Bush was told 9/11 would happen.

Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarkSteven -> Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/11/2012 10:08:49 PM)
Per this article, the neocons in the Bush administration rejected the CIA's arguments because it didn't fit their worldview. And the CIA was yelling at the Bushies to listen to their intelligence.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/11/2012 10:14:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Per this article, the neocons in the Bush administration rejected the CIA's arguments because it didn't fit their worldview. And the CIA was yelling at the Bushies to listen to their intelligence. by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm

popeye1250 -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/11/2012 11:05:26 PM)
I think most people figured that "something" would happen after the bombing of the embassies in Africa and the U.S.S. Cole, especially us military veterans but of course no-one knew what.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 2:47:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Per this article, the neocons in the Bush administration rejected the CIA's arguments because it didn't fit their worldview. And the CIA was yelling at the Bushies to listen to their intelligence. by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm And, Bush was the one telling Congress that Fannie and Freddie needed more oversight. But, when push came to shove, Congress sat still, and yet, it's Bush's fault Fannie and Freddie skewed the market and caused the fail.

Politesub53 -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 3:28:21 AM)
Instead of bashing the OP, you three would have been better served fact checking. The CIA did indeed know an attack was about to take place. The problem was that several different agencies didnt pool information, which together possibly could have prevented it. It is also well documented the administration ignored the CIA`s report that evidence regarding WMD`s were scarce, as well as army estimates of how many troops would be needed on the ground post any invasion of Iraq ( Indeed the two army staff who stated as much before a Senate committe were moved from office. ) So it is clear the administration took to ignoring advice from the relevant government departments.

DomYngBlk -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 10:42:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Per this article, the neocons in the Bush administration rejected the CIA's arguments because it didn't fit their worldview. And the CIA was yelling at the Bushies to listen to their intelligence. by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm And, Bush was the one telling Congress that Fannie and Freddie needed more oversight. But, when push came to shove, Congress sat still, and yet, it's Bush's fault Fannie and Freddie skewed the market and caused the fail. Got any quotes about the whole Frannie and Freddie thing or is it just more of your usual bullshit

Rule -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 4:13:27 PM)
Pff. He had been working since at least the end of the seventies to make it happen. And before him other people prepped the towers when they were built. In my opinion the lot of you suffer from a lack of sufficient paranoia.

mnottertail -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 4:21:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri And, Bush was the one telling Congress that Fannie and Freddie needed more oversight. But, when push came to shove, Congress sat still, and yet, it's Bush's fault Fannie and Freddie skewed the market and caused the fail. It wasn't freddie or fannie caused the fail. It was speculation via derivatives and other financial instruments betting that a house worth 20K was going to go to 200k

dcnovice -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 4:28:22 PM)
quote: by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm Duly noted. Which of his points do you dispute? ETA: I clicked the Amazon link to check out his book. Both the editorial and customer reviews were quite positive.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 5:27:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm Duly noted. Which of his points do you dispute? ETA: I clicked the Amazon link to check out his book. Both the editorial and customer reviews were quite positive. dc, My point is that he has a book to sell, and the more attention he can get, the more he can sell. He's not a historian, and likely has his point of view to support. Some people are still arguing that Roosevelt knew about the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor, and didn't do anything because he wanted it to happen. How many of the authors sources come from the CIA? ... and I'm sure that it's in their bureaucratic interest to shift blame ... what journalist writing an explosive, tell-all book about recent events wouldn't feel like they are the only ones who have "the real poop", when members of government talk to them, and point all the blame to their political masters? All I'm saying ... don't jump to conclusions. The truth is usually more prosaic and less exciting, less filled with villains and saints, and more with bureaucratic infighting and organizational inertia. Firm

dcnovice -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 6:01:02 PM)
quote: dc, My point is that he has a book to sell, and the more attention he can get, the more he can sell. He's not a historian, and likely has his point of view to support. Some people are still arguing that Roosevelt knew about the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor, and didn't do anything because he wanted it to happen. How many of the authors sources come from the CIA? ... and I'm sure that it's in their bureaucratic interest to shift blame ... what journalist writing an explosive, tell-all book about recent events wouldn't feel like they are the only ones who have "the real poop", when members of government talk to them, and point all the blame to their political masters? All I'm saying ... don't jump to conclusions. The truth is usually more prosaic and less exciting, less filled with villains and saints, and more with bureaucratic infighting and organizational inertia. Firm Interesting points, and it's always good to take any source with a grain of salt. But for all your efforts to impeach the witness, you haven't actually identified anything you think he got wrong.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 6:12:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice Interesting points, and it's always good to take any source with a grain of salt. But for all your efforts to impeach the witness, you haven't actually identified anything you think he got wrong. Well, actually, I'm not trying to impeach him, just advise caution on accepting his conclusions uncritically. People here (hell, people in general) tend to jump to the "latest thing", and take a short term view about momentous events, while a study of history will caution that "the truth" is generally not somewhat clearly known until enough time has passed that the flames of passion and partisanship have subsided. Firm

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 7:26:39 PM)
It is actually well documented and publicly available information that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden were threatening the United States for many years before 9/11. It is also common knowledge that Al Qaeda had WTC as a target (does anyone recall the 93 WTC bombing - masterminded by someone who was trained at an Al Qaeda training camp). While chatter had increased in the months leading up to 9/11, Al Qaeda and Islamic terrorists generally, were already a threat, and WTC had already been identified as a likely target (after all they already tried once). In addition, for years, if not more than a decade, people already knew a plane could be used as a weapon (anything with that much fuel is dangerous). One certainly did not have to part of the CIA or the White House to know any of these things, especially post 93. I see this as more a large fail on being able to appropriately connect the dots and properly assess the extent of damage that could be caused in such a situation. I think it is easy post-hoc to say that all the signs were there. I'm not sure that in the moment, all of the available information read the same way. To be clear, I am no Bush supporter, but I'm not sure we can say 9/11 would have necessarily been preventable if we had acted sooner. I'm not sure we would have known exactly what we were looking for in those months leading up to the attack. I say this as someone who was in Manhattan for both the 93 attacks as well as on 9/11. [sm=2cents.gif]

Musicmystery -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/12/2012 7:37:43 PM)
This is not a new story -- it was around in 2002. Exactly as this says. The neo-cons rejected everything from the Clinton administration and only wanted the CIA to tell them what they wanted to hear, not the actual facts. The very definition of "truthiness."

FirmhandKY -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 7:32:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery This is not a new story -- it was around in 2002. Exactly as this says. The neo-cons rejected everything from the Clinton administration and only wanted the CIA to tell them what they wanted to hear, not the actual facts. The very definition of "truthiness." Again ... this is your partisan biases speaking, in the heat of the historical moment. If you weren't biased "anti-republican", then you could just as easily make the argument that Clinton failed to take care of business when it was before him, several times. Which would kinda be true - as far as it went - but also inputting a requirement for precognition on Clinton's administration. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 7:37:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess I see this as more a large fail on being able to appropriately connect the dots and properly assess the extent of damage that could be caused in such a situation. I think it is easy post-hoc to say that all the signs were there. I'm not sure that in the moment, all of the available information read the same way. Exactly. Firm

Kana -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 7:45:49 AM)
Yeah-it's pretty well documented that they had word that an attack was coming. That said: 1-There is ALWAYS word of an imminent attack. Groups like Al Qaeda constantly keep the grapevine swirling with counter-intell to keep western spy agencies on their toes. And there are constant reports of big attacks coming. Think about how many times the terror level has moved precipitously up in the last few years, only to have no attacks materialize. 2-They had no idea what the strike was or where or how. In a country like the US there are only about oooooh, 50 billion targets, ranging from, again oooooh, the mall of america, water supplies, military bases, bridges, banks, govt buildings, nuclear power plants, electronic grid hubs, you get the idea... 3-Al Qaeda frequently planned missions only to have them abort at the last minute due to a variety of reasons. 4-No terrorist group had ever pulled an operation that large, that well timed, over so much ground. There was no game plan for an operation of that level, nor had there been any prior warning that Al Qaeda could pull off such a massive op 5-It's got be remembered that there was a whole lot of info out there, but it was scattered between a hundred agencies and small subgroups and that none of em was really wanting to share info with the other. More than anything else, power silos, stovepiping and agency infighting led to the lack of cohesive information out there. If you want to read a good unbiased work about 9/11 read The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright He's a former NYT editor and his research is awesome. He had access to some real high level stuff. The picture he paints is a tragedy that could have been stopped in a 100 places and times-just everything slipped through the cracks, in many parts because of lack of interagency cooperation.

Owner59 -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 7:57:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess I see this as more a large fail on being able to appropriately connect the dots and properly assess the extent of damage that could be caused in such a situation. I think it is easy post-hoc to say that all the signs were there. I'm not sure that in the moment, all of the available information read the same way. Exactly. Firm This piece may shed some light on what we knew and what we didn`t know. John ONiell....the FBI agent(fired by bush) who probably knew the most about bin-laden and what we were facing. If he had been in his NYC FBI office.....we would have known that the jet air-liners changing course was a possible attack.We at the very least.....would have known to take out the 2nd jet before it hit the 2nd tower. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/knew/view/

Fellow -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 8:18:05 AM)
Yes there could be many conspiracies to attack the US. It does not prove Al Qaeda was able to pull it off. I saw a report that claimed CIA was monitoring the group that allegedly was involved in 9/11 attack for at least a year. You take a plot over and execute it. This is how it was done. You need some kind of evidence and patsies to create the legend. The men took flight lessons, but they had difficulties to fly a crop duster. Does anybody seriously think they pulled it off. General consensus seems to be the planes were flown by remote control.

MrRodgers -> RE: Bush was told 9/11 would happen. (9/13/2012 9:59:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Per this article, the neocons in the Bush administration rejected the CIA's arguments because it didn't fit their worldview. And the CIA was yelling at the Bushies to listen to their intelligence. by ... Kurt Eichenwald, a contributing editor at Vanity Fair and a former reporter for The New York Times, is the author of "500 Days: Secrets and Lies in the Terror Wars." Steven ... I suspect we shouldn't jump to his conclusions just yet. Firm And, Bush was the one telling Congress that Fannie and Freddie needed more oversight. But, when push came to shove, Congress sat still, and yet, it's Bush's fault Fannie and Freddie skewed the market and caused the fail. Bush was the admin.'s chief executive. It was his responsibility to oversee the overseers. Suffice it to say, Fannie & Freddie went outside their historical charter of not borrowing at open market but only sufficient to repurchase standard qualifying mortgages with favorable rates because of the un-required but of course implicit guarantee of a taxpayer rescue. More socialism (risk) for the rich. Then when the states atty. gens. got into the picture and it was BUSH who deliberately set out in federal court using an obscure 1863 fed. code (OCC - Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) establishing that Washington ruled ALL banking and stopped them from enforcing state mortgage lending laws. WHY ?? People say don't blame capitalism but is was 'capitalism' (capitalist) that creates shit-paper. It is capitalism that creates the bonuses and the gambling and the greed. I blame capitalism because of the unabated recklessness that so many 'bankers' were allowed to pursue rewards all in the name of capitalism's greatest value...greed.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625