Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Please critique my Condi Rice LTTE (re: 9/11 perjury)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:04 AM
Original message
Please critique my Condi Rice LTTE (re: 9/11 perjury)
Comments & editing suggestions wanted:
>>>
The White House must be quietly thanking Mark Foley for the pedophilia scandal timing. If not for Foley, we might be talking about how Condoleezza Rice has completely lost what was left of her credibility. The debate would be if perjury charges are justified regarding her 9/11 Commission testimony and if she was also criminally negligent.

In her testimony to the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if they had known an attack was coming, they would have, "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.

In reality, Dr. Rice did nothing to stop 9/11.

On July 10, 2001, the two top CIA people, George Tenet and J. Cofer Black, urgently warned her, Attorney General John Ashcroft and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that a terror attack was imminent. Black even said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head."

So serious was this warning that Ashcroft switched from flying commercial aircraft to private chartered ones.

Though she first denied the meeting, Rice now says she cannot recall the details.

If she does not step down for perjury, Dr. Rice should at least have the shame to step down for her incompetence.

>>>>

link to CBS story on Ashcroft from July of 2001 - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. My edited rewrite:
Edited on Wed Oct-04-06 11:09 AM by SteppingRazor
The White House must be quietly thanking Mark Foley for the timing of the pedophilia scandal. If not for Foley, we might be talking about how Condoleezza Rice has completely lost what remained of her credibility. Along with the Foley scandal, we should be discussing whether perjury charges should be filed against Rice regarding her 9/11 Commission testimony and whether she was criminally negligent.
In her testimony to the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if the administration had known an attack was coming, they would have, "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.
In reality, Secretary Rice did nothing to stop 9/11.
On July 10, 2001, the two top CIA officials, George Tenet and J. Cofer Black, urgently warned her, Attorney General John Ashcroft and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that a terror attack was imminent. Black even said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head."
So serious was this warning that Ashcroft switched from flying commercial aircraft to private chartered ones.
Though she first denied the meeting, Rice now says she cannot recall the details. If she does not step down for perjury, Rice should at least have the shame to step down for her incompetence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Thanks
I'm about due to have one in the hartford courant...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chemenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
2. My only comment is
in in regard to your statement "... Condoleezza Rice has completely lost what was left of her credibility." IMHO, she never had the smallest iota of credibility to begin with. This latest denial on her part re: meeting with Tenet and Black on 10 July 2001 is just another one of her feeble attempts to lie her way out of accepting responsibility for 9/11. This woman is a pathological liar but a piss-poor one at that. Just listen to her voice ... when it trembles you can bet your ass she's lying like a rug. Of all the turds in the * misAdministration I hate and have the most contempt for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Subdivisions Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. I brought this up a few weeks back. You can tell when she is
lying and ad-libbing to cover her ass. Her voice begins to quake and tremble and she sounds just like she is about to burst into tears from the stress of keeping up the charade.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. I'm sure most of DU would agree with you
And, most people outside of the United States would concur that she has none... but she has been a "golden girl" in the media for the past few years and has been almost immune to criticism.

scratch that, all of DU probably agrees with you on her having no credibility.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:20 AM
Response to Original message
4. Good letter, good editing. Good job both of you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I'm a writer/editor by trade, so it better be good!
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. And don't forget that he's a sailor in his free time
Strong to the finish, doncha know!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SteppingRazor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. .
:P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. That's what you get for replying to a "Let Me Photoshop You" thread
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orrex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
8. My offering
Yours:
The White House must be quietly thanking Mark Foley for the timing of the pedophilia scandal. If not for Foley, we might be talking about how Condoleezza Rice has completely lost what remained of her credibility. Along with the Foley scandal, we should be discussing whether perjury charges should be filed against Rice regarding her 9/11 Commission testimony and whether she was criminally negligent.


Mine:
The Whitehouse must be secretly thanking Mark Foley for the timing of his sex scandal. If not for Foley's predatory antics, we might instead be talking about how Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has lost what little remained of her credibility. If not for Foley's shame-induced resignation, we might instead be exploring whether Secretary Rice is guilty of perjury.


Comments: I changed "quietly" to "secretly" because it implies a greater sense of skullduggery and deception. I changed "pedophilia scandal" to "sex scandal," because some people might not consider the pages to be sufficiently young to qualify as "pedophilia," and if that charge is disputed then it distracts from the rest of your argument. I changed "if not for Foley" to "if not for Foley's predatory antics" because it highlights his wrongdoing and reinforces the creepiness of his methods. Also, the use of "predator" resonates with NBC's endlessly ongoinging "To Catch a Predator" series.

I changed "whether perjury charges should be filed against Rice" to "whether Rice is guilty of perjury," because it's more immediate and, I think, packs more of a punch. The word "guilty" is powerful even if it's only hypothetical (at this point). I think that you can drop the bit about "criminally negligent" because it seems too vague and metaphorical, especially since you don't explicitly return to it in the piece.

I used "shame-induced resignation" because it plays well against your closing paragraph (see below).

Yours:
In her testimony to the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if they had known an attack was coming, they would have, "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.

In reality, Dr. Rice did nothing to stop 9/11.


Mine:
In her sworn testimony before the 9/11 Commission, Rice said that if the Bush administration had known that an attack was coming, they would have "moved heaven and earth" to stop it.


Comments: I think that it's useful to name the Bush administration here, rather than refer simply to "they," because you implicate the rest of Bushco. You can eliminate the closing statement ("In reality, Dr. Rice...") because it's obvious from what comes next, and the passage about Black and Tenet packs more punch if it follows immediately.

Yours:On July 10, 2001, the two top CIA people, George Tenet and J. Cofer Black, urgently warned her, Attorney General John Ashcroft and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that a terror attack was imminent. Black even said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head."

So serious was this warning that Ashcroft switched from flying commercial aircraft to private chartered ones.


Mine:
On July 10, 2001 J. Cofer Black and George Tenet, then director of the CIA, urgently warned Rice, Attorney General Ashcroft, and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that a terrorist attack was imminent. Black later reflected that they spelled out a clear and convincing case, yet Rice still failed to act. Ashcroft got the message, though, and as a result he began taking only private, chartered flights, rather than flying in commercial aircraft.


Comments: "top CIA people" is too colloquial; it's enough to name the two men and proceed from there. Change "terror" to "terrorist," because they're two different things, and because Bushco tries to equate them whenever possible. Remove the quote about the gun to the head, because it comes across a trifle too literal in this context, and it may be perceived as a vague threat from a ranting Liberal. It's sufficient to underscore that the warning was clear--clear enough to scare Ashcroft into taking private flights!

Yours:
Though she first denied the meeting, Rice now says she cannot recall the details.

If she does not step down for perjury, Dr. Rice should at least have the shame to step down for her incompetence.


Mine:
Recently Rice denied that the meeting took place. Then she changed her story and said that she didn't recall the details of the meeting.

If her perjury doesn't force her from office, then her clear incompetence should shame her into resigning.


Comments: I feel that it's useful to reiterate that she changed her story, since we know how Conservatives love the "flip-flopper" label. And I think that "shame" as a verb is stronger here than as a direct object. Also, "step down" is a bit tepid, especially if we can use "shame" and "resign" to echo Foley's "shame-induced resignation" mentioned above.

=====================

It's a good LTTE in any case. You are free to adopt or ignore any of my suggestions with no obligation express or implied.

Good luck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-04-06 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Thanks
some excellent ideas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC