Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

PatrickHenry · Jul 20, 2005, 02:14 pm

My question: Why didn't Bob Novak give out the real news? That the Bush Administration was engaged in a retaliatory campaign against its critics?

Because he's a whore for them, that's why.

Osborn F Enready · Jul 20, 2005, 02:22 pm

One of the republicans reps was on a talkshow the other day, and he actually said the CIA has been known to make too big a deal out of secrets anyway.........

Talk about out of ammo.......

Blackrain · Jul 20, 2005, 07:55 pm

I'm not trying to say whether or not Rove is guilty-just that it's the court's decicion, that both sides are using it as a political tool/lightning rod, and that the left is blowing off valuable media ink and air for Rove rather than things far more substantive and worthy.

Anyone heard of Darfur lately, or of how Gitmo interrogations have revealed Saddam's involvement in the African Embassy bombings, or so many other things? Nah, blow em all off to go after Karl Rove. Kinda expected as much now that the Michael Jackson trial's over.

PatrickHenry · Jul 20, 2005, 08:12 pm

Given the dirty tricks Rove has pulled against opponents in both general elections and in the Republican primary race, I am surprised he has gotten such mild treatment so far. He must have powerful friends...

Blackrain · Jul 20, 2005, 08:18 pm

He's on the cover of TIME. He's been the lead on all three networks at least once this week, and he's getting more coverage on the 24hr channels than all of the Amber alerts, Hollywood trials, and Aruba MIA's combined (beat out only by a hurricane and saved by the Supreme Court pick which is directly in support of my point earlier). I wouldn't call that mild. My gawd man, there was an effort by Moveon to have people dump their own personal human waste on his front yard-directions to his house given on a website.

PatrickHenry · Jul 20, 2005, 09:41 pm

Quote:

Quote by: Blackrain

there was an effort by Moveon to have people dump their own personal human waste on his front yard-directions to his house given on a website.

That's wrong.

A public health problem... :(

Blackrain · Jul 21, 2005, 07:07 am

Ignoring Darfur and the increasingly obvious ties between Saddam and Al Queda or ignoring the reduction in the deficit, the reduction in those unemployed, etc....all those take a back seat to such an important matter? If the matter is so important, they why not focus on how it cancels out the claim in the Downing Street Memo too? Nah, it's pure Bushate politics from a disgruntled 48% of the electorate that's bought into compiled conspiracy theories. Blowing off real issues for something this stupid is disgusting politics in my opinion....but that's just mine. Many see Rove as the reason the Dems are losers, and they'd rather attack him than face the party's shattered and fragmented duplicitous policies.

walton · Jul 21, 2005, 09:59 am

Blackrain,

Your dismissal of our criticism as the result of loser hate may work for the team you are on, but the country suffers from the lack of effectiveness of Bush and Rove, who are good at getting power and using it for the gain of insiders, but ineffective at defending the country.

We don't like corruption and treason. It was treasonous for a high Bush admn official to tell Chalabi that we had broken the Iranian code. We lost the ability to read Iranian messages. It was an extremely serious mistake to divulge that Noor Khan had been captured last summer. He had been cooperating, but as soon as the word got out through a Bush admn leak the value of the lucky stroke and good work of an ally was lost entirely. Pakistan was furious with us. The London bombings and other terrorist acts might have been prevented had Bush officials not blown the whole thing. These and other errors are too costly in terms of life, loss of the confidence of others we need to work with us and national security and treasure.

When the Bush regime screws up as they did with the Plame matter, it distracts by attacking someome else. That has been effective in some degree in the past as a means of holding the Bush regime loyalists. However, people who are effective in intelligence and counter terrrorism and in significant numbers have said that they can't work with people so uninterested in our national security.

As with David Rubinstein, we don't hate Bush, at least not in the beginning, we just can't get behind someone who can't do the job. Corruption is a reason to come to hate.

Blackrain · Jul 21, 2005, 10:23 am

See, I think it's the people in the intel community who can't do their jobs and repeatedly fail to meet the expectations of the US that are the problem-no Bush. 911.....blame the captain of the ship, or the people who failed to counter terrorism? Many blame the Captain and let Clarke, Tenet, and others slide because it allows for Bush bashing instead of addressing the real problem-a decrepit, decayed, underfunded, undermanned, ill-equipped, and previously AWFULLY lead intelligence community. That's where I think blame for intel issues should be blamed, but others feel it's the President's political advisor....to me, that illustrates a preference to vent Bushate rather than to address real problems. Before 911, the Sen Intel Com report on 911 tells us that there were only 4 people tracking UBL (never more than 40), and after 1998, there wasn't a single US intel asset in Iraq. The CIA was fixing intel to oppose policy rather than to fit it as the DSM claims, and the DIA was actually refusing to examine Iraq/AQ reports until 2003. Now, I see those as seriousl issues, but they don't offer any potential for bashing Bush except to say, "well he's the captain, so he should wear the scarlett letter" or "regime change in DC will solve the problem" That's simply not helpful, not true, and not possible. So, either we address the real problems, or we put a 'fixed this problem' sign on a new President and pretend everything's just grand....until an unrepaired intel community finds yet another high level mole, finds another Aldrich Ames, or the FBI fubars again, or so on and so on....

Nah, Pres Bush isn't the prob, and his senior political advisor is most certainly not responsible for the London Bombings (nice spin-stretch though). There's an intel community problem that's so deep and so bi-partisan that no one wants to address it. That's why intel reform took so long...no one wanted culpability.

So Bash Bush all you want. Pin whatever you want on Rove (maybe he's causing all those hurricanes too by manipulating the weather on behalf of insurance companies), but fact is....there's real problems, and focusing on Rove or a President who can't run again....is useless.

walton · Jul 22, 2005, 08:04 am

I hate traitors. People who break the law and tell Iranian spies that the U.S. has broken their code have earned my contempt. People who leak that Noor Khan was cooperating and helping Pakistan Britain and the U. S. locate Bin Laden people they are traitors and have earned my contempt. You do not address the failures that are Bush's alone. His WH leaked secrets, the loss of which ,as with Brewster Jennings, cost this nation lives, opportunity, and treasure.

But Rove and Balckrain's favorite traitor criminals can all be pardoned, even Bush, who cannot pardon himself, can be pardoned by his brother when he is president.

A. Gonzales wrote (regarding torture) to Bush warning that the Iraq war could lead to 1996 War Crimes Act charges against the administration. In those cases in which inhuman treatment of detainees leads to death, even those who were responsible for the policy that caused the abuse could be held responsible for the death of the detainee under U.S. law. The crime has no limitation, so that Bush, unless protected by a pardon, could be tried at any time and, if convicted, could be given the death penalty.

Our law could be said to hate traitors.

walton · Jul 22, 2005, 08:13 am

Okay, Mr. Vicchio, if it wasn't a secret that Rove leaked, why did the memo the State Dept. provided to Air Force One say that the information was secret? If there was no violation of law for the reason you suggest, why do the judges say the opposite? They have all said that it was a very serious damaging to this country crime. Do you, Mr. Vicchio, care what evil befalls this country? Does criminal behavior on the part of high official and cover up of such crime not bother you?

snow cone · Jul 22, 2005, 09:17 am

Now this would be interesting. Rove says he learned of Wilson's wife from some reporter. Could it have been that male prostitute that used a made up name and was so often in the WH when there was no press event or gathering? The male prostitute turned supposed journalist could provide the sex element that the Hyde type just has to have to get interested. Couldn't remember who because the guy uses various names. Wow! The Ganon journalist prostitute claimed to have seen the secret info on Plame.

PatrickHenry · Jul 23, 2005, 12:55 am

Intel officers are saying that Bush shoulda disciplined Rove for what he did. Because of this incident, now recruiting is harder.
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news/..._0705bush_rove

Quote:

Former U.S. intelligence officers criticized President Bush on Friday for not disciplining Karl Rove in connection with the leak of the name of a CIA officer, saying Bush's lack of action has jeopardized national security.

In a hearing held by Senate and House Democrats examining the implications of exposing Valerie Plame's identity, the former intelligence officers said Bush's silence has hampered efforts to recruit informants to help the United States fight the war on terror. Federal law forbids government officials from revealing the identity of an undercover intelligence officer.

``I wouldn't be here this morning if President Bush had done the one thing required of him as commander in chief - protect and defend the Constitution,'' said Larry Johnson, a former CIA analyst. ``The minute that Valerie Plame's identity was outed, he should have delivered a strict and strong message to his employees.''

<snip>-----

Patrick Lang, a retired Army colonel and defense intelligence officer, said Bush's silence sends a bad signal to foreigners who might be thinking of cooperating with the U.S. on intelligence matters.

``This says to them that if you decide to cooperate, someone will give you up, so you don't do it,'' Lang said. ``They are not going to trust you in any way.''

Johnson, who said he is a registered Republican, said he wished a GOP lawmaker would have the courage to stand up and ``call the ugly dog the ugly dog.''

``Where are these men and women with any integrity to speak out against this?'' Johnson asked. ``I expect better behavior out of Republicans.''

walton · Jul 23, 2005, 11:15 am

Thanks, PatrickHenry, I hope to review the testimony later today. I heard some yesterday. Among other things it was said that the damage report was probably not good because had it been we would have heard about it. Further it seems that a version of, if not a copy, the damage report is what Fitzgerald has been presenting to the judges who then all say this is too serious a crime to allow confidentiality of sources.

Lang's remarks and the observations of others with experience in the field make sense to us, but not to Blackrain and Mr. Vicchio and the like. Just look back to the response to specific leaks of a very damaging nature and the lack of any meaningful change to prevent another damaging leak. Post #48 three huge damaging leaks done by top Bush people are identified. Blackrain replies, with thinking that becomes downright opaque. The criminal leaks are not a problem. Failure to deal with them also not a problem. The possibility that Noor Khan (the word used is "might") could have helped our side catch the London bombers a year can't be considered at all by Blackrain.

A term I heard yesterday certainly applies - Bush Stupid. Some people become Bush Stupid when presented with facts (they can't accept) of Bush's outrageous failure to defend the country he swore to defend. I've seen it many times face to face, but now it has a name that makes sense to me. (Exactly what you chose, PatrickHenry, from the hearing above.)

It is valuable this effort at Volconvo (Thank you, Sean) if for no other reason than that here a person may see Bush Stupidity. And this is all on top of the lies. Hughes says the leak was a bad thing, but Rove had nothing to do with it. Now it is Rove didn't leak Libby didn't leak. Reporters told them instead.

Some people come to their senses, but it is getting a little late for Blackrain and Mr. Vicchio.
Bush gives the Axis of evil top secret national security secrets and it will cost us between 700 billion and a trillion dollars and more precious blood to unite Iraq and Iran. Blackrain doesn't see a problem with Bush.

RickSp · Jul 23, 2005, 11:35 am

And the lies just keep on coming...

Quote:

The investigation into the White House leak of a CIA agent's identity is now focusing on whether two top administration officials provided misleading statements to the FBI, it was reported yesterday.

Bush aide misled FBI, say reports

walton · Jul 23, 2005, 11:49 am

In post #48 I said that the London bombings might have been prevented, if the top Bush mouth hadn't blabbed that Naeem Noor Kahn had changed sides and was working with our side. Blackrain replies that it is not possible that letting Noor Khan's helping us remain secret could have made any difference to London's underground riders.

Blackrain's breath taking Bush Studpidity is thus shown.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00300.htm

gem · Jul 24, 2005, 12:43 pm

Here is a link to the page that has the pdf of the transcript of the hearing in which the CIA and military intelligence people talk about the damage done by 1) high ranking officials leaking the identity of an intelligence operative and 2) doing nothing when major leaking is coming from the highest government officials.

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=898

snow cone · Jul 24, 2005, 01:49 pm

"I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors." President Bush April 26, 1999

walton · Jul 25, 2005, 10:55 am

It is not just the White House that is mum on the leaking of national secrets. At the hearing of the Government Reform Committee there were no Republicans. The CIA and military intelligence witnesses mentioned this sad fact. Hiding from the problem and hoping it will go away seems to be the Republican way of dealing with the most serious crime (as described by Bush 41).

But I would remind everyone that this is not an isolated case. Huge violations of this kind have gotten the same lack of attention from the Republicans. The Iranian code secret was given to Chalabi, who promptly told the Iranians. Naeem Noor Khan's name was leaked last summer, ruining our best opportunity to find terrorists in hiding. Our nation's security and that of people all over the world is damaged and Republicans want to make believe there is no problem.

Strut, make believe and spill secrets - what a spectacle

Jul 20, 2005, 02:14 pm	#41 (permalink) (top)
PatrickHenry 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,446	My question: Why didn't Bob Novak give out the real news? That the Bush Administration was engaged in a retaliatory campaign against its critics? Because he's a whore for them, that's why. "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams

Jul 20, 2005, 02:22 pm	#42 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	One of the republicans reps was on a talkshow the other day, and he actually said the CIA has been known to make too big a deal out of secrets anyway......... Talk about out of ammo....... Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

Jul 20, 2005, 08:12 pm	#44 (permalink) (top)
PatrickHenry 9/11: Inside Job Location: Hawai'i, Big Island Posts: 10,446	Given the dirty tricks Rove has pulled against opponents in both general elections and in the Republican primary race, I am surprised he has gotten such mild treatment so far. He must have powerful friends... "Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." -- John Adams

Jul 20, 2005, 07:55 pm	#43 (permalink) (top)
Blackrain Sedimentary Rock Posts: 19	I'm not trying to say whether or not Rove is guilty-just that it's the court's decicion, that both sides are using it as a political tool/lightning rod, and that the left is blowing off valuable media ink and air for Rove rather than things far more substantive and worthy. Anyone heard of Darfur lately, or of how Gitmo interrogations have revealed Saddam's involvement in the African Embassy bombings, or so many other things? Nah, blow em all off to go after Karl Rove. Kinda expected as much now that the Michael Jackson trial's over.

Jul 20, 2005, 08:18 pm	#45 (permalink) (top)
Blackrain Sedimentary Rock Posts: 19	He's on the cover of TIME. He's been the lead on all three networks at least once this week, and he's getting more coverage on the 24hr channels than all of the Amber alerts, Hollywood trials, and Aruba MIA's combined (beat out only by a hurricane and saved by the Supreme Court pick which is directly in support of my point earlier). I wouldn't call that mild. My gawd man, there was an effort by Moveon to have people dump their own personal human waste on his front yard-directions to his house given on a website.

Jul 21, 2005, 07:07 am	#47 (permalink) (top)
Blackrain Sedimentary Rock Posts: 19	Ignoring Darfur and the increasingly obvious ties between Saddam and Al Queda or ignoring the reduction in the deficit, the reduction in those unemployed, etc....all those take a back seat to such an important matter? If the matter is so important, they why not focus on how it cancels out the claim in the Downing Street Memo too? Nah, it's pure Bushate politics from a disgruntled 48% of the electorate that's bought into compiled conspiracy theories. Blowing off real issues for something this stupid is disgusting politics in my opinion....but that's just mine. Many see Rove as the reason the Dems are losers, and they'd rather attack him than face the party's shattered and fragmented duplicitous policies.

Jul 21, 2005, 09:59 am	#48 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	Blackrain, Your dismissal of our criticism as the result of loser hate may work for the team you are on, but the country suffers from the lack of effectiveness of Bush and Rove, who are good at getting power and using it for the gain of insiders, but ineffective at defending the country. We don't like corruption and treason. It was treasonous for a high Bush admn official to tell Chalabi that we had broken the Iranian code. We lost the ability to read Iranian messages. It was an extremely serious mistake to divulge that Noor Khan had been captured last summer. He had been cooperating, but as soon as the word got out through a Bush admn leak the value of the lucky stroke and good work of an ally was lost entirely. Pakistan was furious with us. The London bombings and other terrorist acts might have been prevented had Bush officials not blown the whole thing. These and other errors are too costly in terms of life, loss of the confidence of others we need to work with us and national security and treasure. When the Bush regime screws up as they did with the Plame matter, it distracts by attacking someome else. That has been effective in some degree in the past as a means of holding the Bush regime loyalists. However, people who are effective in intelligence and counter terrrorism and in significant numbers have said that they can't work with people so uninterested in our national security. As with David Rubinstein, we don't hate Bush, at least not in the beginning, we just can't get behind someone who can't do the job. Corruption is a reason to come to hate.

Jul 21, 2005, 10:23 am	#49 (permalink) (top)
Blackrain Sedimentary Rock Posts: 19	See, I think it's the people in the intel community who can't do their jobs and repeatedly fail to meet the expectations of the US that are the problem-no Bush. 911.....blame the captain of the ship, or the people who failed to counter terrorism? Many blame the Captain and let Clarke, Tenet, and others slide because it allows for Bush bashing instead of addressing the real problem-a decrepit, decayed, underfunded, undermanned, ill-equipped, and previously AWFULLY lead intelligence community. That's where I think blame for intel issues should be blamed, but others feel it's the President's political advisor....to me, that illustrates a preference to vent Bushate rather than to address real problems. Before 911, the Sen Intel Com report on 911 tells us that there were only 4 people tracking UBL (never more than 40), and after 1998, there wasn't a single US intel asset in Iraq. The CIA was fixing intel to oppose policy rather than to fit it as the DSM claims, and the DIA was actually refusing to examine Iraq/AQ reports until 2003. Now, I see those as seriousl issues, but they don't offer any potential for bashing Bush except to say, "well he's the captain, so he should wear the scarlett letter" or "regime change in DC will solve the problem" That's simply not helpful, not true, and not possible. So, either we address the real problems, or we put a 'fixed this problem' sign on a new President and pretend everything's just grand....until an unrepaired intel community finds yet another high level mole, finds another Aldrich Ames, or the FBI fubars again, or so on and so on.... Nah, Pres Bush isn't the prob, and his senior political advisor is most certainly not responsible for the London Bombings (nice spin-stretch though). There's an intel community problem that's so deep and so bi-partisan that no one wants to address it. That's why intel reform took so long...no one wanted culpability. So Bash Bush all you want. Pin whatever you want on Rove (maybe he's causing all those hurricanes too by manipulating the weather on behalf of insurance companies), but fact is....there's real problems, and focusing on Rove or a President who can't run again....is useless.

Jul 22, 2005, 08:04 am	#50 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	I hate traitors. People who break the law and tell Iranian spies that the U.S. has broken their code have earned my contempt. People who leak that Noor Khan was cooperating and helping Pakistan Britain and the U. S. locate Bin Laden people they are traitors and have earned my contempt. You do not address the failures that are Bush's alone. His WH leaked secrets, the loss of which ,as with Brewster Jennings, cost this nation lives, opportunity, and treasure. But Rove and Balckrain's favorite traitor criminals can all be pardoned, even Bush, who cannot pardon himself, can be pardoned by his brother when he is president. A. Gonzales wrote (regarding torture) to Bush warning that the Iraq war could lead to 1996 War Crimes Act charges against the administration. In those cases in which inhuman treatment of detainees leads to death, even those who were responsible for the policy that caused the abuse could be held responsible for the death of the detainee under U.S. law. The crime has no limitation, so that Bush, unless protected by a pardon, could be tried at any time and, if convicted, could be given the death penalty. Our law could be said to hate traitors.

Jul 22, 2005, 08:13 am	#51 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	Okay, Mr. Vicchio, if it wasn't a secret that Rove leaked, why did the memo the State Dept. provided to Air Force One say that the information was secret? If there was no violation of law for the reason you suggest, why do the judges say the opposite? They have all said that it was a very serious damaging to this country crime. Do you, Mr. Vicchio, care what evil befalls this country? Does criminal behavior on the part of high official and cover up of such crime not bother you?

Jul 22, 2005, 09:17 am	#52 (permalink) (top)
snow cone Martin Moore Posts: 21	Now this would be interesting. Rove says he learned of Wilson's wife from some reporter. Could it have been that male prostitute that used a made up name and was so often in the WH when there was no press event or gathering? The male prostitute turned supposed journalist could provide the sex element that the Hyde type just has to have to get interested. Couldn't remember who because the guy uses various names. Wow! The Ganon journalist prostitute claimed to have seen the secret info on Plame.

Jul 23, 2005, 11:15 am	#54 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	Thanks, PatrickHenry, I hope to review the testimony later today. I heard some yesterday. Among other things it was said that the damage report was probably not good because had it been we would have heard about it. Further it seems that a version of, if not a copy, the damage report is what Fitzgerald has been presenting to the judges who then all say this is too serious a crime to allow confidentiality of sources. Lang's remarks and the observations of others with experience in the field make sense to us, but not to Blackrain and Mr. Vicchio and the like. Just look back to the response to specific leaks of a very damaging nature and the lack of any meaningful change to prevent another damaging leak. Post #48 three huge damaging leaks done by top Bush people are identified. Blackrain replies, with thinking that becomes downright opaque. The criminal leaks are not a problem. Failure to deal with them also not a problem. The possibility that Noor Khan (the word used is "might") could have helped our side catch the London bombers a year can't be considered at all by Blackrain. A term I heard yesterday certainly applies - Bush Stupid. Some people become Bush Stupid when presented with facts (they can't accept) of Bush's outrageous failure to defend the country he swore to defend. I've seen it many times face to face, but now it has a name that makes sense to me. (Exactly what you chose, PatrickHenry, from the hearing above.) It is valuable this effort at Volconvo (Thank you, Sean) if for no other reason than that here a person may see Bush Stupidity. And this is all on top of the lies. Hughes says the leak was a bad thing, but Rove had nothing to do with it. Now it is Rove didn't leak Libby didn't leak. Reporters told them instead. Some people come to their senses, but it is getting a little late for Blackrain and Mr. Vicchio. Bush gives the Axis of evil top secret national security secrets and it will cost us between 700 billion and a trillion dollars and more precious blood to unite Iraq and Iran. Blackrain doesn't see a problem with Bush.

Jul 23, 2005, 11:49 am	#56 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	In post #48 I said that the London bombings might have been prevented, if the top Bush mouth hadn't blabbed that Naeem Noor Kahn had changed sides and was working with our side. Blackrain replies that it is not possible that letting Noor Khan's helping us remain secret could have made any difference to London's underground riders. Blackrain's breath taking Bush Studpidity is thus shown. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0507/S00300.htm

Jul 24, 2005, 12:43 pm	#57 (permalink) (top)
gem dual citizen Location: Seattle Posts: 53	Here is a link to the page that has the pdf of the transcript of the hearing in which the CIA and military intelligence people talk about the damage done by 1) high ranking officials leaking the identity of an intelligence operative and 2) doing nothing when major leaking is coming from the highest government officials. http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=898

Jul 24, 2005, 01:49 pm	#58 (permalink) (top)
snow cone Martin Moore Posts: 21	"I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors." President Bush April 26, 1999

Jul 25, 2005, 10:55 am	#59 (permalink) (top)
walton Molten Ash Posts: 51	It is not just the White House that is mum on the leaking of national secrets. At the hearing of the Government Reform Committee there were no Republicans. The CIA and military intelligence witnesses mentioned this sad fact. Hiding from the problem and hoping it will go away seems to be the Republican way of dealing with the most serious crime (as described by Bush 41). But I would remind everyone that this is not an isolated case. Huge violations of this kind have gotten the same lack of attention from the Republicans. The Iranian code secret was given to Chalabi, who promptly told the Iranians. Naeem Noor Khan's name was leaked last summer, ruining our best opportunity to find terrorists in hiding. Our nation's security and that of people all over the world is damaged and Republicans want to make believe there is no problem. Strut, make believe and spill secrets - what a spectacle