Posted on 09/12/2001 5:13:03 AM PDT by truther
The worst, single most tragic day in the history of America has just passed. Tuesday more Americans likely died than all the casualties of the Battle of Antietam on Wednesday, Sept. 17, 1862.
Already the media spin on yesterday's events is relentless.
The talking heads are pushing several themes, including:
* Now is not the time to point fingers at responsible parties in America, i.e., political figures like Clinton or our own security agencies.
* The events of Tuesday are the "worst-case scenario" – the worst is over.
* Osama bin Laden is the culprit.
On these points of spin, the first one is baloney. Of course we need to find why our security failed. This is basic.
And unless the big media are consulting a psychic better than the one I use, no one knows what the future days, weeks and months may yield. This is not the worst-case scenario. A worst-case scenario is a 25-megaton nuclear bomb detonated in New York or a full-scale attack against the U.S.! These should not be ruled out.
These dangers can be avoided, we pray, but only if we stop listening to the media idiots that feed us a diet of blow-dried nonsense. Is Katie Couric going to say how bad she feels for the terrorists who were driven to these cowardly acts?
It is the big media and the hack politicians that led us to this nightmarish day.
We are Amercans, so let's get our feet back on the ground and use common sense.
The media say we shouldn't point fingers. (Funny, isn't it, how the media have spent 30 years pointing fingers at Richard Nixon for his alleged crimes, but when one of their liberal favorites is due for some blame, they feed us the mantras like "Let's move on!" and "No time to point fingers!")
Common sense, in fact, dictates that we need to critically examine the people who are to blame for this incident, both the perpetrators (and if you believe Osama bin Laden was the major mastermind behind this, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I want to sell you) and the people we pay to protect us – that is, our national security agencies.
Without question, these agencies failed miserably in preventing this sophisticated, wide-scale and coordinated attack against America.
Tuesday I received an e-mail from a recently retired high-ranking CIA official. I will identify him as "Harry":
Here's what Harry said:
"... Reacting effectively and justly to this [attack] makes us hugely dependent on intell [intelligence] capabilities that failed us miserably. This is an enormous liability, which we shall not be able to fix before we have to react. Payback time for the last eight years!"
He continued: "There were clearly enormous failures here. This operation was ingenious in its simplicity, which would have limited the size (number of people, actions) of the operation and hence detectability. But it could not have been that small for at least a dozen men to hijack four carefully chosen aircraft (routes, fuel load) with carefully coordinated timing. And to get through security with knives big enough to subdue four relatively large crews. If the intell and security systems claim that this challenge is simply too hard for them, they have to be replaced, root and branch. Because this challenge is the challenge. It is now pretty self-evident that claims of reform and adjustment [at the intelligence agencies] to new realities that we've heard over the past eight years or so are hollow."
Of course, it's obvious why the media doesn't want any finger pointing.
Guess who ran the U.S. government and was responsible for our national security for the past eight years? Yes, you got it,
The Clintons were supported vociferously by the media through the worst imaginable scandals.
During that time I was one of the lead reporters opposing the Clintons. I was mocked and vilified by my colleagues for doing so. I said throughout that period that Bill Clinton's personal corruption was wholesale and mirrored how he was corrupting America's national security.
I wrote articles and said repeatedly that America, sadly, may end up paying a heavy price for Bill Clinton and the major media's complicity.
I don't believe the worst has passed with the incidents of today.
Brutally, we witnessed our weakness today.
During eight years, Clinton decimated America's military. Our forces were cut almost in half under his stewardship. Research and development on all new weapons systems were brought almost to a halt as other nations continued to build. Clinton destroyed nearly our entire arsenal of tactical nuclear weapons. Monsters like Saddam flourished as Clinton bombed aspirin factories, tent cities in Afghanistan and worthless radar stations in the Iraqi desert.
These are open facts, easily verifiable.
But Clinton, the ever-clever bastard, was more insidious. Little, systematic changes were undertaken to destroy America's intelligence agencies.
Let me explain. A regular NewsMax reader, "Roger," was a CIA spy in the Mideast.
I met him almost two years ago. Roger wanted to tell me why a gung-ho American quit the CIA in disgust. Roger said the CIA was not interested in recruiting spies.
Clinton and company knew they could not just tell the CIA to stop recruiting spies. That would look stupid and embarrassing.
So they just changed the rules of how spies are recruited, raising the bar on requirements to such a high degree that the most valuable spies could never meet CIA standards and couldn't work for us.
Previously, I wrote how Clinton effectively stopped the recruitment of Chinese nationals by demanding that only high-ranking embassy officials could be recruited – knowing this is almost impossible.
Roger told me that. Roger reminded me again of this today. He noted that Clinton policies reached their zenith under CIA Director John Deutch and his top assistant, Nora Slatkin. The pair ran Clinton's CIA in the mid-1990s and implemented a "human rights scrub" policy.
Here's how Roger described it in an e-mail Tuesday evening: "Deutch and Nora, Clinton's anti-intelligence plants, implemented a universal 'human rights scrub' of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for 6 months to a year. This was after something happened in Central America (there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there) that got a lot of bad press for the agency.
"After that, each asset had to be certified as being 'clean for human rights violations.'
"What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people."
Roger says the CIA, even under new leadership, has never recovered from the "Human Rights Scrub" policy.
But we, the American people, Congress, and honest media need to examine all of these issues, now and quickly. If we don't, we risk even more grave dangers than those that we just lived through.
The first statement you made is true; however, there is simply NO WAY their future anti-U.S., terroristic potential could have been known at the time when Reagan was arming the Afghan rebels against the Russians. The earlier decision eventually led to bad results, but it is NOT entirely true that it was a bad decision at the time it was made.
Your second statement is PURE NONSENSE! We will always "spend billions on defense" just like we spend billions on lots of other things, but how many billions and just how the billions are spent are the real issues. Clinton both defunded and politicized intelligence, security, and the military with a vengeance for the full eight years of his disastrous tenure. I wonder if he and Hillary the Great have any appreciation of the results of what they and their evil, lying toadies have done to this country. I doubt it.
Our enemies are within - and all America must know it!
Mr. Woolsley was on this morning encouraging the Bush administration to go further than just thinking the terrorists and those who "harbor" them must be dealt with. He said he hoped the Bush team would also focus on the NATIONS who finance, who train, who sponsor terrorism as part of their official policy - something the Clinton administration STOPPED DOING SHORTLY AFTER HE CAME INTO OFFICE!!!!
I totally agree with him!
Does anyone recall the rash of hijackings in the 70's and how they were stopped? Hmmm???
On several occasions during the two term blight on our nation that was the administration of X42, the FAA conducted several studies of airline security. On at least one occasion the findings were addressed directly to the president together with recommended improvements. X42 did not see fit to implement any security enhancements.
Clinton culpible??? I rest my case.
The platform for international terrorist activity over the last thirty plus years has primarily been commercial airline travel. Short of placing armed, federal marshals on board each flight, cockpits should be intruder proof to prevent terrorists from taking over control of aircraft. Video cameras should be installed at every gate to make a visual record of the persons who actually board each flight. I realize the latter is after the fact regarding yesterday's tragedy but I expect the FBI and CIA would give anything to have just such evidence today. If the local convenience store can afford this technology I expect the airports in this country can as well.
IMHO
You don't solve a problem by dealing with symtoms of the problem. You solve it by dealing with the THE problem.
The PROBLEM is the feminization of America and its great institutions by the party of the emasculated; The DemocRAT Party.
Clinton, "The Great Emasculator" is the epitome / poster boy for that party.
Algore, Clinton's emasculated hand-picked successor, did all in his power to try and prevent the military vote from being counted in Florida.
Algore, the choice of the emasculated party to be THEIR president.
Algore, the feminized male who hired and paid Naiomi Wolfe to teach him how to be an "alpha male".
Cowardly "BASTARDS", as you call them, cannot "take advantage" of MEN.
Thats the "problem" that must be solved.
Tom brought up the subject of the CLINTON decimation of US HUMAN INTELLIGENCE capabilities – that going all the way back to Sun Tsu, SPIES are a necessary part of the information gathering process. He mentioned that if we’d had a few spies and spooks out there in this increasingly dangerous world, we MIGHT have gotten one of them close to the perpetrator and been able to interdict the MURDER of perhaps 15,000 Americans in the incredible tragedy we witnessed this morning.
I think it’s safe to say that Clancy knows a bit about the subjects on which he writes.
Tom then tagged CNN by name as one of the news agencies that greeted Clinton’s decimation of the intelligence community with approval, continuing to say that they COULD have spoken out TO OPPOSE HIM but failed to do so. Tom’s rather clear implication was that CNN played a role in today’s catastrophe.
Judy VISIBLY RECOILED – and quickly concluded the interview. Her expression made it clear that she was NOT happy with Tom.
Clancy was RIGHT ON THE MARK and until we DO beef up those assets, it’s gonna happen again – and probably sooner than later.
And do you suppose there is some sinister significance to the fact that this happened on 9-11 (911!)? Are these people THAT sick? Don’t bother responding as that was a rhetorical question.
Let’s all pray – and shed a tear or two -- for the lost firefighters, police officers, innocent citizens and their families. Until this is behind us, we must put aside as many of our partisan differences as our principles will allow.
And we must also pray that our precious Constitution does not become one of the first victims of this SICKENING and senseless act.
THE HORROR! THE H O R R O R!!!!!!!!!!
I hope you don't mind that I changed the word "Democratic" to DemocRAT. There's nothing democratic about those Socialists/Trotskyites.
Hers is "the face" of the Emasculated Party [the DemocRAT Party] in America.
Clinton, "The Great Emasculator", was himself emasculated. No __MAN__ would EVER admire, or be married to, such a base mentality.
Her mouth was running in the Senate this morning, as if it wasn't UNAMERICAN, emasculated ideas, and practices like those she advocates that didn't INVITE this attack on America in the FIRST place.
"I apologize - he got his statements out before I could stop him!!! It won't happen again."
I will bet dollars to donuts, Tom Clancy will never be asked by CNN for an interview again.
I think these clips deserve a thread of their own.
Oh Geez, give me a break. Who determines what the correct spelling of an Arabic name is? Tell me, is it Peking or Beijing? Is it Qaddafi or Kaddafi? I would answer rather that if you're going to be that ridiculously picky at a time like this, then you would have to write it in it's original language. Can't do that can you, so leave people alone. It's like telling someone whose house is on fire that they should make sure their house is clean for the firefighters when they arrive.
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.