Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:10:36 PM   
losttreasure


Posts: 875
Joined: 12/17/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

...If you have some evidence to bring to the table ... to support your point, I would be willing to read and/or respond to it.


I believe he's done just that ... his point was and always has been:

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

puella,

It's pertinent in this case.  I think there is good evidence that both her and her husband acted and said many of the things they did for purely party partisan reasons.

FirmKY


It appears that in your attempts to be sarcastic and witty, you missed that point. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

But if the best you can do is to try to pick a fight \by trying to insult me, I would enjoy pointing out that one of my jobs (I get paid for it) is to pick fights with people.  Accordingly, you are an untrained amateur and should go back to 5th grade to learn how to succeed at it.


I think we are all aware at how you enjoy pointing out the many and diverse jobs that you've held... though I'm not quite sure why you believe we would be impressed with your erratic employment history or your ability to mimic the verbal skills of a 5th grade bully.

At any rate, I would suggest that your sensibilities might be a bit too delicate if you feel that FirmhandKy's entreaties for more contemplative discussion are insulting.


_____________________________

Just because it isn't "all about me", doesn't make it "all about you".

(in reply to Sinergy)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:14:07 PM   
Sinergy


Posts: 9383
Joined: 4/26/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I think there are some valid questions about how they have both framed things.  What they have claimed as facts, and how they have acted.


Fair enough. What have they claimed as facts that you disagree with?


Lovely post, dcnovice, but I suspect that FirmKY will not respond until he finds something tangentially related to the top at hand, and will jump in with both feet trying to convince all the other readers that up is down and the world is flat.

His tendency is to argue about things he has a modicum of knowledge about, and then back off into a corner when asked to intellectually state his opinion in context.

Just me, etc.

Sinergy

_____________________________

"There is a fine line between clever and stupid"
David St. Hubbins "This Is Spinal Tap"

"Every so often you let a word or phrase out and you want to catch it and bring it back. You cant do that, it is gone, gone forever." J. Danforth Quayle


(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:17:32 PM   
Sternhand4


Posts: 422
Joined: 3/6/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

From the law itself:

quote:


(4) The term "covert agent" means -

(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed
Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency -


Valerie Plame, at the time of Novak's article was an employee of an intelligence agency.

quote:


(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and


quote:


MS. PLAME WILSON: Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know I'm here under oath and I'm here to say that I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. J


quote:


(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;


quote:


REP. DAVIS: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert agent, which has a specific definition under the act. Did anyone ever tell you that you were so designated?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer.

REP. DAVIS: That's why I asked if they told you. I'm not asking for your interpretation.

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no. But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years.


Under Oath. IF y'all think she wasn't covered under the "Covert" definition, then you're saying she lied under oath.

If y'all got evidence of her committing Perjury, bring it on.


Had you heard that Plame's cover has actually been blown for a decade—i.e., since about seven years before Novak ever wrote a syllable about her? Had you heard not only that no crime was committed in the communication of information between Bush administration officials and Novak, but that no crime could have been committed because the governing law gives a person a complete defense if an agent's status has already been compromised by the government?

more info
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTlkODQ1YzgwMGVkNDMxNTFiMzMyYWM2OGQzZWI0Zjg



(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:22:38 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

puella,

It's pertinent in this case.  I think there is good evidence that both her and her husband acted and said many of the things they did for purely party partisan reasons.

FirmKY



Oh what rich but bitter irony!  To state this, to say this in this matter about two people who exposed the partisan lies of Bush to the entire nation.  To say this about a woman who sacrificed her career in a valiant attempt to stop Bush and the Republicans from lying to America in order to goad her into a disastrous war is stupefyingly ironic.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:25:43 PM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		Is Irony something that right wingers just live for?  It must have something to do with the love of hypocricy or something.  If the quote below is true and the lying to grand jury didn't matter because there was no underlying crime (which I think is horsehit, but thats another matter) then since oral sex isn't illegal...

quote:

  Had you heard that Plame's cover has actually been blown for a decade—i.e., since about seven years before Novak ever wrote a syllable about her? Had you heard not only that no crime was committed in the communication of information between Bush administration officials and Novak, but that no crime could have been committed because the governing law gives a person a complete defense if an agent's status has already been compromised by the government?

more info
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTlkODQ1YzgwMGVkNDMxNTFiMzMyYWM2OGQzZWI0Zjg


(in reply to Sternhand4)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 10:26:56 PM   
juliaoceania


Posts: 21383
Joined: 4/19/2006
From: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I think there are some valid questions about how they have both framed things.  What they have claimed as facts, and how they have acted.


Fair enough. What have they claimed as facts that you disagree with?


What a wonderful question

_____________________________

Once you label me, you negate me ~ Soren Kierkegaard

Reality has a well known Liberal Bias ~ Stephen Colbert

Great minds discuss ideas; Average minds discuss events; Small minds discuss people. Eleanor Roosevelt

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:04:00 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline 		puella,

Lots of work to respond, so thank you for the effort.

However, I'd really like a link or two about her exposure to both the Russians and the Cubans being dispatched as "false".

Other things that popped into my head as I read your post:

1.  You address only the first two sources, about the Friend of the Court brief.  You do not address the other sources and incidents I reference.

2.  Nick Christof, the NYT reporter who was originally involved with Wilson's NYT oped piece, and has covered a lot of the Wilson/Plame situation reported that the CIA believed that her identify was compromised by Aldrich Ames in the 1990s.  They believed it so much that they moved her back to the States.  That's a pretty strong belief.  As you said yourself: "The personal security of a covert agent and her family can be a major concern when secrecy is pierced."

The actual article where he did so is now behind the "Times Select" curtain, but here is a reference, and a verbatim quote by Kevin Drum (not exactly a Bush friendly source, btw:  Washington Monthly.

 3. I agree that you must be careful with Wikipedia when it's about current politics, or in areas relating to the "left vs right" arena.  However, there are plenty of sources for the Amicus brief.  I wanted to source it directly, but it was no longer on the Baker Law firm site, and as far as I could find, such documents were not available on the DC Court of Appeals website.

As well, the source of a material is sometimes important, but your lengthy discussion about the non-worthiness of Wikipedia in this particular case almost feels like an attempt to discredit based on source, not content.  Perhaps not your intent, but in light of your dismissal of all the material, it adds to the overall sense of denying the facts.  I quoted Wiki simply because it had a clear summary about the Brief.

4.  Your dismissal of Bill Gertz also feels like a dismissal based simply on source: (Bill Gertz (who works for the decidedly right leaning Washington Times). Please see my comments about Nick Christof in item 2.  Gertz may have been the first.  He was not the only one.  Neither Christof, Drum or the NYT is known for being "pro-Bush".

5.  Are you saying that *gasp* most major news organizations are biased?    Does that mean I can discount them, when it strengthens my argument?

6. You quote Section 422 several times.  I don't think I said anything about the law, or exact legal strictures on whether or not she was a NOC or covert agent.  I specifically phrased my questions so as not to get lost in the legal technicalities of the situation.  My specific questions was:
Did she say she was outed as a covert CIA operative by the Novak story?

Did "many others" outside the CIA know she worked for the CIA before that occurred?

In the plain sense of the words, this means (to me at least) that the fact that she worked for the CIA came to be known to individuals outside of the agency, she was compromised and outed.  You even qualified you answer to me in reference to this by saying the only people who knew 'had security clearances".

7.  What of Novaks call to the CIA, before he published his article, in which the CIA freely confirmed that she worked for them?  Are you saying he lied about this event?

8.  I expected you to jump all over the 60 Minutes quotes.  I'll be expecting your comments on those, when you have the time.

9.  What of the Fitzgerald's admission that it she was known to others as a CIA agent prior to the publication of the Novak's article?  Do reporters not count as people? 

FirmKY

< Message edited by FirmhandKY -- 3/17/2007 11:06:16 PM >

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to puella)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:14:34 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

puella,

It's pertinent in this case.  I think there is good evidence that both her and her husband acted and said many of the things they did for purely party partisan reasons.

FirmKY



Oh what rich but bitter irony!  To state this, to say this in this matter about two people who exposed the partisan lies of Bush to the entire nation.  To say this about a woman who sacrificed her career in a valiant attempt to stop Bush and the Republicans from lying to America in order to goad her into a disastrous war is stupefyingly ironic.


What a perfect example of seeing things from your own biases and prejudices!

Thank you, Crappy.

FirmKY


_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:15:25 PM   
Sternhand4


Posts: 422
Joined: 3/6/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

Is Irony something that right wingers just live for? 

Yes we love the irony of leftwingers using Clintons ( bill ) escapades ( not illegal to get head from an intern just a little skeevey from a power perspective ) to distract from the current discussion
It must have something to do with the love of hypocricy or something.  If the quote below is true and the lying to grand jury didn't matter because there was no underlying crime (which I think is horsehit, but thats another matter) then since oral sex isn't illegal...
But lying in a sexual harrasment deposition is, as well as obstruction of justice.

quote:

  Had you heard that Plame's cover has actually been blown for a decade—i.e., since about seven years before Novak ever wrote a syllable about her? Had you heard not only that no crime was committed in the communication of information between Bush administration officials and Novak, but that no crime could have been committed because the governing law gives a person a complete defense if an agent's status has already been compromised by the government?

more info
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTlkODQ1YzgwMGVkNDMxNTFiMzMyYWM2OGQzZWI0Zjg



(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:18:57 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Yes we love the irony of leftwingers using Clintons ( bill ) escapades ( not illegal to get head from an intern just a little skeevey from a power perspective ) to distract from the current discussion


Maybe we're reading different threads, but my experience is that it's generally right-wingers who drag Bill Clinton into unrelated discussions.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to Sternhand4)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:26:32 PM   
Sternhand4


Posts: 422
Joined: 3/6/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

Yes we love the irony of leftwingers using Clintons ( bill ) escapades ( not illegal to get head from an intern just a little skeevey from a power perspective ) to distract from the current discussion

Maybe we're reading different threads, but my experience is that it's generally right-wingers who drag Bill Clinton into unrelated discussions.

I agree.... thats why I laughed

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:27:19 PM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I think there are some valid questions about how they have both framed things.  What they have claimed as facts, and how they have acted.


Fair enough. What have they claimed as facts that you disagree with?


dc,

If we get to that point, I'll be more than happy to expound, although I wish to finish my discussion with puella first, and not get distracted off of the main topic of how bias affects everyone's perception and stance on political issues.

However, off the top of my head, what immediately comes to mind is the time frame in which Wilson claimed that he was aware that the report of purchasing the yellow cake was a forgery, when in truth, the fact that it was a forgery wasn't known at the time.

It seems to be a convenient confabulation on Wilson's part, in support of his political objective of causing the Bush Administration embarrassment.

FirmKY

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/17/2007 11:46:02 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

not get distracted off of the main topic of how bias affects everyone's perception and stance on political issues.


Isn't it for the OP to define what the "main topic" is?

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 12:10:15 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

not get distracted off of the main topic of how bias affects everyone's perception and stance on political issues.


Isn't it for the OP to define what the "main topic" is?


Ask her if you wish.

But her and my main discussion point - even if some do not wish to recognize the fact - is about the relevance of political affiliation to the hearings.

Her reason for posting appeared to be her disgust at a Republican asking Plame what her and her husbands political affiliations were.  One poster even made the joke about "Are you now, or have you ever been a member of the Democratic Party?".

I made the claim that - especially in this case - political affiliation is wholely relevant.  The main thrust of my discussion posts have been in support of that thesis, have they not?

Is this really unclear to you, or are you just wishing to be contrary, and attempting to join the other "thread noise"?

FirmKY

PS.  And why would you prefer to challenge me on such a point, when you asked, and I responded with a substantive reply to your first post to me?

Can you not address the facts of my reply?  I am claiming that Wilson has had at least one instance of retrospective falsification in relation to this entire affair.  Do you deny this?  If so, on what basis?


< Message edited by FirmhandKY -- 3/18/2007 12:14:44 AM >

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 3:35:16 AM   
FirmhandKY


Posts: 8948
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

I think there are some valid questions about how they have both framed things.  What they have claimed as facts, and how they have acted.


Fair enough. What have they claimed as facts that you disagree with?


dc,

If we get to that point, I'll be more than happy to expound, although I wish to finish my discussion with puella first, and not get distracted off of the main topic of how bias affects everyone's perception and stance on political issues.

However, off the top of my head, what immediately comes to mind is the time frame in which Wilson claimed that he was aware that the report of purchasing the yellow cake was a forgery, when in truth, the fact that it was a forgery wasn't known at the time.

It seems to be a convenient confabulation on Wilson's part, in support of his political objective of causing the Bush Administration embarrassment.


By the numbers ...


1. CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data
Bush Used Report Of Uranium Bid

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 12, 2003

Armed with information purportedly showing that Iraqi officials had been seeking to buy uranium in Niger one or two years earlier, the CIA in early February 2002 dispatched a retired U.S. ambassador to the country to investigate the claims, according to the senior U.S. officials and the former government official, who is familiar with the event. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity and on condition that the name of the former ambassador not be disclosed.

During his trip, the CIA's envoy spoke with the president of Niger and other Niger officials mentioned as being involved in the Iraqi effort, some of whose signatures purportedly appeared on the documents.

After returning to the United States, the envoy reported to the CIA that the uranium-purchase story was false, the sources said. Among the envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong," the former U.S. government official said.


The US Congress's Bi-partisan Intelligence committee's report:

2. REPORT ON THE U.S. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY'S PREWAR INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS ON IRAQ

II. NIGER        
B. Former Ambassador

The former ambassador also told Committee staff that he was the source of a Washington Post article ("CIA Did Not Share Doubt on Iraq Data; Bush Used Report of Uranium Bid," June 12, 2003) which said, "among the Envoy's conclusions was that the documents may have been forged because `the dates were wrong and the names were wrong." Committee staff asked how the former ambassador could have come to the conclusion that the "dates were wrong and the names were wrong" when he had never seen the CIA reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the reports. The former ambassador said that he may have "misspoken" to the reporter when he said he concluded the documents were "forged."


3. In probe of CIA leak, two sides see politics Patrick Healy and Wayne Washington, October 2, 2003, Boston Globe:

Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson, who said a Bush aide disclosed that his wife is a CIA operative in retaliation for his criticism of the Iraq war, has worked since May as an unpaid adviser to Senator John F. Kerry, offering foreign policy advice and speechwriting tips to the Democratic presidential candidate from Massachusetts.


Did he lie, or was it unintentional retrospective falsification based on his desire to service his own agenda and bias? 

I don't know.  Neither does anyone except Wilson. 

If it was an honest error, it was an error that was inline with his political outlook, and that's my entire point.

It's kinda like checking for scanner errors in the supermarket check-out.  They always seem to favor the store, don't they?

FirmKY

_____________________________

Some people are just idiots.

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 6:58:05 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sternhand4

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

From the law itself:

quote:


(4) The term "covert agent" means -

(A) a present or retired officer or employee of an intelligence agency or a present or retired member of the Armed
Forces assigned to duty with an intelligence agency -


Valerie Plame, at the time of Novak's article was an employee of an intelligence agency.

quote:


(i) whose identity as such an officer, employee, or member is classified information, and


quote:


MS. PLAME WILSON: Congressman, thank you for the opportunity. I know I'm here under oath and I'm here to say that I was a covert officer of the Central Intelligence Agency. J


quote:


(ii) who is serving outside the United States or has within the last five years served outside the United States;


quote:


REP. DAVIS: The Intelligence Identities Protection Act makes it a crime to knowingly disclose the identity of a covert agent, which has a specific definition under the act. Did anyone ever tell you that you were so designated?

MS. PLAME WILSON: I'm not a lawyer.

REP. DAVIS: That's why I asked if they told you. I'm not asking for your interpretation.

MS. PLAME WILSON: No, no. But I was covert. I did travel overseas on secret missions within the last five years.


Under Oath. IF y'all think she wasn't covered under the "Covert" definition, then you're saying she lied under oath.

If y'all got evidence of her committing Perjury, bring it on.


Had you heard that Plame's cover has actually been blown for a decade


Not according to General Hayden, the Director of the CIA.

And not according to her testimony UNDER OATH.

So, I'm thinking that the COMMENTARY in the National Review isn't up to the same legal standard as the testimony of a) The DCI and b) Valerie Plame Wilson, under oath before Congress.

Again, if you have evidence of the crime of Perjury, bring it. I see a lot of unsourced allegations in that opinion piece, but no "Evidence". And no footnotes, either.



_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Sternhand4)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 8:30:18 AM   
puella


Posts: 2457
Joined: 12/2/2004
Status: offline
Okay.. please do not take this personally, FirmhandKY as it is not specifically you I am addressing this to, in fact, you at least bring up legal questions and questions of reason, as opposed to just drive by shilling without any factual basis or legitimacy, but I am finding less and less merit in responding to what really are distractionary tactics from the main and pertinent issues. So, I would encourage you and others to go back and look into the numerous previous posts by myself and others which link you to factually integral (and often times official governmental) references. I have decried the 'look at the shiny bead!!!" distractionary tactics which are so much a part of the neocon agenda and play book, used to  confuse the issue (and people) and to keep people off the actual issue by pulling attention away from it and dragging it over to a reactionary and often times fantastical (and usually fantasy based) counter pieces.

Anyway..lets start with the Washington Times...

You do realize that the Washington Times is owned by a church which believes in the transition of democracy into a theocracy, correct? Revered Sun Myun Moon, founder of the Unification Church (Jesus came to him in a dream) owns and runs the Washington Times. The papers bias has a long and checkered history.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1569
http://www.rickross.com/reference/unif/Unif9.html
http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_list.asp?pageID=33&discussionID=428352&messages_per_page=4
(I couldn't pull up the actual article from the Post as it is archived and you have to pay for it, but those two websites have experts.)

http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9074253/Unification-Church
http://unification.org/

Now to sum up as briefly as possible the 'potential pre-outing outings'.. These were all addressed in the due process of the Federal Investigation of the Wilson outing. Had they not been ruled as untrue, the Federal Prosecutor legally could not have proceeded with the investigation. Legally... they were all debunked.

I already answered your two questions but let me do so again. Yes she stated, under oath, as did officials from the CIA, and in a separate statement, Federal Prosecutor Fitzgerald, that her identity as a covert operative had been leaked, and as I have stated and provided the link for, (well over five times and I believe twice in this thread alone) it was legally proven that it was NOT widely known outside of the community who had access to classified information that Valerie Wilson was a covert agent working for the CIA... too tired to go back and get my link for you again, you can do that yourself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY


You quote Section 422 several times.  I don't think I said anything about the law, or exact legal strictures on whether or not she was a NOC or covert agent.  I specifically phrased my questions so as not to get lost in the legal technicalities of the situation. 


This is the crux of the problem, as I see it... so many do not want to deal with what is actually legal, and which has been ruled upon by the gathering of evidence and fact in an impartial forum (US Court of Law).  Unfortunatly, I will not particiapte in a debate that is based on the other option, which is basing your agruments on gossip and uncofirmed and unsubstantiated gossip.

... I will give you a kudos though... by the end of this rebuttal to a completely tangental (and in my opinion an argument that should have been brought up in a separate thread as it has nothing to do with the OP) meandering (one of many, I might add [not all by you!]), even I had to go back and re-read my OP to remember what it was about!

< Message edited by puella -- 3/18/2007 8:42:18 AM >

_____________________________

We must move forward, not backward, upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom...... The Simpsons

War is God's way of teaching Americans geography." ...Ambrose Bierce

"Don't you oppress me!"....Stan/Loretta

(in reply to FirmhandKY)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 8:43:28 AM   
SimplyMichael


Posts: 7229
Joined: 1/7/2007
Status: offline 		If anyone is too stupid to see the trail of lies that were used to justify this war and want instead to focus on the most tangential issues they are too fucking stupid to be allowed to breed or vote.

quote:

It seems to be a convenient confabulation on Wilson's part, in support of his political objective of causing the Bush Administration embarrassment.


What Wilson wanted to do was prevent 5,000 and counting American soldiers from dying, he wanted to prevent 10s of thousands from coming back maimed, he wanted to save America from a disastrous war we have yet to stop paying for with our blood.

Embarrassment my ass!

I remember why I stayed out of her, listening to pompous asses prattling on about things they clearly have no business discussing and wouldn't be allowed to sit at the child's table if there were actually things of merit to be discussed.

(in reply to puella)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 10:22:25 AM   
losttreasure


Posts: 875
Joined: 12/17/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

If anyone is too stupid to see the trail of lies that were used to justify this war and want instead to focus on the most tangential issues they are too fucking stupid to be allowed to breed or vote.


My, my... seems like several people have learned a new word today.  Tangential.

When the op of this thread posts a rant focusing on the merit of a line of questioning regarding party partisanship, I don't believe addressing the relevance of potential influence by beliefs and affiliations to be a digression...

Unless, of course, the intent of the op was to simply generate agreement and kudos for her insightfulness.

I don't believe Puella is quite as shallow as you might suggest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

quote:

It seems to be a convenient confabulation on Wilson's part, in support of his political objective of causing the Bush Administration embarrassment.


What Wilson wanted to do was prevent 5,000 and counting American soldiers from dying, he wanted to prevent 10s of thousands from coming back maimed, he wanted to save America from a disastrous war we have yet to stop paying for with our blood.

Embarrassment my ass!


So you agree that Wilson had an objective that was motivated and influenced by his personal beliefs?

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

I remember why I stayed out of her, listening to pompous asses prattling on about things they clearly have no business discussing and wouldn't be allowed to sit at the child's table if there were actually things of merit to be discussed.


Oh, please... spare us the sanctimonious rhetoric.   Can't you come up with anything better than, "naah, naah... you don't know what you're talking about... you're stupid"?



_____________________________

Just because it isn't "all about me", doesn't make it "all about you".

(in reply to SimplyMichael)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? H... - 3/18/2007 10:41:55 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		It is interesting to go back to the initial news reports in 2003 about
this whole situation. 
 
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/09/30/cia.leak.politics/index.html
 
" The chairman of the Republican National Committee accused Wilson on Tuesday of having his own motivations.

"What I've said is that Ambassador Wilson is clearly -- has a partisan history here," RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie told CNN.

He cited as proof Wilson's $1,000 campaign contribution to Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, one of 10 Democrats running to replace Bush in 2004.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group that tracks money in politics, Wilson made such a contribution to Kerry on May 23. A further search showed Wilson also donated $1,000 to Bush on May 20, 1999.

Gillespie also said Wilson is affiliated with "organizations that are opposed to the president's agenda and anti-President Bush."

Wilson has denied a political motivation to his actions.

He told CNN on Monday that his first appointment was by a Republican.
"In actual fact, my first political appointee was as ambassador," Wilson said. "And I was appointed by George H.W. Bush, the first President Bush. So I really am apolitical in all of this. "

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency? Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109