Most of Washington DC is corrupt and on the Wall Street payroll, so common sense tells me how much more must be corrupt & treacherous in Baghdad with the Iraqi government.

==============================

A Spy Speaks Out
Former Top CIA Official Tyler Drumheller On "Faulty" Intelligence Claims /
http://tinyurl.com/rle4x / April 23, 2006

"The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy."

Tyler Drumheller CIA Ret.

(CBS) When no weapons of mass destruction surfaced in Iraq, President Bush insisted that all those WMD claims before the war were the result of faulty intelligence. But a former top CIA official, Tyler Drumheller — a 26-year veteran of the agency — has decided to do something CIA officials at his level almost never do: Speak out.

He tells correspondent Ed Bradley the real failure was not in the intelligence community but in the White House. He says he saw how the Bush administration, time and again, welcomed intelligence that fit the president's determination to go to war and turned a blind eye to intelligence that did not.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60minutes/main1527749.shtml

========================

Ex-CIA Official Paul Pillar Faults Use of Data on Iraq
Intelligence 'Misused' to Justify War, He Says
February 10, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/azl6w

The former CIA official who coordinated U.S. intelligence on the Middle East until last year has accused the Bush administration of "cherry-picking" intelligence on Iraq to justify a decision it had already reached to go to war, and of ignoring warnings that the country could easily fall into violence and chaos after an invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

Paul R Pillar's critique is one of the most severe indictments of White House actions by a former Bush official since Richard C. Clarke, a former National Security Council staff member, went public with his criticism of the administration's handling of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and its failure to deal with the terrorist threat beforehand.

It is also the first time that such a senior intelligence officer has so directly and publicly condemned the administration's handling of intelligence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020902418.html

1948 Smith-Mundt Act The 1948 Smith-Mundt Act prohibited the domestic dissemination of United States government propaganda. The reasoning behind Smith-Mundt was that Congress wanted to be certain that a United States government agency could not brainwash our own citizens as Hitler had done in Germany.

=======================

A 'Concerted Effort' to Discredit Bush Critic
Prosecutor Describes Cheney, Libby as Key Voices Pitching Iraq-Niger Story / http://tinyurl.com/zvy2o April 9, 2006
As he drew back the curtain this week on the evidence against Vice President Cheney's former top aide, Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald for the first time described a "concerted action" by "multiple people in the White House" -- using classified information -- to "discredit, punish or seek revenge against" a critic of President Bush's war in Iraq.
Bluntly and repeatedly, Fitzgerald placed Cheney at the center of that campaign. Citing grand jury testimony from the vice president's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Fitzgerald fingered Cheney as the first to voice a line of attack that at least three White House officials would soon deploy against former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/08/AR2006040800916.html

------------------

Ex-CIA Agent Melvin Goodman on Cheney Iraq Speech: “Longest Statement of Disinformation” Ever Fed U.S. Public
July 25, 2003 / http://tinyurl.com/5v8r8b
Vice President Dick Cheney yesterday attempted to restate the administration’s case for war at a speech at the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute.
He repeatedly cited an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate that warned Saddam Hussein was seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

“Those charged with the security of this nation could not read such an assessment and pretend that it did not exist. Ignoring such information, or trying to wish it away, would be irresponsible in the extreme,” Cheney said. “And our President did not ignore that information--he faced it. He sought to eliminate the threat by peaceful, diplomatic means and, when all else failed, he acted forcefully to remove the danger.”
Former CIA analyst Melvin Goodman responded on Democracy Now! by describing Cheney’s speech as the “longest statement of disinformation that I think the American government has distributed to the American people.”

Goodman went on to say, “For Dick Cheney to recite those charges we all know now not to be true adds to the terrible politicization of intelligence that’s created a scandal in the intelligence community unlike anything I ever saw in my 24 years in the C.I.A. that includes the period of Vietnam, the period of the intelligence failure on the Soviet Union, and the incredibly contentious disputes over arms control.”

Cheney did not discuss his role in the Iraq-Niger uranium scandal or the reports that he personally went to CIA headquarters to pressure the Agency on Iraq intelligence.
Senator Bob Graham of Florida yesterday called for a congressional probe to examine whether Cheney’s meetings with the CIA.
http://www.democracynow.org/2003/7/25/ex_cia_agent_on_cheney_iraq

That is a question that will take years to answer.And even then it will still go unanswered.

President Bush all but handed Obama a superb win in Iraq, pulling a rabbit out of a hat in the eleventh hour. Its only Obama's to lose now, probably hastening an exit before the new government is completely formed..... Something the world and especially the enemy knows President Bush would never have done. I just honestly hope and pray Obama isn't burned on this one in the end.

Barack Obama is No Failure:

August 30, 2010

"Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty." -- Ronald Reagan, 40th President of the United States

When Rush Limbaugh said of Barack Obama, "I hope he fails," everyone assumed that he wanted Obama's policies to make him so unpopular that in 2012 the electorate would overwhelmingly vote to make him the most unambiguous one-termer since Jimmy Carter. As he approaches the half-way point of that one term, Obama does, indeed, seem hell-bent on serving only four years in office -- but the word "failure" may not apply to this man after all.

This president came into office with the most aggressively socialist agenda of any chief executive since Franklin Roosevelt. His goals were simple but radical:

to diminish the image of the United States abroad as a sort of penance for what he perceives as our past sins on the international stage;
to redistribute the wealth of the nation, thereby punishing the productive and rewarding the dependent;
to grow the size and scope of federal authority and power beyond even the wildest dreams of FDR himself.

In other words, as he told us five days before his 2008 election, his goal was to "fundamentally transform America." By these criteria, Obama is anything but a failure.

Since taking office, he has bowed before Saudi princes and other tinhorn dictators, thereby groveling on behalf of all his countrymen. He has apologized for us to our enemies in the Muslim world, offered to talk unconditionally to the leader of Iran (a suicide state if ever there was one), and snubbed Israel, the one democracy and our most important ally in the Middle East. He is preparing to abandon Iraq to the mercy of Syria and Iran. Can Afghanistan be far behind?

Goal #1 accomplished.

Obama has taken over banks, insurance companies and two-thirds of the U.S. auto industry. He held General Motors and Chrysler stockholders hostage to his auto bailout while stealing their stock and handing it over to his union supporters in the United Auto Workers.

He recently signed a $26 billion bill to bail out teachers' unions and prop up their bloated pensions. (It's for the children, you know.)

He intends to allow the Bush tax cuts to sunset at the end of this year, thereby raising taxes on all productive Americans in the name of "fairness."

Goal #2 humming along nicely.

He forced through a monstrous government health care bill that most of the Congress had not read and most of the country did not want. It forces Americans to buy something they may not need or cannot afford, and it increases the burden on an already overworked system at a time when many health care professionals are threatening to leave their vocation. And now that it is law, Obama will spend unlimited amounts of our tax dollars defending it in court.

He has stated that he wants a gargantuan tax on American consumption (VAT) and upon industry (carbon tax). In short, he wants control of every aspect of our lives.

Goal #3 right on schedule.

Barack Obama knows, as did Franklin Roosevelt, that once enacted and accepted as entitlements, the programs he has initiated will never go away. He is confident that future politicians, Republican and Democrat, will never have the intestinal fortitude to tell the American people the truth as to why, for the sake of the union, they must repeal his initiatives.

In recent years, our benevolent federal government has "saved" us from Big Tobacco, Big Alcohol, Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Insurance, Big Automobile, Big Pollution and Big Business. The question is, when Barack Obama and our other saviors in government and in the media are finished "saving" us, who will save us from Big Brother?

By his own reckoning, Barack Obama is no failure. Even if he is a one term president, he has done damage that may never be repaired.

CBO: Eight Years of Iraq War Cost Less Than Stimulus Act:

August 30, 2010

President Obama prepares to tie a bow on U.S. combat operations in Iraq, Congressional Budget Office numbers show that the total cost of the eight-year war was less than the stimulus bill passed by the Democratic-led Congress in 2009.

According to CBO numbers in its Budget and Economic Outlook published this month, the cost of Operation Iraqi Freedom was $709 billion for military and related activities, including training of Iraqi forces and diplomatic operations.

The projected cost of the stimulus, which passed in February 2009, and is expected to have a shelf life of two years, was $862 billion.

The U.S. deficit for fiscal year 2010 is expected to be $1.3 trillion, according to CBO. That compares to a 2007 deficit of $160.7 billion and a 2008 deficit of $458.6 billion, according to data provided by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.

In 2007 and 2008, the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product was 1.2 percent and 3.2 percent, respectively.

"Relative to the size of the economy, this year's deficit is expected to be the second largest shortfall in the past 65 years; 9.1 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), exceeded only by last year's deficit of 9.9 percent of GDP," CBO wrote.

The CBO figures show that the most expensive year of the Iraq war
was in 2008, the year when the surge proposed by Gen. David Petraeus and approved by President Bush was in full swing and the turning point in the war. The total cost of Iraq operations in 2008 was $140 billion. In 2007, the cost of Iraq operations was $124 billion.

According to an analysis by the American Thinker's Randall Hoven, the cost of the Iraq war from 2003-2008 -- when Bush was in office -- was $20 billion less than the cost of education spending and less than a quarter of the cost of Medicare spending during that same period.

Failure. No "WMD." No government. While we removed our own puppet strongman, in the absence of a government, we can expect another to emerge. This one may be an Iranian puppet.

Only a low down racist peice of shit like Al Sharpton and some of the dumb peckerheads that post on this blog would take issue with someone holding a rally, in a national public park, on the anniversary day, that Dr King delivered one of his most famous speech's, 47 years ago.

Have no other rallys been held on this date?

You are entitled to your opinion,,,,,but

Only backward racist ignorant fools would try to limit free speech in America.

Check yourselves, motherfuckers!

“You are entitled to your opinion,,,,”

Alright then, I have to say something. Way too much anger here.

I agree, NOBODY has the right to limit our freedoms by trying to control what we say or by telling us how we should think and act according to THEIR point of view. And when they falsely malign a GROUP of people without knowing them, simply because they don’t share the same opinion, well that’s enough to get one’s blood boiling.

The reality is that their opinion does not matter because it did not stop the rally. Actually it is doing just the opposite, causing people to get more involved and speak up even louder. However, I think, when we get angry we fuel their opposition, in much the same way they fuel ours.

Truth and peace is the way Brother. At least that is my, entitled opinion.

Mike G: You know I mostly disagree with the political and self serving opinion delivered Rich French and the RNN aperatus.
The usual PC response to my above statement would be, if you dont like the opinion, turn the channel.

However, I as an rugged individual(MIKEQ) fully support the right of pencil dick rich french to espouse his views. I would even go as far as to say, I would fight for his 1st ammedment right, even though i despise most of the message.
Just by commenting here, i lend my support to the right of RNN to do what they do...freely.

That said, I fully support the following:

"Only a low down racist peice of shit like Al Sharpton and some of the dumb peckerheads that post on this blog would take issue with someone holding a rally, in a national public park, on the anniversary day, that Dr King delivered one of his most famous speech's, 47 years ago.

Have no other rallys been held on this date?

You are entitled to your opinion,,,,,but

Only backward racist ignorant fools would try to limit free speech in America.

Check yourselves, motherfuckers"

Lately, we are bombarded by the majority of political and social commetators who would like nothing more than to villify and or silence the opposition/competition.

It is ironic that a very tiny minority of commentors, like Dobbs, opinion talking heads on Fox News, and Limbaugh, hold sway over the vast majority non thinking people who wish to shut them up.

I'm no authority on what the above commentors say, as I have only seen or heard any of them more than a few times. As I dont own a mind numbing TV or listen to talk radio.

Bottom line is main stream political-social commentary has very little to do with facts, it is after all opinion. Take it for what it is and support its right to exist.

Bill F: George W Bush turned two simple military victories into full blown quagmires and the United States of America into bankrupt, dysfunctional, under the "totally" corrupt guidance of the "best men" that HE KNEW for the job of attaining his GRAND SLAM lifetime achievement. What a great assessor of talent.
Bushies starting line-up...

CHALABI-the supplier of the lies that began this fiasco.

Brownie- Great job

Rumsfeld- torture, STOP LOSS UNITS, "depleted uranium" used as protection for our troops

Ashcroft- couldn't beat a dead man.

GONZO- The "Sgt Schultz" "I know nutthink!" Academy Award winner. An Attorney General for the ages.
BANKRUPT AND AWOL!!! FOR THE "4TH TIME".
Read it and weep. Now it's history.

The combined economics genius of the bankruptcy firm of COX, GRAMM & PAULSON-
THE BUSH DOCTRINE- Where Allies become enemy and dictators became our most favored nations.

THE BUSH EXPERTISE! of picking those who can't be trusted even when in the same room with you.
Putin,... KARZAI,... KADAFY,... CALDERON,... OLMERT,... are you getting the drift?

BUSH- THE ONLY ECONOMICS MBA PRESIDENT IN OUR NATIONS ENTIRE HISTORY, BROUGHT OUR NATION AND TENS OF MILLIONS OF ITS PEOPLE INTO RUIN, AND ONTO THEIR KNEES JUST LIKE HE DID THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE...
DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST --> GO BANKRUPT!
AAND GO ---> GO AWOL! (1053 DAYS WHILE OUR NATION WAS ENGAGED IN "HIS WAR OF CHOICE").
Saddam was toppled by SEPT 2003. THE IRAQI PEOPLE CHEERED OUR TROOPS MAGNIFICENT ACHIEVEMENT. ...then Bush went to work with his operatives- and the rest of the retarded progressions are recorded as HISTORY. The way the rest of the literate world will remember it.

ps- Please note. If the SURGE which was supposed to last 6months and was extended to 18months was as totally sucessful as you claim in your off target quotes...
Then why hasn't the terrorist actions been stopped and eradicated instead of increased? Why isn't there a truly functional elected government by the Iraqi people? And so on...

WHAT KIND OF VICTORY ARE YOU PROMOTING?
VICTORY I- The PR version
VICTORY-(redux)
The surge did accomplish one thing if you consider that an achievement? We [PETREAUS} have now funded, and armed the militias that opposed us. Do you really think that they dislike us any less just because, YOU SAY SO.
Think again.

