Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 53
  1.    #1  
    Well I've heard the brave Mr. Tenet talk about his victimization by the Bushies and now find myself staring at a letter sent to him yesterday by six CIA agents regarding his ineptitude in taking on the Bushies if he felt so strongly they were manufacturing and misusing CIA "products" to go to war in Iraq. The letter can be read in full here - http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/04/29/tenet.pdf and an article about it here - http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/29/ten...ter/index.html

    This is the quote that really bothers me though. The CIA signatories claim that, "...On October 1 you signed and gave to President Bush and senior policy makers a fraudulent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)—which dovetailed with unsupported threats presented by Vice President **** Cheney in an alarmist speech on August 26, 2002."

    A fraudulent NIE report that dovetailed with unsupported claims by Darth Cheney seems to imply there was knowledge by both parties that the NIE was fraudulently produced to support the claims later made in a speech by his royal Prince of Darkness.

    Now I've suspected misuse of intelligence and selective picking of intelligence out of context - or rather selecting intel that only supported one context - but the actual fabrication of an NIE used expressly to mislead the congress and American people is news to me.

    So here is my question of the day: If in fact a false NIE was produced for such evil purposes and it turns out Tenet, Condi, Rummy, Darth Cheney, and Gee-golly George were all complicit - isn't that a form of treason? I mean, if we can all agree that treason is defined as:

    trea•son –noun
    1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
    2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
    3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

    And if this could be considered treason, why the heck isn’t there charges against these people? I just don't get how orchestrating the deaths of thousands, maiming of tens of thousands, and causing economic harm to the nation can be compared to lying about a marital affair. Worse, I don't get how and why we spent over $75MM in tax payer money chasing Bubba for his sliminess with women yet the Bushies are getting away with treason and treachery.

    BTW - I'll leave the fact that Tenet himself has denounced the outing of Plame for political purposes. That in and of itself could be considered treason as well but we can debate that later.
  2. #2  
    whoops, I posted a highly related comment in another thread. At any rate, I agree that Tenet's newly released information raises many issues here. In particular this issue of a fraudulent NIE deserves careful and independent investigation.
  3. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #3  
    It won't be too long before the real meaning of " ... support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ..." takes on a more enlightened significance.
  4.    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    It won't be too long before the real meaning of " ... support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ..." takes on a more enlightened significance.
    I'm not so sure about that. The "liberal" MSM just doesn't seem to pick up on this stuff. Instead I fully expect to see Bill Bennett or Ann Coulter posing as moderate political experts on the Today Show attacking Tenet rather than addressing the revelations with no Democratic representative to be found.
  5. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I'm not so sure about that. The "liberal" MSM just doesn't seem to pick up on this stuff. Instead I fully expect to see Bill Bennett or Ann Coulter posing as moderate political experts on the Today Show attacking Tenet rather than addressing the revelations with no Democratic representative to be found.
    Those who report the news have no enforcement power. That is up to us, hence the new oversight with teeth in Congress. Rice won't testify under oath? So she thinks!
  6. #6  
    In relation to the title of this thread, there are some other very interesting points that have been brought to light as well. What I found most interesting is the fact that it was reported by "reliable sources" that a nuke was smuggled into New York in 2001. I never heard of this before. Here are some other interesting efforts by AQ revealed by Tenet in the same book:

    The long reach and ambitions of al-Qaida
    Tenet book details chilling plots to kill Gore, acquire nuclear weapons


    The book, “At the Center of the Storm,” which is being published Monday, reveals that al-Qaida or groups affiliated with it have undertaken several other operations aimed at equaling or even surpassing the carnage of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

    The operations, which either were thwarted by authorities or were canceled for one reason or another, included efforts to assassinate Vice President Al Gore with anti-tank missiles during a trip to Saudi Arabia, release cyanide in the New York subway system and procure weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, from Pakistani nuclear scientists.

    ---------------------

    The plot to kill Gore
    Tenet discloses that in 1998, Saudi officials foiled a plot by Abdel Rahim al-Nashiri to smuggle four Sagger anti-tank missiles from Yemen into Saudi Arabia a week or so before Gore was scheduled to visit the kingdom. But their reluctance to let the United States know what was going on created significant tension between the two nations.

    ---------------------

    Al-Qaida’s WMD plans
    Tenet writes that U.S. intelligence agencies “established that Al Qaeda had clear intent to acquire chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons to cause mass casualties in the United States.”

    According to Tenet, intelligence officials learned that Saudi extremist elements were planning to conduct a cyanide gas attack on the New York subway system in fall 2003 using a homemade device. But first, they requested permission from al-Qaida leaders.

    “Chillingly, word came back from Ayman al-Zawahiri in early 2003 to cancel the operation and recall the operatives who were already staged in New York ‘because we have something better in mind.’ ”


    -------------------

    Al-Qaida’s nuclear ambitions
    It is the story of al-Qaida’s efforts to acquire weapons or weapons technology from Pakistan that anchors the most chilling part of that section.

    The terrorist network made two separate efforts to persuade Pakistani scientists to provide it with nuclear weapons from their stockpile of about 50 nuclear weapons, highly enriched uranium and plutonium, and vast weapons infrastructure.

    --------------------

    At the same time, in the fall of 2001, Tenet writes, U.S. intelligence began picking up rumors from several reliable sources that a small nuclear device had been smuggled into the United States, for probable use in New York City. The Energy Department sent detection equipment to New York, he adds.

    Tenet concludes that a nuclear detonation in a U.S. city is al-Qaida’s ultimate goal.

    SOURCE: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18357494
  7.    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    In relation to the title of this thread, there are some other very interesting points that have been brought to light as well. What I found most interesting is the fact that it was reported by "reliable sources" that a nuke was smuggled into New York in 2001. I never heard of this before. Here are some other interesting efforts by AQ revealed by Tenet in the same book:

    The long reach and ambitions of al-Qaida
    Tenet book details chilling plots to kill Gore, acquire nuclear weapons
    Thanks - yes I saw this in the other thread where you posted it. Interesting information if any is proven true. Not sure that it matters all that much with respect to an admittedly "fraudulently NIE report" though. Unless your point is all of this stuff may be untrue since Tenet is the common denominator in all of this new data?
  8. #8  
    I really didn't have a point....just that all info needs to be taken into account. I am not sure about Tenet personally. He was not appointed by Bush, but by Bill Clinton. He obviously compelled for one reason or another to go along with Bush at the time. He feels he had been taken advantage of. His statements has been wide ranging. He reconfirmed on 60 minutes when questioned about the validity of Powell's statement of the tons of chemical and bio materials that we believed Saddam to have at that time prior to the war that he confirmed that yes that is what they thought "at that time". Yet he feels now that he has been used as an escape goat by the admin for many of the claims.

    I haven't had a chance with work yet to really look at all that has been published on this in the last two days. I know that I have had to deal with high level managers after they felt they were railroaded or thrown under the bus and have had to try to sift through their statements to determine what is real, what is exaggerated, and what are lies due the personal motivation of feeling betrayed. That feeling of betrayal may have such a sobering effect on him that he is telling the whole truth. I have seen effect others to point of revenge manifesting in lies and exaggerations that need to be sorted out. I am just rambling as again I have not had a decent chance to look at this much yet.
  9. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I really didn't have a point....just that all info needs to be taken into account.
    The real point here is that this 'information', whether valid or not, is simply more slanted fear-mongering being used here for political purposes. There are no innocent mistakes. To choose and spread them here is simply more of the same. This nation, in fact, this world, has had quite enough, thank you. Fear is our only enemy.
  10.    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    I really didn't have a point....just that all info needs to be taken into account. I am not sure about Tenet personally. He was not appointed by Bush, but by Bill Clinton. He obviously compelled for one reason or another to go along with Bush at the time. He feels he had been taken advantage of. His statements has been wide ranging. He reconfirmed on 60 minutes when questioned about the validity of Powell's statement of the tons of chemical and bio materials that we believed Saddam to have at that time prior to the war that he confirmed that yes that is what they thought "at that time". Yet he feels now that he has been used as an escape goat by the admin for many of the claims.

    I haven't had a chance with work yet to really look at all that has been published on this in the last two days. I know that I have had to deal with high level managers after they felt they were railroaded or thrown under the bus and have had to try to sift through their statements to determine what is real, what is exaggerated, and what are lies due the personal motivation of feeling betrayed. That feeling of betrayal may have such a sobering effect on him that he is telling the whole truth. I have seen effect others to point of revenge manifesting in lies and exaggerations that need to be sorted out. I am just rambling as again I have not had a decent chance to look at this much yet.
    Yup, Tenet is an angry, confused, and at times - lying little Muppet. But he was a Muppet in the Bush administration to be sure.

    Back on point - Tenet didn't make the accusation that a fraudulent NIE was produced to dovetail into Cheney's claims, the ex-CIA agents did. Are they telling the truth? Dunno. Sort of the point of my post - if we can spend money to get to the truth about a hummer in the oval office then we ought to have Tenet, Cheney, Bush, Condi, these ex-CIA agents, etc. under oath ASAP to find out what happened. And if a fraudulent NIE was produced to mislead the congress and the American people then that is treason by any standard IMO when it involves risking lives and putting our troops in harm’s way.
    Last edited by moderateinny; 05/01/2007 at 10:29 AM.
  11. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Yup, Tenet is an angry, confused, and at times - lying little Muppet. But he was a Muppet in that administration to be sure.
    To the flimsiest of points that Tenet was appointed under Clinton, what distortions of facts is Tenet guilty of while under Clinton? Does being appointed to CID under Clinton mean anything? No, but it serves as a distraction from the real issues, doesn't it?

    Back on point - Tenet didn't make the accusation that a fraudulent NIE was produced to dovetail into Cheney's claims, the ex-CIA agents did. Are they telling the truth? Dunno. Sort of the point of my post - if we can spend money to get to the truth about a hummer in the oval office then we ought to have Tenet, Cheney, Bush, Condi, these ex-CIA agents, etc. under oath ASAP to find out what happened. And if a fraudulent NIE was produced to mislead the congress and the American people then that is treason by any standard IMO when it involves risking lives and putting our troops in harm’s way.
    Exactly! As stated in the open letter from these high-level CIA officials ...
    "CIA field operatives produced solid intelligence in September 2002 that stated clearly there was no stockpile of any kind of WMD in Iraq. This intelligence was ignored and later misused. On October 1 you signed and gave to President Bush and senior policy makers a fraudulent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)—which dovetailed with unsupported threats presented by Vice President **** Cheney in an alarmist speech on August 26, 2002.
    The fear which was this administration's only weapon against the American people has since been diffused by illumination of verified facts.

    What I would like to know is what individuals had knowledge that this NIE was falsified and when did they know it?!
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    To the flimsiest of points that Tenet was appointed under Clinton, what distortions of facts is Tenet guilty of while under Clinton? Does being appointed to CID under Clinton mean anything? No, but it serves as a distraction from the real issues, doesn't it?
    Not sure that I made any specific claim that he distored anything under Clinton, nor do I care that he was appointed by Clinton. I was speaking of the Bush adminstration when I said that.

    He was a weak CIA Director though that clearly failed in his duties no matter which way you look at it - which is why I called him a Muppet. I've heard him say that the CIA Director cannot cross the line and attempt to set policy but I disagree with his weak defense. He could have resigned had he felt so strongly about it AND THEN INFLUENCED POLICY but he did not. Instead he chose to collect his medal and now a very big paycheck in book royalties that amounts to blood money if you ask me. So again....he was a spineless Muppet.

    Back to the point - as you have re-iterated. Who knew what and when? Or more importantly, who ordered and/or authored the fraudulent NIE?
  13. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    Not sure that I made any specific claim that he distored anything under Clinton, nor do I care that he was appointed by Clinton.
    Someone else made that irresponsible politically-charged reference. My bad for quoting you.
    Back to the point - as you have re-iterated. Who knew what and when? Or more importantly, who ordered and/or authored the fraudulent NIE?
    Given the centralization of power by the Executive branch over the past 5+ years, ala Putin/Russia, all Department Directors were minimized in their roles and duties. There is plenty of continuing testimony on the White House manipulation of State, Defense, Homeland Security, Interior, etc in addition to its manipulation of Congress.

    Truth is supposedly the first casualty of war ... Well, this is neither a war as a matter of policy or practice, but truth was sacrificed for a purpose of some grand kind. What that end-purpose is is the ultimate question to be answered. Tenet is just another go-along bureaucrat who signed on to the Bush train, until he was thrown under it. It's always the former officials/military Generals-Admirals who speak frankly and the only time worth be listened to.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    The fear which was this administration's only weapon against the American people has since been diffused by illumination of verified facts.
    What angers me more than anything is that the administration is still using the same fear tactics it has from day one. We have to stay in Iraq and defeat the terrorists there, or they'll follow us back home. The republicans need to stay in office to get things done because the democrats will make it easier for Al Qaeda to destroy us. They need to spy on us without or knowledge or permission because they have to catch the bad guys.

    I keep reading articles and watching TV where they debunk these kinds of myths, but the administration stands firm and gets to do what it wants. It seems that only recently after the mid term elections are they actually being help accountable for the BS they've been producing for years. The American people are finally coming around, and a democratically controlled congress isn't signing off on everything Bush demands anymore. What I want to know is, why did it take this long? And it's not just the administration, and it's not over yet. One of Guilliani's main campaign points is that if we have a democrat president, we'll open ourselves up to another 9/11. I love that line of reasoning, considering 9/11 happened under a republican president (Bush), in New York state which had a republican governor (Pataki), in New York City which had a republican mayor (Guilliani). Clearly they're the only ones who can protect us...
  15. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by letsgoflyers81 View Post
    What angers me more than anything is that the administration is still using the same fear tactics it has from day one.
    If the question is why or how, it's because of grossly ignored historical precedents and/or an immoral compass.

    Sound familiar?:

    1-"Any who act as if freedom's defenses are to be found in suppression and suspicion and fear confess a doctrine that is alien to America."

    2-"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."

    3-"Talk of imminent threat to our national security through the application of external force is pure nonsense. Indeed it is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear."


    Who are these pinko liberal pansies (the same type of liberals who formed this great nation and still populate it)?

    1) President and former 5-Star General of the Army/Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)

    2 & 3) 5-Star General of the Army, General Douglas MacArthur (R)
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    ...So here is my question of the day: If in fact a false NIE was produced for such evil purposes and it turns out Tenet, Condi, Rummy, Darth Cheney, and Gee-golly George were all complicit - isn't that a form of treason? I mean, if we can all agree that treason is defined as:

    trea•son –noun
    1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.
    2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state.
    3. the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith; treachery.

    And if this could be considered treason, why the heck isn’t there charges against these people?...
    The answer is simple; politics, on BOTH sides of the isle. Assuming the statements you cite are proven true, nothing will ever happen for fear of the political fallout for both Republicans and Democrats.

    Unfortunately we live in a time of American history where we have no leaders, just self-indulging politicians subservient to the party's needs and not to the people they are supposed to represent. Political parties are beholden to special interest groups and corporate America.

    Unfortunately the words of Jefferson sound quite relevant at this time:

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    I don't take those literally, but rather to represent that the crop of career partisan politicians in this Country should be renewed.

    Again, in the word of Jefferson:

    "We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate."
    Have a great one...Doc D.

    Phillips VELO > Palm III > Palm V > Palm 505m > Treo 180 > Treo 300 > Samsung i500 > Treo 700p > HTC 6800 > Treo 800w > Treo Pro > Palm Pre > HTC Evo
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    I don't take those literally,
    I do.
  18. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by TreoNewt View Post
    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

    I don't take those literally, but rather to represent that the crop of career partisan politicians in this Country should be renewed.
    I take these words literally and seriously also. It's not necessarily exclusive to 'career politicians' who are the causative factor. One only has to fully examine the machinery behind one George W. Bush/**** Cheney to realize we have a malignant cancer plaguing our nation that can only be removed surgically. No nuanced, time-elapsed legislation, but corrective action. We've done it before, and this time it's necessary for our national survival to do it again.
  19. #19  
    Wow....I never thought that my post stating some simple and trivial facts with even saying that Tenet may be lying between his teeth would get me be called being politically irresponsible by the left just because I also included other possibilities as well into a question that no one knows the answers to yet.

    Before all the flames come a-flying (which I am sure they will saying I am protecting, justifying, etc... ), this is in not in any way shape or form a defense or justification for the Bush admin if proven true of manipulating data and intel and getting others to go along with it. I have always stated that those who are guilty need to be held accountable for their own actions. I felt the same way with Bill Clinton would feel the same way with Bush. But if true, it will hardly be the first time this has happened with the result of America going to war. It has often been said that “Truth is the first casualty of war.”

    SPANISH AMERICAN WAR: The spark that ignited the fire was a lie about the sinking of the battleship USS Maine on February 15, 1898, at 9:30 p.m. in Havana Harbor. The US claimed it was sunk by a Spanish submarine mine, but in reality was caused by an internal combustion in a coal bunker that was situated next to a powder magazine, just as other reports at the time suggested. William McKinley gave into these claims, ignoring reports of what really happened, and proceeded with steps that he knew would lead to war with Spain.

    KOSOVO WAR:
    According to a cover story in the May 15th issue of Newsweek, a suppressed U.S. Air Force report, concluding that the 78-day NATO aerial bombardment had inflicted far less damage on the Serb military targets than publicly announced and widely reported in the media.

    This particular report has become something of a headache for NATO leaders and the Clinton Administration who conducted the war. More specifically, while the Pentagon had claimed to have knocked out 50 percent of Serbian artillery and one-third of Serb armed vehicles, ground inspections by a team of Air Force investigators verified destroying only 14 tanks, not the 120 tanks that were claimed; 18 armored personnel carriers, not the 220 that were claimed; and, 20 artillery pieces, not the 450 that were claimed. In fact, out of the claimed 774 confirmed strikes by NATO pilots, Air Force investigators found damage only from 58 strikes. The damage report has been buried, unfortunately, by a number of top military officers and Pentagon officials, who up until the Newsweek cover story, continued to deny its existence.

    The sad truth, however, is that the NATO air strikes were effective, but only against civilian targets: what military planners euphemistically called “strategic targeting.” Of course, such civilian bombing raises the obvious and very real ethical issues of the consequences to the innocent civilians in that area, but civilian bombing has historically also strengthened the hand of tyrants, like Milosovic, who then can rally the citizenry against what they consider to be an invading hoard. In short, there were no surgical strikes in the Kosovo war, and reports to the contrary were official lies intended to rally U.S. and world opinion in favor of the war campaign and obviously was a major policy initiative of the Clinton Administration.

    NATO Commander Wesley Clark has since resigned over the situation, and the Defense Department has tried to present two subsequent reports denying the problem, both of which have been totally discounted by British and U.S. intelligence experts.

    http://www.independent.org/events/tr...asp?eventID=28
    KOREAN WAR: On June 27, 1950, Truman told the American people that North Korea's attack on South Korea showed the world "Communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will now use armed Intervention" Truman held a campaign comparing them to Joseph Stalin's actions with Adolf Hitler's in the 1930s. He went on to say that it was the strategy of the empire builders. Americans should fear the "Reds" as they are going to invade us and blow up all of our churches.

    The truth has later come out that the civil war in Korea began the day the Japanese were driven out and with the help of "American advisor's" the South Koreans initiated most of the border clashes with North Korean forces at the 38th parallel.


    WWII: It has long been known that President Roosevelt wanted into WWII but that the nation was strongly against becoming involved in this "European War" with what was called the Isolation Movement. I have seen this on either the NY Time Discovery channel and on the History channel since this information has come to light a couple years ago...there have been recent research and docs released that show the manipulation that President Roosevelt did to get us into the WWII. It is also known now that many of the statements in the investigations of these claims that followed were lies as well.

    So all of these intercepts, Japanese intercepts of their diplomatic and military messages, which we were intercepting—I’ll talk about that later—went through Commander McCullum. So he knew the situation. He is the one that routed the information to President Roosevelt. Commander McCullum realized the terrible danger to the United States and proposed in this memorandum on October 7th, eight actions that he said would cause Japan to fight the United States. And he proposed provoking Japan into attacking us at Pearl Harbor, and other regions in the Pacific.

    And the eight actions—you can see them there, they’re in the book. The major action was Action F—keep the Pacific Fleet in Pearl Harbor. And, on the very next day, Action F was put into place by President Roosevelt when he called the commander of the United States Fleet, Admiral James Richardson, who was this admiral right behind me here. Admiral Richardson was called into the Oval Office, October 8th, the very next day, 1940. Obviously, Admiral Richardson, who’s based at Pearl Harbor, had been told 10 days in advance, roughly about September 27th to come to Washington and meet with the President.

    Now September 7, 1940 is very significant, because that’s the day that Germany, Japan and Italy signed the Tripartite Pact, which called for either one of them, if they were attacked by another power, to come to the aid of that power. And that’s why Commander McCullum wanted to get Japan to attack the United Sates and bring us into the war in the “back door approach.”

    --------------

    And in the meantime, in October, 1940, our cryptologists in the Army and the Navy had broken the Japanese diplomatic codes and the military codes. That’s very important that you remember the military codes. Because in a Congressional investigation in 1945 and 1946, the diplomatic codes were fully discussed. That we had broken them, but not a word about the military codes.

    And we had broken the Japanese operational code for their Navy and could follow Admiral Yamamoto, who was the Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese Navy, as he organized to attack Pearl Harbor.

    -------------

    Well, President Roosevelt was able to follow the Japanese reaction to these eight goads, or provocations, if you will, because we had broken the Japanese diplomatic and naval codes, and we also allowed a Japanese Naval spy to come into Pearl Harbor. He was a Naval Ensign. They knew that he was a spy, and were reading his messages to Tokyo. He arrived in Pearl Harbor in late March, 1941. He started preparing a census of the U.S. Pacific Fleet for Tokyo.And he continued sending the messages that were being intercepted and read in Washington, but all of this information was kept from Admiral Kimmel, who was the commander of the Pacific Fleet, and General Walter Short, who was head of the Army defense on Hawaii.

    Both of them were out of the loop, and Commander McCullum’s memo was addressed to the Chief of Naval Intelligence, who was named Captain William Anderson. And, after President Roosevelt fired Admiral Richardson, appointed Anderson as Commander of Battleships of the Pacific Fleet, and sent him to Hawaii. He was number three in command of the fleet. He knew we had broken the Japanese codes, both military and diplomatic, and knew of this plan, but did not tell Admiral Kimmel about it.

    --------------

    Well, the General obviously had read and had a decoded message from the Japanese Chief of Naval Operations, who on November 5th said that the war would start with England, The Netherlands, and America the first week of December. This was a message intercepted in Hawaii, not given to Admiral Kimmel or General Short, but given to General Marshall in Washington.

    Washington pledged the correspondents to secrecy, and they did. It also included the Associated Press, who could have sent that message to Hawaii, and the readers of the Honolulu Star Bulletin and the Advertiser could have learned that war was expected. But this is what newspapers did, the news media did in those days. They looked the other way.

    It really was when Gary Hart asked, what it was in 1984 when he told the media, “Well, if you don’t believe me, follow me.” And the Miami Herald did follow him and they did find him with his friend on the yacht, The Mimi. But it took all that time for the news media to look the other way.


    full account: http://www.independent.org/events/tr...asp?eventID=28

    FIRST GULF WAR: In 1991 President George H.W. Bush claimed that Saddam Hussein’s forces, having occupied Kuwait, were poised to invade Saudi Arabia. Bush refused to declassify the satellite photos that allegedly demonstrated his claim, but former government intelligence officials analyzing commercial and Russian satellite pictures could find no massing of troops.

    VIETNAM WAR: This one I am not sure has been fully proven but maybe it has, I don't know:
    Then there was President Lyndon Johnson. Not exactly a paragon of honesty in his long political career, Johnson secured a blank check for U.S. intervention in Vietnam in 1964 on the pretext that the North Vietnamese had conducted an unprovoked attack against U.S. destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin. In fact, on August 2, 1964, North Vietnamese PT boats tried, unsuccessfully, to torpedo an American ship that had been gathering intelligence to support South Vietnam’s attacks in the north. But the August 4 attacks that Johnson told the American people about in a late-night televised address never took place. Before Johnson made his speech he had been informed by the top man on the scene that what seemed like attacks were the result of “freak weather effects on radar and overeager sonarmen.” Capt. John J. Herrick had cabled the Pentagon that there were “no actual visual sightings” of North Vietnamese warships. The American people did not learn that truth until years later. Three days after the phantom attack, Congress overwhelmingly passed the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, leading to a decade of brutal war, 58,000 American deaths, and 2 million Vietnamese deaths. A little lie went a long way.
    http://www.fff.org/comment/com0308g.asp
  20.    #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal View Post
    Wow....I never thought that my post stating some simple and trivial facts with even saying that Tenet may be lying between his teeth would get me be called being politically irresponsible by the left just because I also included other possibilities as well into a question that no one knows the answers to yet.

    Before all the flames come a-flying (which I am sure they will saying I am protecting, justifying, etc... ), this is in not in any way shape or form a defense or justification for the Bush admin if proven true of manipulating data and intel and getting others to go along with it. I have always stated that those who are guilty need to be held accountable for their own actions. I felt the same way with Bill Clinton would feel the same way with Bush. But if true, it will hardly be the first time this has happened with the result of America going to war. It has often been said that “Truth is the first casualty of war.”

    SPANISH AMERICAN WAR: The spark that ignited the fire was a lie about the sinking of the battleship USS Maine on February 15, 1898, at 9:30 p.m. in Havana Harbor. The US claimed it was sunk by a Spanish submarine mine, but in reality was caused by an internal combustion in a coal bunker that was situated next to a powder magazine, just as other reports at the time suggested. William McKinley gave into these claims, ignoring reports of what really happened, and proceeded with steps that he knew would lead to war with Spain.

    KOSOVO WAR:


    KOREAN WAR: On June 27, 1950, Truman told the American people that North Korea's attack on South Korea showed the world "Communism has passed beyond the use of subversion to conquer independent nations and will now use armed Intervention" Truman held a campaign comparing them to Joseph Stalin's actions with Adolf Hitler's in the 1930s. He went on to say that it was the strategy of the empire builders. Americans should fear the "Reds" as they are going to invade us and blow up all of our churches.

    The truth has later come out that the civil war in Korea began the day the Japanese were driven out and with the help of "American advisor's" the South Koreans initiated most of the border clashes with North Korean forces at the 38th parallel.


    WWII: It has long been known that President Roosevelt wanted into WWII but that the nation was strongly against becoming involved in this "European War" with what was called the Isolation Movement. I have seen this on either the NY Time Discovery channel and on the History channel since this information has come to light a couple years ago...there have been recent research and docs released that show the manipulation that President Roosevelt did to get us into the WWII. It is also known now that many of the statements in the investigations of these claims that followed were lies as well.


    FIRST GULF WAR: In 1991 President George H.W. Bush claimed that Saddam Hussein’s forces, having occupied Kuwait, were poised to invade Saudi Arabia. Bush refused to declassify the satellite photos that allegedly demonstrated his claim, but former government intelligence officials analyzing commercial and Russian satellite pictures could find no massing of troops.

    VIETNAM WAR: This one I am not sure has been fully proven but maybe it has, I don't know:
    I certainly don't mean to flame you and if I gave you that impression I am sorry. As to your posts with alleged wrongs by previous President's....well they are interesting but I don't see how a precedent for lying (assuming any of these accusations are even true) our way into war makes it anymore right or morally just. If a lie about a sex act is bad (but not treasonous), then a lie leading us into war is at least doubly bad. A pack of lies and a fraudulent NIE are treasonous.

    But I should also add that the press was very different both technology and the way they went about reporting the news - at least until Watergate. So I would not be surprised if the press went along with some of this stuff back in the days of WWII (for instance) as that was the norm. Post Watergate - well it’s my theory that that is when the "liberal" media was born. Too bad the MSM has forgetten all about that now and are back to being lapdogs rather than skeptics seeking the truth in an otherwise untruthful town if ever there was one (Washington D.C.).

    The bottom line is that I believe this adminstration went above and beyond any previous adminstrations to fabricate and exagerate reasons to go to war.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions