Berger Again

American Spectator ^ | 11 Jan 07 | R. Emmett Tryyell, Jr.

[rellimpank]

WASHINGTON -- While reviewing national security documents from the Clinton Administration in preparation for his appearance before the 9/11 Commission hearings, the Clinton administration's former national security adviser, Mr. Samuel R. Berger, was observed stuffing them in his socks by employees at the National Archives. Soon he was accused of taking these documents -- memos, draft documents, e-mails, that sort of thing -- from the Archives in breech of the law, and he was duly charged. All of this took place a couple of years ago, and those of us who had followed the Clinton high jinks with more diligence than the rest of the

[Master of Orion]

I have said it over and over. Alberto Gonzales needs to go. Wish Bush felt that way. Maybe we need to do what RATs do. Call for his head.

Exactly! If he ain't pissin off one segment of society or another, he's not doing his job. Get a long to go a long?

[Gritty]

Berger The entire Clinton Adminstration is a criminal.

You are right, of course, but I made your insightful statement even more accurate.

[b4its2late]

Yep, all very shocking to me too.

[Plains Drifter]

AMEN!!!!!!!!!

[Timeout]

Where is Gonzales?

I, too, thought of the Berger case when reading about the stonewalling in leak investigations. But, in answer to "where was Gonzales?", I took something else away from those articles.

I think the bureaucrats in DOJ, DOD, and CIA who are leaking/undermining Bush policies are the same ones who soft pedaled the Berger affair. If Gonzales or the WH had objected to the tepidity of Berger's case, we would have immediately been treated to screaming front-page headlines on how the WH was politicizing DOJ and interfering with an ongoing investigation.

Until I read the articles about the leakers I had been just as mystified as everyone else on why Berger got off so easy. Then I read about how they stymied leak investigations and it solved the mystery. Many here are invested in the back slapping answer to the mystery, but I think this is far more plausible.

[hosepipe]

Elected Republicans seem to care less about Sandy Berger and his ESPIONAGE..

They also could care less about 10 to 30 million or more Illegal aliens invading our country and many of them VOTING in 2006.. probably in 2004 and 2000 too.. and for sure 2008..

Has a Coup D'Etat happened YET?..
OR is the take over more subtle than that..
Whatever happened to the RIGHT WING.. did they ALL die?..

[BILL_C]

Has a Coup D'Etat happened YET?.. OR is the take over more subtle than that.. Whatever happened to the RIGHT WING.. did they ALL die?..

Actually, I believe the present administration is petrified that YOU will find out what is really going on. It should be obvious to the most casual observer that for Berger to be doing this, there's a BIG STORY somewhere. We obviously agree on that point.

So what are possible explanations for Berger stuffing TOP SECRET SPECIAL CATAGORY documents into his UNDERWEAR?

Bill Clinton told an audience and David Letterman that Berger did good work but he was sloppy, his desk was messy but he, well, did good work. The audience and Letterman laughed. Clinton had to find out again that the sheeple really are idiots. Unfortunately, in this case he's absolutely right.

Explanations? Berger is SLOPPY? PLEASE don't even think that's a reasonable explanation.

The MOST OBVIOUS is the Clinton administration had something in the papers he stole that could reveal something very SERIOUS. Let's agree Clinton's inner circle needed to hide something.

One of the things that the Press loves to touch on is that Clinton was soft on going after pre 9/11 terrorism. That has been met with fierce resistance.

My explanation is simple, nobody believes it yet, but it is simple: Clinton decided that certain suspicious acts that looked like Middle Eastern Terrorism were NOT Middle Eastern terrorism, even though NOW we have proof that they (probably) were.

I use the word probably because you may NOT agree, but I would prefer to use the word OBVIOUSLY Middle Eastern terrorists killed Americans on American soil during the Clinton administration.

If you look at a timeline of terroism against America in the 1990's, you'll notice an absence of such acts during Clinton's presidency. Are there any events that might have been terrorist acts but they weren't reported as such?

Let's bring up the first WTC bombing in 1993. I believe there were ties to Iraq but the Clinton administration chose to treat this bombing as a criminal event, not an attack sponsored by a foreign government.

Let's flash ahead to April, 1995. A truck bomb in a parking lot allegedly destroyed a Federal Building and killed, what, 187 Americans? The initial APB was looking for a pickup truck with two Middle Eastern men speeding away from the scene. Twenty four hours later, NO Middle Eastern men are in the equation, it's two Lilly White Americans.

Problems with this explanation: The bomb was NOT big enough to do the damage to the building as the crater under the truck was too SMALL, multiple explosions were detected, there were reports of other bombs in the building......

SO WHAT IN THE WORLD COULD REALLY BE THE EXPLANATION?

Clinton's crowd, who still argue negotiations, holding hands etc. is the BEST SOLUTION was NOT going to let something like a terrorist attack force him to go to war against Iraq. He decided to cover it up, lay everything on McVeigh and Nichols even though Jayna Davis, in her book THE THIRD TERRORIST removes any doubt that there were eight Iraqi FALSE DEFECTORS from Gulf War I in OKC with MILLIONS OF DOLLARS from siblings in BAGDAD!

Look at what Clinton got: He did NOT have to explain HOW 187 people (?) were killed by a terrorist bomb with Iraqi soldiers operating openly in OKC. He treated it as a criminal act, period, and he went after two Americans.

Clinton's next challenge was an airplane which HUNDREDS OF WITNESSES say was a missile which destroyed the airplane and killed hundreds. Clinton brings pressure on the NTSB, the FBI, the CIA.... and suddenly we have an EXPLANATION FROM THE WHITE HOUSE (Richard Clark himself) that we had a center fuel tank explosion, even though there is NO proof that actually happened.

We have the report that explosives residue was found in the plane and a story comes out that bomb dog testing left it there. The Press says OK and forgets it, it's all explained. The ONLY problem is, the bomb dogs were NOT on the plane when they said they were, different airplane. The press does NOT come back to look under that rug again.

Now, virtually EVERYONE says no one could ever get away with such a lie, but I beg to differ. IF not for 9/11, we'd still be wondering WHY Jayna Davis wrote her book THE THIRD TERRORIST, but since terrorism is now front page news, it all falls into place to make perfect sense.

Sandy Berger could NOT let certain documents lay out there for others to find, they simply had to disappear. Berger as recently reported was going after the same documents multiple times.

Jamie Gorelick, who was involved in OKC, TWA 800....., was the terrorism bimbo controller. Jack Cashill has written she was a tie in the investigations in both TWA 800 and OKC Federal Building Bombing. It should make perfect sense WHY SHE HAD TO BE ON THE 9/11 COMMISSION.

It was reported during the 9/11 Commission that Gorelick was the hardest working member...... Well, she had to be because IF the American Public EVER believes that the Clinton Administration covered up TERRORISTS attacks SPONSORED BY IRAQ during the mid 1990's, then Gorelick, Clinton, Richard Clark and probably a few more will be more worried about their own necks being treated to the same party that Saddam just got, death by hanging. If we would have stopped the Iraqi sponsored terrorism in 1995 or even 1996, then the thousands of U.S. Citizens killed on 9/11 would still be alive.

Don't believe it? Then please explain the full page newspaper ad in 2000 taken out by the witnesses that says the NTSB, the FBI ..... are lying. There is absolutely no doubt that the witnesses are credible and that they believe they saw a missile. The only question that remains is why.

I contend the answer is simple: An elaborate lie directed by Bill Clinton himself and carried out by Lieutenants like Jamie Gorelick, Richard Clark and Sandy Berger. The Bush administration is still fighting damage control.

IF you believe that Bill Clinton lied to keep from going to war THEN all the mysteries of WHY we are in Iraq, WMD, ABLE DANGER, Sandy Berger stealing TOP SECRET DOCUMENTS (along with a luke warm punishment that can't make any sense), ALL collectively MAKE PERFECT SENSE: It was CLINTON lying to keep things PEACEFUL (in his warped, dimented mind).

HUNDREDS of EYEWITNESSES KNOW THE CIA AND FBI LIED, WHY isn't it obvious this is the ONLY explanation?

[oceanview]

so what, this administration was bashed in the media by the 9/11 commission anyway. had they used the Berger incident to explain to the american people what was really going on - which administration knews about the extent of AQ presence inside the US before 9/11 - and why they sent their national security advisor to cover it up, they would have been much better off politically.

instead, they chose the "new tone" - and as such, the Clintons stand a 50/50 chance of being returned to the white house in 2008.

[hosepipe]

Actually I asked what happened to the right wing.. since there is no right wing left anymore..
BUT I'll go with you're obsession..

If all you say happened or even a version of it all or some of it happened..
I would not be surpised at all..

If SO then Bush, Cheney, Gates, Tenet, Porter Goss,
and a buttload of others MUST be involved too..
to whitewash all this so thoughly..

I beleive there is (some kind) of a shadow government running America there days.. If NOT then how could our academia be so thoughly controlled by virtual traitors.. add the MsM media and MsPress, Hollywood, the State Department and other bureauracys, and it seems the republican party..

Anyway I smell a skunk in the delusion..
The delusion being voting is valid.. maybe invalid down to the State level..

Am I a MOONBAT?.. maybe but if I am I at least know I am..
HOW can there be NO RIGHT WING IN AMERICA... NONE..
Amazing..

[Unicorn]

He only did what Pres. Bush told hom to do.Pres. Bush seems to be afraid of the Clintons.

[BILL_C]

My obsession :-) , a pretty good description....

The right wing exists but the media makes us believe just the opposite.

Tonight on the History Channel was BEYOND CONSPIRACY, Peter Jennings tells us over and over that you must be a nut if you don't believe the Warren Commission, there's just no other rationale explanation. How could a lone worthless nut ex-marine do it? He explains it exactly.

Problem is: Witness after witness, from ordinary citizen to doctors to military says: IT DIDN'T happen that way.

As a side story, you do know that Lyndon Johnson arranged for the killing and Hoover and Johnson did an absolutely amateurish job of covering it up, don't you? Now for this silliness to go on and on for nearly half of a century is beyond belief, but it does.

I'm not so sure there is a big crowd that understands what happened in the events leading up to 9/11. Information like that, if confirmed, would spread fast and furious. Rather, I think there is a very small group around the President who know. Let's see, tell the world and almost nobody would believe you, but IF the sheeple do start to catch on, then put on a Peter Jennings to tell you that no, it didn't happen that way, it was this way.

Yes America is full of right wing, conservative, American, patriotic citizens. But we are being led away from that, the real power in the media is leaning way left, and they want the rest of us to join them.

"THEY" want you to think you're alone, but you aren't, you have lots of company.