OMG!! A reporter connects the Smirky, 9/11 dots!!!!!

[Sperk]

:bounce:

Is this a mainstream news source? Am I getting too excited?!?!?

http://www.lowcountrynow.com/stories/080103/LOCrose.shtml

If you want to know why 9/11 was allowed to happen you may not have to look any further than the Oval Office.

A little more than a month before the attack, in his Aug. 6 daily intelligence briefing, Bush was "told that morning of the al-Qaida terror network's interest in conducting a strike within the U.S., and that it might involve highjacked airplanes," reports the Wall Street Journal (7/24/03.)

Why didn't he order airlines to be alerted, inform the Federal Aviation Administration of the threat, put the military air commands on a high level of readiness and tell the FBI, CIA and INS to be super vigilant?

more....

[amish_enforcer]

1. Guy better watch his back.....

Happy to see it, :thumbsup: will he be smeared and dismissed as a "conspiracy theorist" though?

[Qutzupalotl]

4. Hopefully not

He only hints at "something darker".

[Gman]

8. I'm sure the guys is probably very despondent

and contemplating suicide by .22 caliber ratshot.

[Gloria]

2. Sure looks mainstream to me!! Small, but

mainstream! A Hilton Head resident? Pretty darned upscale/upper middle class, I would say....

Wow! A great find. I think I'll send it to Rhodes and Malloy! Maybe they can post it on their sites......

[rabid_nerd]

3. a

:kick:

[PaDUer]

5. KICK

Might want to post this in GD..

[CheshireCat]

7. kick

This needs to stay on top.

[DagmarK]

6. "The Truth may be far darker"

SNIP

Perhaps it wasn't arrogance that made the PNAC-influenced administration dismiss multiple warnings of a terrorist attack using highjacked airliners. The truth may be far darker.

WOW......and from a carolina paper.....GOOD! Bush is really working the southern states for the next election

[Sinistrous]

9. It will be interesting to watch the smear campaign unfold against this guy

Unless the House of Bush calls up its airplane mechanics, or, as is probable, ignores the article until it is no longer an issue.

[pa28]

10. Excised from the report

for national security reasons. Providing further evidence to the world that our leader is out of touch and grossly negligent could invite further attacks. National security, see?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

11. If this is part of the redaction....

Watch out. :kick:

[KoKo]

12. This is a South Carolina Low Country Coastal newpaper (small) BUT!!!

That's what makes it even more significant. It's that it's bubbling from the South and a conservative area I might ad! (Lots of rich repug retirees in Hilton Head and the rest of the area there). I've read some of his writings before and wondered if he avoids taking small planes......or how he avoids what they do to conservative writers in the South.......but he's survived...so far.

Good catch.......glad you posted it! Maybe he lurks here on DU!

[grasswire]

13. I wish he had a link..

...to his email addy. I always like to thank those who speak truth to power.

[berry]

17. Me too. Maybe using the link to "opinion" could be used--

asking them to send it on to him. It's a small paper, so that might work.

I wanted to thank him too. But also I want to ask him the names of the 3 foundations that support PNAC and are also linked to Saudi oil interests. Or does anyone here on DU already know this??

Edited to say: the opinion tab goes to a forum, but I went to a page that gave e-mail addys for staff and composed a letter to the office manager asking her to forward it. That may work.

But I have a question--I had intended to include a link to this thread, and copied it from the box for URLs in my browser. That always worked before, but it looked too short and when I tested it it just delivered me to the menu. Can anyone tell me how to get the URL of a thread on the new DU2? Thanks!

[berry]

20. too late to edit--I solved the URL problem (and sent off the letter)

n/t

[samsingh]

14. incredible

hopefully it will get more attention.

[Myra]

15. Wow

Astounding article.

That "...like a new Pearl Harbor" quote
is the nail on the head. Or like a new
Reichstag. Or like so many events used
by power hungry demagogues to control the
sheeple and feed the corporate military
machine.

Thanks for posting this.
John David Rose is now among the few
true journalists, willing to say what
has long been obvious, and back it up
with sound sources.

[Nashyra]

16. Keep this at the top.

Any way to get this multiple media outlets?

[protect freedom impeach bush now]

18. kick the PNAC bastards OUT of America ! Into Gitmo jail !

kick !

[antineocon1]

19. This is an exciting development...

More of these stories will come out. It's only a matter of time IMHO.

[Terran]

21. If you all don't mind, I'm moving this thread to GD.

There's a dupe thread there but it's getting zero attention, apparently. Let's see if this headline wakes them up a little!

Dirk - DU Moderator

[Terran]

22. KICK--IMPORTANT!

:kick:

[DS1]

23. To answer "why", I give you the lamest excuse ever

While I do not have the exact quote, it was something like this, out of Condi:

"The warnings were vague, we did not know whether the attacks were planned for targets inside the US, or US interests abroad. The warnings did not provide us with a place or time".

This argument is so weak. If the CIA/FBI had a specific place or time, even factoring their incompetency, they would have nabbed the perps before any of this happened.

On a personal note, if I were working as a security guard at any airport, and someone tried to get a set of boxcutters past me (even if they weren't specifically on the ban list), I would have told them to get fucked.

Too many things "went wrong" for this to be an isolated incident.

[Poiuyt]

24. Is this like Roosevelt and Pearl Harbor?

The theory goes that Roosevelt knew that the Japanese were about to attack Pearl Harbor but let it go in order to get the US into WWII. Does anyone see a scenario where Bush knew about the intended attacks on the World Trade Centers and did nothing so he could attack Iraq? Or does anyone think that Bush/Cheney actually planned the attack themselves and got their Saudi friends to help?

These are dangerous thoughts.

[JanMichael]

25. There is no question that Bush was briefed on the 6th of August 2001.

None. Not one.

The FDR story, and I've heard it a thousand times, seems to be pure conjecture.

[dflprincess]

34. The FDR story has been widely repeated

and even after 60 years nothing has bubbled to the surface to prove it. I've also read that what his adminstration thought might happen was an attack on the Phillipines, and Pearl Harbor came as shock to all.

[nolabels]

60. You mean NOBODY wants anything to bubble to the surface to prove it

I often find it curious why people would believe the history they were taught in grade school like it was gospel. The deeper and farther one digs, the more one finds out how and who was playing them and for what reason. I hold no high place for these people for these so called leaders, just contempt for people that would tell me such things. Has anyone ever exammined why bringing new text books to schools of countries that were subdued by the US in an invasion is of the first priority?

http://www.independent.org/archive/pearlharbor.html
http://www.independent.org/tii/news/001207Stinnett.html
(snip)
December 7, 1941: A Setup from the Beginning


By Robert B. Stinnett*


As Americans honor those 2403 men, women, and children killed—and 1178 wounded—in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941, recently released government documents concerning that “surprise” raid compel us to revisit some troubling questions.

At issue is American foreknowledge of Japanese military plans to attack Hawaii by a submarine and carrier force 59 years ago. There are two questions at the top of the foreknowledge list: (1) whether President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his top military chieftains provoked Japan into an “overt act of war” directed at Hawaii, and (2) whether Japan’s military plans were obtained in advance by the United States but concealed from the Hawaiian military commanders, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and Lieutenant General Walter Short so they would not interfere with the overt act.

The latter question was answered in the affirmative on October 30, 2000, when President Bill Clinton signed into law, with the support of a bipartisan Congress, the National Defense Authorization Act. Amidst its omnibus provisions, the Act reverses the findings of nine previous Pearl Harbor investigations and finds that both Kimmel and Short were denied crucial military intelligence that tracked the Japanese forces toward Hawaii and obtained by the Roosevelt Administration in the weeks before the attack.

Congress was specific in its finding against the 1941 White House: Kimmel and Short were cut off from the intelligence pipeline that located Japanese forces advancing on Hawaii. Then, after the successful Japanese raid, both commanders were relieved of their commands, blamed for failing to ward off the attack, and demoted in rank.
(snip)

http://www.independent.org/tii/news/021124Higgs.html
(snip)
San Francisco Chronicle November 24, 2002

The Oval Office Liars’ Club

By Robert Higgs*

When American presidents prepare for foreign wars, they lie. Since the end of the 19th century, if not earlier, presidents have misled the public about their motives and their intentions in going to war. The enormous losses of life, property and liberty that Americans have sustained in wars have occurred in large part because of the public’s unwarranted trust in what their leaders told them before leading them into war.

In 1898, President William McKinley, having been goaded by muscle-flexing advisers and jingoistic journalists to make war on Spain, sought divine guidance as to how he should deal with the Spanish possessions, especially the Philippines, that U.S. forces had seized in what ambassador John Hay famously described as a “splendid little war.” Evidently, his prayer was answered, because the president later reported that he had heard “the voice of God,” and “there was nothing left for us to do but take them all and educate the Filipinos, and uplift and Christianize them.”

