Questions Remain Unanswered, Despite Key Testimony
For millions of Americans, the attacks on September 11, 2001 left
many questions unanswered. Many minds were left to wonder how this attack could
happen to such a strong, secure country. Many wondered if the Bush
Administration was even aware of such a threat, or if they ignored several
warnings from reliable sources, which is the thought of many politicians and
analysts in Washington.
Since late 2002, members of the 9/11 Commission have been
attempting to answer these questions by holding hearings in which various
political powers in Washington testify, showing exactly what they knew prior to
9/11. The commission, which is an independent and bipartisan organization, has
already heard the testimony from politicians such as former President Bill
Clinton, former anti-terrorism advisor Richard Clarke, and most recently, the
current National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice.
For weeks the panel has wanted to question Rice about what
warnings the Bush Administration had prior to 9/11 but was refused several
times by President Bush until he finally gave Rice permission to testify, weeks
after the first request. This would mark the first time that any current
National Security Advisor has testified publicly.
³I felt that it was good that the Bush Administration put her on
trial to prove their actions,² said junior Casey Langwith.
An August 6, 2001 briefing was an interesting topic, which supposedly
referred to al-Qaeda¹s plans to attack the United States. Rice¹s testimony was
also very important to the Bush Administration because it helped refute
accusations made during the testimony of Richard Clarke.
According to Clarke, who served under the Clinton Administration
as well as both Bush Administrations, President Bush and his advisors paid
little attention to terrorism prior to 9/11 as they were focused on other
issues. In fact, Clarke recalls in his recent book, Against All Enemies, that prior to 9/11, he had never given
President Bush a briefing on terrorism.
Throughout Rice¹s testimony, she consistently denied most of the
accusations made against the current Administration. In response to Clarke¹s
comments in his book, Rice replied, ³Dick Clarke never asked me to brief the
President on counterterrorism.² Such permission was required by Rice to brief
the President.
In regard to that key August 6, 2001 briefing, titled ³Bin Laden
Determined to Attack Inside the United States,² Rice explained that the
briefing contained only ³historical information based on old reporting,² which
is quite the contrary to popular belief, and that the brief contained
information that was ³frustratingly vague² in reference to any future attacks,
9/11 included. Marian¹s American Government teacher Mr. Tom Baker agrees: ³I
don¹t feel that there is anything Bush could have done to prevent the 9/11
attacks.²
Despite constant pressure by the commission members and accusations
that the Bush Administration repeatedly ignored the warnings and did not do
enough to prevent the attacks, Rice did not waver and answered the questions.
Many critics and politicians believe that the questioning was very
partisan-based on behalf of the democrats, Baker included. ³I thought it was a
very partisan attack by certain members of the board. They seemed to be getting
a very different interpretation of the August 6 briefing than everyone else,²
Baker said.
The hearings held by the 9/11 Commission may not hold any grave
consequences in the future, but with election time just around the corner, the
administration is sure to feel some backlash from the doubt that has been in
the back of millions of Americans minds. The administration would like to move
on and focus on the future of national security. The administration feels it
has done it¹s best to shield the United States from future terrorist attacks,
but according to Rice, ³We are safer, but we are not safe.²