AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Yet another ex-admin says they wanted Iraq right at 911
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yet another ex-admin says they wanted Iraq right at 911 - Page 6  

post #201 of 386
3/23/04 at 7:09am
Quote:
Originally posted by orange whip
"Maybe Syria should be next, then maybe we will finally find the WMD's. Eliminate all of the problems with one proverbial stone"



what about the WMD's?


what is a WMD that you suggest Syria might have.


And what are all of the 'problems' you think might be eliminated with one proverbial stone??


I actually went to the middle east for business, post 911, and met up with Saudis, Palestinians, Iraqis and Lebanese. Some of the most hospitable people I have ever met. I am sure most Syrians are like that. BUT.... I suspect if the Syrians had the 'crap beaten out of them', then most of those hospitable people who had the 'crap beaten out of them' might think that the 'crap beater' was a bit of a prick (to put it in school yard terms).

Uh, you are twisting what I said, and if you are comfortable doing that I am not comfortable with trying to hold a reasonable convo with you.

Terrorists are the focus of this discussion, the citizens of terror supporting countries are not. Syrians should rise up and remove the cancer themselves, but if they will not then who will? The US of course.

Since the terrorism is aimed primarily at the US, that has forced the US to deal with it in one way or another. Terrorism has reached a level that it must be beaten down lest it effects world affairs. It already has thus it is past due IMO.
post #202 of 386
3/23/04 at 7:26am
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Uh, you are twisting what I said, and if you are comfortable doing that I am not comfortable with trying to hold a reasonable convo with you.

Terrorists are the focus of this discussion, the citizens of terror supporting countries are not. Syrians should rise up and remove the cancer themselves, but if they will not then who will? The US of course.

Since the terrorism is aimed primarily at the US, that has forced the US to deal with it in one way or another. Terrorism has reached a level that it must be beaten down lest it effects world affairs. It already has thus it is past due IMO.



maybe I am twisting what you wrote? I don't know. There are just words on the screan at my end.


Okay, I agree with you. Syrians should rise up and remove the 'Cancer'. But if the US is to do the removing, then they(the US Administration) have got to be transparent, honest and just. And that has certainly not happened thus far in this conflict. There is certainly more to this than 911 or WMD or SH. I don't know. Maybe it has something to do with oil, maybe not, I don't know. But continual crap (lies, deception, coverup) comming from the 'Coalition of the Willing', makes me feel extreemly cynical about the motives behind this so called 'War on Terror'


This whole 'thing' maybe legitamit but I have certainly not seen any empiracal or prima facie evidence that justifies the unilateral declaration of war against a sovereign state.


Why hasn't the US administration decided to go into North Korea. Why didn't someone go into Ruwanda when 1000000 people were butchered.

This whole affair is as watertight as a collander.


Anyway, I may not agree with some of your views, but I certainly have common ground with you.


Thanks for the lively discussion.


Please reply, but for now I am off to bed...

I only know 10 people that get the
binary joke

I only know 10 people that get the
binary joke

post #203 of 386
3/23/04 at 7:32am
Quote:
Originally posted by orange whip
maybe I am twisting what you wrote? I don't know. There are just words on the screan at my end.


Okay, I agree with you. Syrians should rise up and remove the 'Cancer'. But if the US is to do the removing, then they(the US Administration) have got to be transparent, honest and just. And that has certainly not happened thus far in this conflict. There is certainly more to this than 911 or WMD or SH. I don't know. Maybe it has something to do with oil, maybe not, I don't know. But continual crap (lies, deception, coverup) comming from the 'Coalition of the Willing', makes me feel extreemly cynical about the motives behind this so called 'War on Terror'


This whole 'thing' maybe legitamit but I have certainly not seen any empiracal or prima facie evidence that justifies the unilateral declaration of war against a sovereign state.


Why hasn't the US administration decided to go into North Korea. Why didn't someone go into Ruwanda when 1000000 people were butchered.

This whole affair is as watertight as a collander.


Anyway, I may not agree with some of your views, but I certainly have common ground with you.


Thanks for the lively discussion.


Please reply, but for now I am off to bed...

Your right that was a good exchange.

Good night, sleep well.
post #204 of 386
3/23/04 at 8:57am
Thread Starter 
The spin is weak.
From HERE --but you need to sign up and take Saolon Premium before ou get to that page so I'll post an ineteresting part of the article:

Quote:
CLAIM #1: "Richard Clarke had plenty of opportunities to tell us in the administration that he thought the war on terrorism was moving in the wrong direction and he chose not to." - National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04

FACT: Clarke sent a memo to Rice principals on 1/24/01 marked "urgent" asking for a Cabinet-level meeting to deal with an impending Al Qaeda attack. The White House acknowledges this, but says "principals did not need to have a formal meeting to discuss the threat." No meeting occurred until one week before 9/11. - White House Press Release, 3/21/04


CLAIM #2: "The president returned to the White House and called me in and said, I've learned from George Tenet that there is no evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11." - National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04

FACT: If this is true, then why did the President and Vice President repeatedly claim Saddam Hussein was directly connected to 9/11? President Bush sent a letter to Congress on 3/19/03 saying that the Iraq war was permitted specifically under legislation that authorized force against "nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11." Similarly, Vice President Cheney said on 9/14/03 that "It is not surprising that people make that connection" between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks, and said "we dont know" if there is a connection.


CLAIM #3: "[Clarke] was moved out of the counterterrorism business over to the cybersecurity side of things." - Vice President Dick Cheney on Rush Limbaugh, 3/22/04

FACT: "Dick Clarke continued, in the Bush Administration, to be the National Coordinator for Counterterrorism and the President's principle counterterrorism expert. He was expected to organize and attend all meetings of Principals and Deputies on terrorism. And he did." - White House Press Release, 3/21/04


CLAIM #4: "In June and July when the threat spikes were so highwe were at battle stationsThe fact of the matter is [that] the administration focused on this before 9/11." National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04

FACT: "Documents indicate that before Sept. 11, Ashcroft did not give terrorism top billing in his strategic plans for the Justice Department, which includes the FBI. A draft of Ashcroft's Strategic Plan from Aug. 9, 2001, does not put fighting terrorism as one of the department's seven goals, ranking it as a sub-goal beneath gun violence and drugs. By contrast, in April 2000, Ashcroft's predecessor, Janet Reno, called terrorism the most challenging threat in the criminal justice area." - Washington Post, 3/22/04


CLAIM #5: "The president launched an aggressive response after 9/11." National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04

FACT: "In the early days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush White House cut by nearly two-thirds an emergency request for counterterrorism funds by the FBI, an internal administration budget document shows. The papers show that Ashcroft ranked counterterrorism efforts as a lower priority than his predecessor did, and that he resisted FBI requests for more counterterrorism funding before and immediately after the attacks." Washington Post, 3/22/04


CLAIM #6: "Well, [Clarke] wasn't in the loop, frankly, on a lot of this stuff" - Vice President Dick Cheney, 3/22/04

FACT: "The Government's interagency counterterrorism crisis management forum (the Counterterrorism Security Group, or "CSG") chaired by Dick Clarke met regularly, often daily, during the high threat period." - White House Press Release, 3/21/04


CLAIM #7: "[Bush] wanted a far more effective policy for trying to deal with [terrorism], and that process was in motion throughout the spring." - Vice President Dick Cheney on Rush Limbaugh, 3/22/04

FACT: "Bush said [in May of 2001] that Cheney would direct a government-wide review on managing the consequences of a domestic attack, and 'I will periodically chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review these efforts.' Neither Cheney's review nor Bush's took place." - Washington Post, 1/20/02
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

post #205 of 386
3/23/04 at 9:31am
So Dick Cheney is making the rounds claiming that Clarke was "out of the loop" in the administration's counter-terror efforts. Therefore, Clarke doesn't know what he's talking about and anything he says should be instantly discounted.

It's amazing that Cheney does not seem to realize what he is actually saying: That the Bush administration's top expert on terrorism was not consulted about their counter-terrorism efforts. This presents several unpalatable choices:

1. Cheney is lying for political gain. If the public picks up on this, the backlash could be out of all proportion to the damage Cheney is trying to control.

2. The administration deliberately ignored its in-house expert, with September 11 being the result. This eliminates one more scapegoat, since the White House cannot simultaneously blame Clarke for failing to stop 9/11 while claiming he was "out of the loop" on counter-terrorism.

3. Assuming Cheney speaks the truth, it actually bolsters Clarke's claim to Cassandra-hood. Cut out of the loop, his warnings went nowhere and were ignored. That, too, is pretty damning of the administration.

From Atrios
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #206 of 386
3/23/04 at 9:58am
You just have to see this.

Halfway down this page, a Real Media clip of Clarke talking about the Bush admin.

Unbefcukin' leivable.
meh
meh
post #207 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:00am
From earlier today at "the hearings"

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told the commission that President Clinton and his team "did everything we could, everything we could think of, based on the knowledge we had, to protect our people and disrupt and defeat al-Qaida."
--------------

Bush intially continued the same approach as Clinton did---both working from conventional wisdom. Spining all of this for politcal gain is simplistic and intellectually dishonest.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #208 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally posted by Harald
You just have to see this.

Halfway down this page, a Real Media clip of Clarke talking about the Bush admin.

Unbefcukin' leivable.

OMFG! Un-fvcking-believable! What kind of country do we live in when the chief terrorism expert is "out of the loop", "off his rocker" and a "bitter ex-Clintonite".
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #209 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:21am
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
OMFG! Un-fvcking-believable! What kind of country do we live in when the chief terrorism expert is "out of the loop", "off his rocker" and a "bitter ex-Clintonite".

He was not the "leading" or "Chief" expert as you keep saying, he was one of many. But his big thing was that cyberterrism was going to be the next big attack, not flying planes into the world trade centers.

Spin to the extreme, Rumba anyone?
post #210 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:29am
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
OMFG! Un-fvcking-believable! What kind of country do we live in when the chief terrorism expert is "out of the loop", "off his rocker" and a "bitter ex-Clintonite".

Don't forget: TWO of the people that held that position in the Bush admin are speaking out against the admin's lack of attention to terrorism.

I can't stress this enough. It's not just Clarke; we also have Rand Beers who resigned at the beginning of the Iraq war from the exact same position, Bush's counter-terrorism advisor at the NSC, who is now working in the Kerry campaign and speaking out against Bush.
post #211 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:31am
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
I can't stress this enough. It's not just Clarke; we also have Rand Beers who resigned at the beginning of the Iraq war from the exact same position, Bush's counter-terrorism advisor at the NSC, who is now working in the Kerry campaign and speaking out against Bush.

This explains why they are speaking out only about Bush's failures according to them. No big surprise there.
post #212 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:33am
Oh yeah, if Kerry does win look at those two to be reworded by gaining a spot in that administration. I'd bet big money on that if I were a gambling person.
post #213 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:54am
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Oh yeah, if Kerry does win look at those two to be reworded by gaining a spot in that administration. I'd bet big money on that if I were a gambling person.

Let's hope so.

But as someone (I don't remember who) pointed out yesterday, it's extremely foolish to believe that Beers and Clarke resigned from as high a position as one can have without being a cabinet secretary, after working under multiple admins of both parties for ~30+ years each, all so they could possibly get appointed to a similar position in an administration that only has a 50% chance of winning.

Not to mention the obvious thing that shatters your theory: what was Bush's appoval rating when Rand Beers resigned and joined Kerry? Hell, in addition to that, what position was Kerry holding in relation to just the other democrats at the time?

So you really have nothing to stand on when claiming that is the motivation. Not by ANY stretch of the imagination.
post #214 of 386
3/23/04 at 10:59am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Oh yeah, if Kerry does win look at those two to be reworded by gaining a spot in that administration. I'd bet big money on that if I were a gambling person.

Yeah . . . let's discount the allegations that our country was both lead astray and into a miasma and that his lame as pre-occupation with Iraq crippled our attention on terrorism as well as excacerbating our relationship to terrorism in general . . . including swelling their support internationally . .

.. are these big words?
simply put: dismissing all of this under the guise of 'personal gain' for someone of Clarke's stature and political leanings is just plain BLIND and STUPID!!!


WAKE UP!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

post #215 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:00am
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Let's hope so.

But as someone (I don't remember who) pointed out yesterday, it's extremely foolish to believe that Beers and Clarke resigned from as high a position as one can have without being a cabinet secretary, after working under multiple admins of both parties for ~30+ years each, all so they could possibly get appointed to a similar position in an administration that only has a 50% chance of winning.

Not to mention the obvious thing that shatters your theory: what was Bush's appoval rating when Rand Beers resigned and joined Kerry? Hell, in addition to that, what position was Kerry holding in relation to just the other democrats at the time?

So you really have nothing to stand on when claiming that is the motivation. Not by ANY stretch of the imagination.

You are assuming that they resigned for reasons any of us know about.

The possibilities are endless. And don't go quoting articles about what they said. We all know that may not match the real reasons.
post #216 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:02am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Harald
You just have to see this.

Halfway down this page, a Real Media clip of Clarke talking about the Bush admin.

Unbefcukin' leivable.

Level headed articulate, smart and, if he is honest, NOT politically motivated at all

This needs to be seen by anyone who is still licking Bush's anus!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

post #217 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:07am
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
Yeah . . . let's discount the allegations that our country was both lead astray and into a miasma and that his lame as pre-occupation with Iraq crippled our attention on terrorism as well as excacerbating our relationship to terrorism in general . . . including swelling their support internationally . .

.. are these big words?
simply put: dismissing all of this under the guise of 'personal gain' for someone of Clarke's stature and political leanings is just plain BLIND and STUPID!!!


WAKE UP!

But what you say is blind and stupid is ok when it applies to bush. Read your post again, because it makes you look extremely partisan. You seem to be calling yourself blind and stupid if you fairly apply your convictions.
post #218 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:12am
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Oh yeah, if Kerry does win look at those two to be reworded by gaining a spot in that administration. I'd bet big money on that if I were a gambling person. [/B]

"I am not going to return to government"
-Richard Clarke, BBC interview, link cited above
eye
bee
BEE
eye
bee
BEE
post #219 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:13am
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
"I am not going to return to government"
-Richard Clarke, BBC interview, link cited above

We'll see won't we.

If bush wins he won't. If Kerry takes it, I think he will.
post #220 of 386
3/23/04 at 11:49am
So let me get this straight. Clarke is full of shit because he might want a job in the white house...a job he already had...errr....ummm....and even when he says he WILL NOT endorse Kerry and has ZERO PLANS to work for the Kerry administration (if there is one)...then he's a liar.

And aren't the Republicans the "liar" watchdog group? Interesting how it's completely out of bounds to insinuate that the president "lied", but it's cool to use broad sweeping strokes to tarnish a good man's reputation and brand him a liar.

The hypocrisy astounds!

For a grownup's perspective Josh Marshall has an excellent and LEVEL HEADED examination of the issue. I recommend everyone read it.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #221 of 386
3/23/04 at 12:23pm
From the sky comes a scream, as Homer is crashing right into the
Capitol. A few footsteps later, he comes running down the stairs.

Homer: America, take a good look at your beloved candidates. They're nothing but hideous space reptiles. [unmasks them]
[audience gasps in terror]
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
[murmurs]
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away.
[Kang and Kodos laugh out loud]

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #222 of 386
3/23/04 at 12:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
But what you say is blind and stupid is ok when it applies to bush. Read your post again, because it makes you look extremely partisan. You seem to be calling yourself blind and stupid if you fairly apply your convictions.

You don't get it . . . many Conservatives are jumping ship . . . many people of stature are coming out with revelations . . . revelations that show what some people already knew . . .except when the latter people held those opinions they were discounted as 'Liberal" smear tactics . . . .
but these aren't Liberals and they have more experience in positions of extreme responsibility than does Bush in Business or politics . . .

I heard that even John McCain has started to voice some stuff . . . any links?

(too wrapped up in my Vid/Sound project to look right now)
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

post #223 of 386
3/23/04 at 1:03pm
Quote:
Originally posted by pfflam
You don't get it . . . many Conservatives are jumping ship . . . many people of stature are coming out with revelations . . . revelations that show what some people already knew . . .except when the latter people held those opinions they were discounted as 'Liberal" smear tactics . . . .
but these aren't Liberals and they have more experience in positions of extreme responsibility than does Bush in Business or politics . . .

I heard that even John McCain has started to voice some stuff . . . any links?

(too wrapped up in my Vid/Sound project to look right now)

Many?

Many Dems are also on the other side on this issue, so what is your point.

I do get it, by the way.
post #224 of 386
3/23/04 at 1:16pm
Man, if the defense of Bush's policies in this thread are any indication of the state of conservative rhetoric, ya'll can kiss your boy goodbye.

We seem to have entered the "defending the indefensible" stage of the argument, requiring the true believers to just wave their hands in the air and go "booga booga booga" as if that were holding up their end of things.

I think the cognitive strain of keeping all these fantasies in mind at the same time, while more and more (actual) information piles up at the edge of the defended perimiter, is starting to take its toll. Larger and larger chunks of reality have top be dismissed or questioned in order to maintain the belief system.

Oh sure, hard evidence and credible witnesses and dire consequences and all that, but how do we really know what we know? Can we ever be sure of anything? Maybe it's all just a dream! Maybe it's all part of Bush's grand plan! Maybe the WOMD are on orbiting space platforms that Saddam had built with the money he stole from his people!

Only time will tell!
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
post #225 of 386
3/23/04 at 2:25pm
It's amazing how many partisan Democrats and disgruntled former employees working under cover as career civil servants have betrayed this president. It just seems to happen again and again and again. I mean, just think of the list: Rand Beers, well-known partisan Democrat and hack, Richard Clarke, self-promoter, disgruntled former employee, and "self-regarding buffoon", Valerie Plame, hack and nepotist, Joe Wilson, partisan hack, self-promoter and shameless green tea lover. The abuse this White House has taken ...

Talking Points Memo

Edit: Link
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #226 of 386
3/23/04 at 2:42pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
It's amazing how many partisan Democrats and disgruntled former employees working under cover as career civil servants have betrayed this president. It just seems to happen again and again and again. I mean, just think of the list: Rand Beers, well-known partisan Democrat and hack, Richard Clarke, self-promoter, disgruntled former employee, and "self-regarding buffoon", Valerie Plame, hack and nepotist, Joe Wilson, partisan hack, self-promoter and shameless green tea lover. The abuse this White House has taken ...

Talking Points Memo

Edit: Link

I bet you could find just as many disgruntled workers from the clinton admin. I would bet many time more.

Come on. This is getting tiresome.
post #227 of 386
3/23/04 at 2:52pm
I wish bush would come out with it just so I could see folks try to rationalize that away.

But having two of his chief counter-terrorism advisors, a cabinet secretary and a list of others is good enough.
post #228 of 386
3/23/04 at 3:09pm
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I bet you could find just as many disgruntled workers from the clinton admin. I would bet many time more.

Come on. This is getting tiresome.

Point, meet Naples. Naples, I don't believe you two have met.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
post #229 of 386
3/23/04 at 3:48pm
You guys! This is hysterical!


Now 9/11 was preventable?! Are you all crazy?! That's were this "point" is going!


*scoots back in his angry recliner*

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #230 of 386
3/23/04 at 3:51pm
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
I bet you could find just as many disgruntled workers from the clinton admin. I would bet many time more.

Come on. This is getting tiresome.

We're not debating Clinton are we? We're debating the actions of the current administration, their appointees and their subsequent actions against the White House. And the point of the post was not that the workers are disgruntled, but that the administration is using the same sorry excuse for each of these people that you just used.

Damn. I guess sarcasm is a lost art.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #231 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:20pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Northgate
We're not debating Clinton are we? We're debating the actions of the current administration, their appointees and their subsequent actions against the White House. And the point of the post was not that the workers are disgruntled, but that the administration is using the same sorry excuse for each of these people that you just used.

Damn. I guess sarcasm is a lost art.

Sure but some make it sound like disgruntled employees only happened to this administration. I quick comparison to other administrations would put that to rest so that it is not treated that way.

Some things require comparison in order to establish a precedent. The technique is pretty common. Don't act as if you don't understand it.
post #232 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:24pm
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Sure but some make it sound like disgruntled employees only happened to this administration. I quick comparison to other administrations would put that to rest so that it is not treated that way.

Some things require comparison in order to establish a precedent. The technique is pretty common. Don't act as if you don't understand it.

Oh. My. God.

Point, this is still Naples. Also, please meet his friend, sarcasm.

Naples, although you have nothing in common, I think you might benifit from getting to know these two.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
post #233 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:25pm
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
disgruntled employees

We aren't talking about disgruntled employees, we are talking about multiple senior officials with ~30 years average experience each under multiple administrations (both repub and democrat) stating very specific things about the bush administration. And they are all saying the same thing.

And not only that, we have two of Bush's (note the name) chief advisors on counter-terrorism saying that the bush admin has done the war on terror completely wrong.

Not one. Two.
post #234 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:30pm
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
We aren't talking about disgruntled employees, we are talking about multiple senior officials with ~30 years average experience each under multiple administrations (both repub and democrat) stating very specific things about the bush administration. And they are all saying the same thing.

And not only that, we have two of Bush's (note the name) chief advisors on counter-terrorism saying that the bush admin has done the war on terror all wrong.

Not one. Two.

If I might add to your thought. I find it fascinating is that the "buffoons" the administration and the echoe chamber are desperately tring to discredit were HIRED by this administration. Ronald Reagan hired him. Daddy Bush hired him. Bubba hired him. And bunnypants hired him. So, who's the fool (assuming you agree with their assertion that he's "crazy")?

Suddenly you don't like what they have to say and their "unworthy" of not only working in the white house, but should be committed.

Is amnesia running rampant amongst the GOP?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
post #235 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:35pm
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
We aren't talking about disgruntled employees, we are talking about multiple senior officials with ~30 years average experience each under multiple administrations (both repub and democrat) stating very specific things about the bush administration. And they are all saying the same thing.

And not only that, we have two of Bush's (note the name) chief advisors on counter-terrorism saying that the bush admin has done the war on terror completely wrong.

Not one. Two.

Three.

Paul O'Neill was on the NSC.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
post #236 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Three.

Paul O'Neill was on the NSC.

Good call.

I'm just emphasizing that both Beers and Clarke held the highest single counter-terrorism position in the bush administration, and both are saying that the Bush admin did and is doing a terrible job.
post #237 of 386
3/23/04 at 4:41pm
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Sure but some make it sound like disgruntled employees only happened to this administration. I quick comparison to other administrations would put that to rest so that it is not treated that way.

Some things require comparison in order to establish a precedent. The technique is pretty common. Don't act as if you don't understand it.

Then name some names... give us the names of "disgruntled" senior officials who spoke out against the Clinton administration after being a part of it. Names, links, facts, instead of "there must me lots", "I bet there are plenty", etc.

Hey, we're already letting you get away with Defending Bush By Attacking Clinton, and "I bet" it's at least the 11th time that's happened.
eye
bee
BEE
eye
bee
BEE
post #238 of 386
3/23/04 at 6:35pm
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Good call.

I'm just emphasizing that both Beers and Clarke held the highest single counter-terrorism position in the bush administration, and both are saying that the Bush admin did and is doing a terrible job.


This is 2-3, 3 1/2 out of.....? How many advisors are there? First of all we know they are stabbing their former employers in the back (chest?), second, unless they are letting it all hang out as to our foreign policy efforts I guess we have to take 3 1/2 opinions on the full scale of the war on tarot---I mean terror. Honestly, just today, Albright (I think) laid it on us that we had SA involved to buy OBL back in the late nineties. Not common knowledge (to my knowledge.)

Folks, this worse than hysteria, it's just stupid---besides if they want this stuff to work against Bush, Viacom should have started it's book tour for Clarke closer to the election.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

post #239 of 386
3/23/04 at 6:47pm
Quote:
Originally posted by FormerLurker
Then name some names... give us the names of "disgruntled" senior officials who spoke out against the Clinton administration after being a part of it. Names, links, facts, instead of "there must me lots", "I bet there are plenty", etc.

Hey, we're already letting you get away with Defending Bush By Attacking Clinton, and "I bet" it's at least the 11th time that's happened.

Define attack for me, because I did not know that pointing out known facts is considered attacking.
post #240 of 386
3/23/04 at 7:08pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Define attack for me, because I did not know that pointing out known facts is considered attacking.

Usually when 'pointing out facts' you point . . . . and there are facts . . . and you are pointing at the facts

. . .?!?!

how about some facts?!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Yet another ex-admin says they wanted Iraq right at 911