Rice's Testimony before the Sept. 11 Commission (FULL TRANSCRIPT)

AP ^ | April 8, 2004 | 9-11 Commission & Dr. Rice

[QQQQQ]

A text of National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice's testimony as delivered before the Sept. 11 commission on Thursday, as transcribed by eMediaMillWorks Inc.:

KEAN: I've got a question now I'd like to ask you. It was given to me by a number of members of the families.

Did you ever see or hear from the FBI, from the CIA, from any other intelligence agency, any memos or discussions or anything else between the time you got into office and 9-11 that talked about using planes as bombs?

RICE: Let me address this question because it has been on the table.

I think that concern about what I might have known or we might have known was provoked by some statements that I made in a press conference. I was in a press conference to try and describe the August 6th memo, which I've talked about here in my opening remarks and which I talked about with you in the private session.

And I said, at one point, that this was a historical memo, that it was _ it was not based on new threat information. And I said, No one could have imagined them taking a plane, slamming it into the Pentagon _ I'm paraphrasing now _ into the World Trade Center, using planes as a missile.

As I said to you in the private session, I probably should have said, I could not have imagined, because within two days, people started to come to me and say, Oh, but there were these reports in 1998 and 1999. The intelligence community did look at information about this.

To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Chairman, this kind of analysis about the use of airplanes as weapons actually was never briefed to us.

I cannot tell you that there might not have been a report here or a report there that reached somebody in our midst.

Part of the problem is _ and I think Sandy Berger made this point when he was asked the same question _ that you have thousands of pieces of information -- car bombs and this method and that method _ and you have to depend to a certain degree on the intelligence agencies to sort to tell you what is actually relevant, what is actually based on sound sources, what is speculative.

[QQQQQ]

It is way too long to post the entire testimony. I have seen Condi Rice's opening statement posted, but not a link to the entire transcript. For those who are interested, please see above link.

[LiteKeeper]

THANK YOU!

[Support Free Republic]

[veronica]

Bush has to be pleased to the max. I have rarely seen someone perform as brilliantly in a situation as Condi did today. She really kicked butt. :)

[sneakers]

I'm at work. Is there a live thread?

[Lopeover]

Dr. Rice gave very telling testimony today. She answered the questions that I had regarding 9/11.

Something that came up during the testimony that disturbed me was the FACT that our national airline companies were subject to FINES if they detained more than two middle eastern passengers for racial profiling. Which was a policy that was followed during the Clinton Admin. It's almost as if policies were kept in place that would put Americans at risk.

I also had another thought while reading previous testimony and watching Dr. Rice's testimony and that was that it is almost as if there was somekind of plan on the part of the "NEW WORLD ORDER" to destroy America. As if the terrorists were used to destroy the opposition party within the United States. Much like the bombings in Madrid derailed the incumbent party and installed the socialist party.

How else could one explain the Clinton administration's lack of action to safeguard America [if the threat was so critical as Dick Clarke stated]. The lack of action towards terrorism by the Clinton Admin. is very curious, unless the so called "NEW WORLD ORDER" was working with, or had a passive, or tolerant attitude, or hoped to use terrorist groups to further the "NEW WORLD ORDER." The one time the Clinton Admin. bombed a terror training camp, no one was there? Were they warned? Was the bombing just a "show" for the American people to give the illusion that they were doing something? Fast forward to the subsequent political sham that the left has made of the 9/11 commission to get Bush, politicizing some of the 9/11 widows and Dick Clarke's book? The Bush Admin. was working with many of the Clinton appointees and hadn't the time to put their own people in place. Was there partisanship? Perhaps they were not willing to cooperate andwork closely with the new Administration due to the ugliness of the 2000 election? I only have more questions about the behaviors, attitudes and actions of the previous administration and their holdovers in office.

[AdamSelene235]

RICE:

As to some of the questions concerning the Saudis: I think that we have had, really, very good cooperation with Saudi Arabia since 9/11, and since the May 12th attacks on Riyadh even greater cooperation, because Saudi Arabia is I think fully enlisted in the war on terrorism. And we need to understand that there were certain things that we didn't even understand were going on inside the United States.

RICE: It's not terribly surprising that the Saudis didn't understand some of the things that were going on in their country.

----------------- Yeah, they just accidentally funded Pakistan's nuclear program. Just like they accidentally funnelled millions to Al Queda.

Gimme a break.

[AdamSelene235]

LEHMAN: Were you aware at the time of the fact that Saudi Arabia had and were you told that they had in their custody the CFO and the closest confidant of Al Qaida _ of Osama bin Laden, and refused direct access to the United States?

RICE: I don't remember anything of that kind.

LEHMAN: Were you aware that they would not cooperate and give us access to the perpetrators of the Khobar Towers attack?

RICE: I was very involved in issues concerning Khobar Towers and our relations with several governments concerning Khobar Towers.

[eureka!]

Re#5 Yep. over 3000 replies and growing. Here goes:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1113643/posts?q=1&&page=3201

[sneakers]

Whoa!! 3000+! Thank you much. don't think I'll be able to read'em all on my lunch break! LOl!

[lilylangtree]

Many thanks. Have forwarded on to others in my email address book.

[eureka!]

Most welcome. The Live threads are great--although I lost 3 hours of work this morning. ;^)

[spunkets]

Bump

[GulliverSwift]

They sure are fun. One of the best things about FR.

[El Gran Salseron]

One of my pet peeves is.....well, it's not a pet peeve.....it drives me up a friggin' tree! When someone asks me a question and as I start to answer they interrupt me in mid-sentence.

Just once, I would like to see Rummy, Powell or Rice in front of one of these congressional investigations or supposedly bi-partisan commissions.....after being asked a question and trying to respond then having the questioner interrupt.....say, "If you are not going to let me answer the question completely then I refuse to answer ANY of your questions, you Effing A'hole! :-)

[kitkat]

BUMP

[elbucko]

....national airline companies were subject to FINES if they detained more than two middle eastern passengers for racial profiling..... It's almost as if policies were kept in place that would put Americans at risk.

I caught that too and at the same time marvelled at the irony of the situation. In the last 40 years America has made great advances to insure the blessings of liberty to all our citizens. The success of the civil rights movement is manifest in the presence of a minority woman, in a position of authority, being grilled by a national commission on details of a national event. Yet, it was the inertia of the same civil rights movement that propelled Ms. Rice to NSA, that caused the prohibition of examining foreign nationals as they enter the US.

Ms. Rice is an example of the success of civil rights, 9/11 the example of taking this policy too far and conferring our liberties on foreign nationals.

[theDentist]

"If you are not going to let me answer the question completely then I refuse to answer ANY of your questions, you Effing A'hole! :-)

In DiploSpeak, that is stated "First I'd like to address one other point you made, Senator Clinton".

[elbucko]

The lack of action towards terrorism by the Clinton Admin. is very curious, unless....

...Bill Clinton was promised 72 (79?) virgins if he'd go easy on Al Qaeda.

[hobbes1]

bump.