n/m

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

we'd never get a conviction for a LOT of crimes, right? the purpose of an investigation is to find the LOSE THREADS & START PULLING

Politics is the Art of controlling one's environment ~ Hunter S. Thompson

I'm reminded of the Jeff Farias Show interview with H.Candace Gorman who talked of visiting her clients in Guantánamo & her escorting 'guards' who began commenting to her about her personal life & family in Chicago

CONSIDER:
DO YOU ACTUALLY BELIEVE Rove wouldn't have **made sure he could control whoever became Press Secretary** before the job was given out?

Think about it: Does KKKarl Rove FAIL TO PLAN?

You wanna know Ol' Scotty Boy was no saint when he applied... but there is no way in HELL that the Bushevik Administration doesn't have INSURANCE to enforce COMPLIANCE against critical functionaries...

Compliance is EVERYTHING that defines this Administration. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised if McCain's
- post-incarceration debriefing &
- medical-psychiatric notes
aren't kept IN A MAN-SIZED SAFE along with other 'critically important' confidential files.

get the right goods on people & they're YOURS - consider that McClellan probably took time out to **ensure his protection** from the Administration & that THE LACK a WILL TO PRIVACY could have a LOT to do with what's going on in our societies.

The Thieves of Virtue: legislating morality undermines representative government. really, VICE is contextual:
* gender
* ethnicity
* age
* race

all pay a part in morals. but VICE, should never be *criminalized*, especially in a nation where PRIVACY has been abolished

Who is PERFECT ENOUGH to represent THE PEOPLE or a populist reform when there is neither privacy nor the Will to preserve privacy in society?
Who stands *for the People* when Money & Power exert corrosive controls to extend their oppression & corruption?

Nobody is immune to *vice* as VICE is about how ONE PERSON privately & personally determines *how to enjoy their own body*

Naked Truth: Civil Rights & CNN coverage of "F.B.I. biometric database - 'Server in the Sky'"
...& THAT is how THE MORAL MAJORITY ensured Money & Power will kill representative government for The Peoples who seek JUSTICE, Freedom & Human Rights

"There is no 'we' in corruption":
"Yell Fire!": Bush to freeze peace activist assets? - Executive Order to "Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq"

NSA's Domestic Spying Grows As Agency Sweeps Up Data

"shock & awe-ful thing"s: "Taking Liberties" & forced drugging of Non-Americans on US flights

Cops & Former Secret Service Agents Ran Black Ops on Green Groups


┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄┄
BlueBerry Pick'n
ThisCanadian
┄
"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid
┄
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... and how brave to now defy the odds that he can presume credibility and to be seen as anything besides the cynical, self serving, baby faced book salesman that he is.

As John Stewart pointed out, even the "journalists" and their editor parents who sucked White House milk at the McClellen teat want distance from the smell of their own nippled breath.

But poor Scott. He's not himself these days, just ask any of his former stickmen bosses in crime. They'll repeat in unison, like the good broadcast "journalists" that they've become, that it's a sad thing.

Anyone buying this book goes to hell, with Scott, where all good propagandists belong.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

First Comedy Central video (BTW, thanks).


Smear tactics 3:20

JS: "on a blackboard,."

SM: "It's more talking amongst themselves and then coming up with those points."

JS: "And will they say like, this will be a great point because it will make him look foolish? How explicit is the conversation?"

SM: "Well, it's more like, How can we discredit this? I mean, this has a powerful message, one that's not helpful to us right now.

That's not the purpose of it, the purpose is something bigger, like I said, which is changing the way washington works."



Cost of the war, 5:07.

JS: "You make mention in the book that this was not willful deception. How is that not willful deception?"

SM: "Well what happens is this becomes part of the culture in washington, this is the way both parties engage in it..."

JS cuts him off, "That's meaningless!" (etc)

SM: "(intelligible) they engage in the spin, in the manipulation."



Truth talk 5:50

JS: "Somebody made a willful decision, don't talk about the price, because that truth..."

SM: "may make people think twice about it. And, and, the cost that concerned me more, of course, is the human cost, the irrevocable human cost.

JS: "This is just the one example, the irrevocable human cost, everything. Isn't that the very definition of deception?

SM: "Well yeah, and the question is, if we start saying was this deliberate? Was this intentional? Or if you're looking at it in a different light? Or this is just the way everybody does it? - That's what we got to stop."

JS; "If they sat in a room, if they sat in a room and said, "When we go to campaign for this war, let's not tell them how much it costs, let's not mention it." That's a sin of omission, that's a lie."

SM: "Yeah, yeah, there's really no difference whether it is deliberate, or unintentional, or or

JS: "there is"

SM: "or not. Well they are both problematic in their own way."

JS: "Bg-bg-bg! They're not both 'problematic', one is homicide the other is involentary man slaughter! "

SM: "Yeah well I don't want to mean to be criminal, for instance."

JS: "That's what I'm saying! That's my point! Isn't it, in the, in the book, you make it very clear, you go out of your way to say you don't think it is intentional."

SM: "And I don't"

JS: "I haven't seen any evidence that it's not intentional, because everything is done with a forethought. It may not have been done with a malice, so it may not be first degree murder, but it was done with a forethought."

SM: "See I think these are good people, they just got caught up in this whole atmosphere.."

JS: "It was done with a forethought. They sat in a room and told, they sat in a room with each other and said, "Don't tell them any of the bad consequences that could come of this war, because we really want to do this."

SM: "W-w, I don't think it was just like that."

JS: (weird noise) "Tell me what wasn't like that."

SM: "Well, I think it was more like talking about what's the strongest possible case we can make. It was talking about what we DO put in there."

JS: "We really want to do this. It could cost two hundred billion dollars. Don't mention that."

SM: "Were you there in the room?"

JS: "Thousands of people might die. Yeah, you might not want to bring that up. What if they call me in front of congress to testify about it? Yeah, just (bleep) say something."

SM: "Ha, ha, ha,"

JS: "Isn't that? All right."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

McClellan is trying to get right with history and make a small fortune doing it. Simple.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]