Not to mention that they tried to bluff by threatening to release some of
Clarke's emails publicly. When Clarke told the media it was a good idea,
and they should do the same to Rice's, the admin didn't know what to do.
I don't understand. This administration has been lying, cheating and
bamboozling everyone and for what? They lied about WMDS. They lied about
Al Queda-Saddam Hussein links. They lied about not taking terrorism
seriously prior to 9/11. They used deceitful lawyering of UN resolutions
(Material Breach) to invade Iraq. They lied about Iraqis greeting us with
open arms, when in fact they had started blowing GI's brains out no sooner
than Saddam's statues were pulled down. I think that impeachments and
possibly criminal investigations are called for at the highest levels.
Powell, has already starting spilling the beans about intelligence on WMDs
were never solid to begin with?? The two hour speech and fancy animation at
the UN in February 2003, was nothing more than a waste of time?
Finally, we find that not only was Clarke most likely truthful in what he
said, but that Rice's had made a speech prior to 9/11 and one that was going
to read on 9/11, which had nothing to do with terrorism, nor Al Queda?
Moreover, it was bad enough that Bush had to be pressured to let Rice speak
under oath, but he and ***** Cheney refuse to speak to the commission under
oath! The American President and Vice President, will not address public
policy and national security mishaps under oath?
As a person with a master's in Public Management I am appalled. This is a
serious case of malfeasance, and it violates the government ethics of
"perceived unethical acts". Justice Scalia is yet one more to add to this
troubling rise of perceived unethical behavior in public office.
---Are you a debater? Discuss Politics, Race Relations, Gay Rights and
Marvel or DC characters.
http://www.comicboards.org
"---= Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí =---" <abuse@anarchy.gov> wrote in message
news:OBK94BEA5BC4346B0001138@r2-dv8.anarchy.gov...
A long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, "Acharya"
<acharya@hawaii.rr.com>
wrote:
That is a circular argument.
How about: not according to Condoleeza Rice's public statements which
contradicted Cheney's allegation?
You see, the Bu$h administration was caught in another lie. They realized
if
they claimed their chief anti-terror secretary was "out of the loop"
they'd
look pretty foolish and incompetent. That's why they changed their story
after Cheney tried to portray Clarke as a "nobody".
Clarke served through three presidential administrations and Cheney goes
out
and calls him "out of the loop." Cheney's a real *****.
"NoPlutocracyUSA" <person332XFG400201@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:B-OdnTemor-AK_rd4p2dnA@adelphia.com...
"Acharya" <acharya@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:kmO9c.24146$Lq4.6261@twister.socal.rr.com...
Clarke is out of the intelligence loop.
Not according to Clarke's under oath testimony.
--
--==( Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí )====-- ----- --- - --- ----
R.ebel A.lliance G.alactic U.senet N.ews S.ervice
---- --- ---====================-------- - --------
http://www.president-bush.com/gulfwars.jpg
http://tlf.cx/bilder/bush_nkpm.jpg
http://www.aracnet.com/~allied/images/bush_vader.jpg
http://members.chello.nl/r.kremers/darth.jpg
http://www.mncollegedems.org/DarthBush.jpg
http://www.mingthemerciless.com/atat.html
http://www.bloodforoil.org/
.
