Rice's Testimonials

Condee is always assuring everyone that she and the administration is on the up and up but if you examine her language there is plenty of hedge room. No one has pinned her down about her statements about WMDs etc., following the administrations line of "faulty intelligence" and the "you too" argument about other foreign intelligence "believed" Saddam had WMDs and that our legislatures "voted for the war", "had the same intelligence the President had" etc. France and Germany did not go to war on their beliefs, G.W. Bush did. Our legislators did not say to the military "attack Saddam"; G. W. Bush did. In fact everyone was saying "hold off and let the U.N. inspectors search for WMDs"; it was G.W. Bush who had them pull out because he was going to attack Saddam.
Ask Condee a question and you either get a roundabout non-answer where the questioner, audience, and even Condee forgets what the question was or you get a non-answer where the language is so hedged, vague, that mercury would be easier to pin down.
Her statement about the U.S. not torturing people wherever. The statement is so broad in definition you could drive a semi through it. What is the definition of torture? No one defines the terms they are talking about--specifically. Is mistreatment torture? If you are on the receiving end of it you might say it is. The military establishment wants some form of persuasion at least, but what is it. If we get it will we squawk if the enemy does the same? Tit for tat maybe? Maybe that is why the military is so coy about what they do, not so much that the enemy will develop counters to it.