Free Republic

On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" -- but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals. The White House declined to release the complete text of Rice's speech, since it was not given. The White House did confirm the accuracy of excerpts given to The Post, and former U.S. officials provided a detailed summary of the speech. "The president's commitment to fighting terrorism isn't measured by the...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice will testify publicly on April 8 before the Sept. 11, 2001, commission in an attempt to counter bombshell charges that President Bush did not make terrorism an urgent priority before 9/11. Responding to heavy political pressure from both Republicans and Democrats, the White House made an abrupt about-face on Tuesday and agreed to allow Rice to testify publicly and under oath after insisting she only speak to the panel privately. A key area of questioning for Rice is expected to be claims by former U.S. counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke that Bush...

Condoleezza Rice Date of birth: November 14, 1954 Hometown: Birmingham, Alabama The girl next door: “I always say to [the President], ‘This is what I think, but let me tell you what the others think.’ The key is to not take advantage of the fact that I live a few doors down from the Oval Office.” Where you’ve seen her: Lighting up the small screen and the press in her current role as President George W. Bush’s sassy national security adviser. Look for her soon, when she will be making her hotly anticipated debut before the 9/11 commission.

<p>WASHINGTON (AP) -- National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will go before the federal panel reviewing the Sept. 11 attacks next Thursday.</p> <p>Rice will testify under oath for about 21/2 hours, with much of the questioning expected to focus on what outgoing Clinton officials told her about the al-Qaida threat and her response afterward.</p>

It appears the liberals are intent on attempting to savage Condoleeza Rice for daring to contemplate the need for our country to defend itself against incoming nuclear missiles from Red China, North Korea or other rogue nations. As is the case it is important to remember that terrorism isn't the only destructive force that the Clinton / Gore administration left the country immune to. Recall that prior to their term in office China could not launch a missile successfully and their missiles could not reach the west coast of the United States. By the time the Clintons left office, however,...

<p>Republicans are pleased that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will testify about September 11 because it keeps the presidential campaign focused on national security — President Bush's strong suit.</p> <p>The Republican Party believes Democrats are repeating their blunder of the 2002 elections, when they demanded prolonged discussions about Iraq from Mr. Bush, who obliged and led Republicans to historic victories. Even some Democrats are becoming alarmed by the similarities between the two campaigns.</p>

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX WED MARCH 31, 2004 21:00:02 ET XXXXX REVEALED: THE CONDI SPEECH THAT WAS NEVER DELIVERED ON SEPT 11 The WASHINGTON POST on Thursday is planning an exclusive: On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address "the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday" The POST is planning to excerpt some of the speech, newsroom sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT. The speech, postponed in the chaos of the day, part of which Rice spent in a bunker, mentioned...

Look. We have seen this move before. Everybody rages that Bush is doing the wrong thing, he has to do X. Senator Daschle says he has to do X. Republicans say he has to do X. The whole press says he is stupid for not doing X. Still, Bush refuses. And refuses. And refuses. Then, after everybody else has spoken, Bush suddenly says, O.K., we'll do X. Then, with the attention of the whole world upon him, and with everybody committed to X, he steps forward and goes right through the hole the attackers opened up for him. He does...

The archetypal liberal is the guy who, every morning, drops a dollar in the lap of the homeless man camped out in front of his apartment building and who, every evening, blames conservatives for the fact that there's a homeless man camped out in front of his apartment building. In other words, liberals don't think things through; they opt for gestures, knee-jerk reactions that feel good, without the slightest consideration of long-term consequences. Such was the case in their demand that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice testify, under oath and in public, before the 9/11 Commission. Now their demand has...

We speak with former FBI translator, Sibel Edmonds, who was hired shortly after Sept. 11 to translate intelligence gathered over the previous year related to the 9/11 attacks. She says the FBI had information that an attack using airplanes was being planned before Sept. 11 and calls Condoleezza Rice's claim the White House had no specific information on a domestic threat or one involving planes "an outrageous lie."

When Condoleezza Rice appears before the 9/11 commission, here's what she should be asked. - - - - - - - - - - - - By David Corn March 31, 2004 | After battling the 9/11 commission, the Bush White House has capitulated. For months, it claimed that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice could not testify publicly and under oath before the commission because that would discourage future presidential advisors from providing no-holds-barred advice to the commander in chief. But in the wake of former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke's dramatic appearance before the commission, the Bush administration has suddenly...

The Riddle of Richard Clarke President Bush vs. The Media by rightcoast As you may know, I achieved a brief moment of FReeper "fame" yesterday for breaking the story about Richard Clarke's refusal of public testimony to Congress in 1999. Watching events unfold over the past 24 hours, I have arrived at two revealing observations. In short, the response to Richard Clarke's testimony reveals little about him or national security, and instead uncovers what I believe are the motives and strategies being taken by the national media and President Bush. First, as a short aside: my "breaking story" yesterday...

Hill pressure tipped the balance on Rice GOP lawmakers told White House stance ‘untenable’ By Jonathan E. Kaplan President Bush’s decision yesterday to allow his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, to testify publicly and under oath before an independent panel investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was prompted at least in part by concerns among senior lawmakers in the House Republican caucus. getty images National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice will testify in public. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- They had come to feel that the White House position had become politically untenable, The Hill learned. The lawmakers conveyed their message through an intermediary, who...

The archetypal liberal is the guy who, every morning, drops a dollar in the lap of the homeless man camped out in front of his apartment building and who, every evening, blames conservatives for the fact that there's a homeless man camped out in front of his apartment building. In other words, liberals don't think things through; they opt for gestures, knee-jerk reactions that feel good, without the slightest consideration of long-term consequences. Such was the case in their demand that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice testify, under oath and in public, before the 9/11 Commission. Now their demand has...

THE WHITE HOUSE announced yesterday that National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice would testify before the 9/11 commission. It’s about time. Not letting Rice testify was a political blunder. Most Americans will never get the full explanation for President Bush’s reluctance to hand Rice over to the commission. (The President was concerned about setting a legal precedent that could be used to compel other executive branch officials to testify before Congress in the future.) All they will hear is that the White House wouldn’t let Rice appear. It makes Bush and Rice look like they both have something to hide. Yesterday...

WASHINGTON — Members of the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks said Tuesday that they will closely question national security adviser Condoleezza Rice on the claims made last week by former White House counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke: that the White House did not urgently react to warnings of an impending terror attack and waited too long to develop a response plan. The battle between the two White House aides that has played out for more than a week in Clarke’s book, at the commission’s most recent hearing and in the media will be re-enacted to some extent when Rice...

<p>March 31, 2004 -- WASHINGTON - National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice got her wish yesterday - the green light to testify in public before the 9/11 commission - and White House officials were confident she would effectively make the case that President Bush was vigilant against terrorism. The historic deal clearing the way for Rice's sworn testimony will put her in the spotlight as the wide-ranging probe gains steam and delves into explosive charges from former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke that the White House didn't take the threat from Osama bin Laden seriously.</p>

The White House has just given Democratic partisans, on and off the Sept. 11 commission, enough rope with which to hang themselves.      National security adviser Condoleezza Rice will testify publicly under oath before the national Sept. 11 commission, and the whole commission will meet, without time constraints, with President Bush [related, bio] and Vice President Dick Cheney.      But the public will only tolerate so much political posturing related to the Sept. 11 attacks. If Democrats take advantage of the administration's cooperation to score political points in this election year, it's John Kerry's, not Bush's, campaign which will be harmed.

President Bush is expected to make statements regarding the 9/11 Commission from the White House today at 4:45 ET.

US President George, vice president Dick Cheney and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice have offered to give evidence to the independent inquiry into the September 11 terror attacks. The White House had previously refused to allow Ms Rice to testify before the committee. Ms Rice will give evidence under oath but Mr Bush and Mr Cheney will not. However, the White House says the offer will only stand if the move does not set a precedent and is seeking a written assurance.