views on Clarks statements

Just wondering what those on the right felt about Richard Clarks recent book and statements to the press? My feelings, Clark has allways seemed to me be a right wing wacko fearmonger, hes the guy how pushed the idea of cyber terror so heavly and would rutinly blast his boss (at the time Clinton) for not takeing the threat of cyber terrorism serriously enough. He allways seemed to me to be a chiken little wit hthe sky allways falling. In saying that his testamony was probably acurate, he probably warned of a dire threat from al-quida and tried to push the administration to act on it long before 9/11, on the otehr hand his constant pridictions of doom during the Clinton administration may have caused the current administration to ignore him.

Mr. Clarke is selling a book..... A book that seems to me to have come out of an over-inflated feeling of self importance..... and when no-one was listening to him he had a hissy fit and wrote the book.

In his position he had access to all the information that both presidents were getting.... I don't actually recall him saying anything about the 9/11 attacks _prior_ to them. Yet, with his glorious 20/20 hindsight, he sits there scribbling away about how Bush should have known. Bush would have known if Clarke had told him. But Clarke didn't tell him because Clarke didn't know himself. Thus my assessment that it's a hissy fit book that he's using to pad his already over-generous federal pension/healthcare etc for his retirement. And thus, I dismiss the book and everything he now says.

BTW, he was "demoted" to Cyber-terrorism Czar because that was where he claimed his expertise and desire was..... Bush was nice to him and put him where he asked to go..... Nice payback......

What if the current administration completely ignored him? Woopie. I believe anyone would act (especially a republican) on good faith and any reasonable threat. Why the 9.11 panel? Why the focus on pointing fingers like little children and not the future defense of this country. That's was pisses me off. The friggin finger pointing. I haven't read his book but he's been around a while and I have read plenty of articles about him over the years. I guess since I am replying that makes me a Right Winger? :eek:

For that matter why the focus on the security adviser to testify in public like a dog and pony puppet? She testified for hours in front of the comittee already. What do they want outside of some smacked up show? I don't watch much media, but that woman always impresses me with her intelligence. I think I'll have a look at that, wish I had cable for once.

Heck the 9/11 panel could come to the conclusion that the real threat was a serious cut in spending on intelligence resources during the 90's, now that would be inrony to those pushing forth.

its the same sickening **** over and over from these guys. make up allegations then act as if they are facts. first bush was AWOl! a blatant fabrication. then "where are the WMD?" let me ask where are the WMD the left was so anxious to point out he had because we gave them to him....duh..what did i du wit dem! now why didn't our president protect us from the world trade terrorists...like it was a plot that allowed it to happen. their making up **** as fast as they can in the hopes someone will fall for it because there is no real reason why any of them should be elected. after the way they've disgraced themselves and every american i could never vote for a democrat again in a national election. the way they are abusing our very expensive legal system i think they should all be thrown in jail for stealing campaign money from us citizens.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Tedob1
there is no real reason why any of them should be elected. after the way they've disgraced themselves and every american i could never vote for a democrat again in a national election. the way they are abusing our very expensive legal system i think they should all be thrown in jail for stealing campaign money from us citizens.

---

Now let me preface this by stating, "I am not for any Party." In fact I am completely anti-politicion.
This has been going on for over the 40+ years I have been aware of politics. The Democrates slander the Republicans when they are in office, and the Repubicans slander the Democrates when they are in office. It never changes except to get worse in an election year.
At the start of the Clinton administration, the Republicans bought Rush Limbaugh a TV show so he could do nothing but bash Clinton. Then they spent millions on trying to impeach him (doesn't matter if he should have been or not). Now it is a Republican administration, so its the Democrats turn.
Wake up people.....its the same as the Roman colosisum. Keep the masses entertained and they won't revolt.

Note -- Now that should really start some chit. But it is just an old farts take on politics.

To quote Richard Pryor....

Quote:

---

Vote for none of the above!

---

your probably right moxnix and im not oblivious to this it just seems so much more intense to me. this year the issues aren't just lower taxes for the working man or a better education this time were talking about global terrorism. maybe its not as real to you guys but im reminded of it every day by the the empty space in the sky that used to be the twin towers. how many of you are stopped by armed people before you cross a bridge or enter a tunnel and are glad to see them there. it's very real to me. bush promised me aggressive action against this threat and dam it he's given it to me. i don’t believe any of the other candidates would have, given the same situation. kerry himself has been quoted as saying he doesn’t believe us troops should be deployed without authorization from the UN. he’s come out as a globalizationist. he was involved (by his own words) with a group of veterans that were planning to assassinate high ranking officials and only left when he found they planned to carry out those plans. he’s made more than a few poor choices in his life. much like me. but i shouldn't be president either.

allen is that the same richard pryor that set himself on fire while smoking free-base cocaine? (honnerary chairman of the ignited negro colledge fund..."a mind is a terrible thing to baste")

Tedob1, I consider terrorists a very real threat also. And I definately support our troops. But I have disagreed with the war in Iraq from the beginning. Sure Hussain was a despot and should have been taken out..... But it was not our job, or right to take him out. Afaganistan was a different story. They were providing a base for terrorists and actively supporting them.
This is not a bash against Bush, as I think any politicion would put his personal concerns above anything else (including human life). Personally, Bush scares the hell out of me (his father did also, just not as bad). And, I don't think the compition is any better.
Whats the answer? hell, I have no idea, but America had better get off the collective asses and figure out something. I spent eight years in the sevice and personally supported our government in body and spirit, but now....I am really ashamed of our country. I have watched the personal rights of individuals be stripped from them, and no one really complains or even says anything. I have seen our government officials lie, steal, cheat, and even murder to gain their own ends. Hell, they have blantently changed history to protect or promote a policy that is benificial to them only.
I only have a limited time left to live (compared to most of you), and in alot of ways I am glad of that. I don't want to see what this country will be like in 25-30 years. If they were to develope a magical immortality drug tomorrow, i don't think I would take it. If I did, I would have to become a revolutionary or something. And I have had too much war, death, and distruction in my life already -- thank you.
Our form of goverment (not our particular government, mind you) is the best I have seen or studied. But when you add the human element (greed, power, ambition, and deviency), it quickly becomes corrupted. I would almost wish for devine intervention, except in my personal beliefs, God is the cause of the biggest problems anyway.
(Sorry, had to introduce the religous angle to start more chit.)

Quote:

---

allen is that the same richard pryor that set himself on fire while smoking free-base cocaine? (honnerary chairman of the ignited negro colledge fund..."a mind is a terrible thing to baste")

---

HEH HEH HEH, I like that.

Back to the original question of what do I think being a right wing republican. Well people are defined by their words and their actions. It is easily proven that Mr. Clarke has issued conflicting statements in his book when compared to breifing he gave while employed by the Bush administration. I will grant that Mr. Clarke is very good at creating excuses for his earlier ....hmmmm......lies. (Let's call them what they really are.) In my opinion he has little to no credibility.

Look into his past a bit...vmyths is a good place t ostart...or some the y2k mess ( I was a front liner in the y2k fixes thats where I first got to know about Mr. Clark.). Every thing to this guy is domsday so Idon't doubt that he was screaming about a poss al-quida attack...this guy wsa a war monger and fear monger for years, i remember starting to dislike him in the late 90's when he was calling for an invasion of afganistan (ok so in hind sight perhaps a good idea), hes also the guy behind the tomohak strikes that took out the asprin factory in the sudan....perhaps if he cried wolf a littel less people in the current administration would have listened to him.

On the other hand the religious right up to 9/11 had been courting the taliban as a like minded group. (well at least the extream religious right like ashcrofts group that wanted to set up a theocracy in the US.) So perhaps their lobbying of bush scilenced his voice.

On thing that could come out of this as a criticism: Bush was perhaps ignorant to keep all the Clinton holdovers at the helm of anti-terrorism. He should have cleaned house and appointed his own right away, instead of waiting. Of course that would have been a very difficult task.

Bush was smart to go after a target that he could use as leverage to additional terrorist associated countries - as a message. If the climate would have been right for Korea or Libya or a host of others, perhaps he would have got them as well. If it WAS Bush's personal vendetta than congress Ok’d it. In addition if Sadam had pulled in his egomania and played the political game, there would have been NO justification to proceed without extreme fallout back here. And then one last thing, the alternative to Bush is Kerry. I see a very real resemblance to Clark in that man.

Clark wasn't a Clinton holdover he was a Regan holdover, up untill recently he was the darling of the neocons Clinton kept him because he did his job so well.... He is also IMHO a warmongerer and a fearmonger...fits right in with the neocons...he left bush because his pet causes (nonstate terrorism and cyberterrorism) where not a priority. Considering that this is a IT security board Im amazed thjat more of you don't know the details of his history.

I was refering also to the entire apparatus in place, they were all holdovers, who ever hired them they were in office during Clintons administration as well, they were hold overs from an 8 year term of Clinton and some, like Clark go as far back as Reagan. Another reason I don't understand the impact of the 9/11 board.

I may not be a Clark expert but I remember his dealings in the past. I remember him refusing to testify, for example, in cases were Clinton was the subject of heated debate, while at the same time making Bush out to be a villian for not testifying on the exact same principle.