Comments: Amazing Statement Of Congressional Impotence By Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller

JUSTICE IS BLIND and so is Congressional Oversight, aparently.

Posted by Mike Meyer at April 24, 2007 05:28 PM

Oh dear and my goodness we would not want Rockefeller to rock the boat. Most likely 82 million is just not enough money for the destitute Rockefeller, it never is for the class he belongs with. I suspect Jonathan that you are being too nice to the dems as no doubt that they saw all the kickbacks and graft enjoyed by the republicans during their little heyday as the majority. I would guess the poor dems are now ready for their share of the loot so why rock the money boat? That would just spoil it for everyone now wouldn’t it.

The dems have made the news with their little dog and pony show saying bring the troops home in October yet they know Bush will veto the bill. Now if the dems actually CUT THE FUNDING FOR THE WAR I might sit up and take notice however that is not the case. Is it because they feel helpless or is it that they are just like the republicans. I vote for the latter though I am no expert on these matters.

So I suppose it is no huge surprise that Rockefeller won’t rock the boat, he is just a rock after all.

I would say get ready for a war with Iran.

Posted by rob payne at April 24, 2007 10:17 PM

Rockefeller is a mewling disgrace.

Posted by The Fool at April 25, 2007 07:04 AM

Rockefeller is an elitist that knows right from wrong but doesn't really care. I mean honestly, he's fat. In this moment of "honesty" he would have the interviewer believe that he is not in some way in-the-know of the goings on in the intelligence community.
He does this pawning himself off as being helpless. This is not the case. This is a man of enough wealth to pay for even the most sacred knowledge; Trust me, he need not beg for it lest he's a fool... Or just plain disinterested.
The time has come for people to do to power and profit what they did to physical magic and disco. Fuh get ta'bot it ah reddy!

Posted by at April 25, 2007 10:50 AM

War with Iran? You must be joking. That "War" would last maybe three weeks and believe it or not, we would end up almost as bad as they would. The only reason for that btw, is the location of the battle. Iran has a very talented, agressive and experienced command corps that has been licking their chops fpr us since their spies were talling them we were going to try and invade. The U.S. military advantage (like most throughout history) is conditional at best.

Posted by at April 25, 2007 10:57 AM

The key to dominance is secrecy. Most specifically, the concealment of comprehensive knowledge of one sides' ground level strenghts, valuable military "assets" and resources.

The U.S. equipment, numbers and skill could be trumped by Iranian geo-political advantage. These two sides offset and seperate themselves if and only if they lose their will. This almost never happens. That is what Guerilla War is all about. Welcome to the 21st Century jarheads!

Posted by at April 25, 2007 11:17 AM

You may be one hundred percent correct in your assessment of what would happen with a confrontation with Iran and honestly I know nothing of military tactics which is because I have no interest in the military, an institution that I hope some day will no longer exist though I see little hope of that when you consider human nature. I probably know even less about politics but what I do know is that Bush is capable of just about anything and all the signs are there that he wants to go at it with Iran beginning with nuclear bombs or bunker busters as they now like to call them. As Hersh points out we see a similar pattern evolving to that of the rhetoric used by the Bushies regarding the buildup to war with Iraq. I find this worrisome as do many other people and I have very little confidence that reality is part of the Bush administration’s thought processes.

Posted by rob payne at April 25, 2007 02:20 PM

That's what this next 100 billion from Congress is for, Iran that is. YOUR TAXDOLLARS AT WORK!!!

Posted by Mike Meyer at April 25, 2007 08:21 PM

When the people who run the government are all so damn rich, comfortable and privileged they have a great deal to lose - the wealth, the comfort, the privileges.

To actually engage in political leadership they would have to risk losing all of this, and have very little to actually gain.

So, they won't actually risk losing all of this. They will avoid political leadership.

The lesson, then, is that when the members of Congress are wealthy, comfortable and privileged, they are unwilling and unable to actually engage in anything resembling political leadership.

Members of Congress should be people who have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Posted by Bobby Magee at April 25, 2007 09:05 PM

In all this bleating about how terrible Rockerfeller is, I hear no suggestions about how, as Chairman of the Intelligence Committee (this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Permanent_Select_Committee_on_Intelligence Can't see him listed.), he could make the DoHS, FBI or CIA do his bidding. These organisations each have a head. Who installs these people, and who do they report to? Who determines what they do? A quick look at fbi.gov , cia.gov and dhs.gov 's about us pages don't reveal much. It says who they have control over, but not to whom they are answerable, specifically.

Posted by me at April 26, 2007 06:25 AM

OK, here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Select_Committee_on_Intelligence

I think you're right, BTW, Jonathan. There needs to be pressure on him, and on other Democrats (who should have access to him) brought by describing actions they could take and constructing strong arguments about why they should do so. Making these well and widely understood would provide the most effective pressure.

Posted by me at April 26, 2007 06:32 AM

Thanks for this, Jon. I second your congratulations to Charles Davis, too.

Posted by Winter Patriot at April 26, 2007 10:09 PM

Iran would kick our ass, period. Anyone who suggests differently doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground. It's not a matter of advantage or technology, it's a matter of geopolitical advantage. Iran would have it. We wouldn't. Basically, the Iraq War MADE Iran all but impervious to U.S. attack.

Posted by at April 30, 2007 09:01 PM

What he likely means by this ("I can't. I can't afford to") is that he has effectively been blackmailed like so many others into silence.
see also: http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts02062006.html

Posted by dougie at May 15, 2007 05:52 PM

Insightful site I have only just finished reading James Shapiro's A Year in the Life of Shakespeare. A wonderful read. Recommended. Really awoken my interest in the Bard.

Posted by Gearldine Kuna at April 13, 2012 08:22 PM

Greeting from across the sea. excellent article I will return for more.

Posted by acid amino at April 18, 2012 12:30 PM

Straight away both youth baseball baseball organizationsWaspsSPlus

Posted by bo jackson nike shoes for sale at March 7, 2014 05:43 AM

A Tiny Revolution: Comment on Amazing Statement Of Congressional Impotence By Senate Intelligence Chairman Jay Rockefeller

Posted by http://www.beautifullazos.com/ at March 25, 2014 09:24 AM