Please Excuse My Self-Indulgence

Sierra Club executive director, enviroweenie and spineless progressive Carl Pope wrings out a last bit of self-pleasuring over the Van Jones Affair:

On Thursday evening, I got worried. Friday I put in a call to ask Van Jones how to help. Saturday I started writing a blog post, which would have appeared this morning. (I've attached it below because it goes into more detail on the history of the "Bush as addict" meme.) But on Saturday night, Van resigned, and this morning I was sick at heart. Collectively we -- the environmental community, progressives, and the Obama administration -- blew this, and we let our cause, our president, and Van Jones down.

Somebody get Carl to the fainting couch... Quick! Once you've done that, ask yourself this question: Would Carl Pope gone on Glenn Beck's show to defend Van Jones' trutherism? Would have risked the Sierra Club's image and his job to do that? Of course not. If he had, his board would have shitcanned him in an instant. Better to punch out a little post on Huffpo and call it a day...

Pope goes on to make excuses and play the race card, then he gets to the heart of the matter:

Anyone who has been an effective advocate for these communities has said things that will sound shocking to people in some other parts of America -- just as anyone who genuinely represents certain evangelical communities will have beliefs about morality that more-secular Americans might have a hard time with.

And you know what Carl? A whole shitload more people might be able to swallow that sort of reasoning if Van Jones had had the balls to actually defend himself. He didn't. He got all whiny about the VRWC and then put his tail between his legs and slinked out of town at midnight on a fucking three day weekend.

That doesn't really scream "courage of your convictions", you know.

And that's the real issue here. This whole line of "I didn't understand how serious this was" is self-serving bullshit. If you really didn't get what Glenn Beck was up to, you're a moron. But I don't think you're a moron. What I think is that you're exactly what Van Jones is:

A big-talkin' pussy.

You see, serious radicals, if they really believe George W. Bush was complicit in murdering 3,000 innocents, stand up and say so. They don't try to back away from it by claiming they didn't understand the petition they put their name to. If Van Jones was anything other than a big-talkin' pussy, he'd have stood up and said, "Fuck yeah, I think the Bush Administration allowed 9/11 to happen. I thought it then, and I still think it now." He would have stuck his chin out, said what he believed, and taken what came like a man.

But Van Jones didn't say or do that, now did he?

No, rather than publicly reaffirm what he believed, Van Jones tried to run away from those beliefs with one of the lamest-ass excuses in the history of lame-ass excuses. So he keep his lame-ass job and his lame-ass salary and his lame-ass status. Who in their right minds would take Van Jones seriously after that performance? More to the point, who in their right mind would defend Van Jones after that performance?

And let's be honest here: Who, in all seriousness, really thought Barack Obama was going to stand by Van Jones? Nobody. That's another reason nobody came to Van Jones' defense. We've all seen Barack Obama in action. And we all knew how this was going to play out... Van Jones was going under the bus. Lefties knew it, the VRWC knew it, and most obvious of all, Glenn Beck and Fox News knew it. Barack Obama won't fight for anyone or anything. What would make anyone think he'd fight for Van Jones?

The bottom line is this: You progressive types want to avoid a rerun of Van Jones? Tell the next Van Jones to grow a pair. And while your at it, tell Barack Obama to grow a pair as well.

Comments

[Paul Young]

You need your own show Dennis. Have you contacted Pajamas Media? I heard there teh awesome.

Honestly, I do enjoy your angle of attack. Keep up the good work.

[PeterUK]

"Every day I get in the queue (Push,push under the Bus)
To get on the bus that takes me to you (Push,push under the Bus)
I'm so nervous, I just sit and smile (Push,push under the Bus)
Your house is only another mile (Push,push under the Bus)
Thank you, driver, for getting me here (Push,push under the Bus)
You'll be an inspector, have no fear (Push,push under the Bus)
I don't want to cause no fuss (Push,push under the Bus)
But can I buy your Magic Bus? (Push,push under the Bus)
Nooooooooo!"

[badanov]

Honestly, I do enjoy your angle of attack

Seven degrees, 140 knots.

Call the ball...

[Mike C.]

Grow a pair ?

You might as well advise a pine tree to produce oranges.

[Mona]

Dennis (or anyone), can you answer this non-rhetorical question? (I did not follow the Van Jones controversy that closely.) Did Jones subscribe to the "truther" notion that 9/11 was an inside job by the Bush Admin, or did he simply subscribe to the belief that Bush had had warning prior to 9/11?

[donniedarko]

Mona,

What difference would it make? Both of your cases are insane nut-root paranoid hallucinations no representative of the executive branch should espouse.

[Mona]

What difference would it make? Both of your cases are insane nut-root paranoid hallucinations no representative of the executive branch should espouse.

Humor me. Among other things, it does seem that Condi Rice gave Bush an Intel report in 8/01 saying that AQ was planning an attack with airplanes. But to advocate that Bush/Israel or whatever "cabal" actually bombed the WTC and Pentagon is six shades of crazy.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Mona-

Van Jones claimed the Bush Administration had specific knowledge of the attack and chose not to act to prevent it in order to have justification for launching an attack on Iraq.

[Mona]

Van Jones claimed the Bush Administration had specific knowledge of the attack and chose not to act to prevent it in order to have justification for launching an attack on Iraq.

Thank you, Dennis. In 8/01 Bush had Intel that AQ had something like that in mind, but I am aware of no credible evidence that he knew specifics.

[ZT]

Mona is right. There are (at least) two types of Truthers. One type says Bush knew about the Arab plot and let it happen, and the other says there were no Arabs, it was an inside job, that the Towers (and Building 7) collapsed because of controlled demolitions, etc. These are obviously different degrees of insanity. As a thought experiment, substitute 'FDR' for 'Bush' and 'Pearl Harbor' for 'WTC' and compare the two theories.
As far as I know (not much), Van Jones signed a petition that said Bush 'Deliberately allowed' the attack to take place.

[Eric Blair]

That 'specific' knowledge charge is really no different than the idea that FDR 'knew' the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor.

[PeterUK]

The brand of Truther is irrelevant,both are loopy in their own way. Any examination of the demolition of buildings know that it can take a year or two to plan and execute a large demolition.The buldings are gutted.All the partition walls are removed,supporting columns weakened.Then hundreds,in this case thousands of holes have to be drilled,and the demolition ignition cord attached to ignite the charges,which are fired sequentially. People might notice.

As for advance warning,too many people would know,someone would spill their guts.

Anyone believing either scenario is too stupid to be in government.

[Mona]

Peter: I do not believe Bush has specifics as to when and where AQ was going to use airplanes to attack America. But in August he was told there was intelligence that AQ was planning an attack of that sort.

[PeterUK]

Mona,
Cites please. If true that the Clinton Administration knew also. The plot took years to come to fruition.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Mona's right about the Administration having intel in August of 2001. The problem was that the intel wasn't at all specific. What the intelligence community knew was there appeared to increased levels of activity by AQ that was pointing to a major operation.

Let's not forget that what Van Jones was really doing, in all probability, was giving expression to his Bush Derangement Syndrome. I doubt seriously he actually believed in the truther bullshit, but he had radical leftist negro street cred to maintain.

Let's face it, after his performance this past week, it's hard to take Van Jones seriously on any single issue, and I certainly wouldn't pick 9/11 as the one to give to him.

Just another lefty on the make.

[Mona]

Dennis: I would not be so sure Jones did not believe the petition he signed. After years participating in Greenwald's comments, I saw Greenwald have to finally threaten to ban True Believer Truthers who kept hijacking his threads with their conspiracy theories and "facts."

The predominant majority of sane people would argue with these liberal (and capital "L" Libertarians), and the conversation went totally nuts. So, while GG gives great latitude to what anyone wants to say in his threads, even he has had to crack down on Truthers.

That all said, given what Bush was advised in 8/01, might he not have done a better job of following up?

[TmjUtah]

Mona,

Every President since Ronald Reagan has been advised that Islamonazis have a hard on for killing Yankee infidels. And every President since Ronald Reagan has been commander in chief when varying numbers of U.S. citizens/service members have been murdered by said Islamonazis.

Mr. Clinton's administration actually restricted the investigative avenues available to U.S. intelligence/counter intelligence/security/law enforcement agencies to be used to combat Islamonazis... after suffering almost continuously escalating attacks, both domestically and internationally. That Goerlick(sp?)lady pops up in more vignettes than Forrest Gump...

Very, very rarely has the advice available to any president been accompanied by anything remotely resembling a time, date, or duty roster.

I await the Grand Apology by Mr. Obama the next time Americans are murdered by Islamists. I don't need the CIA or FBI to tell me how that's going to go down.

It's just a matter of time.

[Mona]

Mr. Clinton's administration actually restricted the investigative avenues available to U.S. intelligence/counter intelligence/security/law enforcement agencies to be used to combat Islamonazis...

That is not so. Clinton (AND Goerlick) was handcuffed by what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act *then* required, which was a wall of separation between the FBI and other intelligence communities. That wall was repealed by Congress shortly after 9/11.

[TmjUtah]

Goerlick authored the official administration memo that exceeded the directive of FISA.

PC sucks. It kills.

[TmjUtah]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamie_Gorelick

It's only wiki, but it was what came up first.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Mona-

Everything's 20/20 in hindsight. If the 9/11 Commission taught us anything, it was that our security agencies were all, to some degree, dysfunctional, and that our domestic security sucked. I'm not sure what anyone, including Bush, could have done about it. Remember, on 9/10, 9/11 was inconceivable.

[TmjUtah]

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200404190849.asp

Read bullet point 2.

For the record, I agree with the author's stated opinion that Gorelick was more interested in pandering to political constituencies than in defending the people or constitution of the nation.

And now I'm angry the night before I go back to work. I really hate politics any more.

[JeffS]

That all said, given what Bush was advised in 8/01, might he not have done a better job of following up?

Nice try at changing the subject of the discussion, Mona. Bush is no longer President, Obama is. As Dennis pointed out, hindsight is a depressing 20/20.

But the facts remain that (a) Truthers are at least loopy, if not flat out nuts; (b) Van Jones supported the 9/11 Truthers (even now, the 9/11 Truth web site is lamenting his departure [I won't dignify those loons with a link]); and (c) Van Jones didn't have the balls to defend his views, and scurried off in the middle of the night.

Says it all, really.

[TmjUtah]

Van Jones, putative expert in a fictional field, is gone.

What onerous regulations depart with him; what changes in policy will be enacted in response to his absence? None. A finger has been withdrawn from a cup of water.

The administration is the threat. The cast is really just a distraction.

[Mona]

Goerlick authored the official administration memo that exceeded the directive of FISA.

No, she did not. Some aspects of FISA were amended in the 90s. But while applicable, (I believe it was a matter of warrants for physical searches, but do not hold me to that) Goerlick and Clinton abided by them.

[Jim Ryan]

From the link:

To quote Gorelick's 1995 memorandum (something she carefully avoids doing), the procedures her memorandum put in place "go beyond what is legally required...[to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation."

[TmjUtah]

http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper441/documents/5nkzph1t.pdf

mona-

This is my last teaching moment. Read the memo, and remember that it was authored from the White House. Read the paragraph on page two that contains the word "exceeds".

Understand that the thrust of the memo was that that from the moment it was published, ALL ongoing investigations by law enforcement and counter intell services would be conducted on seperate administrative tracks. The stated purpose IN THE BODY OF THE MEMO is to avoid the appearance of FISA violations.

The intent might be construed as sort of laudable... until you remember that the Clinton administration operated on strict conflict avoidance. The unintended consequence was to send a message rippling through the intelligence/law enforcement/judicial communities that administrative procedures would add an additional layer of complexity to investigations that bridged law enforcement/intell turf.

A cop asking "why are all these Muslim gomers taking flying lessons and not interested in landing?" was prohibited by policy from contacting INS or any other Federal agency. He had to fly a request for information through a poorly defined and overwhelmed communication tree, and then wait for a response.

All the while waiting for a leak whereby he would be accused of racism or alarmism. "Flying airplanes into buildings? Please!? What are you, a Republican?"

Mistakes were made. I've prayed we learned from them and will continue to heed the lessons. With the current government... well, faith is nothing without tests.

[PeterUK]

Dennis,
There are,at anyone time dozens of warnings of operations by terrorist organisations.It is what terrorist organisations do,keep security services strung out by high alerts. It is only in retrospect any of these can be correctly assessed.

[Dennis the Peasant]

Peter-

There are,at anyone time dozens of warnings of operations by terrorist organisations.It is what terrorist organisations do,keep security services strung out by high alerts. It is only in retrospect any of these can be correctly assessed.

Correct!

[PeterUK]

"That all said, given what Bush was advised in 8/01, might he not have done a better job of following up?"

And Clinton? Oh sorry, he was bound by FISA and the Gorelick Wall.

[PeterUK]

Also,previous attacks had either been hijacks of planes,bombings of planes or both.
Secondly al Qaeda went for symbolic targets,much more damage could have been wrought hitting a refinery or chemical plant near an urban centre. Nuclear power stations,lpg storage,the list is nearly endless.

[J West]

1. The US has always been abysmal at collection of human intelligence. (That would be CIA's domain)
2. Our overhead and signal intercept capabilities have been and are awesome. (NRO and NSA, mostly)
3. We have been reliant on foreign sources for most of our "humint." Read Israeli, for the most part, concerning Arab bad actors.
4. With Sharon's increase in power and eventual election (March. 2001). a lot of Israel's intelligence sources dried up.
5. For most of 2001, the US was relying on signal intercept frequency to gauge the activity of Arab terrorists.
6. Given the disconnect between CIA and FBI, even 19 extremely unprofessional operators could slip through the cracks.
7. In a way, the truther notions are a comfort: they imply a degree of competence on the part of the establishment that does not exist.
8. Things aren't much better today. FBI and local law enforcement are a lot more effective in the realm of internal security than the CIA.
V/R JW

[PeterUK]

JWest.
That is a reflection of most Western agencies. Being government agencies means that,as long as nothing happens,the employees of the agency can simply go through the motions. Make reports,compile information,have meetings and conferences,then some bloody terrorists come and spoils it all.

[Mona]

I've read the Goreick memo before. And? She was carefully attempting to make sure that FISA was adhered to as it was constituted at the time.

[PeterUK]

Oh look! Van Jones accidentally organised a Truther demonstration.

[Eric Blair]

Mona needs to ask herself what the fuck Sandy 'National Security Advisor with secret documents in his socks' Berger was stealing from the National Archives. And why that investigation was basically hushed up/ignored by the MSM/forgotten about.

C'mon Mona. I dare you.