Webster Tarpley credits Truth Movement, speculates Bush insanity impeachment

[ref]

In his latest writing, Webster Tarpley makes some very straightforward truther assumptions and accusations.

From rockcreekfreepress.com article written by Webster Tarpley

http://rockcreekfreepress.com/RCFPJan2007-Pg8.pdf

"9/11 truth movement was a critical component in creating the climate of
opinion for Bush’s defeat at the polls in November 2006"

"The only way to attrit and erode Bush’s hard-core base of support is to bring home the leading facts of 9/11 truth: the 9/11 attacks did not emerge from the world of Bin Laden, Atta, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the laptop, and the cave in Pushtunistan; they were a deliberate war provocation and coup d’etat launched by the invisible government or rogue network..."


Okay then.. this gets only better:

"To ignore the centrality of 9/11 to Bush’s every move is like trying to fight Hitler without mentioning anti-Semitism. Attacks on Bush that do not include 9/11 truth are simply impotent, and will not be effective."

"Impeachment takes only a majority of the House, but requires two thirds of the Senate. Bush can be declared mentally unfit for office by reason of insanity by half of the cabinet under the XXV Amendment, but it takes two thirds of both houses to make this stick if Bush protests that he is not insane."

Nice going there, W.T.

[MortFurd]

I only see one little problem:

They've got to present SOMETHING to the House or the Senate to make them start the impeachment proceedings.

All I see from the "911 Truth Movement" is screaming and hollering - no evidence, and no attempt to present anything to anyone in a position to start any kind of legal proceedings.

I would almost go so far as to kick money into the pot to hire a lawyer (Truther's choice) to review anything they've got for evidence so that they can get an opinion on how their "evidence" would fare before a court or in Congress.

[PerryLogan]

It's just dumb white guys who think they're brilliant.

[ref]

I only see one little problem:

They've got to present SOMETHING to the House or the Senate to make them start the impeachment proceedings.

All I see from the "911 Truth Movement" is screaming and hollering - no evidence, and no attempt to present anything to anyone in a position to start any kind of legal proceedings.

It is ridicilous, that they claim to have the facts. Facts supported by what? Their own assumptions.

If they had the facts, why wouldn't they push them to authorities, or do anything? Because they are not facts, because no evidence backs them up. I so much dislike the claiming of facts, based on some hypothetical and biased assumptions of events. Some theorist's own opinion is not a fact of life.

[PerryLogan]

It doesn't even make sense as a scenario. If Bush is part of mass murder, he needs to be prosecuted, not impeached.

(Impeachment is only used for embarrassing popular Presidents. Doesn't Tarpley know that?)

And if he was part of 9/11, how does this lead us to impeachment by reason of insanity?

And of course, some Truthers don't think GWB even knew. The Truthers have to agree on their story--as well as find some actual facts--before they move ahead.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

In his latest writing, Webster Tarpley makes some very straightforward truther assumptions and accusations.

From rockcreekfreepress.com article written by Webster Tarpley

http://rockcreekfreepress.com/RCFPJan2007-Pg8.pdf

"9/11 truth movement was a critical component in creating the climate of
opinion for Bush’s defeat at the polls in November 2006"

"The only way to attrit and erode Bush’s hard-core base of support is to bring home the leading facts of 9/11 truth: the 9/11 attacks did not emerge from the world of Bin Laden, Atta, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the laptop, and the cave in Pushtunistan; they were a deliberate war provocation and coup d’etat launched by the invisible government or rogue network..."


Okay then.. this gets only better:

"To ignore the centrality of 9/11 to Bush’s every move is like trying to fight Hitler without mentioning anti-Semitism. Attacks on Bush that do not include 9/11 truth are simply impotent, and will not be effective."

"Impeachment takes only a majority of the House, but requires two thirds of the Senate. Bush can be declared mentally unfit for office by reason of insanity by half of the cabinet under the XXV Amendment, but it takes two thirds of both houses to make this stick if Bush protests that he is not insane."

Nice going there, W.T.



One major problem with his brilliant idea to go for insanity, power goes to the VP

Section 4
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Additional_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constit ution#Amendment_XXV

[ref]

One major problem with his brilliant idea to go for insanity, power goes to the VP
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Additional_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constit ution#Amendment_XXV

Imagine their faces. We got rid of Bush!! And who did we get in return.. Cheney, mother of all evil :eek:

[The Almond]

To ignore the centrality of 9/11 to Bush’s every move is like trying to fight Hitler without mentioning anti-Semitism. Attacks on Bush that do not include 9/11 truth are simply impotent, and will not be effective.These are the words of a man divorced from reality. The Democrats did quite well without mentioning any of the 9/11 Truth garbage. They hit hardest on Iraq policies, the ineffectiveness of GOP leadership (Immigration, national security, social reform), and the corruption inherent to big money, big oil, and big industry that so heavily dominates the Republican majority.

The smartest thing the Democrats did was not mention 9/11, terrorism or the war on terror. Nice going guys, enjoy your recently vacated former republican held offices.

[Brainster]

It's just dumb white guys who think they're brilliant.

Tarpley probably is legitimately brilliant, but he's a kook anyway. He's a longtime LaRouche insider who was graduated (according to his Wikipedia entry) summa cum laude from Princeton in 1966, and became a Fulbright Scholar. I assume he's just looking at this as a gravy train.

[skepticalcriticalguy]

Tarpley probably is legitimately brilliant, but he's a kook anyway. He's a longtime LaRouche insider who was graduated (according to his Wikipedia entry) summa cum laude from Princeton in 1966, and became a Fulbright Scholar. I assume he's just looking at this as a gravy train.

His Unauthorized Biography of George Bush is free to read at http://www.tarpley.net/bushb.htm

[Regnad Kcin]

...The Truthers have to agree on their story--as well as find some actual facts--before they move ahead.So, in other words, never?

[pomeroo]

Here is the record of my negotiations with Webster Tarpley. Would it be fair to conclude that his silence translates into, "Hey, you mean I can't just come on the show and spout silly crap without being challenged?"

From: Ronald Wieck (ronniejames@att.net)
To: tarpley (address deleted)
Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 9:55 AM
Subject: Debate

Dear Mr. Tarpley,

I occasionally host a cable show, 'Hardfire,' that airs in New York City. We taped a debate last week between two of the creators of 'Loose Change' and Mark Roberts, debunker extraordinaire. The conspiracy fantasists had good reason to be displeased with the outcome. The tinfoil-hat blogs cry out for a stronger champion, and your name keeps coming up.

Are you interested? I'd be happy to discuss 9/11-related issues with you on either one or two half-hour shows.

Yours Truly,
Ronald Wieck


From: Webster G. Tarpley
To: Ronald Wieck
Sent: Thursday, December 28, 2006 11:05 PM
Subject: Re: Debate

Sounds interesting - can you let me know a little more about your program, and about Mark Roberts.

WGT

December 29, 2006

Dear Mr. Tarpley,

Sure. The show is a small one, although we've recently expanded to Nassau County, NY. Here are the links to the two-part debate between Roberts and the Loose Change Team.

The first program is at http://tinyurl.com/tkfhj.

The second program is at http://tinyurl.com/yfkqeo (http://tinyurl.com/yfkqeo).

You could either debate Roberts--the match people on both sides seem to be clamoring for--or you could be interviewed by me. The range of 9/11-related issues could be broad or restricted to a few topics of your choosing.

Ron Wieck


----- Original

January 15, 2007

Dear Mr. Tarpley,

I haven't heard from you for a while. Are you still interested in appearing on Hardfire?

Regards,
Ron Wieck


January 25, 2007

Dear Mr. Tarpley,

I'm beginning to get the idea that you're not too interested in discussing 9/11 conspiracy theories on Hardfire. Mark Roberts is terrifyingly well-informed, but there is no need to confront him. You can simply be interviewed by me and I'm a pushover.

Regards,
Ron Wieck

[kookbreaker]

"9/11 truth movement was a critical component in creating the climate of
opinion for Bush’s defeat at the polls in November 2006"


Its a perfectly logical conclusion! Its just like the rock on my table that keeps the Polar Bears away!

[Loss Leader]

How many damn times can I say this: If the Democrats had a single shred of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, they would have hollered about it as loudly as possible. Impeachment wouldn't be necessary because Kerry would have won in 2004. Even if Bush won, impeachment would be much easier because the Democrats would have 95% of the House.

It's just so stupid.

[DarkMagician]

How many damn times can I say this: If the Democrats had a single shred of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, they would have hollered about it as loudly as possible. Impeachment wouldn't be necessary because Kerry would have won in 2004. Even if Bush won, impeachment would be much easier because the Democrats would have 95% of the House.

It's just so stupid.

Unless, {turns to other camera} THEY'RE IN ON IT!

DUH duh duh!

{/tinfoilhat}

[ref]

Here is the record of my negotiations with Webster Tarpley. Would it be fair to conclude that his silence translates into, "Hey, you mean I can't just come on the show and spout silly crap without being challenged?"

He must have seen the debate between Mark, You and the LC guys and drew his own conclusions. He doesn't stand a chance when his facts are compared to real facts. His silence is telling. Truth Movement is losing all of their 'star players' because of the lack of even a slightest credibility. And refusal to really test their theories against others. If they really believed in their story, there would be no promblem in coming.

Btw, your last mail to Webster was hilarious :) Wild guess we'll never see him on your show. :rolleyes:

[pomeroo]

He must have seen the debate between Mark, You and the LC guys and drew his own conclusions.


By the oddest coincidence, his silence dates from the moment I sent him the links to the debate.





He doesn't stand a chance when his facts are compared to real facts. His silence is telling. Truth Movement is losing all of their 'star players' because of the lack of even a slightest credibility. And refusal to really test their theories against others. If they really believed in their story, there would be no promblem in coming.




Some of the prominent twoofers are genuine true-believer wackos, others are cynical charlatans hustling a pernicious message for their fifteen minutes of fame, but most combine the village idiot and the snake oil salesman into a single ugly package.



Btw, your last mail to Webster was hilarious :) Wild guess we'll never see him on your show. :rolleyes:



I think we can safely conclude that Mr. Tarpley's ardor has cooled.

[CHF]

A perfect insight into the minds of twoofers.

The Republicans lost an election in which 911 twoof WAS NEVER AN ISSUE. All twoofer candidates lost badly!

And yet the result was somehow thanks to the twoofers. :rolleyes:

[LashL]

I think we can safely conclude that Mr. Tarpley's ardor has cooled.

Well, that's too bad, really. I would love to see him on your show. Let's hope he gets his courage up.