Liberals Are Losers

Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

March 22, 2004

Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
give Bill Clinton?

Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
give Bill Clinton?

Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
give Bill Clinton?

Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
striking back at them?

Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
them?

Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
them?

Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?

Question number 8: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton was slashing the defense
budget in the face of these Al-Qaeda attacks, did you advise him
against it?

Question number 9: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton undermined the CIA in the
face of all these takers, did you advise him against doing that?

Question number 10: Mr. Clarke, isn't it true that you and your
colleagues in the Clinton administration generally were complete and
miserable failures in defending this nation for eight years, and isn't
it a little weak of you to now come forward and say that what Bush
didn't do in the first nine months of his term, is pathetic?

Family Man

I doubt Richard Clarke reads these messages, why don't you write him and ask
him.


"Liberals Are Losers" <diane49x6x@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google.c om...
> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> March 22, 2004
>
> Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
> Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
> Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
> Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> striking back at them?
>
> Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> them?
>
> Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> them?
>
> Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
>
> Question number 8: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton was slashing the defense
> budget in the face of these Al-Qaeda attacks, did you advise him
> against it?
>
> Question number 9: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton undermined the CIA in the
> face of all these takers, did you advise him against doing that?
>
> Question number 10: Mr. Clarke, isn't it true that you and your
> colleagues in the Clinton administration generally were complete and
> miserable failures in defending this nation for eight years, and isn't
> it a little weak of you to now come forward and say that what Bush
> didn't do in the first nine months of his term, is pathetic?

Roger R.

Read his book. He answers all of those questions.

"Liberals Are Losers" <diane49x6x@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google.c om...
> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> March 22, 2004
>
> Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?

The Sudanese government never made such an offer. And for good reason. bin
Laden was on very good close personal terms with the man heading the
govbernment and they agreed on the goals bin Laden was sorking towards. Bin
laden was also providing him financing to stay in office, just as he did
with Mullah Omar in Afghanistan.

>
> Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>

The Sudanese government never made such an offer.


> Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>

The Sudanese government never made such an offer.


> Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> striking back at them?

Read his book. He tells you.

>
> Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> them?

Read his book. He tells you.

By the way, no one in the US government knew of any al Qaeda organization at
that time. The FBI determined that it was a group of mostly Egyptian
refugees who accidently came together with the blind sheik and decided to
attack the WTC. The connection to al Qaeda was not known until about 1997 or
1998.

>
> Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> them?
Read his book. He tells you.

He recommended quick retaliation as soon as it was clear that al Qaeda was
the culprit. As was frequently the case, the Pentagon would not do it.

>
> Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?

Since evidence then and now showed it to have produced nerve gas and was
created by and under the control of a bin Laden organization, it was an
appropriate target.

>
> Question number 8: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton was slashing the defense
> budget in the face of these Al-Qaeda attacks, did you advise him
> against it?

Clinton increased the counterterrorism budget by over 700% after 1995. It
was Ashcroft who cut the counterterrorism budget, to include urgently needed
FBI personnel needed for Homeland Security in the Summer of 1

>
> Question number 9: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton undermined the CIA in the
> face of all these takers, did you advise him against doing that?
>
> Question number 10: Mr. Clarke, isn't it true that you and your
> colleagues in the Clinton administration generally were complete and
> miserable failures in defending this nation for eight years, and isn't
> it a little weak of you to now come forward and say that what Bush
> didn't do in the first nine months of his term, is pathetic?

Roger R.

He answers all these questions in his book.

In fact, Clinton was the person who did the most to counter terrorism of any
President we have had, to include the idiot Bush.

Bush has not only failed to do anything about terrorism, he has conducted
regime change on a man who is mentally so out of it that he is now unable to
respond to questioning. Saddaam would have been gone within a year or two at
most, and the American causality rate would not now exceed 700 KIA and
nearly 4,000 seriously WIA.

In fact, what Bush has done is confirm every prediction that bin Laden made
about Christian nations attacking Muslim nations. George Bush is the
greatest recruiter that bin Laden could have ever hoped for. Because of
Bush, we will face years more terror and hundreds more fanatical terrorists
than would have been the case without Bush and the Iraq invasion.

"Family Man" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:VBjhc.34772$bl.1042@okepread03...
> I doubt Richard Clarke reads these messages, why don't you write him and
ask
> him.
>
>
> "Liberals Are Losers" <diane49x6x@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google.c om...
> > Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > March 22, 2004
> >
> > Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> > Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> > striking back at them?
> >
> > Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> > Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> > 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> > embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> > Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
> >
> > Question number 8: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton was slashing the defense
> > budget in the face of these Al-Qaeda attacks, did you advise him
> > against it?
> >
> > Question number 9: Mr. Clarke, when Clinton undermined the CIA in the
> > face of all these takers, did you advise him against doing that?
> >
> > Question number 10: Mr. Clarke, isn't it true that you and your
> > colleagues in the Clinton administration generally were complete and
> > miserable failures in defending this nation for eight years, and isn't
> > it a little weak of you to now come forward and say that what Bush
> > didn't do in the first nine months of his term, is pathetic?
>
>

retrogrouch@comcast.net

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 20:14:34 -0500, "Roger R."
<jayray21remove@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Read his book. He answers all of those questions.

You're assuming these idiots can read? Or that they'd read something
not approved by the party?
>
>"Liberals Are Losers" <diane49x6x@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google. com...
>> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Bill Walker

<retrogrouch@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hukb8013fjft7hebdhcnk8r9b5ugk18cn4@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 20:14:34 -0500, "Roger R."
> <jayray21remove@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Read his book. He answers all of those questions.
>
> You're assuming these idiots can read? Or that they'd read something
> not approved by the party?

C'mon.. Retro... They all read till their finger gets sore..
> >
> >"Liberals Are Losers" <diane49x6x@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google. com...
> >> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>

Each Hero Sues Ookie

On 4/20/04 6:25 PM, in article 108bjdf1nklei67@corp.supernews.com, "Roger
R." <jayray21remove@hotmail.com> wrote:

> He answers all these questions in his book.
>
> In fact, Clinton was the person who did the most to counter terrorism of any
> President we have had, to include the idiot Bush.

How many terrorist camps did Clinton take out? None. Thanks for playing.

Bill Walker

"Each Hero Sues Ookie" <EachHeroSuesOokie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:BCAB4463.51D4%EachHeroSuesOokie@hotmail.com.. .
> On 4/20/04 6:25 PM, in article 108bjdf1nklei67@corp.supernews.com, "Roger
> R." <jayray21remove@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > He answers all these questions in his book.
> >
> > In fact, Clinton was the person who did the most to counter terrorism of
any
> > President we have had, to include the idiot Bush.
>
> How many terrorist camps did Clinton take out? None. Thanks for playing.

You are "welcome".. Again.. I'm convinced.. "I will not vote for Bill
Clinton for president"
>
>

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

Liberals Are Losers wrote:
>
> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> March 22, 2004
>
> Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
Clarke says that they did not offer bin Laden to the United States.



> Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
> Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?
>
> Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> striking back at them?
>
Clarke wanted to strike back at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, blow up the
terrorist camps and *not* link those attacks to any specific terrorist
attack on us but instead make it a general response to al Qaeda attacks
on us. This would've allowed a response immediately after the attacks on
the USS Cole when we were sure it was al Qaeda but hadn't had time to
prove it.



> Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> them?
>
> Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> them?
>
> Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
>
Clarke says that precursor material found in the soil at the plant could
have only one use, for chemical weapons, and was used in a technology
only used by one WMD proliferator, Iraq.

Bill Walker

"Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:40880350.8677F7E1@backpacker.com...
>
>
> Liberals Are Losers wrote:
> >
> > Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > March 22, 2004
> >
> > Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> Clarke says that they did not offer bin Laden to the United States.
>
>
>
> > Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> > Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> > striking back at them?
> >
> Clarke wanted to strike back at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, blow up the
> terrorist camps and *not* link those attacks to any specific terrorist
> attack on us but instead make it a general response to al Qaeda attacks
> on us. This would've allowed a response immediately after the attacks on
> the USS Cole when we were sure it was al Qaeda but hadn't had time to
> prove it.
>
>
>
> > Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> > Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> > 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> > embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> > Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
> >
> Clarke says that precursor material found in the soil at the plant could
> have only one use, for chemical weapons, and was used in a technology
> only used by one WMD proliferator, Iraq.

Damn.. Bubba.. I have been really worried about you.. Glad to see you
"escaped" again and back to your usual self.. Don't forget to take your meds
this time "out".. You know that you become even more "radical" when you
forget.... Good to see you Bonde, my friend..

Bill Walker
Irving, Tx.

Roger R.

Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name? Though
incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
"Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I expect
from you.

Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book. It is
a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with terrorists
grew in the 1990's. Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.

He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America such
as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building, and Christian
extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists, nor
does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since it is
localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind of
failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were. I bring those up to point
out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an ideology.
Stating that we are declaring war on terrorism makes no more sense than
saying we are declaring war on machine-gunners.

To stop terrorism, we have to address the ideological basis of each of the
many groups attempting to gain their ends through the use of terrorism. We
aren't much good at that kind of effort, and keep trying to substitute
military force because we ARE very good at that.

"Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:40880350.8677F7E1@backpacker.com...
>
>
> Liberals Are Losers wrote:
> >
> > Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
> > March 22, 2004
> >
> > Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> Clarke says that they did not offer bin Laden to the United States.
>
>
>
> > Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > give Bill Clinton?
> >
> > Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> > Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> > striking back at them?
> >
> Clarke wanted to strike back at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, blow up the
> terrorist camps and *not* link those attacks to any specific terrorist
> attack on us but instead make it a general response to al Qaeda attacks
> on us. This would've allowed a response immediately after the attacks on
> the USS Cole when we were sure it was al Qaeda but hadn't had time to
> prove it.
>
>
>
> > Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> > Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> > 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> > them?
> >
> > Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> > embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> > Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
> >
> Clarke says that precursor material found in the soil at the plant could
> have only one use, for chemical weapons, and was used in a technology
> only used by one WMD proliferator, Iraq.

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

Bill Walker wrote:
>
> "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> news:40880350.8677F7E1@backpacker.com...
> >
> >
> > Liberals Are Losers wrote:
> > >
> > > Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > > March 22, 2004
> > >
> > > Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > Clarke says that they did not offer bin Laden to the United States.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > > Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > > Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> > > Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> > > striking back at them?
> > >
> > Clarke wanted to strike back at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, blow up the
> > terrorist camps and *not* link those attacks to any specific terrorist
> > attack on us but instead make it a general response to al Qaeda attacks
> > on us. This would've allowed a response immediately after the attacks on
> > the USS Cole when we were sure it was al Qaeda but hadn't had time to
> > prove it.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> > > Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> > > them?
> > >
> > > Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> > > 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> > > them?
> > >
> > > Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> > > embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> > > Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
> > >
> > Clarke says that precursor material found in the soil at the plant could
> > have only one use, for chemical weapons, and was used in a technology
> > only used by one WMD proliferator, Iraq.
>
> Damn.. Bubba.. I have been really worried about you.. Glad to see you
> "escaped" again and back to your usual self..
>
What are you talking about? I'm just telling you what Clarke says.

Roger R.

"Bill Walker" <bill.walker2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:mvThc.46643$L31.44601@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
>
> "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> news:40880350.8677F7E1@backpacker.com...
> >
> >
> > Liberals Are Losers wrote:
> > >
> > > Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> > >
> > > March 22, 2004
> > >
> > > Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > Clarke says that they did not offer bin Laden to the United States.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Question number 2: Mr. Clarke, the second time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > > Question number 3: Mr. Clarke, the third time the Sudanese government
> > > offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> > > give Bill Clinton?
> > >
> > > Question number 4: When Al-Qaeda attacked our barracks in Saudi
> > > Arabia, Mr. Clarke, what exactly advice did you give Clinton for
> > > striking back at them?
> > >
> > Clarke wanted to strike back at al Qaeda in Afghanistan, blow up the
> > terrorist camps and *not* link those attacks to any specific terrorist
> > attack on us but instead make it a general response to al Qaeda attacks
> > on us. This would've allowed a response immediately after the attacks on
> > the USS Cole when we were sure it was al Qaeda but hadn't had time to
> > prove it.
> >
> >
> >
> > > Question number 5: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the World Trade
> > > Center in 1993, what advice did you give Clinton for striking back at
> > > them?
> > >
> > > Question number 6: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in
> > > 2000, what advice did you give President Clinton for striking back at
> > > them?
> > >
> > > Question number 7: Mr. Clarke, when Al-Qaeda attacked the two U.S.
> > > embassies in North Africa, weren't you one of the experts who advised
> > > Clinton to bomb the pharmaceutical factory in Sudan?
> > >
> > Clarke says that precursor material found in the soil at the plant could
> > have only one use, for chemical weapons, and was used in a technology
> > only used by one WMD proliferator, Iraq.
>
> Damn.. Bubba.. I have been really worried about you.. Glad to see you
> "escaped" again and back to your usual self.. Don't forget to take your
meds
> this time "out".. You know that you become even more "radical" when you
> forget.... Good to see you Bonde, my friend..
>
> Bill Walker
> Irving, Tx.
>
>
Bill, if you haven't already read it, get "Against All Enemies" and read it.

It is one man's experience at the center of the American counter terrorism
establishment for as long as there has been one. Clarke is himself rather
right-wing, but considering his jobs, he would have had to have been. He
puts the war against terrorism into perspective, telling the stories with
the context so that they make sense.

In short, he says that the Clinton administration made mistakes but it put a
high priority on the problems of terrorism and learned as they went along.
Then the Bush administration took over, and with their attitude that a) they
knew what the government should do and b) whatever Clinton did was wrong,
attempted to move back to the Cold War efforts that Bush I had been
conducting, while giving no credence to the new developments from 1990 to
2000. They also had this rather touching faith that the FBI and the CIA knew
what they were doing and could be left to handle the lower-level problems
caused by terrorists like bin Laden and al Qaeda.

The Pentagon did not like Clinton, and so would not let the Special Ops
soldiers be used in counter terror operations. The CIA was afraid that if
they went whole hog into counterterror special ops, the way Clinton wanted,
as soon as Clinton was out the Congress would start blaming THEM for everyth
ing that had gone wrong (as the Church committee had years earlier) so they
dragged their feet. The FBI is the single most ineffective institution in
the federal government, focusing primarily on maintain its reputation by
Hoover-style Public Relations exercises and not getting out into operations
of a type they don't have a great deal of experience in. The murk of
stateside intelligence work is such a dangerous and not very rewarding
operation that the FBI management carefully avoided and still avoids. These
are the organizations that Bush et al felt could be left to handle terrorism
while they worried about the really important stuff like the Anti-Ballistic
Missile program, stopping stem-cell research, and getting out of the Kyoto
Treaty.

Have you noticed, by the way, that the Pentagon needed to do some stem-cell
research, so they had to contract it out to Europe where such research was
permitted?

Anyway, read the book if you haven't already.

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

"Roger R." wrote:
>
> Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name? Though
> incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I expect
> from you.
>
What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.


> Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
>
Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.


> It is
> a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with terrorists
> grew in the 1990's.
>
From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
done.


> Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
> effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
> world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.
>
If you look at his 'answers' at the end of the book, he doesn't really
have any.



> He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America such
> as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building,
>
They could've gotten help from al Qaeda. That has been noted by a lot of
people as of late.


> and Christian
> extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists, nor
> does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since it is
> localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind of
> failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were.
>
Or look at most of Africa. Pre-9/11 I certainly wasn't willing to go
into these messes but I now see that we must insist that failed states
be fixed. It isn't fair though for the US to pay for it all with its own
blood and treasure.


> I bring those up to point
> out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an ideology.
>
They *often* work together. I've pointed out ETA, FARC and Real IRA and
their efforts together. The McVeigh and al Qaeda connection is another
example.


> Stating that we are declaring war on terrorism makes no more sense than
> saying we are declaring war on machine-gunners.
>
> To stop terrorism, we have to address the ideological basis of each of the
> many groups attempting to gain their ends through the use of terrorism. We
> aren't much good at that kind of effort, and keep trying to substitute
> military force because we ARE very good at that.
>
Actually, what I keep trying to explain, and Bush seems to be too, is
that our efforts in Iraq are exactly about hearts and minds. Clarke
talks about trying again to solve the Pali-Israel mess. Come on, that's
been tried for decades. We had to go in and step on some toes. It just
had to be. It isn't pretty, but it had to be done.

Emma Goldwoman

diane49x6x@yahoo.com (Liberals Are Losers) wrote in message news:<8020fd95.0404201639.5d68b66a@posting.google. com>...
> Ten Questions for Richard Clarke!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> March 22, 2004
>
> Question number 1: Mr. Clarke, the first time the Sudanese government
> offered bin Laden to the United States, exactly what advice did you
> give Bill Clinton?

<snip cut and pasted copyrighted material spammed to usenet>

Notice that this poster has only a recent history, which begins just
as a certain poster stops using another personna.

I think it is just a new personna adopted by Dana Raffaniello
<dpraff@gci.net>

Compare the m.o.

No original thought.

Cut & Pasted, spammed copyrighted material often with tacked on tag
line, giving the appearance it is part of the original spammed
copyrighted material.

Plagiarism.

Challenge for people to address the issue contained, while offering no
original opinion of his/her own.

No dialogue/answers to reponses on the points in the spammed
copyrighted material.

My guess is Dana.

Any other guesses out there?

The material posted is copyrighted.

Send copies to the holder of the copyright, to google posting and to
yahoo.

See how long this poster is able to keep their yahoo account open.

Sigourney Smoley

"Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> "Roger R." wrote:
> >
> > Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name? Though
> > incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> > "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I expect
> > from you.
> >
> What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.
>
>
> > Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
> >
> Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.
>
>
> > It is
> > a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with terrorists
> > grew in the 1990's.
> >
> From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
> claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
> done.
>
>
> > Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
> > effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
> > world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.
> >
> If you look at his 'answers' at the end of the book, he doesn't really
> have any.
>
>
>
> > He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America such
> > as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building,
> >
> They could've gotten help from al Qaeda. That has been noted by a lot of
> people as of late.
>
>
> > and Christian
> > extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists, nor
> > does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since it is
> > localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind of
> > failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were.
> >
> Or look at most of Africa. Pre-9/11 I certainly wasn't willing to go
> into these messes but I now see that we must insist that failed states
> be fixed. It isn't fair though for the US to pay for it all with its own
> blood and treasure.
>
>
> > I bring those up to point
> > out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an ideology.
> >
> They *often* work together. I've pointed out ETA, FARC and Real IRA and
> their efforts together. The McVeigh and al Qaeda connection is another
> example.


What have FARC to do with Irish republican militants?

Bill Walker

"Sigourney Smoley" <sigourney.smoley@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:827c686d.0404261553.59b9888b@posting.google.c om...
> "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > "Roger R." wrote:
> > >
> > > Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name?
Though
> > > incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> > > "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I
expect
> > > from you.
> > >
> > What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.
> >
> >
> > > Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
> > >
> > Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.
> >
> >
> > > It is
> > > a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with
terrorists
> > > grew in the 1990's.
> > >
> > From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
> > claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
> > done.
> >
> >
> > > Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
> > > effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
> > > world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.
> > >
> > If you look at his 'answers' at the end of the book, he doesn't really
> > have any.
> >
> >
> >
> > > He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America
such
> > > as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building,
> > >
> > They could've gotten help from al Qaeda. That has been noted by a lot of
> > people as of late.
> >
> >
> > > and Christian
> > > extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists,
nor
> > > does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since
it is
> > > localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind
of
> > > failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were.
> > >
> > Or look at most of Africa. Pre-9/11 I certainly wasn't willing to go
> > into these messes but I now see that we must insist that failed states
> > be fixed. It isn't fair though for the US to pay for it all with its own
> > blood and treasure.
> >
> >
> > > I bring those up to point
> > > out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an
ideology.
> > >
> > They *often* work together. I've pointed out ETA, FARC and Real IRA and
> > their efforts together. The McVeigh and al Qaeda connection is another
> > example.
>
>
> What have FARC to do with Irish republican militants?

Now dammit.. don't you go confusing Bonde again.. Hell.. he just got
released from the institution and commenced a new "meds" regimen.. What's
the matter with you...??

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

Sigourney Smoley wrote:
>
> "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > "Roger R." wrote:
> > >
> > > Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name? Though
> > > incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> > > "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I expect
> > > from you.
> > >
> > What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.
> >
> >
> > > Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
> > >
> > Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.
> >
> >
> > > It is
> > > a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with terrorists
> > > grew in the 1990's.
> > >
> > From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
> > claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
> > done.
> >
> >
> > > Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
> > > effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
> > > world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.
> > >
> > If you look at his 'answers' at the end of the book, he doesn't really
> > have any.
> >
> >
> >
> > > He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America such
> > > as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building,
> > >
> > They could've gotten help from al Qaeda. That has been noted by a lot of
> > people as of late.
> >
> >
> > > and Christian
> > > extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists, nor
> > > does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since it is
> > > localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind of
> > > failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were.
> > >
> > Or look at most of Africa. Pre-9/11 I certainly wasn't willing to go
> > into these messes but I now see that we must insist that failed states
> > be fixed. It isn't fair though for the US to pay for it all with its own
> > blood and treasure.
> >
> >
> > > I bring those up to point
> > > out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an ideology.
> > >
> > They *often* work together. I've pointed out ETA, FARC and Real IRA and
> > their efforts together. The McVeigh and al Qaeda connection is another
> > example.
>
> What have FARC to do with Irish republican militants?
>
FARC is the main terrorist group in South America that Real IRA was
assisting.

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

Bill Walker wrote:
>
> "Sigourney Smoley" <sigourney.smoley@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:827c686d.0404261553.59b9888b@posting.google.c om...
> > "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > > "Roger R." wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name?
> Though
> > > > incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> > > > "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I
> expect
> > > > from you.
> > > >
> > > What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
> > > >
> > > Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.
> > >
> > >
> > > > It is
> > > > a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with
> terrorists
> > > > grew in the 1990's.
> > > >
> > > From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
> > > claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
> > > done.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
> > > > effectively. He provides a context from which to view the problem of
> > > > world-wide terrorism against America and the western world.
> > > >
> > > If you look at his 'answers' at the end of the book, he doesn't really
> > > have any.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > He does not go into the right-wing terrorists we have here in America
> such
> > > > as the ones who sent McVeigh after the Federal Building,
> > > >
> > > They could've gotten help from al Qaeda. That has been noted by a lot of
> > > people as of late.
> > >
> > >
> > > > and Christian
> > > > extremists such as the Atlanta Bomber or the anti-abortion terrorists,
> nor
> > > > does he go into the terrorism that has nearly destroyed Colombia since
> it is
> > > > localized and not aimed at America. Colombia is very nearly the kind
> of
> > > > failed state that Afghanistan, and Somalia were.
> > > >
> > > Or look at most of Africa. Pre-9/11 I certainly wasn't willing to go
> > > into these messes but I now see that we must insist that failed states
> > > be fixed. It isn't fair though for the US to pay for it all with its own
> > > blood and treasure.
> > >
> > >
> > > > I bring those up to point
> > > > out that terrorism is a technique of asymmetric warfare, not an
> ideology.
> > > >
> > > They *often* work together. I've pointed out ETA, FARC and Real IRA and
> > > their efforts together. The McVeigh and al Qaeda connection is another
> > > example.
> >
> >
> > What have FARC to do with Irish republican militants?
>
> Now dammit.. don't you go confusing Bonde again.. Hell.. he just got
> released from the institution and commenced a new "meds" regimen.. What's
> the matter with you...??
>
Don' you get tired of getting your ass kicked round the newsgroup and
back again?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/spain/arti...542364,00.html
#begin quote
Security forces have been monitoring a suspected three-way link between
the IRA, the Basque separatists Eta, and the Colombian guerrillas Farc
for almost a year, it emerged yesterday.
Revelations of the possible relationship come as new claims about the
three suspected IRA men charged with helping to train members of Farc
emerged in Colombia.

It was alleged that one of the men had offered his "services" to a
rightwing paramilitary group in Colombia and that he had visited the
country before.

The new claims have led to fresh calls on Sinn Fein to give fuller
explanations about any links it has to the men.

There is anger and frustration that the Sinn Fein president, Gerry
Adams, has remained silent on the issue despite it putting pressure on
the peace process and casting doubt on the integrity of the IRA
ceasefire.

Security sources revealed that a terrorist conference hosted by Interpol
at its headquarters in France was alerted to links between the IRA, Eta
and Farc.

The conference, which took place in October last year, heard that the
organisations were sharing weapons and technology. A senior Colombian
military figure and the Spanish authorities addressed the delegates.

The IRA and Eta have been linked before. The news that security officers
have come together so recently to discuss a link not only between the
IRA and Eta but with Farc as well is significant

It had been thought that foreign intelligence officers had assisted the
Colombian operation which arrested Niall Connolly, Martin McCauley and
Jim Monaghan on August 11 as they prepared to leave the country with
false passports.

The men have declared their innocence, claiming they were sightseeing
and carrying out research in Colombia. But they were charged after their
stories did not match.
#end quote

(!!)

Bill Walker

"Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
<stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
news:408DE303.9D75B82C@backpacker.com...
>
>
> Bill Walker wrote:
> >
> > "Sigourney Smoley" <sigourney.smoley@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > news:827c686d.0404261553.59b9888b@posting.google.c om...
> > > "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> > <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> > news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > > > "Roger R." wrote:

> > Now dammit.. don't you go confusing Bonde again.. Hell.. he just got
> > released from the institution and commenced a new "meds" regimen..
What's
> > the matter with you...??
> >
> Don' you get tired of getting your ass kicked round the newsgroup and
> back again?

Plainly my good friend, you have never been to a "real" ass kicking... Go
take your meds..
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/spain/arti...542364,00.html
> #begin quote
> Security forces have been monitoring a suspected three-way link between
> the IRA, the Basque separatists Eta, and the Colombian guerrillas Farc
> for almost a year, it emerged yesterday.
> Revelations of the possible relationship come as new claims about the
> three suspected IRA men charged with helping to train members of Farc
> emerged in Colombia.
>
> It was alleged that one of the men had offered his "services" to a
> rightwing paramilitary group in Colombia and that he had visited the
> country before.
>
> The new claims have led to fresh calls on Sinn Fein to give fuller
> explanations about any links it has to the men.
>
> There is anger and frustration that the Sinn Fein president, Gerry
> Adams, has remained silent on the issue despite it putting pressure on
> the peace process and casting doubt on the integrity of the IRA
> ceasefire.
>
> Security sources revealed that a terrorist conference hosted by Interpol
> at its headquarters in France was alerted to links between the IRA, Eta
> and Farc.
>
> The conference, which took place in October last year, heard that the
> organisations were sharing weapons and technology. A senior Colombian
> military figure and the Spanish authorities addressed the delegates.
>
> The IRA and Eta have been linked before. The news that security officers
> have come together so recently to discuss a link not only between the
> IRA and Eta but with Farc as well is significant
>
> It had been thought that foreign intelligence officers had assisted the
> Colombian operation which arrested Niall Connolly, Martin McCauley and
> Jim Monaghan on August 11 as they prepared to leave the country with
> false passports.
>
> The men have declared their innocence, claiming they were sightseeing
> and carrying out research in Colombia. But they were charged after their
> stories did not match.
> #end quote
>
> (!!)

Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )

Bill Walker wrote:
>
> "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> news:408DE303.9D75B82C@backpacker.com...
> >
> >
> > Bill Walker wrote:
> > >
> > > "Sigourney Smoley" <sigourney.smoley@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> > > news:827c686d.0404261553.59b9888b@posting.google.c om...
> > > > "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )"
> > > <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message
> > > news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > > > > "Roger R." wrote:
>
> > > Now dammit.. don't you go confusing Bonde again.. Hell.. he just got
> > > released from the institution and commenced a new "meds" regimen..
> What's
> > > the matter with you...??
> > >
> > Don' you get tired of getting your ass kicked round the newsgroup and
> > back again?
>
> Plainly my good friend, you have never been to a "real" ass kicking... Go
> take your meds..
>
So you ignore a cite from the Leftist Guardian newspaper backing up
exactly what I claimed and you denied, and you want to hold to the view
that you haven't got your ass kicked?



> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/spain/arti...542364,00.html
> > #begin quote
> > Security forces have been monitoring a suspected three-way link between
> > the IRA, the Basque separatists Eta, and the Colombian guerrillas Farc
> > for almost a year, it emerged yesterday.
> > Revelations of the possible relationship come as new claims about the
> > three suspected IRA men charged with helping to train members of Farc
> > emerged in Colombia.
> >
> > It was alleged that one of the men had offered his "services" to a
> > rightwing paramilitary group in Colombia and that he had visited the
> > country before.
> >
> > The new claims have led to fresh calls on Sinn Fein to give fuller
> > explanations about any links it has to the men.
> >
> > There is anger and frustration that the Sinn Fein president, Gerry
> > Adams, has remained silent on the issue despite it putting pressure on
> > the peace process and casting doubt on the integrity of the IRA
> > ceasefire.
> >
> > Security sources revealed that a terrorist conference hosted by Interpol
> > at its headquarters in France was alerted to links between the IRA, Eta
> > and Farc.
> >
> > The conference, which took place in October last year, heard that the
> > organisations were sharing weapons and technology. A senior Colombian
> > military figure and the Spanish authorities addressed the delegates.
> >
> > The IRA and Eta have been linked before. The news that security officers
> > have come together so recently to discuss a link not only between the
> > IRA and Eta but with Farc as well is significant
> >
> > It had been thought that foreign intelligence officers had assisted the
> > Colombian operation which arrested Niall Connolly, Martin McCauley and
> > Jim Monaghan on August 11 as they prepared to leave the country with
> > false passports.
> >
> > The men have declared their innocence, claiming they were sightseeing
> > and carrying out research in Colombia. But they were charged after their
> > stories did not match.
> > #end quote
> >
> > (!!)

Sigourney Smoley

"Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message news:<408DE1A5.306EE135@backpacker.com>...
> Sigourney Smoley wrote:
> >
> > "Bill Bonde ( ''Stop this farce!'' ''Which one?'' )" <stderr2@backpacker.com> wrote in message news:<4088B16B.3C3A8625@backpacker.com>...
> > > "Roger R." wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bonde? Did you write those responses, or is someone using your name? Though
> > > > incomplete, it is surprisingly accurate. It also does not reflect the
> > > > "Destroy America if it will eliminate the Liberals" point of view I expect
> > > > from you.
> > > >
> > > What are you even talking about? I am accurate when I post.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Whoever wrote those responses has read at least part of Clarke's book.
> > > >
> > > Of course I read all his book. I'm back to reading "Ghost Wars" again.
> > >
> > >
> > > > It is
> > > > a memoir, but gives an excellent overview of how the war with terrorists
> > > > grew in the 1990's.
> > > >
> > > From the viewpoint of the White House, specifically Clarke. You can't
> > > claim that is all there is to it. Clarke agrees that enough was not
> > > done.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Clarke also answers the other questions, equally
>