So your claim is that Plame’s status under the law was covert – therefore – “outing” her was illegal. And yet nobody ever got charged for it. Think about it. Think. Think. Think.

How many man-hours were burned up hunting and the best they could do was a perjury charge from someone who wasn’t even the source of any of the stories (per the journalists). How weak can you get. A classic example of partisan blind obsession.

Have a fine dinner of the nothing that came of all this. And don’t foget the tin foil hat.

If there was truly nothing to it, Libby would not have been convicted of perjury and obstruction, and the WH would have conducted the internal investigation that it promised after the initial leak. Also, Waxman is seeking records of Fitzgerald’s investigation interviews, which would finally reveal the full extent of WH involvement in the case. If there was no conspiracy to out Plame, why are they blocking the release of those records????

I specifically meant the promise that our US government has repeatedly made (and repeatedly broken) to move the US Embassy to the Capital of the State of Israel – JERUSALEM. No other country would put up with this nonsense – why should Israel have to?

I think that revealing the identity of a CIA agent is a very significant incident.
In particular, re Libby and others, that fact that chatting freely about an agent was never dealt with by the administration is deeply disturbing.
Pardoning, excusing and ignoring do not constiture taking such revelations seiously.

And if you don’t like Plame, remeber that, the principle still applies, even when the agen should be a devout Republican.

I don’t know what ‘enough’ support for Israel consists of, in your mind. But demanding it just because it’s Israel is exactly what turns people off.
As a non Jew I suspect I get a more honest response when I make the case for Israel than Jews speaking to other Jews do.
i take comfort in my Israeli connections who see things the way I see them. They, like I, feel that an aggressive rhetorical style combined with a constant focus on Israel as the cause clebre, actually makes them a biggger target and less secure.

Speaking softly and keeping the big stick behind one’s back also has the advantage of not putting non-Jews in the hot seat of needing to decide just how much of thier own safety they need to sacrifice for another country. Support for Israel is a moral position, not necessarly a tactical one, remember.

Anything causing an increase in terrorism, as an attack on Iran would undoubtedly do, is a threat to jew and non-Jew alike, remember.Support for Israel, especially when it’s rash, thereforr is more than just words or money. it involves safety.

I’m just telling you what makes my role in the supporting Israel field more difficult.
You can either take my advice seriously or be offended by it. It’s your choice, and your responsiblity.

Valerie Plame was working a desk job in DC because her cover had been blown 10 years previously in the Aldridge Ames affair. Read the damned Senate report. Quit being an ignorant partisan hack.

So if this is ancient history, why should Waxman be wasting his time and our money on it?

He’s being a typical Dim party hack-activist as well as trying to Bush as best he can. Do you think he would do, and spend, nothing?

[W]hat does dubya have to lose with a pardon?

Nothing. He’s been despised and hated for ages by the media and others on the Left for ages, and as soon as Libby was indicted, if not before that (as soon as he was in the news as being associated with the deliberate security compromise) the possibility and likehood of a pardon for Libby was commonly discussed, the object of much speculation (when rather than if).

* * *

we in the US do not support the State of Israel ENOUGH

People often are ignorant or mistaken about Israel’s situation and what it faces from its enemies (they take Israel’s ability to defend itself for granted, may not believe there are any existential threats to it such as a WMD attack; they underestimate its enemies or actually take the enemies’ side and think they’re victims, etc.); if things got worse, many Americans would favor oil over Israel just as the Bush crowd does already (for pro-oil reasons that are associated with special interests of theirs).

The Road Map and Annapolis and the rest show the government’s treatment and attitude, which in some ways is worse than the public’s, because those who are involved in government should know better. The Road Map is a cramming of concessions down Israel’s throat; Israel, the victim of attacks and whose record is almost 100% one-way that of concessions to its enemies without receiving anything in exchange but continued hatred and attacks on it, in Annapolis was asked to — make more concessions. Think of those Czechs in the 1930s, “a people far away, about which we” (not only the public, but seemingly by government) “know [nor care] nothing.” (”They are being so troublesome when it would be so easy otherwise to achieve peace…”)

Making this about Israel is another one of those tone deaf moves that pays no attention to whether what is said gains converts or opponents

I didn’t “make this about Israel” when I listed our vital interests in the Middle East — note the plural; I had also listed the other major interest besides Israel, and even noted correctly that oil is favored over Israel. The obvious subject there was that Iran is malevolent, and it constitutes a threat in the Middle East (and thus to our interests there, as well as to our troops). And what I write is not what you say it is, any more than it is a purple elephant.

Do you ever actually read what I write? Yes. But do you ever understand it, much less plan to respond logically to it? More accurately, will you, sometime?

Making this about Israel is another one of those tone deaf moves that pays no attention to whether what is said gains converts or opponents.

After 40 years of involvement in Israeli related affairs, I’ve never seen the number of supporters falling away to be greater than now.

To a considerable extent, you can thank thsoe who make everything about Israel for that rend,
Israel enjoyed carte-blanche support until it changed its tone from asking for support to demanding it. People have a habit of wanting to decide for themselves and to want the liberty of weighing in their own interests into the mix.
Somewhete, between Pakistan and Iran, American interests have to play a major role, if Israel;s interests are to remain in the game.

Being demanding, overbearing and bullying is the best way to drive support away By making the case against Iran to be one primrily about Israel, activists lead people to question why their own interests are being ignored. People are more apt to sacrifice for others if it’s seen as voluntary support on moral grounds than if it’s forced upon them.
Social psychology should not be such a mystery!

Bush has the same failing. It’s often not what he says, but how he says it that leads people to want to bash him. As you rail about Bush bashers, I would suggest you consider why he so blindly and deafly invites it with his manner of speech and actions.

Think about it. How many converts do those ‘The end is near’ screamers on street corners make?

Whey aren’t the people who believe that military action can solve all problems agitating for a srike there?

They don’t believe that military action can solve all problems, and they never have. Even the “who’s next?” neocons didn’t advocate military intervention against everyone. (I use past tense because despite what some may also believe in addition to “solve all problems,” the neocons are discredited by the nature of Iraqi occupation and reconstruction and have lost a lot of clout.)

Please show me links where the Iranians illegally bought beryllium, krton switches and high speed DAQ

These aren’t normally things that are declassified or widely announced. To do so would reveal sources and methods. You normally don’t read or hear in the news of these things. What you describe is an example of hindsight, where most things can be revealed after the nuclear-weapon status of a nation has been confirmed, such as by a test.

Hey, speaking of supicions and probablities, why are we talking only about Iran?

We already know Pakistan has nukes, has people in its military that are not only ready to initiate a war with India that would destroy the Subcontinent (”Why not?” was the most famous quote from one in Pakistan’s military), and has officials who have wanted to hand nukes to the Taliban for “safekeeping.” (!)

We know Saudi Arabia and other Gulf nations want nukes.

The reason Iran is a major issue is that it threatens its neighbors and especially Israel, is the worst state sponsor of terrorism [which includes in Iraq], and is in the Middle East, site of two critical US interests (stability security of petroleum supplies and existential security of Israel — and as we have seen, the Bush people will write off Israel, as they favor oil interests).

Pakistan’s nuclear facilities are guarded by forces reportedly infiltrated by Islamist extremists.
Pakistan has vast areas controlled by the Taliban and AlQaeda.

The overt dangers lurking in Pakistan are a lot more evident than what is only implied by Iran’s rhetoric and secrecy.
Why haven’t we bombed Pakistan yet?
Whey aren’t the people who believe that military action can solve all problems agitating for a srike there?

Please show me links where the Iranians illegally bought beryllium, krton switches and high speed DAQ like the Pakistanis program did in the 1980’s and 1990’s?

For a gun-type weapon, that doesn’t even need testing? (We didn’t test ours before dropping it on Hiroshima.) All that’s needed is enough bomb fuel, uranium and plutonium, on which the Iranians continue to work (now openly, formerly secretly, which should tell you something not only about for what use the fissile material was and still is intended, but in how defiant the Iranians are now). Don’t assume an implosion weapon is sought, something I believe too many are assuming.

Is your point that perceived intents equals an active program?

No, it’s actual conduct and what that means, even if some of it is now out in the open and not all activity may be happening currently, about the nature (and objective) of the program.

What the nature (and objective) is of Iran’s nuclear program, the many, many years of lies, deceptions, and continued refusal to permit unrestricted access to all nuclear sites lead to the obvious suspicion and conclusion.

Maintaining the appearance of credility is an important aspect of any public office, lest appearancea and acruality get sufffesed. and confused. When there is an overt effort to confuse appeareances with actualities, the problem becomes even graver.

That there was no official reaction to all the loose lips may have just been stupidity or arrogance, but there’s that confusion again.

*** CORRECTION *** Iran had (and still has) a nuclear weapons program, even if you believe all the lies and deception committed by Iran means nothing, that they were “just kidding” or “the evil Bush and Clinton and Bush Sr. and Reagan scared them and they were just responding to their fear.”

Scooter will not be forgotten at pardon time — and he’s more deserving of a pardon than Marc Rich.