SMOKING GUN: Does Senator Bob Graham have the goods on the Bushies and 9/11?
antiwar.com
The mystery of 9/11 only gets murkier as time goes on. How did a rag-tag group of 19 (plus one)http://crime.about.com/library/weekly/aa20thHijacker.htm conspirators manage to hijack three airliners and crash them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon – without so much as a small blip showing on law enforcement's radar screen? We may never know the answer to that troubling question, but some people do know – and Senator Bob Graham may well be one of them.
In an interview with PBS,http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html as we noted last year,
antiwar.com Graham declared that certain intelligence agencies were involved and/or had foreknowledge of the terrorist attacks. Now we have the Congressional Quarterly's Craig Crawford telling the ABC Radio team of John Batchelor and Paul Alexander:
wabcradio.com
"I think Bob Graham has a smoking pistol on the Bush administration."
But there's just one hitch, as Crawford explains:
newsmax.com
"The problem is that what [Graham] knows – and he knows some very damaging stuff about the Bush administration's failures before 9/11 to prevent 9/11 – he can't talk about because it's classified."
According to Crawford, who is covering the Florida Democrat's White House bid, Graham is looking for a way to drop a dime hanoverpolice.org
on the Bushies without overstepping his bounds as a ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee:
"He's got something on Bush. He just can't figure out how to use it."
All I can say is: use it, Bob, use it!
In an interview on MSNBC's Buchanan and Press, Crawford revealed a series of events that purportedly occurred in the months prior to 9/11 which should have led the Bushies to suspect something was up. The implication is that this administration could have prevented the attacks,
msnbc.com
but didn't because they failed to act. Graham has consistently charged that they were more concerned about Saddam Hussein than Osama bin Laden,
miami.com
but that needn't worry the Bushies. After all, we are talking about an electorate that believes Saddam, not Osama, was behind 9/11, the two villains having merged in the public's mind. Now, however, Graham is raising the stakes, and his critique – if true – is a veritable sword of Damocles bartleby.com
hanging over the heads of George W. Bush and Karl Rove.
In his interview with PBS, you'll remember, Graham cited "evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States."
Who knew? Speculation along these lines has developed in a wide variety of, um, directions, most of it wacko in extremis: "Bush knew!" is the war cry of the tinfoil hat brigade, whose partisans write me long indignant letters every time I label them as such. But my best guess is that the truth about 9/11, if and when it comes out, will prove a lot more interesting and surprising than the rather pedestrian and stridently partisan conspiracy theories coming out of the far-left fever-swamps, which posit Bushian foreknowledge and outright complicity. I suspect that what Graham has yet to tell us will show that Bush should have known, but didn't – and that included among those who did know iraq-info.1accesshost.com is at least one duplicitous "ally." antiwar.com |
