Sunday Morning Talk Show Thread 25 February 2007

Various big media television networks ^ | 25 February 2007 | Various Self-Serving Politicians and Big Media Screaming Faces

[Alas Babylon!]

The Talk Shows

Sunday, February 25th, 2007

Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:

FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; Govs. Rick Perry of Texas and Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania.

MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.

FACE THE NATION (CBS): California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger; former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.

THIS WEEK (ABC): Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; former President Carter; actor Patrick Dempsey.

LATE EDITION (CNN) : Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.; Iraq's national security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie; former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and Madeleine Albright; Reps. Jane Harman, D-Calif., and Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; investigative reporter Seymour Hersh.

[maica]

Hersh is seriously delusional, and he quotes Nasrallah as a source, while seeing "his country" supporting jihadists in Lebanon. Good grief! Too much time on a hookah while he is in Egypt?

And what are his editors and publishers thinking!

[Morgan in Denver]

No problem, thanks for the link.

[Freee-dame]

The Clintons aren't the only ones who lie with ease.

Lying for the good of the party is a tenet of their "religion", be it communism, liberalism, environmentalism, etc. What need for facts, when you operate in the world of wishing it were so.

[norwaypinesavage]

"[Sy] talked VERY rapidly"

He had to. There's only a few months left to impeach the President.

[debg]

Now that you mention it, yes. However, I had read the NYer article first so I had the background.

I haven't had a chance to look at the replay video yet.

[Freee-dame]

That's 4,417 deaths in peacetime but, of course, who's counting?

Being in the military is always a dangerous occupation, even in peacetime. Just training for things like carrier landings, underwater demolition and battle experiences lead to lots of accidents. The DBM never seems interested unless it's a plane crash.

[Christian4Bush]

They will probably go home and tell Mommy and Daddy to go home and call 1-888-BRO-BAMA!!!

(come to think of it...he would probably get voted OFF AI, faster that kicked off the POTUS train)

Remember this old game show, shot to stardom and then fizzled?

"Barack Obama, with five votes, you ARE the Weakest Link! Goodbye!" /Anne Robinson

[Freee-dame]

I don't think he has what it takes to change a national course.

If a 'rat wins the White House and they keep the legislature, we will be in a lot worse shape than we are today. Just think what they'll do to the judiciary. Time to increase the prayers.

[Mia T]

Excellent point about misdirection.

The real MISDIRECTION (and the real reason hillary clinton is a fatally defective candidate):

The 'recklessness' alluded to by Geffen is not about the clinton adultery.

It's about the clinton rape and revictimization of Juanita Broaddrick.

It's about the clintons ignoring terrorism for 8 years and WHY.

It's about the clintons' documented and massive abuse of power.

It's about the clintons methodically and seditiously and with impunity
auctioning off our security, sovereignty and economy to the highest foreign bidder.

COPYRIGHT MIA T 2007

[Txsleuth]

LOL...good point.

[Friend of the Friendless]

You have hitting the mark on so many things. Thanks.

[Txsleuth]

LOL...yes, I remember that.

I think I only watched it once or twice...but it surely works for scenario.

[saveliberty]

I do not want to vote for a Dem or allow one to win. I am just saying that there are people who are talented for some specific things. Mitt is one of those people. If he doesn't have to deal with other elected officials, he's wonderful. He's the best for running an administrative office more efficiently. But whenever other elected pols are concerned, there's only so much he can do. This doesn't make him a bad politician, he's just not what I could hope for in a President. I would be glad if I were wrong on this.

If he were the R's nominee, I would absolutely vote for him and hope for the best.

But wearing the lumberjack shirts during Homeland Security issues was downright silly.

[samantha]

Boy it sure does not say much for Geffen's taste in Women. They both have truck driver like voices, and stevedore (potty) mouths. Cher's daughter is gay, and her biggest fans(just like Madonna's fans) are Gay. You are right, Obama is a half white/Black Ken doll. I am not surprised by anything he does. His over the top reaction to anything Political in manner and attitude is a more bitchy, but more feminine like reaction than Hillary gives. He is certainly the more feminine, dainty kind of guy that plays well with the Well heeled Gay minority. He is no Rudy, but probably looks better in a dress than Rudy. It remains to be seen just how low he can go, he is already sunken very low for how early it is in the Campaign. Hillary will be very glad to expose anything that Obama wants to keep hidden. Funtime is coming....

[Phsstpok]

Hersh transcript (the rest of the show transcript is here)

BLITZER: And joining us now from Cairo, Sy Hersh. The article entitled, "The Redirection."

Sy, let me read one line from it. You wrote, "The Iran planning group has been handed a new assignment, to identify targets in Iran that may be involved in supplying or aiding militants in Iraq. Previously, the focus had been on the destruction of Iran's nuclear facilities and possible regime change."

Based on all your reporting, how far along are U.S. military plans for a war with Iran?

SEYMOUR HERSH, NEW YORKER MAGAZINE: Well, of course, they're very far along. They have been studying this forever. They're constantly redesigning, retooling, but right now, as I wrote, look, it's pretty obvious what's going on.

In the last month or so, the president has been talking more and more about cross-border attacks and more and more about Iranian interference in threatening American lives. So it's not surprising they would fine-tune the targeting to after suspected training sites, et cetera, across the border and inside Iran. That's just normal, I think.

BLITZER: And you write that already, some special operations forces, some U.S. intelligence forces have crossed the line and have gone into Iran. Is that right?

HERSH: Oh, yes, that's been happening for months. There's been a lot of very aggressive cross-border activity. It's more than just casual. There has been a lot of jumping over the border, chasing bad guys, or people we think are bad guys. That's been going on quite a bit.

BLITZER: Here is what another line you write about division within the Bush administration over these plans. You say this: "The former senior intelligence official said that the current contingency plans allow for an attack order this spring.

"He added, however, that senior officers on the Joint Chiefs were counting on the White House as not being foolish enough to do this in the face of Iraq and the problems it would give the Republicans in 2008."

Talk a little bit about the divisions you see happening within the administration.

HERSH: Well, I don't think there's any question but much of the senior military leadership do not think it's the wise thing to do. Of course, if the president orders it, it will happen. But they are very skeptical.

For example, I was told -- I hinted at it in the article -- that we could have a carrier in trouble in the Straits of Hormuz. There's very little room to maneuver, and a carrier, when it's recovering planes that are, you know, landing after attacking and trying to recover the planes, their motions, their movements are predictable. They have to have the wind in a certain direction. They could be vulnerable to attack.

Iran has hundreds of PT boats they can load up and make them more or less suicide boats. So the Navy is extremely worried about that possibility. We could have some serious damage to our fleet. And also, what's Iran going to do in response?

I will tell you also that there's a lot of evidence -- I didn't get into this that much into the piece -- that the Iranians are digging more holes, moving their leadership into underground bunkers in other places besides Tehran in case of a bombing. They are anticipating the worst.

BLITZER: The Pentagon on Friday released a statement, even before your article was released, saying this: "The United States is not planning to go to war with Iran. To suggest anything to the contrary is simply wrong, misleading and mischievous.

"The United States has been very clear with respect to its concerns regarding specific Iranian government activities. The president has repeatedly stated publicly that this country is going to work with allies in the region to address those concerns through diplomatic efforts."

 And this is what the new defense secretary, Robert Gates, said on February 15th. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT M. GATES: We are not, you know, for the umpteenth time, we are not looking for an excuse to go to war with Iran. We are not planning a war with Iran.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: All right, what do you say?

HERSH: Well, I guess Mr. Cheney, the vice president, didn't get that message, because the other day, in Australia, he once again publicly renewed the fact that all options are on the table and pretty much made another strong threat against the Iranians.

It's very possible, Wolf, that some of this is simply games being played by the administration that is simply designed to increase the political pressure on Iran, to jack it up. And a lot of this may be agitprop, propaganda.

But inside the military, they are planning very seriously, at the president's request, to attack Iran. And as I wrote in the article, one of the assignments they'd been given, contingency assignments -- there is no operational order, no order to hit anything -- but one of the contingency assignments would enable the president to at 2:00 in the afternoon say, "I want to hit," and within 24 hours, targets would be struck -- a 24-hour package.

BLITZER: You also talk about Israeli intelligence and the information they're collecting and providing to the United States. You speak about this: "Intelligence which came from Israeli agents operating in Iran includes a claim that Iran has developed a three- stage, solid-fueled intercontinental missile capable of delivering several small warheads, each with limited accuracy, inside Europe. The validity of this human intelligence is still being debated."

What's more likely, in your estimate, given the reporting you've done in the region, here in Washington, an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities or a U.S. strike against Iranian nuclear facilities?

HERSH: Look, of course, nobody knows what the answer to that question is with no assurances, but I can tell you, from what I know -- and I do have some access obviously, information -- there is no thought in this administration to letting Israel do it.

If Israel feels it has to do it, we will do it because that is the last thing they want. Israel, of course, is capable of firing some cruise missiles from the Indian Ocean, but we are certainly just as capable of doing that and much more.

So I think if it goes, and one doesn't know, it is going to -- you know, I have been writing the same story for a year, sort of like I would call up my friends and say, it is Chicken Little, you know, the sky is falling, in the last year. And now, obviously, it seems to be much more serious. It is much more intent.

My own instinct is, Wolf, that this president is not going to leave office without doing something about Iran. And he could always negotiate, it's always on the table. And he keeps on refusing to negotiate. He keeps on saying he will not. And he keeps on talking tough.

And maybe we just have to really listen to what he is saying. And I don't know what can stop him because he is president.

BLITZER: Near the end of your article, you have this explosive point in there about John Negroponte, who is now going to be the deputy secretary of state, as opposed to the head of U.S. intelligence. You write this: "I was subsequently told by the two government consultants and the former senior intelligence officials that the echoes of Iran-Contra were a factor in Negroponte's decision to resign from the National Intelligence directorship and accept the position of deputy secretary of state."

Explain what you were hearing, because that's obviously a very explosive charge.

HERSH: Yes, it's probably the single most explosive, if you will, or depressing or distressing sort of thing I discovered in the last few months, which is simply this: This administration has made a policy change, a decision that they're going to put all the pressure they can on the Shiites.

That is the Shiite regime in Iran, and they're also doing everything they can to stop Hezbollah, which is Shiite, the Hezbollah organization from getting any control or any more of a political foothold in Lebanon.

So essentially, I quote -- I saw Nasrallah, the head of Hezbollah, and he described it this way, as fitna, the Arab word for civil war. As far as he is concerned, we are interested in recreating what's happening in Iraq in Lebanon, that is, Sunni versus Shia.

And in looking into that story -- and I saw him in December -- I found this. That we have been pumping money, a great deal of money, without Congressional authority, without any Congressional oversight -- Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia is putting up some of this money -- for covert operations in many areas of the Middle East where we think that the -- we want to stop the Shiite spread or the Shiite influence.

They call it the "Shiite Crescent." And a lot of this money, and I can't tell you with absolute assurance how, exactly when and how, but this money has gotten into the hands, among other places, in Lebanon, into the hands of three, at least three jihadist groups.

There's three Sunni jihadist groups whose main claim to fame inside Lebanon right now is that they are very tough. These are people connected to al Qaida who want to take on Hezbollah. So this government, at the minimum, we may not directly be funneling money to them, but we certainly know that these groups exist.

My government, which arrests al Qaida every place it can find them and sends -- some of them are in Guantanamo and other places, is sitting back while the Lebanese government we support, the government of Prime Minister Siniora, is providing arms and sustenance to three jihadist groups whose sole function seems to me and to the people that talk to me in our government, to be there in case there is a real shoot-'em-up with Hezbollah and we really get into some sort of serious major conflict between the Sunni government and Hezbollah, which is largely Shia, who are basically -- as you know, there is a coalition headed by Hezbollah that is challenging the government right now, demonstrations, sit-ins. There has been some violence.

So America, my country, without telling Congress, using funds not appropriated, I don't know where, but my sources believe much of the money obviously came from Iraq, where there's all kinds of piles of loose money, pools of cash that could be used for covert operations.

All of this should be investigated by Congress, by the way, and I trust it will be. In my talking to the membership, members there, they are very upset that they know nothing about this. And they have great many suspicions.

We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11, and we should be arresting these people rather than looking the other way...

BLITZER: And your bottom line, Sy...

HERSH: ... and could lead to a real mess...

BLITZER: Your bottom line is that Negroponte was aware of this, obviously, and he wanted to distance himself from it? That's why he decided to give up that position and take the number two job at the State Department?

HERSH: That's one of the reasons, I was told. Negroponte also was not in tune with Cheney. There was a lot of complaints about him because he was seen as much too of a stickler, too ethical for some of the operations the Pentagon wants to run.

As you know, this Pentagon has been running covert operations. I think Mr. Gates's job and one of the things he wants to do is get some control over it. But under Rumsfeld, we were running operations all over the world with who knows what money and who knows what authority, because most of those operations are not briefed to the intelligence committees.

And the Pentagon has basically been open about it in saying, hey, this is military stuff that has nothing to do with CIA operations. We have nothing to do with them. We are running military operations. And the president has the authority to do this.

But Negroponte was unhappy about -- in general about some of the things. He also, I don't think, liked -- he may not have been terrific at his job, that's another factor. But certainly John Negroponte went through this issue, Iran-Contra, in the '80s, when we had the first big debate over the use of unlawfully obtained money to buy arms.

Well, you know, the whole arms-for-hostages business was to generate cash to fight the war, the Contra war against the Sandinistas, that mess that we had. Negroponte was ambassador to Honduras there, very sensitive to the issue that took place 20 years ago. He did not want a repeat of it.

And I frankly, it's something that I think to be asking him in a Congressional session or whatever. But I have that -- you know, I understand this is very serious stuff. And my magazine understands this is very serious stuff.

And we have really taken a lot of time with this story and couched it as carefully as we could and with all of the caveats. This is serious business.

BLITZER: The article is entitled, "The Redirection: Is the Administration's New Policy Benefiting Our Enemies in the War on Terrorism?" That is the subtitle, the author, Seymour Hersh. Sy, thanks very much for joining us from Cairo. HERSH: Thank you.

[CDB]

aaaaaaaaaaaarg! Watching Meet the Depressed... Fat boy asked Levin about Cheney's remark about Pelosi's statement...Levin says that the Dems wanting to pull out of Iraq is a plan to Win Iraq?????

The Dems now want to Win in Iraq? I thought we couldn't Win!?!?!?!

Even better-- they define winning by giving the enemy what they want?

It is like a Saturday Nite Live skit with no laugh track!!

phsstpok was sooo right. The 'rats are doing their best imitation of Lewis Carol. "Through the Looking glass," anyone?

[malia]

"As long as these folks REFUSE to blame the power hungry folks like Saddam, Osama, and Ahmadamnutjob, and Lil' Kimmy in NK...they have no business opening their traps about our security, let alone military responses to the these thugs."

But they are opening their traps - example of just two(2) powerful Democrat women.....!

But we R's really showed them, right!!!!!

http://www.azconservative.org/Semmens1.htm

first .... hillary clinton

"Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said that after she is elected president next year she will put an end to U.S. arrogance. “When I’m president, I’m going to send a message to the world that America is back -- we’re not the arrogant power that we’ve been acting like for the last six years,” Clinton said during a campaign stop in Florida."

"Clinton blamed the Bush administration for squandering worldwide goodwill in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks."

“After 9/11 the world sympathized with us,” Clinton said. “They saw that we, too, were victims. Victimhood is the highest moral status one can have. President Bush has squandered this precious status with his aggressive retaliation against the terrorists. It’s very sad to me.”

"Funds saved from downsizing U.S. Armed Forces should be invested in a universal healthcare program, Clinton suggested. “There are some intriguing results coming out of Gambia,” Clinton said. “I think we would do well to pay heed and redirect our efforts accordingly.”

second ...... Nacy Pelosi

"Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) called the proposal “an interesting concept.” “We’ve banned literacy as a voting requirement for citizens,” Pelosi observed. “We don’t require citizens to speak English to vote. Why should we get fussy about aliens voting?”

Ya, we taught them a lesson. Ross Perot re-visited!@@!!

[Freee-dame]

I don't think this election is the time to be looking at changing the national course.

I agree.

[altura]

Someone at FNC, Ailes?, decided that they needed a liberal host to compete with the other shows so they booted Tony and hired Wallace. >>>>

You don't compete with the other shows by being just like them.

But don't bring Tony back, we need him where he is, at least for now.

[samantha]

That cake looks good. I just sent my brother off heading back to Snow and cold with a Whole Key Lime Pie that I made last night. Made with Cream cheese, cool whip, Key Lime Juice, and Condensed milk, it is to die for. His car is loaded down with my home grown Pink and Ruby Red Grapefruit and Valencia Oranges. I noticed in the stores, even Walmart that Grapefruit this size are $.98 each. I wish I could give every deserving freeper a touch of Sunshine. I hope your Dad is doing well, it does not get any easier.