Utopia Talk - Politics - Tom Ridge Clears The Air

Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Jun 27 16:02:44 2025

Utopia Talk / Politics / Tom Ridge Clears The Air

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 03:39:40

Tom Ridge's new book, The Test of Our Times, isn't even out yet and already the former Homeland Security chief is backing off some of its claims. In the book Ridge says that shortly before the 2004 election, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft, in a "vigorous" discussion, pressured him to raise the national terror threat alert level after Osama bin Laden released a videotaped message, suggesting they did so for political reasons.

Ridge writes that @he rejected raising the level because bin Laden had released nearly 20 such tapes since 9/11 and the latest contained nothing suggesting an imminent threat.

"Ashcroft strongly urged an increase in the threat level, and was supported by Rumsfeld," he writes. "There was absolutely no support for that position within our department. None. I wondered, 'Is this about security or politics?' "

Rumsfeld's and Ashcroft's argument, according to the book, is that President Bush's ratings tended to go up when the terror alert level increased. Ridge writes that even though he won the argument and the threat level wasn't raised, the incident prompted him to quit the Bush administration.

Not surprisingly, Rumsfeld, through a spokesperson, dismisses Ridge's claims as "nonsense."

Now, one day before the book's release, Ridge is back-peddling slightly. He tells Time, "I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book.

http://www...bush-administration-colleague/

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 03:46:53

Pathetically bad spin. Back to the drawingboard.

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 03:51:19

Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge does not want to "second-guess" the motivations of his former colleagues in the Bush Administration. But with a new memoir, The Test of Our Times, about to hit bookstores, he is ready to talk about all the second thoughts he has been having.

For instance, he thinks waterboarding "was and is torture," and he wishes the Bush Administration had not permitted it. He thinks President George W. Bush should have gone to Congress sooner to get permission to expand the National Security Agency's domestic-spying program. He even frowns upon the Bush policy of indefinite detention for suspected terrorists, a policy that the Obama Administration has hinted it may continue to some degree. "It seems inconsistent with a country that prides itself on the rule of law," Ridge said on Aug. 30 in an interview with TIME.
(Read "Obama's Delicate Balance on National Security.")

When it comes to the role of Homeland Security Secretary, there are also second looks aplenty. Even though Bush never invited him to a National Security Council meeting, Ridge thinks future Homeland Security chiefs should be asked occasionally to attend. He also says Homeland Security leaders need to be more careful than he was about allowing political language into their public statements.
(Watch TIME's video "Homeland Security Trade Show.")

In particular, he regrets his Aug. 1, 2004, decision to include political language praising Bush in a statement about raising the terrorism threat level. The statement was issued just as Democratic nominee John Kerry was enjoying a post-convention bump in the polls. But he stops short of questioning the intentions of the Bush aides who asked him to include the language in the first place; and contrary to pre-publication media reports that got many former Bush Administration officials up in arms, he claims that the decision to raise the alert was made without regard to political pressure. "I'm not going to second-guess," he says. "But it was wrong for me to put it in."

A few months later, however, Ridge says he did get the sense that politics might be at play. There was a heated discussion on the weekend before the 2004 election, in which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft made their case in vain to raise the terrorism threat level. Ridge now admits that he thought political calculation might have been at play. (Polls supporting Bush tended to spike when the terrorism threat level went up.) But he is not about to accuse either Rumsfeld or Ashcroft of letting politics cloud their judgment. "I'm not trying to second-guess two colleagues whose service I respect," he says.

Ridge welcomes the second looks that his successor, Secretary Janet Napolitano, has initiated at the department he helped create. Just a few weeks ago, Ridge says, he joined former Secretary Michael Chertoff in a discussion with Napolitano's advisers about the future of the color-coded terrorism-alert system. "Neither Secretary Chertoff nor I are married to five levels. We're not necessarily married to colors," Ridge says. "We were most concerned about reinforcing the notion that whether it's a color, whether it's a number, whether it's five, whether it's three, it is a signal that a level of security either goes up or down."

At the same time, Ridge says he worries about a certain "complacency" about preparing the nation and preventing another attack that has set in on Capitol Hill and among the wider American public. "For several years, the public debate and discussion was about funding priorities and technology," says Ridge, "and I don't hear much of that. It just concerns me because there is still a lot of need."

In particular, he wonders why, eight years after 9/11, there is still no first-responder communications system so that police and fire departments across the country can communicate in the event of an attack. And he worries about the continued lack of tracking ability for foreign nationals who overstay their visas. "We don't know today if everybody who came in lawfully with a visa in the last five years has gone home," he says. "What happened to that sense of urgency?"

The political memoir is always a delicate dance, and Ridge has handled it carefully. He still considers Bush a friend, and he has considerable praise for the public servants he worked with at the White House.

Ridge, who now works at his own consulting firm, Ridge Global, writes in his book, with co-author Lary Bloom, that he finally decided to pen a political memoir because "I thought my fellow citizens and public officials needed to know about what happened, what ought to have happened, and what we must do in the future to secure America and to raise the issue of security well above politics." It is an ambitious task for a 280-page book, but Ridge seems to touch on all of the highlights â?? the bureaucratic turf battles, the political pressures, the massive challenge and the occasional missteps.

But Ridge stops short of laying blame at the doorstep of his former colleagues, perhaps out of loyalty or perhaps because he would rather look forward. As he said on Sunday, "There is still unfinished business, so let's finish it."

Read "Inside Bush and Cheney's Final Days."

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 03:58:54

I think that is a different incident than the one discussed here last week which is the one he is recanting.

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 04:18:25

I cant see where hes recanting anything at all. You havent posted that so far, at least.

Forwyn
Member Tue Sep 01 04:19:37
"Now, one day before the book's release, Ridge is back-peddling slightly. He tells Time, "I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book."

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 04:22:27

"I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. "

if you read from the actual book, thats not recanting whatsoever, thats him doubting the honesty of some of the people in the Bush admin...

" the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book."

So says politico...wheres the quote of him saying that? it doesnt even make sense since he's NOT recanting AT ALL.

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 04:27:34

"In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book."

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 04:28:44

"So says politico...wheres the quote of him saying that? it doesnt even make sense since he's NOT recanting AT ALL. "

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 04:30:12

HR, you dont have to be so frightened of this book and come out fighting for Georgeys honor, filled to the brim with BS from the radio - its quite mundane and actually portrays Bush as fairly reasonable. It blames Cheney a lot more. Relax on the propaganda arsenal.

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 04:45:16

When this came out last week the left on this forum made a huge deal out of it.

Now he is setting the record straight.

All I am doing is bringing you up to date. Now you can believe POLITICO, or you can live out your life in ignorance on the matter.

He said last night that his reference to "Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book.

Watch for the video on the TODAY show to see what he is now saying about it.

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 04:46:11
*-Politics Daily

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 04:51:50

"Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book. "

So THATS what hes recanting? One sentence in the whole book? "Is this about security or politics"?

Big deal.

"He said last night that his reference to "Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book."

Link.

Forwyn
Member Tue Sep 01 05:02:22
To be fair, thats what was being argued about.

Whether or not the raising of the threat level was political, and whether or not to blame the Bush admin for another cough-up - determined so far mostly by conjecture. Now he's saying he regretted his questioning of whether it was a political move.

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 05:08:15
Peculiar, since he continues to question it in other places in the book.

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 05:09:57
TIME carries a number of pages from the book. Generally, it seems more like the polite reflections of a well-mannered diplomats career.

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 05:22:50

pb - Link,

I saw Ridge explain himself on Hannity last night where it first appeared just 9 hours ago. It is not on The FOX website yet.

His interview on the TODAY show may turn up sooner if they decide to release it, which I doubt if they will.

president bush
Member Tue Sep 01 05:23:55

Its a non-issue.

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 05:49:16

That is what I thought last week when the liberals on this forum were wetting their pants about it.

hoER
Member Tue Sep 01 06:10:34
Hence you posting yet another thread about it?

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 06:13:05

Where he is back pedaling on what you guys *THOUGHT* he said.

hoER
Member Tue Sep 01 06:43:31

Whos You Guys? is it like "Them"? Sure wasnt me.

Rugian
Member Tue Sep 01 06:55:49
Notice how Hot Rod is no longer claiming that Ridge is a filthy traitorous liar. ROFL, how much more partisan can you get.

Fox News Channel
Member Tue Sep 01 07:04:43
I see no recantation. I do see him acknowledging the incident did occur and he still feels somewhat that what happened seemingly was political. The only thing he is saying is that he shouldn't have included that incident in his book for whatever reason. Unless you are calling him a liar HR?

Hot Rod
Member Tue Sep 01 23:44:11

Ridge Explains Terror Alert Comments

Tuesday, September 01, 2009

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,545150,00.html

purvis
Member Tue Sep 01 23:57:52

So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie.

Hot Rod
Member Wed Sep 02 00:01:33

RIDGE: We made the right decision.

HANNITY: Then why did you put in the book.

RIDGE: That's what's important.

HANNITY: ... that it might have been about politics?

RIDGE: Because â?? perhaps I was â?? I was musing in the book, as I was trying to think back on those discussions.

HANNITY: Right.

RIDGE: That I â?? I didn't keep a diary. Is there something else that I am missing or my department's missing? Pure and simple. It's not an accusatory statement. Wasn't intended to be. And if people want to talk about it in that fashion, in this world â?? see, security is not black and white. Unfortunately, a political regime and sometimes the commentary is black and white, wrong or right. That's not the way we worked.

purvis
Member Wed Sep 02 00:02:13

Sigh...

"So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie. "

Hot Rod
Member Wed Sep 02 04:36:01

Recant:

Synonyms:

abjure, abnegate, abrogate, annul, apostatize, back down, back off, back out, backtrack, call back, cancel, contradict, countermand, deny, dial back, disavow, disclaim, disown, eat one's words, forswear, go back on one's word, nullify, recall, renege, renounce, repeal, repudiate, rescind, retract, revoke, take back, unsay, void, weasel out, welsh, withdraw, worm out of

American idiot
Member Wed Sep 02 05:06:52

In other words:

"So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie. "

american idiot
Member Thu Sep 03 03:50:48
t

show deleted posts

Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 03:39:40 Tom Ridge's new book, The Test of Our Times, isn't even out yet and already the former Homeland Security chief is backing off some of its claims. In the book Ridge says that shortly before the 2004 election, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft, in a "vigorous" discussion, pressured him to raise the national terror threat alert level after Osama bin Laden released a videotaped message, suggesting they did so for political reasons. Ridge writes that @he rejected raising the level because bin Laden had released nearly 20 such tapes since 9/11 and the latest contained nothing suggesting an imminent threat. "Ashcroft strongly urged an increase in the threat level, and was supported by Rumsfeld," he writes. "There was absolutely no support for that position within our department. None. I wondered, 'Is this about security or politics?' " Rumsfeld's and Ashcroft's argument, according to the book, is that President Bush's ratings tended to go up when the terror alert level increased. Ridge writes that even though he won the argument and the threat level wasn't raised, the incident prompted him to quit the Bush administration. Not surprisingly, Rumsfeld, through a spokesperson, dismisses Ridge's claims as "nonsense." Now, one day before the book's release, Ridge is back-peddling slightly. He tells Time, "I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book. http://www...bush-administration-colleague/
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 03:46:53 Pathetically bad spin. Back to the drawingboard.
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 03:51:19 Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge does not want to "second-guess" the motivations of his former colleagues in the Bush Administration. But with a new memoir, The Test of Our Times, about to hit bookstores, he is ready to talk about all the second thoughts he has been having. For instance, he thinks waterboarding "was and is torture," and he wishes the Bush Administration had not permitted it. He thinks President George W. Bush should have gone to Congress sooner to get permission to expand the National Security Agency's domestic-spying program. He even frowns upon the Bush policy of indefinite detention for suspected terrorists, a policy that the Obama Administration has hinted it may continue to some degree. "It seems inconsistent with a country that prides itself on the rule of law," Ridge said on Aug. 30 in an interview with TIME. (Read "Obama's Delicate Balance on National Security.") When it comes to the role of Homeland Security Secretary, there are also second looks aplenty. Even though Bush never invited him to a National Security Council meeting, Ridge thinks future Homeland Security chiefs should be asked occasionally to attend. He also says Homeland Security leaders need to be more careful than he was about allowing political language into their public statements. (Watch TIME's video "Homeland Security Trade Show.") In particular, he regrets his Aug. 1, 2004, decision to include political language praising Bush in a statement about raising the terrorism threat level. The statement was issued just as Democratic nominee John Kerry was enjoying a post-convention bump in the polls. But he stops short of questioning the intentions of the Bush aides who asked him to include the language in the first place; and contrary to pre-publication media reports that got many former Bush Administration officials up in arms, he claims that the decision to raise the alert was made without regard to political pressure. "I'm not going to second-guess," he says. "But it was wrong for me to put it in." A few months later, however, Ridge says he did get the sense that politics might be at play. There was a heated discussion on the weekend before the 2004 election, in which Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Attorney General John Ashcroft made their case in vain to raise the terrorism threat level. Ridge now admits that he thought political calculation might have been at play. (Polls supporting Bush tended to spike when the terrorism threat level went up.) But he is not about to accuse either Rumsfeld or Ashcroft of letting politics cloud their judgment. "I'm not trying to second-guess two colleagues whose service I respect," he says. Ridge welcomes the second looks that his successor, Secretary Janet Napolitano, has initiated at the department he helped create. Just a few weeks ago, Ridge says, he joined former Secretary Michael Chertoff in a discussion with Napolitano's advisers about the future of the color-coded terrorism-alert system. "Neither Secretary Chertoff nor I are married to five levels. We're not necessarily married to colors," Ridge says. "We were most concerned about reinforcing the notion that whether it's a color, whether it's a number, whether it's five, whether it's three, it is a signal that a level of security either goes up or down." At the same time, Ridge says he worries about a certain "complacency" about preparing the nation and preventing another attack that has set in on Capitol Hill and among the wider American public. "For several years, the public debate and discussion was about funding priorities and technology," says Ridge, "and I don't hear much of that. It just concerns me because there is still a lot of need." In particular, he wonders why, eight years after 9/11, there is still no first-responder communications system so that police and fire departments across the country can communicate in the event of an attack. And he worries about the continued lack of tracking ability for foreign nationals who overstay their visas. "We don't know today if everybody who came in lawfully with a visa in the last five years has gone home," he says. "What happened to that sense of urgency?" The political memoir is always a delicate dance, and Ridge has handled it carefully. He still considers Bush a friend, and he has considerable praise for the public servants he worked with at the White House. Ridge, who now works at his own consulting firm, Ridge Global, writes in his book, with co-author Lary Bloom, that he finally decided to pen a political memoir because "I thought my fellow citizens and public officials needed to know about what happened, what ought to have happened, and what we must do in the future to secure America and to raise the issue of security well above politics." It is an ambitious task for a 280-page book, but Ridge seems to touch on all of the highlights â?? the bureaucratic turf battles, the political pressures, the massive challenge and the occasional missteps. But Ridge stops short of laying blame at the doorstep of his former colleagues, perhaps out of loyalty or perhaps because he would rather look forward. As he said on Sunday, "There is still unfinished business, so let's finish it." Read "Inside Bush and Cheney's Final Days."
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 03:58:54 I think that is a different incident than the one discussed here last week which is the one he is recanting.
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 04:18:25 I cant see where hes recanting anything at all. You havent posted that so far, at least.
Forwyn Member	Tue Sep 01 04:19:37 "Now, one day before the book's release, Ridge is back-peddling slightly. He tells Time, "I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book."
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 04:22:27 "I'm not second-guessing my colleagues." Rather, he says, he's simply having second thoughts about decisions made at the Cabinet level in the Bush White House. " if you read from the actual book, thats not recanting whatsoever, thats him doubting the honesty of some of the people in the Bush admin... " the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book." So says politico...wheres the quote of him saying that? it doesnt even make sense since he's NOT recanting AT ALL.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 04:27:34 "In the interview, he even goes so far as to say it was "wrong" to include the incident in the book."
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 04:28:44 "So says politico...wheres the quote of him saying that? it doesnt even make sense since he's NOT recanting AT ALL. "
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 04:30:12 HR, you dont have to be so frightened of this book and come out fighting for Georgeys honor, filled to the brim with BS from the radio - its quite mundane and actually portrays Bush as fairly reasonable. It blames Cheney a lot more. Relax on the propaganda arsenal.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 04:45:16 When this came out last week the left on this forum made a huge deal out of it. Now he is setting the record straight. All I am doing is bringing you up to date. Now you can believe POLITICO, or you can live out your life in ignorance on the matter. He said last night that his reference to "Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book. Watch for the video on the TODAY show to see what he is now saying about it.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 04:46:11 *-Politics Daily
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 04:51:50 "Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book. " So THATS what hes recanting? One sentence in the whole book? "Is this about security or politics"? Big deal. "He said last night that his reference to "Is this about security or politics" was nothing more than musing and he wished he had left it out of the book." Link.
Forwyn Member	Tue Sep 01 05:02:22 To be fair, thats what was being argued about. Whether or not the raising of the threat level was political, and whether or not to blame the Bush admin for another cough-up - determined so far mostly by conjecture. Now he's saying he regretted his questioning of whether it was a political move.
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 05:08:15 Peculiar, since he continues to question it in other places in the book.
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 05:09:57 TIME carries a number of pages from the book. Generally, it seems more like the polite reflections of a well-mannered diplomats career.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 05:22:50 pb - Link, I saw Ridge explain himself on Hannity last night where it first appeared just 9 hours ago. It is not on The FOX website yet. His interview on the TODAY show may turn up sooner if they decide to release it, which I doubt if they will.
president bush Member	Tue Sep 01 05:23:55 Its a non-issue.
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 05:49:16 That is what I thought last week when the liberals on this forum were wetting their pants about it.
hoER Member	Tue Sep 01 06:10:34 Hence you posting yet another thread about it?
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 06:13:05 *Where he is back pedaling on what you guys THOUGHT* he said.**
hoER Member	Tue Sep 01 06:43:31 Whos You Guys? is it like "Them"? Sure wasnt me.
Rugian Member	Tue Sep 01 06:55:49 Notice how Hot Rod is no longer claiming that Ridge is a filthy traitorous liar. ROFL, how much more partisan can you get.
Fox News Channel Member	Tue Sep 01 07:04:43 I see no recantation. I do see him acknowledging the incident did occur and he still feels somewhat that what happened seemingly was political. The only thing he is saying is that he shouldn't have included that incident in his book for whatever reason. Unless you are calling him a liar HR?
Hot Rod Member	Tue Sep 01 23:44:11 Ridge Explains Terror Alert Comments Tuesday, September 01, 2009 http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,545150,00.html
purvis Member	Tue Sep 01 23:57:52 So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie.
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 02 00:01:33 RIDGE: We made the right decision. HANNITY: Then why did you put in the book. RIDGE: That's what's important. HANNITY: ... that it might have been about politics? RIDGE: Because â?? perhaps I was â?? I was musing in the book, as I was trying to think back on those discussions. HANNITY: Right. RIDGE: That I â?? I didn't keep a diary. Is there something else that I am missing or my department's missing? Pure and simple. It's not an accusatory statement. Wasn't intended to be. And if people want to talk about it in that fashion, in this world â?? see, security is not black and white. Unfortunately, a political regime and sometimes the commentary is black and white, wrong or right. That's not the way we worked.
purvis Member	Wed Sep 02 00:02:13 Sigh... "So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie. "
Hot Rod Member	Wed Sep 02 04:36:01 Recant: Synonyms: abjure, abnegate, abrogate, annul, apostatize, back down, back off, back out, backtrack, call back, cancel, contradict, countermand, deny, dial back, disavow, disclaim, disown, eat one's words, forswear, go back on one's word, nullify, recall, renege, renounce, repeal, repudiate, rescind, retract, revoke, take back, unsay, void, weasel out, welsh, withdraw, worm out of
American idiot Member	Wed Sep 02 05:06:52 In other words: "So: Nothing about any recant and this thread is, as we all already knew, a lie. "
american idiot Member	Thu Sep 03 03:50:48 t
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: