No, This is the King. In fact there are two Kings, one Queen, and One Juliet Prowse.
Posted on 03/11/2006 9:22:21 AM PST by kimosabe31
On February 16, President George W. Bush assembled a small group of congressional Republicans for a briefing on Iraq. Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley were there, and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad participated via teleconference from Baghdad. As the meeting was beginning, Mike Pence spoke up. The Indiana Republican, a leader of conservatives in the House, was seated next to Bush."Yesterday, Mr. President, the war had its best night on the network news since the war ended," Pence said."Is this the tapes thing?" Bush asked, referring to two ABC News reports that included excerpts of recordings Saddam Hussein made of meetings with his war cabinet in the years before the U.S. invasion. Bush had not seen the newscasts but had been briefed on them.
Pence framed his response as a question, quoting Abraham Lincoln: "One of your Republican predecessors said, 'Give the people the facts and the Republic will be saved.' There are 3,000 hours of Saddam tapes and millions of pages of other documents that we captured after the war. When will the American public get to see this information?
"Bush replied that he wanted the documents released. He turned to Hadley and asked for an update. Hadley explained that John Negroponte, Bush's Director of National Intelligence, "owns the documents" and that DNI lawyers were deciding how they might be handled.
Bush extended his arms in exasperation and worried aloud that people who see the documents in 10 years will wonder why they weren't released sooner. "If I knew then what I know now," Bush said in the voice of a war skeptic, "I would have been more supportive of the war.
"Bush told Hadley to expedite the release of the Iraq documents. "This stuff ought to be out. Put this stuff out."
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
See above. What exactly don't you understand?
You're making no sense. I didn't say that a quote was nebulous. I did say your cite of an unquoted statement in your post #82 was nebulous.
No, This is the King. In fact there are two Kings, one Queen, and One Juliet Prowse.
Yes - I remember that, and I recall reading a thread very much like the one you presented.
Thanks :^) !
I could probably dig a lot of things up on this subject too - I'm just lazy (and have things that need to be done).
If our socialist lefties are as supportive and sympathetic of al Qaeda as they are, imagine how the average socialist Ruskie or Chinaman might be. I really don't think it's a stretch to imagine these totalitarian entities conspiring together to defeat the greatest hope for freedom and liberty on the planet, while figuring they'll then deal with each other once America is pushed out of the way or made irrelevant. FWIW.
Perhaps anticipating the weakness of his "mere history" argument, Negroponte abruptly shifted his position last week. He still opposes releasing the documents, only now he claims that the information in these documents is so valuable that it cannot be made public. Negroponte gave a statement to Fox News responding to Hoekstra's call to release the captured documents. "These documents have provided, and continue to provide, actionable intelligence to ongoing operations. . . . It would be ill-advised to release these materials without careful screening because the material includes sensitive and potentially harmful information."
This new position raises two obvious questions: If the documents have provided actionable intelligence, why has the intelligence community exploited so few of them? And why hasn't Negroponte demanded more money and manpower for the DOCEX program?
My husband would agree there was only one true king...Elvis.
See above. What exactly don't you understand?
Negroponte has "argued privately"? Says who?
You actually call that a reliabe source?
AS I said before, Negroponte is one of the all time anti-commie, hated-by-the-left good guys. You obviously by your "king of Siam" response have no idea who he is.
If I'm going to believe that John Negroponte is doing harm to this country by protecting an enemy of this country, I want better evidence than some vauge statement by some unnamed source who isn't even quoted.
What part of that can you possibly have trouble with?
I just need to take the time to go through all my bookmarks. A daunting task to be sure.
If our socialist lefties are as supportive and sympathetic of al Qaeda as they are, imagine how the average socialist Ruskie or Chinaman might be. I really don't think it's a stretch to imagine these totalitarian entities conspiring together to defeat the greatest hope for freedom and liberty on the planet, while figuring they'll then deal with each other once America is pushed out of the way or made irrelevant. FWIW.
Perfect!!!!!
You're not Negroponte...you're his son/daughter.
"The president needs to call Negroponte in and inform him that "although these docs/tapes may 'belong' to you as head of DNI, YOU work for me. NOW get these documents released immediately or you AND your lawyers are out on the street"."
EXACTLY!! And .. the President can add - they also work for THE TAXPAYER and the taxpayer should be allowed to see what their tax dollars produced out of Iraq from launching a war.
If people are so afraid of being embarrassed - then they should clean up their act, instead of expecting others to protect their foolishness.
Start calling your congress people and yelling about this stuff being released.
The Thai adored Elvis due to this event.
You actually call that a reliabe source?
Ok, FreeReign, here is the entire paragraph:
For months, Negroponte has argued privately that while the documents may be of historical interest, they are not particularly valuable as intelligence product. A statement by his office in response to the recordings aired by ABC said, "Analysts from the CIA and the DIA reviewed the translations and found that, while fascinating from a historical perspective, the tapes do not reveal anything that changes their postwar analysis of Iraq's weapons programs."
The first sentence, which you seem to want to discount, is backed up and reiterated by the statement from his office.
Your two questions raise two new obvious questions: How do you know that the intelligence community has exploited so few actionable intelligence? How do you know that Negroponte hasn't demanded more money and manpower?
That's your judgement: As usual it's based on nothing.
This paragraph was actually from the article. I must have missed an < i>. So they are Stephen Hayes' questions...not mine. Ask him.
There's an Elvis station on Sirius. When my hubby gets rained out, guess what he listens to? I like the 50's 60's channel myself. But hubby, Elvis all the way. :-)
The American people have made up their collective minds and any new FACTS will be dismissed.
As presented, the above quote is vague. I would like to see the full context. For instance, who is being referred to by the word "their"?
Besides that what exactly do you think the caper is?
We're talking about John Negroponte, a conservative hero. If the guy really was acting against national interests and if the guy really wanted to be deceptive why wouldn't he have just given the "national security" explanation the first time around?
No it isn't. The original "classifier" has the authority to declassify. It isn't just a unilateral choice of the CINC to release everything.
I believed Bush 100% in the run up to the war and still do. I'll never waver on his judgement about that. He was right.
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.