"Bill F: George W Bush turned two simple military victories into full blown quagmires"


You should pay attention more to the latest news (from the last 2 1/2 years or so)......one so called, quagmire in Iraq was turned into a resounding victory where you and yours wanted the Commander in Chief and his forces to rollover and play dead. Unbelievable! I hope you learned your lesson well. Try applying it to Afghanistan now. The USA is undefeatable when interference from the left is put to sleep. Leave Obama alone and don't distract him, you see he can't seem to chew gum and read a newspaper at the same time, but he'll get it right with Bush's Generals conducting the war. He needs to go on another vacation...a real long one and let the Generals do what they are paid to do.

Bill F: George W Bush turned two simple military victories into full blown quagmires and the United States of America into bankrupt, dysfunctional, under the "totally" corrupt guidance of the "best men" that HE KNEW for the job of attaining his GRAND SLAM lifetime achievement. What a great assessor of talent.
Bushies starting line-up...

CHALABI-the supplier of the lies that began this fiasco.

Brownie- Great job

Rumsfeld- torture, STOP LOSS UNITS, "depleted uranium" used as protection for our troops

Ashcroft- couldn't beat a dead man.

GONZO- The "Sgt Schultz" "I know nutthink!" Academy Award winner. An Attorney General for the ages.

Dick "the Cheney" - ENERGY "CZAR"author and manufacturer of the ENRON schemes, gas and heating oil price fixes, the PNAC Articles of Principals which completely outlined the prtetexts for invading Iraq as early as 1992 set in print in 1997.
*Hmmmmmmmmmmm! Who'd have thunk it wasn't premeditated?
Dumbya "Almighty Bush- "BANKRUPT AND AWOL!!! FOR THE "4TH TIME".
Read it and weep. Now it's history.

The combined economics genius of the bankruptcy firm of COX, GRAMM & PAULSON-
THE BUSH DOCTRINE- Where Allies become enemy and dictators became our most favored nations.

THE BUSH EXPERTISE! of picking those who can't be trusted even when in the same room with you.
Putin,... KARZAI,... KADAFY,... CALDERON,... OLMERT,... are you getting the drift?

BUSH- THE ONLY ECONOMICS MBA PRESIDENT IN OUR NATIONS ENTIRE HISTORY, BROUGHT OUR NATION AND TENS OF MILLIONS OF ITS PEOPLE INTO RUIN, AND ONTO THEIR KNEES JUST LIKE HE DID THROUGHOUT HIS LIFE...
DOING WHAT HE DOES BEST --> GO BANKRUPT!
AAND GO ---> GO AWOL! (1053 DAYS WHILE OUR NATION WAS ENGAGED IN "HIS WAR OF CHOICE").
Saddam was toppled by SEPT 2003. THE IRAQI PEOPLE CHEERED OUR TROOPS MAGNIFICENT ACHIEVEMENT. ...then Bush went to work with his operatives- and the rest of the retarded progressions are recorded as HISTORY. The way the rest of the literate world will remember it.

ps- Please note. If the SURGE which was supposed to last 6months and was extended to 18months was as totally sucessful as you claim in your off target quotes...
Then why hasn't the terrorist actions been stopped and eradicated instead of increased? Why isn't there a truly functional elected government by the Iraqi people? And so on...

WHAT KIND OF VICTORY ARE YOU PROMOTING?
VICTORY I- The PR Playboy "jumpsuit" version?
VICTORY- as re-re-re- defined by Bill F in his SURGE(redux)?
*JUST IN CASE YOU DIDN'T KNOW IT, LIL' BUSH WAS RELIEVED OF HIS COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF DUTIES BEFORE "THE SURGE" BY THE BAKER-HAMILTON COMMITTEE---> JAN 2007.
Hmmmmmmm!

The surge did accomplish one thing if you consider that an achievement? We [PETREAUS} have now funded, and armed the militias that opposed us. Do you really think that they dislike us any less just because, YOU SAY SO.
Think again. Better yet. Learn to think and analyze "relevant data". Why do you think you can pass off those dizzy Bush pipe dreams and here?

BLACKWATER CREATED SHELL COMPANIES

The Edwardsville Intelligencier
Sept 4th 2010

WASHINGTON (AP) -- "The security company Blackwater Worldwide formed a network of 30 shell companies and subsidiaries to try to get millions of dollars in government business after the company faced strong criticism for reckless conduct in Iraq, The New York Times reported Friday.

The newspaper said that it was unclear how many of the created companies got American contracts but that at least three of them obtained work with the U.S. military and the CIA.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has asked the Justice Department to see whether Blackwater misled the government when using the subsidiaries to gain government contracts, according to the Times.

It said Levin's committee found that North Carolina-based Blackwater, which now is known as Xe Services, went to great lengths to find ways to get lucrative government work despite criminal charges and criticism stemming from a 2007 incident in which Blackwater guards killed 17 Iraqi civilians. A committee chart outlines the web of Blackwater subsidiaries.

Messages left late Friday with spokespeople for the Michigan Democrat and Xe were not immediately answered.

The 2007 incident and other reports of abuses by Blackwater employees in Iraq led to criminal investigations and congressional hearings, and resulted in the company losing a lucrative contract with the State Department to provide security in Iraq.

But recently the company was awarded a $100 million contract to provide security for the agency in Afghanistan, prompting criticism from some in Congress. CIA Director Leon Panetta said that the CIA had no choice but to hire the company because it underbid others by $26 million and that a CIA review concluded that the contractor had cleaned up its act.

Last year, Panetta canceled a contract with Xe that allowed the company's operatives to load missiles on Predator drones in Pakistan, and shifted the work to government personnel.

However, the Times quoted former Blackwater officials as saying that at least two Blackwater-affiliated companies, XPG and Greystone, obtained secret contracts from the CIA to provide security to agency operatives.

The newspaper said the network of subsidiaries, including several located in offshore tax havens, were uncovered as part of the Armed Services Committee's examination of government contracting and not an investigation solely into Blackwater. But Levin questioned why Blackwater would need to create so many companies with various names to seek out government business, according to the Times.

The report quoted unidentified government officials and former Blackwater employees as saying that the network of companies allowed Blackwater to obscure its involvement in government work from contracting officials and the public, and to ensure a low profile for its classified activities."

YET ANOTHER BLATANT EXAMPLE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATIONS TOTAL DISREGARD, SLAP IN THE FACE TO OUR TROOPS ALREADY IN HARMS WAY.
-no bid contracts
-violations of Geneva convention and its Articles of War
-torture

*****Does anybody see the possibility of a direct correlation to the so called "friendly fire" killings of Pat Tillman and Nick Berg both of whom vehemently objected to the way the war was being carried out by Rummy & Dummy?
*****Do you think that the Bush obsession with MILITARY/fascist AGENDA WOULD HAVE STOPPED IN IRAQ IF NOT FOR PATRIOTIC WHISTLEBLOWERS?

one hint: Bush response to desperate survivors of hurricane Katrina seeking some form of sustanance after days of dehydration and disoreintation.
"I've called in Blackwater and issued this message. "SHOOT TO KILL"

Second hint: Halliburton caught short changing our troops by capturing, rebottling, then dispensing "toxic contaminated waters" from the Euphrities River instead of the sealed bottled water we paid for.

Third Hint: Torture??? "Boys being boys..." heh heh

FOUTH HINT: Bush fought this ponzi scheme war on terror by "endorsing" and "contracting terror"

5th hint: Warning: To congress and the Senate- "Failure to pass TARP and Stimulus welfare bailouts to the banks and financials will result in the declaration of martial law..." Hmmmmmmmm!
http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv8-tyc8&p=sherman%20martial%20law&type=

6TH HINT: Those FEMA CAMPS that were denied by Bush that were created all around the country. Is this reminiscent enough of the Neo- Nazi Agenda agendas for you. Just add in Ashcroft's library card surveillances.
7th hint: Ollie North of Iran/Contra was one of the principal architechs of these FEMA camps and he refused to answer the publics inquiry as to their ultimate purpose. Yikes!!!

LET'S GO OVER THE ENTIRE LIST OF KNOWN BLACKWATER INVOLVEMENT IN THE DECEPTION OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, OUR TROOPS PLACED UNDER THEIR COMMAND, AND THE DIRECT CONNECTION TO $$$ LAUNDERING, PONZI SCHEMING, CONSTITUTION VIOLATING- BUSH ADMINISTRATION.

*** "Preemption"... "torture"... "secret armies"... "wiretapping", the new AXIS OF DICTATORS that Bush fully endorsed.


Gee, Let's wonder who Bush would have called in to oversee that operation. [see BELOW]
http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/blackwater_timeline/index.html?SITE=ILEDW

Bring back, Bush??? ...NOT ON YOUR LIFE!!!

"Bill F: George W Bush turned two simple military victories into full blown quagmires"



You should pay attention more to the latest news (from the last 2 1/2 years or so)......one so called, quagmire in Iraq was turned into a resounding victory where you and yours wanted the Commander in Chief and his forces to rollover and play dead. Unbelievable! I hope you learned your lesson well. Try applying it to Afghanistan now. The USA is undefeatable when interference from the left is put to sleep. Leave Obama alone and don't distract him, you see he can't seem to chew gum and read a newspaper at the same time, but he'll get it right with Bush's Generals conducting the war. He needs to go on another vacation...a real long one and let the Generals do what they are paid to do.

You and yours shamefully tried your best to turn them into massive defeats and miserably failed. We know your heart will always be with the enemy, no matter what war and no matter who the president is. Hang your head in shame. mEND OF STORY!


Obama Calls Bush Fellow Patriot in Iraq Speech:

You should pay attention more to the latest news (from the last 2 1/2 years or so)......one so called, quagmire in Iraq was turned into a resounding victory where you and yours wanted the Commander in Chief and his forces to rollover and play dead. Unbelievable! I hope you learned your lesson well. Try applying it to Afghanistan now. The USA is undefeatable when interference from the left is put to sleep. Leave Obama alone and don't distract him, you see he can't seem to chew gum and read a newspaper at the same time, but he'll get it right with Bush's Generals conducting the war. He needs to go on another vacation...a real long one and let the Generals do what they are paid to do.

Obama administration takes credit for Bush success in Iraq:

Feb. 11, 2010

In the midst of weak polls numbers, the Obama administration is grabbing on to anything that will boost the image of a flailing presidency. Everyone from President Obama to Vice President Joe Biden to White House Press Secretary Joe Gibbs are more than willing to say the successes in Iraq are due to Obama administration policies without crediting the President Bush's foundational groundwork, like the surge (which Obama and Biden opposed) and setting up the military drawdown in Iraq with Prime Minister Maliki before he left the White House. The Fox News Channel details further the Obama administration's attempt to call any success in Iraq their own, while trashing the Bush administration in the process.

It remains amusing that the White House will continue to repeat they "inherited" the Bush economy, when Obama's economic policies continue to fail, while embracing any victory in Iraq that rightfully belongs to the prior administration's work with the U.S. Military and Iraqi government.

This is sort of like beating up on the class nerd everyday, demand he does your class work, score straight A's, still beat up on the class nerd, and truly believe you are some kind of genius for getting good grades. Unfortunately for President Obama, the teachers are the American people. He has not paid attention to them, and stealing the credit for someone else's hard work will not bring up his poll numbers.

Obama Says Iraq Surge Success Beyond `Wildest Dreams':


``The surge has succeeded in ways that nobody anticipated,'' Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, said in a recorded interview broadcast tonight on Fox News's ``The O'Reilly Factor'' program.

Obama has come under repeated criticism from Republican rival John McCain for opposing President George W. Bush's decision last year to send 20,000 extra combat troops to Iraq. While Obama said before that the additional forces have damped insurgent violence, his comments on the program were some of the strongest he's made on the issue.

Petraeus: Obama Said Surge Worked:

Sunday, December 6, 2009 9:00 PM

In developing his plan for a troop surge in Afghanistan, President Obama acknowledged the success of the surge in Iraq and used some of its lessons to develop a plan in Afghanistan, the head of Central Command said Sunday.

During his presidential campaign, though, Obama frequently discussed how he strongly opposed the war in Iraq and the surge of 2007.

Gen. David Petraeus told “Fox News Sunday” that the president asked him how troops worked to secure the population and achieve cooperation with various Iraqi factions, and held several lengthy sessions to review how these principles could be applied in Afghanistan.

Petraeus said that while Obama acknowledged the success of the surge, "we've spent a lot of time taking the rear view mirrors off the bus and avoiding re-litigating, if you will, you know, past battles and all the rest of this, and focusing to the future."

Petraeus said that while "certainly there are some similarities and the -- and the focus again on focusing on the security of the people is an important component of this. But we have to be very careful to recognize the enormous differences between Afghanistan and Iraq."

Obama should thank George Bush:

The mission is still accomplished in Iraq

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

President Obama praised the Iraqi people on Sunday on the occasion of their parliamentary elections. "The future of Iraq belongs to the people of Iraq," Mr. Obama said. That progress is no thanks to him.

Sunday's election was the third since Iraq's liberation in 2003 from Saddam Hussein's dictatorial rule. The event lacked much of the drama of the January 2005 National Assembly election, when the war was hotter and risks were higher. Five years ago, insurgents vowed that they would see to it that the election would fail. "We have declared a fierce war on this evil principle of democracy and those who follow this wrong ideology," Al Qaeda in Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi stated. But the people defied the terrorists, and Iraq's first free election proceeded with little disruption. Eleven months later, the country held another successful election under its new constitution. Six months after that, al-Zarqawi was dead.

The images from Sunday's polling evoked 2005, with long lines of resolute voters, scattered low-level violence and the ubiquitous purple fingers inked to show an individual had voted. But the sense of threat was reduced, and the press coverage was less intense. The most noteworthy factor about the election was the feeling that the process was becoming routine. Iraq is well on the way to being a functioning democracy. The big news was the relative lack of news. Nothing says "mission accomplished" more than a low-key election in a country recently beset by nationwide conflict.

Mr. Obama took the opportunity to reiterate that U.S. troops were meeting their timetable for withdrawal, yet failed to mention that he was executing a policy put in place by the George W. Bush administration. The president is quick to blame his predecessor for various supposed problems he inherited, but the O Force is noticeably stingy when it comes to expressing appreciation for the things the previous administration demonstrably got right. The policies President Bush pursued that then-Sen. Obama opposed, denounced and fought against have made it possible for Mr. Obama effortlessly to preside over the successful conclusion of a hard-fought struggle for freedom.

Last month, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who shepherded the Iraq war authorization through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2002, said that ending the conflict in Iraq would be one of the Obama administration's great achievements. But Mr. Obama's principal contribution to the Iraq effort has been to resist his impulses to pursue the policies he advocated when he was a senator. Had the United States followed the course Mr. Obama was counseling in 2007, there likely would have been no election last weekend, terror would reign in Baghdad, and the Iraqi people's future would be grim. A little gratitude would be appropriate.

Failed Containment Made Iraq War Necessary:


For over ten years, the U.S. played a game with Saddam Hussein. The U.S. strategy was to keep the Middle East dictator in a "box." The so-called box included U.N sanctions, and round-the-clock air cover patrolling the northern and southern areas of Iraq.

For the entire decade of the 1990s the U.S. spent billions of dollars keeping nearly one-third its entire military strength around Baghdad.

FAILED POLICY MADE WAR NECESSARY Up to five nuclear carrier battle groups, with over 100 warships, patrolled the Gulf region. Carriers, cruisers, destroyers, frigates, submarines and a wide variety of support vessels stayed within striking distance of Iraq.

Nearly 500 combat aircraft flew from bases in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. The aircraft included both U.S. and U.K. fighters, bombers, tankers and support aircraft.

F-15s, F-16s, F-14s, F-18s, B-1s, B-52s, B-2s, A-10s, and F-117 stealth fighters dropped tons of bombs on Iraq.

The U.S. dedicated its front line reconnaissance U-2 spy planes, electronic warfare planes, radar planes, and space based satellite surveillance all upon Iraq for ten years. Unmanned aerial vehicles flew regular spy missions while manned aircraft struck at Iraq almost on a daily basis.

The Clinton administration fired nearly 500 cruise missiles at Saddam at various times during the 1990s. The most intense Clinton air strikes were called "Monica Storm" instead of the official title of "Desert Fox" because of the suspicious timing of the attacks.

At any one point, over 100,000 troops were in the region keeping the box in place. The cost was enormous.

AMERICA ATTACKED

When the terrorists struck America on 9/11 the U.S. air defense was flying missions in Iraq. While front line combat planes patrolled over Basra, the U.S. could not muster fighters to cover New York City and Washington D.C.

The years of Clinton neglect of American defense are best summarized by the F-16s from the D.C. National Guard who struggled into the air on that fateful day. There were only two aircraft available because there was no money budgeted to keep any jets on alert.

The two planes that did make it over D.C. were armed only with 300 rounds of "lead" non-explosive ammunition each. Because of the Clinton budget cuts the aircraft could not be armed with missiles or live cannon shells.

The two National Guard pilots were well aware that they might not be able to down a hijacked airliner with the badly planned ammunition load. So they agreed that once they ran out of bullets they would try a suicide dive to ram any airliner.

If anyone questions the bravery or necessity of those who served in the U.S. National Guard then they should reflect upon the two civilian soldier pilots who were willing to sacrifice their lives over Washington D.C. on September 11.

The lesson here is that those who cut defense budgets should also reflect upon what threat they might face - personally - because they were so foolish.

BROKEN BOX

While America suffered under attack, the Iraqi box started to leak. To be sure, the ill thought out policies of Bill Clinton helped Saddam re-arm.

While the U.N. passed a resolution banning arms sales to Baghdad, the U.S. ignored weapons transfers to Iraq from some of its leading allies.

While France voted for the ban on arms sales to Iraq, it does seem that Saddam managed to keep his force of French made Mirage jets in the air for a decade.

Modern jets cannot fly without a fresh supply of spare parts and trained maintenance. Unlike the F-16s of the D.C. National Guard, Saddam's Mirage force was well funded.

The U.N. oil-for-food program provided ample cash to bribe middle-men to provide spare parts fresh from French factories to keep the Iraqi Mirage force active.

Paris turned a blind eye to where the spare Mirage parts were going as long as the money was good. The Clinton adminstration did nothing to stop the violations.

China too voted to support the arms ban on Iraq, and then promptly violated the embargo. The Chinese example, outlined in detail in my book "Deception", included direct assistance from the Clinton Secretary of Defense William J. Perry.

China sold and installed an advanced air defense system; NATO code-named "Tiger Song", for Saddam during the 1990s. The system consisted of American and French made fiber optic parts exported to China as commercial items.

The system originally made its way to Beijing through the direct assistance of William Perry. The trail of evidence shows that Perry worked with Chinese General Ding Henggao and a Chinese defector who later defected back to China.

In fact, the technology transfer was led by Perry's personal "paid" consultant, Dr. Lewis of Stanford University with the assistance of Chinese defector Hua Di. The fiber optic system was sold to a so-called commercial Chinese firm led by the wife General Ding, herself a two-star in the People's Liberation Army.

The Chinese Army took the secure fiber-optic system, converted it for military use and sold it to Iraq where it became the "Tiger Song" air defense network. China also sold a version of Tiger Song to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

The documentation shows that Perry's paid assistant was taking money from the U.S. Defense Dept. and the Chinese Army at the same time. After the GAO wrote a report on the transfer, Hua Di left the U.S. and returned to China.

TIGER SONG

During the late 1990s, the U.S. bombed the Tiger Song system in the Iraqi desert on a regular basis. Saddam's troops used it to shoot missiles, modified by their Chinese contractors, back at the U.S. aircraft.

The Bush administration openly complained about Chinese military sales to Iraq and eventually bombed several sites occupied by Chinese military engineers working for Saddam Hussein.

"We raised earlier in the Administration concerns about what might be going on with Iraq," stated Bush national security adviser Condoleezza Rice on Chinese missile proliferation.

However, the Chinese Army sales to Iraq did not stop. PLA front companies continued to provide camouflage for Beijing as it tried to export more advanced weapons to Iraq.

For example, the harmless sounding Shandong Arts and Craft Company paid a visit to Baghdad. The only problem is that the Shandong Arts and Craft Company is made entirely made up of missile engineers from the PLA Second Artillery Corps. In 2001, the firm acted as a cover for a PLA military delegation to Iraq seeking to sell advanced long-range missile technology to Saddam Hussein.

Today, the threat is gone and with it the U.S. forces. The U.S. now only dedicates one carrier and a small number of aircraft to the Persian Gulf region. We no longer base planes in Saudi Arabia and have few in Turkey and Kuwait.

Squadrons of planes that have not been home in over a decade have returned to U.S. skies to defend America. The U.S. has finally stationed a nuclear carrier group in Pearl Harbor for the first time since World War II. Finally, we are building a long overdue National Missile Defense to protect America from attack.

While many - such as Senator John Kerry - wish to speculate what life would be like with Saddam, it is well worth noting what the world is like without the madman in Baghdad.

Clearly, those who would leave our defense to our U.N. allies in Paris and Beijing are fools not to be trusted with the reigns of power.

Yeah right, Bill. All is well in the land of Oz and the 50 people per day who are being blown up have the SURGE and all of its inconsequential glories to thank for the minor inconvenience of having their lives shattered by the very insurgients that Petreaus armed to the teeth and funded with our capital. Much thanks is due- for nothing.
The very same outcome would have evolved whether or not, there ever was a surge. We told you that before Dumbya preempted.
So what if an unaffected news columnist wants to parrot the political decorum of the day that saves face. We lost our standing in the world. We lost tens of thousands of troops long after Bush-lite put on his jumpsuit and declared his imbecilic victory. And millions of families are ruined today because of it.

Morons weigh all of their hopes and dreams on another persons evaluation of what is important in their lifes for their survival and well being. Intelligent people prepare and have their own defenses. they think independently and are usually way ahead of the learning curve.
You can remain intractable in the quagmire inside your tight circle of comic book propaganda speech and amorphous hypotheticals or you can take a look outside and see what is happening to your country all around you.

Victory as I have always told you would be declared- whenever the bankers and the politicians can no longer get funding from the general public to pay the bill for "stalemate" and IMC largesse.

Caspian, robert, MikeG, MikeQ, BuddyfromWH, fred, Big Bob, Kathy, Mags, Maggie Mama, Gail, William & RNN STAFF:

Let's put a permanent end to all the BillF rhetoric that always attrempts to blow smoke up our collective asses.

Watch this! I'll get back to everyone later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2513JFJsY&feature=related

Answer this everybody. Since neither the CIA[daddys organization] nor the military[the IMC] would sign off on identifying OBL & Al Qaeda as the force in the bombings weren't they themselves hindering President Clinton.
I have more relevant questions for you to seriously ponder and consider but, everytime I begin to set them to print so far I've been knocked out of this site.

Does make you wonder why both the IMC and Bush SRs CIA would obstruct one President who wanted bin laden dead, and on the other hand endorse the lies that sent us into war and protect the buffoon who turned two easy excursions into never ending nightmares that they have become.
Never investigating the most obvious breaches in our security[CHALABI]or bringing charges[for the BIN LADEN/SAUD airlift.

Enjoy!!!

John:

Clinton really gave it good to Fox News Republican Propaganda Channel.

Looks like Obama/Hillary in 2012.

----------------------

Ex-aide Richard Clarke: Bush ignored terror threat
3/20/2004 / http://tinyurl.com/32nv3
WASHINGTON — The White House's former top anti-terrorism adviser says President Bush ignored warnings about al-Qaeda and ordered him to find a link between the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and Iraq.
Former Bush counterterror adviser Richard Clarke says Bush was stuck on Cold War issues.

Clarke also wrote that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice appeared never to have heard of al-Qaeda until she was warned early in 2001 about the terrorist organization and that she "looked skeptical" about his warnings.

Clarke said Sunday on CBS' 60 Minutes that soon after the attacks, Bush demanded to know whether Iraq was behind them. When Clarke told him intelligence found no link, "He came back at me and said: 'Iraq! Saddam! Find out if there's a connection.' And in a very intimidating way."

After experts concluded again that Saddam Hussein played no role, Clarke said, his memo "got bounced and sent back saying, 'Wrong answer. Do it again.' "

As early as Sept. 12, 2001, Clarke says, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld urged bombing Iraq despite repeated assurances from intelligence officials that the threat emanated from Afghanistan.

"Rumsfeld said there aren't any good targets in Afghanistan. And there are lots of good targets in Iraq," Clarke said on Sunday's 60 Minutes. "I said, 'Well, there are lots of good targets in lots of places, but Iraq had nothing to do with it.' "
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-03-20-clarke_x.htm

-----------

Dick Clarke Is Telling the Truth
Why he's right about Bush's negligence on terrorism.
http://tinyurl.com/3yvxr March 23, 2004

I have no doubt that Richard Clarke, the former National Security Council official who has launched a broadside against President Bush's counterterrorism policies, is telling the truth about every single charge. There are three reasons for this confidence.

But on to the substance. Clarke's main argument—made in his new book, Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror, in lengthy interviews on CBS's 60 Minutes and PBS's Charlie Rose Show, and presumably in his testimony scheduled for tomorrow before the 9/11 Commission—is that Bush has done (as Clarke put it on CBS) "a terrible job" at fighting terrorism. Specifically: In the summer of 2001, Bush did almost nothing to deal with mounting evidence of an impending al-Qaida attack. Then, after 9/11, his main response was to attack Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11. This move not only distracted us from the real war on terrorism, it fed into Osama Bin Laden's propaganda—that the United States would invade and occupy an oil-rich Arab country—and thus served as the rallying cry for new terrorist recruits.
http://www.slate.com/id/2097685/

CIA Officials Reveal What Went Wrong - Clinton to Blame:

Sept. 12, 2001

The worst, single most tragic day in the history of America has just passed.

Tuesday more Americans likely died than all the casualties of the Battle of Antietam on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 1862.

Already the media spin on yesterday's events is relentless.

The talking heads are pushing several themes, including:

* Now is not the time to point fingers at responsible parties in America, i.e., political figures like Clinton or our own security agencies.
* The events of Tuesday are the "worst-case scenario" – the worst is over.
* Osama bin Laden is the culprit.

On these points of spin, the first one is baloney. Of course we need to find why our security failed. This is basic.

And unless the big media are consulting a psychic better than the one I use, no one knows what the future days, weeks and months may yield.

This is not the worst-case scenario. A worst-case scenario is a 25-megaton nuclear bomb detonated in New York or a full-scale attack against the U.S.! These should not be ruled out.

These dangers can be avoided, we pray, but only if we stop listening to the media idiots that feed us a diet of blow-dried nonsense. Is Katie Couric going to say how bad she feels for the terrorists who were driven to these cowardly acts?

It is the big media and the hack politicians that led us to this nightmarish day.

Smart to Examine Who Failed Us

We are Americans, so let's get our feet back on the ground and use common sense.

The media say we shouldn't point fingers. (Funny, isn't it, how the media have spent 30 years pointing fingers at Richard Nixon for his alleged crimes, but when one of their liberal favorites is due for some blame, they feed us the mantras like "Let's move on!" and "No time to point fingers!")

Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us – that is, our national security agencies.

Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.

Intelligence Agencies Failed Miserably

Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as "Harry":

Here's what Harry said:

"... Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!"

He continued: "There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we've heard over the past eight years or so are hollow."

Of course, it's obvious why the media doesn't want any finger pointing.

Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years?

Yes, you got it: Bill Clinton, Hillary's husband.

Clinton Responsible for Unpreparedness

The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.

During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so.

I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton's personal corruption was wholesale and mirrored how he was corrupting America's national security.

I wrote articles and said repeatedly that America, sadly, may end up paying a heavy price for Bill Clinton and the major media's complicity.

I don't believe the worst has passed with the incidents of today.

We remain vulnerable and weak.

Brutally, we witnessed our weakness today.

During eight years, Clinton decimated America's military. Our forces were cut almost in half under his stewardship.

Research and development on all new weapons systems were brought almost to a halt as other nations continued to build. Clinton destroyed nearly our entire arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. Monsters like Saddam flourished as Clinton bombed aspirin factories, tent cities in Afghanistan and worthless radar stations in the Iraqi desert.

These are open facts, easily verifiable.

Clinton, the Ever Clever Bastard

But Clinton, the ever clever bastard, was more insidious. Little, systematic changes were undertaken to destroy America's intelligence agencies.

Let me explain. A regular NewsMax reader, "Roger," was a CIA spy in the Mideast.

I met him almost two years ago. Roger wanted to tell me why a gung-ho American quit the CIA in disgust.

Roger said the CIA was not interested in recruiting spies.

Clinton and company knew they could not just tell the CIA to stop recruiting spies. That would look stupid and embarrassing.

So they just changed the rules of how spies are recruited, raising the bar on requirements to such a high degree that the most valuable spies could never meet CIA standards and couldn't work for us.

Previously, I wrote how Clinton effectively stopped the recruitment of Chinese nationals by demanding that only high-ranking embassy officials could be recruited – knowing this is almost impossible. Roger told me that. Roger reminded me again of this today.

He noted that Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton's CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a "human rights scrub" policy.

Here's how Roger described it in an e-mail Tuesday evening: "Deutch and Nora, Clinton's anti-intelligence plants, implemented a universal 'human rights scrub' of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for 6 months to a year. This was after something happened in Central America (there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there) that got a lot of bad press for the agency.

"After that, each asset had to be certified as being 'clean for human rights violations.'

"What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people."

Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the "Human Rights Scrub" policy.

Perhaps that was the intention.

But we, the American people, Congress, and honest media need to examine all of these issues, now and quickly. If we don't, we risk even more grave dangers than those that we just lived through.

Bush finally did what was necessary and what Clinton was too spineless to do.
---------------------------------------

SCOTT Ritter: We Must Break Out of the Failed 'Saddam Trap'

Commentary

September 05, 2000|SCOTT RITTER, Scott Ritter is a former weapons inspector for UNSCOM and the author of "Endgame:

Solving the Iraqi Problem, Once and For All" (Simon & Schuster, 1999). E-mail: WSRitter@aol.com

While the presidential candidates jockey to define their agendas, there is one issue on which both Al Gore and George W. Bush see eye to eye: Saddam Hussein must go.

While neither candidate has offered a precise plan on how to achieve this goal, it seems clear that regardless of who wins the White House, the next four years will see a continuation of America's decade-long fixation on the president of Iraq.

The problem of Iraq is complex and vexing. Over the past eight years, the Clinton administration was trapped in a Saddam-centric policy of regime removal, which dictated the containment of the Iraqi dictator through economic sanctions regardless of the reality of Iraq's disarmament obligation and the horrific humanitarian cost incurred by the people of Iraq. This policy has been an abject failure, a fact that has prompted much of the international community to start viewing Iraq and its leader more sympathetically. Whoever wins the election in November will face the daunting task of overcoming the Clinton legacy on Iraq: a hopelessly divided Security Council, an impasse on weapons inspections, a degenerating system of economic sanctions, the loss of American credibility and a resurgent Saddam Hussein.

Soon, weapons inspectors from the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) will try to resume inspections of Iraqi weapons facilities. Such inspections were stopped 20 months ago, in the aftermath of Operation Desert Fox and the resultant collapse of UNMOVIC's predecessor organization, the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM). Iraq has rejected any cooperation with UNMOVIC as long as sanctions remain in place. The result is that, yet again, the Security Council will be confronted with a crisis regarding Iraq.

Three of the five permanent members of the Security Council--Russia, France and China--have made no secret of their sympathies toward Iraq and their opposition to America's Iraq policy. The rest of the world appears more inclined to trade with Iraq than continue a pointless and morally bankrupt policy of economic sanctions. The fact that both major presidential candidates couch their justification for the continuation of economic sanctions on the grounds that Saddam Hussein is still in power and not on any sound assessment of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction only further distances their respective positions from the rest of the world.
In fairness, the issue of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is no easy hurdle. Years of Iraqi obfuscation, lies and general lack of cooperation have made any unbiased assessment of its disarmament obligation virtually impossible. It is easy, given Iraq's uneven record, to accept analysis based on speculation, rumor and hyperbole. This is the course that many, including Richard Butler, the former executive chairman of UNSCOM, have taken. The message of Iraq as "the greatest threat," however overblown, is widely accepted in those corners prone to demonizing Iraq and Saddam Hussein.

THE PROGRESSIVE-DEMOCRATIC LEFT...........
----------------------------------------

Dismantling America:
August 17, 2010

"We the people" are the familiar opening words of the Constitution of the United States-- the framework for a self-governing people, free from the arbitrary edicts of rulers. It was the blueprint for America, and the success of America made that blueprint something that other nations sought to follow.

At the time when it was written, however, the Constitution was a radical departure from the autocratic governments of the 18th century. Since it was something so new and different, the reasons for the Constitution's provisions were spelled out in "The Federalist," a book written by three of the writers of the Constitution, as a sort of instruction guide to a new product.

The Constitution was not only a challenge to the despotic governments of its time, it has been a continuing challenge-- to this day-- to all those who think that ordinary people should be ruled by their betters, whether an elite of blood, or of books or of whatever else gives people a puffed-up sense of importance.

While the kings of old have faded into the mists of history, the principle of the divine rights of kings to impose whatever they wish on the masses lives on today in the rampaging presumptions of those who consider themselves anointed to impose their notions on others.

The Constitution of the United States is the biggest single obstacle to the carrying out of such rampaging presumptions, so it is not surprising that those with such presumptions have led the way in denigrating, undermining and evading the Constitution.

While various political leaders have, over the centuries, done things that violated either the spirit or the letter of the Constitution, few dared to openly say that the Constitution was wrong and that what they wanted was right.

It was the Progressives of a hundred years ago who began saying that the Constitution needed to be subordinated to whatever they chose to call "the needs of the times." Nor were they content to say that the Constitution needed more Amendments, for that would have meant that the much disdained masses would have something to say about whether, or what kind, of Amendments were needed.

The agenda then, as now, has been for our betters to decide among themselves which Constitutional safeguards against arbitrary government power should be disregarded, in the name of meeting "the needs of the times"-- as they choose to define those needs.

The first open attack on the Constitution by a President of the United States was made by our only president with a Ph.D., Woodrow Wilson. Virtually all the arguments as to why judges should not take the Constitution as meaning what its words plainly say, but "interpret" it to mean whatever it ought to mean, in order to meet "the needs of the times," were made by Woodrow Wilson.

It is no coincidence that those who imagine themselves so much wiser and nobler than the rest of us should be in the forefront of those who seek to erode Constitutional restrictions on the arbitrary powers of government. How can our betters impose their superior wisdom and virtue on us, when the Constitution gets in the way at every turn, with all its provisions to safeguard a system based on a self-governing people?

To get their way, the elites must erode or dismantle the Constitution, bit by bit, in one way or another. What that means is that they must dismantle America. This has been going on piecemeal over the years but now we have an administration in Washington that circumvents the Constitution wholesale, with its laws passed so fast that the public cannot know what is in them, its appointment of "czars" wielding greater power than Cabinet members, without having to be exposed to public scrutiny by going through the confirmation process prescribed by the Constitution for Cabinet members.

Now there is leaked news of plans to change the immigration laws by administrative fiat, rather than Congressional legislation, presumably because Congress might be unduly influenced by those pesky voters-- with their Constitutional rights-- who have shown clearly that they do not want amnesty and open borders, despite however much our betters do. If the Obama administration gets away with this, and can add a few million illegals to the voting rolls in time for the 2012 elections, that can mean reelection, and with it a continuing and accelerating dismantling of America.

The Stimulus Kicks In: Higher Unemployment:

We have left the recession that started in 2007 and entered a new recession caused by Obama's policies

September 3, 2010


"The prospect we now face is not the intermittent up-and-down fluctuations of unemployment we have had since the Great Depression. Thanks to Barack Obama's policies, we're confronting the possibility of an unemployment rate that never comes down, just as they have in Europe. If we stay on Obama's course, lower joblessness in the United States will be a thing of the past."

The recent rise in unemployment back up to 9.6 percent and the loss of 54,000 jobs in August suggest that our prediction is — dismally — coming true.

The Obama stimulus plan has finally kicked in: The higher spending he brought to our nation and the debt levels that are accompanying it are the result.

Why is unemployment remaining so high? Because the totality of Obama's policies are dragging us into a depression.

— The prospect of dramatically higher taxes next year is freezing consumer spending, particularly in the upper-income ranges, which spend a third of America's consumption.

— The huge changes that are looming in medical care brought about by Obama's health care legislation are freezing new employment and expansion in the medical sector, which accounts for 16 percent of gross domestic product.

— The financial reform legislation has so raised the prospect of a federal takeover of any bank that makes "imprudent" loans that financial institutions are afraid to lend, freezing new job creation.

— The looming possibility of cap-and-tax legislation in the name of halting climate change is freezing any expansion in the manufacturing and energy sectors, since these policies will force jobs to move overseas to locations that do not impose such a tax (e.g.

India and China).

— The massive expansion in the deficit and in the resulting debt has so eroded confidence in our nation's future that Americans are now saving 6 percent of their income, up from 1 percent in the past, sapping consumer spending.

— The threat of new rules for union elections that will spread private sector unionization is freezing business expansion plans.

Obama's rush to spend, regulate, re-engineer, redistribute and tax have stopped any recovery and are sending us back into recession.

In her wonderful book, "The Forgotten Man," Amity Shlaes notes how FDR's policies in the late 1930s did the same thing. She notes how the imposition of the Social Security tax in 1937 (benefits did not start until 1941) and the rapid wage hikes that accompanied the passage of the Wagner Act (steel worker wages rose 40 percent in 1937) sent a recovering nation back into a new depression that lasted until the war started in 1939.

In his haste to remake America and bring us the "fundamental change" he promised as he campaigned for president in 2008, Obama has torpedoed the recovery and sent us back into a double-dip recession.

The answer is to cut spending back to pre-Obama levels, reduce taxes and eliminate the threat of tax increases, zero fund the changes Obama has legislated in health care (and repeal them in 2013), eliminate the threat of cap-and-tax and lay the basis for solid economic growth.

We have left the recession that started in 2007 and entered a new recession caused by Obama's policies.

Bill F: Under President Clinton the entire world was headed for detente. We had the Anti proliferation treaty that every nation that possessed nuclear weapons excluding Israel had signed willingly.... just for the record.

CLINTON DEFENSE CUTS
With all the cuts in superflous wasteful duplicate military spending during the Clinton era, America and the entire world was allowed to prosper by leaps and bounds.
Even Saddam your personal boogeyman was rendered completely trapped within a small confine and totally impotent to wage any war with any other country. *This is "fact" maximum range of his weapons 200kilometers. The No Fly Zone was the best strategy the US had ever employed and the cost was just a few tankfuls of jet fuel per day.
Don't you even attempt to add the costs of support units from outlying bases in other countries because, they were already on the public's tab. THEY ARE THEIR 24/7 AND BOTH THEY AND THEIR EQUIPMENT ARE ON PERMANENT ALERT. LOOK IT UP, GENIUS!

The IMC and some of its most diabolical benefactors, and profiteering generals must have taken more than serious offense at the inevitability of obsolescence and just as we saw WAY BACK IN '63 with JFK and the Bay of Pigs with the war-hawks, in tell was sabotaged, and when that was proven not to be enough to bring him into their design, we later had that triangulation that so many withing the construct say had military styled operation written all over it. Led to his assassination that opened the door to that other half ass-ed misadventure that never had a signed "declaration of war" assigned to it- due to the ties of some titans to numerous munitions satellite factories offshore in Europe and elsewhere that were giving support with their armaments and other products to the VietCong effort in Viet Nam.
LOOK TODAY TO SEE THAT THE SAME DOGS FOLLOW THE SAME OLD SCRIPT.
Same old shit, same old tactics, same old propaganda. Same bullshit result. Americans died needlessly, politicians and generals concede to NOT PURSUING THE KNOWN EMENY, then allowing the scripted enemy whom we previously supported and funded before we flipped the switch into hating them, then proceed to conning the public that victory is only to be achieved is by allying again with them becoming part and parcel of the new gov't. What kind of shit VICTORY is that?
PS- VIET NAM BECAME OUR ALLY WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A QUOTE/UNQUOTE "MILITARY VICTORY.

Place this deep in your memory and don't attempt for any reason to forget it. Your bag-man Petreaus has been advocating for close to a year that the Taliban must be included in the other arch-criminal Karzai's half assed Afghan gov't. AGAIN THAT MEANS THAT WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL HAVE BEEN HOODWINKED INTO PAYING EXTORTION MONEY TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN ALEDGED KILLED OUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS. ANOTHER POISON PILL FOR US TO SWALLOW AND A BOON FOR "THE PROFITEERS".

"Those who refuse to learn from history are destined to repeat it."

Bonus question: Please name for me just one general worthy of historic notation from that FUBAR Viet Nam debacle that you are so hellbent upon resuming for your own personal pound of flesh.

ANY GENERAL WHO WOULD ALLOW A DMZ TO PREVENT HIS TROOPS IN HARMS WAY FROM PURSUING THEIR TARGETS OR ANY OTHER FORM OF HINDERANCE WHILE HIS TROOPS ARE BEING ATTACKED- IS NOT A LEADER OF MEN. HE IS A WELL PAID OFF "PATSIE".
------------
BENEFACTORS?- Hmmmmmmmmmm!
Hint: the Bush Klan via Brown Brothers Harriman continued support of Hitlers Nazi's long after our troops entered that war as well.
Hint: Saddam never had a single WMD until former CIA director Bush, emissary Rumsfeld delivered them. that should have made Sr and that PNAC cartel the prime suspects in the first genocide.
What Saddam did with those weapons afterward to his own people could have never happened if not for that assistance.

If by your feeble assessments you still view Wesley Clark as the perfumed prince for his maginicent No Fly Zone that lost no troops during its entire operation.
Then we would have to assess that by your own standards that your hero Petreaus be labelled "A SKUNK".
-bagman of billions to insurgients during THE SURGE
-lost, misplaced or had sold right from under his nose countless weapons that later were found to have killed our troops.
-now he insists or plots along with Cheney the original complicitor with the Taliban for their inclusion in the Karzai drug and population control cartel.

ALL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS FOR THE NEED FOR HONORABLE "VICTORY" IN VIET NAM GET THROW RIGHT INTO THE SCRAP HEAP- ... "FLIP-FLOPPER".
FOR THE RECORD- IF WE FOLLOW THE CHENEY/PETREAUS FORMULAS THAT YOU CLAIM WOULD BE VICTORY. THEN CONSIDER THIS MR FORKED TONGUE...
Let's throw women's rights for Afghan women right out the window. Let's throw away all the sacrifices of our dead and wounded pursuing this keystone cop debacle that hasn't had a single rational strategy to THE MISSION catching the fleeting ex family member with all of those sublime implied if not specific immunities Osama Bin-Bush.

PS: Who put our nukes in that tenuous position just like with Saddam for the threat of home attack to hang over our heads like a sword of damacles. Hmmmmmmm?
OR WAS THAT JUST ANOTHER SIGN OF "THE BUSH GREATNESS" AND THE POLITIC OF "FEAR" IN YOUR COMIC BOOK VERSION OF CONVOLUTED HISTORY.

..dum, de, Dumbya
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vefD3WSiis

MikeQ: This is for you. Enjoy!!!

More video about the Bilderberg Group



Shrewd and calculating, their hearts are filled with lust for power and consumed by greed for money. Rich and aristocratic, they despise Christians and they loathe the lowly working class. *****They control the world's press and virtually all our banks and financial institutions. *****They screen and choose who America's leaders will be and even determine who will run on the Democratic and Republican Party tickets.

Among the elitist membership or attendees at Bilderberg meetings is *David Rockefeller, *Henry Kissinger, Lloyd Bentsen, Helmut Kohl, Prince Charles, *Prince Juan Carlos I of Spain[COUNTRY NOW IN DANGER OF DEFAULT], Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Katharine Graham, Alice Rivlin, Gerald Ford, Bill[GUILTY BY ASSOCIATION ONLY. TRUE MAN AND ONE TRUE GUIDING LIGHT OF COMPASSION FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE WORLD] and *Hillary Clinton[POWER HUNGRY QUEEN OF DENIALS], *Dan Quayle[SON NOW RUNNING FOR OFFICE], ****Donald Rumsfeld, Colin L. Powell, *John Edwards, Bill Bradley, *Bill Richardson[CFR- ILLEGAL ALIENS NORTH AMERICAN UNION, Christopher Dodd[CFR- REGULATION BILL EXCLUDES GLOBAL EQUITIES AND TOO BIG TO FAILS WHO ALSO ATTEND AND PRE-ORDAIN WHO IS GOING TO BE CONFERRED GOV'T MONEY], *Dianne Feinstein, *Kathleen Sebelius, Alexander Haig, Ralph E. Reed, George Stephanopoulos, THE MONEY FIXERS-William J McDonough (former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York), U.S. *****Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, *George Soros, *Paul Volcker & *****Alan Greenspan (former Chairman of the Federal Reserve), Federal Reserve Chairman *****Ben Bernanke, World Bank president ****Robert Zoellick,
THE CORPORATE SLEDGEHAMMMER FOR TOTAL CONTROL AND SURVEILLANCE ****H. J. Heinz II (CEO of H. J. Heinz Company), Peter A. Thiel (Co-Founder, ***PayPal), Eric E. Schmidt (Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, ***Google), ****Lloyd Blankfein (CEO of Goldman Sachs, DON'T FORGET ALL THE PENSIONS THAT ARE AT RISK WHEN G-S HEDGES UNION FUNDS IN THOSE MANUFACTURED PONZI SCHEMES AGAINST THE MAXIMUM PROFITS HELD BY THOSE INSIDE THE GLOBALIST LOOP), THE MASS MEDIA DUMB DOWN- *Rupert Murdoch[FIX NEWS], Donald E. Graham (Chairman of the Board of The *Washington Post Company), William F. Buckley, Jr. (founder of National Review and former host of Firing Line), *Peter Jennings, George Will, Lesley *Stahl, *Bill D. Moyers[NETWORK MSM], and many others.
The list includes prominent persons in *politics, ****the military, *financial institutions, *major corporations, *academia, and *the media.

Leaders of the Bilderberg Club argue that discretion is necessary to allow participants in the debates to speak freely without being on the record or reported publicly. ****Wikipedia recently deleted the Bilderberg attendees list, citing it to be possibly defamatory towards living persons.


More video about the New World Order

TOTAL CONTROL OF UPCOMING FUTURE TRENDS EVENTS AND IT'S OBVIOUS METHOD OF PREMEDITATED COLLUSIONS
Why are the Davos World Economic Forum and G8 meetings carried in every newspaper, given front page coverage, with thousands of journalists in attendance, while no one covers Bilderberg Club meetings even though they are annually attended by Presidents of the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank, Federal Reserve, chairmen of 100 most powerful corporations in the world such as DaimlerChrysler, Coca Cola, British Petroleum, Chase Manhattan Bank, American Express, Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, Vice Presidents of the United States, Directors of the CIA and the FBI, General Secretaries of NATO, American Senators and members of Congress, European Prime Ministers and leaders of opposition parties, top editors and CEOs of the leading newspapers in the world.

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. ****It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. ****The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." -- David Rockefeller


_____
Bilderbergers Planned Kosovo War in 1996
_____
Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century
A premeditated attack on Iraq to secure 'regime change' was planned by George Bush and his cabinet long before the events of 9/11 and even before he took power in January 2001. The blueprint for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and others in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC). ... AND YOU KNOW THAT TO BE FACT FROM THE AARON RUSSO INTERVIEW W/ NICK "THE ROCK"

Enjoy the reading and all of the videos contained within as well...
http://www.jeremiahproject.com/newworldorder/nworder04.html

MikeQ: Let me not forget to include this juicy tidbit which ties the principal orchestrator of this whole flagrant attempt to bankrupt then own and chip the citizens of these United States for his own purposes. With his hands firmly encompassing all banking, the major share of oil energy revenue, and politics in this country your good old unkindly curmudgeon DR who is known and fully documented to have led and still orchestrates both ends of the spectrum by his selections to bring us into his concept of New World Order.

"1973 -- The Trilateral Commission is established. Banker David Rockefeller organizes this new private body and chooses Zbigniew Brzezinski, later National Security Advisor to President Carter, as the Commission's first director and invites Jimmy Carter to become a founding member.
IT IS ZIGGYS BLUEPRINT FOR MIDDLE EASTERN POLICY THAT WE ARE NOW FOLLOWING TO A TEE.

"It will be "perfect" because nobody will know who the enemy is, ...the wars will go on forever." - Nick "the Rock"

"The end goal is to have everyone chipped"- Nick "the Rock"

"Womens Lib? Don't be so naive. We the Rockyfella's via the Rock foundation funded that... so that we [through the private bank owned Federal Reserve and the IRS could tax everybody and gain control of the ways children are molded"... Nick "the Rock"

"What do you care about these people for, ... they're serfs, peasants." -Nick "the Rock"

MAY GOD AND OUR TRADITIONAL CONSTITUIONAL AND FAMILY VALUES BLESS AND PRESERVE AMERICA!!!
I ain't buying secular enslavement and corruption of my god given constitutional rightd to any other maniacal flawed and decedent mortal who presumes to be superior or who wants to imprison the mind, corrupt conscience, and have chipping and 100% surveillance and enjoys sadistic punitive punishment as their ultimate goal.
Sorry pal. It just isn't in my DNA.

Bill F: The beliefs and thoughts of truly "free men" cannot be defeated nor indoctrinated by fears transcended by that promote hatreds, dependence, or hopelessness upon another mortal being.
To him these persons must be considered an adversary that contradicts his family upbringing and sense of justice and every religions command to value and not to take anothers life.
For he depends on "conscience" bestowed within him from the moment of birth, and his connection to the higher aspiration of a world devoid of killing and the destructions that bring death rather than constructive accomplishment. A vision that is all inclusive and is respectful of those who can live in harmony respectful of all the lives, and wonders given to all creatures in the mystery of life.
He descends into the darkness of an early death when he allows the darkness of fear to alter the balances of rational apprehension to substitute for this wonderful birthright. A free man who allows for the alien implantation of someone else's less than rational, oft times despicable, hyped paranoia's, greed and insolence is lost to defeat and surrender of this immortal univeral soul that unites the universe we have yet to explore.
---------------------
"Shape Of My Heart"

He deals the cards as a meditation
And those he plays never suspect
He doesn't play for the money he wins
He doesn't play for the respect
He deals the cards to find the answer
The sacred geometry of chance
The hidden law of probable outcome
The numbers lead a dance

I know that the spades are the swords of a soldier
I know that the clubs are weapons of war
I know that diamonds mean money for this art
But that's not the shape of my heart

He may play the jack of diamonds
He may lay the queen of spades
He may conceal a king in his hand
While the memory of it fades

I know that the spades are the swords of a soldier
I know that the clubs are weapons of war
I know that diamonds mean money for this art
But that's not the shape of my heart
That's not the shape, the shape of my heart

And if I told you that I loved you
You'd maybe think there's something wrong
I'm not a man of too many faces
The mask I wear is "one"
---> Those who speak know nothing
And find out to their cost
Like those who curse their luck in too many places
And those who fear are lost

I know that the spades are the swords of a soldier
I know that the clubs are weapons of war
I know that diamonds mean money for this art
But that's not the shape of my heart
That's not the shape of my heart.

MY INTEGRITY AND MY CONVICTIONS ARE ANCHORED MY TRUST IN AN ALL LOVING CREATOR, MY OWN CONSCIENCE, AND HIS OBEDIENT SON THE ONE AND ONLY PRINCE OF PEACE.
IT IS THROUGH HE THAT THE HEALING SOUNDS OF "MUSIC", AND THE INSTRUMENTS THAT CARRY FORTH HIS MESSAGE WITH CONVICTION IN HIS HONOR THAT WOUNDS ARE HEALED, AND THE RAGES OF HATE AND INSECURITY IS ABATED.
IT IS IN THAT MOMENT OF TRANQUILITY AND POSITIVE VIBRATION WHEN BODY AND SOUL ARE MERGED IN SPONTANEOUS SHEAR DELIGHT AND THE PASSION FOR PEACE SHALL INEVITABLY OCCUR TO OVERCOME THE MANACLES OF FEAR,AGGRESSION AND HOPELESSNESS AND MANKIND SHALL BE REDEEMED.

Music soothes the savage beast. Its vibration brings inspiration to the oppressed and universal enjoyment regardless of language to the masses so that the toils and tribulations as well as the good graces that have been afforded may be celebrated graciously, in concert with voices raised high toward a much, much brighter and positive future.

Enjoy! Find peace. Live!

Poll - 46 Percent Say 'Bring Back Bush!'

Public Policy Polling has some interesting and, for some, sobering numbers. It seems that 48 percent of those polled would like to keep Barack Obama in the White
House. However, 46 percent would really like to bring George W. Bush back.

The results would seem to be in the margin of error. They lend numbers to the growing sense of agreement in the viral Internet image that became a well known billboard, "Miss Me Yet?" Considering President George W. Bush's abysmal poll numbers during the last year or so of his presidency, the Public Policy Polling numbers are remarkable.

How does one explain how who some used to consider "the worst president ever" suddenly come to tie with a President who has been compared by some to be the Messiah?

The answer can be summed up in one word: anxiety.

By anxiety, we mean that not only do we live in anxious times under President Obama, but there is the growing belief that President Obama is not up to the job. More importantly, the Tea Party protests are filled with hundreds of thousands of people who have concluded that the President of the United States means the country harm, inadvertently of course.

Not so President Bush. The most anxious day in the living memory of many people was September 11th, 2001. President Bush quickly became a pillar of strength. The day he stood on the rubble of the World Trade Center, the elderly fire fighter at his side, and thundered that "Soon they will hear from all of us!" was the day that many people believe that George W. Bush became president in fact as well as by law.

Bush's subsequent hammering of the terrorists in Afghanistan proved that the man from Texas meant business. Things only began to go south when the Iraq War began to grind on too long. But even there subsequent events have proven Bush right. The Surge Campaign has all but swept the terrorists from the field, proving that Iraq was not, after all, Vietnam.

Obama/Bush Nearly Divided:
Rush Limbaugh recently articulated another reason why a growing number of people would like George W. Bush back in the White House in place of Obama. George W. Bush, opined El Rushbo, was not busily trying to take our
money and our freedom. He was not enacting policies, like health care reform, that could kill people.

And, one might add, George W. Bush wanted to explore the high frontier of space. Obama would put an end to such overweening ambition.

If the news about President Bush is not chilling enough for the White House, it seems that Obama is also tied with the uber libertarian Ron Paul, a Congressman whose governing philosophy is the polar opposite of Barack Obama's in every way possible in a Rasmussen Poll. That should keep a lot of people awake at night.

Obama's troubles spawn 'bring back Bush' movement:


Calls for the return of Dubya began with bumper stickers and spread to the media - but can the Iraq war be compared to the healthcare battle?

The return of George W Bush has been a secret desire of some on the right of America's political extreme. It has even spawned car bumper stickers. One has a picture of Bush and Barack Obama next to the words "Can we change back?". Another just has a beaming Bush and "Miss me yet?".

But, while a sentimental longing for a return of Dubya may still be a fringe opinion, America did get a little reminder of the "good" old days last week when Bush appeared in a Q&A session at the Economic Club of Grand Rapids in Michigan. A relaxed Bush mixed his usual affable manner with topics of deadly seriousness. "Yeah, we water-boarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed," he said, referring to the mastermind of 11 September, 2001, and barely paused for breath before saying he would happily see it done again.

Bush is preparing to release a memoir. Called Decision Points and due out in November, the book is set to go over some of his "greatest" decisions. He will undoubtedly appear more and more to publicise it. Though he did tell the crowd in Michigan that he would not be trying to make Obama look bad.

He does not need to. The growing legions of critics of Obama include many who slam him as an unworthy successor to Bush. Dick Cheney, Bush's vice-president, wastes no opportunity to rip into Obama's national security policies. Even the media gets in on the comparison act. The current oil disaster is dubbed Obama's Katrina. The Goldman Sachs scandal was Obama's Enron. Healthcare reform was even referred to on the conservative cable channel Fox as Obama's Iraq. And that pretty much sums it up.

Marching Off the Cliff:

The Obamacrats misunderstand the economy

September 13, 2010 Issue

President Obama sure did cover a lot of ground last week in his address to the nation announcing the end of combat operations in Iraq. At times the speech resembled one of those late-night, beer-fueled freshman dorm bull sessions, where you start off discussing Led Zeppelin and end up ten hours later debating the ontological principle.

In between appropriate references to the Iraqi people, the Afghan surge, al Qaeda, George W. Bush, and the sacrifice and heroism of the American soldier, the president mentioned such unrelated topics as the deficit, economic turmoil, energy policy, unemployment, innovation, education, and the “billions of young people” across the globe who “want to move beyond the shackles of poverty and conflict.” By the time Obama started talking about “our manufacturing base,” we were scratching our heads, wondering why the commander in chief was devoting so much time in an 18-minute war speech to the financial crisis. And as with those college-era drunken colloquies, the major aftereffect of Obama’s talk was a bad headache.

Look closer at Obama’s text, however, and the rhetorical thread intended to connect geopolitics and the U.S. economy becomes clear. The president did not argue that foreign policy is a function of domestic politics. Nor did he exactly make the case that a booming economy is a necessary condition for American primacy. What Obama said was that the nation ought to approach the recession the same way it approaches a war. “As we wind down the war in Iraq,” the president said, “we must tackle those challenges at home with as much energy, and grit, and sense of common purpose as our men and women in uniform who have served abroad.” Indeed, the president continued, the American people share a collective responsibility to honor our veterans by “coming together” to restore economic growth.

Now, the president’s attempt to invoke a patriotic sense of national community is well within the boundaries of American political discourse. But it’s also a pretty lousy way to understand the economy. Fighting a recession is not the same thing as fighting a war. The U.S. military is a hierarchical organization in which orders are dispersed through a top-down command structure. Every soldier has an assignment, with every assignment comes orders, and if a soldier does not follow his orders, he’s in a lot of trouble.

The economy is different. It is not a closed system like an armored cavalry regiment, where everything (and everyone) has a place. The economy is open and dynamic, the agglomeration of billions of individual consumers and producers and investors. An army belongs to a particular nation, but today’s economy is global: The high price of Japanese money lowers the cost of German exports, which depresses American manufacturing, which increases demand for Chinese imports, and so on. An army has officers who process and analyze the available information, then plot strategy accordingly. It is impossible to do this in an economy. There is too much information for a single mind, or a group of minds, to comprehend. And there is no way to know for sure which strategies work and which do not—or whether a strategy had any effect in the first place. An army fights and destroys an enemy. But who is the economic enemy and how does one “defeat” them? When Obama said “our troops are the steel in our ship of state,” he rightly implied that he, as commander in chief, is the ship’s pilot. But the economy is not a ship. The economy has no captain.

The equivalence between recession and war is what’s gotten Obama and the Democrats into so much trouble. Liberals like the president and the congressional leadership honestly believe that they can command the economy to recover. By pushing and pulling the correct monetary and fiscal policy levers, the Democrats say, government can manipulate aggregate demand and bring back jobs. By redistributing wealth and regulating the insurance market, the Democrats promise, Americans can achieve universal health care while reducing health spending. By delegating authority to unelected bodies and issuing hundreds of new rules, the Democrats believe, regulators can eliminate credit bubbles and financial crises.

But it’s not that simple. The economy and society are too complex. Expert knowledge is too limited. The science of economics is too primitive. Ordinary human beings do not respond like soldiers to government’s commands. Nor should they respond to government this way.

The real puzzle is that, despite all of the political and economic setbacks they have encountered over the last year and a half, for some reason the president and his party cling to their mistaken belief that the economy is an army. There is still time to embrace a different course, and last week’s report that the administration is considering a payroll tax holiday is an encouraging sign. For now, though, the Democrats just keep on marching. Right off the cliff.

"Bill F: Under President Clinton the entire world was headed for detente....."


You call 9/11 detente??? Asshole!!! Nothing could be further from the truth.
Clinton's panzi handling of terrorist strikes against the USA all over the world for the entire eight years of his administration was precisely what brought on the 9/11 Armageddon! Are you really that dumb???

Iran - The Evil Empirer. First in Iraq and now Afghanistan. What are we waiting for???
---------------------------------------

Report: Iran Paying Taliban to Kill U.S. Troops:

September 05, 2010 | Sunday Times



KABUL -- At least five Iranian companies in Afghanistan's capital are using their offices covertly to finance Taliban militants in provinces near Kabul, according to an investigation by London's Sunday Times.

Afghan intelligence and Taliban sources have told the newspaper that the firms, set up in the past six months, provide cash for a network of district Taliban treasurers to pay battlefield expenses and bonuses for killing the enemy and destroying their vehicles.

The Iranian companies win contracts to supply materials and logistics to Afghans involved in reconstruction. The money often comes in the form of aid from foreign donors.

Profits are transferred through poorly regulated Afghan banks — including Kabul Bank, which is partly owned by President Hamid Karzai’s brother Mahmood — to Tehran and Dubai.

From these countries, the money returns to Afghanistan through the informal Islamic banking system known as hawala to be dispersed to the Taliban.

"This means the companies involved in funding the insurgency can cover their tracks easily. It makes it harder for us to trace the cashflow," a senior Afghan intelligence official said.

Iranian companies have been established with the intention of winning contracts funded by foreign aid so that donors’ cash could be channeled into the insurgency, the official said. Western officials believe the network may have been set up by the Al-Quds force, an elite branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

The Iranian embassy in Kabul refused to respond to the allegations. But according to the Taliban treasurer, who has been interviewed by The Sunday Times, Iran is paying bonuses of $1,000 for killing an American soldier and $6,000 for destroying a U.S. military vehicle.

So, what are we waiting for???
Waiting is Clintonesque Panzism and we know what that will get us.
------------------------------------

Iran boosts nuclear work, bomb concern remains: IAEA

15 mins ago

.VIENNA (Reuters) – Iran's total production of low-enriched uranium has risen by around 15 percent since May to reach 2.8 tonnes, a U.N. nuclear watchdog report said, showing Tehran is pushing ahead with disputed work despite tougher sanctions.

The confidential report, obtained by Reuters on Monday, said the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) remained concerned about possible activity in the Islamic Republic to develop a nuclear payload for a missile.

The IAEA also voiced concern about what it called Iran's "repeated objection" to the agency's choice of inspectors working in the country, after Tehran barred two U.N. nuclear inspectors from entering in June.

"The agency rejects the basis upon which Iran has sought to justify its objection," the report said, also referring to earlier cases where Iran raised such objections.

"It is also concerned that the repeated objection to the designation of experienced inspectors hampers the inspection process and detracts from the agency's ability to implement safeguards in Iran," it added.

Western powers are likely to see the report's findings as backing up their suspicions that Tehran is seeking to build nuclear bombs and underlining the need for the country to enter serious negotiations to curb its nuclear program.

Hey loser, guess what? Written and visual fact that has been documented, and certified by is far superior as proof certain of Bush failures to protect this nation, if not complicity in opening all of the doors to 9/11 than does all of your venomous rants and denials.

Here again, I present to you actual footage of the people who were tasked with the job and actual specific assignment of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda whose operations were halted by bush in January 2001. They know who and what connections tie the Bush Admin etc exactly and where to place the blame for the tragedy of 9/11.

Hear it in their own words. Etch this into your memory. You now have to refute both the Washington Times or the Wall St Journal.
Let's see you weasel out of this, Zippy.

Regarding your quote "And, one might add, George W. Bush wanted to explore the high frontier of space.
BUSH THE DREAMER WANTED A WHOLE LOT OF THINGSTHAT HE WAS NOT WILLING TO PAY FOR OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET- SO LET'S MENTION A FEW.
-DECLARED AND OBTAIN BANKRUPT STATUS 3X IN HIS PERSONAL LIFE.
-SOLD HIS SOUL TO THE BIN LADENS FOR ANOTHER OIL PARTNERSHIP.
-COULDN'T MAKE IT IN A COURTESY POSITION AT CARLYLE.
-COULDN'T GAIN ENTRY INTO YALE WITHOUT DADDY FUNDING A WING.
-COULDN'T WIN A WAR.
-COULDN'T READ A MEMO.
-SAT ON HIS ASS DURING 9/11.
-ABSENT FOR HURRICANE KATRINA.
-DIDN'T PAY A DIME FOR HIS TRILLION DOLLAR OCCUPATION WHICH TURNED A SUCCESSFUL REGIME CHANGE INTO A $2TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT.
-DEMANDED DEREGULATION AND GOT IT, BANKRUPTING THE ENTIRE US ECONOMY.
-HAD THE NERVE TO CALL A HEALTH BILL THAT OMITTED 40MILLION CITIZENS--> "NATIONAL".
-DENIED OUR TROOPS PROTECTIONS WITH NO BID CONTRACTS TO FIRMS WHO STILL AS OF THIS DATE HAVE NOT HONORED THEIR COMMITMENTS- "RAYTHEON". Then again, it was "Raytheon" who aided and abetted the escape of his precious Sauds and bin Ladens with the private jets right after 9/11.

If this is the same Bush that we are talking about, then the most humanitarian thing for him to do for our country would be to donate and offer the incredible amount of space that houses that pee-brain to scienceto find out what the f*ck makes him tick.

****Military Grade Thermite: Molten metal found at the base of the WTC whole 6weeks after 9/11. Thermite burns at 2,500 degrees farhenheit. Gee, no way posssible. That ain't jetfuel maintaining that heat, keeping the temperature at that level. Jet fuel would have completely burned or cooled withing the first day. Hmmmmmmmmmm!

****Bombs heard after the jets hit the buildings heard inactual time and recorded by first responder firemen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfQYsKKU4iY

WHO ARE THE BIN LADENS AND WHY HAVE AT LEAST ONE OF THEM BEEN ATTACHED TO THEN MYSTERIOUSLY RELEASED AFTER ALMOST EVERY MAJOR TERRORIST HIJACK ATTEMPT FROM BOJINKA TO 9/11? WHAT IS THEIR SPECIALTY?
Answer:
1.Construction and "demolition".
2.Hands on Funding and participating in insurgiencys and hijackings as well as money laundering.

GEE, IT MUST BE NICE FOR THE BUSH'S AND DICK CHENEY TO HAVE SUCH "TRUSTED" FRIENDS POP UP EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY NEED TO PLAY- "THE FEAR CARD"?
http://en.wikivisual.com/index.php/Bin_Laden_family
CASE CLOSED!

Mind you the Wikipedia glossary on the bin Ladens is the whitewashed "edit" as you all can clearly see that had been allowed for public consumption.

IF YOU WANT MORE HISTORICAL TIME STAMPED PROOFS OF THESE INVOLVEMENTS- THEN CHECK THIS OUT!
http://www.historycommons.org/searchResults.jsp?searchtext=BIN+LADENS&events=on&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go

Do you want to know about the CIA's "Able Dangers" tracking of Al qaeda that was destroyed for some mysterious reason in 2004?
"The order to destroy the data and documents is given to Kleinsmith by Army Intelligence and Security Command General Counsel Tony Gentry, who jokingly tells him, “Remember to delete the data—or you’ll go to jail.” [Government Executive, 9/21/2005] The quantity of information destroyed is later described as “2.5 terabytes,” about as much as one-fourth of all the printed materials in the Library of Congress." I AM SURE YOU WANT MORE- READ ON.
http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&projects_and_programs=ableDanger
---------------
Mid-September 2000: Bin Laden Message Gives Hint of Upcoming USS Cole Attack

"“Every time he put out one of these videotapes, it was a signal that action was coming.” He claims that after hearing of the video, he “knew then it would be within a month or two.” But nonetheless, his suggestion to put out a general attack warning will go unheeded (see May 2000-Late September 2000). An al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole follows less than a month later (see October 12, 2000). GEE, EVERY TIME THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS ABOUT TO BE INDICTED AL QAEDA SENT A TAPE ISSUING A THREAT WITHIN DAYS?
Hmmmmmmmmm! must have been either a hotline or the advancement of technology.
------------
November-December 2000: Able Danger Stops Data Collection and Moves into Operational Phase Special Assistant to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Cambone will later state, “[The purpose of Able Danger was to develop a campaign plan]. By November of 2000, the Garland effort was terminated—that is, the activity with Raytheon—and resources were shifted to the development of the actual draft of the campaign plan.

*OOOPS! No. You must be kidding. Not Raytheon again. Check earlier posts for your update.
Nah! 1. Providing private jet escapes for the funders of Al Qaeda. 2. Not supplying the IED protections as needed to be provided under wink, wink NO BID contract since 2005 still not provided. 3. Now this, start connecting those dots and the troops casualties that were allowed to happen as aresult of this "favored" contractor that had failde its obbligation and then wwas granted a 7yr reprieve to develop a comparable replica of Israels "trophe system which was offered to Bush but he declined. TROOP SAFETY? DON'T BET YOUR LIFE ON BUSH CARING.

HOW'S THAT FOR STARTERS, BILL F. DO YOU WANT MORE CERTIFIED DOCUMENTATION?

Whats wrong with this picture?

"The largest tenant was rumoured to be the FBI (occupying levels 64-76), followed by Marsh USA (levels 94-100). There are "just 2 FBI deaths" acknowledged in the victim list, --->****including former FBI chief John O'Neill who had recently been appointed WTC head of security. WHO'D HAVE THUNK IT?

January 6, 2000: CIA Informs FBI Leaders about Al-Qaeda Malaysia Summit but Fails to Mention One Attendee Has US Visa
"FBI Director Louis Freeh and other top FBI officials are briefed about the ongoing al-Qaeda summit in Malaysia (see January 5-8, 2000) as part of their regular daily update. They are told the CIA is in the lead and that the CIA promises to let the FBI know if an FBI angle to the case develops. But they also are not told that the CIA just found out one of the participants, Khalid Almihdhar, has a US visa. [9/11 Commission, 1/26/2004] It is unclear who the other top officials are. However, Dale Watson, the assistant director for the counterterrorism division, and Thomas Pickard, the FBI’s deputy director at this time and its acting director in the summer of 2001, will also learn of the summit by 2001, although it is unclear exactly when they are informed. [Pickard, 6/24/2004] One FBI official familiar with the case will later complain, “[The CIA] purposely hid [Almihdhar] from the FBI, purposely refused to tell the bureau.… ****The thing was, they didn’t want John O’Neill and the FBI running over their case. And that’s why September 11 happened.… They have blood on their hands.” [Bamford, 2004, pp. 224] Jack Cloonan, an FBI agent in the I-49 squad that focused on al-Qaeda, later says: “If that information [got] disseminated, would it have had an impact on the events of 9/11? I’m telling you that it would have.” OH NO! NOT DADDY'S CIA AGAIN. NOT TO MENTION WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF WTC SECURITY RIGHT UP TO SEPT 10TH... OH, WHAT THE HECK.

October 1996: Security Firm with Connections to Bush Family Acquires Security Contract for World Trade Center

Directors Include Bush Family Member - ***Marvin P. Bush, the youngest brother of future President George W. Bush, is a director at Stratesec from 1993 to June 2000, when most of its work on these big projects is done. ***Wirt D. Walker III, a distant relative of George W. Bush, is chairman of the board at Stratesec from 1992,
...---> and its CEO from 1999 until January 2002. Another of Stratesec’s directors, from 1991 to 2001, is Mishal Yousef Saud Al Sabah, who is a member of the *Kuwaiti royal family. Al Sabah is also chairman of an investment company called the Kuwait-American Corporation (KuwAm), which, between 1993 and 1999, holds a large, often controlling share of Stratesec.

Clinton and the Left Invited the 9/11 Holocaust
---------------------------------------

If only bin Laden had a stained blue dress:


If you wonder why it took 50 years to get the truth about Joe McCarthy, consider the fanatical campaign of the Clinton acolytes to kill an ABC movie that relies on the 9/11 Commission Report, which whitewashed only 90 percent of Clinton's cowardice and incompetence in the face of terrorism, rather than 100 percent.

Islamic jihadists attacked America year after year throughout the Clinton administration. They did everything but blow up his proverbial "bridge to the 21st century." Every year but one, Clinton found an excuse not to fight back.

The first month Clinton was in office, Islamic terrorists with suspected links to al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein bombed the World Trade Center.

For the first time ever, a terrorist act against America was treated not as a matter of national security, but exclusively as a simple criminal offense. The individual bombers were tried in a criminal court. (The one plotter who got away fled to Iraq, that peaceful haven of kite-flying children until Bush invaded and turned it into a nation of dangerous lunatics.)

In 1995 and 1996, various branches of the Religion of Peace -- al-Qaida, Hezbollah and the Iranian "Party of God" -- staged car bomb attacks on American servicemen in Saudi Arabia, killing 24 members of our military in all. Each time, the Clinton administration came up with an excuse to do nothing.

Despite the Democrats' current claim that only the capture of Osama bin Laden will magically end terrorism forever, Clinton turned down Sudan's offer to hand us bin Laden in 1996. That year, Mohammed Atta proposed the 9/11 attack to bin Laden.

Clinton refused the handover of bin Laden because -- he said in taped remarks on Feb. 15, 2002 -- "(bin Laden) had committed no crime against America, so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him." Luckily, after 9/11, we can get him on that trespassing charge.

Although Clinton made the criminal justice system the entire U.S. counterterrorism strategy, there was not even an indictment filed after the bombing of either Khobar Towers (1996) or the USS Cole (2000). Indictments were not filed until after Bush/Ashcroft came into office.

Only in 1998 did the Clinton-haters ("normal people") force Clinton into a military response. Solely because of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Clinton finally lobbed a few bombs in the general direction of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

In August 1998, three days after Clinton admitted to the nation that he did in fact have "sex with that woman," he bombed Afghanistan and Sudan, doing about as much damage as another Clinton fusillade did to a blue Gap dress.

The day of Clinton's scheduled impeachment, Dec. 18, 1998, he bombed Iraq. This accomplished two things: (1) It delayed his impeachment for one day, and (2) it got a lot of Democrats on record about the monumental danger of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction.

So don't tell me impeachment "distracted" Clinton from his aggressive pursuit of terrorists. He never would have bombed anyone if it weren't for the Clinton-haters.

As soon as Clinton was no longer "distracted" by impeachment, he went right back to doing nothing in response to terrorism. In October 2000, al-Qaida bombed the USS Cole, killing 17 sailors and nearly sinking the ship.

Clinton did nothing. This is only an abbreviated list of Clinton's surrender to Islamic savagery. For a president who supposedly stayed up all night "working" and hated vacations, Clinton sure spent a lot of time sitting around on his butt while America was being attacked.

According to Rich Miniter, author of "Losing Bin Laden," Clinton's top national security advisers made the following classic Democrat excuses for doing nothing in response to the Cole attack:


•Attorney General Janet Reno "thought retaliation might violate international law and was therefore against it."

•CIA Director George Tenet "wanted more definitive proof that bin Laden was behind the attack, although he personally thought he was."

•Secretary of State Madeleine Albright "was concerned about the reaction of world opinion to a retaliation against Muslims and the impact it would have in the final days of the Clinton Middle East peace process." (How did that turn out, by the way? Big success, I take it? Everybody over there all friendly with one another?)

•Secretary of Defense William Cohen "did not consider the Cole attack 'sufficient provocation' for a military retaliation."
Less than a year after Clinton's final capitulation to Islamic terrorists, they staged the largest terrorist attack in history on U.S. soil. The Sept. 11 attack, planning for which began in the '90s, followed eight months of President Bush -- but eight years of Bill Clinton.

Clinton's own campaign adviser on Iraq, Laurie Mylroie, says Clinton and his advisers are "most culpable" for the intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen.

Now, after five years of no terrorist attacks in America, Democrats are hoping we'll forget the consequences of the Democrat strategy of doing nothing in response to terrorism and abandon the Bush policies that have kept this nation safe since 9/11. But first, they need to rewrite history.

An American victory
Impressive turnaround in two years

July 11, 2009


The news is not that American combat troops withdrew from Iraqi cities. The news is that American combat troops withdrew from Iraqi cities in victory -- rather than in defeat.

Two years ago at this time, few in the foreign-policy establishment considered that outcome possible. Some did not even see it as desirable. There were those who believed the conflict in Iraq was "unwinnable," that America had met its match on the dusty streets of 21st- century Mesopotamia. Others thought Americans needed a Vietnam-like refresher course about the futility of the use of U.S. military force anywhere in the world.

The Baker/Hamilton Commission deliberated long and hard and then cobbled together an "exit strategy" intended to make defeat more graceful while spreading bipartisan blame. (Full disclosure: I was one of Baker/Hamilton's "expert advisers," but was among a tiny minority of vocal dissenters.)

Two years ago at this time, MoveOn.org mobilized for what it called the "Iraq Summer," an elaborate campaign to put pressure on members of Congress to cut off funding for the mission in Iraq.

Toward the end of the summer, MoveOn took a full-page ad in the New York Times calling Gen. David H. Petraeus: "Gen. Betray-Us." I think it's safe to say MoveOn's attack on a U.S. combat commander did not make most Americans feel warm and fuzzy about the group.

Taking it on was an informal coalition of veterans and military family groups, pro-defense and conservative think tanks, advocacy organizations and online news services. They worked hard to (1) inform the public about the progress in Iraq, and (2) persuade lawmakers not to surrender in Washington so long as American troops had a chance to prevail against the militant Islamists in Iraq. (More full disclosure: I participated in that effort.)

The mainstream media were astonishingly reluctant to report on the successes of Gen. Petraeus' troops. Most publications tried to avoid even naming our principal enemies in Iraq -- al Qaeda and militias backed by Iran. To do so would have been inconsistent with their narrative that America's presence in Iraq was responsible for all and any violence, that this violence should be seen only as a civil war, that America's involvement had been a "fiasco" from the start and nothing could change that.

To this day, many in the media beat this drum. On July Fourth, Anthony Shadid wrote on the front page of The Washington Post that the U.S. invaded Iraq in "a war of its own choosing, buoyed by grand ambitions and perhaps folly." Iraq, he added, has since "journeyed away from the peaks of invasion, occupation and civil war." He makes no mention of al Qaeda, its recruitment of foreign jihadis, and its deployment of them as suicide bombers in a systematic effort to inflame sectarian strife in Iraq. He makes no mention of Iran, its role in training, arming and instructing militias that have killed both Iraqis and Americans. Not a word.

In the days ahead, expect what's left of al Qaeda in Iraq to attempt to slaughter as many Iraqis as possible. Iran's rulers, though distracted at present, are likely to prompt their proxies to test the mettle of the Iraqi government and its security forces, to find out how much they've learned from the "invaders" who have been teaching them self-defense, while also helping them build sewers, schools and clinics.

This fact will remain: American troops have succeeded in their mission. In the midst of a global conflict with militant Islamism, both al Qaeda and Iran have been beaten on a battlefield in the heart of the Middle East.

One might think that would be a major news story. One would be wrong. The mainstream media have other stories to cover, other priorities -- Michael Jackson's death and Sarah Palin stepping down as Alaska's governor tops among them.

Donald H. Rumsfeld famously said: "You go to war with the army you have." That underestimated the adaptability and ingenuity of America's military. Had he said, "You go to war with the media you have," he would have been spot on.

PRESIDENT CLINTON SPEAKS OUT! TELLS ALL. WHERE WAS BUSH'S BRAIN WHEN HE WAS BEING BRIEFED? WHY DIDN'T BUSH EVER PURSUE OSAMA AFTER 9/11?

Let's put a permanent end to all the BillF rhetoric that always attrempts to blow smoke up our collective asses.

Watch this! I'll get back to everyone later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2513JFJsY&feature=related

Answer this everybody. Since neither the CIA[daddys organization] nor the military[the IMC] would sign off on identifying OBL & Al Qaeda as the force in the bombings weren't they themselves hindering President Clinton.
I have more relevant questions for you to seriously ponder and consider but, everytime I begin to set them to print so far I've been knocked out of this site.

Does make you wonder why both the IMC and Bush SRs CIA would obstruct one President who wanted bin laden dead, and on the other hand endorse the lies that sent us into war and protect the buffoon who turned two easy excursions into never ending nightmares that they have become.
Never investigating the most obvious Bush/Cheney/Bilderberg connection breaches in our security[CHALABI-TRACK RECORD [international criminal/Bilderberger/provider of flasified information that has led to the death of well over 100,000 innocent people]. Or bringing charges[for the BIN LADEN/SAUD airlift.

The Unquestionable Historic Events That Led To 9/11, As they Unfolded:
----------------------------------------
Clinton and 9/11:

Despite recent evidence that Bill Clinton knew by 1996 that al-Qaida terrorists who had tried to topple the World Trade Center in 1993 had plans to hijack commercial planes and crash them into buildings on American soil, this evidence was ignored by the recent Congressional report on the causes of the September 11, 2001 aerial attack on the WTC.

On May 20, 2002, David Horowitz, the Editor-in-Chief of this website, wrote an article entitled “Why Bush Is Innocent and the Democrats Are Guilty”. The article discussed Operation Bojinka, which came to the attention of U.S. authorities in 1995 when Abdul Hakim Murad, a terrorist, was captured in the Philippines. As reported by Maria Ressa in her September 18, 2001 article “U.S. Warned In 1995 Of Plot To Hijack Planes, Attack Buildings” on CNN’s website:

The FBI was warned six years ago of a terrorist plot to hijack commercial planes and slam them into the Pentagon, the CIA headquarters and other buildings, Philippine investigators told CNN.

Philippine authorities learned of the plot after a small fire in a Manila apartment, which turned out to be the hideout of Ramzi Yousef, who was later convicted for his role in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Yousef escaped at the time, but agents caught his right-hand man, Abdul Hakim Murad, who told them a chilling tale.

Murad narrated to us about a plan by the Ramzi cell in the continental U.S. to hijack a commercial plane and ram it into the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and also the Pentagon," said Rodolfo Mendoza, a Philippine intelligence investigator.

Philippine investigators also found evidence targeting commercial towers in San Francisco, Chicago and New York City.

They said they passed that information on to the FBI in 1995, but it's not clear what was done with it.

As reported by Doug Struck, Howard Schneider, Karl Vick and Peter Baker in their article “Borderless Network of Terror” in the Washington Post on September 23, 2001:

Arrested and tortured by Philippine intelligence agents, Murad told the story of 'Bojinka' -- 'loud bang' -- the code name bin Laden operatives had given to an audacious plan to bomb 11 U.S. airliners simultaneously and fly an airplane into the CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. -- all after attempting to assassinate Pope John Paul II.

Luis H. Francia reported in his article “Local Is Global” in the September 26, 2001 edition of the Village Voice that despite the FBI’s post-9/11 denial of any warning signs for the airborne attack on the World Trade Center, much of the information about Bojinka was found on the terrorists’ laptop computer years earlier:

According to Federal Bureau of Investigation director Robert Mueller, there were "no warning signs" of the kamikaze assaults. But somewhere in its files there is information indicating that as early as 1995 there existed a chilling plot code-named "Project Bojinka," which included mid-air bombings of planes headed to the United States from Asian countries on a single day, as well as hijacking airliners and crashing them into targets like the CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia. According to Philippine authorities, this information was passed on that year to the U.S. Embassy in Manila and to the U.S. Joint Task Force on Terrorism.

Evidence of the plot surfaced when Ramzi Yousef—one of three men convicted subsequently for the 1993 WTC bombing and sentenced to 240 years in prison—hastily fled a burning Manila apartment (and the country) just 200 yards from the Vatican Embassy. Cops found Manila street maps and clothing remarkably similar to that of Pope John Paul's entourage—the pontiff was due for a visit a week from the discovery—suggesting a planned attempt on his life. They also discovered bomb materials and a laptop whose disks revealed plans for Project Bojinka—which means "loud explosion" in Arabic.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a computer expert who regularly assists the National Bureau of Investigation (the Philippine FBI counterpart) and the Philippine National Police in their investigations of computer-related crimes said he downloaded the files, revealing the terrorists' diabolical project. One plan called for the hijacking of U.S.-bound commercial airliners from various Asian capitals and then, according to him, crashing them into "key structures in the United States: The World Trade Center, the White House, the Pentagon, the Transamerican [sic] Tower, and the Sears Tower were among the prominent structures that had been identified in the plans that we had decoded." The expert pointed out that in fact a dry run had been conducted in 1994, on a Tokyo-bound Philippine Airlines flight, when a small bomb under a passenger seat went off, killing a Japanese tourist.



When I noted the discrepancy between blowing up the planes in flight and crashing them into buildings, the expert said, "When we searched the files in the archive, there was a specific plan to blow planes up, but there were several other plans. One of them was to crash [the planes] into specific targets." Abdul Hakim Murad, also convicted in the 1993 bombing and Yousef's Manila roommate, admitted to Philippine investigators that he suggested to Yousef hijacking a U.S. airliner and crashing it into the CIA building. Also, according to a Washington Post article, his interrogators learned that Murad had taken flying lessons at aviation schools in San Antonio, Schenectady, New York, and in New Bern, North Carolina.

Steve Fainaru reported in his article “Clues Pointed to Changing Terrorist Tactics” in the May 19, 2002 Washington Post:

A broad array of signals -- from foiled plots to FBI field interviews -- suggested for years that al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist groups had considered employing airplanes as missiles and U.S. flight schools as pilot training grounds.

The clues included a 1995 plot to blow up 11 American jetliners over the Pacific Ocean, then crash a light plane into CIA headquarters -- a suicide mission to have been carried out by a Pakistani pilot who had trained at flight schools in North Carolina, Texas and New York.

FBI investigators visited two of the flight schools in 1996 after the plot was uncovered in the Philippines, school operators said. In 1998 and 1999, analysts warned federal officials that terrorists might crash hijacked aircraft into landmarks such as the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. Then, last July, the Italian government closed airspace over Genoa and mounted antiaircraft batteries based on information that Islamic extremists were planning to use an airplane to kill President Bush.

Fainaru reported that in 1999:

[A] report prepared for the National Intelligence Council, an interagency group, by the Federal Research Division, which is part of the Library of Congress, was titled “The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?” In a section on new terrorist threats, the report noted the Philippines plot and warned: “Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House.”

Matthew Brzezinski’s article in the Washington Post Magazine on December 30, 2001, “Bust and Boom” (available in the WP archives) gave more details about the capture of Murad and stated:

According to U.S. and Philippine officials interviewed for this article, both the CIA Manila station chief and the resident FBI legal attache were notified. A team of intelligence agents flew in from Washington.

Brzezinski quoted Aida Fariscal, the retired Philippine policewoman who was instrumental in capturing Murad:

The FBI knew all about Yousef’s plans,” she says. “They’d seen the files, been inside 603 [Yousef’s apartment]. The CIA had access to everything, too . . .

Brzezinski added:

In her outrage at the biggest U.S. intelligence failure since Pearl Harbor, Fariscal is not alone in the Manila law enforcement community. Gen. Avelino “Sonny” Razon, one of the lead investigators in the Bojinka case, was so shocked at what he saw on September 11 that he jumped on a plane in Cebu, where he was now police chief, and flew to Manila to convene a hasty press conference. “We told the Americans about the plans to turn planes into flying bombs as far back as 1995,” he complained to reporters. “Why didn’t they pay attention?”

Given the knowledge that al-Qaida’s operatives who had tried to topple the WTC in 1993 with a bomb that caused immense damage and loss of life, were plotting to use airplanes to crash into buildings, including the WTC and Pentagon, one would think that the Clinton Administration would have put sky marshals on all commercial jets, had the airlines install secure doors for the pilot cabins and alerted the public and the flight schools. But the Clinton Administration did not do any of this. At the very least, one would think that the Clinton Administration would have told the incoming Bush Administration about this aspect of Bojinka. However, that does not appear to have happened either.

Speaking at a press conference on May 16, 2002, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, President Bush’s National Security Advisor, defended the Bush Administration against charges that Bush learned enough information about a possible airborne attack on the WTC in the spring and summer of 2001 to have prevented the attack. Rice stated that the Clinton Administration did not tell her about Bojinka:

Now, on August 6th, the President received a presidential daily briefing which was not a warning briefing, but an analytic report. This analytic report, which did not have warning information in it of the kind that said, they are talking about an attack against so forth or so on, it was an analytic report that talked about UBL’s methods of operation, talked about what he had done historically, in 1997, in 1998. It mentioned hijacking, but hijacking in the traditional sense, and in a sense, said that the most important and most likely thing was that they would take over an airliner, holding passengers and demand the release of one of their operatives. And the blind sheikh was mentioned by name as -- even though he’s not an operative of al Qaeda, but as somebody who might be bargained in this way.



. . . .



Q -- any specific information just prior to August 6th that raised concerns about hijacking of U.S. planes?



DR. RICE: Again, this was generalized information that put together the fact that there were terrorist groups who were unhappy about things that were going on in the Middle East, as well as al Qaeda operatives, which we’d been watching for a long time -- that there was more chatter than usual, and that we knew that they were people who might try a hijacking. But, you know, again, that terrorism and hijacking might be associated is not rocket science.



Q Why shouldn’t this be seen as an intelligence failure, that you were unable to predict something happening here?



DR. RICE: Steve, I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking. You take a plane -- people were worried they might blow one up, but they were mostly worried that they might try to take a plane and use it for release of the blind Sheikh or some of their own people.



. . . .



Q So, two questions. No discussion at all then in this analytical briefing about either the information during the investigation in the Philippines about possibly flying a plane into the CIA building, or the investigation overseas about possibly flying a plane into the Eiffel Tower? No analytical information discussing those options at all?



And, B, you know that you would not be here today if it weren’t eight months after the attack we hear for the first time that, even in a general sense, the word “hijacking” and “al Qaeda” was before the President prior to September 11th. Why is it that in all the questioning of administration officials -- the President, the Vice President, yourself and others, did you have any hint, did you have any clue, that nobody simply said, you know, we didn’t; there was this general talk once of hijacking, but we looked into it, it had nothing to do with this, there was no connection?



DR. RICE: John, this all came out as a result of our preparations to help the committees on the Hill that are getting ready to review the events. It wasn’t -- frankly, it didn’t pop to the front of people’s minds, because it’s one report among very, very many that you get.



And so it’s out of that review that it became clear that this was there. I will say that, again, hijacking before 9/11 and hijacking after 9/11 do mean two very, very different things. And so focusing on it before 9/11 -- perhaps it’s clear that after 9/11 you would have looked at this differently, but certainly not before 9/11.



Q And no discussion in this briefing, or any others, about the possibility of al Qaeda hijacking, and the fact that there have been active investigations into the possibility of a CIA building plot, or an Eiffel Tower plot. Never came up?



DR. RICE: It did not come up.

It appears that criticism of Bush for failing to connect the dots before 9-11 may be misplaced given this evidence that the outgoing Clinton Administration failed to disclose the key dots to Bush’s national security advisor.

In “Why Bush Is Innocent and the Democrats Are Guilty” Horowitz stated:

Although the Clinton security team knew that Operation Bojinka included blowing up the CIA building in Langley, Virginia, it kept this information from the rest of the government. When Dale Watson, chief of the FBI’s International Terrorism Operations Section testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in February 1998, he withheld this vital information. He identified Operation Bojinka only as a plot to blow up U.S. air carriers, and assured the senators that the FBI had the situation under control.



It is possible that Clinton never received the information about Operation Bojinka, since his lack of interest in national security matters throughout the course of his administration has been noted by many - including his chief political advisor Dick Morris, and his chief "biographer" Joe Klein. February 1998 - the date of the FBI testimony -- is also the month after Monica Lewinsky became a national celebrity.

Since the publication of Horowitz’ article, evidence has emerged that Clinton received the information. Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Robert “Buzz” Patterson was a military aide to Clinton from May 1996 to May 1998 and one of five individuals entrusted with carrying the “nuclear football”—the bag containing the codes for launching nuclear weapons. On page 139 of Patterson’s book “Dereliction of Duty”, published in March 2003, he wrote:

During the summer of the 1996 attacks, I myself learned first­hand that the administration knew that terrorists were plotting to use commercial airliners as weapons. The president received a Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB, every morning. It was a document encased in a smart leather folder, and emblazoned with the presidential seal, that contained the president’s daily intelligence update from the NSC. A senior NSC representative normally delivered it to the president. On weekends, at Camp David, and on vacations, the military aide was responsible for delivering and retrieving the brief.

One late-summer Saturday morning, the president asked me to pick up a few days’ worth of PDBs that had accumulated in the Oval Office. He gave them to me with handwritten notes stuffed inside the folders and asked that I deliver them back to the NSC.



I opened the PDB to rearrange the notes and noticed the heading “Operation Bojinka.” I keyed on a reference to a plot to use commercial airliners as weapons and another plot to put bombs on U.S. airliners. Because I was a pilot, this naturally grabbed my attention. I can state for a fact that this information was circulated within the U.S. intelligence community, and that in late 1996 the president was aware of it.

Patterson’s book continues to be a bestseller. According to Regnery, Patterson’s publisher, the book “has spent an astounding 20 weeks on the New York Times bestseller list – where it has been since its first week of publication.” For the week ending August 30, 2003, it was number 32 on the New York Times bestseller list for hardcover nonfiction. Despite Patterson’s widely disseminated first-hand account of Clinton’s knowledge, the media, Congress and the Bush Administration have been silent about it. Most unforgivable however, is that those whose job it was to investigate Patterson’s account, failed to do so.

In February 2002, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence agreed to conduct a Joint Inquiry into the activities of the U.S. Intelligence Community in connection with the 9/11 attack. The report resulting from that inquiry, that was released on July 24, 2003, consists of 832 pages that present the joint inquiry’s findings and conclusions, an accompanying narrative, and a series of recommendations.

The report ignores Patterson’s account of the episode he describes in his bestselling book. The report is silent about the state of Clinton’s knowledge about the plot to use airliners to crash into buildings. In an interview with this author on August 9, 2003, Patterson stated that he was not asked to testify before the investigating committees, speak with their staff or give any information at all to them. Patterson stated that he did not contact the committees.

Patterson described the nature of a PDB. He stated:

What the PDB actually is is a compilation of intelligence reports that the NSC collects. So they take, they take inputs from the CIA, the FBI, various intelligence agencies and the watch officers that actually work in the NSC, of course Sandy Berger at the time and his deputies, actually glean through that and create that document every single day. . . . It comes from the NSC. It’s a compilation of inputs that I’m sure they sit around all day long and receive data from the CIA and the FBI. They kind of probably glean through it and decide what the President needs to see and what is not all that relevant. . . . What it is is an intelligence briefing. And it covers the gamut, it runs the gamut from what’s going on in Africa to what’s happening in the United States to the Middle East. It really is everything that the NSC feels is important the President needs to be aware of. Why I thought it was so significant that Bojinka was in there was because in my mind that was there because somebody wanted the President to know about it.

When asked whether the account he gave in his book is 100% verifiable, Patterson stated: “Absolutely.” When asked whether all of the PDB’s shown to Clinton throughout his administration still exist, he stated: “Oh yeah, oh yeah. In fact I’m sure they do.” He stated that he does not know for sure where they are kept, but “they’re probably still in the NSC it would be my guess.” In addition, Patterson stated that those who prepared the specific PDB he described would know its contents.

Patterson stated that he is not sure about the exact date he saw the PDB, but believes it was in July or August of 1996. Patterson stated that he did not know if Clinton received the information earlier. He stated that it is possible that Clinton was given this information initially in 1995. Patterson stated that it has been suggested to him that the reason that the information was in the PDB in the summer of 1996 was that somebody thought it was important to give Clinton the information at that time in light of the July 17, 1996 midair destruction of TWA Flight 800. Patterson stated that it is possible that if Clinton had prior knowledge of the information from 1995, he may have requested that because of the destruction of TWA 800, the information be included again in a PDB.

Patterson stated that he has a hunch that the information was in several PDB’s “because they would repeat information from time to time” as it became relevant.

In addition to the Congressional investigation, there is the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9/11 Commission), an independent, bipartisan commission created by congressional legislation and the signature of President Bush in late 2002, that is chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission also is mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks. The Commission released its first interim report on July 8, 2003. It stated:

The contemporary history of the country passed a watershed on 9/11. We must do the job we are required to do by law so that we may understand how we came to this turning point in the way we think about our security and to understand the choices that lie ahead.

Patterson told this author that the 9/11 Commission has not contacted him either.

By failing to investigate Patterson’s account the congressional committees failed the American people and failed the approximately 2,800 people who died in the WTC attacks. We cannot depend on our elected representatives to tell us all of the important facts. Let’s hope the 9/11 Commission does its job, but don’t place any bets on it.

A parade for our heroes:

September 15, 2010

President Obama's action to end Operation Iraqi Freedom and hand the reins of responsibility over to the people of Iraq is a historic moment for our nation and a milestone for our country's men and women in uniform.

Over the last 7½ years, 1.5 million Americans have fought heroically to defend America's 200-year-old commitment to liberty and security. We must prepare to give all of those who served and sacrificed in Iraq the proper thank-you they so valiantly deserve. Any effort to recognize the sacrifices and contributions of our service members is a good idea and should not be limited to Veteran's Day.

As most New Yorkers know, the grandest gesture our city has ever shown has been to honor and thank America's heroes and heroines with a parade through the Canyon of Heroes. Since 1886, when we officially welcomed Lady Liberty to the shores of our great nation, the Canyon of Heroes has been a place for Americans to celebrate their achievements and thank the people who made such accomplishments possible.

During the course of this grueling war, 4,418 men and women in uniform have given their lives in the name of freedom. Today, tens of thousands are healing from the physical and mental consequences that warfare brings.

And for millions of family members around the country, this war is not over. At this very moment, more than 50,000 sons and daughters are still actively serving to bring democracy and security to the people of Iraq.

Sens. Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, as well as Long Island Rep. Peter King, have voiced support for a call to honor our Iraq War veterans with a ticker-tape parade.

As we keep our troops in our thoughts and prayers, we look to our country's veteran-advocacy leaders to guide us toward the most respectful and appropriate moment for a parade through the Canyon of Heroes. But we can say for now that this must remain a priority; we can't let this fall through the cracks or be placed on the back burner.

New York City knows how to come together to honor and thank fellow Americans who risk their lives to protect the lives of others. As we stand together over the coming months and welcome home our troops, we look forward to saying thank you.

super read, thanks!

cheers for the post. I've been a reader