Incidentally I became convinced after this.
Jim Quinn interview David Shippers and Janya Davis concerning OKC terrorist connection(6/27/02).
"Most of this past week, President Bush talked less about removing Saddam and more about making sure Iraq does not possess any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons."
"Secretary of State Colin Powell, working the complex diplomatic corridors of the United Nations to get tougher U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq, never referred to overthrowing Saddam. He set the U.S. goal as disarmament and left open the possibility that Saddam would remain in power."
"Meanwhile, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer announced the "one-bullet" initiative, suggesting that Saddam's internal opponents take out their boss. "Regime change is welcome in whatever form it takes," Fleischer said, going on to contradict Powell by calling it "unrealistic" to think that Saddam could stay in office.
There's that "single-bullet" theory again.(This might be Bush-- or Ari's idea of a joke, or a message, keep reading.)
"The White House was heartened last week when House Democratic leader Richard Gephardt, D-Mo., signed onto a proposed resolution authorizing the use of force in Iraq as long as Bush certifies to Congress that diplomatic efforts aimed at disarming Iraq had failed.Gephardt's move insured the resolution's passage in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and undermined Democrats in the Senate who were still pressing the White House for concessions"
Morality ping to Richard Gephardt.
"Democrat Joe Biden of Delaware said his effort to craft a Senate resolution requiring Bush to give more weight to diplomacy was "cut off at the knees." Biden said he would have had 51 votes -- enough for passage -- if the administration had not "got Gephardt" first. Biden will offer pieces of his proposal as an amendment to Gephardt's deal."
Fifty-one votes, huh? Wonder how many of those are from Republicans?And who they are? Anyway, here's the important part--what the opposition in the senate is planning to do:
" The Senate is slated to vote this week on two amendments designed to link Bush's authority more closely to action by the United Nations and to "tie down what we are authorizing," said Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle."
"Daschle said the deal struck between Bush and Gephardt gives the president too much leeway to wage war. He said he'd vote for Biden's amendment, which is cosponsored by Republican Richard Lugar of Indiana. Sens. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and John Kerry of Massachusetts also support the amendment, Biden said."
"Lugar, respected in both parties for his foreign policy expertise, said he's convinced there will be "unity of purpose" in Congress but that "much diplomatic work needs to be done." The goal must be to eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, he said."
"And the United States must have partners if we are to deal successfully with the myriad of complications that will be present in a post-war Iraq."
Myriad of complications, to be sure.
It seems clear to me that Specter is waving the OKC Bombing stuff around in Bush's face.This could be happening for one of two reasons: If Bush chooses to invade Iraq,and continues to say nothing re: OKC, the OKC Bombing investigation could suddenly develop "legs," as someone put it. And those "legs" might well kick the Bush administration around quite a bit.
On the other hand, if Bush does choose to start talking about Oklahoma City, there's going to be a tremendous amount of political fallout, most of it on the democratic side. Since Arlen Specter often votes with the democrats, this could be a big CYA move. Could his suddenly renewed interest in the OKC Bombing have something to do with Bush's scheduled Tuesday night speech to the nation about Iraq? To quote Specter: "Who knows?"
Read this, Jim Rob, and tell me if what I said about Arlen Specter isn't true. This is typical of Specter, and why he might be termed a "genius." (No adjectives for now).
Specter knows. They all know. And it isn't going to make a damn bit of difference. There isn't going to be any war with Iraq without this stuff coming out first. Mark my words.
Has anybody considered the possibility that if it doesn't come out of the U.S., it could come from Iraq?Sadaam Hussein has received quite a bit of press in the last week talking about the "lies told by the U.S. government." It's not beyond the realm of possibility that Hussein has made it clear through "diplomatic channels" that if any bombs get dropped on Iraq, the U.S. might not like the response --without any chemical or nuclear weapons ever being launched.
But don't mistake what I'm saying. I must mention a prescient and perhapse even cryptic remark from Bush today on CNN --that Americans are "finally beginning to realize the true nature of the threat posed by Sadaam Hussein." He sounded very sad when he said it.
It might be that he wants to tell the truth about Oklahoma City, in his own good time (like after the election in November, when he can't be accused of politicking) but can't get a war against Iraq started without the support of "certain" members of Congress, who might prefer that a different version of the "truth" be told, if it has to be told at all.
This is why NOT all republicans should automatically be re-elected, Jim.
Since this is Sunday morning, all I can say is pray, pray, pray and in the meantime, keep sending those emails.
And just in case anyone wants Specter's email address, here it is:arlen_specter@specter.senate.gov
You might not be aware that Specter is a native Oklahoman.
P.S.
I pinged to this post because I think it is important that a lot of people who might not understand all the implications here read the thread posted in #50. It is a long one, but it's the one that helped me understand an awful lot of things about these case and why they aren't being made public.
The article linked in post #51 also contains what I consider to be further, somewhat shocking confirmation of some of the stuff we suspected all along. I had never read that exact interview before, it is certainly worth perusing.
Honway, it is great to hear that Pat (OKCSubmariner) might be on Fox.I would suggest that any freepers who think this might be a good idea to email them at Comments@foxnews.com You can also email individual hosts if you go to the Fox news website. They do read the mail there.