Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush action gives safe harbor to FBI 'terrorists'
Boston Herald ^ | 12/14/01 | Howie Carr

Posted on 12/22/2001 5:06:08 AM PST by Ada Coddington

Bush action gives safe harbor to FBI `terrorists'
by Howie Carr

Friday, December 14, 2001

So President Bush, fighting terrorism abroad, now invokes executive privilege to keep us from getting to the bottom of FBI terrorism back home.

I don't understand. Except in terms of the body count, what's the difference between an al-Qaeda savage on Tora Bora and a crooked G-man in Boston?

A badge, and that's about it.

They both kill Americans or help fiends who do. And when they're confronted, they run away and hide. The Arabs cower in caves, the retired FBI agents sun themselves in Florida.

Considering what we already know about the 30-year crime wave engineered by the Boston office of the FBI, how much worse stuff must there be in those files that we still don't know about?

And now we may never know, thanks to Bush's invocation of executive privilege.

And another thing: If this sort of FBI misconduct has been going on in Boston, which is, let's face it, a Mafia backwater, then what exactly do you suppose the feds have been up to in places like Chicago and New York? We know something about the ``rogue'' FBI agent in New York who tipped off one faction in the Colombo crime family to the machinations of another crew, leading to various rubouts and attempted hits.

Now you have to figure that there's worse stuff out there, much worse.

Why else would Bush wait to do this until the same day that they release the Osama videotape, make the official announcement renouncing the ABM treaty, and come ever closer to finishing off the terrorists in Tora Bora.

Bush and Ashcroft were trying to bury the story.

Not releasing these radioactive FBI files is so important that the Republican administration thumbed its nose at the Republican House of Representatives. Immediately affected was Rep. Dan Burton (R-Ind.) who subpoenaed the documents relating to the FBI's use of informants in Boston dating back to the 1960s.

``They don't want to create a precedent,'' said one Boston attorney yesterday. ``But the problem is, this can of worms is already opened.''

Is it ever. Back in 1965, the feds got word that Teddy Deegan, a small-time hood (and uncle of future Dukakoid criminal Gerry Indelicato) was on the Lucky Strike Hit Parade. The feds didn't tell Deegan he was going to get hit, and guess what. He got hit.

The FBI knew who whacked Deegan, but they still let four guys who didn't do it go to prison for 30 years, where two of them died, innocent men. The FBI dummied up as their own hitman-turned-informant perjured himself, to protect the brother of another gangster they were grooming as their next big rat, one Steve Flemmi.

Osama had a jihad against the infidels, and that justified absolutely anything. The FBI had a jihad against the Italians, and ditto.

As usually happens whenever somebody thinks God is on their side, the bodies started piling up. The FBI's hoods needed multiple death pits to hide the corpses. Young girls were raped, city neighborhoods were flooded with cocaine, the state payrolls were inundated with gangsters. Law-enforcement was subverted - local, state and federal.

President Bush, I believe we have a right to know how a federal agency aided and abetted serial killers.

``I believe,'' Bush wrote, ``congressional access to these documents would be contrary to the national interest.''

But these gangsters and their crooked-cop enablers were going after American citizens.

Howie Carr's radio show can be heard every weekday afternoon on WRKO-AM 680, WHYN-AM 560, WGAN-AM 560, WXTK 95.1 FM or online at www.howiecarr.org.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: concerned about politics
You summed it up nicely.

Some people are just contrarian by nature. Nothing is ever satisfactory to them. It's akin to a child taking his/her ball and going home.

Benefits of the doubt were my first line of thinking until I considered the source of the article, The Boson Globe, that slightly left-of-center information source (/sarcasm). That said it all.

For someone supposedly to the Right, if I cannot tell a difference between that person and one on the Left, I have to consider that person an enemy because the Left never gets the benefit of the doubt from me.

Never.

21 posted on 12/22/2001 8:48:45 AM PST by rdb3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MeeknMing
"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

"Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear-kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor-with the cry of grave national emergency. Always there has been some terrible evil at home or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it ..." -- General Douglas MacArthur, 1957

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger." -- Leading Nazi leader, Hermann Goering, at the Nuremberg Trials before he was sentenced to death

" Everyone likes to say Hitler did this" and "Hitler did that". But the truth is Hitler did very little. He was a world class a**hole, but the evil actually done, from the death camps to WW2 was all done by citizens who were afraid to question if what they were told by their government was the truth or not, and who because they did not want to admit to themselves that they were afraid to question the government, refused to see the truth behind the Reichstag Fire, refused to see the invasion by Poland was a staged fake, and followed Hitler into national disaster. " It's easy to look back and realize what a jerk Hitler was. But at the time, Hitler looked pretty good to the world, with the help of the media. He was TIME Magazine's Man Of The Year in 1938. Stalin was TIME Man Of The Year for 1939 and 1942. The lesson is that it isn't easy to spot a genocidal tyrant when you live with one, especially one whom the press supports and promotes. Tyrants become obvious only when looking back, after what they have done becomes known. " It is the very nature of power that it attracts the very sort of people who should not have it. The United States, as the world's last superpower, is a prize that attracts men and women willing to do anything to win that power, and hence are willing to do anything with it once they have it. It is racist to assume that tyrants appear only in other nations and that somehow America is immune simply because we're Americans. America has escaped the clutches of a dictatorship only through the efforts of those citizens who, unlike the Germans and Russians of the 1930s, have the moral courage to stand up and point out where the government is lying to the people."

" We are potentially the most dangerous agency in the country. " -- FBI Director Louis Freeh, to the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, 1997

"When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong." -- Eugene V. Debs, American socialist leader, 1855-1926

"The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all." -- Thomas Jefferson, drafter of the Declaration of Independence and president of US from 1801-1809

When Pearl Harbor was bombed, the people who stated that the US government had prior knowledge were ridiculed, labeled as traitors, and by having to suffer this labeling, soon quieted down. Years later, we realized they were correct, that the government DID know what was coming. In every major event, from Pearl Harbor, to JFKs' killing, to OK City, Vince Foster, WACO, flight 800, and it will enventually come to be realized on 9/11. It already is coming to light. Go ahead and be led around like a sheep. It is easier that way. It is hard to question that everything is not as it seems. Why is it that when the news media runs a medical story on a micro camera, that can be swallowed by a patient, to examine the intestines, that is universally excepted, yet if someone claims that the government is planting transponder chips under the skin of people, everybody screams paranoid idiots? Trust. Violation of trust.They got you right where they want you. You are an easy sell. Money and power have the ability corrupt men. Men run our government. But of course OUR powerful government would never do any wrong- we are the good guys! Go ahead, enjoy yourselves. Laugh at me. I know better.

22 posted on 12/22/2001 9:58:41 AM PST by mn_b_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mn_b_one;Joe Montana;rdavis84;landru;Elle Bee;Uncle Bill
BUMP!!!!!!!

Great Post !!!!!!

23 posted on 12/22/2001 10:56:00 AM PST by Donald Stone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ada Coddington
GOVERNMENT TERRORISM
24 posted on 12/22/2001 12:54:30 PM PST by Uncle Bill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mn_b_one
Marvellous! Are you the author?
25 posted on 12/22/2001 2:18:05 PM PST by Ada Coddington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: eightroundclip
This is not the time to be questionig the loyal and patriotic men and women who make up our federal law enforcement.

And just what is the time to question corrupt and brutal law enforcement officers?

26 posted on 12/22/2001 4:14:10 PM PST by Ada Coddington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: mn_b_one
Who were the authors of the first quote and the one that started, "Everyone says that Hitler did this. . ."?
27 posted on 12/23/2001 7:48:42 AM PST by Ada Coddington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Ada Coddington; MeeknMing
Bump
28 posted on 12/23/2001 6:35:36 PM PST by carenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: carenot
"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

I meant to put that in the bump above.

29 posted on 12/23/2001 6:37:24 PM PST by carenot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: mn_b_one
TERRORISTS: Using war as pretext to clamp down on dissent and undermine civil liberties US GOVERNMENT: Using war as pretext to clamp down on dissent and undermine civil liberties

Please explain this last one to me.

30 posted on 12/23/2001 6:40:07 PM PST by xm177e2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ada Coddington
Sorry I forgot to include the names, Michael Riveria was the guy
31 posted on 12/29/2001 7:12:14 AM PST by mn_b_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: xm177e2
Have you read closely the anti-terrorism laws that were passed in 1996? The ones in response to OKBOMB? We always hear about the "anti-terrorism" laws being passed in congress, the news media reports it. But what are the fine points of them? The intent, as interpreted at this time, may not be seen from the same point of view in the future, by a different group of elected or appointed bureaucrats, a slow reshaping of direction. Slow indoctrination. Its all out there, if you look for it. Look at guns. 200 years ago, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". We now have 20,000 laws (all unconstitutional) for the "law abiding" to follow. Under the premise of having to keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, and other dangerous people. The justice system has failed, so I must give up my rights to carry firearms. I must walk the streets an unarmed sheep. The "dangerous people" will still have them, and now the unlawful have the advantage.

The ground work for police state is pretty well in place. They chip away slowly, to minimize large and organized resistance. Remember the Reichstag fire? Politicians state that "we are a nation of laws"--but they are wrong. We are a nation of two kinds of laws. Those for the rich and powerful, and those for the "subjects-the commoners". Mark Rich was pardoned for 48 million dollars in owed taxes, while Gordon Kahl was beat like a dog, shot and burned for less than $20,000 dollars in taxes owed. At Ruby Ridge, Lon Horiuchi violated the already unconstitutional rules of engagement(proven in court) set in place at that confrontation. The rules set forth at R.R. were that any armed male, outside the cabin could be shot on sight. HOW IN THE NAME OF GOD COULD LON HORIUCHI SHOOT AN UNARMED WOMEN, IN THE CABIN? Worse yet, he never had to stand trial. Doesn't this assassin, trained with the best equipment, paid for by your tax dollars, doesn't he know the difference between armed and unarmed, a man or a woman, inside the cabin or outside the cabin? Why isn't Lon on trial for premeditated murder? If you don't get the idea by now, yer not lookin' hard enough.

32 posted on 12/29/2001 7:50:43 AM PST by mn_b_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: mn_b_one
No, I understand how the government does that, I was wondering how the terrorists were "Using war as pretext to clamp down on dissent and undermine civil liberties"
33 posted on 12/29/2001 6:13:46 PM PST by xm177e2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson