Replies

The rumors and pre-publicity I have read about this latest so called "Bush-Bash-Book" have been rather ambiguous. Now, I see that it includes plenty of criticism of Clinton, the FBI, and no doubt the State Department. This may be just another "to-be-discredited" fizzle, as facts and events overshadow any of the author's "revelations". It may say more about the viciousness of the internecine warfare within the "Intelligence Community" than about Bush's doctrine, policies or performance in the War on Terror.

So far, we have seen one after another of these anti-Bush Book fests fall flat, as facts that undermine their main contentions come out. Richard Clark turned out to be so confused and unreliable that he contradicts himself between his book, his previous public interviews, and his DNC orchestrated 9/11 Committee appearance and book tour. Now we hear that reason to believe that Iraq "tried" to purchase yellow-cake from Niger remains strong and corroborated. Scratch Wilson and his phony baloney "mint tea investigation". WMDs are being found, and more information hinting at Saddam's Syrian burial of the rest is coming out.

As of the 16th of this month, the 9/11 Commission has made the determination, buried in the staff report and unreported by the mainstream press, that Bush's policies have been very effective in degrading the effectiveness of Al Qaida, in multiple ways. So... Anonymous might be wise to remain Anonymous, to avoid the ultimate embarrassment of being proven wrong, ...again.