I'm still waiting for The New York Times to report on Dick Cheney's blatant lie at the National Press Club about Richard Clarke: "He was head of counterintelligence leading up to 9/11. He obviously missed it."
Jon's reaction: "Holy [bleeped] shit. Did he just blame 9/11 on Richard Clarke? The same Richard Clark who five days after Bush was inaugurated sent Condolessa Rice a letter warning them about the threat of Al Qaeda and asking for a high level meeting? [which never happened until after 9/11] The same Richard Clarke who on September 4th, one week before 9/11, sent a memo warning them of Al Qaeda and an attack?"
Why did this not at least make page 18 of The Times in a tiny paragraph, if not in fact blazing headlines on the front page? And why did the assembled journalists not boo Cheney off the stage?
No wonder more and more people say they get their news from The Daily Show and the blogs.
Ralph
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It is even more remarkable than that. Richard Clarke was frantic for the whole year before 9/11. I don't know if you've doscovered the timelines at history commons. They are remarkably thorough with linkes to contemporary articles. Just the thing for keeping up with Cheney's lies and distortions. The operative one is "the complete 9/11 timeline"...
ReplyDeleteThanks for this invaluable resource. I was not aware of it.
ReplyDelete