Posted on 11/15/2005 7:01:34 AM PST by SirLinksalot
Rockefeller’s Confession What was the West Virginia Democrat doing as a freelancing prewar diplomat?
By William J. Bennett
Yesterday, on Fox News Sunday, the following exchange took place between Chris Wallace and U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller, vice chairman of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence:
WALLACE: Now, the President never said that Saddam Hussein was an imminent threat. As you saw, you did say that. If anyone hyped the intelligence, isn't it Jay Rockefeller?
SEN. ROCKEFELLER: No. The — I mean, this question is asked a thousand times and I'll be happy to answer it a thousand times. I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq — that that was a predetermined set course which had taken shape shortly after 9/11.
While Democrats in Washington are berating the White House for having prewar intelligence wrong, a high-profile U.S. senator, member of the Select Committee on Intelligence, who has a name more internationally recognizable than Richard Cheney's, tells two putative allies (Saudi Arabia and Jordan) and an enemy who is allied with Saddam Hussein (Syria) that the United States was going to war with Iraq. This is not a prewar intelligence mistake, it is a prewar intelligence giveaway.
Syria is not only on the list of state sponsors of terrorism and the country many speculate is where Hussein has secreted weapons, it is also the country from which terrorists are flowing into Iraq to fight our troops and allies. Jordan and Saudi Arabia have had, over the years, conflicted loyalties. What was Senator Rockefeller doing? What was he thinking? And all this before President Bush even made a public speech about Iraq — to the U.N. or anyone else.
We can have our umpteenth investigation into what the White House knew and when it knew it about Iraqi weapons — we will find the same answer: It knew what President Clinton, Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright, and William Cohen knew when they made speeches about the dangers of Iraq in the late 1990s and when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act. How about an investigation, now, into what exactly Senator Jay Rockefeller told Syria and just what Syria might have done with the information made available to them presumably before it was made available to the U.N., the Senate, or the American people.
Senators and congressmen don't have to agree with their president's policies, and they should make the president robustly defend his policies — but they should not be acting as if they are the president or secretary of state; they should not be tipping off sometimes friends and definitive enemies about war plans that not even the president has yet made as policy. This is the true mockery of prewar intelligence, and Senator Rockefeller should fully explain his actions.
If Syria — or elements in Saudi Arabia — began acting on this information before we even went to war in Iraq (more than a year later), then Senator Rockefeller may have seriously harmed, impeded, and hindered our war efforts, our troops, and the entire operation in the Middle East. This should be investigated immediately; and perhaps Senator Rockefeller should step down from the Intelligence Committee until an investigation is complete.
" By attacking Rockefeller's, you folks are inadvertently calling Bush a liar."
Not really, Rockefeller couched everything in terms of "in my opinion Bush has already made up his mind" therefore whether or not Bush actually had made up his mind is moot. Rockefeller (in my opinion) shared classified intelligence with people he shouldn't have. He should be kicked out of the senate at the very least.
Nothing will happen to him.
There is a select group of people in this world for whom crimes are not prosecuted. He is in that group.
Ask Sandy Berger, Hillary, Bill and the rest of that crowd.
Caught red-handed, they walk.
well thank goodness we at least have the Washington Times
and Michael Ramirez(for a little while longer) & Max Boot at the L.A. Times(who I will email & call TODAY)
Jay Rockefeller strikes me as a really stupid man. This will probably be his defense as it was for the Clintonians time after time. We're not corrupt. We're just incompetent. Rocky will say either he didn't see the harm expressing his opinion or he thought he was in Australia, not Syria.
No, there won't be an investigation and neither blabbing incident will ever be reported by the msm. Now, if he were a Republican, you can bet it'd be all over the front page for the next 6 weeks.
It was in the NYT. And no one cared.
SYRIA that was given a heads up, so all of Saddamns wmd's and nuke s*** could be sent to syria. Now they are training the bombers that are KILLING our young soldiers.
IF ROCKEFELLER HAD A DECENT BONE IN HIS BODY HE WOULD RESIGN. BUT DUMS DON'T HAVE A DECENT BONE IN THEIR BODIES. TRY HIM FOR TREASON AND HANG HIS ASS.
President Clinton signed the Iraqi Liberation Act in 1998. President Bush wasn't elected until 2000.
Exactly and it's even in the New York Times today.
Rockefeller is standing on the bones of his distinguished robber baron grandpa and Chuck Persey, his wifes daddy.
His I.Q. is equal to his body temperature.
Syria has been the Disneyland for Terrorists for years. If we are really serious about winning the WoT, we're going to have to eventually deal with them.
Hang him first. Then give him a trial in absentia. Another millionaire Dim who bought a seat in the Senate.
Hang him first. Then give him a trial in absentia. Another millionaire Dim who bought a seat in the Senate.
I agree with you 100% on that. Syria is an enemy of the USA, and it's about time to clean their clocks too!! Sen. Rocky is as dumb as a box of rocks, and someone should tell him to STFU!
Too bad our guttless Rep senators have no wit or will to investigate or even realize this.
Of course it won't be picked up by the MSM - we have proven that over and over.
It is up to the internet, the emails, the talk shows to get this information out there. It would not hurt to slam those senators with demands that they realize that the intelligence committee has a leaker and remove him from that position.
It is pointless for us to continually talk about how the MSM will not pick this up and we do nothing. How sappy we are. Can you imagine a democrat doing that with any of our actions? They would find a way to create havoc over it.
(Not speaking specifically to you - but everytime something like this comes up - all FR does is continually comment on what the press will do. As if, the press has to approve what is considered right or wrong and what actions would be taken.)
We have to de-power the press. They are not the controller of ALL information, they are NOT the ones ruling this country. Time for us to find a way around them.
Intelligence is relative;
this is after all the U.S. Senate, where his competition would include the likes of Kay Bailey Hutchison, the 15-watt light of the Texas delegation.
Good point and true.
However, he admitted on TV that he goes to foreign nations and presents himself as one with access to intel and shares that intel with other nations as if true.
We have to do something about him.
Another thing.
Of course the President would quickly have determined that Saddam had to be removed after 9/11. When you have foreign attacks on American soil that kill 3,000. You quickly realize that nuclear capability in those same hands would kill 100,000's. And you then look to where the nuclear dangers are.
If Bush had not taken action against a powder keg like Saddam, these Democrats would be calling for impeachment as soon as any attack hit us.
So, Bush would have been in this position either way.
You wont see this going anywhere.
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.