To: Skywatcher who wrote (418848 ) 6/26/2003 11:54:18 AM From: tejek Read Replies (1) | Respond to <font color=green>Read carefully the paragraph where they call Gen. Clark up and ask him to validate Saddam is connected with 9/11. <font color=black>According to what Gen. Wesley Clark told "Meet the Press" on June 15, President Junior may eventually have to resort to the ultimate GOP excuse to explain away Iraq's missing Weapons of Mass Destruction. No need to blame looters as Bush did recently, a preposterous alibi which raised more alarming questions than it pretended to answer. (Only days before, he'd claimed they HAD been found.) <font color=red>Instead, he can blame Bill Clinton, the man whose own extravagant folly helped make it possible for this epic liar to be appointed president. <font color=black> "This is the real intelligence battle and the stakes could not be higher," Clark wrote "for failure to find the weapons could prove to be a Back then, Republicans charged that Clinton bombed suspected Iraqi WMD sites to distract the public from his Oval Office sex antics, as if THAT were possible. But it's beginning to look as if economic sanctions, UNSCOM inspectors and cruise missiles may have done the job. "I think it was an effort to convince the American people to do something," Clark began carefully. "There was a concerted effort during the Fall of 2001 starting immediately after 9/11," he added "to pin 9/11 and the "Well, it came from the White House," Clark said. "It came from people around the White House...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...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." <font color=black>Now in a rational world, the media watchdogs at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting pointed out, this would be newsworthy. The former NATO Supreme Com-mander says the Bush White House pressured him to blame 9/11 on Iraq even as the World Trade Center Towers were still smoking. Perhaps because Clark's own political ambitions remain Elsewhere, however, many in the national press have awakened to their responsibility. New York Times columnists Nicholas Kristoff and Paul Krugman have taken on Bush's habitual mendacity over matters of war and peace and economic justice. "Misrepresentation and deception," Krugman writes "are standard operating procedure for this administration." Most persuasive, however, is a brilliantly dispassionate analysis by John Judis and Spencer Ackerman in The New Republic depicting in compelling detail how Bush administration zealots manipulated the evidence to justify their obsession with Iraq and why "the cost to U.S. democracy could be felt for years to come."
