The Disinformation of Richard Clarke

[cosmicdot]

Scott Loughrey: "it is hard not to believe that Clarke's defection is a hoax."

````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

The Disinformation of Richard Clarke
by Scott Loughrey

www.globalresearch.ca 26 March 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/LOU403A.html


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

The apparent defection of former counter-terrorism official Richard Clarke is a propaganda coup for the Bush Regime. It is reminiscent of the old fable of the smart man who manages to elude a King’s scrutiny by smuggling wheel barrels past him in full view.

Let’s begin with a selection of facts:

In his book Painful Questions http://globalresearch.ca/globaloutlook/SHOPCART.html Eric Hufschmid points out that the World Trade Center rubble was quickly shipped out of New York City after 9-11 before proper examination by qualified investigators took place (Painful Questions, 2002, Eric Hufschmid).

Richard Clarke was designated “crisis manager” by Condoleezza Rice within minutes after the “second jetliner hit the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001” (Washington Post, 03/23/04, Eggen and Pincus). Although the mainstream media won’t inquire to know all that he was responsible for, presumably the decision to quickly sell the WTC rubble for scrap was on his to-do list.

Clarke writes a book (“Against All Enemies”) that states the top officials in the Bush Regime were immediately trying to link 9-11 to Iraq; while he was telling them it was “Al Qaeda” and made-to-order villain Osama bin Laden.

The White House http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/mar2004/clke-m23.shtml controlled the book’s publication date, citing “national security” (Patrick Martin, 23 March 2004, WSWS.org).

The White House chose a date for Clarke’s book to be published shortly before its top officials would be testifying before the 911 Commission.

So, why should anyone think that Clarke isn’t representing the acceptable opposition to the Bush Regime as its top officials receive the old frat-boy-network treatment from the already-compromised 911 Commission http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO212A.html ? Clarke is telling the 911 Families and the 911 Commission that the Bush Regime failed to act on the ‘al Qaeda’ threat. That’s food for the Left Gatekeepers http://www.media-criticism.com/Amy_Goodman_03_2004.html and other sources of disinformation.

In other words, it is hard not to believe that Clarke’s defection is a hoax http://www.911hoax.com/ . The target audiences are the media sources and personalities who are still trying to promote the Bush Regime’s Official Story of what happened on 9/11/01. (This is the fable of 19 suicidal hijackers flying planes into tall buildings at the behest of dialysis patient Osama bin Laden from his cave in Afghanistan.) Since the 911 Truth Movement is now very publicly http://www.media-criticism.com/March_20_2004_Protest.html challenging the Official Story, the White House surely enlisted Richard Clarke’s “defection” in order to help the media define the level of permissible dissent from the 911 Commission.

Sadly, the Left Gatekeepers continue http://www.democracynow.org/ to represent Richard Clarke’s actually very narrow divergence from the Bush Regime’s propaganda as significant. Meanwhile, every chance they get they repeat the ludicrous elements of the 9-11 Official Story as if no one has yet heard the World Trade Center 7 mystery http://globalresearch.ca/articles/LOU308A.html , among thousands of others. The 911 Truth Movement can only stand on the sidelines while what used to constitute the Left in the US prefers their audience be fooled by the Bush Regime’s very obvious wheelbarrow.



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

Email this article

To express your opinion on this article, join the discussion at Global Research's News and Discussion Forum , at http://globalresearch.ca.myforums.net/index.php

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca grants permission to cross-post original Global Research (Canada) articles in their entirety, or any portions thereof, on community internet sites, as long as the text & title of the article are not modified. The source must be acknowledged as follows: Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca . For cross-postings, kindly use the active URL hyperlink address of the original CRG article. The author's copyright note must be displayed. (For articles from other news sources, check with the original copyright holder, where applicable.). For publication of Global Research (Canada) articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [e-mail] .

© Copyright S LOUGHREY 2004. For fair use only/ pour usage équitable seulement.

[KoKo]

1. The odd flag was that the book was vetted by the WH and just given

clearance for release. All the hoopla over this could very well be a huge distraction because of the timing and the fact that the WH knew the book was coming out and so had ample time to put in place a huge disinformation operation. And, in fact we here on the "left" are being taken in by this to distract us from many larger questions about 9/11. They are masters of deception and manipulation. We always underestimate them. :-(

I hope this article is wild speculation, but fear it could be all too true. :shrug:

[mstrsplinter326]

2. I read the conspiracy theory

And while I think its likely that Bush did engineer 9-11, and may have blown up the twin towers, there is no proof presented. Of the claims the Scott Loughrey article (www.media-criticism.com) makes, only a few of them are statements of fact, most are just statements of incompletion. Basically his whole argument is that since their has been no investigation, it must be that the whole event was staged and that bombs really brought down the Towers. Furthermore, he states that there is no proof that hijackers were even on those two planes. Assume that's true, which I can't say one way or another, then there is no proof that there weren't hijackers.

I want so badly to believe him, but let's say that Bush engineered the hijackers, which is not necessary to have engineered the attacks. (He could have simply used preexisting terrorists and turned his back so they could do what was necessary to get on those planes) But if you do buy the claim that the hijackers don't exist, then why would they make up 15 Saudis. That would an obvious mistake by Bush. Pick Iraqis, and you have a tailor made Iraq war.

I'm not saying Bush's hands are clean, because they aren't. But extreme conspiracy theories on;y repel moderates because they are bogus so often. If you believe what you wrote - prove it. Then none of this will be a problem. But if you cannot prove it - then focus your energy else where; spouting unconformable anti-Bush rhetoric will do you little good, and may offend swing voters in the 2004 election.

[Jim Sagle]

3. Horseshit.

[OneBlueSky]

4. I doubt very much that Clarke had anything at all to do with . . .

the sale of the WTC metal scrap . . . that decision would have fallen to the mayor, in consultation with the buildings' owners . . . Clarke was undoubtedly too busy with other things to worry about a yard sale . . .

[MSgt213]

5. You know, anything is possible, but if you believe this theory then you

would also have to believe that the Bush Administration did this without clue to any of the principle people on point on this issue.

National Contridictory Advisor Condi Rice
Vice I don't have a clue what the talking points are President Cheney
Secretary of Calm Lying State Colin Powell
Secretary of Incoherant Statements Defense Donald Rumsfield

Nobody on the same message. If happen like that then they are some good actors.

[KoKo]

6. Plus, Clarke's testimony has opened up a huge can of worms that

it's going to be difficult or impossible to put the lid back on. So, whether he's part of some other disinformation from the Bushies or not, it would be a dangerous gamble for them. They like "known outcomes" not the "known ones."

I don't go along with remote controlled airplanes or bombs in the WTC either, but still leave open the possibilty that anyone whistleblowing from this administration should always be considered suspect until we know that they are truly the "truthtellers" they seem. I hope Clarke is a "truthteller." But, after all our hopes have been dashed time and time again, I can't get too excited that he can bring these people down.

[cosmicdot]

7. I think the idea is to keep the 'many unanswered questions' in mind

... using caution analyzing Richard Clarke ... we certainly know what this cabal is capable of past and present and future ... personally, I don't know if Richard Clarke is a good guy or not ... he rose out of the intelligence bureaucracy under Reagan's crew, who seem to be still around ...



as someone pointed out in another forum as food-for-thought:

"There are so many unanswered questions regarding the events of 9/11 that it is currently impossible to determine exact culpability. But it is the manner in which those questions are being left unanswered, even refused answers, and given obvious phony answers from on high that leads to no other conclusion than elements within the US government were not only aware of the events to unfold but were also involved in their planning and execution."

bio snip

Prior to his White House years, Clarke served for 19 years in the Pentagon, the Intelligence Community, and State Department. During the Reagan Administration, he was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence. During the Bush (41) Administration, he was Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs and coordinated diplomatic efforts to support the 1990-1991 Gulf War and the subsequent security arrangements.

http://www.goodharbor.net/

[RedSock]

9. where did that snip come from?

cosmicdot:

i like that snip. where did it come from?

you can send it to my DU email box if you don't want to post.

[RC]

8. This whole thread reads as

paranoia and/or misinformation.

The idiots in the WH didn't have a plan for Iraq after they got control of the oil fields and they still don't have a clue as what to do other than finish draining the Treasury through Hilliburton.
And yet some here are saying Clarke is a plant doing disinformation for the White House?

Sure and most second graders can grasp the nuisance of Quantum mechanics.

[goz]

10. Big Brother vs Richard Clarke

Is it just me or the whole thing is a global and diabolical campaign of intoxication (disinformation)? ALL these guys and gals, INCLUDING Richard Clarke, are saying the same thing! That is that 9-11 was due to an Intelligence failure... Anyone in the World who is Internet savvy and savvy period (not "braindead"), knows that it was "an inside job", done with a remarquable military precision! That the collapse of the Towers defies the laws of gravity! That the concrete (and human beings) turned into fine powder (1.6 micron) IS the proof that explosives were used! That there is no such a thing as a global terrorist network called "Al-Kaida"! That, as reported in the international Press, in October 2001, there was a secret meeting between Osama Bin Laden and the local representative of the CIA in July of that year, 10 months AFTER 9-11!* That the OFFICIAL VERSION of an airplane flying into the Pentagone was a blatant lie! And so on...

Who can believe (with brains, that is) that Richard Clarke doesn't know all this?

Is it just me or Donald Rumsfeld DID really mention, during this "televised Show", an explosion of "UNKNOWN ORIGIN" (at the Pentagon) on 9-11 and DID add that he heard something ROARING by his window, before the explosion?

What is the name of that local representative of the CIA in Dubai?

What is the name of his superiors, at that time?

What is the name of those "witnesses" (mostly men) seen on television, that "saw" an airplane flying into the Pentagone?

What is the name of the person(s) who transfered Special agent John O'Neil** from the FBI to his last post as of Head of the Security at the Towers, thus sending him to his death?

All the above mentionned people are SOME of the murderous evil ones RESPONSIBLE for the crimes against Humanity perpetrated on 9-11!


(*) It was reported by hospital's staff that the local representative of the CIA, who was very well known in Dubai, was seen using the hospital's main elevator to go to Osama Bin Laden's room. A few days later, the CIA man boasted in front of friends that he had visited the Saudi millionaire. According to reliable sources, this CIA agent was recalled back to the US by his superiors on July 15, shortly after Bin Laden's return to Quetta.

(**) The Man who knew too much.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew /

Excuse my French...

[Abe Linkman]

11. All that and NOW Richard Clarke is Making a Million for his "story"!

It's really becoming a sick farce, isn't it?

Why do they even bother having disinfo agents anymore? They're all over the Net, but no one's buying their spin. And, the majority of the public is not about to doubt Commander Bunnypants.

[NecessaryOnslaught]

13. Welcome aboard goz!

[goz]

14. Thanks!

[Bolo Boffin]

12. The Bush Administration is reeling from the blows...

...that Richard Clarke has dealt it, and some people come to DU to post that he's actually helping BushCo by doing so.

Time for an oldie but goodie:

[goz]

15. Mighty blows...

Al-Kaida! Al-Kaida! Al-Kaida! Al-Kaida! Al-Kaida! Al-Kaida!

Mighty blows...

[gandalf]

16. "propaganda coup": Yes. But: "For the Bush Regime" ?

I suggest it is for the official 9/11 version of events, but not necessarily for the Bush regime.

As was pointed out in this post, the testimony of Clark poses more dangers for the credibility of the Bush regime. So I am not sure if it makes sense to assume that they engineered the Clarke revelations.

But: If one is to suggest MIHOP, it is very probable that the operation was much too big a project for the Bush regime which needed longterm preparation. So one has to assume that other people who hold long-term power are responsible for such a coup. Provided that the Clark-story is propaganda, it was probably not engineered by the Bush regime IMHO.

[goz]

17. You're absolutely right!

It is engineered by the "king-makers" that are and HAVE BEEN pulling the strings for longer then when anyone on this Forum was born. Those "beasts" don't care if the next President is going to be a Rep or a Dem. As long as he's willing to ride along and perpetuate THEIR POWER...

[DulceDecorum]

19. Are you alluding

to the fact that George Soros and Poppy are both members of Carlyle?
http://www.icdsmireland.org/resources/background/2003/soros.htm
Or are you talking about Skull and Bones - the pirate insignia?

[gandalf]

20. Usual suspects for the elite

are probably the Rockefeller clan members and some other old-money-people, the inner circles of the Trilateral commission, the CFR... I suppose mostly people who appear not very much in the public.

At least this is my guess after reading books like
Holly Sklar (1980), Trilateralism
Stephen Gill (1991), American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission (a scholarly book)
Thomas R. Dye (2001), Who is running America.

[goz]

24. I'm alluding to all of them!

... including the second mindset type of carrier soldiers (http://www.hermes-press.com/brainwash1.htm). Among these, the most frightening one on the list, in my opinion, is the last one. That guy really gives me the creeps!

Today's Puppet-Masters are named Soros, Buffet, Rothschild (what a surprise...), Getty, Rockefeller, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, Black, Murdoch & all... and their puppets are named Brzezinski, Kissinger, Wolfowitz, Tenet, Pearle, Rumsfeld, Cheyny the "Dick", Dubyia*, Rice, Powell, Sharon, Peres, Net n' Yahoo, & all...

(*) Where does that nickname come from? What does it mean?

In another post, I wrote "It (the CNN Show) is engineered by the "king-makers" that are and HAVE BEEN pulling the strings for longer then anyone on this Forum as lived. Well, that was a bit conservative ("objectively" speaking as "some" would say...). In fact, we know for a fact that the Rothschild(s) were behind Napoleon's defeat, at Waterloo. As a matter of fact, the Prussian IV Corps (under the command of Friederich von Bulow), that defeated him, on the 2th day of the battle (the British had been crushed, flattened, the previous day, BUT took the Glory...), was financed by THEM...

Although Napoleon was a dictator, he definitively was not "their man", dethroning as he was, the oligarchs of Europe...

We also know for a fact that Pearl Harbor was planned. Strangely enough, NONE of the aircraft-carriers were on the scene... Yamamoto (who, incidentally, was against the whole idea of attacking Pearl Harbor) smelling a rat, didn't give the order to send the 3th wave of attack (as it was planned).

I'd bet anything that the Civil War was planned as well! In fact, as the title of a book says: "Wars are not born, they are made." Let's not forget that England was diplomatically supporting the South France stayed neutral), WHICH fired the first round! Was this at the instigation of Perfidious Albion? As well, among other crimes against Humanity, was She behind the Famine (biological war) that killed millions in Ireland??? And so on...

This manipulation probably goes as far back as the Freemasonry...

NB: I will answer ALL questions and replies to my posts. It's just a question of time.

[goz]

25. Oh, I forgot!

Who's that "Poppy"? And about the Puppet-Masters, I forgot Elisabeth II & puppet-son Charles "the Ears" (with their unwilling and un-cooperative puppet-incubator, the late Diana Spencer)...

[goz]

18. Right on, Gandalf! (Quick re-phrasing)

It is engineered by the "king-makers" that are and HAVE BEEN pulling the strings for longer then anyone on this Forum have lived.

[gandalf]

21. "HAVE BEEN pulling the strings for longer ..."

It is interesting, for instance, that the European Union project seems to have followed more or less a master plan created by the CFR around 1941 in their "War and Peace Studies". I think this is detailed in Sklar (1981), Trilateralism.

[goz]

26. Makes a lot of sense.

... since one of the goals of the NWO is the end of all sovereign states. Could the main promoter of the EU, Jean Monnet, have been a "creature" of the CFR? I've always said that the whole thing was a good example of what not to do... BUT, could it not turn against its Creator and bite its hand and everything else that comes with it?

[Ameridansk]

22. Looove you guys!!!

I'm so glad to see that not everyone on this website is clueless and absurdly naive!

A guy like Clarke, a guy I believe is one of the men directly involved in the planning and execution of 9/11 (as well as, gasp!, John O'Neill) through the "Counter Intelligence Security Group", a lifetime , appointed by Reagan, kept in place by both Bushes, kept in place by Establishment-friendly Bill Clinton, comes out with "revelations" (vetted by the White House), and people take it all at face value. Anyone believing that is two steps behind the game.

This is the very definition of limited hangout. People hoping Bush will be defeated in the "election" this year, believe it for the political expediency. With a guy like this turning on Bush, on such a crucial issue to the "Bush re-election" campaign, Bush will certainly lose! So we should all hail Richard Clarke, right?

One of many things people have obviously failed to understand is that the Georgie Boy doesn't want to be President anymore! Hell, he never really did in the first place. He wants to get back to drinking and partying and making an ass of himself IN PRIVATE.

And nothing could be better than having a "Democrat" like Bonesman John Kerry, do the work for the conservative establishment. If Bush "loses" because he was "weak on terror", what is that as a "mandate" for John Kerry? He must be "TOUGHER" on terror! He must be more intrusive into people's lives. He must start MORE wars. He must continue to increase military spending! Hell, Kerry has already said he would be a stronger "War President".

But the main reason for these revalations by Clarke personally, is that is takes him off the hook. Once people realize that there were no terrorists on the planes, and the members of the FBI, CIA, NSA, Pentagon, etc. have been covering up this fact, people will start to look directly at someone like Clarke.
--clip--
In Washington, O'Neill became part of a close-knit group of counter-terrorism experts which formed around Richard Clarke. In the web of federal agencies concerned with terrorism, Clarke was the spider. Everything that touched the web eventually came to his attention. The members of this inner circle, which was known as the Counter-terrorism Security Group (C.S.G.), were drawn mainly from the C.I.A., the National Security Council, and the upper tiers of the Defense Department, the Justice Department, and the State Department. They met every week in the White House Situation Room.
--clip--
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?020114fa_FACT1

But there were no "terrorists", or anyone else for that matter, on those planes. How many of you have seen this picture of Mohamed Atta in Portland, Maine on the morning of September 11th?



Never mind the fact that it can be proven that the "ringleader" was in another city on the morning of the attack and risked blowing the whole operation of he was unable to make, and subsequently highjack, flight 11 out of Boston.

There are supposedly 17 other highjakers who all had to go through security that morning. Where are they? Logan, Newark, and Dulles don't have cameras? Riiiiiight. Since they were all morning flights, there is not a very large window for them to have gone through security so reviewing the tapes shouldn't be that difficult. Hell, the same company, Argenbright, was doing security at all the airports. And Westfield America (the same company that bought the 99-year lease on the WTC) operates retail plazas in all three airports as well. Perhaps they had camers too! But there is absolutely no physical proof that any of those 19 highjackers were at the airports that day.

Clarke knows this and everything else. And while he has nothing to worry about with Republican dittoheads, those on the left, who understand what the true meaning of is, could be very dangerous to him. So whose hearts does he try to win? The same is true of John O'Neill of course.

If any lover of John O'Neill, (who was never seen dead by anyone in his family, or by friends not connected to the FBI) can explain to me why he took, without authorization, the New York City Field Office Report to Tampa Florida in the Summer of 2000, I'd be very appreciative.

--snip--
After the criminal inquiry, the bureau's internal affairs unit began its own investigation to determine whether Mr. O'Neill had violated F.B.I. rules against mishandling classified information.

Officials identified one document in the briefcase as a draft of what is known in the bureau as the Annual Field Office Report for national security operations in New York. The closely guarded report contained a description of every counterespionage and counterterrorism program in New York and detailed the budget and manpower for each operation. The document, submitted to bureau headquarters, is used as a central planning tool each year.

F.B.I. agents are prohibited from removing classified documents from their offices without authorization. Violations are punishable by censure, suspension or even dismissal, depending on the seriousness.
--snip--
http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cnd24/ARGUS/new_york_times_article.htm

Thanks goz, DD and Gandalf, for not falling for it! You helped me keep my lunch down!

[Ameridansk]

23. My god this website is retarded!

Since when, has it been impossible to use the word f-a-s-c-i-s-m on a "liberal" website? Do people think it doesn't exist, when the current administration is the b\very definition of it? "The combitnation of government and corporate power" is how it was described by Mussolini. Has there ever been a better example of that than the current misadministration? For all y'all that think I'm crazy, well don't worry about hearing from me again. After 3+ years of posting here (less and less frequently), I now know what a POS place this really is. This is what passes for "left-wing" in America? Glad I am an expatriate.