Skip to main content

View Diary: Condi Lied: Declassified Memo from Clarke (416 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Again confirms my suspicions (4.00)
    That there is a deliberate "ignorance" which characterizes the Bush administration's knowlege of a potential 9-11.  I am uneasy about what we don't know, the role of Dick Cheney, heck, even the seismic evidence on the day it happened.

    Please see

    Thanks for this post.  Connecting the dots!

    •  See also the Case Against Cheney (4.00)
      in previous diary about Bush ignoring the signs of 9/11.

    •  No! (4.00)
      Maybe making an expensive and ineffective missile shield your number one defense priority pre-9/11 could be described as some kind "deliberate ignorance."

      But ignoring trans-national entities like al-Qaeda is a symptom of the neo-cons' ideology, not a sign of some nefarious plan to allow thousands of innocent deaths.

      There is blame to be assigned when it comes to Bush and 9/11-- but suggesting a complicity, even a pissive one, in the attacks is complete lunacy!  It distracts attention away from the actual failings of the administration and makes us all look crazy.

      I made a similar post down-thread, but this 9/11 tinfoil hattery is a real pet peeve of mine.  Sorry for the repitition.

      "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

      by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 06:34:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  "i" instead of "e" (none)
        except after a long day and too many cups of coffee.

        -"passive" not "pissive"

        -"repetition" not "repitition"

        "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

        by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 06:37:12 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  "new Pearl Harbor" (none)
        Does that phrase ring a bell?
        •  how about the original Pearl Harbor. (4.00)
          It's widely known that FDR wanted to take a more active role in the European theatre from '39-'41, but felt that public opinion would not support American involvement unless there was a more immediate threat.

          Does that mean that FDR planned or was in any way complicit in the original Pearl Harbor?  

          I hate Bush's foreign policy-- but if you're going to convince me that an American president took an active part in killing 3,000 innocent American civilians, you better have more than 3 words in a right-wing think tank piece.

          "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

          by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:05:17 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I suggest you read the Commanders (none)
            by Bob Woodward. I no longer have a copy but in the intro or first chapter I remember someone in the first Bush adminstration saying that if you want to get into a war, the best way is to be attacked first...wish I had the book, I would post the exact quote.
            •  Again, (none)
              FDR felt the same way about American involvement in WWII.  It doesn't prove anything and distracts from their actual culpability.

              "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

              by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:37:02 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Pearl Harbor (none)
                In fact, FDR and his advisors were certain that the Japanese would attack US forces at some point.  They knew the Japanese fleet had left harbor and was on a mission.  There were four probable targets, Pearl Harbor being one of them.  I forget the other three, sorry (It's been ages since I read the relevant history books and wrote a college paper on the alleged conspiracy), but I think they were all US bases in the Pacific.  

                Short version of the story is that yes, there is some reason to believe that FDR & Co. knew there was an attack coming at Pearl Harbor and did nothing to warn the local commanders about it.  The local forces were only told to be on alert for sabotage.  The result was that all the ships were in the docks, all the planes were parked close together on the airstrips, etc., and the damage was far greater than it would have been if they had been on alert.

                I haven't read the recently-published book by Stinnett, Day of Deceit, but I understand he found some new info through FOIA that bolsters the conspiracy theory.

                Regardless of whether or not this theory is true, it's crucially important to realize that many of these neocons believe in it, and much as they loathe FDR, they would surely emulate him if it meant they would be as successful as he was.

                So yeah, tinfoil-hatty though it may be, I'm coming around to thinking that there was some kind of administration complicity in 9/11.

          •  Show me (none)
            FDR's November 1941 PDB that says "Hirohito determined to attack United States" and I'll let you know.
            •  ARGGH! (4.00)
              The Aug 6th PDB proves the admin's incompetence!  It proves that they had a very state centered foreign policy view, and dismissed non-governmental threats like Islamic terrorism.  It does not prove any kind of governmental complicity in 9/11!

              Every time people here spout off these crazy and foundless conspiracy theories, it takes away from Bush's actual culpability and it makes all of us look like a bad X-files episode.  It's embarrassing.

              "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

              by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:35:32 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That was a frame (none)
                What part of the evidence on the newly declassified FAA warnings doesn't add up for you?

                WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 - In the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission.

                Among other things, the report says that leaders of the F.A.A. received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned Mr. bin Laden or Al Qaeda from April to Sept. 10, 2001. That represented half of all the intelligence summaries in that time.

                Five of the intelligence reports specifically mentioned Al Qaeda's training or capability to conduct hijackings, the report said.

                So, you would chalk the entire context of warnings, from Clarke's memo through the summer of hair on fire and right up to 9/10 to incompetence?  They must be the most incompetent mofos in history.

                •  "the most incompetent mofo's in history" (none)

                  But it also has to do with ideology.  Their neo-Realism was the reason that, initially, their main defense focus was on missile defense shields, ten years after the end of the cold war.  It also explains why they dismiss trans-national terrorism and even post-9/11 can't get past their focus on naion-states.  


