From The Register ( http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/55/33006.html ): DARPA's dreaded Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, formerly administered by convicted felon and Republican hero John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame, may have been de-clawed by Congress, but it lives on at the state level in an incarnation called, ominously, the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange). There's a lot to dislike in this new end-run around Congressional oversight. For one thing there are federal dollars behind it -- four million from the Department of Justice -- which makes it clear that the Feds will be expecting a payoff. (...) The states of Alabama, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Ohio, and Utah have signed on to the scheme. Residents of other states are safe, for now.57 responses total.
In other news, a virus attack crippled the visa issuing system of the US State dept. The computers shut down also had a list of 78,000 terror suspects!!! 78,000!!! Where did they get so many suspects?? JetBlue?? Or Ebay?
Yes, Poindexter was convicted, but I read that his conviction was overturned on appeal. He' reprehensible for any number of other reasons.
hrm... makes me wonder how we can go about getting the state off of this thing.
I'm not sure it's as bad as TIA -- the website is vague, but it's possible this is only going to have things like warrants and arrest records that are already available to law enforcement. Regardless, I've written my state senator and state rep to make sure they're aware of this program, and to ask them to look into it.
Has anyone heard the latest news on the CIA agent that was exposed? I haven't been able to catch the news.
FBI investigating, White House still dragging its feet.
The kerfuffle has, understandably, died down since it was based on nothing. We are awaiting the next accusation from the desperate Democrats.
This response has been erased.
klg, I'm curious as to how you categorize it as "nothing"? Is it because it's an accusation against a Republican administration?
Probably. If it had happened under Clinton he'd be screaming for an independent prosecutor.
Mr. murph, It is nothing simply because of the facts. Ms. Plame is a desk jockey, not an undercover agent. The entire meaningless "incident" was ginned up by her partisan, publicity-seeking husband based solely upon 1/2 truths and non-sensical accusations. If it were not thus, don't you think it would still rate front page coverage (in the liberal press, of course!)? And please, Mr. gull, you ought to know that we are not the screaming type. klg
From what I've heard, while she personally was a "desk jockey", when her identity and the identity of her front company was revealed it also compromised the identities of field agents she was in contact with.
I suppose it's currently trendy for Republicans to pooh-pooh violations of federal law...
Let's call it what it was - treason, and from the White House.
Actually, let's *not* call it "treason from the White House" until there's a lot more proof about what actually happened and how. "Treason" is a very serious and specific crime -- it's also a spectacularly loaded term, which is no doubt why there's such a temptation to assign it to one's political adversaries. I'm not qualified to judge whether a serious crime was committed in the revelation of Valerie Plame's CIA operative status (and I seriously doubt most of the Grexers expressing strong opinions one way or the other are any more qualified, however many news wire stories they've read or talking heads they've listened to..) In my opinion serious charges, backed up by a strong prima facie case that an illegal act was committed, deserve a serious investigation. Until we know a lot more, however, the word "treason" remains just Rane's wishful thinking.
This response has been erased.
If klg's resp:11 was accurate, then the Justice Department would have dismissed the CIA's request for an investigation into the outing of Wilson's wife.
I do think it's "interesting" that the same Republicans who insisted Janet Reno couldn't carry out a fair investigation of Clinton see no problem with Ashcroft investigating Bush. My personal feeling is that no one high up in the White House will be affected by this because if any of them are involved, Ashcroft will cover it up. There's no way he'd do anything that would hurt a fellow conservative, especially not his boss.
I don't see how it can't be called "treason". Espionage by a citizen is treason. Everyone seems to acknowledge that an undercover CIA agent was outed. Novak says it came from the White House. I agree that the full story must still be told, but the question only is *who* committed treason.
Espionage by a citizen may be treason, but that's not what happened here.
My, my, Mr. rcurl. Whatever happened to your insistance that one is innocent until proven guilty in court - or, perhaps, a double standard applies when the accused is not a Democrat? (Flippity-flop. Flippity-flop.) klg (And, Mr. scott, If you would be so kind as to identify the "federal law" which you feel was violated. Thank you very much.)
This response has been erased.
What's wrong with you, klg? Of course everyone is innocent for now. I never said they weren't. I am only stating that treason has occurred. (I also did not say that espionage has occurred....)
This response has been erased.
(Mr. klg, please do your own homework. I'll give you a hint, though: section 421... you must do the rest.)
Mr. scott, Thank you for the citation. We have located the section and read it. (Have you??) "Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert agent's intelligence relationship to the United States. . . ." As one may plainly see, there are several conditions that must be met for the disclosure to be illegal. We presume that you have evidence that all of those conditions are present in this case. Mr. rcurl, Please tell us which of the following statements you did not make: (1) #19 (rcurl): I don't see how it can't be called "treason". Espionage by a citizen is treason. . . ." (2) "#23 (rcurl): . . . I never said they weren't. I am only stating that treason has occurred. (I also did not say that espionage has occurred....)" klg
I now see why you are usually confused, by adopting non-sequiturs for your logic. While espionage by a citizen is treason it does not follow that if treason has occurred that it is espionage.
Mr. rcurl. Spin cycle time? klg
This response has been erased.
Dear klg, only an idiot such as yourself would try to pretend that the various parts require separate proofs.
My dear Mr. scott- It is a rather simple request. Truly. Are all of the component requirements in the law met or are they not? But if you haven't the desire or abilty to make the attempt, kindly do not project your failings onto others. It is bad form. Thank you. klg
Certainly, Mr. klg. Just as soon as you provide proof for all the Clinton-era stuff... my, you're behind in your paperwork!
Actually, I can imagine that it is possible for such a disclosure to have occured without there being treason under the definition given. One way it could happen is to have two people both with security clearances. Person A mentions to person B that whatshername is an agent, but does not mention that she is covert. Person B, not knowing that she is a covert agent, mentions the fact that she is agent to a person without a clearance. In that scenario, it seems to me that neither A nor B is guilty of treason under the definition above. A did not say anything to anyone who wasn't cleared, and B did not knowingly disclose any secret information. Of course A and B (especially A) are both incompetent idiots, but they aren't treasonous idiots. I have no idea if this is what occured.
This response has been erased.
valerie, not of grex-fame, but of plame-fame, years ago was an ak-47 certified undercover contact/agent. she has a history, not a present. her history may be what is endangered. effectively, she had retired AND was supposed to be kept concealed, vis-a-vis her history, not her present. there is no inforamtion i know of which indicates that she still draws a tax-dollar-salary from teh agency. i think she has a pair of 3-yr olds to raise at this time. kinda hard to get a babysitter for all those current operations she gets called on to do.... heh-heh. ::::::::: ring-ring-ring hello? ----- hello, judy... umm, say, can you babysit the kids for about 12 days? i know it's, like, really short notice, but i just got a self-destructing taperecorder message to infiltrate the chinese counter espionage cell for the kgb stationed in north korea. it's not a bad as that africa-iraq-yellowcake trip last month but it's still important. we dont' want to nuke them on the noggin ya know. ------ well, ok, valerie. but this has to be teh last time. i can't keep on lying to the kids. ----- thanks, babe ... i knew i could count on you this last time. oh, and call novak will you? i'm getting tired of this shit too. ---- sure. he's alwasy been good for a leak. click ... dialtone :::::::
This response has been erased.
harvesting perhaps? ... poppys are a self-conflicted symbol.
TS, you do know that poppies grow in the cemetaries of France, right? The American Legion sells little paper ones as a remembrance of WWI. I hadn't known that VFW did as well, but it's not all that surprising.
"In Flanders fields the poppies blow between the crosses, row on row.." etc, etc..
/cues "Veterans Day Poppy" by Capt Beefheart
This response has been erased.
right gelinas, poppys grow in lots of military cemetaries, actually, as well as afghanistan adn pakistan .. and iin one of my yards in a2. it is teh conflict between teh symbol adn the application that has amazed me. \ heroin for the deceased. thus, a self-conflicting symbol.
Is there a special kind of poppy that is used to make opium/heroin, or are those the same poppies that make the poppy seeds I get on my bagel?
I think they are the same. The difference is that the seeds were allowed to mature, rather than the seedpod being 'milked' before ripening.
I think they are different varieties. Former Yugoslavia grew poppies and some fields had white flowers, some purple. The garden variety are red. I know for sure that at least one of the Yugoslav drug companies was making opium from poppies.
Many plants are called poppies. Papaver somniferum L., the opium poppy, is also the source of the seeds used on bagels. I expect, however, there are varieties with more or less opiates. For some other genuses of "poppies", including the California State Flower, see http://www.erowid.org/plants/poppy/poppy.shtml
I've heard that eating things with poppy seeds in them will cause you to fail a drug test.
This response has been erased.
See the cited URL.
No, of course they won't do that, gull. They maybe use to do that, but now MSGM knows: HEY, This guy didn't have enough opium to be a doper. And plus you'd need more seeds than a single bagel!
See the cited URL.
morning glory seeds which *make* brids ding are /nuetered/ and now the birds don;t sing very wel atl all. the poppy seeds might be newutered as well ... do you sing?
Great performance by John McCutcheon tonight. He did a new song about the TIPS program called "Ashcroft's Army." Get the mp3 at http://www.folkmusic.com/f_mp3.htm
That's a good one. I can't help thinking, though, that this kind of poking fun is just preaching to the converted. Liberals need to start making serous arguments to convince serious people. (But I did enjoy the song.)
Humor such as this is a good way of spreading awareness without being didactic or pedantic. First awareness, then action.
smug, oh so smug
whore, oh so whore
You have several choices: