Your logic eludes me on why you think Rockefeller s cofession isn t important.

Network news coverage isn’t the question. It’s whether or not anyone other than a few shouters seems to think it’s noteworthy. Rockefeller’s mention of his trip to Syria in January 2002 doesn’t seem to have kicked off any investigations, raised any eyebrows at the State Department, or gained any interest from the Justice Department.

So don’t you think all the hollering about “treason” is just a bunch of partisan hyperventilating?

You might also recall that Syria was a coalition ally in the first Gulf War, along with Saudi Arabia and other Gulf Region countries. In a 2003 story, Time magazine noted that Washington was putting feelers out to potential allies as early as late 2001. Would a Democratic senator on the intelligence committee be involved in that? I have no clue, and I’ll wager that Captain Cubicle has no idea either.

What seems to have everyone’s pants in a twist is that Rockefeller went on TV to take a shot at George Bush’s war decisions. Now Bush partisans once again avoid the substance of the remarks and choose to tar the source of those remarks with accusations of treason.

First of all I don t NEED anything from you.

Pardon me. I thought you were directing a comment to me personally. I noticed that your c omment seemed to lack important context. I helpfully offered to provide it. My mistake. Feel free to remain as you were.

To top it off, Rockefeller admitted it on national TV!

And yet, no one other than the proprietors of a few extreme right-wing websites seem at all concerned. No prosecutors. No ethics committees. Why do you think that is?

First of all I don’t NEED anything from you.

Secondly, if Rockefeller was just some schmoe freshman congressman who wanted to talk to Assad (ruler of a terrorist sponsoring nation and Baathist brother to Saddam Hussein) about the weather, that’s hunky dory. But Rockefeller is the ranking minority member of the Senate Intelligence Committee and (I’m sure you will stipulate) would be one of the people in the know about this type of thing. The fact that he was whispering in the ear of Assad ANYTHING other than “hey, nice harem you have there Bashar” “might” be a “problem” as you put it. You want to hang someone like Scooter Libby from the nearest yardarm but seem to be somewhat mute in your condemnation of Rockefeller. Smacks of hypocrisy to me. To top it off, Rockefeller admitted it on national TV!

I was directing the c omment to you, but don’t you think it a tad presumptuous to tell me what I need? You can tell me anything you want out of the goodness of your heart; but you can’t divine my needs from the contents of a post. Semantics, I know, but…

Your logic eludes me on why you think Rockefeller’s cofession isn’t important. By your logic, if you were to strangle Ruch Limbaugh and eat his liver with a nice Chianti and some Fava beans it wouldn’t be a crime unless the major news networks covered it?

Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens — leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections — then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic.

We will work closely with our coalition to deny terrorists and their state sponsors the materials, technology, and expertise to make and deliver weapons of mass destruction. We will develop and deploy effective missile defenses to protect America and our allies from sudden attack. (Applause.) And all nations should know: America will do what is necessary to ensure our nation’s security.

We’ll be deliberate, yet time is not on our side. I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world’s most destructive weapons.

Of course, none of this would give anyone any reason to think an invasion was in the works, would it?

And this is OK with you? What business did he have saying ANYTHING whatsoever (other than  you re next ) to Bashar Assad?

Here’s a little information you seem to need, zorro. United States Senators very frequently speak to heads of state in other nations. They often express opinions on the news of the day.

During the time in question, George Bush was making rather transparent threats to invade Iraq. Jay Rockefeller did nothing out of the ordinary in answering a question about it.

Now if Rockefeller had inside knowledge of specific war plans and revealed them, he might have a problem. However, that his comment on publicly available information represents “treason” is a wingnut fantasy of the first order.

And you wonder why people question your patriotism?

No, I don’t. I am well aware of the reasons. They have to do with a lack of imagination on the part of the questioner.

“Translation: Jay Rockefeller told Assad that  I think George Bush has already made up his mind to invade Iraq. ”

And this is OK with you? What business did he have saying ANYTHING whatsoever (other than “you’re next”) to Bashar Assad? And you wonder why people question your patriotism?

Just like the predictions of a greeting with flowers and candy, piles of WMD, mushroom clouds, yellowcake, aluminum tubes, Winnebagos of Mass Destruction, flying biological weapons drones, links between Al Qaeda and Iraq, fully equipped U.S. armed forces (armor), an end to major combat operations, mission accomplished, a sufficient number of battle ready Iraqi battalions…and so on.

So I know how you feel. Although it’s a tad sociopathic to think your support of the war is somehow justified now that a ‘less than predicted number’ of people were killed. But whatever helps you sleep at night.

It was, simply, the wrong thing to do.

Here are some of the titles:

1. Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) Correspondence to Iraq Embassy in the Philippines and Iraq MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
2. Possible al Qaeda Terror Members in Iraq
3. IIS report on Taliban-Iraq Connections Claims
4. Money Transfers from Iraq to Afghanistan
5. IIS Agent in Bulgaria
6. Iraqi Intel report on Kurdish Activities: Mention of Kurdish Report on al Qaeda–reference to al Qaeda presence in Salman Pak
7. IIS report about the relationship between IIS and the Kurdish Group Jalal Talibani [sic]
8. Iraqi Mukhabarat Structure
9. Locations of Weapons/Ammunition Storage (with map)
10. Iraqi Effort to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals
11. Order from Saddam to present $25,000 to Palestinian Suicide Bombers Families
12. IIS reports from Embassy in Paris: Plan to Influence French Stance on U.N. Security Council
13. IIS Importing and Hiding High Tech Computers in Violation of UN
14. IIS request to move persons, documents to private residences
15. Formulas and information about Iraq’s Chemical Weapons Agents
16. Denial and Deception of WMD and Killing of POWs
17. 1987 orders by Hussein to use chemical weapons in the Ealisan Basin
18. Ricin research and improvement
19. Personnel file of Saad Mohammad Abd Hammadi al Deliemi
20. Memo from the Arab Liaison Committee: With a list of personnel in need of official documents
21. Fedayeen Saddam Responds to IIS regarding rumors of citizens aiding Afghanistan
22. Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity
23. Improvised Explosive Devices Plan
24. IIS reports on How French Campaigns are Financed
25. French and German relationships with Iraq
26. IIS reports about Russian Companies–News articles and potential IIS agents
27. IIS plan for 2000 of Europe’s Influence of Iraq Strategy
28. IIS plans to infiltrate countries and collect information to help remove sanctions
29. Correspondence from IIS and the stations in Europe
30. Contract for satellite pictures between Russia, France and Iraq: Pictures of Neighboring Countries (Dec. 2002)
31. Chemical Gear for Fedayeen Saddam
32. Memo from the IIS to Hide Information from a U.N. Inspection team (1997)
33. Chemical Agent Purchase Orders (Dec. 2001)
34. Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team
35. Correspondence between various Iraq organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment
36. Correspondence from IIS to MIC regarding information gathered by foreign intelligence satellites on WMD (Dec. 2002)
37. Correspondence from IIS to Iraqi Embassy in Malaysia
38. Cleaning chemical suits and how to hide chemicals
39. IIS plan of what to do during UNSCOM inspections (1996)
40. Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government (Nov. 2000)

“The Iraqi document revealed that a Sudanese government official met with Uday Hussein and the director of the Iraqi Intelligence Service in 1994 and reported that bin Laden was willing to meet in Sudan. Bin Laden, according to the Iraqi document, was then “approached by our side” after “presidential approval” for the liaison was given. The former head of Iraqi Intelligence Directorate 4 met with bin Laden on February 19, 1995. The document further states that bin Laden “had some reservations about being labeled an Iraqi operative”–a comment that suggests the possibility had been discussed. (According to another Iraqi Intelligence document, authenticated by the DIA and first reported on 60 Minutes, the regime considered bin Laden an “Iraqi Intelligence asset” as early as 1992, though it’s unclear that bin Laden shared this view.)”

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/345qrbbj.asp?pg=2

an analysis of American War Strategy

Translation: Jay Rockefeller told Assad that “I think George Bush has already made up his mind to invade Iraq.”

Thus, Captain Cubicle and Jay Tea and the rest of the brain trust once again find traitors afoot.

1. Which United States Senator provided Bashar Assad with an analysis of American War Strategy in 2002?

2. How many of you moonbats want to try and spin it?

1. In Oct 2002, how many Democrats (in both House and Senate) voted to give Bush Jr the authority to use military action against Iraq?

2. And how many Democrats (in both House and Senate) voted not to give Bush authority to use military action against Iraq?

more soldiers than President Clinton s missile strikes& . that destroyed many of the WMDs that Saddam ever had.

You talk a good game, however you do not provide any proof to base your DNC talking point on. It is widely known and reported that Clinton struck a factory that turned out not to be building WMD’s and this strike occured at night when probably the only person there was the janitor.

OK, JustWankingGuy:
How can you even begin to justify WBush’s INVASION in 2003? And his loss of 2050 [and counting] troops? And the cost of I forget how many 100s of billions [and counting] of dolloars? Because Clinton fired a missle?

First, it wasnt either chem/or bio attack.
Second, it wasn’t illegal.
And Third, a lot fewer killed by WP than by HE. Should we now ban HE?

I wonder how many were killed by the illegal use of white phosphorous in Fallujah?

Considering the use of WP as a weapon against troops is not illegal for the US, I don’t care.

I do care if civilians were killed by WP. However, that has yet to be demonstrated.

How can you even begin to justify WBush s INVASION in 2003?

Well, as stated by so many people…the intelligence community throughout the 90’s and into 2003 believed he still had the WMD. They were wrong.

CONTEXT: This isn’t true.

The Congress didn’t have access to the President’s Daily Brief, a top-secret compendium of intelligence on the most pressing national security issues that was sent to the president every morning by former CIA Director George Tenet.

As for prewar intelligence on Iraq, senior administration officials had access to other information and sources that weren’t available to lawmakers.

Cheney and his aides visited the CIA and other intelligence agencies to view raw intelligence reports, received briefings and engaged in highly unusual give-and-take sessions with analysts.

Moreover, officials in the White House and the Pentagon received information directly from the Iraqi National Congress (INC), an exile group, circumventing U.S. intelligence agencies, which greatly distrusted the organization.

For an “articulate” guy, Oliver isn’t very bright.