Are you stupid? If Clarke lied because the Administration TOLD HIM TO LIE, was the Administration also telling the truth?
Are you stupid? Why are you so quick to believe Clarke when he's already shown he can and will lie under oath?
So tell me, what exactly did the Bush Administration do to fight terrorism? They ignored Clarke's plan, they disregarded the Hart-Rudman reports, memos, and various other notices, they undertook no actions to fight terrorism.
How the fuck do you know what the Bush Administration did or did not do to fight terrorism? He'd only been in office 9 months. Thats not much time to put a far reaching anti terrorism strategy into place.
My God, you are a dumbass. Just because Clarke is speaking before an election does not automatically make him wrong.
You're the dumbass that seems to think everything he says is gospel. I never said speaking before an electiong made him wrong. It sure as shit doesn't make him right either though.
Republican commissioners labored to change that reputation. Fred F. Fielding implied that Clarke may have perjured himself when he spoke to a congressional investigation into the attacks but did not raise complaints about Bush's Iraq policy then. Clarke, though the back of his neck and head were a burning red, replied coolly: "I wasn't asked, sir."
The gallery drew quiet when Lehman questioned Clarke. "I have genuinely been a fan of yours," he began, and then he said how he had hoped Clarke would be "the Rosetta Stone" for the commission. "But now we have the book," Lehman said, suggesting it was a partisan tract.
Clarke was ready for that challenge. "Let me talk about partisanship here, since you raised it," he said, noting that he registered as a Republican in 2000 and served President Ronald Reagan. "The White House has said that my book is an audition for a high-level position in the Kerry campaign," Clarke said. "So let me say here, as I am under oath, that I will not accept any position in the Kerry administration, should there be one."
When Clarke finished his answer, there was a long pause, and the gallery was silent. Lehman smiled slightly and nodded. He had no further questions.
Admiral_K wrote:
Are you stupid? Why are you so quick to believe Clarke when he's already shown he can and will lie under oath?
What the fuck? When has he been shown to lie under oath?
How the fuck do you know what the Bush Administration did or did not do to fight terrorism? He'd only been in office 9 months. Thats not much time to put a far reaching anti terrorism strategy into place.
Clarke told us, actually. Why don't you tell us something to the contrary?
You're the dumbass that seems to think everything he says is gospel. I never said speaking before an electiong made him wrong. It sure as shit doesn't make him right either though.
So it has absolutely no bearing, therefore there's no point in bringing it up. Simple.
What the fuck? When has he been shown to lie under oath?
He either Lied to the 911 commission or to 2002 briefing
He said in 2002 that the Bush administration had decided in principle in the spring of 2001 "to increase CIA resources . . . for covert action, five-fold, to go after al Qaeda." Nowhere is this mentioned in his book
Now he says Bush did nothing before 911
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
What the fuck? When has he been shown to lie under oath?
He either Lied to the 911 commission or to 2002 briefing
You're splitting hairs. He didn't lie in the 2002 briefing, he was asked to present a strong case which meant not mentioning the negative. This is part of the job and if you want to call it lying, then you are fooling no one but yourself.
The Kernel wroteYou're splitting hairs. He didn't lie in the 2002 briefing, he was asked to present a strong case which meant not mentioning the negative. This is part of the job and if you want to call it lying, then you are fooling no one but yourself
Ok... so a five fold increase in budget and a change in policy to get more agressive is the same as BUSH did nothing to stop al Qadea
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
theski wrote:
Ok... so a five fold increase in budget and a change in policy to get more agressive is the same as BUSH did nothing to stop al Qadea
And this has what to do with what? Clarke's statements all have to do with pre-9/11 terrorism policy; his post-9/11 statements focus on the wisdom of invading Iraq.
And this has what to do with what? Clarke's statements all have to do with pre-9/11 terrorism policy; his post-9/11 statements focus on the wisdom of invading Iraq.
Nope, he has repeatedly said "Bush did nothing before 911 to fight alQueda" during the 911 commission
Sudden power is apt to be insolent, sudden liberty saucy; that behaves best which has grown gradually.
And this has what to do with what? Clarke's statements all have to do with pre-9/11 terrorism policy; his post-9/11 statements focus on the wisdom of invading Iraq.
Nope, he has repeatedly said "Bush did nothing before 911 to fight alQueda" during the 911 commission
Howedar wrote:You paraphrase too loosely. Clarke didn't say the Bush administration did nothing. Merely not enough (IIRC).
He also said that if they had done more, it would NOT have stopped 9/11. His objection was not continuing the plan and warning about terrorism that Clinton had set forth, but he never claimed that Bush did nothing. In fact he said that Bush had considered terrorism important, but not a critical issue. That is hardly saying that Bush did nothing theski.
Having recently read Franken's book, he claims that Bush did nothing of any importance in the months preceding 9/11 ("Operation Ignore"). What, exactly, did he do?
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses
"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
I just loved it when Cheney actually said that Clarke "wasn't in the loop," therefore he couldn't comment. Al Franken put it best on The Daily Show. "He's the head of counter-terrorism. If he's not in the loop, there is no loop."
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
HemlockGrey wrote:Having recently read Franken's book, he claims that Bush did nothing of any importance in the months preceding 9/11 ("Operation Ignore"). What, exactly, did he do?
Um. I think he was doing that ABM thing?
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.
Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.
Durandal wrote:I just loved it when Cheney actually said that Clarke "wasn't in the loop," therefore he couldn't comment. Al Franken put it best on The Daily Show. "He's the head of counter-terrorism. If he's not in the loop, there is no loop."
It ticks me off to no end how Cheney always ends up with a free pass with the press, even though he has a pattern of going out to the media, making explosive statements, then jumping back in his hole. When will anyone hold him accountable?
LMSx wrote:It ticks me off to no end how Cheney always ends up with a free pass with the press, even though he has a pattern of going out to the media, making explosive statements, then jumping back in his hole. When will anyone hold him accountable?
Of everyone in the administration, he's the most full of shit- but you want to know who he was talking to when he said it?
What the fuck? When has he been shown to lie under oath?
He either Lied to the 911 commission or to 2002 briefing
You're splitting hairs. He didn't lie in the 2002 briefing, he was asked to present a strong case which meant not mentioning the negative. This is part of the job and if you want to call it lying, then you are fooling no one but yourself.
And ofcourse you know what was said in a classified briefing. .
The Kernel wrote:You're splitting hairs. He didn't lie in the 2002 briefing, he was asked to present a strong case which meant not mentioning the negative. This is part of the job and if you want to call it lying, then you are fooling no one but yourself.
And ofcourse you know what was said in a classified briefing.
According to Clarke, that's what he said. And he does know what was said in a classified briefing.
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
.