Compliation of how Bush & Co Bungled lead up to 9/11

Discussing all things political in NW Arkansas and beyond.
Post Reply
User avatar
Dardedar
Site Admin
Posts: 8191
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:18 pm
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0
Location: Fayetteville
Contact:

Compliation of how Bush & Co Bungled lead up to 9/11

Post by Dardedar »

DAR
Press Secretary McClellan once claimed that fighting terrorism was a top priority before 9-11.

But he was lying. Take a look.

First this:

"Clinton's National Security Advisor Sandy Berger remembered how little help the previous Bush administration had provided to his team. Believing that the nation's security should transcend political bitterness, Berger arranged ten briefings for his successor, Condoleezza Rice, and her deputy, Stephen Hadley. Berger made a special point of attending the briefing on terrorism. He told Dr. Rice, “I believe that the Bush administration will spend more time on terrorism in general, and on al Qaeda specifically, than any other subject.'' --Franken (Lies and lying liars")

***
Bush & Al Qaeda – By The Numbers

0 – Number of meetings held by Vice President Cheney’s counterterrorism task force (which was created in May 2001)

0 – References to Al Qaeda in Dr. Rice’s 2000 Foreign Affairs article listing Bush’s top foreign affairs priorities

0 – References to Al Qaeda in Secretary Rumsfeld 2001 memo outlining national security priorities

0 – References to terrorism is Justice Department's top seven goals for 2001

0 – Number of National Security Council meetings held by Bush administration before invasion of Iraq was discussed (i.e., it was discussed at the very first meeting)

1 – Number of times the Bush administration mentioned al Qaeda prior to 9-11. This was in a notice continuing an executive order issued by President Clinton.

1 – Number of hours President Bush and Vice President Cheney agreed to allow in their joint meeting with the 9-11 panel.

2 – Number of National Security Council meetings on terrorism prior to 9-11 (out of approximately 100).

4 – Minimum number of Al Qaeda millennium attacks thwarted by the Clinton administration (only plots to bomb Seattle, Los Angeles, Brooklyn and Jordan have been specifically identified)

6 – Months that it would take for Vice President Cheney to respond to draft counterterrorism and homeland security legislation sent to him on July 20, 2001 by Senators Feinstein and Kyl, as stated by his top aid.

6 – Months before 9-11 that Paul Bremer - current Iraq administrator and former chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism - claimed that the Bush administration was “paying no attention” to terrorism. “Bremer stated that the Bush administration would “stagger along until there’s a major incident and then suddenly say, ‘Oh my God, shouldn’t we be organized to deal with this.’”

8 – Months the administration sat on an “urgent” request from its counterterrorism chief (Clarke) to meet about al Qaeda.

9 – Percentage cut sought by Bush in FY2005 budget for Nunn-Lugar program to secure Soviet nuclear material and prevent them from getting into the hands of terrorists, while pushing for billions in spending to deploy an unproven missile defense system.
[Dar note: This was what Bush described as the GREATEST threat to America, in the Kerry debate]

36 – Months passed without any meeting of the Cheney terrorism task force since its formation in May 2001

58 – Number of days President Bush spent in Kennebunkport or at his Crawford ranch from January 21 to September 10, 2001

101– Number of public statements by the Bush administration on his missile defense (aka Star Wars) program from January 21 to September 10, 2001.

104 – Number of public statements by the President Bush on Saddam Hussein from January 21 to September 10, 2001

700 – Millions of dollars Bush administration diverted from war against Al Qaeda to prepare for Iraq war.

800 – Millions of dollars Congress sought to shift from missile defense to counter-terrorism programs prior to 9/11, but Bush threatened to veto any such measure.

In April 2001 the administration released the government’s annual terrorism report with no extensive mention of Osama bin Laden as in prior years. A State Department official told CNN that "the Clinton administration had made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden.”

[Dar note: READ THAT LAST SENTENCE AGAIN]

Similarly, at an April meeting of deputies Clarke urged a focus on Al Qaeda. Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz responded, “No, no, no. We don’t have to deal with al-Qaeda. Why are we talking about that little guy? We have to talk about Iraqi terrorism against the United States.”

In addition, General Donald Kerrick, the deputy National Security Advisor under Clinton who stayed on for a few months with the Bush administration, wrote a memo to his successor (Stephen Hadley) that the administration needed to pay attention to al Qaeda since they will strike again. “They never once asked me a question nor did I see them having a serious discussion about it. They didn’t feel it was imminent the way the Clinton administration did.”

The Bush administration terminated a highly classified program to monitor Al Qaeda suspects in the U.S. and even provided aid to the Taliban in 2001. (Scheer – Los Angeles Times 05-22-01)

http://www.bushlies.net/pages/1/

DAR
Wow. I had forgotten just how painfully bad and irresponsible Bush was on this matter. Maybe someday, someday, if the country wakes up, he'll get strung up for the damage he has done to this country.

D.
.
Image
.
.
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Posts: 2232
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 10:55 am
Designate the number of cents in half a dollar: 0

Post by Barbara Fitzpatrick »

Bush wasn't irresponsible, he was, and is, pursuing his own agenda - armegeddon. That's why you note his team was talking about (non-existant) Iraqi terrorism while the Clinton people were trying to help them/get them to deal with bin Ladin. It's why he is now talking about (non-existant) Irani nuclear weapons. Can't have a second coming without armegeddon. (Though where he gets the idea he's one of "the elect"... Talk about entitlement syndrome!)
Barbara Fitzpatrick
Post Reply