NOBODY is talking about Clarke's crucial main point

[glarius]

The fact that there should never have been an attack on Iraq!....They are all deliberately shoving this aside and steering the debate to "was Bush prepared for terrorism"....
The Democrats need to get more people on TV making this point....The American public needs to know the truth ...that Bush & company were determined to go to war with Iraq from the get go, despite being told by Clarke, the CIA etc. that Iraq was not involved in 9/11....They have ex-Secretary O'Neil as another witness who verifies what Clarke is saying....Why are the Dems letting the Repubs get all their hatchet men on TV without being refuted?.....I find this so frustrating....When a Democrat does get on television, they just seem to go along with the "was Bush ready or wasn't Bush ready" debate....WHY DON'T THEY BRING UP IRAQ???.....

[Guaranteed]

1. Hey, if we can hit him directly with being weak on terrorism,

I'll take it. Hell yeah, I'll take that.

[demsrule4life]

21. Here is a thought

Driving home from work yesterday I was listening to a local talk show. A point was brought up I found interesting. If Bush would of said after he stold the office that we need to strike afganistan and start rounding up arabs in our country because of a terrorist threat would have America supported it? I don't think so.

[pansypoo53219]

24. clinton was able to take care of terrorism

DESPITE being under the coup d'etat for a BJ, and most of the SUCCESSFUL stopping of terrorism was not trumpeted to show the retardicans reality.
that was a SPECIOUS arguement.
where there is a fucking will, it can be done.

[demsrule4life]

29. I can't agree

after seven attacks the terrorists figured they could do what they want and not worry about any real retribution.

[BR_Parkway]

2. Actually, the most crucial main point so far:

"Clarke said Iraq was "the reason I am strident in criticism of the president of the United States."

"By invading Iraq, the president of the United States has greatly undermined the war on terrorism," he said, silencing the room."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1504&e=2&u=/afp/20040325/pl_afp/us_attacks_040325065245

[truthspeaker]

3. conventional wisdom is Iraq war was necessary

Anyone who says otherwise is marginalized. Sure, it didn't make us safer or have anything to do with terrorism, but it involved killing a lot of Arabs. Don't ask questions, consumer!

[ET Awful]

4. Because this is a 9/11 Commission . . . .

Any discussion of Iraq would be attacked as straying from the point of the Commission.

The only discussions relevant in the context of Clarke's testimony before the Commission are the events preceding 9/11 and whether 9/11 could have been prevented.

I agree with you about Iraq, but it's not a matter for this Commission to address.

Clarke did address the point rather well, but Iraq isn't the main focus of this Commission or his testimony.

[Spazito]

9. It is an important issue for the commission because...

from the testimony of Clarke and from previous comments made by various bush admin people, the focus was on Iraq from day 1 and that is why Al Qaeda was not a top priority.

[glarius]

17. Exactly....there are a growing list of ex White House people who will

verify what Clarke says about Bush's fixation on Iraq....Why don't the Democrats take advantage of that?...They are missing a good opportunity here...

[glarius]

10. I'm not talking about the Commission addressing it...I'm refering to the

media....Republicans are all over the media talking about Clarke's testimony...but they ignore the Iraq thing! :)

[liberalitch]

15. ah, but the attack on Iraq was SUPPOSED...

to be because of the CONNECTION between Iraq and Al Qaeada.
AND because of the inevitable threat iraq posed to us because of the HUGE stockpile of WMDs.

[ewagner]

25. Agree ET

He stayed quite focused on the subject of 9/11. There are inquiries into the intelligence debacle before invading Iraq and I think we'll hear from Clarke on that point too.

[Spazito]

5. Because they would have to acknowledge the elephant...

in the room and that would end the illusion that the Iraq invasion was not illegal, immoral and put the US in even more danger than before the invasion and that would NEVER do.

[Solomon]

6. Because the spineless asses are afraid that somebody will say,

"if you had your way, Saddam would still be in power, the mass graves would still be filling, and the torture chambers would still be ..."

[Dirty Hippie]

7. Clarke said

Bush invading Iraq after 911 made as much sense as Eisenhower invading Mexico after Pearl Harbor.

[0007]

12. I caught that one and LMAO

[treepig]

14. good point - it's always important to correctly identify your enemy

and hollywood's always ready to help . . . "was it over when the German's bombed Pearl Harbor?"

[fishnfla]

8. Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, thats why

Everybody pretty much knows that by now.

Seriously, the commission is investigating 9/11, not Iraq. Maybe there will be a seperate set of hearings on the failures in Iraq someday.

[glarius]

13. I'm talking about the media discussions....not the Commission

The Repubs are all over TV talking about Clarke's testimony but they don't mention what he said about Iraq....Dems should get on TV and tell Clarke's side of the story re Iraq....

[fishnfla]

22. how many active duty US troopers on the ground in Iraq right now?

I think its bad form to start questioning the policies and motives now when they are in harms way.
Before, and during the build-up yes, but its too late now. Bickering about it wont bring them home quicker or strengthen their perimeter.

another day is the time for the blind into bagdad debates and hearings

[glarius]

23. Sorry....I don't agree...if you want to win the White House you have to

show the public that Bush launched an unnecessary war and there's no time to waste....Pretending all is well for the sake of "bad form" is kind of ridiculous and counter productive, IMO....Sorry if I sound harsh...

[fishnfla]

30. No need to apologize, I'm just trying to answer your question

as to why they are not talking about it. Nobody wants to be portrayed as not supporting the troops right now. Many of the officers serving there received their service academy commissions from members of congress, including Dems. You want them to go on some TV show and say what, about Iraq ? What good would it do now?

[glarius]

The thing I'm trying to get at is that if the people KNOW that Bush took

them into an unnecessary war, surely they will vote against him in November....That, it seems to me is the most important goal, you've got to get Bush out of office!...When anyone talks about it they can always preface their remarks with "we support the troops".....It just seems so obvious to me....:shrug:

[revcarol]

26. "Oh, yes, let's stay in Vietnam. Protesting against the war

and talking about whether we should be there just endangers our troops. You traitor, you."

seems to me I've heard that song before.

[fishnfla]

33. We are gonna win this one at the polls, not on the streets

I understand your frustration, with me, and the war. But lets keep our eyes on the prize. After the election, Kerry will have to deal with a big mess in Iraq. He'll be CIC and those will be his troopers. They need our support now and then.

Going on some talking head show aint gonna mean or do diddly shit right now, thats all I'm trying to say.

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

11. Did you read the headlines? "Your Government Failed You"

that's what people are left with

[robbedvoter]

16. Was this an actual headline anywhere? Please tell me it was!

As for Iraq, remember this?
http://forclark.com/story/2004/3/25/65957/9412

[i_c_a_White_Ghost]

18. Yes

it's been all over, lots of papers that i see, internet sites, etc.

[whatelseisnew]

20. Links to back that up? please

I just did a google news search and only St Louis Dispatch had

this as a headline

It appears in the body of many articles but not many headlines

[procopia]

19. C-Span Bush supporters:

"Clinton had 8 years to stop al Qaeda. You can't blame Bush--he only had 9 months." Point is, Clinton was TRYING to stop al Qaeda, and Bush ignored it.

[Beetwasher]

27. While This is An Important Statement, This Was the 9/11 Commission

This commission was set up to try to find answers about 9/11, not Iraq. So while his comments about Iraq are damning and important, it's not really why he was there. It's a great sound bite and I'm glad he said it, but it's not the main point he made. The main points he made were that the Bush admin. failed the country by de-prioritizing terrorism and therefore not preventing 9/11.

[glarius]

28. Don't you think his point about Bush's fixation on Iraq from the get go

should be used by the Democrats to show how incompetent Bush is?...I'm not talking about the Commission discussing this point....I'm only referring to television....All the talking heads on the Repub side won't even mention it .....I wonder why?....Could it be because it shows Bush for the pig-headed incompetent he is?

[Beetwasher]

36. Of Course

Clarkes entire testimony can be cut up into beautiful sound bites for a dozen powerful ads. I'm sure the Dems will use it.

I'm just saying that in the context of what these hearings were about, that damning statement wasn't as relevant as some others. It was icing on the cake, not the cake itself.

[PATRICK]

31. Still barely scratching

the issue of the all-consuming selfish and manipulative agenda into which 911 merely fit. America may have changed but the Bushites were already there with a much different attitude. Exultation greater than a jihadist I would say, prepared for violence and aggression.

Like waiting for the National Enquirer to get into a real news story. We are still stuck in distracting headlines and personality contests with really agonizing progress made toward the specific truth.

[seabeyond]

32. this is the 9/11 commission

there is also an iraq commission. bush has enough issues. we also have the plum investigation. they are all relavent and part of the whole.

i say equally it all ties together. people in u.s. just digesting bush isnt a hero of 9/11, think of stepford wives, robots, sheep hypnotized is a good one, and waking up. becoming aware

we still have to go to bush day of 9/11.

what bush did immediately aftr 9/11:
not there until four days after event.
allowing workers in unsafe enviroment.


next, how bushco focus on creating the story to invade iraq, as we were preparing to go into afghanistan.

step by step by step

people have their loved ones in that war, and to kill and face death, that is pretty profound, pretty huge. like i have empathy for those families of 9/11, i also have it for soliers, soldiers families, and those in grips of fear, feel threat. that is a hard way to walk life. i dont envy them

i am done with battle once again. i dont need to do this in battle, tho i got sucked in the last week or two.

[BabsSong]

34. Hate to bring this up, but my jaw hit the floor when I heard it.

As Clarke appeared on the scene several days ago and made his 60 Minutes appearance, a reporter with the Kerry camp said that Kerry doesn't want to get into the 9/11 issue regarding what Bush did or failed to do and did not want to get into the issue regarding whether their sights were already set on Iraq, etc. WHY??---I fail to see that this would be detremental to Kerry on the "you voted for the war, too" issue because it's more like showing how all the Senators and Congressmen and the public were manipulated by these bastards. This is a chance to kick the only slat Bush has under him, out from under him so that he can cruise by it and ride it back into the Oval Office. This is not why Dems got all mad and swarmed out to vote in the primaries. And, yes, I also have noted that there are no Dem talking heads flooding the airwaves. But every day the public gets the 9/11 Commission goings on and then endless, unchallenged propaganda from the White House. Tell me we are not going into the lame shit we have done for 3 years and crawl into a hole and suck out thumbs. I'm really upset.

[glarius]

35. Glad I'm not the only one who sees it this way

I'm not American, so I feel a little awkward voicing a strong opinion on this...but here in Canada we are directly effected by Bush and his policies....

[seabeyond]

39. hey babs

or maybe kerry will hear enough and listen to the people. he too has stopped listening to the people over a quarter of century in politics. maybe dean can help him a tad on this. actually i see dean has helped him over the primary, but kerry still works a lot thru ego and arrogance too i am seeing. we just have to say screw that. american people are taking the government back, you are either with us or against us, lol lol lol. we the people

k.

what i like in your post, it brought me to..............if kerry would just get beyond the proving right or wrong in vote for war. bushco lied to all, that doesnt make it our fault. it makes it bush's error. i am seeing the picture of biden on larry king? saying i cant believe i allowed these people to hoodwink me however he said it. that is why i think it was a good thing kerry on vacation during this. he isnt making a stand before he sees what develops. he can to an extent sit back and listen, watch. that isnt a bad thing.

so i am going to go with, kerry is going to get this. he has surprised me in the past. like sticking to i am not apologizing for saying crook and liar.

[underpants]

37. ABC & NBC both ending their reports with"This is not going away...

any time soon" on last nights evening news broadcasts.

[Terran]

38. For the American "public," the bigger point is not about Iraq

It will be the idea that Bush could have prevented 9/11 but didn't. I mean, I agree, Iraq has been far more costly than 9/11 and a bigger waste of money, lives, everything. But 9/11 is what people in this country care about.