• Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Topic: The truth begins to oooooze out..

  1. #1

    The truth begins to oooooze out..

    This story was reported today in the NY Times, LA Times and many other newspapers.

    The bin Laden Warning: Why Did Bush Keep It a Secret?
    05/16/2002 @ 12:52am
    By the way, we, uh, forgot to mention, that in August of 2001, while the President was taking a long vacation at his ranch in Crawford, the CIA told him that, uh, Osama bin Laden might be planning to hijack an airliner as part of some, who-knows-what terrorist action against the United States.

    That is, in essence, how the Bush White House confirmed the CBS News report that broke this story Wednesday night. The White House was quick to say the CIA intelligence did not refer to anything as diabolical as a quadruple-hijacking that transformed airliners into weapons of mass destruction. That\'s probably true. But this latest news follows recent reports that an FBI agent in Phoenix in July 2001 had written a classified memo noting a \"strong connection\" between a group of Middle Eastern aviation students he was investigating and bin Laden\'s al Qaeda, and that one of the FBI agents trying to figure out the intentions of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was arrested at a flight school in August 2001, had speculated he might be planning to fly an airliner into the World Trade Center.

    Before conspiracy theorists run away with this latest revelation, it is important to note its true significance.

    First, the news raises an obvious question, is there anything else the White House is not telling us? Bush and his lieutenants kept word of the CIA briefing secret for eight months. Why did they not disclose this earlier? In January and February, The Washington Post published an eight-part series by Bob Woodward and Dan Balz on how the President and his aides responded to the September 11 attacks. The articles--a mostly positive account--were largely drawn from interviews with Bush and senior officials. Funny, none of them mentioned that a month before the attacks, the CIA had told the President, via the daily briefing it prepares for him, there was reason to worry about a bin Laden action. It is a good bet that at one point on that awful day the President or the other aides who generally have access to the CIA\'s daily briefing--Vice President **** Cheney, CIA director George Tenet, national security adviser Condoleeza Rice, and chief of staff Andrew Card--recalled that warning.

    The Post series did report, \"Through much of the summer, Tenet had grown increasingly troubled by the prospect of a major terrorist attack against the United States. There was too much chatter in the intelligence system and repeated reports of threats were costing him sleep....Everywhere he went, the message was the same: Something big is coming. But for all his fears, intelligence officials could never pinpoint when or where an attack might hit.\" But in this administration-provided account, there was no sign the CIA had informed Bush it was on the lookout for a bin Laden hijacking. Presumably, none of Woodward and Balz\'s insider-sources felt that was worth sharing.

    Once again, the Bush crowd has demonstrated its fondness for secrecy. And for spinning. When Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer, facing a combative press corps, was asked why the adminstration had not revealed that Bush received this warning, he reminded the reporters the real issue was that \"the fault lies with Osama bin Laden and the terrorists.\" Later in the day, Rice, up against the White House reporters, repeatedly depicted the CIA briefing as an unexceptional act during which Bush was merely told that bin Laden could be interested in hijacking. It\'s common sense that a terrorist might be considering a hijacking, she added. But CIA daily briefings are supposed to include noteworthy material for the President, not obvious, generalized information. Let\'s hope the CIA is not wasting the President\'s time by reminding him terrorists sometimes hijack airplanes.

    Certainly, there was an understandable reason for the White House to be mum until now. If the public had learned of the briefing, questions would be asked. Which brings us to the other significance of this disclosure: it provides Congress an additional--and well-defined--avenue for its investigation of the national security community\'s performance prior to September 11.

    Belatedly, Congress in February moved to have the intelligence committees of the House and Senate conduct a joint investigation into what went wrong before the attacks. (The decision came after the Bush White House earlier asked Congress not to pursue this topic quickly.) In doing so, Congress eschewed the suggestion made by Senators John McCain and Joe Lieberman that a blue-ribbon panel outside Congress conduct the investigation. Instead, the mission was handed to committees that have traditionally maintained cozy relations with the intelligence services. And the probe has gotten off to a slow and bumpy start. The first lead investigator, Britt Snider, quit the post, after getting into an internal tussle for not alerting the committees he had hired someone under investigation for failing a CIA lie-detector exam. (Snider, a former CIA inspector general, may not have been the right fellow for the job, since he is a longtime friend and colleague of Tenet, and Senator Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Senate intelligence committee, has had Tenet in the crosshairs since September 11.) Then news leaked that the Justice Department and the CIA were not fully cooperating with the investigation.

    Assuming the inquiry gets on track, the committee investigators should thoroughly examine that August intelligence briefing. They ought to be able to trace it backward and determine what went into this report. What was the sourcing? How did the CIA gather this information? How did it follow up? Did it make a serious effort to learn more about this hijacking plot? If so, what was done? If not, why not? This is an important trail for the investigators to follow, inch by inch. Perhaps the CIA did everything it could and, still, was unable to unearth a clear tip-off. But maybe opportunities were missed. The public deserves to know.

    Second-guessing is easy, but it is tragic that the Phoenix FBI report (suspects in a terrorist investigation linked to al Qaeda are attending flight school), the mysterious Moussaoui case (a suspicious fellow, enrolled in a flight school, is up to something, maybe crashing an airliner into the World Trade Towers), and the CIA warning (bin Laden is planning a terrorist action) were never placed side-by-side on the same desk. Had they been, that might not have spelled out what was coming. But it could have made other information seem more relevant or helped the CIA and FBI locate additional pieces of this secret puzzle. The inability of the intelligence community to coordinate its information streams--not even within the FBI was the Phoenix report passed to the office investigating Moussaoui--is troubling. Is there a point to spending $30 billion-plus dollars a year for a sweeping intelligence system--and Congress is in the process of approving a multibillion dollar boost--if that system cannot discern and efficiently handle the nuggets it does manage to obtain?

  2. #2

    Re: The truth begins to oooooze out..

    FTW Editor Mike Ruppert will appear live with Geraldo Rivera on the Fox News Network on Saturday, May 18 between 9-10 PM, EDT (6-7 PM Pacific time). The subject will be the overlooked issues of 9-11 and whether there was more credible evidence that the Bush Administration had about airliners being used as suicide bombers.

  3. #3

    Re: The truth begins to oooooze out..

    Originally posted by Nick Phoenix:

    The bin Laden Warning: Why Did Bush Keep It a Secret?
    <font size=\"2\" face=\"Verdana, Arial\">The QL Strat Copyright Warning: Why Did Nick Keep It a Secret?


  4. #4

    Re: The truth begins to oooooze out..

    To give this another bump on a more serious note.

    I hope this story isn\'t going to be used as a smoke screen for the more important issues that should be addressed.

  5. #5

    Re: The truth begins to oooooze out..

    Hey Nick. I was wondering when you would post something about the briefings to Bush and September 11. There are a few things that you are missing.

    1. How many threats a day does the White House receive every day? Are you suggesting that the President rush out and shut down the nation’s aviation system because of a possible threat at an undetermined time?
    2. Of course there are things that the White House isn’t telling us. Do you think it is wise for the news media to tell our enemies what we know and what we are going to do about it?
    3. I don’t think that it would have been very wise for any administration either liberal or conservative to go on national television on September 12th and say. “Gee we were warned about this about a month ago, but we chose to do nothing about it.” I don’t think even Ralph Nader would have done that.

    Point is, this was a very well thought out and calculated plan. In a country that is as large as the US, it would have been nearly impossible for the Bush Administration to be able to prevent this.

    Ps. You have to admit Nick that FOX NEWS has the currage to air an interview with Mike Ruppert. (although the thought of Geraldo Rivera does kind of discredit things just a little bit. Now if Bill O\'Reilly were the interviewer......)

  6. #6

    Re: The truth begins to oooooze out..

    What makes you tick? Why do you want to trust our government so desperately? Do you know these guys personally.

    The statement that came from the current regime was flawed. \"We get thousands of reports about terrorists. We can\'t take them all seriously.\" -well this wasn\'t one report it was dozens, if not hundreds. And if they weren\'t credible, why did you even bother telling the president???????????????

    Mike Rupert was cancelled!!!!!! Why? Fox said it was because of the new threats to our nation. As soon as the heat was turned up on 9/11, Bush declares that there is a new, perhaps greater threat. Do you believe that? if that isn\'t the most transparent, childishly political, ridiculously obvious move to redirect everyone\'s focus, I don\'t know what is. IS EVERYONE COMPLETELY STUPID?????? Even the statement itself was wishy washy. notice how the always use Cheney to issue the terror statements. We are being played like a bunch of ants. Want to know how the right wing operates? Read \"Blinded by the Right.\" Written by a right wing insider. 99% of what you are being fed on the news is manipulative lies, carefully released and planned to get your support.

    Once again I want to know

    1. How could such a massive failure in the Department of Defense have happened, when the US was repeatedly warned about the attacks and many in the stock market knew of the attacks? Why wasn\'t the military on heightened alert? Wht didn\'t Bush warn the airports, as is custom?
    2. What happened to our defense protocol on 9/11 and what was the chain of command?
    3. Why wasn’t George W. notified until 45 minutes after the attack?
    4. Why did **** Cheney lie on National TV about the fighter planes that we had in the air and why did the Bush administration lie about having information about the attacks?
    5. How could they let the second plane crash into tower #2, when there was ample time to launch some jets and shoot it down?
    6. Why was the American public not notified that we were planning to attack Afganistan anyway, well before the attacks happened, in order to secure the building of our oil pipeline? (This information is starting to leak out- the government is now quietly saying that we were planning attacks on the Taliban to fight terrorism. We don\'t care about terrorism, we work with them everyday. We are now buddy buddy with pakistan and the Afghani warlords. IS EVERYONE THAT STUPID?)
    7. What is our governments relationship to the Bin Laden family?
    8. Why was the Bin Laden family jet allowed to fly in the US, immediately following the attacks, when no other plane was in the air?
    9. Why hasn’t the CIA followed up numerous reports that Osama met with members of his family recently?
    10. Are the stock irregularities being investigated?
    11. Mr. President, can you please recount to us, what happened on the morning of 9/11? What and when were you told about the attacks and what did you do about it? Did you act immediately? Did you investigate this massive military and intelligence failure? Do you care? Are you from the planet Zreeedkklsq? When the attacks happened, you did not stop your speech at the school you were at. You were informed and kept on speaking. WHY?

    Can I get some credible intelligent opposition? NO, because there isn\'t much of an argument to be made. The US government is at war with the world, but more importantly, they are at war with you. Don\'t let your comfortable life fool you. You are being used. They allow you to be economicly comfortable and tell you what you want to hear to get your support for their plans of economic world domination (of which you know nothing).

Go Back to forum

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts