« The Asian Pivot - TTG | Main | Evacuation to Idlib may be a trip "home." »

20 October 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Larry Kart

When it's combined with "selective editing." That is, you pretend to be someone or something you're not in order to elicit, or lure someone into making, certain sorts of responses (that is you engage in a form of entrapment), and then you also edit those responses, and your side of the "conversation," so that the other parties' responses "mean" just what you want them to mean. I'm not saying that that is what happened in this case, but per the Wikipedia article (FWIW) that's the sort of behavior that O'Keefe has engaged in in the past.

To put it another way, we're all at least anecdotally aware of what goes on, and what can go wrong, in say an FBI or DEA sting operation. The agency has reason to suspect that a dangerous criminal act is being contemplated, its undercover agents contact the supposedly likely perpetrators in a "sympathetic," "We're on your side in this'" manner, saying and doing whatever is necessary to encourages the supposedly likely perpetrators to make incriminating statements or even to engage in criminal acts, and then "gotcha." One hopes that the FBI or DEA or any other law enforcement agency operates carefully on such occasions, but opportunities for abuse and error are obvious.

Well, O'Keefe is functioning as though he himself were the FBI or DEA on a sting operation, but without the checks and balances that one would hope are in place in a law enforcement agency and with a partisan agenda (and partisan financial support) to boot.

mike allen

Thanks Kooshy. I had seen that. There is some discrepancy in the numbers. YPG claimed 10 SDF fighters and four civilians killed by the Turkish airstrikes. Perhaps the remainder of the 200 figure were wounded??? Or perhaps the YPG is wrong? Too early to tell.

Assad or the Russians should have targeted those Turkish aircraft instead of pissing and moaning about it afterward. They would have if SAA or its allies had been attacked instead of the Kurds, wouldn't you think?

mike allen

Scott, a Virginian, was a damn fine general. At the battle of Fort George his achievements were considered one of the best-planned and best-executed U.S. operations of the war of 1812. He wrote some of the earliest US manuals on tactics.

He must have been a good judge of men also, because just before secession in 1861 he offered command of the Army to Robert E Lee.

And a good diplomat. As military governor in Mexico he was reportedly well liked by Mexicans for his fairhandedness. In 39 he calmed down both sides in the so-called Aroostook War so that no shots were fired between Maine militia and the Canadians in New Brunswick. My mother's ancestors were on both sides of that dispute, I am glad it was a non-war.

turcopolier

mike allen

I would say that Scott was the best US general of the 19th Century. Wellington thought that as well. He had thought that when Scott cut loose from his base at Vera Cruz he was finished. pl

kooshy

Mike you're monday morning quarterbacking, fairly, look at what condition Syria, her legitimate legal government and her army is befor spin your quarterbacking on in my judgment your wrong stand with regard those who are legitimately fighting the terrorism that includes Syrian government and her allies including Syrian Kurds, and I personally hope they win against all others including US' ONLY geopolitical consideration.

mike allen

Kooshy -

As I have said before on this blog: I wish the Syrian people a stable government and a thousand years of peace and a prosperity. I believe you feel the same way.

kooshy

Mike perhaps you can tell us why US is not warning the Turks to bomb her Kurd allies, especially when US'
SF are on the ground and fighting alongside the Kurds, would Turks somehow know when and where US SF are accompanying Kurds before they proceed with bombing and killing Kurd fighters.

different clue

Edward Amame,

Then came Obama and his conspiracy with Boehner and McConnell to make the Bush Tax Cuts permanent, and here we are now.

gowithit

Interesting book I came across re mid 1800s in the southwest, Blood and Thunder, by Hampton Sides. Largely focus on Kit Carson, who I previously thought just a pulp fiction character, but now see in a larger awareness. A lot of history in the 1840s-1850s that seems largely ignored in the morning shadows of the Civil War.

mike allen

Colonel -

I am a big fan of General McCaffrey. His heroism in Vietnam speaks for itself and his left hook in the 1st Gulf War was brilliant according to a Marine general that wrote about it. I for one do not believe the hit piece on him of war crimes that Seymour Hersch wrote. Hersch did well in publicizing Calley's crimes, but his attacks on McCaffrey were unwarranted and misguided.

Bill Clinton made McCaffrey head of the war on drugs. And we would be a lot better off if more of Mac's recommendations had been approved by Congress.

I do not doubt your Chelsea story but would respectively point out McCaffrey's opposition to a Trump presidency. Mac called him unfit to serve and a disgrace for insulting the military.

mike allen

Agreed. A 19th Century Marshall perhaps?

There is some dispute about his Anaconda Plan during the Civil War, but from what I have read it made Grant's victories possible. The Anaconda Plan was the strategic conception with which the North won the war and re-united the country. pl

turcopolier

mike allen

I have heard McCaffery recount what CC said to him in the car while he was trying to be pleasant, not all that easy a task for him. the story is not about McCaffery, it is about the attitude that Chelsea Clinton had acquired from her parents. People want to tell me that what a child says is not indicative of anything. I do not accept that any more than I accept the idea that HC's Wellesley graduation speech is not representative of the woman today. pl

turcopolier

mike allen

Neither Marshall not Eisenhower ever commanded anything in battle. I do not consider that theater command is a combat command. People in such jobs are really strategic thinkers and diplomats. Marshall had a great character but he never had a chance to command anything in combat. pl

mike allen

Respecfully, it is about McCaffrey's opinion on Trump as well as the Clintons. I heard him speak a few months ago when he came to Seattle. He was talking about Trump's attitude towards the military, and he called it despicable.

LeaNder

Thanks, TTG, I had to watch it in the German translation and felt forced to explain matters to a friend all the time, when he asked. After that I started to explain even if he hadn't asked. Meaning I was sometimes distracted.

But thanks TTG, that either escaped me or it was badly translated.

turcopolier

mike allen

I don't care what trump's attitude toward the military is. He is not going to be president and commander in chief as HC correctly says. She will be and so her attitude toward the military and foreign policy matters. pl

Bill H

>i>"We can buy back debt at a discount if interest rates rise."

Please explain the meaning of that and the result of it. It sounds suspiciously like a Tar Baby to me.

charly

After French Belgium answer to CETA i think one can assume TTIP is death. And after the Philippian "Pivot to Asia" i think you can say the same of TTP (it is useless if only the usual suspects are in it)

Old Microbiologist

Some of their evidence is just pure BS and looks planted to me. Suspect insiders rather than Russians. Even if it were some form of state sponsored "hacking" the US started it with attacking Iran with the Stuxnet virus. But an insider certainly fits, and I forget the guy's name, but he was killed the next day which fits in with the Clinton modus operandi.

Regarding Congress, some recent studies have shown that they follow public opinion roughly 5 percent of the time but support campaign donors 96 percent of the time with a tiny bit of overlap. The other thing I notice is that rhetoric means nothing. I believe it is a lot like the Ralph the coyote and George the sheepdog who battle it out after clocking in and and go home arm in arm after clocking out. It is all show and nothing else.

It is what gets into Bills, what makes it through committee and finally reaches a vote, then must be massaged between House and Senate versions before making it to a final Bill which often has so many riders attached or is once again edited after it has been voted on, that actually counts. Our democracy is obviously and irreparably broken. The changes necessary require a Constitutional amendment (or IMHO a new Constitution) and these guys will never do anything to reduce their ability to steal money. Our forefathers failed to recognize just how bad it might get but obviously in the back of their minds they foresaw the possibility and included the Second Amendment which I believe the intent is for citizens to overthrow an abusive government by force if necessary. Perhaps we are on the verge of realizing this now?

Old Microbiologist

Better would be a 15% flat rate with no deductions for anything which applies equally to personal and businesses. We could eliminate the IRS completely and make filing taxes very easy and eliminate every loophole at the same time. Russia did this and their tax revenue increased dramatically. It screws over the poor but they don't have much anyway so no big deal. However, it would attract a lot of businesses back into the US.

LeaNder

MB, you don't need Stuxnet, the post 9/11 'cyberwar-awareness' initiatives and programs suffice for me. Once you start to consider and put resources into a field, it goes both ways. Possible application and whatever someone else could do. At that point the other always necessarily becomes a mirror of yourself.

But an insider certainly fits, and I forget the guy's name, but he was killed the next day which fits in with the Clinton modus operandi.

I spare you my comment on that. My thought always follows experience on a deeper level and there seem to be a lot around here that are not open to this as basis of interpretation. It surely is mine to a certain extend.

Two cases we are talking about. One ruled a suicide, one a murder. ... the suicide triggers private associations one on the surface, another one more deeply buried. In the latter case the family objects to the misuse of their son's murder. I can understand that. Who wouldn't like to know what happened. And what can we accept as private and thus none of our business today? In the earlier case too, maybe the family knows maybe it doesn't what the hell could have led their son to kill himself. The suicide case on the top of my mind, by the way, is a former prof....

*********
I wasn't necessarily a antagonist of Hillary Clinton before the 2008 campaign. But yes, I realized the business can be reduced to "winners versus losers", just as in Machiavelli's times.

LeaNder

every AUMF in existence

I was a bit distracted by OM. But yes to the extend I got matters, not sure if before or after my friend surrendered and 'retired' allowing me to shift to English, it looked like as if Clinton opted for covert action.

But maybe that's not what AUMF means?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_Against_Terrorists

turcopolier

LeaNder

An AUMF is an authorization by Congress for war. it is a declaration of war without the dignity of the wording in the constitution. An AUMF authorizes the use of the armed forces as though a declaration of war had been voted by Congress. The AUMF only applies under the conditions named within. For example it may only be valid for named areas. Without it the use of the armed forces in combat is not legal with the exception of the provision in the War Powers Act for the use of the armed forces in an emergency for 60 days. Covert Action is a different thing. the National Defense Acts of1947 and 1958 allow the use of force, trickery and propaganda for policy reason, but the instrument to be used is the CIA directed by what is called a "presidential finding." Can units or personnel of the armed forces be "loaned" to CIA to provide capabilities they do not have? Yes. pl

JSandler

Ha, this is the standard liberal line of attack on O'Keefe's work. His work is unassailable and there's not selective editing (you can compare edited to unedited and see). And that's why it ends with the liberal groups disbanding (ACORN) and the liberal operative being fired (Foval, Creamer). Geez, getting information under false pretenses. They use to call this Jimmy Rockford-style of uncovering info "investigative journalism". I'm an investigator and I use little lies/bluffing/distraction all the time to get info. Doesn't mean the info I get is inaccurate. Heck, I lost a good job with another major (state) organization because in the interview I said that in the scenario presented, I wouldn't precede with something if I wasn't sure it was entirely legal. They wanted a Jimmy Rockford kind of investigator. The investigator's job is to be a good actor. And when you do the same acting role for years you know all the lines that get results and you know all of the antagonist's lines as well.

turcopolier

LeaNder

I would say that the existence of large numbers of Republican members in Congress who favor a belligerent and hyper-nationalist foreign policy ensures that whatever power the Congress has to put a stop to presidential warmongering is made moot. pl

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

September 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      
Blog powered by Typepad