Seek42 :: View topic

So, i'm wondering what everyone else thinks about this Clarke dude telling us about the Bush administration's policy on terror.

I don't know whether to believe the guy or think he is full of crap. Of course i am your typical Bush-hater so i could always use a few more reasons to dislike the man, but if Clarke is full of crap i don't want to waste my time lisetning to him. I don't want this to turn into the typical republican vs. democrat bickering match, but i'm sure it will anyway, lol.

Of course the White House is denying everything, which i would expect if the accusations were true or not. Polticians historically have a hard time of admiting when they made a mistake or messed up (like Clinton and the sex scandal thing....).

Author:	lukecp [ Wed 03-24-2004 9:44PM ]
Post subject:	Clarke
So, i'm wondering what everyone else thinks about this Clarke dude telling us about the Bush administration's policy on terror. I don't know whether to believe the guy or think he is full of crap. Of course i am your typical Bush-hater so i could always use a few more reasons to dislike the man, but if Clarke is full of crap i don't want to waste my time lisetning to him. I don't want this to turn into the typical republican vs. democrat bickering match, but i'm sure it will anyway, lol. Of course the White House is denying everything, which i would expect if the accusations were true or not. Polticians historically have a hard time of admiting when they made a mistake or messed up (like Clinton and the sex scandal thing....).

Author:	Stumbles [ Wed 03-24-2004 10:58PM ]
Post subject:	Re: Clarke
lukecp wrote: So, i'm wondering what everyone else thinks about this Clarke dude telling us about the Bush administration's policy on terror. I don't know whether to believe the guy or think he is full of crap. Of course i am your typical Bush-hater so i could always use a few more reasons to dislike the man, but if Clarke is full of crap i don't want to waste my time lisetning to him. I don't want this to turn into the typical republican vs. democrat bickering match, but i'm sure it will anyway, lol. Of course the White House is denying everything, which i would expect if the accusations were true or not. Polticians historically have a hard time of admiting when they made a mistake or messed up (like Clinton and the sex scandal thing....). I think he is full of crap. He is just riding all this media coverage like one big train to political spotliteville. I highly doubt that the Bush administration was given incredibly reputable information regarding a major attack like 9/11 and then just ignored it or did nothing. Where was the inquiry when Clinton dropped the ball after the embassy bombing in 1998 and the USS Cole attack in 2000? [tin foil hat] I think he could be making a big deal out of this as part of some left wing conspiracy to try to attack the current administration any way they can. I don't mean to turn this into a political flamewar, I think that hardline Republicans would have done the same to a Democratic administration. [/tin foil hat]

Author:	zkissane [ Wed 03-24-2004 11:45PM ]
Post subject:	Re: Clarke
Stumbles wrote: [tin foil hat] I think he could be making a big deal out of this as part of some left wing conspiracy to try to attack the current administration any way they can. I don't mean to turn this into a political flamewar, I think that hardline Republicans would have done the same to a Democratic administration. [/tin foil hat] They did. It was called Whitewater/PaulaJones/Monica. Whitewater went on for 8 years and at the end they were still no closer to nailing Clinton then they were when they started. I think Clarke's testimony is absolutely damning. Whether it's true or not is anybody's guess (I think it is) but anyway you slice it, it is the most direct criticism of Bush I've seen in an official arena for a long time.

Author:	Theincredibleedibleegg [ Thu 03-25-2004 12:25AM ]
Post subject:	Nailing?
I think it was Bill that did all the nailing in the white house, though I hear that dogfaced witch Hillary came a close second.

Author:	moo [ Thu 03-25-2004 1:46AM ]
Post subject:
Clarke was reported as saying earlier that the Bush administration did good. He said that Bush put more money in terrorism defense than Clinton, developed a plan on dealing with terrorism that was finished right before sept. 11 (clinton didn't have a strategy during his entire 8 years), and some other stuff I don't remember. It was all done before sept. 11, so now clarke has changed what he said earlier for who knows what reason. he's a lying bitch.

Seek42 https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/

Clarke https://seek42.net:443/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=6137	Page 1 of 1

Author:	Guest [ Thu 03-25-2004 2:21AM ]
Post subject:
I saw Clarke's testimony at the 9/11 hearing. It sounded like the truth to me. It made sense, about the comments he made to the reporter earlier. If you are expected to "tow the line" these are the comments you are going to give. And you have to consider the statements in January from Paul O'Neill. All this tends to show you a pattern of Bush having his eyes towards Iraq the whole time. post scriptum: Where are the WMD's? .... hmmm

Page 1 of 1	All times are UTC - 6 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/