Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
basskisser
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"NOYB" wrote in message ink.net...
Clarke admitted that he *alone* approved the flights. Why would he protect
the Bush administration after his scathing attack book against Bush?


Former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has testified that he
approved these flights, stating that "it was a conscious decision with
complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the
FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former
Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate
Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.
  #2   Report Post  
NOYB
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message

ink.net...
Clarke admitted that he *alone* approved the flights. Why would he

protect
the Bush administration after his scathing attack book against Bush?


Former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has testified that he
approved these flights, stating that "it was a conscious decision with
complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the
FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former
Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate
Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.


And for that exact reason, Clarke should be indicted for perjury. He
contradicted himself when he admitted in May of this year that he alone, in
consultation with the FBI, granted permission.



  #3   Report Post  
basskisser
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"NOYB" wrote in message link.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message

ink.net...
Clarke admitted that he *alone* approved the flights. Why would he

protect
the Bush administration after his scathing attack book against Bush?


Former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke has testified that he
approved these flights, stating that "it was a conscious decision with
complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the
FBI and the White House." Testimony of Richard Clarke, Former
Counterterrorism Chief, National Security Council, before The Senate
Judiciary Committee, September 3, 2003.


And for that exact reason, Clarke should be indicted for perjury. He
contradicted himself when he admitted in May of this year that he alone, in
consultation with the FBI, granted permission.


Nope, you're wrong. Sorry.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Bwahaha! Bye Bye Bushy! Bobsprit ASA 1 June 18th 04 10:37 PM
( OT) uncovering the truth about 9/11 has never been Bush's intention Jim General 0 March 10th 04 10:27 PM
( OT ) Bush's 9/11 coverup? Jim General 5 March 7th 04 01:36 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017