Various Topics on Lisp

.... ..lm..

On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 18:07:50 GMT, CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>Alan Balmer wrote:
>> Patrick Scheible <kkt@drizzle.com> wrote:
>>
>... snip ...
>>>
>>> They have committees, they don't have independent
>>> intelligence-gathering ability.
>>
>> Neither does President Bush - he doesn't have time for all
>> those field trips. That's why he gets reports from the various
>> intelligence agencies, who also report to the Congressional
>> intelligence committees.
>
>Then why does he ignore them, as evidenced by his non-response to
>the July report on the future of Iraq, which was kept secret until
>a few days ago?

Have you read the report?

By "ignore them", I presume you mean that his reaction to them wasn't
the same as yours would have been.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net

.. ....

# >They have committees, they don't have independent
# >intelligence-gathering ability.
# >
# Neither does President Bush - he doesn't have time for all those field
# trips. That's why he gets reports from the various intelligence
# agencies, who also report to the Congressional intelligence
# committees.

You're right. He is the Excuses president.

In case you missed reading the Constitution in school, briefly, the CIA,
the DoD and its intelligence staffs, the State Department and its intelligence
staffs, the FBI, DoJ, BATF, etc etc etc etc are all part of the executive
branch. The only elected officer of the executive branch, from whom all other
executive officers draw their authority, is the President.

In short, ding dong, the President _does_ have independent intelligence
gatherring ability. It's called the executive branch, and it's at his
beck and call for all legal orders. It's that commander in chief bit.

--
SM Ryan http://www.rawbw.com/~wyrmwif/
I have no respect for people with no shopping agenda.

..u.. ..ll..

CBFalconer wrote:

> Alan Balmer wrote:
>
>>Patrick Scheible <kkt@drizzle.com> wrote:
>>
>
> ... snip ...
>
>>>They have committees, they don't have independent
>>>intelligence-gathering ability.
>>
>>Neither does President Bush - he doesn't have time for all
>>those field trips. That's why he gets reports from the various
>>intelligence agencies, who also report to the Congressional
>>intelligence committees.
>
>
> Then why does he ignore them, as evidenced by his non-response to
> the July report on the future of Iraq, which was kept secret until
> a few days ago?
>

You have no basis from which to judge how or whether there was a
response. Just because you're not in the loop doesn't mean there is no
loop.

-- ced


--
Chuck Dillon
Senior Software Engineer
NimbleGen Systems Inc.

..u.. ..ll..

SM Ryan wrote:

>
>
> In short, ding dong, the President _does_ have independent intelligence
> gatherring ability. It's called the executive branch, and it's at his
> beck and call for all legal orders. It's that commander in chief bit.
>

You missed the part of the constitution that speaks of checks and
balances. By definition the 3 branches are co-dependent.
Administration and oversight of our intelligence systems/agencies have
been pretty sophisticated for a long time. Are you suggesting that
somehow this administration has completely restructured it in just 3.5
years and somehow undermined the oversight authority of the congress?
If, so you have a very high opinion of the abilities of this
administration. I ***ume you think Tony Blair accomplished the same
thing in the U.K...

-- ced


--
Chuck Dillon
Senior Software Engineer
NimbleGen Systems Inc.

..Falcon..

Chuck Dillon wrote:
> CBFalconer wrote:
>
.... snip ...
>>
>> Then why does he ignore them, as evidenced by his non-response to
>> the July report on the future of Iraq, which was kept secret until
>> a few days ago?
>
> You have no basis from which to judge how or whether there was a
> response. Just because you're not in the loop doesn't mean there
> is no loop.

On the contrary, I have a basis. GWB has continued to bray about
"staying the course" since the report was available to him.

--
"It is not a question of staying the course, but of changing
the course" - John Kerry, 2004-09-20
"Ask any boat owner the eventual result of continuing the
present course indefinitely" - C.B. Falconer, 2004-09-20

..u.. ..ll..

CBFalconer wrote:
> Chuck Dillon wrote:
>
>>CBFalconer wrote:
>>
>
> ... snip ...
>
>>>Then why does he ignore them, as evidenced by his non-response to
>>>the July report on the future of Iraq, which was kept secret until
>>>a few days ago?
>>
>>You have no basis from which to judge how or whether there was a
>>response. Just because you're not in the loop doesn't mean there
>>is no loop.
>
>
> On the contrary, I have a basis. GWB has continued to bray about
> "staying the course" since the report was available to him.
>

Which of course is a basis of nothing.

It appears you consider reports from intelligence reliable enough for
the administration to take action with a sense of urgency. So you must
support actions taken last year based on similar intelligence right?
You also seem to support delegating control to whomever writes a
sufficiently gloomy report.

-- ced

--
Chuck Dillon
Senior Software Engineer
NimbleGen Systems Inc.