strategist myself, I can only see two reasons for initiating an unnecessary war: a) revenge/vindication for Bush #1 and/or b) monetary profit.
Hmm...Is anyone following the money trail? Time for Congress to get off its thumbs and get to work...
Posted by: DCNSusan at October 29, 2005 09:01 AM
Capt wrote:
"Not only was America misled into war, but a Nixonian effort to silence dissent has now left Americans wondering whether they can trust anything this administration has to say," said Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass
Some Americans Mr. Kerry, most of us do not have to wonder about a thing."
With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Kerry Said Saddam Husseins WMD Are A Threat. I think Saddam Husseins weapons of mass destruction are a threat, and thats why I voted to hold him accountable and to make certain that we disarm him. I think we need to (NPRs All Things Considered, 3/19/03)
Kerry Said Leaving Saddam Hussein Unfettered With Nuclear Weapons Or Weapons Of Mass Destruction Is Unacceptable. (Jill Lawrence, War Issue Challenges Democratic Candidates, USA Today, 2/12/03)
Kerry Said, If You Dont Believe Saddam Hussein Is A Threat With Nuclear Weapons, Then You Shouldnt Vote For Me. (Ronald Brownstein, On Iraq, Kerry Appears Either Torn Or Shrewd, Los Angeles Times, 1/31/03)
Mr. Kerry Said Iraqs Weapons Of Mass Destruction Posed A Real And Grave Threat To The United States. (Dave Boyer, Key Senators Of Both Parties Back Bush On Iraq War, The Washington Times, 10/10/02)
Kerry: I Am Prepared To Hold Saddam Hussein Accountable And Destroy His Weapons Of Mass Destruction. (Ronald Brownstein, Democratic Presidential Hopefuls Differ On War In Iraq, Los Angeles Times, 10/6/02)
*****end of clip*****
Sounds like Kerry has done some misleading about Iraq having WMDs as well, eh Capt!?!?
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 10:00 AM
Retired Air Force Col: They lied to us about the war and about 9/11 itself
by Ben Frank
A few weeks ago I posted the audio and video from Part 1 of Retired Air Force Col. Robert Bowmans Speech to Patriotic Americans, heres Part 2.
To Download, rt-click -> save as [the video] and/or 6.6mb Audio mp3 with cool backing music... heres the transcript (but you really must listen, hes that good ;-)
Col. Robert Bowman:
As other speakers have said, they knew the American people wouldnt stand for it, and they said so in their documents, and they said, unless theres that new Pearl Harbor. Well 9/11 did supply that. And weve been lied to not only about the war, but about 9/11 itself.
The Bush administration was warned. They were warned by the Clinton Administration during the transition period, they were warned by the intelligence agencies of eleven other nations, they were specifically warned by one FBI agent that Moussawi was planning on flying a hijacked airliner, "into the World Trade Center."
They ignored the warnings, more than that, we have mounting evidence that _at least_, they made it impossible for those planes to be intercepted.
If our government had merely done nothing - and I say that as an old interceptor pilot and I know the drill, I know what it takes, I know how long it takes, I know what the procedures are, I know what they were and I know what they changed them to - if our government had merely done nothing and allowed normal procedures to happen on that morning of 9/11, the twin towers would still be standing and thousands of Americans would still be alive. My sisters and brothers, that is treason!
*****end of clip*****
More from the real guys, not the liars and slugs.
Listen to the audio! (if you all have a spare couple of minutes)
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 10:19 AM
Resolution of Inquiry to demand information on White House Iraq Group(WHIG) to be voted on by Nov 9
Expose the WHIG
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH) has introduced a Resolution of Inquiry to demand the White House turn over all white papers, minutes, notes, emails or other communications kept by the White House Iraq Group (WHIG).
"This group, comprised of the President and Vice Presidentճ top aides, was critical in selling the Administrationճ case for war," Kucinich said. "We now know that the Administration hyped intelligence and misled the American public and Congress in their effort to ճellՠthe war."
This Resolution must be voted on in the House International Relations Committee by November 9th, 2005. The same committee, on September 14, came within one vote of passing a Resolution of Inquiry into the Downing Street Memo (H. Res. 375).
That near victory came after a great deal of citizen activism. This time we need to persuade all of the Democrats on the Committee to push a little bit harder and a few more Republicans to do the right thing. Co-Sponsorship of the Resolution by members not on the committee helps this effort.
*****end of clip*****
Good old Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-OH). A real patriot and a man whose stature is larger than his frame.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 10:25 AM
Capt, saying Bush Lied doesn't make it so. It has already been proven twice that Bush did NOT lie by 2 investigations which you won't accept!
See Capt, you're using a left wing webiste with an agenda, just as many conservatives use right wing sites. But I only use indepedent sources, because they are objective, which the right or left wing sites aren't.
Capt, for you:
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
(Oh, and Libby wasn't even indicted on leaking lol)
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Anti-war Ad Says Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice "Lied" About Iraq
We find some subtle word-twisting, and place the claims in context.
September 26, 2005
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 10:30 AM
Aide's indictment a new blow to Bush
October 29, 2005 - 2:40PM
The White House was left reeling from the indictment of one of its most senior aides, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, charged with lying to the FBI and a grand jury under oath.
Libby, 55, resigned as Vice-President Dick Cheney's chief of staff after being charged with five counts of perjury, making false statements and obstruction of justice.
He faces up to 30 years in jail if convicted.
The indictment stems from a two year investigation into the leaking of a CIA agent's identity.
His trial will almost certainly throw a spotlight on the Bush administration's use of pre-war intelligence and the various justifications it put to the American public.
Rove remains under investigation.
Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald told a news conference that the inquiry was substantially complete, but not yet over.
"Given national security was at stake, it was especially important that we find out accurate facts."
Fitzgerald accused Libby of lying to FBI agents when the probe began in October 2003 with a "compelling story" about "passing gossip from one reporter to another".
Libby told the FBI and the grand jury investigating the leak that he had been told of Plame's identity by reporters.
The probe found he had actually learned about her weeks earlier through a CIA official.
*****end of clip*****
A little perspective from down-under.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 10:33 AM
Capt, your post about that retired Air Force Col. says that 9/11 was caused by terrorists acts from al Qaeda, not by the US government, so isn't his story about 9/11 completely different than yours?
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 10:33 AM
US poor set to lose food stamps
With more than 38 million Americans too poor to buy adequate food, the US Congress has begun to take away the food stamps many of them receive.
The Republican majority on the House Agriculture Committee has approved budget cuts that will take "food stamps" away from an estimated 300,000 people and could cut off school lunches and breakfasts for 40,000 children.
The action came as the US Government reported that the number of people who are hungry because they can't afford to buy enough food rose to 38.2 million in 2004, an increase of seven million in five years.
The number represents nearly 12 per cent of US households.
Food stamps are coupons distributed to low-income people and redeemable at grocery stories for food.
The cuts, approved by the Republican-controlled committee on a party-line vote, are part of an effort by Republicans to curb federal spending by $US50 billion ($65.7 billion).
The food and agriculture cuts would reduce spending by $US3.7 billion, including $US844 million on nutrition, $US760 million on conservation and $US212 million on payments to US farmers.
The $US574 million reduction in food stamp spending is estimated to shut up to 300,000 people out of the program.
The restriction also could take free meals away from an estimated 40,000 school children, because children in many states are automatically eligible for school meals when they get food stamps, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The White House proposed the restriction earlier this year.
*****end of clip*****
See, the WH thinks we can make bullets and bomb from the bread an butter we used to feed those hungry kids who were dumb enough to be born into a poor family.
If we could just find a way to send the poor people back to poorsylvannia or what ever country they came from. Jeeze the hungry little urchins are just a drain on the war economy.
I am sure the MSM will get around to this story.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 10:39 AM
The halfway point of President Clinton's tenure to the fifty yard line of the Bush administration. In 1996, the poverty level in the USA stood at 13.7%. In 2004, the poverty level was 12.7%, so Bush beats Clinton here by a full percentage point. To be fair, Clinton did bring the poverty rate down during his administration, while it has been rising slightly since 9/11. But at the halfway point, Bush wins.
As far as entitlement spending on poverty programs is concerned, it isn't even close. In 1996, President Clinton signed a budget that directed 12.2% of spending be directed toward the poor. In 2004, Bush's budget kicked 2% more than Clinton to poverty programs, an astronomical $329 billion dollars. In fact, President Bush is spending more on poverty entitlement programs and education than any President in history. What say you, Jesse and Howard?
For a country that is often accused by leftwing loons of not caring about the poor, we are certainly putting up a good front. In 2006, almost $368 billion dollars will go for Medicaid, food stamps, family support assistance, supplemental security income, child nutrition programs, earned income tax credits, welfare payments, child care payments, foster care and adoption assistance, and child health insurance payments to the states. The truth is that the working men and women of this country are providing the tightest safety net in history for the poor. And our private charitable donations rank first in the world as well.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 10:44 AM
Treasonous liars and warmongering murderers
By Sheila Samples
What attorney in his or her right mind would take on the mission of defending a gaggle of treasonous liars and warmongering murderers against the clearly stated, time-tested legal boundaries of the United States Constitution? Is there an attorney so ignorant of Constitutional law or so loyal to George W. Bush that covering his sorry ass trumps all reason, dignity, democratic principles or truth? Does that attorney still have the capacity to walk upright?
Oh, yeah. I forgot. That attorney is Harriet Miers who, in my humble opinion, disqualified herself the instant she said George Bush is "the most brilliant man I have ever known..."
The Miers' nomination lasted 24 agonizing days. It was a stroke of genius on the part of Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid to convince Bush that Miers was the perfect Supreme Court candidate. In one fell swoop, Reid knocked the White House off its axis, threw radical right-wing Republicans into total disarray; forcing them to come screeching out of the shadows, and insured at least a delay in packing the high court with Scalias and Thomases...
A brilliant move. Bush, confident that his rabid "base" could be pacified with code phrases like, "I know her heart...I chose her because she is a Christian and a strict constructionist," and flush with success at getting John Roberts' confirmed as Chief Justice while refusing to answer a single ideological question, immediately painted himself into a corner with Harriet Miers. And it was there he ran out of political capital.
*****end of clip*****
The whole issue is not about lying it is about honor, bloodlust and the lies made necessary by failed leadership and flawed policies.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 10:54 AM
Sistani May Call for US Withdrawal
Party Coalitions are Finalized
The intrepid Hamza Hendawi of AP gets the scoop: Aides around Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the chief spiritual leader of Iraqi Shiites, are broadly hinting that after the December 15 elections, he may begin a Gandhi-like campaign to demand a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. A lot of sentiments are attributed to Sistani that he later has to deny, so we should be cautious about whether the aides have their own axe to grind. But if this report is true, it would suggest that Sistani is confident that the Iraqi police and military are strong enough to protect him and the other members of the current Iraqi political class, and that the Americans are not needed.
If Sistani gives The Fatwa for a US withdrawal, the Bush administration will simply have to acquiesce. The situation would be similar to what happened in the Philippines in 1991, when the Philippines senate declined to authorize the extension of the treaty that permitted US naval bases in that country. Given the ongoing Sunni Arab guerrilla movement (which killed another 5 US GI's in the past couple of days), the US simply cannot keep troops in Iraq if the Shiites also begin vehemently demanding their departure. Any attempt by Bush and Rumsfeld to remain in Iraq in defiance of Sistani would certainly radicalize the Iraqi population and risk pushing it toward anti-American Muslim extremism both on the Shiite and the Sunni Arab fronts. As Hendawi notes, most close observers of Iraq, such as Vali Nasr and Ahmad Hashem (who has experience on the ground as US military officer) believe that any such move by Sistani, should it succeed, risks throwing Iraq into substantial sectarian violence.
A majority of Americans now say that getting the troops out of Iraq as soon as possible is more important than ensuring that the country is a stable democracy.
*****end of clip*****
Juan Cole, an insightful and truthful report each day.
Bring the troops home.
Bush would have 20,000 or 200,000 of our brave and best troops die to try to exculpate his lies and prove, no matter what or how and at any cost, that he is not a failed wartime president.
Pro-troops - pro-peace.
People do not die from peace.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 11:01 AM
Capt, the troops in Iraq don't support your views. Over 70% of troops in Iraq suport the mission. They are insulted by you and other leftists who denegrate their mission.
Plus, with your loony ideas, MORE troops would die, and MORE innocent civillians would if we pulled out now.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 11:06 AM
Capt said:
"People do not die from peace."
But people do die from capitualting to terrorists.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 11:09 AM
The other day, there was discussion on this blog about what to call this horrible scandal -- TRAITORGATE came up as a good possibility.
Regarding Scooter Libby and his indictment: He should, henceforth, be referred to as a WAR CRIMINAL.
The WAR CRIMINAL, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney, CEO of the United States of America, Donald Rumsfeld, an unindicted war criminal, and Karl Rove, another unindicted war criminal, lied, plotted and planned to trick the American people into accepting their cabal's Iraq policies. They "fixed" intelligence to justify the (bush) Administration's unnecessary, invasion of Iraq.
They are all WAR CRIMINALS.
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 11:11 AM
Miki, saying Bush Lied doesn't make it so. It has already been proven twice that Bush did NOT lie by 2 investigations which you won't accept!
I only use indepedent sources, because they are objective, which the right or left wing sites aren't.
Miki, for you:
http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
(Oh, and Libby wasn't even indicted on leaking lol)
http://www.factcheck.org/article222.html
Anti-war Ad Says Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld & Rice "Lied" About Iraq
We find some subtle word-twisting, and place the claims in context.
September 26, 2005
http://www.factcheck.org/article349.html
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 11:14 AM
Timmieee! Dude, are you ready to accept the fact the Chimpy is too big of a chickenshit coward to go after Osama in Pakistan? He's Skeeeeeered of mean old Pakistan. They might get their toes stepped on. LOL.
"Pande, all of your sites are liberal sites, so don't expect me to take you seriously. The only site I use is www.factcheck.org, which is a non-partisan indepedent site."
First off Timmiee, the difference between a liberal and a conservative website and a liberal one is what? The opinions. There is no such thing as a liberal or reactionary fact.
Facts are facts. The factcheck site only says that what Chimpy said was accurate not true. Chimpy cited the lies that the British White Paper put out about the Niger forgeries. Chimpy accurately cited the source of his lies. It doesn't mean he told the truth because Iraq didn't try to obtain fissible materials from Niger and the Senate Whitewash Committee says so (that's not a liberal site, it's the whitewash report).
The bottom line is that Saddam had no WMD. One of two things is true and I'll accept either one. Either Chimpy knew and he lied or he didn't know and he's the world's biggest mushroom (kept in the dark and fed shit all day). Since you deny that Chimpy knew he was not telling the truth; then you must be happy with him being the 2nd stupidest fucking idiot on the face of the earth behind D. Feith. I've been saying that all along.
As for Clinton's statements about WMD, they were made before Ritter tried to finish his work. He was trying to keep the heat on Saddam so that the Iraq sanctions wouldn't get lifted. No one died as a result of his assessments and gas didn't turn into the liquid-gold that it is today. Iraq didn't get turned into a Muslim theocracy. The deficit was getting paid down while Big Dawg kicked ass in Kosovo. He know how to bend the international community to his will and got the UN and NATO to do most of the heavy lifting. How many US casualties in Kosovo? About 20,000 (killed and wounded) fewer than in Iraq, right?
If you want to claim all of those things as success, take it baybeee! Clap louder!!
"But people do die from capitualting to terrorists."
You are right about that and they will continue to die under the Cheney administration because of the failure to prepare for post-war Iraq.
Here's some more weirdness from a liberal website:
BUSH THE CANDIDATE PROMISED TO UPHOLD THE HONOR AND INTEGRITY AT THE WHITE HOUSE...
"I will swear to uphold the laws of the land. But I will also swear to uphold the honor and the integrity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God," said then-Governor George Bush [CNN, "Inside Politics," 8/11/00]
"Americans are tired of investigations and scandal, and the best way to get rid of them is to elect a new president who will bring a new administration, who will restore honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Burden of Proof," 9/15/00]
"Americans want to be assured that the next administration will bring honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Capital Gang," 8/13/00]
Oh, no wait. My bad. Those are the preznit's own words (lies, again? sheesh. That is the one thing he excels at)
Fitzie exposed the lies of this administration and he still has them by the short and curlies. He ain't going away and the White House and slowly roast in its own excrement. It will be a great show for me and my family. The beer and pizza are on me.
Colebert sez, "Fitzgerald repeatedly emphasized that neither Libby nor anyone else was charged with the actual 'outing' of a covert CIA agent"
That's the fun of it. Charges aren't brought but no one gets to proclaim innocence. The heat stays on and the White House gets to hear the steady drumbeat of charges and accusations. Meanwhile, the lies (Plame wasn't covert, Corn outed Plame, Rove didn't talk to reporters, the Niger lies and WMD lies) stay in the headlines. Fun for everyone!!
Clinton white house indictments? Link please including the charges. Add up all the Reagan-Bush indictments and the laws that were broken and hold them up to the Sandy Berger idiocy. Yup, funny stuff.
Cha-ching, bada-bing. I'm off to the golf course. Later gators.
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 29, 2005 11:25 AM
Ladies and Gentlemen: The Real George W. Bush
By Stephen Pizzo
Ninety percent of Americans believe the Bush administration is guilty of illegal or unethical behavior in the CIA leak case. Where does that leave our president?
For three more years America is going to be led by not just a lame duck president, but a totally discredited president.
In a poll conducted Oct 21-23 and released on Tuesday, 90 percent of those asked said they believed top Bush administration officials are guilty of either illegal or unethical behavior in the CIA leak case.
So where does that leave an un-indicted George W. Bush? There really are only two explanations, and neither reflect well on him. First, he can claim his closest aides conspired behind his back while he was otherwise occupied. I call that the "Exxon Valdez Defense" -- the captain was not at the helm when a careless crewman ran the ship of state aground. Unfortunately for Captain Bush, that defense did not wash for the real captain of the ill-fated tanker. Because, you see, the captain is always responsible.
The other explanation is worse: that the President of the United States knew what was going on, maybe even participated in it.
Either way, Bush is finished as a force in American politics. How he ever got to become president in the first place -- not once, but twice -- will remain a subject social scientists will study and debate for decades to come. Because there was plenty of evidence that George W. Bush was a made man. He had accomplished nothing in his adult life on his own -- not one thing. (Click here for more.)
Of course, for those of us who have covered
*****end of clip*****
Of course the Coward from Crawford has never accomplished ANYTHING and screws up everything he touches.
A miserable failure in every way.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 11:36 AM
The WAR CRIMINAL, Scooter Libby was indicted yesterday. The criminal case against him is only beginning. Unless bush pulls out his presidential pardon pen, the WAR CRIMINAL Libby will cast a pall over the White House for months and months. Testimony will reveal BAD things at the White House. The Rove/Cheney/Rumsfeld Cabal is not off the hook. No one gives a shit about bush anymore. He is a cipher just like Harrient Miers. The non-president and the non-entity. Two of a kind.
Whether bush lied or not is irrelevant since he never knows what the hell he's talking about anyway. bush will go down in history as the worst excuse for a (so-called) leader in the history of the United States -- no...make that worst in the world.
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 11:36 AM
If you need to know my name please visit www.warisaracket.org and see the male-type name at # 102 . Now, let's see, where was I....... ah, yes, the US military.
The clever what's-it named "Tim L. " care-fully avoids bringing up the old recruit-
ment challenge. Would you join an American
military with Rumsfeld in charge of the Pentagon ? With Pentagon-contract-awarded private security guards EARNING FOUR TIMES
AS MUCH MONEY AS THE CONVENTIONAL, TRADITIONAL U.S. MILITARY SERVICEMEMBERS ?
Would you join that bullsh*t rip-off, stab-the-young-people-in-the-back-and-indulge-the-corrupted-scabs-of-Blackwater-Erinys-CusterBattles-Titan-Bechtel-Halliburton-TripleCanopy bullsh*t that the thieves of Washington DC have put together ? Would YOU join a conventional military during the same decade ( or century ) as it had George W. Bush as the Commander-In-Chief ???????? Which is my way of saying that very few young Americans will EVER
want to be in the US military and people such as " Tim L. " have quite a lot of explaining to do. Not that they will, mind. -----------
Anderson Petition, final Saturday of October 2005 . www.operationtruth.com
www.warisaracket.org
Because WAR IS a R A C K E T.
Posted by: Anderson Petition at October 29, 2005 12:28 PM
Terror cell 'smuggled missiles into Europe'
By Henry Samuel in Paris
(Filed: 29/10/2005)
An Islamic terror cell has smuggled two surface-to-air missiles into Europe in a plot to shoot down planes at one of France's main airports, it was claimed yesterday.
French and Algerian extremists with links to al-Qa'eda bought the Russian SA-18 Grouse missiles from Chechens in 2002 and smuggled them via Georgia and Turkey, according to French anti-terror sources quoted in Le Figaro.
Both missiles and several of the extremists are reportedly still at large.
French anti-terrorism investigators learned of the missile terror plan while interrogating a Jordanian al-Qa'eda operative close to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the head of the Islamic terror group in Iraq.
Adnan Muhammad Sadik, alias Abu Atiya, is now being held by the Jordanian authorities.
He is believed to have been al-Qa'eda's chief in the Caucasus and responsible for training foreign "holy warriors" - many of whom returned to their countries of origin to set up sleeper cells.
According to Abu Atiya, one such group, the so-called "Chechen network", returned to France with the missiles and chemical and biological agents such as botulin, ricin and cyanide.
Some of its members had allegedly been involved in a plan to explode a bomb during a Christmas market in Strasbourg in 2000.
Others were linked to a conspiracy to blow up Los Angeles airport in 1999.
In 2002 the group wavered between attacking a symbolic target such as Russia's embassy in Paris, to punish its Chechen policies, or a higher profile location, such as the Eiffel Tower.
Before homing in on a preferred target, most of the group was arrested in a swoop by the French terrorist brigade, the DST, in two Paris suburbs late in 2002. But some escaped.
Menaces islamistes contre les avions en Europe [28 Oct '05] - lefigaro
Posted by: murad at October 29, 2005 12:32 PM
American Soldiers
2,259 American soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bushճ evil lies.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 12:48 PM
Profile: Patrick Fitzgerald
In Washington, he's the man from whom you do not want to get a phone call.
By Kirsten Scharnberg
Tribune national correspondent
Published October 28, 2005, 12:39 PM CDT
WASHINGTON -- In the nearly two years since federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald began a relentless probe into whether someone in the Bush administration leaked the name of an undercover CIA agent, his was the phone call to be feared in Washington.
Jangling nerves among the political and media elite, he dissected every aspect of the case, forced reporters to reveal sources, dragged political heavyweights before the grand jury--and made them, and the rest of the country, wait until the last minutes of his grand jury's term to announce his findings.
Even for a man who always has kept spare ties and toiletries in his office because he sleeps there so often, the past several years have been hectic for Fitzgerald.
Since becoming the top federal prosecutor in Chicago in 2001, Fitzgerald has spearheaded a fraud investigation into the administration of Mayor Richard Daley and directed the ongoing corruption trial of former Illinois Gov. George Ryan.
He indicted 14 reputed mobsters for 18 unsolved murders, some dating back to 1970. He went after alleged terrorists and routinely serves as one of the country's top experts on Al Qaeda, the terrorist network he has studied since 1996, when he first began investigating its leader, a then-unknown Saudi exile named Osama bin Laden.
But it was Fitzgerald's recent assignment as special prosecutor of the CIA leak probe that transformed him from an Eliot Ness-style G-man in Chicago to national prominence, or as one Beltway pundit put it, "Hurricane Fitzgerald."
Nothing about Fitzgerald's meticulous leak investigation would surprise students of his life or legal career.
*****end of clip*****
I really try to be more cynical than I am. I read this profile and unlike the sour discord of lies and disingenuous character, I hear a tone of truth. I have watched the guy, read his words, read what others have written about him and I wonder if Bush make a huge mistake if he thought this guy was going to play.
He seem very serious, sounds sincere and seems like he is willing to do his job. He does not even sound like he is hunting scalps or trying to make name. I have had the pleasure of knowing one or two attorneys that are of that caliber. There are still some very concerned about the truth and their integrity above reproach.
Somebody posted "Fitzgerald for SCOTUS" and I would second the motion. If he is as genuine as my gut feeling says he is, he would have been a real good choice for CJ.
I could be wrong and hope springs eternal but . . .
I would still expect nothing or not much in the way of Cheney or Rove being brought to justice, so anything better is a dream come true.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 12:58 PM
The tims are between a rock and a hard place. Either their boy is unethical or he is incompetent - or perhaps both.
Bush missed dozens of warnings about 9/11. He then missed dozens of warnings about the lack of WMD. Truly a track record to be proud of.
Fight away, tims!!! Your numbers are dwindling. And while you're at it, have you considered joining the Flat Earth Society? They could use some help in upping their numbers.
Posted by: Sue at October 29, 2005 01:02 PM
Trouble for the White House
By Deirdre Shesgreen
POST-DISPATCH WASHINGTON BUREAU
10/30/2005
WASHINGTON
The indictment Friday of Vice President Dick Cheney's top aide and the continuing investigation into the president's most trusted adviser isn't just a dark legal cloud for the White House.
It puts a bright spotlight on one of the president's biggest current political problems-the war in Iraq.
The charges against Libby have revived questions about the White House's justification for the war. Meanwhile, the involvement of Bush's top aide, Karl Rove, in the ongoing CIA leak case remains an open question.
"This indictment is the result of a larger pattern of deception and abuse of power that this administration used to lead us into an unnecessary war," Rep. William Lacy Clay Jr., D-St. Louis, said in a statement Friday.
Jim Davis of Washington University, an expert on presidential politics, said: "What we will really review in this trial . . . is the administration's over-interpretation of bad intelligence and using what turned out to be bad intelligence" to convince the country that the war was necessary.
It may also remind the public, Davis said, that the justification for an increasingly unpopular war changed from weapons of mass destruction to the need to bring democracy to Iraq - also a continuing challenge for Bush.
"He's in the weakest position of his presidency," Ayres said. And the fact that Karl Rove, the president's top political adviser, remains under investigation "is just a constant cloud hanging over your head."
*****end of clip*****
A trial would be very interesting but I expect Libby to plea, flip or worse. Anything to stop the trial before it begins. Been a while since we have heard about a person being suicided.
Nothing would surprise me these days.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 01:10 PM
#46 Tim L. You asked would I believe that Iraq Posessed WMD'S if other countries claimed this and the U.S. did not.
Tim I drew my conclusion that Iraq did not posess WMD's based on what I was reading from the left, right and center. I was also listening to both NPR and BBc daily prior to the invasion.
Based on what I heard Madeline Albright, SCott Ritter, numerous CIA analyst, General Zinni, Robert Mcnamara, Hans BLix, Zbigniew Bryzinski(sp?), most of all Mr. El Baradei from the IAEA in Feb. or March of 2003, when her reported that the NIGER DOCUMENTS WERE FALSE DOCUMENTS AND BAD ONE'S AT THAT.
I FIRMLY BELIEVED THAT THE ONGOING UN INSPECTIONS SHOULD BE COMPLETED. OF COURSE WE KNOW THAT THEY WOULD HAVE COME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION THAT DAVID KELLY'S TEAM AND OTHER INVESTIGATORS CAME TO, AND THE CLAIMS THAT MANY OTHERS WERE MAKING PRIOR TO THE INVASION. THERE WERE NO WMD'S. IRAQ WAS NOT AN IMMEDIATE THREAT.
I drew my conclusion that the claims that the Bush Administration were endlessly repeating were false. I also knew Iraq had not attacked us, and that we had supported Saddam in the past.
SO ..NO ...I WOULD NOT HAVE SUPPORTED AN INVASION BASED ON WHAT OTHER COUNTRIES WERE SAYING EXPECIALLY IF THE DOCUMENTS THEY WERE BASING IT ON HAD BEEN PROVEN TO BE FALSE BY THE UN.
I WOULD HAVE QUESTIONED OTHER COUNTRIES INTELLIGENCE IF THERE WAS SO MUCH OPPOSITION FROM FOLKS WHO HOPEFULLY KNOW FAR MORE THAN I DO.
Whether you or anyone else was for, against, or on the fence about the invasion of Iraq. The fact remains that ALL OF THE FALSE INTELLIGENCE NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED AND IT HAS NOT.
PHASE II WHICH WILL INVESTIGATE THE WHO, HOW, WHEN, WHY AND WHERE ... OF ALL OF THE INTELLIGENCE CAME FROM... NEEDS TO HAPPEN ...NOW...NOT LATER. CALL , WRITE, VISIT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES DEMANDING THAT PHASE II AND THE RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY THAT KUCINICH IS PUSHING...BE IMPLEMENTED
THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEEDLESSLY DIED DESERVE THIS AT THE VERY LEAST. SO THAT THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
Posted by: kathleen at October 29, 2005 01:11 PM
Pandemoniac said:
"First off Timmiee, the difference between a liberal and a conservative website and a liberal one is what? The opinions. There is no such thing as a liberal or reactionary fact."
BOTH sides distort facts and take things out of context. Do you deny moveon.org does this with the Bush administration?
"Facts are facts. The factcheck site only says that what Chimpy said was accurate not true."
What!? Pandemoniac, you're much more reasonable that Capt. A lie KNOWINGLY making an untrue statement. If the intelligence SAID Iraq had WMDs, and Bush went off of that, that is NOT a lie.
"Chimpy cited the lies that the British White Paper put out about the Niger forgeries. Chimpy accurately cited the source of his lies."
I think you're getting confused. As factcheck.org pointed out, those Italian forged documents (not British) were NOT the basis for Bush's 16 words.
No, Bush accurately cited the intelligence that was shown to him, which isn't lying. Remember Pande, in order for a false statement to be a lie, the person telling that false statement has to KNOW they are lying. There were several other countries as well that had intelligence indicating Saddam Hussein sought uranium from Niger.
"It doesn't mean he told the truth because Iraq didn't try to obtain fissible materials from Niger and the Senate Whitewash Committee says so (that's not a liberal site, it's the whitewash report)."
Bush was MISINFORMED, not lying. You obviously hate Bush so much, you can't see the difference.
From Factcheck.org:
"None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldnt have been part of Bushs speech."
"But what he said that Iraq sought uranium is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time. So Bush may indeed have been misinformed, but that's not the same as lying."
And the only reason you're calling it the Senate Whitewash report is because YOU didn't like the outcome of the invesitgation which has exonerated Bush. Now, how much you wanna bet if that report concluded Bush did intentionally mislead America, you would be all over it!?
Also, the Silberman/Robb WMD commission exonerated Bush as well. So 2 invesitgations have both exonerated Bush which you ignore.
Was the Silberman/Robb WMD report a whitewash too??
"The bottom line is that Saddam had no WMD. One of two things is true and I'll accept either one. Either Chimpy knew and he lied or he didn't know and he's the world's biggest mushroom (kept in the dark and fed shit all day). Since you deny that Chimpy knew he was not telling the truth; then you must be happy with him being the 2nd stupidest fucking idiot on the face of the earth behind D. Feith. I've been saying that all along."
Bush did not know what he was saying was not true, so therefore, he did not lie. But if Bush is stupid, then I guess, France, Russia, Britain, Australia, China, Egypt and Jordan were stupid too, in believing Iraq had WMDs?
"As for Clinton's statements about WMD, they were made before Ritter tried to finish his work. He was trying to keep the heat on Saddam so that the Iraq sanctions wouldn't get lifted. No one died as a result of his assessments and gas didn't turn into the liquid-gold that it is today. Iraq didn't get turned into a Muslim theocracy. The deficit was getting paid down while Big Dawg kicked ass in Kosovo. He know how to bend the international community to his will and got the UN and NATO to do most of the heavy lifting. How many US casualties in Kosovo? About 20,000 (killed and wounded) fewer than in Iraq, right?
Ah, but you are wrong! The Clinton administration did BELIEVE Iraq still had WMDs after 1998. Time interview 6-23-04
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/
Clinton, who was interviewed Thursday, said he did not believe that Bush went to war in Iraq over oil or for imperialist reasons but out of a genuine belief that large quantities of weapons of mass destruction remained unaccounted for.
Noting that Bush had to be "reeling" in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, Clinton said Bush's first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining "chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material."
"That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for," Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.
"Hussein has.... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
So you are wrong again.
No one died in Kosovo because Clinton was AGAINST taking necessary military action. Truth be known, if 9/11 happened on Clinton's watch, we would not have sent troops to Afghanistan or anywhere, we would have done airstrikes. A very tepid response.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 01:23 PM
Kathleen wrote:
"Tim I drew my conclusion that Iraq did not posess WMD's based on what I was reading from the left, right and center. I was also listening to both NPR and BBc daily prior to the invasion.'
NPR and the BBC are both Left wing, not objective.
I don't want it to happen again either, but the Silberman/Robb WMD commission, goes over what you are looking for. I advise you to look at this: http://www.wmd.gov/report/index.html
"SO ..NO ...I WOULD NOT HAVE SUPPORTED AN INVASION BASED ON WHAT OTHER COUNTRIES WERE SAYING EXPECIALLY IF THE DOCUMENTS THEY WERE BASING IT ON HAD BEEN PROVEN TO BE FALSE BY THE UN."
Well then how come the UN had all of these sanctions against Saddam for having WMDs??
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 01:34 PM
The Ping Pong Match - Bush Lied
No he didn't
Yes he did
NO HE DIDN'T!
YES HE DID!
NO HE DIDN'T!!!
YES HE DID!!!
NO HE DIDN'T!!!!!
YES HE DID!!!!!!
You're stupid
No, You're stupid
Man, this could go on forever.
Posted by: stan at October 29, 2005 01:39 PM
Stan it could, but I have won the debate. No one on here has proven Bush knowingly mislead on the Iraq war with objective proof that was factually verified. Only I have proved that Bush did not lie with objective information that was factually verified.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 01:44 PM
Would someone call the DEA. TimL has been online so long, I suspect he has a methlab cookin.
Bush lied, and if you ask him today he'll lie again, as will Cheney, Rice and now....
he can't face the music and hands his scripts to Frist. "Here, you get Harriet off my back, and defend us against the indictment of Scooter."
Sorry I'm about 150 posts behind. I loved the press conference yesterday. How do these guys think they can lie on top of lie and not get caught?
PF isn't done yet. His next indictment id going to be Rove. Two chief of staffs, the presidents and the vice-presidents instigated a conspiracy to expose an operative and then lied to cover it up.
They must have been acting on each other.
Posted by: geof01 at October 29, 2005 01:45 PM
geof, all's you can is Bush lied, but you have provided no factually verifiable proof, which I have.
Posted by: Tim L at October 29, 2005 01:48 PM
Damn Tim L.
Don't you ever get tired of sucking Bushcock?
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 01:49 PM
Anyone paying attention knew the Iraq "imminent threat" was nonsense from jump . Bushco kept telling on themselves, from Andy Card to Wolfowitz, they outed the motives and the methods that were used.
The only people still buying this as an honest misunderstanding of flawed intelligence estimates etc are BushCo officials, who know they could be prosecuted for treason (Cheney & Rummy head the list), and idiots like our trolls on the board today.
Posted by: meade at October 29, 2005 01:52 PM
TIM L AND TIM. I ask this sincerely. If you were in full support of the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan based on the intelligence that the american public and the world were being force fed by the Bush administration. Why oh why did you not run out and offer your services? Put you own lives on the line? Join the military.
I come from a military family and I can tell you that most of the folks who have been to war, know that sending soldiers into a war "of choice", is a crime. This is the REAL ISSUE...REAL PEOPLE HAVE DIED due to the creation and dessimination of this false intelligence. TENS OF THOUSANDS OF REAL PEOPLE...EVEN THOUGH THE AMERICAN MEDIA REFUSES TO OR IS UNABLE TO SHOW US ON OUR CLEAN T.V. SCREENS THE DEATH AND DESTRUCTION THAT IS TAKING PLACE.
ONe of the neo-cons MANTRAS is that "PERCEPTION IS REALITY". No reality is reality. Tens of thousands of people have died. The issue is not Bush, Republicans, or Democrats, Iraqi's or Trolls.
False information was used to sell a war, an agenda. ALL OF THIS FALSE INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE INVESTIGATED. IT HAS NOT. PHASE II NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY.
TIM L . You can not come to a conclusion when all of the evidence and all of those involved with the creation and dessimination have not been part of an investigation. PHASE II NEEDS TO BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY. THE WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP AND THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS AND ALL INVOLVED NEED TO BE THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED. THEY HAVE NOT.
To both Tim's if you believe in this administration and what they say and do so much. JOIN THE MILITARY Because if some of these folks have their way SYRIA AND IRAN ARE ON THE LIST....YOU CAN BOTH SERVE THE NEO-CON AGENDA BY SIGNING UP NOW.
I can assure you the folks who have pushed this country into war do not have children or many (if any) family members putting their lives on the line.
You know the saying ...... PUT UP OR SHUT UP.
Posted by: Kathleen at October 29, 2005 01:54 PM
Bush lied Tim L. when he said they knew Saddam had weapons. They KNEW he had them. Remember the 8x5 colored glossy photos with circles and arrows, with the paragraphs on back explaining what they were? Mobile weapons labs - 500,000 tons of chemical weapons - mushrooms clouds, we know where they are. They're in and around the vicinity to Tikrit... blah blah blah
The only reason they spout those lies is because they know there are people such as yourself who will defend them. What is your stake in it?
Posted by: ripple at October 29, 2005 01:55 PM
bush is irrelevant. bush does not know truth from fiction. bush is a puppet.
America's CEO, Dick Cheney, and his band of
WAR CRIMINALS have used up bush. bush is no longer useful to them. The WAR CRIMINAL puppeteers -- Cheney/Rove/Libby/Rumsfeld and all the hidden criminals -- would love to be rid of bush.
bush's POLL NUMBERS are really disturbing to CEO Cheney. What will they do?
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 02:03 PM
Tim L...the U.N. sanctions had worked. Well, with the sad fact that tens of thousand died due to these sanctions.
Un inspectors confirmed this. Although Clinton, under the influence of Madeline Albright and I think Sandy Berger encouraged Clinton to push for the withdrawal of the UN inspectors in 98.
Tim L. I repeat I do not know every detail or every fact, but I try as so many of us do. This is my bottom line,.......
I am against senseless KILLING ,DEATH AND DESTRUCTION.
IF YOU ARE ALL FOR SENSELESS KILLING ,DEATH AND DESTRUCTION BASED ON FALSE INTELLIGENCE . JOIN THE MILITARY....THE FOLKS WHO DESIGNED THE "PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY" HAVE BIG PLANS AND HAVE JOBS FOR YOU.
STOP BLOGGING AND JOIN. TALK IS CHEAP. YOUR ACTIONS WOULD SPEAK LOUDER THAN YOUR WORDS.
Posted by: kathleen at October 29, 2005 02:07 PM
Why should I trust factcheck.org? Anyone can claim to be unbiased, but our corporate misruling class has money, money, money, and more money--and money can make people lie. They COULD be honest, but I can't know that, can I? Something occurred to me while working this morning. Most of us wouldn't know an Arab Muslim from an Israeli Jew. All three of the Abrahamic faiths have their fanatic, fundamentalist wings. Is it possible that the Mossad, or a rogue faction of it, could have rounded up some fanatic Jewish fundamentalists willing to die for their cause to impersonate fanatic Muslim fundamentalists willing to die for THEIR cause? Maybe our "good friends" the Israelis--who sank the LIBERTY, lest we forget--arranged the 9/11 attacks to trick us into spilling our blood and treasure for the greater glory of the Israeli Empire?---IBW
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 02:12 PM
Schwarzenegger Street - These are the people in my neighborhood
This is hilarious -- but it may be too true to be funny.
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 02:14 PM
Perfectly Legal
In reading David Cay Johnston's book, "Perfectly Legal" he discusses the covert campaign to rig our tax system to benefit the super rich Рand cheat everyone else. Pages 236 and 249 mention that George W. Bush and Dick Chaney, as Director of Harken Energy and CEO of Halliburton, respectively, found offshore tax havens in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying American taxes.
On the day, Mr. Bush spoke that American companies ought to pay taxes and be good Americans, a news story broke and said that when Mr. Bush was Director of Harken Energy, an oil drilling company in Texas, his company set up a Cayman Islands subsidiary to escape paying American taxes. Halliburton has twenty offshore tax havens.
So much said for American patriotism on the part of George W. Bush and Dick Chaney!
Every thirty seconds is born a stupid American, more cannon fodder to fight to protect the lifestyles of the rich and famous and to protect the pathology of American corporations. It means that we can die to keep the corporations from paying any income taxes with their offshore tax havens, such as Halliburton. If you refuse to fight, you are called un-American or unpatriotic and the corporations are called American and patriotic. When will the stupid Americans ever learn that wars are fought to protect corporations and the rich and famous at the expense of the poor and the middle class?
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 02:21 PM
Gerald: "The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind...". Isn't it amazing how the BS artists have managed to construct such a dedicated personality cult around one of the most unlikeable men on the planet Earth?---IBW
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 02:30 PM
Ivory Bill, the neocons and the religious right have given them the power to rape our democracy, freedoms, and human rights. It is accomplished in the names of nationalism and patriotism.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 02:42 PM
Religious Right
I also heard on radio that the religious right controls America. We are becoming a Christian nation similar to Islam. Islam is more of a political ideologue and not a religion. American Christianity is more of a political ideologue and not a religion. America has forsaken God for the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and the bushgod.
America worships evil gods.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 02:46 PM
Lee Bailey Hutchinson
Legal Technicalities
I would like to comment on something that slime and scum said. When Clinton was in office, the repugnants came after him for what they considered perjury and obstruction of justice charges. These were criminal acts.
But, when a repugnant is guilty of perjury and obstruction of justice charges, these charges are considered legal technicalities. Lee Bailey Hutchinson is the poster child for what is wrong with America. We have slime and scum running and ruining this country like Lee Bailey Hutchinson.
There was not much said about Hutchinsonճ comments because we know that the repugnant cabal is crazy. However, we must not overlook these crazy comments by nutcases like Lee Bailey Hutchinson.
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 02:50 PM
Kathleen. I have always thought it our duty and destiny to speak for Peace on earth. When I was born it was only 85 years back to the civil war, 33 years after WWI and 5 years after WWII. A short span of history.
After Vietnam it seemed that peace was at hand. Yet more innocent victims of war have been claimed since 1980 than in all of these conflicts. The world is hell bent on arms sales, and the closing point is always revolving around the ideology of poverty.
The UN is now being criticized for its attempts to maintain sanctions imposed by the security council against Iraq, and its attempt to provide relief to the children in Iraq. The security council saw that over one million Iraqis were killed. Maybe as many as another 100,000 since March 2003. On the other hand the UN is being criticized for its handling of the oil sales. Iraq made money, Bush made money, Cheney made money, Rice made money, and still the children died.
Ms Rice, how do you view your role as a member of the board of Chevron during the time that your company paid bribes to Saddam to procure oil for sale on the world market, knowing that innocents paid the price, and profits were your sole incentive?
So now the Volker and Coleman studies putthe blame on the UN and not on the greed of individuals. This puts peace again out of the reach of mankind and continues the threat of war around the world.
Those that 'have' view the Perito Efficient as an agrument to defend their right to hoard the wealth and resources of this planet against the impoverished, as if feeding someone would inherently take something from them.
Of course the world could share, everyone could go to bed fed, war could be eliminated and more on earth could reach the wealth that 87% of Americans have.
Historically, we are not headed in that direction.
The head of Exxon, in announcing his companies 9.9 billion in profits for the third quarter, sounded very droll and pathetic. And why not? When your sole purpose in life is to screw everyone, there has to come a point when you fear your dick will fall off.
Our purpose must be to expose the greedy, murdering bastards and their accomplices. The UN is humanities chance for a future. I agree with Bolton that reform is imperitive. However, the reform needs to be tilted toward progress and away from the control that the US and other members of the security council have held over the years.
PNAC wants to control the world though absolute power held by the USA. A great plan for the nineties, but as of Wednesday the pendulum has swung as far to the right as its going to go. Now it will pause and then swing back, taking a few heads along the way.
Gerald, keep the prayers for peace in your heart!
Posted by: geof01 at October 29, 2005 02:53 PM
#93
Tim,
Have Capt teach you how to link. Then we don't have to scroll for a half hour to get through your post.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 03:00 PM
""The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind...". Isn't it amazing how the BS artists have managed to construct such a dedicated personality cult around one of the most unlikeable men on the planet Earth?---IBW"
I am right there with you IBW!
So very food to see a few posts from you!
Good stuff one and all!
You guys rock, (I know I say it so often it gets old but)
I resist high-fiven when I agree because I agree with so many maybe even too often!
Peace to all!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 03:06 PM
#213 geof01, good post! God has given our planet enough for everyone to share in His gifts to us but fear keeps us tied to our possessions and we become slaves to our possessions. Does it make us feel better to see the pain and suffering in countries like Darfur, Niger, and Sudan? Do we really feel better to emulate the muslim terrorists? Maybe it was our School of the Americas that gave the terrorists around the world the ideas to give back terrorism, killing, and torture?
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 03:17 PM
If I were a spy novelist who wrote about espionage, international intrigue, power, and arrogant men lusting for world domination, I would wonder what the CEO of the United States, Dick Cheney, and his cabal plan to do about George W. Bush, who is no longer relevant and is no longer useful to them.
Think about it: (1) The cabal's grand dreams of world domination are on the brink of total disintegration. (2) Scholars say a sitting president cannot be indicted. (3) Scholars say a sitting vice president CAN be indicted.
(4) bush meets with unfortunate accident. (5) Cheney officially becomes president (continuing also in his CEO role). (6) The nation is shocked by more "trauma," the untimely death of a president in time of War. (7) Cheney pardons anyone who is indicted in the Plame affair (aka Traitorgate among bloggers). (8) Cheney simultaneously encourages all Americans to "move on" and "unite" for the good of our country. (9) The American sheeple agree. (10) The Cheney Cabal continues their clandestine efforts for world domination. (11) Syria and Iran are clearly in their crosshairs. (12) A war here, a war there, more terrorist alarms, more fearmongering, more Patriot-like Acts, etc. (12) Mission Accomplished.
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 03:22 PM
#213 GEOFO1 ...It is alarming how much time we spend talking about the details of the fabricated intelligence, that none of us are completely sure of.
I give credit to all individuals who are making the effort to discern the truth. Tim L, Saladin, Jeanne, ALL.
Although what I am most bothered by, is that while we are blogging, writing, calling our representatives, trying to figure this out. Real people are dying..thousands.
The journalist Robert Fisk reported that 3-5,000 Iraqi's are dying a month, due to the invasion. This supports the findings of the Lancet Report that came out over a year ago. Which said that over 100,ooo Iraqi's have been killed. This report was swept under the rug rather quickly.
It really bothers me that americans have become so complacent. That the logical question of how many innocent people have died due to our invasion, is not asked and certainly not answered. That our media and journalist are also so incredibly complacent that they do not ask or investigate this logical question.
I keep asking why is that our government can come up with the numbers of how many people Saddam killed. Yet are unable to come up with the numbers of how many we have killed in Iraq. This is so absurd, a lie I believe, and the american people buy these lies, and do not seem to care enough to ask the question.
I have interviewed and audio taped hundreds of vets about this war. It is so incredibly sad and telling when you look into the eyes of individuals who have been to war, witnessed the horrible destruction and watched innocent people die. They know..oh boy..do they know. That you should not take lightly the responsibility that our nation has with such a powerful military.
They know that our military should only be used if it is absolutely necessary. That is if you respect life all of life. Not just american lives.
We seem to have become a soulless nation. Spiritually Bankrupt. Refusing to connect the dots between our actions and the serious repercussions that others around the world may suffer from our selfish acts.
My heart goes out to all on this blog.. I do believe that we are all trying to understand this difficult and complicated situation that the Bush administration has gotten our nation into.
If we fail to connect these dots , if we fail to uncover the truth about the creation and dessimination of the false intelligence. I believe we have failed the "god" in each and every one of us .
Our conscience is a precious gift. Our democracy is a precious gift. It does not matter if you are a Republican, a Democrat, an Independent. EAch and every one of us needs to answer to our own conscience and to our democracy. By holding those responsbible for this false intelligence..ACCOUNTABLE.
WE ALL OWE THIS TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEEDLESSLY DIED.
Posted by: kathleen at October 29, 2005 03:35 PM
Kathleen says: "I have interviewed and audio taped hundreds of vets about this war."
Kathleen, can you share with us what you intend to do with these interviews and audio tapes? Thanks.
Posted by: micki at October 29, 2005 03:45 PM
Pande,
Are you telling me that one of the most educated men in the White House is Bush? The guy can't tie his own shoes. OMG.
I agree with you. I loved to watch the WH twisting in the wind. What is really going to be fun is watching the spin, spin, spin and not being able to get any traction. Kind of like watching a car trying to get up a hill after a snow storm. Funny. Oh, I will enjoy that.
Tim L,
You probably don't care if I read your crap but if you want me to could you make it interesting?
The spew that I've had to listen to for the past eight years is stale. Need to spice it up with something. Maybe the truth? Whatever.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 03:53 PM
NO RESPONSE FROM TIM..L....Maybe he went to join the military.
Nothing wrong with that. If you are trying to truely serve the country and not just become a sheep doing the Bush administration's bloody work.
Many of the people who were the strongest opponents against this invasion had either been in the military or are presently serving.
Posted by: kathleen at October 29, 2005 04:01 PM
Military disagrees with Bush and war
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 04:15 PM
Forging the Case for War
Posted by: Gerald at October 29, 2005 04:19 PM
Micki....I have made them available to NPR. I have also interviewed several young soldiers on leave from Iraq on the air here at WOUB Ohio University . Very sad stories.
I also have a friend Peggy Gish (she will not mind me mentioning her name), who has spent 2 out of the last 3 years in Iraq. She has gone to Iraq with a group called the Christian Peace Maker team. I was able to get her on the Diane Rehm show with Seymour Hersch. He used some of this groups reports about prisoner abuse in his artilcles. I was also able to convince Neil Conan of Talk of the Nation to put her on. This took many phone calls.
I have interviewed her on the air several times. She is available for speaking and can be contacted here in athens, ohio. If you like I could get her information to you. She is an amazing person with a huge heart. Her stories of Iraq are both disturbing and moving.
Many of the vets I have interviewed were at the anti-invasion marches. Four of them were in their 90's, WWII vets. It is so moving to talk with many of these (mostly) gentlemen.
One guy that I interviewed, Virgil is his name was a KOrean war vet. I caught Virgil coming out of a VFW, in Glouster OHio ( an old coal mining town), here in south eastern Ohio.
He had bib overalls on, a ball cap with all of his war pins carefully placed and was chewing tobacco. When I asked Virgil what he thought of this war, tears began to stream down his 76 year old face. He kept repeating "it just ain't right to send young men and women over to an unnecessary war. It just ain't right".
It is talking to these old timers who have been to war, and hearing folks like Zbigniew Bryzinski and Arthur Schlesenger (sp?) say that "this may be the fall of the Roman empire all over again" that have convinced me even more than I was before the invasion....THAT THIS INVASION WAS AND IS WRONG.
I will be signing off now, so please do not be offended if I do not reply. AT least for now
Posted by: kathleen at October 29, 2005 04:21 PM
Talking Point Memo
Mr. Fitzgerald was spotted Friday morning outside the office of James Sharp, Mr. Bush's personal lawyer. Mr. Bush was interviewed about the case by Mr. Fitzgerald last year. It is not known what discussions, if any, were taking place between the prosecutor and Mr. Sharp. Mr. Sharp did not return a phone call, and Mr. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, declined to comment.
*****end of clip*****
Grom talking points memo but the clip is from the NYTs.
A curious question. Sharp was hired for the Plame case?
See what you think.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 05:03 PM
From not GROM! HA!
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 05:04 PM
Why is it that this site can be so constructive with people caring, and then so destructive with people hating. Both emotions come to most(or all)of us.Upon review, tim l , instead of hours of saying prove he lied, prove he didn't? It is a proven fact that bush/cheney were wrong about WMD. Its a proven fact that the USA engaged(engages?) in torture. It's a fact that Valerie was outed and she was classified.It is a fact that oil revenues are the best ever. What i am seeing with our trolls is them saying prove the intent when the result is a fact. Pleading stupidity is the best case scenario them. And for intelligent people, it has become a fact that your point of view has already been considered and dismissed as bullshit.Whether evil or stupid it still is killing people for no gain. Best case scenario is back to an inspected iraq and no more troops there. We had that.
Posted by: Dubendorf at October 29, 2005 05:29 PM
"The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams, Mostly Harmless
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 05:30 PM
Okay, so Mr. Rove has slipped the grip of the legal justice system. But does that mean he will succeed in fooling anybody possessed of even a shred of common sense to not see the simple, obvious fact that he did inform Matt Cooper that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA? Mr. Rove says he was "warning" the writer not to mention that Joe Wilson's wife worked for the CIA. (Does Mr. Rove really expect us to not see his "warning"
was really INFORMING (as in "blowing her cover")? Mr. Rove, your gall is truly inspiring.) Now, Mr. Rove would have us believe that he, the top politico in Washington, didnt know Ms. Plame was a CIA undercover operative. He would have us believe that he, the man referred to as Bush's Brain, knew that Plame worked for the CIA but ALSO did NOT know she was an undercover agent of the CIA. He would further have us believe that he, Bush's Brain, didn't think to check to see if this person working at the CIA was not an undercover agent, before he spoke of her to several reporters.
(Question: IF he knew she worked for the CIA but did NOT know she was a covert agent, why would he feel the necessity to "warn" the columnist about mentioning Wilsons wife worked at the CIA, huh? Note also, the wording of Rove's statement. He said he told Cooper that
Wilson's wife worked "AT the CIA". This shows this statement is an artifact. People don't say someone works "at" the CIA, FBI, etc. They say works 'FOR'. Why did he change this "for" to "at"? .. to make it sound less informative, to make it SOUND AS IF he had no appreciation of her level of responsibility within the CIA and therefor he is less culpable of outing her. As if she was a window washer, or clerk as far as he knew. This is an obvious massaging of the wording for public consumption which implies craft and artifice was involved in his statement.)
Now, let's see, he DOES know the CIA is involved in covert intelligence gathering all over the globe, right? And he therfore could be expected to know that many people at the CIA ARE involved in covert activity and are therefore protected by the law against revealing the identity of a covert agent, right? Apparently not! Mr. Rove would have us believe he knew she worked for the CIA but didnt know she was a covert agent AND that he didnt even think to check to make sure her assignment to the CIA was NOT classified information before informing several reporters of this fact. Mr. Rove, your nerve is surpassed only by the vindictiveness which lead you, and others, on your campaign to GET Joe Wilson by "outing" his wife.
Now, I have heard some conversations regarding what damage has been done by Mr Rove's actions (and those of Libby, Dick Cheney's right hand man). Well, I can tell you about the damage that has been done. Our national security has been compromised. If we are ever going to win a war on terrorism (should we ever start a real one) WE MUST GET BETTER INTELLIGENCE FROM PEOPLE LIVING IN THE COUNTRIES WHERE THE TERRORISTS ARE ACTIVE. NOW, WHAT DO YOU THINK POTENTIAL SOURCES OF VALUABLE INFORMATION ARE GOING TO THINK ABOUT THIS OUTING OF A CIA COVERT AGENT? Mr. Rove, you may have "foxed" the legal system, but this doesn't change the reality of what you and others in this administration have done. FUTURE POSSIBLE SOURCES OF VALUABLE INTELLIGENCE WILL SIMPLY NOT TAKE A CHANCE OF POSSIBLY RISKING THEIR LIVES BY TALKING TO ANY AMERICAN WHO MIGHT LATER BE OUTED BY SOME OTHER REPUBLICAN 'POLITICAL HIT-MAN' EXACTING REVENGE UPON A CRITIC OR NON 'TRUE BELIEVER'. The loss of the intelligence will be impossible to gauge or quantify BUT IT WILL BE NONETHELESS REAL AND SIGNIFICANT. OUR NATIONAL SECURITY HAS BEEN COMPROMISED, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE.
And what will this lead to? We will never know the exact number, but there will be many who will pay for Mr. Rove's treason (remember the agent was outed in a time of war the war on Terrorism). Many will be counted among the number of unwilling draftees to Rove's Regiments of the Dead, those soldiers and citizens on the front lines of the war on terror (terrorist attacks can occur anywhere), who will die because of intelligence we didn't get; because somebody was afraid to talk to an American for fear his contact would later be outed by a Republican politico exacting revenge for someone's lack of blind faith or for doing the right thing and revealing the truth to the American people. Again, the group who claims to be the party of a strong national defense has compromised our national security and put our soldiers and citizens in greater jeopardy. Our national security sacrificed for political payback.
This administration which promised to restore honor and dignity to the White House has set new lows in morality in politics.
Posted by: JOhn Walker at October 29, 2005 05:43 PM
Capt at #192 ended his post with...
"A trial would be very interesting but I expect Libby to plea, flip or worse. Anything to stop the trial before it begins. Been a while since we have heard about a person being suicided. "
I swear Capt, I was thinking the exact same thing! Suicide, literally, or maybe even 'helped' a little bit, isn't unthinkable. It would definitely change the news cycle topic. Can't you just hear the reactionaries spin on that... "...drove a good man to despair with their lies and technicalities."
They make me sick.
Posted by: Alan at October 29, 2005 06:06 PM
Add:
If someone were to commit who would not believe the actions were born of desperate times?
AND - -the bonus - Nobody ever gets convicted . . .
I guess IF such a thing does happen nobody thought to lock the medicine cabinet or the ammo?
Watch for a suicide by pills or shotgun.
The shotgun can hide forensic evidence of a small caliber weapon.
I do not put ANYTHING past these slugs. Their attitude is people die all the time.
All too predictable.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 06:48 PM
#176
Capt,
Stories like the one on food stamps make me so sad. Who does it affect? Kids. They go hungry.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 06:52 PM
The anti-abortion idiots care so much about a baby being given a chance to die from a thousand cuts?
They do not care one iota once the baby is born. The mother is on her own. If she chooses to be poor then she must not care about the baby.
The super cynical view says they want more carbon based bullet stoppers. It is already looking like there will never be enough jobs to keep up with the 150,000 a month trying to enter the shrinking jobs market.
Joining the military is almost a necessity. So not draft will ever be necessary as long as the military is one of the only options.
Very sad indeed.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 29, 2005 07:06 PM
I think Fitzgerald left the gang in a very awkward position. This is why I think that. What do others thing?
The way this whole Fitzgerald thing played out is very interesting. Rove and Cheney and Bush and all the other helpers don't know what Fitzgerald knows. If he doesn't charge them he doesn't write about it. Fitzgerald may or may not know everything. He ain't telling.
So they twist in the wind. They can't really spin because they may say the wrong thing. They know that Fitzgerald is a master at untangling the web. So if they say one thing to one person it better jive with the truth. 30 years is a long time to sit in a cell for lying.
What a tangled web we weave when we practice to deceive.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 07:07 PM
Libby appears to have concocted a rather clumsy cover story, especially in that he pointed to a specific reporter as his source--Russert--for the information on Valerie Wilson that he shared with Miller and Cooper. A reasonable assumption is that even if Libby was not a source for the Novak column that identified Valerie Wilson, he was attempting to distance himself--and perhaps Cheney--from the administration's effort to find and leak information on Wilson and his wife (even if it might be classified) to undercut Wilson's criticism. During the press conference, Fitzgerald noted that Libby was the first official who talked to a reporter about Valerie Wilson when he discussed her with Miller on June 23, 2003./
This is what I think happened: Dick Chaney told Libby to lie and say the reporters gave him the information about Valorie Plame because, at the time, no one thought the Special Prosecuter would get that far with the CIA Leak investigation. In fact, the prevailing opinion was this investigation would not find the source of the leak. It made sense at the time (but now looks clumsy and stupid strategy) and no doubt, Chaney told Libby to do it.
Now the problem is ... proving that.
Posted by: Marshall at October 29, 2005 07:16 PM
177 tim l wrote
"In 1996, the poverty level in the USA stood at 13.7%. In 2004, the poverty level was 12.7%, so Bush beats Clinton"
http://www.louisianaweekly.com/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20051003o
Under the previous administration, poverty rates fell from 15.1 percent of the population at the start of Bill Clinton's presidency to 11.3 percent at the end of it - still way too many, but moving in the right direction.
Tim L also wrote
"In 1996, President Clinton signed a budget that directed 12.2% of spending be directed toward the poor. In 2004, Bush's budget kicked 2% more than Clinton to poverty programs, an astronomical $329 billion dollars."
Do you mean 12.2% plus 2% equals 14.2% of spending or the dollar value of 12.2% plus 2% of that dollar value. And if so is that adjusted for inflation? Numbers are just numbers unless they're placed in context.
Posted by: manxomefoe at October 29, 2005 07:23 PM
Here's a nice little Wash. Post blog itemizing the reasons why "Iraq" does indeed mean "Vietnam" in Arabic.
One reason: "the United States had little grasp of local culture and values . . ."
This, I think, is the key reason for our foreign policy disasters in general, from McNamara and Vietnam to Rice/Wolfwowitz/Perle and Iraq. These belligerents all thought we should be masters of a universe they knew nothing about.
Rice claims to be an "old Soviet specialist," yet on a recent trip to Russia, she admitted that she can't speak Russian well enough to be interviewed in Russian by the Russian media.
In his bio at SAIS (Johns Hopkins), where he served as dean for 7 years, Wolfowitz claimed to be an expert on 8 different regions of the world, yet the only language he speaks fluently is English.
If you don't speak the language, you sure as hell ain't an expert on a region.
A foreign policy dictated by frauds is bound to fail. The problem is, of course, that it's never the frauds who suffer. Condi got her dream job, Wolfowitz was appointed head of the World Bank, and even McNamara's still kicking around. Yet their incompetence has wrought much more suffering, death, and destruction than Brownie 's did.
Seems to me that it's past time to hold members of Congress from both parties accountable for their rubber-stamp approval of ideological cronies appointed to positions they're not qualified to assume. The consequences of that kind of lethargy should now be obvious.
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 07:32 PM
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
APPENDIUM - REASONS, OTHER THAN IRAQ HAVING WMD STOCKPILES, FOR AUTHORIZING MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRAQ
1. IRAQ INVADED KUWAIT
2. IRAQ SIGNED A CEASE FIRE AGREEMENT; TO ELIMINATE WMD, STOP SUPPORTING TERRORISM, AND ALLOW UN INSPECTIONS, ALL OF WHICH IT VIOLATED.
3. WMD AND WMD PROGRAMS DISCOVERED, IN VIOLATION OF THE CEASE FIRE. IRAQ CLOSE TO HAVING A NUCEAR WEAPON
4. IRAQ THWARTED EFFORTS OF THE WEAPONS INSPECTORS - LED TO WITHDRAWAL OF INSPECTORS
5. IRAQ CONTINUES TO BRUTALLY SUPPRESS ITS OWN PEOPLE
6. IRAQ HAS USED WMD AGAINST OTHER NATIONS AND ITS OWN PEOPLE
7. IRAQ TRIED TO ASSASSINATE BUSH
8. IRAQ CONTINUES TO FIRE ON COALITION AIRCRAFT
9. THERE ARE MEMBERS OF AL-QAEDA AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS IN IRAQ, BEING PROVIDED AID AND SAFE HARBOR.
Posted by: murad at October 29, 2005 07:35 PM
Boy, the cons sure must be torqued. They've all taken to uppercase shrieking lately.
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 07:44 PM
murad sed
7. IRAQ TRIED TO ASSASSINATE BUSH
good one murad... and how many people were assassinated when the WTC was brought down by
controlled demolition after being struck by a 737 (not a 767 as bush claimed)? and how many people were assassinated at the pentagon where there was absolutely no wreckage of a 757 whatsoever?
who was that on our tv's that said it was a 757? oh yeah, I remember now! it was bush.
Posted by: James Ha at October 29, 2005 08:10 PM
Isn't it annoying? Jeez. Like writing in caps will make me read it. It's all the same trash over and over and over.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 08:11 PM
Marshall: "It made sense at the time (but now looks clumsy and stupid strategy) and no doubt, Chaney told Libby to do it."
Not prudent, as Bush pere would say. But then, these clowns have never exercised much prudence, especially when someone else's ass was on the line. Cheney and Bush figure theirs are covered by plausible deniability, so what the hell.
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 08:17 PM
#237
Drewp,
The U.S. really has a problem with not just understanding culture but accepting it.
There is a reporter I write to once in a while who is an expert on Iraq (he probably would tell you he isn't) and I asked him a question. What will Iraq do if we pull out today? I asked this because Congress and the white House make the assumption Iraq will crack up and fall into the earth if we aren't there pummeling it into the ground. I didn't buy that assumption.
The guy wrote me back and told me they would and could run Iraq without us. They are already taking steps.
They want us out of their country. Dispite what Tim L and murad and whoever else says, this country can do very well without us.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 08:19 PM
Jeanne: "Isn't it annoying? Jeez. Like writing in caps will make me read it. It's all the same trash over and over and over."
They read like linguistically challenged Americans trying to speak English to foreigners.
I SAID, CAN YOU YOU TELL ME HOW TO GET TO THE CHAMPS ELYSEE, PLEASE! COMPRENDE?
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 08:24 PM
Ha,
Do you have a clue? Do you know, for instance, that a controlled demolition requires almost complete gutting of the interior of the building. And that the interior beams on all floors must be precicely cut and set with blasting material that will sever the beam when ignited? It is hardly an operation that could go unnoticed by the office personnel working in the building prior to the event.
Posted by: murad at October 29, 2005 08:35 PM
capt, alan, micki-- regarding #192, 217, 230, 231
You may be right. Your scenarios all make abundant sense in these desperate times for the liars who took us to war. Perhaps you should collaborate on a book.
Posted by: caroline at October 29, 2005 08:39 PM
Jeanne: "The U.S. really has a problem with not just understanding culture but accepting it."
Yes, I think so too. But I think that understanding is necessary for acceptance. And it seems to me that language serves as a fine indicator of one's level of understanding. To become fluent in the language of a region, it's almost essential that you live there. If you live there long enough to master the language, you naturally form closer relationships with the people. That breeds understanding, and acceptance, I think.
It also makes it much harder for you to kill them.
By the way, I think fluency in the local language is also necessary (but not sufficient) for reporters to do a decent job. Language was no doubt an important reason why Anthony Shadid (Wash. Post) won a Pulitzer for his Iraq reporting. He's fluent in Arabic, although I've heard him say that he doesn't understand Iraqi culture well. He is, after all, an American. Still, he's light years ahead of journalists who go into a country with little or no previous exposure to the culture and rely entirely on interpreters. John Burns drew rave reviews for his reporting in the NYT, probably because he writes so well, but I have much more faith in Shadid's impressions.
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 08:42 PM
Scenarios 217 & 231 sound all too plausible to me. The GOP has been taken over by what amounts to a fascist cult, which cannot be happy until every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that neoconservatism (pseudo-conservatism would be more accurate; there's nothing conservative about messianic foreign policies or budget deficits the size of Jupiter) is the one true faith and the Bushgod (hi, Gerald) is Lord. (Lest we forget, the Egyptians and Romans both thought their monarchs were divine) Hence, the determination of our simian little stormtrooper-wannabes to throw their poop at every last trace of dissent even though they already have a majority--or do they merely have control of the voting machines?
Maybe the scariest thing about the whole Elephascist hegemony that has prevailed since 1980 (Clinton had to face an Elephascist Congress for 6 of his 8 years) is what is shows about the advanced capabilities of "perception management" (aka propaganda, aka lying). An astonishing number of otherwise intelligent, even well-educated people, just can't see through the cult's myths. What happens to free will if psychology becomes an exact science, making it possible to make psychological manipulation--aka "public relations"--an exact technology? To riff on another old PBS kids' show (thanx for the link at 207, Micki), can you say "mind control", boys and girls? I knew ya could.
Except--why isn't the mind control being used in other Western democracies to un-democratize THEM as well? Even in our ally the UK, Blair faces far more vigorous dissent than Doofus Maximus Caesar does here. Are their rulers just less immoral than ours and refuse to stoop to it, or do the common folks of those other countries have some mental defenses that too few Americans share, and if the latter, how can we acquire such defenses?
A proud member of the reality-based community, Ivory Bill Woodpecker
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 08:55 PM
#247
I agree. I think if you live with the culture you don't try to change it to make it comfortable for you. You respect the culture. That's one thing I've noticed about the really good war reporting. 1. They report. 2. They tell the reader about the culture and the people. They want you to learn about the people. 3. They don't try to rationalize the American leadership's demented behavior. 4. And this is a big one. I might even put it in caps...no I won't. They allow the people to speak for themselves. The good reporters interview the citizens of Iraq. To do that the reporter has to gain the people's trust.
There are very few reporters doing that. The reporters that dare report the story are in fear for their lives. This war has had more casualties among reporters than any I know of.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 08:58 PM
#248
Why have we allowed this administration so much power? I ask that every day.
But I have to take into account that both elections were stolen. And with our way of goverment we have no way to fix the problem. At least we Americans think so. We can impeach but that would take a majority in power who agree with a majority of the citizens.
A lot of people say to me "what can we do about it?" I say just writing and talking about it is a start. It is an action. It causes a reaction. Some of the most creative thought in this nation right now is on this blog as well as others. We are thinking. We are discussing. And we are taking back our country. The White House knows we are out here.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 09:14 PM
Thanx, Jeanne. I overlooked the fact that under our non-parliamentary form of government, we can't get rid of a criminal and/or incompetent chief executive with a simple vote of no confidence, or call for elections early instead of having to wait another 2, 4, or 6 years to correct the mistakes.---IBW
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 29, 2005 09:20 PM
Jeanne: "The good reporters interview the citizens of Iraq. To do that the reporter has to gain the people's trust."
I thought a great example of this was Shadid's recent piece (which he actually wrote with another reporter) describing the disillusionment of the Iraqi soldiers as they tag along with their American masters. Shadid was able to use their whispered comments and even songs to tell how they really felt. It was a gloomy story that provided some badly needed truth to counter the rosy picture being painted by the U.S. military and the Busheviks. David even commented on the piece on this blog.
Gleaning those sorts of insights would have been impossible for a journalist who had to rely on an interpreter.
Shadid also probably benefits from looking more like an Iraqi than other American reporters. During a recent panel discussion, he mentioned how Americans were so easy to spot in Iraq. He said even their posture and manner of walking stood out (No doubt Bush, with his practiced arms-wide Texas swagger, wouldn't last 10 minutes in Baghdad).
Posted by: Drewp at October 29, 2005 09:29 PM
#252
Drewp
I don't think I've never read anything by him. I'm going to have to find some of his writings.
Thanks.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 29, 2005 11:16 PM
Tim Russert was interviewed on MSNBC. It was kind of interesting to read his thougths.
GOP week from hell ends with indictmentLook for a Բestartՠattempt in Bush administration next week
A couple of things caught my eye.
-------
...Now it will be quite interesting to see what happens with the Libby case. Will he try to take it to court? Will he seek a plea bargain? Many Republicans are obviously concerned that a trial of Scooter Libby, on this kind of information Ѡabout when he learned it and how he learned it and why he learned it Ѡcould, in effect, put the Iraq war on trial, as Mr. Libby could put the vice president on trial in a symbolic way, as much as Mr. Libby. And put the entire Bush administration on trial in a symbolic way....
So it looks like old Scooter is supposed to fall down and die. He probably did as he was told by Cheney and now he's got to take whats offered so things don't come out in a trial. Boy did he get taken to the cleaners.
Another thing.
---------
...Many Republicans said to me they had hoped they could avoid a trial. That thereդ be some kind of plea bargain, because theyղe concerned that if there is a trial, it would not only be an individual, but the Iraq war would be put on trial on the television sets across America for the next four or five months....
Again bad for old Scooter. Really bad for the country. We have the right to know what our President and his men and women have been doing.
----------------------
...Right, because you stare at the pump and you see that little dial going $35, $40 and you hear, "There's a world-wide shortage and refining is limited and costs have going up," and you say, "OK, fine." Then you see Exxon make a 78 percent increase in profit and you say, "Wait a minute!"
MSNBC: How can the administration deal with that?
Russert: It's painful. I think the president and the Republicans are going to have to step forward and start saying something publicly because they are going to be perceived as part of the problem -"In pocket with the oil companies."
I remember when John F. Kennedy took on the steel industry. It was a real high point of his presidency. If George W. Bush and the Republicans started taking on the oil industry, it would probably be pretty good politics....
----
But will they? No because they are tied to big business. They are tied to oil. They do not care. They care about their pockets full of money. The mentality now is get while the getting is good. That makes for a healthy nation doesn't it?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 12:17 AM
I just heard a good one on SNL: "According to a recent poll, 66% of Americans believe President Bush is doing a poor job in Iraq. The other 34% believe Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church."---IBW
Posted by: Ivory Bill Woodpecker at October 30, 2005 12:35 AM
Jeanne sez:
"Are you telling me that one of the most educated men in the White House is Bush? The guy can't tie his own shoes. OMG."
This is why there is a major rift growing in the GOP. Chimpy's REAL base (uneducated asswipes like Timmiee) feel that the country is being allowed to wither on the vine. They're the ones that agree with Church Lady Miers that Chimpy is a "genius." The "elitists" Reds are crabbing at the fact that Bush and his monkeybrained cronies (Rove, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, the soon-to-be boytoy Libby,
Bolton, Miers, Hughes) are ruining the conservative movement by letting this country turn to shit.
That's why they (the morons) call anyone who can speak clearly and persuasively "Elitist." That's just code for "educated." Their inability to think their way out of a wet paper bag is the reason that they've driven so many people into poverty and rewarded Big Oil with multi-Billion dollar tax breaks on top of record-breaking profits. A few weeks ago Timmiee said that Black folks haven't fared so well under Chimpy because they don't have the moral fiber to succeed in our society. When I pointed out data from the Census bureau (another one of those Liberal Web Sites that he crabs about) that showed that more whites than blacks have been driven into poverty since 2000, he swallowed his tongue. THAT's why I call 'em the Grand Ol' Lynching Party.
"Tim, Have Capt teach you how to link."
Yeah, and why don't we have Capt teach an elephant to fly while we're at it? Capt. could teach my six yr. old daughter to create hyperlinks. Timmiee is a dork of a different color.
Kathleen says:
"It is alarming how much time we spend talking about the details of the fabricated intelligence, that none of us are completely sure of.
I give credit to all individuals who are making the effort to discern the truth. Tim L (sic), Saladin, Jeanne, ALL.
"Although what I am most bothered by, is that while we are blogging, writing, calling our representatives, trying to figure this out. Real people are dying..thousands."
That is why the Fighting Dems are signing up to kick GOoPer ass in the next elections. They've been there and they have the credentials to say that we CAN do better as long as we DEMAND more from our Congressional Reps.
===+===
The rest of this is directed at the Bushbots, everyone else disregard and please accept my apologies for the length of the post.
Pandemoniac said:
"First off Timmiee, the difference between a (oops) conservative website and a liberal one is what? The opinions. There is no such thing as a liberal or reactionary fact."
Timmiee said:
"BOTH sides distort facts and take things out of context. Do you deny moveon.org does this with the Bush administration?"
Whether they distort facts or not, we must insist on facts to debate or else we wander into pointless conjecture like your namesake the edumacated Timmee does all the time. And there are no Reactionary facts and no Liberal facts. Facts are facts. The square root of 9 is 3; and George Washington was the first President of the U.S. whether you're Liberal or a moronic reactionary like murad.
Pandemoniac sez:
"Facts are facts. The factcheck site only says that what Chimpy said was accurate not true."
Timmiee, obviously buffaloed by my repeated use of big words sez:
"What!? Pandemoniac, you're much more reasonable that (sic) Capt. A lie KNOWINGLY making (sic) an untrue statement.
Okay....whatever. Maybe when you sober up you can give that statement a second life cause it didn't make sense.
Timmiee sez:
"If the intelligence SAID Iraq had WMDs, and Bush went off of that, that is NOT a lie."
The intel community did not hype the bullshit.
Actually one part of the CIA did hype the crap: WINPAC. Hmmm. Who was Chimpy's fixer at WINPAC? Aaaah, yes. Bolton. The Cheney administration hired Captain Kangaroo to feed them lies so that they could hype the war.
From another one of those Liberal Web Sites (the Senate Whitewash Committee's report):
"On December 17, 2002, WINPAC analysts produced a paper, U.S. Analysis of Iraq's Declaration, 7 December 2002. The paper reviewed Iraq's "Currently Accurate, Full and Complete Disclosure" to the UN of its WMD programs and made only two points regarding the nuclear program - one noted Iraq's failure to explain its procurement of aluminum tubes the IC assessed could be used in a nuclear program, and the other noted that the declaration "does not acknowledge efforts to procure uranium from Niger, one of the points addressed in the U.K. Dossier." An e-mail from the INR Iraq nuclear analyst to a DOE analyst on December 23, 2002 indicated that the analyst was surprised that INR's well known alternative views on both the aluminum tubes and the uranium information were not included in the points before they were transmitted to the NSC. The DOE analyst commented in an e-mail response to INR that,"it is most disturbing that WINPAC is essentially directing foreign policy in this matter. There are some very strong points to be made in respect to Iraq's arrogant non-compliance with UN sanctions. However, when individuals attempt to convert those 'strong statements" into the "knock out" punch, the Administration will ultimately look foolish - i.e. the tubes and Niger!'"
They knew it was bullshit before the state of the union address; but Bolton, Fleitz, Libby, WINPAC made sure that the world heard it.
I don't care if Chimpy knew it was bullshit or not. Either he's a liar or a mushroom. You seem content to argue that he was kept in the dark and fed bullshit for years. As the leader of our great nation, we deserve someone a little smarter. Who am I kidding? We deserve someone smarter than the common man. The Chimpster ain't it.
Pandemoniac sez:
"Chimpy cited the lies that the British White Paper put out about the Niger forgeries. Chimpy accurately cited the source of his lies."
Timmiee sez:
"I think you're getting confused. As factcheck.org pointed out, those Italian forged documents (not British) were NOT the basis for Bush's 16 words.
"No, Bush accurately cited the intelligence that was shown to him, which isn't lying. "
Exactly. That proves my point. Chimpy is the world's biggest bloomin' mushroom, kept in the dark and fed shit all day. That's the reason that everything he touches (Social Security, Schiavo, Katrina, Bolton, Miers, Iraq) turns to shit. He's too stoopid to handle the tough issues. Lying? Now, that's easy.
BUSH THE CANDIDATE PROMISED TO UPHOLD THE HONOR AND INTEGRITY AT THE WHITE HOUSE...
"I will swear to uphold the laws of the land. But I will also swear to uphold the honor and the integrity of the office to which I have been elected, so help me God," said then-Governor George Bush [CNN, "Inside Politics," 8/11/00]
"Americans are tired of investigations and scandal, and the best way to get rid of them is to elect a new president who will bring a new administration, who will restore honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Burden of Proof," 9/15/00]
"Americans want to be assured that the next administration will bring honor and dignity to the White House." [Then-Governor George Bush on CNN's "Capital Gang," 8/13/00]
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 30, 2005 01:08 AM
HOW HONEST ARE YOU CAPT?
HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU POSTED IN YOUR OWN WORDS OR SOMEONE ELSE'S IN THE LAST MONTH THAT ROVE WOULD BE INDITED ?
DID YOU LIE, ARE WERE YOU MIS-INFORMED?
I WOULD NOT DARE CALL YOU A LIAR, BUT IN THE SAME CIRCUMSTANCES YOU CALL BUSH A LIAR FOR THE SAME OFFENSE. I KNOW, "BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED", BUT IT IS THE SAME THING THEORETICALLY.
Posted by: Trebeloc at October 30, 2005 01:17 AM
Fitz came right out and said that most of the investigation was done, what does that mean? I have lost all faith in the powers that be to do the right thing, we are in big trouble but they are busy netting guppies.
Sal, you may be right. But what I'm thinking is... Fitz knows more than he'll let on, but maybe not enough quite yet to prove it. You put one (Libby) in the oven roasing (per Pande) for a while, and see what kind of juices drip out of him. Something to the effect..."See what Rove is doing to you Scooter. Don't take the fall for them bastards. How's 2 yrs in a medium-security golfclub community sound, and you give me first-hand testimony on ol' turdblossom?" Then you take one out of the oven (Libby), and put the fat one in. "What'd you say Karl? It was Cheney's idea and you want to deal? Speak into this microphone fat boy."
Am I dreaming a little? Yeah, but it could very well be his plan. He's known for the slow-cooking I hear, to get to the cream on top.
*crosses fingers*
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 01:17 AM
More pearls of wisdom for Timmiee:
This is the funniest thing that Timmiee has ever said:
"Bush was MISINFORMED, not lying. You obviously hate Bush so much, you can't see the difference."
Okay, you win. He is stoopid. To paraphrase Tommy Franks, he is the stupidest fucking moron on the face of the earth (apologies to Doug Feith). But read everything that I've written on this blog. I don't hate Chimpy. I think he's the worst president in the history of the world; but he is such a pitiable excuse of a human being that I can't hate the coward. For real. It's like hating a retarded clown because he can't juggle.
From Factcheck.org:
"None of the new information suggests Iraq ever nailed down a deal to buy uranium, and the Senate report makes clear that US intelligence analysts have come to doubt whether Iraq was even trying to buy the stuff. In fact, both the White House and the CIA long ago conceded that the 16 words shouldn�t have been part of Bush�s speech."
"But what he said � that Iraq sought uranium � is just what both British and US intelligence were telling him at the time. So Bush may indeed have been misinformed, but that's not the same as lying."
That's what I said. He accurately reported what the British White Paper said. But none of it was true.
But read the Butler report.
Page 59 paragraph 170 and 171:
170.
The JIC also noted that Iraq: . . . intended to use nuclear material held under IAEA safeguards in Iraq. The Iraqis claim the plan was abandoned because they concluded that the IAEA would detect their activities. In fact,they had insufficient fissile material to make a nuclear device. Hussein Kamil’s reported claim that,at the time of the Gulf conflict,Iraq was only three months from completing a nuclear weapon probably refers to the ‘crash programme’. It is very unlikely to be true.
[JIC, 24 August 1995]
171.
JIC assessments in the period after 1995 to the departure of the United Nations inspectors focussed on continuing IAEA activities, and on Iraq’s residual indigenous capabilities.... We have taken as a useful summary of Iraqi capabilities at that time a JIC assessment in February 1998 that: UNSCOM and the IAEA have succeeded in destroying or controlling the vast majority of Saddam’s 1991 weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capability.
[JIC, 4 February 1998]
The IAEA told UK intelligence (sic) that they had investigated the Iraqi delegation that visited Niger and knew that they weren't trying to get uranium. The British knew that the Niger documents were forged.
Page 124 of the Butler Report:
The investigation was centred on documents provided by a number of States that pointed to an agreement between Niger and Iraq for the sale of uranium to Iraq between 1999 and 2001....For its part,Iraq has provided the IAEA with a comprehensive explanation of its relations with Niger,and has described a visit by an Iraqi official to a number of African countries, including Niger, ....Based on thorough analysis, the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts,that these documents,which formed the basis for the reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger, are in fact not authentic. We have therefore concluded that these specific allegations are unfounded.
[IAEA GOV/INF/2003/10 Annex of 7 March 2003]
502. We have asked the IAEA what were their grounds for concluding that the visit paid by an Iraqi official to Africa was not for the purpose of acquiring uranium. The IAEA said: . . . the Director General explained in his report dated 7 March 2004 [sic] to the UN Security Council that Iraq ”described the visit by an Iraqi official to a number of African countries,including Niger.... The Director of Iraq’s National Monitoring Directorate responded in a letter of 7 February 2003 to the Director of the IAEA’s Iraq Nuclear Verification Office. .... According to the Iraqi information,no such presidential visit from Niger to Iraq took place before 2003. The Iraqi authorities provided the IAEA with excerpts from Mr. Al Zahawie’s travel report to Niger. These excerpts support the above explanation by the Ambassador regarding the purpose of his visit to Niger and do not contain any references to discussions about uranium supply from Niger. In order to further clarify the matter,the IAEA interviewed Mr. Al Zahawie on 12 February 2003. The information provided by the Ambassador about details about his 1999 trip to Africa also supported the information obtained previously by the
124
Agency on this visit. The demeanour of the Ambassador and the general tone of the interview did not suggest that he was under particular pressure to hide or fabricate information.
Funny. That's exactly what Joe Wilson said.
The IAEA knew it was bullshit. The British refused to believe the IAEA. All they had to do was present evidence to the IAEA (from all of the sources that you mentioned) to prove that Iraq was trying to buy Uranium. But they never have because they don't have any evidence. To this day, they haven't produced any evidence. It's all bullshit. And you reactionary fools fall for it every time.
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 30, 2005 01:20 AM
wow I read Sal's post and commented on it. Couldn't find where it was posted. Huh?
Then I scrolled up to see it was posted above hers at 259. Yikes! That's Capt's thing, the ESP. haha My 258 should be time-stamed 2:17 instead of 1.
That was weird.
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 01:35 AM
still more weird... Sal's post keep slipping down the line and new one's tucked in, in front of it. Is it just on my computer??? Cause now Pande's new post is 259. I'ma close this browser and come back again.
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 01:42 AM
Alan, funny how the time change has screwed up the order of the posts?!
More Fun with Timmiee (if his head hasn't melted down yet). Again, apologies for the length.
Timmiee sez:
"And the only reason you're calling it the Senate Whitewash report is because YOU didn't like the outcome of the invesitgation which has exonerated Bush. Now, how much you wanna bet if that report concluded Bush did intentionally mislead America, you would be all over it!?"
It couldn't come to that conclusion because that was left to phase II of the investigation. So when is the Grand Ol' Torturing Party gonna spark up phase II? And I call it the Whitewash Committee Report because it doesn't include relevant facts like the fact that the CIA deskjockey that accused Plame of recommending her husband to go to Niger wasn't even in on the meeting where she was alleged to have done just that. That's kinda important information.
Timmiee wonders:
"Was the Silberman/Robb WMD report a whitewash too??"
The Silberman-Robb Report blames the intel community for giving conflicting reports on WMD that gave the impression that it (WMD in Iraq) existed. This is total bulloney. The intel community tried to warn Chimpy that he was making a mistake; but the moron wouldn't listen:
SEPTEMBER 2001 – WHITE HOUSE CREATES OFFICE TO CIRCUMVENT INTEL AGENCIES: The Pentagon creates the Office of Special Plans "in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz and his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believed to be true-that Saddam Hussein had close ties to Al Qaeda, and that Iraq had an enormous arsenal of chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear weapons that threatened the region and, potentially, the United States…The rising influence of the Office of Special Plans was accompanied by a decline in the influence of the C.I.A. and the D.I.A. bringing about a crucial change of direction in the American intelligence community." The office, hand-picked by the Administration, specifically "cherry-picked intelligence that supported its pre-existing position and ignoring all the rest" while officials deliberately "bypassed the government's customary procedures for vetting intelligence." [Sources: New Yorker, 5/12/03; Atlantic Monthly, 1/04; New Yorker, 10/20/03]
2002: Intel Agencies Repeatedly Warn White House of Its Weak WMD Case
Throughout 2002, the CIA, DIA, Department of Energy and United Nations all warned the Bush Administration that its selective use of intelligence was painting a weak WMD case. Those warnings were repeatedly ignored.
JANUARY, 2002 – TENET DOES NOT MENTION IRAQ IN NUCLEAR THREAT REPORT: "In CIA Director George Tenet's January 2002 review of global weapons-technology proliferation, he did not even mention a nuclear threat from Iraq, though he did warn of one from North Korea." [Source: The New Republic, 6/30/03]
FEBRUARY 6, 2002 – CIA SAYS IRAQ HAS NOT PROVIDED WMD TO TERRORISTS: "The Central Intelligence Agency has no evidence that Iraq has engaged in terrorist operations against the United States in nearly a decade, and the agency is also convinced that President Saddam Hussein has not provided chemical or biological weapons to Al Qaeda or related terrorist groups, according to several American intelligence officials." [Source: NY Times, 2/6/02]
APRIL 15, 2002 – WOLFOWITZ ANGERED AT CIA FOR NOT UNDERMINING U.N. REPORT: After receiving a CIA report that concluded that Hans Blix had conducted inspections of Iraq's declared nuclear power plants "fully within the parameters he could operate" when Blix was head of the international agency responsible for these inspections prior to the Gulf War, a report indicated that "Wolfowitz ‘hit the ceiling’ because the CIA failed to provide sufficient ammunition to undermine Blix and, by association, the new U.N. weapons inspection program." [Source: W. Post, 4/15/02]
SUMMER, 2002 – CIA WARNINGS TO WHITE HOUSE EXPOSED: "In the late summer of 2002, Sen. Graham had requested from Tenet an analysis of the Iraqi threat. According to knowledgeable sources, he received a 25-page classified response reflecting the balanced view that had prevailed earlier among the intelligence agencies--noting, for example, that evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program or a link to Al Qaeda was inconclusive. Early that September, the committee also received the DIA's classified analysis, which reflected the same cautious assessments. But committee members became worried when, midway through the month, they received a new CIA analysis of the threat that highlighted the Bush administration's claims and consigned skepticism to footnotes." [Source: The New Republic, 6/30/03]
SEPTEMBER, 2002 – DIA TELLS WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS: "An unclassified excerpt of a 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency study on Iraq's chemical warfare program in which it stated that there is ‘no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons, or where Iraq has - or will - establish its chemical warfare agent production facilities.’" The report also said, "A substantial amount of Iraq's chemical warfare agents, precursors, munitions, and production equipment were destroyed between 1991 and 1998 as a result of Operation Desert Storm and UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission) actions." [Source: Carnegie Endowment for Peace, 6/13/03; DIA report, 2002]
SEPTEMBER 20, 2002 – DEPT. OF ENERGY TELLS WHITE HOUSE OF NUKE DOUBTS: "Doubts about the quality of some of the evidence that the United States is using to make its case that Iraq is trying to build a nuclear bomb emerged Thursday. While National Security Adviser Condi Rice stated on 9/8 that imported aluminum tubes ‘are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs’ a growing number of experts say that the administration has not presented convincing evidence that the tubes were intended for use in uranium enrichment rather than for artillery rocket tubes or other uses. Former U.N. weapons inspector David Albright said he found significant disagreement among scientists within the Department of Energy and other agencies about the certainty of the evidence." [Source: UPI, 9/20/02]
OCTOBER 2002 – CIA DIRECTLY WARNS WHITE HOUSE: "The CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials in Africa." [Source: Washington Post, 7/23/03]
OCTOBER 2002 — STATE DEPT. WARNS WHITE HOUSE ON NUKE CHARGES: The State Department’s Intelligence and Research Department dissented from the conclusion in the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s WMD capabilities that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. "The activities we have detected do not ... add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquiring nuclear weapons." INR accepted the judgment by Energy Department technical experts that aluminum tubes Iraq was seeking to acquire, which was the central basis for the conclusion that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, were ill-suited to build centrifuges for enriching uranium. [Source, Declassified Iraq NIE released 7/2003]
OCTOBER 2002 – AIR FORCE WARNS WHITE HOUSE: "The government organization most knowledgeable about the United States' UAV program -- the Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center -- had sharply disputed the notion that Iraq's UAVs were being designed as attack weapons" – a WMD claim President Bush used in his October 7 speech on Iraqi WMD, just three days before the congressional vote authorizing the president to use force. [Source: Washington Post, 9/26/03]
2003: WH Pressures Intel Agencies to Conform; Ignores More Warnings
Instead of listening to the repeated warnings from the intelligence community, intelligence officials say the White House instead pressured them to conform their reports to fit a pre-determined policy. Meanwhile, more evidence from international institutions poured in that the White House’s claims were not well-grounded.
