Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs

Lawrence Wilkerson: I received one particular assessment from a person for whom I had no reason whatsoever to believe that he would give me an inaccurate portrayal and one reason was, that was his character, but another reason was that he had no dog in the fight and his estimate of the number of people I think it was 741 or 742 that we suddenly had on a piece of paper somewhere of any significance was as follows. He said, "I'll tell you right now that 700 of them haven't done a damn thing except get in the way of somebody capturing them."

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

truthhurts

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Exactly. And again, that was the story that impressed me in Jane Mayer's book, The Dark Side, when, after understanding that there were so many "Mickey Mouse prisoners," as General Dunlavey called them, John Bellinger, who, at the time, was the National Security Council's Legal Advisor, went to try and have a meeting with Alberto Gonzales, when he was still Bush's Counsel, and found David Addington there, and Addington said, we're not bothered about what you've got to say about innocence and guilt. The President has said they're all guilty on capture, that's the end of the story, nobody's reviewing it. You know, it's an example of justifying actions on the basis of executive power, and as you said as well, if you're going to get into the details of why on earth are you doing it, it's because they thought they could very slowly build this "mosaic" of intelligence that would take forever, of every terrorist movement, every insurgent movement ever, and who knows how many people that would involve? I think the number of people in U.S. custody throughout the Bush years is over 80,000, isn't it?

And they're more interested in hearing this than they are in hearing that this madman was the driver of manufacturing false intelligence through torture to justify the invasion of Iraq.

www.andyworthington.co.uk

[W]hat I have learned is that as the administration authorized harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002 well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the US but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qaeda.

So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney's office that their detainee "was compliant" (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee had not revealed any al-Qaeda-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, "revealed" such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop.


Why was the High Value AL Target transfered to Eygpt and then to Libya instead of being held for intelligence gathering.

AL=AQ

As Paul Krugman explained in the New York Times on April 22, in an opinion piece that should really have been emblazoned on the front page,

Let's say this slowly: the Bush administration wanted to use 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq, even though Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So it tortured people to make them confess to the nonexistent link.

There's a word for this: it's evil.

Hey, we paid for 'em with bounties, fair n' square. I mean, nobody in Afghanistan or Pakistan would sell us someone who they weren't sure hadn't done something, right?
~Apologists for Bush's FUBAR Administration

"~Apologists for Bush's FUBAR Administration"

What's this??? Ol' Docster can't find a "hate Palin" thread so today he has to revert to "hate Bush?" You're getting desperate, Doc. Look around and you might be able to find something contemporary...I'm sure Vernon is around here somewhere.

Wake up, Jest, smell the coffee, and try to follow the thread. Wilkerson's talking about people sent to Gitmo who should've never been sent to Gitmo. And many of them got there by being sold -- literally sold -- to the US by Pakistanis and Afghanis. That was done during the previous adminstration. That's your history lesson for today. Sorry you don't like it, but truths are sometimes both inconvenient and disturbing.

"Sorry you don't like it, but truths are sometimes both inconvenient and disturbing."

That's EXACTLY what I've been saying in regard to the current administration. But, of course, I know you'd rather participate in "hate Palin" or "hate Bush," "hate Reagan," "hate Cheney" threads. Sometimes I think Danni has gotten you drinking her Kool Aid.
By the way...Jone IS a felon and a communist and Obama DID associate with Blogo, regardless of what he has said. Wilson was correct when he said, "You lie," even if he chose the wrong forum in bad taste.
So...can we agree...Bush lied...Obama lies?

"Look around and you might be able to find something contemporary..."

A last point: History is about the present. It influences the present. We are where we are because of what has happened previously.

I realize the subject of Bush is a difficult one for those who lip-locked him for eight years -- for openers, highly embarrassing, I mean what with that War of Choice and all -- but it's something with which you'll just have to come to terms, eventually.

Wilson was correct when he said, "You lie,"

Really?

Wilson's sad outburst came at a specific point in Obama's speech and in response to a specific statement. So, what was it Obama said about illegal immigrants that was a lie?

So, what was it Obama said about illegal immigrants that was a lie?

Said provision within the bill contains no enforcement mechanism.

It has no teeth.

It is a paper-tiger.


We have all sorts of legal language prohibiting illegal entry into this country yet it happens ALL of the time; rarely with any repurcussions.

"I realize the subject of Bush is a difficult one for those who lip-locked him for eight years --"

I think you have me confused with someone else. I was NEVER enamored of Bush. I have been extremely disappointed with candidate choices for the past twenty years or so. I have stated many times that I never voted FOR Bush, I voted AGAINST Gore and Kerry. Same thing in 2008...I voted AGAINST Obama and would even like to see McCain lose his seat in the Senate. I'm still wondering how in hell you and your little friends could have been fainting and getting tingles up your legs at Obama rallies. He doesn't even make eye contact with his audience, he swivels his head left and right, left and right to READ his speeches. Tingles...fainting...and then you say someone had a "lip-lock" on Bush. You crack me up.

From Politifact:

We've been monitoring claims about health care reform and illegal immigrants for some time now. Most notably, a chain e-mail claimed that page 50 of the House bill gave free health care to illegal immigrants. That page didn't say that. Rather, it included a generic nondiscrimination clause that said insurers may not discriminate with regard to "personal characteristics extraneous to the provision of high quality health care or related services." So we rated the chain e-mail's claim Pants on Fire.

We read all 1,000-plus pages of the health care bill and were struck by the fact that it is largely silent on health care for illegal immigrants. Keep in mind that experts estimated there were 6.8 million uninsured illegal immigrants in the United States in 2007, out of a total of 11.9 million illegal immigrants. Right now, most states have laws on the books that require hospitals to treat severely ill people who arrive at the hospital, regardless of immigration status, and we didn't see anything that would change those laws, either.

Most illegal immigrants are also now excluded from Medicaid, the government-run health care for the poor. We didn't see anything that would change that.

One place where the bill does mention immigration status is for "affordability credits." These are tax credits for people of modest means need to buy health insurance. The credits would help them buy insurance on a national health insurance exchange. The bill specifically says that people in the United States illegally are not eligible for tax credits, on page 132, section 242.

Still, given all that, we have heard from people who said that other aspects of reform could benefit illegal immigrants.

One of the most detailed responses was from the anti-immigration group Federation for American Immigration Reform, called FAIR. You can read their statement on the matter on their Web site.

Primarily, they argue that illegal immigrants would be permitted to purchase insurance on the national health insurance exchange because the bill does not include a mechanism for verifying citizenship. So illegal immigrants would have the chance to purchase insurance in the public option, a government-run health care plan that would offer basic coverage at a low price.

FAIR also argues for more robust verification measures for the affordability credit and making sure that illegal immigrant parents won't be able to receive coverage if their citizen children are eligible.

FAIR has a point that illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchangewhether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," the report said.

But it's worth pointing out that illegal immigrants participating in the exchange would be paying for their insurance like everyone else. That's similar to the current system -- we're not aware of any particular restrictions that stop illegal immigrants from buying private insurance now. Under health care reform, illegal immigrants would be able to buy private insurance or the public option.

When we look at all of this evidence, it seems that health reform leaves in place the status quo on illegal immigration, and certainly does not provide any new benefits particularly for illegal immigrants. We hope to look at this issue more in the days ahead, because some hospitals are particularly concerned about recouping their costs for treating illegal immigrants, and we're curious to know more about that problem and how it might or might not be solved by reform.

The best argument that we find that health reform would help illegal immigrants is that some might be able to purchase the public option -- if it passes, and it might not -- on the new health insurance exchange. They would purchase that at full cost. Obama's said "the reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally," which Wilson said was a "lie." Actually, Obama can make a pretty thorough case that reform doesn't apply to those here illegally. We don't find the public option argument enough to make the case that Obama "lied." We rate Wilson's statement False.
www.politifact.com

"Wilson's sad outburst came at a specific point in Obama's speech and in response to a specific statement. So, what was it Obama said about illegal immigrants that was a lie?"

He didn't say, "THAT'S a lie," he said, "YOU lie." In that regard he was totlly correct. Obama DOES lie...all the time.

I'm sure Vernon is around here somewhere.

#7 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2009-09-10 08:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I understand. I have ants in my apartment, and no amount of spraying will make the little irritants go away. (I think ants are like bees? All females? So the irritation is really just a nasty little pussy?

If you find a Drunk_Dwarf spray, spread the word. Many other would appreciate it.

Post a comment
Comments are closed for this entry.
Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable