Panel to reconsider Clarke statements

THE WASHINGTON TIMES ^ | 4-7-04 | James G. Lakely

[Indy Pendance]

The September 11 commission will look at the discrepancy between the testimony of Richard A. Clarke that the Clinton administration considered the threat of al Qaeda "urgent" and its final national-security report to Congress, which gave the terror organization scant mention.

[Oorang]

What a fool (Clarke) to tell such a blatant lie where he would be so easily caught. Says quite a bit about his character (none) and integrity (in the gutter).

Whew. I feel better.

[PhilDragoo]

Queer Eye for National Security
Thursdays on Err America

[potlatch]

You 'outdo' yourself, as usual!!

[MEGoody]

"If an attack against us was necessary to get the American people behind a presidential action against the terrorists, then Clinton should have acted, and DID NOT."

I agree - the Clinton administration should have taken action. But I seriously doubt that the majority of American people would have been behind any action he would have taken anyway.

By no means am I a Clinton apologist - I can't stand the guy. But the blame for not taking action is, at the very least, shared by the American people who prefer to be 'fat and happy' and not have to think about the tough choices of life.