"It's pretty clear defensetech.org is a closet lefty platform. Why not say new Abu Ghraib pics, instead of "awful"? Those pics are pretty damned tame compared to what 'ole Saddam did to folks. Big whoop."

That's sad then it has to through punditry into the mix.

Posted by: daskro at February 17, 2006 10:01 AM

"I'm just curious, is it pretty typical for defensetech.org to post links to progressive blogs such as nationinstitute.org?"

It's pretty clear defensetech.org is a closet lefty platform. Why not say new Abu Ghraib pics, instead of "awful"? Those pics are pretty damned tame compared to what 'ole Saddam did to folks. Big whoop.

Posted by: Joe at February 16, 2006 5:06 PM

The article about a long-term presence in Iraq shouldn't come as a surprise after all this time. Two condition probably need to be met for a major U.S. withdrawl: A strong and self-sufficient Iraqi military in trustworthy hands able to defend against major external threats (read: Iran), and major idealogical changes in the Middle East as a whole away from the current brand of homocidal mania we're accustomed to today. I can tell you which one I won't be holding my breath for, too.

Unfortunately this is also subject to continued support from the White House and Congress. The next eight to twelve years may just give us a President with a cut-and-run philosophy.

Posted by: TrustButVerify at February 16, 2006 9:58 AM

I'm just curious, is it pretty typical for defensetech.org to post links to progressive blogs such as nationinstitute.org?

Posted by: Daskro at February 16, 2006 2:59 AM

"Tice said he believes it violates the Constitution's protection against unlawful search and seizures but has no way of sharing the information without breaking classification laws. He is not even allowed to tell the congressional intelligence committees - members or their staff - because they lack high enough clearance."

Tice's concern is correct concerning staff members, but members of congress, the POTUS and VPOTS and the Supremes do not have clearances as a consequence of their office. They have access to classified information as a consequence of their office, subject to some vaguely stated and untested "need to know." Presumably members of the intelligence oversight committees have a need to know about intelligence activities.

So Mr. Tice would be perfectly within the law if he were to ask for a members-only hearing and Tell All. Or go to any subset of the committees' members and Tell All.

Of course, he'd never get a clearance again and be blacklisted from intelligence jobs.

Posted by: NotAlawyer at February 15, 2006 7:14 PM