Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Transcript of Rumsfeld squirming on Face The Nation today.

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 (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
gristy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:04 PM
Original message
Transcript of Rumsfeld squirming on Face The Nation today.
Oh, my. How Rumsfeld was raked, I tell you, just raked! over the coals today. I learned of this from atrios, and you can get the complete transcript (pdf) from CBS here.
--------------------

SCHIEFFER: Well, let me just ask you this. If they did not have these weapons of mass destruction, though, granted all of that is true, why then did they pose an immediate threat to us, to this country?
Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, you're the--you and a few other critics are the only people I've heard use the phrase `immediate threat.' I didn't. The president didn't. And it's become kind of folklore that that's--that's what's happened. The president went...

SCHIEFFER: You're saying that nobody in the administration said that.

Sec. RUMSFELD: I--I can't speak for nobody--everybody in the administration and say nobody said that.

SCHIEFFER: Vice president didn't say that? The...

Sec. RUMSFELD: Not--if--if you have any citations, I'd like to see 'em.

Mr. FRIEDMAN: We have one here. It says `some have argued that the nu'--this is you speaking--`that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent, that Saddam is at least five to seven years away from having nuclear weapons. I would not be so certain.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: And--and...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: It was close to imminent.

Sec. RUMSFELD: Well, I've--I've tried to be precise, and I've tried to be accurate. I'm s--suppose I've...

Mr. FRIEDMAN: `No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world and the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq.'

Sec. RUMSFELD: Mm-hmm. It--my view of--of the situation was that he--he had--we--we believe, the best intelligence that we had and other countries had and that--that we believed and we still do not know--we will know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
teach1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Condi and "imminent"
From MTP on the same subject, Condi didn't squirm, but the truth seems...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4515556/

MR. RUSSERT: But, Dr. Rice, leading up to the war, the rhetoric of the administration was much different than Saddam could be a threat or he has weapons programs. The president said he was, "a unique and urgent threat." It was, "a unique urgency," "a grave threat." You and the president both talked about the mushroom cloud. Scott McClelland, deputy press secretary, said it's "an imminent threat." Ari Fleischer, the press secretary, said, "absolutely," it was an imminent threat. In hindsight, looking back, it was not an imminent or urgent threat.

DR. RICE: I think what the president said in his State of the Union, Tim, is that we cannot wait until it becomes imminent. It is a gathering and grave threat. We all believed that it is an urgent threat and I believe to this day that it was an urgent threat. After 12 years of refusing to account for his weapons, of refusing to account for his activities, after 12 years of defying the international community, shooting at our pilots in no-fly zones, threatening his neighbors, sitting in the world's most dangerous region, it was an urgent threat. This could not go on. And we are safer as a result because today Iraq is no longer going to be a state of weapons of mass destruction concern. It's simply rewriting history to suggest that people did not think that Iraq was a serious weapons of mass destruction state of concern. After all, President Clinton in 1998 had committed military action to deal with Saddam. In 1998, the United States Congress had adopted a regime change strategy because we couldn't live with the threat of Saddam Hussein.

MR. RUSSERT: But the head of the CIA, George Tenet, testified this week he never said it was an imminent threat and he said it three times he had to correct the vice president or president on comments they had made about intelligence.

DR. RICE: Well, first of all, I think that what George Tenet said is that he never said it was an imminent threat. The president said in his State of the Union, "We cannot wait until it is an imminent threat." The question was how long were you going to wait with the grave and gathering danger of a regime like Saddam Hussein with capability and intent and money, refusing to answer the legitimate questions of the international system, continuing to fire at our pilots in the no-fly zone, continuing to threaten his neighbors--how long were you going to wait? And the president decided that it was time to deal with this problem, particularly in light of September 11, when we learned that we don't ever know when a threat is really imminent. Did we know on September 10 that September 11 was imminent? No, we did not. And so the president was dealing with this in a very different set of circumstances after September 11.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisel Donating Member (217 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Rice Raised Issue of what They Knew on September 10 ?
Edited on Sun Mar-14-04 07:18 PM by terisel
She raised the issue by denying that they knew anything-reminds me of Lady MacBeth. Use of the phrase "really imminent" is interesting. Now we have shades or degrees of imminency to consider.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Hi terisel! It depends on the level of imminence in "imminent" probably...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suegeo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Most incompetent group ever
Edited on Sun Mar-14-04 08:03 PM by suegeo
"And the president decided that it was time to deal with this problem, particularly in light of September 11, when we learned that we don't ever know when a threat is really imminent. "

She just admitted that this adminstration can't find its ass with both hands.

If you can't even give me a ballpark timeframe Dr. Rice, or can't stop "traditional" hi-jackings, then what the hell are you doing as National Security Advisor. Why should I listen to Dr. Rice, who was in charge of security on the day that the biggest security failure in our country's history happened? It's like hiring Forrest Gump to teach me how to map the human genome.

Also, the government itself admitted that the NSA had intercepted messages from the so-called 9.11.01 hi-jackers before the attacks, and that these msgs ("tomorrow is the big wedding!") were sitting on someone's desk waiting to be translated.

So, umm, wouldn't hiring more translators HELP them to know when an attack is imminent? And if not, why did they hire more translators in the months that followed the security failure that happened on Dr. Rice's watch?

From what I can recall, many many countries sent the USA warnings that we were about to be attacked. It seems we were the ONLY country that didn't know something was gonna go down (on Dr. Rice's watch.)

Incompetent boobs (or worse). The whole lot of 'em.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. 100% true
I agree - I think it was just gross incompetence on their part. They were too concerned with Star Wars & missile defense and pulling out of ABM treaties because, as one Republican analyst said, "Osama bin Laden doesn't have any missiles."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. Somebody needs to tell Dr. Rice that "gathering" is a synonym
for "imminent."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
2. Outstanding!
Schieffer called Rummy's bluff.

Rummy has bullied his way through the press corps for three years and they (the press corps) are finally standing up to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Offshore Bush Donating Member (92 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Remember when the media was selling him
as some sort of heroic genius warrior with Time magazine fellating him with his face on the cover? Hopefully those days are over for good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeee !
That was fun to read ..Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. what a dope
"Did we know on September 10 that September 11 was imminent? No, we did not."

I did. And then on September 11, September 12 was imminent. Like 4 follows 3, which followed 2 ....

}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. These BushCo folks are all a bunch of LIARS!!!!
:argh: :hurts: :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
9. Rope a dope! Checkmate! Kerry is right. Liars and crooks!
You will get that apology win pigs fly. :puke:

Go Kerry, go! :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boobooday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
10. Scummy Rummy Looks Like a Dummy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
otohara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
11. Tom Friedman???
I'm confused, why was Friedman on and why is he asking questions NOW? Shouldn't the Pulitzer Prize Winner asked questions prior to quagmire? No, he didn't ask questions like he should have - the adults were in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-14-04 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
13. Rummy DID use "immediate threat"
Rummy did use the words "immediate threat" in regards to Iraq's vast stores of biological weapons. I don't remember the day & time of the quote (somebody with Lexis-Nexis or better with Google?) - but, I remember him specifically using the words "immediate"
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, 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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