Saturday, February 13, 2010

Oldest Bush II Job - Torture Meister

Morning Joe on MSNBC had an interesting segment yesterday that overflowed into The Ed Show in the afternoon.

Lawrence O'Donnell was fed up with the Cheney lies a Bush II speech writer, Marc Thiessen, was fostering on the public during the segment, and said so. Thiessen has released a book that says President Obama is inviting terrorist attacks on the U.S. by stopping CIA torture programs.

The fact is that it was the Bush II policy up to and after 9/11 which increased and enhanced al Qaeda recruiting, and even enhanced terrorism around the globe.

A book by Richard A. Clarke, Against All Enemies, tells the story of the Bush II regime's utter and wide spread unawareness of the terrorist threat that was looming according to U.S. intelligence.

He tried repeatedly to tell them something was coming, but they would not listen.

Wolfowitz felt that there could be no attack against the U.S. without a state sponsor, and the rest of the regime was soft on terrorism as well.

Eventually Clarke resigned because the bushies were clueless, and were ruining the reputation of the U.S. in the world.

For the Bush II propagandist Thiessen to release his book claiming the Obama Administration is not as alert as the bushies were is the ultimate falsehood and hypocrisy.

Their torture of citizens from allies and foes set us back a generation in terms of our reputation and standing in the world.


  1. Actually, if you believe in the liklihood that 9-11 was an inside job (and I think I'm leaning that way now, probably 60-40), then the feigned ignorance before hand was probably all for show, or, at the very least, was manipulated by insiders as well.

    If that's the case, what I WOULD be worried about (or watching for) is another such "attack" sometime during the Obama administration, most likely in the run up to 2010 and/or 2012 elections. Coming on the heels of a constant drumbeat from Cheney and his stooges about American weakness, that would in all liklihood set the stages for a full-on military style takeover in 2012, with predictable consequences thereafter.

    Further, I'm not sure the Obama administration wouldn't be complicit in the whole matter as well. He's looking more and more everyday to me like a potted plant, a stooge, a placeholder, a puppet to me. I just don't see all that much practical difference between Obama and Bush, other than the ability to express himself in complete, logical, and coherent sentences.

  2. disaffected,

    If it was an "inside job" is was rogue and not wide spread across the government.

    My guess is that most of it would be military in origin.

    I have not looked into that because the issue of how the 3 buildings were really brought down, how NORAD was really brought down, and how the 9/11 Commission was really brought down is the prima facia case that first must be made.

    What actually happened must pre-date whodunnit in other words ...

  3. I agree with that; however, some idea of who might be complicit will probably be necessary, since any prospective investigation isn't going to proceed in a vacuum, and in all likelihood, would result in the "elimination" of any single individuals who got too close and who couldn't also be discredited.

    Reasonable doubt as to whether or not there WAS a conspiracy is certainly already there IMO. To get over the next hump IMO, some hint at an actual smoking gun is going to have to be proven, or at least VERY strongly suggested. Absent that, time is on any alleged conspirators' side. In fact, I'd say the ship has already pretty much sailed, other than as historical speculation, a la the Kennedy assasination.

  4. disaffected,

    The 9/11 Commissioners say they were lied to by the government and did not get to the truth.

    The Warren Commission members never went there.

    There is some difference in the 9/11 situation.

  5. Dredd,

    The 9-11 Commissioners actually came out and said that they were lied to by the US Government? I'm asking, because I, like most Americans, never bothered reading the whole thing. Still, I find that a little hard to believe.

    That said, I think we could both agree, in the Warren Commission's day, a massive government conspiracy/coverup was even more unthinkable than it is now (although not necessarily any less do-able).

  6. disaffected,

    You mentioned "The 9-11 Commissioners actually came out and said that they were lied to by the US Government? I'm asking, because I, like most Americans, never bothered reading the whole thing. Still, I find that a little hard to believe."

    Read this post about a book the two co-chairmen of the commission wrote where they say the government officials testifying before them perjured themselves.

    In the same post John Farmer, a commission lawyer, says it was a conspiracy to lie and deceive the commission.

    In this post it is shown that the NTSB black box data from the Pentagon site does not hold up when put in airliner flight simulators (cabin doors never opened, 400 ft high at alleged point of impact, etc).

    In this post we quote from a congress member who was a top scientist at a top lab. He has presented a bill to investigate the anthrax episodes of 9/11, which likewise do not add up.

    And as to torture, this post shows that several of the commissioners and commision lawyers now say that witnesses had been tortured so did not tell them the truth either.

    The data is false, the testimony is false, and the media pancake theory is false since even NIST backed off that story and says it is not true now.

    No wonder some people in congress (Holt) want a new independent commission to look over the case properly.