thunder wrote:
On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 20:54:07 +0000, Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 16:23:56 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 16:30:32 +0000, NOYB wrote:

What is there to spin? As the article points out, it doesn't appear
that there was any violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection
Act. So, instead, the article goes on to *speculate* that Fitzgerald
may be considering charges of perjury or criminal conspiracy.

At this point, it's nothing more speculation and wishing on the part of
whichever left-wing conspiracy site you lifted this from.

I don't know if any charges will come from the Plame investigation, but I
will point out, it wasn't the Watergate burglary that brought Nixon down,
it was the cover-up. If anyone in the Bush administration is charged, it
will be another nail in this lame duck's coffin. Bush is already
wounded, additional bleeding will put his numbers in the Carter area.
Can you say failed Presidency?

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/...l_approval.htm

What was there to cover up? According to what I've read, everybody in the
known universe knew that Valerie Palme was Wilson's wife and she worked at
the CIA.

Everyone seems to be concentrating on the IIPA. There are quite a few
more laws that could apply and may have been broken. Try the Espionage
Act, perjury, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy, all could apply.

I would also point out, that the IIPA may indeed apply. The CIA initially
filed the complaint, with the Justice Dept., that started this
investigation. I'm just guessing here, because we know how frivolous the
CIA can be, but perhaps, their lawyers felt a law may have been broken.

The IIPA is the only thing anybody is talking about. You have brought
up the Espionage Act, perjury, obstruction and conspiracy before. All
of the elements of a crime must be met for there to even be a crime -
which is what will probably send anything under the IIPA out the
window. What elements do you think have been met under the EA?

Perjury would be applicable if anyone lied under oath - I don't know
that anyone has. Obstruction may be in order if anyone stiffled the
investigation - however refusing to incriminate ones self is not
obstruction, nor would it necessarily be obstruction to fail to
volunteer information.

Jesus - doesn't take a freakin' intelligence genius to put two and two
together and come up with four.

That's truly fortunate, because we are not talking intelligence geniuses,
we are talking the Bush administration.

On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 14:00:31 -0700, Curtis CCR wrote:


The IIPA is the only thing anybody is talking about. You have brought up
the Espionage Act, perjury, obstruction and conspiracy before. All of the
elements of a crime must be met for there to even be a crime - which is
what will probably send anything under the IIPA out the window. What
elements do you think have been met under the EA?

I'm not a lawyer, and I'm not claiming that the EA will be used, but it
has in the past been used for plain, old fashioned leaks. See the Morison
case.

http://foi.missouri.edu/bushinfopoli...nofficial.html



Perjury would be applicable if anyone lied under oath - I don't know that
anyone has. Obstruction may be in order if anyone stiffled the
investigation - however refusing to incriminate ones self is not
obstruction, nor would it necessarily be obstruction to fail to volunteer
information.

Again, this is speculation, but:

http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004956.php

I have no inside information that there will be any charges brought. I am
just pointing out that the prosecutor is not limited to the IIPA.

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Do you believe the "biased national press" should report Bush's
announcement, but suppress stories about things which contradict what he
said?

Jeff Rigby wrote:
No, and Fox reported both. The difference is that Fox reports WHY we are
there

Uh huh. Why is that, exactly? Because Saddam was responsible for Sept
11th?

Face facts, Fox is nothing but a Bush-Cheney propaganda outlet. It's
amazing to me that with the millions they spend primping the Bush
Administration (thru Fox and other media), they're still in the mud. Nixon
did a better job... at least, up until he got caught.


... They never report on the strategic value Iraq has. IF it has no
value then why is there such a massive terrorism campaign there and not
in Afghanistan.

Excuse me, there *is* a massive terrorism campaign going on in
Afghanistan. The difference is that there are far fewer U.S. troops there,
they're better insulated, and the whole country has a far lower population
density.

... Everytime I hear of more terrorism in Iraq I KNOW we are in the
right place.

That figures.

You don't think that these people are evil incarnate, worse than Hitler or
Stalin. Saddam is tame in comparison. One of the only arguments that I
accept from the left is that it would have been better to leave Saddam in
power than to allow the terrorists to control Iraq.

No explain why we're doing sucha great job in Iraq if fewer people have
running water & electricity now than 2 years ago, and the Army can't even
keep the road to the airport safe.

DSK

Here is where the problem occurs, we are in Iraq for a number of good
reasons, we may NOT be doing a good job. You seem to think that "we" give
Bush a pass on all things when "we" respond to the Bush bashing. "YOU" focus
the arguments to areas that you think (because of the incestuous nature of
the news medias you watch) are a slam dunk. Thus it appears that we are
always defending Bush administration policy. "We" have no argument with Bush
policy, just it's implementation (at times).

Do you understand this???? You set the argument, You are ill informed about
policy goals of the administration, You do not listen to various news medias
and have a BIAS because of this. You assume others are biased because all
the news medias you listen to are agreed. Think about it, reread the news
articles and you will see "US" responding to distortions of facts, obvious
distortions.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

Debate issue:
Resolved, that the people of the United States need a mechanism to remove
incompetent voters from the voter rolls
Issue: define incompetent

Felons
Anyone on public assistance
Illiterate


Public assistance? You still hold the belief that everyone receiving it is
a bum who's not trying to pull themselves up by the bootstraps?
No but it eliminates those who are susceptible to the politician that
promises a chicken in every pot from government money.

And to Harry, illiterate is not someone who can not speak the words but
someone who can't understand the words. Understanding, something that all
of us lack to some degree. I really wanted to put there a sense of history
instead of Illiterate but that would be too hard to test.

Jeff Rigby wrote:
Here is where the problem occurs, we are in Iraq for a number of good
reasons

Agreed. Should have been done a lot differently, but it's too late for
that now.

... we may NOT be doing a good job.

"May"??? There is no area in which the US is doing a good job in Iraq,
other than handing gazillions of dollars to the "rebuilding"
corporations (surprise surprise, they turn out to be heavy Bush-Cheney
sponsors).

Iraq is broken, probably at least as broken as any Palestinian state
could be.




... You seem to think that "we" give
Bush a pass on all things when "we" respond to the Bush bashing.

Well, you are. It's very simple.
President Bush has done a rotten job of running the country. Very few
(if any) of his policies have resulted in a benefit to the country.

... "YOU" focus
the arguments to areas that you think (because of the incestuous nature of
the news medias you watch) are a slam dunk.

1- what news media do you think I watch? It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are. It is
certainly true that *none* (and I mean zero, zip, nada, zilch-o) of the
Bush-Cheney Cheerleaders have shown any of the points I make here are
wrong, desptie their constant yapping about it.

2- It looks like a "slam dunk" to you because the facts are so uniformly
against you. An intelligent person observes the facts and bases his
opinions on reality, not twisting & spinning (and lying) to justify his
opinions regardless of fact.



... "We" have no argument with Bush
policy, just it's implementation (at times).


Really? You think it's a good idea to destroy the American education
system, to drive the US backwards in science, to push industry offshore
and encourage corporations to duck their taxes (as long as they make
political contributions to the right party), to destroy the environment
for the profit of a few, to eliminate Social Security (or at least, the
Security part), to drive away any country that may want to be our
allies, to increase US dependence on foreign oil now that we're past the
Hubbert peak, to increase military spending while not accomplishing any
military goals, to leave ouor borders largely unsecured... wait that's
enough for now.



Do you understand this???? You set the argument, You are ill informed about
policy goals of the administration,

Actually, the policy goals of this Administration make no sense at all.


... You do not listen to various news medias
and have a BIAS because of this.

How do you know what news medias I listen to?

... You assume others are biased because all
the news medias you listen to are agreed.

Wrong. You assume you know what I listen to (or watch) when you clearly
don't have a clue. Since you have stated your reliance ont Fox News,
stated by Vice President Cheney to be the best news source, we know that
you are both ill informed and heavily biased. Yet because they spoon
feed you a lot of flattery about how smart you are to watch Fox, you
believe it all.

And you have nice little support group of like minded Clinton-hating
Bush-Cheney cheerleaders right here. Must make you feel good, but it
doesn't change what you are.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
Here is where the problem occurs, we are in Iraq for a number of good
reasons

Agreed. Should have been done a lot differently, but it's too late for
that now.

... we may NOT be doing a good job.

"May"??? There is no area in which the US is doing a good job in Iraq,
other than handing gazillions of dollars to the "rebuilding" corporations
(surprise surprise, they turn out to be heavy Bush-Cheney sponsors).

Iraq is broken, probably at least as broken as any Palestinian state could
be.




... You seem to think that "we" give Bush a pass on all things when "we"
respond to the Bush bashing.

Well, you are. It's very simple.
President Bush has done a rotten job of running the country. Very few (if
any) of his policies have resulted in a benefit to the country.

... "YOU" focus the arguments to areas that you think (because of the
incestuous nature of the news medias you watch) are a slam dunk.

1- what news media do you think I watch? It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are. It is certainly
true that *none* (and I mean zero, zip, nada, zilch-o) of the Bush-Cheney
Cheerleaders have shown any of the points I make here are wrong, desptie
their constant yapping about it.

2- It looks like a "slam dunk" to you because the facts are so uniformly
against you. An intelligent person observes the facts and bases his
opinions on reality, not twisting & spinning (and lying) to justify his
opinions regardless of fact.



... "We" have no argument with Bush policy, just it's implementation (at
times).


Really? You think it's a good idea to destroy the American education
system, to drive the US backwards in science, to push industry offshore
and encourage corporations to duck their taxes (as long as they make
political contributions to the right party), to destroy the environment
for the profit of a few, to eliminate Social Security (or at least, the
Security part), to drive away any country that may want to be our allies,
to increase US dependence on foreign oil now that we're past the Hubbert
peak, to increase military spending while not accomplishing any military
goals, to leave ouor borders largely unsecured... wait that's enough for
now.

The above is a perfect example of our difference in facts, take education.
CSPAN had a congressional hearing on the No Child Left Behind Act on Monday.
It appears from the majority of the testimony that it's working. There were
representitives from many states. The REP from Minnisota was claiming that
it wasn't NCLB but an initiative that they started two years before that
resulted in Minnisota test results showing such a large improvement. That
may be true but what they started before NCLB looked alot like NCLB.


the news medias you listen to are agreed.

Wrong. You assume you know what I listen to (or watch) when you clearly
don't have a clue. Since you have stated your reliance on Fox News,

I didn't state my reliance but that I thought that it's only 20% obviously
biased while I thought that the other news groups were 80% hidden agenda
biased. It's easier for me to see bias in Fox while I have to find the news
and data that is left out of the other national news media.

stated by Vice President Cheney to be the best news source, we know that
you are both ill informed and heavily biased. Yet because they spoon feed
you a lot of flattery about how smart you are to watch Fox, you believe it
all.

bull****, the spoon fed news I usually don't watch, I like the panel
discussions, CSPAN and CNN

And you have nice little support group of like minded Clinton-hating
Bush-Cheney cheerleaders right here.

AGAIN, YOU set the arguments we respond to errors in data

Must make you feel good, but it
doesn't change what you are.

Your goal is to change me and my goal is to set the facts straight

DSK

Jeff Rigby wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Jeff Rigby wrote:

Here is where the problem occurs, we are in Iraq for a number of good
reasons

Agreed. Should have been done a lot differently, but it's too late for
that now.


... we may NOT be doing a good job.

"May"??? There is no area in which the US is doing a good job in Iraq,
other than handing gazillions of dollars to the "rebuilding" corporations
(surprise surprise, they turn out to be heavy Bush-Cheney sponsors).

Iraq is broken, probably at least as broken as any Palestinian state could
be.





... You seem to think that "we" give Bush a pass on all things when "we"
respond to the Bush bashing.

Well, you are. It's very simple.
President Bush has done a rotten job of running the country. Very few (if
any) of his policies have resulted in a benefit to the country.


... "YOU" focus the arguments to areas that you think (because of the
incestuous nature of the news medias you watch) are a slam dunk.

1- what news media do you think I watch? It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are. It is certainly
true that *none* (and I mean zero, zip, nada, zilch-o) of the Bush-Cheney
Cheerleaders have shown any of the points I make here are wrong, desptie
their constant yapping about it.

2- It looks like a "slam dunk" to you because the facts are so uniformly
against you. An intelligent person observes the facts and bases his
opinions on reality, not twisting & spinning (and lying) to justify his
opinions regardless of fact.




... "We" have no argument with Bush policy, just it's implementation (at
times).


Really? You think it's a good idea to destroy the American education
system, to drive the US backwards in science, to push industry offshore
and encourage corporations to duck their taxes (as long as they make
political contributions to the right party), to destroy the environment
for the profit of a few, to eliminate Social Security (or at least, the
Security part), to drive away any country that may want to be our allies,
to increase US dependence on foreign oil now that we're past the Hubbert
peak, to increase military spending while not accomplishing any military
goals, to leave ouor borders largely unsecured... wait that's enough for
now.


The above is a perfect example of our difference in facts, take education.
CSPAN had a congressional hearing on the No Child Left Behind Act on Monday.
It appears from the majority of the testimony that it's working.

Working at what? Improving test scores? Yes, good. How much of that is
done by excluding certain groups of kids from the test pool?

The NCLB act is actually a program to reduce the effectiveness of
getting public school kids into college, where they can practice upward
social & political mobility, and the big goal is to reduce the political
influence of the teacher's unions (the last is not necessarily a bad
thing, but it is undertaken as a tactic to solidify Republican hegemony
which *is* a bad thing).

So, in short, your breezy & shallow assurances that the No Child Left
Behind Act is "working" is actually more sinister than you realize. Is
this the direction you really want the country to take?




I didn't state my reliance but that I thought that it's only 20% obviously
biased while I thought that the other news groups were 80% hidden agenda
biased.

Many are, yes. Many more are not, or (like the foreign media for
example) are biased in a direction that is not derived from US politics.

The presumption that the majority of media are liberal biased is a lot
of hooey.

... It's easier for me to see bias in Fox while I have to find the news
and data that is left out of the other national news media.


The great thing about the Internet is the huge variety of information
offered. Of course, that also means that you can always find somebody
who agrees with you, even if you are the type of sicko who is looking
for sex with goats.



AGAIN, YOU set the arguments we respond to errors in data

Well, you certainly haven't responded to any errors in any data that I
have posted here.


... Must make you feel good, but it
doesn't change what you are.


Your goal is to change me

Not at all. My goal is to present facts and 2ndarily to amuse myself
with what a pack of dishonest boneheads the Bush-Cheney Cheerleaders are.

... and my goal is to set the facts straight


You seem to be a bit above the average, but you share the self-delusion.
And it's clear that you're mightily offended by any criticism of
President Bush no matter how justified, and prefer to either ignore or
distort the "facts" you are determined to "set straight" since most of
them don't show the Bush-Cheney Administration in a favorable light.

DSK

The typical arrogance of the brain dead liebral is once again on display
"It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are."

And they wonder why they keep losing elections?


"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
...
Jeff Rigby wrote:
Here is where the problem occurs, we are in Iraq for a number of good
reasons

Agreed. Should have been done a lot differently, but it's too late for
that now.

... we may NOT be doing a good job.

"May"??? There is no area in which the US is doing a good job in Iraq,
other than handing gazillions of dollars to the "rebuilding"
corporations
(surprise surprise, they turn out to be heavy Bush-Cheney sponsors).

Iraq is broken, probably at least as broken as any Palestinian state
could
be.




... You seem to think that "we" give Bush a pass on all things when
"we"
respond to the Bush bashing.

Well, you are. It's very simple.
President Bush has done a rotten job of running the country. Very few
(if
any) of his policies have resulted in a benefit to the country.

... "YOU" focus the arguments to areas that you think (because of the
incestuous nature of the news medias you watch) are a slam dunk.

1- what news media do you think I watch? It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are. It is
certainly
true that *none* (and I mean zero, zip, nada, zilch-o) of the
Bush-Cheney
Cheerleaders have shown any of the points I make here are wrong, desptie
their constant yapping about it.

2- It looks like a "slam dunk" to you because the facts are so uniformly
against you. An intelligent person observes the facts and bases his
opinions on reality, not twisting & spinning (and lying) to justify his
opinions regardless of fact.



... "We" have no argument with Bush policy, just it's implementation
(at
times).


Really? You think it's a good idea to destroy the American education
system, to drive the US backwards in science, to push industry offshore
and encourage corporations to duck their taxes (as long as they make
political contributions to the right party), to destroy the environment
for the profit of a few, to eliminate Social Security (or at least, the
Security part), to drive away any country that may want to be our
allies,
to increase US dependence on foreign oil now that we're past the Hubbert
peak, to increase military spending while not accomplishing any military
goals, to leave ouor borders largely unsecured... wait that's enough for
now.

The above is a perfect example of our difference in facts, take education.
CSPAN had a congressional hearing on the No Child Left Behind Act on
Monday.
It appears from the majority of the testimony that it's working. There
were
representitives from many states. The REP from Minnisota was claiming
that
it wasn't NCLB but an initiative that they started two years before that
resulted in Minnisota test results showing such a large improvement. That
may be true but what they started before NCLB looked alot like NCLB.


the news medias you listen to are agreed.

Wrong. You assume you know what I listen to (or watch) when you clearly
don't have a clue. Since you have stated your reliance on Fox News,

I didn't state my reliance but that I thought that it's only 20% obviously
biased while I thought that the other news groups were 80% hidden agenda
biased. It's easier for me to see bias in Fox while I have to find the
news
and data that is left out of the other national news media.

stated by Vice President Cheney to be the best news source, we know that
you are both ill informed and heavily biased. Yet because they spoon
feed
you a lot of flattery about how smart you are to watch Fox, you believe
it
all.

bull****, the spoon fed news I usually don't watch, I like the panel
discussions, CSPAN and CNN

And you have nice little support group of like minded Clinton-hating
Bush-Cheney cheerleaders right here.

AGAIN, YOU set the arguments we respond to errors in data

Must make you feel good, but it
doesn't change what you are.

Your goal is to change me and my goal is to set the facts straight

DSK

P Fritz wrote:

The typical arrogance of the brain dead liebral is once again on display
"It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are."


Is it brain-dead or arrogant to have posted plain fact and proven many
right-wingers here to be wrong, and yet none of them has ever once...
not the first time... proven any of the facts I post to be incorrect?

Is it arrogant or brain-dead to continually proclaim oneself always
right, and smarter than "the other guys" when you are in fact the one
who is always wrong?


And they wonder why they keep losing elections?


I've never lost an election once.

BTW the subject here is BOATS. Do you have a boat?

DSK

DSK wrote:
P Fritz wrote:

The typical arrogance of the brain dead liebral is once again on display
"It's very likely that I am far
better informed of what is *really* going on than you are."


Is it brain-dead or arrogant to have posted plain fact and proven many
right-wingers here to be wrong, and yet none of them has ever once...
not the first time... proven any of the facts I post to be incorrect?

Is it arrogant or brain-dead to continually proclaim oneself always
right, and smarter than "the other guys" when you are in fact the one
who is always wrong?


And they wonder why they keep losing elections?


I've never lost an election once.

BTW the subject here is BOATS. Do you have a boat?

DSK

Fritz's powers are waning, he doesn't have JimH's ass to stick his nose
in for nourishment. He'll take to someone else, like NOYB soon.