Sunday, 16 March 2008
MORE ON SADDAM AND TERRORISM
William Kristol of the Weekly Standard has written a brilliant, fact-filled
explanation of how strongly saddam hussein was linked to
terrorism prior to our invasion five years ago.
Ironically, the facts for this article were drawn entirely from the
Pentagon report that, according to our "neutral" mainstream media, proves
beyond the shadow of a doubt that there was no such link.
Clearly, either Mr. Kristol or the mainstream media is full of
beans. Well, here is Mr. Kristol's article in its entirety; you tell
me who is who:
the Bush administration silent on the new Pentagon report?
03/24/2008, Volume 013, Issue 27
Late last week, the Defense Department
released an analysis of 600,000 documents captured in Iraq prepared by the
Institute for Defense Analyses, a federally funded think tank. Here's the
attention-grabbing sentence from the report's executive summary: "This
study found no 'smoking gun' (i.e. direct connection) between Saddam's
Iraq and al Qaeda."
Relying on a leak of the executive summary,
ABC News reported that the study was "the first official acknowledgment
from the U.S. military that there is no evidence Saddam had ties to Al
Qaeda." There followed a brief item in the Washington Post that ran
under the headline "Study Discounts Hussein, Al-Qaeda Link." The New
York Times announced: "Study Finds No Qaeda-Hussein Tie." NPR agreed:
"Study Finds No Link Between Saddam, bin Laden."
And the Bush administration reacted with an
apparently guilty silence.
But here's the truth. The executive summary
of the report is extraordinarily misleading. The full report, released
Thursday night, states, for example, on page 42: "Saddam supported groups
that either associated directly with al Qaeda (such as the Egyptian
Islamic Jihad, led at one time by bin Laden's deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri)
or that generally shared al Qaeda's stated goals and objectives." In fact,
as Stephen F. Hayes reports in this issue, the study outlines a startling
range of connections between Saddam and various organizations associated
with al Qaeda and other terror groups.
But don't take our word for it: Go to
http://a.abcnews.com/images/pdf/Pentagon_Report_V1.pdf and read the
59 pages of analysis for yourself. You'll see, in the words of the
authors, "strong evidence that links the regime of Saddam Hussein to
regional and global terrorism." And, from the report's conclusion:
The rise of Islamist fundamentalism in the
region gave Saddam the opportunity to make terrorism, one of the few
tools remaining in Saddam's "coercion" toolbox, not only cost effective
but a formal instrument of state power. Saddam nurtured this capability
with an infrastructure supporting (1) his own particular brand of state
terrorism against internal and external threats, (2) the state
sponsorship of suicide operations, and (3) organizational relationships
and "outreach programs" for terrorist groups. Evidence that was
uncovered and analyzed attests to the existence of a terrorist
capability and a willingness to use it until the day Saddam was forced
to flee Baghdad by Coalition forces.
Take a look also at the documents showing
links between Saddam Hussein and Egyptian Islamic Jihad. Apparently
whoever wrote the executive summary didn't consider the link between
Saddam and al Zawahiri a "direct connection" because Egyptian Islamic
Jihad had not yet, in the early 1990s, fully been incorporated into al
Qaeda. Of course, by that standard, evidence of support provided to Osama
bin Laden in the early 1990s might not be deemed a "direct connection"
because al Qaeda as we know it today did not yet exist.
If you talk to people in the Bush
administration, they know the truth about the report. They know that it
makes the case convincingly for Saddam's terror connections. But they'll
tell you (off the record) it's too hard to try to set the record straight.
Any reengagement on the case for war is a loser, they'll say. Furthermore,
once the first wave of coverage is bad, you can never catch up: You give
the misleading stories more life and your opponents further chances to
beat you up in the media. And as for trying to prevent misleading
summaries and press leaks in the first place--that's hopeless. Someone
will tell the media you're behaving like Scooter Libby, and God knows what
might happen next.
So, this week's fifth anniversary of the
start of the Iraq war will bring us countless news stories reexamining the
case for war, with the White House essentially pleading nolo
contendere. Even though there is abundant evidence that Iraq was a
serious state sponsor of terrorism--and would almost certainly have become
a greater one if Saddam had been left in power--most Americans will assume
there was no real Saddam-terror connection. After all, they haven't heard
the Bush administration say otherwise.
The president has a responsibility to help
the American people understand the nature of the threat we faced in 2003
and the threats we face today--how terror groups work, the extent of state
sponsorship, and how that sponsorship transcends Sunni-Shia or
It's not too late. Bush can still override
his cautious aides and tell the American people the whole truth about the
situation we faced in 2003 and would face today if Saddam were still in
power. This is more than a matter of political advantage. It is a
requirement of war leadership.
Now you know.
The most infamous part of this, of course, is that media are grossly misrepresenting what
the report actually says. But a close second is that the
Bush administration cannot call them on it because, based on experience, they
realize that media would just bombard us with the same misrepresentations a second time and
there is no way for the administration to outfight them.
So they let the lie just sit there.
But now you know. Remember what you just read every time people
tell you that the opposite is true. They have fantasy and
dishonesty. You have reality. Reality is better.
BARACK OBAMA AND CHRISTMAS AT THE CHURCH
The invaluable web site, www.sweetness-light.com, has done it again.
Read this - and wonder why, if an internet web site can put these articles together,
mainstream media can't (won't):
March 15th, 2008
As we have previously
noted, Mr. Obama is now claiming that he
has never heard his pastor for twenty years say anything untoward:
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are
the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him
preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private
Indeed, Mr. Obama has specifically denied
attending Mr. Wrights fiery Christmas 2007 sermon:
But, at least according to the New York Daily
News, Mr. Obama was home in Chicago for
Im no Muslim, says Barack Obama
By Michael Saul
Sunday, December 23rd 2007
PLEASANTVILLE, Iowa - A day before he
will fly back to Chicago to spend Christmas with his family, a voter
asked Barack Obama to explain his Muslim background - an Internet-fed
fallacy that continues to dog his campaign
And the Associated Press says
so as well:
For candidates, relative peace marks
Published: Wednesday, December 26, 2007
MANCHESTER (AP) Christmas Day offered a brief
break from the campaign trail for presidential hopefuls, but their ads didnt
stay off New Hampshire televisions.
With less than two weeks to go before New
Hampshire voters cast ballots in their first-in-the-nation presidential
primary, campaign staffs stayed close to the offices, and the candidates
stayed on the air.
Historically, theyve not really campaigned on
Christmas Day, but this is completely different, said Andrew Smith, a
University of New Hampshire political scientist.
With Iowa and New Hampshire contests coming so
soon after the holidays, taking a break wasnt an option.
Theyll be doing some sort of campaigning. It
may just be making sure the press sees them going to church services, Smith
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., will
celebrate the holiday with his wife and daughters in Chicago.
Weve got family coming in to
spend the holiday with us, and were looking forward to taking a little break
to celebrate before the final sprint.
So are we to believe he did not take his family to
his church for Christmas?
Is there any doubt at all that this is a
Barack Obama is a man in the process of trying to assure voters he is a
Christian, not a Muslim. He is at home, with his family, on Christmas day. And he doesn't
bother taking them to church? A blind person would see through
Not that I needed another proof that Mr. Obama is lying
about his knowledge of jeremiah wright's sermons. Over the
past few days I have blogged about other facts that completely debunk his ludicrous
claim. But this appears to be the ultimate smoking gun.
Barack Obama is a balloon ready to burst, and jeremiah wright is
an aneurysm on that balloon.
As for the people who were telling us that Hillary Clinton should just pack
up and leave the presidential race because Mr. Obama has it in the bag?
They look as stupid as Mr. Obama looks dishonest.
MCGREEVY AND THREE-WAY SEX
Days ago, I made reference to the "tri-state trifecta": the fact that,
in the past four years, a Governor from every part of the tri-state
area - New York, New Jersey and Connecticut - has had to resign in
(This doesn't count the reprehensible hypocrite jon corzine, current
Governor of New Jersey, who SHOULD resign over HIS behavior).
One of the three who resigned was former New Jersey Governor Jim
McGreevy. McGreevey tried to flimflam us by blaming his resignation on
the whiney crybaby claim that he was being oppressed because of his
homosexuaity, instead of a level of corruption in his administration
that would have made Warren Harding green with envy.
And what about McGreevey's wife, Dina Matos McGreevey? For all these
years, everyone I know (me included) felt sympathy for her and assumed she
was a victim.
But wait. Maybe she isn't a victim at all. Here are excerpts from
an article in today's Newark Star-Ledger which spell out the details (you can
read the entire article by clicking here):
McGreevey aide says he had sexual trysts with
by Judith Lucas and John P. Martin/The
Sunday March 16, 2008,
A former aide to James E. McGreevey said today
that he had three-way sexual trysts with the former governor and his wife before
he took office, challenging Dina Matos McGreevey's assertion that she was naive
about her husband's sexual exploits.
The aide, Theodore Pedersen, said he and the
couple even had a nickname for the weekly romps, from 1999 to 2001, that
typically began with dinner at T.G.I. Friday's and ended with a threesome at
McGreevey's condo in Woodbridge.
They called them "Friday Night Specials,"
according to Pedersen.
"I wanted to get this out now because it was so
offensive to me that she goes on television playing the victim," Pedersen said.
"She's trying to make this a payday for herself. She should have told the truth
about the three of us."
Neither of the McGreeveys returned calls for
comment. Their lawyers declined to comment on Pedersen's claims.
Pedersen, 29, served as a driver and traveling
aide for McGreevey during his gubernatorial campaign and after he won office in
2001. McGreevey attended Pedersen's graduation from Rutgers University in 2003
and Pedersen accompanied the governor and others in a trip to China last
Matos McGreevey claims the onetime Woodbridge
mayor duped her into marriage in 2000 to further his political career, and that
she had no clue about his sexual preference until just before he resigned in
August 2004, when he announced he was gay and had an affair with an aide.
She has demanded full custody of their only child,
Jacqueline, plus alimony and more than $600,000 in damages.
McGreevey has denied any fraud and, in court
filings, countered that he fulfilled his duties as husband because he gave his
wife a child and companionship. He has demanded equal time with their daughter.
I do not know if Theodore Pedersen is telling the truth. I wasn't there
(hey, it was a three-way, not a four-way).
But having read this, I now wonder if both McGreeveys, not just Jim, have
pulled a fast one on us.
Between these two, former Senator Robert Torricelli (another
resigner) and the current scumbucket, it's hard to defend my home state
For years, the state slogan was "New Jersey and you. Perfect
together". Who were they talking to? The occupants of Rahway
THE DAILY KOS EXPLAINS WHY OBAMA/WRIGHT IS NO PROBLEM
I once watched a comedy special that had a half dozen or so
old-time comics discussing various things. Shelly Berman's name was mentioned.
One of the comics said "can anyone think of a good thing to say about Shelly
Berman" and they all were laughing and indicating (jokingly, of course) that
they couldn't. Suddenly Henny Youngman looked up and said "His brother was
worse!. The room broke up, because it was so funny that this was the
only "good" thing anyone could come up with.
As comedy, this is great stuff. As reality, it isn't.
I was reminded of this anecdote by how the daily kos has finally talked about the Barack
Obama/jeremiah wright firestorm. It is reported by the wonderful sight www.littlegreenfootballs.com:
Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 9:42:19 am
After doing their level best to completely ignore
the Obama-Rev. Wright scandal, the Kos Kooks finally have a front page post on
it this morning.
Their spin: Well, Mike Huckabee was worse! We
dont have any evidence, but it has the feel of truthiness about it! Daily Kos: The Wright
Without weighing in on whether or not the
content of Reverend Jeremiah Wrights sermons should be denounced by Barack
Obama, I do find one aspect of this story quite troubling. We have now
seen more sermons from Barack Obamas minister in 48 hours than we ever did of
Mike Huckabee and Mike Huckabee was a presidential candidate for 14 long
months. Why is it acceptable to scour every last sermon given by Wright, but
only weeks ago we werent allowed to see or read Mike Huckabees sermons?
In fact, not only was it totally ignored by the traditional media, but
the few times the question of Huckabees sermons was raised, it was brushed
aside as inappropriate.
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
Regular readers of this blog know that I would never vote for Mike Huckabee,
on the grounds that he has blurred the lines of separation of church and
state. Mr. Huckabee stated about 10 years ago that he left the Baptist
ministry for politics so that he could take the nation back for Christ - and has
never specifically disaovowed this objective.
That said, I have never heard Mr. Huckabee say a bad word about any group by race or religion. I have never heard
him say "goddamn the USA" as he voluntarily lives here and enjoys its
rights and privileges. I have never heard him sing the praises of palestinian
Arabs while sneering out disdain for "zionists" And nowhere in the daily
kos whine-fest do I see any evidence that
he ever did.
But I have heard every one of these things from jeremiah wright.
Apparently, none of this counts in the happy horse-manure world of
Markos Moulitsas Zuniga and his daily kos crew.
Charles Johnson runs littlegreenfootballs.com,
and was probably the one who appended "Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic" to the end of the above piece. Truer words were never
JEREMIAH WHO? TONY WHO?
A quick note about the New York Times this morning:
I have just finished reading through its Sunday, "Week In Review"
section. As I'm sure is obvious to you, ths is where the news of
the week is reviewed.
But there is not a word about jeremiah wright, the content of his sermons or
any connection between him and Barack Obama.
Nor is there a word about tony rezko, the progress of his trial or any
connection between him and Barack Obama.
People who think they get the news by reading the New York Times are
wrong. Period. They get whatever part of the news the Times
selects, for the purpose of manipulating them.
What happened to the New York Times? This used to be a great
How much further can it fall?
THIS LITTLE PIG WENT TO SPITZER
As we watch Eliot Spitzer's career in ashes, we are also watching his call
girl partner's career soar. Why? Because she IS his call girl.
That, in and of itself, should tell you how sickening the value system some
of us have really is these days.
Apparently, this young woman does little BUT lie.
And when her lying isn't of the physical variety, it is the description of her
own family. That makes her a pig.
Here are key excerpts from the story that appears on CBS news' web
site (you can read the entire article by clicking here).
'Kristen's' MySpace Story News To Her
Alleged Call Girl Said To Live Life Of Privilege
NEW YORK (CBS)
― So who is the woman at the center of the Spitzer scandal? She was
living a double life as an adult but growing up a wealthy teen in New Jersey
is a far cry from how she described her younger years.
Is the alleged
prostitute named 'Kristen,' also known as Ashley Dupre, telling the truth about
her hard scrabble life?
"I was kind of shocked by that too," said Lauren
del Valle, her former best friend.
Contrast that with what Dupre's
self-described pimp told CBS 2 News on Friday:
"I knew her as Ashley, I
knew her as one of the sexiest women I've ever had the pleasure of knowing."
Lauren says Ashley lived a charmed life in a sprawling, million dollar
home; a total contradiction to the abuse, drugs and poverty she writes about on
her 'MySpace' page.
"I never witnessed or knew of any abuse. Or heard of
any abuse here," said del Valle.
According to family members, Ashley
left her home five years ago at the age of 17, landing eventually in New York
City with big dreams of becoming an R&B singer.
now know that this young woman doesn't just make up her name. She makes up
pretty much everything else as well.
In our society today, that could mean millions more for her. Ugh.
But while we watch her prosper for this, it would be good to remember
that the lies don't just affect her and the men she has sex with for
money. When she tells the world that she grew up in poverty in an
environment of abuse and of drugs, she damns her own family. What are they
supposed to tell the people they live among? What are the people who know
them supposed to think?
Lovely. Just lovely.
Incidentally, there's another little issue here. Since
Kristen/Dupre/Youmans/whatever else she dreams up has been living a high-end
life on the money she made from prostitution, when does the IRS get
involved? Aren't they going to be asking her about how much she paid in
taxes for this lifestyle?
I would love to be a fly on the wall for THAT audit.
Personally, I favor legalizing prostitution and regulating it to protect both
the sellers and buyers from sexually transmitted diseases. I can't say I
consider it a desirable professsion (maybe a desire profession would be more
appropos). But if there is one thing on this earth you own it is your
body, and people should have the right to sell its use. If you can rent
a U-haul, why not a ....er, never mind.
Then the "Kristen" set might not have to lie about every part of their
lives anymore. Just some of them.