SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)9/20/2008 1:24:11 PM
From: Jim S  Respond to of 90947
 
You know what they say, "beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone."



To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)12/23/2008 6:45:30 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 90947
 
Hat tip to Alan Smithee:

Deep Throat: Too Late the Hero

The passing of Mark Felt of Watergate fame forces us to examine the irony in his betrayal of Nixon.

December 20, 2008 - by Clarice Feldman

When I decided to write something on Mark Felt who passed away this week at 95, an online friend, Narciso, wrote of the "incremental irony of Mark Felt." When I asked him to elaborate he wrote back:

>>> He conducted illegal or at least dubious surveillance against the Weathermen, he then faults Nixon for the same tactics, he undermined his own agency and ultimately almost ended up in jail. <<<

Besides sage words about being wary of the motives of government employees bearing tales of corruption to the press, Narciso's words constitute as complete an epitaph of Mark Felt as I can summon.

Felt has been lionized in the media for his revealed role as "Deep Throat" in the Watergate scandal. But he also has a history that shows him to be less than deserving of those accolades.

1. He Conducted Illegal or at Least Dubious Surveillance Against the Weathermen

In 1972 and 1973, the FBI was vigorously pursuing the Weather Underground, a domestic terrorist group who had planted bombs at the Capitol, the Pentagon, and the Department of State. On nine occasions, Felt authorized FBI agents to secretly break into five different residences in New York and New Jersey occupied by persons believed to be associated with the Weathermen.

These break-ins — called "black bag" operations — were conducted without court-approved search warrants. In United States v. U.S. District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972), the U.S. Supreme Court declared such warrantless surveillance to be unconstitutional, and the Carter administration, under Attorney General Bell, investigated the FBI's role in the matter. As a result, Felt was charged with conspiracy to violate the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens (Title 18, Sec. 241 USC) in 1978. After an unsuccessful attempt to plea bargain, the case went to trial in 1980.

Former President Nixon, driven from office by Felt's revelations to Woodward and Bernstein, still did not know he had been his betrayer. Nixon not only contributed to his defense, but also testified on his behalf – as did other members of his administration.Though found guilty of violating the civil rights of citizens, Felt received a relatively light sentence of a $5,000 fine, and even escaped that when, in March 1981, then-President Reagan pardoned him to the great joy of his fellow agency employees, officers, and Nixon.


2. He Faulted Nixon for the Same Tactics

Unknown to those in the agency who defended him, and to Nixon who supported him, Carter who indicted him, and to Reagan who pardoned him, Felt had been the source "Deep Throat." His work for Woodward and Bernstein, the Washington Post reporters whose conversations with Felt revealed details of the "black bag" operatives working for Nixon, illuminated the entire illegal intelligence operation that included the break-in at the Watergate Hotel.

In fact, during the 1976 grand jury investigation of Felt’s own “black bag” operation, Assistant Attorney General Stanley Pottinger had learned that Felt was Deep Throat but the secrecy of grand jury proceedings prevented him from disclosing that to anyone.

So, while his colleagues were toasting his pardon and Presidents Reagan and Nixon were doing what they could to exonerate from blame a man whom they considered unjustly convicted, he was continuing to conceal his role as the individual who brought down the Nixon Administration. His reason? Probably for appointing someone else, not him, to the directorship of the FBI.


3. He Undermined His Agency and Ultimately Almost Ended Up in Jail

With the revelation years later of his double role, some argued that Felt was nevertheless a hero for exposing Nixon’s wrongdoing. Others — and I consider myself among them — believe he could have resolved this more honorably by telling what he knew to the grand jury investigating the break-in at the Watergate offices. (Today, of course, legitimate whistleblowers can bring any presumed wrongdoing to the attention of inspector generals in their departments or to the appropriate congressional committees.) Calling it in to the New York Times as Mr. Tamm did on the FISA program or to the Washington Post as Felt did seems more like an act of a wounded ego or spite than something designed to improve government operations.


In Felt’s case, it is hard to imagine a more monstrous betrayal than his. He reviewed every FBI report on the Watergate investigation and gave it to the reporters almost as soon as it hit his desk. One can only imagine the chaos and paranoia that action caused and how it impacted everything the FBI was working on.

Felt escaped punishment for his own wrongdoing and avoided any consequences for his betrayal of the very people who stood by him when he was charged with that wrongdoing.

So if you’re looking for an Aesop Fable-like moral to this story, as in most real life accounts of double dealing, there isn’t one.


pajamasmedia.com



To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)5/1/2009 5:36:31 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
Hat tip to Alan Smithee:

ZoBama's Under My Bus

youtube.com



To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)9/16/2009 4:09:27 PM
From: Sully-2 Recommendations  Respond to of 90947
 
Our thoughts & prayers are with you Alan Smithee

Message 25945761



To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)12/31/2009 6:43:04 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 90947
 
Hat tip to Alan Smithee:

From mLive.com (a Michigan site):

Customs says second person detained after Flight 253 for reasons unrelated to attack

mlive.com

Kurt Haskell, the Taylor, Michigan, lawyer who reported seeing a "well dressed man" attempt to get the bomber onto the flight at Schiphol posted a lengthy comment under the name "pug":
Posted by pug

December 30, 2009, 11:18PM

Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.

Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253 stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period, all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called "Sharp Dressed" man. I will refer to this man as "The man in orange". The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers and said the following (approximate quote) "You all are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out." We were then marched out of the baggage claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that wasn't a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has, since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be held indefinitely) since our flight landed for "immigration reasons." Notice that this man was "being held" and not "arrested", which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.

Just a question, could that mean that the man in orange had no passport?

However, a few hours later, Customs changed its story again. This time, Mr. Ron Smith of Customs, says the man that was detained "had been taken into custody, but today tells the news the person was a passenger on a different flight." Mr. Ron Smith, you are playing the American public for a fool. Lets take a look at how plausible this story is (After you've already changed it twice). For the story to be true, you have to believe, that:

1. FBI/Customs let passengers from another flight co-mingle with the passengers of flight 253 while the most important investigation in 8 years was pending. I have already stated that not one person who wasn't a passenger or law enforcement personnal was in our area the entire time we were detained by Customs.

2. FBI/Customs while detaining the flight 253 passengers in perhaps the most important investigation since the last terrorist attack, and despite not letting any flight 253 passenger drink, eat, make a call, or use the bathroom, let those of other flights trample through the area and possibly contaminate evidence.

3. You have to believe the above (1 and 2) despite the fact that no flights during this time allowed passengers to exit off of the planes at all and were detained on the runway during at least the first hour of our detention period.

4. You have to believe that the man that stood 20 feet from me since we entered customs came from a mysterious plane that never landed, let its passengers off the plane and let this man sneak into our passenger group despite having extremely tight security at this time (i.e. no drinking even).

5. FBI/Customs was hauling mysterious passengers from other flights through the area we were being held to possibly comtaminate evidence and allow discussions with suspects on Flight 253 or to possibly allow the exchange of bombs, weapons or other devices between the mysterious passengers from other flights and those on flight 253.

Seriously Mr. Ron Smith, how stupid do you think the American public is?

Mr. Ron Smith's third version of the story is an absolute inplausible joke. I encourage you, Mr. Ron Smith, to debate me anytime, anywhere, and anyplace in public to let the American people see who is credible and who is not.

I ask, isn't this the more plausible story:

1. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don't want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers on a flight with a live bomb on the runway for 20 minutes.

2. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don't want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers in customs for 1 hour with a live bomb in a carry on bag.

3. Customs/FBI realize that the man in orange points to a greater involvement then the lone wolf theory that they have been promoting.

Mr. Ron Smith I encourage you to come out of your cubicle and come up with a more plausible version number 4 of your story.

Part 2 soon to follow to discuss why the FBI's passport story is the 2nd biggest joke of the day only superseded by Ron Smith's third version of the man in orange account.

Message 26211586



To: Alan Smithee who wrote (67279)1/27/2010 1:37:59 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 90947
 
**** Higher taxes for thee, but not for me ****

Oregon Says Yes to Taxing Wealthy, Businesses

AP

PORTLAND, Ore. -- Oregon has set aside its history of shooting down tax increases on statewide ballots, with voters endorsing higher taxes on businesses and the rich amid a brutal economic slump.

Democrats in the Oregon Legislature made it as easy as they could for the voters to raise taxes on somebody else, and the electorate responded Tuesday by approving Measures 66 and 67.

The increases approved Tuesday will hit people with taxable income upward of $125,000 -- estimated at fewer than 3 percent of filers. Many businesses who had been paying an annual $10 minimum will see that rise to at least $150.

With 91 percent of the vote counted, the vote was 54-46 on Measure 66 and 53-47 on Measure 67.

Oregon voters have consistently rebuffed legislative attempts to take more in tax revenue -- such as a cigarette tax to pay for health insurance for children three years ago, two previous income tax measures that would have hit most Oregonians and nine sales tax measures over the decades.

A Democratic legislative leader, Senate President Peter Courtney, said he was, just in case, preparing a statement acknowledging defeat just before the results were reported Tuesday.

"This is a tax vote?" he exclaimed later when the victory was evident. "This is indescribable ... It's Oregon being Oregon."

The vote affirms the two-year budget the Legislature controlled by Democrats adopted last year, and spares it $727 million worth of budget cutting during a four-week session that begins Monday.

Courtney's counterpart in the House, Speaker Dave Hunt, says the session will focus on legislation to spur job creation and to help people hurt by the slump that has boosted the unemployment rate to 11 percent and driven record numbers of people to seek aid such as food stamps.

Oregon's Sherwood Forest, take-from-the-rich strategy might appeal to legislators in other states struggling to bandage their budgets, said Portland pollster Tim Hibbitts.

"The nature of the measure they crafted was very smart political strategy," he said.

"If you're going to take this to a red state, it's going to be a lot more difficult," he said. "Other blue states that are feeling the pressure may say, 'Maybe we could craft a similar measure and win with that."'

Business leaders and Republicans were glum. Hibbitts' polls suggested a closer vote, and for much of the voting period, liberal Multnomah County was slow to mail in and drop off ballots, raising the hopes of the tax opponents.

It was a victory for public employee unions who were the spearhead of the campaign for the taxes and raised enough money to outspend the opponents.

A Common Cause analysis put their fundraising advantage to date at $6.85 million to $4.55 million in one of the state's most expensive campaigns.

"The bottom line is the unions bought the election," said State Republican Chairman Bob Tiernan. "It's going to be a sadder day as more businesses leave the state and more don't want to come here."

feeds.foxnews.com