|
Condi Rice heads for the Hill (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MisterOpus1 |
More rebuttals on her testimony:
| quote: | Planes as Weapons
CLAIM: "I do not remember any reports to us, a kind of strategic warning, that planes might be used as weapons." [responding to Kean]
FACT: Condoleezza Rice was the top National Security official with President Bush at the July 2001 G-8 summit in Genoa. There, "U.S. officials were warned that Islamic terrorists might attempt to crash an airliner" into the summit, prompting officials to "close the airspace over Genoa and station antiaircraft guns at the city's airport." [Sources: Los Angeles Times, 9/27/01; White House release, 7/22/01]
CLAIM: "I was certainly not aware of [intelligence reports about planes as missiles] at the time that I spoke" in 2002. [responding to Kean]
FACT: While Rice may not have been aware of the 12 separate and explicit warnings about terrorists using planes as weapons when she made her denial in 2002, she did know about them when she wrote her March 22, 2004 Washington Post op-ed. In that piece, she once again repeated the claim there was no indication "that terrorists were preparing to attack the homeland using airplanes as missiles." [Source: Washington Post, 3/22/04]
August 6 PDB
CLAIM: There was "nothing about the threat of attack in the U.S." in the Presidential Daily Briefing the President received on August 6th. [responding to Ben Veniste]
FACT: Rice herself confirmed that "the title [of the PDB] was, 'Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.'" [Source: Condoleezza Rice, 4/8/04]
Domestic Threat
CLAIM: "One of the problems was there was really nothing that look like was going to happen inside the United States...Almost all of the reports focused on al-Qaida activities outside the United States, especially in the Middle East and North Africa...We did not have...threat information that was in any way specific enough to suggest something was coming in the United States." [responding to Gorelick]
FACT: Page 204 of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 noted that "In May 2001, the intelligence community obtained a report that Bin Laden supporters were planning to infiltrate the United States" to "carry out a terrorist operation using high explosives." The report "was included in an intelligence report for senior government officials in August [2001]." In the same month, the Pentagon "acquired and shared with other elements of the Intelligence Community information suggesting that seven persons associated with Bin Laden had departed various locations for Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States." [Sources: Joint Congressional Report, 12/02]
CLAIM: "If we had known an attack was coming against the United States...we would have moved heaven and earth to stop it." [responding to Roemer]
FACT: Rice admits that she was told that "an attack was coming." She said, "Let me read you some of the actual chatter that was picked up in that spring and summer: Unbelievable news coming in weeks, said one. Big event -- there will be a very, very, very, very big uproar. There will be attacks in the near future." [Source: Condoleezza Rice, 4/8/04]
Cheney Counterterrorism Task Force
CLAIM: "The Vice President was, a little later in, I think, in May, tasked by the President to put together a group to look at all of the recommendations that had been made about domestic preparedness and all of the questions associated with that." [responding to Fielding]
FACT: The Vice President's task force never once convened a meeting. In the same time period, the Vice President convened at least 10 meetings of his energy task force, and six meetings with Enron executives. [Source: Washington Post, 1/20/02; GAO Report, 8/03]
Principals Meetings
CLAIM: "The CSG (Counterterrorism Security Group) was made up of not junior people, but the top level of counterterrorism experts. Now, they were in contact with their principals." [responding to Fielding]
FACT: "Many of the other people at the CSG-level, and the people who were brought to the table from the domestic agencies, were not telling their principals. Secretary Mineta, the secretary of transportation, had no idea of the threat. The administrator of the FAA, responsible for security on our airlines, had no idea." [Source: 9/11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick, 4/8/04]
Previous Administration
CLAIM: "The decision that we made was to, first of all, have no drop-off in what the Clinton administration was doing, because clearly they had done a lot of work to deal with this very important priority." [responding to Kean]
FACT: Internal government documents show that while the Clinton Administration officially prioritized counterterrorism as a "Tier One" priority, but when the Bush Administration took office, top officials downgraded counterterrorism. As the Washington Post reported, these documents show that before Sept. 11 the Bush Administration "did not give terrorism top billing." Rice admitted that "we decided to take a different track" than the Clinton Administration in protecting America. [Source: Internal government documents, 1998-2001; Washington Post, 3/22/04; Rice testimony, 4/8/04]
FBI
CLAIM: The Bush Administration has been committed to the "transformation of the FBI into an agency dedicated to fighting terror." [responding to Kean]
FACT: Before 9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft de-emphasized counterterrorism at the FBI, in favor of more traditional law enforcement. And according to the Washington Post, "in the early days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the Bush White House cut by nearly two-thirds an emergency request for counterterrorism funds by the FBI, an internal administration budget document shows." And according to a new report by the Congressional Research Service, "numerous confidential law enforcement and intelligence sources who challenge the FBI's claim that it has successfully retooled itself to gather critical intelligence on terrorists as well as fight crime." [Source: Washington Post, 3/22/04; Congressional Quarterly, 4/6/04]
CLAIM: "The FBI issued at least three nationwide warnings to federal, state and law enforcement agencies and specifically stated that, although the vast majority of the information indicated overseas targets, attacks against the homeland could not be ruled out. The FBI tasked all 56 of its U.S. field offices to increase surveillance of known suspects of terrorists and to reach out to known informants who might have information on terrorist activities." [responding to Gorelick]
FACT: The warnings are "feckless. They don't tell anybody anything. They don't bring anyone to battle stations." [Source: 9/11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick, 4/8/04]
Homeland Security
CLAIM: "I think that having a Homeland Security Department that can bring together the FAA and the INS and Customs and all of the various agencies is a very important step." [responding to Hamilton]
FACT: The White House vehemently opposed the creation of the Department of Homeland security. Its opposition to the concept delayed the creation of the department by months.
CLAIM: "We have created a threat terrorism information center, the TTIC, which does bring together all of the sources of information from all of the intelligence agencies -- the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security and the INS and the CIA and the DIA -- so that there's one place where all of this is coming together." [responding to Fielding]
FACT: "Knowledgeable sources complain that the president's new Terrorist Threat Integration Center, which reports to CIA Director George Tenet rather than to Ridge, has created more of a moat than a bridge. The ability to spot the nation's weakest points was going to make Homeland Security different, recalled one person involved in the decision to set up TTIC. But now, the person said, 'that whole effort has been gutted by the White House creation of TTIC, [which] has served little more than to give the appearance of progress.'" [Source: National Journal, 3/6/04]
IRAQ-9/11
CLAIM: "There was a discussion of Iraq. I think it was raised by Don Rumsfeld. It was pressed a bit by Paul Wolfowitz."
FACT: Rice's statement confirms previous proof that the Administration was focusing on Iraq immediately after 9/11, despite having no proof that Iraq was involved in the attack. Rice's statement also contradicts her previous denials in which she claimed "Iraq was to the side" immediately after 9/11. She made this denial despite the President signing "a 2-and-a-half-page document marked 'TOP SECRET'" six days after 9/11 that "directed the Pentagon to begin planning military options for an invasion of Iraq." [Source: Condoleezza Rice, 3/22/04, 3/22/04; Washington Post, 1/12/03]
CLAIM: "Given that this was a global war on terror, should we look not just at Afghanistan but should we look at doing something against Iraq?"
FACT: The Administration has not produced one shred of evidence that Iraq had an operational relationship with Al Qaeda, or that Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11 attacks on America. In fact, a U.S. Army War College report said that the war in Iraq has been a diversion that has drained key resources from the more imminent War on Terror. Just this week, USA Today reported that "in 2002, troops from the 5th Special Forces Group who specialize in the Middle East were pulled out of the hunt for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for their next assignment: Iraq." Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL) confirmed this, noting in February of 2002, a senior military commander told him "We are moving military and intelligence personnel and resources out of Afghanistan to get ready for a future war in Iraq." [Sources: CNN, 1/13/04; USA Today, 3/28/04; Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), 3/26/04]
War on Terror
CLAIM: After 9/11, "the President put states on notice if they were sponsoring terrorists."
FACT: The President continues to say Saudi Arabia is "our friend" despite their potential ties to terrorists. As the LA Times reported, "the 27 classified pages of a congressional report about Sept. 11 depict a Saudi government that not only provided significant money and aid to the suicide hijackers but also allowed potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to flow to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups through suspect charities and other fronts." Just this week, Newsweek reported "within weeks of the September 11 terror attacks, security officers at the Fleet National Bank in Boston had identified 'suspicious' wire transfers from the Saudi Embassy in Washington that eventually led to the discovery of an active Al Qaeda 'sleeper cell' that may have been planning follow-up attacks inside the United States." [Source: LA Times, 8/2/03; CNN, 11/23/02; Newsweek, 4/7/04]
http://www.americanprogress.org/sit...JRJ8OVF&b=44918 |
Hmmmm, whom should we believe, Clarke or Rice?
Boy, that sure is a tough one... |
|
|
| xKaoSx |
That's some crazy right there.
I didnt know about 1/2 of that stuff.
How can anyone argue with those facts? (Im not tracking down to verify them :D ) |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
One more thing to add and then I'm done.
You know when Scott McClellan complained last month that when Rice met privately with the 9/11 Commission members with only 5 of them showing up (accusing a lack of interest on the Commissioners' part)? Well, he kind of left off that part about the White House sending the Commission a letter on Nov.21, months before her March inquiry, saying that no more than 3 commissioners could attend meetings with White House aides of Rice's ranks:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...iticismdisputed
Kind of an important tidbit to leave out to the Press, isin't it Mr. McClellan?
When you leave out facts in a story, does that not constitute a lie? |
|
|
| xKaoSx |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
One more thing to add and then I'm done.
You know when Scott McClellan complained last month that when Rice met privately with the 9/11 Commission members with only 5 of them showing up (accusing a lack of interest on the Commissioners' part)? Well, he kind of left off that part about the White House sending the Commission a letter on Nov.21, months before her March inquiry, saying that no more than 3 commissioners could attend meetings with White House aides of Rice's ranks:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...iticismdisputed
Kind of an important tidbit to leave out to the Press, isin't it Mr. McClellan?
When you leave out facts in a story, does that not constitute a lie? |
I dont know if it would constitute a lie- but it is just shady in general.
My ex would leave out little facts all the time. :(
If you dont ask the right questions you will not get the right answers. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
theres no doubt thats what whoever sent the fax in the article was trying to infer. What the hell were you trying to infer by posting it?
How about you read it again?
"The point was clear: the White House could no longer get away with the claim that Rice's appearance would be a profound breach of precedent"
crystal! |
Okay, one more time for you.
You said, "The first point of this article, equating the national security advisor to the chairman of the joint chiefs, is absurd."
The point of it was the disclosure of the fact that the White House was wrong in claiming that Condi's appearance would be a breach of precedent, not an equation of one position to another.
It's easy to tell that you're a propagandist by the way you try to skew the article - and the facts presented. |
|
|
| PHALPAX |
| MisterOpus is the liberal messiah of TA:D |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
Okay, one more time for you.
You said, "The first point of this article, equating the national security advisor to the chairman of the joint chiefs, is absurd."
The point of it was the disclosure of the fact that the White House was wrong in claiming that Condi's appearance would be a breach of precedent, not an equation of one position to another.
It's easy to tell that you're a propagandist by the way you try to skew the article - and the facts presented. |
"The grainy photograph rolled off the fax machine at the White House counsel's office last Monday morning, along with a scribbled note that smacked of blackmail. If the White House didn't allow national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice to testify in public before the 9/11 commission, it read, "This will be all over Washington in 24 hours."
"White House aide says it is "fatuous" to say the Leahy photo forced the White House to capitulate. But after battling with the panel for nearly a year over documents and testimony, the White House finally relented and said Rice would testify publicly under oath."
Whoever sent the fax of Leahy testifiying is trying to equate positions. By doing so he is wrong in trying to link precedent. Thats my point!
The rest of the article conjecture (propaganda)
Hey, you posted it!
Hi Pot, my name is Kettle.
later dude. |
|
|
| smokeape |
| quote: | Condoleezza Rice Has Nothing To Hide, Inks Deal With PlayBoy
March 30, 2004
By Staff
Washington, DC- Claiming she has nothing to hide, Condoleezza Rice announced today that she has signed a deal to appear in PlayBoy magazine.
Rice will appear in PlayBoy's "April Fools", for fools edition, which hits news stands April 1st. The DH has learned that Rice will share the cover with famed pop star Janet Jackson, who herself proved she had nothing to hide during this year's Super-Bowl half time show.
During a press conference earlier today, Rice confirmed she reached a deal to appear in PlayBoy for a rumored $86.
"I've decided to bare my hole soul to the American people", said Rice. Condoleezza continued, "I can't think of any better method to prove I have absolutely nothing to hide, it just seemed like the natural thing to do".
Most Democrats present at the press conference wanted to wait and see their own "April Fools" edition before passing any judgment on Condoleezza Rice's attempt to come clean.
Some Democrats were more than glad to exercise their tongue.
"I'm happy to hear she wants to come clean", said Senator John Kerry. "I have the highest respect for a woman who can come clean, there's nothing worse than a sloppy National Security Adviser ", added Kerry.
Senator John Edwards told the Daily Hog that he's been placed in difficult the position of choosing between two Bush's. "Although the decision is a difficult one, if forced to, I'd choose to come clean between Condoleezza's Bush", said the Senator. |
Don't laugh. $86 buys alot of beer!
Lol!
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| igottaknow |
Mister Opus good post. It's clear the tools of the current administration are lies and more lies. Reminds me of Regan’s famous defense I do not recall. All their schemes are slowly unraveling before our very eyes. Condi looks like she's fighting a war inside her head, one I might add she appears to be losing.
It's ironic that Bush has repeatedly criticized Kerry for flip flopping, but all Bush has done of late is flip-flop. First he said he didn't want a commission, then he said it should be only done after the elections, then he claimed executive privilege preventing Condi from testifying. After each decision he made he reversed himself. He has as much back bone as a jellyfish. :haha: |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
Mister Opus good post. It's clear the tools of the current administration are lies and more lies. Reminds me of Regan’s famous defense I do not recall. All their schemes are slowly unraveling before our very eyes. Condi looks like she's fighting a war inside her head, one I might add she appears to be losing.
It's ironic that Bush has repeatedly criticized Kerry for flip flopping, but all Bush has done of late is flip-flop. First he said he didn't want a commission, then he said it should be only done after the elections, then he claimed executive privilege preventing Condi from testifying. After each decision he made he reversed himself. He has as much back bone as a jellyfish. :haha: |
Enlighten us on what their "scheme" was.
The only time I remember him saying that he didn't want a commission was when his first 9/11 commission fell apart for reasons that he had no control over.
He didn't claim executive privilege, he had executive privilege. After two weeks of pressure, Rice testified. |
|
|
| arctic |
| quote: | Originally posted by PHALPAX
MisterOpus is the liberal messiah of TA:D |
Agreed, great post(s) MisterOpus. I know it was honest reporting style, but hey, I can make exceptions now and then. :p |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
Enlighten us on what their "scheme" was. |
I would if only i could break into their secret society
| quote: | | The only time I remember him saying that he didn't want a commission was when his first 9/11 commission fell apart for reasons that he had no control over. |
selective memory is a requirment to work in this admin, i think you would fit right in. :p
| quote: | | He didn't claim executive privilege, he had executive privilege. After two weeks of pressure, Rice testified. |
I thought Bush was such a man of principle, he would stand by his convictions no matter what and wouldn't cave into public pressure?
It's sad how Bush and his followers have fought every step of the way to prevent the facts from coming out about the government failures that allowed for 9/11 to happen. They are more concerned about protecting their political asses than protecting the country against terrorist. We deserve better, that's why I'm glad that the commission is trying to do something. |
|
|
|
|
