Can Rove spin himself out of trouble? (“Photo” courtesy Democratic Underground)
When you’re dealing with a spinmeister like Karl Rove, reading between the lines is the only place you’ll find any useful information. And that’s exactly what Lawrence O’Donnell does in his latest Plame/Rove update on The Huffington Post.
Rove’s attorney, Robert Luskin, finally admitted that his client did indeed talk to Time Magazine’s Matt Cooper, prior to Robert Novak blowing Valerie Plame’s cover. But O’Donnell focuses on the words with which Luskin chose to defend Rove’s actions.
Luskin then launched what sounds like an I-did-not-inhale defense. He told Newsweek that his client “never knowingly disclosed classified information.” Knowingly. That is the most important word Luskin said in what has now become his public version of the Rove defense.
Not coincidentally, the word ‘knowing’ is the most important word in the controlling statute ( U.S. Code: Title 50: Section 421). To violate the law, Rove had to tell Cooper about a covert agent ” knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent’s intelligence relationship to the United States.”
So, Rove’s defense now hangs on one word
Thought you guys would want to excercise your free speech at this function…
Washington State Republican Party Invitational
July 7, 2005
Washington National Golf Course
8 AM Shotgun Start
Range opens at 7:15 AM
Due to a last minute cancellation, we have ONE foursome still available for this fun day of golf. If you are interested, please call Amilyn at the WSRP immediately to reserve the spot for your team!
To participate in this event please contact Amilyn Davidson at the State Party at 206/575-2900 or via email at amilyndavidson@wsrp.org.
Corn at The Nation says “not so fast” on the Rove thing.
Is Rove It?
There will be alot of spin on both sides regarding Rove. However, each side should want to know the truth… all of it. Don’t blindly defend, or persecute. Just keep asking for the truth so none of this gets swept under the rug like so many other things in American politics.
YES!!!!!!!!! BURN BABY BURN. Take that mother fucking piece of shit down! Bye bye ROVE!
Great posting lately Goldy, even better than usual!
D.O.G. @ 2 –
Interesting read, and pretty level headed. His last sentence struck me:
“Two years ago, senior Bush administration officials revealed classified information, undid the career of a national security official, and endangered ongoing anti-WMD programs in order to pursue a political vendetta against a critic, and to date there has been no accountability.”
What we know for sure is that SOMEONE in the Bush administration committed treason.
If Rove was acting as a political aid during this episode, he would not have had access to classified CIA info. This means that he couldn’t be held liable for releasing the name of an agent, based on that info. That Valerie Plame was a CIA operative was well known in the DC world, so it wouldn’t have been unusual for Rove to have known it from “gossip” rather than classified documents. So the real question seems to be, did he lie to the grand jury? I don’t know, and neither do any of you yahoos.
By the way, there is still the underlying story to all this. Plame recommended her husband for a plum job, using her position of influence. So, if she wanted to stay secret, she should have kept her nose out of politics. But she didn’t. I bet if she was a right winger, though, you guys would be wanting to frog-march her to jail.
@8
so its worth risking our wmd investigation and putting someones life at risk because she ‘put her nose into politics’?
nice unsubstantiated claims, by the way!
@ 1
I’d be bored to tears. Only so much I can stand of people chattering about golf and consumerism – and whining about taxes.
@ 8
Janet, so naive.. If Rove didn’t have direct access he certainly knew people who did. One thing we can we depend on Rove given his track record is that he will dig up every scrap of information on a target and then shoot to kill having first weighed the cost/benefit.
Rove’s message was clear – husbands don’t speak up if you don’t want your loved ones hurt.
And it’s worked. Bush got re-elected and Rove still has his job for the moment.
A plum job for Joe Wilson? Hardly. More like an errand for which Wilson was well suited having served in Africa and knowing a lot about the uranium business.
I hope you’re comfortable in your role as an unthinking dittohead.
Listen Windie, Janet S. would be an apologist for a registered sex offender who kidnapped little children, if defending the scumbag somehow promoted the right-wing cause. In her eyes, Bush and Rove can do no wrong, no matter how much wrong they do.
Hey, Roger Rabbit, at least I don’t stoop the level of personal attacks. Are you so lame in your reasoning that you can’t carry on a discussion? Why the ad-hominen attack? If you can refute what I wrote, then do so. I would think that Goldy would be policing for this kind of thing, but he probably likes it because it gets his stats up.
Fortunately, my expectations for this site are very low. At least at SP they disagree without this kind of tripe.
janet s@12
Do you even read what the righties post on here? We’re not the ones that made it a hostile environment…
Not that it matters, ‘if you can’t stand the heat, etc. etc.’
The thing is you came up with a dittohead/talkingpoint post, and you don’t expect to get slapped down?
@8
That’s fallacious reasoning. Assuming for the sake of argument that what you say about Rove’s security clearance was true (I won’t pretend to know, but as far as I’m concerned the burden of proof is on you since we already know you are intentionally deceptive), all that means is that he shouldn’t have had access to Plame’s CIA file — not that he actually didn’t. That would be something that would come out in a proper investigation. And just because he shouldn’t have had access doesn’t mean he can’t be held liable for releasing classified information that he had gotten his hands on.
The notion that she’d “lobbied” for his appointment has already been thoroughly debunked as a non-issue propogated by right-wing propogandists trying to smokescreen the real crime (see previous paragraph).
Is the White House sweating yet?
I doubt it. In the end it is the reporter’s word against Rove’s now isn’t it?
@15
guess it depends on who the grand jury finds a more reliable witness ;)
I don’t know what’s more scary ,,,, saying “you have to read between the lines” a.k.a. make stuff up. Or the fact that your read The Huffington Post.
I don’t like Rove. If he outed a COVERT operative then he should go to jail. But make stuff up to try to impune him or what you think of him? Didn’t Dan Rather try that and get a whole bunch of his staff fired?
I’d swap you a real conviction for Clinton’s lying, versus Rove’s crime (the whole definition of the word is, etc).
Goldy:
“Is the White House sweating yet?”
I’m sure they are now that some liberal blogger from Seattle regurgitating information from another liberal blogger is on the case.
“Not only is lying about a crime a crime, but it is excellent evidence of the underlying crime itself”
Okay so perjury is a crime. Was it a crime on January 17, 1998?
Clinton! What the fuck does he have to do with anything! Is it that you can’t let go of your glory-days of stirring up a massive federally-funded witch hunt where the only thing you could dig up was the president lying about a blow job under oath? That’s as pathetic as claiming that high school is the best time of your life. In case you haven’t noticed, nobody is talking about Clinton anymore — we’re talking about the current White House intentionally compromising National Security to get back at a political enemy! Why doesn’t that deserve impeachment!?!
Oh, I keep forgetting — it’s because you guys aren’t serious about protecting U.S. citizens.
Oh no.. The conservatives tell me I have to be so afraid of the tewwowists with WMD…
But..
Why do they blow the cover of a anti-WMD spy?
No need to worry.. Faux News says we’re safer…
Janet S @ 8
“By the way, there is still the underlying story to all this. Plame recommended her husband for a plum job, using her position of influence. So, if she wanted to stay secret, she should have kept her nose out of politics. But she didn’t. I bet if she was a right winger, though, you guys would be wanting to frog-march her to jail.”
This makes no sense whatsoever. First, I have no idea whether Plame is left or right wing. But, frankly, being a CIA spy and being married to someone who works for the State Department doesn’t sound very left-wing to me.
In any case, why would anyone, left, right, or center want someone “frog-marched” to jail simply for recommending their spouse for a plum job?
Finally, when the story broke, I assumed that the State Department and the CIA cooperated to get CIA agents into countries of interest. Without knowing any of the details, I was assuming that his appointments, to some extent, were designed to provide access for her work.
Geocrackr; i was responding or inspired i guess by Goldy’s paste of the article
“Luskin then launched what sounds like an I-did-not-inhale defense. ”
I figure we could argue it either way; either Clinton got off w/ a goofy defense, or Rove is arguing for the same.
Were you equally pissed when Philip Agee leaked names 20 yrs ago?
GeoCrackr @ 20
Do you realize your link is to a blog post linking to Lawrence O’Donnell? Why not just link to Goldy’s post? It’s a shorter trip and I’m sure he’d appreciate the traffic.
“In case you haven’t noticed, nobody is talking about Clinton anymore.”
Lots of people are talking about Clinton because there was more to impeach Clinton on in 1998 that there is to impeach Bush on in 2005. So unless the left comes up with something concrete (please spare me the DSM talk), it seems to me all this impeachment and treason talk is really useless blather.
@ 18 & 19
When President Clinton lied, nobody died. That’s the major difference.
If the Clinton administration outted an undercover CIA operative there would be 24/7 news coverage on Fox News, Limbaugh, Hannity and the rest of the usual suspects calling for impeachment. Now that there are few to no real journalist left in this country the thugs in the Bush administration have free reign to do as they please. Hardcore conservatives are so full of self-fulfilling pride that they can no longer admit that the government is out of control regardless of which party is in the WH.
United we stand, divided we fall. GWB and the RNC hardcore elite, conservative Christian right has done more to divide this country than any other group of people since the Civil War. The hardcore right is not going to change. So it’s up to the “Regan Democrats,” “Clinton Republicans,” and moderate conservatives, like PacMan, to come to the center next fall and bring the country back from the brink of catastrophe.
I hope when these people go to the voting booths in Nov. ’06 they’ll look back at the ’90’s and realize that the rhetoric of right regarding President Clinton specifically and Liberals in general, went over the top. I hope they follow their conscience and restore unity to America. Because the truth of the matter is the future of our country, good or bad, is in their hands.
@ 23
You mean when Agee intentionally disrupted corrupt CIA operations that were supporting dictatorships, before it was actually illegal? Sorry, I was still worrying about finishing my math homework and trying to convince my mom to let me get a driver’s license.
@ 24
As I’ve said before, we already know you’re a dissembling apologist. There’s no point in continuing to advertise that fact.
ConservativeFirst @ 24
“Lots of people are talking about Clinton because there was more to impeach Clinton on in 1998 that there is to impeach Bush on in 2005.”
That is debatable. But. . . Clinton was impeached, so, I guess it is lying George’s turn now. The big difference, is that Clinton lied about something inconsequential that had nothing whatsoever to do with the Whitewater Grand Jury’s investigation. Bush lied through his teeth, violated international law (and, hence, domestic law) by invading a country that posed no immediate threat, and now we have 1750 dead U.S. soldiers, thousands and thousands of injured soldiers, and $200 billion dollars pissed away (and without Bush even taking the responsibility for generating the revenue to piss away). Clinton’s lies were embarassing; Bush’s lies have become grave disasters!
ah, ok, then the Rove thing (using confid info) might just be like Hillary and her gang (Livingstone etc) getting 1000 or so FBI files to photocopy and run with….
@28
…which was thoroughly investigated (amid rabid frothing at the mouth by the right wing scheme machine), exonerating the accused. You see, that’s the way the process works.
dj @ 27
“Bush’s lies have become grave disasters!”
You mean the “lie” about WMDs that Senator Kerry agreed with after having the access to the same intelligence the Bush Administration did? Or Kofi Annan at the U.N., who that thought Iraq had WMDs? On to the Hague with all of these war criminals!
If you mean something else, please elaborate. Because there is a difference between being wrong and perjury.
“and now we have 1750 dead U.S. soldiers, thousands and thousands of injured soldiers, and $200 billion dollars pissed away”
So what’s your solution to the Iraq war at this point? We’re in it now, so criticizing the past accomplishes little. I haven’t heard one Democrat with a proposed solution that seems reasonable. If you have I’d like to hear it, because “cut and run” means we’d really piss away $200 billion, and 1750+ lives of U.S. soldiers. Not to mention the 1000s of Iraqi civilian deaths, in case you forgot them.
GBS @ 25
“Now that there are few to no real journalist left in this country the thugs in the Bush administration have free reign to do as they please.”
Do you really believe this? So none of three major networks, CNN, MSNBC, all the big city newspapers, have “real” journalists on their staff. How do they stay in business, or is the government propping them up like Pravda in the USSR? What stories should they be covering that they aren’t? I am sincerely curious about this.
Goldy, I’d be offended by this if I were you. Your scoops on Rove outing Plame have been groundbreaking.
ConservativeFirst@ 30
“You mean the “lie” about WMDs that Senator Kerry agreed with after having the access to the same intelligence the Bush Administration did?”
Yep. . . that was one of the lies. The fact that Kerry or anyone else bought into it is irrelevant. The administration controlled the intelligence that was given to congress. Bush, ultimately, was given authority by congress. He made the decision, he is a criminal.
“Or Kofi Annan at the U.N., who that thought Iraq had WMDs?”
Sorry, but Annan didn’t buy into the bullshit. The weapons inspectors had conclusively ruled out in the late 1990s that Iraq had any nuclear weapons, production capabilities, or mechanisms for delivery. The weapons inspectors also ruled out 90% of biological and chemical weapons. The remaining uncertainty was an accounting problem brought on by Iraqi’s destroying weapons without U.N. supervision.
“On to the Hague with all of these war criminals!”
Nope. . . Annan did not invade Iraq. Kerry did not invade Iraq. In fact, the U.S. congress was sold a bill of goods that war was the last option, and that a vote for authorizing military action was let Iraq know the U.S. was serious. He lied to congress. Now we know that Bush was, all along, looking for a way to spin the war so that he could invade. He couldn’t sell it to the U.N. so, he invaded Iraq in violation of the U.N. mandate.
@ 30, 31
Of course! — you’re a field tester for Frank Luntz, trying out dissembling propaganda on the unsuspecting rubes and kool-aid drinkers to see what sticks. So how’s that working out for you? I’m wondering how you measure your success — I imagine Luntz requires some sort of metric that you have to keep track of in order to measure how much you get paid.
ConservativeFirst@30
“So what’s your solution to the Iraq war at this point?”
I don’t have a solution—it is one fucked up mess.
“We’re in it now, so criticizing the past accomplishes little.”
Bullshit! We go after the fucking criminals who have killed scores of thousands (including Iraqi civilians), and bilked Americans out of hundreds of billions. Just because we are in a fucking quagmire in Iraq doesn’t mean that BushCo escapes accountability!
“I haven’t heard one Democrat with a proposed solution that seems reasonable.”
I haven’t heard of one Republican with a proposed solution, either.
“If you have I’d like to hear it, because “cut and run” means we’d really piss away $200 billion, and 1750+ lives of U.S. soldiers. Not to mention the 1000s of Iraqi civilian deaths, in case you forgot them.”
You didn’t hear me say cut and run. What I am asking is that BushCo be held accountable for their actions. Oh. . . an as to the $200 billion, 1750 dead U.S. soldiers, and 20,000 to 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians—they are all pissed away already.
DJ
Where do you get 20,000 to 100,000 civilian dead? If you are counting the hundreds of thousands of people found in mass graves I have news for you… those people were killed by Sadam not the US. Who you source on the 20,000 – 100,000 figure? Just curious.
dj @ 34
“Oh. . . an as to the $200 billion, 1750 dead U.S. soldiers, and 20,000 to 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians—they are all pissed away already.”
I guess an Arab democracy has no value to you. We’ve already seen the positive effects of the Iraqi election in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt.
I also dispute the 100,000 Iraqi deaths, as well. puts the figure closer to 25,000 max.
“Bullshit! We go after the f****** criminals who have killed scores of thousands (including Iraqi civilians), and bilked Americans out of hundreds of billions. Just because we are in a f****** quagmire in Iraq doesn’t mean that BushCo escapes accountability!” explitives deleted
Wanting accountability is fine. What does “being held accountable” mean to you? Impeachment? Hung for treason? 30 lashes with a wet noodle?
If we are truly in a quamire, sitting over hear complaining isn’t going to solve the problem. How do we get out of this supposed quagmire? Both your posts are in essenced rants against Bush. Hate him all you want, he’s President (unless removed or dies) until January 2009. Oppose him all you want, but I’d suggest coming up with ideas instead just venting your spleen.
I say we continue to kill the terrorists and insurgents trying to kill our troops and install a fascist theocracy (which we seem to have here according to some). We should continue to support the democratically elected government of Iraq. We need to do a better job of restoring infrastructure. If they ask us to leave, we leave. If the President (whomever he or she may be) decides to leave, we leave. If Congress cuts funding, we leave. For the latter to, I don’t think we should do that until Iraq’s democractic future is reasonably assured.
You do value freedom and democracy in the world, don’t you?
CF @ 36
Sorry did a bad job with the HTML.
See http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ for the civilian death count in Iraq.
CF @ 36
I guess an Arab democracy has no value to you. We’ve already seen the positive effects of the Iraqi election in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt.
Which “Arab democracy” would you be referring to? The one that serves at the pleasure of the U.S. military, the one that can’t overturn the “free trade” regulations instituted by Viceroy Bremer just before he skipped out? Oh, and people who are actually experts on the Middle East know that there’s no connection between our latest colony and Lebanon, Syria and Egypt.
I also dispute the 100,000 Iraqi deaths, as well. IraqBodycount.net puts the figure reported in media and eyewitness accounts closer to 25,000 max.
Sly. The Lancet Study puts 100,000 as a conservative estimate.
Wanting accountability is fine. What does “being held accountable” mean to you? Impeachment? Hung for treason? 30 lashes with a wet noodle?
Nice straw man. What does accountability mean to you? Impeachment for lying under oath? Or promoting an incompetent advisor to Secretary of State? Let’s start with an investigation by independent counsel and criminal charges where required — I’d be happy with that basic requirement.
Oppose him all you want, but I’d suggest coming up with ideas instead just venting your spleen.
What’s the point of “coming up with ideas” if ShrubCo already knows the “right” thing to do, damn the consequences? Personally I’ll stick with saying “I told you so.” Too bad about all those people getting killed and all those $billions wasted because of their incompetence — if they’d listened to reason to begin with we wouldn’t be in this mess.
Too bad you’ll have to go back to Luntz and tell him your latest disinformation tactics didn’t work, either.
Neo-Cons don’t give a damn about the deaths in Iraq, that is why they don’t bother to keep informed about the numbers. They only numbers they care about it money.
Just keep it up assholes. you are buring yourselves. Just like Chuck with his war on the prevailing wage. WHy give a fuck about the working man and woman, you want everything for nothing you chickenhawk Death Cult fascists!
The Republican part is dead, and all the blame lies at the feet of conservativefirst, RUFUS and the rest of the kool aid drinking psychos.
Before you befoul this country anymore, police your own godforsaken party. Only you can do it.
Take one for the team, and the human race.
RUFUS @ 35 and ConservativeFirst @ 36
“Where do you get 20,000 to 100,000 civilian dead?”
What the fuck? Have you two been living in a cave for the last year?
The numbers are based on an “on the ground” household survey, by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, and published in one of the most respected peer-reviewed academic journals in the world. The source is Roberts et al. (2004) Mortality before and after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: cluster sample survey, The Lancet. 364 (Iss. 9448):1857. Read it and weep. . . seriously.
The take home message: an estimated 98,000 excess deaths (as a result of the military invasion) with a 95% confidence interval of 8,000-194,000.
Based on media reports of deaths in Iraq, 21,684-24,603 civilian deaths have been reported (summarized here: http://www.iraqbodycount.net/.)
ConservativeFirst @ 36
“I guess an Arab democracy has no value to you.”
Not at the price we are paying. Democracies are not built in a day. The problem here is that Bush’s mismanagement has resulted in far worse side effects—like the U.S. becoming a big recruitment tool for terrorists.
“We’ve already seen the positive effects of the Iraqi election in Lebanon, Syria and Egypt.”
Bullshit. Lebanon responded to internal events. Syria has not changed, and Egypt has made the most superficial moves toward democracy imaginable. There is no evidence that any of them had anything to do whatsoever with Iraq. I would claim that our irresponsible actions in Iraq have hampered democracy in the Middle East. This is most apparent in Iran, which has had a Islamic fundamentalist backlash (partially) in response to the U.S. policy in Iraq.
“I also dispute the 100,000 Iraqi deaths, as well. puts the figure closer to 25,000 max.”
Well, fuck you. When you conduct a household survey in Iraq, write it up and get it published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, then I will accept your opinion. Otherwise, your disputing the range I cited is just blowing smoke out your ass.
“Wanting accountability is fine. What does “being held accountable” mean to you? Impeachment? Hung for treason? 30 lashes with a wet noodle?”
Ultimately, it means being tried (fairly) in The Hague. In the short run, impeachment followed by being (fairly) tried in the Senate would be satisfactory.
“If we are truly in a quamire, sitting over hear complaining isn’t going to solve the problem. How do we get out of this supposed quagmire?”
Like I said, Iraq is such a quagmire that neither Bush, Kerry, nor the Tooth Ferry is going to solve the problem easily or quickly. This quagmire was foreseen by people on the left and the right before the invasion. Just because I don’t have a solution (and neither does anyone else as far as I can tell) doesn’t mean we should not hold the assholes who got us into this mess responsible!
“Both your posts are in essenced rants against Bush. Hate him all you want, he’s President (unless removed or dies) until January 2009.”
With any luck he will be removed before 2009, but in the likely event he remains in office through Jan 2009, I am certainly in favor of a trial in The Hague for Shrub right after he leaves office.
“I say we continue to kill the terrorists and insurgents trying to kill our troops and install a fascist theocracy (which we seem to have here according to some). We should continue to support the democratically elected government of Iraq. We need to do a better job of restoring infrastructure. If they ask us to leave, we leave. If the President (whomever he or she may be) decides to leave, we leave. If Congress cuts funding, we leave. For the latter to, I don’t think we should do that until Iraq’s democractic future is reasonably assured.”
Yes, I don’t see that we have any choice about “staying the course” at this point. But, it is likely to take decades to get Iraq to the point of being a real democracy. Man, are we in for a big credit card bill. . . .
“You do value freedom and democracy in the world, don’t you?”
I value freedom and democracy at home first. I am not a big fan of forcing democracy in other countries. Democracy works very badly in some countries (and I have lived a substantial period of time living in a developing country with a dysfunctional democracy). Unfortunately, Bush has jeopardized our freedom and our democracy for his lunatic and unnecessary war.
Here’s a tasty little tidbit from the blogosphere:
****************************************************************
No one disputes that we were at war when Plame’s identity was leaked. As for our being in ‘peril of attack’, the FBI released a terror warning on March 6th, 2003, and the Defense Intelligence Agency issued a terror alert on June 21st, 2003. Ambassador Wilson wrote his column on July 6th and Novak exposed his wife on July 14th.
Obviously, we were most concerned about attacks using high explosives or weapons of mass destruction. Valerie Plame was employed by the Central Intelligence Agency to work on nuclear proliferation. Shortly before her cover was blown we had uncovered a massive proliferation network run by Pakistani scientist, A.Q. Khan. It’s quite possible that Valerie Plame had a hand in uncovering that network. But even if she wasn’t part of that investigation, the unique value of such agents should have been clear to Rove.
Did Rove commit treason? John Walker Lindh was accused of ‘levying war’ against the United States. Rove would presumably be convicted of giving our enemies ‘Aid and Comfort’.
So, I have to assume that Giuliani would fully support the execution of Karl Rove. That is, provided he has a fair trial and is convicted.
No?
****************************************************************
Treason IS treason, ain’t it?
Hello DJ: Great to see you up this morning.
I asked this question of Don, so I’ll ask it of you. Do you call liars the presidents of these countries WMD liars: Russia, Italy, France, Germany, Egypt, Jordan? Notice GB was not mentioned here. Each country’s intelligence service told the US that they thought Saddam reconstituted his weapons programs. Your side said “Go to the UN”. Bush did and these countries reiterated their positions. Read Tommy Franks book. He outlines some of those countries. Vlad Putin said it publically to the press. The LA Times immediately discounted it saying that he wanted GWB reelected because “they are great friends”. So someone (Puddy?) asked, “Putin wasn’t one of those world leaders who John Kerry could count on?”. So DJ, get off the Don band wagon and open your eyes. Many countries thought Saddam had WMDs and you guys run around saying Bush lied, Bush lied. That’s high on the MoveOn.Org activist list. So do you say you are a moderate Democrat? If so you’s be a funny man! Also, didn’t someone post the fact that just before the Iraq war Hans Blix (you remember him) went to the Security Council and said that he was not sure if Saddam didn’t have WMDs.
You are all pissed off that GWB won last year. Well that’s what presidential elections are for. If your party allowed Joe Lieberman to have a fair chance, your fare would have been paid. I would have voted for Joe. But no, he was more mainstream than the MoveOn.Org and Howard Deaniacs wanted. So Johnny Forbes Kerry was selected, the Vietnam vet (he mentioned it every chance he got) so you guys lost by what, 3 million votes.
Geocrakr regarding the FBI files, it wasn’t fully investigated. Janet Reno and Louis Freeh covered it up. Craig Livingstone, the person who located the files for Hilary, works for a Democrat fund raiser in California. I know all about him here.
DJ why do you call Iraq a quagmire? Are you a Teddy Chappaquiddick Kennedy apologist? That’s his favorite line since it was his big brother who escalated the Vietnam Quagmire!!!
Don am I a neocon? I value all life including that in the womb. I valued my wife’s pregnancies. I talked to the life in her belly. Maybe that’s why I can go to the well and get some more when I like!!!! DJ you seem to have a grasp on economics. Please explain to Don when the prevailing wage is elevated too much, the elasticity of demand changes on the workforce by employers.
DJ we were in Germany for many years, and the Nazis attacked us for many years in a guerilla warfare like action. Please look it up. Democracies do not happen overnight. Regarding dysfunctional democracies, you already know the answer. It’s because certain people who had full control can’t give it up easily!!!
Rujax206, you found something interesting. You actually toned down your anger. I commend you for that.
“guerilla warfare like action” has to be one of the best terms I’ve read in a week, if maddeningly vague~!
Windie: You words mimic your moniker, empty and full of hot air. If that’s your argument against my commentary, you are a weak debater!
Look up Germany, The Marshall Plan, etc. and you will view a close description of a guerilla war like action. The Nazis performed the hit and run actions like the Zarqawi gang of today. Look up who Saddam’s heroes are and you will see Adolf Hitler.
What is really funny is that the tin foil hat brigade is putting forth the notion that a reporter from the uber liberal NYT is protecting Karl Rove.
Packman @ 43
”Russia, Italy, France, Germany, Egypt, Jordan? Notice GB was not mentioned here. Each country’s intelligence service told the US that they thought Saddam reconstituted his weapons programs.”
You and I have not seen a shred of evidence from the intelligence services from these countries. In fact, I challenge you to find any statements made by these countries that suggest their intelligence had uncovered original evidence for WMD or WMD programs in Iraq. The fact is, the U.N. weapons inspectors and statements from the Iraqi government were the only two authoritative sources of information about WMD in Iraq. U.S. intelligence failed on every point that any Administration official ever made to support the WMD charges. The sad thing to me is that Bush lied, and, in the end we learn that Saddam told the truth about WMDs in Iraq. It is too bad that we had to kill tens (and maybe hundreds) of thousands of innocent people to lean this.
