|
Women's Rights
What's New? - Archive
WomenMatter will continuously post updates on all this and other issues as we monitor the continuing philosophical and practical debates nationwide.
Please check back often for updates. Past updates are available for reference on the Women's Rights Archives page.
Since Women's Rights is in many ways an umbrella issue, WomenMatter will highlight related updates from other Life Issue areas here:
Investigating Our Terror: The 9/11 Commission Presents us with a Chance to Question
The shock of September 11th is still with us; it may be a permanent fixture in the American psyche. No matter how thorough our investigations, or how complete our conclusions, we will always wonder, "How could this have happened?"
Investigating Terror
Our desire to understand, control, document, and fully realize the tragedy on
September 11th has materialized in the form of an official investigation by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, casually called the 9-11 Commission. The independent, bi-partisan* group was created through legislation pushed through Congress by the energy and grief of a country mourning, specifically by a small group of women, all newly widowed by the attacks.
*It’s hard to know if the 9-11 Commission is bi-partisan as a whole, or if it is able to call itself bi-partisan because it is made up of five Democrats and five Republicans.
In public
The Commission held its eighth and most-publicized hearing March 23-24, 2003. The questioning of a variety of high-profile witnesses, including Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell, and Donald Rumsfeld, has resulted in politics and controversy, though the goal of the commission is to find fact and clarity.
Most notably, the testimony and new book of Richard Clark, the former antiterrorism chief for both the Clinton and Bush administrations, created a wave of questioning, mud-slinging and disagreement. Clark began his remarks with an apology to the family members of the victims of 9-11, a gesture that families say they have been waiting for and wanting for more than two years.
Clark testified that the Bush administration did not consider Al Qaeda an urgent threat before the attacks. He claims that the President and other high-ranking officials ignored his pleas for strategy meetings on counterterrorism and Al Qaeda.
The White House has responded with disdain for Mr. Clark, claiming that his testimony is an effort to sell his just-published memoirs and to aid John Kerry in his presidential campaigning. One of Clark’s most determined critics is National Security Advisor Dr. Condolezza Rice, who has repeatedly denounced his testimony on political talk shows.
Condoleezza Rice?
Condoleezza Rice is taking some heat for being on every channel but CSPAN.
Though she has graced the networks with her articulate descriptions of Bush’s counterterrorism policies, she refuses to do the same during a public hearing. On March 25, 2004, The White House announced that Dr. Rice would be willing to reappear before the panel, but under the same circumstances of her previous testimonies: in private, and not under oath.
In her defense, the White House claims that it does not want to make a precedent of presidential advisors testifying before Congress. Her appointment is not one that is confirmed by Congress. The White House considers the commission a "Congressional body," though the commission calls itself "independent."
Political ties
The impartiality of the commission has been called into question by 9/11 Citizen’s Watch, a non-partisan, non-profit group of concerned citizens overseeing the commission. According to Citizens Watch, the commission’s Executive Director, Philip D. Zelikow, presents a conflict of interest, since he authored a book with Dr. Rice and has himself testified before the committee that he is directing. Citizen’s Watch has called for Zelikow to resign.
Family members of 9/11 victims are frustrated that the commission is made up of people with close ties to government, to each other, and to the witnesses. The 9/11 Commission consists of two former Senators, two former House Representatives, two former governors, a former deputy attorney general (the only woman), a former White House counsel, and a former Navy secretary. The New York Times reports that Beverly Eckert, a 9/11 widow who pushed the Bush administration and Congress to form the commission, wanted it to be made up of academics and journalists, not politicians.
Terrorism, "a beast with many tentacles"
In addition to their review of counterterrorism policy before 9/11, witnesses testified to the nature of terrorism as fluid, multinational, and multidimensional. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright described terrorism as a "new enemy" and an "ideological virus." She suggested that the ideological battle be fought through education, as well as military action. Albright believes that clarifying our policies for the world will help us to win the battle of ideas.
Colin Powell agreed that ideological differences are at play in the war on terror. He remarked that our principles are one reason for our vulnerability. He suggested that as long as the U.S. remains open and free, it is vulnerable, but that our openness and our freedom should not be compromised.
What are the critical questions?
Though it may be flawed, the 9/11 Commission’s investigation creates an environment for all Americans to ask questions of our government and of ourselves.
What are your expectations of government to prevent terrorism? Do you believe that all terrorist attacks can be prevented? How can we remain aware of the dangers of terrorism, without creating a culture of fear? How are your fears about terrorism affecting your view of the candidates?
To discuss these questions with other WomenMatter readers, log on to one of our online forums. For updates on the Women’s Rights Life Issue, sign up for an e alert. When you’re ready, contact your representatives and let them know what you think.
Article Posted on: 3/31/2004
Rice, Bush, and Cheney agree to participate
The day after WomenMatter posted this article, Condoleezza Rice agreed to testify in front of the 9/11 Commission on April 8, 2004. The New York Times reports that the Bush administration changed its position on the matter because of “heavy political pressure."
Rice is expected to comment on Richard Clark’s testimony, as well as give her own account of Bush administration policy on Al Qaeda prior to 9/11.
President Bush and Vice President Cheney will also testify in front of the commission, but they will do so together, in private, and will not be under oath.
Update Posted on: 4/8/2004
click here to go to next section
return
to top
|
