Posted on 10/19/2005 4:59:18 PM PDT by TomGuy
Rep. Kirt Weldon is on Michael Savage's radio program, and he is implying Rumsfeld is the one blocking further investigation into Able Danger.
Weldon is fuming; says he personally (in a committee hearing) asked Rumsfeld about the investigation being blocked. Rumsfeld replied that he would 'get back to Weldon with a response.' Weldon says he still has gotten nothing from Rumsfeld.
Weldon to give a speech in a few moments this evening on the floor of the House. It should be aired on CSPAN this evening.
Got it!
Rep. Weldon's speech from the floor of the House on 10/19/2005:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r109:77:./temp/~r109DSGGQk::
Ping to #681 transcript
Ping to #681 transcript
Ping to #681 transcript
Velveeta found the Gov transcript here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1505540/posts?page=681#681
BTTT!
Ping to post #681 transcript
ping to transcript
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1505540/posts?page=681#681
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r109:77:./temp/~r109KiDGyd:e0:
Still watching out for the video.
Cross linking transcript thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1505816/posts
bump
I despise that "politically infirm" term you used. It's heartless. Like Clinton was. All dick and no heart.
I believe you are adressing this to me by mistake. I never said anything like that or anything about Clinton here. Maybe find the person who actually said that and refer your comment to him.
Thank you for that link!!! I hadn't heard about his interview until I saw this post. It is amazing that Sandy Berger, a convicted thief of national security secrets will have his clearance restored but Col. Shaeffer is fighting for his...and HE HASN"T EVER BEEN CHARGED!!!!!! Ludicrous.
"Politics has invaded every aspect of life in this country. Instead of waiting to slaughter anyone who's made a mistake or is trying to TELL of a mistake, they should be thanked and enlisted into solving the problem."
I don't think you fully understand my position. I do not believe that George Bush should be attacked over what happened vis-à-vis Able Danger. whatever happened, I'm quite sure that 99% of the blame lies with Clinton and something like 1% of the blame lies with Bush.
However, in this case, the desire to avoid that 1%, has apparently been enough to motivate this cover-up. All I am saying is the first of all, Bush is covering up and second of all, we need to make the truth come out, despite that, if we possibly can.
I still do support Bush overall and will support him after the truth of Able Danger comes out. But I oppose the cover-up itself.
"No, I didn't, unless you are referring to Corsi."
I refer to Scott Swett. He set up the Winter soldier web site. six months before the Swift boat vets became known. He is a freeper.
"You're entitled to what you believe - BUT YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR THEORY - when you have E V I D E N C E - then you can mouth off!!"
The evidence is that George Bush is the chief executive of the government of the United States. 1) I can't believe he does not want to know what happened in regards to Able Danger. 2)I can't believe he would have difficulty finding out what happened, since everyone involved is an employee of his. 3)Since he is made no statement whatsoever regarding the situation, I assume he is covering up.
Of course, this implies that Rumsfeld is covering up. As I think of it, it is possible that the cover-up would stop there and go no higher than that. However, it seems to me that that would be a dishonorable course for Rumsfeld to follow. I believe, that if Rumsfeld is covering up, he's keeping Bush in the loop about it.
I have great respect for both men, but I believe that a mistake was made and that they feel the need to covered it up.
If people on the outside can never speak without evidence, public pressure can never be generated to bring forth evidence. So I disagree with your view, that I should be silent on this.
In addition, you will note that most of the people who post on this board are speculating about what is actually going on with the cover-up. In general, they lack evidence to back up their various speculations due to the nature of this case. Do you equally object to their speculations, which are without evidence, or is it just mine that you feel is so objectionable?
Clinton Administration Secretary of Defense:
1. Les Aspin - 1993 - 1995
2. William J. Perry - 1994 - 1997
3. William S. Cohen - 1997 - 2001
AGREED
"I assume he is covering up."
Therein is the problem .. you are ASSUMING and not basing your belief on facts.
Bush does not micro-manage. He gives people an assignment and he expects them to manage it. It's one of the basics of Harvard Business School - delegate, delegate, delegate.
I remember when the Pentagon first muzzled the witnesses of Able Danger. Sen. Sessions said that he was going to take it up with Rumsfeld. The next day, the witnesses weren't muzzled. Now .. I understand that has changed again - but to say Rumsfeld was covering up - you have no facts to substantiate your case.
You have only ASSUMPTIONS - which are NOT FACTS!
And .. you can't possibly say you "have respect" for people and then believe they are covering up - I don't respect people who cover up.
I'm not saying you should be silent - but if you're going to accuse people of doing things - then have EVIDENCE to back it up. Your assumptions don't cut it.
Speculating is not assuming - it's discussing the possibilities of something happening - assuming means you're believing it so without evidence. I might speculate that some people in the Pentagon are covering up - but I'm not assuming it's any certain person - like Rumsfeld. And .. if you had ever listened to any of the things Rumsfeld has said or any of his Pentagon briefings, you could never assume that about Rumsfeld. You have NOTHING to base your assumptions on.
However, I assume Bill Clinton is still sneaking around and sleeping with anybody who's stupid enough to get involved with him - my assumption is based on a history of that action.
You have NOTHING to base your assumptions on.
I still do support Bush overall and will support him after the truth of Able Danger comes out. But I oppose the cover-up itself.
Thanks for clarifying your position. I agree that the truth has to be told and if heads are to roll, I just hope that FOR ONCE, the correct heads roll. Just once. We need it to restore our faith in the system.
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.