Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

I'll bet Richard Clarke wasn't "in the loop"...

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
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:42 AM
Original message
I'll bet Richard Clarke wasn't "in the loop"...
Dick Cheney, on the wingnut Rush Limbaugh show (?!?), said that Richard Clarke wasn't "in the loop". There's the context (courtesy of Limbaugh's own site):

THE VICE PRESIDENT: Well, he wasn't -- he wasn't in the loop, frankly, on a lot of this stuff. And I saw part of his interview last night, and he wasn't --

Q He was demoted.

THE VICE PRESIDENT: It was as though he clearly missed a lot of what was going on. For example, just three weeks after the -- after we got here, there was communication, for example, with the President of Pakistan, laying out our concerns about Afghanistan and al Qaeda, and the importance of going after the Taliban and getting them to end their support for the al Qaeda. This was, say, within three weeks of our arrival here.


So what "loop" wasn't the Chief Anti-Terror Czar in? Could it be the loop that included those secret energy policy meetings? You know, the loop the offered the Taliban a "carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs", the loop that many believe decided that a little terror attack on US soil would be just what the doctor ordered to justify an invasion of Iraq.

Yeah, I'll bet Richard Clarke wasn't in that loop.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. Everyone is wrong ......... Bush is right
No matter what they say never forget

What a bunch of pathetic liars
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:51 AM
Response to Original message
2. Either was George Bush the first. Even he said that.
So much for the govt knowing what they are doing. Right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 08:08 AM
Original message
Poppy was lying...Junior gets it honestly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maddezmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
3. and yet condi says he was in the loop
now which one do we believe, condi or cheney ? The only one I trust is the one that took the oath, Clarke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MSgt213 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. You notice how Condi and the white house for that matter are releasing
all types of previously classified documents to prove their point. But Condi in particular has a lot of friggen gall to not want to sit in front of this commission in public. First despite the fact that the commission really wouldn't in my opinion just totally attack her. The fact that she sat and answer questions like everyone else would at least let the families know that she is not trying to hide something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booksenkatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
4. You're right, Junkdrawer, there is more than one loop!
There is one loop, for example, that is a legitimate fight against terror. There is another loop, for example, that is a legitimate quest for fat pockets and no-bid contracts. There is no question that Clarke was out of that latter loop! Good point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Yep. He has now openly admitted that, in the months leading to 9/11,
there were at least two policy tracks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jivenwail Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
6. Well, as Jon Stewart so aptly questioned this "Cheneyism"...
Clarke's the terrorism expert in the administration and he's "not in the loop"???

Something is seriously out of whack it that's true. Clarke's not in the loop???

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me that this misadministration is seriously worried, if this is the best they can come up with.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvgwinn Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 08:18 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. keeping Clarke
Why did they bother keeping Clarke on?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 08:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Because he knew what the hell he was doing. The best man for the
job. He served several administrations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Because they WANTED two tracks and having Clarke head the public...
track deflected examination of the "other" track.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billybob537 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. WHIG
Edited on Thu Mar-25-04 09:26 AM by billybob537
Whitehouse Iraq group. thats the loop clarke wasn't in. Special Projects Group at the pentagon; sifting the pentagon trash to find reasons to invade Iraq. Another loop around real inteligence agencies.

I didn't think they could stack shit that high.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. OK. At least two tracks...
I wonder how many "loops" there are at the Whitehouse?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billybob537 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Plenty
If they don't like the message they just shoot the messenger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Let's face it: they're just plain loopy n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
12. The Spin This A.M. on the IMUS Circus from Bill ARKEN
Some dude named Bill ARKEN(?), who was labeled as a consultant for NBC, said that CLARKE was the original "wolf"-crier, that he was the one who fueled the faulty Y2K hysteria and (something else), that he was wrong about those, that crying-wolf on a daily basis loses impact and credibility, that when the Shrubbites took over they saw him that way and marginalized him. Actually, the rest of his yada was still fairly anti-Shrub and when IMUS tried to lead him into anti-CLINTON stuff, the dude would slip out of it. Fwiw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
15. I say PROVE IT release the Energy Papers which tell who was in the loop
We want Proof of who was in the Loop and who wasn't. Release all pertinent papers like the energy task force papers. The Burden of Proof now lies on Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. Now THERE'S an independent investigation I'd like to see...
Subpoena Kenny Boy et. al.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
17. he isnt a NEOCON .. he wasnt in the loop.. they needed 911 as an excuse
for military expansion into oil territory.. notice we are getting sucked into protecting oil fields in Columbia...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-25-04 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
19. Kick
:kick:
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 Fri Dec 27th 2024, 11:03 AM
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