John McCain is asked about PNAC
During a town hall event in Portsmouth, OH on Wednesday, John McCain was asked by a member of the audience whether his links to the parent organization of the Project for a New American Century explain why he has been reluctant to support calls for a new investigation of 9/11.The questioner began, "I was curious about a document. Back in September of 2000, the Project for a New American Century, or PNAC, whose members included Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Paul Wolfowitz, wrote a document entitled 'Rebuilding Americans Defenses.'"As McCain turned and paced away from him, the questioner continued, "In it, they state, quote, "The process of transformation, even if it bring revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.""Now, many Americans believe that that 'new Pearl Harbor' event took place on 9/11," the questioner went on, as McCain grimaced slightly. "And according to a recent New York Times and CBS News poll, 84% of Americans believe that there were some criminal elements of our government involved in 9/11."Calls of disapproval began to arise from the audience, but the questioner shot back, "Hold on!" and continued asking McCain, "Can you tell us about your role as — hold on — as president of the 'New Citizen Project,' founded in 1994, which served as a chief fund-raising and parent organization to PNAC? And is this one of the factors that has made you so reluctant to support the victims' family members and first responders who are begging for a new investigation into 9/11?"The boos became louder at that point, and McCain grimaced again, turned his back and walked away, but the questioner insisted, "It's a serious question.""I have a serious answer, sir," McCain replied, "and that is that it was Joe Lieberman and I — a Democrat — that sponsored the legislation for the 9/11 Commission. ... And very frankly, the administration was not, shall I say, enthusiastic about the establishment of that commission. ... I am proud of what the 9/11 Commission did. I am proud that we have enacted many of the reforms ... that they recommended. And I will stand by their recommendations and their conclusions, as will the overwhelming majority of Americans.""It's a free country," McCain concluded. "You are free to disagree with their conclusions. But I am proud to have been one of those who was, along with Joe Lieberman, responsible for the establishment of the 9/11 Commission."This video is from CNN.com, broadcast July 9, 2008.========================= =============In response to a Freedom of Information Act Request submitted by Kevin Ryan, Mick Harrison and Paul Smith, the government has disclosed documents confirming that Pakistani ISI General Ahmed - the guy who wired $100,000 to lead hijacker Atta — met with a "Senior Representative from the Joint Chiefs of Staff", Centcom Commander General Tommy Franks, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Wolfowitz, Feith, other PNAC members, and probably Intelligence Committee members Graham and Goss, and others in the week before 9/11.All credit goes to Kevin, Mick and Paul. I'm just reporting on their efforts. http://www.infowars.com/?p=336...
Channel: News & Politics
Uploaded: December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm
Author: civilian37
Length: 02:34
Rating: 4.70
Views: 4900
Video Comments
|
KosherHoarse1 (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
Naive I am. To what listen to a bunch of scholars that have indepth knowledge of the issue at background information. I mean your pointing at this one conspiracy nut at the ass end of the internet. And saying here, this guy here who's not even from this country has all the answers. Did you even read the 9/11 Commission report?I mean I can pull together an array of "creditable" sources (ex-CIA,Govt officials,University investigators) and paint the same picture about 9/11
DELPHIIII (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
With all due respect the only thing laughable about 9/11 is the "official story". Anyone that flat out denies any government involvment clearly has not looked through the evidence or has predetermined conclusions.The fact that you would suggest the 9/11 commission report to me clearly shows your naivety. I highly suggest, if you have an open mind about this, to read the 9/11 commision report: omissions or distortions or look through nufffrespects 9/11 videos.
KosherHoarse1 (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
Your implying that a Govt that couldn't even make one measly WMD appear in Iraq some how pulled off this massively elaborate scheme to take a blow at it's own economy and kill it's own civilians? Fucking laughable. I mean that would be an multi Agency effort, there would be countless Americans would have to keep there mouths shut about killing their own people. I mean that isn't even half of it.Seriously read the 9/11 comission report. Get your facts straight kid.
DELPHIIII (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
Well the 9/11 'conspiracy' is indeed fact actually but i do think the guy shoulda finished his question right at the peak of mccains panic when he walked away from the guy with his head down in shame. When he mentioned 9/11 you can see mccains face light up a little bit because the crowd starts heckling and he sees that as a way out.But yea a body language expert would have a field day on this one.
KosherHoarse1 (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
No kidding, It went from panic (Oh shit what am I going to say about that)until the guy blew it, by mixing fact with fiction(9/11 Conspiracy) and opened a door for McCain to drift off topic. I think 9/11 for PNAC was just a happy coincidence. It really just put the plan on the fast track. Good point though. He didn't acknowledge or address PNAC whatsoever. Pander Bear material here.
DELPHIIII (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
The look on john mccains face up until he decided he could try and make the guy look like a nut and completley sidestep the question was priceless. His body language showed complete shock embarrasment and panic.. secrets cant be kept forever mr mccain
COMALiteJ (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
And no, he does NOT support freedom of religion. He specifically stated that States should be permitted to have OFFICIAL STATE CHURCHES. Government at ANY level having an OFFICIAL Church is pretty much the 180º DIAMETRIC OPPOSITE of Freedom of Religion!I said nothing about the other candidates being any better. I only said that Ron Paul disappointed me mightily. It's because I had indeed thought that he was so great, so he had all the further to fall in my estimation.
COMALiteJ (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
Granted, if he indeed never saw such a thing, not mentioning ectopic pregnancy and other such conditions that he would have to know exists isn't technically a LIE per se, but it IS wilfully dishonest and misleading.He claimed to believe in evolution at the first GOP debate (by not raising his hand when Huckabee and two others did when all of the candidates were asked, "Who here does NOT believe in evolution?"), but later denied it in a speech. At BEST that makes him a flip-flopper.
COMALiteJ (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
I, too, respected his Pro-Life stance because of his ObGyn status. But then he said that he had never seen a case where a mother's life was endangered by pregnancy.That was dishonest of him. Maybe he never PERSONALLY saw one out of the 3,000-some-odd kids he claims to have delivered (unlikely in the extreme), but he couldn't possibly have graduated medical school with an ObGyn specialty degree without at least having heard of "ectopic pregnancy."
hyonjun (December 31, 1969 at 11:59 pm)
I think it's clear that RP does not support the gvt telling citizens how to live.He is strongly pro-life being an obgyn but does not believe he has the right to make you abide by his beliefs.He is a strong christian but supports freedom of religion.We all know where the other nominees stand on world domination. BEing all a part of the CFO and the current administrations involvement in PNAC. RP speaks out against all of this. |
|
