I was in an emergency waiting room for a loved one this afternoon. She thought she had a stroke, but everything looks ok so far thank God. We will know more tomorrow after more tests are done.
I had a long stint in the waiting room that coincided with Clarke’s testimony playing on a TV. I came away further pissed off at how the Bush administration flails at his character instead of answering the important concerns he has brought up. Two of the Republicans on the board, instead of asking hard questions, made insinuations into his motives and morals.
Folks – when people attack the messenger instead of the message – they are attempting to hide you from the truth.
Fred Kaplan, a journalist for Slate who had been stiffed by Clark 15 years ago and hasn’t spoken to him since says he’s telling the truth. How he handled the stand made me further believe it. He comes off as a true public servant.
Where are you Condi? If you had any honor – you would be on the stand. If you loved your country, you would be on the stand. Instead, it’s obvious you value your loyalty to the President over that of the American people.
“Ultimately, you?re answerable to We the People, not President Bush, Condi. We the People want to know what the hell went on ? not what you think of Mr. Clarke.”: dangerousmeta says it better.
I’ve been watching this story move along the last few days. I see the same thing. You’re correct they have alot of people coming out of the woodwork. All of them are trying to discredit Clarke.
I sat with my wife the other night as this one guy came out attacking Clarke’s credibility on CNN.
And it was obvious that they do not want to answer the true questions that Clarke has alluded to.
If Dr Rice, doesn’t go in front of the 911 panel and testify in front of the public, we have no other choice but to believe that she is trying to either protect someone or hide something.
The TRUTH is out there….
Did you know that Clark did NOT take the stand in front of a Senate committee in July 1999, per the Y2K investigation citing “priviledge”? Did you also know that his nomination for a cabinet postion was withdrawn? Could it be he’s pissed off?
Let me see…. Bush is lying, Rice is lying, Collin is lying, Rumsfeld is lying… everybody’s lying, but Clark is telling the truth??? You gotta’ be a Democrat!!
Why is it so easy for you to believe that everybody is lying except for the person you want to believe?
It’s people like you that make me more Republican every day!
Whatever scott. Whatever.
When talk is more about the credibility of someone – instead of the allegations – then you know something is going on.
Lets have the concerns in question answered.
Oh – and no one in this short thread said anything you just said they did – putting words in people’s mouths is another argument technique to change the subject.
It’s the allegations. They should be fully vetted to the public. The subject matter is too important to argue in circles.
If Clarke’s allegations proove false, THEN his character should be attacked. Otherwise – lets just find out what the truth is about what went down to try and keep ourselves from shooting ourselves in the foot in the future.
Scott,
Yeah I am a Dem, a Lib, or whatever you want to call me. I am someone just like the rest of America. We all have our voices, and the voice of the people says: WE WANT ANSWERS.
If Clarke is full of BS, so be it.
Just like Karl said, get to the bottom of this thing and clear away ALL the unknowns.
I find it hard to believe that Dr. Rice finds time for 60 minutes, yet due to government policy she is “Prevented,” from giving testimony in public.
That sounds like a nice excuse to not tell what you know. When I look at her on TV and in the papers, my gut tells me there something she is hiding. Where there is smoke, there is fire.
But you know what? Its all going to be fine. In November when the election comes we’re tossing alot of these assclowns and liars off the ship. Government by the people, for the people.
WE THE PEOPLE
Vote Kerry In November!
Know Your Enemy
Finally!
As reported on wpvi.com
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/news/33004-rice.html
Rice to Testify Before 9/11 Commission
WASHINGTON March 30, 2004 ? National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will be allowed to testify in public under oath before the commission investigating the failure to prevent the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, an administration official said Tuesday.
The official said the decision is conditioned on the Bush administration receiving assurances in writing from the commission that such a step does not set a precedent, said the official speaking on condition of anonymity. It appeared the administration already had such assurances verbally in private and is confident it will get them in writing.
White House legal counsel Alberto Gonzales has sent a letter to the commission stating that Rice is prepared to testify publicly as long as the administration receives assurances from the panel that this is not precedent setting, the official said.
Congressional leaders, the official added, have already stated that this would not be a new precedent.
Rice had appeared before the panel in private, but the White House had refused to make her available to testify in public.
“Nothing would be better, from my point of view, than to be able to testify” to the commission, Rice said in a “60 Minutes” interview broadcast Sunday.
But, she added, “there is an important principle involved here: It is a long-standing principle that sitting national security advisers do not testify before the Congress.”