Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
The ebb and flow of this campaign early on is extremely interesting. One week it's the Kerry Campaign that's on the defensive doing major damamge control and the next week it the Dub's Campaign. What is really interesting is that the damage done to both Campaigns is caused by the Republicans or their former cohorts. The Republican Attack Machine is very agressive at making the most mundane statements by Kerry mountains out of Mole Hills and then in turn former members of the Dubs Administration like O'Niel and Clarke come out with Bombshells that rock the Dub's Campaign. So Far all Kerry's team has to do is just rebuke the Republican Attack Machime and then sit back and watch them run around like a Chinese Fire Drill trying to difuse the Damage caused by their own people.
Its about time someone in government said it:
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your government failed you. Those entrusted with protecting you failed you. I failed you. We tried hard, but we failed you...I ask for your understanding, and your forgiveness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought that was really sick, to try and put in someone mind that lost a loved one on 9/11 that the government could have stoped what happen or knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it, That isn't backbone that is trying to save your own ass, Replace Bush in Nov. and sell a book
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your government failed you. Those entrusted with protecting you failed you. I failed you. We tried hard, but we failed you...I ask for your understanding, and your forgiveness.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought that was really sick, to try and put in someone mind that lost a loved one on 9/11 that the government could have stoped what happen or knew it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it, That isn't backbone that is trying to save your own ass, Replace Bush in Nov. and sell a book
I, and many other people, thought it was a wonderful thing for him to do and should set a precedent. Personal responsibility and accountability.
BTW, have you heard that Bush is receiving a lot of flak for his WMD/war on Iraq jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner?
I have to admit they were sorta funny but with this still a fresh event and our soldiers dying weekly, it was way out of line for Bush to make light of it.
BTW, have you heard that Bush is receiving a lot of flak for his WMD/war on Iraq jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner?
I have to admit they were sorta funny but with this still a fresh event and our soldiers dying weekly, it was way out of line for Bush to make light of it.
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
Richard Clarke, Fraud
By PowerLineBlog.com
PowerLineBlog.com | March 22, 2004
The press is abuzz with reports that former Clinton staffers are set to testify before the September 11 commission next week that "they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation ? and how the new administration was slow to act." The Clinton officials expected to so testify include Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright and Richard Clarke.
Where to begin: the mind boggles at such shamelessness. To state the obvious, in late 2000 the Clinton administration was STILL IN OFFICE. If there were steps that needed to be taken immediately to counter the al Qaeda threat, as they "bluntly" told President Bush's transition team, why didn't they take those steps themselves?
More broadly, of course, the Clinton administration was in power for eight years, while al Qaeda grew, prospered, and repeatedly attacked American interests:
*1993: Shot down US helicopters and killed US servicemen in Somalia
*1994: Plotted to assassinate Pope John Paul II during his visit to Manila
*1995: Plotted to kill President Clinton during a visit to the Philippines
*1995: Plot to to bomb simultaneously, in midair, a dozen US trans-Pacific flights was discovered and thwarted at the last moment
*1998: Conducted the bombings of the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed at least 301 individuals and injured more than 5,000 others
*1999: Attempt to carry out terrorist operations against US and Israeli tourists visiting Jordan for millennial celebrations was discovered just in time by Jordanian authorities
*1999: In another millenium plot, bomber was caught en route to Los Angeles International Airport *2000: Bombed the USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen, killing 17 US Navy members, and injuring another 39
So what, when they had the power to act effectively against al Qaeda, did these Clinton administration officials do? Little or nothing. Their most effective action was to bomb what turned out to be an aspirin factory in Sudan. They had the opportunity to kill Osama bin Laden, but decided not to do it because they were not sure their lawyers would approve.
For these people to criticize the Bush administration's efforts to protect Americans against terrorism, long after their own ineptitute had allowed al Qaeda to grow bold and powerful, is contemptible.
Rest of the story is here
By PowerLineBlog.com
PowerLineBlog.com | March 22, 2004
The press is abuzz with reports that former Clinton staffers are set to testify before the September 11 commission next week that "they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation ? and how the new administration was slow to act." The Clinton officials expected to so testify include Sandy Berger, Madeline Albright and Richard Clarke.
Where to begin: the mind boggles at such shamelessness. To state the obvious, in late 2000 the Clinton administration was STILL IN OFFICE. If there were steps that needed to be taken immediately to counter the al Qaeda threat, as they "bluntly" told President Bush's transition team, why didn't they take those steps themselves?
More broadly, of course, the Clinton administration was in power for eight years, while al Qaeda grew, prospered, and repeatedly attacked American interests:
*1993: Shot down US helicopters and killed US servicemen in Somalia
*1994: Plotted to assassinate Pope John Paul II during his visit to Manila
*1995: Plotted to kill President Clinton during a visit to the Philippines
*1995: Plot to to bomb simultaneously, in midair, a dozen US trans-Pacific flights was discovered and thwarted at the last moment
*1998: Conducted the bombings of the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed at least 301 individuals and injured more than 5,000 others
*1999: Attempt to carry out terrorist operations against US and Israeli tourists visiting Jordan for millennial celebrations was discovered just in time by Jordanian authorities
*1999: In another millenium plot, bomber was caught en route to Los Angeles International Airport *2000: Bombed the USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen, killing 17 US Navy members, and injuring another 39
So what, when they had the power to act effectively against al Qaeda, did these Clinton administration officials do? Little or nothing. Their most effective action was to bomb what turned out to be an aspirin factory in Sudan. They had the opportunity to kill Osama bin Laden, but decided not to do it because they were not sure their lawyers would approve.
For these people to criticize the Bush administration's efforts to protect Americans against terrorism, long after their own ineptitute had allowed al Qaeda to grow bold and powerful, is contemptible.
Rest of the story is here
Probably would have been better if the Clinton administration had randomly invaded a country with no proven ties to Al-Qaeda... that would have stopped those terrorist bastards! (Do we know of any international leaders who attempted to assassinate Clinton's father?)
Pay no attention to the fact that several of the major terrorist threats were thwarted. Those were all coincidences, and if they weren't, it was only the hard work of the Republican leadership that protected our nation.
Originally posted by: conjur
I and many other people, thought it was a wonderful thing for him to do and should set a precedent. Personal responsibility and accountability.
BTW, have you heard that Bush is receiving a lot of flak for his WMD/war on Iraq jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner?
I have to admit they were sorta funny but with this still a fresh event and our soldiers dying weekly, it was way out of line for Bush to make light of it
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well then I think you and a lot of others think it was a wonderful thing, Well I won't say what I think, No I haven't heard the jokes about the WMD/war on Iraq, If WMD's are used in this country will you still think it is sorta funny and I do not find the war with Iraq at all sorta funny,
I and many other people, thought it was a wonderful thing for him to do and should set a precedent. Personal responsibility and accountability.
BTW, have you heard that Bush is receiving a lot of flak for his WMD/war on Iraq jokes at the White House Correspondents Dinner?
I have to admit they were sorta funny but with this still a fresh event and our soldiers dying weekly, it was way out of line for Bush to make light of it
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well then I think you and a lot of others think it was a wonderful thing, Well I won't say what I think, No I haven't heard the jokes about the WMD/war on Iraq, If WMD's are used in this country will you still think it is sorta funny and I do not find the war with Iraq at all sorta funny,
A wonderful thing to do would have been to tell the truth in the first place, now all it looks like is he has a job with kerry and is trying to get him elected.
And what part of his testimony under oath disclaiming working for Kerry nor wanting to did you not understand?
Also, point me out one specific instance where Clarke has lied and/or contradicted himself. Just one.
And how do you know this? So far, nothing you've said in ANY of your posts is anything other than your unsubstantiated, uninformed opinion.
Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
Originally posted by: Perknose
Pay the lying little troll no mind, conjur, <a class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://subscriber.anandtech.com/messageview.cfm?catid=52&threadid=1276847" target=blank>here</A> he tries to claim he lives in Ketchum, Idaho when his IP addy, sad to say, shows he's from Philly.
if he is, that does not change the fact the article is real and many of the people there fell that way...unless of course it makes you feel justified in ignoring it.
do you have the same high moral standards for clarke lying? he directly contradicted himself publically...
So has Rice, Powell, Bush, Cheney and the gang about the Iraq War and in major ways !
Apparently, the book was published by Simon and Schuster, owned by Viacom which also owns CBS.
Doesn't matter that Simon and Schuster is one of the largest publishing houses and the book was written months ago.
Or that it was submitted to the Whitehouse for security vetting, months ago. The Whitehouse then sat on it and finally cleared for publication a few weeks ago. The book was barely days out of galley proofs when it was officially released. The first printing was 300.000 copies. The good news is, it's already back for another printing of 100,000 more.
What was that old saying about the truth setting you free?
Something tells me nutxo didn't watch a minute of the testimony, nor a minute of any interview Clarke's been on, nor a page of Clarke's book.
If you bothered to watch Clarke's testimony yesterday, he systematically destroyed most every petty attack made against him in this article.
The thing is the kind of people who read this book are not going to vote for the president anyway. Look at the other books they bought.
You really think Joe Nascar is going to buying this book of Amazon??
then something told you wrong. I watched DICKS interview and read the article , I wouldnt wipe my a** on his book. If the guy is really sincere I think he would donate all monies from his book to 9/11 survivors, after all, he admitted he was at fault.
LOL. They'll probably just pass one copy around the trailer park after each one attempts to read it.
The only thing DoubleL is sure of is that Bush can do no wrong. So, because I'm against Bush in this election, Bush must have been correct in his behavior last night.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
lol i bet nutxo only knows what limbaugh tells him. the fact is clarke was working intelligence/security since reagan. 30 years of loyal service with no record of shinanigans and now you doubt him? doubt a republican to boot? haha funny sh*t. desperate to believe what he says isn't true.
as for who should be giving money back? the bush administration should turn in their wages for the last 3 years, they haven't earned it.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter