TPS

10,000

Seems some people are now questioning the UK's evidence as well. Could it be same strategy that Cheney used with Judy Miller--Feed her false or trumped information for an article, then go on the Sunday talk shows and quote the articles from the NYTimes....? http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politi...ticle325155.ece

Nope, not saying that. In the case of Plame, it could be a criminal offense to leak her name; in the case of the gulags, the leak concerns a "policy" that breaks international law (Geneva Convention). Maybe some of those people at the CIA have a conscience...

You're comparing apples and oranges. In the case of Plame, senior administration officials leaked her name to the press to discredit her husband; in the current case, apparently senior CIA officials leaked the "gulag story" because of their disagreement with the policy--which was also established by the Cheney-Rumsfeld "cabal." The right wants to make this a liberal media/democrats vs. Bush story, but it's not. At least two years ago I speculated that there was a "spy vs. spy" conflict between the Cheney-Rumsfeld Pentagon and the CIA over disagreements about US foreign policy and the war on terror, specifically the need to invade Iraq. This continues to play out today in the form of leaks and criticism from former national security personnel, especially now that Bush's man Goss is trying to purge the CIA of elements that do not support the beliefs of the neocons. Like Wilkerson said, Cheney's cabal has hijacked US foreign policy, and there are a lot of long time foriegn policy/security personnel who are opposed to their plans. I think they see a good chance to sink the ship with the Libby indictment, so they'll continue to "leak" information that further damages the neocons.

apparently I'm not alone is thinking the leak came from within... "Senior intelligence sources blamed the leak on CIA officers unhappy at having to maintain what one former counter-terrorism official described as “secret gulags”. " CIA leaks

from the article is sounds like you've nailed it. Many of the sources are "former intelligence officers." In addition, it states that there is a debate within the CIA about the usefulness of this policy. Could it be another attempt to discredit what GG called the "cabal in the White House?" "The black site program was approved by a small circle of White House and Justice Department lawyers and officials, according to several former and current U.S. government and intelligence officials." In a recent interview, Powell's former aide Wilkerson (who also said "US foreign policy was hijacked by a cabal in the White House) suggests the abuse of prisoners at Abu Graib goes back to the Veep's office as well.... Wilerkson The way that Goss is politicizing the CIA now, it would not surprise me that those liberal CIA folk are behind the leaks...

I thought the main point made was that it's muslim fanaticals causing the riots, which is part of a larger conspiracy to take over the western world.... Seems to me it parallels something like Rodney King and LA riots--as the article I read said it was sparked by two teens being electrocuted while fleeing police. riots

as i said, the article I read didn't mention anything about religious background; it mentioned "poor neighborhoods," and Africans frustrated with not finding jobs.

Is there a link? I figured I could find something on Drudge given the initial post, but the article I read this morning didn't say anything about muslims. Boy, I sure am afraid now that I've read the posts here about the insidious invasion of those muslims into western cultures....

I think the criticism is more about when they elect to throw. I get the feeling that Clements doesn't have faith in the run game in crucial situations. Rarely did the Bills run two consecutive plays in a row--their last drive was one of the few exceptions I can recall. Given their play call mix, I don't think their play-fake is very effective. I'm also a big fan of the draw play, and I don't think they use it nearly enough as well. Between Clements and Gilbride, I almost miss Joe Pendry....

Wait second, you mean GG can use the term and I can't?!? (see the "It keeps getting better" thread--specifically post 6.)

Yes, your typical summary. The one point that you are correct on: "intall an idiot as a puppet president."

That's a lame response. I believe what's really gone on is that the WH cabal was trying to circumvent the CIA to push for the Iraq invasion. Ever since, there has been a battle between the Pentagon, under the cabal, and the CIA, the longstanding bureaucrats of security. In my opinion, the CIA has been instrumental in trying to bring down the Cheney cabal, because they believe these guys are nuts--with respect to their foreign policy.

yes, I always lose you when the words are 3 or more syllables... Seriously, read that piece. I don't know who the guy is other than it says he's a former DIa analyst. however, it's a good chronology of the hacks that took over American foreign policy.

Thanks AD, can always count on you to show that both sides are equally guilty. However, please read my post on selling the war, or at least the article from the DIA analyst on selling the war. All of your quotes fit right in with the "Iraq War Act" of 1998, which according to the author of the article I posted, was sold then by the same group that took control of Bush 2's cabinet. You guys fit right in with the "Kool-Aid" crowd....

Mickey, if you read the article I posted about selling the war, you'd realize that GG is one of the Kool-Aid drinkers.... They either have to admit they were wrong, or they have to swallow the same line of reasoning that Clinton used to defend himself against a blow job. Hmmm...Blow job vs. war....swallow...

This is how pathetic the right's argument has become; you have to focus on some poor woman who lost her son in Iraq, and ignore the fact that you bought, hook, line, and sinker, the PR that the the White House IRaq Group sold to the right-wing press. Cheney fed a line to Scooter, who fed a line to Miller, who printed it in the liberal NYT, and then Cheney quoted the artice from the NYT on Meet The Press. Do you sycophants not see how yo've been played?

You obviously know more than the CIA does, since they asked the AG to investigate the matter..

Your argument for the war is the neocons feared Saddam way back when. I'd say they were plotting how to pursue their interests way back when. As it turned out, Saddam was a minor threat. The UN inspections were working. Read the article on the link "selling the war." Your cabal wanted to overthrow Saddam for their own reasons, and over-stated his threat. They wouldn't listen to anyone else; it was their way or the highway. It was their bloviations in 1998 that got congress and Clinton to pass the "Iraq Liberation Act." Of course, you'll rely on the "experts" here who have argued over the past 3 years that everything we thought about Saddam was true. Is it not now obvious that Saddam was not a threat? Is it not now obvious, as Scowcroft said in his interview, that invading Iraq has increased the threat of terrorism and destabilized the ME? This cabal had a grand vision that if they took out Saddam they could revolutionize the ME, and get a few goodies for their buddies along the way (control of Iraq's oil and eliminate one of Israel's major threats). It ain't working. Yes, quite a few people fell for the svengali influence of this cabal, and now it's coming home to roost--the sane people who run/ran foreign policy want these idiots out.

The possibility that the top aides to the president and vice president may be indicted for the outing of a CIA officer; the cover up of that outing; the possibility that the vp may go down with them; the use and cooperation of a reporter for the nation's major newspaper to market the war; taking the nation to war on falsified/inflated information (possibly behind the creation of the Niger documents); and on, and on... Because you right-wingers have trusted and defended this administration to no end, it puts you in an a no-win situation: you either have to go down with the ship (acting like this is trivial), or admit you were wrong, which means that you bought the PR (lies) these schmucks peddled about Iraq.

Seriously, you act like all of this is trivial; do you really think so?

And i thought I was cynical... Term limits are looking more and more appealing.

i don't know that i'd want Losman's next start to be against the Pats there. i'd let KH go this next one, then you give Losman two weeks to prepare for his next start with the bye week. In addition, the loss to the Pats will dismiss any talk of KH as the solution. No, I don't think we can beat the Pats there.

People have to finally admit that they can't trust or believe politicians from either party. I've stated quite often that I no longer vote for any candidate from either major party. Nothing will change until people get mad as hell and fed up with the two-party system/dominance. I've argued it starts locally: get involved with an alternative party, or start voting alternative at the local level. Once the alternative parties get elected to local offices, then they can start winning national offices. It won't happen overnight, but it won't happen at all if you either become disenchanted or vote party line. The silver lining is the feelings you express: if a large enough segment of the population feels this, then significant change for the better will happen.

whoa! YOU actually call it a "cabal in the White House& Pentagon"? Next we're going to hear about how you never believed the Neocons to begin with...