Clarke 2, Rice 0

From WaPo comes this:

On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals.

The speech provides telling insight into the administration's thinking on the very day that the United States suffered the most devastating attack since the 1941 bombing of Pearl Harbor. The address was designed to promote missile defense as the cornerstone of a new national security strategy, and contained no mention of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or Islamic extremist groups, according to former U.S. officials who have seen the text.

Much more at link

The speech was obviously not given by Rice with this emphasis. The amended speech Rice delivered prominently featured Islamic terrorists, and gave only cursory mention to missile defense.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Clarke is a lot more right than wrong. I have yet to see anything substantive that Clarke has alleged to be effectively refuted.