Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (37846)	4/4/2004 3:40:27 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793903

I've not yet read any evidence that says he was seriously wrong about either. You haven't been reading this thread, or tossing of the evidence of his contradictions, then. He has tried to reinvent history.

To: JohnM who wrote (37846)	4/4/2004 3:55:23 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 793903

"...about Clarke. Why not approach it, not on the basis of some sort of overall judgment but look at specifics." No matter how you spin it, Clarke lied. He has several critical & clearly contradicting statements. There is no reasonable way to nuance them into corroborating statements - they are lies plain & simple. He clearly gave Clinton a pass & blasted Bush, yet his own words show Clinton was far more negligent. Clarke thought going to war in Iraq was a huge mistake & would harm the war on terror. Yet, Clarke's complete silence from the time of his resignation until the perfectly timed release of his book, his interviews & his 9//1 Investigations testimony stand in stark contrast to an allegedly principled man doing the right thing & telling the whole truth. I'd go on, but the facts are overwhelming & obvious IMO. I think Bill has Clarke pegged based solely on the facts.