Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Isn't That Interesting

Rice challenges Clinton on terror record - 26 Sep 2006 at 8:11am - NEW YORK -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice challenged former President Clinton's claim that he did more than many of his conservative critics to pursue Osama bin Laden, and she accused President Bush's predecessor of leaving no comprehensive plan to fight al-Qaida.

Rice: Clinton Claims 'Flatly False' - 26 Sep 2006 at 8:45am - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice disputed ex-President Clinton's claim that the Bush administration didn't actively pursue al Qaeda before Sept. 11, 2001. Rice said the Bush White House was "at least as aggressive" as the Clinton administration.

Isn't this the same Condoleezza Rice who, shortly after the Sep-11-2001 terrorist attacks, justified the Bush administration's inaction against terror by explaining that it disagreed with the Clinton administration's approach and had therefore put anti-terrorism efforts on hold while it was in the process of developing a superior plan?

Intel Chief: U.S. Not At Higher Risk - 26 Sep 2006 at 8:25am - National Intelligence Director John Negroponte acknowledged a new generation of terrorists was emerging from Iraq, but rejected claims stemming from a leaked government report that the U.S. is at a greater risk of attack than it was in 2001.

So, I guess, even though the IraqAttaq has resulted in there now being more terrorists than ever, we're safer than when there were fewer terrorists because... we now remove our shoes in airports?

Rumsfeld enlists Montenegro in war on terrorism - 26 Sep 2006 at 8:21am - PODGORICA, Montenegro (Reuters) - U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Tuesday enlisted the support of Europe's newest state in the war on terrorism and promised to help train Montenegro's modest army of 2,500 to NATO standards.

But this will have no impact, right? Just as losing the support of Italy would have no impact? And just as losing the support of Poland would have no impact?

Bush to declassify part of NIE - 26 Sep 2006 at 11:57am - WASHINGTON -- President Bush on Tuesday said it is naive and a mistake to think that the war with Iraq has worsened terrorism, disputing a national intelligence assessment by his own administration. He said he was declassifying part of the report.
Only the good parts? Is it any less naïve to assume, as Bush, Rush, and their ilk seem to assume, that any U.S. use of military must necessarily make the U.S. more secure?

"Here we are coming down the stretch in an election campaign and it's on the front page of your newspapers," Bush said.
"Isn't that interesting? Somebody took it upon themselves to leak classified information for political purposes."
Perhaps if he hadn't spent the last five months trying to convince his constituents that what's reportedly in the April NIE isn't true, it wouldn't be quite so interesting now. What I find at least as interesting is how many of the same people who insisted on a straight yes-he-has-them-or-no-he-doesn't conclusion on the Saddam/WMD question are now insisting on a "nuanced" interpretation of the April Iraq war NIE.

Dems lose vote for closed House session - 26 Sep 2006 at 1:59pm - WASHINGTON -- Democrats failed Tuesday to push the House into an unusual secret session to discuss a classified intelligence analysis on global terrorism that says the Iraq war is nourishing a new generation of extremist operatives.

Congress unlikely to pass wiretapping - 26 Sep 2006 at 2:05pm - WASHINGTON -- Congress is unlikely to approve a bill giving President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program legal status and new restrictions before the November midterm elections, dealing a significant blow to one of the White House's top wartime priorities.


Post a Comment

<< Home