MA, thats a great article.
I do think that its a bit misleading by claiming "Bush knew of 9/11" though. The reason I say that is because one can draw a few mis-conclusions from what you are implying.

To say "Bush knew" is implying what?

1) He knew that Osama or some terrorist group was going to attack the US, targeting the World Trade Towers with aircraft, on 9/11.

2) He knew that there was a potential for an attack, not knowing the date nor time of such an event, but that a terrorist attack could potentially involve the use of aircraft, targeting skyscrapers and such.

3) Being the WTC Towers had been of target before, the potential was still there that they would be of target again and that Bush knew, again, the exact time and date.

4) Bush "knew" meaning that he was briefed that the potential of terrorist attacks against the WTC and other such potential targets, by the use of aircraft, was a very plausiable scenerio.

Yes, I agree, Bush knew.......
But Bush knew doesn't imply that he knew the time or date.....he only knew of the potential for.
I think that you or I or anyone else had as much foreknowledge or reason to anticipate the attack as anyone in the FBI or CIA. I see it as being that you or I or anyone else (ie: CIA, FBI, etc.) were just as blameworthy as Bush for failing to put two and two together, and figure out or conclude that the terrorist group(s) or Osama might carry out the 9/11 attacks or even an attack on that date and time. I think we all were just as naive as Bush was and to just 'single' him out is unfounded and unfair.

Everyone in government, from the Clinton Administration to the Bush Administration is at fault; from the CIA and FBI. Knowledge of the potential for such an occurance or event was present in 1998 as it was when the 9/11 attacks happened.

Yes, an investigation should be undertaken as to "What really happened" but to blame and then claim Bush knew full well, implying that he knew "exactly when and how" this attack would happen is a little skewed if not unfounded. The potential for this occurance was always there.....the time, place, and date was unknown.

regards
seekerof

Seekerof

You are exactly right about the "implication".

The writer says it is impossible to determine what Bush knew, without full access to the CIA Briefings, which were denied to the Congressional Enquiry. That is stonewalling, covering indiscretions, incompetencies and misdemeanors, not in the interests of national security at all.

You need to step aside from the 'unknown' and take on board the 'known':

* the 'leaked story' of mock military exercises planned for the morning of 9/11 around the pattern of suicide hijackings

* the number of Bush administration officials that were advised not to fly in the mid-September period

* the pattern of response of Bush himself on the morning of 9/11.

It is true that the author does not want to join the dots.

But the blame increasingly is being pinned fairly and squarely on the incumbent administration, which if you read further into this had received very full briefings on a regular basis, but determined not to act on them.

The worst thing in the whole mess is Bush labelling this the third horse in his 'trifecta', enabling him to pass off a pack of lies in order to go and invade Iraq.

All this is true.

Killuminati

That is a very useful analysis.

In layman's terms, beyond Iraqi oil to the completion of the Afghan pipeline.

But I don't see enough of the USD vs Euro arguments, or even the direct benefit to corrupt company owners / participants in the administration.

At least there is a growing number of people who have seen through the transparent lies and are prepared to read the truth of this stuff.



"....Then again, perhaps the administration was engaged in similar gamesmanship before 9/11. Perhaps they are afraid to address the issue at all. The nomination of Kissinger to the 9/11 committee certainly suggests a desire on the administration`s part to never, ever, ever have the facts of that attack come fully to light. They do not want people to know that Brzezinski`s actions in 1979, and the naiveté regarding the potential blowback from his decisions he displayed in 1998, was compounded by the actions of the Bush administrationin 2001. Brzezinski asked in his interview what was more important in 1979: Ending the Cold War or creating the Taliban? In the early days of the Bush administration, a similar question was certainly asked - what is more important in 2001: Gaining access to an incredibly lucrative energy supply, or the dangers of threatening the Taliban?

A pipeline project, aimed at exploiting massive natural gas reserves along the Caspian Sea in Turkmenistan, was revived by the Bush administration when it arrived in Washington in January of 2001. The pipeline project, which sought to bring oil and natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to a warm water port, had been the brainchild of American petroleum giant Unocal for much of the 1990s. After the destruction of two American embassies in Africa in 1998 by Osama bin Laden, the Clinton administration forbade any American companies from doing business with the Taliban, which had been sheltering bin Laden in Afghanistan. Unocal`s pipeline project was frozen.

After the Bush administration came to power, reinvigorating the pipeline project became a high-priority matter of policy. Assistant Secretary of State Christina Rocca was dispatched to Pakistan to discuss the pipeline with Taliban officials in August of 2001. Rocca, a career officer with the CIA, had been deeply involved in Agency activities within Afghanistan. A Pakistani foreign minister was present at the meeting, and witnessed the exchange.

How does this pipeline relate to September 11th? The main obstacle to the completion of the pipeline was the fact that it had to pass through Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. The project would receive no international support unless the Afghan government somehow became legitimized. In bargaining for the pipeline, the Bush administration demanded that the Taliban reinstate deposed King Mohammad Zahir Shah as ruler of Afghanistan, and demanded that the Taliban hand over Osama bin Laden for arrest. Inreturn, the Talibanwould reap untold billions in profit from the pipeline. A central part of the Bush administration`s bargaining tactics involved threats of war if these conditionsfor the legitimization of Afghanistan were not met."



The conclusion is especially 'encouraging':


"Albert Einstein, arguably the most brilliant human being ever to draw breath on planet Earth, defined insanity as "doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results." America instigated a horrible war in Afghanistan 24 years ago to make the world safer. We have attacked and destroyed another Muslim nation purportedly for the same purpose. One of these days we are going to realize that such actions never serve the cause of peace, but only serve to perpetuate and augment the horrors of this terrifying world. We will learn, for all time, that actions have consequences."

It even gets better than that... After being turned down on the oil project in Jan 2001. Bush sent (and I can't think of the generals name...but Ill look for the link) back to talk a month after our 48 million dollar "gift" or bribe was delivered. the Taliban thought that they were getting the short end of the stick financially in this deal and again rejected the offer. The general began pounding on the table and threating violent retribution from the Americans if they couldn't work something out.
Two weeks later the president retired for a month long vacation (must be nice) where he received these "priviledged" daily briefings. He returns to work on 9/1/01 and makes sure that he and most of his administrative staff and family are nowhere near a major "target". Then he gets to watch the FIRST plane crash from the coziness of his limo days before a tape of that plane was discovered. Then his dad, buddies and financial supporters reap billions of dollars from this "new terrorist war". We all know the rest......

but Im sure this is all just coincidance...I mean its not like his family has a history with the Bin Laden family, or his dad was head of the CIA that recruited Osama, or the oil company that now gets to build the pipeline contributed 4.8 million dollars to the 2000 presidential election.........
sigh...back to sleep america..........

I find it more believable that Bush knew and/or assisted in the 9/11 attacks. Given all the evidence, his behavior and the funny little co-winky-dinks involved...

VoD

I had always put down Bush repeatedly claiming he saw the first plane crash when he did, to his stupidity and inability to construct a plausible angle on his inactivity that morning.

I had never considered that he could have been watching it live and not realizing the uniqueness of that 'privilege'.

That is too bizarre.

Give me 48 hours to recover from that one...

I didnt think the white house had any intelligence, i thought they made eveything up.

my biggest question is how can these bastards live with what is obviously an orchestration of a grand scale?

and nothing was turned up on the congressional investigation; gee, well, that's our government for you. more interested in patting each other in the back as opposed to passing legislature that allows for evolution.

It has been almost two years and nothing even close to the truth has been said. you can't even talk about it because most people are into the taboo idea considering the high loss of life. well, that idea alone makes it something that everyone should know. because if they can do it once, they WILL do it again.

that's "alleged" terrorist osama bin laden.
of course, everyone's forgotten.

sheeeshh....
I thought this thread was buried....
After reading what I had written makes me realize just how thick those dern coca-cola bottomed glasses were I had on.....

regards
seekerof

BoutTime

Yes, it was highly successful.

That's why the DoD came out with its Terrorist Futures Market.

This administration is disgusting. Remove it.

Amazing what a little time and some pertinent info can do to chest thumping nationalists!!

Most of what is being written here in this string has been said many times before here & elsewhere but no one wanted to believe it... now we all know and there is yet more to come.

A close friend who is also a fellow former Marine, was adamant that what was happening was real and that my liberal thought processes were just skewing the truth. He approached me last week, shaking his head and muttering to himself "You were right, it was all just a big ruse! How could we be so duped?".

I told him that we want to believe our leaders, that it is what we, as American are all about & how we are raised, to trust our leaders to know what is right for the country. For those of us who have served, especially as Marines "The Presidents Own", it is a very bitter pill to swallow, when one realizes that it is no longer all about what is best for the nation but how can they best line their & their supporters pockets with taxpayers money... a very bitter pill indeed.

The GOP: The Greedy old Poops!!

....on the de-programming needed on post military life. My biggest frustrations are:

- those who've not gotten around to it
- the kiddie pool of GI Jr's ready to sign up

So many have that avoidance mechanism ingrained, that logical appraisal of the realities of life in Bushtopia are an after thought.... if a thought at all.

The 'leadership' thing is also classic: getting our military killed over lies and payola, while cutting veteran benefits and hazard pay for active duty....makes him pro-military!?!?