« Global warming | Main | Lawn-watering rule »

July 15, 2007

Libby-Plame case

Regarding the Libby trial: E. Thomas McClanahan has done his homework. Matt Nelson (7/12, Letters) has not. Plame referred to herself as "covert" during her sworn testimony. But when asked if she was protected under the law, she truthfully answered no. Legal analysts agree that if she is not covered under the law, no law was broken and there is no underlying crime to punish. During her testimony, Victoria Toensing, who helped write the law, said flatly, "She was not covert under the law."

If you study the timeline of this investigation, you learn that Libby was not the source of exposing Plame's name. Richard Armitage gossiped with both Robert Novak and Bob Woodward. Novak was the first journalist to use her name in a public venue. The people that Libby talked to either did not write an article using Plame's name or did so after the Novak article. So if you want to put somebody in jail for exposing Plame's name, the buck stops at Armitage, not Libby.

Dick Crump
Olathe

Comments

kcstar_is_one_sided

Hey, why don't you pass on her manifesto on to Lewis W. Diuguid, Rhonda Chriss Lokeman, or Barbara Shelly, perhaps they can write one of their stellar articles from her tripe. Meanwhile, those subscriptions just keep going down don't they?

kcstar_is_one_sided

FYI, that was a strong opinion that I wanted to express.

kcstar_is_one_sided

So you don't find it offensive that someone takes over a board with 13 posts of BS not even about the topic noted. Great I'll remember that the next time I want to do it.
I guess should've expected no less from a left wing rag like the KC Star.

Letters Editor

Hey, one-sided, cut me some slack. I'm only one person (not to mention I am actually keeping my eye on y'all remotely while on vacation)! ;-)

I've unpublished Karen's duplicate posts but as there wasn't another letter published on the day she posted her comments that would better fit her topic, I'll let her post her "13-page" manifesto. What does it hurt? At least she isn't trying to slip offensive language in by using symbols to represent letters which, personally, I find more offensive and unnecessary.

She has strong opinions. Where better to air them?

Trudy Hurley
Administrative Assistant
Editorial Page
The Kansas City Star
thurley@kcstar.com
816-234-4885

kcstar_is_one_sided

Dear KC Star -

Are you really moderating this forum? IF so, why would you let someone spam a thread with numerous letters that have nothing to do with the post? This is really pathetic.

Arminius

karennkc:

"“Presidential scholars say the unfinished business Bush will leave for his successor is unprecedented since at least WWII.”

I guess that forgot that Clinton left unfinished business with al Qaeda, Iraq, Kyoto, the Israeli-Palestinian issue, Kosovo, North Korea, corporate scandals, a recession, China, illegal immigration, dependence of foreign oil, etc., etc.

karennkc

Bye, Buddy, this might be the last you hear from me. I don't know if it is proper to continue this after I am married. I wish you well.

Bye, to all of you who have been on my side, I wish you well, too.

(That is my 13 page compendium of the most important points that I have worked on concerning this affair)

karennkc

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

karennkc

Concerning the mainstream media, some people are capable of objectivity and professionalism. After much consideration and my own personal, unique and extreme experience, it has occurred to me that the MSM has taken a rap for something that really is the bias of the accusers.

For example, people here in Kansas City are quick to jump on a black journalist every time he brings up the "race card." But, they are strangely silent when racism is obviously present. Also, there is the recent criticism of the new British Prime Minister where he has spoken out against stereotyping Muslims. I believe that he is making an effort to mitigate the hateful, inflammatory, racist rhetoric that has been prevalent throughout society and pervasive on the Internet - not trying to appease the terrorists.

These attitudes were present long before 9/11 and could very well be a motivating factor for many of these extremists. And, so, I can logically conclude that many of the attacks on the MSM are in reality a reflection of these diehard mentalities, whether racism, sexism, or whatever ism applies. Some people just do not like, at all, the new "politically correct” and "sensitive" hard fought strictures that are now still fighting for their lives in our media, government, at work and on the street.

These are prejudices that have been ingrained, people need to learn to think for themselves, and even more importantly, look at situations from different perspectives. That is what I did, there was a conflict between my heritage and the religion I was raised with and I threw out everything I had been told and started over from the foundation up. Of course, this requires an actual willingness to treat others as equals.

The American people have been led to believe that we are protecting our "interests" in the Middle East. We have no business, whatsoever, nor have we ever, meddling in the Middle East - not for oil, not for geopolitical purposes, nothing. That is like saying the Arabs have an "interest" in our timberlands or oceanfronts.

I have heard that the U.S. has proven oil reserves enough to last for anywhere from forty to sixty years. While drilling this oil might seem like a wonderful idea to the me-me-me generation and new reserves might be found, it doesn’t leave much hope for the children.

karennkc

I am not making excuses for anybody. I would like to leave all of this ancient history behind. When I said that the Koran was a reaction to the Bible I meant just as the war in Iraq was a reaction to 9/11. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and the people here would like to nuke the Middle East off the map. That is a reaction. Dropping the bomb on Japan was a reaction. (Technically, the targeting of innocent lives is terrorism. Did the way we came into possession of Pearl Harbor have anything to do with us being attacked?)

I personally do not know what things were like when the Koran was written nor do I know how long the Bible had been discussed amongst the other peoples in the region so I do not really know what their perspective was.

Some people cannot comprehend how it is that I conclude that certain aspects of the Bible are the same as the Holy War that the Muslims have. Go back to your Bible and list the times that God instructed the Hebrews to attack and slay tribes or where God, himself, intervened to bring about the desired result. Although this is not construed today to be an ongoing thing, the Promised Land was meant for Abraham and his descendants, alone, forever.

And, apparently, many people still believe that or they would not have stepped in to establish the modern day state of Israel. The Bible is an ancient deed to property. It would not hold up in a court of law. You have the right to believe what you want, but you do not have the right to use the government of the U.S. to enforce those beliefs.

Taken from the opposite perspective, this would be very threatening. And what I mean is that the Koran is modeled after the Bible and although it is perceived to go much further than the Bible and, in fact, it has, it has many similarities to our own "preemptive strategy."

To me, the Christ vs. Mohammed argument is significant. But, the Hebrews did commit many atrocious acts as well. My personal feelings are that Christ changed everything, the Jews rejected him, and I do not really see why the Old Testament and New Testament should belong together. Christians get into the most trouble, usually, trying to reconcile their beliefs with the OT. That's my opinion.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

karennkc

The U.S. is an extremely, immensely wealthy nation. If interference was necessary, don't you think we could have done a better job of it than supporting terrorism, starting civil wars and wreaking economic havoc on the people the least able to afford it? I think so.

If America has committed crimes in the past, wouldn’t it be the right thing to do to acknowledge that and condemn it – as we expect others to do – and seek forgiveness? Maybe Christians should ask themselves, “What would Jesus do?”

William Dalrymple, author, says that the ideas propelling the intervention in the Middle East, as most throughout history, are a “bigoted oversimplification of a complex reality.” Does this apply to you?

“Do not fear them, for it is the Lord your God who fights for you.” – Deuteronomy 3:22. This is what you would call Holy War. The Hebrews were “sojourners in an ancient culture.” They were just one tribe among many “primitive, semi nomadic herdsmen,” traders, and “great warring hordes” of marauders migrating through the world’s first great civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. Civilizations that arose in more than 5,000 years before Abraham’s birth.

It is believed that the Hebrews came from Mesopotamia. The tribes of Abraham were traveling throughout the region, they were enslaved, they were set free, they wandered the desert for forty years and then they slaughtered numerous other tribes to take their land, as instructed by God. That is the beginning of Holy War.

karennkc

i From the Crimes of Patriots, by Jonathan Kwitny
ii The Oslo Syndrome Delusions Of A People Under Siege, Kenneth Levin, 2005 Smith and Kraus, Inc.
iii “…British Petroleum returned to the Iranian oil fields. Some newcomers tagged along. They included five American companies, the ancestors of today’s ExxonMobil and Chevron-Texaco. Meanwhile, the U.S. government opened the foreign-aid spigot. Over the next 25 years, more than $20 billion in U.S. taxpayers’ money would pour into a decidedly undemocratic Iran, most of it military aid and subsidized weapons sales for the Shah’s armed forces and SAVAK, his secret police. As for American oil companies, they would extract 2 billion bbl. of oil from their Iranian fields. But the access came with a stiff price tag in U.S. government dollars and Iranian lives. And the Shah’s oppression led to the establishment of the first American-hating Islamic republic, when the Shiite Muslim clerics duped by the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh master-minded their own takeover in 1979, installing the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeni.” – By Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, TIME, May 19, 2003

karennkc

The Israeli – Palestinian conflict is clearly at the heart of much of the trouble in the Middle East. But, there has also been a shameful period in America’s history, driven by ambition for superiority and the fear of a “communist threat”…

”…Instead of fulfilling its intended and proper mission, the CIA spent its time organizing and maintaining full-scale armies fighting wars in various parts of Africa, Asia, and Latin America; promoting economic havoc here and there in all three regions; attempting to bring down the foreign governments (those of Guatemala, Nicaragua, Chile, Zaire, Zambia, South and North Vietnam, Iran, Afghanistan, Albania, Cambodia, Laos, Brazil, Guyana, the Dominican Republic, Angola, Cuba, Lebanon, Indonesia, and China, to name a few publicly documented cases) and often succeeding…”

Additionally, “…both for assuring access to Middle East oil and for other geostrategic reasons, the United States must support Arab strongman regimes (including Sadaam Hussein) and that to do otherwise ‘including to encourage democratization’ could lead either to chaos or the rise to power of hostile forces and, in either case, a severe compromising of American interests.”

The U.S. went so far as to stage a coup in Iran in 1953, which resulted in “the establishment of the first American-hating Islamic republic, when the Shiite Muslim clerics duped by the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh master-minded their own takeover in 1979, installing the Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeni.”

Once again, the CIA, the oil, the terrorism, the meddling in Iraq and Iran, and the establishment of the state of Israel all happened in my parent's lifetimes. This is not ancient history and Americans should be saddened and ashamed for their country – to deny the truth means this country is a fraud.

BuddyT

Poor woman.....Iggy, you and yours best keep an eye on her......

karennkc

The Israeli – Palestinian Conflict

What is the basis for the modern day establishment of the state of Israel? The British were occupiers. The U.N. had only one Arab member and no one even considered how the inhabitants of the land would react – and they reacted violently. They have never accepted this.

My research indicates that there was only an 11% Jewish population in the territory at the time of the U.N. mandate. The Jews did not buy the land. Moreover, their attempts at immigration were stymied by the British – “not least out of a desire to defend British interests in Arab oil.”

The Bible is an ancient religious book, an ancient deed to property. The Jews were the “chosen people” and God, himself, instructed them to kill numerous indigenous tribes, in the entirety, to take the land - the “Promised Land.”

Thousands of years later, the Romans came and tore down the Jewish tabernacle in Jerusalem and they called this place Palestine. That was in the 1st century. A couple of thousand years later Western civilization takes back the land and establishes the state of Israel as according to the Bible.

I am not really talking about ancient history except to point out what I know to be true – that the Bible is the basis for Western civilization's establishment and support of Israel. That is something that occurred in my parent's lifetime, not thousands of years ago. Also, I believe that the Holy War in the Koran is a reaction to the Holy War in the Bible.

karennkc

There is nothing wrong with patriotism until it takes the place of all reason.
· “Nationalism is an infantile disease” - Albert Einstein.
· Nationalism - Devotion, often chauvinistic, to one's own nation.
· Chauvinism - Militant and vainglorious patriotism. Unreasoning attachment to one's race, group, etc.

Charles Krauthammer, in an ill-tempered rant in Nov. ’03 when the insurgency was heating up in Iraq, said, “The fact is the world hates us for our wealth, our success, our power…The search for logic in anti-Americanism is fruitless. It is in the air the world breathes. Its roots are envy and self-loathing – by peoples who, yearning for modernity but having failed at it, find their one satisfaction in despising modernity’s great exemplar. On Sept. 11, they gave it a rest for a day. Big deal.”

That is unbelievable coming from a highly educated and well-read man who also is a psychiatrist.

BuddyT

all right KORAN...rock on baby....glad to see you are on your feet, er, ah so to speak...how you feelin?

Need anything? More prozac, beef broth? Glucose....???

don't be ashamed, we will help you koran....

Oh, and listen,,,,just ignore those negative vibes, and ramp up the Jefferson Airplane tapes,,,you will be fine....

karennkc

Another favorite scare tactic that the catastrophe-supporters use is to say that al-Qaida wants to see a Democratic president and Congress because they are not as likely to respond in strength if attacked. Gijs de Vries, a former counter-terrorism expert of the Netherlands, said, “One of the time-honored tactics of terrorists is to draw governments into overreacting.” The war in Iraq would certainly qualify for that thousands of American lives as well as $5-6 billion dollars a month – a figure the Bush administration scoffed at before the war.

Also, the calamity-supporters say that we should profile Middle Eastern people at airports and other such venues. It was reported some time ago that al-Qaida was trying to recruit Asians to throw us off, the same with women. That's why you don't profile, that's why you don't assume. You just get it right.

What of the disaster-supporters idea that because of the war in Iraq we haven’t had another terrorist attack? The 9/11 plot reportedly took years to pull off and afterwards security was ratcheted way up. Awareness is way up, too. And it is much easier for them to attack our soldiers right next door.

The tragedy-supporters often ask what would happen upon a precipitous pullout. My hope would be that the terrorists would stop targeting innocent people. As for the sectarian violence and the so-called security vacuum, the Iraqis will just have to sort their differences out or their militias will, just as they are doing now.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

karennkc

The war supporters (not troop supporters) are always saying that no one else has a plan. My plan would be to treat the global war on terror for what it is - criminals, extremists who are without a nation state scattered widely throughout the world who would have to be contained by using intelligence and cooperation from the other peoples of the world.

Instead, with his arrogance, Bush has alienated some of the very people we need to rely on. Would you blow NYC to smithereens to wipe out a terrorist on the loose? The war fanatics that are always saying we should indiscriminately bomb the Middle East need to get a grip. That is not going to happen. I don’t know how you could be informed and still think that that is the way to defeat this enemy; “shock and awe” certainly did not do it. And the destruction left behind would bear another crop of extremists.

Nightowl 872 writes:
Limited
Every war we have fought since WWII has been "LIMITED". It's been "limited" to keep civilian casualties low. It's been "limited" to keep others from becoming participants even though they send in troops and/or supplies. And it's been "limited" by borders.

Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, even Kosovo.
All "LIMITED".
The right-wing often accuses the other side of moral relativism. How is the above described indiscriminate bombing as well as the ends-justifies-the-means mentality not? Some of us believe that besides being ineffective, we don’t have the right to bring our war on terror to bear on the innocent people of Iraq.

karennkc

There is a “right-wing Kulturkampf” in its own little world on the Internet where the mainstream media (MSM) is not to be believed and where one can just write one’s own reality. The only thing wrong with their idea that the MSM is unreliably biased is that their beliefs have never been shown to be true on the ground.

· There has been a constant shifting of rationale even for the reason for the war - WMDs, liberation, spreading democracy. There has been no progress politically when even military generals say there is no military solution.

· After four years, there are no places in Iraq where the Iraqis have stood up to let us stand down, in fact, the gov't is telling people to arm themselves. Ramadi, “once a killing ground of U.S. Marines” is now a “huge success story,” tribal leaders having turned on al-Qaida and other extremists. However, “Some extremists from Anbar shifted to Diyala province and elsewhere, creating new pockets of violence.” This is known as the “whack-a-mole” counterinsurgency tactic.

· The surge is no surge at all as Petraeus' own counterinsurgency manual calls for as many troops in Baghdad ALONE as are in the entire country.

· al-Qaida, in fact, is in SIXTY countries. How can this strategy (occupation) be effective in dealing with them all?

“Al-Qaida Connections

WASHINGTON | President Bush contended anew Tuesday that the perpetrators of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States are the same as al-Qaida in Iraq.

It was the second time in two weeks that Bush has made the link in an apparent attempt to transform lingering fear of another U.S. terrorist attack into backing for the current buildup of U.S. troops in Iraq.

“Al-Qaida is doing most of the spectacular bombings, trying to incite sectarian violence,” Bush told a business group in Cleveland. “The same people that attacked us on September 11 is a crowd that is now bombing people, killing innocent men, women and children, many of whom are Muslims.”

Al-Qaida in Iraq did not emerge until 2004. While it is inspired by Osama bin Laden’s violent ideology, there is no evidence that the Iraq organization is under the control of the terrorist leader or his top aides, who are thought to be hiding in tribal regions of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan.

Moreover, the two groups have been divided over tactics and strategy.”

----------------------------------------------

The report that says al-Qaida is back in Afghanistan is much more relevant I would think because that is where they train people, there and Pakistan, while our troops in Iraq and the Iraqi people are easy targets.

 
About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright