President Bush was warned one month before 9-11 attacks

ottsie777

Registered User
Forum Member
Jan 22, 2001
212
0
0
Lawmakers Demand Answers on Sept. 11 Hijack Threat

By RON FOURNIER
.c The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (May 16) - Top lawmakers on Thursday pushed for tough inquiries after the White House revealed President Bush was told a month before Sept. 11 that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network might hijack American airplanes.

''Was there a failure of intelligence?'' asked House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo. ''Did the right officials not act on the intelligence in the proper way? These are things we need to find out.''

Federal agencies and airlines were quietly alerted last summer that there were ''nonspecific'' threats of hijackings by al-Qaida, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. After those warnings were issued, Bush was told of the threats during a CIA briefing while on vacation in his Texas ranch the first week of August, Fleischer said.

But the president and U.S. intelligence did not know that suicide hijackers were plotting to use planes as missiles, as they did against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Fleischer said.

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta said his agency had received ''general information relating to threats,'' mostly ''as they related to airline operations overseas. ... That information was then passed on to the airlines, as we customarily do'' sometime last June or July, Mineta said.

''There was really no specificity to the information we received at that time,'' Mineta told reporters at an appearance in St. Louis. ''There was no way we could have, let's say, connected the dots to point to what happened on the 11th of Spetember.''

A spokesman for the trade group that represents the country's major airlines, Michael Wascom of the Air Transport Association, said he was not aware of ''any warnings or notifications in advance of Sept. 11 concerning specific security threats to any of our airlines.''

A CIA official declined to describe what piece of intelligence led to the concern about hijackings, or how it was collected.

The piece of information suggested that al-Qaida terrorists might hijack an airplane in an attack that would target U.S. citizens. That came as little surprise to counterterrorism officials because hijacking planes is a common terrorist tactic, intelligence officials said.

A senior CIA official said it's not clear the information was a bona fide hint of the Sept. 11 plot - or something entirely unrelated to it. It contained no mention of using hijacked airliners as missiles, or of a specific date or location of attack.

In any case, the information was deemed important enough to mention to Bush during one of his daily CIA threat briefings. The suggestion that a hijacking might be in the offing was one potential terrorist attack mentioned among several considered possibilities, and did not generate a lengthy discussion with the president.

Intelligence officials were well aware that terrorists inspired by bin Laden had considered using airliners as weapons in the past. But it appears that sort of plot was not in daily thinking of senior counterterrorism officials.

Donn Marshall, whose wife, Shelley, died in the Pentagon attack, expressed bitterness at the revelations. ''The notion that American planes might be hijacked - that should have caused more concern, even if we didn't think that they might be flown into things,'' said Marshall, of Marbury, Md.

The development, the first direct link between Bush and intelligence gathered before Sept. 11 about the attacks, instantly drew strong criticism from Capitol Hill, mainly by Democrats but also from members of Bush's party.

Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., called on Bush to release to congressional investigators ''the entire briefing that he was given,'' and also a recently revealed pre-Sept. 11 FBI memo from the agency's Arizona office that warned of suspicious activity by Arabs at U.S. flight schools.

Gephardt said Congress needs to find out - in hearings open to the public - what Bush and other officials knew, when they knew it and what they did with the information. He hinted he might push for additional inquiries.

''Right now we have an inquiry that's going on in the intelligence committees,'' Gephardt said. ''It may or may not be sufficient to get all this done.''

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said: ''There were two separate FBI reports plus a CIA warning, none of which were coordinated. The question is, if all three had been connected, would that have led to more vigorous activity? That's the reason why we need the commission to look at it.''

But Sen. Kit Bond, R-Mo., termed Daschle and Gephardt's ''effort to blow this up into a scandal'' as irresponsible. ''Their unspoken implication is that the president knew these attacks were coming and did nothing,'' Bond said.

Peppered with questions about the presidential heads-up, Fleischer sought to play down the development. He said there were long-standing concerns that Muslim extremists might carry out traditional hijackings, and that bin Laden had been a major worry for years.

''I don't think this should come as any surprise to anybody,'' he said of the warning given to Bush. ''But the president did not - not - receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen.''

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the panel had received the same general warning that ''was not specific in its content.''

However, Shelby said on NBC's ''Today:'' ''There was a lot of information, I believe and others believe, if it had been acted on properly we may have had a different situation on Sept. 11.''

On CNN, Shelby also questioned why the White House waited so long to acknowledge Bush's knowledge of the hijacking threat. He said of the warning: ''I think it should have been acted on, but it wasn't.''

Shelby also suggested he may demand that the White House release the top-secret CIA briefing received by Bush, and the FBI memo.

The revelation instantly created a politically charged atmosphere in which every White House statement about pre-Sept. 11 threats was subjected to new scrutiny. Fleischer, for example, was asked by reporters hours after the attacks whether ''there had been any warnings that the president knew of.''

He replied, ''No warnings.''

Fleischer stood by the comment Thursday, saying there indeed was no warning of suicide hijackings against American landmarks.

Bush himself said in January, ''Never did we realize that the enemy was so well organized.''

White House officials said Bush was steadfast in private that CIA Director George Tenet and FBI Director Robert Mueller have done a good job overhauling their agencies to close the gaps exposed by the Sept. 11 attacks. Their jobs are not in jeopardy, officials said.

One Bush associate quoted the president as saying ''no one knew'' that bin Laden was plotting to make the leap from traditional hijackings to the highly sophisticated suicide attacks on U.S. landmarks.

Fleischer said that starting in May 2001, there had been increased threats of terrorism strikes against U.S. targets - primarily abroad - and that security was tightened at U.S. embassies and military installations.

The Associated Press reported earlier this month that FBI headquarters did not act on a memo last July from its Arizona office warning there were a large number of Arabs seeking pilot, security and airport operations training at at least one U.S. flight school and which urged a check of all flight schools to identify more possible Middle Eastern students.

A section of that classified memo also makes a passing reference to bin Laden, speculating that al-Qaida and other such groups could organize such flight training, officials said.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Hey he got instuctions from Dad to finish His war. Not sure if this would be right way to get there. Now could all this info stop 9/11. Good question. Kind of like, did we know a head of time about Pearl Harbor. Is the FBI and CIA really that bad? Maybe. But we will never know.;)
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
good grief.....Bin Ladin has been making threats since the 80's.....this stuff is nothing new.....we have been getting attacked by terrorists for 20 years and all of a sudden we are surprised to be attacked on Sept 11? Give me a break. We have terrorists all over thsi country just waiting for their cue. No one should be surprised at anything. Nothing is preventable and we are all soldiers now. We all have to be ready to take out these infidels at a moments notice and sacrifice our own lives just as the guys on those airplanes did. That is what happens when you indiscriminately let people into your country.
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
77
So Cal
Anyone that ever read a newspaper, listened to news on the radio or watched news on television was aware of the terrorist threats. There is no credible evidence that anyone, including Bush, knew that terrorists had made a credible threat to fly planes into the WTC. Did the FBI do a piss poor job of coordinating info with other agencies? Hell, yes. Given the job that Reno and Freeh had done, should this have been a surprise? Hell, no. Bush needs to clean up the mess that the FBI has become and hopefully he is doing that. To blame him in any way for 9/11 is patently absurd.
 

dr. freeze

BIG12 KING
Forum Member
Aug 25, 2001
7,170
8
0
Mansion
the blame lies directly in the liberal immigration laws we have in this country.....we are letting anti-American people into the country and we might as well start accepting enormous statues from Troy......it is unbelievable how some people fail to learn from history and the same mistakes repeat themselves over and over again.....we used to let people in who wanted to blend in and make a new way of life and pursue the "American Dream"....recently we have let people in who want to DESTROY the American Dream and anyone who criticizes this has been labeled as a bigot, discriminator, etc. etc (see what happened to Pat Buchanan when he spoke on this very subject back in the 1996 election)......we have allowed Osama Bin Ladin to plant his militants all over this country....we have trained foreign terrorists in the arts of science and technology so that they may run airplanes into our buildings and terrorize our country with biological and chemical and perhaps nuclear warfare.....we have allowed the horse which will destroy us to enter our gates.....

That is where the blame lies period. Anyone who can reason and does not have an agenda to promote or tries to view the world with rose colored glasses will admit to that. Anyone who sees reality for what it is can realize that a country should not allow the enemy inside its castle. But unfortunately, America has been so dumbed down to reason that many people are still blind to this and think that we could have prevented this measure by informing the public that a danger was present. This method sure does work -- just check out Israel. Do you think that they can go to the store withOUT being in fear of being terrorized or ever walk out of their house withOUT being constantly vigilant? Vigilance can only help so much. Unfortunately, vigilance does not work against terror until it is too late. For some reason, the left is now trying to say that if we would have been vigilant, this would not have happened. THis is a ludicrous argument first of all, becuase it was Bill Clinton who said that the number one concern in the world and threat to American security was Kosovo of all places. All the while attacks were being made against Americans throughout the world NOT by Yugo's, but by Fundamentalist terror groups -- many of whom were connected to Al Quaeda. It was the Clintonistas who stripped the military & CIA of funding while instead paid for 5 policemen to be standing at the local grocery store every night. It was the Clintonistas who failed to go after Al Quaeda after repeatedly being threatened by them and after the USS Cole was bombed. It was the Clintonistas who encouraged every walk of life in this world to come over and get training in our graduate and medical schools -- taking the spots of patriotic Americans. It was the Clintonistas (and those before him -- but he never did do anything about it) who were responsible for the horrible shape of the FAA and FBI both being managed at the top worse than Enron and Arthur Anderson ever could be compared to. Maybe instead of trying to pinpoint the blame on a new president who was trying to get things in order after the chaos that had been overwhelming the government before him and a government which had never met a spending bill it didn't like -- except of course when it came to national defense -- maybe just maybe Americans could wake up and realize what the real problem has been and where the root of it lies. But who knows....that is probably asking too much.......
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I agree with what most said here that Bush should not be blamed for this.If any President knew before hand that the US would be attacked I am sure that the President,whoever he might be would stop it.
I think that the intelligence community is at fault in not putting the pieces together. Bush & the Senate intelligence committee were given info that BinLaden's thugs were going to make an attack against the US.They were told that it may consist of a plane being highjacked & that the passengers might be held for exchange for the guy who was arrested for the 1993 World Trade Center attack.
There was a report from an FBI agent in Phoenix informing Washington about a group of Arabs taking flying lessons at a Phoenix flight school.
In Minnesota another Arab(Moussoui ) was arrested.He was also interested in flying lessons.He became a suspect because he was not that much interested in learning to land a plane.While interviewing Moussoui,an FBI agent believed that that Moussoui was interested in crashing a plane into a building.On the side of his notes,this FBI agent wrote"World Trade Center".He forwarded his notes to Washington.
In 1994,members of alQaeda were arrested for trying to highjack a plane with an intent to crash it into the Eiffel Tower.
The problem is that nobody''connected all the dots" to all of this info.
Also.the FBI & the CIA never shared their info.They acted like they were in competition with each other.Trying to out do each other.That should not happen anymore.Bush signed into law the Patriot Act where agencies are compelled to share their info

Even though the threats were not specific.The adminstration knew that alQaeda was up to something concerning American planes,the Intelligence Community should have put more security at the US airports.
Usually someone takes the fall in this type of mishap.I think if anyone becomes the scapegoat it will be CIA Director,Tenet.
 

selkirk

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 16, 1999
2,147
13
0
Canada
many people believe Pearl Harbour was created so the US could get into the war, these people are wrong.

if you want to enter a war, you can have one ship or plane fired apon. you do not need to destoy a number of ships and make your navy much weaker, especially when entering a war against Japan.

The main battle after Pear Harbour was one by intelligence (knowing where the enemy were), courageous american pilots, and Japaneese mistakes such as Yamamoto breaking up the fleet instead of keeping concentrated, Nagumo slowness on June 4, a long list. Battle of Midway was not a forgone conclusion like many now seem to believe.


Bush did not know the planes were going to used as misiles and I am sure there are many threats such as highjackings that every president gets.


However under Clinton and Bush there are some questions.

1. After the two US embassies were bombed why (besides a few arrests) was nothing done?

2. After the 18 soldiers were killed in Yemen why was the lead investigator pulled off the case. There is some evidence the State department wanted him off the case as he was causing diplomatic problems (maybe the money trail lead to Saudi Arabia) of coarse it was just 18 dead soldiers better to not upset your allies ? Saudia Arabia.

The lead investigator took a job as head of security at the WTC and died on Sept. 11, so he will not be writing any tell all books.

3. Why did the US after the Two US embassy bombing and 18 dead soldiers and these threats from Al Quaida did the Bush government not even support the Northern Alliance. The Northern Alliance leader came to Washington that summer begging for money to fight the Taliban and Al Quaida, and got nothing.

He was killed a few days before Sept. 11, 2001 by couple of students posing as reporters who blew themselves up. sort of a theme here.

By the way will we ever know who funded Bin Laden, I know longer believe it was just his own money (he helped fund the Taliban government and army, not cheap and money never seemed a concern) , but the US probably does not want to upset their allies ??? in Saudia Arabia.......does not matter there will be a war in Iraq and Afganistan will be forgotten along with questions of who was funding Al Quadia......funny/sad how this works out........


thanks
selkirk
 

aldabra

Registered User
Forum Member
Mar 12, 2001
705
0
0
tulsa ok
POLITICAL POT STIRRING

POLITICAL POT STIRRING

Stirring the pot keeps people from focusing on true ongoing problems that politicians do not want to face.#1..The floundering educational system..#2..unemployment..due mostly to exporting jobs..#3 drug problem...#4..single parents....... PLENTY more
social ills....EASIER to use bipartisan bickering on a mute point
and fill up the airwaves....:nono:
 

Red Raider

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 27, 2001
1,079
0
0
58
Phoenix, AZ
Not only are we allowing those who hate us to come in legally, hell we're being sued by those who come in ILLEGALLY!

The Liberal Media is making me sick.......................:thefinger
 

Red Raider

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 27, 2001
1,079
0
0
58
Phoenix, AZ
You know what reallt pisses me off! That these same liberal dipchits would have been the first ones leading the charge against Bush (or anyone else) if we did anything to them (like kicked their asses out of the country) based soley rumors, and cloudy intelligence reports. I can hear them saying "You can't infringe on their civil liberties.....

These Hypocrites want it both ways, and most of America is too stupid to see this. Its the liberal treatment of these people that allowed the whole thing to happen, and now they want to bitch because the Conservatives did nothing to stop it.

These 2-faced liberals make me ill, but its the moronic, leming, unthinking general public that believes this crap that make me sick......

excuse me while I throw up!
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
I must be missing something.I don't know what the" liberal media "has anything to do with this story.The NY Post,one of the most conservative newspaper in the country,is very critical of this story.
IMO this story is being blown up way out of proportion.The media is frantically covering this story only to make money.TV & radio is doing it for ratings which translates into advertising dollars & the newspapers are sensationalizing(spelling?)it for sales.

The democrats are making this an issue because it is an election year.If the roles were reversed with a democrat as president,the republicans would be making a stink.This is mere political bs nothing more.

Both the President & some members of the Senate were told info about alQaeda,but it was too general.

As I stated in a earlier post the sole responsibility of not collating all the info falls squarely on the shoulders of the intelligence community.Instead of remembering that they are on the same side,they played one upmanship.They competed to see which agency was more efficient.Unfortunately it is somrtimes at the expense of the American people.
 
Last edited:

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
Well RR since you got all the answers. Or think you do. Why don't you go help with your border and shoot some them folks coming in every day. Shit they will have your job next. That's because they will work for 4 bucks. Will You. Your big USA, companies like them comeing in day after day. Good way to screw you if they want to. The truth is you me and many other folks will never know what the FBI/CIA, Bush or any of the good old boys out in Wash DC new. I dont care if there right, or left. But one thing is for sure they sure do kiss Saudi's ASS every day. I wonder if it's got anything to do with oil. Chit they new this prick was planning things back in April of 2000. They new some money was coming from Saudi. Chit lets not go up a notch to higher alert level. Lets worry about Cuba they may attack any day. Oh hell lets just keep blowing up mountains. Lets not go after the real source. All about Oil. That bush boy is all about Oil to.
 

Neemer

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 1999
1,470
6
0
Bluegrass!
this same exact information was passed along to representatives of the house as well. I loved watching the democrats who openly berated the WhiteHouse for their actions try to come up with an excusable reason why they didn't pursue the information as well. Hope they learn to keep thier mouths shut in the future till they get all the information. What goes around comes around...:thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger :thefinger
 

ferdville

Registered User
Forum Member
Dec 24, 1999
3,165
5
0
77
So Cal
Great point, Neemer. Repubs and Dems alike were given enough info to do somethin - nothing done. The fact that we wait until we connect all the dots is the price we pay for the so-called "American way.'' Take a trip over to Saudi Arabia and try to pull some similar shenanigans and then wait for their version of the ACLU to help you out. It ain't gonna happen. It is true - you can't have it both ways. It is the oldest and most tired cliche of all; but the price we pay for the kind of freedoms we enjoy here is the root of the problem.
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
A little warning to just get folks to be a little more on guard. Why Not? Since 9/11 they warn us everytime someone farts side ways. The top guy could have given the ok. You can bet your ass that boy is paying more attention to what he hears since 9/11. I don't give a crap who it is or what party. We just don't learn. There were many little warnings before Pearl Harbor. No one seemed to pay attention then either.
 

JSMOOTH

They still suck
Forum Member
Feb 2, 2001
1,018
0
0
50
Ann Arbor, Ohio
Give em hell W....

Give em hell W....

Whether you voted for George or not, I feel we all, as Americans should support him and his staff.
To me, this is another case of the media making me sick! Just as with this argument over 9/11 photos of W aboard AF1.
The old adage sums it up here.....
Hindsight is 20/20
 

Blitz

Hopeful
Forum Member
Jan 6, 2002
7,540
46
48
57
North of Titletown AKA Boston
Let me try to put this in terms people on this board should understand.

If I'm playing Football, I know the other team is planning a way to score a Touchdown, but that doesn't mean I know how they are going to try to do it....:shrug:
 

Red Raider

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 27, 2001
1,079
0
0
58
Phoenix, AZ
Why don't you go help with your border and shoot some them folks coming in every day. Shit they will have your job next. That's because they will work for 4 bucks. Will You.

Not sure what you mean by this....I didn't even mention the pros or cons of migrant mexican workers. I mentioned the fact that US government is being sued by the families of some illegals that died going across the border. This is what pisses me off. Hell no I won't work for 4 bucks and hour. Or even 10 or 20 for that matter. Not to mention we as Americans, for the most part, won't do the work they do.

Living in Arizona I can tell you that there are ZERO Americans working the feilds around here when its 110 degrees outside!

The fact that ANY criminal even thinks that he can sue the very entity that he as criminalizing (made this word up) make me sick. Thiefs sue home owners who shoot them, and illegals sue because we don;t make it easy for them to break the law and come into our country.

This is getting off topic, so enough is enough I guess.

I gotta go load my shot gun.....................
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,583
78
48
60
Ventura, Ca.
I felt that not enough hard questions were asked right after 9/11 but I am sure we all remember at the time any criticism of Bush and/or the govt in general was on par with treason. So no one pressed foward with them. Unfortunately these questions will be used by politicians for their own bs reasons be they republicans or democrats (both parties indulge in this lets not be ignorant). I mean back to then and Bin Laden, do any of you really believe die-hard fundamentalist islamics would hang out at strip bars like these did in florida? I don't. My own personal belief is that this was a state sponsered act. As for djv's comment about the CIA and oil, I agree with you there buddy. Blindy support your president and govt at your own risk.
RR, I think even some liberals would not support the illegals in their law suit. I mean that is as stupid as the lady suing McDs for having hot coffee despite it was her damn fault she spilled it. Hope they lose. Personally I think we should have our troops on our borders then in Afghanistan. Just my two cents.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top