Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Timesink; shaggy eel
"Miss Clark came under fire last week when she suggested the war in Iraq might not have happened if Democratic nominee Al Gore had won the US Presidency instead of George W Bush."

Why should Miss Clark have to apologize for this statement? It is the absolute truth.

Algore himself has said so. "I never would have started this war", he claimed.

Instead, we would be issuing our apologies to the terrorists for having placed the Twin Towers in such an inconvenient location that they became navigational hazards...

11 posted on 04/05/2003 11:07:26 PM PST by okie01 (The Mainstream Media: IGNORANCE ON PARADE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: okie01; shaggy eel
Why should Miss Clark have to apologize for this statement? It is the absolute truth.

Note the context. She didn't say what you think she said.

14 posted on 04/05/2003 11:11:52 PM PST by Timesink (When was the last time YOU remembered we're on Code Orange?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: okie01; Timesink; Brian Allen; spitz; Neophyte
US refuses to return NZ apology

07 April 2003 www.stuff.co.nz

By RUTH BERRY

Prime Minister Helen Clark may have apologised to the Bush administration, but the United States embassy in Wellington is refusing to reciprocate.

Miss Clark has apologised through New Zealand's ambassador in Washington, for any offence caused by her comments about the Bush regime and the war.

But she said the US embassy in Wellington was out of line for issuing a public rebuke without first seeking to clarify them and without advising the Government.

The embassy had said Miss Clark's comments that the war would not have happened had Democrat candidate Al Gore won the last US presidential election were "regrettable".

Her comments that the invasion of Iraq by US and British-led forces did not appear to be going to plan, also sparked concerns.

Senior Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry and US embassy officials met to discuss and "clarify" the diplomatic row and have agreed on a "communications protocol".

A spokeswoman for the US embassy would not discuss that protocol, but said: "While we have only seen media reports of what the Prime Minister said, we feel the embassy's comment was appropriate and not out of line. We also have no further comment to make on the subject." A spokesman for Miss Clark denied the embassy's statement meant there was a stand-off.

"There's no rift. If stand-off means they are not talking to each other, there is no stand-off. As far as Helen is concerned the matter has been dealt with," the spokesman said.

"The PM says certainly no offence was intended by the comments she made, but . . . it's important now to apologise for what the US took as an offence, and then move the relationship forward from there."

National Party leader Bill English said Miss Clark should now apologise to Australian Prime Minister John Howard.

Miss Clark got a ticking off from The Australian newspaper last week for saying "this Government does not trade the lives of young New Zealanders for a war it does not believe in in order to secure some material advantage".

But Miss Clark's spokesman said Mr English's suggestion was "absolute rubbish". Miss Clark had written to The Australian explaining that the comments were not directed at Australia but at critics who saw her stance on the war as lessening New Zealand's chance of getting a free-trade deal with the US.

34 posted on 04/06/2003 1:31:45 PM PDT by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson