LawTalkers
Page 97 of 126 « First 47879596 97 9899107 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=681)

Bad_Rich_Chic 07-14-2005 12:19 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Have you read much about our sex/HIV education in Africa?
Yeah, actually. And (i) US sponsored sex/HIV education in Africa is inconsistent and all fucked up by the abstinence loons and (ii) with all due respect to Africans, this isn't Africa and we aren't Africans.

Now, if you want to make the argument that, in the third world, sex/HIV education is of limited value in places where a majority of the population (a) is far more worried about eating and not getting killed than learning nifty safe sex tips, (b) doesn't have even the most basic education (and, un-PC though it may be to point it out, may be so malnourished as to be mentally limited, see (a) above), (c) has no access to condoms even if they did somehow manage to get and understand the educational message, and (d) is led by self-serving ignornant tribal leaders to reject educational efforts and/or believe they are really an evil plot against them by colonialist westerners, I'd probably agree with you. The main problem there isn't that education itself doesn't help, it's that education is not that useful in the face of overwhelming poverty, corruption, ignorance and/or backward cultural attitudes.

But I thought we were talking about the US.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 12:20 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I see your point but the problem here is the Admin had a rogue husband-wife team using their government offices to fraudulently attempt to discredit administration policy in furtherance of national security. They had to be neutralised. At any cost. Thankfully Rove et al had the nads to undertake the mission despite the inevitable media frenzy that could result.

The blame should be appropriately placed with the Plames.
ETA: It's too bad we were not in the good old days when the Plames could have been strategically removed from their positions to ensure national security.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 12:25 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
Serious question for you, Slave, and bilmore.

Let's assume that you are right about everything -- Wilson's partisan motivation, that he lied, that Plame picked him for the mission because she wanted to set the Admin up, etc.

It is not disputed that Plame had non-official cover at one point in time, and was "employed" by a company that was a CIA front.

Let's assume that someone in the Admin (doesn't have to be Karl Rove) told Novak and Cooper and others that Wilson was a liar and that they should assess his motivation becuase his wife set him up on the mission. Let's assume that the statute wasn't broken by this act.

Even assuming all that you assert is true, we still have a front company whose cover has been blown, along with the cover of every CIA person who has worked there, and every foreign source who provided information to the CIA via that front company. I am sure that Russian intelligence and Chinese intelligence and French intelligence and every other country in the world that has reason to keep an eye on us for business or security reasons (or vice versa) has now rolled up any then-current activities related to this front, and are going back and figuring out all of the past covert activities they did.

Was it worth it? And would you be so sanguine about it if it were the Clinton Administration that flipped a CIA front company and all of the agents operating through it because they didn't like the comments an agent's wife or husband made about sending US forces into Bosnia (which was, as you may recall, a rather partisan dispute)?
For some perspective, let's all recall that Niger was not supplying Iraq with yellowcake, that the White House and CIA have already acknowledged that the suggestion to the contrary was in error, and that Wilson was correct in challenging the White House line.

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 12:33 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
I would guess that the women in my group had more abortions than the average. Or maybe I just hung out with sluts.
So women who get abortions are sluts? Nice.

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Molly Ivins corrects herself on Saddam's casualties:
Yay! We've killed fewer Iraqis (so far) than Saddam Hussein!

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 12:36 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shape Shifter
So women who get abortions are sluts? Nice.
Translation: Could you introduce me?

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 07-14-2005 12:39 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
They had to be neutralised. At any cost.
You have got to be kidding. Assuming they had to be neutralized, was this the least-cost way of doing so? Methinks not.

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 12:41 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
A guy spends five pages in a nationally distributed magazine to attack an article I spent a lot of time and effort putting together and this is all the sympahty I get.
I think it's sort of funny that they called you a liberal. Now you know how it feels.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 12:42 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You have got to be kidding. Assuming they had to be neutralized, was this the least-cost way of doing so? Methinks not.
My follow up post noted that I lament that they could not have been neutralised in a more strategic manner.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 07-14-2005 12:44 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
My follow up post noted that I lament that they could not have been neutralised in a more strategic manner.
Ah, I see now that you admit that Rove is too much of a pussy to do the real wet work.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 12:51 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I see your point but the problem here is the Admin had a rogue husband-wife team using their government offices to fraudulently attempt to discredit administration policy in furtherance of national security. They had to be neutralised. At any cost. Thankfully Rove et al had the nads to undertake the mission despite the inevitable media frenzy that could result.

The blame should be appropriately placed with the Plames.
This would be a good story if it were actually true. The truth is that Cooper called Rove to discuss welfare reform. Towards the end of the call, Cooper turned the subject to WMD, and Rove, knowing that Tenet was going to be giving a press conference that day on the subject, warned Cooper not to go to far out on a limb on the Wilson story. This was not a hit.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 12:55 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Ah, I see now that you admit that Rove is too much of a pussy to do the real wet work.
Unfortunately the Church Commission has left the government impotent to properly deal with such problems. Church was a demo, right?

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 12:57 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
This would be a good story if it were actually true. The truth is that Cooper called Rove to discuss welfare reform. Towards the end of the call, Cooper turned the subject to WMD, and Rove, knowing that Tenet was going to be giving a press conference that day on the subject, warned Cooper not to go to far out on a limb on the Wilson story. This was not a hit.
Merde, I forget the cover stor.......talking poin.......uh. 2!

sgtclub 07-14-2005 12:59 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
For some perspective, let's all recall that Niger was not supplying Iraq with yellowcake, that the White House and CIA have already acknowledged that the suggestion to the contrary was in error, and that Wilson was correct in challenging the White House line.
Dissent. See the Lord Butler report.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 01:00 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shape Shifter
So women who get abortions are sluts? Nice.
It was a joke. Lighten up.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 01:03 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Yeah, actually. And (i) US sponsored sex/HIV education in Africa is inconsistent and all fucked up by the abstinence loons and (ii) with all due respect to Africans, this isn't Africa and we aren't Africans.

Now, if you want to make the argument that, in the third world, sex/HIV education is of limited value in places where a majority of the population (a) is far more worried about eating and not getting killed than learning nifty safe sex tips, (b) doesn't have even the most basic education (and, un-PC though it may be to point it out, may be so malnourished as to be mentally limited, see (a) above), (c) has no access to condoms even if they did somehow manage to get and understand the educational message, and (d) is led by self-serving ignornant tribal leaders to reject educational efforts and/or believe they are really an evil plot against them by colonialist westerners, I'd probably agree with you. The main problem there isn't that education itself doesn't help, it's that education is not that useful in the face of overwhelming poverty, corruption, ignorance and/or backward cultural attitudes.

But I thought we were talking about the US.
We are, but Africa serves as a good, although severe, example of the limits of education to transform behavior. So does drug education in this country. It would be nice to think that all we have to do is educate people and they will make better choices. That works at some level, but not with the vast majorities.

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 01:04 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
My follow up post noted that I lament that they could not have been neutralised in a more strategic manner.
They could have been effectively neutralized -- in fact we would have never heard of Wilson and Plame -- had Bush simply not lied. He could have just said we were going to war in Iraq because SH was a bad, bad man. Further, in deference to bilmore's sensibilities, we will go to war with wall countries who engage in torture . . . oops, scratch that.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 01:04 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
This would be a good story if it were actually true. The truth is that Cooper called Rove to discuss welfare reform. Towards the end of the call, Cooper turned the subject to WMD, and Rove, knowing that Tenet was going to be giving a press conference that day on the subject, warned Cooper not to go to far out on a limb on the Wilson story. This was not a hit.
Only two people could know this "truth", and you didn't get it from Cooper. Rove has been misleading people for a long time know about his role in this affair, so why are you regurgitating his talking points as the "truth"?

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 01:05 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
It was a joke. Lighten up.
It was not your best material.

dtb 07-14-2005 01:07 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shape Shifter
It was not your best material.
I think velour is his best material.

ltl/fb 07-14-2005 01:08 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
This would be a good story if it were actually true. The truth is that Cooper called Rove to discuss welfare reform. Towards the end of the call, Cooper turned the subject to WMD, and Rove, knowing that Tenet was going to be giving a press conference that day on the subject, warned Cooper not to go to far out on a limb on the Wilson story. This was not a hit.
What better way to spread crap than to drop it into the end of some other conversation? It's like in the trashy romance novel I read, where the Hero believed what he overhead the Villain saying about having fucked the Heroine, because the Villain was talking to other people (not directly to the Hero) and was somewhat drunk. However, the dastardly Villain actually knew the Hero was around, and deliberately said it in that situation so that it would be all the more believable.

And if some trashy romance novel writer can come up with this kind of reasoning, I would hope that one of the premier political operatives in the US today could do the same thing.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 01:09 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Only two people could know this "truth", and you didn't get it from Cooper. Rove has been misleading people for a long time know about his role in this affair, so why are you regurgitating his talking points as the "truth"?
Fair enough on your first point. I'm not sure I agree on the second and, frankly, it doesn't ring true to me given that Rove signed the waiver in 2003.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 01:09 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Dissent. See the Lord Butler report.
Please see this. The report to which you refer does not suggest that Wilson was wrong or that Iraq actually was buying yellowcake -- it only suggests that the intelligence people had some basis to be concerned about it at the time. You can use this to defend the state of mind of people in the White House -- arguably they weren't lying -- but it does not change the facts that (a) Iraq was not acquiring Niger yellowcake, (b) the White House and the CIA now say the 16 words should not have been the State of the Union address, and (c) Wilson was fundamentally right to expose the fact that the White House was scaring people with misinformation.

ltl/fb 07-14-2005 01:10 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
We are, but Africa serves as a good, although severe, example of the limits of education to transform behavior. So does drug education in this country. It would be nice to think that all we have to do is educate people and they will make better choices. That works at some level, but not with the vast majorities.
So . . . social darwinism? "They" aren't educable, have a zillion kids, can't be taught not to take drugs, and thus are really ideally suited to ask if "we" want fries with that? !!!!!!

Penske, I think I am learning at your knee.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 01:13 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Fair enough on your first point. I'm not sure I agree on the second and, frankly, it doesn't ring true to me given that Rove signed the waiver in 2003.
The White House said he wasn't involved. Oops. I've seen a clip of Rove saying essentially the same thing.

Rove publicly gave that waiver, but the reporters -- well, Cooper at least -- felt that he was coerced and did not think it was operative. Cooper decided to spill the beans only when he saw the WSJ quote Rove's attorney as saying that whoever Cooper was protecting, it wasn't Rove.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 01:17 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Please see this. The report to which you refer does not suggest that Wilson was wrong or that Iraq actually was buying yellowcake -- it only suggests that the intelligence people had some basis to be concerned about it at the time. You can use this to defend the state of mind of people in the White House -- arguably they weren't lying -- but it does not change the facts that (a) Iraq was not acquiring Niger yellowcake, (b) the White House and the CIA now say the 16 words should not have been the State of the Union address, and (c) Wilson was fundamentally right to expose the fact that the White House was scaring people with misinformation.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. The Brits and the CIA have concluded that Saddam was likely trying to by yellow cake - which is what Bush said in the 16 words.

sgtclub 07-14-2005 01:20 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
The White House said he wasn't involved. Oops. I've seen a clip of Rove saying essentially the same thing.

Rove publicly gave that waiver, but the reporters -- well, Cooper at least -- felt that he was coerced and did not think it was operative. Cooper decided to spill the beans only when he saw the WSJ quote Rove's attorney as saying that whoever Cooper was protecting, it wasn't Rove.
But if Rove was involved in some machievellian (sp?) plot to out Plame, why the waiver?

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 01:26 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Sorry, I should have been clearer. The Brits and the CIA have concluded that Saddam was likely trying to by yellow cake - which is what Bush said in the 16 words.
I think they concluded that the original British intelligence was not unfounded, but that's different from saying that Hussein was, in fact, trying to buy yellowcake. Based on what we now know about Iraq's nuclear program -- that it was defunct at the time -- it makes no sense for them to have been buying yellowcake. What would they do with it?

This is the significance of what Wilson was saying at the time, without regard to all of the details about his wife's name and all that crap. Iraq was not pursuing its nuclear program, and Iraqi acquisition of yellowcake from Niger was something we need not have worried about.

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 01:27 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
But if Rove was involved in some machievellian (sp?) plot to out Plame, why the waiver?
I think the reporters felt that he was coerced to say publicly that he waived the confidentiality of their conversations, but that he did not really mean it. In either of their shoes, I think I would conclude as much.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 07-14-2005 01:28 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
But if Rove was involved in some machievellian (sp?) plot to out Plame, why the waiver?
Because as a political move, Bush had DOJ send around a generic, full-blown waiver to all WH employees. What are you going to do, not sign?

Bush did that to forestall the criticism. It worked for a year. Too bad Rove didn't speak up then.

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 01:47 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Because as a political move, Bush had DOJ send around a generic, full-blown waiver to all WH employees. What are you going to do, not sign?

Bush did that to forestall the criticism. It worked for a year. Too bad Rove didn't speak up then.
Serious question, Burger, since you seem to know about this stuff. Should Rove be able to keep his security clearance until this is resolved one way or the other?

sebastian_dangerfield 07-14-2005 01:51 PM
Das anti-Kapitalists!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
We are, but Africa serves as a good, although severe, example of the limits of education to transform behavior. So does drug education in this country. It would be nice to think that all we have to do is educate people and they will make better choices. That works at some level, but not with the vast majorities.
Exactly. So give them free abortions and birth control.

Alternatively, you're using a variation of Laura Bush's argument against stem cell research ("Well, we don't know if it will work, so lets not try"). Yours seems to be "Stats seem to indicate poorly implemented education will not eradicate the problem, so lets throw out education as an option entirely."

Replaced_Texan 07-14-2005 01:52 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Serious question, Burger, since you seem to know about this stuff. Should Rove be able to keep his security clearance until this is resolved one way or the other?
I'm not entirely clear why a "political adivsor" got a security clearance in the first place. He wasn't Deputy Chief of Staff until earlier this year.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 02:10 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I'm not entirely clear why a "political adivsor" got a security clearance in the first place. He wasn't Deputy Chief of Staff until earlier this year.
I was under the impression that he only knew about Plame's employment because it was "common knowledge" in his circles that Wilson's wife was CIA. No?

Tyrone Slothrop 07-14-2005 02:12 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I was under the impression that he only knew about Plame's employment because it was "common knowledge" in his circles that Wilson's wife was CIA. No?
By "his circles," you're referring to the senior White House officials involved in the decision to respond to Joe Wilson by trashing Valerie Plame?

Shape Shifter 07-14-2005 02:17 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I was under the impression that he only knew about Plame's employment because it was "common knowledge" in his circles that Wilson's wife was CIA. No?

NATIONAL DESK | July 5, 2005, Tuesday

Private Spy and Public Spouse Live at Center of Leak Case

By SCOTT SHANE; LYNETTE CLEMETSON CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FOR THIS ARTICLE. (NYT) 1939 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 2

ABSTRACT - Valerie Wilson, known to country by her maiden name Valerie Plame, returns to CIA in new job after being identified as covert officer; startled neighbors say they thought of her as 'working soccer mom' before her true job was revealed by syndicated columnist Robert Novak in 2003; her husband Joseph C Wilson IV interprets leak of his wife's CIA connection as act of vengeance from White House officials for his public accusations of Bush administration deceit in building case for Iraq war; former CIA officers differ on impact of Novak's identification of Valerie Wilson, who had been working against weapons proliferation in Europe posing as analyst for shell company set up by agency (M)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AE0894DD404482

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 02:20 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
By "his circles," you're referring to the senior White House officials involved in the decision to respond to Joe Wilson by trashing Valerie Plame?
And the news media riff raff that hangs around that circle.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 02:21 PM
Joe wilson
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Shape Shifter
NATIONAL DESK | July 5, 2005, Tuesday

Private Spy and Public Spouse Live at Center of Leak Case

By SCOTT SHANE; LYNETTE CLEMETSON CONTRIBUTED REPORTING FOR THIS ARTICLE. (NYT) 1939 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 2

ABSTRACT - Valerie Wilson, known to country by her maiden name Valerie Plame, returns to CIA in new job after being identified as covert officer; startled neighbors say they thought of her as 'working soccer mom' before her true job was revealed by syndicated columnist Robert Novak in 2003; her husband Joseph C Wilson IV interprets leak of his wife's CIA connection as act of vengeance from White House officials for his public accusations of Bush administration deceit in building case for Iraq war; former CIA officers differ on impact of Novak's identification of Valerie Wilson, who had been working against weapons proliferation in Europe posing as analyst for shell company set up by agency (M)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...AE0894DD404482
retro-whiff.

Penske_Account 07-14-2005 02:30 PM
breaking....
 
anyone else hearing the rumour that there will be a late day announcement by Bush of his 2 nominees to the court, plus Thomas' promotion to CJ?

Gattigap 07-14-2005 02:34 PM
breaking....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
anyone else hearing the rumour that there will be a late day announcement by Bush of his 2 nominees to the court, plus Thomas' promotion to CJ?
Unless they're coupled with news of Rehnquist's death or retirement mid-afternoon, I wouldn't bet on it.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:46 PM.
Page 97 of 126 « First 47879596 97 9899107 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com