Thanks for your responses. I usually lurk here myself but decided to post because a few upsetting things had occurred. (I think I can say the same is true for the friend of J.R. who posted too.)

I’m sure Jesselyn would appreciate hearing from you. And glad you decided to unlurk yourself too.

Arnie @ 70

Oklahoma kiddo @ 26

US generals ‘will quit’ if Bush orders Iran attack

SOME of America’s most senior military commanders are prepared to resign if the White House orders a military strike against Iran, according to highly placed defence and intelligence sources.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t…..434540.ece

For the objecting generals to resign would be a mistake IMO, they should remain to be legally removed all the while refusing to pass on illegal orders and create the time necessary for the orders to be rescinded or countermanded. Otherwise, a repeat of Nixon’s “Saturday Night Massacre” will allow the apparatchiks to run things as they see fit.

I don’t have the link but just Friday last, the Stennis has met two other carrier groups already in the Persian Gulf. About a fortnight ago, the Reagan carrier group had steamed and was expected in the Persian Gulf area about the end of February. That to my counting is four carrier groups there about now. I recall it might have been the Guardian.uk that carried that information. Also, there are air bases established in Bulgaria/Romania for eventualities, easy bomber striking distance to either Syria or Iran. It doesn’t look like there will be a lot of time left, sorry for the paranoia, saw the same shite for Iraq while Congress fiddled away. All the best……

I don’t see how this strategy would work due to the following:

1) I think if a consortium of generals did not resign, but refused to execute an order of the Commander-in-Chief, it would be called a Coup d’etat.
2) They would instantly be removed from their responsibilities.
3) They would probably be carted off to jail on possible charges of treason.

OTOH, Attorney General Elliot Richardson and his Deputy William Ruckelshaus resigned and their resignation is what caused the overwhelming reaction to what came to be called the Saturday Night Massacre. In the end, although Archibald Cox was removed as Special Prosecutor, his work was carried out to its fruition by Leon Jaworski. Ultimately, Nixon’s actions were counterproductive. I hope that’s what would happen here.

Not following an illegal order cannot be turned into either a coup d’etat (no state is being overthrown by the refusal) or treason (the undermining of legitimately issued orders in this instance). In both, the Uniform Code of Military Justice not only upholds refusal of illegal orders, it actually demands refusal be followed. The officers would be removed from duty, but not instantly, communication with subordinate ranking officers would probably provide no replacement. What would happen is the creation of time to contradict the order. More importantly, such action would upset any time co-ordinated action to where “mischief” could be thwarted. The military do not operate in a communications vacuum, that manner of story would assuredly spread far and wide, and with reason. No military tribunal would ever find against the UCMJ defence of refusing an illegal order.
The apparatchik in the original SNM, didn’t Bork end up on the SCOTUS for his disgrace?
Sorry this reply is so EPU.

I didn’t recognize Jesselyn’s name immediately, but when I followed your link I instantly knew who she was – her story has been emblazoned on my brain since I read it in the New Yorker oh so long ago. I’ve been in the same position (too ethical to work with the Repugs you’ve found yourself among) and met with a similar scorched earth response.

Jesselyn is SO my hero, and I will write her a long fan note at the first opportunity. I just wanted to de-lurk and tell you how grateful I am that I saw your comment today. I’m glad she’s still fighting, and let her know that there are many who “get it.”

707!

… spare good vibes if ya got em. …

(wobble-wobble) (wobble-wobble) :) Knock ‘em dead!!

Speaking of good vibes, true story —

We were on vacation on Cape Cod many years back, us with our two girls then aged about 11 and 14, another couple with their little boy of “dating age” of circa 13. We were all of us sitting around the kitchen table playing Pictionary.

The other couple’s mom got the word “LIGHTHOUSE” which she drew, reasonably enough, as a tall cylindrical object (of indeterminate size), with barber-pole-type painting, and something roundish on the top sending out circular-shaped arcs — intended by her to represent the light waves emanating from the top of the “LIGHTHOUSE”.

(Now remember, this is a true story!) :)

Her 13-year-old-boy took one look and (quite reasonably) guessed “VIBRATOR!” which caused us all (except his Mom) to dissolve into gales of hysterical laughter. Mom, for some strange reason, turned a lovely shade of pink.

Which was not, for some strange reason, alleviated one iota by her son’s aggrieved protestation — “But Mom, you have one right in your night table!”

The game instantly broke up and we never spoke of it again.So think of those good vibes during your interview and you’ll do just fine. No screaming aloud though.

HotFlash and Rayne – In the D.C.D.C. (D.C. District Court) “Sealed v. Sealed” is in fact the standard nomenclature for sealed cases, by all appearances. “U.S. v. Sealed” is apparently not used in that district for sealed cases, having something to do with their software originally, I think. There are regular, and ongoing, filings of “Sealed v. Sealed” cases on the D.C. docket, so the title alone tells us nothing in particular. What might tell us something is the timing of two different sealed cases that were filed the week following Leopold’s Saturday article last May (as regards grand jury timing, etc.). Jeralyn checked yesterday, and at least one of those two cases is still sealed today. It could mean something, or it could mean nothing. [I’m keeping my mouth shut about it, more or less, seeing as I suggested some time back at TNH that Leopold might want to tread carefully, since a sealed case is presumably sealed for a reason.]

Oklahoma kiddo @ 17

Personal attacks on Hillary have a tendency to make me angry. If I sense that anyone from my party is doing this, I will defend Senator Clinton against these attacks, with gusto.

Agreed! Whomever the dem candidate is I am on board. I do hope McCain is the candidate for the Republican Party. He’s old, weak, and morally bankrupt.

On Mccain- I heard someone say it as old, mean and crazy. From republicans, no less.

She mentioned charges of high crimes and misdemeanors do not have to be founded in statutory crimes.

So what the heck is congress waiting on!?

February 19th, 2007 at 10:30 pm

Great post. Thanks for replying. More importantly, thanks for so perfectly describing why what happened to Jesselyn was a travesty of justice and an impeachable offence.

Your post touched me and those of us who support Jesselyn and at least gave me hope that I wasn’t just joining Jesselyn on her lonely island but that there were people who ‘got it’ too.

So thanks for your reply and for the temporary hope it gave.

That Toles cartoon is too rude! lol!

This is the first time I’ve had more than a week off from any job in 10 years. Unemployment has it’s upside. However, the downside is looming…I have an interview in Tampa Tuesday morning. Everybody send out some spare good vibes if ya got em. I’m really nervous about it.

Break a leg, vachon! And remember, if you don’t get turned down a few times, you are aiming too low.