| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Condi doesn’t convince families |
| 2004-04-08 |
| Sorry for length WASHINGTON - Relatives of September 11 attacks victims said testimony given by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to an official commission failed to fully explain why the United States was caught off guard by al-Qaeda. (As I predicted last week!) "I think she really danced around the issues," said Mary Fetchet, whose son Bradley, 24, perished when terrorists flew a jetliner into the second World Trade Center tower on September 11, 2001. "She gave very vague responses. Questions that she didn’t want to answer, she didn’t answer," said Fetchet. She said she had hoped Rice would follow the example of former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, who in testimony to the commission two weeks ago apologized to the families for the government’s failure to prevent the attacks. "She doesn’t accept that she did not make good decisions, that she as national security adviser did not do what she was supposed to do," said Fetchet, who said her son might be alive today if the government had heeded the clues about an impending terror strike. "Any mother will tell you, you need to learn from your mistakes so that you don’t make them again. Unless people are ... honest about what the failures were and take some accountability for those failures, what are we really going to resolve?" she asked. (This woman is obviously loopy off the deep end!) Some relatives felt however, that mea culpas were not called for. "I think an apology would be inappropriate," said Debra Burlingame, whose brother Charles was the pilot of the plane that rammed the Pentagon. "It wouldn’t have mattered who was in the Oval Office on September 11. Nothing they could have done could have prevented my brother’s murder and the murder of 3,000 other people," she said. "We had breakdowns in our intelligence agencies, we had breakdowns with the FBI, we had legal barriers that prevented them from sharing information -- she explained all that," she said. The biggest lesson from 9/11, Burlingame continued, was that "we have new enemies. We have to look ahead. We know now that there are individuals with laptops and cell phones and an overriding desire to kill Americans." (Nicely put!) Hers appeared to be a minority view among family members however. Beverly Eckert, who lost her husband Sean Rooney in the World Trade Center attack, said she feared Americans were no safer today than before 9/11, especially since the US-led war on Iraq. "The war in Iraq diverted resources. Honestly I don’t know that we’re stopping terrorism by agitating that segment of the world," she said. "I don’t think we’re safer from terrorism. I think we’re less safe." (Right from the DNC talking points memo.) Rosemary Dillard said she felt the "utmost respect" for Rice’s grace under fire on the witness stand, but was unconvinced by the testimony, saying much of what Rice -- one of President George W. Bush’s most trusted aides -- had to offer was "spin." "She would go on and on, and by the time she finished nobody knew what the original question was." "She appears to be a very good person. She also appears to be the person who’s going to protect her boss," said Dillard, whose husband Eddie was a passenger on the airliner that slammed into the Pentagon. "I think our government owes us some answers," Dillard said. "We need to know that I can get on an airplane and not have this happen, or I can get on a train. I need to know that the government agencies that are supposed to protect us, protect us." (Again how would Mrs. Dillard would have liked things to be played out prior to 9/11?)Helga Gerhardt and her husband Hans, originally from Germany, said they had been frustrated that the information flow was slow, but, after attending the hearings, said they are piecing together the events which took the life of their son Ralph at the World Trade Center. "I’m getting more answers over time," said Gerhardt, who has lived for nearly four decades in Canada. "For us it’s more important now to find out why this happened. When we saw it on television, we knew immediately that this was a terrorist attack. Why did it take so long to mobilize to protect the sites?" Despite having attended hours of commission hearings, she said, "I’m still not 100 percent sure I understand." I hope you don’t mind but I would like to cherry pick from this article: -Vague answers as to how terrorists carried out this act -No Apology -Iraq diverting resources from WOT -Still not safe -Hiding something Sounds like the talking points for the left not concerned family members. Sad that they don’t understand that they are being used by the LLL. I can’t imagine but if someone in my family had been killed on that day I would want two things: 1) Get those responsible and 2) make sure it never happens again. If these family members need to assign blame for the 9/11 attacks I offer Mr. Osama Bin Laden, not President Bush or Clinton or anyone in their administration. Also Kudos to Senator BOB Kerry for telling those Moveon idiots to stop clapping during testimony and shame on the ?Ben Venosti? for they most partisan questions of the meeting (jackass). Our country has been under attack for at least a decade by Bin Laden and his gang of thugs. At No time prior to 9/11 had anyone (Dem Or Rep) suggested that we even remotely take the steps for security that were implemented AFTER 9/11. Dr. Rice gave some insightful testimony as to what is and isn’t ‘actionable’ intelligence. Two men talking vaguely about something ‘big’ that going to occur soon is NOT and example of intelligence you can use to employ assets (troops, CIA, ETC). Arabs at a flight school is not (pre 9/11) by itself actionable intelligence. The post 9/11 world would still have trouble acting on the chatter but we certainly would take a closer look at Arabs attending flight schools. Of course these points were missed by the ‘News’ correspondents that have 20/20 hindsight. |
| Posted by:Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) |
| #4 I am not just trying to rally those who think 'news' events like this could hurt Bush in Nov. I think that everytime one of these smear pieces come out, Bush has a fresh insight on where his opponents are going. Just one TV ad stating that 12 years of sleeping at the wheel brought about 911, but just 30 months of war, extremely low collateral civilian casualties, and an inspired and motivated military, has made the world a safer place for civilian life; this in spite of defeatist comments made by senior party officials, an a sore lack of help from major and former allies. If I were a democrat operative, I would be begging and pleading our left wing to please, please STFU about 911. |
| Posted by: badanov 2004-04-09 8:45:26 AM |
| #3 While I understand the propaganda value of this farce, I have to say that I think this 9/11 families thing is a negative for the Kerry side. All it does is call attention to the Tides Foundation, and DNC shallow underhanded tactics. Not only that - it's insulting that they really believe the peasants beneath them are this stupid....even though we know that some are. I think this whole 9/11 Families thing is, overall, a big net loss for the democrats and shows just how sophomoric their minds really are. |
| Posted by: B 2004-04-09 7:23:08 AM |
| #2 Fechet is a member of one or several of these groups as well. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-04-09 4:48:50 AM |
| #1 Cybersarge, I got curious about anothe article I read that got reactions from four family members of 9/11 victims. They were Patty Casazza, Carie Lemack, Bob McIlvaine and Beverly Eckert. None were identified in the article(which I can't find to save my life I have the link as www.scoop.co.nz/mason/HL0402/s00021.htm that doesn't work.) Anyway I tracked them back to several groups: Voices of Sept 11, 911 Independent Commission and September Eleventh Families For a Peaceful Tomorrow. The last one isworth a hit. Frankly, I'm glad I don't qualify for membership to the first two but the third looks like a front for puppet-people. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2004-04-09 4:41:38 AM |