Caught the tail end of Condi's testimony Thursday. Wow! What a performance. She was calm and collected, and did a convincing job of answering questions while not answering them. I kept thinking that when they make a movie about this whole period, certainly Halle Berry has to be tagged for the role of Condi. In any case her testimony, I felt, boiled down to a few points which she continually kept falling back on, namely:
1. That 9/11 was unpreventable. There was intelligence that something big was going to happen at some point but without more concrete details, our Government couldn't do much. Hindsight is 20/20 and despite Clarke's warnings there wasn't much to work with.
2. That because of 9/11 our Intelligence Agencies recognized the need for change and hence the Department of Homeland Security.
3. That because of 9/11 our Intelligence Agencies needed better intelligence gathering tools internal to the U.S. and hence the Patriot Act.
Condi also mentioned that they are now aware of and tracking other threatening countries (like Iran and North Korea), of WMDs, and that intelligence is better. Again, her testimony was neat, cool, and very impressive. To be expected, otherwise why let her testify.
But the testimony was also a complete waste of time. Seriously. I caught the last three Commission investigators and their questioning was simplistic and evadable. The last questioner was essentially pitching slow and easy for Condi to hit home runs out of the park. He fawned so much I thought he'd lick her boots at first. I felt that here was a dog-and-pony show (the Commission) presenting a nice smoke-and-mirrors act to, once again, get the attention away from the real issue - Iraq.
Consider: After 9/11, after Homeland, after the Patriot Act what happens? The attention shifts from Afghanistan and the pursuit of bin Laden to Iraq and Hussein. Why? Because the White House (Bush et al) said that Hussein had WMDs, supproted al Qaeda, and was an immediate threat to the U.S - all based on intelligence gathered under a new supposedly smarter system. Yet Iraq has been an utter failure other than the ousting of Hussein. Either our intelligence systems still are incompetent and/or perhaps the Bush Administration had a priority other than the reasons given for going in to Iraq. What we've been hearing is the intelligence regarding Iraq was modified, belittled, trumped up, or outright ignored. What we've been hearing is that even prior to 9/11, Bush was looking for a reason to go into Iraq. Even more ludicrous is that the reasons given by Bush for going into Iraq - have WMDs, have connections with terrorist groups, and may pose as much a threat to the U.S. - would easily qualify other nations (ummm, Pakistan) for invasions. Yet, we did then - and are doing now - nothing, at least not on the scale of an invasion.
We need a true independent investigation into Bush et al's planning regarding Iraq. If Bush had invasion plans for Iraq before 9/11, even before being elected, then his actions may be prosecutable for he has used American personnel for his own agenda. He has placed U.S. military and civilians in harms way. He has repeatedly sidestepped Governmental processes and safeguards to further his own designs. He has wasted taxpayer money. He has made the United States and the World a less safe place by giving terrorists a massive cause to rally around. We need the truth and we don't need Bush.
|
