Politics: J'accuse!

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
she's

Well not me he's starting to concede some of the points. keep pushing.

[SlaveNoMore]

... the French government fiddles and tries to decide whether to accept OBL's offer or to merely withdraw from the EU entirely and become part of Africa or Asia


From AP

"A man identifying himself as Osama bin Laden offered a "truce" to European countries that do not attack Muslims, saying it would begin when their soldiers leave Islamic nations, according to a recording broadcast Thursday on Arab satellite networks. Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain [emphasis added] quickly spurned what appeared to be an attempt to drive a wedge between Europe and America. The tape, which ran in full at more than seven minutes, also vowed revenge against America for the Israeli assassination of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin and denounced the United States as using the Iraq war for corporate profiteering."

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Well fuck Kamikazes flew em into boats, so there is history.
But your point is that Clinton was warned and yet failed to take any steps to improve air security?

No, my point was that it's a little scary to think that, having read this book, I'm better informed than the National Security Advisor is about some of this stuff. If Rice knew anything about the preparation for the Atlanta Olympics, she wouldn't have used that "nobody ever thought of it" line. Maybe someone should give her an Amazon gift certificate.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski

Drop the blame Bush shit Ty. This is a big circle jerk. the nationwide changes necessary took months AFTER 9/11 to get approval. Clinton/Bush should have done ? before?

I blame Freeh. And if Clarke knew about airplanes in 1996, why did he not mention it to anyone in the Clinton admin for 4 years (or, if he did . . . )

I still can't believe the pols. actually gave this committee as much authority and money as they did. Who comes out of it looking good? There's simply no way to make Bush look like the fall guy when 9/11 was so early in his presidency. It's not like he abandoned all the efforts Clinton had set up, but just ran out of time to complete a/o 1/20/01. (And, obviously, how did the R's figure to profit when the attacks happened on their watch?)

[dtb]

Originally posted by Not Me
Did you try calling the phone number they posted?

No. Why?

I called. No one answered. Did you call?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
she's
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well not me he's starting to concede some of the points. keep pushing.

This is how you got to be 945-3, apparently.

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Well fuck Kamikazes flew em into boats, so there is history.
But your point is that Clinton was warned and yet failed to take any steps to improve air security?
Drop the blame Bush shit Ty. This is a big circle jerk. the nationwide changes necessary took months AFTER 9/11 to get approval. Clinton/Bush should have done ? before?

On the more narrow point, do you think it's fair to differentiate between warnings of hijackings and warnings of hijackers who use planes as missiles? Is one so qualitatively different than the other?

It seems to me that measures taken to protect against straight hijacking would be the same as those taken to protect against the "missile" situation (with the possible exception being the adoption of military rules of engagement relating to a hijacked passenger aircraft that we knew was being used as a missile). So the comments that we "just couldn't have predicted this" ring a little hollow for me.

Aside from the specifics of the current inquiry, though, do you think no one should be held accountable for 9/11? I'm not saying we should seek arbitrary firings or follow the lesson of McCain's sack-the-captain anecdote. But it kind of galls me that we had such a huge national security breakdown and not one person has been fired or disciplined for it. I don't think that's just the partisan in me. If I truly believed that the events of 9/11 were caused by Gorelick's legal memo, I'd like to think I'd be calling for her head too.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I blame Freeh. And if Clarke knew about airplanes in 1996, why did he not mention it to anyone in the Clinton admin for 4 years (or, if he did . . . )

He was the chief counterterrorism official. If you read his book or Sacred Terror, you see that he was agitating for change -- money and attitudes -- throughout the late 90s, with great success. Sacred Terror points out that spending on counterterrorism soared during that time, in an era of flat budgets.

Doubtless he thinks more should have been done. You can't blame Cassandra when people don't listen to the warnings.

I still can't believe the pols. actually gave this committee as much authority and money as they did. Who comes out of it looking good? There's simply no way to make Bush look like the fall guy when 9/11 was so early in his presidency. It's not like he abandoned all the efforts Clinton had set up, but just ran out of time to complete a/o 1/20/01. (And, obviously, how did the R's figure to profit when the attacks happened on their watch?)

I'll be curious to see what comes out of this process. I don't think it's been railroaded by the partisans, and I think they'll have a lot to say that we haven't heard yet. Don't forget, they're getting a lot of info that we're not privy to. I expect they'll recommend structural change for the FBI -- setting up the equivalent of MI-5 here. Bush will be criticized, and Clinton will be too. Ashcroft is going to look really bad. But there'll be no one fall guy, even if the media will be looking to report it that way at first.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
... the French government fiddles and tries to decide whether to accept OBL's offer or to merely withdraw from the EU entirely and become part of Africa or Asia


From AP

"A man identifying himself as Osama bin Laden offered a "truce" to European countries that do not attack Muslims, saying it would begin when their soldiers leave Islamic nations, according to a recording broadcast Thursday on Arab satellite networks. Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain [emphasis added] quickly spurned what appeared to be an attempt to drive a wedge between Europe and America. The tape, which ran in full at more than seven minutes, also vowed revenge against America for the Israeli assassination of Hamas founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin and denounced the United States as using the Iraq war for corporate profiteering."

I don't get it. Is this post aimed at the numerous French posters on the PB?

It's obvious that you hate the French for being French. We get it. It's a tired gig that every redneck plays every day. You're better than that.

Germany is okay now that they're training the Iraqi police, right?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
If I truly believed that the events of 9/11 were caused by Gorelick's legal memo, I'd like to think I'd be calling for her head too.

I have yet to see someone explain to me what is so wrong with Gorelick's memo, which may be why the Bush DOJ continued with that policy, as per my post quoting the NYT a day or two ago.

Ashcroft saw the writing on the wall -- newspapers suggesting that Bush was going to lay blame on the FBI -- and decided that the best defense is a good offense. The Democrats on the commission declined to fight with him, but it certainly is valiant of the various right-wing hacks to try to keep running with his talking points.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
I don't get it. Is this post aimed at the numerous French posters on the PB?

It's obvious that you hate the French for being French. We get it. It's a tired gig that every redneck plays every day. You're better than that.

Slave is also working on posts condemning Poland, Switzerland, Belgium and Malta, but cut him some slack -- he's busy today.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
On the more narrow point, do you think it's fair to differentiate between warnings of hijackings and warnings of hijackers who use planes as missiles? Is one so qualitatively different than the other?

Hijackings, in the traditional sense, we've long been aware of. The best you can say is that airport security got really lazy and didn't detect the weapons used when brought through security. But that's not an intelligence failure.

And there's a critical difference in response. At best, the difference saves one of the two towers and the pentagon, because even if the fighters reach the planes, until one was crashed into a building, it was assumed they were the "usual" hijackings of the "take me to cuba" type.

But I guess that all future hijackers are screwed now, because basically you'll get shot down if you get anywhere near anything. So much for freeing Mumia.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I have yet to see someone explain to me what is so wrong with Gorelick's memo, which may be why the Bush DOJ continued with that policy, as per my post quoting the NYT a day or two ago.

It sounds bad, that's what's wrong with it. She didn't anticipate that the Patriot Act or the FISC decision saying that the FBI didn't need that act to drop the "wall" between intelligence and criminal investigation.

The whole thing is a show trial. The memo is as meaningful as requiring Rice to testify in public.

Query: do any of the members of teh Commission figure on having any prominent political jobs ever again?

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Hijackings, in the traditional sense, we've long been aware of. The best you can say is that airport security got really lazy and didn't detect the weapons used when brought through security. But that's not an intelligence failure.

And there's a critical difference in response. At best, the difference saves one of the two towers and the pentagon, because even if the fighters reach the planes, until one was crashed into a building, it was assumed they were the "usual" hijackings of the "take me to cuba" type.

But I guess that all future hijackers are screwed now, because basically you'll get shot down if you get anywhere near anything. So much for freeing Mumia.

If Rice said what you said I would not disagree. It's the "it was unthinkable" line of argument that I find to be pretty lame. The preventative measures for each would be the same (not cutting back the federal air marshal program to the brink of eradication, for example), so I'm skeptical of anyone who tries to tell me they are so different in kind.

I just don't like my country's national security advisor talking about a terror attack plan like it was wholly beyond our powers of comprehension. It's not like they got us by figuring out cold fusion.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by bilmore
This truly is one of the most anti-intellectual approaches to life that military thought brings us, and you want to perpetuate it just so you can feel good that someone has been sacked? Incredible.

Yes, captains who are sleeping are regularly sacked when the officer on watch makes a screwup, because "the captain was in charge." Does this have anything to do with fault? No. It simply allows us to focus on an easy demon.

If that's what you're about, have at it. But, don't expect respect for your position.

Note: Bilmore's wife has been sacked for allowing such a nasty response to Gatti, whom we all like to treat with kid gloves.

(We know who's really in charge)