Posted on 05/26/2004 4:08:42 AM PDT by 7thson
Talking Points Memo & Top Story
The truth on terrorism
President Bush continues to believe that the war in Iraq will eventually make Americans safer, but is this case strong enough? We're fighting terrorism as a nation divided... and defeat is not an option. Bill speaks with David Keene, the chairman of the American Conservative Union, for another view on America's war.
With that said, I still watch his program and he had a very important segment on last night. Above is a quick synopsis of his first segment. He spoke with David Keene and both raised an important point - the vast majority of Americans do not know the connection between Iraq and Al Quada(sp). O'Reilly mentioned listening to Keene on NPR in the morning and when Keene mentioned Salmon Pak, the guy on NPR had no idea what he was talking about.
Bill raised a good point - IMO. How come President Bush not explain this connection to the citizens? I will go O'Reilly one better. How come those that hit the Talking Heads programs not bring this subject up? It frustrates me to no end when a lib states there was never a connection between Iraq and terrorism, and the repub/conservative does not mention this. Especially when it is a Repub Congress Critter - they were all breifed by Tenent concerning Salmon Pak. My last question is how do we get the word out to the citizens?
I don't know. W seems to have this overpowering need to stay civil. I did read a quote from him the other day where he said that a lot of people have said a lot of things that they are going to wish they hadn't said before this campaign is over.
I suspect the Pres is keeping his powder dry. Cleaning Kerry's clock or getting down in the mud with him doesn't do any good right now.
Also, things may look a whole lot different after June 30th. People who tell the POTUS to shange his plan don't fully understand that the next phase of the plan doesn't really kick in until after the handover date. And I hope to God that the Iraqis are more firm about stamping out these invaders than we've been.
A rallying cry of "Remember Salman Pak" wouldn't be so bad. Or "Ask Me About Salman Pak." I would probably put something like that on my car.
I don't care if there was (is) a connection between Al Quaida an Iraq or not.
It is irrelevent to me.
Iraq needed to be liberated.
Saddam needed to go.
This is correcting the U.N.'s failure to properly respond to the Kuwait invasion.
And now, on to Syria!
No need to connect any dots between one group or another, as far as I'm concerned.
I wish they could get a real conservative in that time slot with good guests to inform and discuss rather than tear each other's hearts out or tear down America - the one country that has done the most good in the world.
Is Fox News Channel listening?
Before determining its validity, we have to determine if O'Reilly actually made a point. He asked some questions. What, exactly, was his point?
As someone with an average amount of logic and intelligence, it is obvious to me that Iraq under Saddam Hussein was one of the few countries harboring terrorists.
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was manufacturing and likely distributing nuclear, chemical, and possibly biological weapons or resrarch to other terror organizations.
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was systematically torturing its citizens.
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, harbored one of the main organizers of the 1993 terror attack on the WTC.
Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, gave millions if not billions to organizations such as Hezbolah and Hamas.
Seeing as its 7 am and I have to change my grandson's dirty diaper, I am too tired and frustrated to add any more.
If people refuse to see the logic behind taking out a major country involved in terror, then neither I nor President Bush can help them.
And Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, sent assasins to kill Prez Bush 41 - which by my logic, should have been enough to take him out right then and there.
I didn't see the show and your link doesn't have any more than a summary.
Do you have the whole 'talking points memo' for posting? Sometimes he has good points, sometimes not.
Bottom line is Bush is not the one that divided the nation. His opposition has chosen to make Iraq a political issue, with the assistance of the media. That the country is divided is not Bush's doing. It is obvious that whatever he did would have been politicized. The liberation of Iraq was widely supported on the Dem side of the aisle early on, and was wholehartedly supported by Clinton and the Democrate previous to 9-11.
It's all politics to them, and their goal was to divide the nation to deplate Bush's lock on reelection.
O'Reilly's an entertainer, pure and simple.
He's no great "political" guru who has it all figured out.
His job is to keep an audience, and IMHO, he does so by being controversial, not necessarily conservative.
I quit watching O'Reilly quite awhile ago.
I don't watch much TV, but I do manage to watch Brit Hume's show each night. His roundtable discussions are interesting, and informative, and I think it's the best show that FoxNews has (oh, and I do like Cavuto's show, but don't always get to watch it because of it's mid afternoon timing...now there's an idea, move Cavuto to nighttime, LOL).
"I suspect the Pres is keeping his powder dry. Cleaning Kerry's clock or getting down in the mud with him doesn't do any good right now."
The President doesn't have to engage Kerry at all...he needs to engage the folks. He needs to patiently explain as if to children that Salman Pak was a real place,that terrorists trained there, that Saddam was a bad man and that we are fighting there to keep from fighting here, even tho we still might have to[No, wait...that last might be too complicated.]
I took that to be the thrust of O'Reilly's point and Dick Morris's.
The President needs to realize that the majority of Americans WANT to believe in him. He has a remarkable well of good will because he is a decent man that does rise when he makes a speech the folks understand. Right now, all the folks are treated to are lies and leftist propaganda. Bush simply must speak out and not wait until the end of June to do so.
Adressing Kerry is not necessary...no one is listening to Jeffink anyway.
Good points! I agree. I just want conservatives not to look like idiots or liars.
His point is how come the President does not explain easily and simply the Salmon Pak connections and that one terrorist who received medical aid in Bahgdad.
Take care of that grandson! The best thing about grandchildren is that they go home at night - sometimes!
It was not only the Talking Points but he further elaborated with David Keene. I will try to find the TP's and post them.
There is an uneasy silence of various events starting with United States backing of Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war and continuing forward. O'reilly and Keene are right, it is remarkable to not mention Salman Pak and the terrorists that were trained there in the art of hijacking an airliner. There are a number of events that justified attacking Iraq beside WMD's. Unfortunately, when we are involved with clandestine operations, the exposure of one operation, leads to questions of another. In the world of international intrigue there are things the public is not supposed to know.
That is a question, not a point. That was my point. Should George Bush address the nation on the subject of Salman Pak? I think that would obviously be foolish politically...to join a debate about whether or not we should have gone to Iraq. That is why O'Reilly left it as a question.
Saddam violated ALL the peace accors signed back in 91
In addition he attempted to assassinate a former President
That is an act of WAR
In the midst of a war no more "intel" should be given than is absolutely required by law into the hands of these liberals that seek to use this "war" to win back the White House and Congress.
I think you are on to something with that. The leaked memo was a warning, and the leftists have been trying to follow the script. I just hope Pres. Bush and his team are prepared to do what it takes when the time comes. I won't be happy without a landslide(in Congress too) and/or long prison terms for the traitors.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.