FOX News Alert Proves Dick Clarke Is A Lying, Opportunistic Scumbag!

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SPIKESMYGOD, Mar 24, 2004.

  1. SPIKESMYGOD
    Offline

    SPIKESMYGOD Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    175
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Ratings:
    +46
    Now, we all know that Dick Clarke has been running around to "60 Minutes"- owned by Viacom, owner of Clarke's publisher, Simon & Schuster- & all over telling everyone how Bush dropped the ball, never taking the Al Qaeda/bin Laden threat seriously. He, while giving the Clinton administration a kid gloves treatment, has been saying that Clinton & his administration, before handing over the White House keys, gave Bush & his administration a detailed, comprehensive plan on how to deal with the AQ/BL threat. Also, he is saying that Bush and his administration did not change the failed- my word, not his- policies of the Clinton administration. Well?????????


    THIS JUST IN:
    _____________

    In an August, 2002 interview with Fox's Jim Angle, Clarke, before he was shown the door/resigned, claims that the Clinton administration NEVER handed over ANY plan by which the Bush team could deal with bin Laden's terror network. Also, he details, point by point, how Bush & CO. completely overhauled the previous administration's strategy and, further, devised & implemented a very aggressive new formula by which to destroy Al Qaeda, not smply to roll it back.

    ________

    Now, since the liberal mass media have totally propped up this sociopathic liar's attacks on Bush, I wonder how they are going to deal with this heart-breaking development. Now that their new golden boy has been proven to be nothing more than an opportunistic, book-whoring, lying scumbag, I believe that Bill "The Rapist" Clinton, Katie "The C***" Kouric, Dan Rather, Ted "The Killer" Kennedy, Howard Dean, CNN, all the networks, John Kerry, & liberals everywhere should, for their own safety, be forced into therapy & put on suicide watch.

    Speaking of suicide.......As I have always contended, if you just let liberals speak enough they will hang themselves with their own words.



    Joss, what a great time it is to be a Republican.
     
  2. Syntax_Divinity
    Offline

    Syntax_Divinity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    151
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Corydon, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +1
    Wow. That's pretty indicting stuff. And from Fox?! Man, I know I can rely on them, Fox News being a bastion of journalistic integrity and partisan balance. I do think that Clarke is kind of an opportunistic bastard though, regardless of my feelings on the demagoguery that is Fox News.
     
  3. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    WHy don't you try dealing with the facts in the story instead of attacking the source? We'll make a Master Debater out of you yet, Young Gun.
     
  4. Syntax_Divinity
    Offline

    Syntax_Divinity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    151
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Corydon, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +1
    Man, I could say the same thing about you RWA. Except, in my case, I'm not attacking the source in place of engaging in debate on the substance of the issue, and you, well, are. That kind of takes the wind out of the sails of that argument doesn't it? Come on, go back to the other thread and respond. If you really think that Fox News is fair and balanced in the face of all of the facts that I laid out for you, say so. Stand up and quit dodging for God's sake. I would love to see you spin that one.
     
  5. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,115085,00.html

    Transcript: Clarke Praises Bush Team in '02

    Wednesday, March 24, 2004

    WASHINGTON — The following transcript documents a background briefing in early August 2002 by President Bush's former counterterrorism coordinator Richard A. Clarke to a handful of reporters, including Fox News' Jim Angle. In the conversation, cleared by the White House on Wednesday for distribution, Clarke describes the handover of intelligence from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration and the latter's decision to revise the U.S. approach to Al Qaeda. Clarke was named special adviser to the president for cyberspace security in October 2001. He resigned from his post in January 2003.



    RICHARD CLARKE: Actually, I've got about seven points, let me just go through them quickly. Um, the first point, I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.

    Second point is that the Clinton administration had a strategy in place, effectively dating from 1998. And there were a number of issues on the table since 1998. And they remained on the table when that administration went out of office — issues like aiding the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, changing our Pakistan policy -- uh, changing our policy toward Uzbekistan. And in January 2001, the incoming Bush administration was briefed on the existing strategy. They were also briefed on these series of issues that had not been decided on in a couple of years.

    And the third point is the Bush administration decided then, you know, mid-January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent.

    And the point is, while this big review was going on, there were still in effect, the lethal findings were still in effect. The second thing the administration decided to do is to initiate a process to look at those issues which had been on the table for a couple of years and get them decided.

    So, point five, that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda.

    The sixth point, the newly-appointed deputies — and you had to remember, the deputies didn't get into office until late March, early April. The deputies then tasked the development of the implementation details, uh, of these new decisions that they were endorsing, and sending out to the principals.

    Over the course of the summer — last point — they developed implementation details, the principals met at the end of the summer, approved them in their first meeting, changed the strategy by authorizing the increase in funding five-fold, changing the policy on Pakistan, changing the policy on Uzbekistan, changing the policy on the Northern Alliance assistance.

    And then changed the strategy from one of rollback with Al Qaeda over the course [of] five years, which it had been, to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline.
     
  6. Syntax_Divinity
    Offline

    Syntax_Divinity Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2004
    Messages:
    151
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Corydon, Indiana
    Ratings:
    +1
    Ok. I have to agree with you there, assuming that the transcript is accurate. I was simply having some fun attacking Fox News for being such a journalistic abomination. You see, I can concede a point in the face of facts. In fact, I hadn't made up my mind until I was aware of the facts of the issue. Isn't that a unique idea? Now, how about you go over to the other thread and amuse me with your attempts to spin out of the conclusion that Fox News is subtly populated with right wingers, and that this makes a mockery of the slogan "fair and balanced".
     
  7. DKSuddeth
    Offline

    DKSuddeth Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    5,175
    Thanks Received:
    61
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    North Texas
    Ratings:
    +62
    nothing but smear tactics to discredit a man who spent 30 years in the service of his country. what a hoot.
     
  8. SPIKESMYGOD
    Offline

    SPIKESMYGOD Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2004
    Messages:
    175
    Thanks Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Ratings:
    +46
    Syntax-

    Sorry, I knew that you liberals would point the finger at FOX, but unless they have digitally copied & manipulated his own voice, this baby is 100% true and will stick.

    As for FOX News being "Fair & Balanced," I am the second one, right behind FOX, to admit that they AREN'T truly balanced. Their motto speaks more to the fact that they are a powerful- and annoying to liberals- balance to CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, & NBC. I am sure they would be the first to admit that they- even though, unlike the LMM trotting out "conservatives" like David Gergen & John McCain, FOX has actual liberals on for the counterpoint discussions- are a mouthpiece for the Republican party, though I stop short of The White House. Also, unlike the LMM/networks, FOX doesn't go out of their way to purport a sense of total objectivity, when really the networks say it but refuse to admit to being propaganda/attack machines of the left.

    I have seen the other networks make huge mistakes, yet never correct themselves. Yet, I have seen, on numerous ocassions, FOX make a mistake & correct it LITERALLY minutes later. Know why? Because to liberals, as long as they have the good intention of bashing Bush & supporting the daily liberal lie, that's good enough; this is where liberals' lack of values, right & wrong, truth or lies, gets them into hot water every single time.
     
  9. _dmp_
    Offline

    _dmp_ Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    Messages:
    854
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +7
    What do YOU know about Jounalism? Are you a journalist? What do you know about integrity? You pen (type?) your quips from a fake moral and other superiority which nausiates me.
     
  10. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Yeah. Whatever. It's his own words from an interview transcript, dk. Don't you think this is fair considering his popping out of the woodwork with his book of lies and that book of lies being cited in an investigation against the current administration during a time of war. This is totally fair game. He wants to say they did nothing. That's not what he said before. It's a typical liberal, excuse me, independant, flip flop, yet again.
     

Share This Page