To: GulliverSwift
Clarke worked his way up to become President Clintons terrorism czar in 1998, where he began his crusade: Clarke declared that America faced a new era of terrorist threats for which it was woefully unprepared.
Isn't that when he started claiming that cyberterror was the real future danger?
To: GulliverSwift
Clarke worked his way up to become President Clintons terrorism czar in 1998, where he began his crusade: Clarke declared that America faced a new era of terrorist threats for which it was woefully unprepared.
Isn't that when he started claiming that cyberterror was the real future danger?
To: GulliverSwift
This makes me ill. So Clarke has cultivated the media through all of this. And that makes it OK for him to skew the facts and frankly, lie. I think he believes the ego strokes he is getting right now, I think his easy access to clinton made him think he was a national security god. And then when President Bush came along and made changes, and he wasn't part of those changes, well...if only someone would have listened to him all of this wouldn't have happened.
4 posted on
03/26/2004 10:11:58 PM PST by
Utah Girl
To: GulliverSwift; Howlin; Grampa Dave; MEG33
Barf alert needed!
This guy was on an Ego Trip!
5 posted on
03/26/2004 10:12:03 PM PST by
Ernest_at_the_Beach
(The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
To: GulliverSwift
There is one big problem, Clarke isn't running for President, That long faced retard is
6 posted on
03/26/2004 10:12:52 PM PST by
MJY1288
(When Faced With a Choice as Simple as Night or Day, John Kerry Chooses Dusk and Dawn)
To: GulliverSwift
"As they try to discredit Clarke, they are running into journalists who have known him for years. Most reporters came away trusting Clarke. Credible? asked one reporter. I think he is.
One problem, folks. Most Americans don't believe the journalists or reporters vouching for him are credible either.
Qwinn
10 posted on
03/26/2004 10:17:08 PM PST by
Qwinn
To: GulliverSwift
Clarkes history with journalists does not bode well for his detractors in the Bush White House. As they try to discredit Clarke, they are running into journalists who have known him for yearsClarke's largest detractor may well be his conflicting sworn testimony.
11 posted on
03/26/2004 10:17:48 PM PST by
Dolphy
To: GulliverSwift
13 posted on
03/26/2004 10:23:24 PM PST by
CedarDave
(Election 2004: When Democrats attack, it's campaigning; when Republicans campaign, it's attacking.)
To: GulliverSwift
"Clarkes history with journalists does not bode well for his detractors in the Bush White House. As they try to discredit Clarke, they are running into journalists who have known him for years. Most reporters came away trusting Clarke."If Clarke was deep undercover why was he blabbing to The "Press" about it?
To: GulliverSwift
Well, if the media trusts him so much that means the American people won't.
15 posted on
03/26/2004 10:26:49 PM PST by
McGavin999
(Evil thrives when good men do nothing!)
To: Shermy
While Clarke was White House terrorism czar, he often showed up in news dispatches as an unnamed source. Interviews with reporters on the terrorism beat suggest that Clarke has always been savvy in using the press. He was known to be a source for a select group of journalists, says one print reporter.
Leak-ping.
Richard Clarke and Joseph C. Wilson IV
Washington's Ultimate Power Couple
17 posted on
03/26/2004 10:30:07 PM PST by
okie01
(www.ArmorforCongress.com...because Congress isn't for the morally halt and the mentally lame.)
To: GulliverSwift
Clarke's own testimony will prove to be his undoing.
Indict him and prosecute him for perjury.
23 posted on
03/26/2004 10:39:21 PM PST by
onyx
(Kerry' s a Veteran, but so were Lee Harvey Oswald, Timothy McVeigh and Benedict Arnold.)
To: GulliverSwift
32 posted on
03/26/2004 10:54:45 PM PST by
cyncooper
("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")
To: GulliverSwift
Not if we can help it.
Of course, the collusion between the Democrats and the media is the worst kept secret of this election year.
46 posted on
03/26/2004 11:04:52 PM PST by
My2Cents
("Well...there you go again.")
To: GulliverSwift
Coll describes Clarke as a shadowy member of Washingtons permanent intelligence and bureaucratic classes . . . who seemed to wield enormous power precisely because hardly anyone knew who he was or what exactly he did for a living. Did I guess right? From an earlier post of mine - Destro's Thesis: Paul ONeil then Richard Clarke point to something I have observed for a while now. There is an active revolt by the beaurocratic careerists and other Washington establishment types who are actively out to get Bush.
Why?
Because for the last few decades the religion/operating philosophy of these types have been multilateralisim. They are a diverse group. Some are pro United Nations and are angry that Bush has cut the UN off (In this bracket I will place Clarke). Others are heavily invested in NATO and Europe's EU (In this bracket I will place Paul ONeil) and are not very happy that Bush has cut off NATO's core countries (specifically Germany) and has made nice with Russia - a nation these NATOites want to cut apart and exploit like the "good old days" under Yeltsin.
These beaurocratic careerists and other Washington establishment types come from both the Republicans and the Democrats. This cabal does not serve to preserve the Constitution...they serve other masters/interests. Remember Clinton's Strobe Talbot's comments that we were headed for a "The Birth of the Global Nation "? (see article below).
No historian of American politics has ever seen such a back stabbing orgy as we have witnessed against this president. It is not a coincidence. It is orchestrated. I do not think Kerry behind this per say but rather he is a passive beneficiary.
These powers that be hope that by helping elect Kerry they will make him beholden to their globalist agenda.
62 posted on
03/26/2004 11:16:12 PM PST by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
To: GulliverSwift
Over the years hes been in contact with a lot of journalists in town, says Coll in an interview on Friday.Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Is ROBERT NOVAK one of them? (Wouldn't that be delicious!)
97 posted on
03/27/2004 12:18:36 AM PST by
Stultis
To: GulliverSwift
100 posted on
03/27/2004 4:28:35 AM PST by
GailA
(Kerry I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, but I'll declare a moratorium on the death penalty)
To: GulliverSwift
TERRORISTS CAN'T TERRORIZE WITHOUT THE MEDIA
107 posted on
03/27/2004 7:49:06 AM PST by
alrea
(Democrats, Journalists, your taxes and the U.N. can stop obesity and create jobs.)
To: Fracas
ping
126 posted on
03/30/2004 4:11:41 AM PST by
Liz
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson