Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
11. No be tired. Just drink more juice. Titan Size.
Tue Apr 15, 2014, 02:35 PM
Apr 2014




New NSA docs contradict 9/11 claims

“I don’t think the Bush administration would want to see these released," an expert tells Salon

By Jordan Michael Smith
Salon.com
Tuesday, Jun 19, 2012 04:24 PM EDT

Over 120 CIA documents concerning 9/11, Osama bin Laden and counterterrorism were published today for the first time, having been newly declassified and released to the National Security Archive. The documents were released after the NSA pored through the footnotes of the 9/11 Commission and sent Freedom of Information Act requests.

The material contains much new information about the hunt before and after 9/11 for bin Laden, the development of the drone campaign in AfPak, and al-Qaida’s relationship with America’s ally, Pakistan. Perhaps most damning are the documents showing that the CIA had bin Laden in its cross hairs a full year before 9/11 — but didn’t get the funding from the Bush administration White House to take him out or even continue monitoring him. The CIA materials directly contradict the many claims of Bush officials that it was aggressively pursuing al-Qaida prior to 9/11, and that nobody could have predicted the attacks. “I don’t think the Bush administration would want to see these released, because they paint a picture of the CIA knowing something would happen before 9/11, but they didn’t get the institutional support they needed,” says Barbara Elias-Sanborn, the NSA fellow who edited the materials.

SNIP...

Former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice has taken credit for the drone program that the Bush administration ignored. “Things like working to get an armed Predator that actually turned out to be extraordinarily important, working to get a strategy that would allow us to get better cooperation from Pakistan and from the Central Asians,” she said in 2006. “We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida.” Rice claimed that the Bush administration continued the Clinton administration’s counterterrorism policies, a claim the documents disprove. “If the administration wanted to get it done, I’m sure they could have gotten it done,” says Elias-Sanborn.

Many of the documents publicize for the first time what was first made clear in the 9/11 Commission: The White House received a truly remarkable amount of warnings that al-Qaida was trying to attack the United States. From June to September 2001, a full seven CIA Senior Intelligence Briefs detailed that attacks were imminent, an incredible amount of information from one intelligence agency. One from June called “Bin-Ladin and Associates Making Near-Term Threats” writes that “[redacted] expects Usama Bin Laden to launch multiple attacks over the coming days.” The famous August brief called “Bin Ladin Determined to Strike the US” is included. “Al-Qai’da members, including some US citizens, have resided in or travelled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure here,” it says. During the entire month of August, President Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas — which tied with one of Richard Nixon’s as the longest vacation ever taken by a president. CIA Director George Tenet has said he didn’t speak to Bush once that month, describing the president as being “on leave.” Bush did not hold a Principals’ meeting on terrorism until September 4, 2001, having downgraded the meetings to a deputies’ meeting, which then-counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke has repeatedly said slowed down anti-Bin Laden efforts “enormously, by months.”

CONTINUED w LINKS...

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/19/new_nsa_docs_reveal_911_truths/

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

K&R!! G_j Apr 2014 #1
I guess this shows that DU is not "the real world" BrotherIvan Apr 2014 #2
I have said nothing about this entire affair...until now. Whoever here who has a problem ChisolmTrailDem Apr 2014 #7
The people doing the mocking are of two general types: Maedhros Apr 2014 #10
I do ignore them. 840high Apr 2014 #13
Both types SHOULD be summarily ignored BrotherIvan Apr 2014 #14
I have put those posters on my ignore list, and it has completely transformed my DU experience. Maedhros Apr 2014 #17
You forgot ProSense Apr 2014 #23
Oh look. Here's one now. I think this one is a Type II. DisgustipatedinCA Apr 2014 #25
Hear Hear! WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2014 #18
Jail Them. Octafish Apr 2014 #3
Who... The NSA ??? WillyT Apr 2014 #4
No no no. The Secret Bosses who count. Votes. Octafish Apr 2014 #9
I'm tired Ichingcarpenter Apr 2014 #5
No be tired. Just drink more juice. Titan Size. Octafish Apr 2014 #11
Yes but there was no "actionable intelligence". zeemike Apr 2014 #16
LOL! More cats! Octafish Apr 2014 #19
It's amusing how absent the usually voracious critics have been in response to this news. SaveOurDemocracy Apr 2014 #6
Once they get the talking points BrotherIvan Apr 2014 #15
That's great, but can we get back to focusing on the personalities and not the main issue Rex Apr 2014 #8
I think it's much more important to get back to criticizing journalists Maedhros Apr 2014 #12
But... But... But... Glassunion Apr 2014 #20
This makes it really EASY to see WHO is on the WRONG side of this issue at DU: bvar22 Apr 2014 #21
However important this may be to the issue of our civil liberties - it is still NEVER, NEVER, NEVER Douglas Carpenter Apr 2014 #22
Post removed Post removed Apr 2014 #24
We don't allow anyone to spew homophobic bullshit here. DisgustipatedinCA Apr 2014 #26
Get your mind out of the gutter then. idendoit Apr 2014 #27
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"Winning the Pulitze...»Reply #11