[Shery]

Your initials next to your name on a paper is the same as your signature. It takes the place of the open space that was not left for the signature above the name. This is a real signature.

[Steve_Seattle]

Gorelick is clearly wrong in suggesting the policy wasn't hers - it went out under her name and she initialed it, and if that's not assuming responsibility for content, nothing is. The other question is: to what extent is this policy a departure from, or a tightening of, policies which everyone agrees go back much further. Is it simply a restatement of the old policy, or - as Ashcroft claimed - does it go much further, and did the specific requirements of this policy affect the behavior of FBI agents prior to 9-11?

[Outraged]

Your initials next to your name on a paper is the same as your signature. It takes the place of the open space that was not left for the signature above the name. This is a real signature.

The Washington Post Archives | October 9, 2000 | Vernon Loeb

"Tillie Fowler's (R - Fla.) bill creating a high-level White House coordinating council failed last week in the Senate after administration officials lobbied against it, leaving her locked in debate with the administration's counterterrorism chief over the nation's real ability to respond in the event of a terrorist attack.

Richard A. Clarke, who oversees $11 billion in counterterrorist programs as the National Security Council's coordinator of counterterrorism and computer security, agreed that efforts are fragmented. An interagency coordinating office within the FBI--the National Domestic Preparedness Office--he acknowledged, is "badly broken." But Clarke insists the country is far better prepared to respond to a terrorist attack than it was two years ago. And a new office for interagency coordination, he said, should not reside in the White House, as Fowler proposed.