In fact, Packman, what was the evidence that Iraq had WMD before the war? I don’t know about you, but I found Powell’s U.N. performance embarrassing and shameful (I had some respect for Powell before that speech). Not one of the charges that the U.S. made about WMD was true. Many of them were discredited even within the U.S. government prior to Administration officials making statements about them (buying yellowcake from Niger and the aluminum tool debacles come to mind).
”Your side said “Go to the UN”. Bush did and these countries reiterated their positions.”
Sorry, it ain’t about “my side.” It is about the U.S. obligations under international treaties. The U.S. invaded a country that posed no imminent threat, with no U.N. authorization.
[unintelligible ranting deleted]
”So do you say you are a moderate Democrat?”
Nope. . . I have stated many times before on this blog that I am not a Democrat.
”Also, didn’t someone post the fact that just before the Iraq war Hans Blix (you remember him) went to the Security Council and said that he was not sure if Saddam didn’t have WMDs.”
No, Packman, Blix did not do that. You don’t even have your fucking facts straight, man!
[off-topic rantings about Liberman, moveon, Dean, Kerry Vietnam, FBI files, Janet Reno, Livingstone, Hillary, Democrat fund raisers deleted]
”DJ why do you call Iraq a quagmire? [deleted unrelated stuff about Chappaquiddick and Vietnam]”
What the fuck, Packman? Are you on crack? It is a quagmire because we are stuck there spending over $2 billion per week and losing two or three American Soldiers per day. We have no exit in sight. Iraq cannot form a government because politicians are being assassinated weekly, infrastructure is in disarray, oil sales are minimal. The U.S. occupation has become a big terrorist recruitment tool. Who is the enemy in Iraq? The terrorists? The insurgents? Or people who are angry at the U.S. for killing their relative? All of them. And the U.S. is not ridiculed and scorned by most countries and their citizens in the world. In short, our efforts are nothing short of a humanitarian, fiscal, and political disaster. The term “quagmire” encompasses mostly the military occupation part, but I suppose the term “catastrophe” better describes the big picture.
[unrelated bullshit about wombs, pregnancy, economics, prevailing wage, workforce deleted—holy shit, Packman, take some Riddlin or something]
”DJ we were in Germany for many years, and the Nazis attacked us for many years in a guerilla warfare like action. Please look it up. Democracies do not happen overnight.”
Packman, what happened after WWII is irrelevant. In the current war, the U.S. is the aggressor. We have invaded a sovereign nation that posed no threat to us. My points are that Bush is a war criminal, and lied to the American people in leading us to war. I want him to be held accountable domestically and internationally.
pacman@45
I wasn’t trying to argue with you, I just thought it was funny. Why not just say “Germans used Guerilla warfare tactics in WW2”? Seriously
actually, lets go back to the content of that bit. ‘six months at most’ isn’t years by any means.
I simply don’t remember reading about the massive german insurgency after ‘major combat operations’ were over. What happened in germany is irrelevant, like others have said, but a lie is a lie, and should probably be called.
Why not use Vietnam? There was “guerilla warfare like action” there I bet!
oh wait, you probably desperately want to avoid vietnam comparisons… sorry!
DJ: The name is PacMan, not Packman. Does DJ stand for dumb jerk? Can’t you ever post without one swear word. GBS: I think we know who owns the potty mouth on HA. Now time to dissect this insect called DJ.
I was addressing many different people and their blog entries. I write that way as I have a job to perform and I can visit only so often, much like jsa on beacon hill. If in your small dimly lit intellectual prison you can’t figure that out, well I feel sorry for you!
1.) The other countries intell was discussed in news articles that Puddy posted against Don when we all thought Don was Donna. As I remember, Don had no response to the links. There were seven or eight links. If you took some time and performed due diligence, you would have read them. Some were documented in Tommy Franks book, but it’s more right sided so I know you didn’t read it. You live in a fantasy world about the UN being the only authoritative source. Some of the links had quotes from the respective presidents. I remember the Schroeder comment regarding the WMDs, where he expressed shock they were not there. I guess you forgot the Putin press announcement too? I suggest that you reenter your small intellectual prison.
2.) When do you need UN authorization to take a shit? Our constitution empowers the President to attack any country as a perceived threat. So I assume Bosnia and Serbia were approved by the UN? Uhhhhhh, No DJ!!!
3.) Go to the UN web site. Someone already posted the link where Hans Blix said it. Already been done DJ. Were you on vacation or asleep?
4.) What were my off topic rantings about Lieberman and Kerry. They are on topic about Karl Rove. If you can’t put 2+2 together you are dense as dried concrete in a crashed cement mixer.
5.) Why do most Iraqis want us to stay? Or did you miss that poll also? Were you on vacation or asleep? Look up the cotton-picking poll boy because I am through having to prove my points. You need to read more than MoveOn.Org and People for the “Democratic” Way! What about the 169,000 trained Iraqi police and soldiers? They need assistance in learning to fight these guys. Another cut and runner type. I like the fact that the bad guys are coming to Iraq. This means that they are not trying to inflitrate the US.
6.) Pregnancy wombs and other comments were answers to other posters. Man you’s a real dummy if you can’t figure that out!
7.) What happened after WWII is relevant. It proves that a democracy is not built over night. But then again you forget about the Japanese soldiers who were found in remote Asian countries that were still in war mode many years after the end of WWII. Some were attacking the people in the country side until they were told WWII was over and Japan lost! Funny how the Europeans have stated in some of their press that maybe GWB is right. I know the links to the papers. Perform a Google search!!!
@51
you said ‘nazis’ tho– nice weasel attempt!
I’m not knowledgable about some things to add much usually, but at least I can keep you guys honest :p
Goldy,
Will you publicly apologize to Karl Rove if it turns out he was not the source?
Pacman,
”Can’t you ever post without one swear word. GBS: I think we know who owns the potty mouth on HA. Now time to dissect this insect called DJ.”
Fuck you, pacman! You don’t regulate the language on this blog. If you don’t like the dialog, surf your ass over to somewhere else!
”The other countries intell was discussed in news articles that Puddy posted against”
As I said, there is no evidence that those countries had first-hand evidence of WMD. Statements of surprise by a president have no relevance here.
”When do you need UN authorization to take a shit? Our constitution empowers the President to attack any country as a perceived threat.”
Of course, Iraq was known to be no threat to the U.S. or any other country. In any case, the constitution also requires us to meet our treaty obligations. I am aware of no treaty regarding defecation, but if we signed one, it would be, in essence, domestic law.
”So I assume Bosnia and Serbia were approved by the UN? Uhhhhhh, No DJ!!!”
If you think that those NATO actions violated U.S. laws or treaty obligations, then feel free to press your case for that. In the mean time, I will stick with with pushing for accountability of the administration for their illegal actions in Iraq.
”Go to the UN web site. Someone already posted the link where Hans Blix said it. Already been done DJ. Were you on vacation or asleep?”
No. In fact, Blix said no such thing. I know what Blix said in his 14 Feb 2003 presentation to the security council. He said that UNMOVIC had not found any WMD. He said there was no smoking gun to report. He did point out that the accounting for biological and chemical weapons was not complete (this was old news. In the late 90s UNSCOM certified that 90 to 95 percent of the biological and chemical weapons were accountably destroyed and the remaining 5-10 percent were apparently destroyed without proper documentation). And Blix did state that “without evidence, confidence cannot arise.” Blix later said that that last statement was primarily directed to the Iraqis to encourage them to provide evidence of the unmonitored destruction. Blix pointed out in his presentation that Powell was wrong about the chemical plant. Blix pointed out that Iraq had taken steps of active cooperation to solve the accounting problem.
At the same security council meeting, ElBaradei (from IAEA) reported that there were no unresolved (nuclear) disarmament issues of any substance. He said that they found no evidence of nuclear weapons activities (again, contrary to Powell’s claims).
”Why do most Iraqis want us to stay? Or did you miss that poll also? Were you on vacation or asleep? Look up the cotton-picking poll boy because I am through having to prove my points. You need to read more than MoveOn.Org and People for the “Democratic” Way! What about the 169,000 trained Iraqi police and soldiers? They need assistance in learning to fight these guys. Another cut and runner type. I like the fact that the bad guys are coming to Iraq. This means that they are not trying to inflitrate the US.”
This is all completely irrelevant. (Oh, and I have not been to moveon.org since before the 2004 election. . . . repeatedly bringing up moveon is bullshit). You say, “another cut and run type.” Where have I ever suggested or hinted at any such thing? Get your head out of you ass, dipshit!
”What happened after WWII is relevant. It proves that a democracy is not built over night. But then again you forget about the Japanese soldiers who were found in remote Asian countries that were still in war mode many years after the end of WWII. Some were attacking the people in the country side until they were told WWII was over and Japan lost! Funny how the Europeans have stated in some of their press that maybe GWB is right. I know the links to the papers. Perform a Google search!!!
Again, your babblings about WWII are completely irrelevant. I am asking for accountability for our leaders in invading a nation with no justification, and the enormous costs involved. You seem to be making some type of post-hoc bullshit explanation about building democracy—that is a different topic from what I am discussing.
Hello DJ. Sorry for the delay. I was busy.
Here’s Johnny. Oh wrong show. Let’s start here from links of another poster:
Direct from CNN & Larry King: Bill Clinton says they exist, even after the war: in a July 2003 interview with Larry King, the ex-president uncharacteristically defended George Bush, saying “it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there [was]…a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for” in Iraq. Every intelligence agency in the world – French, British, German, Russian, Czech, you name it – agreed before the war; Jordanian intelligence can certainly confirm their opinion today.
Add Egypt too. Read Tommy Franks book!!!
Canada thought Saddam had WMD’s too? : cnews . canoe . ca / CNEWS / Canada / 2004 / 05 / 11 / pf-455210 . html
Say it ain’t so DJ, but France: www. csmonitor . com / 2005 / 0304 / p09s03-cods . html
ASTANA, Kazakhstan (Reuters) — Russian President Vladimir Putin, in comments sure to help President Bush, declared Friday that Russia knew Iraq’s Saddam Hussein had planned terror attacks on U.S. soil and had warned Washington. Putin said Russian intelligence had been told on several occasions that Saddam’s special forces were preparing to attack U.S. targets inside and outside the United States.
“After the events of September 11, 2001, and before the start of the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services several times received information that the official services of the Saddam regime were preparing ‘terrorist acts’ on the United States and beyond its borders,” he told reporters.
“This information was passed on to our American colleagues,” he said. He added, however, that Russian intelligence had no proof that Saddam’s agents had been involved in any particular attack.
This is an interesting quote from Putin: “At a summit of G8 world industrialized powers at the U.S. resort of Sea Island last week, where he met Bush separately, Putin stepped into the U.S. campaign by chastising U.S. Democrats for attacking the Republican president on Iraq.
He said they had “no moral right” to do so since it had been the Democratic administration of Bill Clinton that had authorized the 1999 bombing of Yugoslavia by U.S. and NATO forces.”
Remember Vladimir Putin in February, 2005. He said “We thought he had WMDs.”
Here is the LA Times response found by David trying to refute Putin: And, according to the LA Times:
Some Russian political analysts said Friday that, although Putin may have given the U.S. information about Iraqi terrorist plots, he was probably disclosing it now to boost Bush’s chances for reelection.
“It’s apparent that Russians and President Putin are interested in a second term for Bush,” said Liliya Shevtsova of the Carnegie Moscow Center. “We’ve always had good relations with Republicans. We dislike Democrats, because Democrats always care about democracy in Russia.”
DJ That’s enough for now. The Hans Blix quote will be forthcoming. But again your small intellectual prison keeps you from reading varied materials.
GBS @ 25:” When President Clinton lied, nobody died. That’s the major difference.”
Vince Foster died.
Pacman @ 55
”Direct from CNN & Larry King: Bill Clinton says they exist, even after the war: in a July 2003 interview with Larry King, the ex-president uncharacteristically defended George Bush, saying “it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there [was]…a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for” in Iraq. Every intelligence agency in the world – French, British, German, Russian, Czech, you name it – agreed before the war; Jordanian intelligence can certainly confirm their opinion today.”
Here is what he said, without the bullshit editing by freerepublic: “People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons.”
And, as I said in my previous post, the accounting problem is not disputed and was known for years prior to Bush being in office. The problem was that about 5 to 10 percent of the biological and chemical weapons were unaccounted for because Iraq destroyed them without oversight. These posed no threat. The biological weapons were way past their shelf life. The chemical weapons, of course, pose less of a threat that biological weapons. Finally, Iraq had no delivery systems. Using this quote by Clinton is complete bullshit rightwing distortion of the facts.
By the way, Clinton knew about the accounting problem for years. The difference is that Clinton didn’t launch into an illegal, poorly planned, costly war over it. In fact, it makes no difference whatsoever what any leader thought about Iraq’s WMD program. The people on the ground said they were not a threat, but technically could not be released until Iraq found a way to account for the last 5-10 percent.
And, PLEASE, spare me the Putin crap. When a Russian president starts criticizing one party and then makes a statement that supports the other party’s candidate, I smell political bullshit. Russia has never made public any evidence they claimed to have about Iraq planning to launch terrorist attacks in the U.S. As you pointed out, “although Putin may have given the U.S. information about Iraqi terrorist plots, he was probably disclosing it now to boost Bush’s chances for reelection.” “It’s apparent that Russians and President Putin are interested in a second term for Bush,”
Pacman, shove your bullshit neocon talking points up your ass (and then wean yourself from them). Everything you have posted has been hashed out before and refuted.
But, you cannot refute the obvious facts: there were no WMDs (we were PROMISED there were WMDs). We spent $200 billion and counting, that we will all be paying off for generations, we have killed off 1750 U.S. soldiers and we have killed 25,000+ (perhaps up to 200,000) innocent civilians. We have irreparably harmed the reputation of the U.S. internationally, and we have harmed our military (low recruitment is just the start of the harm). Bush’s actions have caused an explosion in the recruitment of terrorists, who are raging mad about the unjust actions of the U.S. Finally, the U.S. will be held accountable for their violations of international laws. To me it seems like BushCo ought to be held accountable for duping us into this catastrophe.
I guess all that Republican talk about accountability is just plain bullshit.
Oh, Pacman @ 55 and elsewhere, one other point:
“But again your small intellectual prison keeps you from reading varied materials.”
You know, that intellectual prison was my “shot in the groin” (as Mr. Cynical put it), first used here. I don’t really mind if you borrow it, but I wish you weren’t so fucking lame in your attempts to use it. More importantly, you seem to copy everything you post here. Have you ever had an original thought worth posting? Have you ever done research and synthesized it into an original viewpoint? Try it some time! Try to write something completely original, where you have brought together materials and ideas that nobody has brought together before, and presented them in a well thought out, well supported, concise post. I could learn to respect you if you did that!
Who are you calling a bullshit neocon, jackass? When you live on my side of the river then you can spew names at me boy, you got that? You don’t know jack. You asked me to give you links I delivered. You don’t like the links so your pea brain mushroom clouded in your cranial orifice. Now when people look in your eyes they will see “Vacancy” flashing in bright neon colors.
You claim not to be a lefty Democrat but you sure do sound like Jim Jeffords, an Independent in Democratic Cloth. I explain what I read and you then have to figure it out. Well your figuring leaves a lot lacking.
I don’t dispute the war cost. I dispute the lives lost. I dispute your knee-jerk reaction to it all. Where are the WMDs? I already splained to you whom else in the world thought Saddam had them and they fed it to our CIA. So they were not found. Did Bush lie? If you say yes then most of Eurpoe did too. But your friends the French and Germans, oh no it can’t be true, they lied too. But no, in the small intellectual prison called DJ’s mind, he can’t fathom that. When in the course of human events it does become necessary to take on the enemy. So you don’t like the axis of evil, then go live there. I still support my president in all his foibles and actions eventhough he may have not received good advice. I like the enemy dying on foreign soil vs. our homes and streets. If you like them so much call teh Pentagon and ask for a Club Gitmo detainee. I’m sure your request will be reviewed with the utmost fervor!
If we have such a low esteem in everyone’s eyes, why does the world look to us for African aid? If we killed all those Iraqis, why does the vast majority want us to stay? You never answered that question along with others because in your small intellectual prison, there is no answer for that question.
Why does everyone have their hand out for US Money? If they hate us soooooo much, then they should pull themselves up by the bootstraps and make due with their own lot and say to the world we don’t want that US Money. But it doesn’t happen does it DJ?
So my final questions DJ, who educated you? You claim it isn’t MoveOn.Org, so where are you getting these “sweet” talking points from? I read the Internet. I don’t depend on the RWM or the MSM for my news. If I can be moderate on abortion, how can I be that neocon you like to pin on anyone who can think logically and can take you on in a “discussion”? URSA Jackass! At least David and GBS discuss topics. All you do is throw epithets and vitriol. Even Rujax206 has toned it down! Congrats Rujax206.
Good night DJ. I hope Mrs. DJ gives you some because you are a terribly vexed man!
PacMan,
I’m surprised. You’re losing your cool way too fast for a well educated man. Plus, you’ve quoted Putin’s comments several times, but I find this part weakens your arguement using Putin’s comments.
“This information was passed on to our American colleagues,” he said. He added, however, that Russian intelligence had no proof that Saddam’s agents had been involved in any particular attack.”
I think you need proof of involvement before you launch a war, don’t you?
PacMan
Here’s the other part of your argument that is weak. While many other nations, including our allies, suspected strongly that Saddam had WMD’s, no one believed it strongly enough, or thought it to be such an imminent threat that they waged war over the issue.
Bush’s inability to decipher what his predecessors successfully did is the central part of his failure as Commander in Chief.
While Bush was opening another front in the War on Terror, Iraq, N. Korea went nuclear on his watch and withdrew from the nuclear proliferation treaty.
Iran is going nuclear on his watch. They just elected one of the hostage takers as their duly elected president. I hope that wasn’t his vision of spreading democracy in the middle east. Or is it the laws of unintended consequences?
Pacman @ 59
“Who are you calling a bullshit neocon, jackass?”
I realize from your other posting that you are not a neocon—my point was to lose the neocon talking points. I did not call you a neocon, but I apologize for giving you the impression that I was calling you a neocon.
“I dispute the lives lost.”
And just how do you justify disputing the numbers from the Lancet study? Have you even read the study?
“I dispute your knee-jerk reaction to it all. “
Is mine a knee-jerk reaction? I was regularly writing letters to my reps in congress in the months before Bush sent in the troops, disputing the WMD claims and calling this a witch hunt. I watched Bush systematically spin Iraq as a “problem,” and work up the American people into a war frenzy. The administration stoked Americans into a frenzy not unlike the Salem witch hunts. The process they used was absolutely transparent when observed from the outside.
“Did Bush lie? If you say yes then most of Eurpoe did too.”
As I have said, it is irrelevant whether other governments thought they had evidence or not (or were willing to buy into the U.S. position and arguments). I am holding my leader responsible for his actions. We have new documents with evidence (not proof, just evidence) that Bush was determined to invade Iraq while he was telling the American people that war was the last resort. If, indeed, this is true (and many people like me have suspected this since day one) I want Bush to answer for his actions.
Sure, it could be that Bush was surrounded by complete incompetent idiots who led him into this disaster, but I think the evidence favors the simpler explanation that Bush was determined to go to war against Iraq no matter what. This explanation is consistent with the fact that (1) almost all of the evidence for WMD in Iraq that was made public, was discredited prior to the invasion (yellowcake—forged documents and nonsensical on the face of it anyway; aluminum tubes—discredited by UNMOVIC and the U.S. Dept. of Energy; the supposed chemical weapons plant Powell showed to the U.N.—discredited by UNMOVIC inspectors who inspected the location, and silly because if we knew it was there, we would simply bomb it; the drones—inspected by UNMOVIC and found to be legal model aircraft, probably for aerial photography; the cluster rocket that UNMOVIC inspectors found—silently dropped by the administration because it was left-over scrap; the only evidence not disputed until after the invasion were the two “mobile weapons labs” that turn out to be hydrogen generators for weather balloons; do you remember all the detail the Powell claimed to know about these “weapon labs?” Were those lies, did some delusional intel agent dream that shit up, or what?), (2) the UNMOVIC inspectors testified that they were making excellent progress in Iraq, and (3) Saddam Hussein completely caved in to make concessions prior to the invasion. In the end, Bush only had the old information (from the 1990s) about the accounting discrepancies—a problem widely recognized as being very difficult to fix. The accounting problem was not evidence that Iraq had WMD, only evidence that they could not properly account for the destruction of the weapons.
”When in the course of human events it does become necessary to take on the enemy.“
According to our treaty obligations, we take on an enemy when a country is threatening us with imminent danger or actually attacks or when the U.N. passes a resolution authorizing such action. Nothing of the sort was even remotely true for Iraq in 2003.
”I like the enemy dying on foreign soil vs. our homes and streets.”
Of course, our actions in Iraq have resulted in many, many more enemies (and not for any one reason) willing to sacrifice their life for revenge. As happened in London this morning, we can expect Bush’s actions to result in years of further restrictions in our liberties and living in fear of such attacks. This would not have happened (at least on this scale) if we had stuck to hunting down and bringing terrorists to justice, rather than invading a country that had no substantive links to terrorism.
”If we have such a low esteem in everyone’s eyes, why does the world look to us for African aid?”
Because we have money. The resource poor countries of the world look to all of the rich countries of the world assistance on the AIDS epidemic—this is a humanitarian, not a political, issue. Do you seriously believe that our international reputation has not been seriously injured by Bush’s folly? I suspect many of our allies (as well as countries that are not our allies) are working to provide more balance in world power because the U.S. has shown she cannot be trusted as the sole superpower. Mark my words, this will become a big international issue over the next decade.
”If we killed all those Iraqis, why does the vast majority want us to stay?”
For the same reason that most Americans feel that we have to stay in Iraq—the disaster would be even worse if we were to pull stakes and run. We shouldn’t feel flattered by this. It is more a sign of the disaster we have created than a sign of “winning the hearts and minds” of Iraqis!
”Why does everyone have their hand out for US Money? If they hate us soooooo much, then they should pull themselves up by the bootstraps and make due with their own lot and say to the world we don’t want that US Money. ”
You are confused. Iraq doesn’t need our money—it has the resources to be entirely self-supporting. But, it needs political stability to convert resources into a functioning economy. Unfortunately, our invasion and poorly planned postwar efforts have made it nearly impossible to achieve political stability. Hence, we are now pouring $200,000 a minute into Iraq (and we are not even collecting the revenue for this, so we will accrue interest, as well).
”So my final questions DJ, who educated you? You claim it isn’t MoveOn.Org, so where are you getting these “sweet” talking points from?”
In real life, I am a scientist. Hence, I place an extremely low value on secondary sources of information and unsupported opinion. I place a high value on direct evidence. Therefore, my primary education on these topics comes from following this issue (since the first Gulf War, actually) from direct sources, first-hand accounts, and, to the extent possible, authoritative sources rather than politicians’ spin. I read and did my own evaluation of the Lancet article, rather than accepting anyone’s summary of it. I’ve read books written by UNSCOM and UNMOVIC weapons inspectors (including Blix’s book). (BTW: I have not read Franks book, but I’ll keep my eye out for a copy). What I have not read are books by pundits on either the left or the right. I listened to Powell’s speech before the U.N. (In fact, for an interesting exercise, find and read Powell’s speech before the U.N. In the light of hindsight, it is embarrassing and smacks of trumped up charges—it is shameful). I listened to all of the publicly broadcast portions of the Senate hearings. I read the memos whenever I can get a hold of them. Before I use sources like http://icasualties.org/, I try to evaluate the veracity of their information. I am sure my opinion converges with those of many liberal sources, but they are arrived at largely independently of each other, but relying on some of the same original sources.
Pacman, this is how I approach every issue that I become involved in. For example, if you look at my posts on the election debacle over the last one-half year, you will find that I went to original documents (I have a foot-high pile of court documents sitting on my table), did my own statistical analyses, I listened to every minute of the trial itself. I read the entire election code and the relevant parts of the Washington State Constitution. I relied on the MSM for a limited amount of information that could not be obtained elsewhere (like the Seattle Times survey of felons). You will find that many of my posts correct factual misinformation spewed as talking points from right-wingers. So, when I offer you my opinion on the election contest or on Bush’s folly, you can bet it is based in a high content of primary or impartial sources, and a consideration of the issues from multiple angles. Obviously, I have my political biases, too. But, when the evidence doesn’t support a liberal cause, I don’t take it up as an issue. There are a number of issues I simply don’t discuss on HA—either because I don’t feel I have enough solid information, or because I feel the evidence does not allow me to support it. (A good example is prevailing wages, which I have said before, I will not currently support or reject—forming an opinion either way will require further research.)
Finally, I hope my little essay will help you understand my posting style. I will continue to convey maximal contempt for posts that I judge are thoughtless repetitions of talking points, or for people who spin using factually incorrect information. At the same time, I do appreciate genuine, thoughtful, debate, and you will find that I have had many civil discussions, even in the face of disagreement.
DJ I see we do have some similar ground. I accept your apology. Civility is a necessity for good discussion. I don’t have neocon talking points. But it seems to me that some of you talking points are wacky lefty ones to me!
Where was the UN resolution on Bosnia and Serbia? Did I miss that?
Regarding African aid, as a human of African descent, I support our aid causes into the continent. I look at it through curious eyes because it was the Europeans who raped and pillaged the continent for it’s rare earths and minerals and it’s people and now the Europeans want the US to lead the money foray. Why can’t the Europeans reinvest that which they originally took? I am also taken aback at the amount of $$$ the BUSH Administration has put into the Africa over that of previous “black” president.
You are projecting again. I didn’t say Iraqis need our money. It’s the other countries who have this hatred of us that have their hands out for our money.
I suggest you read Tommy Franks book and LT. Col. Patterson’s Dereliction of Duty. I also suggest you get the book about Jimmy Carter – The Real Jimmy Carter by Steven Hayward. They are available at Amazon.
I too research, but I don’t have copious free time. I have a family to support.
So you admit you are a liberal, then you are one sided. If I was a neocon, I would be against abortion. I support some affirmative action causes, but I don’t support hard quotas. I can take another side and still be true to my core beliefs.
Peace DJ.
GBS – My use of Putin is a sticky point to many Democrats. It was used as a dig against Kerry for his world leaders liking him over Bush. It is interesting that many of his points are irrefutable. It is the American press who spins what he said. Regarding the other countries intell services saying he had WMDs, Clinton made my point again. Thats all. BACK TO WORK