Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If Clarke was as incompetent as the WH now contends............

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:16 PM
Original message
If Clarke was as incompetent as the WH now contends............
WHY KEEP HIM ON? I'm listening to someone go on and on about the bombing in Saudi Arabia, the bombing in 1993, and the bombing of the USS Cole and how Clarke did NOTHING to counter terrorism. It just begs the question, if some media hack would ask it, why keep him on for 2 years?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
rinsd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. Clarke? How about Tenet? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. You're right. But I don't hear them trying to discredit Tenet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zinfandel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-23-04 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #4
24. Because Tenet is playing ball, being vague-not pointing the finger at Bush
Edited on Tue Mar-23-04 12:34 AM by Zinfandel
and his agency (CIA) is receiving billions of dollars in return.

What is the CIA purpose these days...to make more money for American corporations. Over throwing legitimate governments for corporate profits...no wonder why Kennedy wanted to dismantle it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
2. Exactly....they say he did nothing as far back as ten years ago to fight
terror. Neither Mcclellan nor Cheney could pinpoint today why they let him stay on board, and more importantly, WHO let him stay and they all but blamed the 93 WTC bombing on him as well as 9/11.

Also funny, Cheney said he was a low level employee but my news station just showed footage of a meeting where the camera panned a room with him at a meeting where Rice and Powell were in attendance. They must be "low level" too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:20 PM
Response to Original message
3. well, they did demote him
Edited on Mon Mar-22-04 07:21 PM by librechik
I'm just telling you what they say--they are flat out of all the good excuses on this one!

I bet they "demoted" him becasue he wouldn't shut up aboout Al Q when they had a war to concoct with Iraq!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. When did he get assigned to "cyber security?"
I know his cabinet position was removed in January 2001, but he was still the head of counter terrorism, right? It just was no longer a cabinet level position which was why he had to ask for a cabinet meeting. Or am I missing something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. sometime after 9/11 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
21. The impression...
I have from his TV interview - and his book, which I just started to read today, is that he asked for the new assignment to cyber security. He certainly was in the thick of it on 9/11 and the immediate aftermath. His account of the WH on 9/11 is chilling, to put it mildly. Lynne Cheney was giving opinions, for gawd's sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
5. How about O'Neil?
They said the same thing about him.

I've heard Bush supporters argue many times that Bush's questionable intellect is not a problem because he surrounds himself with such expert advisors.

Well? Which is it? Are Bush's advisors right in calling him a fool, or is Bush's stupidity actually a problem since his advisors are incompetent? Which one is it, Bushies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Exactly. I'm waiting for someone in the media to press this point.
This act is getting tired. Everyone who leaves this administration, either voluntarily or not, is painted as incompetent. How can these idiots have held onto their jobs for so long, or for that matter, why were they hired in the first place?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. There's a limit
to how many obviously bright, dedicated people they can attempt to discredit. This is delicious!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugarbleus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. Exactly..........I mentioned in another thread that
Lest we forget, there was O'Neil, Kay, Clarke, a female Officer in the Office of Special Plans revealing the EMPHASIS on Iraq before and after 9-11. There are others that don't come to mind just now, but Hey, how many whistleblowers does it take to convince the public that this administration is CORRUPT and inept?

It's interesting that many of the revealers have been Republicans. Ha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. AND DiIulio
except they got him to declare that everything he had said was unfounded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugarbleus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. RightO.... and more... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
9. I had a similar question:
McClellan kept saying "he was told to come to these meetings, and he never showed up."

:wtf:

If an employee of mine missed a meeting (or rather, meetingS) for no good reason, they would be looking for a new job.

All of their excuses and explanations on this are so boneheaded!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buycitgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #9
20. gee.........who does that bring to mind?
somebody who was 'told' to come to his Air National Guard meetings, but didn't

why should it make a difference, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Trajan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. These are ALL irrelevent ...
What happened in 9-11 happened on BUSH's watch ...

HE wanted to be president .... He got that job: and it is incumbent on the PRESIDENT to protect the Nation: not the PREVIOUS president ...

Clarke wasnt powerful enough to avoid being ROLLED OVER by the PNAC ... LIKE the CIA was ... LIKE the DIA was ... LIKE the State Department was ....

Talking about Clinton is all about misdirection .....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
12. remember Cheney anti-terra task force? formed on May 2001.
Number of meetings: 0
I wonder if they 'formed' it to sut the mouths of people like Clarke, graham Rudman and others who isisted we needed something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #12
19. Then what "loop" was Cheney talking about?
When he said that Clarke was "out of the loop?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sadiesworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
13. 9/11 was the first MAJOR attack on American soil by Islamic extremists....
nothing else is remotely comparable. The attacks on foreign soil which occurred during the Clinton years are only comparable to the terrorists attacks during the prior administrations. The ATTEMPTS on American soil ARE a reasonable basis of comparison. The Clinton administration FOILED a major attack. Getting frustrated here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sugarbleus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. Does anyone have a link or the direct info on
What happened during the Clinton years regarding terrorists?

I seem to remember something about his having to "fight" with congress over money or consent or something ... in other words, the neocons threw up barriers to Clintons attempt to GET SERIOUS with the known Terror groups. He was able to shoot a missle here and there and kept abreast of the activities enough to pass along the info to the incoming Bushistas who dismissed...... I'd like to form a time line of events to use as a rebuttal to others who are challenging all the whistleblowers coming out now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nevernose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:29 PM
Response to Original message
17. An attack on Clarke is an attack on REAGAN
That's "Saint Reagan" for all of you lurking freeper-types. It was HIS administration that gave him the job, Bush's FATHER who let him keep it. CLinton was just following Reagan's lead with this guy...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arewethereyet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-22-04 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
22. its a government thing
painfully common
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-23-04 12:18 AM
Response to Original message
23. Wes Clark is enlightening Judy Dandruff
Edited on Tue Mar-23-04 12:18 AM by robbedvoter
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0403/22/asb.00.html
WOODRUFF: When you say we should ignore the personal but today none other than the Vice President of the United States Dick Cheney came out and said Clarke wasn't in the loop and he may have had a grudge to bear because he didn't get some promotion that he wanted. Could that be behind it?

CLARK: Judy, you can't have it both ways. I mean he either was the counterterrorism czar and was responsible and knew what was going on or the administration gave him a title and didn't put any emphasis on terrorism and that's why he wasn't in the loop and the administration is criticizing him from both sides on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC