Briefing on Al Qaeda Included Specifics

[zimv20]

link (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A387-2004Apr9?language=printer)


Briefing on Al Qaeda Included Specifics
White House Says Declassification of Pre-9/11 Document Will Be Delayed

By Walter Pincus and Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, April 10, 2004; Page A05

The classified briefing delivered to President Bush five weeks before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks featured information about ongoing al Qaeda activities within the United States, including signs of a terror support network, indications of hijacking preparations and plans for domestic attacks using explosives, according to sources who have seen the document and a review of official accounts and media reports over the past two years.

The information on current threats in the briefing, titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," stands in contrast to repeated assertions by national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and other Bush administration officials as recently as this week that the document is primarily historical and includes no warning or threat information.

The commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks, which has demanded that the 11/2-page document be declassified, referred to it in a March 24 report as "an article for the president's daily intelligence brief on whether or how terrorists might attack the United States."

White House officials, after indicating Thursday that the briefing document could be declassified within a day, announced yesterday that they were delaying any release until at least next week.

(more)

[numediaman]

Actually, the briefing memo has already been released:
http://nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Sept-11-Bush-Memo.html?hp

It's interesting that the White House released it on a Saturday -- usually when something is released over the weekend it is to bury it. But this can't be buried -- whether it says nothing, or whether it is the "smoking gun". So far, I've not seen the actual text of the memo on the web -- I'm sure it will be available very soon.

[zimv20]

whether it says nothing, or whether it is the "smoking gun".
imo, the most damning thing is that the administration had information that AQ was planning on domestic hijackings, yet the airlines _and_ the FAA insist they'd received no warning. that's either passive complicity (is that redundant?) or extreme incompetence.

i don't buy the "swatting a flies / comprehensive plan" BS either. the first tax cut was passed in no time. funding for family planning was cut on the very first day. the administration had its priorities and it's clear terrorism wasn't among them.

in addition, clarke's plan was handed to them. "a good plan today is better than the perfect plan tomorrow". unless it comes from the clinton administration, i guess.

[numediaman]

imo, the most damning thing is that the administration had information that AQ was planning on domestic hijackings, yet the airlines _and_ the FAA insist they'd received no warning. that's either passive complicity (is that redundant?) or extreme incompetence.


How do they square this:
Ashcroft Flying High

WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001

(CBS) Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml

[zimv20]

How do they square this:
Ashcroft Flying High

fyi - the 9/11 commission said they've looked into that, and can find no evidence that ashcroft was ever told to stop flying commercial.

personally, i'd like to see some evidence that he _did_ fly commercial after that date, but i don't think anyone's thought to ask

[3rdpath]

i believe the white house's position is that the memo was of no use because it didn't specify the date/time of the attack, the flight numbers, the hijacker's names/phone numbers/favorite colors, the intended targets and...:rolleyes:

[numediaman]

For the sake of completeness . . .

here is the memo:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf

[Sayhey]

The memo talks of not only hijackings, but of scouting federal buildings in New York and bin Ladin's interest in attacking Washington. Add this to the overall "chatter" of al Qaeda operatives in the summer of 2001 and it is looking irrefutable that the Bushies refused to take terrorism seriously prior to 9/11. One other thing is clear, Rice's description of the PDB as just a historical document without warnings is totally false. Is this the record they expect to be reelected on?

[zimv20]

Rice's description of the PDB as just a historical document without warnings is totally false.
agreed. i kinda can't believe she'd try that line. if there really was nothing current about it -- why was it the day's brief?

[IJ Reilly]

The White House can afford to let this story run for only a day or two, then they'll gear up the distraction and misdirection machine. I predict a document dump of some kind. If I were a betting man, I'd wager on some very select and formerly classified Richard Clarke materials finding their way into the media. Then the debate will rage (again) over whether Clarke accurately represented his own opinions in his testimony and his book, instead of over whether Rice mislead the 9-11 Commission last week. It's a risky strategy but the administration has to be desperate to get this off the front pages.

[3rdpath]

i just saw a film clip on the news where bush says the PDB wasn't of any help because it didn't specify " a time or place of an attack".

unbelievable...


edit: exact quote "I am satisfied that I never saw any intelligence that indicated there was going to be an attack on America -- at a time and a place, an attack," Bush told reporters after Easter services in Fort Hood, Tex. "Of course we knew that America was hated by Osama bin Laden. That was obvious. The question was, who was going to attack us, when and where and with what?"

even more unbelievable...

[pseudobrit]

i just saw a film clip on the news where bush says the PDB wasn't of any help because it didn't specify " a time or place of an attack".

unbelievable...

Someone else is watching CNN I guess. ;) I'm caught between laughing and crying everytime I see that deer in the headlights look.

He'll dismiss questions that are concerned with dead Americans while smirking and chuckling. Asshole.

[zimv20]

i just saw a film clip on the news where bush says the PDB wasn't of any help because it didn't specify " a time or place of an attack".

that really is _quite_ unfair of bin laden

[IJ Reilly]

This is misdirection effort no.1. Bush would like to distract us from the question on the floor, which isn't whether he had time and place information about an attack, but whether terrorism was treated as a top priority in his White House before 9-11. This is the charge, Mr. Bush. How do you plead?

[Neserk]

This is misdirection effort no.1. Bush would like to distract us from the question on the floor, which isn't whether he had time and place information about an attack, but whether terrorism was treated as a top priority in his White House before 9-11. This is the charge, Mr. Bush. How do you plead?


"I, Dubya, plead innocent by reason of stupidity." (Said in a good strong Texan accent)

[toontra]

i just saw a film clip on the news where bush says the PDB wasn't of any help because it didn't specify " a time or place of an attack".

unbelievable...


edit: exact quote "I am satisfied that I never saw any intelligence that indicated there was going to be an attack on America -- at a time and a place, an attack," Bush told reporters after Easter services in Fort Hood, Tex. "Of course we knew that America was hated by Osama bin Laden. That was obvious. The question was, who was going to attack us, when and where and with what?"

even more unbelievable...

So now we know for sure - Bush is a man of self-satisfied stupidity and incompetence in equal measures. What beats the hell out of me is why he's still in with even a prayer of being re-elected at this stage.

His modus operandi:

1) Lie
2) Deny
3) Attempt to smear and belittle the accuser
3) Eventually retract (when faced with the evidence)
4) Come up with the most banal of excuse
5) Attempt to play down the importance of the whole thing with an idiotic grin and some decidedly "un-humorous" humor - ("Where are those WMD")!

To be brutally blunt, it doesn't reflect well of the image of US overseas when there is someone like this in charge. I for one a beginning to think there are large swathes of the country whose population either doesn't read the news or give a damn about what's going on.

[IJ Reilly]

To be brutally blunt, it doesn't reflect well of the image of US overseas when there is someone like this in charge. I for one a beginning to think there are large swathes of the country whose population either doesn't read the news or give a damn about what's going on.

As much as it pains me to say so, I can't offer much in the way of a rebuttal. The media in the US has become, at best, docile, passive and corporate in its orientation. Whenever the press steps out of line, which isn't often anymore, they are shouted down and effectively neutralized by the right wing talk radio and TV brigade of spinners, deceivers, character assassins, and outright liars. We are feeling the effects of 20 years of these people pounding out the message that only they can be trusted to tell the nation the truth. For a depressingly large number of people in the US, trusting nobody but the right wing media-tainers is now at the core of their belief system. They will go to their graves believing that Rush never said anything that wasn't the gospel truth.

[zimv20]

I for one a beginning to think there are large swathes of the country whose population either doesn't read the news or give a damn about what's going on.
you'd be correct.

i've also noticed this country has a Winning Complex. that's why it's okay to bomb the crap out of iraq, damn the consequences. 'cuz WE'RE KICKING ASS AND TAKING NAMES!!!

it's also why we can use so much natural resources and expect more -- 'cuz we're at the top of the food chain. we EARNED THIS, BABY! "WE SAVED YOUR *ASSES* IN WWII!!!"

people here actually think this way

[skunk]

"WE SAVED YOUR *ASSES* IN WWII!!!"

Don't you mean the Great Patriotic War? :rolleyes:

[Taft]

I am very interested to hear a Bush-supporter's view of this memo. Are any of you going to comment on it?

Or maybe there is just nothing to say...

Taft

[Sun Baked]

This is getting even sillier...Sony Options Film Rights to Clarke Bestseller (http://news.findlaw.com/entertainment/s/20040412/leisureclarkedc.html)

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The bestseller at the center of a national debate on America's security, "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror," may soon be hitting the silver screen.

Sony Pictures has optioned the film rights to former counterterrorism official Richard Clarke's book, which questions the country's readiness to address potential terrorist threats before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

The project will be produced by John Calley, a veteran Hollywood executive who stepped down as the studio's chief executive and chairman last year...

[delete to end]

[zimv20]

one of the TV majors (NBC?) will be airing a made-for-TV movie, "Homeland Security". i've seen the commercial, where it shows a passenger jet being intercepted or escorted by fighter jets, seemingly on 9/11. now, it could be about another incident, but if it _is_ a scene from 9/11, i call ************.

[zimv20]

fyi - the 9/11 commission said they've looked into that, and can find no evidence that ashcroft was ever told to stop flying commercial.

personally, i'd like to see some evidence that he _did_ fly commercial after that date, but i don't think anyone's thought to ask
oh, i guess there is evidence...

just now listened to some of ashcroft's testimony. he _was_ told by a security detail there was a threat, and he _did_ stop flying commercial for gov't-related stuff in the summer 2001.

he was very careful to point out that, for personal trips, he continued to fly commercially.

[wwworry]

i believe the white house's position is that the memo was of no use because it didn't specify the date/time of the attack, the flight numbers, the hijacker's names/phone numbers/favorite colors, the intended targets and...:rolleyes:

They DID get a first or last name (one of the two) AND a phone number of one of the plotters from the Germans. What more do they want?

[skunk]

he was very careful to point out that, for personal trips, he continued to fly commercially.
How stupid is THAT? If there was a threat, there was a threat.

[numediaman]

oh, i guess there is evidence...

just now listened to some of ashcroft's testimony. he _was_ told by a security detail there was a threat, and he _did_ stop flying commercial for gov't-related stuff in the summer 2001.

he was very careful to point out that, for personal trips, he continued to fly commercially.

Wow, you quoted yourself. I try not to do that. It's bad enough seeing what I wrote the first time! :o