The Los Angeles Times boasts that it has identified three CIA pilots who are facing kidnapping charges in Germany over a 2003 counterterrorism operation there:

The names they used were all aliases, but The Times confirmed their real identities from government databases and visited their homes this month after a German court in January ordered the arrest of the three “ghost pilots” and 10 other alleged members of the CIA’s special renditions unit on charges of kidnapping and causing serious bodily harm to Khaled Masri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, three years ago.

None of the pilots responded to repeated requests for comment left with family members and on their home telephones. The Times is not publishing their real names because they have been charged only under their aliases.

mui @ 130

You know I’m trying very hard to understand the psychology of Cheney& Co. & Novack. I have to confess I am at a loss to understand why they felt they had the right to discard and discredit everyone and everything that disproved their “evidence” for going to war. Cheney must have felt his “right” was so absolute that it took precedence over other peoples’ lives. That is very hard-to-understand psychology.

A uaseful analysis of this phenomenon can be found in John Dean’s Conservatives without Conscience.

This is a must-read for us bleedin’-heard liberals. It is very important for us who are congenital ‘nice guys’ to understand that other people act and react differently than we do. It is vital that we understand what they are doing and can accurately predict what they will do.

HotFlash @ 158

mui @ 130

You know I’m trying very hard to understand the psychology of Cheney& Co. & Novack. I have to confess I am at a loss to understand why they felt they had the right to discard and discredit everyone and everything that disproved their “evidence” for going to war. Cheney must have felt his “right” was so absolute that it took precedence over other peoples’ lives. That is very hard-to-understand psychology.

A uaseful analysis of this phenomenon can be found in John Dean’s Conservatives without Conscience.

This is a must-read for us bleedin’-heard liberals. It is very important for us who are congenital ‘nice guys’ to understand that other people act and react differently than we do. It is vital that we understand what they are doing and can accurately predict what they will do.

I actually bought that book for someone else. Don’t know why I haven’t read it yet.

your writing on this very fact-sy trial has been excellent. it gives depth of understanding and perspective that i have sorely needed.

thanks

beth meacham @ 78

I have long suspected that there’s very big elephant in the room that no one’s looking at.

(snip)

Who was the head of the CPD’s Iraq operation? That’s right, Valerie Plame Wilson.

(snip)

I suspect that Cheney knew that. Blowing Plame’s cover and destroying Brewster Jennings were not an accidental side-effect of trying to discredit Joe Wilson. It was the main event.

I don’t think cheney had any personal experience of valery

he was too inquisitive in his notes when talking about her

though I would love to believe your scenario, the dots don’t connect for me

Beth – I think you may be on to something. He had been dealing with Valerie Plame, not Valerie Wilson. It probably never occurred to him that there was a connection, until Wilson did his op ed. You can imagine his fury when he connected the dots.

There is another component to this. Apparently Scowcroft and Bush’s daddy had very high regard for Wilson and Scowcroft was something of a mentor. That really must have gotten under W’s skin (all these rivals for his dad’s esteem – Clinton, Wilson, etc.).

I think both Bush and Cheney were blind with rage about Wilson’s “slap-on-the face” op ed piece. These are not rational thinkers doing things for the greater good. These are criminals fueled by emotion and thirst for revenge.

it needs to be explained repeatedly, until it’s understood. fitz and his team were really sharp to go the way they did — and even then they had a tall order, building a case that could withstand a “he said, she said” reasonable doubt defense. after yesterday’s closing statements, who doubts that they made their case?

Sadly, Jeralyn is making that argument in her piece at TalkLeft. Actually, I really liked her piece but she thinks that although Fitz showed motive (something she said he hadn’t shown previously) she was somewhat disgusted that he didn’t go ahead and charge conspiracy.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2007/2/21/23551/6143

Hey there.

We’ve already gone to camera this morning, apparently we’ve got an issue with a juror. I’ll post in about 10 minutes.

Please report if Fitzgerald is wearing ashes on his forehead.

You know I’m trying very hard to understand the psychology of Cheney& Co. & Novack. I have to confess I am at a loss to understand why they felt they had the right to discard and discredit everyone and everything that disproved their “evidence” for going to war. Cheney must have felt his “right” was so absolute that it took precedence over other peoples’ lives. That is very hard-to-understand psychology.

A uaseful analysis of this phenomenon can be found in John Dean’s Conservatives without Conscience.

This is a must-read for us bleedin’-heard liberals. It is very important for us who are congenital ‘nice guys’ to understand that other people act and react differently than we do. It is vital that we understand what they are doing and can accurately predict what they will do.

james gordon meek, new york daily news, on c-span’s washington journal just now… prompted by a caller (and reader of fdl)… called fdl in particular and bloggers in general the “stars of the show” and how fdl is the “must read” coverage.

someone please save for Marcy’s scrapbook…

[yahoo?!] ;->