How Sandy Berger Paid Back the GOP

World Net Daily ^ | January 29, 2007 | Jack Cashill

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Shortly after the event the WSJ (not a crackpot publication) printed a story that I've never forgotten and never seen repeated. It said that radar showed one single boat in the area speeding away from the crash site while all the other boats in the area raced to the site (for possible rescue work.) The article said serious attempts to identify that boat were undertaken but were unsuccessful. The suspicion was that people on this boat fired a missile and then fled the scene."

Yes. And Cashill neglects to mention the intercepted converstion between no less than Ramzi Yousef (an Iraqi) and his "uncle", Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, in which Yousef appeared to claim credit for the downing of TWA800, which he attempted to use as a way to disrupt his trial which was then underway. His request for a mistrial the day after TWA800 was denied.

Cashill knows about this and has written about this but obviously prefers the Navy-accident theory, which could be credible were it not for the hundreds, maybe even thousands of Naval personnel who would have to be kept silent. Can't happen.

[tarheelswamprat]

...That leaves a terrorist missile, and the plane was out of the envelope for engagement by a shoulder-fired IR surface-to-air missile.

But not out of range for a variety of larger, longer-range missiles which could easily be fired from a vehicle-mounted launcher (such as a boat, as aculeus notes below).

Shortly after the event the WSJ (not a crackpot publication) printed a story that I've never forgotten and never seen repeated. It said that radar showed one single boat in the area speeding away from the crash site while all the other boats in the area raced to the site (for possible rescue work.) The article said serious attempts to identify that boat were undertaken but were unsuccessful. The suspicion was that people on this boat fired a missile and then fled the scene.

Or sank the boat, and themselves with it. (Of course, our enemies would never commit suicide to attack us. /sarc) In the few instances where this radar track was ever discussed, it was "dismissed" because it was claimed they couldn't find the boat, and that it would be impossible to hide a boat that size. (My comment - it's not impossible if no one is seriously looking for it.)

As I said, one WSJ article followed by silence.

And, curiously, the recordings of those radar tracks disappeared, and the statements of those who actually observed them were then breezily "dismissed" or "discounted". (Those are SUCH useful media weasel-words; they are endlessly used to imply the same meaning as "disproven", but they actually mean no such thing!)

[True Republican Patriot]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY! Dick Cheney who is the BEST Vice President EVER! and will be Our Next President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"I'd like to know how Richard Clarke, the incompetent "terror czar" (never stopped a single attack), became the hero of 9/11. There's a doctoral thesis in public relations there for somebody."

There's a doctoral thesis in Machiavellian backstabbing, that much is for certain.

I'm sure you'll agree that Clarke is best-known for his Bush-bashing. Well, here's an illuminating article from when he was plumping for a promotion (which he didn't get, whereupon he changed his tune just a bit, don't you agree?):

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040325-091451-8041r.htm

Excerpts from the August 2002 press briefing by Richard A. Clarke:

RICHARD CLARKE: There was no plan on al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration ... In January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. [They] decided to ... vigorously pursue the existing policy [and] ... initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years.

In their first meeting [the principles] changed the strategy by authorizing the increase in funding [for covert action against al Qaeda] five-fold, changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance assistance. [They] then changed the strategy from one of rollback with al Qaeda ... to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of al Qaeda.

QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion in the [Aug. 12, 2002] Time [magazine] article that the Bush administration was unwilling to take on board the suggestions made in the Clinton administration because of animus against ... the foreign policy?

CLARKE: I think if there was a general animus that clouded their vision, they might not have kept the same guy dealing with [the] terrorism issue ... There was never a plan [in the Clinton administration].

QUESTION: What was the problem? Why was it so difficult for the Clinton administration to make decisions on those issues?

CLARKE: Because they were tough issues. One of the big problems was that Pakistan at the time was aiding the other side, was aiding the Taliban. In the spring [of 2001], the Bush administration ... began to change Pakistani policy. We began to offer carrots, which made it possible for the Pakistanis ... [to] join us and to break away from the Taliban. So that's really how it started.

QUESTION: Had the Clinton administration ... prepared for a call for the use of ground forces, special operations forces in any way?

CLARKE: There was never a plan in the Clinton administration to use ground forces. The military was asked at a couple of points ... to think about it. And they always came back and said it was not a good idea. There was never a plan to do that.

QUESTION: You're saying ... there was no plan; two, there was no delay; and that actually the first changes since October of '98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?

CLARKE: You got it ...The other thing to bear in mind is the shift from the rollback strategy to the elimination strategy. When President Bush told us in March to stop swatting at flies and just solve this problem, then that was the strategic direction that changed the [policy] from one of rollback to one of elimination.

[anymouse]

X42 legacy ping

[zeugma]

This is just business as usual for MSM and Democrats.\

Pubbies too. It was Bush's team that whitewashed Berger.

 
The ruling class protects its own. 

[Miss Didi]

Dick Cheney who is the BEST Vice President EVER! and will be Our Next President!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm praying to St. Jude on this one.

[Humal]

I agree with you, Dick Cheney is the best candidate for POTUS. He could handle the media, the Democrats, even Michael Moores and George Soros, but why would he want to? Could his health hold up? I would love to see him, Rumsfeld, and Santorum back in, but I don't see any of this happening -- unfortunately.

[SQUID]

Why is this animal still slithering free? He should be shot or hanged for treason. This is what our founders would have done without question.

[seenenuf]

In addition to the report of speeding boat leaving the scene, as reported by the WSJ, I vividly remembered seeing
a low level production on C-SPAN. It was unusually small and short. A committee of ?? had investigated the TWA 800 crash. It was filmed in a small narrow room, with people standing up around a long conference table. The gist of the short report was that is was NOT an internal explosion.
Somewhere in C-SPAN's achieves, is film with faces and statements of record.
Somewhere in the WSJ's archieves is a reporters notebook that needs to be reviewed.

The novel "Night Fall" by Nelson DeMille (2004) is based on
the TWA crash and an excellent read!

[Humal]

I believe Apocalypto 2012 who said this, "I want to see a Republican nominee for president in 2008 that is cunning, ruthless and knows how to play dirty."

However, I don't believe someone who is "simply honest" is enough any more. George Bush is honest to a fault, and look how he has been maligned and his policies thwarted.

[longtermmemmory]

It seems the elitists feared the conservatives would oust the insiders.

The country club betway is back in its comfort zone.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Like Lee Hamilton in Berger's company. It does stink. That still is no reason not to throw Berger under the train. The GOP could have made some gains with his hide and don't think for a minute the Dems would not land on Berger if he was GOP.

[Humal]

Tom Delay is a possibility IMO. He definitely fits the description you give ("smart, competent, tough, knows how to play hardball -- and he's a Reagan conservative"). The Dims were shrewd taking him out first. However, could he over-come the media blitz that would come if he ran?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Yaelle]

Holy heck how can we connect Hillary to all this bump

[Balata]

"Gorelick, of course, was one of five Democrats appointed to the 9/11 Commission – and for no more obvious reason than her stake in keeping talk of TWA Flight 800 out of the commission room."

Wait...wasn't she there to protect the 'wall' she built?

[phillyfanatic]

If Libby were Berger!

[PDR]

ping

[tarheelswamprat]

re:They hair stood up on my neck, as I read this...but, then the little guy on my shoulder was saying that the conspiracy theorists that believe that Pres. Bush had something to do with planning and executing 9/11 are true believers...

PMJI, FRiends, but I felt a comment was necessary.

And I know how crazy they sound.

And some of them are crazy. However, they have the right to make their case, as we have the right to make our rebuttals and counter-arguments. It is through this adversarial process that we hope to reveal the truth. It is this same process that is ostensibly (but no longer in reality, sadly) the basis of our legal system. When one side allows the other to shut-down that process the search for truth is short-circuited, and the truth can then be easily concealed.

This is what has been done to the meaning of the word "conspiracy". The enemy has successfully defined it, at least as far as the general public is concerned, as being practiced solely by "crazy" people. We have allowed them to go unchallenged when they level their accusations that "only crazy people or nuts believe in conspiracies". The FACT is, the word conspiracy simply means plans made in secret. The conspirators themselves can be crazy as bedbugs, e.g. the SECRET MEETINGS of the Congressional Democratic Caucus, or they can be quite sane, as demonstrated by the Founding Fathers. /grin

The simple, incontrovertible fact is that "conspiracies" have played a major role in many of the most momentous, civilization-changing events in human history. The Roman Empire was established through the competing conspiracies of powerful insiders (remember the First Triumvirate, the Second Triumvirate, etc. ad nauseum). The conspiracies of Lenin, Trotsky and the Bolsheviks brought about the Soviet Union. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. The history of human civilization is littered with conspiracies, some successful, some not, some harmless, some devastating in lives and destruction, some we know about, and most likely many we never heard of. It is an undeniable FACT, yet we allow our enemies to intimidate us into silence about them.

No one on our side ever has the guts to get in their face and reply, when accused of "believing in conspiracies": "Do you mean like Thomas Jefferson, or John Adams, or maybe Patrick Henry"? The FACT is, this country was founded in a conspiracy. The Patriots, the Founding Fathers, including those mentioned above, the Sons of Liberty, the Committees of Correspondence, and yes, even the signers of the Declaration of Independence operated much of the time in secret, for the simple reason that they were engaged in a CONSPIRACY against the British Crown, a conspiracy which could have gotten any one of them hanged.

I don't want to put myself in that category.

And thus you, and we, are already defeated, because we have allowed ourselves to be intimidated into forfeiting our God-given right to freedom of thought and expression. We have allowed our enemies to mis-define the meaning of words and then use those lies to bludgeon us into submission and silence.