Comments (14)

Jake D. wrote on October 25, 2007 12:13 PM:

I guess not.

TPM plays its fiddle while California burns.

Curt Reply wrote on October 25, 2007 12:18 PM:

Jake D. diddles while the Constitution burns.

Jake D. wrote on October 25, 2007 12:25 PM:

Curt:

Honestly, I'm just trying to help. Maybe TPM would be interested in this angle "Don't Let Bush Burn Down California": http://action.foe.org/content.jsp?content_KEY=3406

NitPicker1 wrote on October 25, 2007 12:36 PM:

Jake D., if the coverage of Rice's testimony is in your opinion so unimportant, perhaps your time and attention would be better spent at a news site that is focusing on the California fires, rather than here at a muckraking blog.

Click on my name for a link to the San Diego Union-Tribune, which should have plenty of video and up-to the minute reporting to keep you occupied for the rest of the day at least, and that failing, I'm sure a simple search on google news will find more.

Just a friendly suggestion. :-)

moondancer wrote on October 25, 2007 12:36 PM:

War criminal regrets not keeping an eye on her praetorion guard, which happens to be lead by a Christo-fascist traitor.
So now that they've committed murder, your an accomplice.

Anonymous wrote on October 25, 2007 12:49 PM:

"Jake D., if the coverage of Rice's testimony is in your opinion so unimportant"

can't be that unimportant to him since he's desperately rushing to be the first comment on every thread.

RB-Chicago wrote on October 25, 2007 12:50 PM:

moonraker has it exactly right...Shouldn't she be shopping for shoes in Spain?

I have never seen anyone LYING thru their teeth with a straight face as well as her...

Did she take lessons from Cheeeeeeney?? Ooops I forgot, he's asleep...

Jake D. wrote on October 25, 2007 12:54 PM:

For the record, I have not posted first in every thread today -- right now I am multi-tasking at the San Diego Union-Tribune web site -- I do use my REAL NAME when I do post, however.

Anonymous wrote on October 25, 2007 1:05 PM:

"I do use my REAL NAME when I do post, however."

'D.' is your real last name? how unfortunate.

Jake D. wrote on October 25, 2007 1:11 PM:

My last name is Dort.

Jet wrote on October 25, 2007 1:14 PM:

"I certainly regret that we did not have the oversight that I would have insisted upon..."

... what? that I would have insisted upon if I had not been a heartless bush-addled toady who is a large part of the problem as to why we are occupying a foreign country and who knowingly and with malice of forethought bought and paid for and gave my blessings to the mercenaries like this drunk who murdered an innocent man while in the green zone and then helped flee the country so as to impede the "sovereign" Iraqi Government from pursuing him.

I regret so many things:
I regret that the GOP lost so badly in the last elections and that I'm now sitting here having to testify in front of you.

I regret that the cover-up didn't work.

I regret that this whole thing isn't over and I can't go back home and just be baseball commissioner and only have to worry about drugs in baseball and go home nighly to my long-time "roommate" er "friend" and get a cuddle.

Dee Illuminati wrote on October 25, 2007 1:23 PM:

From Yahoo:

(Reason why posted, the unintended conseuquence of the Military Detainee Act's is that these contractors would effectively loose the right of Habeus Corpus if put under Military control

And.. as I still believe that somebody is innocent until proven guilty, especially an American citizen, irrespective of their occupation or political affiliation, race, color, or religion... this needs to be further debated....

I don't want to see US citizens under a condition where: they are subject to military command by non-us command, most notably Iraqi as there is infestation by militants in the Iraqi security forces, US citizens subject to kangaroo court Iraqi laws, and finally, where a US citizen whom is not an official member of the US armed forces without recourse to a fair an open trial.

Does there need to be one-stop-shopping for accountability? Yes. But we need to think twice before knee-jerking into legislation under the circumstances.. I hope the cooler heads in the room will prevail and that the pragmatists will prevail. I have some degree in confidence that Gates is pragmatic enough to find an accomodation to avoid US citizens (contractors) being sucked into a political backlash.)

And Yes folks: If you are picked up and accused of being an enemy combatant, "accused" of that mind you... then you have no recourse to legal appeal of that "accusation."

This has to be deliberated carefully, we went down a slippery slope, and have to consider this issue carefully and return to the principles that have crafted effective management in that past.

My opine is that: Contractors are 'referred for prosecution by the DOD to the DOJ for hearings, trial, conviction and US courts' if they are US citizens performing duties in Iraq.

I would as a contractor consider it a breach of contract if that designation was changed, mid contract and there was not safeguards to pevent a political prosecution. Screw that! These contractors under DOD have sworn to protect the constitution and Americans, not abdicate their rights underneath a contract of employment.

I advise left wing interests to consider carefully what they advocate here...

Article follows:

Article follows:

The Senate this month included such a requirement in its 2008 defense authorization bill. Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told reporters Wednesday he is confident the House will go along with the idea and include it in a final bill sent to President Bush.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was to testify Thursday about the subject before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

She has ordered new rules for the private guards who are hired to protect U.S. diplomats. They include increased monitoring and explicit rules on when and how they can use deadly force. The steps were recommended by a review panel that Rice created after a deadly Sept. 16 shooting involving Blackwater USA guards.

Rice also called for better coordination with the military, but did not explicitly act on a suggestion by Defense Secretary Robert Gates that combatant commanders have control over the contractors.

Levin, D-Mich., said he was not sure if Rice expressly opposed the idea. "Whether she likes it or not, we expect to get this language" to emerge in the compromise with the House.

"It's not slapdash" and "is something we've been working on a long time," Levin said.

The Blackwater shooting provoked an outcry from the Democratic-led Congress and the Iraqi government, which is demanding that it have the right to prosecute the contractors.

In more fallout, the State Department's security chief resigned Wednesday.

Richard Griffin, the assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, made no mention of the furor in his resignation letter to Bush and Rice. But it came just one day after a study commissioned by Rice found serious lapses in the department's oversight of private guards, who are employed by Griffin's bureau and report to it.

Rice accepted the resignation, which is effective Nov. 1, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said. Griffin will be replaced on an acting basis by one of his deputies, Gregory Starr.

Griffin, who previously was deputy director of the U.S. Secret Service and inspector general for the Veterans Affairs Department, had been in his current job since June 2005.

TheraP wrote on October 25, 2007 3:55 PM:

It's always the passive voice. I regret "that there was not the oversight."

"was not" .... never I regret I failed to provide oversight.

No... it's as if it happened by itself... and wow, we regret that thing "happened."

Oversight... it's like the weather... it happens or it doesn't happen. But let's regret...

Uncle_Meat wrote on October 26, 2007 3:30 PM:

She sure as hell didn't regret the loss of life, did she?