An astonishing statement by a high US official

I appreciate that, Jake. In the past, some have taken matters far beyond these limits, and it was those actions I was speaking out against.

It hit a nerve, yes.

But it was through no fault of yours that it hit that nerve, so I'm sorry that I came across in the manner I did, and I appreciate your reasoned response.

I agree that people should be qualified for their positions, and in the cases where that qualification is absolutely a degree, that the degree should fit the stated requirements. As I've said in the past -- my views are not terribly askew from many as regards these matters. I'm actually quite a conservative fellow, however libertarian.

As a libertarian, I believe in freedom of the individual to live unhindered by unnecessary state rule. In the case where the people are protected (medical doctors, nuclear technicians), there is a greater good being served -- but even then, due process and calm heads prevail.

 

True enough, but let me ask you one question;

If we were not drawn into WWII, if it had stayed a European conflict, and Hitler was content to stay on Europe's mainland gassing Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, etc., would we have been justified in not intervening, once we knew of the genocide going on?

 

You know Gregg, I have nothing but contempt for Bill Clinton, he's nothing but an adulterer and perjurer to me, among other things.

However, I would never wish that he "rot in hell", or anything along those lines. You have some seriously misplaced hatred, you should really work on focusing that energy towards something positive.

BTW....the fact that you're absolutely obsessed with FOX News just reinforces my faith in them.

 

The argument for nonintervention was a strong one. We did not get involved until we were attacked. Iraq never attacked us.

There has been widespread genocide in Central Africa--dwarfing anything Hussein had done--and we don't seem to be sending troops there.

Many despots continue to repress and murder their peoples--where are we regarding them? Russia, China, North Korea, and much of Africa. What about Burma? Where were we in Cambodia? Nowhere. Our country has a long history of nonintervention. I'm not saying it's right, but it is true.

There are many and worse threats to the world than a very contained Iraq, yet the Bush administration chose to invade them. Not a threat to us, not a threat to the region, and not a threat to most Iraqis. The comparison doesn't hold up.

Preventing Sadaam from hurting Iraqis wasn't the reason we were sold for going to war. It was WMD's. And that was flat false.

 

...gassing Roma...

One would not employ derogatory terms for Jews or homosexuals.

 

I hope that I am never so sure of myself that I will condemn someone to Hell.
Jack

 

I hope that I'm never so powerful that I could condemn someone to hell.

 

Ah, Rich! But Iraq's got more oil than the rest of them put together!

 

With all due respect, I believe that my prospective problem is more immanent than yours.
Jack
(that is, unless there's something important that you've neglected to tell us)

 

You know what? You're right. I do have some serious anger about the state of things today. But it's hardly misplaced... not by a longshot. And you, on the Right, would just love for people like me to shut up and go focus our energies on something that you would consider "positive." Of course, if we did that who would sound the alarm as Bush43, et al, lead us down the road to despotism?

As for the "rot in hell" remark: I think back on our very first exchange, here, you and me. It was the week Reagan died, as I recall. I thought your requirement that we all be reverent and respectful was inappropriate... still do. But I respected (and still do) your obvious respect for the man... misplace though that may have been.

And though I despise Ronald Reagan even more than my words here can possibly convey, I agree that it really was over-the-top -- ne, flat-out wrong -- for me to have wished that he rot in hell.

So, I apologize. I shouldn't have written that. Seriously. I apologize.


Now... George W. Bush, on the other hand...

(Just kidding... er... well.. you know... sort of!)

The old "any enemy of yours is a friend of mine" argument, eh? That's fine.

But isn't it curious how easily the Right labels such admirable things as passion and/or dedication "obsession."

 

Heh, heh, heh. But how could that interest Bush and Cheney?

 

That was exactly my question.....if we were never attacked, would we have been justified in not confronting Germany, once we knew of the Holocaust genocide?

In case you forgot, Russia, China, and North Korea have nuclear weapons, with crackpots on the trigger. As for Africa, perhaps you forgot about Somalia?

If I remember correctly, we did have a fairly significant military action in Southeast Asia, 30-odd years ago. Gutless politicians saw to it that we didn't prevail that time.

It also has a long history of intervention....Haiti, Bosnia, Serbia, the Dominican Republic, Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan, and the aforementioned Somalia, to name a few.

Assuming for the sake of argument that Saddam had no WMD's in the years prior to the invasion, or that they weren't moved out of the country (neither of which I believe), the decision to invade was one of good faith, based on faulty intelligence.

Do you think it's a bad thing that a side benefit was the removal of a genocidal dictator?

 

No. It is a good thing. But it is a small thing, and it is a de-stabilizing thing. Containing Sadaam seemed to be working just fine. No WMD's, no threat to his neighbors, etc.

Please don't blame the lack of WMD's on "faulty intelligence." First, there is ample evidence of pressure on the intelligence community to come up with reasons for invading Iraq. (Remember Colin Powell's fierce argument to the UN?) But, more important, even if the intelligence was wrong, it was the responsibility of the Administration to verify it and be absolutely sure before going to war. There was no immediate, impending danger to the U.S. There was nothing that couldn't wait. The U.S. could have waited to verify--or invalidate--the intelligence it was receiving. It didn't. And it bears full responsibility. It is petty and wrong to blame the people who work for you for a decision YOU (the President) MADE!

One of the fundamental precepts of leadership is that authority can be delegated, but responsibility cannot. The President and his minions chose to rely on the intelligence they had (assuming they didn't cook it, which I think they did). The intelligence provided by their own people. They had the responsibility to verify, but they were derelict in that duty. So for this mistake many Americans died, and they continue to die today. Blaming the intelligence is like blaming your subordinate for a task you were responsible for. It doesn't wash.

 

Here is something that all of us can, hopefully, agree on ....... Let us get back to Dr. Bear's original post .... and question.



Mr. Charles Abell, a highly-ranked US public official, possesses a diploma mill degree. He has willfully chosen sides in the war between legitimate degrees and (dare I say it?) fraudulent ones. He must be man enough to accept responsibility for his actions.

Thanks to The Macomb Daily:

"Stiff penalties urged for fake degrees

"PUBLISHED: March 29, 2005

"By Matt Wenzel
"Capital News Service

"LANSING -- Lawmakers are attempting to slap heavy fines on those who issue false academic credentials or try to use one to get a job.

"A Senate bill would prohibit people from intentionally issuing false credentials or using them to land a job.

""You shouldn't be able to buy a fake diploma," said Sen. Ray Basham, R-Taylor, one of the bill's co-sponsors. "The main goal is to stop the business."

"Sen. Tom George, R-Holland, the bill's primary sponsor, said the issue came to his attention through members of the Association of Michigan Universities, an alliance of student representatives from each of the state's 15 public universities. Western Michigan University is in George's district.

"George said he wants to protect college students who work hard for years to get a degree from being undermined by someone using a fake one. "These places call themselves a real university, but they're not," George said.

"The proposal would allow a maximum $20,000 fine for issuing fake credentials and a maximum $1,000 fine for those who use one on their resume or a job application. The Department of Labor and Economic Growth would be responsible for investigating complaints and issuing fines.

"However, Tom Martin, the department's director of policy and legislative affairs, said he would like to beef up the bill. He wants a higher penalty for using a phony academic credential.

""A $1,000 fine is not sufficient for someone to take seriously," Martin said. "It would cost a lot more than $1,000 to investigate and follow through with. It wouldn't make sense."

"Even so, Martin said he's working with George and is optimistic the department will support it. Similar legislation has already passed in Oregon, New Jersey, Indiana, North Dakota and Nevada.

"Bogus degrees range in price from $50 to $5,000 and require little to no work. Oregon maintains a list of institutions whose degrees are illegal in the state. The list includes Hamilton University in Wyoming, Stanton University in Hawaii and the University of Wexford in Great Britain.

"Advances in technology, especially the Internet, have made the buying and selling of fake degrees a big business. In 2004, Congress unveiled a list of 463 government employees who had degrees from fake universities or diploma mills. At least 28 held high-ranking positions, including three members of the National Nuclear Security Administration.

"Charles Abell, a principal deputy undersecretary for the U.S. Department of Defense, lists a master's of science degree from Columbus University on his resume. Columbus was determined to be a diploma mill and shut down by Louisiana.

"In Michigan, former Rep. Gloria Schermesser, D-Lincoln Park, and her husband Michael, a former Lincoln Park City Council member, were both exposed for listing degrees from a bogus university. Rep. Schermesser was term-limited in 2002 and her husband resigned.

"George said the bill is a good example of the need to update laws to match technology. "I don't imagine this was as much as a problem before the Internet. The problem is that there is a pattern," he said.

""Technology can be a blessing or a curse, " Basham said. "Along with technology comes responsibility."

===========

Now ...... about Charles Abell ....... and diploma mill degrees ....... and war ........ and responsibility ....... and accreditation .... and skillsets?.......

LOL.

Thanks.

 

I love these kind of threads and think about degree mill apologists that like to place the whole DegreeInfo community into one stereotype.

 

Can anything good come out of Mount Clemens?

Wow. This is the second news flash from the Macomb Daily in as many weeks.
This old East Sider remembers it being called the Birdcage Gazette.
(The vile racialist Northeast Detroiter was known as the Sh**wipe Times.)
I'm waiting for the Hamtramck Citizen to make its mark on DL news.
Awright, it could too.

 

Thoroughbreds and Other Breeds

Could it be that some of you have come to the wrong conclusion, my esteemed knights and zealots? If suddenly you discover that a whole lot of the racehorses at the track aren’t Thoroughbreds, and that they are in fact not only competing but winning, do you then disallow the new breed, or do you open the track to non- Thoroughbreds? Whatever happened to common sense?

 

Re: Thoroughbreds and Other Breeds

This doesn't seem an apt analogy, but I'll take a cut at it.

This isn't about a different breed of horse, or school. This is about fake schools. To continue your analogy, it would be as if those races were being won not by horses, but by fake, mechanical horses. You know, where none of the real work (breeding, training, etc.) is actually being done, but the horses win anyway.

Mr. Abell continues to list his "master's" degree from Columbus University on his official biography, more than a year after it was revealed on Good Morning America.

 

I would not worry too much if I were you, Dr. Douglas. Mr. Charles Abell's fake degree time bomb is tick-tock-ing, and it is only a matter of time until the big "boom!" His suspension, demotion or firing must be in the works. The shame, public outcries of disgust and calls for his ouster are unrelenting and unceasing - and rightly so.

I wonder, for the past year, how it is that Mr. Abell can look at himself every morning in the mirror, knowing as we do, that millions of honorable and ethical citizens of the USA (and abroad) know that he is a fake - a holder of a fake degree!

The holders of the fake or substandard degrees are "competing and winning?" When? Where? On what planet?

Please speak up ........ because I can barely hear your vacuous chest-beating boasts over the cries of derision and disdain and the tsk...tsk...tsks from the pursuers and holders of real (read: legitimate AND properly accredited) schools and DL degrees.

Pray, (real or unreal) esquire, Morgan Khanstein, provide us, right here, with a list of the names and degrees, and "schools" of all such "competing and winning" holders of diploma mill or substandard degrees, so that we may accord them the much-delayed kudos they deserve.

LOL.



Thanks.

 

Re: Re: Thoroughbreds and Other Breeds

A characterization that I like better is that the whole horse race is faked. Whoever pays the "entry fee" is automatically guaranteed a win for their very own fake horse pick. None of the real work is done. They don't bother even having a real race. The whole race track can move to a different jurisdiction by opening a new postoffice box someplace else.