What's In YOUR Pants?
In the Associated Press article by John Solomon, "Clinton Aide Investigated on Terror Memos"
Sandy Berger, former national security advisor to Bill Clinton is quoted as saying, "... I inadvertently took a few (HIGHER THAN TOP SECRET!) documents from the Archives..." Then, "When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few documents that I apparently had accidentally discarded,"
Wow! How does one “inadvertently“ place documents into one's pants? Did he take these top secret documents into the bathroom with him? How does one “inadvertently“ place top secret documents into one's sox? If he thought that what he was doing was legitimate why would he hide them in his pants and sox? Please, e-mail me if you can think of ANY legitimate reason to place any document in your pants. Don't you have to wear gloves or something when handling these documents? If your fingers could damage them, what damage could be done by crumbling them up in your pants?
I can see no way to “inadvertently“ place douments into my pants. But, even if you are naive enough to buy that the top secret documents “fell“ into his pants, when he was informed by the Archives that documents were missing he stated he returned everything he had. If you inadvertently stole top secret documents from the National Archive when they informed you that some were missing would you not first have to look to see if you had these items which you did not know you had? He stated “When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had...“ Does this not indicate that even if he did not intentionally take them, by the time the Archives called him he knew he had them, but appearently had not contacted the Archives to return them.
As for the “acidentally“ discarded top secret documents, say you are the former National Security Advisor, do you “discard“ ANYTHING without looking it over to make sure you are not throwing away government secrets? Are there spys looking through his trash everyday? If they were not last week are they now? At least one of the “missing“ documents contained a detailed list of U. S. vulnerabilities to terror. If these are the kinds of things that Mr. Berger “accidentally“ discards, I expect that al-Qaida will be going through Mr. Berger's trash from now on.
David Gergen, another former Clinton aid said, "I think it's more innocent than it looks." and, "I have known Sandy Berger for a long time. He would never do anything to compromise the security of the United States." He thinks that "it is suspicious" that this would leak just before the Sept. 11 commission report is to be relaesed.
I would like to know when Mr. Gergen would have thought the timing not “suspicious?“ I assume that Mr. Gergen is implying that the Bush administration was behind the leak, and the timing. This may be, but what would the Bush administration have to gain by this? We do not know the content of the 9-11 report. If the report relies heavily on Mr. Berger's testimony to make the Bush administration look bad, then I suppose they have that to gain, a little. And Mr. Berger has been advising John Kerry on national security issues. This could show poor decision making on the part of Kerry to take advise from a theif. But, let's be objective. This leak would have been better timed later, when, perhaps Kerry anounces that Mr. Berger will play a prominent role in the Kerry administration. I don't see the Bush administration getting that much out of this.
We do not know who leaked the information, or their motivation for having done so. The only thing we do know is that there would have been no information to leak had Mr. Berger broken the law by stuffing top secret documents into his pants and inadvertently removing (stealing?) them from the National Archive. Then he either threw away or destroyed documents which showed the action, or inaction of both Mr. Berger and his boss President Clinton in fighting terrorism.
How much do you think the person who leaked the information had to gain by doing so? Do you think that Mr. Berger had anything to gain by “loosing“ certain documents? Did Mr Berger risk our lives by allowing lists of our national terrorism vulnerabilities to end up in a land fill somewhere?
Read more about it and…
Think for yourself!
Make up your own mind!
Sandy Berger, former national security advisor to Bill Clinton is quoted as saying, "... I inadvertently took a few (HIGHER THAN TOP SECRET!) documents from the Archives..." Then, "When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few documents that I apparently had accidentally discarded,"
Wow! How does one “inadvertently“ place documents into one's pants? Did he take these top secret documents into the bathroom with him? How does one “inadvertently“ place top secret documents into one's sox? If he thought that what he was doing was legitimate why would he hide them in his pants and sox? Please, e-mail me if you can think of ANY legitimate reason to place any document in your pants. Don't you have to wear gloves or something when handling these documents? If your fingers could damage them, what damage could be done by crumbling them up in your pants?
I can see no way to “inadvertently“ place douments into my pants. But, even if you are naive enough to buy that the top secret documents “fell“ into his pants, when he was informed by the Archives that documents were missing he stated he returned everything he had. If you inadvertently stole top secret documents from the National Archive when they informed you that some were missing would you not first have to look to see if you had these items which you did not know you had? He stated “When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had...“ Does this not indicate that even if he did not intentionally take them, by the time the Archives called him he knew he had them, but appearently had not contacted the Archives to return them.
As for the “acidentally“ discarded top secret documents, say you are the former National Security Advisor, do you “discard“ ANYTHING without looking it over to make sure you are not throwing away government secrets? Are there spys looking through his trash everyday? If they were not last week are they now? At least one of the “missing“ documents contained a detailed list of U. S. vulnerabilities to terror. If these are the kinds of things that Mr. Berger “accidentally“ discards, I expect that al-Qaida will be going through Mr. Berger's trash from now on.
David Gergen, another former Clinton aid said, "I think it's more innocent than it looks." and, "I have known Sandy Berger for a long time. He would never do anything to compromise the security of the United States." He thinks that "it is suspicious" that this would leak just before the Sept. 11 commission report is to be relaesed.
I would like to know when Mr. Gergen would have thought the timing not “suspicious?“ I assume that Mr. Gergen is implying that the Bush administration was behind the leak, and the timing. This may be, but what would the Bush administration have to gain by this? We do not know the content of the 9-11 report. If the report relies heavily on Mr. Berger's testimony to make the Bush administration look bad, then I suppose they have that to gain, a little. And Mr. Berger has been advising John Kerry on national security issues. This could show poor decision making on the part of Kerry to take advise from a theif. But, let's be objective. This leak would have been better timed later, when, perhaps Kerry anounces that Mr. Berger will play a prominent role in the Kerry administration. I don't see the Bush administration getting that much out of this.
We do not know who leaked the information, or their motivation for having done so. The only thing we do know is that there would have been no information to leak had Mr. Berger broken the law by stuffing top secret documents into his pants and inadvertently removing (stealing?) them from the National Archive. Then he either threw away or destroyed documents which showed the action, or inaction of both Mr. Berger and his boss President Clinton in fighting terrorism.
How much do you think the person who leaked the information had to gain by doing so? Do you think that Mr. Berger had anything to gain by “loosing“ certain documents? Did Mr Berger risk our lives by allowing lists of our national terrorism vulnerabilities to end up in a land fill somewhere?
Read more about it and…
Think for yourself!
Make up your own mind!
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home