Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   New documents show the CIA had Bin Laden in its crosshairs a full year before 9/11 but didn't get the funding from the Bush administration to take him out or even continue monitoring him   (salon.com ) divider line 297
    More: Sad, Bush administration, CIA, Osama bin Laden, KSM, Northern Alliance, intelligence gathering, gag orders, AfPak  
•       •       •

3777 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Jun 2012 at 8:33 PM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



297 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-20 04:20:16 AM  

Shaggy_C: Obama still blames Bush for things that happened 3 years ago and I don't hear much criticism on this BBS.


That's because even after the walls, floors and ceilings are scrubbed, it still takes time for the sh*t smell to dissipate. When there's a turd that large flung around the room (the Bush Tax cuts, the economic depression that happened on his watch, two unpaid for wars, a pissed-off planet and a whole list of other crap), it's going to take awhile.

The current president has spent most of this term with a mop and bucket... and the republicans in congress have done everything they could so far to take the f*cking bucket.
 
2012-06-20 04:35:34 AM  

rewind2846: Shaggy_C: Obama still blames Bush for things that happened 3 years ago and I don't hear much criticism on this BBS.

That's because even after the walls, floors and ceilings are scrubbed, it still takes time for the sh*t smell to dissipate. When there's a turd that large flung around the room (the Bush Tax cuts, the economic depression that happened on his watch, two unpaid for wars, a pissed-off planet and a whole list of other crap), it's going to take awhile.

The current president has spent most of this term with a mop and bucket... and the republicans in congress have done everything they could so far to take the f*cking bucket.


Well obviously your guy is killing it, he has shut down Gitmo, he's got us out of Afghanistan, and let's not forget he's shut down drone strikes in Pakistan. I mean he got alot done his first two years when he had majoritys in the house and senate.
 
2012-06-20 04:50:09 AM  

Shaggy_C: Besides, since when is things that happen during first year in office the fault of the president? Obama still blames Bush for things that happened 3 years ago and I don't hear much criticism on this BBS.


Yeah, superpowers and their economies are like speedboats, they really turn on a dime. I wonder how many more times easier it is to destroy something than to build it back up?
 
2012-06-20 04:54:10 AM  

Red Barchetta: I call BS on this one. No matter who the president is, over the past half century the CIA has operations in over 100 foreign countries. But we cant cut that number down to 75 countries so we have funding for when something really important comes along? Puhlease.


Terrorism. We have to stay alert.
 
2012-06-20 04:55:47 AM  

Shaggy_C: Obama still blames Bush for things that happened 3 years ago and I don't hear much criticism on this BBS.


That's cause everybody's too busy playing Legend of the Red Dragon and TradeWars.
 
2012-06-20 05:04:31 AM  

rewind2846: Shaggy_C: Obama still blames Bush for things that happened 3 years ago and I don't hear much criticism on this BBS.

That's because even after the walls, floors and ceilings are scrubbed, it still takes time for the sh*t smell to dissipate. When there's a turd that large flung around the room (the Bush Tax cuts, the economic depression that happened on his watch, two unpaid for wars, a pissed-off planet and a whole list of other crap), it's going to take awhile.

The current president has spent most of this term with a mop and bucket... and the republicans in congress have done everything they could so far to take the f*cking bucket.


The creation of unregulated derivative markets and the repeal of Glass Steagall, which were the driving factors of the financial crisis of 2008, were both pushed for by Robert Rubin and rubber stamped by a Republican Congress. Blame Bush if you want for not doing anything to prevent it from happening, but Obama hasn't done anything to fix it either; the problem is still out there, and Rubin is still one of Obama's chief economic advisors.

/Iraq, you can blame entirely on Bush
 
2012-06-20 05:52:50 AM  
if nothing else, this thread led to somebody actually seriously quoting Mansoor Ijaz.

that's humor enough to be worth the price of derpmission.
 
2012-06-20 06:51:54 AM  
But but but...Clinton!
 
2012-06-20 07:27:09 AM  

Coelacanth: I have one of the biggest mouths here on Fark, but there are not enough words right now to express how much I HATE George Bush and his supporters.


You should talk to somebody about that, preferably somebody with a license.
 
2012-06-20 07:28:36 AM  

slayer199: Clinton blew it too and has admitted as much.. 9-11 was a failure of the government across multiple administrations. Hell, our foreign policy in the Middle East has been a disaster for damn near 70 years.


They knew where he was, but Clinton wanted him alive with minimal collateral damaged and nixed the operation.

Yeah, he screwed up, but he did not ignore the bastard, or warnings about terrorist attacks like Bush & Co. did the August 8th memo.
 
2012-06-20 07:36:34 AM  

crab66: But but but...Clinton!


Yeah, appointing a brand new Cabinet position, a complete report by Clarke to be handed over to the next Administration, and a shoot on sight order for bin Laden just wasn't enough.

Instead, a discredited account of an exchange that never happened, and could never happen, gets trotted out again, because apparently no one has any memory...
 
2012-06-20 07:55:19 AM  

Great_Milenko: Chariset: slayer199: Clinton blew it too and has admitted as much.. 9-11 was a failure of the government across multiple administrations. Hell, our foreign policy in the Middle East has been a disaster for damn near 70 years.

BOTH SIDES ARE BAD

In this case I think he had a point.

And I also think that no one in the higher levels of the US government actually thought these guys would attempt something so big. They were probably expecting another truck bomb or a simple hijacking.


Didn't the 9/11 Commission prove otherwise, that they knew it would be planes in a large city?
 
2012-06-20 07:59:46 AM  
Can we all agree that subby is a dumbass for the headline?
 
2012-06-20 08:01:23 AM  

Nerdhurter: ... I mean he got alot done his first two years when he had majoritys in the house and senate.I POST FACTUALLY INACCURATE DRIVEL BE CAUSE I AM A LIAR!


Now now, you may just be ignorant, or stupid.
 
2012-06-20 08:22:08 AM  

rosebud_the_sled: Oh come on now. We all know that GW Bush was an incompetent, lazy sack of crap junkie and he surrounded himself with fairly stupid incompetent people with attitudes. After all, the only criteria that someone who should be president needs to be judged on is whether they can drink beer. But, did anyone notice that Obama is black. And uppity.


That's not fair.

If you had previous work with pretty ponies, you could have been the head of FEMA.
 
2012-06-20 08:22:10 AM  
Um, a full year before 9/11/2001 would be 9/11/2000. Bush Jr. was inaugurated January 20, 2001.
 
2012-06-20 08:31:46 AM  

brantgoose: [www.bartcop.com image 600x293]
God Save the King! They've finally admitted it. Viscount Monckton is automatically Governor of New Jersey!


Ronnie was so out of it, he probably thought he was meeting The Grateful Dead.
 
2012-06-20 08:35:07 AM  
From June to September 2001, a full seven CIA Senior Intelligence Briefs detailed that attacks were imminent [...] One from June [...] writes that "[redacted] expects Usama Bin Laden to launch multiple attacks over the coming days." [...] During the entire month of August, President Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas - which tied with one of Richard Nixon's as the longest vacation ever taken by a president. CIA Director George Tenet has said he didn't speak to Bush once that month [...] Bush did not hold a Principals' meeting on terrorism until September 4, 2001, having downgraded the meetings to a deputies' meeting, which then-counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke has repeatedly said slowed down anti-Bin Laden efforts "enormously, by months."

I love all the conservative toadies who ran straight into this thread and didn't bother to RTFA before jumping on the headling to try and blame Clinton for everything.... farking lying-ass scum.

/ did I say "I love" them? My mistake. I meant they sicken me.
 
2012-06-20 08:36:23 AM  

One Big Ass Mistake America: Um, a full year before 9/11/2001 would be 9/11/2000. Bush Jr. was inaugurated January 20, 2001.


For example, this toady.

RTFA, toady.
 
2012-06-20 08:37:48 AM  

NFA: It just fits the pattern of GOP protecting anti-American forces.

