9/11 Panel to reconsider Clarke statements

[conjur]

Nope...didn't fall for anything from the democratic party.

I follow NO party line. My opinions have formed from reading everything I have so far on this topic as well as what I've been on TV News.

I don't need some Party pundit to tell me what to think.

 

[outriding]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur



Clarke was not demoted. He had the same position. The position was changed to report to a deputy-level instead of a Principals-level. That shows right there that the Bush Administration was less concerned with counterterrorism than the previous administration.

I almost let that go, but that part right there in bold, well that is one of the many messages
that the democratic party is relying on to bury Bush..

It is not true or false or capable of being proved true or false.

It is typical emotional pandering and
you fell for it hook, line and sucker...

I was watching C-Span last night and it was a rerun of the 9/11 clarke testomony.

He described the amount of time that it takes to get something from the deputy level to the principal level.

He said it would take months to get something from deputy to principal. ( min. 3 closer to 6 months ) for anything
to get looked at.

It doesnt make sense to take a National security and have it so low.

Can anyone give me a good reason why something that involves national security would be of little concern to bush but all the rest of the presidents kept it a high concern ?