I’m just wondering and all.. but considering all of the flap over the Valerie Plame leak investigation and all….
Since real classified information was leaked in this case – and that leak caused irreparable harm to a program that appears to be generating actionable intelligence…
Where’s the outrage over this disclosure of highly classified information? Where are the calls for a special prosecutor?
I’m just wondering.. that’s all…
The illegal strike of the New York City transit workers makes me wistful for these words of wisdom by former President Ronald Reagan:
Let me make one thing plain. I respect the right of workers in the private sector to strike. Indeed, as president of my own union, I led the first strike ever called by that union. I guess I’m maybe the first one to ever hold this office who is a lifetime member of an AFL – CIO union. But we cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government’s reason for being.
It was in recongition of this that the Congress passed a law forbidding strikes by government employees against the public safety. Let me read the solemn oath taken by each of these employees, a sworn affidavit, when they accepted their jobs: “I am not participating in any strike against the Government of the United States or any agency thereof, and I will not so participate while an employee of the Government of the United States or any agency thereof.”
It is for this reason that I must tell those who fail to report for duty this morning they are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated.
And then this great question & answer:
Q. Mr. President, why have you taken such strong action as your first action? Why not some lesser action at this point?
The President. What lesser action can there be? The law is very explicit. They are violating the law. And as I say, we called this to the attention of their leadership. Whether this was conveyed to the membership before they voted to strike, I don’t know. But this is one of the reasons why there can be no further negotiation while this situation continues. You can’t sit and negotiate with a union that’s in violation of the law.
The Secretary of Transportation. And their oath.
The President. And their oath.
Bubblehead writes of Germany’s release of Mohammed Ali Hamadi:
I have a new standard by which I’ll measure the success or failure of the current Administration: whether or not this scumbag is still breathing in January 2009. Chapomatic makes pretty much all the points I’d make about the Germans freeing Mohammed Ali Hamadi, murderer of SW2(DV) Robert Stethem, in what they’re claiming was not a “terrorist for hostage” deal.
As much as I’d like to see Hamadi dead, I guess I wouldn’t mind too much if he’s just captured and returned to the U.S. to face trial and subsequent execution. And if he’s captured overseas, and our European allies make a big stink about flying him through their airspace, I know just the warship that should carry him here.
Where’s that missile equipped Predator when you need it?
I haven’t had the time or the right mindset yet to dig into the legal arguments surrounding the New York Time’s disclosure of the NSA Wiretaps of some US Citizens thought to be connected to Al-Qaeda, but I did enjoy this little tirade from Froggy:
So essentially what the liberals are saying is that the US should not monitor calls from known terrorists abroad to previously unknown US co-conspirators under any circumstances. They are proposing in essence that only calls to terrorist co-conspirators who are well known and under surveillance already can be monitored. The idea that the US should put its fingers in its own ears and repeat, “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!” when terrorists communicate with their agents in the US is one of the most ridiculous and silly ideas that I have ever heard. Members of the Frogosphere already know that Democrats cannot be trusted with the security of the United States, but this highly political stance cannot be mistaken as anything other than the utterly irresponsible and laughably weak gesture that it is.
I am especially encouraged by the President’s rapid and forceful defense of this practice which has already compelled his leftist malefactors to take indefensible positions that they will undoubtedly regret at the ballot box. Timing the release of this story with the filibuster of the Patriot Act and the successful Iraqi elections demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that the MSM and the radical left are one single purpose entity focusing on any possible method of attacking the President and prematurely ending his term. When Democrats make the same argument against wiretaps targeting terrorists trying to kill millions of Americans with eavesdropping on civil rights leaders and anti-war activists in the 1960’s one shudders at the implications of that level of timidity and cowardice.
When I get a chance to read the 20+ articles I have tabbed here in Firefox about this, I’ll spout off some more…
In all three aspects of our strategy — security, democracy, and reconstruction — we have learned from our experiences, and fixed what has not worked. We will continue to listen to honest criticism, and make every change that will help us complete the mission. Yet there is a difference between honest critics who recognize what is wrong, and defeatists who refuse to see that anything is right.
Defeatism may have its partisan uses, but it is not justified by the facts. For every scene of destruction in Iraq, there are more scenes of rebuilding and hope. For every life lost, there are countless more lives reclaimed. And for every terrorist working to stop freedom in Iraq, there are many more Iraqis and Americans working to defeat them. My fellow citizens: Not only can we win the war in Iraq, we are winning the war in Iraq.
It is also important for every American to understand the consequences of pulling out of Iraq before our work is done. We would abandon our Iraqi friends and signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word. We would undermine the morale of our troops by betraying the cause for which they have sacrificed. We would cause the tyrants in the Middle East to laugh at our failed resolve, and tighten their repressive grip. We would hand Iraq over to enemies who have pledged to attack us and the global terrorist movement would be emboldened and more dangerous than ever before. To retreat before victory would be an act of recklessness and dishonor, and I will not allow it.
We’re approaching a new year, and there are certain things all Americans can expect to see. We will see more sacrifice — from our military, their families, and the Iraqi people. We will see a concerted effort to improve Iraqi police forces and fight corruption. We will see the Iraqi military gaining strength and confidence, and the democratic process moving forward. As these achievements come, it should require fewer American troops to accomplish our mission. I will make decisions on troop levels based on the progress we see on the ground and the advice of our military leaders — not based on artificial timetables set by politicians in Washington. Our forces in Iraq are on the road to victory — and that is the road that will take them home.