LATE 2002-EARLY 2003 – CHENEY PRESSURES CIA TO CHANGE INTELLIGENCE: "Vice President Dick Cheney's repeated trips to CIA headquarters in the run-up to the war for unusual, face-to-face sessions with intelligence analysts poring over Iraqi data. The pressure on the intelligence community to document the administration's claims that the Iraqi regime had ties to al-Qaida and was pursuing a nuclear weapons capacity was ‘unremitting,’ said former CIA counterterrorism chief Vince Cannistraro, echoing several other intelligence veterans interviewed." Additionally, CIA officials "charged that the hard-liners in the Defense Department and vice president's office had 'pressured' agency analysts to paint a dire picture of Saddam's capabilities and intentions." [Sources: Dallas Morning News, 7/28/03; Newsweek, 7/28/03]
JANUARY, 2003 – STATE DEPT. INTEL BUREAU REITERATE WARNING TO POWELL: "The Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), the State Department's in-house analysis unit, and nuclear experts at the Department of Energy are understood to have explicitly warned Secretary of State Colin Powell during the preparation of his speech that the evidence was questionable. The Bureau reiterated to Mr. Powell during the preparation of his February speech that its analysts were not persuaded that the aluminum tubes the Administration was citing could be used in centrifuges to enrich uranium." [Source: Financial Times, 7/30/03]
FEBRUARY 14, 2003 – UN WARNS WHITE HOUSE THAT NO WMD HAVE BEEN FOUND: "In their third progress report since U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441 was passed in November, inspectors told the council they had not found any weapons of mass destruction." Weapons inspector Hans Blix told the U.N. Security Council they had been unable to find any WMD in Iraq and that more time was needed for inspections. [Source: CNN, 2/14/03]
FEBRUARY 15, 2003 – IAEA WARNS WHITE HOUSE NO NUCLEAR EVIDENCE: The head of the IAEA told the U.N. in February that "We have to date found no evidence of ongoing prohibited nuclear or nuclear-related activities in Iraq." The IAEA examined "2,000 pages of documents seized Jan. 16 from an Iraqi scientist's home -- evidence, the Americans said, that the Iraqi regime was hiding government documents in private homes. The documents, including some marked classified, appear to be the scientist's personal files." However, "the documents, which contained information about the use of laser technology to enrich uranium, refer to activities and sites known to the IAEA and do not change the agency's conclusions about Iraq's laser enrichment program." [Source: Wash. Post, 2/15/03]
FEBURARY 24, 2003 – CIA WARNS WHITE HOUSE ‘NO DIRECT EVIDENCE’ OF WMD: "A CIA report on proliferation released this week says the intelligence community has no ‘direct evidence’ that Iraq has succeeded in reconstituting its biological, chemical, nuclear or long-range missile programs in the two years since U.N. weapons inspectors left and U.S. planes bombed Iraqi facilities. ‘We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its Weapons of Mass Destruction programs,’ said the agency in its semi-annual report on proliferation activities." [NBC News, 2/24/03]
MARCH 7, 2003 – IAEA REITERATES TO WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF NUKES: IAEA Director Mohamed ElBaradei said nuclear experts have found "no indication" that Iraq has tried to import high-strength aluminum tubes or specialized ring magnets for centrifuge enrichment of uranium. For months, American officials had "cited Iraq's importation of these tubes as evidence that Mr. Hussein's scientists have been seeking to develop a nuclear capability." ElBaradei also noted said "the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that documents which formed the basis for the [President Bush’s assertion] of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger are in fact not authentic." When questioned about this on Meet the Press, Vice President Dick Cheney simply said "Mr. ElBaradei is, frankly, wrong." [Source: NY Times, 3/7/03: Meet the Press, 3/16/03]
MAY 30, 2003 – INTEL PROFESSIONALS ADMIT THEY WERE PRESSURED: "A growing number of U.S. national security professionals are accusing the Bush administration of slanting the facts and hijacking the $30 billion intelligence apparatus to justify its rush to war in Iraq . A key target is a four-person Pentagon team that reviewed material gathered by other intelligence outfits for any missed bits that might have tied Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to banned weapons or terrorist groups. This team, self-mockingly called the Cabal, 'cherry-picked the intelligence stream' in a bid to portray Iraq as an imminent threat, said Patrick Lang, a official at the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). The DIA was "exploited and abused and bypassed in the process of making the case for war in Iraq based on the presence of WMD," or weapons of mass destruction, he said. Greg Thielmann, an intelligence official in the State Department, said it appeared to him that intelligence had been shaped 'from the top down.'" [Reuters, 5/30/03 ]
JUNE 6, 2003 – INTELLIGENCE HISTORIAN SAYS INTEL WAS HYPED: "The CIA bowed to Bush administration pressure to hype the threat of Saddam Hussein's weapons programs ahead of the U.S.-led war in Iraq , a leading national security historian concluded in a detailed study of the spy agency's public pronouncements." [Reuters, 6/6/03]
This is the 2nd Funniest thing Timmiee has ever said:
"Bush did not know what he was saying was not true, so therefore, he did not lie. But if Bush is stupid, then I guess, France, Russia, Britain, Australia, China, Egypt and Jordan were stupid too, in believing Iraq had WMDs?"
Yes, they were stupid too. Saddam didn't have any weapons afterall, did he? Notice they weren't stupid enough to go to war over such skimpy evidence.
Pandemoniac sez:
"As for Clinton's statements about WMD, they were made before Ritter tried to finish his work. He was trying to keep the heat on Saddam so that the Iraq sanctions wouldn't get lifted."
Timmiee sez:
"Ah, but you are wrong! The Clinton administration did BELIEVE Iraq still had WMDs after 1998."
Ah, but I'm not wrong. I was referring to the quotes that you pasted that were made in 1998. And as I stated before, his statements were made to keep the sanctions in place "the Iraq thing." He's too smart for you morons. That article says exactly what I've noted all along. He argued for weapons inspections and sanctions to keep the pressure on and build an international coalition to deal with Saddam (like the coalition in Kosovo).
"Former US president Bill Clinton sharply criticised George W. Bush for the Iraq War and the handling of Hurricane Katrina, and voiced alarm at the swelling US budget deficit.
Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."
Timmiee pleads:
"No one died in Kosovo because Clinton was AGAINST taking necessary military action."
That is the 3rd Funniest thing you've said. Soldiers die only if you're for taking military action?! Huh-larry-us!
Timmiee shakes his head:
"Truth be known, if 9/11 happened on Clinton's watch, ..."
If Chimpy was in charge during WWII, we'd all be speaking German, driving Japanese cars (oof!), serving Italian masters. And Hitler would still be hiding out in his bunker partying with his girlfriend. How long ago was it that Chimpy lied about getting Osama dead or alive? What a chickenshit liar.
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 30, 2005 01:45 AM
Ivory Bill # 206, you surprise me.
Gerald #211, we are becoming no such thing. You must realize bushco is playing those people for the fools they are. They care no more about Christianity than sharon does about being Jewish. It's all a ploy designed to pull the wool over the sheeples eyes, and it works wonderfully.
Jeanne #214 Tim has been doing that for the year I've been here and I suspect longer, it's an annoyance tactic. If everyone would ignore them they will go away, they will never change their attitude anymore than we will, I don't know why they bother.
Capt, I'm afraid this whole Plame scenario will fizzle out. Fitz came right out and said that most of the investigation was done, what does that mean? I have lost all faith in the powers that be to do the right thing, we are in big trouble but they are busy netting guppies.
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 01:47 AM
More Fun with Timmiee (if his head hasn't melted down yet). Again, apologies for the length.
apologies, hell "Bring 'em on!" haha I love your posts.
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 01:48 AM
From Alternet
Endless sunset
Posted by Rachel Neumann at 1:03 PM on October 28, 2005.
While you were, ah, distracted, Congress was quietly renewing every major provision of the Patriot Act.
Most of the provisions of the USA Patriot Act, including access to library records, were supposed to "sunset" this month, five years after the law's passing. Instead, both the House and the Senate have already voted to renew the entire act, with only minor revisions. While they're at it, they'd like to add some decidedly unpatriotic amendments to expand the death penalty.
These new amendments would let prosecutors shop around for another jury if the one they have is deadlocked on the death penalty; triple the number of terrorism-related crimes eligible for the death penalty; and authorize the death penalty for a person who gives money to an organization whose members kill someone, even if the contributor did not know that the organization or its members were planning to kill.
--------------
So this is what they were up to. Oh yeh, the left and right are so different. But we got scooter, didn't we!
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 01:52 AM
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit Tuesday by a former FBI translator because the information needed to prove the case was classified and protected by what is known as the "state secrets privilege."
In the lawsuit, originally filed in July 2002, Sibel Edmonds alleged that her rights under the Privacy Act and her First and Fifth amendment rights had been violated by the government.
Edmonds, who worked as a contract linguist, claimed she was fired after she alerted authorities about purported security and management problems in the bureau's language branch.
The Justice Department and the FBI both argued to the court that her lawsuit should be dismissed because much of the information needed to be considered for it was protected by the "state secrets privilege," which is meant to protect classified national security information from being disclosed.
U.S. District Court Judge Reggie Walton agreed with the government's position.
--------------
This is the judge assigned to hear libby's case, maybe we don't even have him. Walton is a bush appointee.
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 01:57 AM
How wrong were they you say??
=========================
We dont know yet whether this will prove to be an indictable offense in a court of law, but for it, and for misleading a nation into war, they will be indicted in the high court of history. History will judge the invasion of Iraq one of the greatest foreign policy misadventures of all time.
But the mistakes were not limited to the decision to invade. They mounted, one upon another.
When they could have listened to General Shinseki and put in enough troops to maintain order, they chose not to. They were wrong. When they could have learned from George Herbert Walker Bush and built a genuine global coalition, they chose not to. They were wrong. When they could have implemented a detailed State Department plan for reconstructing post-Saddam Iraq, they chose not to. And they were wrong again. When they could have protected American forces by guarding Saddam Husseins ammo dumps where there were weapons of individual destruction, they exposed our young men and women to the ammo that now maims and kills them because they chose not to act. And they were wrong. When they could have imposed immediate order and structure in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam, Rumsfeld shrugged his shoulders, said Baghdad was safer than Washington, D.C. and chose not to act. He was wrong. When the Administration could have kept an Iraqi army selectively intact, they chose not to. They were wrong. When they could have kept an entire civil structure functioning to deliver basic services to Iraqi citizens, they chose not to. They were wrong. When they could have accepted the offers of the United Nations and individual countries to provide on the ground peacekeepers and reconstruction assistance, they chose not to. They were wrong. When they should have leveled with the American people that the insurgency had grown, they chose not to. Vice President Cheney even absurdly claimed that the insurgency was in its last throes. He was wrong.
read whole speech herehere
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 02:18 AM
Hellen Thomas/Bill Maher
He even asks her about Jeff Gannon.
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 02:41 AM
another good one... Olberman had John Dean on
John Dean:Libby is the firewall at the WH. Fitz is applying pressure to see it crumbles.
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 02:54 AM
*if
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 02:54 AM
Trebeloc
#157 - "Lack of Memory Defense" - reminds you of Clinton? How about the "I can't recall" excuse being a predominant theme of the Reagan years regarding Iran-Contra scandal? Clinton always triggers the "definition of is" arguments in my mind... you know the old technicalities excuse. Expect to see both of these a full steam from this WH admin. (At least Reagan admitted that Iran Contra was a mistake and people like Poindexter and Deaver were forced to resign before the indictments)
#114 help out the readers with what it takes for you to be satisified that a theory is proven... cite someone's economic or political theories that have been proven and why you considered it proven. It will help us all be the judge. (Not that I think Marx was proven right)
#158 / 160 -- what is your point... are you saying Fitzgerald is indicating that Cheney, Rove and even Libby are free from actual outing charges and that Fitzgerald is just going after a few minor technicalities?
I find it interesting that you embed the quote excerpt from Limbaugh's site but not the excerpt from media matters that you linked to in #158.
In the Limbaugh one, Fitzgerald is making a point that just because he says the equivalent of "no comment" on other people's testimony, etc. does not mean they are going to be charged. He never said that they won't be either... just explaining why he always says the equivalent of "no comment".
However, in the media matter's excerpt it says:
Fitzgerald repeatedly emphasized that neither Libby nor anyone else was charged with the actual "outing" of a covert CIA agent, but the allegations of perjury and obstruction of justice were "very serious charges." He said that "talking points" that downgrade the charges "won't fly."
When asked why he did not bring charges related to the original leak, he apologized for offering "a baseball analogy." ...
[analogy deleted... however I interpret his analogy to being that he seeking the motive behind the injury]
Asked about the Republican "talking points" that Libby was only indicted for "technicalities," Fitzgerald replied: "I'll be blunt. That talking point won't fly. If you're doing a national security investigation, if you're trying to find out who compromised the identity of a CIA officer and you go before a grand jury and if the charges are proven -- because remember there's a presumption of innocence -- but if it is proven that the chief of staff to the vice president went before a federal grand jury and lied under oath repeatedly and fabricated a story about how he learned this information, how he passed it on, and we prove obstruction of justice, perjury and false statements to the FBI--that is a very, very serious matter."
Reading this I would say that Fitzgerald considers the "talking points" of technicalities and not going after the leak outing indictment as rubbish.
As an investigating prosecutor he is either required to hold back info by law or by strategy. I see him giving a message to Libby and others this he will go after the truth even if one stonewalls and prevaricate. Kind of like, needing to spray WD40 on rusty bolts and bang on them before you can really see what's going on inside.... except in this case the other bolts being human watching and might give in easier.
Posted by: yelnats at October 30, 2005 05:11 AM
Trebeloc
#157 - "Lack of Memory Defense" - reminds you of Clinton? How about the "I can't recall" excuse being a predominant theme of the Reagan years regarding Iran-Contra scandal? Clinton always triggers the "definition of is" arguments in my mind... you know the old technicalities excuse. Expect to see both of these a full steam from this WH admin. (At least Reagan admitted that Iran Contra was a mistake and people like Poindexter and Deaver were forced to resign before the indictments)
#114 help out the readers with what it takes for you to be satisified that a theory is proven... cite someone's economic or political theories that have been proven and why you considered it proven. It will help us all be the judge. (Not that I think Marx was proven right)
#158 / 160 -- what is your point... are you saying Fitzgerald is indicating that Cheney, Rove and even Libby are free from actual outing charges and that Fitzgerald is just going after a few minor technicalities?
I find it interesting that you embed the quote excerpt from Limbaugh's site but not the excerpt from media matters that you linked to in #158.
In the Limbaugh one, Fitzgerald is making a point that just because he says the equivalent of "no comment" on other people's testimony, etc. does not mean they are going to be charged. He never said that they won't be either... just explaining why he always says the equivalent of "no comment".
However, in the media matter's excerpt it says:
Fitzgerald repeatedly emphasized that neither Libby nor anyone else was charged with the actual "outing" of a covert CIA agent, but the allegations of perjury and obstruction of justice were "very serious charges." He said that "talking points" that downgrade the charges "won't fly."
When asked why he did not bring charges related to the original leak, he apologized for offering "a baseball analogy." ...
[analogy deleted... however I interpret his analogy to being that he seeking the motive behind the injury]
Asked about the Republican "talking points" that Libby was only indicted for "technicalities," Fitzgerald replied: "I'll be blunt. That talking point won't fly. If you're doing a national security investigation, if you're trying to find out who compromised the identity of a CIA officer and you go before a grand jury and if the charges are proven -- because remember there's a presumption of innocence -- but if it is proven that the chief of staff to the vice president went before a federal grand jury and lied under oath repeatedly and fabricated a story about how he learned this information, how he passed it on, and we prove obstruction of justice, perjury and false statements to the FBI--that is a very, very serious matter."
Reading this I would say that Fitzgerald considers the "talking points" of technicalities and not going after the leak outing indictment as rubbish.
As an investigating prosecutor he is either required to hold back info by law or by strategy. I see him giving a message to Libby and others this he will go after the truth even if one stonewalls and prevaricate. Kind of like, needing to spray WD40 on rusty bolts and bang on them before you can really see what's going on inside.... except in this case the other bolts being human watching and might give in easier.
Posted by: yelnats at October 30, 2005 05:13 AM
"skimpy evidence"
I cannot help but think you really meant "Chimpy skimpy evidence" HA!
I am very glad to see the troll post caps or not.
The trolls remind us what the rabid Reich-wingnuts will never see the lies or tell the truth.
Bush never lied, he is the most brilliant man on the planet but it is everybody ELSE that WOULD have started his hobby war? See honest and smart. Not to mention his taking ownership of HIS actions. RIGHT?
See, Chimpy McFlightsuit was just doing what Clinton told him to do. Mission Accomplished.
It is just the SCLM that are trying to take him down because he is such a geat misleader.
"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."
"It was a cold, bright day in April and the clocks were striking thirteen." ~ George Orwell, "1984", first sentence
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 05:22 AM
I found the evidence in the indictment in regards to perjury (lying) and obstruction of justice to be pretty solid. Enough that any employer would demand a resignation or to put the person on leave without pay until the trial is over.
Additionally this evidence also indicates that Libby "ignored" Bush's request about wanting to know who was giving out Plame's name. Maybe Libby didn't "get the memo"? Which makes for an interesting situation where it is a crime to lie to the grand jury but not to the president of the US. Should we have more grand juries in order for the President and VP to get the truth from their staff or are they capable of doing it without their help? Anyway one would expect that these elected leaders to be livid that one of their top officials has lied to the grand jury, and even has lied to them since this perjury evidence is the same evidence that identifies Libby as one of those in the WH admin who "leaked" info to reporters about Plame (and one would suppose that "leaking" without the Pres or VP's knowledge or permission is bad thing, after all Bush said he wanted to know who did it and fire them).
So I find it interesting that VP Cheney's statement said nothing about the seriousness of these charges both ethically and for national security. Instead Cheney focused only on "deeply regretting" that the "capable and talented" Libby had to resign and deal with these charges. This exemplifies a WH Admin that has become incapable of discerning and maintaining "high standards of integrity in governing"; they have diverted badly from the unbroken track record held since the Grant Admininstration that WH officials have been forced to resign prior to their indictments.
Instead they hand that discernment capability over to grand juries and prosecutors and then that is only done when enough legislative leaders have applied enough public pressure to make such discipline happen. The WH Admin has stated that they can't take action until the case has made its way through trial.
Or possibly they are capable of handling such judgment but instead have found it beneficial to stonewall and evade such responsibility.
Posted by: yelnats at October 30, 2005 06:17 AM
This administration stonewall?
HA!
Yeah baby, oh behave (Austin Powers voice). They are stonewallers no doubt! If they would just admit it they would be less conflicted and more popular.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 06:57 AM
Libby's lying could reasonably be interpreted to mean that he thought he had committed a crime in the disclosure, could it not? An Espionage Act charge could have been sold to a jury, as well as one of suborning Miller to perjury.
Posted by: bob h at October 30, 2005 07:23 AM
The facts on the ground and grounded in reality are looking grim for the neocons. The world is watching and every other country and nearly seventy percent of Americans know that the Bush presidency is on shaky ground as top aide charged and the one guy that sounds honest says Valerie Wilson Was "Classified" CIA Agent!
That is why Some experts say case seems strong and the Charges invite reopening debate over going to war.
The hubris and The False Moral Superiority of the Bush White House has the Prosecutor and the White House at Odds Over Libby and contrary to the shrill lies this brings a laser like Focus on Cheney's Powerful Role and his involvement because it was his Chief of Staff and even though it is a Cheney administration, this week Bush got whacked for just being Bush.
Nice to know where we are headed as the great success and legacy from the ex-governor has Texas Leading Nation in Household Hunger so we all have some catching up if we want to compete for that prized slot. More bad news in the south as Military's support of war in Iraq falls in N.C. and the hits keep coming so we might get another 24 hour news cycle out of the deal because the Case is not closed on Cheney's role and the whole thing begs to question Who Talked? It Wasn't the Special Prosecutor. The point being a US attorney and his staff are better at keeping a secret than this White House?
For those that are interested some interesting facts by the numbers but Don't lose sight of where the deceit led. It is no mere technicality to manipulate the country into a mistaken war. what crime could compare to the horror of war? And the poppycock about how everybody else would have gone and Bush had no clue the intelligence was dead wrong even the Italian leader says he warned U.S. on war so add more lies on the lies including those about Restoration.
Talk about needing to scrub down the White House with some disinfectant it will probably take hazmat teams a few months just to wash off the slime.
Nobody is kidding anybody here. This is not about Libby, not even about Plame. The buck stops at the head guy. Remember ownership, responsibility, ethics, character, honesty, values. . . Oh nevermind. When was the last time we had any of those things on the hill.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 07:47 AM
Special report: Bush faces his Watergate
Sleaze, leaks and an indictment add up to the worst presidential crisis since Nixon. And it will get worse. The White House has lost one key man but the whole chain of command may be engulfed by a scandal slowly revealing the lies that led to war.
By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
Published: 30 October 2005
It might not appear that way at first. Mr Bush is unlikely to have to join Richard Nixon, the only president in US history forced to resign from office. But the issues raised by "Plamegate" - the leaking of the identity of Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA agent - are far more significant than those involved in the "second-rate burglary" of the Democratic National Committee's offices in Washington's Watergate complex in the 1970s. They go to the heart of why America, and its faithful ally, Britain, went to war in Iraq.
The administration and its friends have done their best to portray the Plamegate affair as an obscure, "inside the Beltway" scandal, of interest only to Washington obsessives and conspiracy theorists. On Thursday evening, as the whole of Washington speculated over his position, Mr Rove did his best to reinforce that view.
Earlier in the week, the President had already suffered one humiliating setback when he was forced to accept the withdrawal of his nomination for the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, after a fierce campaign from right-wing members of his own party.
If one believes that the government of George Bush - actively assisted by that of Tony Blair - conspired to make a fraudulent case for the invasion of Iraq, then it is possible to see this week's events as nothing less the first fallout for the administration of their attempt to cover-up what they did.
Remember, no one knew where it would all lead when, on June 17 1972, five men appeared for a preliminary hearing at a Washington court charged over a break-in at the Democratic party national headquarters at the Watergate complex.
*****end of clip*****
A third rate burglary versus a first rate lie?
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 08:28 AM
murad, I do have a clue. there are many clues - the 2nd clue is the laws of physics - the WTC was 110 stories tall and they both collapsed into their own footprint in 10 seconds. that's less than a tenth of a second per floor. NIST with
their phony pancake theory would have us believe that each floor dropped onto the one below it, and that the impact of each floor successively weakened the one below - like FALL, SLAM...FALL, SLAM...all the way down - but there was no resistance whatsoever - one can't even SAY it that fast - try it... say FALL,SLAM...FALL,SLAM
110 times - it takes a lot longer than 10 seconds!
but that was only the 2nd clue - the 1st clue was the fact that when the "757" struck the pentagon, photos and videos were taken immediately. there was NO wreckage of a 757 anywhere. in fact, the face of the building didn't collapse until quite some time after the impact, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the govt. deceived us when they said flight77 was the culprit. I'm sure that even you must admit that there was NO 757 at the pentagon. - and if they would lie about that, why wouldn't they lie about all of it? -
to me, the only thing scarier than the fact that our govt. would do something like that is the fact that ALL OF THE McMEDIA ARE PERPETUATING THE COVER UP TO THIS DAY -
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 08:46 AM
I am sure they really meant all of the non-lies that took us to war because if nobody knew they were lying then they did not lie.
Just like: If you do not know it is illegal then it is not a crime? If you did not know intercourse could lead to pregnancy then it is not your kid? You did not know the gun was loaded so you really did not kill the guy you shot?
The insipid garrulous diatribes from the troll remind me of a "New Yorker" cartoon where a cop standing next to an auto accident and writing something down , the caption says: "But officer there was no signal for what I was going to do!"
The trolls have convinced me that they are by far the minority because they are in the last 35% +/- of Americans that support Chimpy Mc Flightsuit. They have convinced me they will still be there if the numbers were in the 20's maybe even the teens! They hate the truth. Like holy water on a demon the truth wounds them.
"The truth that makes men free is for the most part the truth which men prefer not to hear. " ~ Herbert Agar
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 08:47 AM
James Ha,
I heard IT WAS ALIENS THAT ATTACKED US. There was a spaceship right above the twin towers and it sent a lightning bolt down trough the building. And then they went after all the capitals of the world. Fortunately, the president went to the area 51 where they had an alien ship that crashed 40 years ago and then got it to work and implanted a virus in the alien ship and saved us all. Wew! That was a close one.
I want answers. Now! Unfortunately, our McMedia won't cover this.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 09:02 AM
I'm watching This Morning with George S. The Republican senator on the show has a news flash for us. It's all Libby's fault. Cheney is a saint. What a crock. Please do not expect the American public to believe that crap. We are smarter than you freaking spin.
George S is nailing the yes man to the President. Go George S. Go.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 09:06 AM
ArtJunky, just look at the photos and videos - there was NO WRECKAGE OF A 757 AT THE PENTAGON. changing the subject to aliens and ridiculing me does not change the facts.
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 09:15 AM
No, I'm serious, it was aliens
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 09:16 AM
Libbey, Rove and Cheney are all Aliens who are working on the inside. They got this idiot elected because they knew he would go along with whatever they said he should do.
These aliens are very smart. Wish we could expose them but this McMedia won't cover it.
No, I wasn't ridiculing you.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 09:22 AM
I'm told by fiends, I mean friends, that the Iraqi prisoner who was draped in electrical wires and a black cape is the top new Halloween costume for this season.
If you think these are in bad taste, let me respectfully point out that there is no worse taste than a people who accept obvious lies as an excuse to kill people and rob them, who ignore the mass murder of 3,000 of their own countrymen without even a decent investigation, and who are too afraid to even say to their own leaders, "Just tell the truth."
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 09:30 AM
I wonder why the aliens haven't acted to create another "alien invasion." It seems that right now would be a critical time to create a diversion. After all, their earthling puppet is in extreme jeopardy right now and it seems that they would want to pump him up with some sort of "terrorist attack" in order to regain power.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 09:37 AM
Aliens are as believable a scenario as Osama in a cave with a cell phone!
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 09:40 AM
Burn! *dances around effigy*
Posted by: solid at October 30, 2005 09:43 AM
if there was a "terrorist attack" on U.S. soil in 2008, then bush could suspend the presidential election and remain president indefinitely -
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 09:45 AM
Look Who's Suddenly Insisting On The Presumption Of Innocence And The Right To A Fair Trial
By Dave Lindorff
10-29-5
"In our system," he said, "each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to due process and a fair trial."
Sure. That's what will happen with Scooter, and with Karl Rove if he gets indicted when the other shoe drops.
But what about Jose Padilla? This U.S. citizen, picked up at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport back in 2001, has been held in a military brig without charge, without access to an attorney, and in solitary confinement without any contact with family members for four years because President Bush has claimed the right, on his sole authority, to declare any American citizen to be an "enemy combatant" and to revoke their Constitutional rights and rights of citizenship.
No formal charges have been filed against Padilla. Instead, the Justice Department has just made unsupported statements claiming first that he was planning to build and detonate a dirty-nuke bomb, then dropping that and claiming that he planned to blow up gas lines in apartment buildings. Since Padilla is unable to contest these charges--or really even to know what the charges are or who has been testifying against him--no one can know their veracity.
In this case there is presumption of guilt, no due process, and no trial whatsoever.
*****end of clip*****
"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others." ~ George Orwell, "Animal Farm"
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 09:45 AM
Alan, I understand that the wheels of justice tend to grind torturously slow, but I can't help but feel frustrated by the lack of progress, mainly because people are dying every single day, the middle east is being turned into a radioactive hellhole and Israel keeps screaming for more war at our expense while Fitzgerald rounds up one or two for PERJURY? How many more countries will those psychos destroy before someone figures out that it was all a lie? How long before Russia and China get fed up with us and step in? Does anyone want war with countries that actually HAVE WMD's? Normally we would have the luxury of time, we don't now. Time is running out. 3 more years of bushco will be economic ruin for us, and no one who comes after will be able to fix it.
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 09:50 AM
guess who got the contract to haul away the steel from the WTC? - Controlled Demolition Inc. -
guess what their slogan/selling point at that time was? -"our DREXS(tm) systems segment steel components into pieces matching the lifting capacity of the available equipment."
what a coincidence that the steel from the WTC collapsed into convenient sections just long enough to be loaded onto trucks. only a few pieces of steel out of thousands of segments had to be cut with a torch, and it took hours to make each cut with a special steel cutting torch. and yet jet fuel which is nothing more than kerosene supposedly was hot enough to melt them?
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 09:57 AM
James, the only metal that kerosene can't melt is the kind they use to make kerosene heaters!
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 10:08 AM
David Corn:
I think you should pursue this in your reporting on Traitorgate: Bush has repeatedly said that he will not comment on an "ongoing investigation." He has given the false impression that he is restricted from doing so by law.
Fitzgerald pointed out that there is no law that prevents a witness before the grand jury to discuss his/her testimony. Therefore, Bush (and Cheney, too) should be hounded on the fact that they could have long ago determined WHO exposed Valerie Plame and OUSTED him/her/them from the WH staff. They both chose not to do that. They are aiding and abetting.
Bush needs to be asked -- for as long as it takes -- why he has done nothing to fulfill his "promise" to take action on this outrageous national security offense. Bush is playing fast and loose with our national security in a "time of war."
Posted by: micki at October 30, 2005 10:22 AM
sal I have a kerosene heater and burning kerosene won't even melt a soda pop can - I tried it in a wheelbarrow - in fact it would barely burn the paint off the wheelbarrow - ha - oh well, bush never lied though I guess so everything must be fine and dandy! - did you see that they're going to cut the food stamp budget? 12% of american households are unable to afford food and rely on foodstamps - yet Israel gets billions in aid every year and they're not required to pay it back! -
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 10:25 AM
micki, when plame was outed, bush sed "whoever was involved in this, they will be taken care of"
that probably means they will get a medal of freedom and a fat bonus -
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 10:30 AM
BROOKS: WHY ARE DEMS SO OVERHEATED?
Sat Oct 29 2005 17:15:12 ET
Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald did not find evidence to prove that there was a "broad conspiracy to out a covert agent for political gain. He did not find evidence of wide-ranging criminal behavior. He did not even indict the media's ordained villain, Karl Rove," writes David Brooks in Sunday's NY TIMES.
"Leading Democratic politicians filled the air with grand conspiracy theories that would be at home in the John Birch Society."
"Why are these people so compulsively overheated?.. Why do they have to slather on wild, unsupported charges that do little more than make them look unhinged?
Brooks quotes from an essay written 40 years ago by Richard Hofstadter called "The Paranoid Style in American Politics."
Hofstadter argued that sometimes people who are dispossessed, who feel their country has been taken away from them and their kind, develop an angry, suspicious and conspiratorial frame of mind. It is never enough to believe their opponents have committed honest mistakes or have legitimate purposes; they insist on believing in malicious conspiracies.
"The paranoid spokesman," Hofstadter wrote, "sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms -- he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization." Because his opponents are so evil, the conspiracy monger is never content with anything but their total destruction."
Brooks summarizes: "So some Democrats were not content with Libby's indictment, but had to stretch, distort and exaggerate. The tragic thing is that at the exact moment when the Republican Party is staggering under the weight of its own mistakes, the Democratic Party's loudest voices are in the grip of passions that render them untrustworthy."
Posted by: murad at October 30, 2005 10:31 AM
Aiding and Abetting/Accessory
BUSH, CHENEY ACTIONS FIT THE CRIME
A criminal charge of aiding and abetting or accessory can usually be brought against anyone who helps in the commission of a crime, though legal distinctions vary by state. A person charged with aiding and abetting or accessory is usually not present when the crime itself is committed, but he or she has knowledge of the crime before or after the fact, and may assist in its commission through advice, actions, or financial support. Depending on the degree of involvement, the offender's participation in the crime may rise to the level of conspiracy.
Posted by: micki at October 30, 2005 10:32 AM
FITZGERALD INVOLVED IN FLIGHT 800 COVER-UP
Posted By: Ponter
Saturday, 29 October 2005
Greetings:
People who are awakening to the illusion that is all about us:
Peter Lance's investigation of the facts has turned up that prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald knew firsthand of intel provided by an informant, Gregory Scarpa Jr, that one named Yousef was planning an attack on an airplane because he wanted a mistrial in his court case for his involvement on the first WTC attack.
(***SNIP***)
http://www.readersread.com/features/peterlance.htm
Go to http://www.peterlance.com and click #FBI #302s. Then click on the one for 3/7/96 and youll find an internal FBI memo showing that Snell and two other senior Department of Justice officials (Valerie Caproni, chief of the criminal division for the EDNY (Eastern District of New York) and Patrick Fitzgerald, head of terrorism and organized crime in the SDNY (Southern District of New York) knew of the intelligence coming from Yousef, in the spring of 1996.
*****end of clip*****
Well, well. This is bad news, very bad news.
If true, are we seeing a bit more kabuki theater where Fitzgerald plays the part of the honest and honorable man in a quixotic quest for the ever elusive truth monster?
It sure would be a convenient preemptive strike to defend him from the expected onslaught from angry citizens when no other indictments are handed out?
(very bad news for us crazy conspiracy types)
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 10:32 AM
Israel has the goods on bushco, they will say frog and bush will jump after asking "how high?" Maybe Exxon will pitch in some money for hungry people, I guess it will come down to food or gas to get to work so you can afford more gas to get to work. YUP, everything's just fine and dandy in the good ole USofA! Just ask the DOT!
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 10:33 AM
Israel has the goods on bushco, they will say frog and bush will jump after asking "how high?" Maybe Exxon will pitch in some money for hungry people, I guess it will come down to food or gas to get to work so you can afford more gas to get to work. YUP, everything's just fine and dandy in the good ole USofA! Just ask the DOT!
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 10:33 AM
capt.- 300 -
"If true, are we seeing a bit more kabuki theater where Fitzgerald plays the part of the honest and honorable man in a quixotic quest for the ever elusive truth monster? "
that's pretty much what john kerry did in the last selection isn't it?
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 10:47 AM
Yep, or worse.
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 11:25 AM
Paradox
Louis Tice of the Pacific Institute in Seattle, Washington offers a paradox, "You give up control in order to be in control." Confident leaders do not have to rule by controlling and punitive threats. He also discusses Erickson's book, "Eight Stages of Human Development" regarding leadership. Leadership starts at the top with basic trust. A dishonest leader cannot be an effective leader. Controlling and punitive threats will have consequences and there will be a backlash against such a leader. People will subtly undermine the leader and in the end the leader is not in control and he or she remains in a constant state of fear. A fearful leader is an unstable leader. Good examples of fearful and unstable leaders are Napoleon and Hitler. We must be vigilant of such leaders, be it in the United States or in the world.
Please pay careful attention to Bush's behavior. You do not have to be a licensed psychiatrist or a Ph.D. psychologist to know that Bush is a very sick person. His increased temper tantrums, his abusive language, his flying all over the country, and his apparent alcoholism and drug intake are signs that Bush is losing it. We have in the WH a very unstable beast that could snap at any minute. We must never forget this psycho's depraved indifference in the murdering of human beings. Pray hard for this demented and deranged amoeba!
Basic Trust
I have shared with you some information regarding a paradox. I will now stress the importance of basic trust in the eight stages of human development. The Bush misadministration has been a very secretive cabal because Bush does not possess basic trust which should have been instilled in his formative years. He and his brothers have nicknamed their mother, "Nutcracker." This nickname should be quite revealing to you. Everything the misadministration does is done in secret. Some secrecy in government is necessary but with Bush it is an obsession of a sick person.
The eighth stage and the last stage is integrity. Integrity is reached about the age of forty-five. For a person to reach integrity everything starts with basic trust. You pass through the various stages. In Bush's life age forty-five is about the time he found God and said that he would not be a drunk. A dozen years later he becomes president through fraud and rigged elections. Bush is a nutcase but more seriously he displays a depraved indifference toward living human beings. It is my perceptual opinion that Bush is close to becoming an insane person. He is too sick to lead a democracy. He will do all in his power to bring down American democracy. Everything that he touches becomes demented and deranged. You see as Americans the unraveling of insane policies from an insane or close to insane person.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 11:35 AM
Capt, I have read other reports about Fitzy that have given me pause. I know people want to believe in and hope for the best, that there really is a superman that will save the day. I just can't feel that anymore. After two stolen elections and the opposition party that sits on their hands doing nothing I hope for the best but expect the worst. The past 5 years have done that to me. I figure if something good comes I will be pleasantly surprised rather than feeling confident and getting slapped down once again. I guess I am a glass half empty person where politics are concerned, but I never used to be.
Posted by: Saladin at October 30, 2005 11:44 AM
Dear Mr. Corn, thank you for the email of an anti-war ad. I have added this ad to my computer benchmark.
Cornposters and patriotic journalists, we must be vigilant in watching our demented and deranged emperor. We must take back America from insanity and an insane emperor.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 11:50 AM
"A dishonest leader cannot be an effective leader."
I disagree... a dishonest leader can be an excellent leader... of criminals.
^^^^^^^^^^6
The War on Terror is code for belligerent interference in the Middle East. It is also code for the suppression of dissent in America.
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 11:50 AM
I watched MTP this morning. Duberstein of Reagan's administration, Hamilton Jordan of Carter's administration and Panetta of Clinton's administration were on. They all agreed there needed to be a clean up in the White House. Bring in new people outside the scandal. They also said that Bush needed to apologize to the American people. They all agreed he could come back from the problems.
I disagree.
1. I think Pande's description of Bush is about as accurate as I have ever seen. He is a mushroom. He needs people he can trust. In his case that means people who will keep him in the dark and feed him shit. Bringing in new people will mean finding people who will keep him in the dark and feed him shit. And how will that solve anything?
Maybe he’ll turn over a new leaf and will want to know about what’s going on in the world. Maybe he’ll become engaged. Maybe pigs will dance the Salsa and toads will sing opera. And maybe I’ll win the power ball.
2. Apologizing to the American people will be suicide if he doesn't come completely clean. And how does he do that?
If he apologizes for the Libby indictment, what happens when the trial starts and the fact that Cheney was lying and Rove was lying comes out. What does he do, keep apologizing when every new dogpile lands on the white house lawn? (It's already out anyway and will continue to come out. The reporters are on the story like a Pitt Bull on a t-bone steak.) And then of course the issues with the forged documents will continue to come out here and in Italy. What a nightmare for poor George. Berlusconi now says he didn’t even want to go to war. Oh man has he pissed off the Italian public. Scary.
Italian PM Says He Warned Bush against Iraq War
3. To make a success of this White House is impossible. George Bush is not a leader. He's a showman. He's a rich kid who wants to play commander in chief. It takes real leadership to be president. It takes extraordinary leadership to come back from this mess.
Look at it this way. What has Jimmy Carter done for his country since he left office? What has Bill Clinton done? They both continue to be of service. They are both highly educated, thoughtful, compassionate people who really do try to find the best solutions.
When Bush leaves office (by impeachment I hope) he will go back to his ranch in Crawford Texas and he's going to get on his bike and ride his bike until he falls down and dies. Nobody is going to go to him for advice. Why would they? He's a mushroom.
This presidency is doomed and a strategy needs to be put in place to get the country on the right track despite the bozo brigade in the White House and Congress.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 11:52 AM
It is also code for the suppression of dissent in America, something dear to the kind of people with which Bush surrounds himself, people who lie, cheat, and profit from billions of dollars being squandered. And all this crashes over us as a result of what the intelligence community calls blowback from bad policies and neglect of years ago.
bushspeak: dark and garbled words
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 11:58 AM
How much did you earn last quarter? If you are Exxon Mobil Corp you earned 10 billion. If you want to see the picture of a smug corporate thief go to the link.
----------
Your Misery is OUR Gain! - Over inflated Gas Prices mystery solved!!
Largest publicly traded oil company earns nearly $10 billion in third quarter, with rival posting $9 billion.
By Steve quinn, Donna McWilliam
Lee Raymond is chairman and CEO of Exxon Mobil Corp., which earned nearly $10 billion in the third quarter.
DALLAS -- Exxon Mobil Corp. rewrote the corporate record books Thursday as the oil companyճ third-quarter earnings soared to almost $10 billion and it became the first public company ever with quarterly sales topping $100 billion. Anglo-Dutch competitor Royal Dutch Shell PLC wasnմ far behind, posting a profit of $9 billion for the quarter
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 12:01 PM
The American government treats Americans like mushrooms. The government keeps us in the dark and feeds us shit.
For our government officials please do not piss on my leg and tell me that it is raining.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 12:03 PM
Actually pigs probably can dance the Salsa. I'm sure Lee Raymond will end up at the next big Bush feed.
Bush's solution to the gouging?
...Those results led Democrats in Congress to demand a new windfall profits tax. "Big oil behemoths are making out like bandits, while the average American family is getting killed by high gas prices, and soon-to-be record heating oil prices," Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in a statement.
But Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said President Bush opposes such a move and is instead considering a wide range of proposals to help cushion consumers, including the creation of an emergency reserve of gasoline and other refined products....
------
Oh yeah, he's looking for ways to get back in the good graces of the American people. Keep giving into to oil.
-------
...To put its performance into perspective, Exxonճ revenue for the three-month period was greater than the annual gross domestic product of some of the largest oil-producing nations, including the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait -- even though it lost considerable production because of a string of hurricanes that battered the U.S. Gulf coast.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 12:07 PM
#312
Good point Gerald.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 12:09 PM
Its all part of a classified military exercise slated to begin November 1, an exercise that, with the inclusion of North Korea and a terrorist attack in the United States, suggests up-to-the-minute relevance. In truth, though, the exercise replays the same tired Cold War global nuclear war game that has been the bread and butter of the U.S. military for decades.
excerpt from: VIGILANT WARRIOR: will terror 'drill' go live?
^^^^^^^^^^6
we all know what happened during 2 previous 'terror drills'-- one was 911, and one was london 7/7
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 12:12 PM
SNL had a funny skit on Hariet Miers.
Harriet Miers Speaks
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 12:13 PM
Thank you for thoroughly kicking Byron's snide, nerdy ass this morning.
These wingnuts are being forced to make so many concessions to save their own credibility right now- accepting some criticisms, distracting from others, a little off-message which leads to off-topic in most cases, and when faced with someone like David they collapse in a heap. There is no defense, and they say "of course, but..." Just laughable. We should all just agree that Dem talking point #1 (in the face of this argument) must be: "Sand in the eyes of the umpire."
Listening to these kooks debate with someone like David is pure joy for me. Thank you for what you do, David. And great book.
Posted by: Televangefrist at October 30, 2005 12:54 PM
See, the economy IS rolling for the oil companies. Now we need to give tham a bigger tax cut because they have had such huge profits they are really paying more taxes.
Record setting staggering profits as they cut food stamps to 300,000 people (mostly children) to cover the costs of the tax cuts.
What a country, eh?
capt
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 01:24 PM
Must be a small echo in here! HA!
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 01:29 PM
Don't you just love corporate welfare? They're always the ones holding out their hands. More! More! More!
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 02:10 PM
It amazes me how this administration and its minions can be so blatantly anti Muslim. I know the American people are tolerant of such behavior. It doesn't affect average American and the average American is clueless about anything that isn't white and Christian. But cases like the one below are so public. How do we look to the rest of the world? These are examples of just how insular and uncompassionate this administration really is.
NY Civil Liberties Union: U.S. Made "Inappropriate" Allegations of Terrorism Before Sentencing Iraqi-American Doctor Rafil Dhafir to Prison
BARRIE GEWANTER: Well, that's what is really interesting about this. There are American companies that, throughout the sanctions, violated the sanctions, and American C.E.O.'s who made the decision to do so, and activist organizations like Voices in the Wilderness, that is not identified as a Muslim organization, and yet those companies and that organization, the government employees --
AMY GOODMAN: Voices in the Wilderness, of course, a humanitarian group founded by Kathy Kelly, who repeatedly went to Iraq.
BARRIE GEWANTER: Exactly. And we have some people from the Syracuse area that went with Voices in the Wilderness to Iraq. Those individuals and the organization Voices in the Wilderness never got criminal charges filed against them. Instead, the government imposed only fines. Our perception is that the only people that get criminal charges filed against them tend to be Muslims and Arabs. That raises questions about selective enforcement....
...AMY GOODMAN: Two years on the sentence of 22 years in jail. In this last minute, looking at the final Volcker report, looking at Turkey and Jordan, the U.S. corporations like Volvo and DaimlerChrysler, and putting Dr. Dhafir into this.
DENIS HALLIDAY: Well, the impression one gets is the U.S. government is going after the weak and those who canմ defend themselves, although in this case there seems to be more than perhaps meets the eye. It's more than sanctions breaking, which as you rightly said, Voices in the Wilderness has done. I think this report we have now, which is supposed to be final report, actually raises questions, some of which may be answered by congressional committees, which are looking into some of the improprieties under the Bremer period and other occupation activities and diversion of monies to Halliburton and Halliburton ripping off the Pentagon, for example. Some of this will continue. Whether Volcker will continue, although he perhaps should, having raised questions and no answers, that remains to be seen.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 02:26 PM
All the way to the top, baby
Let me be the first to wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. May your season and new year be a happy and a safe one!
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 02:34 PM
happy valentines day everyone!
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 02:51 PM
# 239 DREWP
# 241 JEANNE...HAVE YOU EVER CONSIDERED THAT PEOPLE MAY TYPE IN CAPS BECAUSE CAPS ARE EASIER TO READ. THAT FOLKS MAY BE OLDER, THEIR SIGHT MAY BE FAILING? NO YOU BOTH NEED TO CRITICIZE PEOPLE, NOT FOR THEIR CONCLUSIONS, BUT FOR THE CAPS. HOW SUPERFICIAL.
#SALADIN.....I THOUGHT ONE OF MOST CRITICAL POINTS THAT FITZGERALD MADE DURING THE PRESS CONFERENCE. IS THAT THIS INVESTIGATION WOULD NOT AND COULD NOT TAKE THE PLACE OF CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS OF THE PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE.
THIS IS WHY I CONTINUE TO REPEAT THAT WE NEED TO PUSH, SCREAM, TYPE IN CAPS, CALL, E-MAIL, VISIT OUR REPRESENTATIVES DEMANDING THAT PHASE II OF THE SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE BE IMPLEMENTED...IMMEDIATELY.
ALSO CONTACT CHAIR OF THAT COMMITTEE SENATOR PAT ROBERTS (R) FROM KANSAS, AND THE CO-CHAIR SENATOR ROCKERFELLER (D) FROM WEST VIRGINIA. THIS COMMITTEE WOULD INVESTIGATE THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS AND THE WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP. BOTH OF THESE GROUPS WERE OFF LIMITS TO THE PREVIOUS PRE-WAR INVESTIGATIONS.
YOU CAN ALSO DO YOUR PART IN SUPPORTING THE RESOLUTION OF INQUIRY THAT CONGRESSMAN KUCINICH IS PUSHING FOR. MANY OF US IN OHIO HAVE BEEN PUSHING OUR REPRESENTATIVES NOW FOR QUITE SOME TIME...TO FULLY AND THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATE....ALL..OF THE PRE-WAR INTELLIGENCE AND... ALL... OF THOSE INVOLVED WITH THE CREATION AND DESSIMINATION OF THE LIES AND DOCUMENTS.
PUSH HARDER THAN EVER NOW
THIS IS NO TIME TO "TAKE A STEP BACK...TAKE A DEEP BREATH...AND LET THE PROCESS HAPPEN", AS FITZGERALD STATED IN THE PRESS CONFERENCE.
THIS IS THE TIME TO PUSH HARDER THAN YOU HAVE SO FAR........
SORRY JEANNNE AND DREWP (YOU REALLY SOUNDED LIKE SNOBS ABOUT THE CAPS THING, MAYBE YOU ARE) MY EYES JUST ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE.
Posted by: kathleen at October 30, 2005 02:51 PM
what would Karl Schwartz do?: contract for america
3. I would form a special unit inside the Department of Justice to investigate and possibly bring criminal charges against the George H.W. Bush Administration, the Clinton Administration and the current Bush Administration for War Crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and possibly Bosnia. That would include investigations of the PNAC members and literally flush them out of the system and decision making roles in this nation. That would be after I purge DOJ of all legacy plants that these three administrations have put into place.
6. I would put all of our energy companies under investigation for price gouging and otherwise manipulating the price of energy, knowing they could under the current Bush Administration. The recent all time American corporate quarterly profit high of $9.9 billion by Exxon Mobil says to me that we Americans just got ripped off by at least billions by one firm.
^^^^^^^^^^6
ha. good ol' Karl would last about a week before he committed suicide with 2 bullets to the head in the trunk of his own car...
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 03:00 PM
Kathleen,
The day I reach your level of perfection will be a grand day indeed. I find caps hard to read. So that makes me a snob. Ok.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 03:03 PM
#325
Two bullets to the back of the head. Ha.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 03:05 PM
Kathleen,
Some people, like me, benefit from having the letters differentiated. If I am concentrating on the word you have type instead of the meaning of the word, I get nothing out of the passage.
I have read your posts right along. I find you very interesting.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 03:20 PM
Wolf in Sheep's Clothing
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:26 PM
Well, yesterday I attempted to engage Tim L. with some much-needed looks at the VERY FEW YOUNG AMERICANS wanting to be in the conventional, traditional US military. That was about as big of a hit as that Ben Affleck / Jennifer Lopez motion-picture named " Gigli" . Oh well. Here's some stuff for y'all...................
www.icasualties.org ( Won't be seeeen at
official " Army of One "
website. )
www.warisaracket.org
Because WAR is a RACKET .
www.guardian.co.uk
Good source for info on the next Bali bombing, or the next England bombing, or the next Spain bombing, or the next India bombing, as the US wins the war on terrorism ..........
Posted by: Anderson Petition at October 30, 2005 03:31 PM
#322
Gerald,
I like that site.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 03:32 PM
Election Curiosities
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:32 PM
Corruption and Scandals
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:36 PM
Photo Ops
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:41 PM
Neocons
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:46 PM
#331 Jeanne, I like it too!
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 03:49 PM
Caught just a minute or two of of some show.
The guest was speaking about Christianity and how there is a view from others that there is now a form of Christianity specific to America.
"American Christianity" is what they all see as pro-war, anti-abortion, anti-glad, etc. and it is seen in the same light as Hitlers claims of religious zeal and false moral superiority.
I know he was right but it made me sick to hear it.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 03:54 PM
911 was cased by an alien invasion.
And it's not the "Avian flu pandemic," it's the Alien flu pandemic that's coming. And King George and his alien "underlings" are trying kill us with the flu. Don't let them cover it up.
Don't let the aliens planted in McMedia cover it either.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 04:00 PM
#330
Anderson Petition I have seen some of the best reporting on the Guardian site. I think that was the site that had the Iraqi reporter who remained in Falluja during the siege.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 04:02 PM
Kathleen: "SORRY JEANNNE AND DREWP (YOU REALLY SOUNDED LIKE SNOBS ABOUT THE CAPS THING, MAYBE YOU ARE) MY EYES JUST ARE NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE."
Ah Jeez, the snob charge. Was it because I used a couple of French words?
Well in my snobbish circles, in fact on all Internet forums, people generally don't type whole messages in all-caps. It's considered rude. IT READS LIKE SCREAMING. Caps are generally reserved for EMPHASIS. Computers provide plenty of other ways to increase type size if the user needs that (On Firefox, for example, just hold down the Ctrl key and press the + ).
P.S. Do spare this snob any lectures on doing my part. You have no idea what I'm doing. And screaming at me won't get you anywhere anyway.
Posted by: Drewp at October 30, 2005 04:03 PM
THAT DUTY LIES UPON FITZGERALD IF HE CAME ACROSS OTHER CRIMES?
Fitzgerald is both Special Prosecutor and, in his capacity as lawyer, an officer of the court.
If, during his investigation he came across evidence which strongly suggested that a crime - other than the one he was tasked with pursuing - had been committed, what is his duty? Is he under any obligation - in either capacity (special prosecutor or as lawyer) - to advise the appropriate authorities of the evidence he has unearthed, so that the "new" crime might be investigated and dealt with?
What if such new evidence showed on a balance of probability that some persons - Americans - had been involved in the presentation to elected officials in the American government of false (forged) information regarding the purchase of uranium by Saddam from Niger? What should Fitzgerald do, and to whom should be report it, if it is his duty to report it?
Does anyone know the answer to these questions?
Posted by: CuriosityKilledTheCat at October 30, 2005 04:09 PM
#337
Capt,
That is a very true statement. Some Christianity has become rancid in this country. It is so warped it does not even involve rational thought anymore. The statements about God and religion that I hear some people involved in the right wing group are so far out I just can't fathom how they can say what they say without laughing. It's very freaky.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 04:09 PM
Religious Right
I also heard on radio that the religious right controls America. We are becoming a Christian nation similar to Islam. Islam is more of a political ideologue and not a religion. American Christianity is more of a political ideologue and not a religion. America has forsaken God for the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and the bushgod.
America worships evil gods.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 04:11 PM
James Ha: "ArtJunky, just look at the photos and videos - there was NO WRECKAGE OF A 757 AT THE PENTAGON."
I don't recall seeing much wreckage at the crash site in Pennsylvania, either. Was there any? From the pictures I saw, all that was left was a giant groove in the earth and some fragments hanging in nearby trees.
It's not hard to be believe that a plane that hits a building at 500+ mph would practically vaporize.
Posted by: Drewp at October 30, 2005 04:13 PM
Today on ABC's "This Week", host George Stephanopoulous (sp?) asked his guest what advice they have for the Bush administration. George Will said the Bush administration should "change the subject".
I kept wondering what "subject" Mr. Will would advise this administratio to "change the subject" to?
The quagmire in Iraq , 15,ooo injured soldiers, over 100,000 dead Iraqi people, the efforts by the neo-cons to drag our nation into Iran and Syria, the continued expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank (that continues to infuriate many people around the world), rising gas prices, record breaking oil profits, no-bid contracts in Iraq, Mississippi, Alabama, Lousianna, reduced health care coverage for working americans, 45 million people uninsured, 50% of black and hispanic high school students in america will not graduate (reported on Lou Dobbs), rising heating cost, massive deficits, job loss, no raise in the minimum wage in 7 years, the upcoming Larry Franklin/Aipac trials coming up in January.
Just what "subject" would George Will recommend the Bush administration "change the subject" to?
Posted by: kathleen at October 30, 2005 04:18 PM
The Lord's Prayer
Never forget that we all fall under the umbrella of being interconnected and interdependent as brothers and sisters in God.
I would like to start with the Lord's Prayer.
Our Father, Who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil. Amen.
As Christians, when we recite the Our Father, we must remember that the prayer is more than just words. The prayer is a powerful prayer.
Let us look at the words beyond rote memory. When we say the Our Father, we are acknowledging God as the Father, Our Father. This acknowledgement means that God is the Father of all His children but it is more than the fact that we are His children. We are united in God as brothers and sisters. We are all brothers and sisters.
We know that God is in heaven and that His name will be revered on earth as in heaven. His kingdom is the earth and heaven. We are also asking God for nourishment. As we ask God for nourishment to sustain us, we are asking God to forgive any transgressions and we are to also forgive people who have transgressed against us. Father John Corapi in his lectures equates the daily bread with the Eucharist that Catholics receive at daily Mass. Catholics have a double concern when they recite the Our Father and for Catholics to want to kill their brothers and sisters is a clear indication of irreverence to God. As I have said in some previous posts, that irreverence to God is eternal perdition. I have asked that all of God's children to never show irreverence to God but I especially appeal to my brothers and sisters to never worship a false god which would show irreverence to the true God.
We are also asking God to not be sinful but to keep us away from sin.
The prayer is not just words but it is a powerful statement that we are accepting God as Our Father and as Christians we are united in God as brothers and sisters.
To recite the Our Father and to hate, kill, and revel in wars we really are not Christians. We are instead dishonoring God and we are separated from Him through our sinful ways. To separate ourselves from God, we are on the road to eternal damnation.
In praying we must ask ourselves the question. How can I give glory to God? We can give glory to God by loving and showing mercy to all our brothers and sisters. We are united with God as a family and a community as His children for all eternity.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 04:20 PM
I have a vivid memory of all of the whoopla just prior to Bush having a "hot foot" to go to war.
When some did not understand how or why he was
saying that Sadaam was part of Bin Laden's plot
for Sept. 11, then the media produced a picture
showing them together. What I really would like
Fitzgerald to investigate is : was that a valid
picture or just one of many of the pack of lies the American people were fed. I also wonder if
Sadaam will be asked that question in his trial.
It really needs to be either authenticated~~
or NOT???? WE NEED TO KNOW THIS ~~Is it or isn't
it that they knew each other~~ or is that a
fixed picture?????? Please find out, someone!!!!!
Posted by: Thelma at October 30, 2005 04:22 PM
The Voice of the White House
October 26, 2005: We are all back with you again after a brief pause over the intense scrutiny over the Libby/Rove matter. Here is some information, reasonably detailed, that should be of interest. If you will remember, on Monday, February 14, 2005, Rafiq Hariri, five times Lebanese prime minister, multibillionaire, builder of a country devastated by 15 years of civil war, was assassinated by a huge car bomb that ravaged the Lebanese capitals seafront. Two ministers in his party and 6 of his bodyguards, including its chief Yahya Al Arb, were among the dead. Efforts to save his life at the American Hospital to which he was carried in critical condition were unavailing. The attack is described as the most brutal since the civil conflict ended in 1991.
Last year, Hariri stepped down in protest against the extension of pro-Syrian president Emile Lahouds presidency and was about to take the lead of the opposition. A towering figure in Lebanese politics, Hariri was expected to fight the election due to take place in April or May. (From an Israeli report) The flap over the Plame business pales into insignificance alongside this assassination. Syria wass quickly blamed by both the U.S. and Israel and now let us consider what this was. IN certain exalted circles in the Bush Administration, it is known who did this. The assassination of a very popular Lebanese leader was carried out so as to find a pretext to blame Syria, which has been, and is being done, so as to enable military action against that country. Also, we see in the American press, ongoing horror stories about huge guerrilla raids resulting in the deaths of sensitive young GIs being launched from Syria and so on. The propaganda orchestra is wearing a bit thin in light of continuing leaks.. Hariri was assassinated by a small group of professional assassins, headed by a man who calls himself either Robert H. Lewis, Robert Alan Lewis or Robert Hall Lewis. In actuality, his real name is Robert Lipschitz, born on June 23, 1935. He has two American social security numbers: 451-76-4488 and 114-07-8811. Lipschitz/Lewis, who holds Israeli citizenship although born in the Untied States, has very strong, albeit secret, connections with the U.S. Pentagon, in specific, a secret Pentagon committee, set up by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in October 2001
The secret committee, which prepares false or misleading information for Rumsfeld to use in his reports encouraging military actions in places other than Iraq, is called the Office of Special Plans, and initially was headed by Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and other Pentagon hawks. Both this committee and its many and close friends in the Israeli Mossad determined that Syria should be the next target of Bushs Imperial Expansionism in the Middle East and the removal of a very close and hostile neighbor, Syria, would be of great value to Israel.
Similarly, the 911 attacks also were of great political and strategic value to Israel, bringing as it did, the U.S. into active aggression against Israels enemies. Please do not forget that during the Gulf War, Hussein actually rocketed Israel and the overblown Patriot missiles did not intercept the incoming rocketry. Look for heightened public outrage expressed via Pentagon handouts, against Syria and then look for a long-suffering but truly democratic Bush to rubberstamp the decision to invade yet another country with the attendant escalated death tolls that are doing his reputation little good.
Post assist for Saladin!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 04:30 PM
A Good End
I had a chance to listen to Father John Corapi. He said that a good end does not justify an evil means. Removing Saddam was a good end but it was accomplished through evil means, upon American lives and Iraqi lives.
Geena Davis in the Commander in Chief is the president and she said in one of her shows as president, "There are always other ways." We did not have to attack Iraq. There are other ways to deal with Saddam. Bush's depraved indifference toward living human beings meant that he would kill people instead of finding out other ways.
Father Corapi also said that we may not be able to do great things in changing the world but we can do little things with great love. My health is such that I cannot be very active in attending rallies, etc. Instead I pray and offer my prayers that America and the world would move toward love, mercy, justice, and peace and remove themselves from hatred, killing, torture, and wars. Please remember that we all can do little things with great love in helping to change our world.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 04:47 PM
Anti-war Ad
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 04:54 PM
Finally, Frank Rich and others are starting to write about the promised Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
Go read " One step Closer to the Big Enchilada" by Rich , October 30th in the New YOrk Times or at the Truthout website.
I have been pounding on this topic (calling into radio talk shows, writing representatives, c-span, etc) for over a year and a half now.
I have also tried to get MOVE ON to put a petition on their website about this issue (call or write them please),after I heard reports last summer that the OFFICE OF SPECIAL PLANS AND THE WHITE HOUSE IRAQ GROUP had been "OFF LIMITS" to all other pre-war investigations.
Please call C-SPAN, the Diane Rehm show, Talk of the Nation, DEmocracy Now, Air America and any other media sources that you think would do a show or article on this important issue. I have continued to bring up this issue endlessly.
CALL, WRITE, E-MAIL, VISIT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES DEMANDING THAT PHASE 2 BE IMPLEMENTED IMMEDIATELY.
Patrick Fitzgerald made it very clear that the investigation he is conducting could not move into this territory. This is the job of our congress at least at this time.
PLEASE TAKE ACTION........
Posted by: kathleen at October 30, 2005 04:55 PM
God doesn't require us to succeed; he only requires that you try.
We can do no great things; only small things with great love.
Whether one is Hindu or a Muslim or a Christian, how you live your life is proof that you are or not fully His. We cannot condemn or judge or pass words that will hurt people. We don't know in what way God is appearing to that soul and what God is drawing that soul to; therefor, who are we to condemn anybody?
~ Mother Teresa (1910 - 1997)
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 04:57 PM
I've seen the pics and I've seen the videos and still think it was aliens...there's nothing you can say to change my mind.
Posted by: ArtJunky at October 30, 2005 05:05 PM
The Big Burrito
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 05:09 PM
Burrito
The 30-inch burrito story came from the Yahoo News Service. Yahoo did not mention whether or not the burrito was an all bean burrito. An all bean burrito would have put the burrito in the WMD category.
In fact the all bean burrito may be our answer to an alternative energy source. When people eat the all bean burrito, the gaseous emissions from our human bodies may offer an important research project to keep Americans away from their gluttonous and voracious appetite for oil that places our country in a constant war mode.
It is my understanding that cheney and his band of goons and thugs have now a patent on caked animal and human dung that can be used as an alternative fuel source for Americans in northern states. The sale of caked animal and human dung should be on the shelves before the winter months commence. An insider says that the hold-up for announcing the sale has to do with the settled price for sale of this dung. The insider also says that the settled price for caked animal and human dung will qualify cheney and his band of goons and thugs for the "Golden Fleece Award."
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 05:17 PM
Flying Blind
Dark days: Singed by the special prosecutor and rattled by the Harriet Miers mess, Team Bush is in turmoil."
By Howard Fineman and Richard Wolffe
Newsweek
Nov. 7, 2005 issue - The mood in the White House last Friday afternoon was grim, but eerily quiet. Dick Cheney was gone, off in Georgia giving yet another apocalyptic terrorism speech to yet another military crowd. The president, just back from his own rally-the-troops address, was eager to chopper to Camp David for the weekend. But, in the small dining room adjoining the Oval Office, he was doing something uncharacteristic: watching live news on TV.
I don't read books, I read people," George W. Bush once said, half in jest, and so the figure on the screen spoke volumes to him: the Irish-American altar-boy visage; the off-the-rack attire; the meticulous, yet colloquial speech, a blend of the U.S. Code, Jimmy Stewart and baseball. Special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, Bush said to his aides, "is a very serious guy." And so was the charge he laid out: that I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, the vice president's right-hand man, had lied repeatedly under oath about what might well have been a White House effort to vindictively tip reporters about the identity of a CIA agent whose husband was a critic of the Iraq war. Libby has denied wrongdoing, and his lawyer vowed a vigorous defense. But Bush, an aide indicated, was as impressed by Fitzgerald's case as by the man who brought it. "The indictment speaks for itself," said the aide, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the situation.
*****end of clip*****
I might be paranoid but it is sounding more and more like it is scripted.
I hope I am wrong.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 05:28 PM
Gerald at 346 & 349:
"As I have said in some previous posts, that irreverence to God is eternal perdition. I have asked that all of God's children to never show irreverence to God but I especially appeal to my brothers and sisters to never worship a false god which would show irreverence to the true God."
Thank you for your thoughts on the Lord's prayer. Mentioning false gods brings to mind a memory that has been forever etched in my mind. The images of the Academy awards when Michael Moore had enough guts to speak out against an unholy war. The arts are supposed to reflect society and encourage truth and goodness. How could anyone criticize Moore for acting on his convictions. He was properly reflecting the conflict many Americans felt about the Iraq war. The gathering of celebrities, which included a lot of Jews, centered around a stage with a 50 foot golden statue of the Oscar. They were all worshipping money, power, and vanity. Mankind has paid a hefty price for this type of behavior in the past. Will we ever learn?
Matthew 25:40 -
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
This was the favorite bible verse of Michael Moore's mother. He patterned his life work based on it. Michael Moore is our hero. There is a COMMON THREAD that runs through Bowling for Columbine and The Passion of Christ. It is the noble idea that We can do something to decrease the suffering. As Mike labors to reduce the trend of violence that ravages our country and our children, Mel makes us think that we all are responsible for the suffering of Jesus. If only we could have been there; If only we could have stood up for Jesus and put our lives and reputation on the line. Yes and even though we were all born 2000 years after Jesus, his suffering continues. It continues as Mikeճ mom told him in the suffering of adults and children world-wide. It is abstract to ask what we might have done to protect Jesus. Millions who have watched the Passion are horrified that humans could treat Jesus in such an evil way. But Jesus we continue to allow Jesus to suffer because of the harm and pain we allow other humans to inflict on their victims. But remember, we still have that opportunity as it is still going on every day as tens of millions of children and adults remain or become the victims of repression, illness, lack of medical care, starvation, violence, rape, slavery, including child prostitution, illegitimate wars, etc. When you understand the true meaning of the above verse you can see that Jesus is still suffering.
The Passion of Christ (Here and Now) for you and me:
SUFFERING OF JESUS CONTINUES DURING OUR LIVES. AS LONG AS ONE OR MORE HUMANS SUFFER AT THE HANDS OF OTHER HUMANS, THE HORRIFIC SUFFERING CONTINUES FOR JESUS. WE DO NOT HAVE TO BE APATHETIC BYSTANDERS.
WE CAN STAND UP AND STOP THE SUFFERING.
Gerald: "Please remember that we all can do little things with great love in helping to change our world."
Posted by: MnMnM at October 30, 2005 05:30 PM
#357 MnMnM, The biblical verse that I recite almost daily is Matthew 25:31-46. I also try to recite daily Matthew 5:1-12.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 05:59 PM
MnMnM, I will repost The Formula.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 06:07 PM
The Formula
I am giving you a formula that I believe will bring about justice and peace. Actually, God has given me these ideas directly for a better world. You can accept what I say through Divine Providence or reject what I say. We are all given a free choice. The decision is yours alone.
1. Shalom translated means peace but it is more than peace. Shalom is God's vision of the world. It is God's dream that Shalom comes only to the inclusive embracing community that excludes no one.
2. In each of us there is a Jesus and a Hitler. We should always strive to bring out the Jesus in us.
3. Love is wanting the best for another person or persons.
4. Try to emulate Mother Teresa who saw in each human being the face of Jesus.
5. War is outmoded; no normal person chooses war over peace.
6. From James in the New Testament - Faith without deeds is worth nothing.
7. Practice your faith that believes in the true God. God wants us to love one another.
8. Read the Bible because it is God's love letter to us.
9. Read Mattie Stepanek's books on Heartsongs.
10. John Kerry says that it is not important for God to be on our side, what is important are we on God's side?
11. Read Matthew 25:31-46! When you do it to the least of my brethren, you do it for me.
12. Read Matthew 5:1-12! The beatitudes!
13. Read Luke 10:25-37! Who is my neighbor?
14. Read Luke 12:13-21! These verses warn us against greed.
15. Be aware of the Just War Theory! Are we in imminent danger?
16. Practice being a Conscientious Objector!
17. St. Ambrose says, "I shall pass this way but once, any good that I can do let me do it now, because I shall not pass this way again."
18. Totus Tuus means all yours. We are all God's children.
19. Paul Wellstone says that politics is not about power. Politics is not only about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It is about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in the world. Politics is about doing well for people.
20. Mr. Bourn who built the Filoli Home and Gardens that is south of San Francisco says that we must fight for a just cause; we must love our fellow man; and we must live a good life.
21. When we recite the Lord's Prayer, we are acknowledging that God is the Father and we are all brothers and sisters.
22. The Cross is a sign of contradiction. It is not about death and hatred; it is about life and love.
Many persons will have and will offer various formulas for justice and peace. The end result will center around whether or not we have love and mercy in our hearts. Justice and peace can never move forward unless we have a conversion of the heart.
Leo Buscaglia reminds us that the heart sees what the eyes fail to see. In life we may be called upon to see with our hearts. Our hearts must be filled with love and mercy.
The moral demise of a nation precedes the ultimate demise of a nation. America is in a state of moral demise because Americans do not believe in God.
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 06:18 PM
I do not have the URL on the following article because it was sent to me in an email. I, too, have been struck by the false choices people have in the States. How many brands of toothpaste and breakfast cereal people can choose from, while real choice political is denied them. Here's the article.
Begin article:
Put the blame on Plame
By RICK SALUTIN
The Globe and Mail, Friday, October 28, 2005 Page A23
Many reports from the U.S. have said: With all his troubles -- Katrina, Iraq, the economy -- the last thing George Bush needs is criminal charges
against top aides like Karl Rove (expected today in the Plame-Wilson spy-leak investigation). Yet, you could read this in reverse: With such problems, it may be nice to have a diversion to take people's minds off serious issues. Hey, maybe Karl set it all up. But I doubt it. I think the truth is a bit odder.
That's because real debate over basic foreign and domestic issues is off the table in the United States. It is precluded by the famed "bipartisan
consensus," whereby both parties plus major players in business, media etc. concur fundamentally even if they differ on details. That has been true with Iraq and the economy. But the consensus is constantly threatened by the fact that most U.S. citizens disagree with it. For instance, 65 per cent want health care for all, even if it means higher taxes; 86 per cent
want a higher minimum wage; 59 per cent think the Iraq war was a mistake and 63 per cent want troops partly or fully out. It's true that more
Americans (30 per cent) call themselves conservative than liberal (18 per cent), but that's just labelling. On economic, foreign policy and "non-moral" issues, they are to the "left" of their elites.
This is strangely like the situation in the old Soviet bloc, where most people opposed the regimes but couldn't say so via "official" channels.
Yet, dissent so strong needed an outlet, and it emerged in arenas such as theatre or film. That is, indirectly and metaphorically. Let me suggest
that, in the U.S., opposition to the official "line" is allowed to vent
through anger at minor outrages committed by the forces that impose the bipartisan consensus. If you didn't like the Nixon Vietnam policy, you
could go after him for a petty B and E (Watergate). He was ousted; the policy stayed. With Bill Clinton, nail him for playing kissy-face at the office. The Iran-contra scandal of the Reagan era didn't quite "take" because it wasn't trivial enough, proving the rule. And now, in a time of strong, ill-expressed dissent over a bungled war and staggering economy,there's a CIA-outing mini-scandal.
It's what you get when you have a large stifled undercurrent to the left of an official right-wing political culture. Middle-class families with
the best private health plans are declaring bankruptcy because of deductibles and co-payments for sick kids. Living standards are in
decline: Pay, vacations and benefits are shrinking -- even under "good" union contracts. These crises get reported but not discussed or debated.
Those in power aren't challenged on them. Instead, you're allowed to go after poor (literally) Private Lynndie England for the mess in Iraq, or pathetic Mike Brown of the federal emergency agency for the mess in New Orleans. If you want to attack those at the top, though, it has to be for some minor spy botch, which is in a complicated way connected to Iraq.
When real politics is off the agenda, it has to sneak in the back door by way of ethics, corruption, dating or spying.
I mean: Exposing a spy? Is that so awful? Spying is a weird activity, by definition illicit, often illegal, and inherently dubious. That why it's
secret! I've read lots of punditry explaining that it matters because it's "really" about the President lying to the people about an illegal war etc.
Well, that's my point. Why can't they talk about him lying or the validity of his war? Why must they do it indirectly, and end up having a debate
about what it's really about?
"Changing the subject will not work," said Washington über-insider David Gergen on Bush attempts to evade the spy scandal by carrying on, um, normally. "Giving more speeches about Iraq or the state of the economy doesn't have the weight that action does." But just a minute, Dave. What
if the point is to keep attention off Iraq, the economy and other debatable elements of the bipartisan consensus? Such as? Such as George
Bush's threat, this week, to attack Syria. Or plans this week to cut health care for the poor, food stamps and student loans. Then it does work
-- by not working. You catch the cartoon, you miss the feature.
rsalutin@globeandmail.ca
Posted by: Karen at October 30, 2005 06:28 PM
Bert Cole is a moronic ass.
Posted by: quadlander at October 30, 2005 06:34 PM
Can anyone help me? Is Fitzgerald going to continue to investigate the CIA leak case or is he basically finished? At the press conference he seemed very vague!
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 06:42 PM
Jeanne, since you live in the Twin Cities area, do you have a chance to atted or visit lectures through the G.K. Chesterton Society?
When is the lecture from Camilio Mejis (spell)?
Posted by: Gerald at October 30, 2005 06:50 PM
#361
Put the blame on Plame
By RICK SALUTIN
Friday, October 28, 2005, Page A23
Many reports from the U.S. have said: With all his troubles -- Katrina, Iraq, the economy -- the last thing George Bush needs is criminal charges against top aides like Karl Rove (expected today in the Plame-Wilson spy-leak investigation). Yet, you could read this in reverse: With such problems, it may be nice to have a diversion to take people's minds off serious issues. Hey, maybe Karl set it all up. But I doubt it. I think the truth is a bit odder.
*****end of clip*****
The clip is all that is available at the link.
#361 is better, just offering the source!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 06:59 PM
Jean and Kathleen, there is something you two have in common and that is civil disobedience. Speaking out by way of letters, emails, calls, protests, signing petitions, etc. have all been effective modes of changing status quo throughout history.
We should all practice acts of civil disobedience.
Posted by: trinity at October 30, 2005 07:34 PM
Jean and Kathleen, there is something you two have in common and that is civil disobedience. Speaking out by way of letters, emails, calls, protests, signing petitions, etc. have all been effective modes of changing status quo throughout history.
We should all practice acts of civil disobedience.
Posted by: trinity at October 30, 2005 07:35 PM
New grand jury will continue investigation
"Fitzgeralds spokesman, Randall Samborn, said the investigation will continue but with a new grand jury. The term of the current grand jury cannot be extended beyond today."
*****end of clip*****
Hope this is helpful!
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 07:41 PM
a new take on the song "Monster Mash" (it's a Flash movie)
Climate Mash
"You're doing a great job Zombie."
Posted by: Alan at October 30, 2005 07:58 PM
#364
I will link the information. He will be speaking three times in the Twin Cities. I think we are going to go down to the U of M to see him.
Camilo Mejia: Iraq war veteran speaks out!
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 08:27 PM
STATEMENT AFTER CAMILO'S RELEASE:
"I want to thank all the people and all the organizations who have supported my family and me throughout this most difficult time in our lives. I am now free from prison, but it was because of all of you that I remained a free man during my incarceration. I was not able to read all the mail that was sent, in part because prison rules did not allow it, and in part because I received thousands upon thousands of letters from all over the world. In time I will read all of them, and I will answer as many as I can. From the bottom of my heart, and on behalf of my family, my attorneys, and myself, thank you all.
At the present moment, there aren't any specific plans for the near future, other than to spend time with my family. But I certainly want to continue to lend my voice to the movement for Peace and Justice, of which I feel privileged to be a part. In time I will share my experiences with you. Please check this website to stay updated on any events for the future.
Thank you again for all your support. God bless you all."
*****end of clip*****
All dates and such can be found at the link.
capt
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 08:30 PM
#368
Hey Capt, did you see who commented on that piece?
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 08:37 PM
PROSECUTOR PLANS ON CALLING CHENEY AS WITNESS IN OPEN COURT; EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE FIGHT LOOMS
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX SUN OCT 30, 2005 18:31:21 ET XXXXX
**Exclusive**
Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is planning to call Vice President Dick Cheney as a witness in the trial of Lewis Libby, the DRUDGE REPORT has leaned.
But the high stakes move could result in an executive privilege showdown between the White House and Fitzgerald, a top government source said Sunday.
"If Mr. Fitzgerald is going to demand a public recounting of conversations between the vice president, or even the president, and his staff, on matters he, himself, has acknowledged are 'classified,' executive privilege will obviously be invoked."
Fitzgerald has made it clear to lawyers involved in the case that he prefers Cheney appear as a witness in open court.
"Mr. Fitzgerald is starting from the position that this should not be done on remote or videotape," the well-placed source said.
Fitzgerald and Libby's attorney Joseph Tate discussed possible plea options before the indictment was issued last week, TIME magazine reports in new editions. But the deal was scotched because the prosecutor insisted that Libby do some "serious" jail time.
Developing...
*****end of clip*****
See, because the information that was leaked was classified they cannot talk about it in court.
We will see how Fitzgerald handles this.
capt
PS - I wonder about that post but it could be bona fide. Either way it was good info.
Posted by: capt at October 30, 2005 09:12 PM
DrewP 344 -
that was flight 93 in pennsylvania - the hole actually had trees growing out of it immediately after the supposed crash - rumsfeld admitted that it was shot down, and the wreckage was strewn out for miles - it was another bogus story, that a hero karate guy rallied the passengers and caused it to crash - I swear, every aspect of the govts fairytale has been disproven -
Posted by: James Ha at October 30, 2005 09:13 PM
A reporter once asked Maurice Chevalier how it felt to turn eighty years old. He said he didn't like it a bit, but when he considered the alternative, being eighty wasn't so bad after all.
That's pretty much how the American public feels about George Bush vs. anyone the lunatic left puts up. Hell, Howard Dean couldn't even win one state presidential primary with all the Deaniacs in his own party to vote for him.
And so American presidential politics is reduced to a man with his father's Rolodex for contributors vs. a patrician gigolo who never sponsored one piece of passed meaningful legislation in all his time in the Senate. How did we get to this position in American politics?
The American public yearns for an alternative to President Bush right now; the problem is that when it sees the bunch of losers and lunatics stepping forward to assume his place, he is preferred by forfeit.
We are facing serious times with unserious people and unserious ideas to address those times. One would hope that the posters to this blog are either young and idealistic or old and bitter for all your failings in life. There is no other reason to explain your bizarre logic. (e.g., impeach Bush so we can have Cheney as president)
Posted by: Bill at October 30, 2005 09:16 PM
I've been away all weekend and coming in here cold and probably off-topic. But reading the first 30 or so posts, you know Tim L is all about getting out there and pushing the talking points - I've never seen him ( or her) so persistent. You know the spin is "this is a minor charge and let's move on". But all the debating in the world does not change truth. I knew back in '02 that the the charge that Saddam had nuclear weopons was a LIE. The best bumper sticker I saw in the fall of '03 - "If you're not completely appaled, you haven't been paying attention". Unfortunately, and apparently 52% were not paying attention.
I was disappointed in just Libby but I think it will eventually get to the ugly truth.
Posted by: brent at October 30, 2005 09:36 PM
#375
Oh Bill,
When I say impeach Bush, I've already kicked Cheney's ass into high orbit. I have no confidence in this White House. None what so ever. The nation has to accept reality of the situation. We have a White House that has lied to the public to start a war. And then didn't have the time or the desire to get the soldiers the equipment they needed to stay safe. They have outed a CIA officer leaving her without a career and putting her family and former colleagues in danger. They lied about the 9/11 investigation. They have abused prisoners and detainees because they can. They detain people without trial because they can. They spy on people because they can. They are destroying the economy because they don't understand what a healthy economy is. They allow people to sit for days after a major hurricane because they couldn't get their act together. Dinner was more important than people's lives.
Just out of curiosity, what is your suggestion? Seriously. If you have ideas I want to hear them. By the way, I'm not young or old. I'm not bitter or idealistic. How can I be idealistic in a world where reality is so sharp? How can I be bitter? I can't be. That's a waste of valuable time. I am struggling to save my country. I do things I think will make a difference.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 09:54 PM
This is a long article but very good. It's on the myth of New Orleans. The blacks of New Orleans were victims of Katrina but nature did less damage than the country. There is no excuse.
Myths of New Orleans: Poor, Bad Blacks -- Who Got What They Deserved
...What is most horrifying about the tenacity of these prejudices is the immense extent to which they are contradicted by the facts. But when people are ruled by fear and by the demands of a false belief in their own superiority, facts are easily dispensed with, if they are even considered in the first instance. We have no reason to be surprised by these recent revelations: in a culture where peddlers of racist propaganda like Charles Murray and Michelle Malkin are accorded numerous opportunities to spew their ignorance and blatant falsehoods to huge audiences, prejudice and unreasoning hatred are not merely a comparatively insignificant adjunct to the discussion: they are the staples of our diet. We ought to recognize the lethality of such a diet: if we do not seek to alter it and bring it into accord with the facts, it will finally kill us...
Posted by: Jeanne at October 30, 2005 10:01 PM
Well... after reading all the posts on this thread it suddenly became crystal clear why it is a waste of time to debate with 95% of the people here: they are irrational. There is simply no other word that describes their absolute looney posts! I am simply amazed at what I read here. I don't even know where to begin nor will I try, but I see that calm, rational discussion grounded in reason and containing at least some facts just doesn't happen here very often. Most of the "discussion" is nothing more than ill-informed rants, vile character assasination, breathless histrionics, personal attacks, and/or outright lunacy! What is most shocking and sad as well is that the people repeating the most outlandish stuff apparently believe it! If the folks here I'm speaking of would just stop and ask themselves one question, perhaps they might be able to return to some semblance of rationality. It is this, "Why doesn't everyone understand what is happening? Why does it seem that only a handful of people like myself can see what I know to be true?" The answer? Can you handle it? It is because maybe, just maybe what you just know to be the "truth" isn't the truth at all.
Posted by: Tim at October 30, 2005 10:52 PM
James Ha: " . . rumsfeld admitted that it was shot down . . " I'd like to read more about this. Any leads/links?
Posted by: Drewp at October 30, 2005 11:06 PM
Drewp -- Excusem moi interruptus -- I'm fluent in various languages even though I am not a diplomat -- but I believe rummy was bloviventing (origin: bloviating, blowing, venting) when he made that comment you and Mr. Ha are discussing. The GOPers make many slips of the tongue -- such as Trent Lott's comment about bush's next SCOTUS pick:
Lott: I want the President to look across the country and find the best man, woman, or minority that he can find.
He actually said that! Oy!
Posted by: micki at October 30, 2005 11:39 PM
Timmee!!! Dude, am I part of that 5% that is fun to type at?
"I am simply amazed at what I read here."
Oh, come on now, don't tell me you didn't know that Chimpy was a chickenshit liar and President Cheney lied us into a war and divulged classified information to hide his lies. I know you've got sKiLLz, boyeee.
Here, lemme help you:
"I don't know of anybody in my administration who leaked classified information -- President Bush 9/30/2003"
"If somebody did leak classified information, I'd like to know it, and we'll take the appropriate action." -- President Bush, 9/30/2003
"If someone in this administration leaked classified information, they will no longer be a part of this administration, because that's not the way this White House operates." -- Scott McClellan, 10/7/2003
"Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer. In July 2003, the fact that Valerie Wilson was a CIA officer was classified. Not only was it classified, but it was not widely known outside the intelligence community....In fact, Mr. Libby was the first official known to have told a reporter when he talked to Judith Miller in June of 2003 about Valerie Wilson." -- Fitzie 10/28/2005
The Headlines are downright alarming if you live with your head in dark places.
Posted by: Pandemoniac at October 30, 2005 11:45 PM
#366 I'm sure your comment is meant as a positive but there is something ironic. Most of the posts from kathleen are not requests for civil disobedience, but just basic excercising of your 1st ammendment right, namely the right to petition your government to address wrong doing.
Civil disobedience is when one does something they think is right but is against a civil law, often to make a point or a cause (e.g. Rosa Parks not giving up her seat as required due to her skin color).
The problem is most of us have gotten to lazy in carrying out our basic rights and forgetting to watch and protect the truth, even to the point that we think acting on our basic rights are civil disobedience!
Jim Wallis' book "God's Politics: Why the Right gets it Wrong and the Left doesn't get it" talks about how most politicians start off with noble intentions to their values but soon find that washington works by whatever wind is blowing and they are walking around with their wet fingers in the air. The way to change washington's policies is to change the direction of the wind and he goes on to describe how MLK, Jr. after winning nobel prize talked to LBJ about getting a voting rights act, and LBJ saying it would take 5-10 years because he (LBJ) has spent all his capital in the south with other civil rights legislation. MLK JR went to Selma and with others walked across the famous bridge and brought the winds to change.
Posted by: yelnats at October 31, 2005 12:01 AM
#379
"I don't even know where to begin nor will I try, but I see that calm, rational discussion grounded in reason and containing at least some facts just doesn't happen here very often."
Oh my. Pande, doesn't that sound like Antoine? Tim, do you sing? I don't know, maybe they just follow the same script.
Posted by: Jeanne at October 31, 2005 12:05 AM
THE PLAME LEAK CASE IS SMALL POTATOES !!!
Posted by: Student at October 31, 2005 12:10 AM
It's been great reading these posts for a whole weekend. The article posted re: Cheney in court got my chortler rockin', Capt. Thanks. Truly, I saw a lot of com-skills honed on the boneheaded trolls appearing here and there.
CuriosityKilledTheCat #341: any prosecutor or any other court officer always has a judge to ask or from whom s/he may seek advice. In terms of a crime being uncovered, it is a basic responsibility of an American citizen to report such. You know, the way our illustrious Peacock War President did in his White House.
Yowza!
Posted by: Don Smith at October 31, 2005 12:22 AM
David posted a new one.
Posted by: Alan at October 31, 2005 12:26 AM
#379
Tim stated: It is this, "Why doesn't everyone understand what is happening? Why does it seem that only a handful of people like myself can see what I know to be true?"
I appreciate that you kept your strong comments from being an absolute statement by using relative terms: "seem", "I know". Therefore, it appears that you are not a delusional, self-appointed messianic who defines truth and instead are just possibly misguided like we all can be at times.
Posted by: yelnats at October 31, 2005 12:37 AM
BLOGS are strange.
It's nice to know there are people out there wanting to communicate. However, it seems that the underlying frustration that every entry has isn't materializing into action. In a way, the peaceful communication of frustration is neutralizing the possiblity of real force. Whether it's smacking the timmies around or confiding with an aware person, we are all frustruated strangers who give a little of our energy away every time we hit post. Could we be using our energy better? Is technology impairing our ability to mob? Would there have been riots in the 60's & 70's if they could just post their desires? I don't understand if it's good to know how eveyone thinks. Neutralized is not how I want the machine to think about us...
If things begin to get REALLY bad, please turn off the computers, and I'll see you in the streets. Yes?
Posted by: ripple at October 31, 2005 03:06 AM
Gerald,
Get professional help. Don't wait. Do this now.
Pretty sure GOD would back me on this,....
Posted by: titchaba at October 31, 2005 03:28 AM
Been in the streets, believe in the streets, its a component of a whole.
Blogging is effortless. No particular energy expended or wasted. If what I think finds one like thinker, then its worth the energy expended.
The streets are not the only place. We need to use All the places.
And Im confident we will
Posted by: titchaba at October 31, 2005 03:33 AM
Yelnats,
Thank you for a rational response! You are correct, I don't profess to have a lock on the truth, but I am at least rational and willing to debate real issues as opposed to crazy theories that border on lunacy or engage in character assasination. People here can say whatever comes into their heads, but when President Clinton was in office I never heard conservatives say the types of things I read here every day! The level of hate directed towards our President is so thich in here I can barely breath. Let's just call it what it is! Outright hatred.
Pande,
Dude! It's been a while. You are definitely in the 5%, my friend. I don't necessarily agree with your points, but you post some intriguing items from time to time!
Posted by: Tim at October 31, 2005 11:01 AM
#392 - I have to strongly disagree. I heard equally as high and moralistic diatribes agaist Clinton all through his eight years, and certainly at the peak of the Monica scandal. In fact its almost humorous if not so tragic to watch how very similar methods and arguments that were used by one side are now employed by the other, and they all like to act like its not happening. Or better yet, they somehow want to interpret that this is somehow the exception.
Posted by: Yelnats at October 31, 2005 02:01 PM