Posting to Headlines Wire of Scoop
Date: Friday, 2 April 2004
Time: 11:19 am NZT
Distribution via the Unanswered Questions Wire Sign up for the wire at:
As Americans are burned and desecrated by "liberated" Iraqis, revelations about the Bush administration's "slash and burn" campaign against patriot Richard Clarke continue to emerge. The Washington Post revealed that White House Legal Counsel Alberto Gonzales [Washington Post] placed calls to some Republican members of the 9/11 Commission before they tried to discredit Clarke.
Of course, FOX News, the White House television propaganda outlet, distributed information to GOP members of the panel around the same time, aimed at undermining Clarke's veracity. Meanwhile an MSNBC online news report, since removed, quoted a White House source as indicating that the CIA would look through Clarke's 2002 testimony to cherry pick what would be declassified "with an eye toward pointing out contradictions."
Even the much-headlined retreat by the Bush Politburo to "allow" Rice to testify under oath is less than it appears. No other administration official will be called before the panel under oath, as part of the agreement to obtain Rice — and Bush and Cheney — like the dummy and his ventriloquist — will appear before the commission together and in private. Of course, this is designed to prevent the two of them from contradicting each other — and to allow Cheney to be close enough to Bush that the commission members won't see him pulling the strings when George W. talks.
But you can bet, Cheney will be doing most of the lying for the two of them.
What's more, if the commission finds it needs to question Rice a second time, because of the myriad lies and contradictions that are likely to emerge from her sworn testimony, it has already waived that right.
And these are just some of the Soviet-style, abuse of governmental party tactics that have emerged about just ONE of the Bush Cartel efforts to smear and slime anyone who dares to tell the truth about how this administration has betrayed the nation.
As we mentioned in a previous editorial, don't expect much in the way of the 9/11 Commission outing the truth about the failure of the Bush Cartel to protect America from 9/11. It is a political body composed of Republicans and Democrats that will devise a politically compromised set of final conclusions. As we have also noted, there are more than enough facts and damning admissions by the Bush administration itself to come to the conclusion, without a 9/11 Commission, that the Bush Cartel at a minimum incompetently ignored repeated and urgent pleas to try and prevent a terrorist attack on our nation.
But beyond that, there is also emerging a possibility far more sinister. It is the theory that dares not be spoken because it implies such an unbelievable form of treason, the mention of it is still only tolerated on the fringe edge of conspiracy theories. This is, of course, the notion that some radical zealots in the Bush Administration deliberately ignored the threats of a terrorist attack — perhaps not fully realizing its intended scale — in order to receive the mandate to attack Iraq, seize its oil and install permanent military bases (14 to be exact). And that Iraq was meant to be only the first step in a plan to expand our military reach, force regime change in nations that resisted U.S. influence, and seize natural resources wherever possible.
Does BuzzFlash subscribe to such thinking? Let's just say that we are closer to entertaining such a possibility than we were a few months back. Anyone who connects the factually verifiable dots, not the Bush bullying and lying, would be hard put to rule it out, as extreme as the idea once appeared.
Which brings us to election 2004.
Although we have generally been impressed with signs that John Kerry and other Democrats are beginning to show some backbone and willingness to tell it like it is about the disreputable and chronic dishonesty of the White House and the Republican leadership, the stakes call for even more courage than what we have seen thus far.
On any number of fronts, it is apparent that senior members of the Bush Administration — as well as many staffers — would be likely to face criminal investigation and prosecution were they to be voted out of office. The shredding machines couldn't work fast enough at the White House to destroy the evidence concerning a variety of likely Bush Cartel legal transgressions. And with just a bit of prosecutorial power, particularly if the Democrats reclaim either House of Congress, many members of the Bush Cartel — including Bush and Cheney — could theoretically face years of legal probes into its countless betrayals, deceptions, lies and abuse of power.
When your back is to the wall and you know that you might face a prison term if you lose, you fight like a street brawler wearing brass knuckles and using everything at your disposal, including electronic voting software and the judicial system, to stay in office.
We've warned John Kerry in a previous editorial about not letting Bush define his character, as they successfully defamed Al Gore. Kerry has been slow to listen to us. Already polls indicate that Karl Rove's character assassination of Kerry is trumping the latest round of news about how Bush and his crew did nothing to protect us from 9/11, even though they were warned that it was imminent.
But here's something even more sinister for Kerry to contemplate.
The Bush Cartel is going to fight this election as if their backs are to the wall, because they are.
If Kerry wins, Bush and his advisors know that they are vulnerable to potential prison terms.
That means that they are going to slander Kerry, potentially break laws and steal to win. These are people who think that their lying and abuse of our government is "heroic" because they believe that they are imparted with some elitist notion that they know what is best for this nation.
And that is not a far-fetched theory.
It is happening before our very eyes.
After all, this is an administration that stole one election already.
A BUZZFLASH EDITORIAL
STANDARD DISCLAIMER FROM UQ.ORG: UnansweredQuestions.org does not necessarily endorse the views expressed in the above article. We present this in the interests of research -for the relevant information we believe it contains. We hope that the reader finds in it inspiration to work with us further, in helping to build bridges between our various investigative communities, towards a greater, common understanding of the unanswered questions which now lie before us.