ahh..the good ole days..
 

Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson should have been sent on assignment never to return

yeah...gotta' get rid of anyone who opposes the machine.

or tells the truth

so now we are supposed to believe that Val and Joe are honest and not part of the demachine?

:zz:

Dude: that mess was SO over-blown out of proportion! Real National Security fiasco:rolleyes:

Yeah, outing an American spy for political revenge. What a yawner.

it's not a good thing when officials in our own govt decide to 'out' those who are supposed to be on our side, and risking their own safety in the process. scooter libby should not have gotten a pardon. whether she was some kind of james bond type agent or not, he had no right to give out her name as tho she was a nobody.
as for whistleblowers, i liked colin cowherds take on whistleblowers. he was discussing it yesterday. he said no one likes 'blowers, because we all want things to be nice, easy, friendly-and usually 'blowers don't tell us things we want to hear, they don't give a rosie point of view. of course in his case, he was talking about jose canseco-remember how villified that guy was? but what he said turned out to be right. do you think anyone will give him an apology? no. well..that was one hell of a tangent.

at any rate, whether you've decided plame was somebody or nobody, if she was guaranteed anonymity, that should have been respected, especially by those in the executive!!!

Valerie Plame was not 'outted'

Joe Wilson lied

traitors

This is why you're awesome, because even if the good ol' days are gone, you're always here to remind us what they sounded like.

a beacon of truth in a sea of lies and distortions


















:D

um yes, she was outted. her name was released in an article by robert novak, remember? now, joe wilson might be wrong or right about why she was named-i don't know if it was retribution as he says, but she most certainly was outted.

she wasn't covert

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...eyPlayers.html


On Oct. 28, 2005, a grand jury handed down a five-count indictment in the 22-month-long investigation into whether White House officials illegally leaked the identity of Valerie Plame, a covert CIA agent...

Sorry, I thought that was WorldNetDaily :rolleyes:

btw, this is your defense on giving out the name of someone who probably should be able, and would expect, to remain anonymous? even if you want to argue semantics on whether she was 'covert' or not, she most certainly was 'classified'. politics should not be a reason to play games with peoples' lives-there was no reason to treat someone who has served their country in so cavalier a manner. they played politics with a woman who had every reason, every expectation, that no one would ever know who she was-or where she worked.

she was involved with a shell company the cia set up to make connections with people that might want to sell or obtain components for wmd's. that's the way real intelligence works.

the entire operation was exposed with her.

how was it not covert?

why is she a traitor for being exposed but those that did it aren't?

she wasn't working for any of that
at least not sincerely

i'm interested. can you stretch your point out?

what exactly are you saying?

This has to be Clinton's fault somehow...make it happen

You Steve Carltons refuse to debate the "stimlus" but are going to talk about issues of national security? When your party has considered bringing charges against CIA agents who were actually doing something productive but perhaps a little too messy for the utopian vision of the world that you all seem to have? I'd rather be "outed" by the Republicans than prosecuted by the Democrats for doing my job.

chuck-

i'm having a wtf moment. steve carlton?

the pitcher?

i'll debate stimulus, the efficacy of torture as a method to extract actionable information, or anything else.

but that reference went over my head.

Lefty, eh

Despite the theories to the contrary, it has worked pretty well for thousands of years. My wife has perfected the art. And if SO broke the code before you did then i have nothing more to say to you.

thanks. got it.

now i feel all dumb i had to ask.

usually the only USC affiliated person I would communicate with is OJ but I was impressed that you got it.

people will say anything you want them to under torture.

it's exposed countless heretics and witches. yea torture!

and it's apparently fairly satisfying to do to someone you're really pissed at. so i'd treat your wife a little better.

just hope she never joins the fbi. their agents walked out of abu gharib in disgust at the unsophisticated unproductive methods used.

and i have no excuse for missing the lefty reference. no torture required to get that out of me.

i would prefer neither of those things. secret agent men shouldn't have to worry about what party is in power, or which way the wind is blowing politically...

What exactly are you basing this statement on?

thousands of years of torture.

and 24.

DAMN IT!!!

well, it worked in anne boleyns case. even her own brother admitted under torture that they had been sleeping together-off with their heads.

If there were better methods available then why exactly havent we heard about them? I have heard plenty about the negatives yet I dont ever hear any alternatives? If there are more effective methods available why arent these being promoted as well?

Absolutely. However the irony of democrats hand wringing over the treatment of a CIA agent when many of them want to prosecute agents (for doing what their jobs required) is telling.

So THIS is the evidence you have to support your assertion that torture has "worked pretty well for thousands of years."
:zz:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200506/budiansky


"Since the prison scandals broke, many old hands in the business have pointed out that abusing prisoners is not simply illegal and immoral; it is also remarkably ineffective."

"The torture of suspects [at Abu Ghraib] did not lead to any useful intelligence information being extracted," says James Corum, a professor at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College and the author of a forthcoming book on counterinsurgency warfare. "The abusers couldn't even use the old 'ends justify the means' argument, because in the end there was nothing to show but a tremendous propaganda defeat for the United States."

Corum, who recently retired as a lieutenant colonel after twenty-eight years in the Army and Reserves, mostly in military intelligence, says that Moran's philosophy has repeatedly been affirmed in subsequent wars large and small. "Know their language, know their culture, and treat the captured enemy as a human being" is how Corum sums up Moran's enduring lesson."

honestly, I could care less whether we torture terrorists or not. I think we should get as much info out of terrorists as we can...

They are people who all they care about is killing us.

Do you think if they captured our soldiers or workers over there (which they do) they think "Oh, well it may be unethical to torture this guy... so we'll just not do it" HELL NO... they behead you on camera and then post it online and on TV.

I was very upset at CNN and the other news outlets for all the publicity they give to Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. All they are doing is feeding the Middle Eastern Terrorists more fuel for the fire. There were a lot of contractors kidnapped and beheaded over there when the Abu Ghraib situation was in the news all the time. I think it was shameful for the news outlets to make US out to be the bad guys. Anti-America propaganda used to make the world hate us a little more.

i agree.

which is why we should use effective methods.

i think so too...
by the same token, we can't torture prisoners and then take offense when they treat our men and women in a similar manner. that is not to say that we should put enemy combatants up in a hilton garden inn either.

treat in a similar manner? LMAO we cutting heads off? or hanging them off bridges and setting them on fire? Didn't think so.