Rice Withholding Testimony for Her Own Book
(2004-03-29) -- U.S. National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said today that she doesn't want to testify before the commission investigating the 9/11 terror attacks because she's witholding "insider information" for her own book to be released when her government career is over.
"Richard Clarke's book is flying off the shelves because people think he has some secret information about the Bush administration," said Ms. Rice. "In contrast with Mr. Clarke, I have actually had meetings with the president. I'd like to cash a few royalty checks myself, so I'm going to avoid spilling my guts for free on the public airwaves if I can."
Ms. Rice added, "For now, I think I'll just start spinning--you know, saying things I don't believe--since that seems to be the prerequisite for garnering credibility in this genre."
lol
instead of attacking the accuser. To me, it makes them look bad.
-- Modified on 3/30/2004 8:22:10 PM
Actually, they knew about the World Trade Center attacks (only cause OBD told em) but Bush couldn't wait to get in his jumpsuit to play fighter pilot and Rice wouldn't mind writting a book (of course, Bush will wait for the movie).
Yeah, sure.
'Cept you on the far left love to attack Bush as a dunce, or a toady of oil interests, or a liar. I love it when hypocritical Libs start spouting appeals to objective criteria that they violate themselves every day.
The fact is, Hussein had WMDs, and used them. Whether we can find them now cannot disparage that historical fact. Fact is, Hussein paid rewards to families of homicide bombers in Israel, killed thousands of Iranians and Kurds with poison gas, built a nuclear reactor (with French help) that would even now be producing weapons grade materials but for the foresight of Israel in '80 or '81, and invaded a neighboring country.
Bush isn't stupid, but a good case could have been made that he is if he hadn't asked whether Iraq was behind 9/11 in the immediate aftermath.
And attacking Clarke is wholly proper, particularly in light of the fact that his most damning accusations are based upon his personal observations and assessments of demeanor. And the fact is, since he's now saying something different than he said on background in 2002, the question of whether he is lying now, or he was lying then, is properly raised and considered.
There is a rumor going around the web that she wants to have the love child of at least one high level administration official. Is it Bush, Cheney, Rummie, ...?
LOL
bush only does things with 4 legs..moooooooooooooooooooooooo