  urlLink FOXNews.com - Politics - White House Rebuts Former Adviser's Claims The media's latest little darling - Richard Clarke. Let's see what could motivate him - 1. ) He has a book coming out tomorrow. 2. ) He was demoted by Bush within the National Security COuncil staff after a 30 year career. 3. ) He has ties to the Kerry campaign and said that Clinton would have prevented 9/11. He sounds like another so called 'apolitical' career government flack. The same sort of people who work in the State Department and make secret calls to the NYT to make up stories about schisms between Powell and Bush.
So the President instructed Clarke to 'found out if it was Saddam' after 9/11. I would be a little more concerned if the President said 'Don't look into Saddam and Iraq because the UN program is moving forward just fine. ' Why is Saddam so sacred to the Left? Why are they so bent out of shape over going after Saddam, even if it turns out that he had nothing to do with 9/11? Why are they trying to get us to live by these rules that we can't take out the bad guys until they hit us? If you had a neighbor who was waving a gun around and threatening you, are you supposed to wait for him to actually shoot a family member before doing something about it? If a crook waves a gun at a cop and later it is found to be unloaded, should we crucify the cop? I just don't understand. I don't understand the driving need to destroy what we have done. I don't understand the need to weaken our nation for the sake of politics.
And now Hans is out with his book, saying the war was unjust and the UN was going along just fine. I really would like to know why Saddam continued to dey us if he had already disarmed. I'm still convinced the weapons are there somewhere. They'll turn up in ten or twenty years, not that anyone will really care. 
