Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jul 17, 2003.
It seems the Bush wanted to punish anyone who did not agree with it, even if it meant breaking the law to do so.
how about murder?
That's a pretty outrageous charge, that Bush was behind this guy's murder, and it smacks of conspiracy theory. Unless some more evidence comes out to show US involvement, I don't see how you make the connection so fast. This is really jumping to conclusions IMHO.
But the original article, about blowing the cover of Wilson's wife is awful. That is an unconscionable act, if true.
It quacks like a duck.
Reliable people who have brought forth concrete evidence against Bush's war case are having unusually bad luck lately.
agreed. but is it so easily dismissed?
It should be investigated, hopefully in an independant fashion; but lets wait and see before we go throwing around accusations of murder. I know some people around here think Bush likes killing and all, but all there is so far is a dead guy. There are lots of ways people wind up dead besides having a hit put on them by Dubya.
People accused Clinton of murdering some Arkansas state policeman on far flimsier evidence than exists to suggest that Bush did something similar.
Yeah, but that doesn't make it the right thing to do here.
Isn't it illegal as well as rude to blow the cover of a CIA operative?
Of course it does. Politics is what it is b/c of what was done in the past. Republicans investigated Clinton ruthlessly, therefore Bush Jr. should be investigated ruthlessly. Republicans accussed Clinton of everything, including murder, so if Jr. is involved with a suspicious death, then he should also be questioned.
If the Repubs can't stand the heat, they shouldn't have lit the bonfire.
if she is indeed an operative, then the official broke the law. if she's not, then it's libelous, 'cuz no one's ever going to hire her again (she's an energy consultant who works internationally).
either way, it's an obvious retribution against joe wilson for going public. her career is wrecked. disgusting and petty tactics, but is anyone really surprised they were used?
So you are saying two wrongs DO make a right? Come on, the only people who accused Clinton of murder were extreme right-wingers who were hoping if they believed it fervently enough it would be true. This country will continue to spiral down into petty bickering between two parties (who act like little kids IMHO ) if we continue to perpetuate this eye-for-an-eye / scorched earth policy in politics.
I agree. My point isn't that Jr. killed someone, but that Republicans aren't exactly in any position to tell Democrats that they aren't allowed to accuse the president of something like that.
the u.s. has punished entire countries for not falling in step.
why is it so hard to believe the administration would punish wilson and his wife.
this is politics. it doesn't get any lower, infantile or spiteful.
The article by the nation raises concerns that should be investigated. Exposing of CIA agents used to result in calls for treason trials by conservatives like Novak. Anybody remember Phillip Agee?
The British civil servant who most likely killed himself should be investigated by the Brits. Question is really what kind of pressure did the government put on him to shut up. I think insinuations that he was murdered seem to be very, very premature. Such ideas quickly get people put into the category of conspircy theorist silliness. Anybody got a "grassy knoll" or a "magic bullet" they want to sell?
The right-wing nuts who put out such nonsense about Clinton (ala Jerry Falwell [sp?]) only showed how bad the cesspool of such politics can get. And by the way it wasn't a state trooper, it was a former campaign and White House aide who shot himself in a Washington D.C. Park. It was investigated to death, but some nuts couldn't be convinced that Hillary or Bill didn't pull the trigger.
but if true, i do get to be the "you heard it here first" guy.
You got it! I'm writing it down and I'll be your witness.
Here's some more follow up, it looks like there might be something to this story after all:
There's more on Mark Kleiman's blog including links and a transcript of the press secretary getting grilled about it, but here's the meat of it:
if true, that's disgusting politics. and if, for whatever reason, she's not an agent, it's libel -- she'll never work again.
1 - I mentioned in a previous post a former CIA agent named Phillip Agee. He wrote a book called "CIA Diary" in which he disclosed the names of CIA agents because of the Agency's role in undermining democratically elected governments in South America. Novak was one of those who cried for his head. It is a little disingenuous for him to have no problem disclosing the name of an agent now. It would raise the question whether Novak was chosen to leak the information to because of his partisan politics, situational ethics, and ties to the Bush administration.
2 - The rank hypocrisy of officals, who I'm sure all decried the appearance of impropriety in the Clinton Administration's handling of IRS files, to turn around and abuse their authority is all a little to much to stomach. If they broke the law these folks need to stand trial.
an arizona paper offers this op/ed piece
maybe there is hope for Arizona yet! It will be interesting to see how the WH uses the argument for secrecy based on national security to justify not giving out the names of staffers who "outed" a cia agent.
By the way, love the Wolfowitz quote. It should be used in the dictionary to define "irony."