Rice to Give Testimony.........

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Rice to Give Testimony.........
93
Thu, 04-08-2004 - 10:05am
Bush aide gives 9/11 testimony.

 



President George W Bush understood the threat from al-Qaeda well before 11 September, his national security adviser Condoleezza Rice has said.

Ms Rice is appearing before the body looking into the 2001 attacks.

"President Bush understood the threat, and he understood its importance," she told the commission.

Ms Rice is testifying in public about policy in the months before the attacks after Mr Bush reversed a decision to refuse the commission's request.


In her opening statement she said: "(President Bush) made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al-Qaeda one attack at a time.

"He told me he was 'tired of swatting flies.'"


Ms Rice told the commission: "There was no silver bullet that could have prevented" the devastating attacks on New York and Washington.


The US "simply was not on a war footing", she said.

"For more than 20 years, the terrorist threat was growing, and America's response across several administrations of both parties was insufficient," Ms Rice said.

Observers say Mr Rice's evidence could be vital for Mr Bush's re-election chances.

It is also being seen as a key moment in her own political career, with some tipping her as a future secretary of state or even president.

Her testimony is being covered by all the main US television networks.

She is expected to face intense questioning by the 9/11 commission - a panel of Republicans and Democrats charged with examining all the circumstances of the 2001 attacks, and setting out the lessons to be learned.

They will put to her accusations made by the former White House counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke two weeks ago.

In his testimony - and in a book on the George Bush presidency - he accused the administration of ignoring his warnings about al-Qaeda, and of being fixated with Iraq.

When he appeared before the commission he made a dramatic apology.

"Your government failed you, and I failed you," he said.

Ms Rice did not offer an apology as the White House said the administration felt it had done all it could to prevent the attacks, based on the information available.

But she said: "As an officer of government on duty that day, I will never forget the sorrow and the anger I felt."


The White House had originally refused to let Ms Rice testify, arguing that she was in a privileged position as a presidential adviser and that it would set the wrong precedent.


However it relented after a political row.

The White House has also hinted it may change course and release a speech Miss Rice was due to give on 11 September 2001, but which was never made because of the atrocities.

The speech apparently stressed the need for missile defence, rather than a war on terrorism.

Mr Bush's national security credentials, which are central to his re-election campaign, may depend on Miss Rice's testimony.

Patty Casazza of New Jersey, whose husband died in the World Trade Center attacks, said she hoped the appearance would make things much clearer.

"Her testimony will either undermine our confidence in this administration or bolster it," she told the Associated Press news agency.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2004
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 10:37pm
I've followed everything until now, and yes ma'am he has apologized. The families there clapping for the man that tried to defend them and their lost loves ones should be ashamed. He could have been a piss ant like Bush and done nothing, but he didn't. :-)
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2004
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 10:39pm
If you want to rely on how to read others instead of making an assessment for yourself the rest of your life, then life's gonna throw you all sorts of ways.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2004
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 10:44pm
Is detecting what the blinking of someone eyes and facial gestures means an actual PROFESSION? That's pathetic. I'd be blinking like that too if I was asked to speak in fron of an audience with that volume and TYPE of people. They dogged her. Can you guys HONESTLY say you would have held up better? I think not.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-09-2004
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 10:46pm
I agree strongly with js958. That's the truth, really. He was angry as all of them were because she was female, maybe a smart black woman and they don't have anything to do but be angry!
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-27-1999
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 10:47pm

Sure, it could have been that too, what you said in your first paragraph.


"I was surprised that she didn't tell them to FO"


ROTFL -- I literally had to LOL when I read that!

--Bridgette

You can also check out my L

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Fri, 04-09-2004 - 11:40pm
This is what bothers me the most about how the media portrays things. They all put their particular spin on items to "slant" the news towards their opinion.

Sometimes it is though the media outlets feel their viewers / readers are not intelligent enough to make up their own minds.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Sat, 04-10-2004 - 4:16am
Actually that is not what it means. It means the person is under stress. It doesn't happen to everyone but only some. I have studied this extensively because my son does it. I assure you that he is the most honest child I have ever known. Of my four children, he is the one I can count on to always tell the truth.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Sat, 04-10-2004 - 4:45am
I have a couple of observations. Ms. Rice said that the *president* asked if there were any threats from Bin Laden that could happen inside the United States. The response to that question was a memo entitled: "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States", but when you read the actual body of the memo there was no new information or any direct threats. This is why it was so disengenious of Ben Vaniste to ONLY want her to disclose the title of the memo with no explanation. (When she did explain, he rudely talked over her to keep us from hearing this important information.} I think inflaming *titles* to memos are not enough to put the nation on high alert, and obviously the administration felt the same way.

Also, Andrew Card was the Chief of Staff and Condoleeza Rice was National Security Advisor. Surely the chain of command would be Andrew Card to Condoleeza Rice, not the other way around.

minnie

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Sat, 04-10-2004 - 4:51am
I find your response interesting. I have to wonder why you would make this statement: "I wondered at the time if she was the right person to head the NSA."

How much did you know "at the time" about Condoleeza Rice's qualifications to head the NSA other than the way she looked?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-05-2004
Sat, 04-10-2004 - 5:00am
This is a good post. Thanks for the common sense.

I do have one thing to add, though. The FBI and The CIA should have kept up with the terrorists better, agreed, but we do live in a free society and because of our individual freedoms they can't legally invade people's privacy. It's a catch 22 here in America.

minnie

Pages