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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: jttmab who wrote (185405)4/20/2006 2:52:35 PM
From: Hawkmoon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
A new program gets a line item, it goes into an appropriations bill, no one reads it other than the Intelligence Committee members and it goes off to the White House for signature.

Listen.. the Clinton administration tried to arrest Robert Baer, the CIA case officer responsible for Iraq in the mid-'90s, accusing him of orchestrating (with Iraqi generals) the assassination and overthrow of Saddam Hussein. He resigned as a result.

So why don't you stop trying to weasel around the issue or playing Clinton administration "apologist".

You don't just have a congressman creating his own FP to overthrow another government without the White House putting its stamp of approval on it.

After all, it is a cabinet level agency that is responsible for carrying out the assigned operation.

To assert that Richard Clarke, and the Clinton administration, was not involved in the policy is absolutely LUDICROUS..

Why can't Clarke just come out and admit that the White House was ALSO involved, even if Gringrich might have proposed the operation and guaranteed the funding in the budgeting process in Congress??

The very thought that a congressman, even one as powerful as Gingrich was at that time, can dictate FP to the Clinton administration is essentially an admission that the Clinton National Security Staff was incompetent and not in control over their assigned responsibilities.

Hawk