On Sunday, 3/29, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice appeared on CBS's 60 Minutes; unlike Richard Clarke, Rice refused to admit responsibility for her role in the worst national security failure in American history, and stopped short of apologizing to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11.
Her manner varied from somnambulent to the look of a chicken on a freeway, and like others in the Administration, she avoided making direct answers, instead choosing to restate vague generalities in the hope that the reporter would move on.
As a matter of fact, the basic thrust of her interview was "9/11 was bad, but let's move on" — which is what you'd expect from a habitual liar and someone with something to hide.
But true to form, she nervously stumbled when telling the LIES and DISTORTIONS that follow:
RICE'S LIE: "The administration took seriously the threat" of terrorism before 9/11.
FACTS:
* President Bush himself acknowledges that, despite repeated warnings of an imminent Al Qaeda attack, before 9/11 "I didn't feel the sense of urgency" about terrorism. ("Bush At War" by Bob Woodward)
* Newsweek reports that his attitude was reflected throughout an Administration that was trying to "de-emphasize terrorism" as an overall priority.
* Only two of the hundred national security meetings the Administration held during this period addressed the terrorist threat;
* The White House never held one meeting of its counterterrorism task force. (wash. post)
* The Administration was actively trying to cut funding for counterterrorism, and "vetoed a request to divert $800 million from missile defense into counterterrorism" despite a serious increase in terrorist chatter in the summer of 2001.(newsweek & veto)
RICE'S DISENGENUOUS WHINE: "I don't know what a sense of urgency any greater than the one we had would have caused us to do anything differently. I don't know how...we could have done more. I would like very much to know what more could have been done?"
Article comments
1 - Hal Pawluk
The only good sign I've seen so far is that a few Republicans are starting to realize that there's a distinct difference between being a Republican and just blindly following the neocons.
For example, the entire 9/11 Commission is asking that Condi testify before them, in public and under oath. Their position is that they were appointed by the President, not Congress.
Maybe common sense will take hold, after all.
2 - Shark
...a few Republicans are starting to realize that there's a distinct difference between being a Republican and just blindly following the neocons.
I think there's a line being drawn here that might delineate -- for Republicans -- something important for the future: anyone who values personal integrity has to start questioning the lies and distortions of this administration.
We'll see who wants to hang onto their soul and who wants to sell it to the devil by sticking to the party line at all costs.
(I have a feeling Satan is churning out receipts faster than Bush is churning out deficits.)