Documents: Bush Warned of Terror Threats Before 9-11

[Ironside]

Documents: Bush Warned of Terror Threats Before 9-11



The FBI was warning about "suspicious activity" that could mean "preparations for hijackings" by terrorists before the 9-11 attacks, according to newly declassified materials.

According to U.S. broadcast networks, the White House has released an intelligence briefing that was delivered to the President a month before the terror attacks that killed 3,000 people.

THe briefing was delivered on August 6, 2001.

The materials refer to al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

The briefing, or PDB, was referred to by National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice who testified before the 9-11 Commission last week.

But she said nothing was done to prevent the attacks because the intelligence they had did not include specifics.

The briefing says terrorists were looking to hijack planes to gain freedom for Muslim extremists jailed in the U.S.

The President was also warned that there were terrorist cells active in this country. The 9-11 Commission will issue a report in several months outlining government failures that may have led to the attacks on New York and Washington D.C.

THE SOURCE

[Hannibal]

The FACT is that even Clarke testified that there was nothing that would have actually led to preventing the attacks of 9-11-01. Even killing Bin laden he said would not have prevented the attacks.

What WOULD have prevented that attacks was the gutting and limiting of the CIA and FBI in the 90's. The Clinton reduction of the military and the near schizo deployment of troops in the 90's. The only real reason we were even in Kosovo and Bosnia was because Madeline Albright was born there. I mean THEY are in the EUs back yard per se...

We should have been dealing with the middle east instead of running from Somalia and trying to enforce the pitiful no fly zones at the cost of billions of dollars per year.

-Jason

[cb88]

The FBI was warning about "suspicious activity" that could mean "preparations for hijackings" by terrorists before the 9-11 attacks, according to newly declassified materials.

Do you have any idea how many planes (commercial alone) take off and land in one day in the United States????

And the ACLU is screaming about "racial profiling" now AFTER 9/11, can you imagine if we "harrassed" every middle eastern looking person BEFORE 9/11?????

Aside from the fact that Gore was warned in 2000 and did NOTHING.

[robini123]

Anybody who was unaware that terrorists were planning to attack America before 9/11 is blind in my opinion. I'm not the President and don't need daily briefings to know that they wanted to attack the U.S. I knew that after the first attack on the WTS. So the documents prove nothing.

[kruser79]

After reading the PDB, I came to the conclusion that "Yeah, so what?" So bin Laden wants to attack inside the U.S.? We have terrorist cells inside the country?

For this to be the 'smoking gun' everyone's been screaming about, it needed something a little more substantial, some advisement, some groundwork for plans. This was little more than a historical compilation of facts already known.

C'mon.....next?

[Joker]

Originally Posted by robini123

Anybody who was unaware that terrorists were planning to attack America before 9/11 is blind in my opinion. I'm not the President and don't need daily briefings to know that they wanted to attack the U.S. I knew that after the first attack on the WTS. So the documents prove nothing.

That's a curious line of reasoning. Condaleeza Rice claimed that she and her department actually didn't know enough details of the threat from bin Laden to counter it. The document highlights hijacking. Sure, there are a lot of flights taking off and landing in the US, but does that mean they should throw up their hands and say 'touch wood'? Not any more, I guess.

If you really can't protect the public from every terrorist act, perhaps you should take away the terrorist's motivation and support, by conducting a foreign policy that recognises all grievances, not just those of favoured clients. But that's probably a terribly liberal point of view, isn't it?

[Woodmonkey]

Originally Posted by Joker

That's a curious line of reasoning. Condaleeza Rice claimed that she and her department actually didn't know enough details of the threat from bin Laden to counter it. The document highlights hijacking. Sure, there are a lot of flights taking off and landing in the US, but does that mean they should throw up their hands and say 'touch wood'? Not any more, I guess.

Knowing something is being planned is different from knowing how to counter it. Throwing the hands up in the air didn't work either. This can't be put on Bush. I don't think it's possible to do in 8 months what wasn't done in 8 years.

If you really can't protect the public from every terrorist act, perhaps you should take away the terrorist's motivation and support, by conducting a foreign policy that recognises all grievances, not just those of favoured clients. But that's probably a terribly liberal point of view, isn't it?

I partly agree with you, however, I think it's simplistic. These people attack other countries which aren't wealthy. You are dealing with people who spring from a foundation of hatred instilled by power hungry clerics and kept in poverty and ignorance.

As for our foreign policy, I've not been pleased with it overall for many years.

I started a thread about this and I don't want to copy the entire article here too. Check out http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte...03/938ztlwc.asp

*