[ExI] Who is safe?

spike spike66 at att.net
Mon Dec 13 23:29:32 UTC 2010

... On Behalf Of Stathis Papaioannou
Subject: Re: [ExI] Who is safe?

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 6:14 AM, David Lubkin <lubkin at unreasonable.com> wrote:
>> Seriously. When he gets to trial, I wouldn't be surprised if the 
>> defense argued diminished capacity.

>He was an "intelligence analyst". What does a PFC who is an intelligence analyst do?--Stathis Papaioannou

This is misinformation or disinformation.  Or perhaps *very* liberal use of the term.  Every time I see something like this, the whole thing looks more suspiciously like a setup.

On a related note, regarding a previous post of mine referencing Karl Rove, I looked up in his book what he said about Rathergate.  I noted something this time that I missed on the first reading: Rove does not explicitly deny that he did it.  He set himself up for a later self-congratulatory confession.  See what you think.  On page 390 of Rove's Courage and Consequence, he was talking about the swiftboaters attack on John Kerry.  He says "I had no role in any of it, though the Swifties did a damned good job."

OK now, a few paragraphs later, he is talking about the 60 Minutes story.  Courage and Consequence, page 392, Rove comments:

"...Maureen Dowd, the New York Times columnist, repeated democratic 'speculation about whether Karl Rove, the master of dirty tricks and surrogate sleaze, could have set up CBS in a diabolical pre-emptive strike to undermine damaging revelations' about Bush's National Guard service.  Diabolical indeed.  For this scheme to work, it required me to convince a Bush-hating source to provide falsified memos to Dan Rather through his Bush-hating producer, and then get Rather to take the bait and publish the story, despite how obviously fake the memos were.  My critics were again investing me with superhuman powers."

How do you guys read that?  Note that he flatly denied involvement in the swiftboaters, but slyly indeeds this other caper, with an ambiguous "diabolical indeed."  Indeeding is not specifically denying.  Even if he did it, every word in the quoted paragraph is technically true, and if so, it is something he is proud of, but cannot confess just yet.  I want to live long enough to see if he ever does either confess or specifically deny it.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list