(function() { (function(){function c(a){this.t={};this.tick=function(a,c,b){var d=void 0!=b?b:(new Date).getTime();this.t[a]=[d,c];if(void 0==b)try{window.console.timeStamp("CSI/"+a)}catch(l){}};this.tick("start",null,a)}var a;if(window.performance)var e=(a=window.performance.timing)&&a.responseStart;var h=0=b&&(window.jstiming.srt=e-b)}if(a){var d=window.jstiming.load;0=b&&(d.tick("_wtsrt",void 0,b),d.tick("wtsrt_","_wtsrt", e),d.tick("tbsd_","wtsrt_"))}try{a=null,window.chrome&&window.chrome.csi&&(a=Math.floor(window.chrome.csi().pageT),d&&0=c&&window.jstiming.load.tick("aft")};var f=!1;function g(){f||(f=!0,window.jstiming.load.tick("firstScrollTime"))}window.addEventListener?window.addEventListener("scroll",g,!1):window.attachEvent("onscroll",g); })();

Saturday, April 08, 2006

Another Non-Scandal - CNN Apologizes

More hyperventilating from the Left again. The HuffPo and the media think this is some huge scandal, but once again they are flailing about wildly at nothing.

There's a difference between providing declassified information when it's in the public interest, and leaking classified information that could jeopardize national security. The New York Times was about to go to press with a story that was supported by bogus allegations from Joe Wilson. It's been pretty well established who was responsible for Joe Wilson getting the gig in the first place (his wife) and it was pretty obvious from the non-written report he gave upon his return from Niger that his story didn't hold water when contrasted with all of the intelligence compiled by international intelligence agencies.

All Bush did was declassify some information about the subject so that the public could see that the NYT story was bullshit if it went to press. They told Judith Miller her story was flawed and showed her proof of it via the declassified docs. It's a crime for the U.S. to protect itself from allegations that it is involved in an illegal war? Since when!!??

"Now, there are Democrats out there that fail to recognize that distinction or refuse to recognize that distinction," said McClellan. "They are simply engaging in crass politics."

Bush's "selective declassification of highly sensitive intelligence for political purposes is wrong," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

It wasn't highly sensitive material Ms. Plastic Face. The Democrats can't stand the fact that the president has Executive Powers that do not require him to beg their approval each time he decides to do something in the better interests of this country.

This crying wolf every week is really getting old.

Breaking News:
CNN's JIM CLANCY: "A major story breaking now out of Washington right now. According to court papers that were filed by prosecutors, I. Lewis Libby, Scooter Libby, who was a key man in the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, has alleged that U.S. President George W. Bush was the man who authorized the leaking of the name of a CIA operative and the wife of a former ambassador.

"Now - that former CIA operator, Valerie Plame, was unmasked to journalists."

In fact, the so-called leak authorized by Bush had nothing to do with Plame - but instead covered Iraq war intelligence that was mostly already in the public domain.

CNN eventually realized its error and issued an on-air correction, forcing liberals coast-to-coast to cancel their planned impeachment parties.



Blogger Jason Ward said...

British intelligence still stands by their Saddam/yelloecake story, but that is hardly news that will be reported.

The ghost of Lindburgh is alive and well!

1:32 PM  
Blogger Oliver Twit, Her Majesty's Royal Pudding Critic said...

I'm sure you'd put up with similar behavior from a Democrat and view it as being perfectly acceptable, right? The problem with you right wingers is you excuse anything as long as it's done by somebody with whom you agree politically. In case you missed it, Gerogie is NOT a conservative, as any real conservative will tell you. Of course, if you're still supporting Bush, truth and morality obviously mean nothing to you. Who would Jesus torture?

1:37 PM  
Blogger joe said...

Wow, you really do just post the latest talking points dont you?

The problem with your post, aside from the fact that iraq had huge amounts of yellowcake since at least 1991, amd we didnt do anything about it becuase he doesnt have the technology to enrich the uranium into anything useable, and the fact that Wilson turned out to be completely correct, is that if this was just a matter of declassified information being legally fed to reporters, there never would have been an issue, Bush would have come out and said, "there is no leak, I authorized the release of this information." So why didnt he...oh right, becuase what happened consisted of the outing of a cia agent in direct retaliation for a political disagreement. OKay, we dont yet know whether Plame-Wilson was covert, there has yet to be an investigation into her status, or any possible dmamge done to her contacts in the middle east (remember she worked on WMD intelligence).

you state:
"it was pretty obvious from the non-written report he gave upon his return from Niger that his story didn't hold water when contrasted with all of the intelligence compiled by international intelligence agencies."

How did you get access to his non-written report? were you there during de-briefing? If it did contradict intelligence reports, why did his written statements turn out to be so factual? Simply a matter of all the intelligence being wrong? Which then begs the question: Why did Tenet get the medal of freedom?

Mclellan spends his life trying to spin the WHite houses earlier words into whatever the newest angle they are using to distract us from those same words. It seems to me anyone who can rub two brain cells together should be able to see that.

I love that outing a CIA agent in retaliation for her husbands work is now deemed (by you anyway) to be in the best interest of this country.
That kind of subjective morality is pretty frightening especially if you consider that were I to practice it myself, every fundamental religionist alive today would be rounded up into work camps to serve the rest of humanity they've been on a centuries long crusade to destroy.

But to be honest to myself I must conclude that I havent the right to destroy these people's lives, even when the crimes of their cuase are plenty and widely apparent. This is really just more of the same, the politics of personal destruction. It's the modus operandi of the Bush regime, its pathetic, corrupt, and immoral.


# In 1991, Iraq was discovered to have about 500 metric tons (~1 million lbs.) of yellowcake they'd 'forgotten' to mention. George Herbert Walker Bush, his coalition pals, and the International Atomic Energy Agency were so alarmed that Iraq had yellowcake, they decided to leave it in Iraq. The "prudent" course of action as they saw it: put it drums, seal it up, and check the seals once a year. They knew an entire year was not long enough for Hussein to make anything dangerous out of yellowcake. [3, .pdf]

# That yellowcake was inspected and remained untouched until Hussein barred the U.N. inspectors in late 1998. [see 3 above]

# On Oct. 6, 2002, the CIA sent a fax to the White House that stated "the procurement [of yellowcake] is not particularly significant to Iraq's nuclear ambitions because the Iraqis already have a large stock of uranium oxide [yellowcake] in their inventory. [4, para. 7, emphasis added]

# During Dec. 9-11, 2002, before Bush's SOTU claim that Iraq was trying to buy yellowcake from Africa, U.N. Inspectors verified that the yellowcake from 1991 was in Iraq, undisturbed, and still sealed. [see 3 above]

Now we can keep attacking the messenger for poniting out the Bush regime's lies and falsehoods, or we can go ahead and prosecute these criminals, or we can all go stick our heads in the sand... Or I suppose if we really wanted to we could just keep pushing those ridiculous and easily debunked talking points.

Its up to each of us to decide which we want, honesty and integrity in government, or the politics of personal destruction. This November will be the perfect chance to make that choice once again. I just hope more folks vote on the facts rather than the rhetoric.

4:11 PM  
Blogger Senor said...

On at least two occasions [Wilson] admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all.

For example, when asked how he "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."

During Mr. Wilson's media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had "debunked" the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT "debunk" the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true.

They 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. . . . .

6:56 PM  
Blogger Aurelius said...

Did you really say that Wilson's contradiction of the whole Yellowcake thing is bogus?

It this one of those rightie sites that just repeats lunacy so their 'base' can get some reinforcement? I mean, come on?!? Obviously, Mr. Wilson was on the side of right since NO WMD's were found. Dispite the horrible corporate media, most rational folks are now aware that the whole WMD thing (and the leaking of selective classified data) was done to legitimize the war - it had nothing to do with the motives.

Nobody wants to admit they got taken for a ride, but you neo-conned need to take a step back and ask some tough questions.

11:36 PM  
Blogger Senor said...

Wouldnt it be pretty pointless to lie about WMD's if he KNEW none would be found once we got there?
If he deliberately lied, then he knew in advance he would be caught in a lie. Why would he do that? So he could face impeachment and be disgraced? So why didnt he just fake WMD's if he's so evil and dishonest? If George is such an evil genius why didnt he plant WMD?

Because the entire world believed Sadamm had them. And he did. They are now in Syria and Iran. HIs top general Sadr now says they ferried them nonstop via a 747 and 767 in the months while congress debated the 'rush to war'.

What part of this do you not get? The committee announced publicy that much of what Wilson said was flat out wrong and had NO BASIS IN FACT.

Wilson admits to taking 'literary flair' in writing his book. Just like Jayson Blair of the NYT.

Then he goes to that same NYT to peddle his book and his pack of lies. So the Bush Admin said FUCK YOU, here's the facts. It had the right to do that.

You are delusional. Your pure hatred for Bush makes you want to believe anything and everything you hear from the lunatic fringe.

12:47 AM  
Blogger Mike V. said...


You mean the same NYT that had Judy Miller beating the war drums?
That NYT?


Your failure to move past the talking points noted.

I guess we're back to what the definition of "is" is.

2:06 AM  
Blogger joe said...

I'm really not sure how anything Wilson said that adds to the government 's argument for war has anything to do with the Government outing his wife. It makes it more a story that bush ordered the leak. The Facts in the case are obvious, the yellowcake argument was nothing more than a fear tactic to push the "mushroom cloud" argument. It was all lies, it was obvious then and its obvious now. Iraq already had tons of yellowcake, and now we know who forged the documents saying Saddam wanted to buy some. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2125630,00.html

Your "non-story seems to be quite a story now doesnt it?

And Why didnt Bush plant WMD's? Are you kidding me? how does that make any sense from anyone's perspective? They know as do all propagandists, that you can lie and lie and lie, there never has to be any corroborating evidence, Some people will believe anything when they are scared.

So wilson used some literary license while writing his book? so what? it doesnt change any of the facts about the yellowcake story, it was all complete crap and they knew it while they lied to you every time they spoke about iraq. Why you continue to allow these criminals to distract you from the truth I have no idea, otherwise you seem generally intelligent.

2:07 AM  
Blogger Senor said...

The point you seem to want to overlook is that Wilson was wrong. He went on a 'junket' courtesy of his wife and never left poolside at the hotel.

7:20 AM  
Blogger joe said...

You keep saying wilson was wrong...about what? and what does that have to do with the outing of a CIA operative?

That has nothing to do with the discussion about Bush ordering the outing of a cia operative in retaliation for her husbands work.

The facts havent changed one bit. The Bush administration attacks everyone and everything that goes against their policy regardless of what the facts are in the matter. They cant argue their case, the facts are nearly always against them , so they attack, its like bullies in a school yard. No brains, just a big stick to keep the cowards shaking. Which to me looks exactly like the type of thing Saddam did.

3:26 PM  
Blogger Senor said...

Joe, try to educate yourself. Nobody has said Bush authorized leaking Plames name. Nobody except the looney left, anyway. He declassified certain information AS IS HIS PRESIDENTIAL priviledge.
You guys hate the fact that the president has inherent powers that dont require approval from Pelosi or Reid.
Thats why CNN gave an on-air retraction about what they said.
You guys hear what you want to hear.

10:13 PM  
Blogger prying1 said...

I'm ticked off that President Bush does not declassify the REAL "Area 51" information. Not the weather balloon stuff.

I have 1000 tinfoil covered baseball caps for sale. They are not moving and I'm sure all I need is one front page story in the L.A. Times to get those wacky liberals to purchase them.

3:01 AM  
Blogger joe said...

Kevin, You need to wake up, Bush certainly does have the right to declassify anything he wants, within the law, and certainly in the interest of national security. However, He denied it all the way up until he was caught, just like every other politician, then its: oh I can do it anyway. Now maybe there is some argument that outing a CIA operative in retaliation for a disagreement about policy with her husband, on documents already proven to be false, is in some way a matter of national security, but I dont see it. Why didnt he just say, I approved the release of this data? no he denied it over and over, said anyone found to have leaked it would be punished by the law and removed from his administration, and all the while allowing millions of dollars in taxpayer money to be completely wasted by this ongoing investigation, which would never have occured if Bush were just honest.

Perhaps I do only hear what I want to hear, that would certainly explain how you ignore every valid point made while sticking firmly to the talking points of the moment. But it completely ignores the facts in every one of these situations.

6:57 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home