May 23, 2002
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). Thank you.
The BuzzFlash Mailbag is updated on an ongoing basis, with the newest material and comments on top. Again, 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.
Buzz,
Today I finally reached my threshold of tolerance and went off the deep end. For a brief period of time - it could have been minutes or hours, I lost it. I was diagnosable. I was caught is a psychotic episode. It was not a pleasant place to be, but I feel so much better now. However, I am not sure if I am no longer psychotic.
What set off this indiscriminate Neuron firing? Rarely do I watch cable news, but today I had finished some great work and decided to indulge. Bad choice! I got to witness a media feeding frenzy over the latest bushie FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt). Then I saw it, the Statue of Liberty is closed based on warnings from that great intelligence community in the sky. My fate was cast and my brain moved into "bad hair day" territory.
However, on reaching a lucid moment, I wondered what evidence led to this conclusion. An intercepted communiqué from Osama, capturing and interrogating a known terrorist, a computer discovered with these plans on the hard disk, warnings from a friendly ally (not as many as there use to be), or several pieces of "connect the dots" type information had surfaced. The answer to all of these was not No, but HELL NO. Well what was it. This is when I lost.
1. Increased communications traffic on the al-Qaida network
2. Intelligence gathered from the prisoners in Cuba
3. It rained in California the last few days
Yes, there could be increased traffic because of birthday wishes or a new web site came on line. Nothing specific, just more traffic. I felt better that our intelligence group was hard at work and interpreted this as reason for an alert.
How long have the prisoners been interrogated in Cuba? Why this sudden revelation? The interrogators must be doing good work after the dot connecting class.
I will predict that it will rain again in California. This is a certainty. So is the bushie statements that claim there will be another terrorist attack. I know this is a definite possibility also. What I don't know is when or where or how. When the intelligence community can connect these dots, let me know.
I then began to wonder if there could be another reason for this huge serving of FUD. Is anything going on that requires media attention diverted? Could this prez masquerading as a human being with the power of 2 (neurons that fire in deep thought) have perpetuated a mistruth on the American public to stem the storm and slow the poll numbers from heading further south due to last Thursday revelations? I wonder.
But wait. There have already been several warnings issued since 911, but what makes this so different that the Statue is closed. I am moving to the deep end again and then it becomes so clear. How many terrorist attacks have there been since 911? Hold up one closed fist. How many terrorist have been caught associated with 911? Hold up one middle finger. How many times has it been necessary to divert the media to keep the bushie image untarnished? This is to easy. Count the number of alerts and you got the answer.
The answer - there is no difference. The bushies only operate on the principle of Power begetting Power. There is no ethical or moral code in the administration. It is devoid of empathy for you and me or other Americans who believe the FUD and react to it. Gun sales will go up, rationing will increase, fear will escalate and it is all to protect the sanctity of an unelected president in a quest to protect the Power of a privileged few.
I will never lose it again because we have already lost.
Dennis Ledden
Dear
BuzzFlash,
I am sufficiently scared to death. I have been trying to e-mail both Gephardt and Daschle and ask them where in the world their nerve went after the news of the weekend. They were talking the big talk, investigations, and then all of a sudden, just like always, they tucked tail and ran. If you can get this message to either of them, I would so appreciate it...or let me know how I can e-mail either. I am not in Daschle's district, but I sure am in Gephardt's...and believe me, if this is what we have to look forward to, I am through. We know that Bush and his minions threatened the Afghanis before 911, because they wanted that oil pipe line.. So, the Afghans decided to hit his country first..At least, that is the way I see it.. We know. (I especially know) that they are all chickenhawk cowards. My brother died for this country in Viet Nam and I am especially disgusted with a bunch of fools running this country with at least 14 deferments between them....Bush, the one who doesn't know where he was for a year...Cheney, who chickened out 5 times....and Ashcroft, who chickened out at least 8 times. What in Gods name has happened to this country!? We spent, let them do this to us, 8 years investigating every check written, every woman with a story who wanted money from Star and the Enquirer, every inch of the white river in Arkansas, the travel office and then there was Dandy Dan Burton out in his back yard, shooting watermelons to try to prove that Vince Foster could not possibly have killed himself, when he (Foster) had just made the remark that Washington was such a nasty place that they chewed people up and spit them out! I have begged Sen. Daschle and Congressman Gephardt to please get a spine, a backbone, whatever it takes to force them to tell the American people the truth. Just yesterday, that Buffoon man who lives in the white house, told Castro he would be glad to drop the embargo if he (Castro) would have fair elections! This man even mentioning Fair Elections is sort of like the pot calling the kettle black!! Hello! Is there anyone out there who is going to do anything? We put up with so much, you guys..everything the Clintons endured in the eight years in the white house, and now this thieving bunch of crooks! I am sick..I really thought this time, maybe the Democratic leadership would do something but I am losing all hope..and to Congressman Gephardt..whom I do have the right to vote for and always have....never, never again! I will find anyone, another democrat in this district to work for me who will not sell out! Thanks to BuzzFlash...your are the light at the end of a tunnel I am not sure we will ever emerge from......
Shirley, St. Louis
Hi
Buzz,
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you feel like kicking someone in the....well, you know. Two quotes from the printed issue of Newsweek that brought my tic back:
"Defense Sec't. Donald Rumsfeld elected not to relaunch a Predator drone that had been tracking bin Laden" under the Clinton administration. - Noozeweak, 5/27/02 issue.
"'He doesn't recall seeing anything,' {Condo} Rice said when asked if Bush had read the Phoenix memo." - ditto.
Uh-huh.
Maru
Dear
Buzz
Re: Rumsfeld sound bites today have him saying that the terrorist are jerking us around and maybe issue warnings that are not true. Says Rummy, "They just want to see what we're going to do."
They know what we're going to do, Rummy. Nothing.
John Lux
Dear BuzzFlash,
Even without the revelations of the last week or so, there has been plenty of evidence that Bush and company could have prevented the September 11 attacks. For instance, in the very first weeks of his stolen presidency, Bush was presented with the Hart-Rudman report, with its recommendations for defending this country against terrorist attacks. Bush failed to implement a single one of the recommendations that had been agreed upon unanimously by the bipartisan commission. If the recommendations for improving airport security had been implemented, September 11 might have been prevented. But what did Bush do with the report? NOTHING.
Bush also dismantled the efforts put into place by the Clinton administration to fight Al Qaeda and bin Laden, in his quest to get the Taliban to agree to the oil pipeline for UNOCAL, a major Bush contributor.
Ashcroft turned the focus of the Justice Department away from the emphasis of fighting terrorism, that had been of major importance to the Department of Justice under the Clinton administration, and Attorney General Janet Reno. (Other things, like protecting the tobacco companies and the gun dealers, took precedence with Ashcroft.)
The new revelations that there had been numerous warnings of just such an attack as occurred on September 11 merely make certain that the Bush administration failed, through its own negligence and incompetence, in one of the primary responsibilities of the presidency -- protecting the American people.
The Scalia Five have much to answer for; if the man the American voters had elected president, AL GORE, had been in the White House, the murder of 3,000 lives on American ground might have been prevented.
Joann Olbrich
Dear BuzzFlash,
The mainstream press and the administration have been telling us that (up til this week) it was a sucker punch (any dealings surrounding Afghanistan were more of a black hole... nothing in/nothing out), but with the information that we're getting now it's obvious that Bush and Co. were paying attention to Bin Laden and the Taliban, but why? While reading about the what and when, I ran across this article during the recent and brief rise and fall of the democratic opposition:
"U.S. planned for attack on al-Qaida:White House given strategy two days before Sept. 11"
http://www.msnbc.com/news/753359.asp
"The couching of the plans as a formal security directive is significant, Miklaszewski reported, because it indicates that the United States intended a full-scale assault on al-Qaida even if the Sept. 11 attacks had not occurred."
And AP reported...
http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2002/05/17/plan/index.html
"The existence of the memo was made public in general terms late last year, but has gained new importance in light of revelations this week that Bush was told Aug. 6 that bin Laden wanted to hijack planes."
I don't know anyone who heard about this last year, and very few that have heard this at all. So now we find out that not only was our gov't getting active information about a possible attack, but they had made plans of their own.
After running across this, I scrounged up an article that I'd seen at Jane's Intelligence Review that places the US in an active role against the Taliban as of feb '01.
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n. shtml
I also had an article about "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth" (a book you still can't purchase in the States), dealing with a US/Unocal/Taliban Meeting...
http://serendipity.magnet.ch/wot/bl_tft.htm
"But, confronted with Taliban's refusal to accept U.S. conditions, "this rationale of energy security changed into a military one", the authors claim. "At one moment during the negotiations, the U.S. representatives told the Taliban, 'either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs,'"
The "Carpet of bombs" comment is now more interesting, not only because we have proof that the US was looking to take military action, but also because UNOCAL has been granted the rights to build a pipeline across Afghanistan. "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth" has been referenced on CNN, The New York Times, and Salon at the very least, but as far as I can tell neither the administration nor UNOCAL have denied or even reacted to issues raised in those articles. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/international/12LADE.html http://www.salon.com/politics/feature/2002/02/08/forbidden/ http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/08/ltm.05.html http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/09/ltm.07.html http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0201/09/ltm.06.html
Three reviews of the book:
http://serendipity.magnet.ch/wot/bl_tft.htm
The interview with the late Mr. John O'Neill in the book also sounds more credible when he was one of the few FBI agents that received the "Phoenix" report, and after I read this quote...
http://www.nymag.com/page.cfm?page_id=5513&position=1
"The answer would often be 'Check with John O'Neill,' " says Janet Reno. "When I walked into the room and saw John O'Neill there, I was always pleased, because I always knew I would get a reasoned analysis. He had a powerful command."
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?020114fa_FACT1
Now, if this paranoid rant makes any sense I come to two main possibilities...
1)They planned on war, didn't consider Bin Laden a viable domestic threat, and the intelligence community really didn't have their shit together. O'Neill's negative comments could back this up, so could the fact that Freeh left before June 22nd and Robert Mueller wasn't sworn in until September 5th: the only thing worse than Freeh running the FBI might have been no one running it. 2)They planned on war, and had a basic clue that terrorists would be knocking on our door (because I think Bin Laden can afford Jane's, as well as noticing some Yanks wandering around the poppy fields). This would kinda explain why Cheney and Ashcroft were flying private planes, and why Jr was taking a 31-day vacation (See World, he wasn't lazy, he was... ummm... hiding).
I've got a few questions... 1)Has anyone seen any other articles on this "formal security directive" than the two articles above? I can't believe that nobody has dissected this. 2)If this was the same basic plan that they utilized after 9/11, how were they going to talk us and the rest of the world into war without that hellish day? Before that day, pretty much the only news we saw about that area of the world was they were blowing up Buddha statues, not something I could see Bush really caring much about. 3) "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth" is sounding like a very interesting read... why isn't any stateside or Brit publisher picking it up?
So which makes you feel better: that Bush wanted to kick Taliban butt, but was too obtuse to the idea that Al-Quada intelligence might feel the pressure and would want to respond in kind (an administration that wants to go to war, but doesn't consider a possible response from a violent enemy seems very short-sighted/incompetent)? Or, he was hoping they would start something that would motivate the whole world into following their "formal security directive" (kinda adds an interesting twist to the parsing of "If only we knew they were going to use the jets as bombs" comments)?
I'll be the first person to admit that my conjecture's could be completely off the mark, but there are two points that can't be argued: Bush intended to go after the Taliban with or without 9/11 and there's no dialog about it, and no one died because of Monica. We need an independent commission.
Joshua Gilbert
[BuzzFlash Note: When the English translation of "Bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth" is released, it will be available as a BuzzFlash Premium!]
Dear BuzzFlash,
BUSH had a plan to attack Afghanistan on his desk on 9/9 ..... Yet he keeps claiming he didn't see a specific threat from Al Queda .... well, then why the war plans ? ....
RK Seattle, Wa
Dear BuzzFlash,
Was Ashcroft warned just a few days after 9-11 or is this correct:
scroll down
The Justice Department (news - web sites) said Monday that Attorney General John Ashcroft (news - web sites) did not learn until weeks ago of the Phoenix memorandum.
more
I have read both, either way he was negligent in his duty, but then he doesn't understand the military and threats to the US. He avoided service in Vietnam. I didn't and I am a woman.
Karen/WI
Dear BuzzFlash,
Just watched a report on Chicago Fox 32 WFLD, Larry Yellin investigative report describing the deception used by Ryan International Airlines to get their employees to participate in spiriting the Bin Laden family out of the country, while the rest of the country was grounded.
Turns out most of the crew that came through Chicago did not know until halfway through their flight who the passengers were. Needless to say they were pissed.
I am pissed myself that the family was escorted out without being held for questioning. Many of the Bin Laden family members are reportedly not quite so innocent as they were portrayed, and may well have been in possession of relevant info. Why was it so important for our government to provide transportation and cover for these particular Saudis? Why are our gov officials being so reverential to Saudis at all considering the way they indoctrinate their citizens to wish us harm?
Hopefully this report will make its way into online print format so you can link into it and see what it was all about. Pretty interesting to say the least.
Jim Stewart
Chicago IL
Buzz,
What-a-ya mean Bush avoids "the buck stops here" approach?
He certainly does not avoid the buck stops here!
He just grabs the dollar, stuffs it in his pocket, grabs his Teddy and goes night-night.
~ Cathy
Sirs:
When I first heard the Bush apologists say that the idea of a suicide pilot had just never crossed their mind my first response was: why not? Shouldn't the geniuses in charge of protecting us have at least thought about several scenarios with which a foreign terrorist might attack us. Even ones that no foreign terrorists has yet pulled off. After all they are foreign and apt to do things differently than us.
But a few days later I had an emergence of a repressed memory that I must have shared with the Bush administration, the CIA and the FBI. Only, I remembered mine and they didn't. I remembered a person named Frank Corder. I remembered him and I am just a mere, concerned, semi-informed citizen. It is the administration's, the CIA's and the FBI's job to never forget someone like Frank Corder. For the Bush apologists to say that they had never thought of suicide bombers they would have to expect us to believe that they forgot all about Frank Corder.
Just who is Frank Corder? What did he do that should earn him a place in the government's memory? On 09/11/1994 Frank Corder, a drunken crackhead without a pilots license, but with several flying lessons under his belt, stole a small plane from an airport near Baltimore. At 1:29 the next morning he crashed it into the White House, killing himself in the process.
Please notice the date. Did Osama Bin Laden pick out 9/11 because it is the number of our telephone emergency system or because that was the anniversary of Frank Corder's, the American terrorist who showed him how to do it, minimal-damage attempt at immortality. Booze and crack are powerful motivators. But nothing compared to religious zealotry. How could any government official stand up to a microphone and say that the idea of a suicide pilot had just never crossed their minds. People who try to gain fame by committing senseless acts of violence should not be allowed achieve the success they desired. However, the very nature of Mr Corder's act, and the training it afforded to the likes of OBL, should make Mr Corder, and his act, unforgettable to the likes of the president, the CIA and the FBI.
So where are the references to Corder in the news when it is explained that the thought of a suicide pilot never crossed their mind? Why don't the reporters ask Ari how Corder's act could be forgotten after a mere seven years? Why does it take me to bring him up? Why does it take me to notice the eeriness of the coincidences of the date and the similarities of the pilot and their actions?
Those that knew ducked.
Have a nice day!
KFM
Dear Buzz,
I surely hope the democrats mean what they say, in claiming the latest revelations are just the tip of the iceberg on the Bush 9/11 incompetence.
At first, came the blockbuster bombshell. The media was all over it and asking questions. Days later, news people seem to be softening their attitudes and making the same excuses that republican spinmeisters are cranking out for Bush. Two national polls, since, have indicated that most Americans are eating the excuses up.
It appears that the administration has forced a "draw" on the first round. The democrats had better put their money where their mouths are for the remaining 9 rounds, or it's curtains for them. If they don't come through with the goods, it will be reflected in the upcoming congressional elections. All we can do is hope the dems follow through on this one.
~ Cathy
Dear BuzzFlash,
I am a dedicated reader of BuzzFlash.com and plan to send 50$ contribution in tomorrow's mail.
I did my own internet investigation in the weeks after 9.11 and came up with some very shocking and not pretty conclusions. One of these conclusions was reported in last week's news. I'm pretty sure that the full weight of this shoe has not settled yet, as many more supporting (fact-checked) details have not been mentioned.
I am concerned about the second shoe. This shoe involves oil journals from around the world...oil journal articles from the past several years and especially Summer 2001 concerning Cheney and UNOCAL and Centgas and the Taleban and bin Laden and the Afghan pipeline deal...and the Dahbol generating plant in India with Enron looking for cheap natural gas so the Indian government would finish paying them for it...
This second shoe should fall hard and take a surreal amount of time for the full weight of it to finally settle!
Gary Bergeron
Lowry Crossing TX
Dear BuzzFlash,
Tuesday morning, 5.21, Paula Zahn interviewed L. PAUL BREMER III, FORMER AMBASSADOR-AT-LARGE FOR COUNTER- TERRORISM about a report his commission issued in June 2000. The transcript in part:
ZAHN: What did the Clinton administration do with this information once you compiled it?
BREMER: Well, one of the lasting heartbreaks of the Bremer Commission report was we had about three dozen recommendations in there covering many of the areas I already talked about. And not one of those recommendations had been acted on by September 11.
ZAHN: And why do you think that was? Did it never make it to the hands of President Clinton? Do you think it got buried in committee? What do you think happened?
BREMER: Oh, I don't know, Paula. I think democracies are not, on the whole, very good at planning ahead. If you think about American, the American experience in the 20th century, it took a torpedo to bring us into the First World War, which was by then already three years old. It took the attack on Pearl Harbor to bring us into the Second World War, which was by then already two years old. We seem to come lately to these kinds of threats.
Now it's clear we have the threat before us. I think we laid it out pretty well two years ago. And now the question is what are we going to do about it?
ZAHN: Well, let me ask you this. If the Clinton administration had acted on some of the recommendations you talked about or if the information had been handed over to the Bush administration, could the attacks of September 11 been prevented?
Nowhere in the interview does Zahn ask whether the Bush administration received the report, acknowledged the report, sought information about the report, or acted on any of the recommendations in the report. But she does try--three separate times--to pin the blame on Bill Clinton.
Can CNN's reporting get any dumber?
Full transcript at:
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0205/21/ltm.12.html
Joe
Moran
Denver CO
Dear BuzzFlash,
Yesterday, as Bush 43 addressed the Cubans in Florida, he profusely thanked them for coming out for the rally and added, "I really appreciate your poignancy!"
Say What? Hehehe
Barbra Stickler
BuzzFlash,
I read the Guardian, 2-3 days ago, and they said that a secret deal had already been signed between Russia and the Bush to go ahead with the new "BUSH" star wars SDI program. I think that all this talk about the reduction of warheads is just a means of prepping the media and us before this SDI agreement is announced.
George Ducott
Dear BuzzFlash,
That State Department report on Terrorism that was issued yesterday has received coverage in the US press mainly because it fingers Iran as a major player in supplying terrorism. But there's another, even more important, statement in there:
"The U.S. State Department on Tuesday said that Israel had made Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Authority less effective by destroying its security infrastructure, and it absolved Arafat and his senior associates of responsibility for attacks on Israelis in 2001."
In other words, all that bluster from Sharon and Bush that Arafat had to "stop the terrorism" was just an excuse. Arafat and the PA had already been made powerless to do anything because of Israeli actions.
Thanks for the good work,
Louise Mowder
Dear BuzzFlash:
After reading in full the Globe and Mail item referenced by Gloria Lalumia today, I was reminded of how INCENSED the Canadian people where that their troops were taken out by a misdirected American bomb/missile.
I think the following statement to the contrary was a polite way for the government to our North to say: Buzz off, Buckwheat! Know what I mean?
Sharon Andrews
Canada to pull troops out of Afghanistan
"Four soldiers were killed during a night training mission last month when an American F-16 pilot dropped a laser-guided bomb on them. The friendly-fire incident resulted in separate inquiries on behalf of the two countries.
"Gen. Henault denied the incident has anything to do with the decision to pull the troops out. He also denied the decision came at a time when the bulk of the war is over."
Dear BuzzFlash,
With so much smoke and mirrors, I've lost track of the date and exact content of the memo from the FBI agent in Phoenix ....can you help? You guys are not only the greatest, you're the only.
Thanks from the High Alert Capital of the Western World, the trembling Apple!
Sally
Dear BuzzFlash,
The New York Times today has an article on the front page with the headline, "On the job, Bush has mastered diplomacy 101, his aides say."
At this rate in six or seven years he will have completed the entire diplomacy curriculum, then maybe he'll be prepared to be president of the United States. I'm not counting on it.
(And what's with this "his aides say" -- this is news?)
Brian
McCafferty
Crawfordsville, IN
Dear BuzzFlash,
Would Bush Have Lost the Civil War?
The performance of the Bush team has all the earmarks of incompetence. The North had, in its might and innocent inexperience, chosen all sorts of politician generals, heroes, experts all who possessed overweening arrogance and self-confidence- except when it came to doing their job in battle. Pinkerton's Intel was a bad and self-serving as any in memory. Easily outmaneuvered, spooked and sent packing, the blustering union generals always overestimated the enemy and the obstacles because that gave them cover for cowardice.
Lincoln had to learn, had to patiently weed out these bloody incompetents. We have NO Lincoln today. Competence as usual is restricted to the lower levels. Ridge is a colorless panic adrift and as sidelined by Powell in the internecine fight for the administrative center. Where resides a zero, a black wormhole of a leader surrounded by Iagos, Berias and Wormtongues more intent on fixing the next election. The people, without benefit of the clear truth, must themselves sort out the mess which threatens to have an endless cycle of Shilohs, Frederickburgs, and Chancellorsvilles. Who will emancipate US from a world of secrecy and lies?
P. Murphy
Dear BuzzFlash,
SUBJ: Senator Lieberman's office confirms subpoena issued!
For Enron documents. Say, is that a "democratic spine" growing?
Carolyn
Buzz,
I'd like to put out a general alert to mailbag readers that something negative will happen to them BETWEEN NOW AND THE END OF THEIR DAYS. I can't be specific. This is my CMB alert [Cover My Butt!] Can't say I didn't warn y'all !!!
~ Cathy
Buzz,
We are under heightened alert for terrorist attacks.
Now, we need to check between the lines again as to reasons for the alerts to the nation. Well, they are telling us that questioning of detainees at Guantanamo Bay gleaned information that the terrorists are going to attack NY monuments and national high-rise apartment buildings soon. Hmmmmm.
How long have these detainees been detained? Do they still have regular communications with Al Queda? Do they have laptops and cell-phones? Do they have mid-eastern visitors? How is it that these detainees know the scoop, yet they have been locked up tighter than a drum, guards even listening to their nightly snores?
Then again, is this old information that was kept secret up till now? We know that the prisoners were brought to Guantanamo months ago. If some prisoners divulged "long-term" Al Queda plans to their captors back then, why are we just hearing about it now?
Questions, questions, everywhere and not a soul to answer! Better still... questions, questions, everywhere and not a person who dares to ask!
~ Cathy
Dear BuzzFlash,
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/TheNote.html
I wonder if Democrats will ever learn that if they are going to blast Bush, they had better be prepared for a stronger counter-blast. They always seem to be completely thrown by the blowback, even though it is the way Bush has handled critics his entire career. Democrats must expect it and be prepared in advance, rather than hitting Bush and then running scared. This quote says it all about the Bush philosophy:
"At least one White House official handed out the same blind quotes to several news organizations, including ours, clearly intended to send a Tony Soprano message: Screw with us and we will screw with you. Or, as Sean Connery told Kevin Costner in "The Untouchables:" "He pulls a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue."
MB
Dear BuzzFlash,
I met Canadians in Alsace last week.
They said they were afraid of the entire Bush administration, Rumsfeld in particular. I met an American woman working in Bavaria last December--she said she could no longer live in a country that would have Bush as president.
I met a British scientist on a train from Berlin last January who was promoting alternative energy around the world. He said he couldn't believe the U.S. would have a president who had no feasible energy plan.
The Europeans I have spoken to here think Clinton is very bright. About Bush, they say, "We're afraid of him." I called Daschle last August, and his aides told me to leave that message on his answering machine. I did, and added, "I'm afraid of him, too."
After that we had 9-11, and all the rest of this mess.
Bush et al expend so much energy on making us afraid of someone else. It's the Bush administration we need to fear. That fear needs to be passed along to our representatives. Forget loathing.
WE'RE AFRAID OF HIM!
You don't have 100,000 in Berlin to "greet" Bush for nothing.
A BuzzFlash Reader
Dear BuzzFlash,
He got "out of harm's way" during all of August, too, it seems.
A Reader
Dear BuzzFlash,
It's about time
...to connect the real dots and realize that the Al-Queda that attacked NY & Washington was funded by the Bush Family Empire
To realize that Cheney, Ashcroft & the little smirkin' jerk were on vacation in August because that's when the attacks were supposed to happen
...to realize that the anthrax letters went to the independent press and two Democrats because they were the most likely to raise a fuss about 9/11
To realize that if there's another attack, it's the Bushies who are behind it
To impeach the whole administration and 5/9ths of the Supreme Court, and to find the CIA & FBI agents with the most integrity and put them in charge of their agencies
To convict of treason anyone who tried to bring Clinton down by knowingly lying and spreading those lies
To get this country, and the rest of the world, back on track by bringing Bill & Al back to run things
Let's do it NOW!
Lee
Holbrook
Fort Collins, CO
Dear BuzzFlash,
It is common knowledge that Bush doesn't read much (dyslexia), but instead he has his aides/minders distill the information in reports for him. He brought in Condi because she explains international affairs "in ways I can understand." But less reported is the fact that Ashcroft doesn't read either (aside from KKK & NRA periodicals). In a recent New Yorker piece, it was noted that he is the first AG ever to not bother reading legal briefs. His aides read them and then give him the gist. He also doesn't read newspapers. I guess that's a common conservative philosophy. After all, if you actually read things and became informed, how could you possibly keep your right-wing views?
Judson Kilpatrick
Dear BuzzFlash,
I read your site DAILY, as I know it is one of the few places I can get TRUTHFUL information about what is going on in this country. Attached is my latest letter to Senator Phil Gramm, who represents me in Texas. I would appreciate other BuzzFlash readers writing Senator Gramm about his working to prevent any meaningful accounting reform.
Keep the faith BuzzFlash !
Sincerely, Rhonda Miller
* * *
May 22, 2002
Senator Phil Gramm 370 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, D.C. 20510-4302
Dear Senator Gramm,
I live and work in Houston Texas and have written you many times in the past regarding things that I felt strongly about. I have always received the standard reply letter from you explaining to me that you take my concerns seriously. I hope this time, Mr. Gramm that I receive a letter from you, explaining exactly why you are doing everything in your power to kill the bill drafted by Paul Sarbanes that would take some very modest steps in my opinion, toward accounting and auditing reform for corporations.
I have a few friends that worked for Enron and are now out of a job due to that company pretty much going down the drain thanks to fuzzy accounting and auditing of their books. I understand too, that Enron's situation though extreme, was not unique. I know full well that both Democrats and Republicans have taken large contributions from many accounting firms, but the effort right now to preventing any meaningful accounting reform, which looks to me to be explicitly a Republican initiative, and seemingly directed from people at the top, is appalling.
Having seen first hand the lives that have been destroyed by the Enron and Anderson implosion, I think it is high time Mr. Gramm that we understand once and for all that honesty in corporate accounting protects investors and also the people at the other end of the spectrum, those who work for the trading and accounting firms. This is most definitely not a left or right issue Mr. Gramm; it is about HONESTY plain and simple.
We have a broken system where our accounting firms are concerned Mr. Gramm and by blocking reform of this broken system it tells me that the Bush administration does not care much about the everyday people like my friends that had a job at Enron. It seems to me that the Bush administration favors the corporations, and I would very much like to hear from you, my Senator as to why you will not support the bill drafted by Paul Sarbanes to begin correcting the problem.
Sincerely,
Rhonda C. Miller
Houston, TX
Dear
BuzzFlash:
So the Bush regime is now crying incapacity. They say that disaster is inevitable, and they can't stop it, so we'd best brace for impact.
Well, first of all, this is an explicit admission of failure. Is this sort of protection what we paid trillions for? And what was that big war eight months ago all about? They held back on using Marines at Tora Bora; are they willing to admit now that was a fatal mistake? And for what did we cede the Bill of Rights?
I have long felt that Bush's method is success-via-failure. This exemplifies it.
But just as bad is the timing of the announcement. I see two possibilities; either they're lying or they're telling the truth. If they're lying (my default assumption re all things Bush!) then this is classic distraction-politics. "Well, we're warning you this time, so shut up." (And by the way, "so shut up" tends to be the usual coda to all Bush announcements.) As such it is an ignoble evasion of responsibility. (And therefore classic Bush.)
But what if they're telling the truth? This is worse, and not only because of the impending attack itself. For why do they tell us now? Why not weeks ago? Clearly they tell us now in order to head off criticism for keeping the attack secret last time. If the report of the previous cover-up had not come forth, then they would have announced nothing; a second cover-up!
So really we're talking about _two_ unraveling cover-ups here, and not one!
Incidentally, 9/11 was preceded not only by domestic warnings, but also by warnings from abroad. The British, the Israelis, the Russians, the Germans, the Egyptians; all sent warnings. The question now is; are they doing so again? Perhaps we should all send letters to their embassies, saying "If you get wind of something about to happen, then please tell us, not him."
And by the way, if a second wave of attacks does occur, then I for one have no intention of 'rallying behind the President'. He's a thief, a usurper, a divider, a liar, an incompetent, and a failure.
- Nathaniel Hellerstein
Dear BuzzFlash,
WHITE HOUSE ADMITS TERROR WARNINGS USED TO "FEND OFF CRITICISM FROM THE DEMOCRATS"
Who are the terrorists?
The dictionary defines terrorist as "a radical who employs terror as a political weapon." So if Bush, Inc. is employing terror to the citizens to "fend off the Democrats (a political act)" I ask again: Who are the terrorists?
Thomas W. Wooldridge
Dear BuzzFlash,
In regards to the piece listed on BuzzFlash from the Globe Mail about how the White house acknowledged that its latest terror warnings were only to fend of democratic criticism, I say: THE TIME HAS COME TO IMPEACH THESE BASTARDS WHO PLAY US LIKE SO MUCH POLITICAL FODDER!!!!!!!!! Is this acceptable behavior for the President, Vice President, National Security Advisor?? We all know they are a bunch of liars. Any semblance of credibility this administration had is gone. When Bush took office, I swallowed my prejudice against him, and decided I would show my true loyalty to this great system and give him a chance to prove to me that he is all he said he was while campaigning. Well friends, he has absolutely proven who he is, and in the process has proven over and over again that he is a despicable liar who cannot be trusted even at his word. How then can we continue to trust him with the safety of our country, and of our world? The answer which has gotten clearer with almost every single action or NON-ACTION he has taken, is that we simply cannot afford to have a president like this. He is far too unintelligent, and blatantly uninterested in the well-being of the nation as a whole. "OH it's a-hard, it's a-hard, it's a-hard, it's a-haarrrrddd, it's a hard raaaaiiiiin gonna fall."
BuzzFlash Reader & Pissed off Citizen
In Reference to the Discovery of Chandra Levy's Body:
Dear BuzzFlash,
Doesn't this sound a little odd?
The same park that Vincent Foster was found in?
Extensive and numerous searches found nothing. Now a woman walking her dog finds the bones and a skull out where they can be seen. Even if they aren't Levy's why weren't they found before? How could they not have been found before?
The bones may be old, but that doesn't necessarily mean they were there all along. In fact if they were it would be hard to explain why they were not found.
But its another serendipitous happening for the Bush administration.
First the trifecta, now (maybe) this.
Robert Reynolds
Hi BuzzFlash,
Okay! Now we Democrats are blamed because those dimwits that infest the White House, are issuing so many unnecessary warnings, everyone is exhausted. What color are we on now? The gang that can't lie straight, blame the Democrats, and pout. Poor babies! We don't think there any grown men or women at all in the whole bunch? Spoiled brats are trying to run our country, and are finding out they can't. What will they do when they run out of others to blame for their inadequacies ? We're afraid to think of what that answer will be.
BuzzFlash Readers from Philly
Mr. Jim Miklaszewski,
I am writing regarding your statement quoted below & appearing on Newsmax:
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2002/5/22/95452
Dan Rather:
"If the attorney general is given information that convinces him, 'Hey, I don't want to be on any commercial airliners just now. I'm gonna take government planes everywhere.' If the attorney general was told that ... then it raises a question. Why wasn't the public alerted?"
"Some people probably would not have flown" had they also received the Ashcroft warning, he complained.
After the CBS news anchor's interview, NBC Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski called Imus to correct the record, explaining that Ashcroft's decision not to fly commercial aircraft last summer was prompted by threats against his life - and had no connection whatsoever to pre-Sept. 11 intelligence information.
I am very happy that you were able to clear up the threat to Ashcroft. I would really appreciate a copy of that memo or confirmation. Barring that, would you state unequivocally that you had two close, independent sources for the statement you made. Forgive me if I seem skeptical, but I have been trying for months to find out what prompted Ashcroft to start taking private jest, at great increased cost to taxpayers, but have always run into the "classified" excuse.
Anther thing you might be able to shed some light on, since you seem to be the authority on this, is the statement Ashcroft made that he would have to take private jets (at greatly increased taxpayer expense) throughout his term. This implies that there is absolutely no hope of finding the crazy person that threatened his life. Do you know what the status is with that investigation - the investigation to find the person who threatened him? Obviously this was a very credible threat, so there must have been some kind of intelligence or something that they used to verify this threat. I am surprised that they have not apprehended this person and don't expect to..........
Thank you,
Linda Kekumu
Dear BuzzFlash,
Just read in The Times of India and The Peoples Daily of China's announcement of discovery of "massive" natural gas field in Mongolia. Could be bad news for Bushies' plan to sell natural gas to China.
John Aughbaugh
Dear BuzzFlash,
We are under attack -
Yes Americans- Not from some terrorist group or from some country that we are hoping our military and intelligence organizations are defending this nation from, but from our own government- Remember the energy crisis? Do you, now, know about the Bush gang and Enron??? Do you know about the Carlyle group and the Bin Laden family and how they are related to Bush, Cheney, Haliburton, and our oil and defense contractors, the pipeline in Afghanistan and all the Halliburton contracts with Iraq and Iran and Afghanistan??? Do any of you out there know who profited from the IRAQ WAR? Do you know about Senator Phil Gramm, his wife, offshore tax write-offs for the corporate elite and what they are trying to do to regulations concerning the auditing firms? If you are not informed about these issues and if you don't know about the spineless Democrats looking out for their own re-election-then you better keep reading BuzzFlash.
- Anthony
Dear BuzzFlash,
The Bush Admin is quite good at expressing indignation over criticism from opposition leaders, but there is one little bit of indignation I have yet to see: that over the failure to learn about the Phoenix memo in the first place, back in July.
So here's a multiple choice question: What's more troubling?
a) The fact that the Phoenix memo didn't reach Mueller until just after Sept. 11, despite being written in July 2001?
b) The fact that when Mueller and Ashcroft did finally learn of its existence, they didn't tell the President for 8 months?
c) The fact that the Bush Admin has expressed NO anger or indignation over the fact that neither the Phoenix nor the Minnesota FBI intelligence reached them in time to act on it?
We hear that the August briefing on potential hijackings was too vague to do anything in response, but I've yet to hear that the White House is upset in any way over the fact that other intelligence out there could have reached them in time to respond.....before Sept. 11. Where's the outrage? Where's the indignation? Or have I missed the reports that detail this?
Jane
