Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush Administration’s Pre-9/11 Focus Was Missile Defense, Not Terrorism

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 (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
RedEarth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-26-06 08:41 PM
Original message
Bush Administration’s Pre-9/11 Focus Was Missile Defense, Not Terrorism
Bush Administration’s Pre-9/11 Focus Was Missile Defense, Not Terrorism
In her interview with the New York Post, Condoleezza Rice falsely claimed that President Bush’s pre-9/11 anti-terror efforts were “at least as aggressive” as President Clinton’s. In fact, the 9-11 Commission disputes that account. While the Bush administration should have been preparing for a potential terrorist attack, it was instead focused on developing a costly missile defense system. Here are the facts:

Clarke Handed Over Plan To “Roll Back” Al Qaeda. “The terrorism briefing was delivered by Richard Clarke … enior officials from both the Clinton and Bush administrations…say that Clarke had a set of proposals to ‘roll back’ al-Qaeda. In fact, the heading on Slide 14 of the Powerpoint presentation reads, ‘Response to al Qaeda: Roll back.’ Clarke’s proposals called for the ‘breakup’ of al-Qaeda cells and the arrest of their personnel.”

Bush Said “Most Urgent Threat” Was Ballistic Missiles. In a speech on May 1, 2001, Bush said, “Unlike the Cold War, today’s most urgent threat stems not from thousands of ballistic missiles in the Soviet hands, but from a small number of missiles in the hands of these states, states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life.”

Bush’s Priorities Did Not Include Al Qaeda. “After his first meeting with NATO heads of state in Brussels in June 2001, Bush outlined the five top defense issues discussed with the closest U.S. allies. Missile defense was at the top of the list, followed by developing a NATO relationship with Russia, working in common purpose with Europe, increased defense spending in NATO countries, and enlarging the alliance to include former East European countries. The only reference to extremists was in Macedonia, where Bush said regional forces were seeking to subvert a new democracy.”

Rice Was “Focused On Matters Other Than Terrorism.” “A review of the record, from testimony and interviews, suggests that Ms. Rice…was usually fixed on matters other than terrorism , for reasons that had to do with her own background, her management style and the unusually close, personal nature of her relationship with Mr. Bush. … he reality is that Ms. Rice has virtually no public utterances about Al Qaeda to point to as evidence that she was as engaged in the issue as she was in Mr. Bush’s other foreign policy agendas.”

Rice Was Set To Deliver 9/11 Speech On Missile Defense. “On Sept. 11, 2001, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was scheduled to outline a Bush administration policy that would address ‘the threats and problems of today and the day after, not the world of yesterday’ — but the focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals. … The address was designed to promote missile defense as the cornerstone of a new national security strategy, and contained no mention of al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or Islamic extremist groups, according to former U.S. officials who have seen the text.”

President Bill Clinton, meanwhile, was focused on the terrorist threat. He outlined a three-pronged strategy for combating terrorism in a 1998 speech at the Naval Academy. Read it here

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/26/not-focused/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-26-06 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Missile defense: upteen billions for favored contractors
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-26-06 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. Those are thoughtcrimes there, citizen. Double-plus-ungood on you!
This is old history. You need to learn the new history. Report to the soma center for reeducation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mediaman007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-26-06 09:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Don't forget how they tried to bully China with the spy plane and
China kicked our ass. Remember on CNN...live pictures of the Chinese inside the plane taking it apart.

Bush* had a chance to be a tough guy, and got his ass handed to him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-26-06 09:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Rumsfeld was brought in to make missile defense happen
He chaired the second star wars commission at the urging od Curt Weldon in the House. It was formed to make new excuses to start the program up again after it was all but dead after failed and faked tests. The Bush regime is packed with former aerospace industry executives who are poised to funnel money into Lockheed, Boeing, General Dynamics, and the others whenever the war and occupation allocations dry up. Sloughing off their take of the $10b a month going to Iraq alone, the industry will have a nasty addiction when we go cold-turkey and bug out.
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 Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 12:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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