Dixon
Joined: Mar 10, 2004
# Posts: 39
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-01 02:46
You may have heard about Richard Clark, Well here is a article on him
Richard Clark
|
 |
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-01 15:40
I take it all with a grain of salt, but think the facts/conclusions are pretty dead on.
|
|
jcokos
Staff
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 171
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-01 19:09
It's unfortunate that the 9/11 commission is now being used by everyone to make political statements and to "prove their case" rather than what it's original intention was .... which is to find out exactly what pieces of the puzzle weren't put together, so that in the future, we'll be able to recognize them earlier.
Shame that it's degrading to this point, isn't it?
IMO, it's less important to assign blame at this point, as everyone in every position in every administration over the last 12 years missed the boat in some way. The important thing, and the goal should be in making sure that those same mistakes can't be repeated, or at the least, will be taken without a grain of salt.
|
|
Dixon
Joined: Mar 10, 2004
# Posts: 39
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-01 19:57
I don't think that anyone could have taken it as serius as they should have, But we are doing a good job of it now. And it is too bad that Richard Clark has to turn what was supposed to be something to keep it from happening again into just anuther political fight.
|
|
greenleaves
Joined: Mar 21, 2002
# Posts: 720
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-01 20:37
you won't see me commenting on politics, religion or football.
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-02 15:36
lol @ greenleaves!
anytime there is a commission in the house or senate it ALWAYS turns into political one-upmanship. Very unfortunate that in politics any ore we can't get to real facts but is a fight to see who can get the best spin.
Anybody think Clarke would have written his book had he gotten the job of Homelands Security #2 that he wanted?
|
|
Dixon
Joined: Mar 10, 2004
# Posts: 39
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-02 18:22
No
|
|
jcokos
Staff
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 171
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-02 20:24
I think that the quote of the commission (and Clarke) so far was this one:
Commision Person (I think it was Slade Gorton): "Mr Clark, if both the Clinton and Bush administrations had followed your advice to the letter, and had done everything you recommend, exactly as you indicated was necessary, would that have prevented the 9/11 attacks from happening ?"
Richard Clark: "No."
Thanks for wasting everyone's time, Dick 
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-05 06:11
lol... that about sums it all up. I think he's been pretty thoroughly discredites. I hears a blip on the news today that one of the big newspapers (WSJ?) said the book should have been called "Against All Evidence"
|
|
greenleaves
Joined: Mar 21, 2002
# Posts: 720
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-07 18:03
here is something I consider political hummor http://www.federalobserver.com/content_images/beavis_butthead_02.jpg
|
|
jcokos
Staff
Joined: Eons Ago
# Posts: 171
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-07 20:20
LOL, reminds me of the Saturday Night Live skits, where GW starts snickering every time he says "Dick"
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-07 21:54
The guy was good enought to serve under 3 presidents
but he has no crediblity because a bunch of bush flunkies say so
instead of debating if what he says is true or not they attack him as a person
do any of you people actually know what he said?
He said bush could have done more against terrrorism, thats it , thats all
I think the facts show obviously their was room for improvement
|
|
Dixon
Joined: Mar 10, 2004
# Posts: 39
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 02:48
Did you read the article(the one at the top of the page)?
And I think that it is allways POSSIBLE to improve.
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 12:55
Ye I read your artcile it doesn't say much
this is what it says
richard clarcke is a democrat or gave money to democrats
that clinton didn't give bush a plan for stopping al queda
I don't know I'm sort of a news hound, I don't remember clacke every saying that, I remember him saying that he thought terrorism was seen as more pressing by the clinton people
but I don't every remember him mentioning a actually plan being ignored
weather or not he block the extradition of bin ladin, years ago doesn't effect the validity of his claims.
This is what he said pretty much
"bush could have done more on terror"
"the war in iraq is taking away from the war on terror"
instead of trying to find a a way to call the guy a liar why don't you forget about him and debate on those 2 claims.
Both of which have merit.
[ Message was edited by: ferret77 04/08/2004 05:22 am ]
|
|
St0n3y
Joined: May 01, 2002
# Posts: 1620
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 15:35
Clarke has been pretty throughly discredited, not because of who does or does not like him, but based on the facts and his own contradictions. Do I know what he said? Yes. But I'm not gonna just pick and choose to beliee what I like and what I don't like. Take his book and statements in their totality and you'll see he is contradicting himselfe. This then leaves the door open to suggest why.
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 16:03
Could you please inform me of his contradictions?
or are you just a totally sucker which bought into the white houses media blitz
Do you actually know anything about this topic?
|
|
Dixon
Joined: Mar 10, 2004
# Posts: 39
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 16:30
"bush could have done more on terror"
"the war in iraq is taking away from the war on terror"
First like I said it is allways posible to do more. But Bush has done more then Clinton.
Second the war in Iraq is the next level of fighting terrorist. The level that Clinton never took even thought he bombed Iraq from time to time.
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 16:46
umm,
George Bush himself said there is no link between iraq and alqueda
have you read the news latlely
All we have done in iraq is spend billions of dollars to create guess what
another muslim country that hates us
the sunnis and shites are uniting to fight against us right now
|
|
philh
Joined: Sep 14, 2001
# Posts: 3050
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 17:12
<war in Iraq is the next level of fighting terrorist>
Wrong - Iraq has little or nothing to do with Al Qaeda and it's Al Qaeda and Muslim fundamentalists that threaten the world not Saddam Hussein and his cronies - he's just a despot (with a rather large amount of oil).
There is no need to spend millions of dollars and thousands of lives on the "next level" - it's Al Qaeda that need to be stopped. Iraq will become another Vietnam - a pointless waste of young American lives that ends badly.
IMHO of course.
|
|
ferret77
Joined: May 31, 2002
# Posts: 354
|
Posted: 2004-Apr-08 17:45
here are couple provable contradictions coming form the bush adminastration though
“Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage contradicted Rice's claim that the White House had a strategy before 9/11 for military operations against al Qaeda and the Taliban; the CIA contradicted Rice's earlier assertion that Bush had requested a CIA briefing in the summer of 2001 because of elevated terrorist threats; and Rice's assertion this week that Bush told her on Sept. 16, 2001, that "Iraq is to the side" appeared to be contradicted by an order signed by Bush on Sept. 17 directing the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq.
“Rice, in turn, has contradicted Vice President Cheney's assertion that Clarke was "out of the loop" and his intimation that Clarke had been demoted. Rice has also given various conflicting accounts. She criticized Clarke for being the architect of failed Clinton administration policies, but also said she retained Clarke so the Bush administration could continue to pursue Clinton's terrorism policies.”
|
|
Inbox
