How SICK are you of Condi's media pass?

buycitgo

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Mar-26-04 02:45 PM
Original message

How SICK are you of Condi's media pass?

and EVERYbody in the media and politics (dems included) sings her praise: her poise, her honesty, her command of the facts (!!!!!!), her effectiveness on TV/in front of the Commission

I just don't get that.......consensus here, and among other non-delusionals is that she's the worst, and most transparent liar this side of Nixon, and that's the real reason they don't want her to testify in public

this pretty well sums it up....note how old it is:

PROMOTING ICON CONDI: Condi Rice is a press corps icon. According to the White House, Rice failed to read the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, and therefore didn’t know about State’s objections to uranium-from-Africa. She also didn’t know the CIA’s thoughts on this matter, we are told. But when she appeared on last Wednesday’s NewsHour, Gwen Ifill didn’t mention these awkward matters (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 8/1/03). This morning we learn that Rice is next in line to replace Colin Powell at State.

Because Rice is a press corps icon, there is no attempt—repeat that, none—to hold her work to normal standards. Rice doesn’t read 90-page reports? The press corps completely ignored that matter (for a fuller chronology, see below). But it’s hardly the first time the slumbering press corps looked away from Rice’s odd performance. To help flesh out the amazing way the corps behaves toward Icon Condi, let’s review a previous howler which the press almost wholly ignored.

On May 15, 2002, CBS News reported that President Bush had been warned about possible al Qaeda hijackings on August 6, 2001. The Washington Post reported the story on May 16. “President Bush and his top advisers were informed by the CIA early last August that terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden had discussed the possibility of hijacking airplanes,” the paper reported. “White House spokesman Ari Fleischer confirmed that Bush had been told about the possibility of hijackings but he declined to say what had been revealed during his intelligence briefings.” On May 16, Rice held a press briefing; she insisted that no one could have envisioned the events of September 11. “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people…would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile,” Rice said.

Rice’s remark was surpassingly odd. No one could have predicted use of a hijacked plane as a missile? In fact, ever since September 11, news reports had mentioned earlier warnings about that very sort of activity. On May 18, 2002, the Post’s Bob Woodward and Dan Eggen challenged Rice’s statement. After quoting Rice’s remark, they outlined some previous warnings:

>>>>WOODWARD AND EGGEN: But a 1999 report prepared for the National Intelligence Council, an affiliate of the CIA, warned that terrorists associated with bin Laden might hijack an airplane and crash it into the Pentagon, White House or CIA headquarters.
The report recounts well-known case studies of similar plots, including a 1995 plan by al Qaeda operatives to hijack and crash a dozen U.S. airliners in the South Pacific and pilot a light aircraft into Langley.

>>>>“Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaida’s Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House,” the September 1999 report said.

>>>>Woodward and Eggen recounted case studies which they said were “well-known.” But if these cases were well-known to some, they apparently weren’t well-known to Rice.

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh080403.shtml

Dana Millbank is on MSNBC, talking about the Rice inconsistencies that are HURTING their cause