[www.bartcop.com image 600x293]


The Taliban was formed after the exit of the USSR from Afghanistan. The guys in that picture are presumably native Afghanis who formed the resistance group, Mujahaddin. Many of those went on to form the Northern Alliance.

All brown people are the same? Is that your argument? Are you really going to say that because Reagan met some swarthy people from Afghanistan, he supported the Taliban?
 
2012-06-20 08:39:34 AM  

hinten: I don't know how to program a computer which, of course, means that nobody knows how to do it.

The 'nobody could have expected it' excuse was rampant right after 9/11. We have thousands and thousands of people whose job is dedicated to knowing exactly these types of things. Just because you don't spend your day on this outside of reading a Tom Clancy novel...
I hated the days after 9/11 almost as much as the attack itself.


What specific, actionable intelligence did we have that we could have acted upon, given the legal constraints of the time, that would have prevented the 9/11 attacks?
 
2012-06-20 08:43:18 AM  

GoldSpider: You should talk to somebody about that, preferably somebody with a license.


And you should be relieved that all I can do right now is PLONK you.
 
2012-06-20 08:48:38 AM  
I suspect as more comes to light, history is going to be very, very unforgiving with Bush and friends.
 
2012-06-20 08:51:03 AM  
October surprise?
 
2012-06-20 08:54:19 AM  

Gestalt: I suspect as more comes to light, history is going to be very, very unforgiving with Bush and friends.


And let's remember that that's what's really important here. Learning from the mistakes of past administrations is a tertiary goal at best.
 
2012-06-20 08:55:46 AM  
Oh look, we've had crappy government for years and years and years, what a surprise.
 
2012-06-20 09:03:58 AM  

Gestalt: I suspect as more comes to light, history is going to be very, very unforgiving with Bush and friends.


Sadly, no. I mean, yes, factually, that's probably true, but realistically what will happen is that the toadies will scream that textbooks and historical accounts are all part of the indistinct, unidentifiable "liberal agenda" they're always on about but can never clearly explain. Schools and media will self-censor because conservatives have managed to convince them that every argument has two sides no matter what the facts are while people who actually stick to those facts will be slandered and reviled as liberal agitators.

You already see it with Reagan. How many people remember that the man raised taxes twice? Significantly.

Conservatives have used substantial doublethink and newspeak to turn this country around a terrifying corner that we've seen before in other places and I don't think they have any plans on turning back around and heading out of this alley they're dragging us down. They've redefined language, rewritten established history and turned objective facts into things to be viewed with suspicion. We're about one charismatic leader with delusions of grandeur away from the republican party invading Poland....

/ thankfully, nobody in the tea party is charismatic enough because there's nothing inspiring about a 60 year old fatwad in a Rascal slopping Taco Bell processed and seasoned meat product all over distended spandex pants....
 
2012-06-20 09:05:46 AM  

Gestalt: I suspect as more comes to light, history is going to be very, very unforgiving with Bush and friends.


I don't think so.

At best, this is a "Pearl Harbor" type of situation: Yeah, maybe we had an inkling that something was going to happen at sometime, but we didn't have any real specifics that would have permitted us to *PREVENT* it, or to mitigate it.

Also, killing bin Laden prior to 9/11 probably wouldn't have prevented the attacks: He merely approved the plan, and approved the expenditures to make it happen. He didn't conceive of the plan himself, nor was he involved in the actual detailed planning of it. If he was dead due to a drone strike by the US when Khalid Sheik Muhammed came up with the idea, the new head of Al Qaeda would likely have approved it.

Then we'd be arguing whether Clinton or Bush *CAUSED* 9/11 by killing the leader of Al Qaeda, which had never attacked in the states, just overseas.
 
2012-06-20 09:09:17 AM  

ebooks-imgs.connect.com



Bush overheard speaking to his very close business partners, the extremely rich Bin Laden family:

"Don't worry, sir. As long as I'm in the White House, your son is safe."
 
2012-06-20 09:15:07 AM  
What is more important to note in this blame fest, is that, clearly, all threats posed by terrorism were ended by getting a homebound and soon to die of natural causes armchair quarterback for Al Qitty.

I mean if Bush had killed Osama in 2000 like a good president should have, OBL couldn't have personally flown those planes into the towers. So what that it wasn't his plan? So what that he didn't actually carry it out? It was the only way to prevent what was going to happen with or without him.
 
2012-06-20 09:18:47 AM  

Splinshints: From June to September 2001, a full seven CIA Senior Intelligence Briefs detailed that attacks were imminent [...] One from June [...] writes that "[redacted] expects Usama Bin Laden to launch multiple attacks over the coming days." [...] During the entire month of August, President Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas - which tied with one of Richard Nixon's as the longest vacation ever taken by a president. CIA Director George Tenet has said he didn't speak to Bush once that month [...] Bush did not hold a Principals' meeting on terrorism until September 4, 2001, having downgraded the meetings to a deputies' meeting, which then-counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke has repeatedly said slowed down anti-Bin Laden efforts "enormously, by months."

I love all the conservative toadies who ran straight into this thread and didn't bother to RTFA before jumping on the headling to try and blame Clinton for everything.... farking lying-ass scum.

/ did I say "I love" them? My mistake. I meant they sicken me.


7 out of a possible 120(?) SEIBs for that time period (june to september) claimed their was an imminent threat. How do you know which SEIB is the one that you really have to pay attention to? I'd wager that the average Farker couldn't tell an SEIB from a Weekly World News article.

A president is responsible for the mess the previous administration left him, or he's not....make up your mind.
 
2012-06-20 09:21:24 AM  

intelligent comment below: America is "at war" while it was not with Clinton........Clinton was not going to conduct military operations during peace


No declaration of war but we were killing, bombing and missling the shiat out of people in Haiti, Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, and the Balkans.
 
2012-06-20 09:22:03 AM  

Goodfella: Bush overheard speaking to his very close business partners, the extremely rich Bin Laden family:


Which probably makes a lot of sense if you ignore the fact that it was no secret that most of the family had little love for Osama, disowned him in the 90s, and several members outright condemned him in public....

The bin Laden family has always held a greater affinity for Saudi Arabia than for Osama bin Laden. Even ignoring his butchering, Osama's condemnations of Saudi royalty earned him plenty of scorn from the family that had such close ties to them.
 
2012-06-20 09:26:06 AM  

intelligent comment below: 9beers: You just proved my point with what you posted, you do realize that, right? The CIA had Bin Laden in the crosshairs and were denied permission to launch a strike. Oh no, maybe Bin Laden will run to the store for some Skittles and all we'll do is blow up a camp full of terrorists.


No. your point was "launch a missile" to which I refuted with a link

You then said "launch a strike team" as your final stumbling, except that isn't OBL in the crosshairs. That's order a military strike with troops not in friendly territory without Congressional approval.

9beers: Oh and lets not forget this.

Change your name.

Forget what? You backpedaled from this after I proved it a complete fabrication:

9beers: Cruise missiles are very good at what they do, blowing shiat up. Clinton wouldn't order a strike and claimed that he wanted to take Bin Laden alive, even though there weren't ever any plans drawn up on how to do that if we happened to located him.

CHANGE YOUR NAME


Seriously, you would have to drink about 9 beers to write such prattle as "9beers".

/I know he was originally focused at you
//2 weeks and so many names in ignore filter
 
2012-06-20 09:27:49 AM  

s2s2s2: What is more important to note in this blame fest, is that, clearly, all threats posed by terrorism were ended by getting a homebound and soon to die of natural causes armchair quarterback for Al Qitty.

I mean if Bush had killed Osama in 2000 like a good president should have, OBL couldn't have personally flown those planes into the towers. So what that it wasn't his plan? So what that he didn't actually carry it out? It was the only way to prevent what was going to happen with or without him.


It depends on what al Queda actually is. If it's a cult of personality like the Westboro Baptist Church or Apple, it will wither and die without it's spiritual leader. If it's more like a corporation, it will continue to function despite major setbacks. After all, rednecks didn't stop buying Chevy's just because Dale Earnhardt died.
 
2012-06-20 09:28:46 AM  

Hobodeluxe: I seriously doubt they could have put boots on the ground in Afghanistan quicker than a missile strike


We had boots on the ground. Boots on the ground doesn;t have to be brigade strength. It can and has been something as small as 2 guys with a M24......

/snip
Logan then narrates that Crumpton "couldn't get permission to do anything, including allowing the CIA's Afghan agents on the ground to attack bin Laden's compound."

The miniseries featured a scene vetted, as all the scenes were, by a battery of ABC lawyers, in which a CIA team and its Afghan allies had bin Laden in its sights, called the White House for approval to make the hit, and were denied the go-ahead.

---------------

Scheuer has been critical of the Bush and Clinton administrations for not killing bin Laden, for costly and disastrous policy missteps, and for not taking decisive measures to defend the country. He states that Clinton had eight to ten opportunities to kill bin Laden prior to September 11, and Bush had one opportunity thereafter. Richard A. Clarke and the Clinton administration, according to Scheuer, thwarted the CIA's ambitions to kidnap or kill bin Laden when they had the chance.[27] According to Scheuer,


Clarke's book Against All Enemies is also a crucial complement to the September 11 panel's failure to condemn Mr. Clinton's failure to capture or kill bin Laden on any of the eight to 10 chances afforded by CIA reporting. Mr. Clarke never mentions that President Bush had no chances to kill bin Laden before September 11 and leaves readers with the false impression that he, Mr. Clinton and Mr. Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, did their best to end the bin Laden threat. That trio, in my view, abetted al Qaeda, and if the September 11 families were smart they would focus on the dereliction of Dick [Clarke], Bill [Clinton] and Sandy [Berger] and not the antics of convicted September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui.[28]

Of the Bush administration, Scheuer warns against assigning it full responsibility for the nation's troubles since September 11, 2001. Although the "unprovoked attack of Iraq" will forever be remembered as "infamous", as will Dick Cheney's "reptilian contention that Americans who criticize U.S. foreign policy are 'validating the strategy of the terrorists'," according to Scheuer, a "bipartisan governing elite", both Democratic and Republican, is to blame for the nation's woes.[29

/snip
 
2012-06-20 09:29:45 AM  

Nerdhurter: his first two years when he had majoritys in the house and senate.


Did he really?
 
2012-06-20 09:33:22 AM  

Giltric: How do you know which SEIB is the one that you really have to pay attention to? I


The famous August brief called "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike the US" is included.
[...]
During the entire month of August, President Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas - which tied with one of Richard Nixon's as the longest vacation ever taken by a president. CIA Director George Tenet has said he didn't speak to Bush once that month
[...]
Bush did not hold a Principals' meeting on terrorism until September 4, 2001, having downgraded the meetings to a deputies' meeting, which then-counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke has repeatedly said slowed down anti-Bin Laden efforts "enormously, by months."


STOP LYING.
 
2012-06-20 09:33:35 AM  

s2s2s2: I mean if Bush had killed Osama in 2000


Ummm he was innaugurated in January of 2001 wasnt he?
 
2012-06-20 09:36:08 AM  

Great_Milenko: It depends on what al Queda actually is. If it's a cult of personality like the Westboro Baptist Church or Apple, it will wither and die without it's spiritual leader. If it's more like a corporation, it will continue to function despite major setbacks. After all, rednecks didn't stop buying Chevy's just because Dale Earnhardt died.


Yeah, kinda my point. Killing OBL did nothing, and would have done nothing, but stop OBL from living. This argument is about telling the world how much you like or dislike our political leaders.
 
2012-06-20 09:39:12 AM  

Giltric: Ummm he was innaugurated in January of 2001 wasnt he?


mimg.ugo.com
 
2012-06-20 09:40:20 AM  

Splinshints: Giltric: How do you know which SEIB is the one that you really have to pay attention to? I

The famous August brief called "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike the US" is included.
[...]
During the entire month of August, President Bush was on vacation at his ranch in Texas - which tied with one of Richard Nixon's as the longest vacation ever taken by a president. CIA Director George Tenet has said he didn't speak to Bush once that month
[...]
Bush did not hold a Principals' meeting on terrorism until September 4, 2001, having downgraded the meetings to a deputies' meeting, which then-counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke has repeatedly said slowed down anti-Bin Laden efforts "enormously, by months."


STOP LYING.


Lying about what? This is more a case of hindsight being 20/20 then anything else. I wonder if theres an SEIB that says Iran is intent on building and using a nuclear weapon....tthat would be interesting.....would you take it seriously and call for intervention or would you brush it off?
 
2012-06-20 09:44:41 AM  

Great_Milenko: After all, rednecks didn't stop buying Chevy's just because Dale Earnhardt died.


Any chance they will start buying Toyota Camrys now that they are winning races???
//RFLOL
 
2012-06-20 09:48:35 AM  
Bush

just didn't care.
 
2012-06-20 09:59:28 AM  

Giltric: This is more a case of hindsight being 20/20 then anything else


Yea, that's the ticket. Nobody could have foreseen that it might be a bad idea to ignore multiple claims of serious threat and imminent attack over the course of three months, take a record long vacation a measly eight months into your first term, downgrade the briefings, and not be in touch with your CIA director for an entire month while continuing for months to take no action on the outgoing administration's budget issues. Nope. Totally honest mistake. No possible way to see that would be a bad idea. None at all. Completely forgivable to not realize that a policy of inaction at the highest level of government might lead to negative consequences.

STOP LYING.

I wonder if theres an SEIB that says Iran is intent on building and using a nuclear weapon....tthat would be interesting.....would you take it seriously and call for intervention or would you brush it off?

If I read it and had the option of deciding, it would be entirely unlike this situation where a series of concerted efforts by Bush to actively remove himself from the review process left him and much of his senior staff completely uninformed about serious and valid threats against the nation so that there was no possibility of making that decision one way or the other.

STOP LYING.
 
2012-06-20 10:00:21 AM  
Salon thinks the Bush administration was in control in September 2000. Epic fail, Salon.
 
2012-06-20 10:03:23 AM  

davidphogan: If a dumbass kid like I was back then could figure out flying large jets into tall buildings might be a damaging thing, it's hard to believe the older and wiser nerds in Langley couldn't come up with the same scenario.


The Lone Gunmen had it figured out months in advance.
 
2012-06-20 10:04:26 AM  

jyoders19: Salon thinks the Bush administration was in control in September 2000. Epic fail, Salon.


By inventing and using the shiat out of "Obama's time machine" they have made themselves immune to its logic.
 
2012-06-20 10:06:54 AM  

Splinshints: Giltric: This is more a case of hindsight being 20/20 then anything else

Yea, that's the ticket. Nobody could have foreseen that it might be a bad idea to ignore multiple claims of serious threat and imminent attack over the course of three months, take a record long vacation a measly eight months into your first term, downgrade the briefings, and not be in touch with your CIA director for an entire month while continuing for months to take no action on the outgoing administration's budget issues. Nope. Totally honest mistake. No possible way to see that would be a bad idea. None at all. Completely forgivable to not realize that a policy of inaction at the highest level of government might lead to negative consequences.

STOP LYING.

I wonder if theres an SEIB that says Iran is intent on building and using a nuclear weapon....tthat would be interesting.....would you take it seriously and call for intervention or would you brush it off?

If I read it and had the option of deciding, it would be entirely unlike this situation where a series of concerted efforts by Bush to actively remove himself from the review process left him and much of his senior staff completely uninformed about serious and valid threats against the nation so that there was no possibility of making that decision one way or the other.

STOP LYING.


Remove himself from the process? Is that like not meeting with cabinet members cause the president shouldn't micro manage every federal agency....like Fartbongo?
 
2012-06-20 10:09:23 AM  
MugzyBrown: People sure have odd memories of people they don't like

Golly, shucks, heavens to betsy... I have you labelled as "pretends to be an ingenue," so thanks for the consistency.
 
Displayed 50 of 297 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report