Saturday, March 27, 2004
The Only Point that Matters About Richard Clarke
GORTON: Now, since my yellow light is on, at this point my final question will be this: Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001, based on Delenda, based on Blue Sky, including aid to the Northern Alliance, which had been an agenda item at this point for two and a half years without any action, assuming that there had been more Predator reconnaissance missions, assuming that that had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?
There will continue to be lots of finger-pointing, but over what? If 9-11 was not preventable, who cares about the rest of his testimony?
A few weeks ago I posted a comment on this blog about how paranoid some of the members of Lucianne.com are about Hillary, that they even think she is going to come riding in on her broomstick and steal the nomination from John F'ing Kerry. I take it back; it now seems quite possible to me that will happen.
Friday, March 26, 2004
Macho Liberals, Part Quatre
I wish I could say this is a surprise
Now We Know Where Terry Gets Those Stupid Ideas
Read the last paragraph of this
, then look at this
. Kudos to Drudge.
Thursday, March 25, 2004
The Republican Who Gives ONLY to Democrats?
Insight Mag reports
that Richard Clarke gave $2,000 to two Democratic candidates for Congress and nothing to Republicans in 2002. In fairness to Clarke, both candidates were former NSC staffers, and therefore he was presumably friendly with them. However, there is no record of him giving any money to Republican candidates, despite his claim before the 9-11 commission that he was a Republican up until 2000.
A Conservative Cocoon?
Mickey Kaus commented months ago on the liberal cocoon. His thesis was that liberals get their news from liberal sources like the New York Times and CBS News, and that while this helps keep them happy and confident, it gives them a distorted picture of the world--that Democrats are on the verge of taking over Congress, for example. Then the election comes along and spoils their fantasy.
I see the potential of that developing on the conservative side. It's true we don't have control of the major media like the liberals, but we have developed our own alternative sources of media--talk radio, Fox News, conservative weblogs, sites like Drudge
. I have been a long-time member of Lucianne and I absolutely love the site. It's one of my two or three most visited sites daily, and the first one I fire up in the morning.
But (you knew there had to be a but) I wonder if there isn't a danger here of developing complacency based on continual reinforcement of conservative opinion. The issue that brings this up is Richard Clarke and his testimony before the 9-11 commission. Those in the conservative cocoon know
that he has been thoroughly debunked (see for example two posts below). And that is fine. But we can't assume that the rest of the country knows this; in fact they do not.
Rich Lowry wrote a fine article for the NY Post
about Clarke's testimony. But it starts like this:
DEAN Acheson famously titled his memoir of his years as secretary of state after World War II "Present at the Creation." Anyone close to Richard Clarke these last few days could write a memoir called "Present at the Self-Immolation." Rarely has a former public servant with such a sterling reputation shot it all away so quickly.
The comments on the article at Lucianne
were along the lines of the following:
This maniac, Clarke, is TOAST.
The whole spectacle turned out to be another useless attempt by the DNC (and Klintoon) and their shills at CBS to discredit GW and his administration.
This hearing was foisted upon us by partisans and it's goal was to indict the Bush administration for clintoon blunders...it has failed miserably,
Sorry if I don't buy the notion that he's been thoroughly discredited in the eyes of the American people. In the eyes of those who pay attention and surf the web looking for information, yes. Unfortunately, we're still a small minority of the country.
Macho Liberals, Part Trois
Michael Signer has an op-ed in USA Today urging Democrats to be tougher. His prescription:
If they are to prevail, liberals need to reinvent themselves. This enterprise will require a brand of internationalism that unquestionably places America first; the framing of causes in a moral language of certitude; a renewed fighting approach, both in campaigns and governance; a side-stepping of policies and language based purely on rights or empathy; and a new political vocabulary premised on courage, fortitude and certitude.
I don't see how it's going to work. Even John Kerry's fans admit that he sees the world in shades of grey, which sort of rules out "framing of causes in a moral language of certitude". The "renewed fighting approach" of course sounds great to liberals who think that a lack of feistiness is what cost Michael Dukakis (we hear this all the time, now that another Massachusetts liberal is about to win the nomination). Not to be unkind, but it sounds more to me like rubbing the lipstick off the pig and hoping that NOW people will kiss it.
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
And We Thought Kerry Was Flipper
(Via Instapundit) Here's Lesley Stahl's favorite intelligence expert in 2002
RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.
So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.
And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course [of] five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline.
Anybody think CBS will issue a retraction of the story?
What Policy? Accepting the Lies?
Madelaine Almostbright at the 9-11 hearings yesterday:
Well I do know that, but I also, um, do know that many of the, ah, um, policy issues that we had developed were not followed up, and I have to say with great sadness, ah, to watch an incoming Administration kind of take apart a lot of the policies that we did have, whether it had to do with North Korea....
Why would she bring up one of the biggest foreign policy debacles of the Clinton Administration? That's almost as dumb as saying "I was disappointed that they didn't do in Iraq what we did in Mogadishu."
Kudos to Hugh Hewitt
for highlighting this on his radio show yesterday.
Tuesday, March 23, 2004
This is a Sad Joke
Newsmax is reporting that the 9-11 commission has rejected
any evidence that Bill Clinton turned down an offer from the Sudanese to hand over Osama Bin Laden in 1996, despite Clinton's own admission that the incident did in fact happen!
Can you say "whitewash"?
Now the Terrorists are Really Mad!
That appears to be the point of Robert Fisk's latest offering, appropriately titled "The Gloves are Off in Terror War"
No one has begun to work out the implications of all this. For years, there has been an unwritten rule in the cruel war of government-versus-guerrilla. You can kill the men on the street, the bomb-makers and gunmen, but the leadership was allowed to survive.
Now all has changed utterly. Anyone who advocates violence - even if they are palpably incapable of committing it - are now on a death list. So who can be surprised if the rules are broken by the other side?
The top guys are now in the firing line. Let us not say we didn't know.
Jeez, I didn't know Hamas was leaving Israel's leaders alone.
Monday, March 22, 2004
Although most of the focus on yesterday's 60 Minutes has been on the Dick Clarke segment, Ed Bradley's piece on Al Queda #2 man, al-Zawahri
, contained this floater:
Ayman al-Zawahri does not fit your typical profile of a terrorist. He grew up in Cairo in one of the most exclusive neighborhoods along the banks of the Nile.
No, of course that is not the typical profile of a terrorist. Atta's father was a lawyer. Bin Laden's father was a billionaire contractor.
When Peace Protests Turn Ugly
(Via Little Green Footballs). Here's a photo story
of a woman being trampled by anti-war protesters. You may have to scroll down a few photos to see the beginning.