and the mouths of at least one other writer and editor who were fired for plagerism-you'd think the NYT would learn its' lessons about credibility.

As usual Glenn-I love your posts and go straight for them every morning!

To add to the facts about the Iranian-Iraq "problem":

I've read that Al Qaeda makes up less than 4% in Iraq-yet accounts for 95% of the violence. This leaves 5% which would probably be subcategorically divided into: Shiite-sunni violence,Shiite on Shiite violence, Kurdish violence.

Once again this is in keeping with Cheneys'1% doctrine rule-of rather than dealing with the reality of 95%- go for that other percentage to make your point (Iran).We are supplying the Sunnis with weaponry through Saudi A.-so what's the difference? Secondly if the WH is mounting clandestine activities in border crossings and naval blockades-the WH has already put into action "aggressive war" tactics-and Iran should be able to defend itself by proxy. This is even if they are supplying some weaponry.The US has already violated the laws of war-so why can't Iran defend itself however it needs to?

As usual great work-was curious to know what you'd write today.Think everyone just feels the same way anout this WH.

TPM has a really good article-which may go missed-but needs to be paid some attention to. it's about the Duke C. case adn the discovery of another secret scam-think the acronym is TALON.

Duke may be the beginning of the end for them-where theres' smoke there is fire.

Trouble is there are too many fires right now-not enough water.

Glenn I looked up Burden of proof on Wik.

It is the one being accused who has to supply the "burden of proof" as to it's innocence. So a citizen challenging the govt. or a telecom company has to defend itself.Stonewalling and saying "state secrets" is NOT an acceptable defense. It says not. Furthermore there is more than enough probability that NSA spying is illegal-yet courts are ignoring the Constitutional rights of citizens.

If courts don't start doing the right thing-they are opening themselves up to a whole host of lawsuits in the future-which citizens should be allowed to if rights are knowingly being violated by our Justice Dept. covering it over.

Was just thinking about Ledeen in relation to the forged Niger docs and the Plame-case. Pakistan too.

I ,like other readers, was shocked not to see CBS story on al Maliki no-confidence vote by Iraqis. Writings' on the wall, yet the same fools who haven't won one yet-still want to try for 3. Is 3 lucky for us or what?-can someone give me the logical explanation behind why.

Think it's time for a Church Committee-like hearing on our CIA Intel and war before we get involved in any more-especially concerning countries like Pakistan.

Our Intel is broke bigtime and needs to be completely revamped.

Novak just made some idiotic statement about dems and McCarthyism- saying "...but alot of people liked McCarthy".

so that's the new GOP perjorative? McCarthy had the best of intentions? Boy are they doomed.

As far as your article on govt. secrecy. Of course I think it's worse than we know. I just read an article on how FISA was supposed to have a govt. oversight committee overseeing it-but it has not been functioning since 02-becasue GW disbanded it. I think this professor in your article is full of bs. If the WH had an argument justifying it-I'm sure they'd be trying to spin it by now.Not waiting 6 yrs in to war.

I've also read some disturbing articles about some marines from C. Lejune accused of killing Iraqis. The orders that they had gotten by thier commanders was to increase violence on the ground.Now why would commanders be giving those orders?

do ya think it's to try to prolong the war? To keep any withdrawal process from going forward? Ya think? (Huffpo Sun 7/15)

With or without the secrecy-the problem is that the public does not nor will they ever trust this WH. The goodwill from 911 is gone-becasue of the obuse of power.

If it comes down to winning the war-or choosing open government with pre-911 rights. americasn have already chosen to lose the war-judging by poll numbers.

The war was never about Iraqis but Bin Laden-who is in Pakistan. the men being killed in Iraq are not terrorists-but men defending their country against an unwanted invasion and theft of their oil.

from me Glen.

I agree with both Popes this war was a "war against Peace"

and a war of aggrerssion. all invasions and subsequest occupations of countries with natural resouce wealth should be called as such.

Catholics should never give the GOP thier votes again.

GOP valuse go against every doctrine of the Catholic church under the ruse of "religion".

Pope J. Paul and Pope Benedict have been smart enough to say it-unlike other religious leaders who want to use the GOP for church handouts.

Dems are missing the boat by not pointing out that it is GW that is prolonging the war by not giving the Iraqis a fair oil law.

ooooooh... there I've said it....awaiting my muzzle.

The Iraqis know they are getting a bad deal from the oil companies and want to control thier own oil. Publicly GW is in a Catch22 here-becasue after all, he did go in for democracy-so what better way to let them have democracy but to run thier own country. Talking about control of oil exposes what GW/Cheney plan was all along-to take thier oil-to the tune of 80% to US/ British Oil Companies to 20% split by Sunni, Shiite, And Kurds (profitwise).

Give them a fair deal and the occupation could be over.

Even the dumbest checkpaying,whoreriding,backwoods,man named Mitt could understand those numbers.