We are not saying Bush was responsible for 9/11 BUT....

[kentuck]

The American people, Democrats and Republicans both, need to know what happened on August 6, 2001. Bush was briefed on that day and he chose to ignore it. We have a right to know, actually a responsibility, to know what this Administration was told about the terrorism threat before 9/11. They cannot be permitted to sweep this under the rug. If there is any justice in this world and if there is one honest journalist left in Washington, we must get to the bottom of this. We cannot let them politick and PR this question away.
==================================================================

http://truthout.org/docs_03/120803A.shtml

<snip>
Richard Clarke was Director of Counter-Terrorism in the national Security Council. He has since left. Clark urgently tried to draw the attention of the Bush administration to the threat of al Qaeda. Right at the present, the Bush administration is trying to withhold documents from the 9/11 bipartisan commission. I believe one of the things that they do not want to be known is what happened on August 6, 2001. It was on that day that George W. Bush received his last, and one of the few, briefings on terrorism. I believe he told Richard Clarke that he didn’t want to be briefed on this again, even though Clarke was panicked about the alarms he was hearing regarding potential attacks. Bush was blithe, indifferent, ultimately irresponsible. The public has a right to know what happened on August 6, what Bush did, what Condi Rice did, what all the rest of them did, and what Richard Clarke’s memos and statements were. Then the public will be able to judge exactly what this presidency has done.

....more

[Racenut20]

1. Only a Federal Grand Jury could get to that, I think

[cthrumatrix]

2. you will know by how the WH recats to the RICO suit vs. Bush...

I suspect stonewall, evade and lies to continue....it would be the undoing of his term.

[xray s]

3. Has Richard Clarke gone 'on the record' as to the 8/6/01 meeting?

if so, any links available?

[dweller]

4. Great article!

but i have to point out: "The American people, Democrats and Republicans both, need to know what happened on August 6, 2001." (kentuck)

and the article gives us what happened:

" Interview: Sidney Blumenthal with William Rivers Pitt
t r u t h o u t | Interview

Monday 8 December 2004

Sidney Blumenthal was a former assistant and senior advisor to President Clinton."

damn Will, time-traveling again?
:)

dp

[kentuck]

6. True. We just have to assist in getting it out to the masses.

If the people know, they will not let them off the hook.

[papau]

5. Do you think 60 minutes will do Russia 2000 asthe out of town test for 911

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/04/60minutes/main586841.shtml
60 Minutes

60 minutes reveals Bush Iraq lies that rest of media hide - Is Russia's way to win elections – at least in 2000 - the next 60 minutes show to reveal a possible interesting lead-in to 911 - something that taught Bush a lot?

In any case this was an amazing tale that other networks will ignore - traitors (Baathist murders chosen by Bush) in power, heroes arrested and held with out charges or contact with anyone (Bush seems to like this procedure) and all that is known is that the heroes objected to putting Saddam's torturers and murderers - the Baathists - back in power - and indeed had been selected by their local community as "city councilors" so as to bring that message to Bush and Bremer - so off to prison they go. From the report:


"Even though Ambassador Paul Bremer is on record saying that no high-ranking members of Saddam's old Baath Party will hold power in Iraq, in Karbala, the U.S. government is cooperating with Gen. Abud and has put him in charge of a well-armed force – even though he is a Baathist.

“The decision is Mr. Bremer's. He's the decision maker and he can make an exception,” says Abud.

Neither Ambassador Bremer nor the Marines would discuss any aspect of their role in Karbala."

Seems Bush lies to us and the US media - except for 60 minutes - lies or chooses to not tell us.

When you combine this with the way Putin got power in Russia in 2000 - by having the new KGB plant bombs in apartments, killing hundreds, and claiming that the Chet's rebels had done the evil - thereby getting the strong leader vote. It makes Bush's need to hide 911 info very interesting. But the Putin control of the media after it was proven that he and friends had faked the terror - because the next apartment bomb did not go off, the found the terrorist called home to the KGB to ask instructions and were told to get out of town the best they could - and when the shit hits the fan, Putin's replacement as head of the KGB admits everything and says it was an exercise in seeing if the town had good homeland security - and that the town did great!

And this "a fake terrorist were really KGG" story is known throughout Russia and Europe, and our media has said nothing.

Do you think they are afraid that if we saw that Putin was ready to kill thousands to win an election - and did - and got away with it - in 2000, we might think Bush might follow the same plan in 2001 - say on 9/11/2001?

Nah- unthinkable.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/04/60minutes/main586841.shtml
60 Minutes


I believe the c-span discussion of Putin's FSB(the new KGB)
and use of fake FSB terrorist to committ killings so Putin's vote was larger was actually a discussion of this book.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/225

Putin's War
By Sergei Kovalev

[groovedaddy]

7. Bush may not be "resonsible" but he did admit

to having seen the first plane hit the WTC:
"Well Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower--the TV. was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a terrible accident.’” George W. Bush - Town Meeting in Orlando, Florida 12/4/01
Repeated virtually the same in California one month later.

[Old and In the Way]

8. Was he confused in that he saw the second plan hit?

No, because we all saw Andrew Card tell him in the classroom that the 2nd plane had hit.

And we all know that no TV broadcast camera caught the 1st plane hitting the WTC.

So that leaves CCTV. Did he blow his lines? That I wouldn't put past him.

At the very least, based on his public statement, I cannot understand why he has not be asked to clarify his statement under oath.

[maggrwaggr]

9. Bush failed to protect the country on 9/11

that's the bottom line, no matter who caused it.

He said after the Cole bombing that something like that would never happen "on his watch" and he was right. Something much worse happened.

He failed. He should have been fired the next day.

[kentuck]

10. That is the bottom line , isn't it?

As Commander in Chief, he failed to protect this nation....and he may be hiding information that shows he was forewarned. What a tragedy if this guy gets away with such a travesty?