Palestinian Jew
Member
In my previous post I asked whether you thought Condi was incompetent or a liar, well, I think its safe to say its the former.
Condi made the claimed "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking. You take a plane -- people were worried they might blow one up, but they were mostly worried that they might try to take a plane and use it for release of the blind Sheikh or some of their own people"
And yet here are CIA reports saying the opposite:
http://www.americanfreepress.net/Mideast/CIAKnew.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002...ain509471.shtml
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...anguage=printer\
And Clarke has also said that he and others had asked questions about planes being used to fly into buildings and crowded areas.
But now the washington post reveals a new Condi gem. In a speech she was to deliver the day of 9/11:
The address was designed to promote missile defense as the cornerstone of a new national security strategy, and contained no mention of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or Islamic extremist groups, according to former U.S. officials who have seen the text.
The speech was postponed in the chaos of the day, part of which Rice spent in a bunker. It mentioned terrorism, but did so in the context used in other Bush administration speeches in early 2001: as one of the dangers from rogue nations, such as Iraq, that might use weapons of terror, rather than from the cells of extremists now considered the main security threat to the United States.
The text also implicitly challenged the Clinton administration's policy, saying it did not do enough about the real threat -- long-range missiles.
"We need to worry about the suitcase bomb, the car bomb and the vial of sarin released in the subway," according to excerpts of the speech provided to The Washington Post. "[But] why put deadbolt locks on your doors and stock up on cans of mace and then decide to leave your windows open?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42287-2004Apr1.html
Condi made the claimed "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking. You take a plane -- people were worried they might blow one up, but they were mostly worried that they might try to take a plane and use it for release of the blind Sheikh or some of their own people"
And yet here are CIA reports saying the opposite:
http://www.americanfreepress.net/Mideast/CIAKnew.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002...ain509471.shtml
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/w...anguage=printer\
And Clarke has also said that he and others had asked questions about planes being used to fly into buildings and crowded areas.
But now the washington post reveals a new Condi gem. In a speech she was to deliver the day of 9/11:
The address was designed to promote missile defense as the cornerstone of a new national security strategy, and contained no mention of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or Islamic extremist groups, according to former U.S. officials who have seen the text.
The speech was postponed in the chaos of the day, part of which Rice spent in a bunker. It mentioned terrorism, but did so in the context used in other Bush administration speeches in early 2001: as one of the dangers from rogue nations, such as Iraq, that might use weapons of terror, rather than from the cells of extremists now considered the main security threat to the United States.
The text also implicitly challenged the Clinton administration's policy, saying it did not do enough about the real threat -- long-range missiles.
"We need to worry about the suitcase bomb, the car bomb and the vial of sarin released in the subway," according to excerpts of the speech provided to The Washington Post. "[But] why put deadbolt locks on your doors and stock up on cans of mace and then decide to leave your windows open?"
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42287-2004Apr1.html