WorldNetDaily.com
September 28, 2006

© Jack Cashill

Last week, I wrote on these pages that the Clinton shadow government (CSG) has set its sights on Curt Weldon, a veteran Republican congressman from Pennsylvania's Democrat-leaning 7th District. I mentioned Sandy Berger’s role in launching the campaign of his opponent, Joe Sestak, as well as the active financial support of Sestak by people like Madeleine Albright, Anthony Lake, John Deutch, and Richard Clarke.

On Sunday, during former president Bill Clinton’s already legendary performance on FOX News with Chris Wallace, the nation saw just how big are the guns aimed at Weldon. Other than George Bush, Clinton mentioned only one other Republican by name. “A three-star admiral,” he announced out of nowhere, “who was on my National Security Council staff, who also fought terror, by the way, is running for the seat of Curt Weldon in Pennsylvania.”

Without meaning to, Clinton also suggested why the war on Weldon is so important. For postmodernists like Clinton, there is no such thing as absolute truth. This he proved in spades during the Monica escapades. In his world, there are competing “narratives.” Those in power have the ability to impose their narrative on those without power and call it truth. For years, Clinton had great success in controlling that narrative, certainly as it played out in the major media. Not surprisingly, he felt utterly betrayed when ABC aired its “little Pathway to 9/11," which he first tried to shut down and ultimately dismissed as a “right-wing conservative” conspiracy. Likewise, he saw Wallace’s probing questions as some sort of conspiracy to offset viewer criticism “because Rupert Murdoch's supporting my work on climate change.”

As Clinton made painfully clear, his preferred narrative on the events leading up to 9-11 is terrorist czar Richard Clarke’s book, Against All Enemies. No fewer than five times he admonished Wallace and/ or the audience to read the book.

I am among those who have actually read Against All Enemies. In a more honest media climate, this sycophantic hack job would not have gotten past the editor, so rife is it with obvious falsehood and fabrication. As Laurie Mylroie has pointed out, many key facts are comically awry: Pan Am 103 was bombed in Reagan’s tenure, not in Bush 41’s; El Sayyid Nosair launched the Americaan jihad by killing Meir Kahane in 1990, not 1992; the attack on Khobar Towers occurred after April 1996, not before. Likewise, the Iraqi assassination attempt on Bush 41 occurred after the first WTC bombing, not before.

Some of Clarke’s mistakes are honest, if inexcusable. Some are not. His whole discussion of the demise of TWA Flight 800 rings knowingly false from beginning to end. “The FAA," Clarke reports, "was at a total loss for an explanation. The flight path and the cockpit communications were normal. The aircraft had climbed to 17,000 feet, then there was no aircraft." In fact, the FAA did have an explanation. Its radar operators in New York had seen on their screens an unknown object "merging" with TWA 800 in the seconds before the crash. This is why Clarke called the meeting. Besides, the last altitude the FAA actually recorded was about 13,800 feet. This is easily verified and beyond debate. Clarke's dissembles here because he needs to lift the aircraft – even if just in the retelling – above the reach of a shoulder-fired missile.

As I have also written, Clarke takes full credit for devising the exploding fuel tank theory, which would become the official bogus explanation for the plane’s destruction, and he takes partial credit for the notorious zoom-climb scenario, which was used to discredit the eyewitnesses.

Nor is Clarke anything like the nonpartisan patriot of Clinton’s imagination. In reading his book, one can see how thoroughly seduced Clarke was by the Clintons and his proximity to power. He portrays himself as the ultimate insider, flying to JFK Airport with Clinton a week after the crash of TWA Flight 800, briefing him on the new safety regulations. About the performance of the Clintons among the victims' families, Clarke positively gushes. Here is the president "praying with them, hugging them, taking pictures with them." Here is "Mrs. Clinton" alone in a makeshift chapel, praying, "on her knees." And then, the Bush people come in and, according to Clinton at least, “fire Dick Clarke.” They didn’t fire him, of course, but they did sever his direct link to the Oval Office. His book reads like a vendetta.

The Clarke book did the Democrats a double favor. It whitewashed the Clinton failures—and his—in the war on terror. And it discredited the war in Iraq by denying any connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq. This Clarke could get away with only because his side has historically controlled the narrative. Consider, for instance, the White House response to the 1998 embassy bombings. The Clinton people bomb a sovereign country like the Sudan without Congressional or UN approval, publicly say that the bombing was necessary because of the link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda—Clarke prominent among those making this claim--and then simply ignore or deny everything they once said when the narrative needs tweaking.

Why Curt Weldon presents such a challenge to the CSG is that he is one of the few people in Congress willing and able to re-write this narrative. His exposure of Able Danger and his book on the CIA, Countdown to Terror, have already deflated much of the Clarke story. His further interests have the potential to unravel the Clarke/ Clinton narrative altogether. High among these is his search for the truth behind Sandy Berger’s shredding of stolen files, the Rosetta Stone of the Clinton saga.

It is no wonder that the shadow government wants Weldon shut down. The former president is coming to Pennsylvania next week to help make it happen.

Webmaster's Note: Click here to read further on why Clinton is targeting Weldon