Ahhh, more quality treatment for our veterans:
WCBS:
Former Army Specialist Rodriguez started getting bills for $700 for lost or damaged government property this summer. Although he was discharged some four years ago, bills recently arrived demanding payment, but giving no details on what or why -- nor do they offer a way to dispute the charges.
And he's not alone. A 2006 government report found more than 1,000 soldiers being billed a total of $1.5 million. And while fighting overseas put their lives on the line, this battle on paper could cost them their future by ruining their credit. Rodriguez will be reported to credit agencies next month.
"It makes a terrible point about the nature of military service today," citizen soldier Tod Ensign said.
Ensign is a veteran's advocate. He says this is all part of the military’s push to be run more like a business.
"They'll just pound him and call him, call his employers, and make his life as miserable as they can until he pays up," Ensign said.
Testimony before Congress detailed in a report found that "although unit commanders and finance offices are authorized to write off debts for lost and damaged equipment ... they have not always done so."
Ummmm, What the fuck is that all about? If there is anything that can be classified as the 'cost of war' it's lost and damaged equipment, never mind the human costs...
Excuse me--numb fuck, stone brained looking for any angle to squeeze a buck from any potential source military beaurocrats:
IT'S FUCKING WAR. SHIT GETS BLOWN THE FUCK UP. FUCKING DEAL WITH IT. IF YOU DIDN'T WANT TO PAY FOR IT, DON'T GET INTO A WAR!!
Of course, we know how receptive these folks are to common sense and logic now, don't we?
What's next? Billing widows or parentless children for the cost of a dead soldier's uniform and equipment they had on when they were killed? Maybe billing a Hummer driver's widow for the cost of the vehicle since it was damaged beyond repair by an IED or EFP?
I'm going to stop now before the wrong person stumbles upon this and thinks it's a grand idea and should be implemented yesterday...
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Money for Nothing
Jim Hightower:
By a 244-181 vote in June, our congress critters quietly hiked their own pay, putting them in an income class that exceeds 97 percent of American households. And guess what? Unlike us riff-raff, their pay raise is automatic! Deserve it or not, need it or not, they get this annual boost, unless they choose not to accept it. And, gollies, guess what again? They rarely choose to say no!
Glad to see that a little less than half of the reps. in Congress recognize how ridiculous this is, but it's still not enough...
Worse than the raise – which comes when the majority of Americans are falling behind economically – are the excuses of the congressional leaders. They say the big bucks are necessary to retain experienced lawmakers. Yeah... experienced at raising their own pay, which they've done for seven of the past 10 years. And if you want to hear a truly sad tale, try this: members wail that they have to meet with lobbyists who are paid far more than they are, so they need to narrow the gap to save face.
Ken Boehm of the National Legal and Policy Center:
"Their approval rating is 14 percent," Boehm points out. "That means that 86 percent of the American public thinks they're doing a pretty crummy job. If they were doing an absolutely sterling job -- and everybody knew it -- and working long hours and doing productive stuff and not getting caught stealing and so forth, then you might be able to make an argument about it. But that's hardly the case when their approval rating is [so low]."
In the Spirit of Hill...
By a 244-181 vote in June, our congress critters quietly hiked their own pay, putting them in an income class that exceeds 97 percent of American households. And guess what? Unlike us riff-raff, their pay raise is automatic! Deserve it or not, need it or not, they get this annual boost, unless they choose not to accept it. And, gollies, guess what again? They rarely choose to say no!
Glad to see that a little less than half of the reps. in Congress recognize how ridiculous this is, but it's still not enough...
Worse than the raise – which comes when the majority of Americans are falling behind economically – are the excuses of the congressional leaders. They say the big bucks are necessary to retain experienced lawmakers. Yeah... experienced at raising their own pay, which they've done for seven of the past 10 years. And if you want to hear a truly sad tale, try this: members wail that they have to meet with lobbyists who are paid far more than they are, so they need to narrow the gap to save face.
Ken Boehm of the National Legal and Policy Center:
"Their approval rating is 14 percent," Boehm points out. "That means that 86 percent of the American public thinks they're doing a pretty crummy job. If they were doing an absolutely sterling job -- and everybody knew it -- and working long hours and doing productive stuff and not getting caught stealing and so forth, then you might be able to make an argument about it. But that's hardly the case when their approval rating is [so low]."
In the Spirit of Hill...
Friday, July 20, 2007
The Citadel of Sanity
"The Atlantic and Pacific are our walls. Broad, stout walls. The Citadel of Sanity! If we get in it we'll go bankrupt like the others and lose a couple million of our finest young men."
Ike Lacouture, on why the U.S. should avoid entry into World War II, The Winds of War, by Herman Wouk. The character of Lacouture may have been based on the real life isolationist Senator from Michigan Arthur Vandenberg.
Houston Chronicle, 19 JUL 07:
Construction of a polarizing fence along the Texas-Mexico border is expected to begin by this fall, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff confirmed Wednesday, adding that border communities will be consulted "in terms of style" so the government doesn't "create any eyesores."
Chertoff said he had seen some fencing "that was quite attractive" during his visits along the South Texas border.
"I think I was in Brownsville ... and I saw some very nice fence that was ornamental but it did the trick," he said.
Similar to how effective the isolationist camp's views were in the lead up to the U.S.'s entry into World War II (all Pearl Harbor attack conspiracy theories non withstanding...) border barriers of any kind serve no purpose but to antagonize the nation that didn't build them and make life difficult for the people and other life living on either side of the border on all sorts of levels.
Oh, yeah, it probably won't keep folks from crossing the border in search of work and a better life, either. Despite what some of the commenters on the piece from yesterday had to say:
44mag wrote:
The fence won't solve all the problems on the border, but it will help. The open borders lobby knows this to be true, hence their hysterical opposition - it will ruin the environment, cause flooding, kill livestock, destroy the economy, bankrupt farmers, blah blah blah.
texrob1 wrote:
Build It! It certainly won't hurt anything,all these people claiming the fence will hurt the environment,what about the tens of thousands of Illegal aliens trampling all over the environment? I guess they are careful as they are entering our country Illegally, to not hurt any plants or animals,what a Joke.
sportfanatic wrote:
I want a fence with electricity, just like jurassic park.
Ahhh, I love Texas, just not too fond of some of my fellow Texans...
Back to Thursday's article:
Chertoff, however, pledged Wednesday to consult with border leaders on the fence design, but said "we can't give border communities a veto."
The homeland chief on Wednesday said he "can't rule out" that the government would use eminent domain to seize private property to make way for the fence. Governments use eminent domain to take private property for public use.
In a state rich in property rights history, that acknowledgment will likely earn a fiery reception along the border.
Yes, it will and it has:
Chronicle, 20 JUL 07:
(John Cornyn showing some intestinal fortitude on one thing at least)
"I assure you there will be local consultation," the Texas Republican said in a call with state reporters. "There will not be ... unilateral actions on the part of the Department of Homeland Security without local input."
"This could not be mishandled any worse, as far as I'm concerned," said Cornyn, who voted last year for legislation mandating the construction of 700 miles of double-layered fencing at the Southwest border but insisted that local leaders be consulted.
Or, maybe just self preservation by trying to please everyone on some level:
The fence issue is a tricky one for Texas elected officials in Washington, and particularly for Cornyn, who is up for re-election next year. On the one hand, Cornyn and other Texas congressional delegation members are pressing for increased border security. But they also are facing a huge wave of opposition to the fence from border officials and landowners who view it as the wrong approach to border security.
I myself like this comment:
txnflfan wrote:
Cherfoff says that construction was to begin by this fall... Hmmm
Weren't these the same people a few weeks ago who ran around talking about urgency, and the need for immediate legislation.
The last time I checked we are at the end of July, and the fall is in October.
Where is this urgency they were talking about???
I say get rid of every incumbent in office regardless of party. Perhaps the next batch will actually do the will of the people who sent them to Washington.
If only wishing would make it so. These Congress critters are worse than cockroaches in terms of getting rid of them for good. Remember our good buddy Tom Delay from Sugarland? He's still weighing in with random idiocy like this that Hill went off on the other day.
But I'd like to go back to a phrase from the article on Thursday:
The homeland chief on Wednesday said he "can't rule out" that the government would use eminent domain to seize private property to make way for the fence.
Ummmmm, excuse me? Homeland Chief? As in, "Jawohl, mein Commandant?" He's not my homeland chief, I'll tell you that right now.
Let's keep it in perspective and call him what he is, the Homeland Security Chief.
Amazing what the omission of a single word can do to a title... maybe I should apply as a copy editor over there at the Chronicle....
Another great passage that somehow didn't make it into the online article was a quote from none other than the Shrub himself on the merits and risks of stepping on the toes of landowners here in Texas over the issue of this pesky fence:
By the way, in my state of Texas, when it comes to the fencing, I would strongly urge those who advocate it not to go down there and go face to face with some of these Texas ranchers down there.
As Hill would say:
BwaaaaaaaaaahahaahAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think I can call Texas my state before he can, even though I've only been back for 12 years after being spirited away by parental units at the tender young age of one...
Remember: Broad, Stout Walls! Bigger Fences Make Better Neighbors!
Just ask the Israelis about how well their wall is working over in the West Bank.
Col. (res.) Shaul Arieli, who was the last commander of the Gaza regional brigade of the IDF, has stated that the effectiveness of the barrier will only be short-term. "The fence provides a partial security response to the terror threats and a good response to prevention of illegal immigration and prevention of criminal acts," he explains, "but on the other hand, in its current format it creates the future terror infrastructure because this terror infrastructure is precisely those people living in enclaves who will support acts of terror as the only possible tool that they perceive as being able to restore them the land, production sources and water wells taken from them."
Ike Lacouture, on why the U.S. should avoid entry into World War II, The Winds of War, by Herman Wouk. The character of Lacouture may have been based on the real life isolationist Senator from Michigan Arthur Vandenberg.
Houston Chronicle, 19 JUL 07:
Construction of a polarizing fence along the Texas-Mexico border is expected to begin by this fall, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff confirmed Wednesday, adding that border communities will be consulted "in terms of style" so the government doesn't "create any eyesores."
Chertoff said he had seen some fencing "that was quite attractive" during his visits along the South Texas border.
"I think I was in Brownsville ... and I saw some very nice fence that was ornamental but it did the trick," he said.
Similar to how effective the isolationist camp's views were in the lead up to the U.S.'s entry into World War II (all Pearl Harbor attack conspiracy theories non withstanding...) border barriers of any kind serve no purpose but to antagonize the nation that didn't build them and make life difficult for the people and other life living on either side of the border on all sorts of levels.
Oh, yeah, it probably won't keep folks from crossing the border in search of work and a better life, either. Despite what some of the commenters on the piece from yesterday had to say:
44mag wrote:
The fence won't solve all the problems on the border, but it will help. The open borders lobby knows this to be true, hence their hysterical opposition - it will ruin the environment, cause flooding, kill livestock, destroy the economy, bankrupt farmers, blah blah blah.
texrob1 wrote:
Build It! It certainly won't hurt anything,all these people claiming the fence will hurt the environment,what about the tens of thousands of Illegal aliens trampling all over the environment? I guess they are careful as they are entering our country Illegally, to not hurt any plants or animals,what a Joke.
sportfanatic wrote:
I want a fence with electricity, just like jurassic park.
Ahhh, I love Texas, just not too fond of some of my fellow Texans...
Back to Thursday's article:
Chertoff, however, pledged Wednesday to consult with border leaders on the fence design, but said "we can't give border communities a veto."
The homeland chief on Wednesday said he "can't rule out" that the government would use eminent domain to seize private property to make way for the fence. Governments use eminent domain to take private property for public use.
In a state rich in property rights history, that acknowledgment will likely earn a fiery reception along the border.
Yes, it will and it has:
Chronicle, 20 JUL 07:
(John Cornyn showing some intestinal fortitude on one thing at least)
"I assure you there will be local consultation," the Texas Republican said in a call with state reporters. "There will not be ... unilateral actions on the part of the Department of Homeland Security without local input."
"This could not be mishandled any worse, as far as I'm concerned," said Cornyn, who voted last year for legislation mandating the construction of 700 miles of double-layered fencing at the Southwest border but insisted that local leaders be consulted.
Or, maybe just self preservation by trying to please everyone on some level:
The fence issue is a tricky one for Texas elected officials in Washington, and particularly for Cornyn, who is up for re-election next year. On the one hand, Cornyn and other Texas congressional delegation members are pressing for increased border security. But they also are facing a huge wave of opposition to the fence from border officials and landowners who view it as the wrong approach to border security.
I myself like this comment:
txnflfan wrote:
Cherfoff says that construction was to begin by this fall... Hmmm
Weren't these the same people a few weeks ago who ran around talking about urgency, and the need for immediate legislation.
The last time I checked we are at the end of July, and the fall is in October.
Where is this urgency they were talking about???
I say get rid of every incumbent in office regardless of party. Perhaps the next batch will actually do the will of the people who sent them to Washington.
If only wishing would make it so. These Congress critters are worse than cockroaches in terms of getting rid of them for good. Remember our good buddy Tom Delay from Sugarland? He's still weighing in with random idiocy like this that Hill went off on the other day.
But I'd like to go back to a phrase from the article on Thursday:
The homeland chief on Wednesday said he "can't rule out" that the government would use eminent domain to seize private property to make way for the fence.
Ummmmm, excuse me? Homeland Chief? As in, "Jawohl, mein Commandant?" He's not my homeland chief, I'll tell you that right now.
Let's keep it in perspective and call him what he is, the Homeland Security Chief.
Amazing what the omission of a single word can do to a title... maybe I should apply as a copy editor over there at the Chronicle....
Another great passage that somehow didn't make it into the online article was a quote from none other than the Shrub himself on the merits and risks of stepping on the toes of landowners here in Texas over the issue of this pesky fence:
By the way, in my state of Texas, when it comes to the fencing, I would strongly urge those who advocate it not to go down there and go face to face with some of these Texas ranchers down there.
As Hill would say:
BwaaaaaaaaaahahaahAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think I can call Texas my state before he can, even though I've only been back for 12 years after being spirited away by parental units at the tender young age of one...
Remember: Broad, Stout Walls! Bigger Fences Make Better Neighbors!
Just ask the Israelis about how well their wall is working over in the West Bank.
Col. (res.) Shaul Arieli, who was the last commander of the Gaza regional brigade of the IDF, has stated that the effectiveness of the barrier will only be short-term. "The fence provides a partial security response to the terror threats and a good response to prevention of illegal immigration and prevention of criminal acts," he explains, "but on the other hand, in its current format it creates the future terror infrastructure because this terror infrastructure is precisely those people living in enclaves who will support acts of terror as the only possible tool that they perceive as being able to restore them the land, production sources and water wells taken from them."
Friday, July 13, 2007
Cataloguing(people...)
How long would it take for the idea of this to be shot down here in the U.S. where Democracy "exists"? The same sort of Democracy that we are purportedly bringing to Iraq?
U.S. troops are stopping Iraqis at checkpoints, workplaces and sites where attacks have recently occurred, and inputting their personal data using handheld scanners or specially equipped laptops. In several neighborhoods in and around Baghdad, troops have gone door to door collecting data.
Can this be far behind?
Over there and maybe over here?
I can't help but recall the fears of Paul Craig Roberts in this interview with Mark::
"the United States is is essentially finished. Liberty's dead, I don't see any way to bring it back. The country is balkanized, it's split, and ignorant. It hasn't the foggiest idea what's happening to it."
"...I don't see any signs of hope at all. I see none. None at all. I expect to die in a concentration camp."
U.S. troops are stopping Iraqis at checkpoints, workplaces and sites where attacks have recently occurred, and inputting their personal data using handheld scanners or specially equipped laptops. In several neighborhoods in and around Baghdad, troops have gone door to door collecting data.
Can this be far behind?
Over there and maybe over here?
I can't help but recall the fears of Paul Craig Roberts in this interview with Mark::
"the United States is is essentially finished. Liberty's dead, I don't see any way to bring it back. The country is balkanized, it's split, and ignorant. It hasn't the foggiest idea what's happening to it."
"...I don't see any signs of hope at all. I see none. None at all. I expect to die in a concentration camp."
More Support for the Troops...
I think all of this speaks for itself. My blood has been close to the boiling point and I'm going to meet a friend for lunch here in a little while, so I wanted to assemble these items together not unlike the modifications that the boys and girls over there have had to employ for years now just to feel like they have a chance of surviving an ambush:
But here we are in Iraq after 15 bloody months still welding steel plate onto Humvees. Sure, our soldiers gain a tad more protection, but it also turns the vehicles into rollover queens because it shifts their center of gravity.
The problem is that the soft-skinned Humvee was conceived as a light utility truck – not a close combat vehicle. "The Humvee is horribly thin-skinned and underpowered," says Army veteran Scott Schreiber, who drove one for six years. "It should be used in roles that don’t call for armor. If the role calls for armor, it’s simple: use armor."
Bob Geiger:
A study completed in late June by the Pentagon's Inspector General concludes that the Department of Defense (DoD) has risked the lives of U.S. troops in Iraq due to malfeasance in awarding and monitoring contracts for badly-needed armored vehicles.
The study, which was requested by Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York, found that since 2000 the DoD has awarded "sole-source" contracts valued at $2.2 billion to just two companies, Force Protection, Inc.(FPI) and Armor Holdings, Inc (AHI).
Inspector General auditors found that the Marine Corps Systems Command (MCSC) made these two companies the sole providers of armored vehicles and armor kits for troops, despite knowing that other suppliers may have produced the equipment so desperately needed in Iraq substantially faster. Both manufacturers fell far behind delivery schedules, while AHI also produced inadequate and faulty equipment.
Democracy Now!:
On Wednesday, Republicans defeated an amendment that would require U.S. troops to get as much or more rest between deployments as the time they were deployed. Seven Republicans joined Democrats in support but the measure failed to attract the sixty votes needed to move ahead. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid criticized Republicans, saying: “Our troops are not machines, they are human beings.”
UPDATE 14 JUL 07 (very early):
Then there's this:
Following the Committee’s April 24, 2007, hearing on the Tillman fratricide, the Committee wrote to White House Counsel Fred Fielding seeking “all documents received or generated by any official in the Executive Office of the President” relating to Corporal Tillman’s death. The White House Counsel’s office responded that it would not provide the Committee with documents that “implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests” and produced only two communications with the officials in the Defense Department, one of which was a package of news clippings. The response of the Defense Department to the Committee’s inquiry was also deficient.
How far are these bastards willing to go? As Poppy put it in 1990:
That's why, in the Persian Gulf, George Bush had to say, 'This will not be another Vietnam.' He actually said, 'this time we're going all the way.'
*Rubbing eyes fiercely...*
But here we are in Iraq after 15 bloody months still welding steel plate onto Humvees. Sure, our soldiers gain a tad more protection, but it also turns the vehicles into rollover queens because it shifts their center of gravity.
The problem is that the soft-skinned Humvee was conceived as a light utility truck – not a close combat vehicle. "The Humvee is horribly thin-skinned and underpowered," says Army veteran Scott Schreiber, who drove one for six years. "It should be used in roles that don’t call for armor. If the role calls for armor, it’s simple: use armor."
Bob Geiger:
A study completed in late June by the Pentagon's Inspector General concludes that the Department of Defense (DoD) has risked the lives of U.S. troops in Iraq due to malfeasance in awarding and monitoring contracts for badly-needed armored vehicles.
The study, which was requested by Democratic Congresswoman Louise Slaughter of New York, found that since 2000 the DoD has awarded "sole-source" contracts valued at $2.2 billion to just two companies, Force Protection, Inc.(FPI) and Armor Holdings, Inc (AHI).
Inspector General auditors found that the Marine Corps Systems Command (MCSC) made these two companies the sole providers of armored vehicles and armor kits for troops, despite knowing that other suppliers may have produced the equipment so desperately needed in Iraq substantially faster. Both manufacturers fell far behind delivery schedules, while AHI also produced inadequate and faulty equipment.
Democracy Now!:
On Wednesday, Republicans defeated an amendment that would require U.S. troops to get as much or more rest between deployments as the time they were deployed. Seven Republicans joined Democrats in support but the measure failed to attract the sixty votes needed to move ahead. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid criticized Republicans, saying: “Our troops are not machines, they are human beings.”
UPDATE 14 JUL 07 (very early):
Then there's this:
Following the Committee’s April 24, 2007, hearing on the Tillman fratricide, the Committee wrote to White House Counsel Fred Fielding seeking “all documents received or generated by any official in the Executive Office of the President” relating to Corporal Tillman’s death. The White House Counsel’s office responded that it would not provide the Committee with documents that “implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests” and produced only two communications with the officials in the Defense Department, one of which was a package of news clippings. The response of the Defense Department to the Committee’s inquiry was also deficient.
How far are these bastards willing to go? As Poppy put it in 1990:
That's why, in the Persian Gulf, George Bush had to say, 'This will not be another Vietnam.' He actually said, 'this time we're going all the way.'
*Rubbing eyes fiercely...*
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Ooops, who left that faucet running again? No wonder the damn water bill is so high...
George W. Bush, 9/30/03:
And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
Tom Delay, 7/13/05:
The law specifically says that the CIA operative, they're trained to keep them covert. That means usually they're overseas, they're not working out of Langley driving in and out of the gate, they are truly undercover, and you leak it, you're breaking the law.
That wasn't the case. That wasn't the case here. Ms. Plame was working at Langley, coming and going quite obvious she was working for the CIA and this...uh...er..this...there may be other's who leaked...uh...we'll find out when the investigation is over.
Paul Bedard, 7/3/07:
Robert Novak:
"I am sure it was not a planned leak but came out as an offhand observation."
The rest is history. Novak was investigated in the CIA spy case, slammed by fellow journalists for "outing" an agent, the subject of what he calls false stories, kicked off his regular CNN gig, and barred from Meet the Press for two years-and out $160,000 in legal fees. Still, he writes,
"Judging it on the merits, I would still write the story."
Bob Ewegen, Denver Post, 7/6/07:
I am angry at the underlying event - the fact that an American patriot whose only crime was to serve her country in a dangerous and honorable profession had her mission undercut for partisan political purposes.
I am even angrier that the vicious "outing" of Valerie Plame put her sources at risk - the men and women in foreign countries who had risked their own lives to help America in our war on terror.
In the intelligence trade, such foreign sources are called "assets." I call them heroes. And they are the ones who were put most at risk after columnist Robert Novak revealed Plame's CIA connection as part of a clumsy Bush administration effort to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had become a critic of the Iraq war.
I will never forgive anyone who willfully puts the lives of America's military or intelligence personnel or our friends abroad in danger.
And that's exactly what former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage did when he leaked Plame's identity to Novak - and what Novak did when he published the name of a covert CIA agent.
Between Armitage's dishonorable act and Novak's dishonorable act were a string of other dishonorable acts, including an executive order by President Bush empowering Vice President Cheney to declassify classified information, which Cheney did, thus allowing Libby to shop Plame's identity around in hopes of finding a journalist willing to smear Wilson through his wife. With Libby's information confirming Armitage's original tip, Novak willingly blew Plame's cover.
In so doing, he didn't put Plame at personal risk, because she was not overseas at the time. But he did irrevocably damage her mission - and put those human "assets" at risk.
You see, al-Qaeda and its ilk rarely try to kill CIA agents - or anyone else who can fight back. What these cowards do is kill people who have worked with U.S. agents.
You can imagine the conversation: "Hmm, that Valerie Plame who visited here turns out to be a CIA agent. Didn't she hang out at Hamid's coffee shop a lot?"
Next day, Hamid's body turns up, along with the bodies of his wife and family, all of whom were tortured to death before his eyes.
That's the way our enemies play the game. That's why we train brave men and women like Valerie Plame so America can fight back.
Politics, or national security?
Politics.
Politics, or the safety of our combatants and allies in the war on terror?
Politics.
Politics, or the Law?
Politics.
Politics, or common sense?
Politics.
Politics, or--
Politics.
And if there is a leak out of my administration, I want to know who it is. And if the person has violated law, the person will be taken care of.
Tom Delay, 7/13/05:
The law specifically says that the CIA operative, they're trained to keep them covert. That means usually they're overseas, they're not working out of Langley driving in and out of the gate, they are truly undercover, and you leak it, you're breaking the law.
That wasn't the case. That wasn't the case here. Ms. Plame was working at Langley, coming and going quite obvious she was working for the CIA and this...uh...er..this...there may be other's who leaked...uh...we'll find out when the investigation is over.
Paul Bedard, 7/3/07:
Robert Novak:
"I am sure it was not a planned leak but came out as an offhand observation."
The rest is history. Novak was investigated in the CIA spy case, slammed by fellow journalists for "outing" an agent, the subject of what he calls false stories, kicked off his regular CNN gig, and barred from Meet the Press for two years-and out $160,000 in legal fees. Still, he writes,
"Judging it on the merits, I would still write the story."
Bob Ewegen, Denver Post, 7/6/07:
I am angry at the underlying event - the fact that an American patriot whose only crime was to serve her country in a dangerous and honorable profession had her mission undercut for partisan political purposes.
I am even angrier that the vicious "outing" of Valerie Plame put her sources at risk - the men and women in foreign countries who had risked their own lives to help America in our war on terror.
In the intelligence trade, such foreign sources are called "assets." I call them heroes. And they are the ones who were put most at risk after columnist Robert Novak revealed Plame's CIA connection as part of a clumsy Bush administration effort to discredit her husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, who had become a critic of the Iraq war.
I will never forgive anyone who willfully puts the lives of America's military or intelligence personnel or our friends abroad in danger.
And that's exactly what former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage did when he leaked Plame's identity to Novak - and what Novak did when he published the name of a covert CIA agent.
Between Armitage's dishonorable act and Novak's dishonorable act were a string of other dishonorable acts, including an executive order by President Bush empowering Vice President Cheney to declassify classified information, which Cheney did, thus allowing Libby to shop Plame's identity around in hopes of finding a journalist willing to smear Wilson through his wife. With Libby's information confirming Armitage's original tip, Novak willingly blew Plame's cover.
In so doing, he didn't put Plame at personal risk, because she was not overseas at the time. But he did irrevocably damage her mission - and put those human "assets" at risk.
You see, al-Qaeda and its ilk rarely try to kill CIA agents - or anyone else who can fight back. What these cowards do is kill people who have worked with U.S. agents.
You can imagine the conversation: "Hmm, that Valerie Plame who visited here turns out to be a CIA agent. Didn't she hang out at Hamid's coffee shop a lot?"
Next day, Hamid's body turns up, along with the bodies of his wife and family, all of whom were tortured to death before his eyes.
That's the way our enemies play the game. That's why we train brave men and women like Valerie Plame so America can fight back.
Politics, or national security?
Politics.
Politics, or the safety of our combatants and allies in the war on terror?
Politics.
Politics, or the Law?
Politics.
Politics, or common sense?
Politics.
Politics, or--
Politics.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Still think it's not a Civil War?!?
BBC, 3/21/06:
US President George W Bush has said he does not believe Iraq has descended into civil war but urged the nation's leaders to confront sectarian violence.
Bill O'Reilly, 11/29/06:
It's not a civil war as NBC News wants you to think. It has nothing to do with that.
AP, 7/9/07:
Prominent Shiite and Sunni politicians called on Iraqi civilians to take up arms to defend themselves after a weekend of violence that claimed more than 220 lives, including 60 who died yesterday in a surge of bombings and shootings around Baghdad.
During a news conference yesterday in Baghdad, Abbas al-Bayati, a Shiite Turkoman lawmaker, criticized the security situation in Armili, saying its police force had only 30 members and that the Interior Ministry had finally responded to requests for reinforcements only two days before the attack.
In the absence of enough security forces, al-Bayati said authorities should help residents "arm themselves" for their own protection.
The call for civilians to take up arms in their own defense was echoed yesterday by the country's Sunni Arab vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi, who said all Iraqis must "pay the price" for terrorism.
OK kids, it's official: the presence or absence of U.S. forces in Iraq has NO IMPACT on the fact that a Civil War is currently occurring there, therefore rendering this argument completely moot:
Iraq's foreign minister warned Monday that a quick American troop withdrawal could lead to civil war and the collapse of the Iraqi state, adding that the U.S. has a responsibility to build Iraqi forces so that they take over.
And if that's not enough fun and excitement for ya, chew on this:
Iraq says Turkey has 140,000 soldiers along its border, prompting fears of an incursion against Kurdish guerrillas.
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari an ethnic Kurd himself, said his government was against any breach of Iraqi sovereignty.
Turkey accuses Kurdish separatists of staging attacks from inside Iraq. It has often warned Baghdad that it is prepared to take military action.
It's time to get the Hell out RIGHT NOW. If the saber rattling in the north as detailed above doesn't abate pronto, there will be a new huge messy front in this mess that the U.S. forces will be powerless to influence except through the implementation of force through the air, the accuracy of which has already been proven over and over again as suspect, to put it gently. The only sure result of any air sorties on the part of the U.S. forces would be the killing of Kurdish and Turkish forces, resulting in the ire of both groups being focussed upon the U.S., who right now can sort of call both groups allies, or at least "not enemies".
There's no way that the oil worshiping fat cats are going to get their hands on that oil:
In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.
I suppose that the U.S. could stay and follow Gunner's advice:
One of the big problems with how we have fought this war of liberation is our unwillingness to completely exterminate the bastards. Churchill also said we should just gas the “uncivilized” fucks that give us a hard time. An American military man in Vietnam gave us a wonderful phrase for this, “destroy the village in order to save it.” That is exactly what needs to happen. And I don’t mean something small scale like 1-3 million dead Iraqis (the toll of our Indochina wars) I am thinking big. Like all males between the ages of 9-55, or something similar. That’s what it will take to win this thing, whatever that means. But the softies in the liberal media and Congress won’t go for it…
But in eliminating all the opposition, it would gravely polarize the rest of the region against the U.S. and demonize the U.S. imperialistic empire alongside such revered infamous members of the book that is world history as the Emperors and Centurions of the Roman Empire, Genghis Khan and his Mongol hordes, the Vandals and Visigoths, Imperial Spain during the Inquisition, and Nazi Germany among others.
I kinda doubt that the fellas who got together in Philadelphia in 1787 had this sort of thing in mind when they drafted this:
US President George W Bush has said he does not believe Iraq has descended into civil war but urged the nation's leaders to confront sectarian violence.
Bill O'Reilly, 11/29/06:
It's not a civil war as NBC News wants you to think. It has nothing to do with that.
AP, 7/9/07:
Prominent Shiite and Sunni politicians called on Iraqi civilians to take up arms to defend themselves after a weekend of violence that claimed more than 220 lives, including 60 who died yesterday in a surge of bombings and shootings around Baghdad.
During a news conference yesterday in Baghdad, Abbas al-Bayati, a Shiite Turkoman lawmaker, criticized the security situation in Armili, saying its police force had only 30 members and that the Interior Ministry had finally responded to requests for reinforcements only two days before the attack.
In the absence of enough security forces, al-Bayati said authorities should help residents "arm themselves" for their own protection.
The call for civilians to take up arms in their own defense was echoed yesterday by the country's Sunni Arab vice president, Tariq al-Hashemi, who said all Iraqis must "pay the price" for terrorism.
OK kids, it's official: the presence or absence of U.S. forces in Iraq has NO IMPACT on the fact that a Civil War is currently occurring there, therefore rendering this argument completely moot:
Iraq's foreign minister warned Monday that a quick American troop withdrawal could lead to civil war and the collapse of the Iraqi state, adding that the U.S. has a responsibility to build Iraqi forces so that they take over.
And if that's not enough fun and excitement for ya, chew on this:
Iraq says Turkey has 140,000 soldiers along its border, prompting fears of an incursion against Kurdish guerrillas.
Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari an ethnic Kurd himself, said his government was against any breach of Iraqi sovereignty.
Turkey accuses Kurdish separatists of staging attacks from inside Iraq. It has often warned Baghdad that it is prepared to take military action.
It's time to get the Hell out RIGHT NOW. If the saber rattling in the north as detailed above doesn't abate pronto, there will be a new huge messy front in this mess that the U.S. forces will be powerless to influence except through the implementation of force through the air, the accuracy of which has already been proven over and over again as suspect, to put it gently. The only sure result of any air sorties on the part of the U.S. forces would be the killing of Kurdish and Turkish forces, resulting in the ire of both groups being focussed upon the U.S., who right now can sort of call both groups allies, or at least "not enemies".
There's no way that the oil worshiping fat cats are going to get their hands on that oil:
In March 2001, the National Energy Policy Development Group (better known as Vice President Dick Cheney’s energy task force), which included executives of America’s largest energy companies, recommended that the United States government support initiatives by Middle Eastern countries “to open up areas of their energy sectors to foreign investment.” One invasion and a great deal of political engineering by the Bush administration later, this is exactly what the proposed Iraq oil law would achieve. It does so to the benefit of the companies, but to the great detriment of Iraq’s economy, democracy and sovereignty.
I suppose that the U.S. could stay and follow Gunner's advice:
One of the big problems with how we have fought this war of liberation is our unwillingness to completely exterminate the bastards. Churchill also said we should just gas the “uncivilized” fucks that give us a hard time. An American military man in Vietnam gave us a wonderful phrase for this, “destroy the village in order to save it.” That is exactly what needs to happen. And I don’t mean something small scale like 1-3 million dead Iraqis (the toll of our Indochina wars) I am thinking big. Like all males between the ages of 9-55, or something similar. That’s what it will take to win this thing, whatever that means. But the softies in the liberal media and Congress won’t go for it…
But in eliminating all the opposition, it would gravely polarize the rest of the region against the U.S. and demonize the U.S. imperialistic empire alongside such revered infamous members of the book that is world history as the Emperors and Centurions of the Roman Empire, Genghis Khan and his Mongol hordes, the Vandals and Visigoths, Imperial Spain during the Inquisition, and Nazi Germany among others.
I kinda doubt that the fellas who got together in Philadelphia in 1787 had this sort of thing in mind when they drafted this:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)