Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
National Security Advisor, Dr. Condoleezza Rice
Topic Started: Sep 29 2003, 06:38 PM (205 Views)
benetil
Unregistered

It isn't my nature to empathize with bureaucrats and politicos, but I felt bad for Dr. Condoleeza Rice during her appearance on Tim Russert's program yesterday (Meet The Press, 9/28).

Those "16 words" in the President's State of the Union Address just will not go away! And it is my opinion that during the course of the interview with Tim Russert on 9/28, Dr. Rice was reduced to falsely claiming to be a forgetful person as she tried to explain how the erroneous statement was allowed into President Bush's speech. Dr. Rice is clearly a highly competent, brilliant individual - and her ridiculous explanation of how the key phrase slipped into President Bush's State of the Union Address at a key time (we attacked Iraq just two months later) was disgraceful - the most disingenuous attempt to cover for the deliberate efforts of militant neo-Conservatives in President Bush's administration (Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld) to "sensationalize" the threat that Iraq posed to the United States.

I have to say that my opinion of Dr. Condoleezza Rice went down as I listened to her incredible explanation.
| Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
How does it compare to Senator Clinton's explanation of how they "found" suppoened records that had been missing for two years (and that had her fingerprints on them) in the private sitting room of the White House? :P ;)
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Wichita
Sep 29 2003, 09:00 PM
How does it compare to Senator Clinton's explanation of how they "found" suppoened records that had been missing for two years (and that had her fingerprints on them)  in the private sitting room of the White House?   :P  ;)

There is no comparison (my opinion) between Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton. It was just hard for me (disappointing, a let down) to see the smartest person in the Bush administration (my opinion) have to say something silly like, "I forgot" (I didn't remember) when she, as National Security Advisor, is talking about the threat that Iraq posed to my country. I've admired her - held her in such high esteem - that I was angry about her being caught in the uncomfortable position of covering for something like this. Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld should be taking the heat on this one.

In my view, Hillary Clinton is nothing more than a self-serving political partisan. She, as First Lady, should never have had those files. She lied and was caught red handed. Shame on her.

In short, Hillary Clinton's bad behavior (illegal behavior) confirmed my negative image of her.

Condoleezza Rice's pathetic mea culpa has diminished my very positive image of her. She's being very loyal to her boss (who just happens to be President of the United States).

In forty or fifty years, we'll be reading her (Rice's) book about this incident - she'll roast Vice President Cheney!!
| Quote | ^
 
nztrekkie
Lieutenant
benetil
Sep 29 2003, 06:38 PM
It isn't my nature to empathize with bureaucrats and politicos, but I felt bad for Dr. Condoleeza Rice during her appearance on Tim Russert's program yesterday (Meet The Press, 9/28).

Those "16 words" in the President's State of the Union Address just will not go away! And it is my opinion that during the course of the interview with Tim Russert on 9/28, Dr. Rice was reduced to falsely claiming to be a forgetful person as she tried to explain how the erroneous statement was allowed into President Bush's speech. Dr. Rice is clearly a highly competent, brilliant individual - and her ridiculous explanation of how the key phrase slipped into President Bush's State of the Union Address at a key time (we attacked Iraq just two months later) was disgraceful - the most disingenuous attempt to cover for the deliberate efforts of militant neo-Conservatives in President Bush's administration (Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld) to "sensationalize" the threat that Iraq posed to the United States.

I have to say that my opinion of Dr. Condoleezza Rice went down as I listened to her incredible explanation.

benetil - I don't know what interview you're reffering to but it seems to confirm the gut suspicion that I have had all along on this matter.

Rice is either covering up for other, more "senior" members of the team,(in which case, Bush obvioulsy considers the lovely and intelligent Ms Rice more expendable than Duck Rumseld or Cheney) or is part of the stratedgy of cover up from the Whitehouse.

either way, this "I forgot" interview by such a senior Bush figure seems to shake the foundations of truth and intergrity which are becoming more shaky each week.

Don't forget - you heard the election result first on this board !!! :P
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
For those in this thread with certain anti-Bush bias, here are the infamous sixteen words (because I'd be willing to bet that two posters on this thread don't even know what they are):

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Please note that it doesn't say Saddam BOUGHT uranium, but SOUGHT. As for Joseph Wilson, I found this little quote from my source in the earlier thread:

"Wilson is no disinterested career diplomat - he's a pro-Saudi, leftist partisan with an ax to grind. And too many in the media are helping him and allies grind it."

This is such a NON-ISSUE, except for those like NZ who figure, "Tell a lie often enough and people will think it is truth."
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Admiralbill_gomec
Sep 30 2003, 09:17 AM
For those in this thread with certain anti-Bush bias, here are the infamous sixteen words (because I'd be willing to bet that two posters on this thread don't even know what they are):

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Please note that it doesn't say Saddam BOUGHT uranium, but SOUGHT. As for Joseph Wilson, I found this little quote from my source in the earlier thread:

"Wilson is no disinterested career diplomat - he's a pro-Saudi, leftist partisan with an ax to grind. And too many in the media are helping him and allies grind it."

This is such a NON-ISSUE, except for those like NZ who figure, "Tell a lie often enough and people will think it is truth."

But while the Bush administration commits a public character-assassination of Ambassador Joe Wilson, we're supposed to maintain unwavering confidence in the character and motives of a person like Vice President Cheney?

Vice President Dick Cheney is no disinterested politician - he's got his personal agenda, too. And he's (Cheney) in a position to use the full force of the United States government to carry out his agenda. Of the two individuals (Joe Wilson / Dick cheney) Dick Cheney is far more powerful and holds all of the cards.

As far as this being a non-issue - I don't think that the CIA would have sent two letters to DOJ about the incident if it were an non-issue (one of the letters was rather formal and came from Director George Tenet). Maybe George Tenet is a traitor, too?

I remember those sixteen words in President Bush's State of the Union address. So does Condoleezza Rice (now). The statement was false/erroneous - Joe Wilson knew it was false and he told our government that it was false (before the State of the Union address).
| Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
Ummmm...... Benetil, how did Wilson KNOW it was false?

According to him, his investigation conisisted of drinking tea with a number of people. He reported what he was told. It may or may not have been true.

According to what I have read Britain STILL says that information is true.

As to Tenet, I personally have not heard anyone call him a traitor so I cannot comment on that. Who specifically have you heard use that phrase?

I remember during the investigation of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky, the Secret Service fought every attempt to give up their records. Was it important to national security how many times she visited him? Not hardly, but it was important to maintain the principle of trust with the President. IMO opinion Tenet is doing the same thing. I certainly wouldn't want to see another case result in a slap on the wrist like the Leahy case if I were the one responsible for those agents.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
benetil
Unregistered

Wichita
Sep 30 2003, 06:27 PM
Ummmm...... Benetil, how did Wilson KNOW it was false?

According to him, his investigation conisisted of drinking tea with a number of people.  He reported what he was told.  It may or may not have been true.

According to what I have read Britain STILL says that information is true.

Hi, Wichita.

I suspect that Joe Wilson was having tea with certain people who would be in a position to speak with authority on the subject. I guess there is no guarantee that his (Wilson's) information was accurate. But, he (Wilson) did what his government asked him to do.

My understanding is that our government (USA) has abandoned the British intelligence report that linked Iraq/yellow cake/Africa. I understand the Britain continues to stand by the report. But you're right - I think it is possible/likely that we don't know the whole story.

By the way, RNC Chairman Ed Gillespie said that if the "leak" allegation is true, that it is more serious than the "third rate robbery" (Chris Matthew's words) carried out by the Nixon administration (Watergate). Ed Gillespie said that an offense of this nature (leak) has real world implications and that if the crime (leak) did take place then prosecution needs to be carried out. I agree with what Ed Gillespie said.

I also think that the President did the right thing by ordering government employees to cooperate with the investigation. One thing I have to say about President Bush - he definitely means what he says - he doesn't play communication games by saying something silly like, "it depends what the meaning of the word 'is' is." President Bush also said that if the reports of the leak are true that he'll deal with the problem - I also believe that he is sincere when he says this - at least I wouldn't want to be the person who called those six reporters back in July :) .
| Quote | ^
 
Wichita
Member Avatar
The Adminstrator wRench
If true, I wouldn't want to be them either. :no: :no:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus