[zachs]

9/11 Chair: Attack Was Preventable

For the first time, the chairman of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks is saying publicly that 9/11 could have and should have been prevented, reports CBS News Correspondent Randall Pinkston.

"This is a very, very important part of history and we've got to tell it right," said Thomas Kean.

"As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea what wasn't done and what should have been done," he said. "This was not something that had to happen."

Appointed by the Bush administration, Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, is now pointing fingers inside the administration and laying blame.

"There are people that, if I was doing the job, would certainly not be in the position they were in at that time because they failed. They simply failed," Kean said.

And last year, from the Washington Post:

"Something really spectacular is going to happen here, and it's going to happen soon," the government's top counterterrorism official, Richard Clarke, told the assembled group, according to two of those present. The group included the Federal Aviation Administration, along with the Coast Guard, FBI, Secret Service and Immigration and Naturalization Service.

...

Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet had been "nearly frantic" with concern since June 22, according to one frequent interlocutor, and a written intelligence summary for national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on June 28: "It is highly likely that a significant al Qaeda attack is in the near future, within several weeks." By late summer, one senior political appointee said, Tenet had "repeated this so often that people got tired of hearing it."

So basically, Bush & Co. were told that 9/11 would happen, but didn't want to do anything about it. All they did was sit on their hands while the warnings just kept coming that "something spectacular" would happen, and that it would "happen soon".

Of course, they'll probably try and lay all the blame on Clinton, no doubt. But whether or not Clinton could have done something does not exonerate Bush, and it doesn't change the fact that Bush could have done something to prevent 9/11, and didn't.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Hey in the future, something bad WILL happen.

Now that you know this- you'd better prevent it from happening, or I'll be blaming you for it when it does.

[Spliffdaddy]

I'm with CRASH.

If something bad happens - it's your ass, zach.

[wang_himself]

Yeah zach, your ass is already grass, I think I failed one of my finals, therefore something bad has happened.

[clod]

They get warnings like that all the time. What could anybody have done without specific information?

[jbartone]

Let's wait for the report...

[gadster]

Originally posted by jbartone:
Let's wait for the report...

Yeah.


Let's.

[macvillage.net]

The warnings alone were rather vague.

But there could have been more seriously taken, that's for sure. Including putting officials on alert, which wasn't done.



It could have been "prevented", perhaps 15+ years ago when the policies that led to the attack were intitially started. Right before? I doubt it.

[zachs]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
Hey in the future, something bad WILL happen.

Now that you know this- you'd better prevent it from happening, or I'll be blaming you for it when it does.

Except I don't have access to the intelligence that the administration did/does.

They get warnings like that all the time. What could anybody have done without specific information?

They may not have known that 19 people would hijack airplanes on September 11, 2001 and crash them into the WTC and the Pentagon, but based on what Kean said, it seems that they knew something would occur, and that certain things that should have been done were not.

[spacefreak]

Originally posted by zachs:
They may not have known that 19 people would hijack airplanes on September 11, 2001 and crash them into the WTC and the Pentagon, but based on what Kean said, it seems that they knew something would occur, and that certain things that should have been done were not.

For one, everytime the government receives such a threat, they can immediately ground all airplanes, search all the passengers, and thoroughly search the airplanes.

[Lerkfish]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
For one, everytime the government receives such a threat, they can immediately ground all airplanes, search all the passengers, and thoroughly search the airplanes.

on the other hand, they DID get specific information from the south pacific concerning the exact nature of the future attack, they DID know about the flight schools in florida, they WERE keeping these exact men under surveillance, there WAS a female agent who kept trying to properly investigate who was thwarted at every turn by her superiors.

This is not as vague and groundless as you'd prefer to believe.

Do I think they could have precisely predicted it? probably not, but to say they had no reason to seriously consider the threat is wrong also.

[zachs]

Originally posted by spacefreak:
For one, everytime the government receives such a threat, they can immediately ground all airplanes, search all the passengers, and thoroughly search the airplanes.

Well, here are a few things they could have done

[BRussell]

You people. Blaming our president. There's nothing any president could have done about this. Except Clinton of course. He could have done something. But not Bush. That's just ridiculous. And even if something could have been done, we sure as hell shouldn't have an investigation into it. And if there is an investigation, we sure as hell shouldn't release any damning evidence.

All of you critics are going against the American public, who know the truth:

Gallup Poll: Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?

Sept. 7-10, 2001: 51% approve
Sept. 21-22, 2001: 90% approve, the highest approval rating ever recorded by Gallup, which began asking when FDR was president.

[zachs]

Originally posted by BRussell:
You people. Blaming our president. There's nothing any president could have done about this. Except Clinton of course. He could have done something. But not Bush. That's just ridiculous. And even if something could have been done, we sure as hell shouldn't have an investigation into it. And if there is an investigation, we sure as hell shouldn't release any damning evidence.

All of you critics are going against the American public, who know the truth:

The fact that Clinton could have done more does NOT mean that Bush is exonerated from all blame. Yes, Clinton could have done more...but Bush could have too.

And why not have an investigation? What's to hide?
And not releasing "damning evidence" would provide no check on the government. If the government did something wrong, then people need to know.

[Spliffdaddy]

"The government" IS the people.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
"The government" IS the people.

Not in the United States.

[chaldean oracle]

zachs, you've been around here long enough to know that BRussell is being sarcastic.

[Spliffdaddy]

If 'the government' couldn't prevent 9/11 then their intelligence is flawed and therefore it's unlikely 'the government' is involved in ANY conspiracy.

Since peaceniks thrive on the belief that 'the government' is plotting and planning and always up to something - it doesn't help the peacenik's case to suggest that 'the government', in reality, hasn't got a clue what's going on.


See, according to the peaceniks 'the government' is all-powerful and all-knowing.

That's what makes the peaceniks wrong.


'The government' is your neighbors. How smart are they?

[Powerbook]

Originally posted by BRussell:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gallup Poll: Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president?

Sept. 7-10, 2001: 51% approve
Sept. 21-22, 2001: 90% approve, the highest approval rating ever recorded by Gallup, which began asking when FDR was president.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This says more about your country than you might imagine...

PB.

[Spliffdaddy]

Everyone and everything says all sorts of stuff about our country.

I think the world revolves around the US.

At least that's the opinion I get.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
on the other hand, they DID get specific information from the south pacific concerning the exact nature of the future attack, they DID know about the flight schools in florida, they WERE keeping these exact men under surveillance, there WAS a female agent who kept trying to properly investigate who was thwarted at every turn by her superiors.

This is not as vague and groundless as you'd prefer to believe.

Do I think they could have precisely predicted it? probably not, but to say they had no reason to seriously consider the threat is wrong also.

Bears repeating.

I don't really know if any real blame can fall on president (other than the principle of the buck stopping somewhere), but the evidence seems more than clear that this was a **** up of collossal proportions and there were numerous and frequent missed opportunities to do the right things that could have prevented the attack.

[zachs]

Originally posted by chaldean oracle:
zachs, you've been around here long enough to know that BRussell is being sarcastic.

Sorry, I wasn't sure. Unfortunately, that IS what most right-wingers do say.

[saab95]

Originally posted by jbartone:
Let's wait for the report...

[saab95]

Why wait?

We all know that America's unprincipled way of dealing with the terrorist attacks upon it is to blame.

That commission is full of **** for blaming Bush. it doesn't get any more shortsighted than that.

[saab95]

Originally posted by Lerkfish:
on the other hand, they DID get specific information from the south pacific concerning the exact nature of the future attack, they DID know about the flight schools in florida, they WERE keeping these exact men under surveillance, there WAS a female agent who kept trying to properly investigate who was thwarted at every turn by her superiors.

This is not as vague and groundless as you'd prefer to believe.

Do I think they could have precisely predicted it? probably not, but to say they had no reason to seriously consider the threat is wrong also.

Really? How could they know all this?

FACT: America has been attacked before by these Muslim fundamentalist killers and didn't respond in a forceful manner that would have ensured that this would never happen again.

Basically, guys, they thought they could get away with 9-11.

And they did.

You won't see that in the report. You can wait as long as you want because you know it's going to be all bullshit.

[eklipse]

I don't think 9/11 was preventable - postponable, maybe, but not preventable.

The US had been pissing various groups off for a long time - one of them was bound to strike out sooner or later.

Trouble is, America is still pissing people off.

[BlackGriffen]

Originally posted by saab95:
Why wait?

We all know that America's unprincipled way of dealing with the terrorist attacks upon it is to blame.

That commission is full of **** for blaming Bush. it doesn't get any more shortsighted than that.

All the commission said is that the attacks could have been prevented.

That's not the same as blaming Bush, himself. there may have been high level officials involved. It may, in fact, go all the way to Bush. The non-partisan commission that is headed by a Republican has said nothing to make us believe that, though.

Here's some ice for that knee. It must have hit the desk pretty hard.

BlackGriffen

[Athens]

Originally posted by zachs:
9/11 Chair: Attack Was Preventable



And last year, from the Washington Post:



So basically, Bush & Co. were told that 9/11 would happen, but didn't want to do anything about it. All they did was sit on their hands while the warnings just kept coming that "something spectacular" would happen, and that it would "happen soon".

Of course, they'll probably try and lay all the blame on Clinton, no doubt. But whether or not Clinton could have done something does not exonerate Bush, and it doesn't change the fact that Bush could have done something to prevent 9/11, and didn't.

The CBC has a full report about 911 with lots of facts that I think most americans will find interesting if they are willing to read all 4 articles, http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=194661

[TeknoTurd]

Hind-sight is 20/20. People can claim all they want, but the thought of someone attacking our homeland in that matter would have been unthinkable at the time. If we to spend the money to beef up security before this happened, and even arrested a few people in the process people would be screaming about how much money we are wasting on defense, just like it is now. Hey have we had any successful attacks since? I rest my case.

[Wiskedjak]

9/11 could have been prevented. However, preventing it would have had nothing to do with any warnings and would not have been Bush's responsibility alone. Stop pissing in other people's yards and you would never have seen the events of September 11, 2001.