http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... index.html
Here it is now to the public to read this controversial briefing at august 6 2001 that says about Bin Laden threat to the US almost one month before 9/11.
WH releases Osama Bin Laden memo of august 6 2001
Moderator: S2k Moderators
- cycloneye
- Admin
- Posts: 146146
- Age: 69
- Joined: Thu Oct 10, 2002 10:54 am
- Location: San Juan, Puerto Rico
WH releases Osama Bin Laden memo of august 6 2001
Last edited by cycloneye on Sat Apr 10, 2004 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 likes
Visit the Caribbean-Central America Weather Thread where you can find at first post web cams,radars
and observations from Caribbean basin members Click Here
and observations from Caribbean basin members Click Here
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 1371
- Age: 63
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:45 pm
- Location: Seminary, Mississippi
- Contact:
Looks like the press and others made a big deal about nothing.
*The memo mentions that bin Laden had been set on striking the US as early as '97 through 2001....did he not do so in '93?
*70 FBI investigations were underway in 2001 regarding al Q cell/related ops in the US.
Bottom line is this:
"Much of the intelligence was uncorroborated, and nothing in the memo points directly to the September 11 attacks."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... index.html
*The memo mentions that bin Laden had been set on striking the US as early as '97 through 2001....did he not do so in '93?
*70 FBI investigations were underway in 2001 regarding al Q cell/related ops in the US.
Bottom line is this:
"Much of the intelligence was uncorroborated, and nothing in the memo points directly to the September 11 attacks."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... index.html
0 likes
I agree with you Tim; until we see clear evidence otherwise, it is ridiculous to suggest that the Bush administration had direct knowledge of the attack beforehand and failed to act. I'm sure they had some information, but if it was uncorroborated as the report seems to indicate, it is not likely that any other President would've taken any different action. Hindsight is always 20/20, and there are probably dozens of terror threats at any given time, the vast majority of which never pan out and thus are put on the back-burner in favor of pressing domestic issues. This is a clear case IMO of the Democrats using invalid means to attack the Republican President (that applies only to the ones shouting and pointing fingers; those who are simply questioning and calling for investigation are right on the money), and while I do agree that there are plenty of Dems doing this, I have not seen the media implying that the memo was a clear-cut allusion to the events September 11. Then again, as a general rule I usually do not buy into the whole "liberal-biased media" frenzy that some seem to be in.
0 likes
-
- Category 5
- Posts: 1371
- Age: 63
- Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 5:45 pm
- Location: Seminary, Mississippi
- Contact:
Brett, I think it's just a case of some looking for someone to blame....kind of a "human nature" thing.
While Clinton could have had bin Laden handed to him, for whatever reasons, he didn't accept the offer. I am not familiar enough with all of the facts in that situation to say that he was right or wrong on that call. It would be easy to say "It's Clinton's fault" but we honestly don't know that that would have prevented 9-11.
IMO I think the US needs to focus on making sure something like that never happens again. Learn from past mistakes and stop playing the "blame game".
While Clinton could have had bin Laden handed to him, for whatever reasons, he didn't accept the offer. I am not familiar enough with all of the facts in that situation to say that he was right or wrong on that call. It would be easy to say "It's Clinton's fault" but we honestly don't know that that would have prevented 9-11.
IMO I think the US needs to focus on making sure something like that never happens again. Learn from past mistakes and stop playing the "blame game".

0 likes
The most important thing was they made the accusations public!
What happened was the white house called their bluff.So all they could do is spin what was being said.
Examples:
81 widows of 9-11 (all registered Dems)are given front row seat at these hearings.They clap(which is forbiden at such hearings) only when it (the question,not even the answer)was showing Bush in bad light.
Hardball with Chris Matthews has on 5 of the 81 and he is pissed at Dr.Rice,they only show her saying I cant remember and one wife said "I can't believe the white house or Bush didn't know this was ging to happpen,just look how long it took for the military to respond after the 2nd plane hit the towers"chris mattehews reply"yeh I know what you mean"
CNN reported the Dr.Rice was grilled and didn't fair well on certain subjects.
On good morning America Diane Sawyer "there is more to what President Bush knew before 9-11"then just before commerical break she said"President Clinton testified yesterday,he was to speak for 3 hours but he gave them more and finished in over 4 hours,President Clinton told the truth"
Then the liberal media made its focus the PBD and called for its release.
The White House did it again they called thir bluff.
After it was released MSNBC only pointed out the 2nd to last paragraph and the reporter got allexcited and said"look there you go there was information about hijacking planes and crashing them ino federal buildings in New York City"Then David Gregory said"No you miss heard me "Then they feed was lost.
Its so blatant.No matter what Bush will say or do will be wrong no matter what and the media will report it if it is true or not.
Just look at what these people said and try to defend them,it wont be done on the air waves!
Peace
Steve O.
What happened was the white house called their bluff.So all they could do is spin what was being said.
Examples:
81 widows of 9-11 (all registered Dems)are given front row seat at these hearings.They clap(which is forbiden at such hearings) only when it (the question,not even the answer)was showing Bush in bad light.
Hardball with Chris Matthews has on 5 of the 81 and he is pissed at Dr.Rice,they only show her saying I cant remember and one wife said "I can't believe the white house or Bush didn't know this was ging to happpen,just look how long it took for the military to respond after the 2nd plane hit the towers"chris mattehews reply"yeh I know what you mean"
CNN reported the Dr.Rice was grilled and didn't fair well on certain subjects.
On good morning America Diane Sawyer "there is more to what President Bush knew before 9-11"then just before commerical break she said"President Clinton testified yesterday,he was to speak for 3 hours but he gave them more and finished in over 4 hours,President Clinton told the truth"
Then the liberal media made its focus the PBD and called for its release.
The White House did it again they called thir bluff.
After it was released MSNBC only pointed out the 2nd to last paragraph and the reporter got allexcited and said"look there you go there was information about hijacking planes and crashing them ino federal buildings in New York City"Then David Gregory said"No you miss heard me "Then they feed was lost.
Its so blatant.No matter what Bush will say or do will be wrong no matter what and the media will report it if it is true or not.
Just look at what these people said and try to defend them,it wont be done on the air waves!

Peace
Steve O.
0 likes
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests