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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (561088)	4/7/2004 5:28:31 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Assertions have been made, and denied, that Bush, Rice and others in the administration were more concerned about missile defense than terrorism. This speech of the national security advisor's that wasn't given but was written to be given on 9/11 and is lying in a file is said to advocate missile defense as a more urgent priority than the al Qaeda threat. A good way to show that al Q was on the administrations mind to some degree, however slight, would be to release the text of the speech. The 9/11 commission wanted Clark's papers, memoranda, emails, everything, after the WH made selective releases. Clark says fine, release them all, don't cherry pick, release everything. The WH has declined. I can understand the feeling the WH might have that quoting one speech could be like cherry picking. But they have the right to release any other speeches or papers or transcripts showing that they weren't ignoring Clark's warnings, so the cherry picking complaint isn't persuasive to me. I imagine that that speech had something to do with national security, don't you? Maybe we don't have a right to know what was on the national security advisor's mind before 9/11? That's a position.

To: Bill who wrote (561088)	4/7/2004 5:49:38 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

This is why Bush should have put his foot down firmly on Rice's testimony. She cannot possibly win because the leftists are going to put an impossible burden upon her. In effect, they are going to claim she should have focused primarily on possible Al Qaeda attacks upon the country when no one, not even Clarke or Clinton (and these two were in charge when the terrorists hit us in the first place) focused on home attacks. The focus was always abroad. But the leftists are going to hang Rice with the responsibility for having failed to bring the focus home. And the leftist media is going to run gleefully with the story for weeks. Bush is about to take a huge hit. I don't think Rice has a chance; but if I am wrong and she manages to pull this off, the GOP will owe her a debt that will be impossible to pay, but that it should try to pay nevertheless.