On Monday, President Barack Obama nominated John Brennan, his chief counterterrorism adviser, to head up the CIA. Brennan, 57, has served as assistant to the president for counterterrorism and homeland security since 2009.
Before voting to confirm, Republicans in the Senate may want to question Brennan about the role he played in Obama’s 2008 campaign, specifically his potential involvement in the multiple breaches of the presidential candidates’ passport records in March of 2008.
The “Rice” in question was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. The offended party in the Post story was Barack Obama. He told reporters that he expected “a full and thorough investigation,” one that “should be done in conjunction with those congressional committees that have oversight function so it’s not simply an internal matter.”
WHAT the Republicans painstakingly constructed here was meant to look like the biggest of tents. And still they couldn’t spare so much as a sleeping bag’s worth of space for the likes of me.
Women were welcomed. During the prime evening television hours, the convention stage was festooned with them, and when they weren’t at the microphone, they were front and center in men’s remarks. Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney both gushed about their moms in tributes as tactical as they were teary.
And while one preconvention poll suggested that roughly zero percent of African-Americans support Romney, Republicans found several prominent black leaders to testify for him. Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state, delivered what will surely be remembered as the convention’s most stirring and substantive remarks, purged of catcalls and devoid of slickly rendered fibs.
Publisher, The California Courier
In her newly published 750-page book, “A Memoir of My Years in Washington: No Higher Honor,” former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice proudly describes her efforts to defeat Armenian Genocide resolutions on two separate occasions. With great relish, she brags about her success in undermining the acknowledgment of the Armenian Genocide by the U.S. Congress in 1991 and 2007.
Time to Storm Obama and Washington D.C.? (“Every day brings at least another treasonous act against the USA and its people by and from Dictator Obama. “)
…..It’s inordinately clear that Congress will do nothing. Only We-the-People can stop this. Isn’t it time for a REAL Million Patriot + march on Washington D.C.? If we don’t take back our country no one else will…no one. Obama and his illegal government are now completely criminal and, apparently, in total control of us all.”Now recently, during a rousing speech given to donors at a Romney campaign event in Park City, Utah, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said:
“It is a narrative that is being pushed by our current president, that ‘I’m doing poorly because you’re doing well,’” she said. “That has never been the American narrative. Ours has never been a narrative of aggrievement and ours has never been a narrative of entitlement. It is time for all of us, in any way we can, to mobilize, get our act together, and storm Washington D.C.”It appears that many Republican leaders who, in the past, have not come out in any partisan manner have now realized the extreme jeopardy that comprises the current state of our country.
Multitudes of Americans are also, more each and every day, now aware of the dire straits the Obama syndicate has forcefully pushed us all into and are determined to stop the totalitarian onslaught. Obama and his cabal have summarily gutted the US Treasury—with ObamaFriend Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner’s assistance—and made tremendous progress into destroying every uniquely American institution that still exists.Obama has appointed to high levels of the US government’s national security members of the foundational terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood Sunni Muslims and he and his syndicate are in the process of bringing down each and every non-Sunni Muslim regime Obama’s ostensible father and family are Sunni in the Middle East.
I saw some stories about… Actually, I should more accurately say I saw blog posts speculating on what would happen to turnout. Some of them made the point that there really isn’t a whole lot of turnout energy, that conservative turnout’s kinda flapping away in the wind. And if Condoleezza Rice had happened to be the nominee, it could suppress turnout.
And I read that and it boggles my mind.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who reportedly is on Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney‘s short list for a running mate, said in a December 2010 interview with Christianity Today that while she believes marriage is designed for a man and a woman “perhaps we will decide that there needs to be some way for people to express their desire to live together through civil union.
President Obama took an apparent racial swipe at Colin Powell in a 1994 NPR interview in which he implied the four-star general is acceptable to “white America.”
In the same interview, Obama advocates that the government should provide jobs for every citizen and prenatal care for all women.
Is secret lair being built under the White House? West Wing vanishes behind a fence in $86 million ear-splitting project | Mail Online
What lies beneath: The secret passageway, Armageddon-proof bunker (and basement bowling alley) under the President’s feet
The White House already has a number of tunnels — the exact number is, of course, classified.
Underground command: President George Bush and his senior staff in the President’s Emergency Operations Center, built during World War Two for President Roosevelt
While Hollywood and many conspiracy theorists suggest a rabbit warren of subterranean passageways — including mythical tunnels to Capitol Hill and even Camp David — there is at least one hidden passageway that has been revealed in the famous residence.
A 50-yard tunnel leads from a concealed doorway in the Oval Office to the basement of the First Family’s residence in the East Wing.
The clandestine passage was built during Ronald Reagan’s presidency as a way to guard the President in a terrorist attack……………………..
But Obama has no intention of restoring the rule of law. He not only refuses to prosecute flagrant war crimes, but has immunized those who orchestrated, led and carried out the torture. At the same time he has dramatically increased war crimes, including drone strikes in Pakistan. He continues to preside over hundreds of the offshore penal colonies, where abuse and torture remain common. He is complicit with the killers and the torturers.
The only way the rule of law will be restored, if it is restored, is piece by piece, extradition by extradition, trial by trial. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, former CIA Director George Tenet, Condoleezza Rice and John Ashcroft will, if we return to the rule of law, face trial. The lawyers who made legal what under international and domestic law is illegal, including not only Rizzo but Alberto Gonzales, Jay Bybee, David Addington, William J. Haynes and John Yoo, will, if we are to dig our way out of this morass, be disbarred and prosecuted. Our senior military leaders, including Gen. David Petraeus, who oversaw death squads in Iraq and widespread torture in clandestine prisons, will be lined up in a courtroom, as were the generals in Argentina, and made to answer for these crimes. This is the only route back. If it happens it will happen because a few courageous souls such as the attorney and president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, Michael Ratner, are trying to make it happen. It will take time—a lot of time; the crimes committed by Bianco and the two former officers sent to prison this month are nearly four decades old. If it does not happen, then we will continue to descend into a terrifying, dystopian police state where our guards will, on a whim, haul us out of our cells to an amusement park and make us ride, numb and bewildered, on the kiddie train, before the next round of torture.
The terrorist attacks on America on September 11, 2001, gave his administration a clear goal and him the resolve to find out who was responsible and “kick their ass,” former President George W. Bush writes in his new book.In “Decision Points,” Bush describes his reaction when his then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice informed him of the crash of a third airplane into the Pentagon.
“I sat back in my seat and absorbed her words. My thoughts clarified: The first plane could have been an accident. The second was definitely an attack. The third was a declaration of war,” the former president writes in his 481-page book, which goes on sale Tuesday.
“My blood was boiling. We were going to find out who did this, and kick their ass,” Bush writes.”In a single morning, the purpose of my presidency had grown clear: to protect our people and defend our freedom that had come under attack.”
Excerpt Read more at wtsp.com …
The Story of Rick Rescorla
More info from RickRescorla.com
I couldn’t find any info on the History Channel site, unfortunately:http://www.rickrescorla.com/9-11pm ET/PT:9/11: State of Emergency NEW show:9/11 STATE OF EMERGENCY is a ground-breaking documentary that tells the story of 9/11 in the words of key political and military leaders, and ordinary men and women who suddenly found themselves on the frontlines of a new kind of war. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dick Myers, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and a host of other top officials take viewers deep inside the corridors of power during the most dramatic day of the century, offering fresh insights into the unprecedented state of emergency that was 9/11.Info for the above show:
I am not promoting the DVD here, but this is the only information I could find about the show on the History Channel.
Cheney Targets Iran [Admiral Fallon may be opposed]
Rolling Stone ^ | October 18 2007 | Robert Dreyfuss
Posted on 10/19/2007 1:38:56 AM EDT by freedomdefender
Sometime early next year, Dick Cheney is planning to start his third war in the Middle East. According to a wide range of Washington insiders — from Cheney sympathizers to anti-war activists — the vice president is angling behind the scenes for yet another unilateral military action, this time aimed at toppling the clerical regime in Iran. “It’s an open secret,” one leading analyst of Iranian relations tells Rolling Stone. …
“For Bush, the Middle East is everything,” says Larry Korb, a former defense official in the Reagan administration. “Cheney reinforces the idea that Bush’s legacy will be what happens there. And Cheney can tip the balance.”…
Some observers say that Cheney is losing the policy fight on Iran. Acting against the vice president’s advice, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is engaging in talks with Iran in search of a negotiated end to its nuclear program. In March, she gained a key ally when Adm. William “Fox” Fallon, a diplomacy-minded officer, was named to head the U.S. Central Command, the war-fighting body with responsibility for the Persian Gulf. Dismissing talk of an attack on Iran as “unhelpful” and “distracting,” Fallon declared that “the idea that we have yet another conflict in this region strikes me as not where we want to go.”
(Excerpt) Read more at rollingstone.com …
Back to Cheney Targets Iran
Cheney Targets Iran
The vice president is angling behind the scenes for another war in the Middle East
Posted Oct 18, 2007 12:02 PM
Sometime early next year, Dick Cheney is planning to start his third war in the Middle East. According to a wide range of Washington insiders — from Cheney sympathizers to anti-war activists — the vice president is angling behind the scenes for yet another unilateral military action, this time aimed at toppling the clerical regime in Iran. “It’s an open secret,” one leading analyst of Iranian relations tells Rolling Stone. Even though America remains bogged down in twin conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, the insiders add, Cheney still has the clout to get President Bush to give the order — despite strong opposition from the State Department and the Pentagon, both of which believe that attacking Iran could have catastrophic consequences for the United States.
“For Bush, the Middle East is everything,” says Larry Korb, a former defense official in the Reagan administration. “Cheney reinforces the idea that Bush’s legacy will be what happens there. And Cheney can tip the balance.”
In May, the vice president made the threat of war explicit when he boarded the aircraft carrier U.S.S. John C. Stennis in the Persian Gulf — from which vast firepower could be unleashed against Iran. “With two carrier strike groups in the Gulf, we’re sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike,” Cheney declared. “We’ll keep the sea lanes open. We’ll stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining nuclear weapons and dominating this region.” The speech, described as “saber-rattling” by one State Department official, was not circulated broadly to other officials in advance. Cheney “still kind of runs by his own rules,” according to an American diplomat.
Some observers say that Cheney is losing the policy fight on Iran. Acting against the vice president’s advice, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is engaging in talks with Iran in search of a negotiated end to its nuclear program. In March, she gained a key ally when Adm. William “Fox” Fallon, a diplomacy-minded officer, was named to head the U.S. Central Command, the war-fighting body with responsibility for the Persian Gulf. Dismissing talk of an attack on Iran as “unhelpful” and “distracting,” Fallon declared that “the idea that we have yet another conflict in this region strikes me as not where we want to go.” Other high-level military brass also oppose the idea of war with Iran: According to Chas Freeman, who served as ambassador to Saudi Arabia under George H.W. Bush, opposition runs so strong at the Joint Chiefs of Staff that several top generals and admirals might resign if Bush orders an attack on Iran.
Behind the scenes, however, Cheney has been working to short-circuit opposition to war. Last December, the vice president huddled with staff from the American Enterprise Institute, now home to several former Bush administration hawks, including former deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz and ex-United Nations ambassador John Bolton. Together, Cheney and AEI sold the president on backing the “surge” in Iraq — with a special twist. Announcing the addition of 21,500 U.S. troops in January, Bush went out of his way to blame Iran for the violence in Iraq. Cheney himself appeared on Fox News to sound the alarm, warning of the possibility of “a nuclear-armed Iran, astride the world’s supply of oil” and “prepared to use terrorist organizations and/or their nuclear weapons to threaten their neighbors and others around the world.”
Such bellicose language — coupled with the halfhearted negotiations being pursued by Rice — effectively guarantees that diplomacy won’t work. “The so-called diplomacy that is being engaged in now is very inadequate,” says Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council and author of Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran and the U.S. “The United States is pursuing policies that make it impossible to succeed.”
And that, say Washington insiders, is precisely what Cheney is counting on. It is the same pattern the vice president used in pursuing a war with Iraq: ignore objections from the State Department and the military, engage in token talks and then mobilize American troops after declaring the U.N.’s efforts pointless. This summer, as other aides counseled restraint, Cheney reportedly demanded that the United States conduct air strikes against purported bases in Iran used by Iranian-allied insurgents in Iraq. He also dispatched David Wurmser, then his top Middle East adviser, to begin circulating ideas in Washington about how to bring about a military confrontation with Iran. According to those familiar with the move, Wurmser has made it clear that Cheney disagrees with the president’s decision to use diplomacy to dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons.
Another neoconservative on Cheney’s staff who has been pushing for war with Iran is John Hannah, his adviser for national-security issues. “The vice president’s office has been the focal point for the view that puts the focus on hard power, on military power, as a way of achieving goals,” says Dennis Ross, a veteran U.S. diplomat who has been close to Hannah for years. “I think it’s going to come to a head sometime in 2008.”
Attacking Iran would likely involve at least 1,500 separate bombing raids over many days or weeks, striking not only Iran’s several dozen nuclear research and industrial sites but also its military facilities. “You’re not talking about a surgical strike,” according to Wayne White, a former top intelligence official who has seen classified plans for what an attack on Iran might look like. “You’re talking about a war against Iran. The Iranians will do everything in their power to retaliate.”
That’s what worries military brass, who fear that Iran would hit back against U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and activate terrorist allies in the Middle East, further destabilizing a region already struggling with two major wars. Such scenarios have apparently been war-gamed at the Pentagon, with sobering results.
Some analysts argue that politics will restrain Bush and Cheney, since the country is in an anti-war mood and that any escalation of the conflict in the Middle East could cost Republicans dearly at the polls next November. Among conservatives in Washington the question of the day is: Are the president and vice president willing to sacrifice the future of the Republican Party on the altar of the failed war in Iraq and a new war in Iran?
According to most analysts, the answer is yes. “We see a stubbornness in the president that is virtually unique,” says Doug Bandow, a foreign-policy expert and former Reagan aide. “What does he care about the party’s future? He parachuted into politics on his father’s coattails. He’s never been much of a party guy, and I think he could care less. Cheney is more of a Republican, but he’s at the end of his career. He just might be ready to bring the whole house down on top of them if that’s what it takes.”
News-N-Views, Military, History, Politics,
Controversial, Unusual, Non-PC
Articles Just Not Seen… Elsewhere!
The “Original and Only” Gunny G!
THE “G” WEBLOG @N54
By R.W. “Dick” Gaines
(Also Known As: Gunny G’s…Weblog)
Previous/Numerous GyG Posts Below!!!!!
Go To: Gunny G’s Sites/Forums/Blogs!
HISTORY ETC. — The Gunny G History Wiki!
RESTORE THE REPUBLIC/
TAKE AMERICA BACK!