|Date:||Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:59:58 -0300|
|User-agent:||Thunderbird 184.108.40.206 (Windows/20060909)|
The SEC is one of the biggest data miners in the world. It's not that hard a question - if you have any sense of moral balance whatsoever. The President says it damaged the war effort.
The only way it is too early to talk about prosecuting them is if you do believe that they are, in fact, above the law that governs the rest of us. Indeed, that very drill was executed countless times in Fallujah. And the Times is not exempt from the laws of the country, no.
In fact, his entire argument rests on the premise that despite the unanimous testimony of people who do, in fact, know, that were' not in a position to know.
Which is precisely why the Times got way too big for its britches, and subverted the right and just role of our accountable officials in three branches of government. The rules of engagement allow for a close quarters fight like that. was trying this, and we know that they were shifting the way they transfer money to other methods.
Who's in a position to know for sure?
Sandy Berger got in heap big trouble for doing next to no damage to national security, other than perhaps tampering with records. Make sure it rattles around a bunch.
That the Marines involved were executing a doctrinally-mandated battle drill when the civilians were killed.
If he's that bad, why not hire someone else permanently?
I was apparently smoking crack or something. That the Marines involved were executing a doctrinally-mandated battle drill when the civilians were killed.
I suppose I would say that there probably is some chance of that, yeah. Not entirely a safe harbor - I would have to question why, when it became apparent that the Marines had clearly wounded noncombatants, aid was not rendered.
was trying this, and we know that they were shifting the way they transfer money to other methods.
Once again, I tried to be gentle.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|