NationStates Jolt Archive

US al-Qaeda warning revealed
From correspondents in Washington
11feb05

EIGHT months before the September 11 attacks the White House's then counterterrorism adviser urged then national security adviser Condoleezza Rice to hold a high-level meeting on the al-Qaeda network, according to a memo made public today.

"We urgently need such a principals-level review on the al-Qaeda network," then White House counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke wrote in the January 25, 2001 memo.

Mr Clarke, who left the White House in 2003, made headlines in the heat of the US presidential campaign last year when he accused the Bush White House of having ignored al-Qaeda's threats before September 11.

Mr Clarke testified before inquiry panels and in a book that Rice, his boss at the time, had been warned of the threat. Rice is now US Secretary of State.

However, Ms Rice wrote in a March 22, 2004 column in The Washington Post that "No al-Qaeda threat was turned over to the new administration".


Mr Clarke told a commission looking into intelligence shortcomings prior to the attacks, "There's a lot of debate about whether it's a plan or a strategy or a series of options - but all of the things we recommended back in January were those things on the table in September. They were all done, but they were done after September 11."

The document was released by the National Security Archive, an independent US group that solicits government documents for public review.

Another document released by the archive said that from April to September 2001, the US Federal Aviation Administration received 52 intelligence reports on al-Qaeda, including five that mentioned hijackings and two that mentioned suicide operations, according to today's New York Times.

The Times quoted a previously undisclosed report by a commission set up to investigate the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

The report criticises the FAA for failing to strengthen security measures in light of the reports and describes as "striking" the false sense of security that appeared to predominate in the civil aviation system before the attacks, the paper said.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,12216311%255E401,00.html

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v427/vonbek/memo59ma.jpg


I am not able to post the WP article she wrote as the site needs registering. Nor am I able to provde a link as it seems their servers are rather busy.

Bottom line is that she lied.

Welcome to Bushco.

Big suprise there. If only we lived in Pinnochio's world. You could tell a neo-con by the length of his/her nose. :p

*yawn*

Big suprise there. If only we lived in Pinnochio's world. You could tell a neo-con by the length of his/her nose. :p

Condi is not a Neocon though. Not a dyed in the wool necon. Condi has one ideaology...The Advancement of Condi.

Condi is not a Neocon though. Not a dyed in the wool necon. Condi has one ideaology...The Advancement of Condi.

I'm sorry. I thought that was the definition of neo-con.

I'm sorry. I thought that was the definition of neo-con.

Hmmm. Well in a way perhaps you are right howver on a deeper level I think that the Neocons are more a movement that supports the collectivisation of power for the group rather than the single individual.

I think the debate of Buchco and the Neocons could be based around Stalinism/Facsism.

However this thread shows that the US Secretary of State lied under oath.

*yawn*

Great contribution.

Thats how revoutionists succeed....through the apathy of the majority.

Do you have any idea how many terrorist groups are investigated on almost a weekly basis? If you yanks want your government to investigate every one you will need to cough up trillions more /year and negotiate rights to go into foreign countries on a regular basis. Basically you will need to rule the world. Not likely to solve your problem so much as increase the problem!
If you include splinter groups there are literally thousands of groups most of whom talk a big game but lack the resources to pull off anything on foreign soil. Al-queda was classified as one of these since Osama was a known screw-up that had been rejected by all arab groups and had to buy/marry his way into an influencial family to get the power to have some-one wash his clothes for him.

Use your freedom of information privilage to get at the facts before you believe some political nut who is trying to get some power back after being forced out!

Great contribution.

Thats how revoutionists succeed....through the apathy of the majority.
Sorry, I just find this to be a boring argument. I can not find anything to argue any side for. To me it seems like another attempt to attack anything one can find about the Bush Administartion. Thus, yawn.

Do you have any idea how many terrorist groups are investigated on almost a weekly basis? If you yanks want your government to investigate every one you will need to cough up trillions more /year and negotiate rights to go into foreign countries on a regular basis. Basically you will need to rule the world. Not likely to solve your problem so much as increase the problem!
If you include splinter groups there are literally thousands of groups most of whom talk a big game but lack the resources to pull off anything on foreign soil. Al-queda was classified as one of these since Osama was a known screw-up that had been rejected by all arab groups and had to buy/marry his way into an influencial family to get the power to have some-one wash his clothes for him.

Use your freedom of information privilage to get at the facts before you believe some political nut who is trying to get some power back after being forced out!

Can you explain the influential family part and the political nut part please? Thanks..

Politics as usual.

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, knew about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor. He needed an excuse to ask Congress for a declaration of war on the Axis, so he could take a more active role in supporting the British Commonwealth.

Almost every war the U.S. fought, was preceded by an attack by someone else.

Check it out. ;)

Sorry, I just find this to be a boring argument. I can not find anything to argue any side for. To me it seems like another attempt to attack anything one can find about the Bush Administartion. Thus, yawn.

Well the fact is its not an arguement. The fact that she lied is there in black and white.

Nor is it another 'attempt to attack anything one can find about the Bush Admin'. What it is showing that the Bush Admin was incompetent and not willing to take responsibility for its [in]action.

Rice as NSA had a responsibility to look into the matter which she did not.

Have we become so innured to scandal that this will also be swept under the carpet?

Politics as usual.

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, knew about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor. He needed an excuse to ask Congress for a declaration of war on the Axis, so he could take a more active role in supporting the British Commonwealth.

Almost every war the U.S. fought, was preceded by an attack by someone else.

Check it out. ;)

Conspiracy theory :rolleyes:

bump

bump


I posted the same thing yesterday Von, and got pretty much the same result:

"Bahhhh - you just teh sux0r anti-american"

And nobody touched the subject.


Saddly, the motto seems to be: We won the election, and nothing else matters.

Sorry, I just find this to be a boring argument. I can not find anything to argue any side for. To me it seems like another attempt to attack anything one can find about the Bush Administartion. Thus, yawn.

This is a big deal. However, debating this is like kicking a dead horse.

I posted the same thing yesterday Von, and got pretty much the same result:

"Bahhhh - you just teh sux0r anti-american"

And nobody touched the subject.


Saddly, the motto seems to be: We won the election, and nothing else matters.

ahhh...sorry Zep...thats the problem with this place...thread sink so fast...had I known I'd have commented on your thread...

I find that the lack of reporting of this in the US media to be worrying as well. That this is not raising major concerns is just plain shocking. Here is proof that she lied under oath.

That her incompetance made 9/11 a cakewalk for the Saudi terrorists after Richard Clarke notified her with a 13 page document on how to deal with AQ...and she did nothing.

Yet these same people that you mention Zep...are more than happy to condemn Clinton for doing not enough. Let alone the calls for his impeachment due to lying under oath.

There is a word for this scenario - clusterfuck.

Politics as usual.

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, knew about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor. He needed an excuse to ask Congress for a declaration of war on the Axis, so he could take a more active role in supporting the British Commonwealth.

Almost every war the U.S. fought, was preceded by an attack by someone else.

Check it out. ;)
Vietnam, Korea, Cold War (its a war...just no firing bullets and stuff), Revolutionary War, French and indian war? These are only wars that Americans have taken part that no shots were fired first...

Civil war...south attacked out Fort.
Japanese attacked out Pearl Harbor.

So you are almost right.

Vietnam, Korea, Cold War (its a war...just no firing bullets and stuff), Revolutionary War, French and indian war? These are only wars that Americans have taken part that no shots were fired first...

Civil war...south attacked out Fort.
Japanese attacked out Pearl Harbor.

So you are almost right.

1st? I guess the Lusitania is not a grey area?

Sorry, I just find this to be a boring argument. I can not find anything to argue any side for. To me it seems like another attempt to attack anything one can find about the Bush Administartion. Thus, yawn.
If you can't find anything to argue any side for then why did you bother replying? That's inconsistant if not overtly hypocritical.
As the Bush administration goes, it needs every bit of scrutiny it has brought to bear against it, since it fancies itself a major proponent in ethical and moral superiority. Maybe you should sit this one out since you don't seem too educated on the sitauation, at least, and at most are already biased to misalign the statements and facts to being something you find personally and politically offensive.
To put it in more clear perspective:
The FAA received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned bin Laden or al-Qaida from APRIL to SEPT 10, 2001. THAT IS HALF THE INTELLIGENCE SUMMARIES AT THE TIME. That isn't a small number.
Also, it was the DIRECTIVE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION to BLOCK the public release of the report for more than FIVE MONTHS.
If you want to be under a rock, be under a rock. It's scary out here. Yawn away.

If you can't find anything to argue any side for then why did you bother replying? That's inconsistant if not overtly hypocritical.
As the Bush administration goes, it needs every bit of scrutiny it has brought to bear against it, since it fancies itself a major proponent in ethical and moral superiority. Maybe you should sit this one out since you don't seem too educated on the sitauation, at least, and at most are already biased to misalign the statements and facts to being something you find personally and politically offensive.
To put it in more clear perspective:
The FAA received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned bin Laden or al-Qaida from APRIL to SEPT 10, 2001. THAT IS HALF THE INTELLIGENCE SUMMARIES AT THE TIME. That isn't a small number.
Also, it was the DIRECTIVE OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION to BLOCK the public release of the report for more than FIVE MONTHS.
If you want to be under a rock, be under a rock. It's scary out here. Yawn away.

Well said! And it is not a case of being dem or repub....but rather of being for honesty and integrity.

Well said! And it is not a case of being dem or repub....but rather of being for honesty and integrity.
Thank you. I agree with you completely. The (one of the many, actually) IRRITATING thing about it is the brazen and blatant hypocrisy of Bush saying he was bringing "integrity" back to the White House. To be fair, maybe he meant "integration" of like minded evil manipulative bastard crooks, not "integrity" as dictionaries adhere to: (OED) #1:
moral uprightness, HONESTY (see any number of threads including this one); #2: WHOLENESS, SOUNDNESS (see "misunderestimated" and "strategery");
#3: rectitude (see 1), DECENCY, HONOR (see 1 again and first two presidential debates, 2004, note communication box between shoulder blades), probity
it goes on ...

Thank you. I agree with you completely. The (one of the many, actually) IRRITATING thing about it is the brazen and blatant hypocrisy of Bush saying he was bringing "integrity" back to the White House. To be fair, maybe he meant "integration" of like minded evil manipulative bastard crooks, not "integrity" as dictionaries adhere to: (OED) #1:
moral uprightness, HONESTY (see any number of threads including this one); #2: WHOLENESS, SOUNDNESS (see "misunderestimated" and "strategery");
#3: rectitude (see 1), DECENCY, HONOR (see 1 again and first two presidential debates, 2004, note communication box between shoulder blades), probity
it goes on ...

It used to be Country over Party....

Bushco reminds me of the Stalinists.

(as for medical/electronic props look at Brezhnev)

ahhh...sorry Zep...thats the problem with this place...thread sink so fast...had I known I'd have commented on your thread...

I find that the lack of reporting of this in the US media to be worrying as well. That this is not raising major concerns is just plain shocking. Here is proof that she lied under oath.

That her incompetance made 9/11 a cakewalk for the Saudi terrorists after Richard Clarke notified her with a 13 page document on how to deal with AQ...and she did nothing.

Yet these same people that you mention Zep...are more than happy to condemn Clinton for doing not enough. Let alone the calls for his impeachment due to lying under oath.

There is a word for this scenario - clusterfuck.


Is there anyone who would actually bother reading an entire 13 page document? For that matter is there anyone who would bother reading 52 intelligence reports? Government agencies have to deal with a great many reports, decoments, and forms. For the most part, they are rubber-stamped by machine and filed somewhere. Having a human read them would be too costly.

Isstead of 13 page documents and 52 intelligence reports the people who actually wrote these things should have send one-paragraph memos that would have actually been read. How many sentences do you need to say "Nuke, Afganastan and Saudi Aradia".

Is there anyone who would actually bother reading an entire 13 page document? For that matter is there anyone who would bother reading 52 intelligence reports? Government agencies have to deal with a great many reports, decoments, and forms. For the most part, they are rubber-stamped by machine and filed somewhere. Having a human read them would be too costly.

Isstead of 13 page documents and 52 intelligence reports the people who actually wrote these things should have send one-paragraph memos that would have actually been read. How many sentences do you need to say "Nuke, Afganastan and Saudi Aradia".

In my job I do that quite often. Reading documents. Its part of my job. As it is for the NSA.

Oh...and as for nuking Saudi and Afghanistan....well done...you just started WWIII

Politics as usual.

U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, knew about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor. He needed an excuse to ask Congress for a declaration of war on the Axis, so he could take a more active role in supporting the British Commonwealth.

Almost every war the U.S. fought, was preceded by an attack by someone else.

Check it out. ;)
Actually he could have gotten Congress to back him but he would have run into a similair problem as the Veitnam war with the people and he knew it! Only WW 1&2, Korea, Desert Storm 1 and Vietnam could be classified as such.(Though the last 3 were in defence of an "ally") Aside from the present one of course!
In my job I do that quite often. Reading documents. Its part of my job. As it is for the NSA.

Oh...and as for nuking Saudi and Afghanistan....well done...you just started WWIII52 reports. Half of the total reports for the year or the week. To get 50+ reports a week in NSA or CIA would amount to a slow week! To read all the reports in a timely matter would require the hiring of at least another 25-50 personel while keeping up with the influx of recorded conversations would require another 50-100 dedicated mainframe computers with the addition of another 100-200 personel and that wouldn't even make up for the 4-5 year backlog being stored. It is so easy to sit back after the fact and say I told them that AQ and BL would strike and they didn't listen. But to sort out the facts from the hearsay, misinformation and speculation is a Herculean task! Can you tell me which report will cause my stock to double or triple with even a 60% accuracy? Close to 75% of all plots against Western powers never make it off the drawing board thanks to the actions of operatives from the CIA, MI-5/6, Mossad, Interpol and MANY others. Many many others 15-20%-+ are stopped before they are carried out. How many of us can claim that sort of success in our own lives?

Condi is not a Neocon though. Not a dyed in the wool necon. Condi has one ideaology...The Advancement of Condi.
A philosphy hereby dubbed "Neo-Condi"

Actually he could have gotten Congress to back him but he would have run into a similair problem as the Veitnam war with the people and he knew it! Only WW 1&2, Korea, Desert Storm 1 and Vietnam could be classified as such.(Though the last 3 were in defence of an "ally") Aside from the present one of course!
52 reports. Half of the total reports for the year or the week. To get 50+ reports a week in NSA or CIA would amount to a slow week! To read all the reports in a timely matter would require the hiring of at least another 25-50 personel while keeping up with the influx of recorded conversations would require another 50-100 dedicated mainframe computers with the addition of another 100-200 personel and that wouldn't even make up for the 4-5 year backlog being stored. It is so easy to sit back after the fact and say I told them that AQ and BL would strike and they didn't listen. But to sort out the facts from the hearsay, misinformation and speculation is a Herculean task! Can you tell me which report will cause my stock to double or triple with even a 60% accuracy? Close to 75% of all plots against Western powers never make it off the drawing board thanks to the actions of operatives from the CIA, MI-5/6, Mossad, Interpol and MANY others. Many many others 15-20%-+ are stopped before they are carried out. How many of us can claim that sort of success in our own lives?

Thats all very well and good but does not excuse the fact that Condi lied under oath and placed the country under threat.