home

Friday Open Thread

It's your turn to pick the topics and opine.

< RoveGate: Where Does Condi Rice Fit In | Iraq and Mental Health >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    If you liked NAFTA...you will love CAFTA, which basically makes state and federal laws meaningless. We will soon be living in a country that effectively has the same labor and environmental laws as El Salvador and Guatemala.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#2)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    Does anybody else feel like trolling and pointless rambling has shot waaay up lately?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#3)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    JL and John H - You and I had quite a conversation about whether Plame sent her husband to Niger. If you will go down two posts you will see that Cooper says she did. Or, you can read this article.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#4)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    PPJ: That hardly cofirms anything. Did you read it? Cooper says that "on background, I asked Libby if he had heard anything about Wilson's wife sending her husband to Niger. Libby replied, 'Yeah, I've heard that too,' or words to that effect." On NBC's Meet the Press, host Tim Russert asked Cooper, "Did you interpret that as a confirmation?" Cooper replied, "I did, yeah." Methinks the CIA needs to address who sent whom as opposed to information that best can be described as "hearsay" from those with an agenda. The agenda here was to discredit Wilson and out his wife. From what I have read, his wife reocmmended him which of course is a far cry from sending him. Is it your argument that his wife AUTHORIZED the trip? That is how I would interpret "sending" him. That she was the authority in charge of instigating the investigation and signed off the investigation and mandated the travel. I really hate when you make such ridiculous arguments on such innocuous statements. The Senate Intelligence Commitee's account, presented in its 2004 review of prewar weapons intelligence on Iraq, matches Wilson's. "Officials from the CIA's DO Counterproliferation Division told committee staff that in response to questions from the Vice President's Office and the Departments of State and Defense on the alleged Niger-uranium deal, CPD officials discussed ways to obtain additional information. ... CPD decided to contact a former ambassador to Gabon [Wilson] who had a posting early in his career in Niger," the report stated. No where in the 9-11 commission report does it suggest that his wife "sent" him....

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jlvngstn on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    But the claim that Plame authorized -- or even suggested -- Wilson's trip is unproven, if not demonstrably false. The Senate Intelligence Committee closely examined the issue but did not reach a conclusion about how the CIA made the decision to hire Wilson, noting only some "interviews and documents" indicating that Plame "suggested his name for the trip." But even if Plame did "suggest" her husband, she could not have "authorized" it; only the heads of CPD could do that. The Senate report describes "a memorandum to the deputy chief of CPD, from the former ambassador's wife" [p. 39] touting her husband's credentials. But if Plame herself had the power to "authorize" Wilson's trip, as Rove told Cooper, such a memo would hardly have been necessary.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    Texas leader welcomes "physical confrontation" with protest group. Thankfully, Howard Dean is about to visit, so everything's going to be OK.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#7)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    JL - I agree the CIA needs to address it. But, with Libby's information and Wilson's, at best, waffling it starts to become a "preponderance of evidence" thing, don't you think? Look. Plame didn't have the horse power to send her husband. But she did, and I have no doubt about this, suggest/push it. Either when asked, or on her own after hearing about the "mission" from someone else. The real question remains: Why did the CIA send a non-agent. We have proven professionals to do such work. I think TL has it right. The CIA decided to send someone after being pressured for more information by the VP's office. I think Wilson, who has admitted to some "literary flair," tried to enlarge his importance by claiming/hinting that his selection came from the VP himself, when actually it was only the push for more information that the VP's office was involved in. Now, we come to the motive for selecting Wilson after he was nominated by his wife. He did have the background…. BUT he also had a stated bias against the claim, and against the war and the administration. For anyone wanting to send someone who would want to support the previous claim, Wilson was perfect. On the other hand, a professional agent would have had an open mind. roy – I have noticed that one person’s troll is often another’s learned and highly qualified commentator. ;-)

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#8)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    Everybody see the video of Bush flipping off the press on Tursday? Here's the link you'll need quicktime. Such a diplomat link

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#9)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    A terrorist organization bites the dust: LINK Perhaps it's not quite as hopeless as some here choose to believe?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#10)
    by desertswine on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    If you liked NAFTA...you will love CAFTA
    Another sellout of American workers for the benefit of the super-wealthy.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#11)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    I think Wilson, who has admitted to some "literary flair," tried to enlarge his importance by claiming/hinting that his selection came from the VP himself,
    Jim, you keep insisting this is true. When did Wilson ever say--or even suggest--Cheney selected him? You can't show us because it never happened. As for the "Plame sent him" silliness, all you have to do is go back to Novak (remember him?):
    At the CIA, the official designated to talk to me denied that Wilson's wife had inspired his selection but said she was delegated to request his help.


    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#12)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    A terrorist organization bites the dust: LINK Perhaps it's not quite as hopeless as some here choose to believe?
    You may have neglected to notice that the IRA's fortunes declined only after the occupation ended.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#14)
    by peacrevol on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    As a resident of Texas, the border issues that we face are an every day thing for me. But it seems that what should concern us the most about our borders is that if illegal aliens can be here, who else is here? Terrorists? I hope not, but how do you know if you have no control over your border. In my town there are, at any time of the day on certain corners, an abundance of Mexicans, I would suspect here illegeally, standing around waiting for someone to stop and offer them work. This is not as big of a concern for me, because if they are willing to stand outside in 100 degree heat all day to find a manuel labor job for one day so they can send money home to their families then we should let them. These are jobs that could be done for Americans if they offered a higher wage, but that's pretty much just how capitalism works. If these are jobs that Americans will not do because they dont pay enough, then the people paying the lower wages earn more money (obviously). It becomes somewhat of a wash when those small time business owners who have paid low wages to these people (presumably illegals) go to the American market and spend their money on American products. This money is then reinvested in the form of more jobs for Americans that Americans should be willing to do. Therefore, though it is a problem, the cheap labor offered by illegals should not concern us more than what it says about our borders and what kind of monsters could potentially be crossing them with harmful intentions.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#15)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    Quaker, NI remains British territory.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#16)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    Yes, still a British territory. However, since the Good Friday agreement in 1998, the number of British army troops stationed in Northern Ireland has been reduced, army patrols in Belfast have been withdrawn, and the Royal Ulster Constabulary has been replaced. Like I said.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#17)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    I'm a "letters to the editor" junkie, and what I've read from my fellow citizens in the local papers about the new random bag search policy on the NY subway/rail systems troubles me. The attitude of most seems to be "if it makes me safer, I'm all for it". If this is the common reasoning, why not repeal the 4th Amendment alltogether? We will be "safer", right? These cowards wouldn't know freedom if it slapped them in the face.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#18)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    I wasn't disputing Quaker, merely pointing out something that could be more important to those involved. I don't suggest that any of the specifics of the Cath/Prot/Irish/British conflict are directly applicable to our present conflict, merely suggesting that our problem with terrorism may not be as hopeless as some may choose to believe.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:44 PM EST
    You have to love it when a wingnut, bush-pushing s-s-s-s-news group finds a way to borrow (steal) the acronym of a very leftwing organization, one that said s-s-s-s-news group probably has little sympathy for, to use as their moniker.

    No imagination.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#20)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Zach, the boy committed to the re-education camp for gay kids, is to be freed today. Time will only tell if he weathered the thing allright or if he will be irrevocably screwed up, providing a nice solid income stream for a psychotherapist. Meanwhile, like a moth to a flame, Zach's father couldn't help running to Ayatollah Pat Robertson's TV network to denigrate and demonize gay people (of which his son is one, by his own words) using outrageous statistics with no basis in fact. Lovely man, Zach's dad. So now, thanks to him, we know that Zach's full name is Zach Stark, and that he loves him so much as to out him on national TV and say that if he really turns out to be gay that he will probably be dead in 15 years. Are you feeling the love in action yet?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#21)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    QIB – Here is a quote from a CNN program on 8/3/03 and was provided by John Horse.
    “WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger.” What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself”
    Here, read the whole thread. And it goes on:
    “They asked essentially that we follow up on this report -- that the agency follow up on the report.”
    Notice how Wilson slips back and forth. And this is what the Chairman of the Senate of the Intel committee concluded:
    When asked how [Wilson] 'knew' that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book,he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved 'a little literary flair.' The Intel Committee chair concluded: "I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact."
    DA – Re Wilson’s bias
    What did appear relevant could easily be found in what the CIA would call "open sources." For example, Mr. Wilson had long been a bitter critic of the current administration, writing in such left-wing publications as The Nation that under President Bush, "America has entered one of it periods of historical madness" and had "imperial ambitions." What's more, he was affiliated with the pro-Saudi Middle East Institute and he had recently been the keynote speaker for the Education for Peace in Iraq Center, a far-Left group that opposed not only the U.S. military intervention in Iraq but also the sanctions and the no-fly zones that protected Iraqi Kurds and Shias from being slaughtered by Saddam. Mr. Wilson is now saying (on C-SPAN this morning, for example) that he opposed military action in Iraq because he didn't believe Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and he foresaw the possibility of a difficult occupation. In fact, prior to the U.S. invasion, Mr. Wilson told ABC's Dave Marash that if American troops were sent into Iraq, Saddam might "use a biological weapon in a battle that we might have. For example, if we're taking Baghdad or we're trying to take, in ground-to-ground, hand-to-hand combat."
    And the trump card on this is that he interviewed no one new, merely those interviewed before. So there is no surprise that he found no new information. I think a professional CIA agent would have done better.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#22)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Jim: "I think a professional CIA agent would have done better." They could have written a better FORGERY in the first place. I see what you mean. Do you do the OTHER Jeff Gannon services as well? Or is it just voyeurism?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#23)
    by soccerdad on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    I think a professional CIA agent would have done better.
    Ni there was nothing to do better, because there was nothing

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Everybody see the video of Bush flipping off the press on Tursday? Here's the link you'll need quicktime. Such a diplomat
    But yet, even through this one, not a single one of the Emily Post christians will ever change their minds about Bush being one of them. My god, what does the man need to do? Sacrifice puppies to Cthulu on national t.v.? It's so obvious that he's just about the crassest man alive, and yet so called "good christians" all over the country love him for it, as if he's voicing something that they only wish they could and they're living vicariously through him. Weird.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#25)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    SD - And the person who did no new investigating tells us that there was no need for any new investigating. Makes as much sense as, "If we had some ham we would have some ham and eggs if we had some eggs." PIL - No I don't. I would think there are services in LA. You might try one of them.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Oh, and HOORAY! for Incurious George, who welched, once again, on a promise -- and got whole divisions of Scouts brainfried while they were waiting in vain. I hope they learned something about Trustworthy. Such experiences will REALLY help the Scout Masters serve up the scouts as the fodder-supply for the further calumnies of George Whoops! Bush. Loyal? To his criminal friends, yup. Helpful? To Osama Bin Laden, yup. Friendly? To the Saud Princes, yup. Courteous? With more middle-fingers of any normal human. Kind? Don't make us laugh. Obedient? To his VP, yup. Cheerful? No nukes under his pillows, so why not? Thrifty? Are you kidding? Brave? Nope. Clean? Evidence all shredded. Reverent? Never met a hypocrite he didn't like.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#27)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Wilson was actually overqualified for the mission. The CIA people proabably felt lucky his wife could connect with him. The CIA never wanted a major investigation launched. In no case could they do anything but give Cheney bad news. But they wanted to keep having things both ways -- supporting the African uranium claim in some documents while expressing skepticism in others. They pretty much buried Wilson's finding anyway - never giving Cheney a direct report. Wilson made clear in his first NYT article how the trip came about. If, in some later interview, he used a shorter statement such as "I went because the Vice President wanted the matter investigated." Who cares? He can't be expected to tell the long version everytime.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#28)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    centrist voice writes:
    Who cares? He can't be expected to tell the long version everytime
    Uh, do you really mean that a person can't be expected to be truthful when they describe something they have done, or were involved with? Surely you jest. And he was so qualified that he did no new investigating. Uh-huh. Sure.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#29)
    by Quaker in a Basement on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Jim, none of that makes a lick of sense. Where, exactly, does Wilson claim that Cheney sent him to Niger? The closest you've come is providing a convoluted quote in which Wilson says: "Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger.” What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself” The first half of the quote directly says the vice-president didn't know Wilson was going. The second half makes no sense at all. So where's Wilson's claim that Cheney sent him?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#31)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    PPJ, More links to wingnut websites (aim.org, don't get me started on what I dislike about that again. See above). Links that don't work, and quotes from "the Chairman of the Senate Intel committee", Sen. Roberts (give me a break please).

    Can we never have a serious discussion on this matter without the convoluted arguments, and the right-wing spin and "talking points". PPJ is smokescreening us again.

    What happened to my milkshake offer?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#32)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Dark Avenger, Looks like someone thought your milkshake prize offer was an insult. I must be missing something. Strange things happening on this site lately.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#34)
    by MikeDitto on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Ugh, please don't refer to Bush administration people as "queens". It's an insult to queens everywhere. (Yours truly included!) *Snap!*

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    They could have written a better FORGERY in the first place. I see what you mean. right! the notion that a "CIA agent or officer would have done a better job" is laughable at best.. i.e. an agent working for BushCo cheerleader and ass-k**er George Tenet? gimme a break.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#36)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    QIB - Go back and read the quote:
    WILSON: Well, look, it's absolutely true that neither the vice president nor Dr. Rice nor even George Tenet knew that I was traveling to Niger.” What they did, what the office of the vice president did, and, in fact, I believe now from Mr. Libby's statement, it was probably the vice president himself”
    Now read the second quote, notice how he uses "we" then slips back to "CIA." What don't you understand about that? He is implying something. It is the oldest trick in the world. Again, what did he say when caught by the Senate Intel Committee? Something about "literary flair?" ;-) DA - cheetah Here's the Link I am so sorry that something happened and you were deprived of an educational opportunity. BTW, cheetah. I took your comments especially seriously since you provide so many links yourself. DA - It doesn't matter how many people thought that Wilson's assignment was not necessary. In fact, he was given it, and he accepted it. And then he just revisited the previous investigation. He did nothing new. He dogged it. And I think his bias contributed to the dogging because it influenced his thinking. And that's not what I would expect a trained, professional CIA agent to do.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#38)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    DA – Guess you didn’t read the link you complained about, since it was to Education For Peace In Iraq. And here is the other failing link. It is actually more educational. What he did was re-visit all the previous people that had been interviewed. He didn’t make an effort to re-investigate others, etc. That is known, by most of us, as not doing anything new. Pretty basic, and I think those of us in the middle can figure out what was happening. Or should I say, not happening. And no, I'm not going to comment on your family members.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#39)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    "BTW, cheetah. I took your comments especially seriously since you provide so many links yourself." PPJ, you just made me spit my Pepsi out! Lovely.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#40)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    su:
    PPJ, you just made me spit my Pepsi out! Lovely.
    Too bad no one could make you spit the Kool-Aid out. PPJ:
    Pretty basic, and I think those of us in the middle can figure out what was happening. Or should I say, not happening.
    PPJ...all partisan politics aside...the Niger uranium story was a crock, was it not? So why is it surprising that nothing came of it no matter who was sent to investigate?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#42)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    Posted by Michael Ditto: "Ugh, please don't refer to Bush administration people as "queens"." It seems like the best referent, Michael. Don't mean to step on your terminology, but if you have a better word for male-dominant thugs and their sadistic pecking order, what is it? The movie Performance, with its stunning Brit Mafia-Queen music video, is the model for this sort of 'people in power who hate each other and have to submit to everyone they don't dominate' perversion. I have nothing against diversity; is there a better term for powermad homoerotic, Jeff Guckert-serviced, sadomasochist traitor Caligulas? Because that's a little long in the tooth.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#43)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    DA writes -
    “What he did was re-visit all the previous people that had been interviewed"(From PPJ) I don't know and you don't either. You're just asserting something that has no basis in fact, or you'd have put up a link by now.
    Ask and you shall receive a link. From the NYTimes Wilson article dated 7/6/03:
    In late February 2002, I arrived in Niger's capital, Niamey……….. ... I met with Ambassador Owens-Kirkpatrick at the embassy. For reasons that are understandable, the embassy staff has always kept a close eye on Niger's uranium business. I was not surprised, then, when the ambassador told me that she knew about the allegations of uranium sales to Iraq — and that she felt she had already debunked them in her reports to Washington. Nevertheless, she and I agreed that my time would be best spent interviewing people who had been in government when the deal supposedly took place, which was before her arrival. I spent the next eight days drinking sweet mint tea and meeting with dozens of people: current government officials, former government officials, people associated with the country's uranium business. It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place. Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger's uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there's simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired.
    So what he did was interview people who had previously been interviewed. And note that he relies on the oversight of various groups, and depends upon them not having breached agreements. That is, of course, not an investigation, but a summation of what the people under investigation have said. One other point. Wilson is a creature of the State Department. Note that the existing Amb. thinks she has already debunked the story. Understand that if Wilson finds her in error she will be very embarassed, so it would be a politcally incorrect thing for Wilson to do. Ernesto: It was the British who brought this up and, to my knowledge, they have not changed their mind.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#44)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:45 PM EST
    It was the British who brought this up and, to my knowledge, they have not changed their mind.
    So why didn't they ever pass on their info to the International Atomic Energy Agency? And what was the point of the forgeries?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#46)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:46 PM EST
    s u o, If PPJ's "link" remark caused you to lose your pepsi, you either 1)are way too easily entertained, or 2) had a little something mixed in with that pepsi.

    I provide links when I feel it's necessary, and never because I feel bullied into it. So, keep spitting that pepsi. Or drooling it, whatever the case may be.

    At least I don't waste thread space by providing a link, then printing half of it. Completely unnecessary, and not without purpose.

    As for stories about Joe Wilson, the real story here is that people working in the whitehouse leaked the name of a covert CIA officer, and none of the right-wing ranting and raving, or lying, can change that fact. They should be called what that makes them. I'll let you wingnuts fill in the blank. The "talking points" shouldn't change the facts for those who call themselves patriots, and who truly love their country.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#47)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:46 PM EST
    Excellent NYT article Military Opposition to Harsh Interrogation Is Outlined. Rear Adm. Michael F. Lohr, the Navy's chief lawyer, Brig. Gen. Kevin M. Sandkuhler, a senior Marine lawyer, and Maj. Gen. Thomas J. Romig, the Army's top-ranking uniformed lawyer, all voiced opposition to the harsh techniques at Guantanamo. As General Sandkuhler noted the Bush administration which was pushing for these harsh techniques "does not represent the services; thus, understandably, concern for service members is not reflected in their opinion."

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:46 PM EST
    john horse-From that article, this stood out as well:
    Other senior military lawyers warned in tones of sharp concern that aggressive interrogation techniques would endanger American soldiers taken prisoner and also diminish the country's standing as a leader in "the moral high road" approach to the laws of war.
    If nothing else, this is a nose thumbing to the troops. This puts them in a most dangerous position, if captured.

    Where is that "support our troops" clarion call we continually hear from this adm., when confronted by this type of analysis? Too inconvenient for them?

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    I would assume that bush considers these dissenting military leaders as "a few bad apples". If the leadership of the military is truly concerned with the policies of the commander in chief, they are in a position better than anyone else to "correct" the shame that bush has placed on this counrty and it's military.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#50)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    DA - A CIA agent? How about ABW.. Anybody but Wilson... as long as the replacement is a CIA employee, vetted, trained, experienced, politically neutral, etc. You know. Everything Wilson wasn't. For the rest, it's obvious to anyone who looks. You know, going back in history, the "talented amateurs" in the State Department brought us a ton of failures after WWII. This is another example. cheetah - No one is saying you have to link. Just that you don't. As you pointed out, it is labeled "comments." Of course it is nice to offer some support for your points. You might, for example, look up the law regarding who is and is not a covert agent. John H - Given that the people you keep trying to say will be affected by our behavior, won't be, I must conclude you are flogging a dead horse.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    ppjakaoldfart

    I myself don't post often, but I do read here frequently. I have seen and clicked links provided by cheetah a good deal, in fact, as I recall, he/she placed a couple of links to declassified C.I.A. documents about Che Guevara, which you happened to contest. So what's the matter, memory going on you, old man? Just because cheetah doesn't put 10,000 links a day to right wing tabloids, as you do, doesn't equate to not providing links.

    ppj says "jump"

    Come on everyone, say "how high".

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#53)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    PPJ Regarding my link to military opposition to Bush's use of abusive techniques, I was making several points. First of all, there is some question regarding the legality of the abusive techniques deployed at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. For further information, read the JAG memos. Please note that this opposition isn't coming from ACLU lawyers but from the military's own legal experts. We also know that there were other people who questioned the legality of the abusive interrogation techniques, including the FBI agents who visited Guantanamo. Second, the use of abusive and degrading interrogation technique was not established military policy but a change of policy imposed upon the military by the Bush administration. Third, part of the military's opposition was based on their belief that this would have adverse consequences for those who serve in the military. For example, General Sandkuhler's February 27, 2003 memo lists the following:
    a. Treatment of U.S. Servicemembers by Captors and compliance with International Law. b. Criminal and Civil Liability of DOD Military and Civilian Personnel in Domestic, Foreign, and International Forums. c. U.S. and International Public Support and Respect of U.S. Armed Forces. d. Pride, Discipline, and Self-Respect within the U.S. Armed Forces. e. Human Intelligence Exploitation and Surrender of Foreign Enemy Forces, and Cooperation and Support of Friendly Nations.


    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#54)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    DA - I expect my CIA management team - you know, the people we pay to run the thing - to take care of such details. I don't expect them to let some of the troops do unprofessional things like hiring a non-agent for an important investigation. Now, is that really so hard to understand? fatalbert - Thanks for the insult old chap, we over here in the colony do need to be reminded evrynow and then of how bathroomie English humor can be.. Must be a hold over from the public school days. As for links, and numbers thereof, if you pay for the resarch by a $50.00 contribution to TalkLeft I'll go back and count the number cheetah has done as compared to mine, over say, the last three months. But I won't be jumping up and down in anticaption of you doing anything except making a personal attack followed by an uninformed comment. InTheAttic - OBL said the opposite. He said it didn't matter. Here, read for yourself. John H - I grant you the debate. My comment was that the enemy doesn't care. So the debate is basically useless.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#55)
    by john horse on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    PPJ, Yes, Al Queda doesn't care but so what? Since when is our conduct dependent on what our enemies think or feel? I believe that detainee abuse has provided invaluable propaganda for Islamic extremists. In any case, as my mother used to tell me, just because others have gone to the devil doesn't give you an excuse to do so.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    "..count the number cheetah has done as compared to mine, over say, the last three months."

    Like the little snot-nosed kid on the playground saying, my dad's stronger than your dad.

    OMG, could you possibly sound any sillier?

    No.

    Re: Friday Open Thread (none / 0) (#58)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    Just another case of "all hat, no cattle", just like his hero, the faux Texas cowboy (p)resident bush.

    Yes, I do see, and that makes him the worst kind of bully, as well. He's never wrong, because he never acknowledges that you have proven him wrong. LOL.