Search This Blog

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Democratic Hypocrisy 101

Brian Ross over at The Blotter has a piece up about the declassified NIE report and how some intelligence analysts feel about the findings. Who did he use as his sources? None other than old Pinocchio himself, Richard Clarke, and of source some "unnamed intelligence analysts".

Intelligence analysts and the former White House counterterror official describe as "pure pablum" the unclassified version of the National Intelligence Estimate released today on terror threats to the United States.

Well I guess Clarke IS the resident expert on pablum since he wrote a whole book full of it several years ago.

But the hypocrisy is exposing itself with this statement...

"Given that there was no al Qaeda in Iraq until we invaded there," says Clarke, "it's hard not to draw the conclusion that going to Iraq has created a further threat to the United States."

Ahem... Ladies and Gentlemen I present The 9/11 Commission Report. Chapter 4 “Responses to Al Qaeda’s Initial Assaults”. page 128-129.

"On November 4, 1998, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New Yorkunsealed its indictment of bin Ladin, charging him with conspiracy to attack US defense installations. The indictment also charged that al Qaeda had allied itself with Sudan, Iran and Hezbollah. The original sealed indictment had added that al Qaeda had ‘reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.

This passage led Clarke (Richard), who for years had read intelligence reports on Iraqi-Sudanese cooperation on chemical weapons, to speculate to Berger (Sandy 'stuff my socks' Berger) that a large Iraqi presence at chemical facilities in Khartoum was ‘probably a direct result of the Iraq- Al Qaeda agreement.’ Clarke added that VX precursor traces found near al Shifa were the ‘exact formula used by Iraq’.

This language about al-Qaeda’s ‘understanding’ with Iraq had been dropped however when a superseding indictment was filed in November 1998." **(This last statement came from the testimony of Patrick Fitzgerald June 16, 2004 according to the 9/11 Commission's notes.)

Clarke needs to do some fact checking before he starts throwing out the blame tags...

Speaking of the CIA and "unnamed intelligence sources", Rowan Scarborough has a new book out called "Sabotage". Here's what Amazon says about the book...

In Sabotage, you'll learn:
* How CIA analysts repeatedly leak details about classified intelligence programs with the dual intent of ending them and damaging the president
* How, on at least eight occasions, intelligence officials have made serious allegations of wrongdoing against the president's men--which turned out to be false
* Why, contrary to popular belief, the CIA has become predominantly liberal
* How a CIA turf battle prevented special operators from pursuing and capturing a notorious Taliban leader
* How current and former CIA officers fueled conspiracy theories that President Bush orchestrated the 9/11 attacks on America
* How a CIA leak to the New York Times deprived the U.S. of critical information in the War on Terror
* How press leaks by the CIA have damaged relations with our foreign allies in the War on Terror
* How a CIA analyst worked with Democrats to sabotage the nomination of John Bolton to the UN
* How Clinton's downsizing of the CIA led to the closing of stations in scores of jihadist breeding grounds--including Hamburg, Germany, where the 9/11 plot was hatched

Can anyone say Larry Johnson, Ray McGovern and the VIPS (Veteran Intelligence Personnel for Sanity)? Watch out for some NASTY feedback on the book's Amazon site...

And here our last little lesson in Democratic Hypocrisy 101 for today...

Just in case everyone has forgotten, here’s a reminder of how Dick (the Turban) Durbin REALLY feels about US soldiers. All that fiddle faddle about sleepless nights and worried families is just more of the dog and pony show.

BTW can anyone tell me why The Turban looks straight at the camera when he is speaking on the floor of the Senate? It’s almost as annoying as listening to him…

No comments: