Skip to comments.
Montreal man linked to Clark controversy - Presidential candidate claims pressure
The Star ^
| 9/18/03
Posted on 09/18/2003 12:25:15 PM PDT by areafiftyone
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 261-263 next last
To: GoOrdnance
I didn't "edit" anything. I simply cut and pasted it as it was. Take your DemcocRAT shilling somewhere else.
181
posted on
09/18/2003 3:22:13 PM PDT
by
MizSterious
(Support whirled peas!)
To: GoOrdnance
GEN. CLARK: Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.
182
posted on
09/18/2003 3:25:06 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0 .............................................. 0 rows returned)
To: montag813
183
posted on
09/18/2003 3:25:49 PM PDT
by
Peach
(The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: GoOrdnance
Want to come to Clark's defense on this one also?
Clark Alleges White House Pushed CNN to Fire Him
Face it, the man has no restraint when it comes to saying things which clearly raise false inferences about others. It's undisciplined and disgraceful. A man who would so casually say such things in public forums is not qualified to run a Dairy Queen, much less be president of the United States.
184
posted on
09/18/2003 3:28:04 PM PDT
by
AHerald
To: montag813
" He was commanding a Texas Army base from which the Army equipment was used to pump in gas and incinerate American civilians at Waco."Thanks--I had been trying to recall Clark's involvement with that horrible event. Of course, this isn't the only thing about him I find disgusting, there's much more. How can anyone defend this monster?
185
posted on
09/18/2003 3:28:07 PM PDT
by
MizSterious
(Support whirled peas!)
To: theFIRMbss
When did he get pressure from the White House if he never got a call from the White House or anyone "around" the White House?
186
posted on
09/18/2003 3:28:35 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0 .............................................. 0 rows returned)
To: areafiftyone
"I didn't have sex with that woman...ms. Lewinsky" Oh sorry..that ones been used already.
To: GoOrdnance; Peach
How did he get pressure from the White House if the White House did not call him?
He had a goal - to implying that the White House wanted him to say the Iraq was behind the attacks. AND THAT HE STOOD UP TO THE WHITE HOUSE.
He never got pressure and that was a lie - The phone call bit was to imply that the White House called - to put the before mentioned IMMEDIATE pressure on him.
He is a liar and a manipulator.
188
posted on
09/18/2003 3:33:28 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0 .............................................. 0 rows returned)
Comment #189 Removed by Moderator
To: MizSterious
Reno also meet with Two Military Men to discussed and plan strategy. It has always been thought the Clark was one of those two.
190
posted on
09/18/2003 3:36:40 PM PDT
by
CyberCowboy777
(SELECT * FROM liberals WHERE clue > 0 .............................................. 0 rows returned)
To: areafiftyone
Hecht said he did not pressure the former army general..."I don't know why I would be confused with the White House. I don't even have white paint on my house," he added. "I saw those comments he made and I just chuckled."
191
posted on
09/18/2003 3:36:56 PM PDT
by
AHerald
To: areafiftyone
Oh, not another Clinton type lie from Wes...the horror!
To: Quilla
"Hecht is mistaken, his house was white in 2001" With a convenient backdoor - "oh, that was snow?" :-)
To: GoOrdnance
So your argument basically is that because he has no restraint, that we are free to lie about what he actually says? Huh? What are you talking about? First off, it's not lying about Clark when rational people draw what are clearly logical and commonsense inferences from what Clark said on Meet the Press.
Second, even if you're argument that Clark did not literally claim a call came to him from the White House is correct, Clark clearly stated on Meet the Press that the White House was trying to "pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam." That much clearly can't be denied, even by you.
"...there was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001 starting immediately after 9/11 to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein." RUSSERT: "By who? Who did that?"
CLARK: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House."
So again, where is Clark's evidence that the White House was trying to pin 9/11 on Saddam? And please don't fall back on that Woodward book info, which is clearly not evidence of pressuring anyone to link Iraq with 9/11.
BTW, your repetition of the "I don't want to be in the same company as FAIR and the NY Times" line seems to me to be a transparent bit of misdirection on your part designed to give you some sort of conservative bona fides as a defender of Clark's intentional obfuscations.
194
posted on
09/18/2003 4:06:22 PM PDT
by
AHerald
To: AHerald
Full quote from June 15
Meet the Press in context so as not to be accused of taking Clark out of context.
CLARK: "I think it was an effort to convince the American people to do something, and I think there was an immediate determination right after 9/11 that Saddam Hussein was one of the keys to winning the war on terror. Whether it was the need just to strike out or whether he was a linchpin in this, there was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001 starting immediately after 9/11 to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam Hussein."
RUSSERT: "By who? Who did that?"
CLARK: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You've got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'But--I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence. And these were people who had--Middle East think tanks and people like this, and it was a lot of pressure to connect this and there were a lot of assumptions made. But I never personally saw the evidence and didn't talk to anybody who had the evidence to make that connection."
195
posted on
09/18/2003 4:11:31 PM PDT
by
AHerald
To: Dog
I guess it depends on what the meaning of 'IT' is?
196
posted on
09/18/2003 4:12:24 PM PDT
by
Samurai_Jack
(Im Just filling in the blanks)
To: billhilly
Oops, steak = stake. I was thinking about food at the time of the post.
To: areafiftyone
Hecht said he called Clark either Sept. 12 or Sept. 13 not the morning of the attacks, as the former general said but he merely passed on information he had received from Israel which drew a purported link. ....Israel....
....White House....
Same thing really.
To: CyberCowboy777
Bingo! But you won't get a concession to your analysis or the facts by those who seem to want to believe in Clark's lies.
199
posted on
09/18/2003 4:29:32 PM PDT
by
Peach
(The Clintons have pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
To: GoOrdnance; Peach
You know what... that monster Clark may have put his life on the line in Viet Nam... some folks say he is and was a perfumed OXFORD prince in uniform... but, nevertheless he is lower than whale dung in my opinion.
He followed ALL the clinton's orders and did their EVIL bidding in the WAR CRIMINAL-style bombing of Serbian civilians... he is no better than any war criminal general who served hitler!!
clark is a first class villian.... just like some Viet Nam vet who killed a fellow in in a robbery after he had been home for some 25 years.
JUST BECAUSE HE IS A VIET NAM VET DOESN'T MAKE clark any GOOD!
Hanging is too good for clark, the killer of 73 SERBIAN CHILDREN !!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 261-263 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson