Read the commenting rules carefully because they will be enforced!
It's a little frustrating, granted, but underneath it's all a game. The libs, NY Times, etc all took a beating about the head with the leaks about secret surveillance mechanisms, terrorist financial tracking, etc...This is their opportunity to show their "outrage" this time around at such leaks and hope everyone forgets about the past to focus on this trumped up controversy. Sad that it's too little too late in their expressions of "shock" when the real damage was done previously when they were defending journalistic free speach and the publics "right" to know. What a joke that now they try to pin it on Bush...Yes, everything from world hunger to vegetative deforestation in the Amazon is all Bush's fault.
Hey Phil.. I had a bad hair year in 2004.. so, maybe I can just blame Bush for it too huh? LOLOLOL
All I want to know is who leaked the information. Someone did it.
That's what I want to know, too, Stormwarning, and then I want to see their head on a pike somewhere on display for all to see.
A game, Phil? Perhaps it is a game, but it's a high stakes game with deadly consequences.
EXPERTS SPEAK THEIR MINDS: On his blog Haft of the Spear, signals and human intelligence veteran Michael Tanji says “without a doubt SITE is justified in feeling like the government screwed things up - and - The normally government-friendly Spook86 agrees over at In From the Cold, saying that “Ms. Katz is rightfully upset. But he takes away a different message from the incident than Tanji does. Spook86 believes that Katz should have never trusted “an intelligence community that leaks like a sieve and is always looking for plausible cover to protect its own collection efforts.
I think the more important point everyone seems to be ignoring is SITE claims they turned it over on the 7th... The Blotter publish their piece on the 6th...therefore it wasn't SITE's information that got leaked, unless SITE leaked it.
Therefore we are back at The Blotter knowing who they recieved the info from...as well as leaving the question "who had it BEFORE SITE?
If it was "leaked" before SITE turned it over to the WH, then by what right does SITE have to be complaining or implying accusations????
That is very damning.
As of this moment I would much rather vote for Ron Paul than any of the others. I think he has some incomplete thoughts on the war , but at least he knows the place of the government and knows his constitution.
I really am not fond of Rudy. I dont think he is presidential material. Fred Thompson reminds me of an old blood hound laying on the porch of a Dixie mansion. Mitt strikes me as untrustworthy especially the way he fought for something that was unconstitutional. John is iffy, and none of them bothered to show up for two debates. Debates that were held by Christians and Minorities, two groups you don't want to blow off.
This will be a tough year for me , I will not vote democrat, but I don't like the choices for republican either.
spree I am so sorry!!!!!!
I totally posted that in the wrong place
insomnia took over! I should learn not to post anything after midnight lol I am very sorry very very very sorry
I want to know who leaked it. Everything else, and all other issues or questions are distractions.
Hawk, my reference to "a game" is the liberal media's play on the issue, not specific to the leak itself. My belief is that the posting of information that compromises the confidential tracking networks designed to take out these al qaeda bastards and our security should land all these media folks and leakers in the slammer. The game refers to excuses that the liberal media profered up vociferously in defending what they did, TWICE!, by the NYTimes and what the lib politicians did to come to their aid. Is it treasonous? Sure is in my mind. However, it makes me pause to wonder why the Department of Justice NEVER filed charges in both cases.
Phil, we have asked that dozens of times.
Commenting by HaloScan
