Tarkan,
IMO : the question from the beginning has been: was the name leak for political gain.
If it was a question of written basic standard straightforward strict law and regulations owing to mechanisms within your own government, i.e. in regards to a statue of limitations on officers NOC nonwithstanding or not, the publics curiousity would never have been aroused enough to warrant the slightest media attention.
Apparently you are not allowed to drop names of agents period, it seem's to reporters et al , and esp it seems to stir contentions and arouse tempests in tea pots...esp when is concerning matters as highly politically sensitive (and not national security sensitive) as motivations for a nation to go to war.
The ensuing controversy that ensued was enough to distract readers from Mr.Wilsons articles and "testimony" in the annals of the public press.
When an investigation began and now ended, it appears Mr. Libby was culpable in obstructing the course of justive which would ostensibly end its course and path of action by vanquishing the quest for answers.
In doing so he broke the law. Unwittingly perhaps but that in itself is a further question that will no doubt be pursued with vigour by his party in an effort to further exonerate him self.
Theres no doubt its political but it does make one wonder with both amazement and admiration at the turning of wheel s at the justice system in motion.
At least from this vantage point in Canada.
Yours with regards
Mach
--
- - - -
BFC POLITICS
note to coldharvest: no such thing as stupid questions. some might even argue that further by saying: only stupid replies.
It took more nrg for Kurt to ban me than to simply let all posters live and let live without his casual interference.
Unlike Mr Libby, Kurt seems to have an exacting type memory. The difference is in how it serves. His seems to serve him solely to justify repeated banning whereas my recall ability seems to indicate that although a few remaining questions about the incident remain, I do have both feet firmly planted in the present.
Unlike him, constantly quoting and referring to yesteryear and even years before that.
Thats called living in the past. How ironic that natives have often been disparingly told to get with the 21st century. Now that the opportunity looms on the horizon, its people like cold and kurt who stand to be left behind by not adapting. Of course, they can always trade faces between on line and off line, be one person online and another in rl (criminal trademarks I take it)
but there is no real lead to take here. Only a course correction. Everyone in the world knows that by now. Thats why native american wisdom gets a shunt. But it is funny how a return to it now makes sense.
As indicated by the clear political stance of all who support Kurts ban on my posting, its clear he just doesnt like me but also allows him self to be used by the right wingers as the perfect excuse to carry out his ban and clearly sales and people using the Black Flag to sell things (or promote them-lol) is not the issue.
The issue is: who gets to use their political stance to influence peddle to help Kurt reach his decision? The political right.
IN the case of Libby, I think Fitz was as unpolitically un-biased as they come. Which is exactly why its a beatific thing to see the wheels of justice in motion. Even for an instant.
caffeinated
lazy
crushed out
don't ask
energetic