← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Sertorius
Thread ID: 14049 | Posts: 8 | Started: 2004-06-04
2004-06-04 16:45 | User Profile
Bill reinvents the wheel.
The War in Iraq, What Really Happened?
Friday, June 04, 2004
By Bill O'Reilly
Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thank you for watching us tonight.
The war in Iraq, what really happened? -- That's the subject of this
evening's "Talking Points Memo."
The following information comes from a single well-placed source with direct
access to the Bush administration. Now I usually like to get two sources on
things like this, but that's not possible right now. So take this memo for
what it's worth.
As has been widely reported, the Defense Department is running the Iraq
campaign with the State Department and U.S. intelligence agencies, pretty
much spectators to the decision making. Donald Rumsfeld and his deputies
allied themselves early with Ahmed Chalabi (search), the Iraqi exile who
wants to be president of Iraq.
Chalabi fed Rumsfeld in the Pentagon information that Hussein had weapons of
mass destruction. And he also gave this information to New York Times
reporter Judith Miller. The scenario, of course, turned out to be wildly overstated.
From the beginning, the military and the CIA did not trust Chalabi, with
General Tommy Franks (search) specifically despising him. When Chalabi
demanded to be on the scene for the fall of Saddam's statue, Franks said no,
defying Secretary Rumsfeld (search).
Chalabi also told the Defense Department that his organization could run the
civil service in Iraq during the occupation and that Saddam's army and the
Ba'athists running the country for Saddam should all be fired, which they
were. That turned out to be a disaster, as many of those people are now
actively fighting against the coalition.
Chalabi also allegedly bragged about his personal relationship with reporter
Judith Miller. And now "The New York Times" once again finds itself in a
very difficult position. Many of Ms. Miller's stories turned out to be
wrong. And her friendship with Chalabi is a potential embarrassment for the
paper, which doesn't need that after the Jason Blair fiasco.
Now President Bush allowed Rumsfeld and his team to dictate the Iraq strategy
on the strong advice of Vice President Dick Cheney, who also bought into the
Chalabi propaganda. Now the Bush administration is scrambling to recover
from the mistakes. And Chalabi is in deep trouble. The gloves are off. And
the CIA which hates him says he spied for Iran.
Finally, we have told you, and as my source confirms, many military
commanders in Iraq simply have no confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld, who is
seen as indecisive and tainted by the Chalabi association. The Pentagon and
Rumsfeld office are supposed to be on the same page. They are not.
President Bush has taken the first step in reorganizing his foreign policy
situation by saying goodbye to CIA Chief Tenet. More resignations are
likely.
So summing up, the U.S. government bought into Ahmed Chalabi's scheme and
America is paying a big price for that decision. That's what happened. And
that's "The Memo," which can be down loaded from The Factor Web site for your
Very good, Bill!
The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day
Time now for "The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day"...
**A new Gallup (search) poll says that 53 percent of Americans between the ages
of 18 to 29 do not know who the USA fought in Europe during World War II.
Can you believe it?** Ridiculous off the chart. And I believe the poll, the
collapse of the public education system in this country is staggering. Also
popular culture has robbed many young people of any kind of learning in their
leisure time.
Which leads me to rap superstar Jay-Z. In a new song entitled "Threat" the
performer says this: "This is an unusual musical I've conducted. You're
looking at the black Warren Buffett (search). I don't care if you see
Dolores Tuckett or you're Bill O'Reilly, you won't be riling me up."
Hey Jay-Z, I don't want to rile you up. I just want to know what you're
talking about. How do I get in these songs?
Send your comments to: [email]oreilly@foxnews.com[/email]
[url=http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,121765,00.html]http://www.foxnews.co
**A new Gallup (search) poll says that 53 percent of Americans between the ages
of 18 to 29 do not know who the USA fought in Europe during World War II.
Can you believe it?**
Yes, it is hard to believe, after years of "holocaust" propaganda. This must really upset the Zionists. All that work for nothing, in trying to propagandize folks into thinking that the U.S. was indirectly responsible for the "holocaust". The bright side of this is that those who finally decide they wish to learn about WW II only have to learn, as verses unlearning everything they "knew" before, to paraphrase Field Marshall Rommel.
2004-06-04 17:35 | User Profile
Good O'l "Condom Bill" is trying his best to save face from this war fiasco. He was Murdoch's whore all during the build-up, now he has to explain to his idolizing fans how he, of all people, could screw up so badly. Not going to be easy...
2004-06-04 18:23 | User Profile
Buster,
I'll give him credit for saying on his program that he was wrong about the WMDs and that is the only thing I will give him credit for in this sorry affair. Too bad Bill didn't see fit to listen to Scott Ritter instead of yelling at him that time on the Factor. He wouldn't have to eat crow or worse. You're right. It won't be easy for him nor for the rest of the liars who are desperately attempting to backpeddle from the stuff they said or wrote in the past.
2004-06-04 21:06 | User Profile
[QUOTE][B]A new Gallup (search) poll says that 53 percent of Americans between the ages
of 18 to 29 do not know who the USA fought in Europe during World War II.
Can you believe it? [/B] [/QUOTE]
Unfortunately, the other 47 percent have been fully indoctrinated and are now being groomed to rule the 53.
2004-06-05 13:26 | User Profile
I would put O'Reilly in the 47%. On his radio show yesterday he was repeating the Goldhagen nonsense about Pope Pis XII being "Hitler's pope." I'm surprised he didn't bring up the Inquisition as well for good measure.
2004-06-05 14:22 | User Profile
Chalabi never had credibility. The hawks don't care about credibility, they just were pleased to have excuses to go to war.
I think nearly everyone between 19 and 29 knows the US fought in Europe in WWII. The public school history books don't slack on WWII, the evil whites vs. the saintly Jews. I don't know which question, for sure, that O'Reilly is talking about, but probably this one:
What Countryââ¬â¢s Army Did the U.S. and Allied Forces Fight Against During the D-Day Invasion?
47% of 18-29 year olds correctly said Germany.
That's really a different question, and given the length of these telephone surveys, these kinds of questions are probably not as accurately polled as "Who are you going to vote for for president?" They know the US fought in Europe, but they may have answered that question by naming Britain (the primary ally), France (the location), Russia (the cold-war enemy), etc. 23% of all people (all ages) responding did not answer this question. Only 70% of people over 65 answered Germany! That age group was there, and they're not a bunch of ignorant immigrants, African Americans, or fruits of a sorry government school system (however, many of them may be suffering from senility).
2004-06-05 14:57 | User Profile
Bill O'Reilly is an overrated, pompous, blowhard dumbass. Yelling at someone and then cutting off their microphone is not an interview.
2004-06-05 16:10 | User Profile
Happy,
Thanks for digging that up. It does put things in a different context. Chalabi only has credibility with the morons who believe that they are being well informed by the talkradio hosts (Laura Ingraham is an exception) and those liars and fools get their talking points from the Wall Street Journal editorial page which still defends this crook.
Qauntrill,
True enough, unless it is a ziocon such as Stephen Hayes, who was on O'Reilly's show last week. Here we see Bill grasping at straws over a book that Hayes has written "proving" that al-Qaida and Hussein were in cahoots with one another. I'm willing to bet that Hayes is attempting to recycle the lie he came out with back in December of last year in the Weekly Standard entitled Case Closed. If you recall that was a bunch of raw intelligence leaked by Feith's office, obstensibly showing the link. Hell, that was so bad that even Rumsfeld's office issued a statement denying the article by Hayes.