posted on April 29, 2007 01:07:14 PM new
Well....it appears that CC has RUN OFF again. tsk tsk
I'll add that it's funny to me how each and every time ANY book comes out that is critical of this admin.....the liberals hop right on it.
But they'll TOTALLY ignore any negative written about their admin. - whether it be in those SAME BOOKS or elsewhere.
And like CC did here....she'll claim she believes the 9-11 commission. Supposedly uses it for her proof....when she's really using Tenet's BOOK and what HE said.
BUT she's very selective in what they [the 9-11 commission] have said that she CHOOSES to not to believe.
Like she's STILL going on and on falsely stating 'he lied'. But obviously she DOESN'T BELIEVE the 9-11 findings on that issue either. Because they put NO BLAME for 'lying NOR manipulating ANY intelligence' about Iraq on this President.
Matter of FACT....they said HE DIDN'T do any such thing.
So....the liberals will continue to believe what people write in books....that ALWAYS make themselves look so innocent and SO knowledgable.
While they'll ignore the findings of FACT SEEKING investigations - LOL LOL LOL
And the Tenet book is NO different.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by linda_K on Apr 29, 2007 01:11 PM
[ edited by linda_K on Apr 29, 2007 01:18 PM ]
posted on April 29, 2007 02:09:26 PM new
Linda, You are so tiresome and predictable. Love to try and get people's hackles up with all your mumbo jumbo, misquotes, selective C & P's. I have told you repeatedly that I did not answer your question about Clinton because I do NOT KNOW the reason (a phrase you rarely if ever use.) Would you like me to make one up? When I have time to do enough research, I may have an opinion.
"And like CC did here....she'll claim she believes the 9-11 commission. Supposedly uses it for her proof....when she's really using Tenet's BOOK and what HE said."
Now you know what I am REALLY doing as opposed to what I say I am doing. No end to your talent! As the OP of this thread, I thought it would be interesting to C & P a few excerpts from Tenet's book and have a discussion about it---not a war, for Pete's sake. Why must you go off the deep end about everything? The information about the transition plans given to Bush's adminstration was taken directly from the 911 Commission report. I believe several other posters also C & P'd the same information from the same source, the 911 Commission Report. Not that it matters to you, as you will put your own spin on it.
posted on April 29, 2007 03:23:34 PM new
Your excuses don't work, CC.
I asked for YOUR OPINION....and you're telling me you can't come up with one. LOL LOL LOL
I'm pointing out to you that you're holding one admin. to something the other admin didn't use either.
It's really pretty simple.
You are ONLY expecting this one to have 'followed' those recommendations....but not the one that drew them up.
DOUBLE STANDARD....clear enough.
As to the rest. I will again point out to you most of what has been posted here came from Tenet's BOOK...or other sources.
I will ALSO point out to you NO WHERE did any liberal use a LINK to the 9-11 commissions FINDINGS.
You accept that as FACT....I don't.
I prefer to see the links and where these 'supposed' info. comes from.
The fact that you don't REQUIRE links to see where posted info. actually came from/comes from....speaks VOLUMES to me as to your lack of requirements in debate.
And it's why I see your willingness to believe ANYTHING an liberals posts....LOL
posted on April 29, 2007 04:11:39 PM new
Coincoach, another one of linduh's "outs" is the "link" thing. She seems to have rules that she thinks we must obey. Like when she's losing an argument ..it's the Excuse # 35 : You didn't provide a link.
It was standard operating procedure here in discussion/debate for many years.
Any of the old timers here would KNOW that.
But since we have all these liberals who have joined in....and who ONLY want to post PARTIAL copy and pastes....and are ASHAMED of what they came from or whose opinions they are....LOL
we have now come to a point where ANY falsehood can be posted....and the simple minded with automatically believe it. Without proof/without any verification.
Just their personal distortions or those of other liberals whom they are cowards to give credit to for THEIR op-eds.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on April 29, 2007 04:53:36 PM new
"Your excuses don't work, CC.
I asked for YOUR OPINION....and you're telling me you can't come up with one. LOL LOL LOL"
I have no doubt that you can give an opinion without the information needed to form one, but I can't. It is not an excuse, it is a fact. Why should I make any excuses to you, of all people? The point I was making is that Condoleeza Rice LIED about receiving those reports.
"I will ALSO point out to you NO WHERE did any liberal use a LINK to the 9-11 commissions FINDINGS.
You accept that as FACT....I don't."
I don't have to accept any other LIBERAL'S post without a link. I read it for MYSELF in the 911 Commission Report. When other posters ask you for a link, you are quick to accuse them of being lazy--so follow your own advice and go Google the report yourself.
posted on April 29, 2007 05:00:55 PM new
What you can't seem to GRASP, CC. IS that when a liberal posts a partial copy and paste.....as you did in opening this thread....and then CLAIMS that is factual....we don't know that at all. We don't know what else was said in that op-ed piece that mentioned something else....like the OTHER side of the story.
And you are living in some fantasy world if you think I don't post my sources on EVERY copy and paste post I make. Because I do.
So there's NO double standard on my part, CC. You're just blind it appears.
Besides being biased....and not even being able to ADMIT here that NO LINK was provided by ANY copy and paste ANY of you liberals made in this THREAD. As is you normal MO.
And I'm saying that when some op-ed writer takes PART of what was said in the 9-11 commissions report......and gives their TAKE on it.....that doesn't at all discount that the testimony of OTHERS didn't DISPUTE what they said.
See....there's two sides to EVERY issue.
And you just find it 'tiresome' when it's pointed out that believing everything someone SAYS....doesn't make it TRUTHFUL.....at all.
posted on April 29, 2007 05:04:02 PM new
To try and clarify what I'm saying....
....you present as FACT condi had that info...and therefore this admin. SHOULD have followed their recommendations but didn't.
lol
Then I point out to you that the 9-11 commission report says THEY didn't either. lol
Then....you don't want to discuss it any further. YOU KNOW condi lied....doesn't matter that the 9-11 commission reports is what condi USED as her proof....while clinton used clarkes BOOK.
LOL LOL LOL
I'll take the commissions 'take' over clarks book any day.
posted on April 29, 2007 05:23:52 PM new
"Besides being biased....and not even being able to ADMIT here that NO LINK was provided by ANY copy and paste ANY of you liberals made in this THREAD. As is you normal MO."
What is wrong with you? No where did I say there was or was not a link. I did not use a link and I would have to read through the thread to see if others did.
"....you present as FACT condi had that info...and therefore this admin. SHOULD have followed their recommendations but didn't."
Not anywhere in this thread did I criticize the Bush administration for not following up.
Never even mentioned it. It was only about whether or not Rice was given transitional reports or not. The 911 Commission Report says these reports were given to Rice. She said they were not.
"Then....you don't want to discuss it any further. YOU KNOW condi lied....doesn't matter that the 9-11 commission reports is what condi USED as her proof....while clinton used clarkes BOOK."
What are you talking about? Rice told the Commission that she did not receive these.
This link (sorry forgot how to make it clickable)is 911 Commission Report.
Early in 2001, DCI Tenet and Deputy Director for Operations James Pavitt gave an intelligence briefing to President-elect Bush, Vice President-elect Cheney, and Rice; it included the topic of al Qaeda. Pavitt recalled conveying that Bin Ladin was one of the gravest threats to the country.25
By 2001 the government still needed a decision at the highest level as to whether al Qaeda was or was not "a first order threat," Richard Clarke wrote in his first memo to Condoleezza Rice on January 25, 2001. In his blistering protest about foot-dragging in the Pentagon and at the CIA, sent to Rice just a week before 9/11, he repeated that the "real question" for the principals was "are we serious about dealing with the al Qida threat? . . . Is al Qida a big deal?"
One school of thought, Clarke wrote in this September 4 note, implicitly argued that the terrorist network was a nuisance that killed a score of Americans every 18-24 months. If that view was credited, then current policies might be proportionate. Another school saw al Qaeda as the "point of the spear of radical Islam." But no one forced the argument into the open by calling for a national estimate or a broader discussion of the threat. The issue was never joined as a collective debate by the U.S. government, including the Congress, before 9/11.
We return to the issue of proportion-and imagination. Even Clarke's note challenging Rice to imagine the day after an attack posits a strike that kills "hundreds" of Americans. He did not write "thousands."
Institutionalizing Imagination:
These excerpts show she knew about it.
"ALONG with your FALSE accusation about this President LYING.
The 9-11 commission said that wasn't TRUE....but doesn't keep you from posting THAT FALSHOOD, still."
I never mentioned anything about Bush lying in this thread, nor do I attribute that to the 911 Commission. That is my long-standing opinion. You are all over the place, Linda, in your desperation to always be right and to get people to grovel at your feet.
posted on April 29, 2007 06:27:56 PM new
And on how the Tenet book is doing BEFORE it's even been released....lol
And as when hillary's book came out....many didn't agree with HER 'recollection' of certain events either. LOL
Maybe their memories aren't so clear. lol
==============
NewsMax.com
Sunday, April 29, 2007 6:35 p.m. EDT
Tenet Faces Backlash Over Memoir
The backlash has built up even before the official release of former CIA Director George Tenet's memoir, with criticism about his version of the run-up to the Iraq war, interrogation techniques and other events.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday disputed Tenet's claim that the Bush administration, before the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003, never had a serious debate about whether Iraq posed an imminent threat or whether to tighten existing sanctions.
"The president started a discussion practically on the day that he took power about how to enhance sanctions against Iraq," she said. "You may remember that in his first press conference, he said the sanctions had become Swiss cheese."
Rice, who was Bush's national security adviser in his first term, said the administration reviewed the sanctions, went to the United Nations to strengthen them and tried to tighten the no-fly zone in northern Iraq to better police Saddam Hussein's forces.
A Tenet associate, who spoke on condition of anonymity before the book's release Monday, said Tenet was not talking about improving the sanctions, but rather the debate about the wisdom of going to war. The associate said those debates did not happen in the presence of Tenet or other senior CIA officials, despite their participation in numerous discussions in the White House's situation room.
The memoir from the second-longest serving CIA chief covers many topics — from his attempts to help negotiate peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians during the Clinton administration, to the days surrounding Sept. 11, 2001, and to the invasion of Iraq and its aftermath.
Looking ahead, he says, al-Qaida wants to change history and meet its top one goal of obtaining a nuclear device.
Tenet highlights the errors of others during his tenure from July 1997 to July 2004, such as the extraordinary efforts by Vice President Cheney and others to connect Iraq and al-Qaida.
Tenet also takes blame for other failures, such as the production of the botched National Intelligence Estimate in 2002 that was used to justify invading Iraq.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he does not accept assertions from Tenet that the U.S. government saved lives through some of the agency's most aggressive interrogation techniques.
In an interview with CBS' "60 Minutes" to air Sunday evening, Tenet says the intelligence gained from suspected terrorists in the CIA's covert detention program and its "enhanced interrogation techniques" was more valuable than all the other terrorism-related intelligence gathered by the FBI, the National Security Agency and his own agency.
Yet McCain said the U.S. cannot torture people and maintain its moral superiority in the world. "I don't care what George Tenet says. I know what's right. I know what's morally right as far as America's behavior," the presidential candidate and former prisoner-of-war said Sunday.
McCain said he does not accept Tenet's premise that the CIA's practices save lives because torture and mistreatment historically have not worked in intelligence collection.
"We've gotten a huge amount of misinformation as well as other information from these techniques," McCain said.
Tenet and the CIA deny using torture. But McCain's words suggest he believes the CIA's practices amounted to torture and were wrong.
In his book, Tenet said McCain has engaged the country in an important moral debate "about who we are as people and what we should stand for, even when up against an enemy so full of hate they would murder thousands of our children without a thought."
If elected officials believe certain interrogation actions put the country in a difficult moral position, they should be stopped, according to Tenet, once the Democratic staff director of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Writing in Sunday's Washington Post, the one-time head of Tenet's Osama bin Laden unit, Michael Scheuer, said Tenet should have told his story sooner.
"At this late date, the Bush-bashing that Tenet's book will inevitably stir up seems designed to rehabilitate Tenet in his first home, the Democratic Party. He seems to blame the war on everyone but Bush (who gave Tenet the Medal of Freedom) and former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell (who remains the Democrats' ideal Republican)," Scheuer wrote.
A half-dozen former CIA officers — including counterterrorism experts Larry Johnson and Vince Cannistraro — are urging Tenet to dedicate a significant portion of his royalties to soldiers and families of those killed or wounded in Iraq.
"We agree that the war of choice in Iraq was ill-advised and wrong headed. But your lament that you are a victim in a proIss you helped direct is self-serving, misleading and, as head of the intelligence community, an admission of failed leadership," they wrote.
Rice appeared on CNN's "Late Edition," ABC's "This Week," and "Face the Nation" on CBS. McCain was on "Fox News Sunday."
===
Associated Press
[ edited by linda_K on Apr 29, 2007 06:34 PM ]
posted on April 29, 2007 06:44:40 PM new
also from newsmax.com - in part.
Tenet will not only be tough on Republicans.
The former chief spook also takes on Bill Clinton. In "At the Center of the Storm," he describes how he had to establish a back-channel relationship in the late 1990s with Republican Newt Gingrich, who was then House speaker, to obtain a much-needed influx of dollars for the intelligence community.
Clinton's annual budgets slashed the CIA's clandestine service by 25 percent at a time when it was trying to penetrate Osama bin Laden's organization.
Over the objections of the Clinton administration, Tenet had to try to offset the cuts by obtaining additional funding through supplemental appropriations.
Supplementals, however, are only good for a year and are no way to rebuild an agency, which was decimated by Clinton.
Beyond the hits at Democrats, Republicans will be cheered that the book leaves Bush relatively unscathed. Some Democrats have charged that Bush and his key lieutenants manipulated pre-war intelligence to make a strong case that Saddam had or was about to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Tenet provides these critics no smoking guns. Besides the fact that every major intelligence agency in the world believed Saddam had WMD, Saddam's own generals believed it.
Tenet is not simply using his book to point fingers. He tries to present a factual narrative rather than deliver judgements. And Tenet is tough on himself for mistakes made by the CIA during his time at the helm, according to a source familiar with the book.
Some of the early leaks about the book have been wrong. For example, Chris Matthews asserted on MSNBC's "Hardball" that Tenet will deny having made the claim that "there was a slam dunk case to be made that Saddam Hussein possessed those banned weapons."
When Bob Woodward interviewed Bush for his book "State of Denial," the president attributed the remark to Tenet, saying that Tenet told him the case that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction was a "slam dunk."
According to a source, Tenet does not deny uttering the words but argues that the comments' context and implication were subsequently misstated.
The 576-page book is said to be jam packed with new disclosures. In writing the book, Tenet had access to classified documents at the CIA. The book had to be reviewed by the CIA to make sure no sensitive information that is still classified was disclosed. The CIA allowed the vast majority of the draft manuscript to be published.
Some of the censored material described successful CIA operations to obtain intelligence and stop terrorist plots -- anecdotes that supported White House claims that the war on terror has been a success.
Publicity begins this coming Sunday with an appearance by Tenet on CBS' "60 Minutes." The book goes on sale Monday, April 30.
========
Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of NewsMax.com
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/4/22/204033.shtml?s=tn
[ edited by linda_K on Apr 29, 2007 06:49 PM ]
posted on April 29, 2007 07:09:11 PM new
"posted on April 29, 2007 06:14:01 PM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOL....oh the GAMES you liberals play.
No, you didn't mention it in THIS thread. BUT you have said he lied. THAT is NOT what the FACTS show.
So again....you choose to only believe what you want to believe. The 9-11 final report noted that HE DID NOT.
Yet you continue to restate that LIE.
tsk tsk tsk
Linda, Talk about playing games. This is your game #1---when you can't dispute, divert attention. You are trying to change the subject. Continue to re-state that lie? When and where in this thread? We were talking about Condoleeza Rice and you wanted a link to the 911 Comm. Report. I gave it to you. Now all of a sudden you are bringing up the Pres. Why?
posted on April 30, 2007 04:57:31 PM new
[i]I am surprised you are so sensitive. Talk about a double standard.{/i]
Linda is the biggest hypocrite on the board. She accuses everyone else of what she does herself.
She doesn't like being called names but as you already pointed out she throws them out all the time. Yet when she is called one, she plays the victim role to a "T".
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
