 |
||||||
|
March 31, 2004 |
||||||
Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 400. If your letter includes hypertext links, please include the entire URL. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.
Subj: Sunday Morning Spin On one of Sundays morning's spinning head shows, my husband and I were both listening to Colin Powell. In reference to Clarke's recent book, Powell was asked why someone in charge of something as important as terrorism (Clarke) was left out of the White House loop, as the White House had been claiming lately. Powell responded that it was because there was a new loop at the time. My husband and I both just burst out laughing at the same time. It was quite a statement.....These guys oughtta be on court TV. A great big BuzzFlash fan. You guys make my day, every day. Subj: Condi's Body Language Dear BuzzFlash: I was out last night and taped the Condoleeza Rice interview on 60 Minutes. I have just reviewed the tape and am fascinated by what I see. I have learned in my work that I have to listen carefully to what people say and also watch their body language and eyes to be able to read any conflicts with the words being spoken. Everything I have read about Dr. Rice's statements on talk shows, etc, over the past several months makes me fear that she is incapable of telling the truth or admitting errors. After watching Ed Bradley's interview of her and her continued denunciation of everything that Clarke has talked about in his book (which, by the way, is a very interesting discussion about the operations of our government), I am convinced that Clarke is straight-forward and Rice is spinning everything. Each time she shades the truth, she unconsciously shakes her head! She says they were focused on Al Quaida, and her head goes from side to side as she says it. She says that the war in Iraq was a response to the war on terror, and her head moves from side to side again. The head goes up and down when she is saying something that is most probably true and side to side when she is refuting anything Clarke says. What is so fascinating is that her body language and her words do not correspond then. She also has a way of phrasing her responses that reeks of spin, most specifically of Karl Rove spin, and that uses the same words that Bill Frist, Dick Cheney, George Bush, and other inner circle Republicans are using. Apparently, they think very little of the capabilities of the citizenry to recognize strings of words as coming from a central source. Clarke's body language, by the way, is very consistent with his words, and he addresses the issues very directly instead of letting the smears become the topics of interest. I really hope that others can see the body language conflict with Clarke's critics. I am just sorry that the failings of this administration will be laid on a woman's platter instead of falling where they belong, on the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz serving dish. A BuzzFlash devotee Subj: Did you see this? http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25177-2004Mar25.html Look in the middle of the article- Condi ASKED to to have her Airplane comment REVISED. Talk about revisionist history-this needs to be a HEADLINE. Of all the nerve today, where they are accusing Clarke of REVISING HISTORY and PERJURING HIMSELF when frigging Condi won't say anything under oath AND WANTS TO REVISE HER STATEMENT. NO WAY she should be able to do anything except PUBLICLY AND UNDER OATH!!!! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: 60 Minutes got hate mail from the right During the comments section on 60 Minutes Sunday night Leslie Stahl mentioned the emails ran heavily against Clarke and CBS News for running the interview, including calling them traitors. I suggest BuzzFlash readers contact 60 Minutes to let them know how much they appreciated Clarke's interview. (www.cbs.com then go to the bottom for Feedback link.) I did and I concluded that the evidence shows the Bush Administration had plenty of warning, thus one of two conclusions is correct. Either they bungled it or they ignored it on purpose (the "Pearl Harbor" scenario), making them the traitors. Pat Subj: Frist is a Coward! Why would Bill Frist choose the floor of the Senate to level unsubstantiated charges at Richard Clarke and accuse him of perjury? Because he’s hiding behind the Constitutional privilege that allows him to slander a true hero and not be subject to civil litigation for slander that’s why! Like CONdi, he wants to be able to impugn the reputation of a critic without having to face the legal consequences by forum selection. Another example of conservative cowardice!
Turk Meister Subj: Now We Know Why Ari Fleischer Resigned & Burnt Rice Dear Buzz Flash Readers: Now we know why Ari Fleischer resigned his job as Press Secretary; he didn't want to have to testify before the 9/11 commission and some shred of decency reared its head to the point, he probably knew what was coming and didn't want to be co-signing on it. Eventually, one gets tired of lying, and I guess it came soon enough for Fleischer. Scott McClellan is the perfect man for the job; act like a robot and repeat the "spin" Karl Rove tells you to. Sliming is also a requirement and qualification for the position, as well as blind loyalty to the Bush Cartel. As an African-American woman, I am ashamed of Condosleeza Rice - she is the Devil's handmaiden personified! I didn't care for her when she was the provost at Stanford University (on her watch, she used Affirmative Action to keep qualified African-American and Latino kids with 1600 SATs and 4.0 GPAs out), and she continues to demonstrate her incompetence for the position of National Security Advisor. There's a saying among defense attorneys: "The Grand Jury will indict a ham sandwich." I think a similar saying is appropriate for the National Security Advisor. It is painfully obvious she needed an IQ greater than a ham sandwich in order to be qualified for the position of National Security Advisor, despite how high her IQ is rumored to be. The point is, the ham sandwich probably would have recognized what Al Queada was about to do and told Bush to put a stop to it instead of letting him leave for a month long vacation on that cow chip he calls a "ranch" in Crawford, Texas. Let's keep turning up the heat, Buzz Flash! Leutisha - Loyal Buzz Flash Reader and Proud Christian Liberal Subj: "Fox News reveals unnamed source" While Robert Novak and the Bush administration are busy protecting the "unnamed sources" in the Valerie Plame outing, Fox News has permission from the White House to reveal its source for a story in August 2002 that seemed to support Bush efforts against