SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: John Carragher who wrote (20769)12/21/2003 10:12:41 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793707
 
Look for the Dems to make hay out of the hearings. Condi's testimony will be crucial.

Saturday, Dec. 20, 2003
Condi and the 9/11 Commission

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is apparently not keen on going under oath for the Kean 9/11 commission.
By TIMOTHY J. BURGER WASHINGTON - TIME

Poised to convene its first hard-hitting hearings in January, the federal commission investigating the 9/11 attacks continues to be at odds with the White House over access to key information and witnesses. Two government sources tell TIME that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice is arguing over ground rules for her appearance in part because she does not want to testify under oath or, according to one source, in public. While national security advisers are presidential staff and generally don’t have to appear before Congress, the commission argues that its jurisdiction is broader—and it's been requiring fact witnesses in its massive investigation to testify under oath. The exception: it may not seek to swear in President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Bill Clinton or Al Gore in the increasingly likely event they will be asked to speak to the commission. "I think that it is in their interest to meet with us," says GOP commission member John Lehman, saying that they should be invited, not subpoenaed, and be allowed to appear behind closed doors.

With such high-profile testimony in the offing, it’s no wonder the commission chairman, Republican Tom Kean, was telling reporters last week to expect major revelations from the investigative hearings expected to begin in late January.

He also suggested that the 9/11 attacks might have been prevented if mid-level government officials at various government agencies had done their jobs. As for senior officials like Rice or her predecessor, Clinton NSA Sandy Berger, and their bosses, Kean said the commission was still studying whether they share the blame. Rice could face tough questioning. One Republican commissioner says a comment by Rice last year—that no one “could have predicted that they would try to use a…hijacked airplane as a missile”—was "an unfortunate comment . . . that was, of course, a wrong-footed statement on its face," given that there was years of intelligence about Al Qaeda's interest in airplane attacks.

Whether she signs up willingly to testify now is still an open question. But the commission wants to hear from her. Said Democratic commissioner Tim Roemer: "The Presidents and Vice Presidents and national security advisers in both administrations should appear." Spokesmen for Rice and the commission had no comment on the talks but a senior Rice aide insisted that "Dr. Rice and the White House continue to work amiably with the commission, consistent with the President's desire to make staff available in accordance with his ability to fight the war on terrorism."

time.com



To: John Carragher who wrote (20769)12/21/2003 10:17:15 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793707
 
What happened that day on patrol

James Kelly, Managing Editor - TIME



Posted Sunday, December 21, 2003; 7:45 a.m. EST

As you can imagine, there wasn't much disagreement among the editors this year about the biggest story of 2003. George Bush's campaign to overthrow Saddam Hussein has dominated the headlines; TIME has devoted 19 of this year's covers to the war and its aftermath. We did have a spirited debate about who would best represent the story, and finally decided on the American soldier as Person of the Year. Yes, it was the President's decision to go to war, and it was up to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to devise the strategy. But the burden of executing the decision rested on the shoulders of the men and women who make up the armed forces, both the 1.4 million in uniform and the 1.2 million who serve in the reserves.

By naming the American soldier as Person of the Year, we're using that term in its broadest sense, to stand for all of those in a U.S. uniform who go in harm's way, including the Navy's sailors, the airmen and women of the Air Force, and the Marines. By the way, when I and several other editors met with Rumsfeld at the Pentagon in November to talk about the war, he made the pitch, unsolicited by us, that the Person of the Year should be the American soldier. (Or as he put it, the American volunteer.)

Our reporting, in fact, was already under way. We decided to tell much of our story through a single platoon in Iraq: an artillery survey unit in the U.S. Army's 1st Armored Division. Based in Germany, the platoon arrived in Baghdad in late May and soon got nicknamed the Tomb Raiders after being assigned the task of looking for weapons hidden in one of the city's cemeteries. Shortly before Thanksgiving, our team gathered in Baghdad to embed with the Tomb Raiders. Romesh Ratnesar, a writer based in New York City who had already spent three months this year in Iraq, was joined by Michael Weisskopf, a senior correspondent in Washington who had spent four weeks earlier this year reporting out of Baghdad. James Nachtwey, the legendary war photographer, who insisted on staying in the Iraqi capital when the war began last March, joined them two days later.

For three weeks, the team ate, slept and went on patrol with the Tomb Raiders. Jim shot thousands of photographs of the platoon and its headquarters unit, some of which can be seen in the photo essay that begins on page 42. Jim also photographed the cover, which features platoon members Sergeant Marquette Whiteside, Specialist Billie Grimes and Sergeant Ronald Buxton. On the evening of Dec. 10, our team was deep into its reporting when something happened that underscored the violence in Iraq and would change the lives of several people forever.

Someone threw a grenade into the back of a humvee on patrol in Baghdad; Michael instinctively grabbed hold of it to throw it out. Jim, who was sitting next to him, saw it explode as Michael cupped his hand around it. The next image Jim recalled was Michael's right arm, raised up and handless. Jim had been hit by shrapnel in the abdomen, where his armored vest ended, in an arm and finger, and below both knees. Private Orion Jenks, 22, suffered a broken leg, and Private First Class Jim Beverly, 19, lost teeth and lacerated his tongue.

Grimes, 26, a medic who had been traveling in the next humvee, jumped out and began applying a tourniquet to Michael's arm, as close to the wrist as she could, to stop the bleeding. Later, a colonel would explain to Michael that the shrapnel range of an unimpeded grenade is about 15 feet in all directions. In this case, the combination of Michael's hand and the bench below it contained enough of the blast to save the life of everyone in the back of the truck. You can read the full details of the incident in "Portrait of a Platoon," which begins on page 58.

Michael and Jim were flown by helicopter to Baghdad's 28th Combat Support Hospital, where correspondents Brian Bennett, Michael Ware and Phil Zabriskie, photo-operations manager Bill Kalis and photographer Yuri Kozyrev stayed with them and helped organize their departure for a U.S. military hospital in Landstuhl, Germany. At the same time, Washington bureau chief Michael Duffy and senior correspondent Mark Thompson set aside the profile of Rumsfeld they were co-writing to press the Pentagon for assistance and information on transferring Jim and Michael out of Iraq. By Friday, enough had been established for Michele Stephenson, director of photography, and Howard Chua-Eoan, news director, to fly to Germany to meet our two wounded colleagues.

Michael is now at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, in Washington. He is receiving excellent care there, supervised by Dr. Andrew Friedman. Jim is back home in New York City, seeing doctors almost daily. I spoke with Michael twice last week and had lunch with Jim last Friday, and their spirits are remarkably good. The two soldiers are recovering as well.

Ever since the incident, soldiers have been coming up to Michael to thank him for saving the lives of their colleagues. "All I did was follow my instincts," he says. The day before he left Germany, his nurse, Captain Nina McCoy from San Antonio, Texas, held his arm and walked him up and down the hallway for exercise. Michael, 57, was trying to explain to her—and perhaps to himself—that it was good that he was at his age when this happened, saying he couldn't imagine what it was like for younger people who had yet to figure out what life was about. McCoy then told the story of another nurse who was walking a young man who had lost both his forearms. The soldier turned to the nurse and said, "I don't know what I'm going to do. I'm supposed to be married when I get home. How am I going to wear the ring?" The nurse clutched him tight and said, "You can wear it on a chain around your neck and it will lie even closer to your heart." Michael nodded to McCoy and said, "That was the right thing to say."