There are signs all over DC today telling me to Google "Terror Storm". I did, these are the results. I didn't bother to click any of the links, just thought I'd share the lefty zeitgeist with you.
#1
I could only stand to watch the first minute or two. Leftist conspiracy theory crap about how the West is using the WOT to subjugate its population or some such nonsense. Probably a good vehicle to enable moonbats to deny what is going on. They must feel so powerless subconsciously so they have to dream this stuff up. Gives them purpose in their miserable lives until they find the grace to die I guess. I wonder how they'd feel and what they would do if they actually knew they were wasting their lives (and others) with this drivel. Kinda makes me wonder if there isn't something genetically wrong with these kind of people that makes them think this way, of if it was just a bad upbringing or unfortunate combination of exposures as they were growing up.
Virginia Tech massacre
Alex Jones believes that Cho Seung-hui the young man behind the Virginia Tech massacre was a victim of a secret government mind control program.[16] The intent, he claims, was for the government to implement more gun control and place restrictions on the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution. He believes that this was a black psy-op. He has stated in the past that the Columbine killers were also victims of a covert government mind control program.
Sounds to me like the moonbat colony has crowned its new king!
#5
So the same fanatical right-wing government that let the assault weapons ban expire because the gun lobby told 'em to staged the VTech attack to impose more gun control?
Jeezeopete! Is it asking too much to ask the moonbats to at least be internally consistent?
Posted by: Mike ||
04/30/2007 6:49 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Sounds like he has his tinfoil hat on too tight. Either that or he went out in the sun without a tinfoil hat covering and baked his brain. Seriously, though, people like this live in a fantasy world where bad things only happen because of the evil machinations of bad government officials. Since they aren't rational but believe themselves to be ny irrational behavior by others MUST be initiated by outside forces.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
04/30/2007 7:52 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I've said it before, but it bears repeating: the US government is incompetent to run a conspiracy like this. I know because I work for 'em. Governments are all about rules (I shudder to think what life would be like under the EU). Making bullsh*t rules is the only thing it does well.
#8
This guy lives in Austin, and does a Sunday afternoon talk radio show. It is incredible. I mean, there is a conspiracy for everything!
Nothing escapes, from shots for our kids, to police state, to cover up for UFO's. For Alex Jones, everything and everybody is a victim of a secret government mind/body control program.
Can only listen when I driving, (nothing else on) and then, finally, just turn the radio OFF!
#15
Alex Jones is the same nutcake that runs PrisonPlanet.com and who's a regular on George Noory's CoasttoCoast program (heir of Art Bell). He's a complete lunatic that even Noory has a hard time with for all his conspiracy theories and his anti-US and anti-Semite attitude.
This work is extremely difficult to watch and wade through as it's so completely biased and so full of mis-statements and factual inaccuracies and outright lies.
#16
Art Bell was once very clear that he would not tolerate Truthers on his show, and that the cause of the collapse of the WTC was fire fueled by civilian jumbo jets that were hijacked and crashed by Arab terrorists for their own purposes on the orders of Osama bin Laden.
Scott Shane reported in Saturday's New York Times that former CIA chief George Tenet's dramatic description in his book, At the Center of the Storm, of an August 2002 presentation at the CIA by defense undersecretary Douglas Feith and his staff, is at the very least misleading. In order to suggest that Feith's staff was utterly out of its depth, Tenet characterized the main briefer, Tina Shelton, as a "naval reservist." In fact, she had been a Defense Intelligence Agency analyst for almost two decades. Tenet also claimed that Shelton said in her presentation of Iraq-al Qaeda contacts, "It is an open-and-shut case." Shelton and Feith both deny she said that. One person who served in government with Shelton told The Weekly Standard today he finds it "inconceivable" that Shelton, an experienced analyst, would have made such an unequivocal assertion.
The Weekly Standard has now learned of a second, more stunning error in Tenet's book (which is due to appear in bookstores tomorrow). According to Michiko Kakutani's review in Saturday's Times,
On the day after 9/11, he [Tenet] adds, he ran into Richard Perle, a leading neoconservative and the head of the Defense Policy Board, coming out of the White House. He says Mr. Perle turned to him and said: "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday. They bear responsibility."
