“They Let It Happen”

Cross posted from The Stars Hollow Gazette

Many of us who doubted the 9/11 Commission Report was really the whole truth. Just the fact that they had President George W. Bush and his Vice President, Dick Cheney, interviewed together, in secrecy and not under oath, diminished the commissions credibility for those of us who were expressing our doubts about the attack. In some places, any question or discussion was too controversial about 9/11, was labeled “conspiracy theory” and further discussion was banned. Even linking to sites or articles as forbidden. But like all skeletons that get locked in the closet, someone gets curious and the door gets opened. Yesterday, on its Op-Ed page, The New York Times took a giant leap toward revealing some of the truth many had called “conspiracy theory.”

We already know about the August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) but what was in earlier PDB’s. Surely this wasn’t the first one. Apparently it was not but it was the last and final warning that the Bush administration dismissed.

On the eve of the eleventh anniversary of September 11, Kurt Eichenwald, author of the new book 500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars and contributing editor of Vanity Fair, wrote this article:

   The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

   But some in the administration considered the warning to be just bluster. An intelligence official and a member of the Bush administration both told me in interviews that the neoconservative leaders who had recently assumed power at the Pentagon were warning the White House that the C.I.A. had been fooled; according to this theory, Bin Laden was merely pretending to be planning an attack to distract the administration from Saddam Hussein, whom the neoconservatives saw as a greater threat. Intelligence officials, these sources said, protested that the idea of Bin Laden, an Islamic fundamentalist, conspiring with Mr. Hussein, an Iraqi secularist, was ridiculous, but the neoconservatives’ suspicions were nevertheless carrying the day.

   In response, the C.I.A. prepared an analysis that all but pleaded with the White House to accept that the danger from Bin Laden was real. [..]

In the aftermath of 9/11, Bush officials attempted to deflect criticism that they had ignored C.I.A. warnings by saying they had not been told when and where the attack would occur. That is true, as far as it goes, but it misses the point. Throughout that summer, there were events that might have exposed the plans, had the government been on high alert. Indeed, even as the Aug. 6 brief was being prepared, Mohamed al-Kahtani, a Saudi believed to have been assigned a role in the 9/11 attacks, was stopped at an airport in Orlando, Fla., by a suspicious customs agent and sent back overseas on Aug. 4. Two weeks later, another co-conspirator, Zacarias Moussaoui, was arrested on immigration charges in Minnesota after arousing suspicions at a flight school. But the dots were not connected, and Washington did not react.

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.

We have known since the Clinton administration that the neoconservatives had wanted Sadaam Hussein overthrown. In 1998, the now defunct Project for the New American Century audaciously sent an open letter to President Clinton urging him to attack Iraq. The signers of that letter were the same men and women that were embraced by the Bush regime, some of whom (highlighted) are advising the Romney campaign:

Elliott Abrams    Richard L. Armitage    William J. Bennett  Jeffrey Bergner  John Bolton    Paula Dobriansky   Francis Fukuyama    Robert Kagan    Zalmay Khalilzad   William Kristol    Richard Perle    Peter W. Rodman   Donald Rumsfeld    William Schneider, Jr.  Vin Weber   Paul Wolfowitz    R. James Woolsey    Robert B. Zoellick

And these lying war hawks haven’t gone away. They have once again reemerged emboldened by the prospect of a malleable Republican president to ramp up the possibility of attacking Iran on the false premise that they are trying to build a nuclear weapon. In fact, Republican presidential nominee, Mitt Romney has surrounded himself with many of the same people to advise his campaign on military and foreign affairs.

It is clearer now that the Bush administration, surrounded by the neoconservative hawks who were urging attacking Iraq, knew and ignored the warnings about Al Qaeda. It is obvious from what we know now about the run up to the war in Iraq, that the neocons got what they wanted then and are now determined to push the world into another war, this time with Iran.

The facts remain, whether or not the Bush regime disregard of the warnings and intelligence from the CIA was intentional or just out of pure willful ignorance, they let the attack happen.  


Skip to comment form

  1. TMC
  2. Lasthorseman

    thermite, molten steel,”We decided to “pull it.” cellphone capabilities in 2001, voice morphing technology, Elvis Bin Laden, Russia invades Afghanistan, Mossadegh, Operations Northwoods, Paperclip plus a certain grassy knoll in Dallas Texas.

    Also in my years upon years of woods camping I have developed ways to smelt a 30 pack of beer on the evening campire but office paper?  Glazed official pages touting the wonders of Wall Street?  Does not burn, smothers the fire.

  3. banger

    That is was an intel operation–though I don’t know who was responsible. It is possible it was not a matter of U.S. policy but the result of a faction within the intel community that interacts with other intel agencies probably the Saudis, Pakistanis and Israelis.

    Have you see the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth new movie? It offers pretty convincing evidence (particularly since the gov’t presented no evidence for their story–just speculation as per NIST report) of controlled demolition of the three WTC buildings that fell. This is a big stumbling block for many people because such a thing seems, on the surface, so impossible–yet, the evidence is there and no one that I know of has refuted most of the points made in the movie.

    Regardless whether the let it happen or inside job theories we need an investigation. Once a certain baseline of facts can be established and people are allowed to debate the issue the truth will come out. This event is, I believe, equal in importance to the Civil War. Before 9/11, the Constitution was embattled–the Republic not standing to tall, but after 9/11 no Constitution and no Republic. What we have instead is an imperial system that increasingly rules by decree and has a blatantly corrupt political, security and judicial system that delivers remedies only to those that can pay a toll. All “made-men” (and women?) are invulnerable to prosecution for even major crimes. This is a reality. While, in the old days, these people always had preferential treatment they were not immune from prosecution.

    Of course, that’s not to say that life can’t be great, just that we no longer live in the country we claim to live in.

  4. tahoebasha3

    So, so many of us have been following this “incredible” story for a long time now.  Thanks for mentioning the Project for the New American Century and the letter to Bill Clinton, respecting a necessary “attack” on Iraq and regime change.

    To go a bit further, looking at the Statement of Principles of the PNAC, you will note the following signatories to the stated purposes of the PNAC, as of June 3, 1997 (not to be a copycat).  

    Elliott Abrams  Gary Bauer  William J. Bennett  Jeb Bush

    Dick Cheney  Eliot A. Cohen    Midge Decter  Paula Dobriansky    Steve Forbes

    Aaron Friedberg    Francis Fukuyama    Frank Gaffney    Fred C. Ikle

    Donald Kagan    Zalmay KhalilzadI. Lewis Libby   Norman Podhoretz

    Dan Quayle    Peter W. Rodman    Stephen P. Rosen    Henry S. Rowen

    Donald Rumsfeld    Vin Weber    George Weigel    Paul Wolfowitz

    and any names I may not have emboldened that should have been.  

    My personal assessment is that there was a willful and deliberate disregard of the warnings and intel that was afforded the Bush Administration. I so recall Richard Clarke’s (the counter-terrorism expert) tremendous frustration in trying to get anyone in the Bush Adm. to even listen to him.


  5. banger

    How do you explain the building collapses (of course there are many other bizarro mysteries surrounding 9/11)? I say this in light of a pretty air-tight explanation of the the building collapses by 1600 Architects and Engineers–new film: http://911expertsspeakout.org/. If there are counter arguments to these people (other than the usual “they’re crazy”) I’d like to hear them. You have to account for the very anomalous events that occurred that day.

    BTW, I don’t believe “the government” ran the operation–I believe it was part of the black-op community that appears to operate independently from the U.S. government that includes a healthy supply of “terrorists.” I have many reasons for believing this.

  6. tahoebasha3

    While, in the old days, these people always had preferential treatment they were not immune from prosecution.

     Except, perhaps, the CIA!

    I had quoted this article elsewhere, but I’m going to include a portion of that article here.

    A Congenital Structural Fault in CIA

    It was an unfortunate accident of history that, after World War II, covert action operatives were given a home in a CIA created by President Harry Truman for a completely different purpose – to give him prompt, no-holds-barred intelligence analysis and prevent another surprise attack like Pearl Harbor. The State Department’s George Kennan, on the other hand, wanted to create a strong capability to checkmate the U.S.S.R. by covert action, including overthrowing governments (known today as “regime change”).

    Kennan and his supporters cleverly shoehorned the covert operations function and its practitioners into the CIA by inserting one sentence into the National Security Act of 1947. That sentence charged the CIA director with performing “such other functions and duties related to intelligence” as the President might assign.

    Presidents like George W. Bush have interpreted that sentence as carte blanche to use the CIA as their own personal Gestapo. Do not blanche before the word Gestapo, the name for Adolf Hitler’s secret police. Once out of office, Truman himself was quoted as using it while bemoaning what had become of the CIA he created to provide him with objective intelligence upon which to base well informed policy decisions.

    In a Washington Post op-ed on Dec. 22, 1963, titled “Limit CIA Role to Intelligence,” Truman complained that the CIA had been “diverted from its original assignment … from its intended role.” He argued that the CIA’s “operational duties be terminated or properly used elsewhere.”

    Correspondence between Truman and a former intelligence aide, Admiral Sidney Souers, suggests that the timing of the op-ed, one month after President John Kennedy’s assassination, was no accident.  Documents in the Truman Library show that nine days after the assassination, Truman sketched out what he wanted to say in the op-ed.


Leave a Reply