terrorist threats "although the comments were originally made on condition that their speaker not be identified." http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/bal-to.fox25mar25,0,2667376.story?coll=bal-features-headlines Guess who? none other than Richard Clarke, deposed counter-terrorism czar in the Bush administration, and current best-selling author and witness for the 9/11 panel. If Rove et al want to get you....they will turn the dogs on you faster than you can leak a story. If Rove wants to hide behind national security or privilege, that cover is sacred. Funny how that works. Well actually, not that funny. Funny to Bush&Co is joking about the missing WMDs while hundreds of our military lie in graves or in "transfer tubes" in Dover, or in intensive care units in Germany or at Walter Reed Hospital. Funny is vetoing a UN resolution condemning the assassination of the Hamas leader in support of a special kind of terrorism - the kind we support. Funny is holding men and boys in Gitmo for years with no legal recourse. Funny is naming racists to judicial posts while Congress is on break. Funny is passing a Medicare bill that hurts the recipients, while profits to the insurance and pharmaceutical companies multiply. Funny is threatening to fire the actuary who wants to disclose the real cost of the Medicare bill to the country. Funny is annihilating the character of any one who disagrees with them. But the biggest joke of all was the selection of this president. We believed that we were holding a popular election, and they were laughing all the way to Pennsylvania Avenue. I guess I just can't take a joke. Leslie Subj: You are out of your league, Condi! Each day we have cause to believe that things can't get any worse --but then a new day arrives, and sure enough -- things got worse!! Do the "principals" of this administration really know what is going on? Do they ever, ever talk to each other? Do they ever listen to what the others are saying? A big, resounding "NO!" seems to echo through the halls of government in response to these questions. Condi refutes Cheney, Cheney refutes Condi, Rumsfeld refutes everyone, and Dubya doesn't know what they are talking about, and really isn't interested unless it relates to tax reductions or WMDs. Now don't get me wrong. There is enough blame to go around, for it is quite obvious to see (with hind-sight) that Bill Clinton didn't do as much as he could have. But let's keep things in perspective. How many of you reading this ever head of al-Qaeda before 9/11? I don't know if I did or not, but if I did it sure failed to impress me. (Gawd! that puts me in the same boat as Dubya!!! But, at least, he was getting daily briefings -- supposedly.) Also, Richard Clarke says in his book the first time he mentioned al-Qaeda to Condi she had a puzzled look as if to say, "What in the world is an al-Qaeda?' But, if I did know of them I'm afraid I was thinking like most others -- "What can a bunch of camel-humping, towel-heads, way over there in the armpit of creation, possibly do to harm the world's superpower? Me get scared? Don't be ridiculous !" Like a lot of other people I was Ignorant and we learned the hard way just a little of what they can do. We all get too late smart! How much did we know, and when did we know it? I have no clue. But I am sure that with each passing day, week, month, and year, we learned more and more as our intelligence gathering and interpretation improved. Maybe we were getting the signals but were not putting the dots together correctly. That is for the investigation commission to determine. Which finally let's me arrive at the main purpose of this letter -- my advise to the commission regarding Condi's request for another appearance before the commission. If I was a member of the commission I would see Condi dance barefoot on razorblades before I would permit her to come before the commission in any way other than in public and under oath! She has already been allowed to correct previous statements that were not made under oath, and despite her willingness to "talk" to the commission again, I'm fearful that there would not be sufficient time left before the commission's July deadline if she is permitted to start revising her previous testimony. She has already contradicted herself so many times it would a full cadre of Philadelphia lawyers to keep track of things -- "Back here she said this, but later she said this -- and now she is saying this." Therefore, my response to her request to testify once more, on her terms, would be as follows. "Dear Condi, "Sorry, but it seems that you have pee-ed in your Post Toasties. You had one shot to testify, on your terms, and you blew it. There will not be another appearance unless it is on our terms -- in public and under oath. If you cannot accept these terms you will just have to live with the consequences of knowing that you have contributed absolutely nothing for the closure of the survivors of nearly three thousand individual who lost their lives on 9/11. That you are a part and parcel of the responsibility for the future safety of our nation and our world, and each day of your life will bring with it the fear that perhaps that day will be the last one for another three- or four-, or how many thousands of other innocent people, simply because you were not able to get your s--- together, which would have enabled us to prevent a recurrence of the mistakes that were made earlier! "And, by the way, Condi. Have you given any serious thought to the possibility that you, in reality, are just out of your league. It appears to a lot of us that you are not ready for prime time, but that is difficult to ascertain accurately since it is rather hard to isolate one from all the other misfits in the same barrel. It just seems to me the demands of your job are not conducive to on-job training. Just a thought you might want to consider. "Now, you have a nice day, your hear?" --Bill
Sybert Subj: Core Facts, Bush, and 9/11 Dear BuzzFlash, We know that prior to 9/11 Bush had tons of warnings that a major strike was about to happen, possibly in the US, possibly using weapons as missiles, probably in the early part of September. We also know that Bush did absolutely nothing to increase security, and I would like to point out this story that has not gotten the play I think it deserves. In September 2002, BBC TV broadcast a show called "Clear the Skies". It was laudatory of Bush, but in the course of the program Col. Robert Marrs, who was Commander of the Northeast Defence Sector that day, said some relevant things. First, "we had no idea there was an internal threat." And second "...at the time of the attacks the US had just four fighter pilots on alert covering the north eastern United States." BBC did a news story on their then-upcoming documentary, in which they quote Marrs as saying jets scrambled (late I may add) were unarmed, and were considering ramming the hijacked planes." You can read the original story here at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2222205.stm. PBS also broadcast "Clear the Skies" a few months ago (Sept? 2003). Here we have direct proof that absolutely nothing was done by Bush to prepare for a massive attack. We had four armed planes in the sky when Bush had been told that hijacked planes could be used as missiles in the US, and the air defense sector had no clue that this was known to the President [sic] because Bush had warned no section of our defense to be on the look-out for such a problem. And this incompetent (at the least) wants to be elected President! Jim P Subj: Louisiana Judges enact SEARCH WITHOUT WARRANT LAW! Hey, Dude, where IS my country??? This is TERRIFYING! It only takes ONE step beyond our Constitution to bring us into the PNAC's New American Century of Totalitarian Police State. M. Freira * * *
Subj: Lives Lost I only would like to see people stop talking about "American Lives lost" as if this is all that counts. I realize this is political and we are talking about US policy and US people but do not the people of Iraq and Afghanistan count? We did the same thing in Vietnam as millions of Asian's were killed we talked about all the Americans who died. Until we realize that all wars are civil wars, we will continue killing each other as if the other guy is so different that it is OK to kill him. A BuzzFlash reader Subj: Clarke They, the media, are so busy trying to discredit Clarke. He has been on many shows, and to the idiots who are trying to say he is doing this for money....pshaww! I have watched him on everything...and one question asked of him is, why did you come out with it before these hearings. His reply is so real......when you work in the white house, everything you write in the form of a book, has to be given over to them to read, and refute if necessary.....he said the the White House had his book for at least 6 months. They are the ones responsible for the book coming out at this time...and you know, I would not doubt if they wanted it that way....hey, they could use this against him! To understand a republican....you gotta think like one...and it is hard for me, but if it involves trying to make someone else out a liar.....they do it well. Bill Clinton said the night of the Unity dinner...."They are good at it!" Shirley..........St. Louis Subj: Not a laughing matter Below is a letter I wrote to over 50 newspapers worldwide. It is going to be published this week in the Military newspaper called Stars & Stripes. It will be in the Europe and Pacific editions. Enjoy!!! * * * This letter goes out to the men and women of the American Armed Forces. Not only did our Commander in Chief send us on a wild goose chase for Weapons of Mass Destruction, he now thinks it's ok to use our efforts in a joking manner. You frequently hear the Commander in Chief say "support our troops" and he does just that by making not only one joke but five variations of WMD jokes recently in front of media correspondent. I bet those jokes really hit home to the family members and friends of the almost 600 dead and over 3000 severely wounded soldiers from the Iraq war. Show the Commander in Chief that the joke is on him in November. Show him the support that he has shown the US Armed Forces. Be safe and God Bless America. A TRUE Patriot Act...VOTE! Gabriel
Rodriguez Subj: Payback Buzz, It is now a known fact that lilbush has a wicked vengeance streak in him. He never forgets and he always pays back....usually times ten. Given what we have been learning lately, does anyone not believe at this point that this was all a simple vendetta against Saddam? After all, "that varmint threatened muh daddy." This country is here for the use of Imperials like the bush's. Our betters have a right to send our children to die to avenge their Hatfield/McCoy bullshit. You must one way or another pay to live in bush America. Fill the money sacks of him and his circle, or fill the body bags. God help us! Phil Rowland Subj: Richard Clarke Richard Clarke is trying to warn us about what a disaster the Bush administration is, so we don't make the same mistake again in November. Clarke's two main assertions, that Bush was not focused on terrorism before 9/11 and that the war in Iraq is a mistake is not news. The most damaging thing to come out of all this is hearing VP Dick Cheney say the top counter-terrorism expert (Clarke) was out of the loop. Rice also stated that Clarke was not in many of the top level meetings. And worst of all, they're accusing Clarke of being disgruntled because Bush downgraded the position of counter-terrorism expert from a cabinet level position to a staff level position. Not only do these facts prove Clarke's assertions, they also show how disconnected the Bush administration still is from the problem. Richard Clarke was the "loop" when it came to al-Qaeda and bin Laden. George Bush was the one out of the "loop." Bush's policies are close minded, arrogant, secretive and inflexible. His stubborn “with us or against us”attitude is unwilling to admit mistakes and change policies accordingly. It's time to make a change. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Todd Smyth Subj: Bush did nothing before 9/11 You want proof that Bush did nothing before 9/11? Here it is. According to Dick Cheney, Clarke was "out of the loop". So who was in the loop? Dick Cheney. Yes, he was the person Bush chose to lead the administration's antiterrorism task force in May 2001. This is the same task force that never had a single meeting. But what about the Bush administration's argument that they had only 8 months compared to Clinton's 8 years? Oh, so if it's under a year you get a pass on any terrorism attack that kills over 3,000 citizens? The truth is that Bush is not up to the job. He never was. A lot of courageous former Bush administration employees keep letting the American people know this. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: a dangerous precedent The administration argues that if Condi Rice testifies publicly it would set a dangerous precedent, and future presidential advisers could be compelled to testify about the advice they have given the President. Since Rice is not being, and will not be (says Tom Keen), compelled to testify, how this follows is Bush-Logic to me. And, as everyone except the mainstream media have noted, if you tell every TV news show and Sixty Minutes what advice you gave to the President; if you tell the Commission in private what advice you gave to the President; and if you offer to have your testimony about what you advised the President made public after another private appearance before the Commission, it's hard to see just how testifying under oath, in public, before Congress is the ONLY form of disclosure that sets the " dangerous" precedent that must be avoided at all costs - unless what must be avoided at all costs is really the truth. Albert Clark, NY Subj: Activism Now Dear Buzz- In the midst of the Bush Administration's darkest media coverage, with the nation glued to the testimony of Richard Clarke, George Bush's approval ratings rise http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/30/election.main/index.html Please do not down play the power and effectiveness of the main stream media. They can get Americans to believe anything. Tell your readers not to be pacified by Buzz' s pro liberal message. It is not enough. We need activism. We need people in the streets! That needs to be your message! just a thought Tom Subj: Richard Clarke vs Condoleezza Rice Hello Buzz, What with all the pressure on the Bushies to 'allow' Condoleezza Rice to testify under oath before Bush's hand-picked 9-11 Commission, doesn't anyone else expect another convenient Orange Alert from Tom Ridge? Cheers, Pete Moulton Subj: HOPE MORE PATRIOTS LIKE RICHARD CLARKE COME OUT WITH THE TRUTH Dear Buzz To me, Richard Clarke is a brave man, who, despite knowing that the white house will unleash their dogs on him, came out and spoke the truth. He is one man fighting a powerful group of mad dogs. He has been a loyal public servant for 30 years, and obviously so efficient that he was asked to stay on through four presidents. But look how these filthy dogs are attacking his character and integrity. They accuse him of being partisan (A Reagan appointee) They accuse him of trying to make money off his book They accuse him of being a disgruntled employee They said that he was a friend of a Kerry advisor (Mary Matlin and James Carville should now divorce!!) He apologizes to the 9/11 families (the only one to do so) and they call him arrogant (the pot trying to call the kettle black?) And much, much more! If one had half a brain, one would realize that they have personally attacked the man, AND HAS NOT ADDRESSED ANY OF HIS ACCUSATIONS SUBSTANTIALLY. They have once again taken the focus from their miserable failings, and have launched the dirtiest attack campaign against him. We saw "Con" Rice, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Powell, McClellan and other thugs come out on every possible news organization and hurl vicious attacks on Dick Clarke. AND METHINKS THEY PROTEST TOO MUCH!! We know the pattern now folks, it was the same with O'Neill, and Ambassador Wilson. I hope that Clarke has no family member in the CIA, because very soon, we will be reading an article by Novak "outing" that helpless person. Unfortunately there are many people out there who cannot think for themselves, and are easily led by these misleaders in the white house. They lie, distort, and probably control a lot of what the media says, and these people, I hate to say it, are like brainless sheep, who accept anything that comes out of this terrible administration. If only they had the smarts to find out things for themselves, analyze what is said, and research it, they might get enlightened. As for those so called polls that show Bush's approval rating are high, I just don't buy it. During the 2000 elections, most polls showed that Bush was leading Al Gore by even a few points, and we now know that Al Gore won the popular vote by thousands of votes, which might have been more if Sneaky Jeb and Cruella deville did not disenfranchise thousands of voters in Florida. Poor Senator Kerry has a tough battle to fight, but if we stay firm and resolved, we can kick this horrible, horrible, group of dishonest crooks out of the white house. THIS NATION CANNOT TAKE FOUR MORE YEARS OF THIS DISASTROUS REGIME !!!!! A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Brit Hume: should YOU get over it? Dear Buzz, I am so sick and tired of reading about the hateful garbage spewed 24-hours a day on Faux News. In response to the latest outrage uttered by Brit Hume, this morning I sent the letter below to every email address I could find on the Faux News website. If anyone else wants to write or call, here is their contact info: To Call FOX News Channel: 1-888-369-4762 Emails: Viewerservices@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Foxnewsonline@foxnews.com, foxfeedback@foxnews.com, Afterhours@foxnews.com, Foxreport@foxnews.com, Atlarge@foxnews.com, Hannity@foxnews.com,Bullsandbears@foxnews.com, Colmes@foxnews.com, Cash@foxnews.com, Heartland@foxnews.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, Dayside@foxnews.com, Special@foxnews.com, Forbes@foxnews.com, Studiob@foxnews.com, Friends@foxnews.com, Beltway@foxnews.com, Foxmagazine@foxnews.com, Myword@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Oreilly@foxnews.com, Comments@foxnews.com, Warstories@foxnews.com, FNS@foxnews.com, Cavuto@foxnews.com, Newswatch@foxnews.com Dear Mr. Brit Hume, So, you've stated on the air that those who think Bush's "joke" about missing WMD in Iraq is not funny should "just get over it." http://www.counterbias.com/news004.html And your statement included those families of US troops who have died for Bush's lies. Given your callous and cruel disregard for their pain, I guess it's not surprising to read, in the same article, that you lost a son to suicide. It makes one wonder what type of parent you were to him. It also makes one wonder if anyone ever said to you, in your darkest moments of grief and despair over his death, "just get over it." I doubt it. And one would think that anyone who has suffered the death of their child would have a bit more compassion towards those who've lost loved ones searching for the WMD that George W. Bush thinks are a laughing matter. But we would be talking about someone with a heart, with feelings, not an automaton who spews any garbage to defend and protect the liar in OUR White House. You should be ashamed of yourself. I wonder how your son would feel about it. A loyal BuzzFlash Reader Subj: "They gotta be around her somewhere"! I saw Bushie doing this silly routine...and it was not funny! I don't think it would be funny to anyone who had ever had a relative killed/wounded or just in a war this wrong...I have had both. Of course, Barbara Bush (prez mom) who'd beautiful mind is just too good to see body bags coming into this country......brought him up...what do you expect? Those rich people who do not even know how much money they have....are so much better than we are...no wonder they were all laughing...likely not one person in that room of rich donors had ever dealt with death or destruction from war! That is something that the 'peons' do....and they are so brainwashed before they go in, they think by then that the president...at least in this case......is God!!! I don't blame the victims of 911 for their being insulted by the silly joke. It was just that....silly! He should be given a "One way ticket back to Crawford, Tx." I loved Howard Dean...and will work for Kerry just as much. For those of you who felt that Howard gave this democratic party its spine back,,.........the Big Dog.,,.. Clinton gave him the credit he so richly deserved at the Unity Dinner...I could have cried and almost did! And now, on to Larry Klayman.....folks, I am not even going to try...He was an idiot in 1998-2000...and he is still an idiot! Anyone who would vote for him, would also have to be in that category! And Brit Hume...same thing...Get over it!!!! We will stand up and be counted this time. And believe me, no one thinks the jokes about WMD was funny, except Bush and his minions.................... Shirley..............St.Louis Subj: Here comes the cover-up http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/29/clarke.testimony/ The CIA is vetting Clarke's congressional testimony. How much do you want to bet that only the stuff that puts the Bushies in a good light comes through? This is Bs - they should declassify the whole thing. Linda Subj: Rice Appearance: The Apparent Agreement The letter also seeks written assurances that the panel will not request additional public testimony from any White House official. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4623066/ I can't help remembering President Clinton and First Lady Hillary Clinton testifying in public. This is bogus and it stinks. BuzzFlash Reader Re: I got you some free air time exposure on radio Hi BuzzFlash, I thought you might enjoy knowing that I was able to get your web site mentioned four times the other day on WMNF (88.5 FM) community owned radio here in Tampa, Florida. They are a non-commercial, progressive, list5ener backed station with a huge local following and an international presence on the web via streaming audio. They were interviewing Greg Palast on his new book. They had a listener call in Q&A after the excellent interview. I called in and both Greg and I referred several times to recent articles on BuzzFlash. Both Greg and the news interviewer from the station mentioned what an important site BuzzFlash was in the battle to win back the US from the Bushites. The interviewer even spelled out the web address. Best regards, Bill Short Subj: Four unconnected sources accuse Bush of lying. Former Bush Security aide Richard Clarke Former Supreme NATO Commander General Wesley Clark Former Representative Cynthia McKinney Former Bush aide Paul O'Neill Are they all lying when they say Bush deceived us? Or is Bush lying? Just asking A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: National Security 'ya Know Ok, so Rice is going to testify under oath. Rice will decline to answer the most fruitful questions publicly. We saw Tenet do that several times during his questioning [due to national security, he would talk about the questions behind closed doors.] Watch for Rice to deploy the same national security tactic anytime the commission makes her squirm in her seat. 'Ya heard it here first, Buzzers! ~ Cathy Subj: jesus god! jesus god! the lawyers said rice can testify only if the commission agrees not to call any other white house officials...........hmmmm, no one to point out her lies? these people are so corrupt they are more like the mafia! and why aren't the media reporting the part about only if they agree not to call anyone else in the white house? why not? 3000 american people are dead, why don't they let the commission talk to anyone they wanT? a BuzzFlash reader Subj: Rice's Testimony Sirs: In as large letters as possible, please suggest that the commission ask Condi Rice the extent of her knowledge about the planeload of Bin Laden's permitted to leave this country on September 12th. Who gave permission for that flight? Who was on it? And why was that plane permitted to depart this country on September 12th? Thank you... A BuzzFlash Reader Dear BuzzFlash, There is one screaming issue regarding the Clarke revelations that has not been seriously followed up in the media. Of course, there are many, but this one resonates. First, Clarke is unquestionably a knowledgeable man with a great deal of experience. For my part, I believe he is honest and truthful. Furthermore, there should be no question that Clarke knows a lot more than he has been able to reveal. His book, after all, was "vetted" for three months by the government before publication. We must assume that it was, to some extent, edited for "national security" purposes. On Sunday on NBC's Meet the Press, Clarke said, "We're going to catch bin Laden. I have no doubt about that. In the next few months, he'll be found dead or alive. But it's two years too late . . .". (This quote is taken directly from a transcript of the interview.) Reading between the lines, I think it is possible that Clarke was actually saying bin Laden has already been captured or killed. The revelation of this fact by the Bush administration awaits only the politically opportune moment. Everything done by the Bush administration is, after all, done purely for political purposes. This statement by Richard Clarke should be given the consideration it deserves. As far as the statement by McClellan and others in the administration that Clarke timed the book's publication for the sake of sales, it may be wise to consider that Clarke could have left the government at any time over the past 25 or so years and used his government contacts to make a good deal of money. He could have been a lobbyist or a consultant for the defense industry. Unlike many others, he did not take this path. For this reason, it's apparent to me that Clarke has not in the past, at least, been motivated by money. Why would he be motivated by money now? It is unseemly that he should be maligned at this point for his non-existent greed. What is being lost in the debate over the administration's attacks on this man may simply be the possibility that he is a patriotic American who believes that the truth needs to be told in a democracy, and that it should have some place in the national discourse. This notion is fundamentally contrary to that of the Bush Cartel. Based on the conduct of this administration in other cases (e.g., Scott Ritter), it's likely that if Clarke had gone public before the Iraq invasion with his statements about the administration having put terrorism on the back burner in deference to a misplaced obsession with Iraq, he would have been preemptively marginalized, fired and demonized. Don't think for a moment that he was not aware of this. His timing, unfortunately, could not have been better, but only because it was not allowed to have been better. William
Betz Subj: Bush's High Ethical Standards Hi Buzz, I thought you might be interested in posting this January 23, 2001 article as a reminder to all of us, of the high moral and ethical standards that mr. bush expects from his staff. "Bush Urges High Ethical Standards" http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/1/22/213715.shtml Thanks to the folks at Democratic Underground for digging this one up. Unfortunately I think this philosophy went right out the window along with our Constitution. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: An observation on the OK City bomb thing and possible al Qaeda conx I noticed today that when commentators were discussing the 1/2 ton of ammonia nitrate found in England they often compared it to the same stuff used in the OK City bomb and the Bali bomb. They also usually say that fuel oil was mixed with the ammonia nitrate to produce these bombs. According to the link I posted a few days ago that is not entirely true. The given POSSIBLE connection between al Qaeda and Nichols/McVeigh was that at OK City they actually used nitro-methane (like top fuel & funny cars use in drag racing) to mix with the ammonia nitrate instead of plain old fuel oil (diesel or kerosene I suppose). Supposedly this greatly increases the explosive force of the mixture by double or more. This variation on the recipe was supposedly first used by al Qaeda (it was also described in a captured al Qaeda training manual) and since the OK City bomb supposedly used nitro-methane some speculate that McVeigh and Nichols may have learned it from al Qaeda. There are dates that show a possible correlation between Jose Padilla (the “dirty bomb”suspect) when they were all three possibly in Florida and Chicago at the same times. Also I believe if I remember right that Nichol’s wife is from Thailand and that he continued to make calls to even after his wife no longer lived there so there are some possible foreign connections also. ALL of these connections are extremely circumstantial of course right now anyway. Either way I am sure the government is in no hurry to find a connection between al Qaeda, the racist arm of the religious hard right, and the right to lifers even. Just thought that was somewhat interesting, Lp PS: Some of the other “conspiracy theorists”claim that McVeigh was really mislead about the size of the bomb by his co-conspirators and he really meant to just send a message instead of the massive carnage that was caused. Hey Buzzers, CLARKE CALLS FRIST'S BLUFF Unbelievable. Frist gets all puffed up and demands that Clarke's 2002 testimony be de-classified so they can get him on perjury. Then Clarke INSISTS that all of the testimony, plus all emails, including Rice's be de-classified. Now they're all freaking out. Wait! No, no, not the whole testimony! Then people will find out that Clarke is telling the truth. No, we'll just cherry pick bits and pieces that are completely out of context to make Clarke look like a liar. We're really good at cherry picking. We get a lot of practice in the Bush Administration. Clarke is unflappable. The more they jab at him, the stupider they look. Buzz you're the best. Barbara in NYC Subj: Wonder what Lies Condi will dream up? Condi would never do a day in jail if she were to like under oath, so I wonder if she is going to lie all the time in her testimony, knowing that the good ole Supremos will clear her in any event. Wes Clark Democrat supporting John Kerry Subj: Did you notice? Has anyone noticed the way the white house and repuke robots strategically call Richard Clarke "Dick Clark"? Childish, arrogant, vindictive, revengeful -- that is the newest tone in washington, or was it a continuation of the tone that was set by the Republican house and senate representatives. PJOnes Subj: Condi under Oath So much of the fuss over Condi Rice's refusal to testify has consisted of "she can't testify under oath because she would have to tell the truth?" What in God's name makes you think being under oath will stop her from lying? Being a sociopath is apparently the major requirement for serving in Bush's cabinet; why should Condi be any different? I'm sure if she was prosecuted for perjury, as long as she serves her sentence quietly (and doesn't write a book), the "Family" will take good care of her. Doing time would have to be a hell of a lot easier than what the White House is putting Richard Clarke through right now. This is going to get really interesting. Lynne Keeley Subj: Midnight in America As Harry Truman might have said: "That was a damn fine editorial." The only word you left out was the word, Fascist. Let's not hold back anymore. Let's call 'em as they really are. This Den of Thieves in the White House mean to turn our Republic into the second coming of the Roman Empire. Well, I don't want an empire. I am satisfied with Mr. Jefferson's republic. This fall, we are going to have to rise to the challenge of Ben Franklin. When asked what kind of government the Con-con had given us, he said: "A republic, if you can keep it." Great editorial. Tom from Muskegon, Michigan Subj: Conditions on Condi testifying. She will testify under oath and in public if they don't call any other officials to testify under oath. Some people have a lot of gall, but this bunch has it in spades. Clinton had to testify under oath about something that didn't have anything to do with his job, but Bush doesn't have to testify under oath about causing the deaths of nearly 600 Americans for his own trumped up reasoning and cooked evidence. They are investigating the possibility of impeaching the Oklahoma Insurance Commissioner without a conviction. If they decide to impeach without a conviction, then Rep. Mike, the perv, O'Neal should go first. Karen Webb Subj: to the un and media BUSH IS SO SCARED OF THE 9-11 COMMISSION HE HAD HIS LAWYERS CUT A DEAL THAT IF HE GIVES THEM CONDI RICE UNDER OATH,,,HE WOULD GET TO HAVE CHENEY WITH HIM WHEN BEING QUESTIONED SO CHENEY CAN HELP HIM WITH THE ANSWERS. :):):):) Subj: Truth, the Whole Truth... Today's missive to the White House. And yes, each letter, complete with a used teabag is actually mailed to GWB. Thanks for being here, Buzz. ============================================= Tuesday, March 30, 2004 George W.
Bush Mr. President, Hello, Sir. Well, of course your tea is ready. Here you are, Sir. Why yes, as a matter of fact, I did see your TV address earlier today. I think it's wonderful that you've stopped all that bobbing and weaving about Condi appearing before your very own non-Congressional commission. It doesn't become the President of the United States to be so evasive, especially about the deaths of not only our friends and relatives, but possibly our beloved country. It doesn't make any of us look good, you know? One thing, Sir. I found your presentation rather unnerving. How? May I be really, really frank, Sir? Thank you. Well, in all truth, you looked scared to death. Like some of the many ends of the many threads of the many stories were somehow slipping away, out of reach and out of control. Really, really scared. And that reminds me. When I watched Condi doing her thing on 60 Minutes, I was also very aware of her presentation. Every time she affirmed something, said 'yes', or agreed with Ed, she was steadily shaking her head 'No.' I believe they call that a 'tell', Sir. No, really. You should watch some of those poker tournaments. You could learn a lot about the Art of the Bluff. Both of these are unconscious attempts to tell the truth. No, really. You'll have to be more careful when you testify, Mr. President. I, for one, plan to tape and study every moment of it. But Sir, you and Mr. Cheney ARE going to testify, aren't you? In public and under oath? No oath? The reason I look baffled is that I am baffled, Sir. It's not logical. If you testify under oath, you simply agree to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. And the problem with that is...? You'll get back to me on that? I look forward to it. Now that we know each other a bit better, I do have something that I've been dying to ask you. When you did the interview with Diane Sawyer, there were several moments where you paused and then got this million-mile stare as if you were listening to some small far-away voice. Please tell me that you were being coached through your hidden earphone and not really hearing 'voices'. Well, Sir, sometimes it's hard to tell. And, yes Sir, it DOES make a difference. Will the commission allow that, too, Sir? Maybe you could negotiate something. In any case, the entire world will be watching and listening and measuring as the three of you tell us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about what happened. Scones? Now that you mention it, I got a really strange note from Mr. Cheney. It was a little terse: "Scones missing. Confirmed intelligence - Haitian insurgents-Iraqi-al Quaeda alliance responsible. Evil attempt to undermine New American Tea Party. This shall not stand. We WILL find them." Sir? We're not going to war with Haiti, are we? Well, yes, they were American scones but, Sir? Scones? Surely, Halliburton knows where to get more. As you say, if it's a matter of principle, I suppose I understand. I think... Does Congress have the need to know anymore? Most Sincerely, Barbara
A. Rittiman Subj: Tim Russert, Bush's apologizer and justifier in chief. NBC's Washington bureau chief Tim Russert defended Bush's comments, explaining on the Today show (3/26/04) that while Democrats and military families might be critical, "rather than be judgmental, let me just step back. Ironically, for me the exact same joke was told to me two weeks ago by a very rabid anti-war Democrat. In the context of that evening, after the president made those jokes, he had very emotional comments about the military in Iraq…. So if you look at the evening in the totality, the people who were there I don't think came away with some of the same conclusions as people who just heard snippets on the radio or television." * * * It certainly doesn't surprise me that Tim Russert would consider the commander-in-chief making a joke about not being able to locate the primary reason for the war in Iraq amusing. I suppose he agrees with Bret Hume at Fox that the families of our dead troops should just sit back and enjoy the fun. A comedian making fun of the president is a bit different than him expecting a "Whoops" from the guy who started the war over nothing even approaching the imminent threat that is required for a pre-emptive strike by the strongest military on the planet. The only thing amusing/ironic about the slide show is that Bush was definitely searching in the right place. The Weapons of our own Mass Destruction are definitely in the White House. It would have been funny had Bush ended the piece by looking under the bathroom sink and slowly moving up looking into the mirror and screaming, "Thank the Lord. Laura come quick I found the WMD in the bathroom mirror." Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: A Great Ploy Dear BuzzFlash, So, now the 9-11 Commission has agreed to a "deal" to let Condoleeza Rice testify... as long as no other high ranking official has to testify! This means, yes... GEORGE W. BUSH doesn't have to testify before the public! I wonder if this was the plan all along? After all, Condoleeza is a better liar than Bush. Now he has been conveniently excused from having to show what a fool he is to the American public! What a sham! As an American citizen, if I am ordered to testify in court, I don't get to dictate the conditions under which I will testify! The 9-11 Commission should not have agreed to any such "deal". They should have subpoenaed Rice. Once again, this administration is demonstrating it's blatant disregard for the rule of law... which all the rest of us have to live under, and the 9-11 Commission fell for it... hook, line and sinker! DOWN WITH BUSH! LONG LIVE THE U.S.A.! Rob Moitoza Subj: You just can't make this shit up!!! You just can't make this shit up!!! Bush Sr. defending W in a speech to oil execs---talk about irony. stevie g * * *
Subj: Reagan Shooting Anniversary Hi. Today's the 23rd anniversary of Reagan getting shot. As another public service, we enlisted the NY Public Library to help us dig up an actual copy of the infamous Houston Post article about how Neil Bush was scheduled to have dinner with John Hinckley's brother that night: http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2004/033004.asp Seems them Hinckleys were big contributors to Bush 41's 1980 presidential campaign against Reagan. Who'd a thunk it?? ;) I believe this is the only copy of this article on the web. 10 - 4, - John PS - Also: The New Gas Crisis: President Discusses the Patriotic Privilege of Investing "Tax Relief" in Oil Baron Vacation Chateaus http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2004/032704.asp Subj: National Security If the Bush administration went after al Qaeda the way Bush is going after Richard Clarke for saying that Clinton did a better job on terrorism than Bush did, there wouldn't be a terrorist threat to worry about. Marc Perkel Subj: Why weren't the airlines/public warned about possible hi-jackings prior 9-11? Opinion polls ( if they are to be believed) indicate that many Americans don't think that 9-11 could have been prevented. Lost in all the debate about Richard Clarke and Condoleeza Rice's pre-911 assertions is the fact that Condoleeza Rice has publicly stated that the administration HAD been advised of possible airplane hi-jackings. If the administration knew about this, what was wrong with alerting the public and the airlines to look out for suspicious behaviors. Perhaps this would have prevented at least one or two of the planes from being hi-jacked. Also, Kudos to Barbara " have a cup of tea" Pittiman of California. In this nasty and vicious political environment, it's often hard to find something to smile about. Dee Turner P.S. Buzz, I have purchased "Bush lied and our Soldiers Died" twice before from you. I need more!! The check's in the mail. Subj: POOR GEORGIE NEEDS CHENEY TO HOLD HIS HAND Dear BuzzFlash, I just heard a news conference with the two leaders of the 9/11 commission, and they mentioned that the white house had requested that Bush and Cheney appear TOGETHER to testify (not under oath) before the commission. Aw, poor little Georgie is afraid to testify alone, and needs his prop Cheney to hold his hand! I knew all along that despite all the bluster and rhetoric, George Bush is one big COWARD, and it is a disgrace that a President of the United States cannot stand up to any commission, and does not have the ability to be a man and face up to tough questioning. So this time Cheney, who is usually in an undisclosed location, is able to come out to be with Bush (they usually say that the two should not be together when it suits them), because perhaps Bush may have to be bailed out of a difficult question. It also makes me wonder how the republicans can call Bush a strong leader, when he is definitely afraid of being questioned. SHAME ON THIS DISGRACEFUL LOT. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: CNN Karimov: U.S. ally with poor rights record March 30 Hi BuzzFlash, As President Islam Karimov, the brutal dictator and Best Bush Buddy, is busily murdering and imprisoning his hapless subjects, why doesn't anybody remark that America is supposed to be toppling such people and spreading democracy? I mean, there were no WMD's, no nuclear programs, no terrorists in Iraq, just a brutal dictator and former Best Bush Buddy. Who do you have to oppress around here to get a regime change, anyway?
A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Congratulations! From the first time I went to this site, I knew it was meant for greatness!!! So many people needed some place to go to vent...and to read truth! From 2000 on, as you know, we got none of it from the Media(so called)..and still are not getting anything of substance from them. I just hope you do not grow out of your space....I think not! So long as the readers keep sending even small donations....and the idiots on television, who want to ,(if they are republicans ) lambaste you....or, the others who love you like we do, just mention BuzzFlash.....it will grow!!! I hope we really have something to celebrate in Nov., 2004....and if we do, I think you have helped with that very, very much! Funny, I have not found another website to even go visit....and do not feel the need! Keep on keeping us straight!! Very much affection.............Shirley.........St.Louis Subj: Teabags I really love the idea of sending tea bags to bush* at the white house but with the anthrax scares, I doubt if those letters get any where near a white house staffer. However if someone could come up with a virtual tea bag jpeg that could be put in an email, I will join the campaign. I doubt if they pay much attention to any email sent to bush* (president@whitehouse.gov) but hundreds of emails with a tea bag prominently displayed might make an impression. Howard Dean has encouraged us to do our own actions to take our country back and that might be one. Especially if we can fill up their email boxes. A BuzzFlash reader |
||||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
