Paula Zahn/Bob Kerrey: 9/11 panel sworn to secrecy for campaign

DireStrike

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Mon Nov-08-04 10:12 PM
Original message

Paula Zahn/Bob Kerrey: 9/11 panel sworn to secrecy for campaign

Edited on Mon Nov-08-04 10:40 PM by DireStrike

Yeah, Olberman was on at the time...

Apparently he made some jaw dropping revelations!

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/index.php?showtopic=1995&st=0

Edit: Transcript!

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0411/08/pzn.01.html

To quote a person from that thread: This is the basic transcript but the tone and emphasis in what Kerrey said is not evident. You had to see it to know how firm and positive he was.

ZAHN: And joining me now, a Democrat who has served as both a governor and U.S. senator. Bob Kerrey also was a member of the 9/11 Commission and is now president of the New School University here in New York.

You better not do much more, because I can barely get that all into the introduction.

BOB KERREY (D), FORMER U.S. SENATOR: That's it. That's it.

ZAHN: Welcome back.

KERREY: Thank you.

ZAHN: I wanted to start off tonight by talking about the role that faith and the evangelical vote played in the reelection of President Bush.

And one of your former colleagues, Senator Hart, wrote quite pointedly about that issue in an editorial today. And he said -- quote -- "It should concern us that declarations of faith are quickly becoming a condition for seeking public office. Declarations of faith are abstractions that permit both voters and candidates to fill in the blanks with their own religious beliefs."

He thinks that's dangerous. Do you?

KERREY: Well, it can be if you don't understand the importance of keeping the government secular, so that you can practice whatever religion you want.

(CROSSTALK) ZAHN: Do you fear that's going to happen the second go-round of the Bush administration?

KERREY: Well, I think it's not likely, but it's potentially there.

When the president stood up at a faith-based initiative program and said, we don't need a rule book, we just need the good book, and held up a Bible, that was a mistake. That sends a signal that the New Testament is going to be the rule of law. And it cannot be. We have got to keep that separation, so that we can practice our religion, whatever our religion is. Or if we choose not to practice a religion, we can choose that as well in this country.

ZAHN: So what do you think is going to be the defining moment for the president when it comes to whether in fact he rules by the good book or rules more...

(CROSSTALK)

KERREY: Well, I think it actually could become this same-sex marriage amendment.

Look, my religious belief causes me to conclude that homosexuality and heterosexuality are both natural states, that God put gay and straight on this Earth alike. And it's taken us a while to come to terms with that, but that's my religious belief. It's an article of faith. It's not based on science or a political calculation.

And, as a consequence, I find myself saying any church that wants to deny a right for a man and a man to get married, that's fine with them. The Catholic Church won't let me get married in the church, even though I would prefer it, because I won't have my first marriage annulled. But marriage is a legal issue as well. And just as the government shouldn't tell the church what to do, the church shouldn't tell the government what to do.

And I fear that's what this is all about, as well as people not really understanding that homosexuality is a state that people acquire at birth. It's not a choice that's been made.

ZAHN: Well, a lot of Americans don't think it's an article of faith according to their own religious convictions.

(CROSSTALK)

KERREY: They need to hear Democrats say -- this isn't a political calculus. This isn't us trying to put together a coalition.

It's just as important a religious belief of mine as it is those who say I'm uncomfortable with same-sex marriage. I think it is in fact a natural state. It was a question that was asked during the debate and I think answered improperly. That was the one where John went on about the vice president's daughter. That set off a wave of anger, etcetera, rather than focusing on the question, which is, do you choose it or are you born that way? And Americans need to understand that. I think the president understands that. The question is, will he push that as a religious issue?

ZAHN: The former president, President Clinton, in a piece over the weekend suggested John Kerry lost for a number of reasons, particularly because he didn't think John Kerry connected in rural America with voters, particularly on moral issues, including the issue of gay marriage, and went on to say the Republicans had a clear message and a great messenger, that they used a culture war to leave the Democrats -- quote -- "demonized, cartoonized, as aliens."

Did they not understand the culture war going on in this country?

(CROSSTALK)

KERREY: President Clinton never faced an opponent as tough as George W. Bush. His father wasn't as tough and Bob Dole wasn't as tough.

George W. Bush is a very tough campaigner. He is an intuitive politician. He's an incumbent president. And he was an exceptionally difficult person for John Kerry under the best of circumstances.

ZAHN: Was John Kerry an intuitive campaigner?

KERREY: He's not as intuitive a politician as George Bush is. I mean, George W. Bush's father isn't as intuitive. I'm not as intuitive.

George Bush knows when to kiss the baby. And that's a hard thing to teach. In fact, it's an impossible thing to teach. He's very good on the street and he's good with the message. His message was, I will keep you safe, and the other guy won't. And when you are the incumbent, it's a much higher standard for an opponent to prove that you're wrong. So...

ZAHN: The American public, by and large, didn't think John Kerry was the guy to do that.

KERREY: That's correct, because the president had a case, a very simple case to make: I am the commander in chief. I won the war in Afghanistan, even though John Kerry supported it, even though, by the way, there's a credible case that the president's own negligence prior to 9/11 at least in part contributed to the disaster in the first place.

ZAHN: How so?

KERREY: Well, the 9/11 report says in chapter eight -- now that it's beyond the campaign, so the promise I had to keep this out of the campaign is over.

The 9/11 report in chapter eight says that, in the summer of 2001, the government ignored repeated warnings by the CIA, ignored, and didn't do anything to harden our border security, didn't do anything to harden airport country, didn't do anything to engage local law enforcement, didn't do anything to round up INS and consular offices and say we have to shut this down, and didn't warn the American people.

The famous presidential daily briefing on August 6, we say in the report that the briefing officers believed that there was a considerable sense of urgency and it was current. So there was a case to be made that wasn't made.

(CROSSTALK)

ZAHN: But what we continue to hear from this administration is that the threat was much too diffuse. There was no way you could zero in on the fact that al Qaeda was going to use jets as bombs and ram them into buildings.

KERREY: That is a straw man.

The president says, if I had only known that 19 Islamic men would come into the United States of America and on the morning of 11 September hijack four American aircraft, fly two into the World Trade Center, one into the Pentagon, and one into an unknown Pennsylvania that crashed in Shanksville, I would have moved heaven and earth. That's what he said.

Mr. President, you don't need to know that. This is an Islamic jihadist movement that has been organized since the early 1990s, declared war on the United States twice, in '96 and '98. You knew they were in the United States. You were warned by the CIA. You knew in July they were inside the United States. You were told again by briefing officers in August that it was a dire threat.

And what did you do? Nothing, so far as we could see on the 9/11 Commission. Now, that's in the report. And we took an oath not to talk about it during the campaign, I think correctly so, to increase the capacity of that commission's report to be heard by the people's Congress.

But the report, I think, it's difficult for a challenger. If I had been the challenger, it's difficult to make that case when you are running against an incumbent. He can stand back and say, oh, you're just grousing.

ZAHN: Oh, we couldn't connect the dots is what we heard.

Final question for you sir. In Falluja...

KERREY: Yes.

ZAHN: There are some Democrats that suggest that this incursion was delayed until after the election because of the vulnerability of the U.S. troops and this could be a very bloody campaign. Where do you stand?

KERREY: Oh, I think it's likely it was delayed until after the election. And it's probably a smart thing to do. This is as much a political battle inside of Iraq as it is a military battle. And everybody knows that who has talked to people that's over there. So I think it's likely that it was.

ZAHN: Bob Kerrey, thanks for dropping by.

KERREY: You're welcome. Nice to see you.

ZAHN: Always appreciate your perspective.