Monday, April 30, 2007

Rice Admits Tenet's "Truthiness"

In a CBS News article titled "Rice Dismisses Tenet's Accusations", Condoleeza Rice appears to be disputing George Tenet's claims. However, a fairly casual evaluation of her answers reveal just the opposite. Let's review these statements from her Sunday interview with Bob Shieffer on CBS's "Face the Nation" and see what answers truly reveal:

Tenet tells Scott Pelley in a 60 Minutes interview that, before the September 11 attacks, he told Rice in a White House meeting the U.S. should take preemptive action inside Afghanistan.

"We need – we need to – we need to consider immediate action inside Afghanistan now," Tenet remembers telling Rice, who was then National Security Advisor. "We need to – we need to move to the offensive."


Rice, however, said Tenet's claim was a "new fact" and she would "have to look."

If it is a fact, how can it be new when he said it happened prior to September 11, 2001? She refers to Tenet's claim as a "fact" which is a clear acknowledgment that it is true. Further, what does she have to look into about a fact? Possibly come up with an answer to hide the truth?

She told Bob Schieffer, "It's very interesting because that's not what George told the 9/11 Commission at the time. He said that he felt that we had gotten it."

She refers to his testimony and attempts to point out that he withheld that information from the 9/11 Commission. However, even if he did it in no way proves that it is false.

Asked why Tenet would make the claim if it wasn't true, Rice said she didn't know. "I don't know what we were supposed to preemptively strike in Afghanistan," she said. "Perhaps somebody can ask that."

Her claim appears to be that he didn't provide specific targets,which he never claims to have done. Notice that she still does not deny his assertion, then takes an offensive stance saying that he should be questioned about specific targets that should have been picked. That is totally irrelevant as to whether or not he recommended preemptive action in a general manner. It would be up to the Military and intelligence Agencies combined to select specific targets.

A careful examination of her statements reveal that while Secretary Rice makes weak attempts to defend herself, she is unable to come up with even a weak rebuttal and clearly confirms that his assertion is a fact.

No comments: