Condoleezza Rice Was "Bombarded" with Warnings Before 9/11, Commission Biased Ag

[Attero Dominatus]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2975411

The tinfoil is strong in this one.

marmar  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 08:42 AM
Original message
Condoleezza Rice Was "Bombarded" with Warnings Before 9/11, Commission Biased Against Clarke   Updated at 10:49 AM
   
Advertisements [?]
from AlterNet's PEEK:



Condoleezza Rice Was "Bombarded" with Warnings Before 9/11, Commission Biased Against Clarke

Posted by Faiz Shakir, Think Progress at 5:28 AM on March 8, 2008.

9/11 Commission staff director Philip Zelikow was not interested in pursuing criticisms against Rice.



New York Times reporter Philip Shenon’s new book — The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation — paints a damning portrait of Condoleezza Rice. Shenon argues that Rice was “uninterested in actually advising the President,” but was instead more concerned with being his “closest confidante — specifically on foreign policy — and to simply translate his words into action.”

Today’s Sydney Morning Herald prints an extract from Shenon’s book which provides further details about Rice’s incompetence. “Emails from the National Security Council’s counter-terrorism director, Richard Clarke, showed that he had bombarded Rice with messages about terrorist threats” before 9/11, Shenon writes. Some examples:

“Bin Ladin Public Profile May Presage Attack” (May 3)

“Terrorist Groups Said Co-operating on US Hostage Plot” (May 23)

“Bin Ladin’s Networks’ Plans Advancing” (May 26)

“Bin Ladin Attacks May Be Imminent” (June 23)

“Bin Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats” (June 25)

“Bin Ladin Planning High-Profile Attacks” (June 30)

“Planning for Bin Ladin Attacks Continues, Despite Delays” (July 2)


But 9/11 Commission staff director Philip Zelikow was not interested in pursuing criticisms against Rice. Zelikow — who had worked closely with Rice on the Bush transition team in 2000 and 2001 — “made it clear to the team’s investigators that Clarke should not be believed, that his testimony would be suspect.”

When 9/11 Commission historian Warren Bass uncovered a smoking gun email from Clarke to Rice written on September 4, 2001, which asked, “Are we serious about dealing with the al-Qaeda threat?,” Zelikow reverted to defending Condi. Bass then threatened to resign:

“I cannot do this,” Bass declared… “Zelikow is making me crazy.”

He was outraged by Zelikow and the White House; Bass felt the White House was trying to sabotage his work by its efforts to limit his ability to see certain documents from the NSC files and take useful notes from them. … Bass made it clear to colleagues that he believed Zelikow was interfering in his work for reasons that were overtly political - intended to shield the White House, and Rice in particular, from the commission’s criticism.


The former weapons inspector in Iraq — David Kay — passed word to the 9/11 Commission that he believed Rice was the “worst national security adviser” in the history of the job.


http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/79059 /



Refresh | 75 Recommendations    Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

joshdawg  Donating Member  (285 posts) Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
1. 9/11
   
Is anyone surprised about this?
If bush and his gang of thugs did not plan for this to happen, they did nothing to stop it. The only things with them were their hatred for Clinton and also their grab for power. Nothing else interested them. Don't bother them with possible terrorist threats, they are too busy screwing the American public for monetary and political gain.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Echo In Light  (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sun Mar-09-08 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
55. Heads-Up To Ashcroft Proves Threat Was Known Before 9/11
   
Heads-Up To Ashcroft Proves Threat Was Known Before 9/11
by Harley Sorensen

Don't let them fool you, folks: They knew.

They might have been surprised by the ferocity of the attacks, but the highest-ranking members of the George W. Bush administration knew before Sept. 11 that something terrible was going to happen soon.

Bush knew something was going to happen involving airplanes. He just didn't know what or exactly when. His attorney general, John Ashcroft, knew. His national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, knew. They all knew.

And, in spite of its apparent ineptness, the FBI knew, too.

Not only did they all know, but they told us. Obliquely. And we didn't pay attention. Why would we? Then, as now, terrorist threats were a dime a dozen.

Is this my opinion? No, it's published fact.

On July 26, 2001, cbsnews.com reported that John Ashcroft had stopped flying on commercial airlines.

Ashcroft used to fly commercial, just as Janet Reno did. So why, two months before Sept. 11, did he start taking chartered government planes?

CBS News correspondent Jim Stewart asked the Justice Department.

Because of a "threat assessment" by the FBI, he was told. But "neither the FBI nor the Justice Department ... would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it," CBS News reported.

The FBI did advise Ashcroft to stay off commercial aircraft. The rest of us just had to take our chances.

The FBI obviously knew something was in the wind. Why else would it have Ashcroft use a $1,600-plus per hour G-3 Gulfstream when he could have flown commercial, as he always did before, for a fraction of the cost?

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0603-06.htm
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

BerryBush  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I myself have always said "Never attribute to treacherous plottting what can be attributed to sheer
   
incompetence."

But you do pose an interesting question.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

From Bush allowing it to Bush causing and now incompetence. Which delusion is it going to be DUmbasses?

texshelters  (119 posts) Click to send private message to this author  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
35. Yes
   
In 2004 as "Tex Shelters, Billionaire for Bush" I would taunt young Republican who told be that he felt safer with Bush in the White House by stating the obvious (to me at least): Bush was president when we were attacked and he ignored the warnings and didn't prevent the tragedy. Then I would ask, "Now, why do you feel safer with Bush as President?" They of course, had no answer. It's sad that so many patriots like Pat Tillman lost their lives in a war based on a lie and incompetency.

Tex
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Beam Me Up  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
14. When I'm incompetent, I loose. I'm held accountable in some way.
   
Maybe it is a personal loss of prestige or money or simply failure to achieve an aim. But when the Bush gang are "incompetent," they win -- big time. Money, power, prestige -- and they are never "held accountable" to anyone or anything. Go figure.

Yes, I agree, the recent emergence of all this "incompetence theory," as criminally negligent as it is, still keeps the lid on the cover-up. It wasn't "negligence" that brought down the twin towers and building seven. It wasn't "negligence" that underfunded and misdirected the 9/11 Commission. It wasn't "negligence" that gave us a flight 77 data recorder with data that does NOT match the physical damage path at the Pentagon. 9/11 was a false-flag terror event and it is long past time the truth finally got through.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Progs Rock  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sun Mar-09-08 04:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
46. Yep. Not new, though. OCTabots have been pumping that one for years.
   
"Willful incompetence" is more precise.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

seemslikeadream  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 07:03 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. All this can remain buried for just so long
   
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

leveymg  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
21. My concern with this account is that t downplays the warnngs given directly to Bush
   
Edited on Sat Mar-08-08 05:48 PM by leveymg
by Tenet, who saw Bush almost every day, including a specal trip to Texas in mid-August.

Bush knew. He's ultmately responsible.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

marmar  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Even with rational, skeptical people - myself included - there's a cognitive dissonance with 9/11...   Updated at 10:49 AM
   
.... Contemplating that our government, no matter how rancid BushCo is, could have intentionally allowed or even orchestrated the attacks is too much to deal with, despite the gaping holes in the official story.

   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Gonnuts  Donating Member  (376 posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. "... to much to deal with..."
   
What exactly is "too much to deal with"? If it's real and you deal with it or you're a coward. I don't mean to be harsh or demeaning but it's not like 9/11 isn't important and must be dealt with. Running from it just because one "can't deal with it" simply isn't good enough.

And not only is it not being dealt with, those that are questioning it are now being targeted and this is simply intolerable. This is when people should stand up and not remain silent. This is not a time to be squeamish.

And as I mentioned it's not like our government hasn't committed horrendous crimes before, so please, what makes you not believe they wouldn't do it this time? This is what I don't get? If you know they're liars and murders why believe what they tell you concerning 9/11?
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

marmar  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sat Mar-08-08 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. I don't disagree with you....and I've gotten over it BTW.   Updated at 10:49 AM
   
I've accepted that what we've been told is a lie.

   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

Gonnuts  Donating Member  (376 posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sun Mar-09-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #53
58. When pigs fly ...
   
Thinking the M$M is going to tell us the truth about 9/11 is like thinking a mob lawyer will stand-up in court and declare their mob-boss client guilty of all crimes - won't happen. It's unfortunate but most don't realize just how corrupt our entire system has become, the press, judges, legislators, up and down the line are compromised.

And for anyone that says you couldn't have thousands of people involved in a crime of this magnitude I point to Nazi Germany where thousands of people murdered millions of people over several years and no one would have found out about that if we hadn't won the war.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

jeff30997  (1000+ posts) Journal  Click to send private message to this author  Click to view this author's profile  Click to add this author to your buddy list  Click to add this author to your Ignore list      Sun Mar-09-08 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
61. LIHOP!
   
Big time.
   Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top

[Chris_]

Some local moonbats scraped up enough couch-cushion change to have "Loose Change" run on the community access cable channel at 1:00 this morning.  Looks like they weren't the only ones.

Makes me want to open up a theater and show moonbat-only movies.  A fool and his money are soon parted.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

So far at DU we have, in the same weekend:

A) There's no such thing as the al Qaeda

B) There is al Qaeda, but Bush knew and didn't do anything

C) There is al Qaeda, but Bush didn't know because Condi never took it seriously

D) There is al Qaeda, but they are a Frankenstein's monster coming to get us...blowback dontcha know

E) There is al Qaeda but they were framed because Bush really blew-up the towers himself


Did I miss anything?

[Attero Dominatus]

So far at DU we have, in the same weekend:

A) There's no such thing as the al Qaeda

B) There is al Qaeda, but Bush knew and didn't do anything

C) There is al Qaeda, but Bush didn't know because Condi never took it seriously

D) There is al Qaeda, but they are a Frankenstein's monster coming to get us...blowback dontcha know

E) There is al Qaeda but they were framed because Bush really blew-up the towers himself


Did I miss anything?

The only one the DUmmies forgot is the theory that the illuminati did it.

[Bondai]

Why are they on the 9-11 stuff again? Bored? or looking for impeachment fodder?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

The only one the DUmmies forgot is the theory that the illuminati did it.

bush = neocons = illuminati

So it's intrinsically covered.

[Carl]

DUmmies have to deny the plain and obvious truth about 9/11 because it refutes every last element of their belief system.

They believe the most important thing in America is providing their individual personal wants....9/11 proves there is a national threat that overides personal desires.

They believe that America and capitalism are the only forces of evil in the world....9/11 proves that true evil is out there and is our enemy because we are good.

They believe that they are uniquely oppressed and persecuted for their socialist views....9/11 opened our eyes to what true persecusion and oppression is from a totalitarian,fanatical system.

They believe that there is no need for a military and that the money for defense should be spent on their personal wishes....9/11 showed that there is a constant threat to the USA and that we need a strong military.

They believe that it is wrong to have a love for our country and for the freedoms we share because of it....9/11 and the aftermath showed that they are wrong about that and therefore they have worked tirelessly to ridicule any sign of patriotism displayed.

They believe that we deserve to be hated....9/11 showed that there are those in the world who agree and are willing to kill in that belief.

September 11 2001 exposed that everything they believe in is wrong or misguided and they have spent every waking moment in the last 7 1/2 years trying to blur that through lies and distortions.

[Chris_]

What fools and assholes these people are.

Before 9/11 there were literally billions of pieces of data suggesting all kinds of possible attacks of all kinds of targets.   Even if (big IF) some snippets of 9/11 slipped through, there ws never a single, solid picture of what would happen on 9/11.

And, of course, 9/11 was the result of cigar-boy's premature withdrawal from Somalia and was completely planned during his terms.

If intelligence was so easy to come by and understand, how come bubba didn't take any action to stop it, since it was already well underway well before his administration?  And what about the first WTC attacks -- there wasn't any warning at all?  How about the Cole? Cold-cocked again? 

And let's not forget who was HANDED UBL and demurred.

Revisionist history -- the first act of the last-witted.