[swilhelm73]

Clarke worked his way up to become President Clinton’s 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?

[swilhelm73]

Clarke worked his way up to become President Clinton’s 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?

[Utah Girl]

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.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Barf alert needed!

This guy was on an Ego Trip!

[MJY1288]

There is one big problem, Clarke isn't running for President, That long faced retard is

[Qwinn]

"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

[Dolphy]

Clarke’s 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

Clarke's largest detractor may well be his conflicting sworn testimony.

[CedarDave]

Check out this thread:

Preparing for The Next Pearl Harbor Attack (JUNE 2001, Bush team addressing terrorism threat)

[blackbart.223]

"Clarke’s 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?

[McGavin999]

Well, if the media trusts him so much that means the American people won't.

[okie01]

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

[onyx]

Clarke's own testimony will prove to be his undoing.
Indict him and prosecute him for perjury.

[cyncooper]

When the Bush administration took over in 2001 and decided to reduce Clarke’s power, Coll writes what Clarke this week told the 9/11 committee: He tried to warn Bush officials that terrorism was a major threat, but they ignored his pleas.

Oh, the power of the internet:

Preparing for The Next Pearl Harbor Attack (JUNE 2001, Bush team addressing terrorism threat)

[My2Cents]

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.

[Destro]

Coll describes Clarke as “a shadowy member of Washington’s 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 O’Neil 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 O’Neil) 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.

[Stultis]

“Over the years he’s 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!)

[GailA]

3 part VERY long series by the wash compost

Ghost Wars : The CIA and Osama bin Laden, 1997-1999 A Secret Hunt Unravels in Afghanistan

The CIA and Massoud. Legal Disputes Over Hunt Paralyzed Clinton's Aides

Flawed Ally Was Hunt's Best Hope

[alrea]

TERRORISTS CAN'T TERRORIZE WITHOUT THE MEDIA

[Liz]

ping