Ahira's Hangar

Ok, Richard Clark, former chief of terrorism information and action in four administrations (brought on board by R. Reagan, served with George Bush, William Clinton, and George W. Bush) wrote a book about his years of service and some assessments of administrations he served under. Been much in the news this last week. Anyone care to comment? taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i></i>

Doesn't it all boil down to Kondelina Rice's pubilc testimony? *****
Before, you are wise; after, you are wise. In between you are otherwise.
Fravashi saying (from the formularies of Osho the Fool) <i></i>

Condalysa Rice? Well, I'm far from sure that if she gave a testimony or even made a public statement, all questions would be answered. If her statements agree with Dick (the attack dog) Cheney, then there will be questions about their absolute veracity, the responses will go like this "well, she was coached to agree with the current administration tack, that Mr. Clark was really out of the loop and not a player in the discussions, so can make no definitive or authoritative statements about what the official policy focus (Iraq or Al Qaeda domestic or foreign threats, or all) was." IOW, she has fallen on her own sword. If statements disagree with the Dick Cheney (consequently, they agree with Mr. Clark's more than not), well that really stirs the pot.

Lastly, not having her give a sworn statement to the 9/11 commission, really does make Cheney, Rumsfeild, Ashcroft, et. al., look like they're trying to cover something up. This is deja vu all over again. If there is nothing to hide, do not look like you're covering up.

Do I believe there's a cover up, do I even believe there's anything to cover up? Well, I do not know. taraswizard
Allan Rosewarne N9SQT/WDX6HQV
Chicago area
W/T forever, always
Plan C - http://planc.bravepages.com/main.html<i></i>

Well, it seems to me like the hearings have become far too politicized to be of much value. Which is a shame, but I guess it was inevitable in an election year.

Weirdly enough, I actually agree with the White House position on Condoleezza Rice testifying. I think the principle is correct, whether or not they're using it cynically, and I hope they stick to their guns. ******************

To seek the sacred river Alph, to walk the caves of ice ...<i></i>

My question is this:
If she can go on ALL the news programs & speak to the talking heads about this, why cant she sit & answer questions from the people's representatives??????
That part pisses me off - it's a total double standard, which has only the best interests of the present administration in mind, not the American public. Cripple but free; I was blind all the time I was learning to see<i></i>