Forwarding this from
NextDraft
as appropriate in this context



The Knewness of it All

What did he know? When did he know it? These
are the questions that have become a national
(or at least a media) obsession. Over the course
of this week, the public has learned more about
what kind of intelligence the Bush administration
had access to before September 11. So far, this
story's meaning can be divided into the good, the
bad and the ugly.

In the sense that there is a good, it is related to
the fact that there is no way George W Bush had
some kind of advance warning and then somehow
decided not to (or forgot to) do something about it.
It is an absurd suggestion that no one is saying out
loud, but for some, it is clearly the subtext of the
story. What we know so far is that during one of Bush's
daily intelligence briefings, he was warned that Al Qaeda
may be planning a major attack on the U.S. and one
of the possible strategies could be the hijacking of
a plane. No one has suggested that the report was any more
specific than that. Even in the post September 11th world,
to make such a report public would be unlikely. In
the pre-September 11 world, it would have been unthinkable.

We also know that W's advisors had prepared a plan for
a full-fledged, long term battle to uproot and destroy
Al Qaeda. It was presented to the President on September
9th (he hadn't yet signed it by the time of the attacks)
and included many of the strategies (financial, diplomatic,
military) that have been employed over the past few months.
That means that the Bush administration was extremely
concerned about Al Qaeda and understood the threat that
they posed, but it in no way implies knowledge of a
specific attack on a specific day.

The bad part of all of this is the culture secrecy (between
intelligence agencies, between government branches, and
between the White House and the public at large). The
key question is why hadn't we heard about the intelligence
warnings or the prepared battle plan before it was leaked?
This information clearly should have been shared. It would
have made it a lot more clear why the administration was so
sure it was Osama from moment one, and how they were able
to develop a long range, detailed retaliatory plan almost
overnight. While much has changed since September 11, the
guarded secrecy of the Bush administration, the lack
of open communication between key intelligence organizations,
and Washington's cover your own rear mentality have all
remained largely intact. We still haven't really set up
a non-partisan Congressional panel to look into what
specifically went wrong and what specific steps need
to be taken to plug the system's holes. There are several
politicians (including Dick Cheney) who argue that such
an investigation would take resources away from the effort
to prevent a future attack. But isn't it clearly worth
it to pause for some reflection so that we are playing
this course with the right set of clubs?

The ugly part of this is the media, especially the television
news players. Television news has been largely built to
cover the game of politics. That's why this story is so
mouth watering. Is Bush hiding something for political
reasons? How will the Democrats take advantage of this
chink in the President's public approval armor? This is
what the talking heads love. It is their area of expertise.
I'm not suggesting that politics is not a worthy topic
for discussion or that this story should not be fully examined.
But we have to ask ourselves, where is the coverage of
the war itself? What is a bigger story; that President Bush
received an intelligence update regarding Al Qaeda in
August or the fact that we still have no idea of the
whereabouts of Osama bin Laden and most of the top Al
Qaeda brass?

Ultimately, the real question here is whether or not
we are doing everything humanly possible to overcome
our past deficiencies to make our citizens as safe as
possible from another attack. And the answer to that
question is probably no. And that's the scandal.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

THE FRONT SECTION

Warning Signs
During a speech on Friday, President Bush criticized
the fact that "Washington is unfortunately the kind
of place where second-guessing has become second nature"
and insisted that, regardless of now surfaced memos and
reports, he had no information that could have
enabled him to prevent the 9-11 attacks. "Had I known
that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on
that fateful morning, I would have done everything in
my power to protect the American people."

http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/17/bush.sept.11/

+

As early as 1999, a federal report warned of the
use of airplanes as weapons. "Suicide bomber(s)
belonging to al-Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could
crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives
(C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters
of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the
White House."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washdc/2002/05/17/terror-report.htm

+

Were the warning signs there? In retrospect
perhaps, but the clues were murky at the time.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/17/politics/17AUGU.html

+

Communication Breakdown
Zacarias Moussaoui was taken into custody
because of his strange behavior at a flight
school; an FBI agent in Arizona wrote a memo
indicating a concern about Al Qaeda operatives
attending U.S. flight training schools; the CIA
warned that Al Qaeda might be preparing to hijack
an aircraft. All of these clues - in one place - may
have made a difference.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-051702why.story


Coalition Forces in Action
British troops supported by U.S. air-power
are battling a "substantial enemy force" in
southeast Afghanistan. It is expected that
the fighting could last for days.

http://abcnews.com/sections/world/DailyNews/STRIKE_MAIN.html








on 5/17/02 3:01 PM, KENT JOHNSON at [log in to unmask]
wrote:

> ------- Forwarded message follows -------
> To: ps <[log in to unmask]>
> From: portsideMod <[log in to unmask]>
> Date sent: Thu, 16 May 2002 21:15:51 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: What Bush Knew When the Terrorists Flew
> Send reply to: [log in to unmask]
>
> [ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]
>
>
> Statement by Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney
> ===========================================
> May 16, 2002
>
> Several weeks ago, I called for a congressional
> investigation into what warnings the Bush
> Administration received before the terrorist attacks of
> September 11, 2001. I was derided by the White House,
> right wing talk radio, and spokespersons for the
> military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist.
> Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to
> suggest that Congress should conduct a full and
> complete investigation into the most disastrous
> intelligence failure in American history. Georgia
> Senator Zell Miller even went so far as to characterize
> my call for hearings as "dangerous, loony and
> irresponsible."
>
> Today's revelations that the administration, and
> President Bush, were given months of notice that a
> terrorist attack was a distinct possibility points out
> the critical need for a full and complete congressional
> investigation. It now becomes clear why the Bush
> Administration has been vigorously opposing
> congressional hearings. The Bush Administration has
> been engaged in a conspiracy of silence. If committed
> and patriotic people had not been pushing for
> disclosure today's revelations would have been hidden
> by the White House.
>
> Because I love my country, because I am a patriot, and
> because the American people deserve the truth, I
> believe it would be dangerous, loony and irresponsible
> not to hold full congressional hearings on any warnings
> the Bush Administration had before the terrorist
> attacks of September 11, 2001. Ever since I came to
> Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying
> to silence my voice. I've been told to "sit down and
> shut up" over and over again. Well, I won't sit down
> and I won't shut up until the full and unvarnished
> truth is placed before the American people.
>
> © : t r u t h o u t 2002
>
> _______________________________________________________
>
> The Terrorists Flew and Bush Knew
> =================================
> By William Rivers Pitt
>
> t r u t h o u t | 16 May, 2002
>
> When Andrew Card interrupted the 298th reading of 'The
> Very Hungry Caterpillar' by whispering words of fire
> and death into the ear of George W. Bush as he sat with
> schoolchildren on September 11th, 2001, Mr. Bush's face
> betrayed not a hint of surprise and shock. Now, we know
> why.
>
> Governor Jeb Bush of Florida signed Executive Order No.
> 01-261 on September 7th, 2001, renewing an order signed
> six months earlier that allowed the National Guard to
> be called out in case of emergency. On September 11th,
> he used this order to command members of the National
> Guard into active service and essentially declared
> martial law in Florida. When informed of the attacks in
> New York and Washington, Governor Bush responded, "Was
> it the terrorists?" Now, we know why.
>
> On the eve of his first State of the Union speech,
> George W. Bush along with Vice President Cheney
> contacted Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and asked
> him to soft-pedal any Congressional investigations into
> the September 11th attacks. The requests were little
> more than thinly veiled threats. Now, we know why.
>
> Virtually every news outlet is buzzing today with the
> newest revelation: Bush had been warned in the months
> before 9/11 of Al Qaida terrorist plans to hijack
> airplanes. The White House response to this thunderclap
> has been predictably muted: "The administration, based
> on hijackings, notified the appropriate agencies," said
> Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. He did not deign to
> reveal which agencies were alerted, nor did he specify
> the content of the warning. Jose Juves, spokesman for
> the Massachusetts Port Authority, the state agency
> responsible for security at Boston's Logan Airport,
> stated in today's Boston Globe, "The Federal government
> never handed down any intelligence regarding
> hijackings." The two airplanes that destroyed the World
> Trade Center towers came from Logan. Someone is lying.
>
> Fleischer has described the warnings as having been
> regarding "hijackings in the traditional sense," and
> that no one in the administration could have conceived
> of a plot to turn commercial airlines into suicide
> bombs. This does not defray the substance of the
> central question: If Bush heard the words 'Al Qaida'
> and 'hijackings in America' in the same sentence, why
> did he fail to substantially augment airline security
> across the nation? He and his people did not need to
> conjure images of 9/11 before the actual event to
> understand that avoiding terrorist hijackings within
> the continental United States was of paramount
> importance under any circumstances. Besides, one
> protects an airplane from getting hijacked in the same
> way one protects an airplane from becoming a fuel-air
> bomb.
>
> The warnings delivered to Mr. Bush regarding Al Qaida
> plans to hijack American airplanes did not occur in a
> vacuum. FBI agents in Phoenix issued warnings in the
> summer of 2001 about suspicious Arab men receiving
> aviation training in American flight schools. The
> warning was never followed up. An agent in the Arizona
> field office commented in his case notes that Zacarias
> Moussaoui, arrested in August after suspicious activity
> at one of these flight schools, seemed like a man
> capable of flying airplanes into the World Trade
> Center.
>
> Newspapers in Germany, France, Russia and London
> reported in the months before September 11th of a
> blizzard of warnings delivered to the Bush
> administration from all points on the compass. The
> German intelligence service BND warned American and
> Israeli agencies that terrorists were planning to
> hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to
> attack important American targets. Egypt warned of a
> similar plane-based plot against Bush during the G-8
> summit in Genoa last June, a warning taken so seriously
> that anti-aircraft batteries were placed around
> Columbus Airport in Italy. Last August, Russian
> intelligence services notified the CIA that 25
> terrorist pilots had been trained for suicide missions,
> and Putin himself confirmed that this warning was
> delivered "in the strongest possible terms"
> specifically regarding threats to airports and
> government buildings. In that same month, the Israeli
> security agency Mossad issued a warning to both the FBI
> and CIA that up to 200 bin Laden followers were
> planning a major assault on America, aimed at
> vulnerable targets. The Los Angeles Times later
> confirmed via unnamed US officials that the Mossad
> warnings had been received.
>
> On September 16th, 2001, Vice President Cheney gave an
> interview to Tim Russert on the NBC news program 'Meet
> the Press.' In the course of the interview, the
> following exchange took place:
> "MR. RUSSERT: Were you surprised by the precision and
> sophistication of the operation?
> VICE PRES. CHENEY: Well, certainly, we were surprised
> in the sense that, you know, there had been information
> coming in that a big operation was planned, but that's
> sort of a trend that you see all the time in these
> kinds of reports. But we didn't...
> MR. RUSSERT: No specific threat?
> VICE PRES. CHENEY: No specific threat involving really
> a domestic operation or involving what happened,
> obviously, the cities, airliner and so forth. We did go
> on alert with our overseas forces a number of times
> during the course of the summer when we thought the
> threat level had risen significantly. So clearly, we
> were surprised by what happened here."
>
> Cheney's claim that no threats had been leveled against
> domestic targets "involving what happened" stands in
> stark contrast to the warnings received from foreign
> intelligence services regarding suicide pilots,
> aircraft and important American buildings. Furthermore,
> Ari Fleischer's claim that no one in the administration
> could have conceived of any hijackings beyond the
> "traditional" kind stumbles across these same warnings.
>
> Conspiracy-minded Americans have taken as an article of
> faith the idea that the Bush administration and the CIA
> knew full well that the 9/11 attacks were coming, and
> allowed them to happen for personal and political gain.
> Though largely circumstantial in nature, these claims
> do have some definite substance. It cannot be denied
> that Bush has enjoyed phenomenal support from the
> American people since the attacks, and political
> opponents who were ready to take his policies apart
> last August have been cowed into silence for months
> now.
>
> Bush has personally used 9/11 to earn laughs at the
> expense of the dead, and to make some fast cash for the
> Republican Party. On no less than eight occasions, Bush
> has made his "trifecta" joke before fawning GOP
> audiences. Based on a reported campaign 2000 promise
> that he would not raid social security or enter deficit
> spending unless the rise of war, recession or national
> emergency, Bush has since 9/11 remarked that he "hit
> the trifecta" and was safe to crack open the taxpayer
> piggy bank. The joke never failed to earn laughs from
> the crowd. It was recently revealed that the GOP was
> selling photos of Bush's activities on September 11th
> as a fundraising gimmick, an act that Al Gore has
> labeled "disgraceful."
>
> The idea that Bush allowed 9/11 to happen for his own
> gain is difficult to swallow, and even more difficult
> to prove. As things stand today, however, the evidence
> and information in hand is damning enough. The Bush
> administration was repeatedly warned by foreign
> intelligence services of immediate threats via aircraft
> to American targets. FBI agents in Phoenix had more
> evidence in hand, which was ignored. Bush himself was
> warned of Al Qaida hijack threats, but failed to
> augment airline security. Vice President Cheney lied on
> national television about having received these
> warnings, and Ari Fleischer has been bolstering this
> lie with many of his own since the story broke. Add
> this to already-existing reports that the
> administration stood down its anti-terrorism forces
> many months ago out of concern that such investigative
> activities might offend a variety of oil-rich nations.
> This stand-down came on the eve of the conclusion of a
> major deal involving a natural gas pipeline through the
> Subcontinent that was sponsored by Unocal.
>
> This much is certain: The Bush administration, the FBI,
> and the CIA failed utterly to act upon readily
> available warnings regarding September 11th. Bush
> himself owns this failure. Not only must he answer for
> this, but he must also become the Number One Advocate
> for a far-reaching Congressional investigation into the
> attacks, and into the failure of his administration and
> its intelligence services to address the threat. He
> must stop making jokes about trifectas, and he must
> stop selling photographs of himself depicting the
> moment of his greatest shame. Thousands of Americans
> are dead, thousands of civilians in Afghanistan are
> dead, and thousands more may follow in Iraq. Now, we
> know why.
>
> (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section
> 107, this material is distributed without profit to
> those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving
> the included information for research and educational
> purposes.)
>
> © : t r u t h o u t 2002
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
> http://launch.yahoo.com
>
>
> portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a
> news, discussion and debate service of the Committees
> of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It
> aims to provide varied material of interest to people
> on the left.
>
> Post : mail to [log in to unmask]
> Subscribe : mail to [log in to unmask]
> Unsubscribe : mail to [log in to unmask]
> List owner : [log in to unmask]
> Web address : <http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/portside>
> Digest mode : visit Web site
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
> ------- End of forwarded message -------