NYT Bombshell: 'SIGNIFICANTLY MORE 9/11 NEGLIGENCE THAN HAS BEEN DISCLOSED'

[Seawytch]

Bush White House Deaf to 9/11 Warnings

Damn...

 

[Papageorgio]

So we are supposed to believe the op-Ed writer because he says so.

Two, why are we supposed to believe the CIA? Weren't they the ones that told us that Iraq had WMD's?

Three, Clinton had intelligence reports on Osama and and imminent attack. From what I have gathered, there was chatter about an attack for a few years.

However, Sunday morning QBing is pretty easy for an op-Ed writer.

 

[Political Junky]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIpEwGmSsmM]Condoleezza Rice asserts 'Bin Laden Determined To Attack' wasn't a warning. thumpandwhip.com - YouTube[/ame]

 

[tjvh]

One Bush Two Bush red Bush Blue Bush.

 

[Papageorgio]

One Bush Two Bush red Bush Blue Bush.

About sums it up.

 

[Lakhota]

I was just reading this on HuffPo. Damn, this is awesome!

 

[Lakhota]

This just further vindicates Richard Clarke.

 

[Lakhota]

The Out-of-Towner: While Bush vacationed, 9/11 warnings went unheard

 

[Lakhota]

If Romney had selected Condi Rice for VP, this NYT bombshell would have likely ended his candidacy.

 

[Lakhota]

O'Neill: Iraq planning came before 9/11

By Dave Moniz and Peronet Despeignes, USA TODAY

CRAWFORD, Texas — Paul O'Neill, President Bush's Treasury secretary in the first two years of his presidency, says the Bush administration was planning to invade Iraq long before the Sept. 11 attacks and used questionable intelligence to justify the war.

In wide-ranging interviews with the CBS program 60 Minutes and Time magazine, O'Neill said Bush and a number of top advisers began planning to get rid of Saddam Hussein soon after the 2000 election. As early as January 2001, they began looking for ways to justify an invasion, O'Neill said.

"From the very beginning, there was a conviction that Saddam Hussein is a bad person and that he needed to go," O'Neill told 60 Minutes. "From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime."

In the interviews, O'Neill was critical of Bush's leadership skills. He said Bush is too secretive and has saddled the economy with crippling long-term debt.

Bush fired O'Neill in December 2002 after clashing with the Treasury secretary over economic issues, including Bush's $1.7 trillion in tax cuts. O'Neill is the principal source for a new book about the Bush administration, The Price of Loyalty: George W. Bush, the White House and the Education of Paul O'Neill by former Wall Street Journal reporter Ron Suskind.

In the book, Suskind used materials provided by O'Neill to show that Bush administration officials targeted Saddam immediately after the election. Interviewed in the Jan. 19 edition of Time, O'Neill said the White House overstated the threat posed by Iraq.

"In the 23 months I was there, I never saw anything that I would characterize as evidence of weapons of mass destruction. ... I never saw anything in the intelligence that I would characterize as real evidence."

The Bush administration declined to comment on the substance of O'Neill's statements. Spokesman Ken Lisaius said Sunday: "The White House is not in the business of doing book reviews. This is an attempt to justify the former secretary's own opinions instead of looking at the record of results being achieved for the American people."

Suskind, also interviewed on 60 Minutes, said the Bush administration had already begun planning for an invasion of Iraq in January 2001 — eight months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington. The planning, Suskind said, involved discussions of war crimes tribunals, peacekeeping troops and questions about how to divide Iraq's oil wealth.

More: USATODAY.com - O'Neill: Iraq planning came before 9/11

 

[tjvh]

I was just reading this on HuffPo. Damn, this is awesome!

This is awesome??? What exactly is so awesome about failed intelligence leading to the deaths of thousands of Americans? You are a fucking loon.

 

[Papageorgio]

I was just reading this on HuffPo. Damn, this is awesome!

This is awesome??? What exactly is so awesome about failed intelligence leading to the deaths of thousands of Americans? You are a fucking loon.

Yeah, we need to celebrate failed intelligence, how fucking low does one have to be to be excited over the death of innocent people? Just when I thought the left couldn't get more disgusting, they get excited over people dying. What a great bunch of assholes.

 

[Lakhota]

I was just reading this on HuffPo. Damn, this is awesome!

This is awesome??? What exactly is so awesome about failed intelligence leading to the deaths of thousands of Americans? You are a fucking loon.

Yes, it's awesome that Bush is being further exposed for the lazy, lying, vacationing, stupid asshole that he was for ignoring pre-9/11 warnings while planning to invade Iraq. Yes, this is awesome news! I'm sure the media will have plenty to say about it tomorrow.

 

[Lakhota]

BTW, the intelligence wasn't failed.

 

[tjvh]

I was just reading this on HuffPo. Damn, this is awesome!

This is awesome??? What exactly is so awesome about failed intelligence leading to the deaths of thousands of Americans? You are a fucking loon.

Yes, it's awesome that Bush is being further exposed for the lazy, lying, vacationing, stupid asshole that he was for ignoring pre-9/11 warnings while planning to invade Iraq. Yes, this is awesome news! I'm sure the media will have plenty to say about it tomorrow.

Seek medical attention... You are one mentally ill sick fuck.

 

[auditor0007]

Bush White House Deaf to 9/11 Warnings

Damn...

National Security advisors get warnings everyday about all sorts of things. If somehow we get hit despite those warnings, it doesn't mean they were ignored; it just means we had a failure at some level. In every war, we lose people. We end up killing more than they get of us, but we have casualties. We're not going to stop every single threat that comes our way, although we better try damn hard.

This is not something I am going to blame Bush for. There are just too many things we politicize, and this happens on both sides of the fence. Honest to goodness, a little cooperation from both sides could go a long way in accomplishing some of the things we need to work on instead of constantly pointing fingers at each other.

 

[Papageorgio]

Bush White House Deaf to 9/11 Warnings

Damn...

National Security advisors get warnings everyday about all sorts of things. If somehow we get hit despite those warnings, it doesn't mean they were ignored; it just means we had a failure at some level. In every war, we lose people. We end up killing more than they get of us, but we have casualties. We're not going to stop every single threat that comes our way, although we better try damn hard.

This is not something I am going to blame Bush for. There are just too many things we politicize, and this happens on both sides of the fence. Honest to goodness, a little cooperation from both sides could go a long way in accomplishing some of the things we need to work on instead of constantly pointing fingers at each other.

Did hell freeze over? I agree with you. These reports were coming in daily over a span of a few years, the chatter was out there but no one knew when or where. The same can be said about FDR, he didn't know, intelligence was telling him something was going to happen, sometime, somewhere, how is he supposed to know either?

 

[tjvh]

Bush White House Deaf to 9/11 Warnings

Damn...

National Security advisors get warnings everyday about all sorts of things. If somehow we get hit despite those warnings, it doesn't mean they were ignored; it just means we had a failure at some level. In every war, we lose people. We end up killing more than they get of us, but we have casualties. We're not going to stop every single threat that comes our way, although we better try damn hard.

This is not something I am going to blame Bush for. There are just too many things we politicize, and this happens on both sides of the fence. Honest to goodness, a little cooperation from both sides could go a long way in accomplishing some of the things we need to work on instead of constantly pointing fingers at each other.

Did hell freeze over? I agree with you. These reports were coming in daily over a span of a few years, the chatter was out there but no one knew when or where. The same can be said about FDR, he didn't know, intelligence was telling him something was going to happen, sometime, somewhere, how is he supposed to know either?

Hindsight is 20/20. Isn't it amazing how much easier it is to connect the dots when your looking into the past, as opposed to predicting the future. Nuts.

 

[Lakhota]

Two Months Before 9/11, an Urgent Warning to Rice

 

[grunt11b]

The Out-of-Towner: While Bush vacationed, 9/11 warnings went unheard

You should be happy about this news, after all the downfall of 9/11 is what helped usher in a democrat sweep of both houses in 2006 and the white house in 2008. Which makes you wonder just who stood to benefit most from it happening right? Oops......if there ever really is a truther conspiracy now that would be a good one right?