Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Clarke Approved Saudi Flights After 9/11

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    He is a Republican, but he likes Democrats better.

    Gotcha.
    And, frankly, it has never occured to me that "winning" a debate is important, or that I should be hurt when someone like Airshark or kah, among others (for whom winning a pseudo debate or declaring intellectual superiority over invisible others is obviously very important) ridicule me.

    -The Artist formerly known as King in KC

    Comment


    • #32
      I've still yet to see/hear/read any direct refutation of any of Clarke's claims.

      Moe
      The Dude abides.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Moe_Szyslak@Mar 29 2004, 10:27 AM
        I've still yet to see/hear/read any direct refutation of any of Clarke's claims.

        Moe
        Have you read the posts in this thread? I think not.

        It's not the facts that are in dispute. It's the conclusions/spin.
        "Need some wood?" -- George W. Bush, October 8, 2004

        "Historians will judge if this war is just, not your punk ass." -- Dave Glover, December 8, 2004

        Comment


        • #35
          Originally posted by phantom+Mar 29 2004, 10:28 AM-->
          QUOTE (phantom @ Mar 29 2004, 10:28 AM)

        • #36
          opinion
          Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist

          Comment


          • #37
            Originally posted by lazydaze@Mar 29 2004, 10:38 AM
            opinion
            That the administration was focused on Iraq immediately post-9/11?
            The Dude abides.

            Comment


            • #38
              Originally posted by Moe_Szyslak@Mar 29 2004, 10:37 AM
              Exactly.

              And the facts - especially the administration's obsession with Iraq, corroborated elsewhere - are damning, IMO.

              Moe
              If you think that looking at Iraq was inherently wrong, then yes, Clarke's facts are damning.

              But many don't believe that looking at Iraq was wrong.
              "Need some wood?" -- George W. Bush, October 8, 2004

              "Historians will judge if this war is just, not your punk ass." -- Dave Glover, December 8, 2004

              Comment


              • #39
                no, that it was an obsession or detrimental to the larger war on terror.
                Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist

                Comment


                • #40
                  Moe,

                  Don't forget that many anti-Bush people are focusing on more than just Iraq when discussing Clarke's accusations.

                  Many are saying that the Bush Administration was unreasonably negligent in dealing with terror -- even more negligent than previous administrations. This has not been shown to be true dispite Clarke's statements.
                  "Need some wood?" -- George W. Bush, October 8, 2004

                  "Historians will judge if this war is just, not your punk ass." -- Dave Glover, December 8, 2004

                  Comment


                  • #41
                    that's where our roads diverge...

                    I think invading Iraq pre-emptively (and largely unilaterally) was a colossal mistake - and that Bush is exposed on this issue. (He must agree, given the double-barrelled attack on Clarke). The dissed and ignored Blix, told the allies to stuff it, and found no WMD...no link to al Queda or 9/11 ever existed...now looking at a decade of occupation and at least half a trillion dollars to unseat a bankrupt, delusional dictator who was focused on writing his romance novels.

                    You guys seem to be good with it.

                    Honest difference of opinion.

                    Moe
                    The Dude abides.

                    Comment


                    • #42
                      no link to al Queda or 9/11 ever existed
                      There are supposed links to al qaeda, as reported by the clinton admin and many others.

                      Maybe not evidence of complicity in 9/11. But this was a war against terror not just vengeance for 9/11
                      Un-Official Sponsor of Randy Choate and Kevin Siegrist

                      Comment


                      • #43
                        Originally posted by lazydaze@Mar 29 2004, 09:58 AM
                        Clarke describes his book, in the preface, as "factual, not polemical," and he said in an interview that he was a registered Republican in the 2000 election
                        Former counterterrorism czar Richard A. Clarke insists his attacks on President George W. Bush have nothing to do with politics, but an Insight check of Federal Election Commission (FEC) records shows that his only political contributions in the last decade have gone to Democrats.



                        FEC records show that Clarke reported no political contributions when he worked in the Clinton administration in the electoral cycles of the 1990s and 2000, when he said he was a Republican.

                        nothing damning here, just background fodder.
                        Good points, thanks.

                        Again, I can understand the guy voting for Gore after working with him for 8 years, regardless of his politics. But yes, full disclosure is a good thing.
                        Dude. Can. Fly.

                        Comment


                        • #44
                          Funny how Moe turned this into a conversation about Iraq.

                          First, he posted saying that Clarke hadn't been proven wrong about anything. But Moe is only willing to focus on the Iraq part. What about the focus on terror prior to 9/11? Clarke's conclusions that the Bush Admin was unreasonably negligent were wrong.
                          "Need some wood?" -- George W. Bush, October 8, 2004

                          "Historians will judge if this war is just, not your punk ass." -- Dave Glover, December 8, 2004

                          Comment


                          • #45
                            Originally posted by phantom@Mar 29 2004, 10:56 AM
                            Funny how Moe turned this into a conversation about Iraq.

                            First, he posted saying that Clarke hadn't been proven wrong about anything. But Moe is only willing to focus on the Iraq part. What about the focus on terror prior to 9/11? Clarke's conclusions that the Bush Admin was unreasonably negligent were wrong.
                            IMO, Clarke's observations about the focus on Iraq are much more serious than his contention that Bush could have prevented 9/11 - which I do not buy.
                            The Dude abides.

                            Comment

                            • Working...
                              X