Posted on 06/01/2005 4:27:34 AM PDT by Chairman_December_19th_Society
We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail!
Good morning!!
Do not let the victims of the attacks on New York and Washington, nor the brave members of our Nation's military who have given their lives to protect our freedom, die in vain!!
The trial of Saddam is expected to begin in two months.
The Supreme Court tossed the conviction of the Arthur Anderson acounting firm in the destruction of Enron records, saying jury instructions were too broad. The Government is considering whether to retry the case.
Some Muslims in captivity in Gitmo are now claiming they were sold into American bondage by Pakistani tribesman.
Tom DeLay has promised that funding NASA for manned missions to Mars and the Moon will be priorities.
And eko-wackos have declared that man is thretening the existence of 20 percent of the planets species of birds.
For AMERICA - The Right Way, I remain yours in the Cause, the Chairman.
See you all after 9 pm tonight.....hold down the fort.
Looks promising...except you KNOW I like more yard, being a gardener. I will write more later.
How did Felt come about his info of what occurred in the White House? He either had an illegal wiretap or there was a mole. Either way, laws were broken and the RATS GOT AWAY WITH ANOTHER ONE.
OK, you guys - you've goaded me on enough... Here's what I really think about MF. He belongs in jail. Now.
Someone ought to clue the Old Mediots in about the results of the overblown Watergate affair:
-A presidency was brought down by indirect effects simply because the president was perhaps overly loyal to his people.
-The United States was weakened.
-The worst and weakest president of the 20th century was installed - emboldening our enemies.
-The Shah of Iran was overthrown instead of the US being able to bolster up a voice of moderation and modernity in the MidEast - and much of the world's terrorism was strengthened as a result
- and OPEC stretched its muscles - and the US was not strong enough to effectively respond (I categorically don't mean militarity).
-Reagan was the inevitable reaction to the worst president, but by that time irreversible damage had been done.
-The Old Media FRAUDcasters have since been trying to bring down presidents, and even found themselves forced, finally, into joining the New Media to some extent against Bill Clinton.
-Journalism's "highest calling" has become trying to bring shame on politicians - with the gold prizes for R-politicians - instead of reporting news that really affects the country and the world.
(Others have made these comments far more effectively than my poor attempt here, and I would appreciate a ping to better enumerations.) We're still in the process of attempting to recover from Watergate.
---->
Felt is a Klinton-like scumbag.
Watergate tore apart a nation and demoralized it - and contributed greatly to the "malaise" of the '70s. It was greatly overblown, and we are now likely to discover that the pieces all fit: that it was a blatantly political ploy to hurt Republicans.
Not only ought he be in jail, something ought to be done to extract reparations from this MF and his family.
---->
However, I just love the "investigators" who have fingered so many people wrongly over the course of the years.
Look at some examples from Wikipedia (as of yesterday):
First cut:
Over the years, political observers have suggested many possible candidates as Deep Throat, including FBI director L. Patrick Gray, Nixon advisor Alexander Haig, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and even former U.N. ambassador (and later president) George Bush, Sr..
[I never suspected any of these, personally - but had no idea myself who else to suspect]
Second cut:
Leading candidates
Generally acknowledged to be the three leading candidates are W. Mark Felt, Fred Fielding, and William H. Rehnquist.
----->
Someone from Wikipedia gets partial credit!
also, check out this School of "Journalism" take:
"The 7 finalists are listed here: http://www.comm.uiuc.edu/spike/deepthroat/
Patrick Buchanan, speechwriter and special assistant to the president.
David Gergen, speechwriter, then served as press spokesman for President Reagan.
Jonathan Rose, Attorney for White House relations.
Raymond Price, head speechwriter.
Stephen Bull, a special administrative assistant to Nixon.
Fred Fielding, top assistant to John Dean.
Gerald L. Warren, deputy press secretary under Nixon."
----->
How about how well the Investigative Journalism classes at UofI can really get to the bottom of things...
From another of their web sites: http://deepthroatuncovered.com/
How students solved one of America's top mysteries
After a four-year investigation, students at the University of Illinois have determined the identity of Deep Throat, the most elusive, anonymous news source in history: Fred Fielding, deputy counsel to former President Richard Nixon
Updated 11/21/2003
Wrong yet again...
Amazing.
----->
More amazing is the supreme confidence these academics have in their results.
These are the type of people who are writing "history books" now - "investigating" such things as Jefferson's sex life, etc. ,as well as seeking out stories for Newsweak, CBS 60min, and the NYSlimes.
It is important for us to to recognize their enormous fallibility.
Many people have been slandered by these "investigative journalists" inspired by their @#$%^ "professors" over the years.
TO ME/ FOR ME - this is the REAL story of Watergate.
I loathe them all nowadays.
FRAUDcasters.
Excellent rant.
My concern, like Jane's, is the yard.
The price is reasonable.
Back outside.
I heard in addition, a bit ago, Rush restating something (Buchanan?) said: Nixon's weakness led to the defeat of S.VietNam, and the death of the millions of SE.Asians.
That's right. I consider any of the slime who took part in this to be demonic, not heroes - wheter MF, WP, or any of their colleagues.
MF ought to have gone over to the US Attorney, who was already well into investigating, instead of doing his self-aggrandizing power play - for which until recently, he was properly ashamed - but insufficiently punished.
That is absolutely correct.
General Giap and the NV leadership tested American resolve at Phuoc Long (about 80 miles NW of Saigon) in the beginning of 1975. ARVN fought bravely, but lost. The territorial change was relatively insignificant--the NVA took up a few square miles of South Vietnamese territory.
NVA leadership had surmised the resignation of Nixon would weaken the ability of the Executive in its ability to undertake and sustain foreign military endeavor. The Phuoc Long operation would test that theory; if Hanoi was wrong, they would simply pack their bags and wait some more.
President Thieu's impression was that America would stand by its obligations made in the Treaty of Paris of 1973. Nixon had given his solemn word, and Thieu operated on the assumption that Ford, being Nixon's Vice President, would continue the policies of his predecessor. Thieu, operating a pseudo-dictatorial regime with a rubber-stamp Parliament, really didn't understand how American politics and Congress could play in the determination of American policy.
Amazingly, Thieu persisted in this policy, even after the North Vietnamese staged their armed demonstration at Phuoc Long. Thieu was in fantasy land. The Hanoi regime received the answer it was looking for, and launched its offensive in mid-March of 1975 at Ban Me Thout.
The American media didn't even notice the loss of Phuoc Long to the NVA. The Ford Administration was equally disengaged, so why shouldn't the NVA move in the Central Highlands?
After the collapse of the ARVN in Ban Me Thout in March 1975, NVA forces struck down from the DMZ, and the Convoy of Tears followed.
Stunningly, Thieu based his decision to abandon the Central Highlands in part on the Treaty of Paris, which required the United States to responsd "with decisive military force" if North Vietnam were to invade--this in spite of what occurred at Phuoc Long, Ban Me Thout, Quang Tri, Hue, Da Nang, and so on.
The ultimate was that Thieu, up until the day he resigned, around April 20, 1975, believed the Americans would come. He openly accused President Ford of treachery upon him and the South Vietnamese people in his resignation speech.
He was only partly right, because of his lack of understanding of how American politics worked.
Nixon's demise absolutely prevented any guarantee of South Vietnamese territorial integrity of being fulfilled.
Thus South Vietnam was lost.
I agree with you 100%! Excellent rant, and we should keep talking about it. Any of us who lived through the 70's (the worst decade in American history, with the worst president, the worst politics, the worst music, the worst clothes, and the worst decorating) should remind younger people what this was all about. No backing down!!
BTTT! Excellent!
Thank you all for your posts, and for your encouragement of mine.
Chair - good history
I'm going to reproduce here another thing I wrote in my determined effort to "not back down" ...
Nixon's major crime was loyalty to his friends.
As a result, he helped to cover up an investigation into wrongdoing.
