TESTIMONY OF RICHARD A. CLARKE (REVISITED)

[Ozoned]

A Generalization in its entirety???

Therefore, I will limit my prepared testimony
to a chronological review of key facts and then provide some conclusions and summary
observations, which may form the basis for further questions. My observations and
answers to any questions are limited by my memory,

It has been suggested on this forum that the highlighted part in Key fact #2 is only a generalization
and possibly incorrect..



Key fact #2) 2.

Terrorism Early in the Clinton Administration: Within the first few weeks of the
Clinton administration, there was terrorism in the US: the attack on the CIA gatehouse
and the attack on the World Trade Center. CIA and FBI concluded at the time that there
was no organization behind those attacks. Similarly, they did not report at the time that al
Qida was involved in the planned attack on Americans in Yemen in 1992 or the Somali
attacks on US and other peacekeepers in 1993. Indeed, CIA and FBI did not report the
existence of an organization named al Qida until the mid-1990s, seven years after it was
apparently created. Nonetheless, the 1993 attacks and then the terrorism in the Tokyo
subway and the Oklahoma City bombing caused the Clinton Administration to increase
its focus on terrorism and to expand funding for counter-terrorism programs.
2
As a result of intelligence and law enforcement operations, most of those involved in the
World Trade Center attack of 1993, the planned attacks on the UN and New York
tunnels, the CIA gatehouse shootings, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the attempted
assassination of former President Bush were successfully apprehended

One must consider this statement when weighing the validity of all of Clarkes statement of facts.

because I do not have access to government files or classified information for purposes of preparing for this hearing.

One could even suggest that since Clarke didn't have access to classified information to prepare for the hearing questioning, anything he testified to including things during his tenure in counter-terrorism was a generalization and possibly incorrect..

The R.A.M. was certainly justified in going after Clarke and questioning his Motives...



??????????????????

 

[conjur]

<yawn>

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: conjur
<yawn>

:beer:

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur
<yawn>

The loudest *liberal voice* on this forum, having his ass handed to him on a plate so many times in one week is hardly a <yawn>


I suppose we could add this one to that list.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur
<yawn>

The loudest *liberal voice* on this forum, having his ass handed to him on a plate so many times in one week is hardly a <yawn>

I suppose we could add this one to that list.

WTF? Crack is killing your brain cells, my friend. If anything, that was your head on the plate.

 

[Codec]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

One could even suggest that since Clarke didn't have access to classified information to prepare for the hearing questioning, anything he testified to including things during his tenure in counter-terrorism was a generalization and possibly incorrect..

One can suggest just about anything, as you've just proven.

 

[0roo0roo]

wow, the fact that he's not arrogant enough to claim that he is the word of god like many repubs strikes you as somehow bad? hahahaah.. weak. seems your just rather desperate to believe what you need to believe.

 

[Siddhartha]

Who is "The R.A.M."?

 

[conjur]

Republican Attack Machine

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
A Generalization in its entirety???

Therefore, I will limit my prepared testimony
to a chronological review of key facts and then provide some conclusions and summary
observations, which may form the basis for further questions. My observations and
answers to any questions are limited by my memory,

It has been suggested on this forum that the highlighted part in Key fact #2 is only a generalization
and possibly incorrect..



Key fact #2) 2.

Terrorism Early in the Clinton Administration: Within the first few weeks of the
Clinton administration, there was terrorism in the US: the attack on the CIA gatehouse
and the attack on the World Trade Center. CIA and FBI concluded at the time that there
was no organization behind those attacks. Similarly, they did not report at the time that al
Qida was involved in the planned attack on Americans in Yemen in 1992 or the Somali
attacks on US and other peacekeepers in 1993. Indeed, CIA and FBI did not report the
existence of an organization named al Qida until the mid-1990s, seven years after it was
apparently created. Nonetheless, the 1993 attacks and then the terrorism in the Tokyo
subway and the Oklahoma City bombing caused the Clinton Administration to increase
its focus on terrorism and to expand funding for counter-terrorism programs.
2
As a result of intelligence and law enforcement operations, most of those involved in the
World Trade Center attack of 1993, the planned attacks on the UN and New York
tunnels, the CIA gatehouse shootings, the Oklahoma City bombing, and the attempted
assassination of former President Bush were successfully apprehended

One must consider this statement when weighing the validity of all of Clarkes statement of facts.

because I do not have access to government files or classified information for purposes of preparing for this hearing.

One could even suggest that since Clarke didn't have access to classified information to prepare for the hearing questioning, anything he testified to including things during his tenure in counter-terrorism was a generalization and possibly incorrect..

The R.A.M. was certainly justified in going after Clarke and questioning his Motives...



??????????????????

Is this a parody thread? I read the OP three times and can't tell if you are joking or not.

 

[arsbanned]

Whos ass got handed to whom?

 

[villager]

Remember on the 60 Minutes interview when a White House staffer denied a meeting between Clarke and Bush on Iraq? For the next couple of days the RAM said this meeting never occurred and claimed this as proof that Clarke is a liar. Then a week later Rice said yes that meeting did take place! Did the RAM ever apologize for this lie?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: villager
Remember on the 60 Minutes interview when a White House staffer denied a meeting between Clarke and Bush on Iraq? For the next couple of days the RAM said this meeting never occurred and claimed this as proof that Clarke is a liar. Then a week later Rice said yes that meeting did take place! Did the RAM ever apologize for this lie?

Nope....ya kiddin' me??

They wouldn't apologize if they accidentally set off a nuke in Baghdad.