What is the deal with Clark saying was called

[TioDiego]

by the Bush admin to say that Saddam was behind 9/11? Any talking points on that?

[Cocoa]

1. he clarified it

he said he never got a call from the White House, he got a call from a think tank.

[lazarus]

2. He never said it

Yet another media lie.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh092303.shtml

[sfecap]

3. Yes he did. Clarks own words:

Meet the Press, June 15th, 2003:

(snip)

MR. RUSSERT: Was there an intelligence failure? Was the intelligence hyped, as Senator Joe Biden said? Was the president misled, or did he mislead the American people?

GEN. CLARK: Well, several things. First of all, all of us in the community who read intelligence believe that Saddam wanted these capabilities and he had some. We struck very hard in December of ’98, did everything we knew, all of his facilities. I think it was an effective set of strikes. Tony Zinni commanded that, called Operation Desert Fox, and I think that set them back a long ways. But we never believed that that was the end of the problem. I think there was a certain amount of hype in the intelligence, and I think the information that’s come out thus far does indicate that there was a sort of selective reading of the intelligence in the sense of sort of building a case.

MR. RUSSERT: Hyped by whom?

GEN. CLARK: Well, I...

MR. RUSSERT: The CIA, or the president or vice president? Secretary of Defense, who?

GEN. 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.

MR. RUSSERT: By who? Who did that?

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.” 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.

(snip)

http://stacks.msnbc.com/news/927000.asp

[lazarus]

4. from the link I posted

Which you might want to read, it covers this in much more detail.

"Can you read? If so, you will note that Clark didn’t say that the phone call came from the White House. And when people began to think that he had, he clarified what he had meant. That’s the way that decent people conduct a public discussion. But as we learned in the last election, your “press corps” is full of lying liars and fools. For example, note what Ben Fritz pointed out in Spinsanity: Note the way Will rearranged the order of Clark’s Meet the Press remarks to make it seem that he’d tied that call to the White House. In a real professional sector, people get fired for frauds of that type. But at the Washington Post, it’s OK. By the way, Fred Hiatt “edits” Will at the Post, Gail Collins “edits” the worn-out old Safire. Read much, Fred and Gail? And do you really think that American citizens are prepared to put up with this clowning again? Your papers made a joke of the last White House race. Do you really think that you’ll be allowed to produce this lying lying once again? "

I'm not a proponent of any candidate yet, but the media is doing to Dean and Clark exactly what they did to Gore, and I don't like it.

[Cocoa]

8. I don't agree with the Howler on this one

I think it's fair to interpret what Clark said the way EVERYONE interpreted it, including everyone here. I don't remember anyone at the time saying "that's not what he said."

When I read Clark's clarification, I was very surprised. I'd never had any doubt that he had actually said what he said.

Note that the Howler also holds that Bush didn't really mislead us in the State of the Union.

[LizW]

17. The press didn't do anything to Clark's words

I heard him say these words:

GEN. CLARK: "...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.

MR. RUSSERT: By who? Who did that?

GEN. CLARK: Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House."

And then he talks about the phone call. Now I know later it was claimed that the call didn't come from the White House. But the fact is, HE SAID that the White House was trying to connect 9/11 to Saddam Hussein right after it happened, and then in the next breath he told about the phone call.

I wish someone would ask him who the phone call did come from, if not from the White House.

[lazarus]

30. He already said who it came from

Read the link I provided.

He said the effort came from the White House, but the call came from elsewhere.

[renie408]

39. I think this is funny

We are all raising hell because Bushco has managed to put Iraq and 9/11 in the same sentences without actually declaring that there was a real link enough times that people believe it. Any of us will tell you that the government was intentionally misleading the public.

Now Clark does the same damn thing and people jump to his defense and say that he didn't ACTUALLY say that the White House called him. HE SAID THAT THE EFFORT WAS COMING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, THEN TWO SENTENCES LATER SAID HE GOT A CALL. Isn't that implying pretty strongly that the White House was behind efforts to get him to spin 9/11 as state sponsored terrorism?

[lazarus]

42. yes it is

But it is not saying that the White House directly called him. And that's the accusation.

[returnable]

5. *sigh* Reading comprehension

Can't believe DUers are actually perpetuating a Rush Limbaugh spin.

Read the damn quote:

"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..."

Once he says "It came from all over," the White House is out of the equation, get it? He got a call from a think tank.

Geezus.

Show me ANYWHERE where Clark says "The White House pressured me to make a connection" or some variation of that where there is ACTUAL SUBJECT/VERB AGREEMENT.

Unbelievable. If you want to question Clark's merits as a candidate, fine. But quit spreading misinformation. This is old news.

The right wing hasn't even brought this up in awhile.

[sfecap]

9. What part of "Well, it came from the White House"...

don't you understand?

Is this a made up transcript?

I realize Clark disavowed his staement afterward, but "it came from the White House", is pretty clear to me.

Frankly, I think he DID get a call from the WH. I wish he hadn't backtracked...

[returnable]

13. "It came from the White House..."

As we all know, the White House WAS pressing for a Saddam link. That's what Clark was saying.

But, again, he never said they called him directly to make the case. That's just false.

[lazarus]

15. It came from the White House

Followed by, "It came from all over". Then he mentioned a think tank. But none of those are options for the phone call, are they? Because this is too juicy a lie to have caught him in, if only it were a lie.

[usregimechange]

24. because he said from all over does not delete

the it came from the White House statement!

[returnable]

29. Ugh

The "IT" in "it came from the White House" was the "pressure" to make a Saddam connection!!!

Did you even read the whole transcript? Put "it" in context!! The phone call isn't even mentioned until AFTER that.

This is ridiculous.

[usregimechange]

33. evidence

then what is his basis for claiming that it also came from the White House???

[renie408]

40. Hey

How are you??

So that means that the government is off the hook for 70% of Americans thinking that Saddam and Iraq had something to do with 9/11, eh? Cause they never directly linked those subjects and verbs. Boy, I bet that is a relief for them.

[Timefortruth]

12. I have avoided these anti-Clark threads like the plague.

And I still don’t have an opinion on Clark.

So this is the first time I actually read what he said, and it doesn’t look to me like he said the WH called him. He doesn’t even come close to saying that. He says folks around the WH were drumming up support for a 9/11- Iraqi connection as early as 9/11.

That’s absolutely true. What is the problem?

[Caution]

16. oh for bob's sake

here is the quote. read it in context:

GEN. 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.

MR. RUSSERT: By who? Who did that?

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.” 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.
<snip>

now, here is the way this actually reads clark says that right after 9/11 there was an immediate effort to tie 9/11 to Iraq and that this effort came from the white house, from people around the white house and from all over. THEN...SEPARATE statement: I got a call on 9/11.

Nowhere does he say the call came from the white house. he says the effort to tie 9/11 to Iraq came from the white house. If we as Democrats have any hopes of winning this election it will be by thwarting the attempts of people to spin the words of our candidates.

[returnable]

20. Thank you

"If we as Democrats have any hopes of winning this election it will be by thwarting the attempts of people to spin the words of our candidates."

Probably the smartest thing I've read on here.

Questioning our candidates is fine. But continuing right wing distortions isn't going to help anyone.

[Timefortruth]

27. Amen.

This is a contrived issue if there ever was one. It reminds me of the attack against Gore that Gore supposedly said he invented the internet. Just last week a CNN “reporter” made the claim again, the fact that Gore didn’t say that just doesn’t matter.

[TioDiego]

37. Thanks and tip of my hat

[usregimechange]

6. Well Clark????

Did it come from the White House or a Canadian think tank?

[usregimechange]

10. He said ir came from the white house as well

I suspect it did as well but what evidence does he have?

[Cocoa]

11. he clarified it

he said unequivocally that no one in the White House called him.

[usregimechange]

14. after saying

it came from the white house.

[usregimechange]

18. shouldn't make claims

without evidence.

[Cocoa]

32. he should have been more careful with his words

imo, it was his fault people drew that conclusion.

But he should get credit for clarifying his statement, even if it was belated.

[lazarus]

19. once more

"it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over."

Are you saying now he got a phone call from God? Since God is all over, he must be the one who called Clark.

[returnable]

21. God only calls Bush...

...or hadn't you heard? :)

[usregimechange]

22. ???

He said it came from the White House! What evidence did he present of this? Zero!

[returnable]

26. It's obvious...

...you have a reading comprehension problem.

Clark never claimed the call came from the White House. There is not a transcript ANYWHERE that indicates he did.

This is a non-issue that even the right wing has abandoned, yet for some reason it is just winding its way to you now. Sorry you missed the party, but the lights are on now. It's time to put this issue to bed.

[usregimechange]

28. Is my patriotism at stake?

He said "it came from the White House". Evidence?

[returnable]

34. Patriotism? No. Reading ability? Yes.

I'm done with this. It's obvious you'd rather believe a discredited spin job than facts. Ah, well. Not my problem.

I suppose you believe Al Gore said he invented the internet, too?

[tabasco]

31. Just saying so over and over doesn't make it so.

Read the quote. Your statement that Clark said the call came from the White House is false. What does that make you?

[usregimechange]

35. then

what came from the white House? Did they send it morse code?

[lazarus]

36. sigh

Once more, with feeling:

"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.

MR. RUSSERT: By who? Who did that?

GEN. CLARK: Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around the White House. It came from all over."

[TioDiego]

38. Thanks again Lazurus, I will put a Kabosh on a Freep ahora mismo

[Timefortruth]

41. Come on, he said it came from the White House.

there isn’t a person in their right mind who doesn’t know that. I could say it came from the White House and in no way be speaking anything but the whole truth. It did come from the White House. To say that does not imply that someone from White House called me and told me so.

Is this your real problem with Clark?

[lazarus]

43. What?

I don't have a problem with Clark. Is this meant to be a reply to someone else?

[salin]

25. What is the big deal?

Things were chaotic on 911. BUsh was flying all over the country. Cheney was getting ready to go into hiding (shunned) because HE was claiming that all was in control because HE was in DC (Rove didn't like that image at all).

Add to it that there are so many GOP/RNC operatives very close to the WH that at times it is hard to distinguish who is IN and who is AROUND. Perle - is he in or around? Racicot - is he in or around?

I read the initial statement as close to the WH - so assuming it was on behalf of the WH that Clark read the call was made. But in clarifying - he paints a slightly broader picture - which is probably technically correct.

I don't view it as intentional disinformation. What is the point of these questions? Is this a way of questioning credibility? Its a stretch.

[Timefortruth]

23. Read what he said.

He said it came from all over.

Clark doesn't have to have direct contact from the WH to reach that conclusion all he would need to have is a working television set. Since he does not say that the contact was directly from the WH and he does not imply that, why is this even an issue?

We know to a certainty that that is the position that the WH was promoting and it worked because 70% of the population was bamboozled.

[salin]

7. I heard the story quite a while ago

He said he had been approached on 911 to make the case. He said show me the evidence (as in - I will if you give me the evidence), and they never got back to him (there was no evidence), so he didn't go forward.

I think it came out around the time of the Wilson controversy - so while it was one more piece of the picture of the WH trying to manipulate public sentiments (it came out as damning the WH - and his saying so publically was a good thing). But it got overlooked at the time due to the brief, intense focus on the Wilson story. Which, by the way, fell out of the limelight after the very controversial leaking by the WH of intel networks tied to tracking WMDs (National Security breach on the top threat to the country). Another example, imo, of the media carrying water for this White House.

Clark showed his integrity. Would serve his country (give info) if it was documented. Wouldn't carry the water without proof (ala just because they asked). Came forward about it painting the methods of the WH in its most manipulative form.