Replies

Well, these old articles predating 9/11 must be false. Richard Clarke has arrived to set us straight. 'Twas Clinton who focused like a laser on terrorism and Bush who shrugged.

/sarcasm

I was especially annoyed by that idiotic Washington Post article yesterday about Rice scheduled to talk about security on 9/11 in a speech she never gave and the main theme was missile defense, though even the article acknowledged and gave examples of references to terrorism in her speech. Excerpts leaked by "former officials" to the Post.

193 posted on 04/02/2004 5:13:08 AM PST by cyncooper ("The 'War on Terror ' is not a figure of speech")

".......Rice scheduled to talk about security on 9/11 in a speech she never gave......"

Clarke is NOT held accountable for words he speaks and Rice IS held accountable for words that never crossed her lips.

We can thank Richard Clarke for his statements which have more emphatically defined the line between those 'for' or 'against' our country.

194 posted on 04/02/2004 10:23:01 AM PST by windchime (Podesta about Bush: "He's got four years to try to undo all the stuff we've done." (TIME-1/22/01))