Up until the end of June ( it is suspected that the owner of the site just let it expire ) I was a regular and hopefully honest contributor to a bulletin board in a quiet, distant, off the beaten path corner of the ‘Net.

The overall site was connected with radio control model aircraft (something that fringes interests of mine) but it had within it one board named most appropriately as “The Trash Can”.

Over about three or four years there were a diverse range of contributors representing a wide range of political opinion. Most of those domiciled in the US were very Republican, very patriotic, and mostly with connection of one kind or another to the US armed services. So we had the likes of “papadean”, RONALDEFODGE, stettoman, OHEng, Line Goddess, and many others. Some became personal friends ( as close as one may on the ‘Net.) for the time being. Some are implacable enemies ( in their eyes, at least).

But I want to place on record that I really do miss the ‘Can. Why? Well to be brutally frank, I used to get considerable enjoyment from picking news from (mainly) US sources and posting it out with my own commentary. Well, to be fair it was not always necessary to initiate debate with blatant trolls. Often discussion of matters current and topical became incendiary without any assistance from me. Sometimes just producing a match was enough to get things going. Anything from US foreign policy to US Supreme Court decisions to the place of religion in society were all fair game. All in all it was a very enjoyable place to hang out, to shoot the breeze, to kill a few dragons along the way.

I guess that I am undergoing some form of withdrawal – from the addiction of being able to post various stories if nothing else than “to just see what happens.”

The last post here – the self analysis by New York Times – is a case in point. That would have been a first rate troll if followed by “What impact might this have on George Bush’s chances in Nov?” Not just because of the timeliness of the Time’s navel gazing. It is a primary example of the impact that the media can have on the political climate. That potential immediately raises the quest ion of “Why did the Times report at this time?”. Much of the Time’s comments in that instance reflected interpretations used by the US administration many times to justify their “pre-emptive strike” against Iraq.

But there is no flesh left on those bones – the vultures and the hyenas have all had their fill. But nowhere in the ensuing rush to comment has anyone raised my questions –
Why did the Times do it?
What impact was it intended to have politically?

And so we come to today’s offering, once again courtesy of the NYT.

New York Times

The article is three pages long and essentially deals with the relationships between the US administration and the two (or is it three) ring circus that their intelligence service has turned into over the Iraq war and its “justification”.

I am not one for “I told you so”’s because they lead to healthy helpings of crow whenever predictions are wrong (and I am one of the worst Nostradamus’ in the game).

The “early departure” of George Tenet from the CIA did signal the findings of the investigating committee as clearly as waving a Palestinian flag from the top front balcony of the White House. There will be much soul searching, particularly within the CIA. There will probably be some more heads to roll, enough even for a deck of cards all of their own. Time will tell.

What will be the most interesting of all is whether the administration – Bush, Cheney, Wolfowicz, and Powell – will be strong and brave enough to conduct a review of their words and actions as has been done by the Times.

I say no, it will never happen. The last President to commit political suicide was Clinton. The neo-cons will “believe” that the country can not afford a second strike in succession.

More is the pity?