Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Dr.SteveB
Is this you? Claim Profile »
7 months ago
in Silvestre Reyes Wants Obama to Keep McConnell, Hayden on The Washington Independent
Given that at the time he became chairman, Reyes did not know the difference between Sunni & Shia, there is still nobody "serious" in favor of keeping those who both missed the lack of WMDs and but are pro-torture in place:
from Congressional Quarterly in 2006:
I thought it only right now to pose the same questions to a Democrat, especially one who will take charge of the Intelligence panel come January. The former border patrol agent also sits on the Armed Services Committee.
Reyes stumbled when I asked him a simple question about al Qaeda at the end of a 40-minute interview in his office last week. Members of the Intelligence Committee, mind you, are paid $165,200 a year to know more than basic facts about our foes in the Middle East.
We warmed up with a long discussion about intelligence issues and Iraq. And then we veered into terrorism’s major players.
To me, it’s like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who’s on what side?
The dialogue went like this:
Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?
“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”
“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.
“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.
He couldn’t have been more wrong.
Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.
That’s because the extremist Sunnis who make up a l Qaeda consider all Shiites to be heretics.
Al Qaeda’s Sunni roots account for its very existence. Osama bin Laden and his followers believe the Saudi Royal family besmirched the true faith through their corruption and alliance with the United States, particularly allowing U.S. troops on Saudi soil.
It’s been five years since these Muslim extremists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center.
Is it too much to ask that our intelligence overseers know who they are?
Link:http://public.cq.com/public/20061211_homeland.html
from Congressional Quarterly in 2006:
I thought it only right now to pose the same questions to a Democrat, especially one who will take charge of the Intelligence panel come January. The former border patrol agent also sits on the Armed Services Committee.
Reyes stumbled when I asked him a simple question about al Qaeda at the end of a 40-minute interview in his office last week. Members of the Intelligence Committee, mind you, are paid $165,200 a year to know more than basic facts about our foes in the Middle East.
We warmed up with a long discussion about intelligence issues and Iraq. And then we veered into terrorism’s major players.
To me, it’s like asking about Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: Who’s on what side?
The dialogue went like this:
Al Qaeda is what, I asked, Sunni or Shia?
“Al Qaeda, they have both,” Reyes said. “You’re talking about predominately?”
“Sure,” I said, not knowing what else to say.
“Predominantly — probably Shiite,” he ventured.
He couldn’t have been more wrong.
Al Qaeda is profoundly Sunni. If a Shiite showed up at an al Qaeda club house, they’d slice off his head and use it for a soccer ball.
That’s because the extremist Sunnis who make up a l Qaeda consider all Shiites to be heretics.
Al Qaeda’s Sunni roots account for its very existence. Osama bin Laden and his followers believe the Saudi Royal family besmirched the true faith through their corruption and alliance with the United States, particularly allowing U.S. troops on Saudi soil.
It’s been five years since these Muslim extremists flew hijacked airliners into the World Trade Center.
Is it too much to ask that our intelligence overseers know who they are?
Link:http://public.cq.com/public/20061211_homeland.html
7 months ago
in Could Sheila Bair Rescue HUD? on The Washington Independent
and she is, technically, a Republican, which satisfies that so-called promise by Obama to have bipartisan cabinet (in addition to Gates).
7 months ago
in Daschle for HHS on The Jed Report
Not a favorite of career HHS/PHS:
See:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...
There was more lobbyist related unpleasantness behind this, and some cover-up... Not everybody's favorite.
NY Times January 14, 1995
Charter Plane Crash Traced to Pilot Error
Investigators have concluded that pilot error was responsible for the crash of a charter plane that killed three government doctors and the pilot when he was unable to pull out of a landing last Feb. 24 during a snowstorm at Minot, N.D.
The investigators' findings were made public on Thursday in a report by the National Transportation Safety Board. The report also raised questions about Senator Tom Daschle's intervention on behalf of the pilot's employer.
The crash occurred as Mr. Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat who has since become the Senate minority leader, was pressuring the Clinton Administration to reduce inspections of charter services used by the Government, including B & L Aviation of Rapid City, S.D.
The company, which was used by employees of the United States Forest Service, had routinely failed Forest Service safety inspections, but in April, bowing to Mr. Daschle, the Administration limited the Forest Service's inspection authority.
Mr. Daschle, a friend of the company's owner, defended the company's safety record. "Unfortunately no number of inspections would have prevented this tragic accident," said his spokeswoman, Ranit Schmelzer.
See:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=...
There was more lobbyist related unpleasantness behind this, and some cover-up... Not everybody's favorite.
- 0 points
- Jump to »
9 months ago
in What About the Attorneys That Weren’t Fired? on The Washington Independent
the one in NJ has been making a career going after Dems only, and insinuating against Menendez during last eleciton. The problem is that some of them are crooks. Just can't trust any of the federal prosecutions (and certainly not any insinuations not back up by indictments) given the policization of DOJ.
1 year ago
in Obama on Shakesville
1a. Obama could/should pick a woman, but not Hillary Clinton. Several good choices from swing state senate and governors.
1b. He must NOT pick a misogynist anti-female male such as Jim Webb, or others who are anti-choice. That will give women excuse to stay home or even vote for McCain, especially if McCain selects a woman (even if that woman is anti-choice).
2. Very scary for Democrats if McCain picks a woman. That is the only McCain VP choice that makes a difference. It could actually swing some of the supposedly outraged Clintonista white women to McCain, despite his and his party's immensely anti-female personality and policies (anti-choice, anti-equal pay, misogynist horndog (called wife c*&t, cheated multiple time on fist wife, etc.) militarism, supreme court choices, etc).
3. Some argue that Clinton believes that Obama cannot win and is positioning herself for 2012. Let us be clear: If Obama loses (with Clinton having already undercut him), there is no way she get the nomination in 2012. There will be new people running, including new women, and Clinton (both of them) will be remembered as having destroyed the Democratic party and the country.
1b. He must NOT pick a misogynist anti-female male such as Jim Webb, or others who are anti-choice. That will give women excuse to stay home or even vote for McCain, especially if McCain selects a woman (even if that woman is anti-choice).
2. Very scary for Democrats if McCain picks a woman. That is the only McCain VP choice that makes a difference. It could actually swing some of the supposedly outraged Clintonista white women to McCain, despite his and his party's immensely anti-female personality and policies (anti-choice, anti-equal pay, misogynist horndog (called wife c*&t, cheated multiple time on fist wife, etc.) militarism, supreme court choices, etc).
3. Some argue that Clinton believes that Obama cannot win and is positioning herself for 2012. Let us be clear: If Obama loses (with Clinton having already undercut him), there is no way she get the nomination in 2012. There will be new people running, including new women, and Clinton (both of them) will be remembered as having destroyed the Democratic party and the country.
