 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
homesteader
PO3
Joined: 17 Sep 2004
Posts: 294
Location: wisconsin
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:51 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Maybe just maybe is the MSM finally figureing out that their emporer has/had no clothes on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Wallace: "I felt as if a mountain was coming down in front of me. "
Heh. at Media Bistro
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Curtis H.
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 143
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kate
Admin
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 1891
Location: Upstate, New York
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let the legacy shredding continue...
Clinton opened up the proverbial can of worms with that interview. Has both the old & new media all abuzz.... and digging in the archives
Fox News
Transcript: Clarke Praises Bush Team in '02
March 24, 2004
this is long but good read, in light of Clinton's protestations about reading what Clarke had to say...this is before Clarke resigned in a snit 'cuz Condi wasn't paying him enough attention. Short version - Clinton had-a-plan-on-the-table. Bush did something about it.
couple snips | Quote: | | Clarke describes the handover of intelligence from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration and the latter's decision to revise the U.S. approach to Al Qaeda. |
| Quote: | Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998. And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office — issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.
And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.
And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.
So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda. |
| Quote: | | And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course of five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of Al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline. |
oh, then this from the guy who did the negotiating between Sudan & Clinton
LA Times
December 5, 2001
Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize
another long read, he has dates & names...just some snips
| Quote: | | From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, |
| Quote: | In May 1996, the Sudanese capitulated to U.S. pressure and asked Bin Laden to leave, despite their feeling that he could be monitored better in Sudan than elsewhere.
Bin Laden left for Afghanistan, taking with him Ayman Zawahiri |
| Quote: | | And that was not the end of it. In July 2000--three months before the deadly attack on the destroyer Cole in Yemen--I brought the White House another plausible offer to deal with Bin Laden, by then known to be involved in the embassy bombings |
| Quote: | | Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history. |
_________________
.
one of..... We The People |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
"New NIE Shows Iraq War Has Hampered War On Terror"
Amazing they have waited until now to bring up this April 2006 "report."
Of course, I discuss it here: NIE Report: Iraq War hampers War on Terror
They discredited this group over pre-war intelligence about WMDs, but embrace them now when parts of it might make the administration look bad and hamper the effort in Iraq.
_________________
Clark County Conservative |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
four-niner delta
Lt.Jg.
Joined: 20 Aug 2004
Posts: 134
Location: Burbank, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
At least Chris Wallace knows which buttons to push on Clinton! I wonder what Chris' old man thinks about his son going after Clinton? It's going to be a very cold Thanksgiving dinner this year in the elder Wallace house.
_________________
Gary Armitstead
Burbank, CA
U.S. Army Vietnam 1966-67 Mekong Delta
Mobile Riverine Force
A Co. 3/60 9th INF DIV |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good piece, Lew.
| Quote: | | Amazing they have waited until now to bring up this April 2006 "report." |
This was LEAKED for the express purpose of countering the recent rise in polls for President Bush.
The National Intelligence Estimate is prepared for the President from all the various branches of the Intelligence community.
IT IS A CLASSIFIED DOCUMENT.
Obviously someone wanted only the negative portion made public. Only the President or VP can declassify any portion of it!
So who LEAKED IT TO THE NYT.
Could it be a Democrat member of Congress who sits on the Intelligence Committee???
Again putting political expediency ahead of national security.
Reuters
| Quote: | White House: Account of Iraq report incomplete
Sep 24, 7:08 PM (ET)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A newspaper report that a U.S. intelligence analysis found that the Iraq war gave rise to a new generation of Islamic radicals and made the overall terrorism problem worse was "not representative of the complete document," the White House said on Sunday.
The New York Times reported that a classified National Intelligence Estimate completed in April said Islamic radicalism had mushroomed worldwide and cited the Iraq war as a reason for the spread of jihadist ideology.
It was the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by U.S. intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began in March 2003 and represents a consensus view of the 16 spy services.
"The New York Times' characterization of the NIE is not representative of the complete document," said White House spokesman Peter Watkins.
He declined to comment on information contained in the classified document.
U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte said news reports on the NIE characterize "only a small handful" of the conclusions from a broad strategic assessment of global terrorism.
"The conclusions of the intelligence community are designed to be comprehensive and viewing them through the narrow prism of a fraction of judgments distorts the broad framework they create," Negroponte said in a statement.
Negroponte said the analysis found that if the U.S. effort to establish a stable government in Iraq succeeded, jihadists would be weakened and "fewer jihadists will leave Iraq determined to carry on the fight elsewhere."
President George W. Bush has steadfastly insisted that his decision to invade Iraq was the right action to take to head off a potential threat.
At fund-raisers ahead of the November congressional elections he has been striving to portray his administration as tough on terrorism and the Republicans as the best party to protect Americans.
Democrats, trying to win control of Congress from the Republicans, have focused on the Iraq war, which is increasingly unpopular with the public.
Rep. Jane Harman of California, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said she agreed that the Iraq war had caused the spread of jihadist ideology. "Every intelligence analyst I speak to confirms that," she said on CNN's "Late Edition."
"And that is why ... the best military commission proposal in the world and even capturing the remaining top al Qaeda leadership isn't going to prevent copycat cells, and it isn't going to change a failed policy in Iraq," she said. "This administration is trying to change the subject. I don't think voters are going to buy that." |
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Clinton should have been asked what his buddy Sandy the Burglar was trying to hide for him, now that would have been a great follow up to his Right Wing Conspiracy rant.
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 7:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting to read the Federal Indictment against Bin Laden--an overview going back to 1993.
| Quote: | New York -- A U.S. Federal Grand Jury in New York on Nov. 5 issued an indictment against Usama Bin Laden alleging that he and others engaged in a long-term conspiracy to attack U.S. facilities overseas and to kill American citizens.
The indictment noted that Al Qaeda, Bin Laden's international terrorist group, forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in Sudan and with the government of Iran and with its associated group Hezballah to "work together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States."
Additionally, the indictment states that Al Qaeda reached an agreement with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons development.
According to the indictment, Bin Laden's group also tried to recruit Americans to travel through the United States and the West to deliver messages and to conduct financial transactions to aid their terrorist activities.
The indictment also states that Al Qaeda used humanitarian work as a conduit for transmitting funds to affiliate terrorist groups.
The indictment also claims that Bin Laden's supporters purchased land for terrorist training camps; bought warehouses where explosives were stored; transferred bank accounts using various aliases; purchased sophisticated telecommunications equipment; and transferred money and weapons to Al Qaeda and affiliated terrorist organizations.
The indictment also states that beginning in 1993, Al Qaeda began training Somali tribes to oppose the United Nation's humanitarian effort in Somalia. In October, members of Al Qaeda participated in an attack on U.S. military personnel where 18 soldiers were killed and 73 others wounded in Mogadishu. In another reference, the indictment noted that an unnamed "co-conspirator" transported weapons and explosives from Khartoum to Port Sudan for transshipment to the Saudi Arabian peninsula.
The Grand Jury document, which usually does not provide a great amount of details in advance of a prosecution, also stated that Bin Laden and "others" tried to develop chemical weapons and attempted to obtain nuclear weapons components in 1993.
The indictment noted that Bin Laden issued his Declaration of Jihad with the aim of recruiting others to "kill Americans and encouraged other persons to join the jihad against the American enemy."
Following is the text of the indictment: (Begin text)........
Cont'd: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html |
Besides documenting that Clinton had every reason to kill or capture Bin Laden, this paragraph seems to endorse the relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein:
| Quote: | | Additionally, the indictment states that Al Qaeda reached an agreement with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons development. |
And the Left still decries that there was no connection between AQ and Iraq??
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Uisguex Jack
Rear Admiral
Joined: 26 Jul 2004
Posts: 613
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Clinton was asked if he could have done more to get Bin Laden.
Appairently the answer was NO, No he could not have done more to get Bin Laden, he did everything he could and it is none of your damn buisness, just as me lieing under oath is none of your damn buisness.
I beg to differ, I think he could have done more, thwarted quite a few efforts and ought to be held accountable for his words and deeds.
And yes where was the follow up question about Sandy Berger?
Was he acting under the comand of Clinton when he messed about at the archives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anker-Klanker
Admiral
Joined: 04 Sep 2004
Posts: 1033
Location: Richardson, TX
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Re the NIE "report": good article Lew, and good follow-up Shawa. But let's go back and allow ourselves an even more fundamental look at this situation...
The entire report (dated April) is still Classified. No part of the report has been "released." The only way we "know" anything about it - all documented (via careful reading) in the original NYT article - is because some people who apparently did have access to the report felt motivated to leak selected conclusions from it.
Now I ask you can a leaker of classified information ever not be motivated by some ideology? Since the information was leaked to the NYT whose sympathies are notoriously well known, can there be any doubt as to the agenda of the leakers? That, I suggest, is the first level of "cherry-picking" and spin/distortion.
But, wait, we still don't know the identity, and hence credibility, of the leakers, because the NYT kept them anonymous. We don't even have direct quotes from the NYT's sources. All we have is what the NYT's editors says that it's motivated leakers said. And that is the second level of hearsay, "cherry-picking" and spin/distortion.
Now all MSM and the whole of the blogosphere is pratting on about the NIE report - many as though the report had been released, or as if the information supplied by the motivated leakers was reported with veracity.
This is another perfect example of pseudo-news, and has all the earmarks of another "Plamegate" news event.
And finally, let's not forget that the report - which only authorized persons have access to - is dated April 2006. Thus, someone (i.e., the leakers or the NYT, or both) has been sitting on this "earth-shaking" information for about 6 months - suspiciously just-in-time to have an impact on the mid-term elections (but I'll not suggest another conspiracy theory, just point out the raw facts). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gmez2001
PO3
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Posts: 274
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 6:08 pm Post subject: Re: Clinton > preview of Fox News Sunday |
|
|
| kate wrote: | Whoa, Clinton is one angry man in the interview wth Chris Wallace, doing that pointy finger thing and veins poppin'. Is he seething from The Path to 911?
snip
| Quote: | | 'At least I tried. That's the difference between me and some, including all the right wingers. They ridicule me for trying. They had eight months to try, they did not try. I tried. So I tried and failed'... |
You had eight years,
Bush had eight months
Okay., we see your logic,not
watch a snippet from the interview coming up on Chris Wallace's Fox News Sunday
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UwJabtvSUQ |
Seems to me I read a report that Bush was on the Hussein and Osama problem right from the start. January inaguration followed by a Feb 2001 request for a plan on the above individuals.
_________________
Tin Can Gunline Vietnam
2nd generation Navy |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
baldeagle
PO2
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Posts: 362
Location: Grand Saline, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Schadow wrote: | | NortonPete wrote: | | .. What happened to that Congressional legislation that we can't go around assasinating people? Wasn't that something dating pack to Allende in Chile? This tied the hands of the CIA. |
I could be wrong, but I think the legislation applied to heads of state. Since these terrorists are stateless, the rules may be looser.
Schadow |
Schadow, is that the same reading as the Geneva Convention rules only applying to Uniformed members of a military of a State?
_________________
"In a word, I want an American character, that the powers of Europe may be convinced we act for ourselves and not for others; this, in my judgment, is the only way to be respected abroad and happy at home." --George Washington |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Schadow
Vice Admiral
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 936
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| baldeagle wrote: | | Schadow, is that the same reading as the Geneva Convention rules only applying to Uniformed members of a military of a State? |
It's generally understood that Geneva applies as you state. The Supreme Court has gone wobbly and applied it to stateless terrorists.
The ban against assassination of heads of state still stands as far as I know. The legal ability to kill someone like Bin Laden derives from something called a "finding" issued by somebody, presumably the Justice Department, a court, or other body. I'm not clear on the "finding" process at all. Maybe someone here knows.
Schadow
_________________
Capt, 8th U.S. Army, Korea '53 - '54 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shawa
CNO
Joined: 03 Sep 2004
Posts: 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 2:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's called a Presidential Finding. I'm not real sure of the history, but I think it was back in the 70's, the Congress passed a law that no funding could go to the CIA for "dirty ops". I remember a ban on CIA recruiting of so-called unsavory characters to carry out operations. Seems to me it was the Church Committee. That's when the Dem Congress eviserated the CIA. Somewhere in years hence, maybe late 80 or early 90's, it changed to where the President could issue a "Finding" authorizing an operation etc. Only the President can issue a finding. It is classified so we don't ususally know of it. But I think he has to inform the Intelligence Committees of Congress. I might not have it exactly right.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
