Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Update: Media Believed Al Qaeda-Saddam Connection... When Clinton Told Them So | Main | Saddam to Bin Ladin: "I Like You, But I Don't Like Like You" »
June 18, 2004

The Last Press Conference

It's time for Bush to call for a prime-time press conference in which he lays out the links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. The under-the-radar strategy is not working. If there are links between the two -- and I believe there are -- it is time for Bush to stop being afraid to say so.

If there are not links, it is time for him to admit that too. That will cost him the presidency, of course. But I, for one, have had enough of the kinda-sorta mealy-mouthisms.

It's one or the other, Mr. Bush.

I'd like to see a press conference -- in prime time, with the time specifically and strongly requested by the President -- in which he lays out the case.

But that's not the good part. The good part comes during reporters' questioning.

He picks on reporters representing the major liberal media. After they ask their predictable questions and he gives them the predictable response, he poses questions in turn to the media.

To the Newsweek reporter, he reads the following Newsweek report, verbatim:

"Saddam Hussein, who has a long record of supporting terrorism, is trying to rebuild his intelligence network overseas--assets that would allow him to establish a terrorism network. U.S. sources say he is reaching out to Islamic terrorists, including some who may be linked to Osama bin Laden, the wealthy Saudi exile accused of masterminding the bombing of two U.S. embassies in Africa last summer."

He then asks:

Has Newsweek written a correction for this report?

Has Newsweek any evidence the original report was wrong?

Has Newsweek written an article suggesting that Clinton was "strongly contradicted" by the 9-11 panel?

If not -- and of course all the questions are answered "No" -- then why not?

Next he calls upon Terry Moran of ABC. Once Terry Moran is done screeching about Abu Ghraib, he reads him this ABC News report:

Intelligence sources say bin Laden's long relationship with the Iraqis began as he helped Sudan's fundamentalist government in their efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. . . . ABC News has learned that in December, an Iraqi intelligence chief named Faruq Hijazi, now Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, made a secret trip to Afghanistan to meet with bin Laden. Three intelligence agencies tell ABC News they cannot be certain what was discussed, but almost certainly, they say, bin Laden has been told he would be welcome in Baghdad."

Once again, he asks Mr. Moran:


Has ABC News published a correction for this report?

Has ABC News any evidence the original report was wrong?

Has ABC News written an article suggesting that Clinton was "strongly contradicted" by the 9-11 panel?

If not -- and of course all the questions are answered "No" -- then why not?

And so forth around the room, until reporters almost refuse to stand and ask questions when called upon.

For those few organizations that did not report on the Saddam-bin Ladin connection in 1998-2000, he reads to them the words of Kean and Hamilton specifically and vigorously refuting the media's coverage of the 9-11 Panel's findings, and asks:

"Did you prominently feature 9-11 Chairmen Kean and Hamilton specifically and vigorously refuting your coverage of their findings? If not, why not?"

The media has declared war on the Bush Administration. The time for pretending to make nice-nice is over.

Again: Either these links are real or they are not. If they are not, then Bush deserves to lose this election.

If they are real, but Bush does not take on the media regarding their distortions, then he deserves to lose the election for his utter stupidity and gutlessness.



posted by Ace at 04:10 PM
Comments



The reverse inquisition is a nice idea, but what makes you think the newspapers would report it? What makes you think CNN wouldn't cut the feed?

I'd put 50/50 odds that anyone who didn't watch such an occurence with their own eyes would have to rely on word of mouth reports. It sure wouldn't be on the cover of the New York Times.

Posted by: Brock on June 18, 2004 05:21 PM

That occurred to me, but I think basically they wouldn't dare.

Oh, they'd have their fingers over the cut button.

But they wouldn't have the balls to push it.

Posted by: ace on June 18, 2004 05:34 PM

I think this is a great idea, ace. I think he needs to take off the gloves and stop the himming and hawing as we say in Texas. Make his case, bitch slap the press and win reelection. He wont though.

I personally think his handlers are over handling him. I think they have him afraid to be the blunt person he was when he got elected. At this point he really has nothing to lose. He needs to put up or shut up.

They can sic Cheney on the media all they like, the average joe american doesnt relate to Cheney so it is not overly effective. People like, W. Maybe not his politics but his manner.

If W. stood on tv and called the NYT treasonous and shameful. If he called on the liberal media to pull their collective head out of John Kerry's ass and shook his head in disgust the voters would stand up and say "HELL YEAH!"

Posted by: Jennifer on June 18, 2004 06:44 PM

Ace,

This is puzzling.

Why has the Bush administration been so quiet on the connection?

And yes, Stephen Hayes has been writing about this in The Weekly Standard and has asked the same question.

What are they waiting for?

There are of course reasons for this posture, but none of them seem like very good ones.

Posted by: MeTooThen on June 18, 2004 08:01 PM

Ace,


Here is another article citing major news outlets reporting on Saddam-Al Qaeda.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8887

Posted by: Golden Boy on June 18, 2004 08:58 PM

My comments are at my blog. Just click on my name.

Posted by: Kerry Is Unelectable on June 18, 2004 11:09 PM

[quote]Again: Either these links are real or they are not. If they are not, then Bush deserves to lose this election.

If they are real, but Bush does not take on the media regarding their distortions, then he deserves to lose the election for his utter stupidity and gutlessness.[/quote]

This bit alone is worth a $10 hit to the tip jar. This is Bush's election to lose, this is his fight to lose, and if he is incapable of winning this election this he does not have the long term strategy skills to win this war. And I would want him replaced.

Said it before, I'll say it again: If you want the American people to believe that you are a wartime president then you damn well better start acting like one. Grow a pair, present your plan and vision to the American people and then prosecute this war.

Stop futzing around with the MFA (which is just a political black hole... you get nothing out of it no matter how you try to finesse your position - people's minds are made up on this and it is not a fight for national level politicians - and you end up carrying no legislative influence anyway). Stop trying to stake out a domestic, compassionate conservative claim by trying to make prescription drug reform a hallmark issue while simultaneously attacking the scourge of.... illegal steroids. (geez where did that come from?) You don't have the luxury of the Clinton administration to wade in ADD politics and a cause d'jour spin cycle. There's a f**king war on and I want you fighting it and rallying the country. And if you can't do it then I'll be happy to vote you out!

Posted by: Ron C on June 19, 2004 12:41 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!
Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine
US decimation of Iran's ICBM forces is due to Space Force's instant detection of launches -- and the launchers' hiding places -- and rapid counter-attack via missiles
AI is doing a lot of the work in analyzing images to find the exact hiding place of the launchers. Counter-strikes are now coming in four hours after a launch, whereas previously it might have taken days for humans to go over the imagery and data.
Robert Mueller, Former Special Counsel Who Probed Trump, Dies
“robert mueller just died,” trump wrote in a truth social post on march 21. “good, i’m glad he’s dead. he can no longer hurt innocent people! president donald j. trump.”
Canadian School Designates Cafeteria And Lunchroom As "No Food Zones" For Ramadan
Canada and the UK are neck and neck in the race to become the first western country to fall to Islam [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD have a short chat about Iran, the disgusting SAVE Act theater, Mamdani's politicizing of St. Patrick's Day, and more!
Recent Comments
Bulg: "107 Hi, Dash! ..."

Dash my lace wigs!: "Hi, Bulg! ..."

Bulg: "Hullo, All. ..."

JTB: "Even when the song is instrumental, I often vocali ..."

Rev. Wishbone: "If I'm doing karaoke, it's gotta be 'I Like to Sle ..."

The Grateful - Acta Non Verba: "We had Eternal Father sung at my daddy's funeral. ..."

Accomak: "I have been partially deaf since weeks old. First ..."

The Grateful - Acta Non Verba: "When I transferred from Catholic elementary school ..."

JackStraw : "Don't sleep on the Pirates. They've got some arms. ..."

Matthew Kant Cipher: "To my earlier points about interesting lyrics (and ..."

JTB: "TRex, Thanks for this topic. It brought back a lo ..."

The Grateful - Acta Non Verba: "The Karaoke at Corsicana is very worth listening t ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives