Norman is Disappointed

It is that the intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again.

This is of course infuriating. The intelligence community undermines GW Bush only insofar as GW Bush is uninterested in actual intelligence. What will be even more galling is that the same people who engaged in the careful cherry-picking that resulted in the case for war against Iraq are now going to use their own dishonesty as a justification to ignore the latest intelligence now.

Ah yes, senior foreign policy advisor to Giuliani. It's like the GOP is trying to go from being 28-percenters to 2.8-percenters.

Yeah, what will poor Rudy have to threatan the world with, now? Can he still boast about nuking Iran within his first 100 hours as POTUS?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

NPod is a lunatic conspiracy theorist. If he was a resident of any other city, he'd be sitting in the park talking at the pigeons.

Instead, he's a Very Serious Person of the Beltway Insider clique.

Those commies in the CIA. Add them to the list of leftist professions: with journalists, teachers, scientists, lawyers, government employees of any sort--pinkos every last one. I saw one without a flag lapel pin the other day.

While the pushback against the information contained in the NIE is an interesting story, I'd like to see more investigation into the decisionmaking process that allowed this information to be made public at this time in the first place.

Keep digging Joe. It's one of the questions that you are actually uniquely qualified to get to the bottom of.

Argumentation, for many conservatives, is about proper allegiances and adherence to political correctness, never about facts. Podhoretz judges the CIA's track record not on accuracy, but fealty. Only those in the Party can be trusted, because they share the glorious vision of war without end.

It is time to do a phenomenally un-Bushian thing: Send a message to the Supreme Leader...

Well, geez, maybe.

But you know what? That's not going to happen. Not with this president. Never ever ever.

This is just a post on a blog, so I don't want to make too much of this point. But I think it's a much better use of time and column-inches to criticize the Bush administration for its irresponsibility and indifference to reality than to offer hypothetical actions that a sane president might consider. (That's a lesson that Ken Pollack should have learned a long time ago).

You saw Kevin Drum's followup, right?

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2007_12/012626.php

I cannot understand why Bush does not approach Iran, the way you sugggest. It would be his very own Nixon-to-China moment and create an actual legacy that would long outlive his presidency. A nice way to counterbalance in some small way the epic, world-historical pratfall that is Iraq. Flipping the script on Iran would be one of the greatest accomplishments of the last few decades, the one thing of which Bush could be justifiably proud if he got it done.

Of course he won't.

You know that diplomacy will never happen. Why?

This quack job has had NUMEROUS POLICY TALS WITH BUSH HIMSELF. He has a direct line into the White House's ear. They'll listen to him before they listen to some commie CIA.

To them, the NIE isn't a report meant to change our view on our Iran approach. It's a sign that the CIA can't be trusted to help do Bush's business, and thus has become a liability to minimize and mock lest they interfere with the great War plan.

congratulations on writing the same thing a glenn greenwald commentor already brought up.

Up until this very moment, George's presser has been a miserable failure and deathly boring.

And then Martha Raddatz got to ask a question. Basically, on the NIE explanation the WH is floating: George, are you crazy?; Do you really think the international community is prepared to follow you down the rabbit hole?

She just separated herself farther from the stenographers in the WH press corps. Cheers, Martha. At least one of you journalists are on the job.

My browser appears to be faulty and is not displaying the last graf of Joe's column. Somebody please remind me how this is bad for the Democrats...

Joe's buddy Peter Hoekstra also has to be extremely disappointed...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009149

Hoekstra -- who Klein relies upon for "intelligence analysis", has been consistently pushing the big lie about Iran's non-existent nuclear program. Hoekstra even went so far as to meet with a highly dubious "source" on Iran's non-existent program -- at the behest of none other than arms dealer and serial scamster Manucher Ghorbanifar.

but somehow, Klein can't be bothered to denounce serial fabricator Hoekstra...perhaps because he's the reason Klein made statement like this (h/t to sy)

"Klein: And, by the way, we're very much well liked among the young, educated Iranians. But this is not Iraq we're dealing with here. This is an ancient country, a very strong country, and a very proud country. And so, yeah, by all means, we should talk to them, but, on the other hand, we should not take any option, including the use of nuclea-....tactical nuclear weapons off the table.

Stephanopoulos: Keep that on the table?

Klein: It's absolutely stupid not to.

The idea that Klein is "more moderate" than Podheretz, given his advocacy of the use of nuclear weapons against Iran despite the fact that there has never been any credible evidence that Iran was developing nuclear weapons (hint-- the IAEA has never said that Iran had such a program) would be funny -- were it not for the fact that Klein is as much an advocate of Persian genocide as Npod.

Paul Dirks:
What amazes me is that Poppy didn't tell Jr. not to fu-k with the Intelligence Community(Or else Jr. didn't listen). I bet part of the reason it found its way out was in payback for Valerie Plame.

Sy:
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day? It's good though that Martha is finally doing her job. Maybe it is a sign that the media finally realizes that the emperor has no clothes.

From the first comment at NPod's place:
It is my gut impression that the NIE is staffed by “elites” who graduated from Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and other so-called universities of distinction. These people are very dangerous. A very high percentage of them, maybe even the majority, embrace a deceitful pacifism.

Everyone knows the Defense and Intelligence departments of the US consist of Commie Pacifist Libtard's... These people really do live in another world.

I bet Robert Gates has something to do with this. It seems before, the Pentagon was was siphoning crappy intelligence into the system. Apparently Gates put an end to this. All sorts of cute games were going on before, including leaking unvetted intelligence to the press.

All sorts of cute games were going on before, including leaking unvetted intelligence to the press.

I wonder how many times Hoekstra assured Klein that the Iran intelligence was reliable?

Isn't it about time that "reporters" disclose the nature and extent of the false information that is consistently given to them by their sources? Because its this kind of false information that got us into the Iraq war, and is keeping us there -- and as long as the Joe Kleins of the press continue to repeat the lies of people like Hoekstra while protecting them, Americans and Iraqis will continue to die in Iraq.

Maybe Klein thinks that "access" to liars is worth all that American and Iraqi blood -- but the rest of us recognise exactly what he is doing -- facilitating the slaughter of thousands in order to keep his job.

Here is the way the Pentagon intel shop operated during the runup to the Iraq War:

The OSP had access to a huge amount of raw intelligence. It came in part from "report officers" in the CIA's directorate of operations whose job is to sift through reports from agents around the world, filtering out the unsubstantiated and the incredible. Under pressure from the hawks such as Mr Cheney and Mr Gingrich, those officers became reluctant to discard anything, no matter how far-fetched. The OSP also sucked in countless tips from the Iraqi National Congress and other opposition groups, which were viewed with far more scepticism by the CIA and the state department.

There was a mountain of documentation to look through and not much time. The administration wanted to use the momentum gained in Afghanistan to deal with Iraq once and for all. The OSP itself had less than 10 full-time staff, so to help deal with the load, the office hired scores of temporary "consultants". They included lawyers, congressional staffers, and policy wonks from the numerous rightwing thinktanks in Washington. Few had experience in intelligence.

"Most of the people they had in that office were off the books, on personal services contracts. At one time, there were over 100 of them," said an intelligence source. The contracts allow a department to hire individuals, without specifying a job description.

As John Pike, a defence analyst at the thinktank GlobalSecurity.org, put it, the contracts "are basically a way they could pack the room with their little friends".

My bet is that one of the things sucked up was the Niger Uranium story and this whole operation was what Cheney and his office were so nervous to conceal during the Plame affair. If so, they needn't have worried. The lapdog press was running full steam ahead away from this story.

So why does Wolfowitz keep popping out of his rat hole (i.e. the disarmament committee assignment)? Perhaps Rice is tossing a conciliatory bone to Cheney, but I don't know why she bothers.

Joe, I agree with you on this post.

But you still need to fix the FISA mess you created.

I forgot all about that interview Joe gave where he advocated nuking Iran. Thanks for reminding me about that.

Ahem. Thank Mr. Swift.

Let The Games Begin

Journalism 101

Glenn Greenwald and other liberals in the blogosphere have been criticizing respected Time reporter Joe Klein for writing a piece about attempts to reform the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that had a few minor factual errors and accused the Democrats of giving "terrorists the same legal protections as Americans." Time's Managing Editor Rick Stengel eventually responded to the criticism by appending a "correction" to the piece that said, "In the original version of this story, Joe Klein wrote that the House Democratic version of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) would allow a court review of individual foreign surveillance targets. Republicans believe the bill can be interpreted that way, but Democrats don't." That should have ended the controversy right there, but Greenwald persisted, writing, "All Time can say about this matter is that Republicans say one thing and Democrats claim another. Who is right? Is one side lying? What does the bill actually say, in reality? That's not for Time to say. After all, they're journalists, not partisans." Now, like Joe Klein, I have neither the time nor legal background to figure out who's right, but I do know a little something about journalism since I once saw All the President's Men and I worked on my high school newspaper, so I think it would be helpful if bloggers knew the 20 basic "Rules of Journalism" so that they won't pester Joe Klein and other professional journalists too much about journalistic ethics in the future. If any real journalists think I've written something that is inaccurate, let me know and I'll just append a correction way down at the end of the post or delete the inaccuracy altogether and hopefully no one will notice.

The Rules of Journalism

1. Journalists must be completely objective. This is the most important rule of journalism. Objectivity means not having any opinion or feelings whatsoever no matter what the circumstances. This rule was best expressed in a line I recently quoted from Washington Post columnist David Broder, the dean of American journalism, about his response President Kennedy's assassination: "As an ordinary man, I wanted leave the scene, hide somewhere, and weep," Broder said. "But I managed to calm myself and to report the event in the most objective way." As I explained in my earlier piece, "Broder refused to take sides after the President was killed. Was he for the assassination or against it? It was impossible to tell from his reporting. No matter what his personal feelings might have been, as a reporter he had to be objective when it came to whether killing Kennedy was a good thing or a bad thing."

2. There are two sides to every story and a journalist must give both sides equal weight even if he or she knows one side is completely false. Weighing one side against the other violates a journalist's objectivity. (See Rule No. 1.)

3. The only exception to Rules 1 and 2 is that during wartime journalists must be patriotic and not write anything that might undermine the government or the war effort or lower morale. Wearing a flag pin on one's lapel is a good way to demonstrate you are adhering to this rule. Reporters should always remember that they are Americans first, journalists second and human beings third.

4. Because most journalists are liberals, they have to bend over backwards to consider the conservative viewpoint in their articles so that it all evens out in the end. (See Rule No. 1.)

5. If you criticize a Republican you must also criticize a Democrat. If you criticize President Bush, you must also criticize President Clinton.

6. If both liberals and conservatives criticize you, that must mean you are doing something right. If moderates criticize you, too, it probably means that they are leaning one way or the other and aren't really moderate at all. The more people who say you are wrong, the more objective, and hence right, you are. (See Rule No. 1.)

7. Journalists should avoid using anonymous sources unless those sources have a reasonable fear of retribution or have political agendas that would be compromised if their identities were revealed or if refusing to grant them anonymity would limit the journalist's access and give his or her competitors an unfair advantage, which could damage the journalist's career.

8. Journalists must always protect their anonymous sources no matter what those sources' agendas might be and even if those sources misled them or were using them to get back at a political opponent. As Richard Cohen has pointed out, using journalists to publish leaks to assassinate the character of an anonymous source's political opponents is a time-honored tradition and the life-blood of Washington journalism. A journalist's job is to facilitate what Cohen calls "the dark art of Washington politics" not pass judgment on it, which would compromise his or her objectivity. (See Rule No. 1.)

9. Rule No. 8 is so important that journalists should be willing to go to jail to protect anonymous sources, unless someone pressures those sources to sign a waiver or the reporter thinks going to jail would just be too much of a hardship to endure. Besides, you can't do any reporting when you are in jail.

10. Journalists should be as accurate as possible, but sometimes there is not enough time to dot every i and cross every t. Getting the story first is more important than getting it completely right because mistakes can always be fixed with "Corrections" in very small print in another edition, in online "updates" or buried in the "Letters to the Editor" section, which no one ever reads.

11. Journalists should not give money to any political campaigns, participate in any political activities or even vote. Former ABC political director Mark Halperin and Washington Post editor Len Downie don't vote, which is why they are so trustworthy and so respected by other journalists. Just as Catholic priests give up sex, journalists should give up their right to participate in the political process so that they will not have to think too much about whether one side or another is correct. Thinking too hard threatens their objectivity. (See Rule No. 1.)

12. Journalists should not censor a story unless the government or a big advertiser asks them to.

13. Because space in newspapers and magazines is limited there is no room for ideas that are too far out of the mainstream or that challenge the conventional wisdom unless the ensuing controversy would sell more papers or magazines.

14. Plagiarism is strongly discouraged and anyone caught plagiarizing should be fired immediately and never be allowed to work as a journalist again, unless they are prominent or distinguished or a close personal friend of the editor and have a really good explanation, in which case they should be given a second chance or even a third.

15. What someone says is not so important as how they said it, what they were wearing when they said it, or their body language. As long as the details are accurate, it makes no difference how trivial those details are. Journalists should just report the facts, especially facts that give their story "color," and not worry about how important those facts are. (See Rule No. 1.)

16. Reporting on people's personal lives should be avoided unless the Drudge Report or the National Enquirer has already written about it, in which case you can report that they reported on it, which is not the same as reporting on it yourself.

17. Every prominent person should be assumed to be not gay unless there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary or they are dead, and usually not even then.

18. Victims of sexual crimes should never be named, but those accused of sexual crimes should be named even if their reputations are ruined because they probably wouldn't have been arrested if they weren't guilty of something. Shaming people accused of sexual crimes on television is a good way to discourage other people from committing such crimes, even if it leads to unfortunate consequences.

19. Ruining people's lives is generally frowned upon and should be avoided if at all possible unless the public has a right to know. A journalist must be completely dispassionate and not worry too much about the impact of the story they are writing on the people they are writing about or on the world in general as that would compromise their objectivity. (See Rule No. 1.)

20. If someone criticizes a journalist's reporting, especially if it is a blogger, the best response is to dig in one's heels and deny there is a problem, attack the critic as biased, concede a minor point or claim the criticism itself is trivial. A journalist must defend his or her credibility at all costs because without credibility, a journalist is no journalist at all.

http://jonswift.blogspot.com/2007/11/journalism-101.html

Chutzpah Joe Klein thinks war with Iran is a bad idea. Wow, what an insight! This is the kind of incisive analysis that Time Magazine delivers week after week. This is how we pissed away $1 trillion dollars in Iraq. Time Magazine was leading the cheerleaders for WAR, WAR, WAR, when Iraq looked like a "cakewalk." Where were you then Joe? Do you have any more great news from Anbar province? When is the Iraq victory special edition of Time coming out?

Just go away.

This guy is either A) lying, or B) terminally incurious about getting the truth before fearmongering about "World War III":

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/060226.php

"It is time to do a phenomenally un-Bushian thing: Send a message to the Supreme Leader--not the stooge Ahmadinejad--and say, "OK, we were wrong..."

Joe, how about you say, "OK, I was wrong..." in detail, and with apologies to the people who were right, without your usual sneers, and in the same forums that the wrongs were done. Your good advice for Bush is also good advice for yourself.

Looks like the administration is tying itself in knots:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/bush-never-learned-of-nie/

I think that the NIE's release to the public was a wise choice by whoever authorized it.

The NIE is news with a vengeance and if it does nothing other than whip the remainder of Cheney's Dark Forces into their kennels, a great service has been performed.

Imagine what would have happened had we attacked Iran and the ME exploded beyond our (and Israel's) control. We would not only not be getting our of Iraq, which is the wish of the American people, but we would be dragged DEEP into a region wide war. A war like that would take a draft and the fielding of three to five million troops to enforce a peace durable enough to keep oil flowing.

THEN, to hear of the NIE afterward?!?!

I agree, Joe.

Just say "Ok, we were wrong."

Fromthe ThinkProgress link:

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/bush-never-learned-of-nie/

At a press briefing this morning, President Bush said he was told by his Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell “in August” that “we have some new information” regarding Iran’s nuclear program. But Bush asserted “he didn’t tell me what the information was”:

This should come as a surprise to no one. Everyone knows that GWB is incapable of listening to intelligence briefings in August.
What with all that brush to clear and such!

Joe, the next time you're tempted to get with Pete Hoekstra on a national security issue, call these guys instead. That's what they're there for:

Appearing on the BBC World news program, Joseph Cirincione (...the director of nuclear policy at the Center for American Progress, said that the US military and intelligence agencies were reasserting themselves as President Bush enters the final year of his administration. Cirincione agreed with the BBC host that intelligence had "rediscovered its spine."

"And they of course are now dealing with a lame-duck president...and you're seeing first the military reassert the integrity of its institutions, and now the intelligence agencies," he continued. "So both are now saying 'go slow on Iran, there is no good military option here.' And now, there isn't really an imminent threat. We have time to let diplomacy work."

Cirincione also suggested a change in strategy from intelligence community leadership since the publication of the 2005 NIE, which found that Iran was determined to acquire a nuclear weapon.

"Well, I think what you've seen is a change in the leadership of the intelligence agencies since the 2005 assessment, and this may be a very good sign that the agencies are now more professional," he continued. "The leadership is protecting the analysts from the kinds of political pressure that distorted the intelligence assessments before the Iraq war and up until very recently."

Pelosi Peace Plan: Give Iran, Chavez, Castro, Pyongyang, and Petra Kelley's rotting Red Brigades corpse the benefit of the Kos Klowns Visit The SEC doubt, SCUDs and EFPs notwithstanding vital NY Timid screwtiny.

CNN queries for Clixons rule!

BTW, has Sgt Smurfa changed his Surge View again today?

Oh well.

HILLARY HAPPENS.

Interesting. In that Raw Story clip, about six minutes in, the Center for American Progress analyst is saying exactly what the stories I linked to above are saying (except for the Plame affair stuff). Finally, we've got some adults in charge. Seems like it was quite a wrestling match to get here, though.

I said "about six minutes in." Make that four and a half minutes.

Yes, by all means McGovernite mole DC libs, issue Iran that coveted Get Out Of Nuke Scrutiny Free card, just in time for Hanukkah.

Nice peace plan!

"The Iranians have been cooperating in Iraq the past few months."

Have they stopped hitting their wives, and offing students and journalists too?

You should have I CAN'T SEE BEYOND THE CASH BAR stamped on your press pass.

CNN MeetUps for Hillary rule!

Robert Gates and Michael Hayden are "McGovernite mole DC libs." Riiiight.

Can a reporter perhaps ask Rudy if he agrees with his main foreign policy adviser that the CIA deliberately leaked info to "undermine" Bush?

Robert Gates and Michael Hayden are "McGovernite mole DC libs." Riiiight.

You think THEY wrote this odious, buck passing "report"?

You may want to update your SF-171, from Clerk to Clairvoyant.

I don't need no SF-171. I just have some books and the intertubes...

From Editor and Publisher's Greg Mitchell:

Press reports so far have suggested that the belated release of the National Intelligence Estimate yesterday throwing cold water on oft-repeated claims of a rampant Iranian nuclear weapons program has deeply embarrassed, or at least chastened, public officials and policymakers who have promoted this line for years. Gaining little attention so far: Many in the media have made these same claims, often extravagantly, which promoted (deliberately or not) the tubthumping for striking Iran...

As I've warned in this space for years, too many in the media seemed to fail to learn the lessons of the Iraqi WMD intelligence failure -- and White House propaganda effort -- and instead, were repeating it, re: Iran. This time, perhaps, we may have averted war, with little help from most of the media. In this case, it appears, the NIE people managed to resist several months of efforts by the administration to change their assessment. If only they had stiffened their backbones concerning Iraq in 2002.

For the rest of today and this week, media critics will be offering up all sorts of reminders of the near-fatal claims by many in the press relating to Iranian nukes. Sure to get attention are the scare stories in the summer of 2005 after "proof" of an Iranian nuke program somehow surfaced on a certain laptop, proudly unveiled by offiicials and bought by many in the media then as firm evidence...

Has Howard Kurtz had a lobotomy?:

Howard Kurtz: I would just make a note about the attribution in the lead: "senior intelligence officials said Monday." They may well be right. But some intelligence officials were obviously flat wrong about Saddam's WMD.

Can't he like, wheel his chair over to Walter Pincus's cube? Don't they have a cafeteria where, some time over the past four years, he and Walter could have had a conversation?

Bottom Line:

The PLO sycophant libs won't be appeased until some nut hatch detonates a nuke in Tel Aviv, or Toulouse, or Tacoma.

After all, masochism IS what they do best at DNC HQ.

Is anyone at Time going to respond to this?

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/04/time/index.html

"Let's just ponder for a second how lowly Time's behavior here is. It refused the requests of two sitting members of Congress, both of whom are members of the Intelligence Committees and have played a central role in drafting the pending FISA legislation, to correct Klein's false statements in Time itself. What kind of magazine smears its targets with patently false statements and then blocks them from responding?

Making matters much worse is the fact that, as we now know, Klein's false statements about the House Democrats' FISA bill was basically ghost-written by GOP Rep. Pete Hoekstra. Klein never quoted a single Democratic proponent of that bill -- either in his original false article, his multiple Swampland posts, nor the "correction" posted by Time.

The whole episode was a GOP-fueled smear on Democrats. Yet Time nonetheless refused to allow Congressional Democrats with the greatest knowledge of this matter to bring to the attention of Time's readers how false Klein's statements were, and how false the subsequent "corrections" were. To describe Time's behavior is to illustrate how profoundly unethical it is.

Third, at least 100 individuals wrote letters to Time's editors protesting Klein's article and responding to its claims. I know this because that's how many people (at least) cc'd me on their letters, forwarded them to me, and/or copied their Letters to the Editor in the Comment section here. Managing Editor Rick Stengel's voice mail and email box overflowed with responses.

Nonetheless, Time -- while publishing 15 separate letters on a whole array of topics in its print edition this week -- did not see fit to publish a single letter about the Klein falsehoods. At every step, they sought to hide from their readers -- and continue to hide from their readers -- just how outrageous and severe were Klein's false statements by suppressing all responses."

Is anyone at Time going to respond to this?

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/04/time/index.html

No.

This has been another edition of easy answers to easy questions.

Listen to the way Bush has been describing the need to confront Iran lately. He wants to:
"prevent[ing] them from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." Could it be he already knew what was in the NIE? We're not stopping a development program, we're stopping 'knowledge'.

So how does Bush plan to prevent Iran from gaining 'knowledge'?

Fortunately, the pentagon has a plan: Flights of B-2 and stealth bombers dropping millions of Chinese made toys (acquired from WalMart in a no-bid contract). The lead paint will make the Iranians too mentally impaired to develop knowledge about anything.

Since we had to sign up, is anyone gonna finally ban QH?

Here you go, Joe. I'm sure you lost your copy of this letter from Senator Feingold last week when everyone was pointing out your blatant lies about FISA. The Chicago Tribune published it for you:
Joe Klein criticizes the Democrats on Iraq, even though we are acting on the demands of the American people that we bring the Iraq war to a close ("What others are saying," Editorial, Nov. 28).And Klein calls the Democrats' position on reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act "well beyond stupid" but without getting his facts straight. Contrary to Klein's claims, Democrats want to require individualized warrants only when the government targets Americans, not foreigners overseas. Klein is also flat out wrong to suggest there is "broad, bipartisan agreement" on new surveillance powers. In fact, the administration and its allies adamantly oppose even modest proposals to protect law-abiding Americans who are swept up in this new, essentially warrantless surveillance. Only after the president's illegal wiretapping program was publicly revealed was the administration forced to comply with the law. Now the administration is demanding broad new powers that could allow it to collect countless communications. Congress must make sure that the new law requires independent court oversight and protects innocent Americans' privacy. That's not "stupid"; that's our sworn and solemn duty. U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold(D-Wis.)

We get it, Joe. Versaille doesn't have to answer to Feingold, Holt, Conyers, or Reyes. This is the way things work in Potomia, huh?

I honestly don't know the answer to this, but something to think about. What if Feingold, Holt, Conyers, and Reyes were Republicans? Would you answer them then? Be honest with yourself. If you would, what does that say?

What does that say about the state of our national discourse?

It is amazing that Podhoretz gets any attention at all - much less taken seriously by anyone. Of course, the lunatic fringe of the anti-reality types, embodied by dead-ender posters like "Question Hillary (tm)", suck that stupid nonsense up while acting like traitors by accusing those they disagree with as being traitors. It's an old story.

Anyway, nothing wrong with this column, but Klein/TIME have to fix the FISA mess they made.

It's not right. They need to do the right thing and set the record set with a lengthy column, color glossy photos and a new headline.

I wonder if we might figure out how to have a strike here.

What about if we all post Glenn Greenwald's column, or the link to his column, or Feingold or Holt's letters to Time over and over until they respond?

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2007/12/04/time/index.html

That's gotta be embarrassing, passing along false information to the public in order to advance an agenda and then the truth comes out.

Can you imagine how Hadley must've felt Joe? And how pathetic is Pod, casting aspersions on the truth teller for undermining the liar's murderous plot? And I would have gotten away with it, if not for these meddling kids!

I'll bet you're chuckling at Pod's lack of integrity, huh Joe?

To the editors of TIME Magazine

Joe Klein recently criticized the RESTORE Act ("The Tone Deaf Democrats," Nov. 21, 2007), claiming that it "would require the surveillance of every foreign-terrorist target's calls to be approved by the FISA court." This is incorrect. The RESTORE Act creates "basket" authorizations to allow widespread surveillance of foreign powers (such as Al Qaeda) and their agents. To prevent a repeat of the Bush Administration's extra-legal warrantless wiretapping program, the court must approve the parameters of the group surveillance to ensure that warrants are still obtained for Americans' communications. But no court orders are required for surveillance of foreigners reasonably believed to be outside of the country. The bill simply will not make our intelligence agencies get thousands of warrants for foreign terrorists.

The RESTORE Act's blend of executive branch flexibility, court approval, and congressional oversight is calibrated to ensure that the fight against terrorism is conducted in an efficient and constitutional manner. We would hope that Mr. Klein, having studied the RESTORE Act further, is no longer so confused as to continue to characterize our system of constitutional checks and balances as "well beyond stupid."

John Conyers, Jr. and Silvestre Reyes

Norman is Disappointed

I'd be disapointed, too, if I had to continute living in a world where beyond stupid tone-deaf Democrats repeatedly stumbled on National Defense.

The subject of a very wonderful and distinct I thank you for
continuing excellence Thank you
=========================================================================
شباب ليبيا

ريال مدريد
ميلان
يوفنتوس
الجزيرة الرياضية
فالنسيا
مانشستر يونايتد
صور سيارات همر
سيارات مرسيدس
صور سيارات مرسيدس
فيديو سيارات
سيارات تفحيط
تفحيط كامرى
تفحيط جديد
لقطات تفحيط
حوادث
حوادث سيارات
تفحيط جديد
صور حلوة
صور حب
صور رومانسيه
صور اطفال
صور بنات
صور بنات رسوم
صور حيوانات
صور حيونات
اجمل صور
صور للماسنجر
صور متحركة للماسنجر
صور حلوة للماسنجر
صور رومانسية للماسنجر
ابتسامات للماسنجر
غرف نوم اطفال
غرف نوم
غرف نوم
عبارات ترحيب
كلمات ترحيب
صور ترحيب
صور ترحيبيه
صور للترحيب
صور ترحيب
صور ترحيبيه
صور للترحيب
مقاطع اغاني جوال
مقاطع بلوتوث
نغمات
مقاطع فيديو
كلمات ترحيب
ليبيانا
ليبيانا
ليبيانا
ليبيانا
bmw
صور سيارات
سيارات
تحميل فيديو
google video
صور كاكا
ثيمات الجوال
ثيمات نوكيا
ثيمات n70
ثيمات n73
تحميل ثيمات
ثيمات جوال
theme
Windows Live Messenger
خلفيات للجوال
نغمات للجوال
نغمات
تحميل ثيمات للجوال
صور للجوال
العاب للجوال
ثيمات رياضية للجوال
ثيمات للجوال
C.Ronaldo
باب الحارة
سنوات الضياع
نكت
مسلسل نور
prison break تحميل
messi
Kaka
منتدى الكساد
توم وجيري
عدنان ولينا
Youtube Download
AlWafi
Office
نقار الخشب
هايدي
كونان
الجاسوسات
سبيستون
kaspersky
infiniti
سيارة انفنتى
car
خلفيات موبايل
صور رمزية متحركة
صور ورود حمراء
صور هيفاء
نانسي عجرم
هيفاء وهبي
روبي
صور روبي
صور قلوب
نكت ليبية
وصفات طبخ منال العالم
مطبخ منال العالم
منال العالم
منال العالم
وصفات منال
مطبخ منال
اكلات منال العالم
اطباق منال
طبخات منال
طبخ منال
وصفات مطبخ منال
سلطات منال
معجنات منال
اكلات منال
اطباق منال العالم
اكلات منال العالم
منال mbc
طبخ بالصور
اكلات
سلطات
وصفات طبخ
طبخات بالتوست
طبخات السمك
طبخات حلويات
طبخ عربي
طبخ مصري
طبخ مصرى
طبخات سريعة
طبخ حواء
طبخات سهلة
طبخات سهله
كتب الطبخ
كتب طبخ
وصفات الطبخ
وصفات طعام
وصفات اكل
حلويات
وصفات حلويات
الحلويات
حلويات مغربية
حلويات جزائرية
حلويات شميشة
حلويات شرقية
حلويات شرقيه
حلويات سورية
حلويات عربيه
نغمات mp3
تحميل نغمات
نغمات جوال
نغمات للجوال
تنزيل نغمات
نغمات للموبايل
برامج الجوال
كعك العيد
سلطات لبنانية
سلطات رمضان
سلطات مغربية
اكلات عربيه
صور اكلات
اكلات شعبيه
اكلات مصريه
اكلات عراقيه
اكلات لبنانيه
اكلات شعبية
اكلات سريعة
اكلات شرقية
اكلات لبنانية
اكلات شهية
المعجنات
معجنات
كيكات
البسكويت
البقلاوة
الكنافه
طبخ
منال
اكلات
حلويات
بسبوسة بالقشطة
بسبوسة
كيك
حلى
عصير
الجبن
صور غرف نوم
غرف نوم اطفال
غرفة نوم
غرف نوم
غرف اطفال
غرف الاطفال
furniture
decor
dicor
seedecor
ديكور حدائق
الجبن
nero
Nero
nero vista
nero vista
nero free
nero 6
nero express
ايقونات
ايقونات للمنتديات
ايقونات xp
ايكونات متحركة
ايقونات رموز
صور ايقونات
ايقونات جميله
ايقونات رومنسيه
ايقونات ترحيب
Windows Live Messenger
مسجات ليبية
مسجات رومانسية
مسجات روعة
مسجات حب
مسجات عتاب
مسجات جديدة
مسجات ليبية
رسائل رومانسية
مسجات مصرية
مسجات سعودية
مسجات اماراتية
مسجات بحرينية
مسجات تونسية
مسجات سورية
مسجات شبابية
مسجات مغربية
مسجات جزائرية
مسجات سودانية
مسجات قطرية
مسجات لبنانية
مسجات يمنية
مسجات عراقية
مسجات فلسطينية
مسجات العيد
مسجات ليبية
مسجات غرامية
مسجات فراق
مسجات كويتية
رسائل غزل
رسائل حب
مسجات غزل
رسائل شوق
مسجات شوق
مسجات فراق
مسجات غرام
مسجات صداقة
مسجات حزن
مسجات عشق
مسجات مقالب
مسجات جوال
مسجات وداع
مسجات اسلامية
مسجات مدح
رسائل الوسائط
مسجات عاطفية
مسجات نقال
مسجات صلح
مسجات انجليزية
مسجات تسامح
مسجات الصباح
مسجات نكت
مسجات ضحك
مسجات حلوة
مسجات الحزن
مسجات موبايل
مسجات الجوال
مسجات للموبايل
مسجات للحبيبة
ضحك,
مضحكه,
مضحكة,
مضحك,
ليبيا,
شباب ليبيا,
شباب ليبيا
منتديات شباب ليبيا
منتدى شباب ليبيا
منتدي شباب ليبيا
شبكة شباب ليبيا,
منتديات,
منتديات,
منتديات ليبية,
احاديث نبوية,
احاديث الرسول,
السيرة النبوية,
برامج اسلامية,
صوتيات اسلامية,
اناشيد اسلامية,
اناشيد اسلاميه,
خواطر,
الخواطر,
غرائب وعجائب,
غرائب,
غرائب العالم,
غرائب وعجائب,
غرائب العالم,
غرائب الصور,
الشعر الشعبى,
الشعر الشعبي,
قصص,
روايات,
حكايات
اللغات الاجنبية,
تعلم الفرنسية,
تعلم الانجليزية,
الطب
تقنية الاسنان,
طب الاعشاب,
اناقة وجمال,
اناقة الرجال,
الاسرة والمجتمع,
طبخ,
الطبخ,
مطبخ,
طبخ عربي,
تعليم الطبخ,
مطبخ حواء,
صور اثاث,
ديكور,
decor,
الديكورات
مقاطع كورة,
مقاطع كوره,
كليبات كورة,
مقاطع فديو,
الدوري الليبي,
المصارعة,
الكرة العربية,
كرة القدم,
الدوري الاسباني,
الدوري الانجليزي,
الدوري الايطالي,
اخبار المشاهير,
اخبار الفنانين,
صور فنانات,
صور المشاهير,
افلام اجنبية,
مسلسلات اجنبية,
تحميل افلام,
افلام عربية,
تحميل مسلسلات عربية,
افلام كرتون,
برامج,
برامج نت
برامج الفيديو,
اخبار التكنولوجيا,
شبكات الحاسوب,
تطوير المواقع,
تطوير المنتديات,
محادثة,
صور,
صور,
خلفيات,
خلفيات,
برامج الجوال,
كليبات جوال,
نغمات نوكيا,
نغمات عربية,
نغمات اسلامية,
العاب الجوال,
مسجات,
رسائل
رسايل
مسجات sms
mms مسجات
الفضائيات,
شفرات,
كروت الساتلايت,
الرسيفرات,
خلفيات للجوال,
نغمات اجنبية,
برامج الجوال الجيل الثالث,
ترحيب
games
online games
free games
free online games
play games
Make Money
العاب فلاش
تحميل العاب فلاش
العاب فلاش
طيور الجنة
اناشيد طيور الجنة
صور ورد
صور متحركه
صور الحب جديدة
صور كرتون
صور ماسنجر
صور حلوة
صور شباب
صور جميله
صور روعه
صور حزينه
صور مضحكه
صور رائعة
صور رعب
رسايل
صور بنات صغار

Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
Sesli Sohbet
SesliSohbet
Kameralı Sohbet
Kameralı chat
Görüntülü sohbet
Görüntülü chat
Sesli Chat
Kameralı Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat Siteleri
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
Kameralı Chat
Sohbet
Sesli Chat paneli
Kameralı Sohbet,
görüntülü chat,
kameralı chat,
video chat,
görüntülü chat programı,
Kameralı chat programı,
live chat,
yazılı chat,
canlı chat,
camera chat
Sohbetetikla.com
Gelin Bura
Tirtikla Bura
TIRTIKLA
TIRTIKLA Sitemap
Kameralı chat
Sesli Sohbet
SesliSohbet
SpeakyChat Odaları
Sesli Chat panelleri
kameralı sohbet
kameralı chat
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
Sesli Chat
SohbeteTıkla
Tırtıkla
SesliŞehir
Sesli sohbet Siteleri