He was threatened with impeachment by the large-majority Democrats after much hounding by the Old Media. Representatives of his party, Republicans, took a walk from the Capitol to the WH to ask in a private conversation that he resign. Nixon further showed his loyalty to his friends and his country by doing resigning, instead of forcing the party and country to split in a trial over this, though he never believed his actions were wrong. In fact he believed that the state of war gave the executive branch the right to do what his subordinates did, though he never specifically authorized their ill-fated actions, and cited WW2 precedents.
An unbiased history of Watergate would include this.
I've just pinged you to this link, by Veto.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1413997/posts?page=52#52
Please have a look.
That's just it, the myth of Deep Throat being an idealist...has been shattered. Felt was a ticked-off Hooverite G-Man who despised Nixon for passing him up for promotion.
Felt's illegal leaking of FBI files has been shown to have been due to avarice, not nobility.
...even though it may take decades before the popular zeitgeist picks up that fact.
I saw that Wikipedia article yesterday. It is consistent with my prior understanding and recollection, and is probably true in detail.
Ping!
I could not agree more. Nixon was loyal to his subordinates. I compared Nixon to what Ike did when his chief of staff, Sherman Adams, took the gift of a Vicuña coat from a South American nation. Vicuña is just the wool of a sheep that is raised in South America. The south American nation (Argentina?) wanted to sell coats in the USA and gave Ike's Chief of Staff a free wool coat.
Of course the media always called it a Vicuña coat instead of a wool coat. and the public believed that it must be worth more than Mink. It was just a coat made from wool cut from a sheep.
Ike responded by firing his chief of staff. What was Adams supposed to do when given the coat at a public gathering. Tick the Argentine government off by refusing to take it? And at that time it was not even against the law to take the coat. But Ike feared the media and canned a loyal employee.
Many presidents expect upward loyalty but offer none down. Nixon tried to protect his own people. It cost him his presidency. Remember that in 1973 there were many abitious liberals and ambitious conservatives in the Republican party. Lots of them wanted to be president.
When the media went after Nixon, men like Howard Baker were happy to appease the media by offering Nixon's scalp in return for great coverage. Barry Goldwater, still smarting from losing control of the party to Nixon, was also after Nixon's scalp.
Howard Baker, the minority leader, thought that he could use his media created hero status to make a run at the presidency. He ran in New Hampshire. He ended up getting very few votes. I once calculated that Baker spent well over $1,000 for each vote he got in New Hampshire.
By the way Nixon's job approval rating on the day he resigned was higher than Harry Truman's on the day Harry left office.
I have done some thinking about our need for a national police force. And the reasons we have limited ourselves local police forces.
I have put on my metal helmet.
President Nixon has been a thorn in the side of the democRATS and presstitutes since he told President Eisenhower that the incoming ruler of Cuba was a communist.
At that time President Nixon was Vice President, but had been watching and monitoring castro when he was a Senator. So the dislike by the democRATS and presstitutes go back a long, long way in time.
I think you hit the nail squarely on the head. You have posted the feelings I have toward these presstitutes and so-called learn--ed professors. Real history be darned, tabloid food into the minds of our youngsters. Onward, onward toward total de-education of America's youth!!
Again, nice history lesson.
I'll take a look at your thoughts about nat'l police force later on... let me say before I do, that I believe we ought to restructure the military in such a way that we have some type of force that I speculate you are espousing. I phoned thw WH about the concept a bit ago, but foolishly didn't follow up on their requests.
Such a force would have responsibility for borders. In addition, they would be deployed to Bosnia-like situations, and after-battle actions such as much of the need in Iraq now, and other "peace-keeping" operations. They would have specialized equipment like riot control gear and weapons, and would definitely not need or be trained in such heavy weaponry such as tanks or helicopter gunships, etc. they would call in the army or AF if that need arose. Where the line is drawn in weaponry they have inherent in their unit would be interesting discussions. They may even be able to serve for perimeter security for bases, etc... but that may be defining their responsibility too broadly.
Such a dedicated force would be good for our borders and internal security in times they aren't needed overseas. In addition, it would put into the Pentagon a powerful advocate for some "weaponry" and training that does not exist now. City and state police forces would benefit.
...
There's the outline
Now --- I'll take a look at what you wrote...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.