Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Insiders Are Coming Out

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-09-03 12:28 PM
Original message
The Insiders Are Coming Out
For many, many months now, we have endured what is known in the common political lexicon as an ‘Imperial Presidency.’ The term denotes an administration that keeps its secrets, says nothing to the press worth reporting, lies with impunity beneath the veil of those secrets, and threatens retaliation against anyone who might stand in the way. When done properly, an Imperial Presidency becomes a powerful, unstoppable force. When an Imperial Presidency is guarded in Congress by political allies who hold the majority, it becomes almost completely unassailable.

Think about it. When was the last time we got a straight answer out of the Bush administration? When was the last time anyone with real power demanded answers? In the vacuum, we wind up getting answers like the one Don Rumsfeld delivered on February 12, 2002 when faced with pointed press questions about terrorism and Iraq:

“As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know we don’t know.”

These boys could give lessons to Orwell. Without anyone in Congress slinging subpoenas, and with a press cowed by the threat of removal from the White House beat, there is no way to take an Imperial Presidency to task for its actions when deliberate gibberish is the rule of the news day.

There is no way…unless the White House insiders come out and start talking. Suddenly, that is exactly what is happening.

On June 26, I conducted <a href=http://truthout.org/docs_03/062603B.shtml>an interview</a> with 27-year CIA veteran Ray McGovern. McGovern served every President from Kennedy to Bush Sr., and delivered a wide spectrum of insight and data regarding both the September 11 attack and the second Iraq war. One key question McGovern answered dealt with the rapidly expanding scandal surrounding Bush administration tampering with evidence of Iraqi weapons.

The story has been taking a slow boil for months now, ever since the end of the war. The justification for attacking Iraq, as presented by the administration, was that Saddam Hussein had thousands of tons of deadly weapons practically falling out of his ears. Day after day came the dire reports from Bush, from Cheney, from Rumsfeld, from Rice, from Powell before the UN, from dozens of hired administration guns who saturated the airwaves with stories of looming doom in the shadow of September 11.

The weapons never showed up. Stories began to swirl about Vice President Cheney taking unprecedented trips to CIA headquarters for the purpose of leaning on the intelligence analysts so he would get the damning Iraq weapons reports the administration needed to justify combat. Stories began to swirl about obviously forged evidence of an Iraqi nuclear program that was deliberately used by Bush to justify war, despite the fact that everyone in the White House knew the evidence had been crudely faked. To counteract these stories, the Imperial Presidency laid blame for all of this on the CIA.

When I questioned McGovern on the impact these developments were having on the American intelligence community, McGovern made a prescient prediction:

“To the degree that esprit de corps exists, and I know it does among the folks we talk to, there is great, great turmoil there. In the coming weeks, we’re going to be seeing folks coming out and coming forth with what they know, and it is going to be very embarrassing for the Bush administration.”

A New York Times article from Sunday July 6 quoted former US ambassador Joseph Wilson as saying, “Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.” Wilson was the man sent to Niger in February of 2002 to assess the validity of evidence that claimed to describe an attempt by Iraq to procure materials for the development of a nuclear weapons platform. “It did not take long to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction had ever taken place,” said Wilson in the Times.

Wilson certainly reported his findings to the White House, because he was asked to make the Niger trip by none other than Dick Cheney. Despite this fact, the faked Niger evidence was used dramatically by George W. Bush in a speech that directly connected September 11 to the alleged Iraqi weapons:

“We have experienced the horror of September 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing -- in fact they would be eager -- to use a biological, or chemical, or a nuclear weapon. Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”

The “mushroom cloud” comment was appalling to another administration insider. Greg Thielmann, Director of the Office of Strategic, Proliferation, and Military Issues in the State Department, told Newsweek at the beginning of June 2003 that the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research had concluded the documents were "garbage."

"When I saw that, it really blew me away," Thielmann told Newsweek. When Thielmann found out that Bush had used the faked Niger evidence to justify war to the American people, he thought, "Not that stupid piece of garbage. My thought was, how did that get into the speech?"

Another White House insider has come out in spectacular fashion. Rand Beers served the Bush administration on the National Security Council at the White House as a special assistant to the President for combating terrorism. Mr. Beers served in government for more than 30 years working in international narcotics and law enforcement affairs, intelligence, and counter-terrorism. He worked for the National Security Council under presidents Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton. Beer’s service to his country began with two tours in Vietnam with the Marine Corps.

In a June 25 2003 interview with Ted Koppel on Nightline, Beers reported that the administration was failing dramatically to defend the United States against terrorism. According to Beers, al Qaeda presented a far greater threat to America than Hussein and Iraq, and that the Iraq war was a terrible and unnecessary distraction from what was truly needed to keep the nation safe.

In his Nightline interview, Beers said, “Well, I think, firstly, there is an inadequate amount of funding. There was a report about the House passing the fiscal year 2004 budget, yesterday. And the main point of the article is that most everybody, expect for the Administration, believes that there was an inadequate funding level in that budget. People voted for it because the alternative was not acceptable, to have no budget. That has been, to my knowledge, a continuous perspective that the Administration has had. They've been unable or unwilling to ask for sufficient funds to actually do the job. And then, they haven't followed through with the programs that actually would turn that money into activities in as rapid and forceful a -fashion as I think that it should. One of the phrases that is used often within Washington is "business as usual.” And I'm really concerned that this Administration, despite its rhetoric, has given the homeland security function a "business as usual" mantra.”

Beers’ position as special assistant to the President for combating terrorism meant he saw everything and knew everything. He was on Nightline for one reason: He quit his job, walked out the door, and joined the John Kerry for President campaign as National Security Advisor.

Today, everything Beers knows about the manner in which the administration acted towards Iraq, towards Afghanistan, towards September 11, is also known by a Senator from Massachusetts who is running for President on a very large and public stage.

Ray McGovern was right. The insiders are coming out, and the trickle has become a flood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Fixated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. I saw an ad for your book in the new Mother Jones
I'm semi-new to the board, so while I immediately recognized the name, I wasn't sure if you were the author. Either way, I ordered the book a week ago, so I'll have it in about two weeks (I'm away from home currently, so my parents will likely get to read it first).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thanks!
I hope you like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. "The last time we got a straight answer out of the Bush administration?"
We don't know. You're so right, Will. (Right in the good sense of the word).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ninkasi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. I'm still waiting for the first time
to get a straight answer from them. I don't think they've ever done it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
4. You hit the nail on the head - great write!
I expect things to get hot and heavy in the next few months.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
5. And THAT is why the push to keep Kerry from winning the primaries.
THIS is what BushInc does NOT want the American people to hear - the case that is being built against Bush right now. Many are working feverishly to insure Bush gets his way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
33. you'll have to translate that for the non-sycophants.
do you mean by suppressing kerry they're suppressing beers' information about bush? that's about the best i could make of your post. hope that's not what you mean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Bush's mediawhores
will do what they can to protect Bush from a direct showdown with Kerry. If you notice, there has been little said about Beer's defection and the reasons for it, but, you'll hear plenty of disinformation on the horserace aspect of the primary like the American Spectator article, and Howard Fineman dissing Kerry at every opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GainesT1958 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
6. First Ray McGovern...then Rand Beers...and now comes Redmond...
Edited on Mon Jul-07-03 03:27 PM by GainesT1958
WILL--And some truth about Inslaw...It's amazing how often just a few snowflakes shifting can trigger an avalanche, isn't it? :eyes:

Can't wait to get hold of your book!:D

B-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Inslaw?
??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sangh0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Yep, Inslaw
It turns out that Poppy may have given the Promis software to Saddam and to Russia, and somehow, Osama got his hands on it shortly before 9/11 and is now using it to avoid capture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
32. Promis?
The whole Inslaw affair was baclk in the early 80's.

Isn't that software a tad obsolete by now?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. It's a light rain...
...and there's no sign of flooding.

- More like wishful thinking than high water.

- The Bushies own the media. The truth is what they say it is. The former free press becomes believable to many when there's no loyal opposition to contradict the official version of events.

- The flood will come when the press actually beccomes 'free' and the Democrats can muster more than a few moans and groans in opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
21. they own the media
but until they close down the internet, the word will keep spreading till the media has to make mention from time to time. Already happening. Not fast enough, but happening.

I keep thinking of the Chinese gentleman who held his ground in the face of that tank. we can do no less and we have greater tools at our disposal. Rough fight ahead, but it took a long time for things to get this bad. The pendulum always swings back.

Will Pitt is fighting the good fight. Many people are. More and more are hearing more and more. Courage is contagous. There is hope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
juajen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Havocmom, bite your tongue!
Just seeing that "internet" phrase scares me. Everyone says they couldn't do without it, but just the thought is horrible to contemplate. Please tell me they couldn't do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. C'mon Will...
Inslaw has always been an important issue with those of us who see the Octopus. Scratch almost any story right now, and you'll find a BFEE tentacle underneath.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
24. Sorry
I'm not as up on my reading as I should be. :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 07:16 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Redmond & Inslaw
This only proves your point, Will. If Redmond talks we win.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm

RIDDLE AS US SPY CHIEF QUITS
Sunday Express
July 6, 2003
**Exclusive**

AMERICA'S top spy catcher, Paul Redmond, has suddenly resigned in the middle of his secret investigation into how Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden allegedly obtained US computer software, the SUNDAY EXPRESS claimed this weekend.

The software is said to enable the two most wanted men in the world to avoid capture because it can pinpoint every move in the global manhunt.

Redmond's departure last week was accepted "without discussion" by President Bush, the man who had brought the spy catcher out of retirement to conduct the investigation.

Hours after Redmond had cleared his desk, Bush ordered a GBP 25million bounty on Saddam's head. He wants Saddam "dead or alive" and the same goes for bin Laden. Already Bush has agreed to either man forgoing a trial and being shot after interrogation. The official reason given for Redmond's abrupt departure was "health reasons." But stunned colleagues in the Homeland Security department in Washington, where Redmond had his office, insist the former Associate Director of the CIA was in perfect health. His departure has led to intense speculation that he may have begun to uncover embarrassing details of how the software came into the hands of Saddam and bin Laden.

Documents obtained by the respected International Currency Review, a London-based newsletter for the financial community, allege that the software was provided for Saddam on the authority of President Bush's father when he was in the White House - a time when relations between Iraq and Washington were close during Baghdad's war with Iran. The Review's publisher, Christopher Story, a former financial adviser to Lady Thatcher, said: "The documents are extremely sensitive and raise some very serious questions." <more>




www.cjr.org/year/91/6/octopus.asp

<snip>Riconosciuto declared that someone in the Justice Department had stolen Inslaw's software, called Promis, and given it to American intelligence operatives for resale in the international intellegence market. He later said he had been hired to alter the software prior to these sales.

Promis was designed to manage and track complicated cases through the manifold layers of criminal-law bureaucracy -- from investigation to arrest to grand jury, trial, and, in the event of a guilty verdict, prison and parole. It could deliver myriad details at the push of a button. Slightly altered, it could easily become a powerful tool for monitoring intelligence cases, dissidents, and even citizens at large. As such, William Hamilton reasons, it would be of value to any number of regimes.

In recent months, the Hamiltons have charged that Promis had been illegally distributed to military and intelligence agencies in Iraq, Libya, South Korea, Singapore, Israel, Canada and other nations. This is a scenario that would never have occurred to the Hamiltons until Riconosciuto laid it out in the spring of 1990.

Early on, Riconosciuto told Casolaro that the software had been traded for cash, with some of the money going to reward American intelligence figures for services redered, and the balance going into slush funds for future operations outside the purview of Congress. Casolaro asked his newfound source what deeds had been done to warrant such payment.

"I told Danny that one of the services rendered was orchestration of the 1980 release of the American hostage in Iran," Riconosciuto told me.<more>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. You got it, Stephanie.
There is a huge case being built here. Rand Beers is one part of it. As an analyst he'll be quite helpful, and I expect there's an open door to welcome fellow defectors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #24
26. Octafish has plenty...
tap into what he has dug up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 03:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. They committed the cardinal sin -- they messed with the intel community
If there is one unwritten rule in Washington, it is that you do NOT mess with the intelligence community. Some have tried in recent memory -- Johnson and Nixon. It was the downfall of both of them.

In trying to deliberately manipulate intel, the administration signed its own death warrant. It is only a matter of time before the cracks in the facade spread to the point that it falls completely off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MoonAndSun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. How true, IrateCitizen,
you would of thought that Poppy would have warned his idiot son and his advisors not to mess with the intel community. Maybe he did and they did not listen.

bush* and his advisors have got to be the most arrogant in history, with lots of help from the whore media who never questioned any of their words or deeds.

It is coming back to them full force. Karma always does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zan_of_Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Some believe
that the intelligence community is split, with some being the more traditional ones, who actually abide by some rules, and some being rogues who will do absolutely anything.

Some argue that intell runs the country and the world anyway, because they have so much raw power at their disposal (tech, money, weaponry, info, systems of money laundering, knowledge of how to assassinate political leaders and throw elections worldwide, accountable to virtually nobody......)

So, it would be interesting if what we're seeing is a serious division in their ranks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Exactly right...
They messed with the CIA, FBI, NSA, and the military brass. There will be a significant seachange in 2004. After 2004, the BIG LIE that Republicans are better for national security and for military matters will be DEAD AND BURIED! We can go on to deal with other problems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lapislzi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
37. please, please, please be right!
I have long hoped and believed that this administration's overweening hubris would finally bring it down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
15. So when do we get "The Langley Papers"?
This administration will destroy anybody to get its way. The professional future of career intelligence officers will be thrown aside like the empty bindle of an 8-ball of cocaine if massive deception like this is allowed to continue.

I, and many others here, have been predicting that careerists will do this mob in at some point. Unless someone is willing to be this generations Daniel Ellsberg, we will slip into a an even darker darkness for a very long time.

Thanks again, Will...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GalleryGod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. My Best Friend was SOG In Country-He told me at a ballgame last week
1. We're "Fresh out" of Troops.
2. Langley won't take the fall for Punk Ass and The Viagara 5!

It's comin' around a-gain!

(smile)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wellstone_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. I heard the same
as I posted on a similar thread: lifelong career people in diplo/miltary/intell jobs with upper GS ratings that want OUT. Checking into early retirement and so on. Why? They hate what one called the "cabal" and think this country is being destroyed. One suggested that I look at reports over the next few months on "how we are going to send in fresh troops to the ME---there aren't any."

None were "freeperish" in the least but several were definitely "Bush-is-OK-conservatives" or more or less apolitical wonks. Boy, is there an unhappy middle and upper management. (BTW, apart from Bush, the hatred for Rumsfeld and Ashcroft was breathtaking)

If its in the papers and others hear it from their friends, things are far worse than we imagine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:19 PM
Response to Original message
16. AWESOME! added some links to help connect the dots ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lkinsale Donating Member (662 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
17. This is what Graham has been SAYING!!!!
Over and over and over. Not even the Democrats seem to be listening, much less the press.


Graham Blasts Bush for Failing to Secure America's Ports
May 20, 2003
http://www.grahamforpresident.com/news/0305/030520-1.html

Claims Bush Decision Leaves America's Seaports at Risk of Terrorist Attack

Washington DC -- Senator Bob Graham today criticized the Bush Administration's decision to redirect appropriated funds away from protecting America's three largest seaports from potential terrorist activity and towards covering budget shortfalls in other areas.

Last week, Transportation Security Administration (TSA) chief Admiral James Loy testified before a Senate hearing on homeland security that TSA, which is a part of the Homeland Security Administration, is refusing to follow the direction of Congress and spend $58 million in allocated funds on Operation Safe Commerce, a program meant to strengthen security at seaports in Los Angeles, Seattle and New York by monitoring the contents and integrity of containers from the point that they are loaded to the point they are unloaded. Loy told the panel that the funds would be redirected to cover significant budget shortfalls in other areas of homeland security.

"Once again this Administration has its priorities mixed up," said Graham. "After underfunding first-responders in the states, now President Bush is shortchanging the security of our ports -one of our greatest vulnerabilities to terrorist threats."

Portsmouth Herald
July 3, 2003
http://wwwseacoastonline.com/news/07052003/news/37839.htm


In 1997, after a workday as a U.S. Customs inspector at Florida's Port Manatee, Graham convinced President Bill Clinton to establish a special commission to evaluate port security around the nation. The Interagency Commission on Crime and Security at United States Seaports helped to craft a comprehensive maritime security bill, which Graham co-authored. Congress passed it, and the President Bush signed it into law in December 2002.

Unfortunately, said Graham, the president has not recommended significant funding for port security. Last month, the Department of Homeland Security offered $170 million to 387 ports and facilities, but the Port of New Hampshire was not one of them.

Graham said his bill did prioritize the funding for the largest U.S. seaports, but he acknowledged that port security today is little different than it was before Sept. 11.

"I think that's a potential vulnerability," he said. "Id like to bring the technology up to at least the current state of the art."

Graham said he would model U.S. port security on methods used in Rotterdam, Holland, where nearly 15 percent of incoming container ships are screened, as compared with less than 3 percent in U.S. ports.

Washington Post
June 21, 2003
http://www.grahamforpresident.com/news/0306/featured/f030621-1.html (the Post's article is archived)

Graham Jabs Hard at Bush

Drawing on his experience as ranking Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, Graham has pounded on the administration's failure to dismantle the terrorist group behind the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "Al Qaeda was on the ropes in 2002," he said during a trip to Iowa this month, "and was allowed to regenerate." He likes to call Osama bin Laden "Osama bin Forgotten."



*****

Bush isn't giving us any protection at home. Gee, is anybody out there??

*listens for the echo*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
39. Ports are just one of the reasons
Bush is actually very, very WEAK on defense -- national and homeland.

Eloriel
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
19. Read your book on the 4th of July
I just knew you would write something I needed to read on that day. There is was - the Trifecta "joke".

Thank you Will, you've penned a measure of justice and vindication for loved ones lost. My children have already asked that a copy of your book be kept in the family.

Oh, and the rest of the book kicks arse too!

Peace be with you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Thank you
I am profoundly glad you liked that. It made me insane to write it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
28. I hope we can the truth to America
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stumblnrose Donating Member (405 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
29. Who cares...
in a place where the people don't think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-03 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
31. And what about McGovern's claim that Tenet is going to bat for the adminis
,Bush can't fire him because he knows where the bodies are buried re: 9/11?OOOH, that came out wrong,,,I mean that Tenet knows what the President knew and when he knew it about 9/11, like that "report on his desk" and stuff like that?...........................Can Tenet keep the rest shut up? Will he have to resign?

Your book is now in two public libraries as a gift; one in Texas and one in New Mexico. I sacrificed my copy to a library. Can't afford to buy another one right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
revcarol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. No answer? Will Tenet bite the bullet for Bush?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
36. What is the reason Kerry has given for signing the War Resolution?
Edited on Tue Jul-08-03 01:29 PM by Dover
Still trying to put that one together in my mind, and do NOT accept that he fell for Bush's lies, when any idiot could see through it. And Kerry and others certainly could have tapped sources to verify the info they were being fed by the administration.

I was feeling led by the article Will posted and when I got to the end I realized where it was they were taking me. It occurred to me when I was reading that the insiders at the CIA were handing off the football (damning information) to the candidate of their choice in order to send him over the goal line for the win...the hero who would bring Bush down and win the election. They chose Kerry. This kind of coziness does not leave me feeling warm and fuzzy. I have more confidence in "outsiders" than "insiders".

Now understand my perspective which is nonpartisan in this regard. I think corporations have the clout and call the shots both through the DLC and GOP. And if there is a seachange, that is it's source. So if Bush is out (and I'm going to assume he is, praise the Lord) then what will corporations do to win back the people and stimulate the economy while still maintaining their influence? We all know why the reforms don't work. The corporations would never allow it. Clinton conceded a lot of territory to the corporations in order to gain their support and make the Dems competitive, but now this cannot continue to any positive conclusion. This arrangement has no place in politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mairead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. Shout it out!
" Clinton conceded a lot of territory to the corporations in order to gain their support and make the Dems competitive, but now this cannot continue to any positive conclusion. This arrangement has no place in politics."

Exactly. Sing it, brother!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flpoljunkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
38. Here's hoping we are indeed approaching "critical mass", Will...
and that Bush/Cheney will be exposed for ALL to see--even those who have been blinded by the right--those who do not question this unelected fraud.

...those who bought this corrupt administrations' cynical use of 9/11 to fulfil their wet dreams of power in the Middle East! Those who cynically used patriotism as a weapon against Democrats in the Congressional elections of November, 2002, and defeated real patriots, like Max Cleland of Georgia.

Will, when will you be interviewing John Kerry? Has a date been scheduled?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. It's highly unlikely that Bush* is going to suffer for any of this...
Edited on Tue Jul-08-03 02:47 PM by Q
...before 2004. I see the media 'reporting' some of the Bush* screwups...but not in a way that would connect the right dots.

- Why does the media give Bush* a free ride? Because he was the corporate candidate of choice...the one the Republican party and their media chose for us.

- Bush* will remain in office as long as he continues to serve the needs and wants of 'Big Business'. The Banksparty is not about to allow a 'liberal' in the oval office unless they're willing to pledge to the corporate flag.

- If the Dem nominee isn't 'corporate' enough...the neoconservative meda will character assassinate them and make GWB* look like God's Right Hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 02:48 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. Still putting it together
Hopefully soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Missy Vixen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-08-03 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
43. Heard you on KIRO-AM this morning!

I was thrilled to hear Will on KIRO-AM in Seattle this morning with Dave Ross!

Here's to a flood, and here's to those with the courage to come forward...

:toast: Julie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:41 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC