Clarke testified that Bush reduce the priority that terrorism was being given by Clinton despite their advice that it would be Bush's biggest problem.
Clarke also claimed Bush was as much atop terrorism as could be and that there was no exchange of plan from Clinton to Bush. Since he has a new book and since it is helpful that he now contradict himself to sell his book, the guy clearly is unworthy of any thinking man’s trust.
Rice reduced the counter terrorism department by having it report a lower level. This is Clarke's message....Bush, through Rice, returned to the Cold War mentality of confronting Russia and building Star Wars.
Clarke is a leftist, and, as you know, leftists are liars.
Clarke, despite asking for a high level meeting in January never got it until August.... Most damaging to Rice and Bush is the prescient memo Clarke wrote to Rice on Sept 4, ie one week before the attack, in which he warned of 100's of dead from a terrorist attack they had strong signs was going to happen soon.....
Well, such a memo, even were it valid, cannot possibly substantiate the claim that Bush failed to adequately prioritize his assault against terrorism. At the very most it can only corroborate what very many people have known all along, that someone had a belief that terrorists were about to hit us. Not even Clarke knew it would happen right here in America. Clarke was pressing for us to bomb terrorists sites overseas. Even he admits that his own plan could not possibly have stopped 911.
GORTON: Now, since my yellow light is on, at this point my final question will be this: Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001, based on Delenda, based on Blue Sky, including aid to the Northern Alliance, which had been an agenda item at this point for two and a half years without any action, assuming that there had been more Predator reconnaissance missions, assuming that that had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?
CLARKE: No.
weeklystandard.com
You simply see evidence where none exists. You have lost all ability to reason here, sir, so great is your hatred against your own country’s leadership.
"Bush appears to hide nothing at all"....what cave are you living in? Why is Bush stonewalling the commission he appointed which has a Republican majority?
Because that commission has become politicized by leftists, just as the leftists claimed they would do. It only takes one leftist to corrupt what would otherwise be an honorable pursuit.
Why won't Rice testify in public and under oath? Nothing to hide, you're high!!
And you obviously are hysterical. Rice likely will not testify because she understands two things: 1. That the Legislative Branch is not above the Executive, that it can command the Executive at its whim, and 2. that this commission is corrupt and unworthy of public respect from the Executive.
And if she believes this, she is exactly right. |
