Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: All

Hello, it's a glorious day in freepdom. Roberts on CNN said he would be releasing over 500 statements from the democrats from the past... since they want to play this game. Good to hear. For reading, you may be interested on these links on Rockefeller:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004779

As if you haven't seen it by now... the Rockefeller Memo:

Rockefeller memo

Here is the full text of the memo from the office of Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.) on setting a strategy for pursuing an independent investigation of pre-war White House intelligence dealings on Iraq.

We have carefully reviewed our options under the rules and believe we have identified the best approach. Our plan is as follows:

1) Pull the majority along as far as we can on issues that may lead to major new disclosures regarding improper or questionable conduct by administration officials. We are having some success in that regard.

For example, in addition to the President's State of the Union speech, the chairman [Sen. Pat Roberts] has agreed to look at the activities of the office of the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, as well as Secretary Bolton's office at the State Department.

The fact that the chairman supports our investigations into these offices and cosigns our requests for information is helpful and potentially crucial. We don't know what we will find but our prospects for getting the access we seek is far greater when we have the backing of the majority. [We can verbally mention some of the intriguing leads we are pursuing.]

2) Assiduously prepare Democratic 'additional views' to attach to any interim or final reports the committee may release. Committee rules provide this opportunity and we intend to take full advantage of it.

In that regard we may have already compiled all the public statements on Iraq made by senior administration officials. We will identify the most exaggerated claims. We will contrast them with the intelligence estimates that have since been declassified. Our additional views will also, among other things, castigate the majority for seeking to limit the scope of the inquiry.

The Democrats will then be in a strong position to reopen the question of establishing an Independent Commission [i.e., the Corzine Amendment.]

3) Prepare to launch an independent investigation when it becomes clear we have exhausted the opportunity to usefully collaborate with the majority. We can pull the trigger on an independent investigation of the administration's use of intelligence at any time. But we can only do so once.

The best time to do so will probably be next year, either:

A) After we have already released our additional views on an interim report, thereby providing as many as three opportunities to make our case to the public. Additional views on the interim report (1). The announcement of our independent investigation (2). And (3) additional views on the final investigation. Or:

B) Once we identify solid leads the majority does not want to pursue, we would attract more coverage and have greater credibility in that context than one in which we simply launch an independent investigation based on principled but vague notions regarding the use of intelligence.

In the meantime, even without a specifically authorized independent investigation, we continue to act independently when we encounter footdragging on the part of the majority. For example, the FBI Niger investigation was done solely at the request of the vice chairman. We have independently submitted written requests to the DOD and we are preparing further independent requests for information.

SUMMARY: Intelligence issues are clearly secondary to the public's concern regarding the insurgency in Iraq. Yet we have an important role to play in revealing the misleading, if not flagrantly dishonest, methods and motives of senior administration officials who made the case for unilateral preemptive war.

The approach outlined above seems to offer the best prospect for exposing the administration's dubious motives.

http://www.hillnews.com/news/110603/memo.aspx




27 posted on 11/02/2005 9:05:58 AM PST by AliVeritas (Weldon Ops, Earle Fatwa Team, Pork Jihadi, MOOSEMUSS, Stick & Bucket Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: All

This list is a must have and save- courtesy of Peach:

How about Republicans finally grow a spine and support the military effort and remind the left of a few things.

1. Remind the left that every single Democrat of note said in 1998 that Iraq's WMD posed a danger to the United States.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/972389/posts

2. Remind the left that Clinton's Justice Department obtained a federal indictment of Osama bin Laden which stated that AQ had a deal with Iraq. They agreed not to attack Iraq in exchange for weapons development.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/985906/posts

3. 9/11 Commission reaffirms Bush administration view of Iraq/AQ ties.
June 21, 2004. RNC.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1157478/posts

4. Long List of Clinton Administration Officials who Believed There was an AQ/Iraq connection.
July 12, 2004. NewsMax.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1169397/posts

5. List of CIA and various Reports regarding Iraq's support for terrorists, terrorism and AQ.
September 16, 2004. The Weekly Standard.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/631slkle.asp

6. Osama bin Laden was considered an Iraqi Intelligence asset.
October 14, 2004. National Review.
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1246505/posts

Funny how in the 90's the world was concerned about the growing relationship between OBL and Saddam and now the left is revising history.

Saddam reaching out to OBL
January 1, 1999. Newsweek
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158277/posts

ABC news reports on the Osama/Saddam connections
January 14, 1999. ABC News
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1229608/posts?page=1

Osama and Saddam Work Together
January 27, 1999. Laurie Mylroie interview. She is a former Clinton terrorism czar.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158482/posts

A Much Shunned Terrorist Takes Refuge In Iraq (Abu Nidal)
New York Times. January 1999.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1433610/posts

Western Nightmare: Saddam and OBL versus the World. Iraq recruited OBL.
February 6, 1999. The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,12469,798270,00.html

Saddam's Link to OBL
February 6, 1999. The Guardian
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/866105/posts

Saddam offered asylum to bin Laden
February 13, 1999. AP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158274/posts

Son of Saddam coordinates with OBL.
Iraqi Special Ops coordinates with Bin Laden's terrorist activities.
August 6, 1999. Yossef Bodansky, National Press Club
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/951911/posts

That and more here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1327993/posts?q=1&&page=151

Thanks for the pass along SE Mom.


28 posted on 11/02/2005 9:06:35 AM PST by AliVeritas (Weldon Ops, Earle Fatwa Team, Pork Jihadi, MOOSEMUSS, Stick & Bucket Brigade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

To: AliVeritas
"Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the Iraq Liberation Act.

William Jefferson Clinton, 31 OCT 1998
34 posted on 11/02/2005 9:09:10 AM PST by sono (That was a metaphor. You DO know what a metaphor is? - Z Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson