Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gen. Clark Weighs Presidential Bid; Accuses Bush of inaction before 9/11
AP ^ | September 13, 2003 | nwrep

Posted on 09/14/2003 6:35:27 PM PDT by nwrep

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 last
To: middie
And helped to incinerate everyone at Waco, getting paid off later by Bill with the above gig.
81 posted on 09/17/2003 5:01:25 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: middie
He is a strong proponent of a national defense structure that would have avoided the morass that has evolved in Iraq.

Morass. Ha ha ha. This is a perfect example of a sentence that appears to say something but really doesn't because--the problem of the underlying premise notwithstanding--there are so many contingencies involved that the conclusion is merely a wish rather than a certain prognostication of what would have happened.
82 posted on 09/17/2003 5:19:08 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
Gen. Clark's solution for
terrorism?

[Gen. Clark salutes KLA terrorists,an Al Qaeda ally]

Salute terrorists !!!

WESLEY CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
A general only Liberals and his Mom Could Love(c)

83 posted on 09/17/2003 9:33:45 AM PDT by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nwrep
"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute
the office of President of the United States,
and will to the best of my ability, preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States... ..Just like I did in Ft. Hood , Tx in 1993"

WESLEY CLARK FOR PRESIDENT
A general only Liberals and his Mom Could Love(c)

84 posted on 09/17/2003 9:34:56 AM PDT by DTA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Now that General Clark has finally announced his candidacy, can we hope that he will at long last be willing to address his fanciful allegations against our President? General Clark implied very candidly, on CNN, that the Bush Administration specifically asked him to draw a connection between the evil Dictator Sadaam Hussein, and the attacks of 11 September, A.D.2001. He has spent the time since trying to distance himself from these untrue remarks. Undoubtedly, he assumed that his rank would alleviate him from the liability of academic and journalistic honesty. However, he had a rude awakening when he found that there were some honest journalists who were not willing to defer to his rank, especially when it meant spreading treasonous lies about our Commander in Chief, who of course outranks the General. One such honest journalist was Sean Hannity, who in conducting what is probably the single most important interview with the General earlier this season
called him on his high treason.Of course the General could offer no response to Hannity's queries. The attitude of aloofness and royal immunity maintained by General Clark represents perhaps the most perfect example of what Colonel Hackworth referred to as the "Perfumed Prince".
The simple and irrefutable facts remain, that General Clark has repeatedly proved himself dishonest, un-American, and traitorous. He predicted on CNN, upon accepting a position there as a military commentator, that a quick victory in Iraq by our Valiant Coalition Forces was "out of the question", and yet we were militarily victorious in less than a month. His analysis of the military situation, actually not analysis at all but anti-American rhetoric, is a disgrace to every American who has ever worn a uniform. However, when we apply his standard of success to his operations in Kosovo, where he attempted to single-handedly cause World War III, we find that it was not nearly as successful as Operation Iraqi Freedom, which will probably be remembered in history as the greatest military achievement in American history. If the General led a successful military campaign in Kosovo then why are we still involved there, and better yet, why was he fired by the Clinton Administration ? I thank God that he was dismissed by Secretary Cohen after his inhuman war crimes against the civilian population of that country and other misdeeds, which included the now infamous Military Review, a double honor granted to visiting distinguished officers, which he conducted of the Kosovo Liberation Army, an avowed Terrorist Group and alleged ally to Al-Qaeda, see above piece by 'DTA' and my previous column for more on General Clark's incompetence as an officer, suffice it to say that most who have served with him would rather die than do so again.
General Clark has, like President Clinton, been very public about his receipt of the Rhodes Scholarship. This is very frightening to individuals who understand the nature of that particular honor. As for me personally I would rather have hanged for treason than accept the Anti-American Rhodes Scholarship. This particular characteristic frightens me more than any other thing about General Clark and this fear was affirmed in me when upon announcing his candidacy the first reason he gave for choosing the Democratic Party was that it is a party of "Internationalism". Well I wonder what General Washington, or even the so-called 'Democratic' General Andrew Jackson, would say about that. The Rhodes Scholarship was established by Cecil Rhodes for one purpose only; to destroy the United States of America as we know it. This he, Rhodes, intended to execute by recruiting the cream of American Academia, which has never been considered legitimate by British Universities, to the movement of restoring the authority of the British Crown over the whole of North America. In bringing U.S. graduates to Oxford and illuminating them with the superiority of British ways, Rhodes hoped to once and for all stamp out the evil and mongrelizing anathema of democracy and liberty. This plan is actually working very well. Make no mistake about it, people like Clinton and Clark, and all the others in the Rhodes Program, do not simply spend two years in Britain growing beards, women included, and smoking marijuana, they become indoctrinated with the ideals of World Communism and International Globalism.
Finally, General Clark goes too far in implying that our President has sole responsibility for the terror attacks against our nation when it is well documented that it was President Clinton that repeatedly refused to take action against Al-Qaeda following the first attacks on the World Trade Center, among other terrorist attacks seemingly ignored by President Clinton, who did not even bother to visit the attack site. He remarks in his speech; "What happened on 9-11, Mr. President? Why is it that eight months into your administration, why is it that there was no plan to deal with the number one threat that Bill Clinton's national security team warned you about when you took office?" To this I would reply, why is it that Bill Clinton did not respond to the number one threat that his National Security Team warned him about? President Clinton not only gave Al-Qaeda de facto favored status with our government, he actively rewarded Usama bin Laden by preventing other sovereign nations, and our own CIA, from taking actions to apprehend him, technically accessorizing himself to the organization. This should not be allowed to go unnoticed by the media, and I feel President Clinton should be held accountable for his treason in violating his inaugural oath by leaving our nation undefended against terrorism, so much so that even now we have not been able to bring our military back to the strength level it was at when Clinton entered office.
General Clark is not merely an incompetent officer turned political pundit, nor is he merely another Bush-bashing high tax proponent. He is a trained agent of "Internationalism" and world communism. Nevertheless, I still hold to my previous assertion as to his unelectability and I greatly anticipate seeing drop off the radar charts of political history as the American people learn more and more of the truth about his miserable and detestable career.



85 posted on 09/19/2003 9:46:46 AM PDT by Ryan Bailey ("Gen. Clark and Pres. Clinton should both be hanged for High Treason")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson