The perspective one has of society's creation and one's role in it.***
Not* Exactly[!]
[Ideology and Iowa are a lot like the eye of the needle or camel.(no pun)]
[Perspective: to be processed later more or less...[!]
Speaking of ant or fable TV. Democrats cannot afford to have distractions or liars, just because "the Right" does it. Speaking of irrelative**: ant:Anthony, Ed:Rush,(or Beck Or Reck) Whiner:BaneOr, silver lining:golden rule, objective/subjective ]
* iOWa, iRreleFont? Rachel Maddow discusses the "small i" people. But then, eye had not seen her comments.
** something about relative in regards to the differences in ideologies and personalities on spectrum ofor loopiness on the left or right.
***[Media(sources) a side: wMD: I may go on or take hiatus but the bottomline is the top line is mine. i.e. I have only begun the Mike Cormack book, and I am not quoting it. Ibid this bracket.(Thanks to truthout.org for this last crack, not the book]
[!]Hi Ate Us, interesting Try Angle or Segue(way)[]. Or Tr(eye)i Pod?
A.B.C.D...
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query distractions. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query distractions. Sort by date Show all posts
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
The Fighting Ill Lie Nigh!
Robert Greenwald on the Koch brothers on The Ed Show.
Who thinks whom is stupid?***
I'll trump your "campaign of diversions, distractions, and distortions."
Who thinks whom is stupid?***
I'll trump your "campaign of diversions, distractions, and distortions."
The Ill Lie Nigh crack goes to the reality of the campaign, regardless and inspite of the truth. Buy this, I mean, you better not buy it. Some on the Right have misused Illinois, making it a good example of this twist.*
And in regards to the youth wars, it is not so much that students have such huge debts from college**, it is that Republicans want to increase the interest at that.
** no disrespect to the Illini.
*** Speaking of Q&A^: Do not ask what good we do. On The Last Word.
[^ 4-26-12 Related: Krugman^^/ Bernstein / Twist?]
^^ This is the only one of the last four I have read complete.
^^^ INET
*** Speaking of Q&A^: Do not ask what good we do. On The Last Word.
[^ 4-26-12 Related: Krugman^^/ Bernstein / Twist?]
^^ This is the only one of the last four I have read complete.
^^^ INET
Monday, December 11, 2006
Once, Twice, Three Times A Charm
This could be referring to the trilogy of wars, but it is more about the times needed to read the article about the Google of Intelligence.[not a number]
To be more direct, the three wars I don’t mean are; Terrorism, Iraq and Iran; the final yet to be. I would have said Afghanistan, but it was more legit. Not that the war on terror is not legit, just that the definitions and terminology still need to be fought. But I did read the link three times, with some distractions, but it really does smell like a rerun.
My point is that the purpose for which the State Department sought intelligence was to prepare a list of individuals and organizations for sanctions, without providing any real link to intelligence.
The bonus feature may be that if they provided the link, it may show that there is not enough to go on. So to avoid the previous problem of "flawed intelligence", the solution is to not provide any, but approve other’s intelligence which do not have a direct link.
The irony is that there was plenty of "open source" intelligence available before this disasterous course unfolded, much of it filtered here.
One connected dot further: intentions, preemption and their denial are the greatest hazzards to navigate, but one thing is certain, they may be connected, but they can change, and one side always knows the truth, whether it is your's or not.
Now I know it is not just me that can't be direct, but that has no bearing on the reality.
To be more direct, the three wars I don’t mean are; Terrorism, Iraq and Iran; the final yet to be. I would have said Afghanistan, but it was more legit. Not that the war on terror is not legit, just that the definitions and terminology still need to be fought. But I did read the link three times, with some distractions, but it really does smell like a rerun.
My point is that the purpose for which the State Department sought intelligence was to prepare a list of individuals and organizations for sanctions, without providing any real link to intelligence.
Those with the most hits under search terms such as "Iran and nuclear," three officials said, became targets for international rebuke Friday when a sanctions resolution circulated at the United Nations.
The bonus feature may be that if they provided the link, it may show that there is not enough to go on. So to avoid the previous problem of "flawed intelligence", the solution is to not provide any, but approve other’s intelligence which do not have a direct link.
None of the 12 Iranians that the State Department eventually singled out for potential bans on international travel and business dealings is believed by the CIA to be directly connected to Iran's most suspicious nuclear activities.
"There is nothing that proves involvement in a clandestine weapons program, and there is very little out there at all that even connects people to a clandestine weapons program," said one official familiar with the intelligence on Iran. Like others interviewed for this story, the official insisted on anonymity when discussing the use of intelligence.
The irony is that there was plenty of "open source" intelligence available before this disasterous course unfolded, much of it filtered here.
One connected dot further: intentions, preemption and their denial are the greatest hazzards to navigate, but one thing is certain, they may be connected, but they can change, and one side always knows the truth, whether it is your's or not.
Now I know it is not just me that can't be direct, but that has no bearing on the reality.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)