Why did US Media forget their 4/1/01 report-"Bush says Don't worry re Osama
Now you ask yourself how the US media "forgot" that they had reported on the Bush folks saying no need to worry about bin Laden - 4 months before 9/11 - in the governments annual terrorism report - via Bush's removal of the prior years Clinton version bin Laden references, and the Bush folks explanation to the media at the time that Osama was not worth a lot of energy or mention in the report ("A senior State Department official told CNN that the U.S. government made a mistake last year by focusing too tightly on bin Laden and "personalizing terrorism ... describing parts of the elephant and not the whole beast.")? Well at least Bush mentioned Al Qaeda as a threat in the report and as a suspect in the Cole bombing - and the media at the time noted the change. But could this media memory problem be the same problem that caused the media to forget that 4/1/01 Bush was trying for a pipeline agreement with bin Laden and Afghanistan?
Now Misleader report is not as complete as the DU thread in LBN where folks have noted: "Washington Times, May 1, 2001
The State Department accused Iran yesterday of being "the most active" among the seven state sponsors of terrorism in 2000, along with Cuba, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Sudan and Syria.
Iran won the designation because of its support for Hezbollah, Hamas and Palestine Islamic Jihad, groups "which seek to undermine the Middle East peace negotiations through the use of terrorism," the department said in its annual Patterns of Global Terrorism Report.
"Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Cuba, North Korea and Sudan continue to be the seven governments that the U.S. secretary of state has designated as state sponsors of international terrorism," said the report.
Critics accuse the United States of listing countries such as Cuba, Libya and North Korea on the basis of ideology, whereas more active supporters of terrorism, such as Pakistan, are ignored.
Afghanistan was accused of harboring terrorists, including Osama bin Laden. Bin Laden, whose group Alqaida has been on the U.S. list of terrorists for two years, is accused of bombing U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania and other U.S. targets. But since the United States does not recognize its Taliban-run government, it was not listed among state sponsors of terrorism.
The 2000 report dropped the bloody Khmer Rouge Cambodian guerrilla group from its list of terrorist groups, now that its leaders are dead, jailed or cooperating with the Cambodian authorities.
However, the State Department added to its list the Colombian paramilitary group United Self-Defense Forces, accusing it of 804 assassinations, 203 kidnappings and 75 massacres with 507 victims - all in the first 10 months of 2000.
The paramilitary group was one of 15 groups on a list marked "other terrorist groups," which are active but have not been formally designated foreign terrorist organizations (FTOs).
Two leftist Colombian guerrilla movements did make the Foreign Terrorist Organizations list:
* Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as FARC, for "bombings, murder, kidnappings, extortion, hijacking and executing three U.S. Indian rights activists."
* National Liberation Army, known as ELN, for "kidnapping, hijacking, bombing, extortion and guerrilla war."
FTOs are barred by law from raising funds in the United States. Members can be denied U.S. visas and their assets may be seized.
The report said that 423 attacks produced 405 dead over the year 2000, up from 1999 when 233 died in international terrorist attacks.
Secretary of State Colin Powell, who spoke to reporters yesterday at Foggy Bottom to present the report, said "international cooperation against terrorism is increasing and it is paying off."
Mr. Powell warned that "state sponsors of terrorism are increasingly isolated" and "terrorist groups are under growing pressure" but warned that the problem will not be completely ended.
"Terrorism is a persistent disease" he said, made easier in part because of wider global trade and communications.
But the U.S. terrorist designation has only a small effect on them, conceded Edmund J. Hull, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.
"I don't think it's a question of the list itself, being on the list, effecting that kind of change," said Mr. Hull.
"Most of these governments are extremely uncomfortable with the stigma that comes attached to being accused of sponsoring terrorism, and they will, over time, often seek ways to escape that stigma," he added.
The Palestinian Authority and Yasser Arafat's Fatah wing of the Palestinian Authority came under criticism for allowing attacks on Israelis. However, the criticism was oblique, citing Israeli accusations that Palestinian security officials and Fatah members had taken part in attacks.
Asked why the report cited Israeli reports but not Palestinian accusations against Israel, Mr. Hull said the State Department had reason to believe the Israeli reports."
The report itself can be found at the State Department.
SO STATE HAD LITTLE interest in Al-Qaeda or Bin Laden.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/04/30/terrorism.state.dept /
Relevant paragraph:
Unlike last year's report, bin Laden's al Qaeda organization is mentioned, but the 2000 report does not contain a photograph of bin Laden or a lengthy description of him and the group. A senior State Department official told CNN that the U.S. government made a mistake last year by focusing too tightly on bin Laden and "personalizing terrorism ... describing parts of the elephant and not the whole beast."
http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rm/2001/2571.htm But bin Laden's name is nowhere in the Briefing.
Here's the CNN link
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ASIANOW/south/04/30/us.southasia /
And bin Laden's name was not in the US section - only Asia
____________
From the CNN link:
Unlike last year's report, bin Laden's al Qaeda organization is mentioned, but the 2000 report does not contain a photograph of bin Laden or a lengthy description of him and the group. A senior State Department official told CNN that the U.S. government made a mistake last year by focusing too tightly on bin Laden and "personalizing terrorism ... describing parts of the elephant and not the whole beast."
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/04/30/terrorism.state.dept /
BUT the Misleader sums it up rather well:
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=24792 WHITE HOUSE, 4/01: FOCUS ON BIN LADEN "A MISTAKE"
A previously forgotten report from April 2001 (four months before 9/11)shows that the Bush Administration officially declared it "a mistake" to focus "so much energy on Osama bin Laden." The report directly contradicts the White House's continued assertion that fighting terrorism was its "top priority" before the 9/11 attacks (1).
Specifically, on April 30, 2001, CNN reported that the Bush Administration's release of the government's annual terrorism report contained a serious change: "there was no extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden" as there had been in previous years. When asked why the Administration had reduced the focus, "a senior Bush State Department official told CNN the U.S. government made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden." (2).
The move to downgrade the fight against Al Qaeda before 9/11 was not theonly instance where the Administration ignored repeated warnings that an Al Qaeda attack was imminent (3). Specifically, the Associated Press reported in 2002 that "President Bush's national security leadership met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior to the Sept. 11 attacks yet terrorism was the topic during only two of those sessions" (4). Meanwhile, Newsweek has reported that internal government documents show that the Bush Administration moved to "de-emphasize" counterterrorism prior to 9/11 (5). When "FBI officials sought to add hundreds more counterintelligence agents" to deal with the problem, "they got shot down" by the White House.
Sources:
1. Press Briefing by Scott McClellan, 03/22/2004,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=24793 .
2. CNN, 04/30/2001.
3. Bush Was Warned of Hijackings Before 9/11; Lawmakers Want Public Inquiry, ABC News, 05/16/2002,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=24794 .
4. "Top security advisers met just twice on terrorism before Sept. 11 attacks", Detroit News, 07/01/2002,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=24795 .
5. Freedom of Information Center, 05/27/2002,
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=24796 .
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
