Kerry is saying this in reaction to Republican calls to discredit Richard Clarke who served as terrorism czar for three administrations, including the Bush 41 Admin. While still under employment of the USGov, back in 2002, Clarke gave classified testimony to Congress that apparently praised Bush 43's behavior in the war on terror. Now that he is no longer an employee of the USGov and he is speaking out against King George's behavior, he is being held to task for his words.
Forget the fact that part of his job was to do what he was told. In his testimony on March 24, 2004, he defended the 2002 testimony by explaining that he was told to accentuate the positive. Putting it bluntly, he did his job and spun the situation so it sounded good. Now that he's spinning it the other way, Republicans want his head. They even accused him of being "immoral" for spinning Bush's behavior in a positive direction despite Clarke's personal feelings on TWAT (The War Against Terror). To that accusation, Clarke responded with what sure seems like the truth. He said that it was strictly a political move. This seems to suggest that he did it to protect his own career, at the time.
Here's where Kerry comes in. He's now goading King George to go after Clarke. Clarke is the guy standing up for what's right here and Kerry wants to see Bush go after him. This is not the act of a man who wants to see the truth come out. Kerry should be behind Clarke saying things like:
"If it's true, Bush has got some explaining to do."
or
"Why was Bush so impotent in the war on terror? Because he didn't realize how it could help him - after 911, he took full advantage of terrorism and still does, to this day."
Instead, Kerry is protecting what he believes to be his future job. He is showing us all that if we speak out against anything the government does that is wrong we will get attacked, despite our courage and despite the fact that it's the right thing to do.
Clarke is on the side of the people, here - he is showing us how Bush and his administration has changed negatively since 911 and how things could have been done to stop 911. Kerry swoops in and plays the role of the instigator, the antagonizer. He is NOT on our side and I am concerned that if he makes it into office there will be few changes. I'm still going to vote for him, but only because I know for a fact that Bush 43 needs to be forced out of his job.
But Kerry - I just don't understand why he's come out on this side of the argument. He should be attacking Bush - not siding with him. Maybe this is still because of that damn fraternity they have common...
Read an AFP article that covers Kerry's comments over at Yahoo News.
From the AFP and Yahoo News.Com:
Kerry challenges Bush to prosecute Clarke if former anti-terrorism advisor lied - CBS
NEW YORK (AFP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) challenged President George W. Bush (news - web sites) to prosecute former national security aide Richard Clarke if they can show that he lied about terrorism policy.
"My challenge to the Bush administration would be, if (Clarke) is not believable and they have reason to show it, then prosecute him for perjury because he is under oath, Kerry told CBS's MarketWatch.
"They have a perfect right to do that," said Kerry.
Republicans in Congress want to declassify testimony Clarke gave before Congress in 2002 that they claim is at odds with accounts critical of the administration in the aide's recently published book.
Clarke, a counter-terrorism advisor to three presidents, published a book this week entitled "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror," in which he claims the Bush administration failed to heed warnings of the September 11, 2001 attacks and then focused its attention on Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) rather than al-Qaeda.
He repeated the allegations under oath in testimony before a congressional committee.
The charges prompted an aggressive response from the White House, amid apparent concerns that they could undermine the president's re-election bid in November.Copyright © 2004 Agence France Presse.
Hi,
ReplyDeleteJust came across this post, way late. Kerry was calling their bluff. Have you noticed that a year later they still have not tried to prosecute Clarke?
You've got a point there!
ReplyDeleteToo bad it didn't help him at all.
And we're still trapped on Bizarro World, anyway.