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

Skip to comments.

The Clare Luce Democrats - How they're lying about "he lied us into war."
Opinion Jouranl (WSJ) ^ | November 3, 2005 | Editorial

Posted on 11/02/2005 10:38:40 PM PST by Jim Robinson

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: Jim Robinson

Well, so far anyway...

On the Laura Ingraham show this morning a Congresscritter guest stated that one of the sticking points with regard to the second level investigation up until now had been the following...

The Dems had actually wanted 300 Republican statements documented to see if they misled the public. The Republicans had basicly agreed to this, as long as 100 Democrats statements could be parsed as well.

The Dems for some reason weren't quite so happy to include their own statements. I wonder why.


21 posted on 11/02/2005 11:56:52 PM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HundredDollars

You are exactly right on action, and I have little doubt that is what we will see if the democrats try for a third time to run on this losing strategy.

Sometimes I wonder if the RNC holds back too much too, but the longer and louder the D-team gets away with it, the dumber they will look when the hammer comes down.


22 posted on 11/03/2005 12:15:29 AM PST by EERinOK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: EERinOK
The 9/11 commission was a real boon-doggle as well.

All those accusations against the Bush admin never covered any of the failures of the Clinton Admin. The RNC never made those public, and of course MSM wouldn't expose their rat friends.

THE OSAMA FILES BY DAVID ROSE

A snip from this tell all article buried away.

"From the autumn of 1996 until just weeks before the 2001 attacks, the Sudanese government made numerous efforts to share this information with the United States all of which were rebuffed. On several occasions, senior agents at the F.B.I. wished to accept these offers, but were apparently overruled by President Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, and her assistant secretary for Africa, Susan Rice, both of whom would not comment for this story after repeated requests for interviews. Vanity Fair has obtained letters and secret memorandums that document these approaches. They were made directly to the State Department and the F.B.I., and also via a series of well-connected U.S. citizens who tried to warn America that the Sudanese offers were serious and significant.

By definition, September 11 was an intelligence failure. As the C.I.A. man puts It, We didn't know it was going to happen." Some of the reasons for that failure were structural, systemic: the shortage of Arabic-speaking agents, the inability of C.I.A. officers to go underground in Afghanistan.

This one was more specific. CE Had U.S. agencies examined the AF Mukhabarat files when they first REI had the chance in 1996, the prospects of preventing al-Qaeda's subsequent attacks would have been much greater. Tim Carney, the last U.S. ambassador to Sudan, whose posting ended in 1997, says: "The fact is, they were opening the doors, and we weren't taking them up on it. The U.S. failed to reciprocate Sudan's willingness to engage us on serious questions of terrorism. We can speculate that this failure had serious implications-at the least for what happened at the U.S. Embassies in 1998. In any case, the U.S. lost access to a mine of material on bin Laden and his organization."

How could this have happened? The simple answer is that the Clinton administration had accused Sudan of sponsoring terrorism, and refused to believe that anything it did to prove its bona fides could be genuine. At the same time, perceptions in Washington were influenced by C.I.A. reports that were wildly inaccurate, some the result of deliberate disinformation. The problem, Carney says, was "inadequate vetting and analysis by the C.I.A. of its own product." That, in turn, was being conditioned by the Clinton administration's hostility to Sudan's Islamic regime: "Despite dissent from the State Department's own Bureau of Intelligence and Research, U.S. intelligence failed be- cause it became politicized."

Worth keeping before it dissapears. I just don't know why the RNC doesn't throw these issues back at the RATS along with everything else.

23 posted on 11/03/2005 12:34:46 AM PST by Forte Runningrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jonah Johansen; logician2u
Um, ... must be nearing the "magic" December 7th Pearl Harbor attack anniversary ... 64 years on.

So, is it better to know the exception to the rule or just the rule itself?

Regarding "provocation" - Oliver Lyttelton, the British Minister of War Production during War World Two, said " ... Japan was provoked into attacking the Americans at Pearl Harbor. It is a travesty of history ever to say that America was forced into the war. Everyone knows where American sympathies were. It is incorrect to say that America was ever truly neutral even before America came into the war on an all-out basis." [See Prange's ''Verdict of History'' on page 35]

The freezing of Japanese assets in the US, the sub-rosa world-wide oil embargo (along with the British and Dutch), ...

The "pop-up cruises" of US warships in the March of 1941 (i.e., USS Brooklyn, USS Savannah, USS Chicago, and USS Portland), and later by USS Salt Lake City and USS Northhampton in July/August of 1941, violating Japanese territorial waters...

McCollum's Action Proposal - all eight items of which were implemented [See Stinnett's "Day of Deceit" - paperback edition, Notes for Chapter Two, pages 321-322, notes 7, 8, and 11)...

That frantic efforts to make the Lanikai a US warship ...

As logician2u states, the documented evidence keeps going in only one direction ... radio silence is a myth and Allied efforts against the Japanese Naval operations codes had some success ... Let others "reconcile" that bit about "zero" versus "some."

As is known, several "non-schedule" related and complete messages are in the public domain in multiple collections. Upon reflection they can be identified as pointers in the literature have been ample. Note that the raw intercepts still - now almost sixty-four years later - remain beyond public inspection. FOIA requests continue to be denied on national security grounds.

There seems one certainty, however. For many it is likely that they do not want the release of clearly identified and very specific now-classified Pearl Harbor materials to continue apace. Why? Because it has not strengthened their cheval-de-frise stance since the declassifications began decades ago. Even the worn and old gambit of " .... all documents have long been released ..." has since faded as multiple authors claim, within just the past few years, to paraphrase, " ... documents now recently declassified ..."

Why the fear?

As a recent reminder of purposeful and fradulent intent, on October 31, 2005, from the New York Times, regarding new information on the Tonkin Gulf incident, the following:

Apparently the National Security Agency (NSA), in a 2001 self-study, found evidence that intelligence officials falsified evidence in August 1964 to make it appear as if the so-called second attack on U.S. ships had occurred. The falsification involved mistranslations of intercepted North Vietnamese communications, "altered intercept times," and "selective citation of intelligence."

The New York Times article, "Doubts Cast on Vietnam Incident, But Secret Study Stays Classified," by Scott Shane, asserts in the opening paragraph that "NSA officers deliberately distorted classified intelligence to cover up their mistakes...."

The above is the self-same pattern with many things Pearl Harbor, but, time is on the side of truth.

So, the exception to the rule or the rule itself?

24 posted on 11/03/2005 4:43:39 AM PST by jamaksin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: franksolich

Clare Boothe Luce ping.


25 posted on 11/03/2005 5:38:10 AM PST by Charles Henrickson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson

I guess the 'Rats have forgotten the 1.7 Metric Tons of enriched Uranium that was found in Iraq in June, 2004!

Semper Fi,
Kelly


26 posted on 11/03/2005 6:09:28 AM PST by kellynla (U.S.M.C. 1st Battalion,5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Div. Viet Nam 69&70 Semper Fi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it?"

It appears like they are, so far. No one is standing up to these CIA lies.

27 posted on 11/03/2005 7:39:42 AM PST by p23185
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
Unfortunately, the MSM are now simply covering this story as pure political theater. Can the Democrats score points on Bush? Can they drive opinion polls to "show" that the public now believes "Bush lied?" They don't even care about the facts, they just want to see some evidence that the Democrats have a pulse and can "do damage" to this President. They are rubbing their hands with glee that Bush is "in crisis" and his approval ratings are in "free fall." They will simply refuse to air any facts that detract from this storyline. It's going to be up to the alternative media and the conservative grassroots to put a stop to it.

At some point the Democrats will overplay their hand; they always do. They did it with Rathergate and the forged memos. I believe they are doing it now with Joe Wilson. He is such a blowhard and obvious fame-seeker that eventually the public will tire of him.

28 posted on 11/03/2005 7:48:24 AM PST by Dems_R_Losers (The Kerry/Lehane/Wilson/Grunwald/Cooper plot to destroy Karl Rove has failed!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dems_R_Losers

I bore of hearing this story myself.


29 posted on 11/03/2005 7:50:27 AM PST by mojojockey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we've encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history.

Rewriting the history of the Iraq war is going to be a difficult task.

Two thousand dead in exchange for the liberation of 25 million oppressed people will be justified by history. The left is so blinded by Bush hatred that they cannot see that they have picked the wrong side.

It will cost them dearly.

TERROR as a tool of fanatics will be defeated.....in Iraq. There is a qualitative difference between killing Arabs in Iraq and Jews in Israel. Soon American troops will be coming home, and Americans will begin to turn a deaf ear toward the anti-war rantings of our fifth-column within.

The vaunted Arab street, once ululating in triumph, has been reduced to calling for a halt, and is no longer supplying willing martyrs, as the use of ten year olds and the retarded in suicide missions clearly points out.

Democracy and private property, combined with 5% of the world's petroleum will vault Iraq ahead of all of Europe in prosperity and influence on the world stage.

Iraq will be like KRYPTONITE to the super-despots of the ME, as the oppressed will begin to clamor for an existence they can now see within the realm of the possible, thanks to George W. Bush.

The left will not be able to spin their way out of the QUAGMIRE that is their willingness to oppose the Iraq war, no amount of revision can erase the very public humiliation they will soon experience, IMHO.

30 posted on 11/03/2005 8:32:00 AM PST by wayoverontheright (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deetes

The Republicans shouldn't let the Dems get away with the nonsense that they're just public spirited goody-goodys. That is garbage.


31 posted on 11/03/2005 10:54:35 AM PST by popdonnelly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 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.

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