Heads-Up To Ashcroft Proves Threat Was Known Before 9/11

SFGATE (San Francisco Chronicle online) ^ | June 3, 2002 | Harley Sorensen

[Coop]

why didn't we have contingency plans to protect the capital from attack by air?

Such as??

[concerned about politics]

Any one with at least 2 fireing neutrons in thier brain knew we were in for an attack. I was marveling that it had not already happened when it happened. We did know!

Americans were attacked all through the Clinton administration.
I've listed a few, without adding TWA800, or the OKC Federal Building. Heck, I even cut Clinton some slack! Bush only had one!
The NYT had an article that said everything the Bush administration was told in 1995! We were warned! 7 years ago! What did Clinton do about it???

[leadpenny]

I knew too.

Exactly! If the pompous Tom Clancy and Hollywood had it figured out, any one of us with an average imagination could figure it out. I just always thought it would come with an explosive laden corporate aircraft, breaking off an approach to Reagan National at the last second.

[rintense]

I swear the entire WORLD knew and we were all kept in the dark. It all goes back to the Clinton admin, but the liberal press just seems to be skirting the issue.

[concerned about politics]

I swear the entire WORLD knew and we were all kept in the dark. It all goes back to the Clinton admin, but the liberal press just seems to be skirting the issue.

see post #16. Add 9/11 to the Clinton list. This one was started on his watch, in 1995.

[wingnuts'nbolts]

It would be nice if the kid from Hope got the crap kicked out of him this time.

[tallhappy]

i can't understand what people want from government, a confession?

Exactly. It's politics and not a good idea.

Perhaps they think Ashcroft should have banned all jet traffic in Summer of 2001 forever?

[rintense]

Oh no doubt! But until the media ACTUAlLY admits this, they will still try to pin it on Bush.

[truth defector]

I knew of the threat in december 1998, just not the date of the act. should have checked the stars man.

[Jumper]

"Heads-up to Ashcroft Proves Threa Was Known Before 9/11Every American Knows China Has Nukes Before Launch So what! Common sense dictates that we might know something but be unable to act on that information, say profiling of potential criminals, or that a certain stock might go up.. or down... or or or....

[texasbluebell]

Ashcroft used to fly commercial, just as Janet Reno did. So why, two months before Sept. 11, did he start taking chartered government planes?

The dims are just going to keep trying to put this one over, aren't they? This has been refuted numerous times already.

[concerned about politics]

Hey, the "Gore really won, let's count again for the 7th time to prove it" didn't work.
Enron didn't work.
They have to find something else to lie about.
Sad for them, but the majority of Americans don't follow politics. No body really cares. They lived through Clinton. Nothing could be worse than that. Clinton lied right to their faces! Seen the polls?
the Dems just keep trying. They do seem rather pathetic, don't they?

[xrp]

Recently thunderstorms blew through my area. The weatherman KNEW that there was going to be lightning but he wouldn't tell me where the lightning bolts would strike. THAT MEAN WEATHERMAN!

[texasbluebell]

Yes, you're right, anyone paying attention knew we would get hit. I knew it, for at least 6 years, from the time I first heard Steven Emerson talking on some tv show probably in '94 or '95. I'm sure I wasn't the only one listening to him.

[Richard Axtell]

"How do you explain this away? If we knew something was about to take place, why didn't we have contingency plans to protect the capital from attack by air?"

Attack by air? You mean, like... shoot down every commercial airliner that comes within, oh... 20 miles of the capital? Or just certain ones? Which ones? Better yet, why didn't the administration intercede earlier, and demand strict licensing and limit the production and sale of box cutters, the real "culprit" in this controversy?

This "What did they know before 9/11?" hysteria is absurd. Half the crackpot "journalists" in this country are being stampeded by this idiotic "feeding frenzy", but they live off of that kind of hysteria, called "buzz", and care not for logic or getting at the real basis of a story. I hope we folk at FR are not falling for a similar scam.

This particular "feeding frenzy" is very much like the one we saw regarding the ENRON collapse; leftist journalists hear the beginings of a hot story, they make wild assumptions about what is behind it, and go looking for a predetermined "smoking gun" to back up said assumptions. In that case they wanted to somehow blame the "ENRON disaster" on Bush and find coresponding classic examples of back room corruption. Instead, they found nothing to in anyway blame the looting and failure of ENRON on Bush, but found plenty of classic examples of back room corruption... by the Clinton administration. Follow the pattern, as the same will happen again.

All of the "dots" that the intelligence establishment failed to connect, were in place long before Bush came to office. And more importantly, the real reasons for these bureau's ineptitude, inaction, and vacilation regarding all these "warnings" or "clues" were instituted as points of policy by previous administrations. The Rowley memo points out that a major reason FBI agents were inhibited from making the connections that would lead to warning about possible hyjackings was... fear of offending racial and ethnic sensibilities, i.e. political correctness. Are we going to try and link that to the Bush administration too?

[Washington_minuteman]

"If you think that's a good idea, and if you approve of all the extraordinary powers the government is giving itself these days, just remember that the next president with the power to spy on Americans, to listen in on lawyer-client conversations, to arrest and detain without probable cause, and so on, may be named Hillary. Still think it's a good idea?"

In spite of the source, who in their right mind can disagree with the closing remarks?

[DoughtyOne]

Richard, in a study presented to President Clinton, the scenario of hijacking planes and crashing them into the pentagon and CIA headquarters was documented. If you guys want to stick your head in the sand and dismiss everyone who acknowledges this report and others as Monday Morning Quarterbacks, so be it. The fact is these types of attacks were predicted and our intelligence service as well as our president did nothing to stop them.

For the record, I'm not laying this at Bush's feet. However, it does appear that something was up, for even under his watch department heads were called in and warned that it appeared something was going to take place.

Now, do you find it unreasonable for us to question why even our capital was left exposed to these suicide flights? I don't.

[RDangerfield]

DoughtyOne: why didn't we have contingency plans to protect the capital from attack by air?

Coop: Such as??

Such as: fighter planes scrambling immediately after the first plane crashed into the building, protecting the airlanes over major cities. Haven't you ever wondered why there was no such fighter presence in that interim time in New York? No, not a conspiracy theory. Bush obviously didn't know the attack was coming as it did. But you asked for a contingency plan. That is certainly one possible plan.
--Raoul

[good1]

Hey Harley, you're real good at hind sight. It's no doubt because you have your head so far up your a**.