I'm sorry, but Madsen (see the interview below) is right.
This is funny as hell! Now that the shit is officially out of the
horse in regard to Bush's knowledge of terrorist plans against the United
States before 9-11--plans which are proving to have been more specific as
each day goes by--every conservative and social Darwinist pundit in the
nation is squealing like a pig.
Ari Fleischer's muted revelation of a few days ago has tapped a virtual
wellhead of rightist whining--whining which has come in the form of
nearly forty-eight solid hours of adjectives ranging from "skanky
bitch" to "despicable."
Whether justified or not, the same pundits made sport of the Clinton
administration for eight years, and now that the shoe is on the other
foot, the art of hurling political invective just isn't fun any
more. Bend over Hannity. Bend over Limbaugh. It's your guy's
turn at the stump!
As an aside, I was one of the ones to slam Cynthia McKinney (my
"representative" in the House, BTW) after her then baseless
suggestion that there be an investigation involving Whitehouse
foreknowledge of events prior to 9-11. I believe the term I used
was "crazy as a shit house rat." In retrospect, and my
error in appraising McKinney notwithstanding, I know that even crazy
people can be right. Has Ms McKinney been vindicated? As far
as I am concerned, she has been vindicated in spades (no pun
intended).
Edward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A FoxNews Flashback
Defending Cynthia McKinney
by Wayne Madsen
[Editors' Note: What follows is a transcript of an April 12 debate on
Fox
News's Hannity and Colmes show between Rep. Mark Foley and
CounterPunch
contributor Wayne Madsen over Rep. Cynthia McKinney's suggestion that the
US
government knew more about the 9/11 attacks than it had been letting on.
One
out of four was right. Guess which one?]
Hannity & Colmes
April 12, 2002
COLMES: Joining us tonight is Florida Congressman Mark Foley and
Wayne
Madsen, an investigative journalist who has worked with
Congresswoman
Cynthia McKinney for three years.
Now, before I defend Cynthia McKinney's right to say what she said,
Mr.
Madsen, would you agree that to suggest that the United States or anybody
in
this country knew or -- in the government had advance knowledge of this
is
preposterous?
WAYNE MADSEN, FRIEND OF REP. CYNTHIA MCKINNEY: I don't think
so.
I think what the congresswoman is asking is that, with the worst
intelligence failure in the history of the United States, why cannot we
have
in this country a full independent congressional investigation of who
knew
what when. How was all this intelligence...
COLMES: I agree there should be.
MADSEN: Yes.
COLMES: But she went further than that. She accused the Bush
administration,
if not Bush himself, of knowing in advance, because he or his father
would
benefit because of The Carlyle Group, which we'll get to in a moment.
She
accused him of having advance knowledge of this. Do you concur?
MADSEN: Well, you know who else is calling for an investigation in
the
financial
(CROSSTALK)
COLMES: But I'm not talking about an investigation. I'm talking about
the
accusation that the president -- forget the investigation for the moment.
I
want to talk about an accusation that President Bush had advance
knowledge.
Do you agree with that?
MADSEN: Judicial Watch is asking for the same investigation of
(CROSSTALK)
COLMES: I didn't say investigation, sir.
With all due respect, my question had to do with whether you concur
that
President Bush had advance knowledge of what happened on September 11.
Do
not use the word investigation, I beg of you, in your answer.
MADSEN: I won't use it. All I'll say is, let the facts come out. And
that's
all Congresswoman McKinney is asking for at this point in time.
COLMES: Well, that's not all she's asking for. I would disagree that
that's
all she's saying.
HANNITY: Well, Mr. Madsen, I'll go to you here. And I expect a direct
answer
to a very simple question. What evidence do you have that our president
was,
in any way, had any knowledge of these attacks? Do you have any evidence
at
all?
MADSEN: Sean, the evidence is out there. It was --
HANNITY: Wait a minute.
MADSEN: One place reported Salman Rushdie had been warned two weeks
before
September 11 not to fly. It was your paper, Mr. Murdoch's paper,
"The Times
of London."
HANNITY: What evidence, sir, do you have that links our president to
that
knowledge? Do you have any direct evidence, yes or no?
MADSEN: There is ample evidence out there reported in the media
about
advance knowledge of what happened on September 11.
Mr. Madsen, look, I don't want you to tell me evidence is out there.
This
charge is against the president of the United States of America at a
time
we're at war in a conflict. You're making a charge that he has
knowledge,
prior knowledge of the September 11 attack. And I ask you, sir,
specifically, what evidence do you have?
MADSEN: There was a warning that the congresswoman referred to from
President Putin before the attack. ..
HANNITY: A warning to who?
MADSEN: ... warnings from French intelligence, Israeli, to the
United
States, FBI and to the CIA. And I find it strange that, here we suffered
the
worst intelligence failure in the country's history and George Tenet
is
still director of the CIA. Can you imagine if they were airliners
that
crashed into buildings in downtown Tokyo?
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: That's a different issue, Mr. Madsen.
But, Mr. Madsen, an intelligence link or survey or something that came
in
does not represent -- in any court of law, sir, does not
represent...
MADSEN: Why does...
HANNITY: Hang on -- enough evidence to convict -- see, this is what's
going
on here.
Congressman, I'll throw it to you. This is just an irresponsible,
irrational
political assault on the president while we're at war. That's what's
so
offensive here to me.
FOLEY: Well, in "The Washington Post" today, Cynthia says she
has no
evidence. However, if they would investigate, maybe some evidence would
be
turned up. So it's like, what is she saying?
(CROSSTALK)
MADSEN: Why is the Bush administration against an
investigation?
(CROSSTALK)
HANNITY: Mr. Madsen, you're a journalist, sir. Would you even print this
on
this flimsy amount of evidence that you have here?
MADSEN: I've read the work of many journalists: "The Times of
London," the
BBC, "Der Spiegel" in Germany. They have all been reporting the
same thing
about advance knowledge. Is everybody crazy? Are all these journalists
not
allowed to express their opinion?
COLMES: I agree with that. But the investigation aspect of it I think
is
something -- maybe she has a point on that one.
I know you want to respond, Wayne. Go ahead.
MADSEN: Well, it's typical. Attack the messenger.
I mean, isn't it funny? The Republicans, when Bill Clinton was
president,
they dragged him into every possible conspiracy theory, except for
linking
him to the Lindbergh baby kidnapping. I mean, now we see the same
people
saying Cynthia McKinney has no right to her opinion. She's out there.
I
think it's nonsense.
FOLEY: Wayne, let me just say this. When they said that President
Clinton
launched the war simply to take away the Monica Lewinsky story, I
absolutely
refuted that and said that was absolutely wrong and unnecessary. I have
not
let false statements stand, whether they were Democratically directed
or
Republican directed. I think, in this particular instance, she has
a
fiduciary, as a member of Congress, to tell the facts and not
lie.
HANNITY: Absolutely. Good line.
MADSEN: I think the Congress has a responsibility to
investigate.
HANNITY: Congressman Foley -- we're going to give you the last word.
Thank
you for being with us, Mr. Madsen. Appreciate your time tonight.
Edward ><+>
"UFOs exist. It's the
Air Force that's only in science fiction."~GB+
http://www.global-connector.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/reality_pump/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
