Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: conjur
Without a shred of proof??
![]()
http://www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/
Yes, without a shred of proof. That democratic Waxman site does not and cannot prove that Rice would or has lied. Bowfinger made the assumption that Rice would lie.
hmmmm
Statements by National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice
"We do know that he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon."
Source: Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, CNN (9/8/2002).
Explanation: This statement was misleading because it failed to acknowledge the intelligence community's deep division on the issue of whether Iraq was actively pursuing its nuclear program.
"For example, the declaration fails to account for or explain Iraq?s efforts to get uranium from abroad . . ."
Source: Why We Know Iraq Is Lying, NYT (1/23/2003).
Explanation: This statement was misleading because it suggested that Iraq sought to acquire uranium despite the fact that the CIA expressed doubts about the credibility of this claim in two memos to the White House, including one addressed to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. CIA Director George Tenet also warned against using the claim in a telephone call to Ms. Rice's deputy. In addition, the statement fails to mention that State Department intelligence officials also concluded that this claim was "highly dubious."
"We do know that there have been shipments going . . . into Iraq . . . of aluminum tubes that really are only suited to -- high-quality aluminum tools [sic] that are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs."
Source: Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, CNN (9/8/2002).
Explanation: This statement was false. The government?s most experienced technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy concluded that the tubes were "poorly suited" for this purpose, and intelligence officials at the State Department concurred in this view
"My only point is that, in retrospect, knowing that some of the documents underneath may have been--were, indeed, forgeries, and knowing that apparently there were concerns swirling around about this, had we known that at the time, we would not have put it in. . . . And had there been even a peep that the agency did not want that sentence in or that George Tenet did not want that sentence in, that the director of Central Intelligence did not want it in, it would have been gone."
Source: Face the Nation, CBS (7/13/2003).
Explanation: Ms. Rice was responding to questions regarding how the claim that Iraq sought uranium in Africa made it into the President's January 28, 2003, State of the Union address. The statement that the Director of Central Intelligence and the CIA did not object to the claim was false. In October 2002, the CIA expressed doubts about the claim in two memos to the White House, including one addressed to Ms. Rice. Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet also warned against using the claim in a telephone call to Ms. Rice?s deputy in October 2002.
She's not setting a good precedent for herself, is she?
Also:
Democratic commission member Richard Ben-Veniste disclosed this week that Rice had asked, in her private meetings with the commission, to revise a statement she made publicly that "I don't think anybody could have predicted that those people could have taken an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center . . . that they would try to use an airplane as a missile." Rice told the commission that she misspoke; the commission has received information that prior to Sept. 11, U.S. intelligence agencies and Clarke had talked about terrorists using airplanes as missiles.
Also, this sounds very similar to what Clinton's administration was trying to do. Didn't Rice say there was no plan passed from the Clinton administration?
In an op-ed published Monday in The Washington Post, Rice wrote that "through the spring and summer of 2001, the national security team developed a strategy to eliminate al Qaeda" that included "sufficient military options to remove the Taliban regime" including the use of ground forces. But Armitage, testifying this week as the White House representative, said the military part was not in the plan before Sept. 11. "I think that was amended after the horror of 9/11," he said. McCormack said Rice's statement is accurate because the team discussed including orders for such military plans to be drawn up.
