Edgewise

RNC: Quick takes

Arnold? Pretty entertaining. But I kept waiting for him to tell us why it was we should reelect Bush. Sure, we got plenty of reasons why America's great. And let there be no doubt: If the USA and all the positive things it can stand for in this world are ever on the ballot, they've collectively got my vote. (also: Wooo!) But what I was looking for were a few positive attributes or policies or actions related to this particular president. I got a grand total of one: "he's quite decisive." And you know what? So is that gorilla that learned ASL. When she wants an apple, boy, she really wants an apple. But I ain't letting Koko hold The Button.

The so-called "Bush twins"? They put the "train wreck" in "holy crap! I just saw a train wreck!" Even the Fox "All-Stars" (and speaking of them: [insert vomity noise here]) thought these two were a disaster. I'm sure it doesn't really matter to the actual election. And I'm not gonna tear them apart, because it ain't their fault. But yeeesh. Whoever wrote and approved those speeches managed to make Paris Hilton and Nicole Ritchie look like Mother Teresa and the Dalai Lama. In comparison. Which is not an easy thing to do. Because Paris Holton and Nicole Ritchie really aren't very deep. Or at least, they don't seem very deep on the TV. And neither did the so-called "Bush twins." Tonight. Was my impression.

GWB's introduction of Laura? So boring the people (I assume being paid to stand behind him and look like they're casually playing softball) couldn't even be bothered to stop playing softball long enough to look over. Now that's charisma!

Mrs. Bush? Not bad, actually. A little dull. Sure, she stretched the truth at points ("my husband is actually at home doing stem cell research right now! using real live babies!") But credit where credit's due: she was pretty specific, she was fairly positive, she seemed reasonably sane. A solid B+. Too bad she's not running for office.

And ye shall judge them by what they say about John McCain

Got an email from the Kerry campaign Monday night pointing out this bit of unpleasantness:

One of the groups making the case that decorated war hero John Kerry is actually a cowardly, unpatriotic, Viet Cong-loving liar have also put up a lengthy post making the brutally detailed case for why decorated war hero John McCain is actually -- whoa! surprise! -- a cowardly, unpatriotic, Viet Cong-loving liar. (Why? Oh lots of reasons. I gather they don't want McCain moving into the GOP VP slot. And the head of this group is angry with both McCain and Kerry for making peace with Viet Nam. And on and on.)

And you know, when I come across stuff like this, bits of trash that redefine southward -- yet again -- just how low some people appear eager to go, well it just sorta makes me hope there really is a hell. That's all.

Scoop: Presidential race still tied. Developing...

Here's a quick replay of the last several months:

Kerry up by 4 -- oooh, Bush is really in trouble now. Bush up by 1. Sounds like Kerry's on the ropes! Kerry up by 2, whatever will Bush do?

And all this drama driven by polls that generally have margins of error around 3 or 4 points.

And then there's my current favorite-- ABC News and the Post have a new poll just out. And among likely voters, it's 48 to, you guessed it, 48.

Their headline: "Advantage Incumbent." Now I know they're getting this by looking at the internals -- which side is more enthusiastically behind their candidate, that sort of thing.

But you know what? I don't care. 48 to 48 isn't "advantage: incumbent." It's a tie. And you know what else, it's been a tie for months. Swift Boat Vets, Farenheit 911, Dem convention, Olympics, whatever. It's a tie. And no matter how much big media wants to force a more dramatic horse race out of this, wishing don't make it so.

I'm pretty sure.

(btw, if you're interested in a little supporting data, check out Rasmussen's poll with numbers for the last 31 days. It's just one poll, but it's pretty representative. Neither candidate ever gets more than 4 points ahead. This poll has a margin of error of +/-3. In other words, it's a tie.)

Geekiest protest sign ever

I saw this picture or Ross Mayfield's weblog (he got it from Boing Boing).

DEA Dogs Busted!

The DEA is scrambling to explain reports that a number of dogs in its employ have been found sniffing drugs.

Bush's 20 Electoral College "Bonus Votes"

Here's a bit of arcane, but consequential US Civics:

One of the ways the Electoral College is skewed is that states don't get Electoral votes in proportion to their population. There are 435 votes allocated by population, according to the number of seats the state has in the Hose of Representatives. Then each state gets what are, in effect, two "Bonus Votes," based on its two seats in the US Senate. (DC is allocated a total of three.)

So, for example, Alaska, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Delaware. Vermont, and DC (in its unique way) each have just one seat in the House of Representatives. Based solely on population, then, they would have a total of eight Electoral Votes among them. But with the addition of the two Bonus Votes for each, they have a total, not of eight votes, but 24

Using the projections of ABC News, Bush is currently leading for 222 Electoral Votes, and Kerry for 221 (the other 95 are "Toss Ups."). But Bush is leading in 26 individual states, Kerry in only 16. So, Bush gets an extra 20 of the Bonus Votes--52 of them to Kerry's 32.
Without Bonus Votes, the projection of
Bush 222 Kerry 221
would become
Kerry 189 Bush 170

In 2000, Bush received 271 Electoral Votes, Gore 266 (there was one abstention). Subtracting the Bonus Votes, the Presidential results in 2000 would have been:
Gore 224 Bush 211

The National Guard: He Wanted It to Be a Surprise!

Democrat 'Ashamed' He Helped Bush, AP, 8/29/04
"Bush...has said he received no special treatment and did not seek help to be admitted to the Guard...."
"White House spokesman Scott McClellan said....'This was fully covered and addressed five years ago. It is nothing new.'
"Five years ago, Barnes's lawyer issued a statement saying Barnes had been contacted by...a Houston oilman and friend of Bush's father....Adger asked Barnes to recommend Bush for a pilot position with the Air National Guard, and he did...."

The Bushes did not seek help. Adger woke up one morning and said to himself, "That young man needs to be in the National Guard." He wanted it to be a surprise!

to NYT: "A serious lapse in editorial command!"

[I sent this as a Letter to the Editor of the NYT. today]

You said, accurately, in your editorial, "The Road to Confrontation in Najaf," 8/21/04...
"[This] showdown began...because of serious lapses in the American military command structure in Iraq....when a newly arrived Marine Expeditionary Unit in Najaf started skirmishing with Moktada al-Sadr's Shiite militia without its officers first clearing that decision..."

Refreshing objectivity. But then, today on Page 1...
"The upstart cleric began his latest uprising on Aug. 5, when his men attacked a Najaf police station after the arrest of one of his aides."

A serious lapse in editorial command!

David Kolodney

Bush loses the 2012 Olympics?

Following up on Boris Khadinov's note about the pro-Bush ad that takes advantage of the Olympics: various blogs are now repeating a quote from the German magazine Der Spiegel (here translated by me). An unnamed IOC member says that because Bush won't stop running the ad,

"New York's chances to host [the Olympics in 2012] were not that good. But now they've dropped to zero."

Daily Kos has the complete Spiegel article and a translation.

The People's Guide to the Republican National Convention for the Children

Was the counterconvention this well organized in Boston? Didn't seem to be.

The People's Guide to the Republican National Convention

Note to left-wing marketers: "The People's anything" is a salesbuster.

Iraq and Afghanistan - democracies?

Regarding Bush's Olympics ad referring to Afghanistan and Iraq as democracies: Don't you actually have to have at least one successful election before you can call something a democracy?

Isn't it just special that George Bush refuses to remove the ad, contrary to the wishes of the Olympic brass and the Iraqi soccer team, while Kerry removed the McCain ad at McCain's request? Do you suppose that might have any bearing on the "character" issue?

i <3 Orcinus

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Thank goodness for David Neiwert. He isn't attracting the most attention among the scholars, journalists, and bloggers rebutting FOX-pundit Michelle Malkin's defense of Japanese-American internment, but as always he is providing long-form cogent detailed critiques and summaries that will help anyone get up to speed on the relevant issues without having to grovel fruitlessly around the blogosphere and the tabloid web for splintered shadows of history:

Orcinus on Malkin, dual citizenship and profiling

some administrivia....

I didn't file this under Republicans - I think I need a new category for antifascism. We're all on guard against creeping authoritarian communism*

oh, and a reminder to edgewise contributors and readers. I'm going to New York this weekend to cover the convention from the city. We will be quoted and aggregrated in various places and so anyone who wants to write about the convention should please pitch in and do so.

* and the online conservatarian wingnuts are even policing the nation's thought for anything they consider that smacks of socialism which, since they use it to mean any manifestation of the state whatsoever ** includes a large fraction of the current Bush administration's activities under its umbrella.

** aside from the libertarian exceptions for homeland defense and probably some kind of magical property right *** - I have to admit I'm not up on the fine details of libertarianism. Was Vidal exaggerating when he said on Terry Gross "The libertarians are against traffic lights. I favor traffic lights."

*** - so, effectively, anything to the left of Birch is socialism, also known as communism, a.k.a the French are coming!

Najaf Optimism Counseled

US intelligence sources have good news about the coming assault on the Imam Ali Mosque in Najaf:

--US troops entering the shrine are likely to be greeted with cheers by the militia members holding out inside.
--The building itself will be protected from battle-damage by America's new GARDOL Anti-Missile Shield.
--US diplomat Paul Bremer will be tapped to head the Transitional Shi'ite Holy Sites Protective Commission.

John Kerry eats human brains

Tonight on The Daily Show, John Kerry finally puts all those "was he wounded? did he bleed? really? really?! how much did he bleed? and does he really bleed at all? or is he an undead? a zombie? a creature of the night? a crypt thing?" questions to rest by letting host Jon Stewart puncture his right shoulder with a ballpoint pen. Tonight! On The Daily Show.

(x-posted over at dailykos).

The Uneven Bar

I don't want to diminish anybody's accomplishments with my expertise, but some of these contestants were VERY lucky there was another bar to grab on to.

Who's more negative - officially speaking?

With the subject of negative ads rearing its ugly head again, I was wondering who is in fact running the most negative campaign (I know, I know - just humor me). With all the so-called 527s obscuring the message, wholly-independent Republican groups and surrogates of Kerry alike, I figured the best way to get to the heart of the matter would be to go directly to the official sites of each campaign and compare them, to see who is being "officially" more negative.

The Kerry/Edwards page shows a big picture of John Kerry, waving to the faithful at a rally, with the caption "Serving His Country." Rah, rah, very nice, very positive. Yawn. There are calls to volunteer, links to biographical information, and in the right column, there are boxes containing the latest official ad from the campaign and one with the caption "Our Plan for America" peddling a book that presumably outlines what a Kerry/Edwards administration would attempt to do. Yawn. Good thing I'm not driving right now.

No problems so far. If you scroll down the page you see blurbs about tour stops, testimonials about Kerry and - oops, there it is! Over on the right, just above the box pimping Kerry gear, there's a box called "bush-cheney: wrong for America" that accuses them of one of the most negative campaigns ever. That's a bold statement! Clicking on that link, sure enough, there's a media center dedicated to debunking Bush's claims to things such as success in Iraq and health care reform, and reminding us of his ties to oil and pharmaceuticals. Okay, that's not very nice.

Now, let's look at the Bush/Cheney site. Hmm right there, where the Democratic site has a picture of John Kerry there is a picture of...hey, its John Kerry! Wow, they must really respect the guy.

No wait, it's a link to the Bush campaign's latest ad. And it says nothing about President Bush - it claims that Kerry is saying he wants to ease the middle class tax burden, but that his record suggests he is lying and that we shouldn't trust him. Repeat after me: "98 tax increases." Over there, right next to it is "John Kerry: the raw deal," saying something about 98 tax increases. To the left, where they have links to biographical info and all, there is a link to the Kerry media room. A simlar place to the one on the Kerry site. Oh, did I mention 98 tax increases? If I didn't, just let me say: 98 tax increases. But I digress...

We scroll down and see - oh look, there's a cute little caricature of John Kerry holding two signs, one saying "against" and the other "for". It links to this hi-larious little John Kerry flip-flop game that also has lovely charicatures of Hillary, Ted and Howard. It cracked me up!

Beside it, you will find the Kerry gas tax calculator. It duly notes that John Kerry "has supported a 50 cent per gallon tax increase," and then it has these cool calculators where you can find out how much your gas expense would increase based on the type of car you drive, what state you live in, and how much you drive per day. Cool! Of course, Kerry isn't proposing a gas tax now, but still I....Whoa!! I'd be paying THAT much??? No thanks, Mr, Kerry!

Curiously, on the entire home page (as of today, 8/24/04) there are no pictures of either Bush or Cheney (the latter, probably a wise decision) and there are no testimonials or anthing like that. No, wait, there is a chat with George's nephew, George P. Bush. He has a Mexican wife, you know. But still, Kerry has a testimonial from a former democratic president. Bush has one from a relative! Couldn't he get someone more official-sounding? Next thing you know, he's going to trot out his dad! But again, I digress.

So let's see, the Bush/Cheney features negative stuff four times at the top of the page and a couple more lower down. But Kerry has a link to negative press too, so there you have it - it's a tie! They both can be negative!

Maybe the problem is that liberals don't have a sense of humor. Hey liberals - lighten up, will ya?? Now, I'm gonna go back and play that Kerry Flip-Flop Olympics game again. That thing just cracks me up!!!!

Keeping it "real"

A group called RNC Not Welcome in NYC (or noRNC for short) and CounterConvention present Fuck New York (video/quicktime object) (warning: language not work-safe + some may find the satire offensive as it blends racialized language with preppy stereotypes are borders on minstrelsy).

Swift Boats for Me, Me, Me!!

It was nice of Bill O'Reilly to criticize the Swift Boat ads as deplorable. But, as he quickly notes, these sorts of smear ads have been coming from both sides, apparently, equally. In fact, last night he started his "talking points" discussion of the issue by focusing on the democratic side and how they are by no means above reproach. He makes it sound like they somehow started it. Proof: well, he was himself the target of such smear tactics, so there's the proof in the pudding. (He later had a nice, casual interview with Travis Tritt about his new song "What Say You," one of O'Reilly's catch phrases, in which virtually every question or comment was self referential.)

But anyway, I'm still waiting for that shining example to hold up against the Kerry/McCain/Richards smears of mean-spirited innuendo based on nothing. Sure, I've seen anti-Bush ads. They tend to deplore his policies and say so, which I believe is totally fair. When the democrats start accusing him of having illegitimate children, or start making accusations that directly contradict clearly recorded evidence to the contrary, then wake me. Not one talking head or newspaper has mentioned a single democratic ad in direct comparison to this swift boat vets campaign.

Can someone please mention one for me? And I mean that seriously. I don't see much because I don't watch much network TV and I'm in California anyway, which means nobody is bothering to spend money here. I want to see those democratic smears.

Not even Bill came up with a specific smear on his character. It's just, "blah, blah Soros! blah, blah Smalley! blah blah Moore!"

But still, Bill thinks he made his fair and balanced assessment of the situation and it goes as follows: Lefties can't get too upset about the Swift Boats people going after Kerry because liberal media folks say bad things about O'Reilly. Well, that pretty much evens up the score on the presidential campaign commercial deal.

What say you??

Olympics

I follow the Olympics very closely, and I notice that the race this year between the Golds, the Silvers, and the Bronzes is, as always, incredibly close--which makes it very exciting.

My problem is don't you get the feeling everyone is trying just a little bit too hard?

Quote without Comment

"Still, the phenomenon of Iraqis being shot simply because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time has been a recurring problem for the Americans."

Sadr City Sings Its Praises of Cleric, LA Times, 8/22/04

Kerry response to swift boat smear

This remarkably powerful ad from Kerry/Edwards -- and the associated petition -- are well worth your time.

Undercovered #2

"[J]just 5% of Jordan's 11,000-truck fleet was ferrying supplies to Iraq--down from 85% before the U.S.-led 2003 invasion."

Article

Undercovered #1

"US and Iraqi government forces have been forced out of Falluja, with the fighters of the insurgency now dominating Ramadi and Samarra and both sides fighting for control of Mosul."

Article

Media Monkeys & Red Star Republicans

....as in See No Evil, etc. Has anybody noticed that the Bush campaign stops all seem to take place in the same room? And that the media show only the podium-shots of Kerry and Bush as if they were both addressing actual crowds of people? Have you also noticed that the Bush "campaign speeches" include a laugh-track and a boo-track? News outlets have commented on Bush "rallies" that require participants to undergo a loyalty inspection before entering. But who's pointing out that those side-by-side Kerry/Bush photo ops at the public podiums are patently one-sided? The Kerry rallies have huge crowds of people who congretated in public places to hear him--whether they support him as a candidate or not. The Bush events are not public appearances. They're Mao Moments. Remember those? The cut-and-pasted head of Chairman Mao floating in the Yellow River to prove that he was alive and swimming? The hordes of Mao-izens herded into the streets for a Mao Moment photo-op? Maybe Republicans should be wearing red stars on their lapels instead of the American (equal parts red and blue) flag.

This blog, too, kills fascists

The Thorn Papers

It's happening again...

Remember when the media spent all that time covering Monica Lewinsky and Whitewater and Travelgate? And then, how after 9/11, looking back, most of us, regardless of party (far far right excepted) thought: "hunh. that may not have been the best way for the media to have used its time -- yapping on about that [expletive] for nights on end, all while al qaeda was gathering strength?"

Remember that? Like, a month ago?

It's happening again. For the last week I haven't been able to switch on a cable news channel (most of all Fox, with their recently revised slogan "we interview John E. O'Neill over and over again, you decide") without seeing a lengthy segment on those darn Swift Boat Vets for Truth. And it's just so clear, y'know? That, of course, those crazy media yahoos haven't learned a thing.

We're at war. An expensive war. A war with casualties. A war with consequences. Whether you're pro or con the war, I think almost every sane American would agree this war -- the one currently underway -- is more important than debating the exact degree to which John Kerry was wounded in his early twenties. Also likewise more important: the state of the economy, the state of our civil liberties, abortion laws, the state of our schools, the state of the environment. And on down the line. Hell, I'd rather hear about those darn activist judges than this [expletive].

Whichever side you're on, how could a reasonable person think this is the most important topic on the table? That it's worth 2 weeks of news time two+ months before the election? They couldn't. It ain't.

With everything at stake here, if we spent two solid weeks worth of news cycles debating GWB's national guard service, I'd lose my lunch. I'd lose my mind.

My only comfort: with the Olympics in full swing, you've got to figure there are only about 6 or 7 people actually watching this trainwreck. And we're all voting for Kerry.

Sovereign Power in Iraq

"Nobody is taking Sadr at his word," [US national security advisor Condoleezza Rice said]. "He's someone from whom you have to see action. He said lots of words before. He has never followed through on them. And I don't think you're going to see an Iraqi government that's going to take his word."
Sadr "can't have a militia running the streets," said Rice. "He can't occupy the holiest shrine in Shiadom. He has to be dealt with and I'm quite certain he will be."

--The United States is providing assistance to the government of Iraq.

Cut the Roaming, Please!

Conflict in Najaf Dominates Iraq Political Meet, Reuters, 8/16/04
"Residents said the holy city was tense as Shi'ite militia loyal to radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr roamed the streets...."

"Roaming the streets." What is it with them? They're always doing that! Why can't they be like Americans? We just walk around.

Do you want some bureaucrat in Washington...

Sites Could Face Shortage of Cleanup Money, NYT, 8/16/04
Around the Omaha Lead site...there are thousands of house yards where lead contamination is suspected to be two or three times greater than the level considered safe...; delaying financing is likely to mean delaying the sampling of yards and identification of hazards.

Do you want some bureaucrat in Washington telling you how much lead you can or can't have in your own back yard?

--Hell, Yes!

Doing their homework for them

Imagine if the press corps, instead of simply parroting the right's latest talking points and mocking jibes instead did a little research.

I suspect that even googling around for the word "sensitive" in the context of the war on terror and the sideshow in Iraq would have turned up some of the examples that LiberalOasis highlighted earlier this week.

Do SecState's usually avoid conventions?

Can we read anything into this report (Colin Powell will skip GOP convention)?

Brings to mind Bill Maher's recent quip about Keyes running for senator in Illinois, to the effect that the Republicans couldn't find Osama, couldn't find weapons of mass destruction, and couldn't find an African-American in Chicago.

Legacy Admissions to Economic Life

Columnist Roland Martin recently asked George Bush about preferential treatment in college admissions. (Article)

Martin: "If you say it's a matter of merit and not race, shouldn't colleges also get rid of legacy?"
Bush: "If what you're saying is, is there going to be special treatment for people - in other words - we're going to have a special exception for certain people in a system that's supposed to be fair, I agree. I don't think there ought to be."
Martin: "So the colleges should get rid of legacy?"
Bush: "Well, I think so. Yeah, I think it ought to be based on merit.

That's a good beginning. Now I understand the American social/economic system as a whole is also supposed to be fair, and based on merit. If legacy college admissions are unfair, what about plain old legacies? Should there be special treatment, a special exception, for the offspring of the rich? Or should wealth in America be based on merit?

A merit system wouldn't need to intervene in the childhood years. At age 21, everyone would start from zero and be staked to an equal grant of start-up money that they hadn't earned. Then let merit take its course. Merit! Red meat for Republicans, I should think.

The gang that couldn't shoot straight

They blew it with the mobile phone monitoring of Osama, they outed Plame, and now they've burned a turned al Qaeda mole (double agent) for short-term political damage control:

Read between the lines, and CNN is suggesting that the outing of Khan has led to greater caution in al-Qaeda and similar groups about using electronic communications, which may make it more difficult to monitor them.

Someone remind me where Bush's remaining advantage over Kerry (prosecution of the war on terror) derives from? Photo ops?

Opportunity costs

This op-ed chart from the NY Times compares how the money spent getting Saddam out of power could have been put to other uses in the war on people who hate our freedom.

When someone asks you if it was worth it getting Saddam out, ask them "compared to what?"

An Acrobatically Deceptive SpIn

To my ear, this whole article from the NYT gives the overall impression of a clean slate for higher ups at Abu Ghraib.

At Abuse Hearing, No Testimony That G.I.'s Acted on Orders NYT 8/06/04

"Witnesses...,have described...[p]risoners were left naked for long periods as punishment and were at least occasionally abused, in one case leading to a death from what investigators called trauma to the head....
"Yet no one has said there were direct orders to carry out the treatment seen in photos...."

Get the distinction? Yes, blatantly criminal abuse was command-authorized and accepted as routine, but not the criminal abuse in the pictures.

Purple states turning blue

Diarist Andy at Kos notes that Kerry is now leading Bush in Pennsylvania polls by more than the margin of error, and threatening to do so in a few other battleground states.

Uniting liberals and conservatives

The Left Coaster lays out the conservative case against Bush.

I have always been proud to be known as liberal and I agree with many of the goals of the traditional and new left, but I have also always been sympathetic to many of conservative ideals (as stated) and the drives that underlie them.

I've been dismayed to see the Republican party taken over by crony capitalists who pay lip service to conservative principles while running this nation's economy and reputation into the ground, enriching themselves and their allies at the expense of most of us, so it is refreshing to see the "grownups" in the conservative movement beginning to take steps to repudiate the people who have highjacked their ideology and are taking it down into the sewer.

Revision watch

OK, over at the White House's official transcript it appears that the "misstatement" was spoken as written:

Third, this bill meets our commitment to America's Armed Forces by preparing them to meet the threats of tomorrow. Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we. We must never stop thinking about how best to defend our country when we all must always be forward-thinking.

Who wants to bet on when the draft will be retroactively edited to say something that makes more sense?

Freudian much?

This latest Bush gem sounds like a parody (but apparently it's simply a flub - what did the speech have in this place as written, I wonder?):

Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we," Bush said. "They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.

(via cf)

When they talk about "Bush hating" remember this

The headlines over on the drudgereport (again -- can't stand to give him a link, though I suppose -- blech -- I am giving him "press" by even commenting on this) currently reads "Slaughters Animals. Burns Down Tiny Village." Who does such things? Why, according to Drudge, John Kerry. (These are those charges from the band of brothers out to drag Kerry through the mud -- Drudge is sleazing these micro-charges out one by one to get maximum bang out of this book).

"Slaughters animals?"

"Burns down tiny village?"

All I'm saying is: (1) Drudge is repulsive. OK, old news, I know. And (2) when it comes to player hating, the big names on the left, even the dread Michael Moore, are (fortunately) rank amateurs.

Those Pesky Word-Choices

Ridge Defends "Three-Year-Old" U.S. Terror Alert
Reuters 8/3/04

"I don't want anyone to disabuse themselves..."

disabuse To free from a falsehood or misconception

Torturing the Death out of Them: Ours

Al-Qaida detainee recants claims, The New York Times 7/31/04

A senior leader of al-Qaida was the main source for intelligence...that Iraq had provided training in chemical and biological weapons to members of the organization....

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a member of Osama bin Laden's inner circle, recanted the claims sometime last year, .... about links between Iraq and al-Qaida that involved poisons, gases and other illicit weapons.

Let's make the most charitable assumption about the When-Did-They-Know-It of this recantation, i.e., they still believed his original story at the time they went to war.

Now this was a paradigm case of an ultra-secret interrogation of terrorists that "could save American lives," hence it was an interrogation that would justify use of the "harshest" of methods. And let's suppose our hard-headed realpolitic leaders squared their jaws and used them.

Then what we tortured out of this man not only failed to save lives, it helped cause thousands of deaths in our global-vigilante military adventure.