So, Richard Clarke doesn’t like the way the Bush administration handled the events leading up to 9/11. He feels that more could have been done to prevent it. Did we really need Richard Clarke to point that out to us? Wasn’t it obvious that the Bush administration was completely incompetent with regards to the handling of 9/11 (before and after it happened)? And now that Bush is getting a lot of bad press from Clarke’s book and comments on how incompetent he is, he has decided to “allow” Condoleeza Rice to testify to the commission investigating 9/11. It’s more like she will be made to testify against her will. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not the biggest advocate of Condoleeza Rice. But she certainly isn’t the only person in the Bush administration that was involved in the handling (or lack there of) of 9/11. It kind of makes you wonder why she is being singled out.

I have an idea. Why don’t we “allow” Bush to testify publicly about what did and didn’t happen prior to 9/11? Put Colon Powell on the stand too for all I care.

When you lay with dogs....you get fleas.

I have to agree with PA on this; but, as I have stated in the past, I shutter the kind of pressure this woman must be under... and Colin Powell too; I mean he gets grayer-skin and hair- as each day passes.

I am no fan of either of them; and what little empathy I may have had for them- because of scrutiny that they go through, etc.... left after Haiti- And I still think that is for the Haitians to figure out; but did they get their souls mixed up in this matter?

I just wish them rest.

This is an example of why I think the present day political arena can be extremely hazardous to the health and welfare of Black Americans. With people like Bush at the helm, leading the pack, how can we not get sucked into the vortex when the "stuff" hits the fan?

Because Colin and Condi have such high level positions with a great deal of "authority", they are very deeply involved in what happens politically in this country and therefore, all we can do is sit back and wait to see where the axe drops. Even though in the beginning Colin was very much against taking on Iraq, and vehemently argued his opposition with Bush and Condi, ultimately he was out powered and had to go along and defend whatever reasons he was told we should. Did he know he was defending a "lie"? Probably so, and if he didn't he should have taken the time to find out since it was his butt that would be out there naked taking pot shots. The National Security Advisor and Secretary of State...don't have the luxury of saying "oops!"

Peace,
Queenie :spinstar:

:angel:“You may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all the time.”
--- Abraham Lincoln

Resisting the strident public calls for Rice’s testimony under oath, the White House has unwittingly generated the distressing impression that they are seriously afraid of perjuring themselves during an election year. In fact, new information on a national security policy speech has recently surfaced that reveals that the White House was preoccupied with establishing Reagan's SDI system on the very day that the terrorists attacked. In short, terrorist attacks were not on their radar screen, and as a result, poor George was caught with his pants down.

Condi is a brilliant woman.. I think people will/have been surprised at just how well she has performed in the public spotlight. This Clark guy is a joke. He will make money off his book, but that will be the end of him. When the real pro's like Rice get done with him, he will wish he were poor again...

Raymond

Greetings and welcome, Captain Ray. Make yourself at home by checking out the variety of different features we have to offer.

Thank you for responding to our discussion threads. As you can see, we discuss everything under the sun here. I'm glad to see you jumping right in and adding your opinions.

In reference to your comment about Condi, I agree, she is brilliant in terms of her intellect, particularly as it relates to foreign affairs which is her area of expertise. But let me ask you, regardless of what we might think of Clarke and his allegations of how the Bush administration handled 9/11, and even though he may be no match for Condi, do you think that she will be forthcoming with the truth in her testimony before the special 9/11 committee or will she prove that she's also an expert in "covering up" the truth?

Peace,
Queenie :spinstar:

Thank-you for the welcome!



Well, that is a more interesting question than perhaps you meant it to be.

It implies that she would cover anything up, before she has answered a question!?!

I think she has answered all the questions she is able to publicly.. putting her in front of the 911 commission is just a dramatic episode that will only serve to crush the reputation and work of Richard Clarke. It's too bad really, because I doubt Clarke is as Evil as the right wing play him.. I think he is an opportunist that thrust himself into a game he is not fit to play.

Raymond

(edited for spelling... I type on the fly...)

Here is a link to the entire trasncript of Rice's testimony as given before the 9/11 commision today. I would be curious to hear what you think about it.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-08-rice-transcript_x.htm

I watched the last hour and 1/2 or so. It started a bit early west coast time for me.

I thought she (Dr. Rice) did very well. She maintained her decorum, and in the face of some pretty abusive attacks, (which to me at times seemed far more concerned with the politics, and less with the substance and/or desire to make sure this kind of thing never happens again.) was clear, unwavering, and confident. I didn't detect from her any lie. She answered the leading questions forthrightly, and completely.

I think what I got out of the whole debacle was that the commission has an agenda, and most if not all of the commissioners had made up how they want their report to read long before Condi took the oath.

Rear Admiral Lehman was the most impressive of the commissioners. He really put the screws to her, and brought out some good information. Of course I am biased on this point.. When I was in the Navy, Lehman was the then CNO. So I like him from the start.

Also, I found it pretty funny that the commissioners kept referring to her as "Dr. Clarke!" LMBO Freudian slip?!?!

I give Dr. Rice a B+!

Raymond

Clarke is going to come out of this smelling like roses. I think that he was telling the truth... his truth was not much different from Ms. Rice's. boy, but don't she love her some George Bush! Yeap, being facetious here... Clarke is part of the club; they can disagree and hate each other in public, and still sit down, have dinner and shoot the breeze... just because we cannot seem to do such is Our downfall.

Ms. Rice is an expert; but I found her to be incompetent-- I had the t.v. on at work; hell we all did. She was derelict in her duties. On all points that were her job, she would say that she was not told what to do--by her subordinates?

She was to make a decision based upon the finding of her subordinates- which Mr. Clarke was; and she acknowledged most of what he said, or said that she couldn't remember if this or that happened (cover up/ lie)... then she was to make her opinion of the situations known to the President. Right?

Now either she didn't do those things ("No one told me what to do...") or she is just working the White House as a token negro?

Either way, to say that she came out looking good--is an exaggeration of the facts at best.

Well Happy, I dissagree, but that's no big deal. I thought she did a pretty good job. The panel was out to do her as much damage as possible IMO. It would have been much more interesting had they attempted to seek the truth, rather than slam/talk over Doctor Rice. Hugh Hewitt (http://www.hughhewitt.com) wrote an interesting blog on the subject. I will provide the text so you don't have to wade through all the right wing banter...

Posted at 3:40 PM, Pacific

Peter Beinart, editor of The New Republic (http://www.tnr.com), was my first guest today. Although our conversation was, as usual, contentious, Peter gave up this admission about today's conduct of would-be bully-boy Richard ben Veniste, the Democratic hatchet man on the 9/11 Commission:



Beinart: "I thought ben Veniste was terrible. I thought ben Veniste really made a fool of himself....Ben Veniste is the most partisan Democrat on the Commission, and I frankly wish he wasn't on the Commission."

I appreciate Peter's candor, and hope that other responsible pundits of the left declare ben Veniste a disgrace. But it isn't just a ben Veniste problem, though Peter tried to isolate the loss of integrity to ben Veniste. Even Bob Kerrey couldn't resist mugging for the camera with his granstanding advice to Dr. Rice on how to wage the war in Iraq. Combined, today's performances by these two members guaranteed that the Commission's credibility is in tatters.

Ask yourself: Did one or both of these men conduct their questioning in a different fashion than would have been the case had the hearing not been testified? If your answer is "yes"--and any honest answer will be "yes"-- then the conclusion is inescapable that these two had an agenda other than getting at the facts, that they intended to shape public opinion, which means they had a preconceived objective, which means the Commission's reported is tainted by politics before it is written. What a horrible joke on the 9/11 families and the country, but not surprising. Very few Democrats of high profile within that party have been able to put the country ahead of their party. Just this week Kennedy, then Kerry, then ben Veniste, then Kerrey all postured when they might have come to the defense of the mission.

Keep in mind that when Richard Clarke testified, ben Veniste's major concern was the release of the Predator video showing that during the Clinton Adminsitration, the United States knew where bin Laden was, and did nothing. Ben Veniste was outraged by the video's appearance because it is conclusive evidence of the opportunity to have disrupted the al Qaeda network prior to 9/11, an opportunity that did not present itself in the first eight months of the Bush Adminsitration.

At least Peter Beinart has ben Veniste's number. We will have to wait to see what The New Republic says about the circus in next week's issue.

Peter is an alarmist, though, referring to a "massive uprising" underway in Iraq, the potential for the worst "foreign policy debacle since Vietnam," and other similar statements. Just like Joe Biden warned of the snows in the mountains in Afghanistan; just like the talking heads declared defeat in the sandstorm-induced slow-down of last March, and just like the doomsayers out and about these past few days. How often does the American military have to demonstrate its awesome power and technique before the left will cease its shrill and debilitating declarations of either imminent or actual defeat?

I think the military will subdue al-Sadr's "Mahdi army." I think the turn-over will occur on the date appointed. I think the new regime will grow stronger with every passing month, and that the Middle East will be remade as a result.

When that comes to pass, will the media learn anything since this will be the third exercise in premature proclamations of American quagmire? Of course not. That would require admitting that, again, the media elite was prepared to decalre Vietnam II even as a war that needs to be waged and won is in fact being waged and won.

Raymond

Our sister has messed up in the "big house" and will soon be tossed back into the fields. Very sad that she would feel comfortable in aligning herself with such demented people who will now serve her up as the sacrificial lamb. The FIRST Black woman to serve in such a powerful position and look at her legacy. *smh* She must do something quick to redeem herself and raise her credibility and integrity. Protecting Bush isn't worth all of that.

The handwriting was on the wall the minute those planes crashed into the twin towers. Sister was travelling so fast on a course of events that she completely missed all of the danger signs. I knew all along that Condi was going to catch most if not all of the heat in this situation. I think the reason she constantly wears a scowl now on her face is because she realizes she's playing with the "big dogs" and she is out of her league. The media made it quite evident early on that even she and Colin Powell disagreed on the Bush Administration's position on Iraq. But she forged ahead leading the way for Bush to do his thing anyway.

So, what is Condi and Powell learning from all of this close scrutiny and criticism of the handling of 9/11 information? Being an expert in international affairs doesn't make you a quarterback when you don't know the rules of the game. No doubt that Condi is brilliant but she came out of higher education as a provost at a university on the west coast but she soon found out that Washington is an entirely different ball game. It's as though she's playing tag and other's are playing brutal professional football.

Oh well . . . maybe Bush let her cry on his shoulder after that grueling 3-hour interview before the special commission. She claims she knew nothing and he even knew less. Nevertheless, she'll still end up a wealthy woman though. Just wait until she writes her book. It ought to be a very interesting read. Should we add it to our reading list when it comes out? Hmmm...give it some thought.

Peace,
Queenie :spinstar:

No, Queen, don't go pushing any Negroid Right Wing Banter on Us please!

But, in all honesty, I don't think that she was riled or anything yesterday- I don't think that she was mistreated or anything; and I think that if the precedent was that someone in her position does not have to testilie, I mean testify, then she shouldn't have had too.

I don't dislike the woman at all; again, I think that the pressures she face are pressure that are only heightened because she is a woman and because she is black.

If any blame will be assessed, Yes, I agree she will be the one sacrificed; and should be. She continually said, "No one told me what to do?????"

Beware, Family, of wolves lurking in sheeps clothing.



I kind of like her "moxie" to be truthful, again. I don't think she is a genius or anything... but I hope that she will have peace--- and Colin, too. The only difference b/t the 2 of them is that , I think Colin has more of a conscious... then again, her job calls for her to display as little emotion as possible.