Skip to comments.
Washington Post Trashes Able Danger Witnesses
NewsMax ^
| 9/24/05
| NewsMax
Posted on 09/24/2005 10:55:28 AM PDT by wagglebee
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
It used to be that the Washington Compost just ignored news that didn't fit their agenda, now they just show how flagrantly biased they are.
1
posted on
09/24/2005 10:55:30 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
To: wagglebee
Pure undiluted mind-control of the Beltway -- yet everyone there just drinks it up happily. I'd imagine the same slanders are being spread by DC talk radio and all the hallway buzz. Mind-numbed animals. With too-cushy jobs and pensions that sustain and encourage this vileness borne of the unearned position and wealth.
2
posted on
09/24/2005 11:00:45 AM PDT
by
bvw
To: wagglebee
Or else they see Able Danger as a missile headed straight for the Clinton legacy. It's too big to ignore so they have to try to shoot it down.
3
posted on
09/24/2005 11:03:42 AM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(We need a strict constructionist - not someone who plays shadow puppet theater with the Constitution)
To: wagglebee
The witnesses and Weldon will be trashed in the press from now until the hearing resumes.
4
posted on
09/24/2005 11:07:30 AM PDT
by
Roccus
(I've been called a romantic cynic. Also a cynical romantic.)
To: KarlInOhio
"Or else they see Able Danger as a missile headed straight for the Clinton legacy. It's too big to ignore so they have to try to shoot it down."
But why would the Bush White House be so keen to assist? Do you think it's likely that Stephen Hadley is lying about being shown the chart and, if so, what is he so keen to keep covered up?
5
posted on
09/24/2005 11:10:58 AM PDT
by
Canard
To: wagglebee
6
posted on
09/24/2005 11:11:22 AM PDT
by
Eagles6
(Dig deeper, more ammo.)
To: wagglebee
Must be a lot to the story if the ComPost is baring it's teeth this much.
7
posted on
09/24/2005 11:14:07 AM PDT
by
prairiebreeze
(Take the high road. You'll never have to meet a Democrat.)
To: All
What the Washington Post is really saying is "HOW DARE YOU TRY TO SHIFT THE BLAME ON WILLIAM J. CLINTON!"
8
posted on
09/24/2005 11:15:17 AM PDT
by
Bringbackthedraft
(Frodo failed, Hillary now has the Ring)
To: wagglebee
"Weldon is a controversial figure who is vice chairman of the House homeland security and armed services committees and is known for carrying a replica of a suitcase nuclear bomb."
Irrelevant. He could be a complete kook and still have a point. But I expect the Post to be above the ad hominem game. Silly me.
9
posted on
09/24/2005 11:15:30 AM PDT
by
Das Outsider
(Cipherin' ain't my specialty.)
To: Roccus
The wash compost, the nyslimes and pravda, all three organs of truth and objectivity. Their collective motto:
If the truth don't fit, we'll go and cover it {with bull****}.
The liberal rags are realizing that someone in the Pentagon {probably named Rummy} decided to kick some bureaucratic butts and that now the truth about Able Danger and the gang of klintoon thieves will be coming out. They will do their part in covering bj's tracks {as always}.
10
posted on
09/24/2005 11:18:34 AM PDT
by
USS Alaska
(Nuke the terrorist savages - In Honor of Standing Wolf)
To: Bringbackthedraft
What the Washington Post is really saying is "HOW DARE YOU TRY TO SHIFT THE BLAME ON WILLIAM J. CLINTON!"
It should read:
"HOW DARE YOU TRY TO SHIFT THE BLAME ON THE HONORABLE, MAGNIFICENT, MAGNANIMOUS STATESMAN WILLIAM J. CLINTON!"
Not that the Post made him out to be Thomas Jefferson for those eight years or anything. /sarcasm
11
posted on
09/24/2005 11:20:28 AM PDT
by
Das Outsider
(Cipherin' ain't my specialty.)
To: KarlInOhio
Or else they see Able Danger as a missile headed straight for the Clinton legacy. It's too big to ignore so they have to try to shoot it down. I hope that one day (probably at least 25 years away) we will finally find out what was in all of those pilfered FBI files, because it amazes me that so many people and organizations are willing to "take a bullet" to protect the Klintoons.
12
posted on
09/24/2005 11:26:22 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
To: Roccus
Washington politicians and the media want to distract us from Able Danger by focusing on the government response to hurricane Katrina.The hurricane investigation is meaningless and will be nothing more than another 9/11 style commission with a purely bias agenda.We need to get to the bottom of Able Danger no matter who gets taken down in the process.Political legacies and futures are not important when it comes to past and present problems that put us in danger by jeopardizing our security.
13
posted on
09/24/2005 11:30:31 AM PDT
by
rdcorso
(Shut Up Cindy Sheehan! Nobody Wants To Hear A Filthy Pig Squeal!)
To: wagglebee
They loved and adored all of the anti-Bush witnesses. Whether it was Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, etc. They get glorified. Anyone who dare crosses the dems will be destroyed. They are also not covering the Lt. Gov. Steele credit report story.
14
posted on
09/24/2005 11:32:06 AM PDT
by
Ron in Acreage
(It's the borders stupid! "ALLEN IN 08")
To: wagglebee
are there any links as to how this rag treated the we-can't-find-the Downing Street Memo?? thanks in advance.
15
posted on
09/24/2005 11:43:34 AM PDT
by
God luvs America
(When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
To: wagglebee
The Washington Post is siding with the Pentagon???
To: God luvs America
I think that Bush/Rumsfeld were originally protecting the Clinton Presidency by not allowing the testimony.Then Clinton bashed Bush and someone must have said..screw this,let Able Danger testify.
The media was happy when the DOD was stopping it because it would have exposed Clinton.
Once the DOD reversed itself, I said I wonder how fast the media is going to try to harpoon this story that they virtually ignored all summer now that it will expose Clinton.
17
posted on
09/24/2005 11:55:27 AM PDT
by
ricoshea
To: wagglebee; Peach; Enchante; Congressman Billybob
ARTICLE...."Most damaging to Weldon's claims, the paper said, was the denial it obtained from National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley on Friday - whose spokesman challenged Weldon's assertion that he had given Hadley a copy of the Atta chart two weeks after the 9/11 attacks.
"Mr. Hadley does not recall any chart bearing the name or photo of Mohamed Atta," Frederick L. Jones II told the paper. "NSC staff reviewed the files of Mr. Hadley as well as of all NSC personnel. That search has turned up no chart."
Hadley a member of the Bush administration, is apparently going to deny this all the way...its his word against Weldon's. Somebody is lying.
Ive focused repeatedly on Hadley and his own particular CHART as significant in this investigation...it makes liars out of Slade Gorton and others on the 9-11 Commission.
We now have two people in the current Admin who are noteworthy...
Stephen Campone denying that he witnessed a presentation to Shelton in March 2001 timeframe which allegedly mentioned Able Danger...
Stephen Hadley denying that Atta was on a chart he received from Weldon two weeks after 9-11.
Obviously...both Hadley and Campone need to be put under oath and queried in front of Congress in public hearings.
IMO, although this stuff is POST 9-11, these people are the gatekeepers in getting into the truth about AD and its findings PRE 9-11, and the actions of the previous administration. If Hadley's implied and Gortons direct characterizations of Weldon are allowed to stand...and they WILL be assisted to a large measure by the LIBERAL MSM... as in this article...then any attempts to get at the truth of the Clinton admin and AD will be made much more difficult.
This investigation has to proceed in an orderly, methodical fashion...as a prosecutor would in peeling away layers of an onion.
Lets see what develops....
18
posted on
09/24/2005 11:56:26 AM PDT
by
Dat Mon
(still lookin for a good one....tagline)
To: God luvs America
"are there any links as to how this rag treated the we-can't-find-the Downing Street Memo??"
The 'Downing Street Memo' was just minutes of a meeting attended by several people, so there was never any actual dispute as to its existence.
19
posted on
09/24/2005 12:11:48 PM PDT
by
Canard
To: wagglebee
The Washington Post should just change its name to the "Washington Enquirer." No, on second thought, that would probably insult The Enquirer, I think the Enquirer has more credibility...
Maybe just the "Washington Trash." For "all the news that's not really fit to print!"...
ANTI-DNC Web Portal at ---> http://www.noDNC.com
20
posted on
09/24/2005 12:20:41 PM PDT
by
woodb01
(ANTI-DNC Web Portal at ---> http://www.noDNC.com)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-54 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson