Scylla & Charybdis
A journey through the narrow channel between the Scylla of a controlled press and the Charybdis of effete thugs with immunity.
Thursday, June 30, 2005
Wednesday, June 29, 2005
Flashback: CIA Set Out Iraq Terror Evidence
George Tenet, head of the CIA, sent the following letter to Senator Graham, Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, on October 7, 2002:
In response to your letter of 4 October 2002, we have made unclassified material available to further the Senate's forthcoming open debate on a Joint Resolution concerning Iraq.
As always, our declassification efforts seek a balance between your need for unfettered debate and our need to protect sources and methods. We have also been mindful of a shared interest in not providing to Saddam a blueprint of our intelligence capabilities and shortcomings, or with insight into our expectation of how he will and will not act. The salience of such concerns is only heightened by the possibility of hostilities between the U.S. and Iraq.
These are some of the reasons why we did not include our classified judgments on Saddam's decision-making regarding the use of weapons of mass destruction (W.M.D.) in our recent unclassified paper on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction. Viewing your request with those concerns in mind, however, we can declassify the following from the paragraphs you requested:
Baghdad for now appears to be drawing a line short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or C.B.W. against the United States.
Should Saddam conclude that a U.S.-led attack could no longer be deterred, he probably would become much less constrained in adopting terrorist actions. Such terrorism might involve conventional means, as with Iraq's unsuccessful attempt at a terrorist offensive in 1991, or C.B.W..
Saddam might decide that the extreme step of assisting Islamist terrorists in conducting a W.M.D. attack against the United States would be his last chance to exact vengeance by taking a large number of victims with him.
Regarding the 2 October closed hearing, we can declassify the following dialogue:
Senator Levin: . . . If (Saddam) didn't feel threatened, did not feel threatened, is it likely that he would initiate an attack using a weapon of mass destruction?
Senior Intelligence Witness: . . . My judgment would be that the probability of him initiating an attack — let me put a time frame on it — in the foreseeable future, given the conditions we understand now, the likelihood I think would be low.
Senator Levin: Now if he did initiate an attack you've . . . indicated he would probably attempt clandestine attacks against us . . . But what about his use of weapons of mass destruction? If we initiate an attack and he thought he was in extremis or otherwise, what's the likelihood in response to our attack that he would use chemical or biological weapons?
Senior Intelligence Witness: Pretty high, in my view.
In the above dialogue, the witness's qualifications — "in the foreseeable future, given the conditions we understand now" — were intended to underscore that the likelihood of Saddam using W.M.D. for blackmail, deterrence, or otherwise grows as his arsenal builds. Moreover, if Saddam used W.M.D., it would disprove his repeated denials that he has such weapons.
Regarding Senator Bayh's question of Iraqi links to Al Qaeda, Senators could draw from the following points for unclassified discussions:
¶Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.
¶We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade.
¶Credible information indicates that Iraq and Al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.
¶Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
¶We have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire W.M.D. capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.
¶Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda, suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the role of invader, conquerer and then supporter, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to war (with all kudos to Andrew McCarthy, who pens an informative column on Bush's speech and which I rip off, below):
The president should know he hit the sweet spot during his Fort Bragg speech ecause all the right people are angry. The New York Times, with predictable disingenuousness, is railing this morning that the 9/11 references in the speech are out of bounds because Iraq had “nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist ttacks.” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and the tedious David Gergen, among others, are in Gergen’s words “offended” about use of the 9/11 “trump card.”
If the president is guilty of anything, it's not that he's dwelling on 9/11 enough. It's that the administration has not done a good enough job of probing and underscoring the nexus between the Saddam regime and al Qaeda. It is absolutely appropriate, it is vital, for him to stress that connection.
....The president needs to be talking about Saddam and terror because that’s what will get their attention in Damascus and Teheran.... On that score...What does the “nothing whatsoever” crowd have to say about:
-- Ahmed Hikmat Shakir — the Iraqi Intelligence operative who facilitated a 9/11 hijacker into Malaysia and was in attendance at the Kuala Lampur meeting with two of the hijackers, and other conspirators, at what is roundly acknowledged to be the initial 9/11 planning session in January 2000? Who was arrested after the 9/11 attacks in possession of contact information for several known terrorists? Who managed to make his way out of Jordanian custody over our objections after the 9/11 attacks because of special pleading by Saddam’s regime?
--Saddam's intelligence agency's efforts to recruit jihadists to bomb Radio Free Europe in Prague in the late 1990's?
--Mohammed Atta's unexplained visits to Prague in 2000, and his alleged visit there in April 2001 which — notwithstanding the 9/11 Commission's dismissal of it (based on interviewing exactly zero relevant witnesses) — the Czechs have not retracted?
--The Clinton Justice Department's allegation in a 1998 indictment (two months before the embassy bombings) against bin Laden, to wit: In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.
--Seized Iraq Intelligence Service records indicating that Saddam's henchmen regarded bin Laden as an asset as early as 1992?
--Saddam's hosting of al Qaeda No. 2, Ayman Zawahiri beginning in the early 1990’s, and reports of a large payment of money to Zawahiri in 1998?
--Saddam’s ten years of harboring of 1993 World Trade Center bomber Abdul Rahman Yasin?
--Iraqi Intelligence Service operatives being dispatched to meet with bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998 (the year of bin Laden’s fatwa demanding the killing of all Americans, as well as the embassy bombings)?
--Saddam’s official press lionizing bin Laden as “an Arab and Islamic hero” following the 1998 embassy bombing attacks?
--he continued insistence of high-ranking Clinton administration officials to the 9/11 Commission that the 1998 retaliatory strikes (after the embassy bombings) against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory were justified because the factory was a chemical weapons hub tied to Iraq and bin Laden?
--Top Clinton administration counterterrorism official Richard Clarke’s assertions, based on intelligence reports in 1999, that Saddam had offered bin Laden asylum after the embassy bombings, and Clarke’s memo to then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, advising him not to fly U-2 missions against bin Laden in Afghanistan because he might be tipped off by Pakistani Intelligence, and “[a]rmed with that knowledge, old wily Usama will likely boogie to Baghdad”? (See 9/11 Commission Final Report, p. 134 & n.135.)
--Terror master Abu Musab Zarqawi's choice to boogie to Baghdad of all places when he needed surgery after fighting American forces in Afghanistan in 2001?
--Saddam's Intelligence Service running a training camp at Salman Pak, were terrorists were instructed in tactics for assassination, kidnapping and hijacking?
--Former CIA Director George Tenet’s October 7, 2002 letter to Congress, which asserted:
----- Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.
----- We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade.
----- Credible information indicates that Iraq and Al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.
----- Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
----- We have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.
----- Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
Read Back the Bush Transcript, Please
Following Bush's speech last night, all kinds of folks will be spinning today, as to the reason the U.S. went to war in Iraq.
I remain puzzled at how little attention has been paid to the text of the classic Casus Belli given by Bush. To be fair, in the modern age, with a year-long run-up to the war, the classic "Statement of War" was disassembled a bit, but this Bush speech, in late February 2003, in front of a friendly audience (no protesters) just 3 weeks before the war began, has all the markings of the classic War Statement.
Too many MSM's want to give you their version, marred by obvious spin, about "what Bush said," but few want to pull out the transcript. Too inconvenient, perhaps?
The anti-Bush camp (which I consider the vast majority of MSM to belong to) will focus on the language concerning Hussein's weapon programs and terrorist ties, as the threat that must be confronted. The WMD weapons threat appears to have been significantly less than thought. The terrorist ties were there, but the ties at the time were not pervasive.
The pro-Bush camp will focus on the language concerning the "just cause" of of liberating a people, and the "Wolfowitz Plan" strategic value of inserting a democracy into the broken region, as an agent of change for the entire region.
(Bummer is an avid Wolfowitz advocate, as the Bummer23 may have discerned...hence, I tend to give shorter shrift to the WMD and terror ties issues.)
The Iraq War Casus Belli transcript is here. It's worth a read; it puts all of today's spin in perspective. Highlights:
In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world -- and we will not allow it. This same tyrant has close ties to terrorist organizations, and could supply them with the terrible means to strike this country -- and America will not permit it. The danger posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons cannot be ignored or wished away. The danger must be confronted.
The safety of the American people depends on ending this direct and growing threat. Acting against the danger will also contribute greatly to the long-term safety and stability of our world. The current Iraqi regime has shown the power of tyranny to spread discord and violence in the Middle East. A liberated Iraq can show the power of freedom to transform that vital region, by bringing hope and progress into the
lives of millions. America's interests in security, and America's belief in liberty, both lead in the same direction: To a free and peaceful Iraq.
The first to benefit from a free Iraq would be the Iraqi people, themselves…
Bringing stability and unity to a free Iraq will not be easy. Yet that is no excuse ....
…The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq's new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet, we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected.
Rebuilding Iraq will require a sustained commitment from many nations, including our own: we will remain in Iraq as long as necessary, and not a day more….
There was a time when many said that the cultures of Japan and Germany were incapable of sustaining democratic values. Well, they were wrong. Some say the same of Iraq today….
The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values, because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. They encourage the peaceful pursuit of a better life….
..Success in Iraq could also begin a new stage for Middle Eastern peace, and set in motion progress towards a truly democratic Palestinian state.
The passing of Saddam Hussein's regime will deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training, and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers. And other regimes will be given a clear warning that support for terror will not be tolerated.
Tuesday, June 28, 2005
The Hollywood Mind
I cannot help but post these illuminating comments from one of the most popular directors of the age, Steven Spielberg:
"Oscar-winning director Steven Spielberg is baffled that fewer UFO sightings are made now than were made twenty years ago - because the technology to record would-be aliens is so commonplace today.
"...Spielberg says, 'There are millions of video cameras out there and they're picking up less videos of UFOs, alleged UFOs, than we picked up in the 1970s and 1980s. There's 150 per cent more cameras, so why are we getting less from up there?
"I think that we all know that we're not alone in the universe. I can't imagine that we are the only intelligent biological life form out there. I'm a little less sure in my fifties that I was in my late twenties whether we're actually ever going to find out."
Psssst. ...Hey Steven: Because they were all fake. And you can't fake 'em with all those video cameras rolling.
Iraq Math, and Those Who Hate Math
Lost among a flood of good observations, Brendan Miniter's article today in the Wall Street Journal reminds us of the following:
"On the military side of the war, U.S. forces have lost fewer than 2,000 people in more than two years of fighting in Iraq--an outcome that would have been dismissed as utopian before the invasion."
Query: Is there an overlap between those who (incorrectly) argued that the U.S. forces would sustain heavy casualties in toppling Hussein, and those who now argue that the U.S. should pull out of Iraq?
Monday, June 27, 2005
Supreme Court: No "Benefit of Clergy" for Reporters
The Supreme Court has refused to hear the claim of reporters that they have immunity from the jurisdiction of the courts. Thus, the decisions of 2 lower courts that reporters do not have immunity from courts, stand.
The MSM won't report what is really going on. The non-MSM backstory is here.
And, on the grab for immunity underlying it all, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Reporters and the MSM believe that a NYTimes Staff ID Card should confer benefit of clergy to the anointed holder. "No way," say the courts. History Repeats:
"The Benefit of Clergy was a medieval technicality run amok. It started out as the perfectly sane political arrangement whereby a clergyman could be tried only in church court, and not in the King's court. Clergy proved their status to the King's clerk by reading a verse from the Bible, thus winning their release (i.e., only clergy could read.)
"Later, this immunity applied to anyone who could read. Thereafter, anyone who could recite a 3-word Bible verse was deemed to be "reading," and thus deemed "clergy," and thus was protected by "benefit of clergy," and thus had legal immunity in the courts.
"Memorize a Bible verse and earn immunity from the courts? Literate folks love their immunity. "
Sunday, June 26, 2005
Hollywood Calls For a Blacklist
Some of Bummer's 23 readers think he is being coy, what with all his hiding behind a funny name and a funny picture (that's Milton, the suffering dolt arsonist from Office Space).
BummerNoia? Maybe not. See, today the NYTimes ran an expose entitled, "On the Right Side of the Theater Aisle." The piece is nicely laid out as a down-the-middle article.
But is it so innocuous? Or, is the intent to "out" and expose those individuals the NYTimes believes are responsible for blueprinting a right wing counteroffensive against the Hollywood Left?:
"THE film producer Stephen K. Bannon isn't just on a crusade... .Though heavier than most on messianic zeal, Mr. Bannon - Roman Catholic filmmaker, conservative-film financier, Washington networker and Hollywood deal-chaser - is emblematic of a new wave in Hollywood, a group that intends to clean those media pipes with pictures that promote godliness, Pax Americana and its own view of family values. Some of these filmmakers, armed with camcorders and Web sites, are pushing overtly political projects... . "
BummerNoia, or Code Words? I'll let you decode them.
Hint: "Alex, I'll take mid-century fascist Northern European political movements for $100: What rhymes with, 'Let's see.' "
But the NYTimes doesn't leave it to chance that its readers might fail to come up with the "Blacklist" idea, as a means of dealing with these incoming Panzer divisions:
Ahhhhhh....maybe it's nothing. But regardless, you can be sure that at every West L.A. birthday party, deli and BBQ today, this article will be a Casus Belli for many on the Hollywood Hard Left.
"[A] participant who asked not to be named to protect his relationship... . Religiously motivated filmmakers can 'obviously find it difficult enough' working in Hollywood ... . 'it's become such a political liability here.' .... 'the secret underground,' working professionals who prefer to be discreet about their political affiliations in Hollywood. ... a blacklist of Hollywood conservatives 'may ultimately defeat us."
Saturday, June 25, 2005
It worries me that I understand exactly what the late poet Steven Jay Bernstein was thinking:
Come Out Tonight
Forecast in chrome and plastic, tyrants breathing out oil, slavery, planet hunger versions of Jackie-O. Sherry, Sherry baby, won't you come out tonight.
And the stars whisper like old blood at the edges of the body of night. She stood with one hand on the phone for four hours, poised as only a few seconds had passed. I watched her through the crack between the shade and the sill. She waited for a forecast in human trembling, together with other important women.
Come, come, come out tonight.
The world suffers for her. The clock hurries like a terrified animal and stops, dribbling saliva. She is eating chicken pie and bubble gum. For a month the Luftewaffe lived on raisins, same with the French after the war. Jackie-O received fresh oranges from John Kennedy. Silly girl!
She cannot put down the telephone reciever. She is waiting to recieve my body of work. She wants to take it into her ear. A modeled flush builds under her cheeks. She eats Christmas candy while she waits. The telephone rings and rings. I am not at home. I am with Jackie-O. We are eating oranges from the President.
We are alone on the roof of a Park Avenue penthouse. Picture of Marilyn Monroe in my back pocket, molded by heat and sweat to the shape of my buttocks. You are gripping the phone, smiling, eating candy, crying, "I am with the important women now." I am secretly an important man.
Hang up the phone, I can't dance with you anymore. Go to your freezer and get a popsicle. Go to your TV. Turn on your TV. You will see me and Jackie-O. She will be taking it in the ear, my body of work.
In the planetarium, you will receive a forecast: "I will always be more important than you. You will never be important enough. You will never be on the repent end of slavery, never be the one to wield hunger against humanity. Heaven will never be an extension of your body. Your body will always belong to someone else."
The picture of Marilyn Monroe flutters across the roof, steaming, shaped like me, shaped like my ass. The sky is filled with oranges during the war. We eat them. The President is alone in a room. He is unimportant. As we eat his oranges the sky grows blacker. The moon ripens and turns red. It rots and is swallowed by the darkness. You are still by the phone. It is ringing and ringing, dead.
Sherry, Sherry baby, won't you come out tonight.
It is completely dark. The earth freezes. You put down the receiver and go to the window.
Come, come, come out tonight.
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Missing from all the public discourse about the Kelo case:
The Fifth Amendment provides:
"...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
The 5th Amendment sets forth rights of the individual. The individual is the focus of the 5th: No capital indictment without a Grand Jury; no double jeopardy; right to "plea the 5th;" right of due process of law; and the "no confiscation of property" clause.
The pundits are missing the key point of the anti-takings clause (which is true of all 5th Amendment rights): The various local, state and federal governments HATE the 5th Amendment. It is inconvenient.
So the Supreme Court has more-or-less always prevented the government from getting to define what the 5th Amendment means. Because governments will, be definition, tend to favor the benefit to the community, to the detriment of the individual. And the 5th Amendment says: You cannot infringe upon these individual rights, no matter how convenient or attractive or profitable it may be.
The theory of the Kelo majority is that local politics is where things are best decided - like when and where developers should get to partner with the local government to take public property for public use, and use the fact that the developer has cut a deal with the local government as a substitute for the requirement of a "public use."
It is horrific jurisprudence.
Imagine the corollary case, where the Court applies similar logic to the 5th Amendment clause stating that "[No person] shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself." Suppose California passed a law that said,
"If any person is subpeona'ed to testify in a Civil Trial, and he shall refuse to do so, he shall be guilty of a felony. A 'Civil Trial' shall mean an matter that involves the state bringing charges in matters of less than one billion dollars in value, or involving less than 100 other persons directly involved in the matter."
"Wait a Minute!" you'd cry. "California just changed the definition - it's simpy changed the name, and is now calling criminal matters "Civil Trials" in order to try to make the 5th Amendment inapplicable. What Bullsh*t!"
Now, compare that hypothetical game being played on the definition of a "Criminal Case" under the 5th and the sleight-of-hand to simply call it something else, with Kelo. In Kelo, the fact that a local government cut a deal with a developer is deemed to satisfy, ipso facto, the constitutional requirement of a "public use."
Unbelievable crap logic.
And as a citizen, what would you think if, in complaining that California had just taken away your 5th Amendment Right Against Self-Incrimination, the Supreme Court reasoned:
The whole point of the 5th Amendment is: WE REALIZE THAT THE GOVERNMENT WILL SCREW YOU ON THESE ISSUES, SO AS A MATTER OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT DO THESE THINGS.
"Yes, California did just pass a law taking away your 5th Amendment Rights; but we think that such matters are best handled on the local level, like, out there in California. So...go complain to the California legislature."
Yet Kelo says, "These things are best decided by local government."
This Kelo case is insane.
Does the AP Realize How Slanted It Is ?
Sloppy syntax? Or something else?
The AP slants a story and flunks middle school in the process:
"One of Saudi Arabia's most-wanted militants was killed by [sic: "killed in" an airstrike, by the gunner who killed him] a U.S. airstrike in northwestern Iraq, the leader of al-Qaida in Iraq said, and four car bombs outside Shiite mosques in Baghdad killed 15 and wounded 28 [sic: terrorists who planted the bombs did the killing and wounding, not the cars] Thursday, police said.
"The latest violence [sic: false equation of actions by a military and by terrorists together as "violence"] followed a series of car bombs [sic: "series of attacks using car bombings], late Wednesday, including four exploding within minutes of each other [sic: inanimate objects do not blow themselves up; coordinated actions of humans are the cause]. At least 23 people were killed [sic: failure to distinguish military vs. civilian deaths] in western Baghdad's Shula neighborhood and a nearby suburb, bringing the death toll over a 12-hour span to 40.
"... The Web statement said Abdullah Mohammed Rashid al-Roshoud was killed in fighting near Qaim, on the border with Syria. It was signed [sic: paper is signed, not web pages; accepts disputed fact that Zarkawi is still alive] by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most notorious terrorist leader in Iraq.
"The statement did not say when al-Roshoud was killed, but U.S. forces have launched a series of offensives near Qaim in past weeks against militants coming across the border. Al-Roshoud slipped into Iraq in April, according to the posting, the authenticity of which could not be confirmed.
"The Saudi militant and a group of mujahedeen "killed some of the Crusaders until the enemies of God had to withdraw," it said. [sic: it "claimed," incorrectly, since the US forces did not withdraw.] "When the Crusaders could not enter the area, the only thing they could do was bombard the mujahedeen with warplanes," it said. "Our sheik (al-Roshoud) got what he wished" — martyrdom.
"...The bombings Wednesday and Thursday served as a chilling reminder [sic: as opposed the the chill on terrorist recruitment caused by another example that the US kills al-Qaida?] of how potent militants remain in the capital despite around-the-clock patrols by American and Iraqi troops [sic: efficacy re: militants in battles with any military or police force, or efficacy of militants murdering unarmed civilians?]
"...A young boy, his left leg missing from below the knee, sat on the sidewalk near a mangled bicycle, screaming as a man tried to comfort him [ed: bury the fact that the terrorist attack included intentional targeting of civilians and childred].
"A pre-dawn raid led by U.S. troops destroyed a hideout in Baghdad used by extremists associated with al-Zarqawi, the military said. The attack killed at least six insurgents who opened fire on the troops, the military said. [Ed: bury the fact regarding another US rout of terrorists.] Troops seized weapons, ammunition and explosives. [Ed: id.]
"Separately, a car bomb detonated by remote control [sic: the bomb was detonated by a terrorist, who used a remote control] hit an Iraqi police patrol in Tuz Khormato, north of Baghdad, killing one policeman and wounding seven civilians, [Ed; bury the fact regarding intentional terorist targeting of civilians] police Brig. Gen. Sarhad Qadr said.
"... In another incident before dawn Thursday, U.S. troops backed by Iraqi troops and helicopters killed at least seven insurgents who opened fire on the patrol from a home in western Baghdad's Jamiaa neighborhood, said police Maj. Moussa Abdul Karim and 1st Lt. Mohammed al-Heyaali. [Ed: Bury the fact regarding another US rout of terrorists]. The home was reduced to rubble and U.S. troops displayed a weapons cache they had seized, including rocket-propelled grenade launchers, machine guns and ammunition. [Ed: id.]
"Iraqi police, meanwhile, detained 50 suspected insurgents in separate raids in southeastern Baghdad and north of the capital Thursday, officials said. [Ed: Bury the fact that the Iraqi forces are competent and actively working effectively against the terrorists.]
"In all, at least 19 people were killed Thursday across Iraq, including two brothers and a niece who were shot south of Baghdad in the town of Iskandariyah when gunmen [sic: terrorists in fake uniform] wearing Iraqi army uniforms broke into their house, police said.
"Insurgents bent on starting a civil war to overthrow Iraq's U.S.-backed government have maintained nearly eight weeks of relentless attacks, killing more than 1,240 people [sic: obfusate the fact that the deaths are overwhlemingly civilian murders by terrorists] since April 28, when Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari announced his Shiite-dominated government.
"Sunni Arabs, who dominated Iraq for decades, lost power when Saddam, their last patron and a Sunni, was ousted. Their boycott of historic elections in January further sidelined them.
But Sunni Arab participation in the political process is essential for Iraq's passage to democracy[sic: political theory presented as fact; why?]. Parliament has until Aug. 15 to draft a new constitution, which will be put to a referendum two months later. If ratified, it will be the basis for a general election in December, giving Iraq its first, full-term elected government in decades."
Emotion + Meltdown = Emeltion
Is the truth a valid point to raise in the presence of an emotional meltdown (that is, an Emeltion)?
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who is certainly liberal (if not Left Wing), perhaps feeling emotionally throttled by public backlash against the pre-meditated but ill-advised "Gitmo = Nazi gulag" verbal stylings of Democratic Senator Dick "Turban" Durbin, engages in yet another public display of Emeltion by a high-level Democrat:
"Karl Rove should immediately and fully apologize for his remarks or he should resign."
Reid's demands are in response to Bush's political director Karl Rove's statement:
"Liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."
Rove is demonstrably at least half-correct. The Left wanted 9/11 to be treated as a "policing action" - thus, indictments, not war.
As to the "therapy" quip, that's a little flavoring by Rove, but a fair one. Bummer was alive and well during the month after 9/11, and engaged in hours of discussions with his liberal, and far left, colleagues. If you examine the purported rationale of the anti-war crowd regarding the US attack on Afghanistan in October 2001, you'll find lots of "therapy" talk about "healing," "reaching out," etc.
More and more in daily life, Bummer finds that BummerDiscourse over the issues of the day seems to get down to whether "Truth" constitutes a valid response to "Emeltion."
Wednesday, June 22, 2005
He Said, She Said
Senator Joseph Biden: "Disaster in Iraq is a real possibility... The disconnect between the administration's rhetoric and the reality on the ground has opened up...a credibility chasm."
Senator Dianne Feinstein: "..Everything seems to be going the wrong way....Support is dropping drastically."
Columnist David Brooks: "There are times in the course of war when the outcome is simply unknowable....We're at one of those moments in the war against the insurgency in Iraq."
"[I] returned to Iraq in April and May of 2005 for another embedded period of reporting.... What the establishment media covering Iraq have utterly failed to make clear today is this central reality: With the exception of periodic flare-ups in isolated corners, our struggle in Iraq as warfare is over .... There is now no chance whatever of the U.S. losing this critical guerilla war .... Our [unreported] successes at urban combat ... made it crystal clear to both the terrorists and the millions of moderate Iraqis that the insurgents simply cannot win against today’s U.S. Army and Marines ..... [P]ublic opinion is not on the insurgents’ side, and the battle of Iraq is no longer one of war fighting—but of policing and politics."
Tuesday, June 21, 2005
Kerry's Records, Chapter III
The next few days will include a lot of blogger analysis of Kerry's SF-180 records release.
As a non-expert, looking with a lawyer's eye at the SF-180, I liken the matter to someone requesting school records. Middle School was 3 grades (7th-9th) and High School was 3 grades (10th-12th). My Middle School was Acme Junior. My High School was Beta Senior.
The question is whether I was expelled from Beta Senior in the 12th grade. My records show that I graduated Middle School in year 3, but that instead of graduating High School in year 6, the diploma date says year 12.
Why wasn't my High School diploma issued in year 6?
The GED Program - you know, where the burn-outs got their diploma in 5 days - was somewhere down in the 'hood - the "Alternative Learning Center."
With that analogy, here are the basic ways that I would play games, if someone was inquiring about my high school records, and I wanted to hide my having been kicked out of Beta:
1. Request all my records, but only from Acme Junior. My request letter may appear comprehensive, addressed to the Acme School, except the request is being made to the wrong school. Acme has no records of my years at Beta.
2. Request all my records, but only from Beta Senior. My request letter may appear comprehensive, addressed to the Beta School, except the request is being made to the wrong school. Beta has has no records of my 5 days at the Alternative Learning Center.
3. Request all my records from the local school board (the umbrella group for all schools), but make the request using my student ID number from Acme Junior, and not include my separate student ID number from Beta Senior, or any separate student number from Alternative Learning Center.
4. If the school board decided that a lot of ALC students were unfairly kicked out of Beta and sent to ALC by an evil administrator, the school board may have determined that all the ALC diplomas should be re-issued as Beta School diplomas. Further, all of the proceedings by which diplomas were re-issued 6 years later should be sealed, so that no prejudice to the affected ALC students is inferred. So, a request for records to Beta or the School Board may well (by design) omit any records that dislcose that the diploma was originally issued by ALC, and not Beta.
I'm sure the experts will dive into this in the next few days. I'd focus on these questions: (a) was the SF-180 directed to the correct records center, (b) did the "all years" request (rather than 1967-1978 specificity) obfuscate that the records center receiving the request was not the place holding the relevant records from 1972-1978, (c) are records of "discharge rehabilitation" expunged from the files, and (d) why won't the news organizations make public the "relevant files?"
Sunday, June 19, 2005
Michael Smith Strikes Again
Captain's Quarters has the story that the authenticity of the "Downing Street Memos" is being questioned.
Seems that reporter Michael Smith can't authenticate the originals; in fact, it looks like he may have faked the memos.
HEY ! A reporter hired by Mary Mapes as a CBS assistant producer, "Michael Smith," was the guy that BummerDietz fingered as the true culprit of MemoGate. Can there be two "Michael Smiths" who are leftish military stringers?
Rawstory indicates that Michael Smith admits that he "destroyed the original copies" before September 17, 2004. So, this timeline would be that Smith is destroying memos, around September 2004....The faked Killian memos appear to have been forged in mid-August, 2004, and a story was told by Burkett that he had "destroyed the originals."
Now we have Michael Smith (again, same Mapes team guy?) admitting that he was typing up old memo copies the same 30-day period?
Is that the same Michael Smith - the one emailed Mapes in Memogate, trying to arrange a publishing advance/bribe for Burkett, asking if it could be arranged: "What if there was a person who might have some information that could possibly change the momentum of an election?"
One or more Michael Smiths were very busy in August and September 2004 with not one, but TWO SETS of faked memos that were highly critical of George Bush.....
Friday, June 17, 2005
A Jury of My Peers
[Update 2: OH-MY-GOD it's on tape right here !]
I honestly thought this was a spoof until I got it directly from the Washington Post:
It seems some in the brain trust of the House Democrats decided to hold a little inquisition in the basement, at which - !!! - Bush was found guilty of lying.
African-American Representatives John Conyers Jr. (Far Left - MI) and Maxine Waters (Far Left - California) proposed various conspiracy theories about the Iraq War, and one "witness" pressed the case that the Iraq War was a Zionist conspiracy, with Bush as Sharon's puppet.
I wonder if the "witness" wore a white hood while he testified to the secret nefarious conversations between Sharon and Bush?
Let me get this straight: This week, while the U.S. Senate apologized for decades of filibustering* laws against lynching of blacks, the highest profile blacks in the House staged a little basement kangaroo court/political theatre, complete with Jew-baiting?
Update: Howard Dean disavows any anti-Semitism involved in the incident.
* - Opps; banned word.
I Wanna Be an Astronaut....A Tranny Astronaut..
George Bush is a lousy public speaker. On the rare occasion that I hear him deliver a speech, I feel like a spectator at the Special Olympics, wracked with angst about whether my favorite will make it to the finish line, or instead have to be helped off the field. It wears me out. The Left takes great pleasure in compiling and circulating the Bush malapropisms, as evidence that GW is stupid. So be it.
So it's fair game to turn the tables on those who delight in skewering GW, especially when the gaffer is unaware that I am laughing at him, not with him.
So the prize this quarter goes to the Los Angeles Times, via today's Theater Review (OK, a bit like shooting fish in a barrel...). Here's the subheadline, from page E1:
It's impossible to make this stuff up.
Monday, June 13, 2005
Checking the Wrong Box on the Pulitzer Application
Bummer Dietz remains a bit obsessed by the potential that John Kerry and the Democratic Party might have come within inches of pulling off a P.T. Barnum scenario by creating a "Citizen Soldier" persona for Kerry, complete with a Stephen Spielberg film about the brave warrior Kerry...all about a guy who was dishonorably booted from the Navy.
"You can fool all of the people, some of the time."
But, did Kerry in fact get dishonorably discharged?
Thomas Lipscomb continues to smell a rat, and has FOIA'ed the underlying Form SF180 used by the Kerry-apologist MSM newspaper the Boston Globe. You see, Kerry purports to have released to the Globe his "complete record," and in turn for the exclusivity, the Globe declared the only thing hidden in Kerry's file was that Bush had a better Yale gradepoint that Kerry. To wit, that's what Kerry was hiding.
But, without ever making his files public, wasn't this just too nicely a constructed piece of bait to end all discussion of the matter, with the "embarassing" disclosure by Kerry? Said Kerry's PR Agent, David Wade: ‘The issue is over.’"
No, it's not.
I'll be succinct about the BummerObssession: This is about exposing an overwhelmingly important instance of the MSM being a functional wing of the Democratic Party. And where there is exposure, good things result.
The common man understood that CBS ran bogus documents in order to hurt Bush before the election. No amount of nuance will change his basic understanding. Similarly, the common man understood that Berger was caught destroying documents at the Archives, although the MSM was somewhat successful in obfuscating the Watergate-esque election-related reasons for his doing so.
With the Kerry Records Affair - IF the details play out as I obsessively believe they will - the common man will know that the DNC tried to play a filthy trick, and that the MSM cooperated by looking the other way. Toss in a little Spielberg aid to create a fictional movie - a coverup? - and you've got one helluva story.
Kudos to Thomas Lipscomb for his continued dogged pursuit of the matter. If they didn't restrict Pulitzers to Lefties, he'd surely get one for this. But he isn't, so he won't.
nb: An indicator that Lipscomb is close to breaking this DNC-MSM-Kerry Records DischargeGate story?: DNC Dean says, "Fox News is a propaganda outlet for the Republican Party."
Is there a common thread between Al Franken's teen-like refusal to give up the mike at an awards banquet, and a similar refusal last week by Amnesty-Only-For-Bandits activists at a Congressional hearing (who decided that the stated Patriot Act topic was too narrow and took it upon themselves to change the topic of the US Congressional hearing)?
EmotionBot partisans (they exist on the Right, too) are ruled by an emotional timeline that extends to -- oh, maybe 30 minutes on a good day. The logic and discipline required to undertake longer-range analysis (under whatever utilitarian or other theory you'd prefer) just isn't part of their hardwiring.*
* - To understand the compelling nature of a war to save millions of people, but in which thousands will necessarily die, one must be able to think in the abstract, over long periods. EmotionBots are not capable of that. Instead, the emotional centers of their brains intercede and send flashing red neon signals that say: "You are murdering thousands!" And thus, the EmotionBot understands the situation only as "Thousands are being murdered."
Perhaps it's like dilexia - the brain wiring is just different. Like that gradeschool fascination with the question of whether my perception of the color green is what you perceive as the color red.
For fun - kinda like picking on the class retard - ask the EmotionBot to compare and contrast the "dead millions" versus the "dead thousands," and watch cognitive dissonance at work.
For what it is worth, EmotionBots HATE Professor Hardin and the horse he rode in on.
EmotionBots are not limited to the Left wing. I'll wait for a good example and blog about it in the future.
Sunday, June 12, 2005
NY Times Buries Year's Top Story: Too Pro-Bush
The Left-of-Center Los Angeles Times, which loathes the Bush administration, nonetheless recognizes the HUGE story and runs with this lead front-page Sunday item today: "Debtor Nations Freed of Burdens." Basically, the U.S and Britain have caused (and will pay for the lion's share of) $40 billion of World Bank and IMF debt owed by poor African countries to be written off.
That's $40 billion of aid to the poorest countries of Africa. $40 billion. The B-Word. Forty. Thirty + Ten.
Yet, the New York Times simply will not run a lead story that is favorable to George Bush or his administration. Accordingly, this whopper of a story -- and a Left-of-Center Top 10 Policy Objective, to boot -- appears in the Sunday Times on page 12, buried under the headline, "Finance Chiefs Cancel Debt of 18 Nations."
Let this article jog your memory -- U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary and Iraq War architect Paul Wolfowitz just took over as World Bank chief; he was nominated by Bush .
God forbid that the New York Times even hint at the obvious connections among Bush, Wolfowitz, Tony Blair and the world capital funds, and (a) the spreading of democracy and (b) the eradication of world poverty.
Bush and Blair lead the G-8 into giving a $40 billion aid package to Africa, and it's Page 12 News?
The New York Times is in complete and open war with the Republican Party and the Bush administration. The Times maintains a coy pretense, but the veil is diaphanously thin.
Update: Some have noted that the NYTimes did run a lead story on Friday about the US and Britain having agreed an allocation of $16.7 billion between them. But the US and Britain had not gotten the G-8 to agree to the package. More importantly, the $40 billion had not been approved by the G-8 on Friday, and the Friday article does NOT mention $40 billion dollars of total aid to Africa.
Friday, June 10, 2005
Military Is 3X More Trusted Than MSM News
Public trust in newspapers and television news continued to decline in Gallup's annual survey of "public confidence in major institutions" in the United States, reaching an all-time low this year.
Summary of Public Confidence Levels:
Oranized Religion: 53%
Newspaper News: 28%
TV News: 28%
Wednesday, June 08, 2005
Bummer's 23 know that MemoGate, EasonQuiddick and MSM press immunity infuriate The Dietz.
This Kerry records thing, if it plays out, is as bad as MemoGate.
From an old post:
The thrust of John Kerry's campaign, launched at the Democratic Convention, was Citizen Soldier. MSM TV networks ran a film of Kerry in Vietnam. Steven Spielberg helped produce the film. MSM TV carried mini-shows about "Spielberg and the making of Citizen Soldier."
Meanwhile, the MSM continued to pursue claims that Bush did not properly fulfill some part of his military reserve obligations. Although the military records were all released and were reasonably convincing that Bush had earned all his hours and not dodged any service, there was some ambiguity, and the MSM deemed that fair game, and a campaign issue.
It then came to light in small circles, and the internet, that Kerry had likely received a less-than-honorable, or even dishonorable, discharge from the military, and that it had later been upgraded to an honorable discharge under Carter's Vietnam amnesty pronouncement. The most logical reading of the public records supported that conclusion (E.g., Kerry's discharge occurred years too late, and noted special appeal procedures that had been utilized.) The missing part of Kerry's record - according to the National Archives, over 100 unreleased pages - would presumably have confirmed, or rebutted, the allegation.
Kerry not only refused to release his records, he told the media that "all records have been released," which was demonstrably false.
"Although Kerry campaign officials insist that they have published Kerry's full military records on their Web site... they have not permitted independent access to his original Navy records. A Freedom of Information Act request by The Post for Kerry's records produced six pages of information. A spokesman for the Navy Personnel Command, Mike McClellan, said he was not authorized to release the full file, which consists of at least a hundred pages."
The MSM did not run a single item on either the Baby Doc or Papa Doc stories involved here -- to wit, that Citizen Soldier was a guy who wouldn't release his military records to the press; and maybe, just maybe, that was because Citizen Soldier was hiding something.
The Swift Boat Veterans for Truth then released a book, challenging details of Kerry's war record, claim by claim. The challenges were by dozens, among hundred of supporting veterans, who served in the flotilla of several boats along with Kerry's boat. The Swift Boat vets signed a petition: "Kerry, Release Your Military Records."
The MSM tried to ignore, and then write off, the Swift Boat vets, and then branded them as Republican dirty trick operatives. Not once did the MSM ever address the petition of the Swift Boat vets: "Kerry, release your records."
Not the New York Times. Not the Washington Post. Not Newsweek. Not CBS. Not ABC. Not NBC. Not even FOX. Not the Wall Street Journal. Not Time Magazine. Not the Chicago Tribune. Not the Dallas, Seattle, San Francisco, Miami, Atlanta, Boston or Minneapolis papers.
Not a single MSM outlet investigated,or event bothered to assign any reporter to investigate, why the "Citizen Soldier" presidential candidate was refusing to release 100 pages of his military records.
The story potential was huge -- a Big Lie story -- the kind that Pulitzers are made of, and the average Joe can and will understand it, without complication.
The story was never told, other than via Thomas Lipscomb in the small newspaper The New York Sun.
The MSM simply would not address a story that would end badly for Kerry. That is the bias.
The hidden records establish that Kerry got a less-than-honorable or dishonorable discharge. In light of Citizen Soldier campaign, that fact might fuel a generation of cynicism against the operatives behind Citizen Soldier. Why would these people try to pass off this guy - kicked out of the US Navy on a dishonorable basis - as a "war hero?" The current Democratic power structure would take a huge hit if that were to come to light. So the MSM would not touch the story.
Meanwhile, CBS and 60 Minutes used memos forged by left wing CBS producers to continue an assault upon Bush for his Guard service, the gist of which story was that Bush got into the Texas Air Guard through favors arranged by his dad (read: de facto draft dodger), and then was too cocky to bother to show up for his duties (read: asshole). Although the existing records, and testimony from those involved, do not support this interpretation, the lack of clear documents was used as a reason for the MSM to investigate the story.
Pre-broadcast, the impending CBS story was leaked to the Kerry campaign, and the campaign and DNC created a further "Fortunate Son" campaign to focus attention on the false Bush-was AWOL story.
The MSM credo: OK to investigate and attack Bush on fake documents; but absolutely forbidden to investigate and attack Kerry on suppressed military records. Forge the Bush memos, and ignore the memos that Kerry refuses to authorize for release.
Update: Thanks to the internet archive: Even Kerry's website didn't list a discharge date. Kerry accepted his discharge on July 13, 1978. His discharge paperwork is dated February 16, 1978. This official record shows the almost 6-year lag time between his going inactive in 1972, and his discharge in 1978.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Scour Those Records
Kerry has purportedly released his military records.
Thomas Lipscomb, who detailed the holes in Kerry's record for the New York Sun and showed by a preponderance of evidence that Kerry was less-than-honorably discharged from the Navy, is hopefully scouring the newly-released data. Watch for Lipscomb's opinion... .
William Dyer of BeldarBlog also did some outstanding work on the question.
Let's see where this goes... .
Update: Powerline already points out a possible Kerry Records Ruse - Kerry has not released records from the correct government agency. The Navy Personnel Command is reported to have provided records to the Boston Globe. But it's the Navy Personnel Record Center that is said to contain the missing records, and its website indicates that it is under the auspices of the National Archives and Records Administration ("NARA"). I don't see any "Navy Personnel Command" referenced at the NARA site.
Might the U.S. Military have multiple, confusing records bureaus? And might some sleight of hand be involved? Shocking...
We'll see where this goes... .
Update: Beldar Blog , Malkin, Captain's Quarter's, Tom MacGuire all take up the case.
Does this smell like the Boston Globe is laundering the record? Remember any other MSM that recently demanded that the public "trust them" on the underlying documents?
Update: Standard Form 180 has a section where the person filling out the form can specify certain years to be omitted from what is released per the request (Section II, Question 1). Am I a cynic for believing that Kerry did not authorize the release of any records AFTER his active tour of duty - i.e., he purposefully did not release his records from the pertinent years 1973-1978?
Update: Prowler at American Spectator details the problem:
...."I don't know what everyone expected," says a former Kerry campaign staffer. "We said this was the complete file months ago. The Senator pointedly requested that the grades not be included in the documents released during the campaign."
...But redirecting media and the public away from his full file appears to have been Kerry's plan all along, because he submitted his SF-180 to the wrong entity.
"It doesn't make sense that he is going through the Navy," says [Professional Archives researcher Steve Jones, of Lyons Research]. "Applying through the Navy gives this scenario the appearance of a personnel shuffle. ... By going through the Navy Kerry makes it appear that he is using the Navy to screen his file; he added a layer of bureaucracy when all he needed to do was sign an authorization allowing a third party to look at his record at the NPRC."
....The Navy, which created the documents to begin with, is legally obligated to protect the privacy of the veteran..... If an individual were to have a received a less than honorable discharge, but then gained a full, honorable discharge some years later, only the honorable discharge order might appear in the Navy file, while both discharges might appear in the individual's file at the NPRC in St. Louis, Mo.
Update: From the Lyons Research website (Steve Jones, quoted above):
1) Why did Senator Kerry apply to the Navy for a copy of his record when the National Personnel Record Center is custodian of the file?
The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) is the custodian of records of discharged Navy personnel who served in 60’s and 70’s. All requests for navy personnel records of both officers and enlisted should be made to the NPRC, not the Navy... . When a Veteran wants a copy of his Navy Record he/she must fill out an SF180. The Veteran can apply directly to the NPRC, the custodian of the record, or he can have a third person obtain the record for him/her, in which case he must sign an authorization to allow the third person to act as his agent. It is not enough to fill out an SF 180. There must be a third party authorization, or the record will only be released to the Veteran. We see no reason why Senator Kerry would choose to have the Navy release his record when the NPRC is the custodian of his full record.
2) Why was Senator Kerry discharged from the Navy Reserve in 1972 but his discharge is dated 1978?
Kerry was discharged from active duty on Jan 3rd 1970. He entered the inactive reserve at that time. In July of 1972 he entered the standby reserve. The standby reserve is a status that only requires the veteran to notify the Military of his/her current address, in case the Military wants to call the Veteran up to active duty. The standby reserve is often referred to as individual ready reserve (IRR). Typically participation in the Standby Reserve is limited to a couple of years. We have never seen a Veteran in any branch of the military that had a 6 year standby reserve obligation, unless it was part of their enlistment contract. Except for Senator Kerry’s 1978 discharge from the Reserve, we have not seen any other records that indicate that the Senators Standby Reserve obligation was that long.
3) Why is there a statement of service from a JAG officer in Senator Kerry’s personnel file?
The Judge Advocate Generals Office is the legal branch of the military. In the hundreds of personnel files we have reviewed, we have never seen a JAG summary in such a format and have only seen summaries when they are used in sentencing or pretrial investigations. The presence of this statement in Senator Kerry’s file is certainly unusual. This document by itself, however, is not enough to make assumptions about why it was created.
In Summary it is impossible to guess what is in Senator Kerry’s Navy personnel file. The ONLY way to obtain a true and complete version of the file is to have Senator Kerry sign a release and an SF180 allowing the bearer of the SF180 to obtain any and all of his Military Service Records from the National Personnel Records Center, a branch of the National Archives. The NPRC is the only Government organization that has and can release a copy of his complete personnel file.
Update: Thomas Lipscomb pens a relatively muted article in the Chicago Sun Times. He picks up the pace a bit in a further article in Editor and Publisher.
Monday, June 06, 2005
Where Is the MSM Outrage?
In the '04 Washington state governor's race where the math didn't add up, there is strong evidence - and perhaps overwhelmingly strong evidence, let's see what the judge says - that voter fraud in favor of the Democratic governor actually threw the race.
For my 23 regular readers, don't get too upset that the MSM will refuse to cover this until after a verdict, and in case the election is thrown out, such coverage will be used only as an entry point for the MSM to continue its farce that somehow Gore was robbed of Florida in '00, or that Kerry was robbed of Ohio in '04.
For my 23 regular readers, also realize that the Loony Left (whose denizens will of course respond because by their nature they have no self control over their emotions), will characterize any finding of pro-Democratic fraud with their usual warnings of the "disenfranchisement of people of color," etc.
1 - Since when did engaging in election fraud become a protected activity under the Constitution?
2- You can still get away with stuffing voting boxes with dead people's ballots in the year 2004?
Friday, June 03, 2005
A Midway Point
Saturday morning, June 4 -- at 10:22 a.m., if you want to be precise -- deserves to be the most hallowed anniversary date in an American's lifetime.
BummerDietz isn't kidding.
Please read it all, here.
Shorting Howard Dean
If Howard Dean's tenure as DNC Chairman was a traded security, I would short it.
In fact, I'd buy a September 05 put on his chairmanship. That's a hard stop expiry date of September 16, 2005.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
Deep Throat at the Archives .. and in the Blogosphere
Why isn't that National Archives employee who fingered Sandy Berger being treated as a national hero in the manner bestowed on Deep Throat Mark Felt?
Why aren't the LGF, INDCJournal, Powerline and Allahpundit (RIP) guys being treated like the Deep Throat hero?
Watergate at its core was a felony burglary by members of a [Republican] candidate's re-election committee, to steal documents that might affect the upcoming election.
Bergergate at its core was a felony burglary by a member of a [Democratic] candidate's re-election committee, to steal documents that might affect the upcoming election.
Memogate at its core was a felony forgery by official and unofficial members of a [Democratic] candidate's re-election committee, to create forged documents that might affect the upcoming election.
All of them got busted. Watergate took 2 years to unravel. Bergergate, about 2 months. Memogate, about 2 hours (or days, depending upon your cairn.)
nb - John Kerry was anything but a "Citizen Soldier," but seems to have gotten away with having faked his military records file by omitting 100 pages detailing his having been kicked out of the Navy. Sometimes, you get away with scrubbing document files!
- Newspaper Frontpage Scans
- Kind Women
- Newspapers Online
- Internet Film Data Base
- Lib Congress Oral History Tapes
- L.A. Library Search
- Family Winemakers of California
- Phil Hendrie, Sick Dude