Divided Loyalties? (Frank Gaffney)

Frank Gaffney, President of the Center for Security Policy, describes people like me who have closely observed the politicization of intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq – and said something about it – as having divided loyalties.

He describes those who have closely observed the impoverished and possibly criminal lack of rational post-invasion planning by senior civilian appointees in the Pentagon and other parts of the present administration – and said something about it – as having divided loyalties.

To be fair, Frank Gaffney truly cares about this country’s security. He leads a neo-conservative thinktank that produces a great deal of the policy input used by the current administration. But Frank has made a few mistakes in his most recent tirade.

Gaffney’s lament, a front and center opinion piece in the 12 August 2003 Washington Times, says that the source of the broad-based criticism of the administration’s latest adventure in governing (Iraq, that is) is simply political divisions in America. He believes that Democratic presidential appointees who are left-of-center ideologues "burrow into the permanent bureaucracy" leaving the next administration "saddled with individuals of a profoundly different ideological stripe who hold senior staff positions and who, under civil service rules, cannot be easily displaced."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/kwiatkowski/kwiatkowski33.html

...for dictatorship of the totalitarian kind has been well noted in the past. The similarily between communist ideologues and fascists are greater than their differences. Gaffney is the perfect example.

I don't concede that Gaffney is genuinely concerned about national security. He also only pays lip service to the Constitution and our traditional way of democratic government. Like most fascists, he is concerned about one thing, Frank Gaffney. The same can be said of Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Ledeen, Kristol and the rest of neo-con fascist clique.

I observed long before 911, a major piece of Frank Gaffney on his web site concerning urban warfare. I had come across it by chance while doing some research on military ops on an unrelated subject. It was truly alarming.

In this extensive analysis Gaffney described the increasing likelihood of rebellion and uprisings against the government in the nation's cities and that only the military forces of the central government could restore order. Ostensibly this was a proposal to the Pentagon for a new mission priority. With the evaporation of cold war missions, he was trying to fashion a new model for "national security" which focused on domestic "order" at home. He advocated the abandonment of "posse comitatus" and any other restrictions on using US Armed Forces to conduct COMBAT operations in the nation's urban areas against US citizens. I tried to find the site again right after 911 when I saw this fruitcake on television touting "homeland security" but it had disappeared, wasn't archived or cached anywhere that I could find.

Purveyor of the imperialistic FILTH of the PNAC .....

There are NONE who are untainted by these associations in the administration ....