“Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”

[maddog42]

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html

"On July 9, at a meeting of the counterterrorism group, one official suggested that the staff put in for a transfer so that somebody else would be responsible when the attack took place, two people who were there told me in interviews."

This is the most damning article I have read about Bush and 911. The neocon group didn't believe the CIA.

[ArlJim78]

It never ends.

[PaceAdvantage]

It had been widely known bin Laden had been determined to attack the US ever since it had become known that bin Laden was a wanted terrorist...which was WAY BEFORE that memo...

Nowhere in the article does it even imply that any SPECIFICS to these planned attacks were ever known beforehand to any US intelligence agency, so what exactly was the White House to do with such limited time and such generalized information? Drop the big safety net over the US that hangs in the sky?

Everything put in place since to thwart attacks has taken Congressional approval and massive amounts of MONEY.

Tell me what you think Bush could have done in response to these memos that would have given him a chance to stop these attacks before they happened.

[lsbets]

Tell me what you think Bush could have done in response to these memos that would have given him a chance to stop these attacks before they happened.

He could have attacked a night watchman at an aspirin factory.

[horses4courses]

Tell me what you think Bush could have done in response to these memos that would have given him a chance to stop these attacks before they happened.

Hindsight always makes these situations seem so different.
I blame Bush for causing many problems, but there's no way that he could have foreseen the 9/11 attacks.

[Tom]

Blame the security guy at Logan who left one of them get on the plane when he should not have.

[maddog42]

I agree that hindsight is always 20/20. I don't know what he could have done.
The suspicious actions at the flight training school had already came to light.
But when counter-terrorist people are SO SURE they are thinking of resigning
to avoid blame, then it makes me wonder what could have been done. Maybe nothing. It just pisses me off we were so close to stopping theses guys.

[cj's dad]

If only Cigar Bill had taken up the offer from the Sudanese government 9/11 may be just another day in September.

On Tape, Clinton Admits Passing Up bin Laden Capture; Lewinsky Played Role






http://archive.newsmax.com/images/spacer.gif
Bill Clinton denies it now, but he once admitted he passed up an opportunity to extradite Osama bin Laden.

And NewsMax has the former President making the claim on audiotape. [You can listen to the tape yourself] -- Click Here (http://archive.newsmax.com/audio/BILLVH.mp3)

[maddog42]

If only Cigar Bill had taken up the offer from the Sudanese government 9/11 may be just another day in September.

On Tape, Clinton Admits Passing Up bin Laden Capture; Lewinsky Played Role






http://archive.newsmax.com/images/spacer.gif
Bill Clinton denies it now, but he once admitted he passed up an opportunity to extradite Osama bin Laden.

And NewsMax has the former President making the claim on audiotape. [You can listen to the tape yourself] -- Click Here (http://archive.newsmax.com/audio/BILLVH.mp3)


According to fact check.org about Clinton turning down offer from Sudanese government:

Ultimately, however, it doesn’t matter. What is not in dispute at all is the fact that, in early 1996, American officials regarded Osama bin Laden as a financier of terrorism and not as a mastermind largely because, at the time, there was no real evidence that bin Laden had harmed American citizens. So even if the Sudanese government really did offer to hand bin Laden over, the U.S. would have had no grounds for detaining him. In fact, the Justice Department did not secure an indictment (http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html) against bin Laden until 1998 – at which point Clinton did order a cruise missile attack on an al Qaeda camp in an attempt to kill bin Laden.

Quite a bit different story when we get around to real facts and circumstances and dates.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/clinton-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/

[dartman51]

According to fact check.org about Clinton turning down offer from Sudanese government:

Ultimately, however, it doesn’t matter. What is not in dispute at all is the fact that, in early 1996, American officials regarded Osama bin Laden as a financier of terrorism and not as a mastermind largely because, at the time, there was no real evidence that bin Laden had harmed American citizens. So even if the Sudanese government really did offer to hand bin Laden over, the U.S. would have had no grounds for detaining him. In fact, the Justice Department did not secure an indictment (http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1998/11/98110602_nlt.html) against bin Laden until 1998 – at which point Clinton did order a cruise missile attack on an al Qaeda camp in an attempt to kill bin Laden.

Quite a bit different story when we get around to real facts and circumstances and dates.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/01/clinton-passed-on-killing-bin-laden/

If you haven't figured it out yet, FACTCHECK.ORG, is NOT the most reliable source around. Just the parts that I put in BOLD, should tell you that. Saying "even if the Sudanese government really did" indicates that they are saying that it didn't really happen, but IF it really did, it wouldn't matter. If they had stated "Even though, the Sudanese government offered Bin Laden to the U.S., they had no grounds to take him or hold him", THAT would have been a TRUE statement. Bill Clinton admitted as much, yet these clowns still don't believe it. :ThmbUp:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wvo2lQe81xk

[Tom]

We may have had no grounds to hold him, but we had good reason to kill him.
Hold him hell, just kill the mutha and be done with it. See what playing by the rules gets you?

Lessons learned - mess with us, you die. No questions asked.

[maddog42]

You seem very at ease with killing people with no evidence. That was the situation in 1996. Hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? Maybe the REPUBLICANS are the party of hate? Kill people. Ask questions later. In this situation you would have been right. In many cases you would have been wrong.

[GameTheory]

You seem very at ease with killing people with no evidence. That was the situation in 1996. Hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? Maybe the REPUBLICANS are the party of hate? Kill people. Ask questions later. In this situation you would have been right. In many cases you would have been wrong.The exact tactic that Obama has taken in his term to avoid questions of detainment, interrogation, etc etc. He just has drones kill all the targets, never capture.

[maddog42]

Don't ask me to defend Obama's drone policy or Bush's or Clintons. Every one of them has killed innocent people.

[GameTheory]

Don't ask me to defend Obama's drone policy or Bush's or Clintons. Every one of them has killed innocent people.
Then don't single out the REPUBLICANS as the party of hate that likes to kill people...

[newtothegame]

Then don't single out the REPUBLICANS as the party of hate that likes to kill people...
Game, mad will only single out the rethugs as it doesnt fit the agenda....
thread open points directly at Bush but neglects to talk about all the other presidents and their killing of innocents and untried people...but, its ok. Let mad beleive as he wishes....:lol:

[delayjf]

Osama bin Laden as a financier of terrorism

Wouldn't that amount to just cause?

[maddog42]

Game, mad will only single out the rethugs as it doesnt fit the agenda....
thread open points directly at Bush but neglects to talk about all the other presidents and their killing of innocents and untried people...but, its ok. Let mad beleive as he wishes....:lol:

Thanks for letting me believe as I wish....I am being honest. This thread is about competency in defending this country. When the antiterrorist branch of the CIA is so convinced that there will be a Major terrorist attack in the next few months and are so convinced they are thinking of transferring to another branch and the President doesn't believe you or at least decides to do nothing, well you have a problem. I don't really know if this is a failure of nerve, judgement, or a bureaucratic snafu, but it seems that someone could have put 2 and 2 together.

These people were "apoplectic ". In case you don't know that means "to lose consciousness as if by a stroke". They repeatedly warned Bush and the neocons and were aghast that nothing was being done. The Bush administration conveniently did not release this info. If this had been Obama
you would be forming torch carrying lynch mobs around the white house.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think you should stick with your core belief that the reason Bush didn't do anything was because he/they wanted something like 9/11 to happen in order to further the neocon desire to launch an attack against Iraq.

Why not just come out and say it?

[newtothegame]

Thanks for letting me believe as I wish....I am being honest. This thread is about competency in defending this country. When the antiterrorist branch of the CIA is so convinced that there will be a Major terrorist attack in the next few months and are so convinced they are thinking of transferring to another branch and the President doesn't believe you or at least decides to do nothing, well you have a problem. I don't really know if this is a failure of nerve, judgement, or a bureaucratic snafu, but it seems that someone could have put 2 and 2 together.

These people were "apoplectic ". In case you don't know that means "to lose consciousness as if by a stroke". They repeatedly warned Bush and the neocons and were aghast that nothing was being done. The Bush administration conveniently did not release this info. If this had been Obama
you would be forming torch carrying lynch mobs around the white house.
You are aware of what they say about people who have to say "I am being honest" right????
Then you lead in with your second sentence about competency in leading this country.....OMG (you did not just say that with this current pos sitting pres)???
Libya and Egypt today tore down our embassies and burned them if I read right......I know though...he is competent based on the fact he went to harvard right????

[Tom]

You seem very at ease with killing people with no evidence. That was the situation in 1996. Hindsight is 20/20 isn't it? Maybe the REPUBLICANS are the party of hate? Kill people. Ask questions later. In this situation you would have been right. In many cases you would have been wrong.

It was blatantly obvious in 1972 - the Olympics - that you kill terrorists whenever you see them. You NEVER extend justice to terrorists. You obliterate them, and anyone who supports them.

[maddog42]

You are aware of what they say about people who have to say "I am being honest" right????
Then you lead in with your second sentence about competency in leading this country.....OMG (you did not just say that with this current pos sitting pres)???
Libya and Egypt today tore down our embassies and burned them if I read right......I know though...he is competent based on the fact he went to harvard right????


I was being honest about Obama having killed innocent people with drone strikes. This was supposed to elicit the response from you guys that "maybe Bush could have done more to prevent 911". Fat chance.

[maddog42]

I think you should stick with your core belief that the reason Bush didn't do anything was because he/they wanted something like 9/11 to happen in order to further the neocon desire to launch an attack against Iraq.

Why not just come out and say it?

This is not my core belief. Only a monster would let something like that happen to further a political agenda.

[maddog42]

This articles main theme was:


"Could the 9/11 attack have been stopped, had the Bush team reacted with urgency to the warnings contained in all of those daily briefs? We can’t ever know. And that may be the most agonizing reality of all."


Also, not all of those briefings have been released. What else is being with held from our viewing? Those are really good questions. No real answers yet.

[PaceAdvantage]

This is not my core belief. Only a monster would let something like that happen to further a political agenda.Please accept my apology then. I was wrong.

It does seem though that this is an underlying current to many of these "Bush could have done something but didn't," especially when the word "Neocon" is thrown in for good measure.

[Tom]

How many security briefings has Oblamea blown off so far.....

[NJ Stinks]

How many security briefings has Oblamea blown off so far.....

That's it. It's official. You are a political posting headache. No objectivity. No restraint.

No doubt it just slays you that Obama has kept us safe while Bush ignored the warnings. Goes against whatever fairytale you've conjured up in your head.

[Tom]

That's it. It's official. You are a political posting headache. No objectivity. No restraint.

No doubt it just slays you that Obama has kept us safe while Bush ignored the warnings. Goes against whatever fairytale you've conjured up in your head.

You must have missed the news today.

Do I need to list the numerous attacks on us under Billy the Zipper's reign of perversion? DO I need to remind you the 9/11 plot developed on our shores under the Zipster?

While you are at it, ask your boy where were the marines?
How many shots did they fire?

[ElKabong]

Heard on NPR on the way home that the attack on our embassy in Libya was a planned attack targeted on the anniversary of 9/11.

edited..., after reading ArlJim's "Today's Headlines" thread. Maybe the OP should chime in there.