SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Attack Iraq? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2222)10/7/2002 9:50:39 PM
From: GROUND ZERO™  Respond to of 8683
 
Raymond Duray is a Lee harvey Oswald wannabee... useful idiots are all the same...

GZ



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2222)10/7/2002 10:54:16 PM
From: lorne  Respond to of 8683
 
Freeh: 'Right-wing groups' bigger threat
Clinton FBI chief's counterterror focus to be probed at 9-11 hearing
October 7, 2002
WASHINGTON – As WorldNetDaily first reported Friday , former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who has been criticized for refocusing counterterrorism efforts on "right-wing groups," will headline tomorrow's Senate hearings probing Sept. 11 failures.

CIA Director George Tenet, another Clinton appointee, is scheduled to testify in Thursday's hearing, jointly held by the Senate and House intelligence committees, a House Intelligence Committee aide said today. This week's witness schedule has not yet been released to the press or posted on either committee website.

Despite alarming evidence of an escalation in anti-American attacks from Islamic terrorist groups like al-Qaida, Freeh in 1999 told Congress that domestic "right-wing groups" posed "a very real threat" to national security.

"While the United States holds little credible intelligence at this time indicating that international or domestic terrorists are planning to attack United States interests domestically through the use of weapons of mass destruction, a growing number (while still small) of 'lone offender' and extremist splinter elements of right-wing groups have been identified as possessing or attempting to develop/use chemical, biological or radiological materials," Freeh said Feb. 4, 1999, in a prepared statement submitted to a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations.

"Additionally, religious/apocalyptic sects which are unaffiliated with far-right extremists may pose an increasing threat," Freeh said.

Freeh seemed less worried about the threat from Islamic terrorist groups like al-Qaida, even though they had been responsible for a pattern of attacks from the 1993 World Trade Center bombing to the 1996 bombing of U.S. military barracks in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, to the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998.

"We are fortunate that in the nearly six years since the World Trade Center bombing, no significant act of foreign-directed terrorism has occurred on American soil," Free testified.

As WorldNetDaily first reported July 25, veteran FBI agents have complained that the Clinton administration shifted counterterror efforts to fighting "right-wing groups" as part of a larger political strategy to demonize Republicans.

After the Oklahoma City bombing, President Clinton bashed the anti-big-government movement that led to the GOP takeover of Congress. He also took the opportunity to implicate talk radio for broadcasting "a relentless clamor of hatred and division."

Freeh in his 1999 testimony defined "right-wing groups" as "militias, white-separatist groups, anti-government groups," "tax protestors" and "anti-abortion" bombers.

He stressed that the bombing of an abortion clinic in Birmingham, Ala., had "resulted in a significant allocation of FBI manpower and resources to the investigation."

Freeh and his deputy Robert B. "Bear" Bryant moved counterterrorism analysts over to tracking "right-wing groups" and aiding in criminal prosecutions, agents have told WorldNetDaily. Intelligence-gathering on foreign threats suffered as a result.

"Sept. 11 proved that plan didn't work," concurred Washington Times national-security reporter Bill Gertz in "Breakdown," his new book released in August. "It later came to light that headquarters ignored dedicated agents in the field who had flagged the suspicious activity of Middle Eastern men enrolled at U.S. flight schools."

FBI agents knew the threat of homegrown terrorism from militias and other groups was not as serious as the growing threat of Islamic terrorism.

Yet Freeh and Bryant – under the direction of Attorney General Janet Reno – made "right-wing" terrorism the centerpiece of their strategy to combat Y2K security threats.

The strategy, called "Project Megiddo," zeroed in on white supremacists, militias and Christian "extremists." The project was outlined in a 32-page report that the FBI recently removed from its website.

The fear of homegrown terrorism proved overdone.

In fact, the only real terrorist threat in the new millennium came from an al-Qaida operative who tried to sneak into the U.S. from Canada with bombs to blow up Los Angeles International Airport.

Critics say the bureau wasted valuable resources that could have been better spent hunting down Osama bin Laden and eradicating al-Qaida sleeper cells in the U.S.

Republicans on this week's joint panel exploring Sept. 11 failures are expected to press Freeh about the alleged politicization of the bureau under the Clinton administration.

Joining Freeh on tomorrow's witness panel are former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H., Paul Pillar, national intelligence officer for the CIA's Northeast South Asia region, and Mary Jo White, former U.S. attorney in New York.

Thursday's witnesses include Tenet, FBI Director Robert Mueller and Lt. Gen. Michael Hayden, director of the National Security Agency.

The joint panel – co-chaired by Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., and Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla. – will hold a closed session on Wednesday.

Tuesday's and Thursday's hearings, which will be held in Room 216 of the Senate Hart Building, are open to the public. They are slated to run from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. both days, with an hour break for lunch from 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.
worldnetdaily.com



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2222)10/7/2002 10:55:38 PM
From: lorne  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 8683
 
Democrats Try to Steal Another Election
By Doug Patton
October 7, 2002
You have to hand it to them - Democrats, that is. No one can disregard the rule of law and get away with it like they can. They have become masters at it.

In fact, just when it would appear impossible for the ethically challenged party of "Chappaquidick" Teddy, "Intern" Bill, "Cattle Futures" Hillary and "Buddhist Temple" Al to sink any lower into the cesspool of power-grubbing corruption in its disdain for statutory or Constitutional authority, its power brokers show us otherwise.

I refer, of course, to the breathtaking contempt for election law displayed last week, when the New Jersey Supreme Court swept aside the will of the people and their duly elected state representatives in order to allow Democrats to cling to the one thing they fear losing above all else: power.

For those who may have missed the story, the candidacy of New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli - another towering paragon of Democrat virtue - had become so compromised by revelations of personal and political corruption that the party bosses decided he was going to lose his bid for reelection. This, of course, would upset the delicate balance of power in the U.S. Senate and bring about the unthinkable: a Republican President working with a Republican House of Representatives and a Republican-controlled Senate.

The last time that happened, several members of this current Senate had not yet been born!

Something had to be done. So, in the tradition of their past political thefts, Democrats did what they always do when they are about to lose - change the rules. It worked for them in Missouri when, on Election Night 2000, a circuit court judge (who just happens to be a former crony of Rep. Dick Gephardt) kept the polls open late in certain predominantly black districts of St. Louis. This, of course, gave Democrats an advantage and probably allowed Jean Carnahan to steal John Ashcroft's Senate seat. Of course, we will never know for sure because Ashcroft was too much of a gentleman even to campaign against the newly widowed Carnahan, let alone accuse her party of stealing an election.

It would have worked for them in the 2000 presidential election as well, if the United States Supreme Court had not intervened to stop the Democrat-dominated Florida Supreme Court from stealing the election for Al Gore.

This year, New Jersey Democrats decided to simply replace Torricelli's name on the ballot with someone they believe can win. Never mind that New Jersey election law clearly states that it is illegal to do so a month before an election. "The Torch" was about to lose, so they put somebody else up - and the state Supreme Court let them do it.

Can you imagine the outcry if Republicans had taken a poll at this point in the 2000 New York Senate race, determined that Rick Lazio was going to lose to Hillary Clinton and decided to replace him on the ballot with Rudy Gulliani? We all know what would have happened, and the media even now would be talking about it as the most outrageous power grab in history - and they would be right!

But no such media outrage seems to exist in this case, even though such political manipulation surely would have impressed Richard Nixon or Huey Long.

For the record, it should be noted that six of the seven judges who unanimously upheld this violation of the law were appointed by none other than former New Jersey Governor Christie Whitman - a RINO (Republican In Name Only), if ever there was one.

Will the U.S. Supreme Court hear this case and once more save the Republic from this kind of Democrat thievery? If so, they had better do it soon.
gopusa.com



To: Raymond Duray who wrote (2222)10/8/2002 12:15:32 PM
From: Lazarus_Long  Respond to of 8683
 
Say, coward, why is it you never answer any of us? Afraid of us? Can't take care of yourself? Afraid we'll show you for the idiot you are?

"I'd be the last person to compare anyone with Hitler
Except, of course, that he then proceeds to do just that.

If you like conspiracies,
I can see why you liked the article. You certainly are part of that group.

According to a Sept. 17 editorial in The Charleston Gazette, Kristol was paid $100,000 a year by Enron, the troubled energy broker.
Are you aware that Guv Davis of CA accepted $150,000 in campaign contributions from Enron? You think this might have influenced his actions during the CA energy crisis? You know, buying energy at the highest possible price.

These convoluted relationships remind me of the laughter and derision that greeted Hillary Clinton when she referred to "a vast right-wing conspiracy."
It's true. There really is such a thing. I'm a Proud Member of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

Our military budget, by the way, is bigger than that of "the next eight spenders combined, and 22 times the combined military budgets of our fiercest enemies -- Libya, North Korea, Cuba, Iraq and Sudan,"
Yeah. We prefer to spend money rather than lives.

You got a problem with that?

In essence, the "take over the world" plan says we should be equipped to fight and win multiple simultaneous wars in widely separated parts of the world.
Uh, that has been US military doctrine for DECADES. Remember WW2? Europe and the Pacific? Think it can't happen?

Our leaders believe it's our destiny to control the world.
Well, actually, the US is a world power. You ever hear of a world power that DIDN'T extend its influence across the globe? Remember Britain? "The sun never sets on the British Empire"?

Compared to our predecessor world powers, I'd say we're pretty sober and mild.

Or do you think Saddam would be a nice guy?

Come on, little boy, screw up your courage. We're waiting to hear from you.