ADN

QUOTE(Buffmaster)Where are you getting your info? it's pretty dated and has been squashed for some time now. The 9/11 commission was a white wash and everybody with half a brain knows it too. You should go to factcheck.com and check yourself, it might be an eye opener.
you should read the story about the declassified memo's on http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NS ... /index.htm

or directly linked:
Clarke Memo: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NS ... 20memo.pdf
Clarke Attachment: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NS ... chment.pdf

since I was browsing some more on this topic, here's a CBS 60 minutes interview with the man who has been Security Advisor for Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton AND Bush Jr. (that's a whole lot of anti-terrorist knowledge in one man, is it not?!): http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/ ... 7356.shtml


now link me to documents which prove the Bush administration did the necessary before 9/11/2001...

Dude, those links are nothing but bullshit. The first memo provided NOTHING! I read the first 3 pages of the second memo and it was just giving a history of the organization. Shit... I wrote an essay about 9/11 in high school, and I provided some of the information in that memo in my essay to back up my points.

well. can we agree that the memo and the attachment do say that Al Quaeda is a clear and present danger?

btw: i also edited my post above prior to reading yours. some new links are posted.

Yes... but EVERYONE already knew al-Qaeda was a thread. Don't think the Clinton administration was giving the Bush administration a gem or anything...

QUOTE(Kramer)Yes... but EVERYONE already knew al-Qaeda was a thread. Don't think the Clinton administration was giving the Bush administration a gem or anything...
fair enough. so where are the documents proving the Bush Administration's action towards the Al Quaeda threat prior to 9/11 and in response to this urgent memo and its attachment?

Hey Brains, why don't you ask Sandy Berger that since he was caught destroying documents from the National Archives, I remember he was sticking them down his pants and taking them home and burning them. Maybe you can explain that away with some links.lol

The following is an excerpt from Lt. Gen Mike DeLong's book, Inside CentCom. DeLong was the deputy commander at CentCom for roughly 3 years. He and Tommy Franks were responsible for the Afghan and Iraq wars. It's from the first chapter, pages 14 and 15.


"In the months and years to come, the critics turned on us, saying that we had †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™¢¢¬‚¦‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“credible intelligence†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬? that could have averted the disaster. The truth is that we had received an intelligence report warning that †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™¢¢¬‚¦‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“somewhere in the world there might be an attack in a port against a U.S. ship,†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬? and we kept our ships on guard as a result. Various intelligence indicated that the attack could happen in the eastern Mediterranean, in the Red Sea, in the Indian Ocean, or in the Gulf. And there was no telling when. The bombing on the Cole occurred six months after this piece of †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™¢¢¬‚¦‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“intel.†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬? It is impossible to take action based upon such vague intelligence, and this is one of the reasons why Dick Clarke†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¾¢‚¬Å¡‚¢s book, Against All Enemies, in my opinion, draws wrong conclusions.

I met Dick Clarke when he came down to CentCom to brief us. He specifically told us how comfortable he was with all that President Bush was doing for the War on Terror. But he was not an insider. He was not included on any of the numerous video teleconferences I attended with President Bush. I suspect we might have had better knowledge of existing intelligence from the Middle East than Clarke did. I was given a daily breakdown of all the intel †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œ including from the CIA, FBI, and our intelligence units †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œ originating out of twenty-five countries in our AOR. There was of course a lot of intel that warned in a general way that †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™¢¢¬‚¦‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“something was going to happen somewhere.†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬? Our intel people were constantly doing †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™¢¢¬‚¦‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦¢‚¬Å“spider graphs†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬? so that this vague intel might be pinpointed, but the spider trails almost always resulted in very few leads. It was frustrating and time-consuming.

The bottom line is that, when it comes to intel, you†™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¾¢‚¬Å¡‚¢re no better than the people you have in the field collecting the information, the technical intel you receive, and the analysts that you have interpreting that information. Intel is ultimately no better than the educated guess of an expert analyst †™ ¢‚¬„¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¢†™‚¢‚¢¢¢‚¬Å¡‚¬¦‚¡¢‚¬Å¡‚¬†™‚¢‚¢¢¢¬…¡‚¬¢‚¬¦¢¢¬…œ and there will always be some analyst somewhere who, like Dick Clarke, will step forward after the fact and hurl accusations of ignored intel. One thing we had learned in interpreting intelligence about possible terrorist attacks was that there would often be a spike in the sheer amount of intel warning of an attack, even if the who and where were unknown. This is precisely what happened in the months leading up to September 11, 2001. Again, the intel was frustratingly general, but the spike in al-Qaeda message traffic about a big hit somewhere made an attack seem imminent. We naturally assumed the attack would be in the Middle East, and in the weeks leading up to September 11, 2001, our AOR was kept in a high state of alert."

QUOTE(Buffmaster)Hey Brains, why don't you ask Sandy Berger that since he was caught destroying documents from the National Archives, I remember he was sticking them down his pants and taking them home and burning them. Maybe you can explain that away with some links.lol
oh yeah. that was a strange story indeed. strange it got big that big, since Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, asserted that the documents Berger removed were only copies, and government sources have said that no original material was taken. http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/01/berge ... cnn_latest

also, the guy stole 5 documents - how much documents would there be in the National Archives?

so, how does this berger story does away with my question for documents proving the Bush administration did anything significant towards avoiding 9/11 in reaction to Clarke's urgent memo and its attachment?

and Kramer, you tell me that I should take more note of a deputy commander who conceived and implemented the Global War on Terrorism, Operation ENDURING FREEDOM and Operation IRAQI FREEDOM and who is President of Shaw CENTCOM Services, LLC, a joint venture which consists of The Shaw Group, Inc., Al-Khudhairy Group, Kharafi National, and NESMA formed January 2004 to "provide the full range of design-build and construction-related services within the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM)". So not only did he co-engineer this "war on terror", he also is in charge of a company getting contracts from the government organisation - he is commander to - which gives out contracts to said company. Kramer, you believe this guy MORE than you do Clarke? O_o frankly.... that is beyond me.

You completely missed why I posted that... :?

ok, yeah. I ignored your last paragraph indeed. I read it this morning. not anymore now when I posted. scuseme.

so yes... you are right. intel volume is sure to go up prior to a strike. still does not explain why the Bush administration did not react when indeed intel WAS going up prior to 9/11, does it?