McKinley’s motivations had little if anything to do with uplifting the people whom William H. Taft, the first governor-general of the Philippines, patronizingly called “our little brown brothers,” but much to do with the political and commercial ambitions of influential expansionists such as Captain Alfred Mahan, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Cabot Lodge and their ilk. The official apology for the brutal and unnecessary Philippine-American War was a mendacious gloss.

The Catholic Filipinos evidently did not yearn to be “Christianized,” American style, at the point of a Springfield rifle, and resisted the U.S. imperialists as they had previously resisted the Spanish imperialists. The Philippine-American War, which officially ended on July 4, 1902, but actually dragged on for many years in some islands, cost the lives of more than 4,000 U. S. troops, more than 20,000 Filipino fighters, and more than 220,000 Filipino civilians, many of whom perished in concentration camps eerily similar to the relocation camps into which U.S. forces herded Vietnamese peasants some 60 years later.
(snip)

[DagmarK]

44. Oh, Bush has admitted seeing the memo on Aug 6...

he said so...I am sure of it. Seems I remember an interview .....he was saying he was at the ranch...and there were morning briefings while he is on vacation, blah blah blah...

[PurityOfEssence]

47. FDR was complicit in the Pearl Harbor disaster

To what degree is an open question.

From the evidence, it's far from conclusive that he knew it was coming right there and then and that he let down our guard and starved the local commanders of evidence (hard LIHOP) but it is undeniable that he placed the more obsolete elements at Pearl (moving them from San Diego) and left us a tempting target. The better ships, and especially the carriers, were elsewhere or on the move. There is much direct and circumstantial evidence of the Japanese fleet being tracked, and the local commanders were definitely kept in shade, if not the dark.

We knew for a fact that this is how the Japanese started wars, 1904 being a classic case. Billy Mitchell predicted (in 1920, I think) that Japan would start a war by launching an airstrike against Pearl Harbor on a Sunday. (Good thing we cashiered that troublemaker, isn't it?)

Personally, I'd like to think that Roosevelt left a tempting target and made it seem like our guard was down (hoping that they'd make a move to which we could respond) and the Japanese got the jump on him. (Lest we forget, the Japanese operation was masterfully executed.)

I like the man and respect him too much to think he'd do a full-on LIHOP, but I'm in denial of a veritable mountain of evidence. If he did, let's remember that those exposed were military personnel, not civilians. We provoked the Japanese with naval maneuvers in their inland sea (between Japan and Asia) and cut off their scrap metal and oil in a very draconian way. We were hardly pals at the time; they had sunk a gunboat of ours (U.S.S. Panay) in China in 1937. Let's also not forget that this was just what he needed to get us into the war, and even then we didn't declare war on Germany, his true enemy. Hitler obliged us by beating us to that punch on the 11th.

Churchill said that he "slept the sleep of the saved" that night.

Don't forget that Lincoln calmly left exposed garrisons hoping for an attack too, and was obliged as well.

Google it and do some reading. We didn't just start sucking as a nation somewhere in the 80's, you know, and our adversaries at this time were a truly despicable bunch. Thanks to the depression and a hardcore cadre of Republican isolationists, we'd made intervention impossible without something of this sort.

[TahitiNut]

27. I can find Japan on a map.

Can someone show me where al-Qaeda is? I know what the Japanese flag looked like. What does the al-Qaeda flag look like? Hirohito was emporer of Japan and had a government that declared war and could sign surrender papers. Can someone tell me who would do the same in the land of al-Qaeda? Do they have an embassy in Switzerland? Do they have passports? citizenship? :eyes:

[never cry wolf]

26. first a kick

from reading other du-er comments, then i'll read the whole article and comment. :kick:

[Ress1]

28. There is a John David Rose who writes for TruthOut.

Don't know if he is the same nor if it makes any difference if he is.

[Gloria]

29. Just for the record: I did send if off to Malloy, Rhodes and Buzzflash...

eom

[KoKo]

38. Glad to hear that Gloria.....this is something good from a small place!

Somewhere tell us if they were interested. I wonder if this means that some folks brains are waking up.......it's about time.

[foo_bar]

30. which part is the revelation?

that Bush didn't tell the FBI to be "super vigilant"?

[never cry wolf]

31. great article

and great that it's in a mainstream publication!! i hope it was read and not used to line the bird cage. the only thing i took small exception to is from the following paragraph:

But perhaps the Bushies had a reason for ignoring the warnings. Something brushed over in the Congressional 9/11 report suggests the possibility of one of the worst conspiracies of American history."

what does he mean "one of the worst conspiracies in american history." surely, there could be none worse, could there? anything even in the team picture??

[davsand]

32. I am loving this!

It tells me that other people are looking at this beside us. If it turns up enough times people might realize that we aren't just "picking on" shrub. I get tired of being told I'm a nutcase for wondering if my government killed those people on 9/11.

Laura

[jbm]

33. and here is why...

crime doesn't pay..

<snip>
Nine months before 9/11 the Clinton administration had a bold plan to attack al-Qaida," wrote Time magazine (8/12/02) before it could attack us. Weakened by the impeachment battle, Clinton put the plan on hold as a courtesy to the incoming Bush. In January 2001, the Clinton security team attempted to brief incoming Bush officials of the al-Qaida threat and the plan. Again they were given the brushoff.
<snip>

So if the repukes hadn't been so busy crucifying Clinton for a BJ,then he would have been able to have nipped this early on.

[Resistance Is Futile]

35. Strategic victory the GOP

Obstructing Clinton's attempts (such as they were) to manage al Qaida helps to further entrench the meme that democrats are soft on national security. Shrewd move for a party looking to create a one-party state.

[Lostnote03]

51. JBM......Feb 13th NSPD 2001????

.....Thanks for the reminder....add to this Bushs executive order 9 months prior to 9/11 that essentially put a halt to Trumans policy of assembling all branchs of intelligence together to share imformation and one gets the picture that the intelligence sharing excuse was being concocted early on......damn this all reeks of collusion....a poster mentions later in this thread that the familiy member lawsuit is the achilles heel to full exposure.....I have believed this for some time simply because Americans will side with their grief in their effort for legal "discovery"....actually it will probably take a hunger strike by them on the W.H. lawn however......

[punpirate]

36. Don't want to puncture anyone's balloon...

... but there's absolutely nothing new in this. The sources are old, and quite public. His speculation is no different than that of many people over the last year or so. The newest source, the WSJ from a week ago, is simply reiterating what's been said for quite a while.

Yeah, it's good that a paper south of the Mason-Dixon line is taking a little notice, but there's nothing solid behind this article except other news sources.

When someone leaks an unredacted copy of the report, and there is dramatic language in the section on the Aug. 6th briefing, then there's cause for excitement.

Cheers.

[KoKo]

39. But, Punpirate...just a while ago people weren't talking about this.....

and this little newpaper goes out into the Repug....big money retiree part of the SC Coast.

That's why it's significant! Compare this article with what we here on MSNBC or CNN or read in most of our local newspapers. If it's becoming mainstream LIHOP.......then it's big.

SC is very conservative.......and where this paper is put out is part of all that......but BIG TIME HIGH ROLLING REPUG.......

[DagmarK]

45. Punpirate.....this has NEVER been written up like this.......

In a paper that Mom and Pop can buy at their local 7/11...... And certainly not in a tone of what I consider to be a DU post!

Never that I can think of.

This is really BIG...........it's old hat to us. But for 80% of the population? NEW news.........

[punpirate]

56. Again, not trying to diminish...

... the fact that someone, somewhere, took speculation to that level. If you do a Google for "John David Rose," though, you'll discover that this is hardly a new theme for the fellow. He does get reprinted a lot in leftie web zines.

My guess is that there's a certain portion of the population there who read and agree with him, and the rest say, "never mind, it's just John David. He's just an eccentric librul, you know." I get the feeling from the number and tone of his previous columns that this one would not be particularly shocking or revelatory to his community.

Cheers.

[DeathvadeR]

37. What about the guy that worked in the Petnagon

He started shouting off all kinds of shit then they fired him or he left and then headed the security in the world trade centers? Anyone remember his name? Did he live?

[DemBones DemBones]

40. You're referring to John O'Neill and he resigned because he was

so frustrated with the lack of support for tracking Osama. He got out of the second tower alive, made a phone call or two, went back in to help others and was killed.

[goforit]

41. It appears to be getting closer and closer!!......

hope that reporter is well protected.

[foo_bar]

50. non sequitur doesn't upset the establishment

He's one of their regular columnists for the counterpoint. Believe it or not, South Carolina isn't suffering for lack of "Zionists ate my balls" editorials.

[Sperk]

42. one swift kick before beddy-bye

:kick:

[kentuck]

43. Is this in the 28 missing pages ?

I would not be surprised. As we know, the Senators that have read it are sworn to secrecy and could not expose it. However, I would think it would be rather like the Ellsburg Pentagon Papers, it would be in the national interest to make it public. The people's right to know supersedes the WH wishes to keep this "embarrassment" secret.

[alaine]

46. My feeling is that the 9/11 families may be the ones

who bring Bush down. They are mad as hell, and they are not going away, no matter how much stonewalling and slow-walking the intelligence agencies do. I swear I hope they are on the internet reading these so-called "conspiracy theories" and wondering if there is any truth to them. Because the definition of a theory is something that MAY be proven at some point. We need to start asking pukes why when someone questions this admin they automatically spout "conspiracy theory". If there wasn't some fear there might be truth in it the intelligence agencies might be quicker in handing over the info.

It makes me sick that this admin is saying they redacted the pages because it "might be embarassing to international affairs." What a freaking lie, and every one knows it. The main country concerned apparently is Saudi Arabia, and they want them released, so that points it right back to us in terms of who might be "embarassed".

[Minstrel Boy]

48. agreed

And those who most loudly disparage "conspiracy theory" are most often the ones with the least knowledge of the evidence.

As Gore Vidal writes in Dreaming War, "'Conspiracy stuff' is now shorthand for unspeakable truth."

[proud patriot]

49. I just got that book of Vidal's

:hi:

[Sushi_lover]

55. True. I hope the families speak out at the NYC convention on 9/11/2004

I hope the families rip him to shreds during his "memorial" photo-ops slated during the specially-scheduled Republican convention 9/11/2004

[Judi Lynn]

52. It's wonderful seeing someone get the story out

to a country which has been deliberately kept clueless:

(snip) Here's the chilling kicker: To convince the American people to spend extra billions for defense instead of on Social Security, Medicare, etc., PNAC suggested it would take a "catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor." (PNAC's exact words.)
(snip)

Hope the reporter lives a long, accident-free, safe life, considering the enemies he has won, no doubt, by writing this article.

[laylah]

53. kickin' for the morning crowd

:kick:

[cthrumatrix]

54. The fact is the information has been there....this is good to see....yet

the larger papers that help drive admin policy are woefully closing thier eyes and letting this nightmare continue.

I would feel a little different if the WP were breaking the headline. And i would like to be a fly on the wall when the good people of SC were reading this article.

[Poiuyt]

58. Mainstream media

What would it take for the larger newspapers to get on this story? Surely they must be aware of the PNAC.

[cmd]

57. Kick for a must read n/t

[UTUSN]

59. My New Hero n/t

[scarletlib]

61. kick

n/t

[UTUSN]

65. Any Responses for My Wingnut?

I send my local radio talkshow wingnut CHOICE tidbits like this link in the original post. Here's what he sent back:

"So Bush knew this was in prospect but did nothing so it could happen to galvanize the people to get what he/his manipulators wanted?"

I sent him many DU witty smackdowns of Dan COULTER, which he found amusing.

In his current response here, he is weakly attempting to portray us as tinfoilers. Any suggestions will be appreciated.

[UTUSN]

66. Link to Parallel Thread About SCHIPPERS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=116709&mesg_id=116709

[Mari333]

62. mAJOR kick

:kick:

[GeronimoSkull]

63. BOOM

kick

[jfkennedy]

64. Big government

If he had alerted all those agencies, he would have to increase their funding. Airports are owned by large corporations, whom want to make a profit not provide national security. Thus Bush was more concerned with helping the owners of the airports make money rather then to defend the country which is his Constitutional responsibility to undertake.

For example in countries like Kashmir India, where some of the Taliban and the Taliban terrorists hide out, they have a huge security network at the airport. When you go to the airport they ask for your passport, and hand check all your bags. Then you go thru a metal detector, then a second handheld metal detector to all that enter the airport. Then as you are walking to the plane another handheld metal detector check as a surprise, then further on why your just about to enter the plane another handheld metal detector check.

Not exactly good public policy for the Republicans that own the corporations, to have people go thru such scrutiny, as well as think of the cost that would be to the bottom line of the profits for the airline industry, as well think of the cost to do it all around the US.