Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Pre-9/11, Bush Deprioritized Counter-terrorism and Targeted It For Cuts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
scottxyz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:11 AM
Original message
Pre-9/11, Bush Deprioritized Counter-terrorism and Targeted It For Cuts
Edited on Wed Mar-10-04 01:11 AM by scottxyz
Remember 9/10 and 9/12
9/10 - Ashcroft submits a budget with CUTS for counter-terrorism
9/12 - Bush lets Bin Laden family quietly fly out of the US while airspace closed

Right now, Bush is pointing to some vote Kerry made in 1995 for small cut in intelligence funding. How about looking at Bush's record on terrorism before 9/11 instead?

Who is soft on terrorism? Who flip-flops?

= = =

http://davidsirota.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_davidsirota_archive.html#107880808913102994

As the President desperately reaches back to 1995 in a sad attempt to bill Sen. Kerry as weak on terrorism, the media appears to be forgetting a much more relevant story: it was the Bush Administration that was trying to cut counter-terrorism funding and shift the Justice Department's focus away from counter-terrorism in the months leading up to 9/11. The NY Times wrote a front page story on this way back in February of 2002 (before Bush politicized the traditional bipartisan national security consensus), but the story has yet to re-emerge. Here are some of the most disturbing excerpts:

= = =

For Mr. Ashcroft, the change in spending priorities before Sept. 11 and after has been especially noteworthy. Although the attorney general made speeches and delivered Congressional testimony before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in which he said fighting terrorism was a top priority of his agency, he identified more than a dozen other objectives for greater emphasis within the Justice Department before the attacks, internal department documents show.

In his final budget request for the fiscal year 2003 submitted on Sept. 10 to the budget director, Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., the attorney general called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of which directly involved counterterrorism...In his Sept. 10 submission to the budget office, Mr. Ashcroft did not endorse F.B.I. requests for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence analysts and 54 additional translators. Mr. Ashcroft proposed cuts in 14 programs. One proposed $65 million cut was for a program that gives state and local counterterrorism grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and training to localities for counterterrorism preparedness....

In a May 10 letter to department heads, which told them the agenda the new administration was setting, Ashcroft did not mention terrorism...the attorney general's tough talk {on terrorism} was not always reflected in the department's priority lists and budget requests, and some former Justice officials and officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation said they were frustrated that he had not supported more financing for counter- terror programs before Sept. 11.

One former federal law enforcement official said that top officials in the F.B.I., which does the bulk of the department's counterterrorism work, had been concerned about Mr. Ashcroft's initial lack of focus on fighting terrorism. He said there was worry among some senior agents that counterterrorism would be downgraded in future years if Mr. Ashcroft's early attitude did not change. Another former F.B.I. official said that Mr. Ashcroft's attitude "really undermined a lot of effort to change the culture and change the mind-set" of F.B.I. agents. Any organization, the official said, reacts to its boss's priorities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. and how many days of vacation had he taken
between the selection and 9-11?

asleep at the wheel...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. What about the vacation he took right before 9-11??
They had warnings about impending attacks, so what did they do?

They went on vacation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.msnbc.com/news/907379.asp?0cv=KA01

<snip>Some sources who have read the still-secret congressional report say some sections would not play quite so neatly into White House plans. One portion deals extensively with the stream of U.S. intelligence-agency reports in the summer of 2001 suggesting that Al Qaeda was planning an upcoming attack against the United States—and implicitly raises questions about how Bush and his top aides responded. One such CIA briefing, in July 2001, was particularly chilling and prophetic. It predicted that Osama bin Laden was about to launch a terrorist strike “in the coming weeks,” the congressional investigators found. The intelligence briefing went on to say: “The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A15957-2001
Aug 29, <2001>

<snip>The White House had announced that Bush would stay at his 1,600-acre ranch in Crawford from Aug. 4 through Labor Day on Sept. 3, a 31-day stretch that would have broken a modern record for a presidential vacation, held by Richard M. Nixon for a 30-day trip to San Clemente, Calif., in 1969. News reports played up the record, and a Gallup Poll found that 55 percent of respondents thought Bush's vacation was too long.

The length of the trip revived old questions about Bush's work ethic, and the poll and the news coverage caused consternation in the White House.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.jacksonholenews.com/Archives/NewsArchive/2001/010815-News.html
Aug. 15, 2001

Vice President Dick Cheney took time off from his month-long working vacation Monday to outline his plans for August in Jackson Hole and to reflect on "an amazing year."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml
Ashcroft Flying High
WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001

(CBS) Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
15. and, didn't he go on vacation soon after?
I'm pretty sure he was on vacation a little while after 9/11... not the first week, but it wasn't long.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
2. brilliant
bring it on - there is no issue we can't win on the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. Bush didn't flip-flop on Terrorism
Consider:

He didn't give a shit before 9/11.

He doesn't give a shit now.


so, where is the flip flop?


;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scottxyz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Good reply
...but remember he CLAIMS to give a shit now. In fact, his supposed compentence to defend us from terrorists is essentially the ONLY thing he's pointing to in his campaign so far.

Bush's supposed strength on terrorism ("steady leadership in a time of change") is the ONLY leg he's trying to stand on in this campaign.

And it would be SO easy to knock this leg out from under him.

Let him hammer about 9/11, 9/11, 9/11.

We just need to hammer back with 9/10 and 9/12.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yeah but there are quotes from last year where
Bush says that he doesn't know and doesn't care where Osama is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fearnobush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 01:49 AM
Response to Original message
7. Lets make a goal of dropping Bush's terror poll of 63% and
drop it down to 48% by April 15. Bush is still polling at 49% overall because of his false, image as strong on terror. Lets expose who the real flip flopper is!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newdealer Donating Member (232 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 03:38 AM
Response to Original message
8. on terrorism compared to Bush, Clinton was practically Wyatt Earp
Edited on Wed Mar-10-04 03:40 AM by newdealer
there's a great article that was in "The American Prospect" which detailed how the Bush administration ignored all that the Clinton Administration had been doing to fight terroism.

"the Post also relates the story of Army Lt. Gen. Donald Kerrick, a top National Security Council staffer who stayed with Bush through May:
He noticed a difference on terrorism. Clinton's Cabinet advisers, burning with the urgency of their losses to bin Laden in the African embassy bombings in 1998 and the Cole attack in 2000, had met "nearly weekly" to direct the fight, Kerrick said. Among Bush's first-line advisers, "candidly speaking, I didn't detect" that kind of focus, he said."

There's a web version of the same story at:
http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2002/01/page-a-01-23.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DinahMoeHum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. It seems that * & Co. didn't just drop the baton Clinton gave them,
they flung it into a trashbin (figuratively)

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. Ahhhh, yes -- Operation Ignore!
as Al Franken calls it in his wonderful book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
11. SCREAM this from the rooftops, because the media
won't mention it.

I remember those little "gaffes" very well, but voters won't unless they are somehow reminded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arugula Latte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
12. Paging John Kerry:
USE THIS USE THIS USE THIS USE THIS ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 02:34 PM
Response to Original message
13. Exactly
We must hammer this ...:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sliverofhope Donating Member (858 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-04 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
14. kick
kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 09th 2024, 12:25 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC