Scooter guilty! Miss Piggy in Tears!

I find it interesting and revealing that you continue to persist in insisting that these two events are unrelated. I find it interesting that you seem desperate to ensure that these two incidents are not associated in anyone’s mind. I disagree. You are free to hold a different view. Again, Armitage is the one guilty of committing a crime, the crime specifically here in question. What do you suggest be done about him and why when every other infraction committed by the Bush administration earns pages and pages and new topic posts of your wrathful invective have we seen not one MFGR screed calling for Armitage’s head? Very interesting that… I mean assuming that you really do care as much about the outing of a “covert operative” like Valerie Plame as you claim to, no? Armitage is the guilty party and nothing from you? None of your usual outraged shuckstering? nothing? no? sure now? don’t want to say anything?

[quote=“fred smith”]Rove told Armitage but as an administration official that would not be a crime. Armitage revealing that to an outside source would. Anyway, if the sentencing is 1.5 to 3 years that would seem far more reasonable and he should get out on good behavior on three months. THAT would be the FAIR and JUST thing to do in this whole sad fiasco.

I notice however that Spook has not disputed my assertion that the Senate found Wilson to have been lying on numerous counts including not finding any evidence of Iraqi intent to purchase yellowcake in Niger. Right? MFGR? No comments on that? Unfortunately, for both, the Senate report has already been provided repeatedly here. Wonder why we continue to read in the new therefore that Wilson’s claim is given credence despite being discredited. Strange, eh? For such lapses in factual information? Must be simply a slip of the computer keyboard? Maybe? haha[/quote]

Why ask me? Lying is your area of expertise. Now if you want to ask me who is telling the truth I might be more help there.

The opaque White House starts to face the music:

Libby was the fall guy. The system did not work because the most serious crime was not punished.

I don’t know. Do you consider it a truism that if no one in prosecuted, then no crime was committed? Seems pretty naïve to me.

The prosecutor said she was undercover, as did a former CIA official.

See MFGR’s comment.

I am not happy about that. But in the Plame situation, the culprits were our own officials. The case you are referring to is a foreign government upset we carried out covert operations without their permission. Italy is an ally. We have troops there. Like you I think the proper diplomatic channels should have been pursued to convey their grief. However, I can understand the judge wanting to protect Italian authority more than I can understand petty political hacks seeking revenge by jeopardizing our own operatives. Do you really not see a difference in these cases?

We’ll probably never know. The point is that it could have happened

You won’t catch me championing Wilson. He broke the law and he should pay for it. I want to see him in prison.

The third former CIA official who spoke on NPR today seems to think the absolute worst result of this case was the damage to the CIA’s reputation.

LOL. That’s rich coming from you. The first and second former CIA operatives who were interviewed on NPR this morning, Larry Johnson –who was recruited at the same time as Plame and went through training with her- and the former #2 guy in the CIA (I believe his name was Robert Richard, but I’ll look it up later), both seemed to think this was very worthy of comment. The theme of both of their messages was that revealing an undercover operative has indeed broken a sacred code, and it has happened only a few times in US history. Like me, they want to see the real criminals brought to justice, and are angry the real crime is not being punished.

I know that, and if you actually read my posts you would realize that too. That’s why I want the real culprits –including Armitage- brought to justice.

See above. I am not accusing Libby of treason, and to be technical, the crime of treason is not applicable even to those who outed Plame. But as I said the spirit of the crime is treasonous.

I’m glad you agree.

Again for what crime. Do you find it completely unnatural that White House officials would discuss how Wilson got sent to Niger? Do you find it completely unusual that in the context of this that his wife and her role might have come up? Do you think that it is unusual for White House officials to discuss covert operations? secret plans? Again, Libby did not out Plame, Armitage did. Fitzgerald is trying to pressure Libby into revealing a secret plot to deliberately out Plame. Nothing of the sort has surfaced. The focus was on Wilson. Plame came up into this almost by chance if you will. MFGR likes to pretend that Plame was an isolated event that happened along as an option to get revenge on Wilson, while pretending that the White House would not have wanted to or should have even wanted to answer Wilson’s very serious charges. At other times, MFGR complains that the White House has insulated itself from public opinion so much that it never even deigns to address the concerns of “real folks.” So what is it? How many sides of the coin can MFGR play from? And don’t we all look forward to his future contortions as he attempts to do so? haha

The only thing naive is your belief that Libby should be tried for a crime. Again, White House officials discussing how Wilson was sent to Niger was a completely NORMAL thing. Plame came up in this context. No one except Armitage revealed her name and he did so accidentally. Now, are you telling me that Rove deliberately revealed this information to Armitage just so he would accidentally release it? Okay, then why prosecute Libby and not Armitage? Why not put the pressure on Armitage to get him to turn on Rove? This simply does not make sense.

supply those links. The prosecutor may have said that early on but he backed off rather quickly. In addition, during the entire court case, Plame’s exact status was never revealed because the judge did not want the jury to know, neither did Fitzgerald. They both claimed that it was “irrelevant,” but why? Why was it irrelevant when this is precisely what the whole case is about? Otherwise what context exists for determining that Libby’s “lies” were a crime?

I think I have a lot more knowledge and understanding of how these things work than MFGR does and I don’t need to be married to an ambassador to do so.

NO. The culprits were NOT our officials because the only person who committed a crime was Armitage and he was not even prosecuted. In addition, he claims to have outed her accidentally. The crime would be to KNOWINGLY out her. Also, you would have to prove that Plame came up solely as a revenge option. This seems incredible to me. Wilson lied about what he found and why he was sent to Niger. Does it defy logic to assume that anyone in the White House would want to find out the exact particulars and would the fact that Valerie Plame, his wife, was the one who sent him be so out of the ordinary?

NO again. Your understanding of these cases is very surface. This was one JUDGE who acted on his own. The Italian government knows and knew full well what we were doing. We would have been treaty bound to provide them with all the details of such an action. This is why I have such contempt for so many European governments. They are fully involved in these operations or they would not be happening but they cannot protect the identies of these agents because of their fear of public opinion? And again, this is NOT the fault of the CIA operatives who were directly in danger not parked behind a desk as was Plame. I find it amusing that MFGR is so quick to explain this away by blaming the actions of our government. THIS was not his attitude when a total nonentity like Plame was involved. This is why I find talking to him so amusing. He bounces across the spectrum with the one key central core interest being to bash the Bush administration. Great on him. Too bad he cannot take that hard on to a whore and get it taken care of.

Grief? What grief? The man was a known radical that the Italian authorities had had under surveillance for years.

You don’t seem to be able to wrap your mind around what a treaty involves. THAT treaty covers all aspects of Italian “sovereignty” being the word that you might want here not authority?

Again, these are top White House officials who in the course of determining how and why this Wilson guy was even sent to Niger stumbled upon the one person who arranged to send him: his wife and you think that this is a hack job? You think that it was not important and only about revenge? to determine who sent Wilson? because Cheney sure and hell did not.

Discussing this with you is simply bewildering to me. I have no idea how you can have such a surface knowledge of these matters and be so adamantly damning of the Bush administration. Are you actually taking in MFGR’s argument? Shit. I thought he served a good purpose to amuse all of us on this forum but you don’t actually take investment tips from the clowns in the circus do you? decide how to vote because the hairy lady tells you to? buy property based on advice from the two-headed calf? What the f***?

Great. Let’s use that the next time a crime is being prosecuted. It could have been you right? forget any evidence. The fact that it could have been you makes you guilty. And aren’t you the people who are so worried about loss of rights and the shredding of our Constitution? haha Give me a break. You really are not firing on all four pistons today are you?

Ironic that something far more serious in terms of exposing our agents in Niger and anyone who talked to them there has generated how many threads? responses from you? so pardon me but I laugh at your apparently inconsistent “concerns” about the safety of our agents, covert or otherwise.

Sure it is. Sure it is. NPR? former CIA official? haha Sorry, but this is just too too rich.

So you dimwit go the f*** after the one who committed the crime: His name is Richard Armitage. I think that even the f***wits in the CIA know where they can find him. IF he KNOWINGLY outed Plame or this was some machination of Rove’s, then put the screws to him. AGAIN, does anyone really believe that it was only about revenge that Plame’s name came up? That this is the No. 1 reason why she was involved? Does no one see how logical it is that when someone wanted to find out who really sent Wilson that the person who in fact arranged to send Wilson might come up and that person was Plame?

Which is why you have been so busy writing posts and starting threads on that very same subject?

Oh yippee. And that is going to really fly in our courts and that is a real nice protection of civil and constitutional rights. Who, pray tell, is going to determine that “spirit” when and if future cases of this nature arise? Oh, but they won’t right? Because once Bushitler is out of office, sanity, normalcy and American pie will have been restored to our nation. And the long nightmare of this huge fascist assault on our rights and freedoms will finally be over? Smirk. Double smirk.

So you’re saying that a Euro government’s first allegiance (in this kind of situation) should be to the CIA and its agents and not to the public of the relevant Euro country? Are you for real? The CIA agents broke the law and got found out. The CIA guys fucked up - if they did their job properly, no one would have known who they were.

Nope. I am saying that the Italian judge was not acting in accordance with his nation’s treaty with the US. How did the CIA agents break the law exactly? How did they fuck up? Italy knows full well what is going on. That is why the judge also targeted the Italian secret services. This is actually a type of treason as it directly affects national security. I think that the JUDGE should be prosecuted. After all, what was illegal about sending the terrorist or radical back to his HOME country? Granted he was not deported through the usual channels but terrorism is not a simple common form of crime. It necessitates different measures that are not that different from how drug barons are treated. Why no outcry whenever some Colombian or Mexican drug lord is nabbed and turned over to the US?

Nope. I am saying that the Italian judge was not acting in accordance with his nation’s treaty with the US. How did the CIA agents break the law exactly? How did they fuck up? Italy knows full well what is going on. That is why the judge also targeted the Italian secret services. This is actually a type of treason as it directly affects national security. I think that the JUDGE should be prosecuted. After all, what was illegal about sending the terrorist or radical back to his HOME country? Granted he was not deported through the usual channels but terrorism is not a simple common form of crime. It necessitates different measures that are not that different from how drug barons are treated. Why no outcry whenever some Colombian or Mexican drug lord is nabbed and turned over to the US?[/quote]

How did they break the law? Well, kidnapping for starters. Sending the guy to a place where they know he’ll be tortured. And why couldn’t he have been deported through usual channels? If there’s evidence against him, then he could have been arrested by the Italian police, then extradited/deported to Egypt. And the fact that he’s not in prison anywhere at the moment would suggest that he wasn’t guilty of much, if anything. If he was a terrorist, he wouldn’t have ended up being sent to Egypt and released a couple of years later, he’d have gone to Gitmo and we’d have never heard about any of this.

Right… Might I suggest a refresher course on international treaties and what they entail? And again, is he and was he an Egyptian citizen? Why would returning him to his NATIVE country be OUR problem?

Obviously the CIA doesn’t have a clue which of its employees is covert and which isn’t, perjury and obstruction of justice are no longer crimes, Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald hates the Bush administration and the jury system has proven once again that it should be abolished in favor of something better and more suitable to the times like the tribunal system the Bush adminstration is tinkering with down in Guantanamo.

Have a rough night last night did we Spook?

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

Fred, is that really you, or has someone taken over your account?

Would those international treaties you mention be in anyway similar to the international treaties that the US govt ignores whenever it suits them?

Have a rough night last night did we Spook?[/quote]

Was that you, Fred? Sorry, I didn’t recognize you in your Anna Nicole Coulter outfit or I would have gone easier on you.

Which international treaties is the US ignoring? Proof please. And when you come back with any of those “ignored” treaties, please do be clear about which aspects of them are being ignored. That way I will be better able to respond to your “concerns.”

Be careful responding, however. I KNOW that you do not know what you are talking about and I am relishing the prospect of sending you off to the woodshed. I will embarrass you.

Which international treaties is the US ignoring? Proof please. And when you come back with any of those “ignored” treaties, please do be clear about which aspects of them are being ignored. That way I will be better able to respond to your “concerns.”

Be careful responding, however. I KNOW that you do not know what you are talking about and I am relishing the prospect of sending you off to the woodshed. I will embarrass you.[/quote]

Well just quickly, while I’m on a break and keeping with the case at hand, have a read of this.

http://www.asil.org/insights/2005/07/insights050707.html from the American Society of International Law.

In particular [quote]Torture is universally regarded as a violation of international law. No government openly asserts that torture is lawful. It is condemned under several treaties, including the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, a multilateral treaty to which 139 States (including Egypt, Italy and the United States) are parties. Article 3 of the Convention against Torture says, “No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.” It goes on to say that the existence of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights should be taken into account in ascertaining whether that standard is met. The United States understands “substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture” to mean “if it is more likely than not that he would be tortured.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone would point out Egypt as a place that doesn’t have a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Or, for something completely different, explain why the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) treaty tightened international protection for mahogany in November 2003, a move backed by the Bush administration as a centerpiece of its initiative against illegal logging and yet the US remains the worlds largest mahogany importer. In 2005, 20 companies, with permits from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, knowingly imported illegally logged Peruvian mahogany.

Sorry so you think that the Egyptian in question should have been given asylum in, say, Italy? because there was the possibility that he might be tortured upon his return to Egypt? Also, what about those committing non-terrorist related crimes or those overstaying their visas? Are we also to not return them to their nations because they might be tortured? I really do take your point, but I see no reason why we need to go out of our way to protect the rights of non-citizens in these cases. We should return them and then remonstrate the Egyptians to be nice to them. haha That is the kind of spineless “principled” stance that is most favored by most European nations, Canada, NZ among others. Also, I kind of am looking forward to seeing this case go ahead. Why? Because this radical was sent back to Egypt with the full compliance of both the Egyptian and Italian governments. This has also been the case with similar matters throughout Europe. IF this is a problem, then I would love to see everyone squirm when trying to avoid the self-righteous outrage of individuals such as yourself. Ditto for the Canadian Syrian that the US deported to Syria. I really do hope that we have a very serious look at this because I am sure that he was sent back with the full connivance and cooperation and perhaps even at the behest of the Canadian government. Alas, we will not discover anything of the sort since the Canadian government has already paid him off in record time. Interesting? But the speed at which the case has been “resolved” ensures that Canadians have very little knowledge of anything other than that the US deported one of their citizens to Syria where he was allegedly tortured. That is good enough for most of them. The moral high ground is preserved. No evidence to the contrary and damn those Americans but speaking of which…

As to the mohagany thing, well goodness me, that certainly is a new and original reason to hate and despise the US government. You have left me speechless in my amazement that people like you even know about such things. That the leve of anti-Americanism has reached such a desperately dismal zenith continues to amaze me. Absolutely astounding.

Plame is not Wilson, she is a separate person. There is no part of attacking her that is an appropriate or legitimate part of trying to rebut Wilson’s charges. Plame’s event is “isolated” in that there is no excuse for exposing her. That it was done in a way that hurt her ability to continue with her intelligence work and has compromised her cover company is disgusting. That the exposure of her and her cover companies used over the years exposes other CIA officers and sources to risk is beyond the pale.

What contortion? You’re squirming mighty hard to find a rationale by which a serving CIA intelligence officer’s identity and cover companies have been exposed to the world through the actions of top-level Bush administration officials. I would think that your current rhetorical position was physically impossible, but I do hope that you don’t get an infection from it.

Why? Mr. Libby got convicted. Let’s see what other things start to happen.

What was the case about? Lying under oath, lying to an FBI agent and trying to impede an investigation. Let’s see what else starts to come from this.

I disagree. But then I also don’t laugh at U.S. war wounded the way you do.

Cluephone to Fred Smith – Libby was convicted. Let’s hope that all this gang of crooks is brought to justice.

[quote=“fred smith”]Sorry so you think that the Egyptian in question should have been given asylum in, say, Italy? because there was the possibility that he might be tortured upon his return to Egypt? Also, what about those committing non-terrorist related crimes or those overstaying their visas? Are we also to not return them to their nations because they might be tortured? I really do take your point, but I see no reason why we need to go out of our way to protect the rights of non-citizens in these cases. We should return them and then remonstrate the Egyptians to be nice to them. haha That is the kind of spineless “principled” stance that is most favored by most European nations, Canada, NZ among others. Also, I kind of am looking forward to seeing this case go ahead. Why? Because this radical was sent back to Egypt with the full compliance of both the Egyptian and Italian governments. This has also been the case with similar matters throughout Europe. IF this is a problem, then I would love to see everyone squirm when trying to avoid the self-righteous outrage of individuals such as yourself. Ditto for the Canadian Syrian that the US deported to Syria. I really do hope that we have a very serious look at this because I am sure that he was sent back with the full connivance and cooperation and perhaps even at the behest of the Canadian government. Alas, we will not discover anything of the sort since the Canadian government has already paid him off in record time. Interesting? But the speed at which the case has been “resolved” ensures that Canadians have very little knowledge of anything other than that the US deported one of their citizens to Syria where he was allegedly tortured. That is good enough for most of them. The moral high ground is preserved. No evidence to the contrary and damn those Americans but speaking of which…

As to the mohagany thing, well goodness me, that certainly is a new and original reason to hate and despise the US government. You have left me speechless in my amazement that people like you even know about such things. That the leve of anti-Americanism has reached such a desperately dismal zenith continues to amaze me. Absolutely astounding.[/quote]

What I think doesn’t really matter, but for the record, if he committed any crimes in Italy, then he should have been charged and tried there. If he committed crimes in Egypt and was wanted there, then the Egyptian govt should have made a request for extradition to the Italians, who then could have arrested him, and extradited him in accordance to international law. If he could demonstrate a well founded likelihood that he’d be subject to torture, then he’s got the right to apply for refugee status, which is overseen by UNHCR.

There’s absolutely no reason the CIA needed to get involved, unless of course, he was being sent back at their request. Regardless, the US (and Italian, Egyptian) govt, by carrying out these actions was ignoring an international treaty - the very thing that you asked me to provide an example of so you could embarrass me.

Re: mahogany. That was just another example in response to your request to show where the US govt was ignoring intl treaties - it wasn’t an “I hate the US govt” rant. Simply providing you what you requested. As I told you in the global warming thread, I’m a climatologist by training, so things to do with deforestation regularly come to my attention. That’s the only reason I knew about that.

Hmm, still not embarrassed.

I’m not on here to be insulted. I come to Forumosa for intelligent discussion and debate, and most of the time I get it. If you’re looking to spew caustic invectives at Forumosans then stick to your usual targets. They keep coming back for more. I won’t.

haha sorry I am … nevermind…

You are assuming that anyone wanted to attack her. First, she was the one who sent Wilson to Niger not Cheney. That much came out. Then you would have to prove that once this knowledge was er known that there was a deliberate effort to get revenge on her rather than to get the information out that Cheney was NOT the one who sent Wilson to Niger. Please do give us some more of your views on this subject. I find the efforts most amusing.

Yes, but how did her name come up in the first place and why and then once that name was known by several people, including most importantly Armitage, why and how was that information revealed to the general public? THAT is the question and I can understand why you so desperately wish this were not the case. Yes, keep peddling or rather pedaling that she is a separate individual line. It is almost as good as key weapons proliferation expert and then then other one about suckerpunching some guy’s wife. Brilliant. But most important, amusing…

Hurray! Two points for you!

Er, yes, unless you consider the 25 agents imperiled in Italy who were doing really covert, really dangerous work, but then you seem awfully silent there and so do all the CIA, er, rather “former” CIA professionals who are no doubt all key in whatever areas of proliferation they are working in and on and I have a pretty good idea about what some of those proliferating things are, smirk, smirk, so once again, Monsieur Chouteau, it all falls rather unconvincingly into the same line of rabble rousing that you seem so genetically predisposed to.

And again, it defies all logic to prosecute someone in the White House like Libby when Fitzgerald (IF he were truly most concerned about the damsel in distress) could have gone straight to the source of the leak (Armitage) and pressure him (not even a day in jail to cool his heels?) to get him to cough up who? Rove. I mean after all, you cannot tell me that you and others of your stripe would not rather have taken down Rove, surely? and then send Rove to cool his heels in jail. But no. We have Judith Miller in jail for 85 days and now Libby? How in the name of anything does that make sense to you? All this while Sandy Berger is smuggling out documents in his pants to destroy at a later date? and you are worried about the Republicans? haha I must simply MUST meet your entire family now. I have to KNOW where all of this “good sense” comes from. I have a picture in my mind. Your dad wasn’t a union man was he? fomenting struggle on the floor? perpetually finding a new cause to rally the workers? while really secretly just being in it for the fight against Authority?