Powered by TypePad

« The March of Feminism | Main | Don't Know Much About History... »

May 06, 2008

Comments

Jane

Ahhh but the liberal talking point is that Ayer's doesn't matter because McCain is friends with G. Gordon Liddy.

Case closed in progressiveland

PeterUK

"MURTAGH: Greta, I do not hold Senator Obama responsible for what happened to my family four decades ago. But he has a relationship with Bill Ayers and with Bill Ayers wife and family that goes back 20 years or more."

So Obama knew Ayers twenty years closer to the offence.Not forty years ago,but twenty.

clarice

In the Libby case people often attacked me for my criticism of the prosecution of the blink sheikh who contrary to popular belief was never charged with a substantive offense related to the WTC bombing..it was a bit of fancy prosecutorial tap dancing that (a) made people think otherwise and (b) hid from view the far more likely prospect that this was a false flag op with Iraq pulling the strings.

Here's the latest on McCarthy's "Willful Blindness" and remember, never trust anyone from the SD NY US atty's office. I mean never.
I urge you to read her spirited response which concludes:
[quote]To what extent are the networks of Islamic militants penetrated and sometimes supported by states that use the militants for their own purposes? Despite all the injunctions against group-think issued after 9/11, McCarthy, et. al. want to impose just such a stifling consensus and silence the dissenting voices that may exist, like mine.

The Reagan years saw a fierce fight over a closely related issue. The view that prevailed was promoted by figures like CIA Director Bill Casey and journalist Claire Sterling: Major terrorist attacks, particularly against the United States, are basically state-sponsored. That remained the consensual perspective through Bush 41. Are we really sure that this changed so radically a mere month into Clinton’s first term in office?

Considerable evidence exists to support the notion that Islamic networks are thoroughly penetrated by states, including evidence presented in Willful Blindness, highlighted in my review. Yet we are not allowed to consider this point and its implications, even as it, quite arguably, represents a dangerous strategic vulnerability: any enemy state that infiltrates the networks of Islamic militants can attack the United States with impunity, as long as that state takes sufficient measures to hide its hand from our incurious eyes.[/quote]


http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGU2Y2U3OTJkMDViZDQ2NmI3YjkzZGU1MTYwMTAyYTk=&w=MQ==>Proseuctorial funny business

clarice

Oh CARP!
Laurie Mylroie and Andrew McCarthy have been involved in a dispute again centered on his book, "Willful Blindness". I think Laurie has the better of it, critical of McCarthy's role in the prosecuting that case in a way that left most people thinking the blind sheikh was behind it when the evidence showed he was not, that , in fact, it was more likely a false flag operation with Iraq pulling the strings.
I urge you to read her spirited response which concludes:
[quote]To what extent are the networks of Islamic militants penetrated and sometimes supported by states that use the militants for their own purposes? Despite all the injunctions against group-think issued after 9/11, McCarthy, et. al. want to impose just such a stifling consensus and silence the dissenting voices that may exist, like mine.

The Reagan years saw a fierce fight over a closely related issue. The view that prevailed was promoted by figures like CIA Director Bill Casey and journalist Claire Sterling: Major terrorist attacks, particularly against the United States, are basically state-sponsored. That remained the consensual perspective through Bush 41. Are we really sure that this changed so radically a mere month into Clinton’s first term in office?

Considerable evidence exists to support the notion that Islamic networks are thoroughly penetrated by states, including evidence presented in Willful Blindness, highlighted in my review. Yet we are not allowed to consider this point and its implications, even as it, quite arguably, represents a dangerous strategic vulnerability: any enemy state that infiltrates the networks of Islamic militants can attack the United States with impunity, as long as that state takes sufficient measures to hide its hand from our incurious eyes.[/quote]

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGU2Y2U3OTJkMDViZDQ2NmI3YjkzZGU1MTYwMTAyYTk=&w=MQ==>Prosecutorial funny business

LindaK

Soon after the attack on Murtagh's family, domestic terrorists building bombs in a brownstone in Greenwich Village blew up the building. There was no connection ever made officially, but it was suspected that the terrorists who blew themselves up were Weatherunderground.

Ann

I am so glad you are addressing this madness, Clarice. Someone needs to stick up for Laurie. The nerve of Andy calling her loopy.

Go Clarice!!

Danube of Thought

I saw that Murtagh interview. At least twice he said that Ayers is "still an advisor to Barack Obama." I haven't seen it suggested anywhere else that he is one now, or that he ever has been one.

Anybody know anything about this?

clarice

Indyk and McCarthy and a whole lot of guys who dropped the ball have been systematically trying to puff up their credentials, hide their shortcomings and sluff off what is too important to be sluffed off at her expense, Ann. Thanks for noticing!

Ann

I am wrong about Andy calling her loopy. This is what I read this morning.

Laurie Mylroie [Andy McCarthy]
As she apparently wants to have Round Two, I will have more to say later this week about Laurie Mylroie's blather here on the site today. Meanwhile, besides my take, and Steve Hayes's post at the Weekly Standard last week, Daniel Pipes also has a few choice words today, in a post on his site called, "Laurie Mylroie's Shoddy, Loopy, Zany Theories — Exposed."

Seems the boys are afraid of Round Two!

clarice

Yeah--Seems that way,Ann.

ben

"I haven't seen it suggested anywhere else that he is one now, or that he ever has been one."

http://globallabor.blogspot.com/2008/04/
who-sent-obama.html
Steve Diamonds makes a good case of why the Ayers-Obama relationship was a lot closer than reported.

There is strong evidence Ayers was instrumental in "launching" Obama on the Chicago scene, so the "advisor" label certainly fits. Why wouldn't it be reasonable to think it the relationship does not continue? Or at least continuing until questions started being asked.

davod

Clarice:

It is getting so a fellow does not know what to believe.

davod

Clarice:

It is getting so a fellow does not know what to believe.

Jane

Twice even - Fox is reporting early trends - white men with no college education are voting for Hillary overwhelmingly in both NC and Indiana as is everyone who thinks Reverend Wright was a big deal. Of those who think the economy is the most important thing, in Indiana they are going for RW and in NC for the Messiah.

clarice

More great news about federal prosecutors:
"WASHINGTON - Federal agents raided the office and home of U.S. Special Counsel Scott Bloch on Tuesday while investigating whether the nation's top protector of whistle-blowers destroyed evidence potentially showing he retaliated against his own staff.



Computers and documents were seized during the raid on the special counsel's downtown office, according to two law enforcement officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry. At least 20 agents were still on the scene as of mid-afternoon Tuesday.

Bloch's home, in a Virginia suburb of Washington, also was raided, the officials said."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080506/ap_on_go_ot/special_counsel

Ranger

It would be a nice campaign add to compare Obama's strong statements about his concerns over Don Imus' comments and his rather mild rebuke for Ayers' violence. Say a mean thing and Obama will never be able to work with you no matter how sorry you are, but do real violence and refuse to say you're sorry, and that's ok, Obama can work with you (as long as you were doing it against the right people).

glenda waggoner

Clarice--Help!! Is this thing w Bloch good or off target? And which whistleblower feels betrayed? Remember, I suffer from being represented by Ron Paul here in my corner of the beautiful state of Texas and need an expert's eye re:justice dept.

troy mcclure

Terry Gold, the SDS organizer at Kent State
(that worked out well, didn't it)Diana Oughton, among others were Weatherpeople as was Kathy Boudin; according to the wiki of the event.Their target was the NCO dance at Ft. Dix, which prefigured Islamist attempts
three and a half decades later,

PeterUK

"Say a mean thing and Obama will never be able to work with you no matter how sorry you are, but do real violence and refuse to say you're sorry, and that's ok,"

Of course,that is the beauty of being a leftist,have the thinnest of skins so they can consign you to the re-education camps with equanimity.

clarice

glenda, this story about Bloch is the first I heard about the matter. I've no independent info about it at all. I really do think it's way past time that there be greater oversight over these special counsels.

ParseThis

Despite all the injunctions against group-think issued after 9/11, McCarthy, et. al. want to impose just such a stifling consensus and silence the dissenting voices that may exist, like mine.

Why can't we be encouraged to ask ourselves these questions?

I was under the impression that Claire Sterling's whose work was based on CIA black propaganda planted in the European press. Mylroie sounds kind of clingy to me.

Who knows, maybe Barack Hussein really is the anti-Christ.

troy mcclure

Mylroie is one of the first to identify how certain Baluchi Pakistani families were at the core of AQ strikes against America; and how they were tied to Iraqi intelligence.
Among them, Mir Amir Kansi, the Langley shooter back in '93, who also had Iranian
ties, but more importantly the family of KSM, Ramzi Yousef; AKA Abdul Basit, and Ammar Al Baluchi. The first two were involved with WTC 1 and Bojinka; the last two expanded it into the 9/11 plot and provided financing from the UAE. McCarthy doesn't like to be reminded of how Sheik Rahman was essentially caught by a version of the old Sedition plot; not any new anti terror legislation. or the fact he let Maj. Ali Mohammed off to easily, and later planned the Embassy bombings; and apparently
provided the intel for the two increasingly more vague PDBs most relying on his former
Egyptian security service colleagues Mustafa
Atef and Seyf Al Adel aka Mohammed Mokkawi.

Bill in AZ

All this talk about McCarthy, and no mention of our favorite prosecutor Fitz! who was bumbling around in the same case trying to find an innocent victim to pin the whole thing on... sheesh, what's JOM coming to...

ParseThis

The Bloch story is over three years old. He's a typical Bush appointee whose purpose is to turn a department into a political operation or simply make it dysfunctional.

troy mcclure

There we go with Henze & co, framing a guilty person. Ali Agca was of the right wing Grey Wolves, yet according to Gordon
Thomas, trained in Libya under Frank Terpil. Did the Grey Wolves, not have ties
to the Bulgarians through Kintex and the drug trade. One needs to be reminded that this was the same publication that took seriously JFK conspiracy theories and the
October Surprise. The major source for this
was Edward Herman, a finance professor at Penn and collaborator with Noam Chomsky, who started speculating about the future "Brazilianization" of American Conservatism, complete with police death squads,(remember when they silenced Tim Robbins, on the 404 freeway.) branched out into the field of 'demonstration elections' in El Salvador and the Phillipines, (how'd
that theory, pan out?)

SunnyDay

Sounds like the Bloch story is related to the Lurita Doan case. I watched some of those hearings - part of the attempt to gut the Bush administration, IMO.

She wasn't intimidated. It's a shame she was tossed aside. From some of what I'm reading in Feith's book, the Bush admin just folds up instead of fighting back. I know Feith sounds like he was frustrated that so many attacks and betrayals were tolerated.

Maybe one day we'll find out there was a good reason. shrug.

glenda waggoner

Thank you, Clarice.

kim

I hope there is a good reason, SD. When I'm feeling good I liken it to the administration's insouciance about the press. I can't help but think that Bush and Company simply believe it would interfere with good administration to fight with their enemies, and are counting on the ultimate verdict of historians. It's worth remembering that Bush is the first President with an MBA. Some of this is just good administration of the apparatus of government, if it isn't so great for the party.
======================================

Topsecretk9

SuunyDay

It's my understanding that Bloch became a mini hero to the left for initiating a "Doan" investigation just after the time he was being investigated himself for questionable behavior.

SunnyDay

thanks tsk9. I didn't start following Doan's story until the hearings were on c-span, so I missed that.

kim

Doan know much about history. Please, clues.
============================

Elliott

Good one, Kim. Far better than the "a correction Dobbed with humor" that I considered posting on the subject of H&R's email to Geraghty.

PrestoPundit

There's a cartoon on Ayres and Obama you'll like here:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/05/07/just-a-guy-in-baracks-neighborhood/

The Annenberg Challenge gig is mentioned.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame