militant = innocent bystander

* scott:

"Ever notice that when the Israeli government murders someone, they call them a “militant“? Now, Hamas suicide bombers and riflemen are “terrorists,” but what exactly is a “militant”? It seems that if those they killed were terrorists, they would say so.
I’m sticking with the definition “innocent bystander” until someone can show me different."

* upi via scott:

"The arrest of suspected al-Qaida member Jose Padilla in 2002 was not the FBI`s goal, but rather to recruit him as an inside informant, an agent testified.
[]
\'I didn`t want to arrest him,\' said Special Agent Russell Fincher said. \'I needed his cooperation.\'
[]
He said the agency had hoped Padilla could provide information about an al-Qaida plot to detonate a radioactive device, or so-called \'dirty bomb\' on U.S. soil, and needed an insider, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported."

* scott:

"This message is for all who supported this war: I hate you, and I hope you die a slow, painful, fright-filled death soon, you fucking less than human pieces of garbage.
Update: OK, so that was a bit much, but please everyone, try not to be so stupid next time."

* AL:

"That said, I'm not sure I follow the basic 'plot' of the Wilson's civil claims. In a civil suit, no matter what type, you have to establish a causal connection between the wrongful behavior you're alleging and the injury you claim to have suffered.

Let's assume for the moment that Bob Novak's disclosure of Plame's identity caused legally cognizable damages to the Wilsons. The person most directly responsible for those damages (other than Bob Novak) is Novak's original source. The problem, however, is that neither Cheney, Libby, nor Rove was Novak's original source. Rather, the consensus seems to be that Novak's source was Richard Armitage.

While Libby appears to have leaked Plame's identity to a number of reporters, perhaps at the behest of Cheney, these leaks did not lead to publication. So unless the Wilsons can establish that Cheney and Libby were somehow in cahoots with Armitage (or whoever Novak's source was), it will be very difficult to establish the necessary causal link.

Because Rove was one of Novak's confirming sources, the causal link is a little stronger in his case, but still, if it ever reaches that point, his attorneys will undoubtedly argue that the lion's share of the blame lies with Novak's original source."