The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html) +--- Thread: The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... (/thread-13588.html) |
The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Cliff Varnell - 16-02-2015 Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Be careful what you ask for, Jim. Hardly. I tried in two posts to put the thread back on topic -- McAdams and Colby. Albert posted on-topic. Then you dragged this stuff up again. It's all on you, Jim. The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Cliff Varnell - 16-02-2015 Magda Hassan Wrote:It was the group-think by one group there that spurred the formation of the DPF and a source of pride for many. The assault on group-think begats group-think. When it became insufferable at the EF -- people took correct action. DPF born. It seems to me there is an unfortunate group-think within the JFK Critical Research Community -- which itself is an assault on "official" accounts of JFK's murder, among other deep political events. There seems to be widespread sentiment that a study of the head wound/s and a study of Oswald are studies of the murder of Kennedy. I would argue they are studies of the cover-up, not the murder. I find it likely that Oswald's various handlers were themselves groomed, in certain contingencies, as back-up patsies. A study of Oswald and his handlers is the study of the cover-up. I've already made the same argument about the head wound/s, an argument not rebutted. . The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Jim DiEugenio - 17-02-2015 As anyone can see in my post 96, that is an accurate description of what happened. And anyone can check it against the record. CV at 101 is not accurate. Also as far as the "be careful what you ask for" response, Cliff missed the intended irony. The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Tracy Riddle - 17-02-2015 Cliff Varnell Wrote:Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Be careful what you ask for, Jim. It's really quite amazing that we haven't solved the JFK assassination after 51 years, especially with all the time and effort we've devoted to fighting with each other. :::: The Lies of Colby: New Spartacus? McAdams... - Tom Scully - 26-07-2015 A "gift" that keeps on giving. What could the purpose or the point of the entity starting a new thread and posting the PBS link, actually be? Quote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233007/ Quote:New Photos Show Bush Administration Reaction to 9/11 Attacks Quote:http://www.villagevoice.com/news/054...y,70685,6.html Quote:President Meets with Displaced Workers in Florida Town Hall Meeting Quote:http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0020105-3.html If you buy what he is distributing, you'll have no trouble accepting that between 1856 and 1903, it was unremarkable at the hallowed institution that produced "the faces of President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney," they plumb forgot who designed or constructed this "thing"! A long, proud tradition of distortion, omission, and subterfuge. American Architect and Architecture, Volume 82 Description of 1903 addition. "Many years"= 47 years since original building was erected in 1856. Ironically Gilman was alive when the S&B temple was duplicated in 1903, yet there is nothing to indicate any inquiry involving him took place in an effort to identify the original architect or 1856 design and construction records. Quote:Daniel Coit Gilman ( July 6, 1831 October 13, 1908) Quote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4179618/ Quote:http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/gossip/rich-bounty-good-article-1.902485 Quote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A63076-2004Sep30.html [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601 By Jim Miklaszewski Chief Pentagon correspondent NBC News March 2, 2004 the Bush administration had several chances to wipe out his terrorist operation and perhaps kill Zarqawi himself but never pulled the trigger. In June 2002, U.S. officials say intelligence had revealed that Zarqawi and members of al-Qaida had set up a weapons lab at Kirma, in northern Iraq, producing deadly ricin and cyanide. The Pentagon quickly drafted plans to attack the camp with cruise missiles and airstrikes and sent it to the White House, where, according to U.S. government sources, the plan was debated to death in the National Security Council. The Pentagon drew up a second strike plan, and the White House again killed it. By then the administration had set its course for war with Iraq. "People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the president's policy of preemption against terrorists," according to terrorism expert and former National Security Council member Roger Cressey. In January 2003, the threat turned real. Police in London arrested six terror suspects and discovered a ricin lab connected to the camp in Iraq. The Pentagon drew up still another attack plan, and for the third time, the National Security Council killed it. Military officials insist their case for attacking Zarqawi's operation was airtight, but the administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam. The United States did attack the camp at Kirma at the beginning of the war, but it was too late Zarqawi and many of his followers were gone. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.senate.gov/~levin/newsroo....cfm?id=262690 News from Senator Carl Levin of Michigan FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 8, 2006 The President says Saddam had a relationship with Zarqawi. The Senate Intelligence Committee found that the CIA concluded in 2005 that "the regime did not have a relationship with, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi." [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17970427/ Saddam's pre-war ties to al-Qaeda discounted By R. Jeffrey Smith Updated: 10:56 a.m. ET April 6, 2007 Captured Iraqi documents and intelligence interrogations of Saddam Hussein and two former aides "all confirmed" that Hussein's regime was not directly cooperating with al-Qaeda before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, according to a declassified Defense Department report released yesterday. The declassified version of the report, by acting Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble, also contains new details about the intelligence community's prewar consensus that the Iraqi government and al-Qaeda figures had only limited contacts, and its judgments that reports of deeper links were based on dubious or unconfirmed information. The report had been released in summary form in February. The report's release came on the same day that Vice President Cheney, appearing on Rush Limbaugh's radio program, repeated his allegation that al-Qaeda was operating inside Iraq "before we ever launched" the war, under the direction of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the terrorist killed last June....... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060910.html .....Q Then why in the lead-up to the war was there the constant linkage between Iraq and al Qaeda? THE VICE PRESIDENT: That's a different issue. Now, there's a question of whether or not al Qaeda -- whether or not Iraq was involved in 9/11; separate and apart from that is the issue of whether or not there was a historic relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. The basis for that is probably best captured in George Tenet's testimony before the Senate intel committee in open session, where he said specifically that there was a pattern, a relationship that went back at least a decade between Iraq and al Qaeda...... ........we know that Zarqawi, running a terrorist camp in Afghanistan prior to 9/11, after we went into 9/11 -- then fled and went to Baghdad and set up operations in Baghdad in the spring of '02...... .........Zarqawi was in Baghdad after we took Afghanistan and before we went into Iraq. You had the facility up at Kermal, a poisons facility run by an Ansar al-Islam, an affiliate of al Qaeda...... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Cheney was saying it, even though this was reported, just two days before: Quote: https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1893&dat=20060908&id=ue80AAAAIBAJ&sjid=BNYEAAAAIBAJ&pg=1895,1225573&hl=en By JIM ABRAMS, AP Writer Fri Sep 8, 12:17 PM ET WASHINGTON - There's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Al-Qaida associates, according to a Senate report on prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats said the report undercuts President Bush's justification for going to war..... .....It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates."......Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0070405-3.html For Immediate Release Office of the Vice President April 5, 2007 Interview of the Vice President by Rush Limbaugh, The Rush Limbaugh Show Via Telephone 1:07 P.M. EDT Q It's always a great privilege to have the Vice President, Dick Cheney, with us. Mr. Vice President, welcome once again to our program. THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you, Rush. It's good to be back on...... .....Q It may not just be Iraq. Yesterday I read that Ike Skelton, who chairs -- I forget the name of the committee -- in the next defense appropriations bill for fiscal '08 is going to actually remove the phrase "global war on terror," because they don't think it's applicable. They want to refer to conflicts as individual skirmishes. But they're going to try to rid the defense appropriation bill -- and, thus, official government language -- of that term. Does that give you any indication of their motivation or what they think of the current plight in which the country finds itself? THE VICE PRESIDENT: Sure -- well, it's just flawed thinking. I like Ike Skelton; I worked closely with Ike when I was Secretary of Defense. He's Chairman of the Armed Services Committee now. Ike is a good man. He's just dead wrong about this, though. Think about -- just to give you one example, Rush, remember Abu Musab al Zarqawi, a Jordanian terrorist, al Qaeda affiliate; ran a training camp in Afghanistan for al Qaeda, then migrated -- after we went into Afghanistan and shut him down there, he went to Baghdad, took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq; organized the al Qaeda operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene, and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June. He's the guy who arranged the bombing of the Samarra Mosque that precipitated the sectarian violence between Shia and Sunni. This is al Qaeda operating in Iraq. And as I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq. ...... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...061019-10.html For Immediate Release Office of the Vice President October 19, 2006 Satellite Interview of the Vice President by WSBT-TV, South Bend, Indiana 2nd Congressional District - Representative Chris Chocola ........Q Are you saying that you believe fighting in Iraq has prevented terrorist attacks on American soil? And if so, why, since there has not been a direct connection between al Qaeda and Iraq established? THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, the fact of the matter is there are connections. Mr. Zarqawi, who was the lead terrorist in Iraq for three years, fled there after we went into Afghanistan. He was there before we ever went into Iraq. The sectarian violence that we see now, in part, has been stimulated by the fact of al Qaeda attacks intended to try to create conflict between Shia and Sunni...... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0060915-2.html Sept. 15, 2006 ......MARTHA: Mr. President, you have said throughout the war in Iraq and building up to the war in Iraq that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein and Zarqawi and al Qaeda. A Senate Intelligence Committee report a few weeks ago said there was no link, no relationship, and that the CIA knew this and issued a report last fall. And yet a month ago, you were still saying there was a relationship. Why did you keep saying that? Why do you continue to say that? And do you still believe that? BUSH: The point I was making to Ken Herman's question was that Saddam Hussein was a state sponsor of terror, and that Mr. Zarqawi was in Iraq . He had been wounded in Afghanistan, had come to Iraq for treatment. He had ordered the killing of a U.S. citizen in Jordan. I never said there was an operational relationship..... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0060912-2.html Office of the Press Secretary September 12, 2006 Press Briefing by Tony Snow ...Q Well, one more, Tony, just one more. Do you believe -- does the President still believe that Saddam Hussein was connected to Zarqawi or al Qaeda before the invasion? MR. SNOW: The President has never said that there was a direct, operational relationship between the two, and this is important. Zarqawi was in Iraq. Q There was a link -- MR. SNOW: Well, and there was a relationship -- there was a relationship in this sense: Zarqawi was in Iraq; al Qaeda members were in Iraq; they were operating, and in some cases, operating freely from Iraq. .. No. There was no direct operational relationship, but there was a relationship. They were in the country, and I think you understand that the Iraqis knew they were there. That's the relationship. Q Saddam Hussein knew they were there; that's it for the relationship? MR. SNOW: That's pretty much it. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20060821.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary August 21, 2006 Press Conference by the President White House Conference Center Briefing Room ......Q Quick follow-up. A lot of the consequences you mentioned for pulling out seem like maybe they never would have been there if we hadn't gone in. How do you square all of that? THE PRESIDENT: I square it because, imagine a world in which you had Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life, who would --who had relations with Zarqawi..... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0060320-7.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary March 20, 2006 THE PRESIDENT:..We also did say that Zarqawi, the man who is now wreaking havoc and killing innocent life, was in Iraq. .....but I was very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on America.... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030206-17.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary February 6, 2003 President Bush: "World Can Rise to This Moment" .... One of the greatest dangers we face is that weapons of mass destruction might be passed to terrorists, who would not hesitate to use those weapons. Saddam Hussein has longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks. Senior members of Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda have met at least eight times since the early 1990s. Iraq has sent bomb-making and document forgery experts to work with al Qaeda. Iraq has also provided al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training. We also know that Iraq is harboring a terrorist network, headed by a senior al Qaeda terrorist planner. The network runs a poison and explosive training center in northeast Iraq, and many of its leaders are known to be in Baghdad. The head of this network traveled to Baghdad for medical treatment and stayed for months. Nearly two dozen associates joined him there and have been operating in Baghdad for more than eight months. The same terrorist network operating out of Iraq is responsible for the murder, the recent murder, of an American citizen, an American diplomat, Laurence Foley. ...... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030128-19.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary January 28, 2003 President Delivers "State of the Union" .....With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own......... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0021014-4.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary October 14, 2002 Remarks by the President in Michigan Welcome ..... September the 11th changed the equation, changed our thinking . It also changed our thinking when we began to realize that one of the most dangerous things that can happen in the modern era is for a deceiving dictator who has gassed his own people, who has weapons of mass destruction to team up with an organization like al Qaeda. As I said -- I was a little more diplomatic in my speech, but we need to -- we need to think about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his dirty work, to not leave fingerprints behind..... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0021007-8.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary October 7, 2002 President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat .....Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints..... [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: alt2"] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea.../20020928.html For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary September 28, 2002 Radio Address by the President to the Nation .....The danger to our country is grave and it is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist groups, and there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq.. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Quote: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/wo...3qaeda.html?hp July 13, 2007 Bush Distorts Qaeda Links, Critics Assert click to hide By MICHAEL R. GORDON and JIM RUTENBERG BAGHDAD, July 12 In rebuffing calls to bring troops home from Iraq, President Bush on Thursday employed a stark and ominous defense. "The same folks that are bombing innocent people in Iraq," he said, "were the ones who attacked us in America on September the 11th, and that's why what happens in Iraq matters to the security here at home." It is an argument Mr. Bush has been making with frequency in the past few months, as the challenges to the continuation of the war have grown. On Thursday alone, he referred at least 30 times to Al Qaeda or its presence in Iraq. But his references to Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, and his assertions that it is the same group that attacked the United States in 2001, have greatly oversimplified the nature of the insurgency in Iraq and its relationship with the Qaeda leadership. http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresid...p20011114.html Interview of the Vice President by CBS's 60 Minutes II November 14, 2001 ......Gloria Borger: Well, you know that Muhammad Atta the ringleader of the hijackers actually met with Iraqi intelligence. Vice President Cheney: I know this. In Prague in April of this year as well as earlier. And that information has been made public. The Czechs made that public. Obviously that's an interesting piece of information. Gloria Borger: Sounds like you have your suspicions? Vice President Cheney: I can't operate on suspicions. The President and the rest of us who are involved in this effort have to make what we think are the right decisions for the United States and the national security arena and that's what we're doing. And it doesn't do a lot of good for us to speculate. We'd rather operate based on facts and make announcements when we've got announcements to make. ......... http://www.whitehouse.gov/vicepresid...p20011209.html December 9, 2001 The Vice President Appears on NBC's Meet the Press .......RUSSERT: Let me turn to Iraq. When you were last on this program, September 16, five days after the attack on our country, I asked you whether there was any evidence that Iraq was involved in the attack and you said no. Since that time, a couple of articles have appeared which I want to get you to react to. The first: The Czech interior minister said today that an Iraqi intelligence officer met with Mohammed Atta, one of the ringleaders of the September 11 terrorists attacks on the United States, just five months before the synchronized hijackings and mass killings were carried out.. ........RUSSERT: The plane on the ground in Iraq used to train non-Iraqi hijackers. Do you still believe there is no evidence that Iraq was involved in September 11? CHENEY: Well, what we now have that's developed since you and I last talked, Tim, of course, was that report that's been pretty well confirmed, that he did go to Prague and he did meet with a senior official of the Iraqi intelligence service in Czechoslovakia last April, several months before the attack. Now, what the purpose of that was, what transpired between them, we simply don't know at this point. But that's clearly an avenue that we want to pursue........... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10036925/ 'Hardball with Chris Matthews' for Nov. 11th Updated: 10:08 a.m. ET Nov 14, 2005 ......MATTHEWS: All this week weve been examining the Bush administrations claims about Iraq that sold America on the war. Weve looked at claims that Saddam was a nuclear threat, that our troops would be greeted as liberators and that administration ally Ahmed Chalabi could be trusted. All of those claims, of course, were false. Tonight, we offer you a closer look at another key White House argument. The alleged link between Iraq and 9/11. HARDBALL correspondent David Shuster reports. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DAVID SHUSTER, HARDBALL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Just days after the 9/11 attack, Vice President Cheney on "Meet the Press" said the response should be aimed at Osama bin Ladens al Qaeda terror organization, not Saddam Husseins Iraq. DICK CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Saddam Hussein is bottled up at this point, but clearly we continue to have fairly tough policy where the Iraqis are concerned. TIM RUSSERT, NBC HOST: Do we have any evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraqis to this operation? CHENEY: No. SHUSTER: But during that same time period, according to Bob Woodwards book, "Bush at War," Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was pushing for military strikes on Iraq. And during cabinet meetings, Cheney quote, expressed deep concern about Saddam and would not rule out going after Iraq at some point. That point started to come 11 months later, just before 9/11s first anniversary. The president and vice president had decided to redirect their war on terror to Baghdad. So, with the help of the newly-formed White House Iraq group, which consisted of top officials and strategists, the selling of a war on Iraq began and the administrations rhetoric about Saddam changed. Not only did White House hawks tell The New York Times for a front-page Sunday exclusive that Saddam was building a nuclear weapon, and not only did five administration officials that day go on the Sunday television shows to repeat the charge....... CHENEY: That he is in fact, actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons. SHUSTER: But the White House started claiming that Iraq and the group responsible for 9/11 were one in the same. BUSH: The war on terroryou cant distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror. Weve learned that Iraq has trained members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. Hes a threat because he is dealing with al Qaeda. SHUSTER: In pushing the Saddam/Iraq/9/11 connection, both the president and the vice president made two crucial claims. First, they alleged there had been a 1994 meeting in Sudan between Osama bin Laden and an Iraqi intelligence official. BUSH: We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. SHUSTER: After the Iraq war began, however, the 9/11 Commission was formed and reported that while Osama bin Laden may have requested Iraqi help, quote, Iraq apparently never responded. The other crucial pre-war White House claim was that 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta met in a senior Iraqi intelligence official in the Czech republic in April of 2001. GLORIA BORGER, CNBC HOST: You have said in the past that it was quote, pretty well confirmed. CHENEY: No, I never said that. BORGER: OK, I think that is... CHENEY: ... I never said that. Thats absolutely not... |