we called it 'treason' -- more than 6 months ago--
http://deskrat.blogspot.com/2005_03_01_deskrat_archive.html
* yeah i know it's probably a sin to quote yourself but we did call the outting of cia agent valerie plame by members of a "war president's" administration and /or staff --perhaps by the 'war president' and / or his vp themselves --during a time of war --treason --plain and simple--
now a member of 'veteran intelligence professionals for sanity'--"vips" calls plame's outting the treasonous act that it obviously was...i got slapped around and made to appear like a nut when i called in to some radio show hosted in a metropolitan area i was visiting last spring while seeking treatment for an old sports related injury. guess that ridicule goes with the territory when you criticize this administration but at least , i can say to that radioshow host and her guest who cut me off , "i told you so"
Author: d sekou
Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 12:28 pm
[No profile available]
yeah , that's ...the guy i talked to yesterday...(* the guest that previous day on a radio call in show--DOUGLAS McCOLLAM, a lawyer/journalist whose article on the topic of valerie plame, judith miller etc. was published in the Columbia Journalism Review) they blocked everything i tried to say except my original question.
the callers after me weren't blocked ...one caller made two replies to the guest's reply... i tried for about five minutes to get a point across and they blocked every one of my rebuttal comments from going over the public airwaves...and then AFTER, the host and the guest pooh pooh my question and try to make me look like a wild eyed "jump to conclusionist"...
AFTER the guest finished his weak rebuttal of my question, the host says "thank you for your call diallo"- as if this guy refuted my question of whether "war president" bush and his people did a treasonable act in outting plame ---she (the host ) acted like her guest refutted my question so badly that i was left speechless...
it reminds me of the net noir type days when this nut i was debating in a room he was administrator of blocked my text so i could not respond to his ridiculous claims that there was no arab enslavement of blacks ... the dirty little neegrow then announced to the rest of the room over and over " you see! sekou has no response because he has no evidence ! he's too mentally weak to respond to my logic and truth "
on the plame thing , the only way to get the info that plame is covert cia is from someone with higest national security clearance. to get such clearance, that "someone" must first sign several agreements stating under penalty of law that classified information is kept secret .
whoever provided the information about plame had to have signed and then violated that confidentiality agreement .
back in the 70s or so ,a --quote unquote-- "left wing" type of publication somehow got a list of cia operatives over seas .
they published the list and one of the outted cia agents was kidnapped and killed -- i think his name was james buckley .
the law requiring prosecution and 10 years in prison for intentionally revealing this type of classified info and outting cia operatives was the direct result of the buckley killing...back then the rightwing screamed that the left wing "outters" committed treason by aiding the enemies of the Us and getting cia personnel killed .
in the plame case the 70 people under her in her covert network were rendered ineffective and some killed ...in a state of "war"...under a "war" president --as that idiot is so fond of calling himself , to knowingly reveal classified information --information that could help the so called "terrorists" --information that allowed "enemies" of the Us to kill covert assets who were operating for the Us --compromising an entire intelligence undercover network---in a time of war --is treason plain and simple.
what if plame's network was about to uncover plans of another 9-11 attack on the Us ?
if this had happened under clinton's administration , he and hillary would both be in prison...but of course we know the rightwing nuts selectively apply their "moral" standards .
free speech ? ...yeah right...whatever...
Author: d sekou
Monday, March 14, 2005 - 11:56 am
[No profile available]
wow ! i called in JUST NOW to the "radio times" show carried in syndication out here by npr .
the topic was freedom of the press --in particular they concentrated on the valerie plame case and a reporter's right to not have to reveal their sources . apparently the judith miller /matt cooper thing is an appendage to the valerie plame case --which was the core of the discussion...the guest's article in columbia journalism review was titled something like "the dangers in the valerie plame case"
"Radio Times for Monday, March 14th
Hour 1
Should reporters be required to reveal their sources when the information is useful in prosecuting a crime? That's the question at the core of the case against New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Matt Cooper of Time magazine. We'll explore the dilemma with DOUGLAS McCOLLAM, a lawyer/journalist whose article on the topic was published in the current issue of the Columbia Journalism Review."
they picked up on the second ring --indicating not an overflow of callers this morning
i gave my info-- name and where i was calling from ,explained what my question was and waited patiently on the phone for my turn . then i finally got on .
i brought up the jeff gannon /johnny gosch thing .{http://www.rense.com/general63/hey.htm} told them on -air that it's all over the internet ...the real issue is not "protect your sources/freedom of the press"-- the real issue was whether the bush administration used "freedom of the press/protect your sources" to hide the fact that they committed treason by DELIBERATELY releasing the CLASSIFIED "valerie plame is CIA" info to whitehouse phony 'reporter' jeff gannon as retaliation for plame's husband puncturing bush and blair's "saddam wanted yellow-cake uranium from niger to build a nuke" hoax .
the host-- marty moss-cowain-- asked me on-air where on the internet had i read this --i mentioned sherman skolnick's name --offered to give the web site address ---she IMMEDIATELY said "I'm NOT INTERESTED IN THE WEBSITE ADDRESS" --the guest immediately "pooh poohed" my statement by basically saying it a was a big exaggeration to call outting plame "treason" and went on to continue to his speil about "freedom of the press -quoting thomas jefferson-'i'd rather have A free press and no government than no free press and A government' blah blah blah...spin spin spin bulshit bullshit bullshit" ...
during this LONG speil, i politely kept trying to interject and clarify WHY it was treason, but i don't know if they had me on block and the listening audience could not hear me --i had my radio turned down very low and couldn't hear myself when i tried to speak the second time---BUT i believe they could hear me in the studio because the guy seemed to grow more and more irritated as i tried to respond AS he TALKED OVER ME AND NEVER LET ME GET ANOTHER WORD IN EDGEWISE.
when he finished his spin the host quickly said "we have another caller" and "free speech" was through with me...
interesting that the caller before me asked a question --remained on-air for the guest's reply and then was able to make another comment on the guest's reply...which happens often on these shows--i've heard the host at times ASK for a caller to respond to the guest's response to the caller's question --and appear SURPRISED that the caller did not hold on , and was not there anymore---so it's not unusual to be able to respond to the guest's response to your question --especially since time was not short -- BUT apparently NOT THIS TIME---or as the football player in that VISA commercial on tv says, "Not in OUR house buddy. Not today ! ...Not today... not tomorrow..."
so much for free speech...
* yeah i know it's probably a sin to quote yourself but we did call the outting of cia agent valerie plame by members of a "war president's" administration and /or staff --perhaps by the 'war president' and / or his vp themselves --during a time of war --treason --plain and simple--
now a member of 'veteran intelligence professionals for sanity'--"vips" calls plame's outting the treasonous act that it obviously was...i got slapped around and made to appear like a nut when i called in to some radio show hosted in a metropolitan area i was visiting last spring while seeking treatment for an old sports related injury. guess that ridicule goes with the territory when you criticize this administration but at least , i can say to that radioshow host and her guest who cut me off , "i told you so"
Author: d sekou
Tuesday, March 15, 2005 - 12:28 pm
[No profile available]
yeah , that's ...the guy i talked to yesterday...(* the guest that previous day on a radio call in show--DOUGLAS McCOLLAM, a lawyer/journalist whose article on the topic of valerie plame, judith miller etc. was published in the Columbia Journalism Review) they blocked everything i tried to say except my original question.
the callers after me weren't blocked ...one caller made two replies to the guest's reply... i tried for about five minutes to get a point across and they blocked every one of my rebuttal comments from going over the public airwaves...and then AFTER, the host and the guest pooh pooh my question and try to make me look like a wild eyed "jump to conclusionist"...
AFTER the guest finished his weak rebuttal of my question, the host says "thank you for your call diallo"- as if this guy refuted my question of whether "war president" bush and his people did a treasonable act in outting plame ---she (the host ) acted like her guest refutted my question so badly that i was left speechless...
it reminds me of the net noir type days when this nut i was debating in a room he was administrator of blocked my text so i could not respond to his ridiculous claims that there was no arab enslavement of blacks ... the dirty little neegrow then announced to the rest of the room over and over " you see! sekou has no response because he has no evidence ! he's too mentally weak to respond to my logic and truth "
on the plame thing , the only way to get the info that plame is covert cia is from someone with higest national security clearance. to get such clearance, that "someone" must first sign several agreements stating under penalty of law that classified information is kept secret .
whoever provided the information about plame had to have signed and then violated that confidentiality agreement .
back in the 70s or so ,a --quote unquote-- "left wing" type of publication somehow got a list of cia operatives over seas .
they published the list and one of the outted cia agents was kidnapped and killed -- i think his name was james buckley .
the law requiring prosecution and 10 years in prison for intentionally revealing this type of classified info and outting cia operatives was the direct result of the buckley killing...back then the rightwing screamed that the left wing "outters" committed treason by aiding the enemies of the Us and getting cia personnel killed .
in the plame case the 70 people under her in her covert network were rendered ineffective and some killed ...in a state of "war"...under a "war" president --as that idiot is so fond of calling himself , to knowingly reveal classified information --information that could help the so called "terrorists" --information that allowed "enemies" of the Us to kill covert assets who were operating for the Us --compromising an entire intelligence undercover network---in a time of war --is treason plain and simple.
what if plame's network was about to uncover plans of another 9-11 attack on the Us ?
if this had happened under clinton's administration , he and hillary would both be in prison...but of course we know the rightwing nuts selectively apply their "moral" standards .
free speech ? ...yeah right...whatever...
Author: d sekou
Monday, March 14, 2005 - 11:56 am
[No profile available]
wow ! i called in JUST NOW to the "radio times" show carried in syndication out here by npr .
the topic was freedom of the press --in particular they concentrated on the valerie plame case and a reporter's right to not have to reveal their sources . apparently the judith miller /matt cooper thing is an appendage to the valerie plame case --which was the core of the discussion...the guest's article in columbia journalism review was titled something like "the dangers in the valerie plame case"
"Radio Times for Monday, March 14th
Hour 1
Should reporters be required to reveal their sources when the information is useful in prosecuting a crime? That's the question at the core of the case against New York Times reporter Judith Miller and Matt Cooper of Time magazine. We'll explore the dilemma with DOUGLAS McCOLLAM, a lawyer/journalist whose article on the topic was published in the current issue of the Columbia Journalism Review."
they picked up on the second ring --indicating not an overflow of callers this morning
i gave my info-- name and where i was calling from ,explained what my question was and waited patiently on the phone for my turn . then i finally got on .
i brought up the jeff gannon /johnny gosch thing .{http://www.rense.com/general63/hey.htm} told them on -air that it's all over the internet ...the real issue is not "protect your sources/freedom of the press"-- the real issue was whether the bush administration used "freedom of the press/protect your sources" to hide the fact that they committed treason by DELIBERATELY releasing the CLASSIFIED "valerie plame is CIA" info to whitehouse phony 'reporter' jeff gannon as retaliation for plame's husband puncturing bush and blair's "saddam wanted yellow-cake uranium from niger to build a nuke" hoax .
the host-- marty moss-cowain-- asked me on-air where on the internet had i read this --i mentioned sherman skolnick's name --offered to give the web site address ---she IMMEDIATELY said "I'm NOT INTERESTED IN THE WEBSITE ADDRESS" --the guest immediately "pooh poohed" my statement by basically saying it a was a big exaggeration to call outting plame "treason" and went on to continue to his speil about "freedom of the press -quoting thomas jefferson-'i'd rather have A free press and no government than no free press and A government' blah blah blah...spin spin spin bulshit bullshit bullshit" ...
during this LONG speil, i politely kept trying to interject and clarify WHY it was treason, but i don't know if they had me on block and the listening audience could not hear me --i had my radio turned down very low and couldn't hear myself when i tried to speak the second time---BUT i believe they could hear me in the studio because the guy seemed to grow more and more irritated as i tried to respond AS he TALKED OVER ME AND NEVER LET ME GET ANOTHER WORD IN EDGEWISE.
when he finished his spin the host quickly said "we have another caller" and "free speech" was through with me...
interesting that the caller before me asked a question --remained on-air for the guest's reply and then was able to make another comment on the guest's reply...which happens often on these shows--i've heard the host at times ASK for a caller to respond to the guest's response to the caller's question --and appear SURPRISED that the caller did not hold on , and was not there anymore---so it's not unusual to be able to respond to the guest's response to your question --especially since time was not short -- BUT apparently NOT THIS TIME---or as the football player in that VISA commercial on tv says, "Not in OUR house buddy. Not today ! ...Not today... not tomorrow..."
so much for free speech...
posted by dsekou at 4:22 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home