4/08/2006

Get To The Public Interest Part

Recently word come out of the Plame leak investigation has George W Bush authorizing the leak of Valerie Plame's name "for the public interest"
Let me see, leaking the warrantless spying of the government is not in the public interest but leaking a covert operatives name in childish retaliation for her spouse discrediting claims made by her husband against the intelligence the administration twisted is? What was gained in this leak vs. what was lost? We know that exposing Valerie Plame's anme put all her contacts at risk. It also exposed the company she worked for, Brewster Jennings, as a CIA front company. A company that was monitoring WMD worldwide. So is it in the public interest to remove US intelligence agents who are monitoring WMD? How does that make us safer? It doesn't. It's fairly obvious that the Bush administration has no real concern for US citizens safety. I mean they ignored warnings about BinLaden's plan to strike in the US, as well as potential catastrophe in New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. So what does the Bush administration consider the public interest
"There were irresponsible and unfounded accusations being made against the administration, suggesting that we had manipulated or misused that intelligence," said White House press secretary Scott McClellan. "Because of the public debate that was going on and some of the wild accusations that were flying around at the time, we felt it was very much in the public interest that what information could be declassified be declassified. And that's exactly what we did."
"Irresponsible and unfounded"? Joseph Wilson's trip was to investigate the administrations claims about Saddam's attempt to purchase uranium from Niger. "Suggesting we manipulated or misused that intelligence"? But the Bush administration did misuse and manipulate intelligence, no one need suggest it, it has been proved. How did any of this bolster there case that the claims of the Bush administration were right? There was no purpose of leaking Plame's name other than to silence any critic of the Bush administration as to how low they would go to protect their drive for war with iraq, which they had been planning since at least September 12.
McClellan claimed that the release of information was designed to inform public debate about the war, when it had nothing to do with the public debate about the war. It didn't change the fact that Bush was using forged documents to bolster it's case for war, nor did it inform the public about anything but the Bush administration's lack of real concern with WMD falling into the hands of terrorists.
No, the Bush administration was using the war in Iraq, just as it plans on using the war in Iran (coming soon ) for it's political advantage. Wars and propaganda get the masses in a flag waving patriotic mood, which always works out to the advantage of those who are manipulating the intelligence. Iran has yet to be found in violation of any part of it's NPT obligations, but that hasn't stopped the scare mongers from saying they have. And, as an aside, the great irony is they plan on using nuclear weapons in Iran to combat Iran's peaceful nuclear program. But who could blame them for wanting to protect their country from all the oil thirsty neocons who look to take over their country?
So once again, Scotty, how does declassifying information designed to expose an operative working to monitor WMD worldwide covertly thereby protecting the citizens of this country from them falling into the wrong hands serve the public interest? Once again the Republicans have put the party before the country.

20 comments:

Lily said...

It requires the sort of leap of logic only managed with a big vodka hip flask on the 14th green. Or, multiple buds whilst brush-clearing.


I think you are nit picking, Lew. "Leak"."Declassify" Its just semantics!

Crazy, republicratochistic reptilian self -serving SEMANTICS!

"Expose" "Out" "Reveal" "Ruin" "Retaliate" "Malicious Traitorly Back-Stabbing"...all were "words of the day" at WhiteHouse.Gov.

earl bockenfeld said...

This story is from the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, Bush already has decided on war with Iran, and is thinking of using nukes. Hersh who unfortunately gets his stories right.

Bush is planning to attack Iran with a massive massive attack. He's afraid Iran is developing nukes, so the idea is to launch a devastating attack against Iran so that - get this - the Iranians rise up against their own government. Sound familiar?

From the New Yorker:

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’ ”

Sound like Iraq yet? Try this quote:

A senior Pentagon adviser on the war on terror expressed a similar view. “This White House believes that the only way to solve the problem is to change the power structure in Iran, and that means war,” he said.

A long time ago I read something about WW111 starting in the middle east and virutally ensuring the destruction of mankind. I cannot for the life of me remember where I read this, but upon seeing this post this morning, that old memory came flooding back.

Anarchy? Marital Law? Terms read in books now seem to take on meanings in this real Bush world.

Holy shit that gets yer attention! Somebody got between Bush and the football?

I think most of the world would prefer that Iran had nukes and we didn't.

Omnipotent Poobah said...

There you go parsing words again!

It's like this...he DID release the information in the public interest. He IS a member of the public and he IS interested. Besides, emporers can do all that fancy declassifyin' stuff.

Lew Scannon said...

The thing is, there is no proof that Iran has a weapons program, they are enriching uranium for peaceful purposes. But, if they are facing the possibility of being nuked by the US, why shouldn't they allowed to defend themselves. Also, what Bush doesn't realize is that Iran voted for their leader, their system is pretty much like ours, somebody other than us gets to pick out who we vote for.But the plan to attack Iran with nukes has been in place since July of last year and the propaganda started last May; one of my first posts at my other blog was about the US invading Iran.

earl bockenfeld said...

And while the military is trying to take the nuclear option off the table, the White House is refusing to budge, they want the nukes:

Late this winter, the Joint Chiefs of Staff sought to remove the nuclear option from the evolving war plans for Iran—without success, the former intelligence official said. “The White House said, ‘Why are you challenging this? The option came from you.’ ”

If Bush uses nukes against Iran, kiss every high-rise in America good-bye. Kiss our relationship with every country in the world good-bye. Not to mention, as Hersh notes, imagine the reaction from the world's 1.2 billion Muslims if we nuke their brothers. I'm not one to shy away from a confrontation, but going nuclear? And against a country that has decades of experience with international terror? Is he mad?

Here's the dilemma for the US. Iran cannot be allowed to have nukes. But George Bush cannot be allowed to be the man running the war against Iran - he's going to screw it up. Something has to give, and that give is Bush.

The only way to take on Iran responsibly - whether that means war or diplomacy or something else - is for Bush and his senior leadership to step down. America cannot afford this man as president any longer. He is, quite literally, going to get us all killed.

Since George Bush is tight with God, I gotta believe God hisownself gave the thumbs-up on this Armageddon-inducing plan to hasten the second coming. While that sounds bizarrly logical, yet ultimately insane, wouldn't that make George the Anitchrist?

I don't have enough religion in my bones to take this End Times rapture stuff seriously, but for those that do, wouldn't the George Bush Anticrist connection be plainly obvious?

I find it kinda curious, considering I'm not religious, that George Bush and his deeds seem to cause me think in religious terms more than anything else ever did, including pondering my own mortality. Maybe it's because I'm looking for a good excuse to liquidate all my possesions and go on a road trip for the rest of my life. I don't know. But, I am.

glenda said...

Exactly, Lew. There are many who think the whole Iraq with nukes in their basement theory is more from the same government propaganda machine that bought us the iraq war based on WMDs..

pinkfem said...

What scares me, Earl, is that I know how meticulously you research your information...can me and the hubby come along on that road trip with you and your'n?

earl bockenfeld said...

Nuking Iran has been discussed since last summer. But the current Hersh New Yorker article talks about the Joint Chiefs trying to remove the nuclear option in planning and the WH keeps puting it back on. Discussions are underway, groups within the Gov are fighting over this and Joint Chief staff and administration officials are talking about resigning, etc.

With Bush's credibility where it is now, there wouldn't be any UN resolutions, or any run-up to a war. I would expect, "My fellow Americans, YOUR bombers are in the air and headed towards liberating Iran. I am confident of a quick and complete victory - this time. Good night and God Bless American. You can duck and cover, I'm going to go down to the command bunker now.

Talk about making the same mistakes over and over, and then expecting a different outcome. I think the Neocons think it's now-or-never for their idiotic grand scheme. The Talibornagins are probably having a wet-dream as they sell off their stuff and gett ready for their ride-in-the-sky.

Glenda, can you drive south and get down to the tip of South America? Do you know anything about medicines for radiation sickness?

Eli Blake said...

Oh, Elizabeth:

"Malicious."

I just put up a post focusing on adjectives, and that was one that I forgot. I'll go and add it now.

sy hersh said...

"Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people...I can’t fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."

And by "people" you know I aint talking about America...eh comrades?

rev. billy bob gisher ©2005 said...

you finally get the featured link from my site you had been bitching about for so damn long, and i guess because it came from chertoff you are unappreciative. see how you are?

Bay Buchanan said...

Aw, Gisher, I still love your marauding ways... let me grab my coat.

Rory Shock said...

even a good bullshitter, and I'm not saying scottie is a good bullshitter, even a good bullshitter needs a little material to work with ... these fuckwads are no longer hurling feces up into the air to confuse the masses ... they are searching for little dingleberries of rhetoric to deperately flick ... they be goin' down ... their arguments are really silly ...

Kvatch said...

Recently word come out of the Plame leak investigation has George W Bush authorizing the leak of Valerie Plame's name "for the public interest"

Bzzzt! Thanks for playing. There are well-established procedures for declassifying information, approvals that have to be met, and criteria that have to be estalished. "The public interest" is not one of the criteria. In fact, with very rare exceptions, the only criteria usually used is the fact that the information is no longer security-sensitive.

Failure to follow the procedure or establish the basis are at best a procedural no-no. At worst, their a felony.

Ron Nasty said...

The real reason Bush outed Plame is here It wasn't because of what her husband did, it was because of something her employer did.

rev. billy bob gisher ©2005 said...

they didn't tell you? plume was a hack agent, and kept screwing up assignments. sooner or later, she was going to piss off the Chinese and get us all nuked. feel better now?

The Fat Lady Sings said...

The cabal that ID'd Iraq was formed long before Bush's elevation to emperor. The American Enterprise Institute targeted both Iran and Iraq, along with other Middle Eastern countries as part of a plan to completely re-shape the entire region. Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, Cheney – all part and parcel of the institute’s ‘think tank’ that began hawking these wars way back during Reagan’s term in office. Thank god he refused to listen. Unfortunately, messianic, intellectually challenged frat boy George did. Wanna know what these guy’s think?

"The goal is not just a new regime in Iraq. The goal is a new Middle East,'" said Raad Alkadiri, an Iraq analyst with PFC, a Washington-based energy consulting organization. "The goal has been and remains one of the main driving factors of preemptive action against Iraq."

Scare the hell out of you? Well it should. And that religious reference you’re remembering Earl is spot on. Supposedly a ‘man in a blue turban’ is supposed to be the anti-Christ and begin WWIII. How much you wanna bet ol’ Georgie boy has one tucked away somewhere?

Eli Blake said...

I just wonder,

why all the coy disguises? If it was legal, and if it was in the public interest, then why go to the trouble of telling your second in command's secretary to find a columnist that would print it and then tell them on condition of anonymity? I mean, if he really figures that telling everyone her name was in the public interest, then why not just come out and give a speech and say it?

Oh, I forgot. That is how a man with a backbone would do things. But then the men with backbones either went to Vietnam or spoke out publically against it.

Anonymous said...

Wonderful and informative web site. I used information from that site its great. »

Anonymous said...

Best regards from NY! http://www.cheap-dvd-player.info forex broker Hummer fiberglass car kit mitsubishi http://www.business-interuption-insurance.info

Graphics by Lily.Template Designed by Douglas Bowman - Updated to New Blogger by: Blogger Team
Modified for 3-Column Layout by Hoctro