Oh wait, that's not Burkett, that's some other nutcase.
Posted on 09/13/2004 7:18:02 PM PDT by aft_lizard
I was listening to Scarborough Country and Howard Fineman said that they were looking into whether Bill Burkett was the source of the forged papers.
from http://michael-friedman.com/archives/000139.html
Who is Bill Burkett? Former Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett is the man who claims that Bush and the Texas National Guard cleaned out any damaging information in Bush's National Guard files in 1997.
As Kevin Drum explains in an exhaustively researched post, Burkett has a major axe to grind - he blames Bush for the military denying him medical care during an illness in 1998.
However, there is another reason to be skeptical about Burkett. Burkett has strongly held loony left political views. He has written numerous articles espousing his positions and clearly wishes to sway the electorate. This gives him another obvious motive to lie about Bush's National Guard files.
Here are some quotes from articles Burkett has written for far left news outlets. From "What do you say?":
I've sat in total grief for the past three years, watching the institutions of America being spent as if they were lottery winnings.
...
As I said, a UN vote would not stop GW Bush from attacking Iraq. Nor will anything else. And weapons of mass destruction will be discovered in great quantities; but the entire affair will stink to high heavens because it will be as staged as the White House press conference you just viewed.
The human death toll will publicly not be mentioned, yet in truth, it will far exceed 120,000. Our vast size and force will quickly break the back of any Iraqi resistance, yet we will not break their spirit. This is a society which has learned to live in troubled politics. They will go about their business while seething inside. There will be small uprisings, but they will quickly be crushed. The emotion and anger that we will have built will spill over into other countries and meld like an alloy with other problem areas of the Middle East, becoming a deeper seated problem. We will have insured that America's dynasty is nearing an end.
While GW Bush will be cast as a conquering hero by his political team and accepted by the population as such, history will treat him as Napoleonic. Bush will reach a new lofty level of acceptance by first fear and then staged triumph. Those who waited too long to gain their voice will lose their voice again.
America will over pledge economically in order to establish this new footprint; but the economic worth will not go to offset our fiscal investment, or to the Iraqi people. Iraq will be stripped by the vanquishers; the major corporations, who will then control not only the assets, but the cash flow. Their names will be Mobil, Exxon, Halliburton and the likes.
...
Lost within a short time will be the name Saddam; for like Osama, he was never the purpose of this campaign. Never in the history of the world has a great society survived whenever its focus was allowed to magnetize to its most powerful. And here we will clearly have in view that there is little value accorded to the innocent 3-year-old Iraqi girl who will today be playing in the streets, or the 19-year-old soldier who will launch the missile that will kill her.
What do you do? Watching the sunrise on a beautiful morning, I used to feel hope. Before my illness, I felt exhilaration at the prospects of the day. After my illness, I felt hope that I might work hard to live. Now I feel sickness that today another massive group of people, held worthless by this anointed king, will be trampled upon like grapes. But their blood will not be rendered into wine. It will be spilled into the sands of this desert or another, or on the streets of Washington, or in the halls of the US Congress, or in the courts.
But there is a difference from any phenomenon previously faced by a spoiled American populace. With Teddy Roosevelt, we badgered and dented him into listening; with Franklin Roosevelt, we tenaciously talked until he listened; with William Jefferson Clinton, we crippled him through deceit and his own frailties. But none were anointed as king.
We must now revert to the history of Europe to discern what to do. We must study the nemesis of France and how Napoleon was felled before understanding the damage a tyrant does to a nation and society. We must examine the ruthless and dictatorial rise of yet another of the three small men - one whose name is not spoken out of fear of reprisal, but his name was Adolf. We must examine history, in order to not repeat it, and to understand the mesmerism of a public to a murderous scheme. Three small men who wanted to conquer . . . and vanquish. Each created a need for a balancing throng; history then recorded the damage from a far better perspective.
More than one French or German household now sits watching the US expending her virtue through the tools of greed, anger and vengeance. And they caution us. They caution that out of this strong arm tactic will bring about the rise of a United Europe or Asia to counterbalance an arrogant superpower.
I do not believe that this world can, or will, stand idly by. While many will rally to the side of this conqueror, there must be a steadfast collective group who hold their ground, their principles and the Constitution of this land. For there is never found the word "King" within that great architecture of Democracy, or as the Republicans like to say this "Republic". There is only the structure of an equally shared and responsible government "of, by and for the people" anchored within the principles of defense rather than attack.
From "Snippets about life and politics":
That's right, [the Texas redistricting is] the same concept that was tried in South Africa within the past 30 years. It's also the root of the Tulsa massacres in which "black districts" were eventually attacked by the Oklahoma National Guard and the police.
From Bush's Iraq Attack Risks Reaction:
I have argued with the senior members of the Bush team since 1996, insisting that preventive war was not an option for the United States. The Preventive War concept is a WARHAWK product which, in my opinion, is totally foreign to the principles the Founding Fathers established for the USA.
...
The debate about Iraq is really not about Saddam Hussein. It is a debate about countering the threat of the US challenges to the rest of the World.
...
The collapse of the Soviet 'bear' significantly contributed to Bush I's scheme to encourage Iraq to invade Kuwait.
...
But Bush's abrupt withdrawal from the Kyoto process signaled that the US crossed the line from legitimate national interest into imperialism...
There are more articles but they are apparently no longer available online.
The issue here is not that Bill Burkett is a liberal. It isn't even that he is left wing. The issue is that he is loony left. We are in "precious bodily fluids" territory. I'm not calling Burkett a Democrat because I think he is too far left to be a Democrat. This is the left wing version of the John Birch Society.
Not only are Bill Burkett's politics loony left but he is trying to be a political player, writing editorials and trying to sway the American people against George Bush and the Republican Party.
Burkett's politics are certainly not common among members of any military service. Given this, isn't it a pretty amazing coincidence that someone with his political views just happened to be in the right place to overhear people talking about cleansing Bush's files?
Did Burkett get lucky or is he lying to promote his political agenda?
Burkett just hasn't been the same since he was kidnapped and anal-probed by aliens in 1979.
He' a nut case.
Seems like prime suspect number 1 in this case.
I don't think Burkett is the source of the documents. I think he is the inspiration for them.
My first guess was Barnes, another nut case.
It's funny, that CBS described the source as being "unimpeachable."
That's it! The source is Bill Clinton!
Is this President Bush (41), out of office for 6 years in 1998, or is it President (then Governor) Bush (43) two+ years from assuming office in 1998?
Or does the Governor of Texas (in 1998) have other powers we are not aware of.
Something fishy here?
Who are you going to believe concerning what Col. Killian, Bush's one-time superior officer, thought about Bush: Killian's family and co-workers or Bill Burkett? Remember, before you answer, that DAN RATHER believes Bill Burkett.
Never mind your lying eyes and a few so-called experts with their nonsense about those rock-solid memos. CBS News, a panel of prestigious experts we refuse to name, and DAN RATHER believe Bill Burkett.
I would hope that's all you need to know.
</Dan_Rather_mode>
"The issue here is not that Bill Burkett is a liberal. It isn't even that he is left wing. The issue is that he is loony left. We are in "precious bodily fluids" territory. I'm not calling Burkett a Democrat because I think he is too far left to be a Democrat. This is the left wing version of the John Birch Society."
If it wasn't for that crack about Kyoto, I'd say he sounds very much like Lew Rockwell and his crowd. Or, maybe a Buchanan supporter. But, his comment about Kyoto puts him square into the Kerry camp.
I think Kerry said that Bush's withdrawal from Kyoto was why Bush couldn't get a 'coalition'. Very much implying he, Kerry, was all in favor of Kyoto. Bush should certainly challenge Kerry on this support.
I dont think so, this Bill Burkett who Newsweek is calling primesuspect number 1 in rathergate is not a Bush supporter.
That would be "If he IS the source" sheesh, spell-check, wouldya?
> Seems like prime suspect number 1 in this case.
"Person of interest" - let's stay out of libel territory here.
One thing that points away from Burkett is that he almost
certainly knows what TXANG memos are supposed to look like.
In my view, Barnes is more interesting, both because he's
been pushing the Bush-AWOL story longer, and because he
probably has no fluency in ANG memo formatting.
There are other parties positioned and motivated to
execute the forgeries as well.
I think the state of texas has its own VA system for guardsmen, somebody can coorect me on this.
W0W I was about to say I saw BG Burkett speak at the Viet Vets for Truth Rally yesteday on capitol hill and He's one of the good ones!
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.