Zelikow's commission to interrogate-- Zelikow!
And talking of hometown Charlottesville news, here was ambitious hometown boy Philip D. Zelikow in a front-page story in the New York Times yesterday.
Zelikow-- in addition to being the Director of U.Va.'s Miller Center of Public Affairs-- is also the executive director of the official government panel of enquiry into the 9/11 disaster.
But he has also become a focus of enquiry for the commission since back in Dec 2000-January 2001 he was a leading member of incoming "President" George W. Bush's transition team.
One of the issues the panel is investigating is the question of the degree of priority (or lack of priority) that the Bush national-security team gave to the terrorism/Al-Qaeda threat in the months leading up to September 11.
Of course, the revelations in the about-to-be-published book by former counter-terrorism boss Richard A. Clarke will also provide a lot of evidence on this point. (Clarke's tenure as White House counter-terror coordinator spanned the Clinton and GWB administrations.)
What has been revealed from Clarke's book so far has been pretty damning to the Bush team. See, e.g., this story.
Clarke is due to testify before the 9/11 commission on Tuesday. Also expected up Tuesday or Wednesday, according to yesterday's NYT story, will be Clinton administration luminaries like Madeleine Albright, William Cohen, and Sandy Berger. The Times reports that they
- say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation-- and how the new administration was slow to act.
They said the warnings were delivered in urgent post-election intelligence briefings in December 2000 and January 2001 for Condoleezza Rice, who became Mr. Bush's national security adviser; Stephen Hadley, now Ms. Rice's deputy; and Philip D. Zelikow, a member of the Bush transition team, among others.
Do you think that panel member Philip Zelikow may have to recuse himself because of his close relationship with potential interrogee Philip Zelikow?
Maybe he should ask Justice Scalia for an opinion on this tricky issue...
Anyway, the week ahead promises to be an interesting one for the panel.
Slightly OT, but read the latest article from VDH: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200403260836.asp
Great reading, especially the following quote:
"The problem is not "getting the message out," but having the intellectual courage to tell the truth and not to be browbeaten by faux intellectuals who talk monotonously of mythical pipelines and Zionist aggression. The fact is, beneath the hype, Iraqis will soon appreciate American help and idealism far more than French perfidy. It is never wrong to be on the side of freedom — never."