Politics: Onward from New Hampshire

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by bilmore
I would be leery of giving Kim even the illusion that he could attempt to pressure for concessions simply because of the upcoming election. ("Mr. Bush, give me everything I want, and I promise I'll endorse Kerry again!")

I see your point, but there's risks to not engaging Kim as well, especially now that we've got (some) momentum on nonproliferation after busting A.Q. Khan and sending him off to a well-earned vacation at the Pakistani government resort of his choice.

Aside from that, your parenthetical made me laugh. I bet there are guys in NK photo studios right now doctoring photos that show Kim and Kerry as part of Kim's future endorsement press releases. Of course, unlike the Fonda photos, the doctoring is mostly to make Kim look like he is as tall as Kerry.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I bet there are guys in NK photo studios right now doctoring photos that show Kim and Kerry as part of Kim's future endorsement press releases.

I bet there are guys in the US doing that, too.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Turns out the sources weren't so good back when the admin claimed those squeaky clean trailers found in Iraq were actually mobile bioweapons labs.

The Bush administration's prewar assertion that Saddam Hussein had a fleet of mobile labs that could produce bioweapons rested largely on information from an Iraqi defector working with another government who was never interviewed by U.S. intelligence officers, according to current and former senior intelligence officials and congressional experts who have studied classified documents.
...
The claims about the mobile facilities remain unverified, however, and now U.S. officials are trying to get access to the Iraqi engineer to verify his story, the sources said, particularly because intelligence officials have discovered that he is related to a senior official in Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, a group of Iraqi exiles who actively encouraged the United States to invade Iraq.

Powell also cited another defector in his speech, an Iraqi major who was made available to U.S. officials by the INC, as supporting the engineer's story. The major, however, had already been "red-flagged" by the Defense Intelligence Agency as having provided questionable information about Iraq's mobile biological program. But DIA analysts did not pass along that cautionary note, and the major was cited in an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq and was mentioned in Powell's speech, officials said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Mar4.html

I sure wish we hadn't thrown our hat in with this INC crew. It may have been that there wasn't much of a selection of Iraqi exile opposition groups to choose from, but even so it sure seems like they've done nothing but take our govt for a ride this whole time.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by bilmore
"it is only a matter of time until North Koreans for Kerry starts a blog. Any suggestions on their slogan?

UPDATE: Early entries are rolling in:

A vote for Kerry is a vote for Kim.

Vote for Kerry or we will kill you.

Vote Kerry. He'll fight the special interests that stand in our way.

It's no fluke, he'll share the nukes. Kerry in '04.

Kerry in 'o4. He won't ask. We won't tell.

Kerry, our beloved nominee for President of the American Criminal State.

Be careful Billmore. You are getting awfully close to questioning his patriotism. Don't you remember - he is a decorated war veteran.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Turns out the sources weren't so good back when the admin claimed those squeaky clean trailers found in Iraq were actually mobile bioweapons labs.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Mar4.html

I sure wish we hadn't thrown our hat in with this INC crew. It may have been that there wasn't much of a selection of Iraqi exile opposition groups to choose from, but even so it sure seems like they've done nothing but take our govt for a ride this whole time.

Did you guys lie to us when you said the labs were for making helium for observation balloons? where are the observation balloons? Dems lied about observation balloons!
Dems lied about existance of observation balloons!

[Not Me]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I sure wish we hadn't thrown our hat in with this INC crew. It may have been that there wasn't much of a selection of Iraqi exile opposition groups to choose from, but even so it sure seems like they've done nothing but take our govt for a ride this whole time.

Who gives a crap. SH is out of power, no more rape rooms/tongues cut out/mass executions, Iraq is the fly paper helping to keep terrorist attacks off of US soil, and Libya has agreed to denuke.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Did you guys lie to us when you said the labs were for making helium for observation balloons? where are the observation balloons? Dems lied about observation balloons!
Dems lied about existance of observation balloons!

Kay has said he believes the trailers were likely used to produce hydrogen for weather balloons.

Lousy David Kay. He's lying too.

[eta I posted the story more for the INC angle and the fact that the intelligence agencies didn't even interview the guy, but if you want to get back into the Bush lied recriminations wait a second so I can go set my bullhorn to "shrill"]

[Not Me]

Anyone want to give their last minute predictions?

I say she is found guilty on at least one count.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I sure wish we hadn't thrown our hat in with this INC crew. It may have been that there wasn't much of a selection of Iraqi exile opposition groups to choose from, but even so it sure seems like they've done nothing but take our govt for a ride this whole time.

I'm thinking you're right, but, really, if your government and the rest of the world is already sort of assuming WMD's, and you get scientists from the country saying, yes, we have them, it may not be the clearest call in the world, but I think you have to give it some serious credence, indications of bias or not. Imagine the mushroom cloud, and then trying to explain "well, we thought they were lying to us."

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Not Me
Anyone want to give their last minute predictions?

I say she is found guilty on at least one count.

No jail time.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Not Me
Anyone want to give their last minute predictions?

I say she is found guilty on at least one count.

Agreed. Second prediction: Baconvic is found guilty on more counts than she is.

But, question, do I understand the judge's perjury ruling correctly? That the "two witnesses for perjury rule" is satisfied by a person's testimony and that same person's written recollection. That makes sense and honors the purpose of the rule.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
I see your point, but there's risks to not engaging Kim as well, especially now that we've got (some) momentum on nonproliferation after busting A.Q. Khan and sending him off to a well-earned vacation at the Pakistani government resort of his choice.

Khan was pardoned. Fair enough, since it is pretty apparent he didn't do anything other than cover Musharaf's ass anyway.

But, whether we are engaging NK or not, China will be, and it is, frankly, China that can (and needs to) apply serious pressure there - the US's most useful role is to keep saying "we're not buying the same shit in a new pot, thanks" so the local actors who have some real levers to pull can do so but blame the US for the hard line. On the other hand, giving China the space to flex muscle on its own (without public talks with the US hanging around) may also be a good move since they may feel freer to be forceful if they may then be able to take credit on their own instead of being seen as a tool in a US-led effort. China wants desperately to be perceived as a responsible and serious international citizen to be reckoned with, and they've pretty clearly gotten the message that this is their big chance to show they can play with the big boys and get results.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Agreed. Second prediction: Baconvic is found guilty on more counts than she is.

But, question, do I understand the judge's perjury ruling correctly? That the "two witnesses for perjury rule" is satisfied by a person's testimony and that same person's written recollection. That makes sense and honors the purpose of the rule.

I wasn't paying attention to the details of that. I heard something about it but I wasn't paying attention at the time so I don't know what the jury asked the judge.

[Not Me]

MS guilty on 4 of 4 counts. The broker was acquitted on one count, but I don't know which one and guilty on all others.

I hear they have stopped trading on her stock.

I bet that defense attorney is regretting his failure to put on a defense.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by bilmore
I'm thinking you're right, but, really, if your government and the rest of the world is already sort of assuming WMD's, and you get scientists from the country saying, yes, we have them, it may not be the clearest call in the world, but I think you have to give it some serious credence, indications of bias or not. Imagine the mushroom cloud, and then trying to explain "well, we thought they were lying to us."

Sorry, that "we can't let the smoking gun be a mushroom cloud" excuse doesn't get me very far, when we didn't even interview the guy. It may lower the threshold for believing something, but it doesn't excuse us from doing the due diligence.

On top of that you appear to gloss over that the guy we used for backup had been red-flagged by one of our own intelligence agencies, who didn't bother to tell the rest. In effect we had said we thought he was a liar. And yet his statements made their way into the NIE and the materials presented to the UN. I can probably accept that this was just poor coordination among agencies rather than some nefarious plot by the admin, but don't try to convince me that it's good evidence based on our overriding fear of a nuclear strike.

To me there's got to be two sides to the mushroom cloud issue. On the one side the potential harm is so horrific that I can understand the need to go on evidence that's less than perhaps would be required in other contexts. On the other hand I think most people seem to ignore that there is a very real monetary and security cost for a loss of credibility if we're wrong.