Sandy Berger
If ever there was a person who deserved to be tried for treason ... it'd be Sandy Berger.
Do you remember him? During the 9/11 Commission hearings, he's the guy that went into the National Archives and stole documents. And that's not allegedly stole documents either ... he did the steal the documents. He put them in his shoes, his socks ... and then took some to a construction site and hide them so he could go find them later.
But what still remains a mystery, is what did he steal? What was he trying to hide? And who - if anyone - did he hide / destroy it for?
The Opinion Journal ran an op-ed today about this, and it's pretty interesting. But the other thing that's interesting ... is that Shawn Hannity aired the deleted scenes from "Path to 9/11," you know, that film on ABC that Clinton and others were so up in arms about? And ABC didn't cancel it, like the Reagan Docu-drama was canceled, but they cut the bad parts out.
But in the scene that was cut, what we see is some intelligence officials asking the national security advisor (than Sandy Berger) if they could go ahead an execute their plan to get the "package." The package being Osama Bin Laden. Berger refuses to answer, and I'm not clear, either he disconnected the conversation so they aborted the mission because they couldnt' get authorization, or he ordered them to abort. I'm not clear which. It's not a great copy of the video.
Either way ... I'm not really all that interested in what happened 9 years ago in the hunt for Osama. It's over and done with. But I do know someone that is very interested.
I think Bill Clinton got so upset about that movie (Path to 9/11) and ordered Sandy Berger to remove records from the archives so that his legacy as President would not wind up being the President who let Osama get away. I think - and I'm just one person - I think he's so caught up in preserving what he feels his legacy is, that he'll go to far lengths to change the records of history to show he did everything he could to catch Osama ... even though ... anyone with an ounce of common sense explains it this way ...
Yeah, Clinton probably did have half a dozen opportunities to catch Osama. And he probably didn't jump at any of them. But the world was a different place then. Pre 9/11 the American people did not think such an attack was possible. And Finger in the Wind Clinton went with what the American people felt was popular of the moment.
So yeah, in 1996 no one much cared about Osama. But in 2007 we all know better, and the person that should have known better in 1996 just didn't.
But Sandy Berger should be under arrest. Though he wont be. And I bet bottom dollar if a Dem is in office in 08, he'll have a place in the cabinet. Yippie.
Do you remember him? During the 9/11 Commission hearings, he's the guy that went into the National Archives and stole documents. And that's not allegedly stole documents either ... he did the steal the documents. He put them in his shoes, his socks ... and then took some to a construction site and hide them so he could go find them later.
But what still remains a mystery, is what did he steal? What was he trying to hide? And who - if anyone - did he hide / destroy it for?
The Opinion Journal ran an op-ed today about this, and it's pretty interesting. But the other thing that's interesting ... is that Shawn Hannity aired the deleted scenes from "Path to 9/11," you know, that film on ABC that Clinton and others were so up in arms about? And ABC didn't cancel it, like the Reagan Docu-drama was canceled, but they cut the bad parts out.
But in the scene that was cut, what we see is some intelligence officials asking the national security advisor (than Sandy Berger) if they could go ahead an execute their plan to get the "package." The package being Osama Bin Laden. Berger refuses to answer, and I'm not clear, either he disconnected the conversation so they aborted the mission because they couldnt' get authorization, or he ordered them to abort. I'm not clear which. It's not a great copy of the video.
Either way ... I'm not really all that interested in what happened 9 years ago in the hunt for Osama. It's over and done with. But I do know someone that is very interested.
I think Bill Clinton got so upset about that movie (Path to 9/11) and ordered Sandy Berger to remove records from the archives so that his legacy as President would not wind up being the President who let Osama get away. I think - and I'm just one person - I think he's so caught up in preserving what he feels his legacy is, that he'll go to far lengths to change the records of history to show he did everything he could to catch Osama ... even though ... anyone with an ounce of common sense explains it this way ...
Yeah, Clinton probably did have half a dozen opportunities to catch Osama. And he probably didn't jump at any of them. But the world was a different place then. Pre 9/11 the American people did not think such an attack was possible. And Finger in the Wind Clinton went with what the American people felt was popular of the moment.
So yeah, in 1996 no one much cared about Osama. But in 2007 we all know better, and the person that should have known better in 1996 just didn't.
But Sandy Berger should be under arrest. Though he wont be. And I bet bottom dollar if a Dem is in office in 08, he'll have a place in the cabinet. Yippie.
Comments