So this speaks volumes about Kerry’s priorities.

Many people, on both sides, have said that keeping Kerry out of the public eye is his only hope. This statement just supports that contention

Posted by: skip at July 9, 2004 11:16 AM

this should be one of the MOST IMPORTANT things a possible future president should worry about and MAKE time for…maybe if he throws some medals at the bad guys they’ll go away

WPoS

Posted by: WPoS at July 9, 2004 11:17 AM

So, it’s official. Kerry IS insane.

My god, can you imagine being so stupid as to say this in front of a television camera?

His campaign manager probably had an aneurysm on the spot.

Posted by: DWC at July 9, 2004 11:20 AM

Kerry has an election to win and campaigning to do.

No matter — Tom Ridge is keeping everyone fully informed. The “briefings” contain nothing of substance that isn’t already public.

Unless folks believe that the administration is confiding Really Good Stuff to the folks incongruous, and not letting the rest of us know about it. Figure that’s the case?

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 11:21 AM

Geez Don

I think if I were a presidential candidate running on the platform that the war on terror is being mishandled I think I would at least like to stay informed, so when questions come up I don’t look like an ass.(mught be impossible)

Chads

Posted by: Chads at July 9, 2004 11:36 AM

Do try to remember that Kerry is running on a “the War on Terror is all a sham dreamed up by the republicans” platform. The more he acts like the terrorist are not really a threat the more he plays it up for his constituents. If you want to be really paranoid immagine how badly the terrorist would like to have him elected as president for future appeasement. Now all they have to do is hold off all terror attacks until after the election but keep up the chatter and make lots of ‘fients’ to keep tom ridge on TV screaming “incomming, hit the deck!!!” and it will make the current administration look like fools after a while.

Or much worse, design a attack on the democrats that makes it appear that the administration either knew it was comming and did nothing or had was too incompitent to stop. Now if the “freedom fighters” had even minor cooperation with the campaigne leaders cough it would be pretty easy to pull off as long as they dont get caught.

Now where did i put that tinfoil……

Posted by: Ronin at July 9, 2004 11:36 AM

Even if you assume the briefings contain nothing of substance, or they are timed to interrupt Kerry’s campaign schedule. Kerry’s response still comes off very badly for him.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at July 9, 2004 11:40 AM

Chads: You have the same information on the current status of the WoT that the folks incongruous do. The noozemeeja have no more information on which to base a question than they have already reported.

Yuhsee — it works like this: If the noozemeeja have Actual Information, they report it! If not the NYT, then the Post; if not CNN, then Faux Nooze. But someone puts it out there.

Asking a question requires some informational baseline on which to base the question. There will be no questions that arise that will come from any informational baseline that Kerry doesn’t already have.

That really is how it works.

Information as a campaign tool is fraught with problems. But Cheney has the technique down to a T — imply that you have More Information that has not been released publicly, but that If The Public Only Knew, why then all his decisions and policies would become Perfectly Clear and their correctness unassailable.

It’s a religious thing — a belief in things Unseen. It’s also nonsense and assumes a level of gullibility that is extreme on those who like to parrot such nonsense.

Ronin: It’s now pretty clear that the WoT has been botched by bad intelligence, too much reliance on folks we paid to tell us what we wanted to hear, incorrect assumptions on what would happen in Iraq after the initial battle, a lack of focus on what’s really important (Afghanistan and ObL) rather than what’s not (Iraq) and where the greater danger really resides (Pakistan), and just generally p-poor management from the initial planning to the occupation stage.

Even publications like The Economist (which has a wonderful ability to see past the nonsense and get down to Reality™ of situations) that were and continue to be supportive of the invasion have now fessed up to the obvious truth of that statement.

Trying to gloss it over by redefining it as a partisan matter doesn’t help deal with what’s really going on.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 11:49 AM

Kerry could have said:

“They have offered to brief me, I have accepted that offer, and I will soon be receiving the briefing regularly.”

It’s a parsing thing. Use the future tense. No need to bring up the past. My god, did he learn nothing from watching Bill Clinton?

Posted by: DWC at July 9, 2004 12:01 PM

If Kerry is running on the terrorism is just something the Republicans dreamed up so they could buy blood with oil and deprive people of their Constitutional rights, shouldn’t he have sneared at these briefings?

The guy is just nice hair married to a rich wife. That’s about it. The way the Democrats hope to win is by demonizing President Bush.

They’d rather win the election than the war, so they will happily give aid and comfort to the enemy.

Posted by: Limpet at July 9, 2004 12:03 PM

DWC Sez: “It’s a parsing thing. Use the future tense. No need to bring up the past. My god, did he learn nothing from watching Bill Clinton?”

Evidently not…maybe he should have picked PIAPS as his running mate.

Bucky Katt

Posted by: Bucky Katt at July 9, 2004 12:20 PM

DWC: There’s something wrong with plain speaking? Clearly the briefing was offered — it’s offered to all the congresscritters. Clearly he’ll get it when he has time. Of late, he hasn’t had time.

Which is what he said?

Is that so big a problem?

Even if he had received it already, what possible difference would it make? It contains nothing that is not already public.

Limpet: Kerry saying he hasn’t had time for a briefing is not giving aid and comfort to The Enemy. Indeed, just at the moment, we do more for The Enemy by continuing to waste our energy and resources in non-productive matters concerning the WoT.

There’s much to be said for The Subject, though. Topicality is A Good Thing.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 12:23 PM

don engages in the most clever bit of sophistry I’ve seen in quite a while. Brilliant, Bravo.

Let me see if I can get to the meaning of it all:

The pretzel logic of the news media is this: if they have a question about something it’s because they already have information. No information, no question. Uh, yeah I see that. I only ask a question if I have the answer, right?

Next is this stunner:

//it works like this: If the noozemeeja have Actual Information, they report it!//

Of course if the news media doesn’t have actual information, it reports that too. Tales of fabrication yeah unto the NYT itself give the lie to this bit of insight.

Of course someone like Don couldn’t pass up an opportunity to make an unrelated statement re: his opinion about the prosecution of the war.

It has nothing to do with the original thread, it’s just a throw out to keep up his end of the conversation.

Still, this was a dumb thing for Kerry to say. DWC offered a much more “politic” potential response. My original contention remains: Kerry’s bad for Kerry and he’s got to be kept under tight wraps by his handlers.

And yes Don it is a partisan matter, this is an election campaign.

Hello? hello?

Posted by: skip at July 9, 2004 12:26 PM

Has anybody actually seen the clip? I’m just wondering how bad it looks.

I’m also wondering if that thing Hillary said in SF - “We have to take more of your money back for your own good” was caught on tape. Unfortunately, with this electorate, if it’s not caught on tape, it effectively didn’t happen.

Posted by: samuelv at July 9, 2004 12:36 PM

Skip:

In order to ask a question, a reporter must have sufficient information to cast the question at all. Since the material in the congressional briefings is already public, that’s the material the reporters have to work with.

What additional information, other than the briefing stuff, would Kerry have to answer a question derived from those sources? None.

As for meeja inventing things, those incidents are all over the landscape, viz the NY Post and its breathless headling about how Kerry picked Gephardt (which was foreshadowed hereon by a matter of hours by equally silly folks doing precisely the same thing, and which was immediately commented on by the excessively gullible in turn) as his VP candidate. Didn’t happen. But there are others as well, viz Faux Nooze’s seven reports during the Iraqi Invasion about the actual discovery of WMDs at various places, none of which actually occurred. Even just this week, we have an Israeli newspaper reporting that the “smoking gun” was found in Iraq, when that was not correct and the report on which the story was based Explicitly said it was not correct.

This bespeaks much about the Human Condition of those who run the meeja, but is otherwise merely a wash, and content-free for discussion purposes. Unless you like conspiracies, in which case Everything is part of one.

As for the comment to Ronin, though his post was off-topic, my response was on topic to his. Under the circumstances, it seems quite reasonable to me. The fact that its observations are internally correct merely makes it the more useful.

You are correct — this is a political campaign, undertaken by folks with a decidedly Partisan bent.

Folks of a more rational and reasonable mien will, however, attempt to see through such stuff, and try to discern the underlying material that really does matter. Learning how to resolve Spin is great fun.

I commend the practice of both to you as Something New and Interesting for you to try.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 12:45 PM

As far as “It contains nothing that is not already public” is concerned, that is simply not true. In what now seems like a prior life, I was an analyst in the State Dept.’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research in the late 80s/early 90s. I and others briefed the likes of Jimmy Carter and others outside the administration, but with a clearance and reason for the briefing. There is a LOT of stuff that’s not public; whether it changes the public conclusion is another matter, but the raw data is not out there in the public domain. My understanding at the time was that this had been done for presidential candidates and others since after the Kennedy missile gap and Bay of Pigs fiascos.
Kerry IS being irresponsible to make policy pronouncements without the benefit of both the raw info and the finished intelligence.
Rambler

Posted by: Rambler at July 9, 2004 01:08 PM

-Don “As for the comment to Ronin, though his post was off-topic, my response was on topic to his. “

Maybe you mean the opposite of what you say, im not sure.

The first part of my post was entirely on topic pointing out the reasons WHY kerry would make the statement the way he did, to give the appearence of one who believes the document in question was unimportant, or that he believed it to be hot air and fluff. After that my paragraphs devolve into conspiracy and ramblings of course.

Your reply however seems to only involve critisism for the WoT as it stands and of course Iraq…which wasnt mentioned in the original article.

Seems were both guilty of rambling on and on but lets both try to at least throw in a on topic sentance amidst the sludge.

Posted by: Ronin at July 9, 2004 01:35 PM

Squidward is right.

He can’t break a date with Whoopi to attend some stoopid briefing about “terrorism.” The guy is a Vietnam Vet. There is nothing they can tell him.

Posted by: jones at July 9, 2004 01:35 PM

samuelv

I just heard it a little while ago - it’s really more of a bad recovery than a total screw up. He started by saying “I haven’t been briefed yet”, then he immediately followed it with “they’ve offered to brief me, I just haven’t had time”.

I think he didn’t want to end it with the first phrase, cause he didn’t want to sound like he was blaming somebody for not telling him. Not great, but not quite as bad as just saying “I haven’t had time”.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at July 9, 2004 01:36 PM

The point, again, is that Kerry is not showing well as a campaigner. This is another gaffe, another blunder. How much play it gets will depend on who it benefits. I think the RNC should fold this into a campaign ad ASAP.

but if this is really what the guy meant to say, God help us if he gets into the oval office.

Posted by: skip at July 9, 2004 01:41 PM

Sigh.

It’s the same briefing the congresscritters get. I know four of them on a first name basis, and discuss this stuff with their staffs. Nor is it classified. That stuff doesn’t get loose outside the WH, much less to an opposition candidate.

There’s nothing in the briefing that isn’t already public. The noozemeeja have it all already, and have reported what they know within the past 48 hours.

Few of you folks seem to know how DeeCee actually works. But you can’t be held responsible for not knowing — you haven’t worked with those folks. You’re off the hook, sfaic.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 02:09 PM

Don—
With respect, I wonder why you think they would discuss classified information with you. Besides that, other than some committee staffers, the staff people don’t get intel briefings, and neither do most Congressmen.
Aside from speculation and repetitive innuendo, how do you know what “actually goes on” in Washington?
R.

Posted by: Rambler at July 9, 2004 02:16 PM

Of course they wouldn’t discuss classified information with me. They don’t have any to discuss, ferpete’ssakes!

Kerry would get precisely the same briefing that the other congresscritters get. It doesn’t contain classified information either.

The members of the two intelligence committees get deeper briefings that sometimes (though seldom) contain some material that has a relatively low classification. But not of the genuinely deep stuff. That information is not and never has been at issue wrt Kerry’s briefing.

Congress is a Leak waiting to happen. Always has been, and nothing substantial has changed. Which is why the information the congresscritters get is assumed to be made public within minutes of their getting it. The congresscritters themselves inevitably share that stuff with their staff aides — the folks who actually do the work in the offices.

You really don’t know how the place works at all, apparently. You should spend some time with the folks there, and discuss things back behind the press releases.

I’ve done that for decades.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 02:23 PM

I really should remember not to feed the trolls. I’m retired from the State Department, ditz. It may not be a life grounded in reality, but it does impart some idea of the foreign policy and intelligence process.
Enjoy your Georgetown cocktail parties.
R.

Posted by: Rambler at July 9, 2004 02:29 PM

One too many commas in one of your sentences.

Why do you think the State Department does intelligence briefings in these matters? Why do you think its briefings are the Only ones out there?

As for Georgetown, you are a continent-width off.

Learn to question your assumptions. That’s what got us into this fiasco in the first place.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 02:42 PM

Don,

My understanding is that the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) schedules an initial, in depth briefing with the presidential candidate, and that the candidate then receives the Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB).

My understanding is that the PDB contains considerably more intelligence than that received by the “congresscritters” to which you keep referring.

Please illuminate if I am mistaken.

Posted by: DWC at July 9, 2004 02:45 PM

The initial briefing is less on substantive Intelligence matters and more on how the classified material is to be dealt with by the persons receiving the PDB thereafter. Essentially it’s a lecture on how to handle classified material fundamentally, plus some information on how to discern the difference between various sources.

The PDB is a printed document. It contains all sorts of stuff, including selected and edited Raw Data, guesses, surmises and the like. It also includes a bunch of otherwise Public stuff — selected news articles and editorials, pictures, excerpts of speeches and television interviews, etc.

The really Deep intelligence stuff does not make it to the PDB.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 03:13 PM

Don and others:
I’m going to try to make this basic, unclassified, and the last post I’m sending on this thread.

First, some terms. “Intelligence” is “information” that has been analyzed in conjuction with the other information available that day, and with a comment or other indication of its context and meaning. “Information” is a raw report from the field or elsewhere (sorry, have to keep it unclas). A “Briefing” is a presentation by an analyst of the intellegence and, in some cases, other raw information (which may include broadcast reports from the Foreign Broadcast Information Service, the wire services, Embassy reports, etc., as well as “jucier” stuff). “Collection” is the process of obtaining the information — the familiar HUMINT, SIGINT, etc — and “Analysis” is the process of reviewing the information, sorting the wheat from the chaff, and preparing the information for briefing.

Each of the members of the Intelligence Community (http://www.intelligence.gov/) produces a “book” or other publication daily; many produce several, at various levels of access or analysis. All are classified Top Secret, along with one or more codewords indicating the level of access required. Frankly, the “deepest” intelligence is based on the ANALYSIS of raw information, rather than the raw information itself. A briefing, whether for an Executive-Branch policymaker or on the Hill, consists of presenting the pubs and special reports in the briefee’s area of interest, along perhaps with some explanation and context. No one is briefed without both a TS clearance and special intelligence access, and almost all of what is briefed requires it.

The President, Cabinet principals, and some Hill folks (don’t know who, offhand) get the President’s Daily Brief as part of their briefing, along with the other pubs. The President, if he chooses, gets the DCI to do the briefing. The President and the DCI are the only people who generally have full access to both the collection side and the analysis side, it being felt that it is too dangerous to allow anyone else to know both the information and the details on its collection (except in a general way).

I can’t testify to what’s in the PDB; I didn’t have access to it (need to know). I know some items I did for State ended up in it. I do know the process and roughly who gets what in the foreign policy community.

Enough. Hope this helps everyone sort their own raw info on this subject.
R.

Posted by: Rambler at July 9, 2004 03:53 PM

“Yuhsee — it works like this: If the noozemeeja have Actual Information, they report it! If not the NYT, then the Post; if not CNN, then Faux Nooze. But someone puts it out there.”

Don… I could give you some information AS I SPEAK that was ACTUAL NEWS on the WoT yesterday, that the ‘noooozemejaa’ didn’t bother to report. And I am talking MAJOR. It ain’t covered, and you ain’t gonna see it. WHY? Because the MAJOR players don’t want this kinda stuff to be spread about right now. It would look too good for those whose job it is to see that these things happen. I didn’t hear about it on in this forum, and I certainly ain’t gonna do anything about changing that. I’ll just let you play with your words like a little schoolkid.

“It’s a religious thing — a belief in things Unseen. It’s also nonsense and assumes a level of gullibility that is extreme on those who like to parrot such nonsense.”

And you are doing what?

“Ronin: It’s now pretty clear that the WoT has been botched by bad intelligence, too much reliance on folks we paid to tell us what we wanted to hear, incorrect assumptions on what would happen in Iraq after the initial battle, a lack of focus on what’s really important (Afghanistan and ObL) rather than what’s not (Iraq) and where the greater danger really resides (Pakistan), and just generally p-poor management from the initial planning to the occupation stage.”

Hmmmm. I can tell from your response to him that you really do have your finger to the pulse of the WoT. NOT.

“Even publications like The Economist (which has a wonderful ability to see past the nonsense and get down to Reality™ of situations) that were and continue to be supportive of the invasion have now fessed up to the obvious truth of that statement.”

What statement would that be?

“Trying to gloss it over by redefining it as a partisan matter doesn’t help deal with what’s really going on.”

RRRIIIIIIGHTTTT.

The italicized portion of the above Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 11:49 AM

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at July 9, 2004 04:01 PM

look carefully at what Don is really trying to do here. by attempting to down play the value of the briefing he’s trying to diminish the poor performance of his candidate.

Basically he’s saying “Hey, missing this is no big deal, there’s nothing that will be said that everybody doesn’t already know.”

to me if it moves rapidly in a pretty tight circle, its gotta be spin. And that’s what this is, pure and simple.

Then when learned posters attempt to point out that perhaps there is some merit to the briefing, Don argues from a position of complete ignorance.

All of this is of course vintage trollery. The point here is Kerry as a poor campaigner. His loyal minions will have to spin like whirling dervishes to keep up with his verbal gaffes.

We’re just getting an early look at how this will be done.

So thanks Don

Posted by: skip at July 9, 2004 04:13 PM

skip Just in case you’re wondering what the hell I’m talking about - Satphones are nothing but trouble for the BadBoys.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at July 9, 2004 04:25 PM

I used to live near fort Huachuca, some mighty interesting stuff goes on in the old listening closely line, eh?

Posted by: skip at July 9, 2004 04:29 PM

Keep it unclassified, guys.
R.

Posted by: Rambler at July 9, 2004 04:33 PM

Rambler I got the message, but I grow tired of DonnieChad being some pompously self-righteous about his ‘intel’. He must be getting all the juicy stuff from his TennisPartner.

Posted by: Cap'n DOC at July 9, 2004 04:51 PM

No matter — Tom Ridge is keeping everyone fully informed. The “briefings” contain nothing of substance that isn’t already public.

Unless folks believe that the administration is confiding Really Good Stuff to the folks incongruous, and not letting the rest of us know about it. Figure that’s the case?

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 11:21 AM
******************************************
YES I figure that IS the case. You REALLY expect EVERTHING to be divulged to the public view?

The Germans, the Japanese and the Soviets would have loved you.

Had that philopshy been in place in the not to distant past, we would be speaking German, Japanes or Russian.

Posted by: Dan Kauffman at July 9, 2004 05:48 PM

Just dropping in to see how the comment policy is doing …

Hmm. Quite a thread. Strident, pointed at times … Doc and some others clearly doing their best to stay civil and respectful. Rambler, excellent primer, thank you … I may put that on the Publisher’s Desk.

Oh, and extra credit to Skip and Don for using “sophistry” and “mien” in the thread … good work, boys.

Posted by: Alan @ TCP at July 9, 2004 06:04 PM

So Don,
Simple question, if Larry King asked Kerry if he had been to the briefing, why would’nt Kerry have just said ” well all the information is already public and I heard the news today”. Instead of “I just don’t have the time to be briefed”?

Posted by: commander at July 9, 2004 06:21 PM

I watched Larry King last night. In addition to the “gaffe” he quickly added that he would be getting the briefing before the end of the week (it was already Thursday night).

Keep in mind that the briefing we are talking about is with regards to this new intelliegnce that was announced less than 8 hours earlier, so in THAT context, not having time to receive the briefing (which he can’t do squat about at this point anyway) is not the mountain its being out to be on this thread.

Posted by: rdelephant at July 9, 2004 06:30 PM

“Yuhsee — it works like this: If the noozemeeja have Actual Information, they report it! If not the NYT, then the Post; if not CNN, then Faux Nooze. But someone puts it out there.”
******************************************

Correct me if I am wrong someone? And I will take WRONG instead of mistaken. ;-)

But didn’t quite a few MAJOR media outlets admit/confess what ever you wish to call it that they did NOT report many things that happened in Iraq because they had been afraid WAHHH Sob snivel that if they did their access would be cut off?

Oh and the NYTs? GIVE ME A BREAK!

You ever hear of Holodomor?

That was the Ukranian Genodice the NYTs star Reporter got a Pulitzer for COVERING UP.

Asked how he could justify what he did if not as a human being, then as a journalist, Walter Duranty is purported to have said, “The deaths of a few tens of millions of peasants are of little consequence when compared with the final victory of the Revolution.”

The day the NYT does as the Survivors of Holodomor have asked, and RETURNS the Pulitzer they display that was given for the articles covering up the genocide, I MIGHT give them credence as a reliable source of informatioin, until then I want to see sources and corroboration.

Posted by: Dan Kauffman at July 9, 2004 06:34 PM

Self-Styled Commander:

Are you criticizing Kerry for Not Spinning his answer?

I find it quite credible on its face, knowing what his schedule has been of late. He didn’t have Time. And he said he didn’t have Time. He didn’t spin it, he didn’t fake it, he didn’t obfuscate it. He just said what the situation really was.

I find that refreshing. No reason at all why you shouldn’t either.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 10:47 PM

DK: (Sigh!) Do you really need to go so far back as that for your accusations? If you do, I can take you to the era of Yellow Journalism, where the Press felt free to start wars, then respond to them in a jingoistic fashion.

Over the years, the press has changed. History works like that.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 10:48 PM

Skip: If there’s spinning going on here, it’s being done by those who take a completely innocuous and utterly true statement, and attempt to twist it into something it isn’t.

The briefing really is No Big Deal, and there’s no particular rush for Kerry to get it. There’s nothing specific to be accomplished by getting it, other than to check it off on a list of Things To Be Done sometime this week.

It’ll get done. No need to concern yourself with it. Time is Nature’s Way of ensuring that everything doesn’t happen all at once.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 10:51 PM

DK: You have a childlike Belief in Things Unseen. That’s religion, as defined, or perhaps merely superstition.

“You can trust Dubya. He knows More than you do.”

Convenient, but unpersuasive. It’s so wide-ranging that no matter what else happens, you can claim it as a Fact, and it’ll cover every exigency.

Doesn’t fly with me. But then, I have some experience with how the whole thing actually works in DeeCee.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 10:55 PM

DK: (Sigh!) Do you really need to go so far back as that for your accusations? If you do, I can take you to the era of Yellow Journalism, where the Press felt free to start wars, then respond to them in a jingoistic fashion.

Over the years, the press has changed. History works like that.

Posted by: Don at July 9, 2004 10:48 PM
******************************************
The NYT doesn’t seem to have changed much.

The refusal to return the Pulitzer or repudiate the articles it was given for is TODAY not 60 odd years ago.

I might add the articles on the Iraqi occupation could be lifted with little alteration from articles about the European occupation.

Yal take a gander at the jpgs of NYT articles found here from those days.

http://thecr.blogspot.com/

See anthing that looks familiar?

Some dogs don’t change their spots.

Its called a “prevailing pattern of activity” ;-)

Posted by: Dan Kauffman at July 10, 2004 12:18 AM

But then, I have some experience with how the whole thing actually works in DeeCee.
*****************************************
And of course we are supposed to merely take your word for that in the spirit of

“childlike Belief in Things Unseen”
rotflamo

But then this whole thread started with Kerry’s statement that he had been offered intelligence briefings but JUST DID NOT HAVE TIME FOR THEM

Now I REALLY want a guy like that with his hands on the tiller when my ship is going in harm’s way.

Posted by: Dan Kauffman at July 10, 2004 12:22 AM

Re : Classification : To anyone who has ever had any access to sensitive material, remember rule #1.

Rule #1 : STFU.

Rule #2 : In cases where there is any doubt whatsover as to the wisdom of posting, Rule #1 shall apply.

Rule #3 : No matter how much you may want to explode when some know-nothing spouts drivel that you can easily refute…. see Rule #2.

Finally remember that gathering enouch Unclass stuff together, and adding 2+2 to make a number between 3 and 5 can also make the final product of higher grade. “Confirmatory Intelligence’ as one US Admiral put it IIRC.

Of course, things may be different in the USA, but that’s how we do things here.

Posted by: aebrain at July 10, 2004 03:01 AM

re: Kerry/Edwards and two americas:
Perhaps they were thinking of this when they spoke:
http://www.marxists.org/archive/cannon/works/1948/twoamer.htm

Posted by: UnlikelySource at July 10, 2004 05:43 AM

I think you are all missing the obvious regarding this “faulty intelligence”.

First, it was the same intelligence that the Clinton Admin. touted as being correct, and delivered by the CIA and FBI agencies that the Clinton administration gutted and bastardized.
Second, it was information delivered by the heads of those organizations that the Clinton administration had appointed.
So in other-words, it’s all the Democrats fault and why in Gods name should they ever be trusted again?
As the 9/11 inquiry pointed out, Bush barely had time to get the oval office carpet stains steam cleaned out before 9/11 happened, and all security was still staffed by those appointed by the previous Clinton government.
Further, if the Democrats insist that this was faulty intelligence, then they have only themselves to blame because it was gathered while THEY were in office.
Lastly, we didn’t need this big long inquiry and investigation to waste all that tax payer money to prove the Democrats were idiots and incompetent when they were in power, and their incompetence had serious carry over effects into the following government. They put the nation and national security at grave risk, not to mention costing 3000 people their lives.

And Kerry doesn’t care about a security briefing? It sounds to me that national security still isn’t important to the Democrats.

Micheal Moore is right, Americans ARE the dumbest people on the planet, except he doesn’t know why, because he himself is dumb. Americans are going to elect another incompetent Democrat government, and this time it may kill millions.

Posted by: Imam_Nathan at July 10, 2004 07:47 AM

re: [aebrain]Re : Classification : To anyone who has ever had any access to sensitive material, remember rule #1.

Those ‘rules’ seem to need repeating more often than they should.

Posted by: CERDIP at July 10, 2004 11:07 AM