 | |  |
 |
|
|
|
Rice
to Testify Publicly Before 9/11 Panel |
Posted:
04.07.04
|
|
|
After initially citing executive privilege and refusing to testify
publicly, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice has reversed
course and agreed to appear before the 9/11 commission, an independent
panel investigating whether the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks could
have been prevented.
Printer-friendly versions: HTML
/ PDF
|
|
|
|
|
President Bush's national
security adviser will appear Thursday before the National Commission
on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, which was created by
Congress in November 2002. Its mission: to determine why the government
was unprepared for the events of Sept. 11, 2001. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
National
security adviser |
|
|
|
|
|
As national security adviser, Rice's job is to analyze and respond
to any dangers the United States faces from terrorists or other
countries.
 The
president's supporters hope Rice's testimony will put to rest
charges the White House ignored the threat of terrorists, like
Osama bin Laden's group al-Qaida, before Sept. 11.
Rice's 2-and-a-half-hour testimony will be carried live on most
television networks. Rice will be sworn in under oath, and after
making an initial statement, she will be questioned by the ten-member
panel.
|
|
|
|
Possible
rebuttal to Clarke's criticisms |
|
|
|
|
|
Rice is expected to challenge claims made by former counterterrorism
chief Richard Clarke in his recent book "Against All Enemies:
Inside America's War On Terror" and in his testimony before
the panel last month.
Clarke said the Bush administration did not take seriously enough
the possibility terrorists might attack, choosing instead to focus
on more traditional threats like long-range missiles in countries
like Russia and China.
"I believe the Bush administration in the first eight months
considered terrorism an important issue, but not an urgent issue,"
Clarke testified.
Clarke also said the war on terror was derailed because the Bush
administration focused so heavily on invading Iraq -- a country
the White House claimed had weapons of mass destruction and ties
to al-Qaida. To date, no such weapons have been found.
Members of the Bush administration -- including Rice -- spent
the past several weeks trying to discredit much of what Clarke
said on and before his official testimony.
 "Before
Sept. 11, we closely monitored threats to our nation. President
Bush revived the practice of meeting with the director of the
CIA every day -- meetings that I attended. And I personally met
with George Tenet regularly and frequently reviewed aspects of
the counterterror effort," Rice wrote in an editorial in
The Washington Post.
White House officials have said that Rice will argue that the
Bush administration did not ignore possible signs that the 9/11
attacks would occur and that it was in the process of devising
a plan to combat terror and al-Qaida. Rice will argue that the
public should not judge the president and his advisers on their
pre-9/11 policies based on what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.
|
|
|
|
Could the terrorist attacks
have been prevented? |
|
|
|
|
|
Last month the 9/11 commission released an interim report looking
at the problems that all administrations have had fighting terrorism
and the mistakes made -- including problems using diplomacy to
try to stop Osama bin Laden.
Two leaders of the 9/11 commission, Republican Thomas Kean and
Democrat Lee Hamilton, have already suggested the attacks could
have been prevented.
 "The
whole story might have been different," Kean said on NBC
News, "if we had been able to put those people on the watch
list of the airlines, the two who were in the country; again,
if we'd stopped some of these people at the borders; if we had
acted earlier on al-Qaida when al-Qaida was smaller and just getting
started."
All of this puts tremendous pressure on Rice, not only to refute
Clarke's charges, but also to restore the president's credibility
as he faces reelection.
Members of the panel are expected to ask Rice some tough questions,
especially about whether anti-terrorism was a high priority before
Sept. 11, 2001 and whether the administration missed warnings
from the Central Intelligence Agency and the outgoing Clinton
administration about the gathering terrorist threat.
Rice is not expected to publicly apologize -- as Clarke did --
over the government's failure to prevent the attacks.
|
|
|
|
Reluctant testimony |
|
|
|
|
|
Rice's public testimony
almost didn't happen at all. For months, the Bush administration
argued with the 9/11 commission over how or whether she would testify.
Rice spoke to the panel in February, privately and not under oath.
The president initially said Rice would not testify publicly
because it would violate executive privilege -- the rule that
says the president's aides do not have to testify about private
conversations with the president. Unlike Cabinet secretaries,
who often testify before Congress, the national security adviser
is expected to be an independent advice-giver to the president,
above any political fray.
 But
after Clarke's explosive testimony, public pressure mounted and
President Bush reversed course.
"Now the commission and leaders of the United States Congress
have given written assurances that the appearance of the national
security adviser will not be used as precedent in the conduct
of future inquiries," he said.
Mr. Bush, who initially opposed the creation of the 9/11 commission,
told reporters he looks forward to Rice's testimony.
"She's a very smart, capable person who knows exactly what
took place and will lay out the facts. That's what the American
people want," he said.
--
By Gregg Wirth, Online NewsHour
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
American schools and financial aid should be only for legal citizens of the United States. There should be no exceptions to this.
