The truth behind the failure leading up to 9/11 is being purposely
withheld from both Congress and the so called independent commission
that is supposed to be investigating it. Whenever we have been faced
with a national disaster, a truth commission has been formed, and in all
but one instance (The Warren Commission) they have discovered the cause
and suggested improvements.
It was true of the Challenger disaster, and other events too numerous to
go into.
Just as in their secret meeting with the energy moguls just prior to the
California rip-off, the Bush administration refuses to relinquish
material pertinent to the events leading up to 9/11. So it's up to us to
assemble what we know. What has been made public?
In finally allowing the independent commission to go forward the Bush
administration tried to force a rule that said only the chairman could
issue subpoenas and then tried to appoint Kissinger to head the
commission. Kissinger took one look at the information that was coming
in and immediately resigned. He may be Machiavellian, but he also will
cover his own ass.
What do we know? That the administration is willing to give up the
information, but is not willing to say where that information was
delivered--in other words, they don't want you to know that they got the
warnings in advance and failed to move on them. And if you think they
are trying to protect intelligence assets, just remember how they outed
Ambassador Wilson's wife.
That George Tenet, CIA Director warned the incoming Bush administration
that "Al Qaeda posed the most significant, immediate threat to American
security.
During the transition, Sandy Berger gave Condeleeza Rice an urgent
briefing in January 2001, "you are going to spend more time during your
4 years on terrorism generally and Al Qaeda specifically than any
issue." Richard Clark, counter terrorism chief, delivered similar
briefings to Cheney and Stephen Hadley, Rice's deputy. But instead of
heeding these warnings the new administration decided to take "Star
Wars" out of moth balls and focus on that boondoggle instead. Notice how
they have dropped that topic since 9/11? But it was "the most important
thing regarding security" according to Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld before
9/11.
On August 6, 2001, the CIA had warned the President and other top
officials of an active plot by Al Qaeda operatives to seize civilian
aircraft.. During that same period FBI special agents in Phoenix and
Minnesota had warned their own agency of activity by suspected Al Qaeda
operatives at U.S. flight schools. The FBI was essentially leaderless at
this time because Freeh had resigned. Nobody at FBI, the CIA, the
National Security Council or any other government intelligence agency
managed to connect those warnings until after the disaster.
But what should have the administration have known? In late July 2001,
in the weeks preceding the G8 meeting in Genoa, Italy, federal police
warned about an Al Qaueda plot to assassinate Bush. The threat was
considered sufficiently serious to keep the President away from the
luxury cruise ship that housed his fellow heads of state.
According to a Los Angeles Times report, Italian officials were warned
that Islamic terrorists might try to hijack an airplane and crash it
into the summit location, with the intention of killing Bush and others.
The Italians responded by setting up rocket batteries. Just prior to the
meeting, the Times of London warned the CIA station chief in Rome of a
possible suicide attack by Al Qaeda.
Simultaneously on July 26th, 2001, Attorney General John Ashcroft
abruptly stopped flying on commercial airliners, reportedly due to a
"threat assessment" by the FBI. The White house said that this was not
because of any related Al Qaeda threats, but because of specific threats
against Ashcroft. CBS news reported, "a senior official at the CIA said
he was unaware of specific threats against any cabinet member."
Obviously mistakes were made. Our anger should be directed towards Al
Qaeda. But after 9/11 Democrats met with their counter parts on the
other side and told the world that we were one country and they would
not be divisive. Immediately Carl Rove met with senior Republicans and
said that this was too good an opportunity to miss and he urged that the
Republicans pound "homeland security" in the upcoming midterm elections.
They did so. And it seems that every month (while the White house sits
on the information the committees are requesting and are threatening to
subpoena) another conservative sponsored book arrives blaming Clinton
for 9/11.
But what does the record indicate? That Clinton tried to coerce the
Taliban into expelling Bin Laden. He froze $254 million in Taliban
assets in the U.S. Under Clinton the NSA and a special Al Qaeda unit
thwarted several deadly conspiracies, including a scheme to blow up Los
Angeles International airport on Millennium Eve, and plots to bomb the
Holland and Lincoln tunnels on New York as well as the U.N. building. He
prevented an assault on the Israeli Embassy in D.C. Meanwhile the CIA
neutralized dozens of terrorist cells overseas through covert action
undertaken by allies from Albania and the Philippines.
Robert Oakley, former counter terrorism head in the Reagan
administration gave Clinton "very high marks" for these efforts. Paul
Bremer, chosen to head our occupation of Iraq said, 9 months before
9/11, in the Washington Post, "the Clinton administration had correctly
focused on Bin Laden."
After the bombing in Oklahoma, Clinton introduced legislation to broaden
the justice department surveillance. These were rejected (rightly or
wrongly) by Republicans and civil libertarians. The bill included powers
to turn away suspected immigrants, swifter deportation procedures, and a
new deportation court that could look at secret evidence. During the
2000 campaign George W. Bush won support from American Muslims for
denouncing that provision.. Republican Senator Phil Gramm blocked an
administration bill to close loopholes that let terrorists groups
launder money through offshore accounts. Since 9/11 Bush has enacted
that very same provision. Between 1996 and 2000 FBI counter terrorism
budget rose from $78 million to $609 million, and the agents assigned to
counter terrorism were tripled. Whether FBI director Freeh managed these
agents properly is another matter.
During the brief period when the Democrats held control of the Senate in
spring of 2002, according to both Newsweek and the Washington Post
Cheney called Daschle to warn him against any 9/11 investigation.
Why? It will not flatter them. Carl Rove can sell pictures of Bush
landing on an aircraft carrier, but the American people want to know
what led up to 9/11. And only by cooperating with the investigation can
Bush make this happen. Why are they fighting it? I think a quote by Tom
Delay will be quite revealing, "We will not allow our president to be
undermined by those who want his job during a time of war." What exactly
is it in this investigation that would undermine Bush?
The fact that the administration is trying to stop the investigation
means that we must put out whatever public information is currently
known. I ask you to please forward this. |
