Posted on 03/29/2004 12:34:01 AM PST by kattracks
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice told CBS's “60 Minutes" Sunday evening that she wants very much to testify publicly before the 9/11 Commission, but that such a move would break with the important precedent of executive privilege. “I would really like to do that," she told Ed Brady during the interview at Washington’s Executive Offices building, “but there is an important principle -- it’s long standing that sitting National Security Advisors do not testify before the Congress.”When Brady pressed, arguing that the 9/11 attacks were such a defining moment that executive privilege should be put aside, Rice countered, “This commission is not concentrating on the day 9/11.”
When asked about the now infamous meeting on Sept 12, 2001 where former terror advisor Richard Clarke said he was talked to in an “intimidating” way by the president – challenging him to find a nexus between Saddam Hussein and the attacks, Rice defended by saying, “I’ve never seen the president talk to his staff in an intimidating way.”
“The president asked [Clark] a perfectly logical question, considering the animosity between the two countries,” Rice added. “When we went to Camp David, it was a map of Afghanistan that was rolled out on the table.”
“Our energy and attention was on Afghanistan,” she added.
Rice further disagreed with Clarke’s characterization of the terrorism issue being underestimated by the administration. “Of course it was an urgent problem. We were looking for a more comprehensive plan … in the meantime continuing with the Clinton plans.”
When pressed by Brady that the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Gen. Henry Shelton had opined that the administration had put terrorism on the “back burner,” Rice countered: “I don’t know what else we could have done but continue with policies while we developed a more robust policy.”
“I’m saying that the administration took seriously the threat,” she added. “I don’t know what a 'greater sense of urgency' would have done.”
When asked the inevitable question about the lack of finding of weapons of mass destruction and no proof of a Saddam-9/11 link, Rice responded, “The war on terrorism is a broad war not a narrow one. Iraq under Saddam was a destabilizing influence. The world is now safer war, and the war on terrorism has been served.”
When asked if the president should apologize to the American people – the way Clark did during his testimony on Capitol Hill, Rice responded, “The families have heard from the president, and in some cases from me, how sorry we are [for their losses in the tragedy of 9/11]. We need to stay focused. The best thing we can do is to focus on those who did this to us.”
Rice noted that looking back to 80s and 90s, it was clear that terror attacks were becoming bolder. “But we were not being aggressive." Using the attack on the Marines in Beirut as an example, she noted that the unfortunate impression gleaned by the enemy was that “if we took casualties, we would not respond.”
All that’s changed now, argued Rice. “They are going to be defeated.”
“We are being attack because they know we are at war with them.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.