Posted on 05/18/2002 12:43:38 PM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
Democrat Political Attacks
Democrat insinuations that the President and Administration had prior knowledge of the September 11th tragedy is an outrageous political attack on the Commander-in-Chief during wartime.
Principled dissent and disagreement are at the heart of democracy. However, principled dissent should not be confused with the political gamesmanship and partisan attacks being launched by Democrats.
The insinuation that President Bush had prior knowledge of the September 11th attacks is nonsensical but not without precedent.
Conspiracy theorists have long accused FDR of having prior knowledge of the December 7, 1941, surprise attack on Pearl Harbor.
Conspiracy theories are as American as baseball and apple pie, but historically they have not been fueled by the mainstream news media or prominent politicians.
Any Democrat who criticizes American intelligence agencies for a lack of preparedness should be ready to defend their long history of voting to cut intelligence budgets.
After September 11th, Attorney General Ashcroft issued a series of non-specific, general warnings about potential threats. The same people who criticized the release of that information because it was non-specific and general are now criticizing the Administration for not releasing general, non-specific information. This is a hypocritical and absurd circular argument.
Proof of this goes no further than examining the record of prominent Democrats who have spoken out in the past two days:
Democrat Dick Gephardt said:
"What was the failure of intelligence? Did the right officials not act on the intelligence in the proper way? These are the things we need to find out." (CNN, "Fingers point as early clues of attacks surface" 5/17/02)
"I think what we have to do now is to find out what the president, what the White House, knew about the events leading up to 9/11, when they knew it and, most importantly, what was done about it at that time." (Washington Post, "An Image of Invincibility Is Shaken by Disclosures" 5/17/02)
Gephardt and his colleagues voted: · TWICE in 1998 and 1999 to CUT intelligence funding · TWICE to CUT military spending · TWICE AGAINST additional military funding · AGAINST increased funding for border patrols.
Democrat Rep. Jerry Nadler went so far yesterday as to say, "If the White House had knowledge that there was a danger or an intent to hijack an American airplane, and did not warn the airlines, that would be nonfeasance in office of the highest order, that would make the President take a large amount of responsibility for the tragedy that did occur." (CNN, 5/16/02)
Mr. Nadler has the gall to launch a political attack despite his poor record on military and intelligence issues. Mr. Nadler has voted: · SIX times to CUT intelligence spending. · ELEVEN times to CUT defense to the bone, including voting just last week against pay increases for military personnel.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi had this to say today on prior knowledge by President Bush, "But, Ms. Pelosi added, the president's briefing paper had three pieces of specific information that day in August that the intelligence committees had learned over several months. That, she said, 'raised it to a different level' and needed to be part of the Congressional investigation into Sept. 11." (The New York Times, "Democrats End United Support of Bush War" 5/17/02)
Pelosi has voted: · TWICE to CUT intelligence funding. · REPEATEDLY voted AGAINST increased defense funding · THREE times AGAINST strengthening our boarders. · AGAINST increased healthcare funding for military personnel.
Pelosi has defended her weak voting record on military funding by saying this about President Clinton's call for increased defense spending:
"'Certainly the president's announcement is a misguided one,' said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. 'The Cold War has ended. Why are we doing this?'" (Chattanooga Times/Chattanooga Free Press, 1/22/99).
Rep. Cynthia McKinney said, "Today's revelations that the administration, and President Bush, were given months of notice that a terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out the critical need for a full and complete congressional investigation." (Atlanta Journal & Constitution, "Revelations give boost to McKinney; But Miller, Norwood unapologetic" 5/17/02)
Ms. McKinney has voted: · AGAINST last week's Defense Authorization bill which provided increased military funding and a pay increase for military personnel. · THIRTEEN times AGAINST increased defense funds. · FOUR times to CUT military funding. · FIVE times to CUT intelligence funding. · TWICE AGAINST increased funds for modernizing military hardware. · REPEATEDLY voted AGAINST pay increases, funding for health care and housing for military personnel.
Americans know that President Bush when faced with credible information about a threat would act swiftly and strongly. It is terribly unfair to the victims and victim families of the terrible tragedy of September 11 for anyone to suggest anything to the contrary. Such statements are irresponsible and politically motivated.
Last summer, President Bush and Members of Congress received briefings that contained general, non-specific and uncorroborated information about possible threats. In light of the potential threats, the Bush Administration took appropriate action including alerts to law enforcement agencies, airlines, and U.S. assets overseas to protect the lives of American citizens here and abroad.
Click here to get the facts about the Bush Administrations actions.
Despite these facts, Democrats leaders such as Senator Tom Daschle, Rep. Dick Gephardt and Senator John Edwards have tried to play politics with this threat information by making irresponsible statements about President Bush allowing their presidential ambitions get the best of their judgment.
Friday's New York Times cautions:
"As Congressional Democrats and other Bush opponents rev up the recriminations following this week?s disclosures, they should remember that the House and Senate Intelligence Committees received some of the same intelligence reports as the White House. These included public and private warnings from George Tenet, the director central intelligence, that Al Qaeda could strike at any time."
The Washington Post states:
"The tempest seems overblown...based on what the White House has revealed thus far, the information Mr. Bush received was very general, and the possibility of a domestic hijacking was far less salient in the briefing he received from the CIA than the possibility of an overseas attack. The administration warned airlines to take precautions. It's easy after September 11 to insist that more should have been done."
How The Left Undermined America’s Security
Horowitz was really laying it on the Democrats and Clinton.
So Pelosi is part of the Cabal!
To find all articles tagged or indexed using above index words
Go here: OFFICIAL BUMP(TOPIC)LIST
and then click the topic to initiate the search! !
See above post.
Jerry Nadler is (in the words of the Seargent from Full Metal Jacket) a DISGUSTING FATBODY.
Maybe this is honest:
Torricelli Calls for 9-11 Probe into Clinton Intelligence Failures
This is getting good!
Link to that thread here:
David Horowitz "How the Left Undermined America's Security." on C-SPAN 9:35 pm PST Sat May 18
Some details on this, please.
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.