                  "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

                  by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 08:07:48 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  This comparison is gratuitous and silly (4.00)
            That "right-wing think tank" now controls the federal government, if you haven't noticed. It is a cult, in the word of Sy Hersch, that has hijacked the United States.

            Did FDR belong to a group with a radical agenda before he was elected? Was his administration run essentially as a crime family with open contempt for the rule of law? Did he launch wars on lies? Did he have fifty warnings of Pearl Harbor before the attacks? Did he refuse to meet people who wanted to urgently warn him about the Japanese?

            You also have a specious straw man in the "3000" American citizens--one out of Bush's own mouth, when he said the fact that he didn't know the exact time, place and location of the attacks excused him from all responsibility.

            The claim that the White House was complicit need only go so far as to encompass an agreement to let a little terrorist attack take place. A few people, maybe another military target like the Cole or a plane hijacked in the traditional sense would certainly be "worth it" to Wolfowitz and Feith and Cheney. Too much happened on 9-11 that has yet to be explained. The idea is not proven but it is hardly ridiculous.

        •  Not In My Belfry (4.00)
          It does in the number of casualties--hence the personal tragedy--and in the sense of our being caught with our pants inexcusably down. But that's where the comparison stops.

          Pearl Harbor was attacked by the massed forces of an expanding empire. On 9/11, 4 buildings were hit with planes hijacked by a couple dozen individuals wielding knives.

          On 9/11, unarmed civilians brought down one of the planes, averting 25% of the attack. I don't think anything done on our side at Pearl Harbor saved a comparable fraction of damage.

          Pearl Harbor destroyed much of the U.S. Navy's functionality in the Pacific for several years and helped allow the Japanese Empire to expand. I've never heard that 9/11 caused any detectable damage to our ability to project force anywhere.

          1941 put us into a global war against allied empires that were well along into conquering serious fractions of two hemispheres. 9/11 threw us up against a few radicals who couldn't hold its 3rd world territory a month after we first hit back. There was so little war to fight against terror that we had time to start one against a disinterested nation.

          We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

          by Gooserock on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:36:29 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  look at the facts (none)
        and read the additional posts today on 9/11, fascism, etc.  Don't dismiss everyone who thinks something is going on here as tin foil.  Read the data in the links.
      •  Pretty Much Agree, WAmod (4.00)
        I'm willing to accept the possibility that folks in the administration looked the other way on and before 9/11, but I certainly see no proof of it so far. And Occam's Razor suggests that incompetence is a more likely explanation.  This administration is very good at political manipulation, but when it comes to actually implementing policy, they're terrible. Iraq is only the most obvious example of this.  What this tells me is that: a) incompetence is certainly a sufficient explanation for what happened on 9/11; b) if there had been an internal conspiracy to let 9/11 happen, more direct proof would have come out (though it would stil be dismissed as tinfoil hattery by the MSM).

        I guess the one place I part company with WAmod is in my attitude toward the 9/11 tinfoil hat brigades.  I don't agree with their view of 9/11, but I'm glad they're looking into it, and I'm open to being convinced they're right (though I'm not at all convinced yet).  They can also be politically useful, as they can help undermine the legitimacy of this presidency.  Every little bit counts!

        Start doing the things you think should be done, and start being what you think society should become. -Adam Michnik.

        by GreenSooner on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 07:49:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Tinfoil hat brigaes can also be harmful (4.00)
          By making it seem like anyone who thinks Bush is culpable for 9/11 in some sense (myself included) also subscribes to the nonsense that Bush ordered the attacks himself.

          That's my main peeve with the whole thing, I think it's a distraction and hinderance to the real argument against the administration.

          "If immortality is found in the absence of time rather than infinite stretches of time, then those who live in the present live forever."

          by WAmod on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 08:35:53 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  occams razor (4.00)
          suggests complicity not incompetence to me, since to accept incompetence means that these warnings were misread and misunderstood in fundamental and nonsensical ways. These were not a few minor or vague warnings: these were multiple, explicit, highlevel, red alert warnings from numerous ualified sources over an extended period of time: and nothing really significant, save Ashcroft using a private plane, was done in response.
        •  Parting company . . . (none)
          You do more than part company from WAmod at "one place" -- Yours is an open-minded viewpoint; WAmod's is closed.

          I don't consider myself outside of anything. I just consider myself not around . . . Bob Dylan

          by ponderer on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 09:23:45 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  People are going to get sick (4.00)
          of seeing this, but to me the stumbling point is with NORAD.  Why weren't the planes put up after the hijacked planes?  They were in the air within about 10 minutes when Payne Stewart's plane quit responding.  I don't let my thoughts stray there too often but, when they do, it seems more likely this admin just let it happen.

          Speaking the truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act. - Orwell

          by TracieLynn on Thu Feb 10, 2005 at 09:37:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  you are confalting issues (4.00)
        here with regards to prior knowledge, intent, complicity, and downright top-down conspiracy, and would suggest you see at the bottom of this diary's

        thread an attempt by me to show why most people still cannot seem to walk and chew gum at the same time (i.e. think critically) when it comes to so-called "conspiracy theories"

        It is not all tinfoil vs. n-tinfoil: there are many shades of grey between

    •  Upton Sinclair said... (none)
      "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site