Here's the problem: Richard Perle was in France on that day, unable to fly back after September 11. In fact Perle did not return to the United State until September 15. Did Tenet perhaps merely get the date of this encounter wrong? Well, the quote Tenet ascribes to Perle hinges on the encounter taking place September 12: "Iraq has to pay a price for what happened yesterday." And Perle in any case categorically denies to The Weekly Standard ever having said any such thing to Tenet, while coming out of the White House or anywhere else.
According to Kakutani, Tenet concludes by paraphrasing Daniel Patrick Moynihan's comment: "Policymakers are entitled to their own opinions--but not to their own set of facts." How many other facts has George Tenet invented?
#1
...Sadly, all this means is that the MSM will ignore the facts entirely in order to make it appear as if the White House had it in for Saddam from the beginnning.
While I'm on this subject, let me ask a question -it's always assumed that Bush goes after Saddam because Saddam (among other things) tried to kill his father. Frankly, would you have a lot of respect for a man who WASN'T pis*sed at the man who threatened to kill his father?
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
04/30/2007 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
When I heard Tenet yesterday all over the telly I said to myself: "Self, methinks that guy is hawking his book."
#3
I'm not against the administration having it out for Saddam from the beginning. Hell, I think we should have taken him out in '96 at least. But to lie about it to hawk a book to the liberal-unhinged is beyond disgusting and bordering on sedition.
George Tenet Sings Toby Keith
by Jed Babbin Posted: 04/30/2007
From what he's said about it, former CIA director George Tenets memoir sounds like a country song minus the good music. His "Sixty Minutes" interview made me think of that sorrowful line in one of Toby Keiths songs: Yeah, I wish somehow I didnt know now what I didnt know then.
#6
Tenent likes to deflect blame on others; However, His Tenure at CIA predates Bush by a few years and he missed many intelligence events. The attack on the USS Cole, Somalia militias, embassy bombings, etc. If we knew nothing about these events then what in the hell were our intelligence assets directs at? The culture and mindset at CIA and State Department lead directly to leaving this country vulnerable to attack. Prior to 9/11 they would never have taken a threat from a jihadi seriously because it would paint them in a racists light. How can we suffer these blunders and NOBODY in intelligence isnt called to account? I heard about Gen Odom becoming the latest General/Celeb to Monday morning quarterback the war on terror. Well folks I served under Gen Odom the mid-late 1980s and I heard him give a speech about Glasnost. He claimed that it was nothing new and there was no fundamental change in the function of the Soviet State. He like other Intelligence Professionals had painted a picture about the Soviet Union and they were not about to change it for anyone. Tenent and his gang of idiots did know anything because they had painted a picture of terrorists and they could not (for the life of them think) that they were capable of large-scale attacks. I would really like to read some of the post-embassy bombing reports as to who, what, why, and how it was carried out. That would tell you everything you wanted to know about their culture and mindset. I will bet they blame Bush for that too.
#7
TENNET: I don't know what's happening here. The intelligence community's judgement is he will not have nuclear weapons until the year 2007, 2009.
"The CIA has recently been pressured into accepting the idea of devoting the bulk of its attention to such global issues as pollution, health, natural resources, and endangered species. In 1991, President Bush signed a directive to this effect and the Agency quickly fell into line, creating a National Intelligence Officer for Global and Multilateral Issues. According to Robert Gates, the CIA was planning in 1992 to devote 40 percent of its resources to international economics and only 34 percent to Russia and the other successor states to the Soviet Union. One can only view such a shift of emphasis as a desperate attempt to find a make-believe role for the CIA in the post-Soviet world. [Note the leftist fantasy that the world is all sweetness and light since the demise of the USSR. ed.] But intelligence has only one function: to uncover foreign threats to national security. International terrorism and nuclear traffic clearly come within its purview. Global economic or environmental problems just as clearly do not: along with other ills afflicting humanity and the earth, they are best left to international organizations". Richard Pipes, "What to Do about the CIA," Commentary Mar. 1995
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
04/30/2007 12:39 Comments ||
Top||
#8
On 9/11 Bush probably should have fired Tenet. Unfortunately, he probably reasoned that, given the immediate need to attack al Queda in Afghanistan and elsewhere, he probably thought he could not afford the short term impact on organizational effectiveness associated with making a change at that time. I am sure his decision was also influenced by the fact that his father thought well of Tenet.
This is likely why he did not fire Tenet on 1/20/01 as well, though the politician in him probably saw value in keeping on an old Clinton hand until he and his team had a full grasp of the national security program.
According to Bob Woodward, Tenet did not have his a-players working Iraq for years prior to the invasion. This resource allocation decision came after Saddam had completely fooled the CIA in 1990/1991 by concealing a robust program and while the Air Force was patrolling the no-fly zone and often exchanging fire. I cannot understand what was more important.
Now we see Tenet as primarily concerned with a) cashing in on a book deal and b) making sure that he is back in the good graces of his fellow lefties on the dc cocktail circuit. Patriotism, the need to protect intelligence, the importance of being fact based: none of these things matter to him.
What a horrible decision Bush made in hiring and keeping this man in such a critical position
I assume that there are patriotic, aggressive people working for the CIA on the ground in the crappiest corners of the Earth. However, at the leadership level in DC, they are more interested in attacking the Bush admin with lame ops like the Plame/Wilson affair and this book than attacking the otherwise vulnerable governments of our enemies, like Iran. It may be unreformable.
Everything's difficult, isn't it? In the Democratic presidential candidates' debate, Sen. Barack Obama was asked what he personally was doing to save the environment, and replied that his family was "working on" changing their light bulbs.
Is this the new version of the old joke? How many senators does it take to "work on" changing a light bulb? One to propose a bipartisan commission. One to threaten to de-fund the light bulbs. One to demand the impeachment of Bush and Cheney for keeping us all in the dark. One to vote to pull out the first of the light bulbs by fall of this year with a view to getting them all pulled out by the end of 2008.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/30/2007 07:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think a date should be set for total pull out.
Hawking his new book, At the Eye of the Storm, former CIA Director George Tenet bared his soul Sunday night to Scott Pelley of the CBS news magazine, 60 Minutes. Some preliminary thoughts about his jaw-dropping performance are in order.
1. Tenet met every morning with President Bush. Indeed, he was the point person at the national-security briefing the daily session Bush, from the beginning of his presidency, has made a point of taking more seriously than his predecessor did. Tenet now claims that in the summer of 2001, he was convinced al Qaeda was on the verge of launching a spectacular, multiple-site attack against the United States. He was convinced the United States should take action against the terror network in its Afghanistan safe haven. But, he maintains he shared this information only with (then) National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, not the president.
Why, day after day after day, didnt he advise the president of his suspicions? Because, Tenet says, the United States government doesnt work that way. The president is not the action officer. You bring the action to the national-security adviser and people who set the table for the president to decide on policies theyre gonna implement.
Sure, Mr. Director. Just one question: What the hell goes on at the daily briefings?
2. Immediately after 9/11, Tenets first response was that (a) he knew for certain al Qaeda was responsible (when youve been following this as long as Ive been following this, when youve been thinking about multiple spectacular attacks. There was no doubt what had happened in my mind immediately), and (b) bin Laden better watch out because Im gonna run you and all your bastards down. And here we come. Because the rules are about to change. Here we come; our turn now. Unleashed, authorities, money, direction, leadership; here we come, pal.
Question: Why did it take 9/11 for that?
We knew Bin Laden had bombed the embassies in 1998. In October 2000, al Qaeda bombed the destroyer, the U.S.S. Cole, in Yemen. The Clinton people say they did not respond to the Cole attack because the intelligence community would not assure them that al Qaeda was responsible. Regardless of what Tenet and others may have been telling them, I find it impossible to believe that the Clinton people did not fully appreciate that al Qaeda was the culprit. But lets assume, for arguments sake, there really was some doubt. Was Tenet certain then, as he says he was the minute 9/11 happened, that al Qaeda did the Cole? And since the Cole bombing killed 17 U.S. naval personnel, why didnt the rules change then? Why was our response to do nothing.
#2
I was thinking the same thing. Israel got a good lesson at a reasonable expense. But so did Hamas/Iran. Hopefully the second time through Israel will have learned more than Hamas/Iran, and anticipated where Hamas/Iran will apply their lessons learned.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
