Transcript: Bin Laden determined to strike in US

Dorian Gray said:
Pentagon was.
Click to expand...

The full story, please: The memo spoke of federal buildings in New York.

Now, I've lived in New York, and I am pretty sure the Pentagon isn't there.

I could be wrong, of course. New York is a pretty darn big place...
 
Yeah I agree, no big deal.
Politicians not paying attention.
Business as usual.

So... anyone all set to argue Bush is a real smart guy and was gonna analyze this? Hey at least the memo was typed, not done in crayon with pretty little pictures.

Rice did ok, she was far more boring than we thought she might be. I think the administration knew this paper was out there a long time ago, potentially bad news for the prez, and released it when they wanted.

The paper was released on Saturday of a three day weekend. That's sort of guarantees it will be DOA with the public. Will be surprised if anything comes of this.

I just wish these guys were as clever with running the country as they are playing Cover Their A$$.
 
Jeezus.. the memo was nothing new whatsoever. Senator Graham - Dem from Florida - talked about it a few years ago and dismissed it as nothing more than old intelligence. The only thing novel or remarkable about the memo was that it has just been released to the public. Everyone on the commission knew about it years ago. Keep that in mind when you hear Ben Veniste's ominous questioning. He knew there was nothing there - he was trying to score a few political points. It looks like it backfired on him.
A further note - when Rice was first interviewed, only 4 of the commissioners found it necessary to hear her testimony and question her. When she returned in front of the cameras, they all suddenly realized they needed to be there to have some questions answered...
 
Thing is, that they did nothing, not even ensure that airport security was operating efficiently. That is, nothing, not even a simple review of existing security. The same morning of 9/11, Condi was supposed to be giving a speech on how they were leaving the old problems behind, and were going to implement the anti missile system to improve USA security. Not only were they ignoring real threats, they were concentrating on phantom ones.
 
Tmy said:


I think your right. Its just that conservatives having taken pot shots at him for 911 for some time now. If you gonna blame clinton then you'd have to blame GW also.
Click to expand...

You're right, but only IF such memos were "all Bill Clinton had to work with". He also had the aftermath of many individual terror attacks "to work with". What BC is getting sh!t for from the right were his ineffectual knee-jerk responses. Granted that the attacks BC had to deal with were insignifigant in comparison to 9/11.....but he should have, and could have, made more effectual military responses.

Now, you guys on the left have gotten great comic mileage out of the "Orange Alerts" of Homeland Security....yet OTOH many are complaining here that GWB had this memo and should have alerted the public. (Trying to have the proverbial cake and munch on it too eh?) Yet even so, a truly effectual means of informing the public did not exist. Had he appeared on tv to warn us we'd have been confused as to the nature of the warning. He couldn't have given us anything specific...look at the memo, nothing was there. Even had there been the D of HS prior to 9/11 an "Orange Alert" would not have meant there were less people present in the WTC or Pentagon. It would however, have put airlines on alert...and yet they had no time frame. Raise an alarm in August....then what? Can people stay on high alert for more than a month, and with no 9/11 event to help them keep such an alert in perspective? I doubt it.

Obviously this whole thing is merely high political drama. A made for tv event drawn from partisan roots in an election year.

-z
 
Rik:

Is anyone saying Bush should have warned the public? I thougth Bush shoudl have made changes within before 9/11 if he thoguht there was enough evidence to warrant the changes. Regardles, we KNOW where Bush's priorities were before 9/11; Iraq and missile defense.

CFLarson:

Other than that pdb, there were warnings of airplanes being used as missiles before 9/11 that Rice should have been aware of. It is within the totality of the evidence that the brief you mentioned becomes more important.

All that being said, I do not blame Bush for 9/11. It would have been hard to prevent. I do think his priorities were mixed up.

Lurker
 
Lurker said:
CFLarson:
Click to expand...

Larsen. Quite many Americans get it wrong, nobody else. Weird...

Lurker said:
Other than that pdb, there were warnings of airplanes being used as missiles before 9/11 that Rice should have been aware of. It is within the totality of the evidence that the brief you mentioned becomes more important.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying there wasn't any other IntelInformation out there. There was probably an abundance! But we can't possibly say this memo is the smoking gun it's been made into by the media and some politicians.
 
CFLarsen said:
Larsen. Quite many Americans get it wrong, nobody else. Weird...
Click to expand...
I think it has to do w/ the fact that people emigrating to the USA were generally poor and illiterate. The immigration man would have to spell the name of the immigrant himself, and so often anglicized the name. Thus, Larsen becomes Larson.

A quick look at the Chicago phone book shows more than twice as many Larsons as Larsens, probably all had the same spelling in the old country.

My own last name is a complete abomination of a German name. I doubt anyone in Germany has a name w/ this spelling, though my great-grandfather was from there.
 
crackmonkey said:
A further note - when Rice was first interviewed, only 4 of the commissioners found it necessary to hear her testimony and question her. When she returned in front of the cameras, they all suddenly realized they needed to be there to have some questions answered...
Click to expand...
There is so much spin surrounding this thing it is making me dizzy. For example, the quote above may be factual but it neglects to mention that "on Nov. 21 — long before Rice met with the five commissioners in February — the White House counsel's office had sent the commission a letter saying no more than three commissioners could attend meetings with White House aides of Rice's rank." Source: USAToday This is of course more "unprecedented cooperation" on the part of the White House, and I'm sure they can give a perfectly suitable explanation for this request... all we need is a competent press to ask a simple question or two. (And cue crickets.... now!) So, if the White House did not allow more than 3 commissioners, how did 5 commissioners show up to meet with Rice? Well, because the commission did not agree to the White House terms, "ut the commission did agree to meet with Rice at her convenience, and the date and time she chose — a Saturday afternoon — limited the number of commissioners who could attend because several live far from Washington." Now that is pretty weak on both sides of the ball, Rice for picking a weird time, and anyone on the commission who actually used the excuse that it was too far away. I have no idea what other commitments the commission members have, so quite possibly they have legitimate excuses, but until I hear some good ones, it seems like balderdash (take that, censor software!) to me.

Another thing, according to Bush, this PDB was created because he specifically requested it. True? Not according to the CIA.
The CIA now says that a controversial August 2001 briefing summarizing potential attacks on the United States by al Qaeda was not requested by President Bush, as Rice and others had long claimed. The Aug. 6, 2001, document, known as the President's Daily Brief, has been the focus of intense scrutiny because it reported that Osama bin Laden advocated airplane hijackings, that al Qaeda supporters were in the United States and that the group was planning attacks here. -- Source: Washington Post
Click to expand...
Who is telling the truth? Who knows.

The spin piles on, but this, to me, takes the cake. Bush, on Sunday, says "the PDB was no indication of a terrorist threat." and "that PDB said nothing about an attack on America." Source: The White House Um.... are you f***ing kidding me? Now, maybe there are surrounding documents that legitimize that statement, but the PDB that I read had several indications of a terrorist threat and said many things about an attack on America. I don't see how someone can say that kind of thing without bursting into flames.
 
I was listening to the Roger Hedgecock who was filling in for Rush Limbauh today and he read a memo that was given to John Kerry with specific warnings that Logan Airport was going to be targeted for hijackings by terrorists for the purpose of coordinating an attack by using planes as weapons. According to Hedgecock Kerry gave the letter to someone else and did not act on it.

Hedgecock was pointing out how this story did not get any air time on the major news. Of course he saw this as proof of media bias. I questioned whether the story was cut out of whole cloth. Hedgecock is conservative so I really wonder. I can't find any reference on his page or Rush's.

Anyone familiar with the story?
 
RandFan said:
Anyone familiar with the story?
Click to expand...
Kerry was given a letter from a former FAA employee detailing security breaches at Logan Airport. He was also given video tape documenting the breaches. He passed the info on to the authorities. At about this point is when the tornado effect kicks in, and I can't tell which spin to believe.

The NY Post has this editorial about it saying Kerry is a rat bastard.

John Kerry's peeps of course say he did the right thing.
 
WildCat said:
I think it has to do w/ the fact that people emigrating to the USA were generally poor and illiterate. The immigration man would have to spell the name of the immigrant himself, and so often anglicized the name. Thus, Larsen becomes Larson.

A quick look at the Chicago phone book shows more than twice as many Larsons as Larsens, probably all had the same spelling in the old country.

My own last name is a complete abomination of a German name. I doubt anyone in Germany has a name w/ this spelling, though my great-grandfather was from there.
Click to expand...

Well, yes and no. I could understand it perfectly, if people here had only heard me say "Larsen". That's not the case: People only see my last name - they read it, shown on their monitors. What happens in their minds, that compels them to use another spelling still?

Interesting......oh, well, off topic. Back to topic.
 
JesFine said:
Kerry was given a letter from a former FAA employee detailing security breaches at Logan Airport. He was also given video tape documenting the breaches. He passed the info on to the authorities. At about this point is when the tornado effect kicks in, and I can't tell which spin to believe.

The NY Post has this editorial about it saying Kerry is a rat bastard.

John Kerry's peeps of course say he did the right thing.
Click to expand...
But were security breaches at the airport to blame for the hijackings? The box cutters used were not banned from airplanes at the time, they were in fact permitted. So even if Kerry had personally searched and found them on the hijackers there wasn't anything he could have done about it.

The tit-for-tat politicking in this election is getting unbearable.
 
CFLarsen said:


Larsen. Quite many Americans get it wrong, nobody else. Weird...
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. FWIW, my last name is mangled here in America because it is a Finnish name. Ever see a Finnish name? They are impossible to spell, much less pronounce.


I'm not saying there wasn't any other IntelInformation out there. There was probably an abundance! But we can't possibly say this memo is the smoking gun it's been made into by the media and some politicians.
Click to expand...

I agree it is not the smoking gun.

Lurker
 
RandFan said:
I was listening to the Roger Hedgecock who was filling in for Rush Limbauh today and he read a memo that was given to John Kerry with specific warnings that Logan Airport was going to be targeted for hijackings by terrorists for the purpose of coordinating an attack by using planes as weapons. According to Hedgecock Kerry gave the letter to someone else and did not act on it.

Hedgecock was pointing out how this story did not get any air time on the major news. Of course he saw this as proof of media bias. I questioned whether the story was cut out of whole cloth. Hedgecock is conservative so I really wonder. I can't find any reference on his page or Rush's.

Anyone familiar with the story?
Click to expand...

I also heard this on this show. Let's see. Kerry passes the info on to the proper authorities. What else was he supposed to do?

Lurker
 
I suppose Clinton and Bush both could have "done something". They could have invaded Afganistan. They could have seriously controlled our borders. They could have seriously profiled duskey hued folks. They could have had serious airport and port security.

Everyone on the planet would have bitched.
 
I'd say the blame for allowing 9/11 would have to rest on the bureaucracy - legal impediments preventing FBI and CIA from sharing intelligence, that sort of thing.
Click to expand...
The comments through this thread mainly discuss what could have been done to prevent the 911 attacks.

How exactly can a group of determined, suicidal, organized, and secretive zealots be stopped from carrying out a new type of attack? Other than a lucky break by investigators, not a damn thing is what could have been done.

Understanding this, the Bush administration blundered in withholding documents and not willingly presenting the information available before the attacks. Most people understand that nobody is infallible. Give a little credit to the pubic.
 
JesFine said:
Kerry was given a letter from a former FAA employee detailing security breaches at Logan Airport. He was also given video tape documenting the breaches. He passed the info on to the authorities. At about this point is when the tornado effect kicks in, and I can't tell which spin to believe.

The NY Post has this editorial about it saying Kerry is a rat bastard.

John Kerry's peeps of course say he did the right thing.
Click to expand...
Thanks Jes,

I agree with your assesment about the tornado effect.
 
fishbob said:
Other than a lucky break by investigators, not a damn thing is what could have been done.
Click to expand...
Gotta disagree with you on this one my friend.
Not being able to be 100% effective is distinct from not being able to do a damn thing. You can do many damn things, and be successful. You can do everything you can, and fail.
The proposition that you can't do a damn thing leads to not doing a damn thing. I know that's not what you mean to say.

I agree that the administration's approach to the investigations was counter productive to them. I think if they would have laid it all out and said, "We did the best we could with what we had, and it wasn't enough we failed to prevent this" the public would buy that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom