On April 25, 2007 you said:
"I Urge the President to Sign This Bill so We Can Focus on Winning the War Against Terrorism"
Gabby's questions:
Nancy Pelosi, where is the war on terrorism that you would like to focus on winning, located?
Nancy Pelosi, who are the terrorists of which you speak?
Nancy Pelosi, if not with troops - how do we fight this war on terrorism of which you speak?
Nancy Pelosi, with what methods do we fight this war on terrorism of which you speak?
Nancy Pelosi, can we win the war against this terrorism of which you speak?
Friday, April 27, 2007
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Jihad in Utah
Trolley Square gunman's name released
Salt Lake Police released the name of the man who walked into Trolley Square Mall Monday night, killing 5 people and injuring several others. Police say they don't know what motivated 18-year-old Sulejmen Talovic to perform this senseless act of violence.
Salt Lake Police released the name of the man who walked into Trolley Square Mall Monday night, killing 5 people and injuring several others. Police say they don't know what motivated 18-year-old Sulejmen Talovic to perform this senseless act of violence.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Zawahiri Whining to the Democrats
New tape surfaces from Ayman Al Zawahiri.
Jawa Report has the transcript.
Laura Mansfield located the tape and has analysis.
Jawa Report has the transcript.
Laura Mansfield located the tape and has analysis.
Message from a Marine's Father
JUSTIN SHARRATT- MY SON
I am the father of L/Cpl Justin Sharratt. On August16th, 2003 the dreams of a little boy became reality. My son Justin enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school graduation. Since the age of six, Justin dreamed of a military career. The combat boots, camouflage fatigues and helmet he wore as a child would soon become his uniform of the day as a United States Marine. To serve and protect the United States of America from all enemies both domestic and foreign; a duty he did not take lightly.
Justin’s first combat tour of duty was the city of Fallujah, Iraq. It was here, in the heat of the Iraqi desert, a boy became a man. Sharratt, Stone, Mitchell, Stevens and Wolf soon became ‘brothers by different mothers.’ In a battle known as “Hell House” they fought toe to toe with Iraqi insurgents bent on the destruction of U. S. Marines. They formed a bond forged in the furnace of combat; a bond that will last a lifetime. Semper Fidelis.
Upon his return from Iraq Justin joined us while on leave. He was transformed into the man all fathers dream and hope they will be. While on leave, Justin broke his ankle and was put on medical leave. It was at this time I realized what it meant to him to be an infantry rifleman, a grunt. He stared me in the eyes and said “Dad, all I want to do is get my ankle healed. I have to return to Iraq with 3-1 Kilo Company. The guys are counting on me to cover their six and I will never let them down.” Discussion ended—my son the warrior.
The city of Haditha, Iraq was the destination of 3-1 Kilo Company on Justin’s second deployment. Known to be a hot bed of Iraqi insurgency, the Marines of 3-1 Kilo Company could only envision what to expect. Seasoned from their tour in Fallujah, most of the Marines were on their second Operation Iraqi Freedom deployment, many their third. They were experienced combat veterans, drilled on the Rules of Engagement yet sensitive to their alien environment and the Iraqi populace.
On November 19, 2005, a convoy of four Marine humvees was ambushed on a city street in Haditha. A massive IED explosion ripped the fourth humvee in the column apart. One Marine was killed and two were seriously wounded. 3rd platoon, 3-1 Kilo Company, my son’s unit, was now in a firefight for their lives. There was no time for rage or revenge. Justin needed to apply his Marine Corps training and experience to preserve the lives of his fellow Marines. All the Marines in 3rd platoon responded in like manner- to preserve the lives of fellow Marines. Reinforcements were called in and an ambulance was needed to attend the wounded. Marines were positioned to defend their precarious position and a comm link was established to FOB Sparta. All done in the best of Marine Corps tradition and training while taking enemy fire.
In the aftermath of this engagement, 24 Iraqis were killed. A U.S. Congressman has called these Marines murderers. Time magazine has enlisted the propaganda of foreign journalists to sell its political agenda. Iraqi civilians have been schooled in making false statements. An Iraqi girl missed a day of school because she was afraid the bomb blast would injure her. Interesting reading, but I truly believe the American people can see through this barrage of media conjecture. I ask you not to prejudge my son, not to prejudge these Marines. They have served this country with honor, truth and diligence. I say unto you. the Few, the Proud, the Marines………..
War is a tragic thing. The enemy we are fighting has had centuries to prepare. They wear no uniforms, fight by no Rules of Engagement or follow the Geneva Convention. Using civilians as human shields is a common practice and their hatred for non-Islamic cultures is endemic.
The United States government has taken 12 months and spent millions of dollars and countless man-hours investigating the Haditha engagement. On December 21st, 2006, four NCOs and four officers were charged with violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. My son, LCpl Justin Sharratt faces three counts of unpremeditated murder. This is not the forum to discuss these charges but my son stands strong in the fact he followed the Rules of Engagement, protected his fellow Marines and did nothing wrong. All of these men are innocent of these charges. In the aftermath of 9-11, these men have risen to honorably serve their country. Some have given a lifetime of dedicated service, others were just beginning. They have demonstrated to the world there is “No better friend, No worse enemy” than a U.S. Marine.
For now, the handshakes will be tighter, the hugs will be longer and the tears sliding down my face are not a sign of weakness- they affirm a father’s love for his Marine son.
Darryl Sharratt Canonsburg, Pa.
www.justinsharratt.com
Are you listening John Murtha???
God bless all our brave heroes.
I am the father of L/Cpl Justin Sharratt. On August16th, 2003 the dreams of a little boy became reality. My son Justin enlisted in the United States Marine Corps after high school graduation. Since the age of six, Justin dreamed of a military career. The combat boots, camouflage fatigues and helmet he wore as a child would soon become his uniform of the day as a United States Marine. To serve and protect the United States of America from all enemies both domestic and foreign; a duty he did not take lightly.
Justin’s first combat tour of duty was the city of Fallujah, Iraq. It was here, in the heat of the Iraqi desert, a boy became a man. Sharratt, Stone, Mitchell, Stevens and Wolf soon became ‘brothers by different mothers.’ In a battle known as “Hell House” they fought toe to toe with Iraqi insurgents bent on the destruction of U. S. Marines. They formed a bond forged in the furnace of combat; a bond that will last a lifetime. Semper Fidelis.
Upon his return from Iraq Justin joined us while on leave. He was transformed into the man all fathers dream and hope they will be. While on leave, Justin broke his ankle and was put on medical leave. It was at this time I realized what it meant to him to be an infantry rifleman, a grunt. He stared me in the eyes and said “Dad, all I want to do is get my ankle healed. I have to return to Iraq with 3-1 Kilo Company. The guys are counting on me to cover their six and I will never let them down.” Discussion ended—my son the warrior.
The city of Haditha, Iraq was the destination of 3-1 Kilo Company on Justin’s second deployment. Known to be a hot bed of Iraqi insurgency, the Marines of 3-1 Kilo Company could only envision what to expect. Seasoned from their tour in Fallujah, most of the Marines were on their second Operation Iraqi Freedom deployment, many their third. They were experienced combat veterans, drilled on the Rules of Engagement yet sensitive to their alien environment and the Iraqi populace.
On November 19, 2005, a convoy of four Marine humvees was ambushed on a city street in Haditha. A massive IED explosion ripped the fourth humvee in the column apart. One Marine was killed and two were seriously wounded. 3rd platoon, 3-1 Kilo Company, my son’s unit, was now in a firefight for their lives. There was no time for rage or revenge. Justin needed to apply his Marine Corps training and experience to preserve the lives of his fellow Marines. All the Marines in 3rd platoon responded in like manner- to preserve the lives of fellow Marines. Reinforcements were called in and an ambulance was needed to attend the wounded. Marines were positioned to defend their precarious position and a comm link was established to FOB Sparta. All done in the best of Marine Corps tradition and training while taking enemy fire.
In the aftermath of this engagement, 24 Iraqis were killed. A U.S. Congressman has called these Marines murderers. Time magazine has enlisted the propaganda of foreign journalists to sell its political agenda. Iraqi civilians have been schooled in making false statements. An Iraqi girl missed a day of school because she was afraid the bomb blast would injure her. Interesting reading, but I truly believe the American people can see through this barrage of media conjecture. I ask you not to prejudge my son, not to prejudge these Marines. They have served this country with honor, truth and diligence. I say unto you. the Few, the Proud, the Marines………..
War is a tragic thing. The enemy we are fighting has had centuries to prepare. They wear no uniforms, fight by no Rules of Engagement or follow the Geneva Convention. Using civilians as human shields is a common practice and their hatred for non-Islamic cultures is endemic.
The United States government has taken 12 months and spent millions of dollars and countless man-hours investigating the Haditha engagement. On December 21st, 2006, four NCOs and four officers were charged with violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. My son, LCpl Justin Sharratt faces three counts of unpremeditated murder. This is not the forum to discuss these charges but my son stands strong in the fact he followed the Rules of Engagement, protected his fellow Marines and did nothing wrong. All of these men are innocent of these charges. In the aftermath of 9-11, these men have risen to honorably serve their country. Some have given a lifetime of dedicated service, others were just beginning. They have demonstrated to the world there is “No better friend, No worse enemy” than a U.S. Marine.
For now, the handshakes will be tighter, the hugs will be longer and the tears sliding down my face are not a sign of weakness- they affirm a father’s love for his Marine son.
Darryl Sharratt Canonsburg, Pa.
www.justinsharratt.com
Are you listening John Murtha???
God bless all our brave heroes.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Brother of slain Dearborn man wants answers
Brother of slain Dearborn man wants answers
Sibling doesn't believe allegations of abuse, drug use
For more than five years, Gus Kassem believed his brother, Walid Fouad Alyoussef, was missing. He searched the depths of Detroit and even looked for a homeless man who matched his brother's description.
Kassem remained close to his sister-in-law, her parents and his nephew, visiting them frequently and attending family weddings and funerals. But his missing brother was constantly on his mind — and then the mystery was cracked wide open.
Mohammed El-Astal, 68, is charged with murdering Alyoussef, his son-in-law.
"(El-Astal) was a nice guy," Kassem said. "Nobody believed it — including me."
El-Astal, an artist and retired teacher, was arrested Jan. 19 and bound over to Wayne County Circuit Court on charges of first-degree murder, felony firearm and disinter-ment/mutilation of a body. If convicted, he faces life in prison. An arraignment is set for 9 a.m. Friday.
Continue reading here
Poor Gus - what an awful tragedy.
Sibling doesn't believe allegations of abuse, drug use
For more than five years, Gus Kassem believed his brother, Walid Fouad Alyoussef, was missing. He searched the depths of Detroit and even looked for a homeless man who matched his brother's description.
Kassem remained close to his sister-in-law, her parents and his nephew, visiting them frequently and attending family weddings and funerals. But his missing brother was constantly on his mind — and then the mystery was cracked wide open.
Mohammed El-Astal, 68, is charged with murdering Alyoussef, his son-in-law.
"(El-Astal) was a nice guy," Kassem said. "Nobody believed it — including me."
El-Astal, an artist and retired teacher, was arrested Jan. 19 and bound over to Wayne County Circuit Court on charges of first-degree murder, felony firearm and disinter-ment/mutilation of a body. If convicted, he faces life in prison. An arraignment is set for 9 a.m. Friday.
Continue reading here
Poor Gus - what an awful tragedy.
Friday, February 9, 2007
Saddam and al Qaeda: Blitzer and Feith Transcript
I'm Wolf Blitzer. You're in THE SITUATION ROOM.
Did top Pentagon officials stack the deck when it came to making the case for a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein before the war? Doug Feith was undersecretary of defense for policy. He's at the heart of this controversy and he's not taking the criticism lying down.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: The inspector general of the Department of Defense says your actions were, quote, "inappropriate", that you and your colleagues had a mindset to prove that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, a connection that the intelligence community simply couldn't confirm but you still went ahead and tried to do that to build a case for the war.
DOUGLAS FEITH, FORMER UNDER SECY. OF DEFENSE: What the inspector general is criticizing is the fact that people in the Pentagon criticized the quality of the CIA intelligence. And the inspector general, I think, wrongly says that the criticism of intelligence was intelligence work. And it was inappropriate for non-intelligence people to do that.
BLITZER: But in this case they were right and you were wrong.
FEITH: No they were not right.
BLITZER: There was no connection that the 9/11 Commission could come up with to show that there was a deliberate pre-war, operable connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.
FEITH: Which nobody ever claimed. I mean it shows how much misinformation there is even somebody as well informed as you...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: What was your bottom line when you wrote that report?
FEITH: The report didn't have a bottom line. What the report said...
BLITZER: It did, if you read...
FEITH: No, it didn't.
(CROSSTALK)
FEITH: No, it didn't.
BLITZER: What did it say about the Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda connection?
FEITH: What it said was the CIA's work was not up to quality. And it specifically said the CIA is filtering its own intelligence to suit a theory that it had that secular Baathists would not cooperate with religious extremists...
BLITZER: But that theory was right, right?
FEITH: Well it's absolutely wrong. I mean you could see even in Iraq today. Who are we fighting in Iraq? We're fighting a strategic alliance of Baathists and Jihadists.
BLITZER: But what they were saying -- correct me if I am wrong -- was that Saddam Hussein would not be involved in working with al Qaeda because al Qaeda didn't want to have anything to do with this secular Iraqi leader.
FEITH: What they were saying is the CIA had intelligence, its own intelligence that was inconsistent with its theory that there couldn't be any cooperation. And the CIA was not drawing on all of its intelligence. It was filtering its own intelligence to suit its own theory. It was a proper criticism...
BLITZER: Here's what the Senator Levin said and I'm going to play a little clip for you and give you a chance to respond.
SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Intelligence relating to the Iraq/al Qaeda relationship was manipulated by high- ranking officials in the Department of Defense to support the administration's decision to invade Iraq when the intelligence assessments of the professional analysts of the intelligence community did not provide the desired compelling case.
BLITZER: All right. You want to respond?
FEITH: I mean that's as inaccurate as almost everything that the senator has said on the subject.
BLITZER: What was the purpose of that report you were putting together on this question of a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein?
FEITH: OK, it wasn't a report. It was a criticism of the CIA's work.
BLITZER: Why did they do that?
FEITH: Because the CIA was doing things that people in the Pentagon thought were substandard and the CIA got angry when they got criticized.
As we know, the CIA did not do a flawless job. And we are in trouble in Iraq because of errors that the CIA made. We need more people in the government doing intelligent, professional criticism of intelligence.
BLITZER: Here's the criticism, as you well know. The criticism is that you and your colleagues, whether the defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, the vice president, Dick Cheney, his staff, Scooter Libby, all of you came to the conclusion that there should be an effort to overthrow Saddam Hussein and, as a result, you just needed the weapons of mass destruction evidence, the al Qaeda connection. And as a result the Congress and the American public would go along with it.
FEITH: That's just wrong. That wasn't the analysis at all. I know it's been described that way by critics of the war. It's just inaccurate.
BLITZER: Looking back ...
FEITH: And the record shows insure some day the documents will be exposed and that will be exposed as a false narrative.
BLITZER: Did you and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Cheney and Scooter Libby and the president make a mistake?
FEITH: Well, I mean, in the -- lots of mistakes were made and lots of right things were done.
BLITZER: In your analysis?
FEITH: The issue here was not that we did an analysis. The issue was we criticized the CIA's analysis.
BLITZER: But right now.
FEITH: Hang on a second.
BLITZER: Are you ready to acknowledge there were no WMDs ...
FEITH: You're not letting me explain the essence of the problem.
BLITZER: I will let you explain but quickly. Are you ready to acknowledge there was no WMD, are you ready to acknowledge that there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda?
FEITH: We did not find WMD stockpiles. We found WMD programs. And the Duelfer report as I'm sure you know, was very clear on what we found in the WMD area, although we did not find the stock piles. We found that he had the facilities, he had the personnel, the intention. So there was a WMD threat but it wasn't the way the CIA described it.
BLITZER: There wasn't the stockpiles. What about on the al Qaeda connection?
FEITH: On the al Qaeda connection, George Tenet on October 7th, 2002 wrote an unclassified letter to the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee laying out the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.
BLITZER: So you believed there was a connection?
FEITH: I believed George Tenet.
BLITZER: But now you know that was now false.
FEITH: I never heard it was false.
BLITZER: You believe Saddam was working with al Qaeda?
FEITH: I believe that what George Tenet published in October of 2002 was the best information on the subject. And as far as I know, that is largely -- I mean, there may be -- look, I've not been in the government the last year and a half.
There may be some more intelligence on that subject. I'm telling you from the time George Tenet published his findings on the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship which is that they had a relationship for 10 years and they talked about various things, bomb making and save haven and other issues, that that was the U.S. government's best understanding of the subject. I never criticized that in public or in private.
BLITZER: All right. Let's talk about Senator Jay Rockefeller. He is the new chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and he says the I.G., the inspector general, may have concluded you didn't violate the law, you didn't break the law, your actions were ...
FEITH: He did conclude that everything we did was lawful and authorized said we did not mislead congress.
BLITZER: He said your actions were inappropriate. That's the word he uses. Even though you didn't break the law. He's not claiming you did break the law. But Rockefeller is saying you may have and he wants to hold hearings on what's called the 1947 National Security Act. He says this, Senator Rockefeller, "Section 502 of the National Security Act of 1947 requires the heads of all departments and agencies of the U.S. government involved in intelligence activities to keep the congressional oversight committees informed."
Did you inform, whether the Armed Services Committees or the Intelligence Committees of your intelligence operation at the Department of Defense?
FEITH: We didn't have an intelligence operation and we didn't do intelligence activities. Here's the heart of the issue.
BLITZER: Because the I.G. says these were intelligence operations.
FEITH: Let me finish the sentence.
BLITZER: All right.
FEITH: That's precisely what I disagree with. The inspector general said that the criticism of the CIA was an intelligence activity. That's preposterous. Policy people criticize intelligence every day. Calling that criticism an intelligence activity improper for non-intelligence people to do means that policy people can't criticize intelligence.
By the way, it's an interesting thing. Senator Rockefeller and Senator Levin have severely criticized the CIA. Now when the policy organization criticized the CIA, that's called by them ...
BLITZER: Inappropriate.
FEITH: An inappropriate activity that only intelligence people should do. When they criticize the CIA what is it, statesmanship?
BLITZER: These are serious -- When you were confronted by the I.G., the inspector general, who disagrees with you on the nature of whether or not this was intelligence or nonintelligence, you made your case but he didn't buy it.
FEITH: The inspector general, with all due respect, was in an area of opinion for which there are no legal standards and he made an argument that is self contradictory, doesn't hang together. The essence of his argument was that criticism of intelligence is intelligence work. Ridiculous.
The other argument that he made was that our work was not the highest quality. How did he do that? He didn't evaluate our work and the work we were criticizing. He didn't look at the underlying intelligence. What he did of said the work we did was he said the work that we did was at variance with the consensus of the intelligence community. Of course it was. It was a critique of the intelligence community's consensus. That's exactly what it was intended to be.
BLITZER: But I just want to be precise on this. Rockefeller says you never informed Congress of your activities. Is he right on that front whether or not legally you were required to do so according to the '47 National Security Act?
FEITH: In fact -- all of these activities were the subject of hearings and document requests. I mean, Congress was thoroughly informed. What he's saying he was calling something that was a perfectly reasonable policy project of criticizing the intelligence, he's calling that an intelligence activity and then saying we should have informed it as an intelligence activity to Congress and it wasn't an intelligence activity.
BLITZER: Thanks very much e for coming in.
FEITH: Thank you.
Did top Pentagon officials stack the deck when it came to making the case for a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein before the war? Doug Feith was undersecretary of defense for policy. He's at the heart of this controversy and he's not taking the criticism lying down.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BLITZER: The inspector general of the Department of Defense says your actions were, quote, "inappropriate", that you and your colleagues had a mindset to prove that there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda, a connection that the intelligence community simply couldn't confirm but you still went ahead and tried to do that to build a case for the war.
DOUGLAS FEITH, FORMER UNDER SECY. OF DEFENSE: What the inspector general is criticizing is the fact that people in the Pentagon criticized the quality of the CIA intelligence. And the inspector general, I think, wrongly says that the criticism of intelligence was intelligence work. And it was inappropriate for non-intelligence people to do that.
BLITZER: But in this case they were right and you were wrong.
FEITH: No they were not right.
BLITZER: There was no connection that the 9/11 Commission could come up with to show that there was a deliberate pre-war, operable connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.
FEITH: Which nobody ever claimed. I mean it shows how much misinformation there is even somebody as well informed as you...
(CROSSTALK)
BLITZER: What was your bottom line when you wrote that report?
FEITH: The report didn't have a bottom line. What the report said...
BLITZER: It did, if you read...
FEITH: No, it didn't.
(CROSSTALK)
FEITH: No, it didn't.
BLITZER: What did it say about the Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda connection?
FEITH: What it said was the CIA's work was not up to quality. And it specifically said the CIA is filtering its own intelligence to suit a theory that it had that secular Baathists would not cooperate with religious extremists...
BLITZER: But that theory was right, right?
FEITH: Well it's absolutely wrong. I mean you could see even in Iraq today. Who are we fighting in Iraq? We're fighting a strategic alliance of Baathists and Jihadists.
BLITZER: But what they were saying -- correct me if I am wrong -- was that Saddam Hussein would not be involved in working with al Qaeda because al Qaeda didn't want to have anything to do with this secular Iraqi leader.
FEITH: What they were saying is the CIA had intelligence, its own intelligence that was inconsistent with its theory that there couldn't be any cooperation. And the CIA was not drawing on all of its intelligence. It was filtering its own intelligence to suit its own theory. It was a proper criticism...
BLITZER: Here's what the Senator Levin said and I'm going to play a little clip for you and give you a chance to respond.
SEN. CARL LEVIN (D-MI), INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Intelligence relating to the Iraq/al Qaeda relationship was manipulated by high- ranking officials in the Department of Defense to support the administration's decision to invade Iraq when the intelligence assessments of the professional analysts of the intelligence community did not provide the desired compelling case.
BLITZER: All right. You want to respond?
FEITH: I mean that's as inaccurate as almost everything that the senator has said on the subject.
BLITZER: What was the purpose of that report you were putting together on this question of a connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein?
FEITH: OK, it wasn't a report. It was a criticism of the CIA's work.
BLITZER: Why did they do that?
FEITH: Because the CIA was doing things that people in the Pentagon thought were substandard and the CIA got angry when they got criticized.
As we know, the CIA did not do a flawless job. And we are in trouble in Iraq because of errors that the CIA made. We need more people in the government doing intelligent, professional criticism of intelligence.
BLITZER: Here's the criticism, as you well know. The criticism is that you and your colleagues, whether the defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, the vice president, Dick Cheney, his staff, Scooter Libby, all of you came to the conclusion that there should be an effort to overthrow Saddam Hussein and, as a result, you just needed the weapons of mass destruction evidence, the al Qaeda connection. And as a result the Congress and the American public would go along with it.
FEITH: That's just wrong. That wasn't the analysis at all. I know it's been described that way by critics of the war. It's just inaccurate.
BLITZER: Looking back ...
FEITH: And the record shows insure some day the documents will be exposed and that will be exposed as a false narrative.
BLITZER: Did you and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz and Cheney and Scooter Libby and the president make a mistake?
FEITH: Well, I mean, in the -- lots of mistakes were made and lots of right things were done.
BLITZER: In your analysis?
FEITH: The issue here was not that we did an analysis. The issue was we criticized the CIA's analysis.
BLITZER: But right now.
FEITH: Hang on a second.
BLITZER: Are you ready to acknowledge there were no WMDs ...
FEITH: You're not letting me explain the essence of the problem.
BLITZER: I will let you explain but quickly. Are you ready to acknowledge there was no WMD, are you ready to acknowledge that there was no connection between Saddam and al Qaeda?
FEITH: We did not find WMD stockpiles. We found WMD programs. And the Duelfer report as I'm sure you know, was very clear on what we found in the WMD area, although we did not find the stock piles. We found that he had the facilities, he had the personnel, the intention. So there was a WMD threat but it wasn't the way the CIA described it.
BLITZER: There wasn't the stockpiles. What about on the al Qaeda connection?
FEITH: On the al Qaeda connection, George Tenet on October 7th, 2002 wrote an unclassified letter to the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee laying out the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda.
BLITZER: So you believed there was a connection?
FEITH: I believed George Tenet.
BLITZER: But now you know that was now false.
FEITH: I never heard it was false.
BLITZER: You believe Saddam was working with al Qaeda?
FEITH: I believe that what George Tenet published in October of 2002 was the best information on the subject. And as far as I know, that is largely -- I mean, there may be -- look, I've not been in the government the last year and a half.
There may be some more intelligence on that subject. I'm telling you from the time George Tenet published his findings on the Iraq-al Qaeda relationship which is that they had a relationship for 10 years and they talked about various things, bomb making and save haven and other issues, that that was the U.S. government's best understanding of the subject. I never criticized that in public or in private.
BLITZER: All right. Let's talk about Senator Jay Rockefeller. He is the new chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and he says the I.G., the inspector general, may have concluded you didn't violate the law, you didn't break the law, your actions were ...
FEITH: He did conclude that everything we did was lawful and authorized said we did not mislead congress.
BLITZER: He said your actions were inappropriate. That's the word he uses. Even though you didn't break the law. He's not claiming you did break the law. But Rockefeller is saying you may have and he wants to hold hearings on what's called the 1947 National Security Act. He says this, Senator Rockefeller, "Section 502 of the National Security Act of 1947 requires the heads of all departments and agencies of the U.S. government involved in intelligence activities to keep the congressional oversight committees informed."
Did you inform, whether the Armed Services Committees or the Intelligence Committees of your intelligence operation at the Department of Defense?
FEITH: We didn't have an intelligence operation and we didn't do intelligence activities. Here's the heart of the issue.
BLITZER: Because the I.G. says these were intelligence operations.
FEITH: Let me finish the sentence.
BLITZER: All right.
FEITH: That's precisely what I disagree with. The inspector general said that the criticism of the CIA was an intelligence activity. That's preposterous. Policy people criticize intelligence every day. Calling that criticism an intelligence activity improper for non-intelligence people to do means that policy people can't criticize intelligence.
By the way, it's an interesting thing. Senator Rockefeller and Senator Levin have severely criticized the CIA. Now when the policy organization criticized the CIA, that's called by them ...
BLITZER: Inappropriate.
FEITH: An inappropriate activity that only intelligence people should do. When they criticize the CIA what is it, statesmanship?
BLITZER: These are serious -- When you were confronted by the I.G., the inspector general, who disagrees with you on the nature of whether or not this was intelligence or nonintelligence, you made your case but he didn't buy it.
FEITH: The inspector general, with all due respect, was in an area of opinion for which there are no legal standards and he made an argument that is self contradictory, doesn't hang together. The essence of his argument was that criticism of intelligence is intelligence work. Ridiculous.
The other argument that he made was that our work was not the highest quality. How did he do that? He didn't evaluate our work and the work we were criticizing. He didn't look at the underlying intelligence. What he did of said the work we did was he said the work that we did was at variance with the consensus of the intelligence community. Of course it was. It was a critique of the intelligence community's consensus. That's exactly what it was intended to be.
BLITZER: But I just want to be precise on this. Rockefeller says you never informed Congress of your activities. Is he right on that front whether or not legally you were required to do so according to the '47 National Security Act?
FEITH: In fact -- all of these activities were the subject of hearings and document requests. I mean, Congress was thoroughly informed. What he's saying he was calling something that was a perfectly reasonable policy project of criticizing the intelligence, he's calling that an intelligence activity and then saying we should have informed it as an intelligence activity to Congress and it wasn't an intelligence activity.
BLITZER: Thanks very much e for coming in.
FEITH: Thank you.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
New Iraq Report Makes Case for Victory
WASHINGTON, Jan. 30 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A new report on Iraq was released today that covers many subjects not touched on by the Iraq Study
Group.
Titled Citizens Report on Iraq: Attainable Victory vs. the Propaganda of Defeat, the report was conceived, researched and authored by independent citizens with experience in Iraq who are concerned that the American people and politicians are ill-informed about the situation in Iraq.
The 86-page report is available for download at the Free Republic website:
http://www.freerepublic.com/CitizensReportonIraq.pdf
In the Citizens Report on Iraq, readers will learn that progress is being made in Iraq; there are large areas of Iraq that are safe and prospering; that the enemy is being killed and wounded in astounding proportion to American casualties; that the reporting on Iraq by the dominant media is universally despised as inaccurate and misleading by those fighting for Free Iraq -- Americans and Iraqis alike; that the so-called antiwar movement, including the organizers of this past weekend's protest in Washington, is led by terrorist supporting Marxists as part of a global alliance seeking America's defeat in the Global War on Terror and that a prominent White House correspondent has allied herself with one of these groups.
The report includes frank interviews with dozens of Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans, their families and several Gold Star parents. Those who think their support for President Bush and victory in Iraq has waned will be sorely disappointed.
The report also includes an overview of captured Saddam Hussein eraIraqi government documents that demonstrate Saddam's commitment to international terrorism and research in to Weapons of Mass Destruction, including nuclear weapons.
Contributors include a history professor, an American contractor who has spent the past three years in Iraq, an Iraqi living in Baghdad, and numerous soldiers who spoke frankly on condition of anonymity.
The information in the report was gathered from original research andinterviews, publicly available government reports, blog entries, news articles and transcripts.
SOURCE D.C. Chapter of FreeRepublic.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related links:
http://www.freerepublic.com
Group.
Titled Citizens Report on Iraq: Attainable Victory vs. the Propaganda of Defeat, the report was conceived, researched and authored by independent citizens with experience in Iraq who are concerned that the American people and politicians are ill-informed about the situation in Iraq.
The 86-page report is available for download at the Free Republic website:
http://www.freerepublic.com/CitizensReportonIraq.pdf
In the Citizens Report on Iraq, readers will learn that progress is being made in Iraq; there are large areas of Iraq that are safe and prospering; that the enemy is being killed and wounded in astounding proportion to American casualties; that the reporting on Iraq by the dominant media is universally despised as inaccurate and misleading by those fighting for Free Iraq -- Americans and Iraqis alike; that the so-called antiwar movement, including the organizers of this past weekend's protest in Washington, is led by terrorist supporting Marxists as part of a global alliance seeking America's defeat in the Global War on Terror and that a prominent White House correspondent has allied herself with one of these groups.
The report includes frank interviews with dozens of Operation Iraqi Freedom veterans, their families and several Gold Star parents. Those who think their support for President Bush and victory in Iraq has waned will be sorely disappointed.
The report also includes an overview of captured Saddam Hussein eraIraqi government documents that demonstrate Saddam's commitment to international terrorism and research in to Weapons of Mass Destruction, including nuclear weapons.
Contributors include a history professor, an American contractor who has spent the past three years in Iraq, an Iraqi living in Baghdad, and numerous soldiers who spoke frankly on condition of anonymity.
The information in the report was gathered from original research andinterviews, publicly available government reports, blog entries, news articles and transcripts.
SOURCE D.C. Chapter of FreeRepublic.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related links:
http://www.freerepublic.com
Friday, January 26, 2007
Hanoi Jane Redux
Jane Fonda to Protest Iraq War at Navy Memorial Sat. (Help D.C. Chapter Counter-Protest!)
Jane: Once a traitor, always a traitor.
Godspeed, Kristinn.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1773045/posts?page=1,50
Osama
Bin Laden Alive, Active Says Algerian Group
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/01/bin_laden_alive.html
We'd have heard if he was dead, IMO.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/01/bin_laden_alive.html
We'd have heard if he was dead, IMO.
Jose's Got Issues
Issues in the case against Jose Padilla
By The Associated Press
MIAMI - Some of the major issues yet to be resolved before trial can start in the terrorism case against alleged al-Qaida operative Jose Padilla and two co-defendants, according to court documents and lawyers involved in the case.
http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2007/01/26/ap-state-il/d8mta17o0.txt
By The Associated Press
MIAMI - Some of the major issues yet to be resolved before trial can start in the terrorism case against alleged al-Qaida operative Jose Padilla and two co-defendants, according to court documents and lawyers involved in the case.
http://www.jg-tc.com/articles/2007/01/26/ap-state-il/d8mta17o0.txt
BOLO: 3 Middle Eastern Guys and a White Truck
"Suspicious Event At Gun Manufacturer Prompts Investigation"
A suspicious event at a Middle Tennessee gun manufacturer has investigators across the state searching for men and a white truck. A statewide be on lookout has been issued Thursday for subjects described as being of Middle Eastern descent who asked questions of Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc. employees and tried to enter the secure facility. Deputies were called to the plant Thursday morning to gather information about the Wednesday afternoon incident. A plant employee was leaving the building at about 4 p.m. when he encountered a man who appeared to be Middle Eastern who'd arrived in a white pickup truck towing a white utility trailer. The man asked questions about what was manufactured there, and when refused information by the employee, began demanding entry to the building. When the employee began studying the man's truck, the subject became upset and was told to leave the area. In all, there were three men in the truck.
Anyone who may have information about these men should call 898-7770 .
UPDATE:
The truck may have Michigan license plates.
Michigan plates - incident in Tennessee - heading further south???
A suspicious event at a Middle Tennessee gun manufacturer has investigators across the state searching for men and a white truck. A statewide be on lookout has been issued Thursday for subjects described as being of Middle Eastern descent who asked questions of Barrett Firearms Manufacturing, Inc. employees and tried to enter the secure facility. Deputies were called to the plant Thursday morning to gather information about the Wednesday afternoon incident. A plant employee was leaving the building at about 4 p.m. when he encountered a man who appeared to be Middle Eastern who'd arrived in a white pickup truck towing a white utility trailer. The man asked questions about what was manufactured there, and when refused information by the employee, began demanding entry to the building. When the employee began studying the man's truck, the subject became upset and was told to leave the area. In all, there were three men in the truck.
Anyone who may have information about these men should call 898-7770 .
UPDATE:
The truck may have Michigan license plates.
Michigan plates - incident in Tennessee - heading further south???
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
