The Post-911 Bush/Cheney Commission Interview Summary Declassified

[Allen773]

Yup.

Btw Axxman: in response to your repeated questions about what Sandy Berger stole/tried to steal from the National Archives, it was a classified NSC report assessing the US government’s (read: the Clinton administration’s) response to Al-Qaeda’s millennium plots, i.e. the plots to blow up Los Angeles International Airport and a bunch of targets in Amman, Jordan.

And the author of that report? Richard Clarke. Apparently the Bush NSC aren’t the only people for whom he had damning words, given Berger’s bizarre actions at the NA. Not hard to read between the lines.

I’ll try to find where I read all of this.

 

[Fonebone]

Direct link to PDF of interview summary here:

https://www.archives.gov/files/declassification/iscap/pdf/2012-163-doc-1-release-material.pdf

Nothing new, or shocking. No surprises. Not sure why this was classified in the first place.

Here's The Intercept's take on it:

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/10...ntercept&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social



Again, nothing new.

Same Old S#!t you mean
James Colbert summary circa 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrJiKbK0tVM


Yep- nothing new!

 

[Axxman300]

Same Old S#!t you mean
James Colbert summary circa 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrJiKbK0tVM


Yep- nothing new!

Wow, you're on top of it.

Wait to you get to the part where Al Qaeda planned and carried out the attacks on 9-11 all by themselves. It will blow your mind, how many hours of your life you've wasted trying to be special.

 

[Axxman300]

Yup.

Btw Axxman: in response to your repeated questions about what Sandy Berger stole/tried to steal from the National Archives, it was a classified NSC report assessing the US government’s (read: the Clinton administration’s) response to Al-Qaeda’s millennium plots, i.e. the plots to blow up Los Angeles International Airport and a bunch of targets in Amman, Jordan.

And the author of that report? Richard Clarke. Apparently the Bush NSC aren’t the only people for whom he had damning words, given Berger’s bizarre actions at the NA. Not hard to read between the lines.

I’ll try to find where I read all of this.

The bottom line is: There was the DoD and CIA before 9/11/2001, and the DoD and CIA after 9/12/2001. Caution and discretion is thrown to the wind. Anti-American terrorist are hunted, smoked out, and hit. Our Op-Tempo for the past 22 years has been pushed to the limit. We've ground down a lot of good men in our pursuit of Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups in the Middle East,SE Asia, and Africa.

These missions occurred just last week:

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS...raid-in-northern-syria-targets-isis-official/

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS...aid-in-northern-syria-captures-isis-official/

In 1999, both of these missions would have been front page news. Today? You're lucky if you catch the press release on Twitter. For all of our many sins prior to 9-11, we've overcorrected a thousand times since.

 

[Fonebone]

Originally Posted by Fonebone
To not "remember"
exposes one to the dangers of acute epiphanies
followed by severe bouts of chronic mentation.


On March 2nd of 2007 on a nationally broadcast radio show
"Democracy Now" the show host, Amy Goodman, interviewed
a retired U.S.Army four star general Wesley Clark before a live audience
in New York City USA ....

I think a four star general (retired), addressing a live audience in New York City N.Y. weeks after the September eleventh attacks would garner more
respect and credibility than any anonymous cucurbitae blather.

Such a fine source of independent thinkers.

I agree. One participant is is a well respected member of the U.S. military and the other is an internationally respected journalist.
Your definition of an "independent thinker" appears to be posting ASCII text sound-bites gleaned from military contractor puff piece publications.

So where's that memo? Why hasn't that one leaked with all the others?

I will call your attention to this dictate from the secretary of defense dated July 1996...
https://sgp.fas.org/clinton/perry.html
A junior enlisted E-3 with intestinal fortitude and conscience just learned the hard way the penalties of leaking classified information....
https://www.militarytimes.com/news/...ntrols-over-classified-info-after-major-leak/
Courage and conscience generally diminishes with rank and experience--
General Clarke was blessed with both.

You do know why Clark was relieved of command, right?

.

No- I do not know the reason. Quit the cryptic innuendo and spell out the reason general Clarke was "relieved of command".

Sorry, the Bush NSC were 9-11 Truthers before it was cool. You've jumped on a sinking ship without asking who the captain is.

The term "truther" is short for Truth-seeker. Name one example of any
member of the Bush NSC even vaugely fitting that description.

 

[Oystein]

Why are you responding to yourself, Fonebone? Do you find fault with your previous response? Well, then, kudos to you!

...
The term "truther" is short for Truth-seeker. Name one example of any
member of the Bush NSC even vaugely fitting that description.

Nope. Nonsense.
Many people with zero interest in 9/11 Truth (or JFK Truth, or Covid Truth, or any other hot topic for "Truthers") are genuinely seeking truth, in many fields of inquiry, and generally do NOT call themselves "Truthers". As always, you are making up ****.

The best available definition for the term "9/11 Truther" - in fact, the only one that includes very nearly ALL who consider themselves to be "9/11 Truthers" while at the same time avoiding to implicate people who don't call themselves thus, nor are called by others thus - is this:

A 9/11 Truther is a person who persists in being essentially wrong about the events of 9/11.​

 

[Allen773]

The way Truthers talk about the US government’s capabilities and preparedness leading up to 9/11/2001, you’d think it was the height of the Cold War re: NORAD on the day of the attacks combined with the operational tempo of post-9/11 Global War on Terror CIA/JSOC terrorist-hunting in the years and months leading up to 9/11.

And these wildly false assumptions about the post-Cold War, pre-9/11 era HAVE to be baked in to any remotely plausible “LIHOP” scenario. Not to mention, the assumption that an untold number of US government officials across different administrations and agencies were so evil and treasonous to let the attacks happen on purpose and that countless more aren’t willing to rat our these alleged traitors. “Plausible.”

As always, these conspiracy theories quickly fall apart upon any serious scrutiny.

 

[Fonebone]

The bottom line is: There was the DoD and CIA before 9/11/2001, and the DoD and CIA after 9/12/2001. Caution and discretion is thrown to the wind. Anti-American terrorist are hunted, smoked out, and hit. Our Op-Tempo for the past 22 years has been pushed to the limit. We've ground down a lot of good men in our pursuit of Al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups in the Middle East,SE Asia, and Africa.

These missions occurred just last week:

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS...raid-in-northern-syria-targets-isis-official/

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PRESS...aid-in-northern-syria-captures-isis-official/

In 1999, both of these missions would have been front page news. Today? You're lucky if you catch the press release on Twitter. For all of our many sins prior to 9-11, we've overcorrected a thousand times since.

CIA operating in America before 9-11-2001?
FBI agents come forward in 2021.
MSM is on the case. FRONT PAGE HEADLINES


Glen Beck on twitter
https://twitter.com/i/status/1653942522438385664

 

[Axxman300]

CIA operating in America before 9-11-2001?
FBI agents come forward in 2021.
MSM is on the case. FRONT PAGE HEADLINES


Glen Beck on twitter
https://twitter.com/i/status/1653942522438385664

There are already two threads on this subject here, and it has been mentioned in multiple other threads...which you'd know if you bothered to do any basic reading here.

You'd also know that after 9-11, Alec Station and Langley did separate audits to make sure none of the 19 hijackers had any connections to the CIA. And that's sort of weird considering Alec Station would have been the folks running this kind of operation.

Doesn't matter, Al Qaeda's people would never work for the CIA or USA under any circumstances. During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan the CIA approached bin Laden with an offer of financial and material assistance. His reply contained contained the letters, "F.O".

And you really need to make up your mind. Either magic, fictional cruise missiles did 9-11, or Al Qaeda did their homework, hijacked four jets, and hit their targets. Can't argue what the CIA was doing if you think phantom missiles were involved.

 

[Allen773]

After the bombing the press stories were all about the "Blind Shiek" and Ramzi Yousef, but the connection to Al Qaeda was not underlined. The 1993 bombing was expressed to the American public as the work of a small cell working out of New Jersey.

My understanding is the name Al Qaeda was unfamiliar to the US until 1996 when Jamal al-Fadl turned himself in to the US Embassy in Khartoum and defected to the US, where he described to the the FBI in painstaking detail Osama bin Laden’s leadership of Al-Qaeda, its various committees and their roles, and the shura council that advised bin Laden. The dominant perception in the US government prior to 1996 was that Osama bin Laden was this rich Saudi exile in Sudan who financed terrorist groups and cells but didn’t organize or direct anything himself.

While bin Laden did fund terrorist groups, it wasn’t really through his own money, since after the Saudi government froze his accounts, his older half-brothers cut him off from his family inheritance, and the Saudi government revoked his citizenship, Osama didn’t have that much personal wealth to speak of. None of his Sudanese business ventures turned much of a profit either.

Much of the funding for bin Laden and AQ came through rich Saudi donors, some of whom were probably members of the sprawling royal family itself, along with sympathetic Wahhabi clerics who had infiltrated the bureaucracies of the Kingdom’s Islamic charities. Similar dynamics at play in many of the other Gulf monarchies, from which AQ also received or collected a lot of donations. And importantly, these funding networks operated globally, including within the US, so it was easy to move money around to various cells around the world.

Speaking of which: regarding the early 90s cell in NY/NIJ area around the Blind Sheikh, I can’t help but wonder about the fact that their first victim was Meir Kahane, a guy whose death a lot of people didn’t mourn. I remember reading that law enforcement in NYC initially assumed the assassin operated alone. Maybe there was a mentality there of “figures that some Arab finally offed this infamous Jewish extremist, well good riddance.” Perhaps there wasn’t an initial sense of alarm—I mean, Kahane was the leader of a terrorist group himself!

 

[paloalto]

Direct link to PDF of interview summary here:

https://www.archives.gov/files/declassification/iscap/pdf/2012-163-doc-1-release-material.pdf

Nothing new, or shocking. No surprises. Not sure why this was classified in the first place.

Here's The Intercept's take on it:

https://theintercept.com/2022/11/10...ntercept&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social



Again, nothing new.

au contraire

First, there was lots new.

The fact that this interview has been kept secret for 22 years is new information. And even the interview itself has new information. Bush claims that the information he was given was for an al Qaeda terrorist attack that was to take place overseas. This excuse does not even pass the smell test. It is absolutely pathetic. There is absolutely no credible evidence the CIA ever thought the attacks they were warned about since April 2001 were going to take place overseas. The CIA said that they had given Busk unambiguous warnings of an al Qaeda terrorist attack 40 times, and yet he did absolutely nothing to stop this attack. So now we know why this interview had been kept secret for 22 years.

If this interview had come out when the 9/11 Commission was written, everyone would have wanted to know whether the CIA committed treason by giving the president wrong information or had the president deliberately done nothing to prevent the attacks on 9/11 and allowed the terrorists to kill all of the people killed on 9/11 when he had unambiguous information a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack was about to take place inside the US.

Again, now know why this interview had been kept secret for 22 years.

 

[Oystein]

The fact that this interview has been kept secret for 22 years is new information.

What utterly obvious nonsense.
Do you think at all before you post words?

And even the interview itself has new information. Bush claims that the information he was given was for an al Qaeda terrorist attack that was to take place overseas. This excuse does not even pass the smell test.

Regardless of whether or not that excuse passes what test, it has been Bush's excuse all these years - it's nothing new.

It is absolutely pathetic. There is absolutely no credible evidence the CIA ever thought the attacks they were warned about since April 2001 were going to take place overseas. The CIA said that they had given Busk unambiguous warnings of an al Qaeda terrorist attack 40 times, and yet he did absolutely nothing to stop this attack. So now we know why this interview had been kept secret for 22 years.

You have been of this opinion for the better part of those 22 years - and now you pretend that's "new"? Seriously??

If this interview had come out when the 9/11 Commission was written, everyone would have wanted to know whether the CIA committed treason by giving the president wrong information or had the president deliberately done nothing to prevent the attacks on 9/11 and allowed the terrorists to kill all of the people killed on 9/11 when he had unambiguous information a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack was about to take place inside the US.

Again, now know why this interview had been kept secret for 22 years.

Thanks for your opinion - which is nothing new at all. And also has not been declassified in 2022, for your opinion has never been classified in the first place.

Is there anything new in the actual, previously classified material from the Bush/Cheney interview? Then you would do well to actually quote any such allegedly "new" content, and present an argument for why you think it is actually and substatially "new".
Your shouting that the declassification confirms all your long-held opionions simply doesn't cut it. Or cut anything.

 

[bknight]

Oh I don't know. Seems to me that the opinion cut the cheese.

 

[paloalto]

What utterly obvious nonsense.
Do you think at all before you post words?


Regardless of whether or not that excuse passes what test, it has been Bush's excuse all these years - it's nothing new.


You have been of this opinion for the better part of those 22 years - and now you pretend that's "new"? Seriously??


Thanks for your opinion - which is nothing new at all. And also has not been declassified in 2022, for your opinion has never been classified in the first place.

Is there anything new in the actual, previously classified material from the Bush/Cheney interview? Then you would do well to actually quote any such allegedly "new" content, and present an argument for why you think it is actually and substatially "new".
Your shouting that the declassification confirms all your long-held opionions simply doesn't cut it. Or cut anything.

Please read my post. I listed what was new. The CIA said they had given him unambiguous warnings of an al Qaeda terrorist attack inside the US 40 times, and yet Bush did absolutely nothing to stop this attack because he claimed the al Qaeda terrorist attack the CIA had been warned him about would take place overseas.

Do I have to make this simpler so you can understand?

The CIA says the al Qaeda terrorist attack would be inside the US;

Bush claimed he was told the attack would take place overseas. How can I make this any simpler?

The CIA and FBI HQ even knew from August 22, 2001, that al Qaeda terrorists Mihdhar and Hazmni were inside the US to take part in the al Qaeda terrorist attack they knew was about to take place inside the US. And they did nothing to stop this attack, and 3000 people paid with their lives for this!

Had this information from this interview been released at the same time as the 9/11 Commission report, everyone would have asked who was lying and who was telling the truth. The question that would have been asked was, had the CIA committed treason by giving the president wrong information, or had the president allowed the attacks on 9/11 by doing nothing to prevent this attack? The families of the 3000 people murdered on 9/11 would certainly want to know the answer to this question.

The CIA and FBI HQ used delay, deflect, and denial to hide their malfeasance in allowing the al-Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11, and delay worked just fine. Mainstream media had moved on, in fact, a long time ago from the reason for the attacks on 9/11. No one, even to today, has answered the question why the CIA and the FBI HQ withheld the information they had on Mihdhar and Hazmi from the FBI Cole bombing investigators when they knew their direct actions to continue to withhold this information would result in the murder of thousands of Americans.

 

[paloalto]

Please read my post. I listed what was new. The CIA said they had given him unambiguous warnings of an al Qaeda terrorist attack inside the US 40 times, and yet Bush did absolutely nothing to stop this attack because he claimed the al Qaeda terrorist attack the CIA had been warned him about would take place overseas.

Do I have to make this simpler so you can understand?

The CIA says the al Qaeda terrorist attack would be inside the US;

Bush claimed he was told the attack would take place overseas. How can I make this any simpler?

The CIA and FBI HQ even knew from August 22, 2001, that al Qaeda terrorists Mihdhar and Hazmni were inside the US to take part in the al Qaeda terrorist attack they knew was about to take place inside the US. And they did nothing to stop this attack, and 3000 people paid with their lives for this!

Had this information from this interview been released at the same time as the 9/11 Commission report, everyone would have asked who was lying and who was telling the truth. The question that would have been asked was, had the CIA committed treason by giving the president wrong information, or had the president allowed the attacks on 9/11 by doing nothing to prevent this attack? The families of the 3000 people murdered on 9/11 would certainly want to know the answer to this question.

The CIA and FBI HQ used delay, deflect, and denial to hide their malfeasance in allowing the al-Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11, and delay worked just fine. Mainstream media had moved on, in fact, a long time ago from the reason for the attacks on 9/11. No one, even to today, has answered the question why the CIA and the FBI HQ withheld the information they had on Mihdhar and Hazmi from the FBI Cole bombing investigators when they knew their direct actions to continue to withhold this information would result in the murder of thousands of Americans.

I should have added the CIA, FBI HQ, and the Bush administration used delay, deflect, and denial to hide their malfeasance in allowing the al-Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11, and delay worked just fine. The CIA, FBI HQ, and the Bush administration together or by themselves could have prevented the attack on 9/11.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

You should also add that you have made these claims many, many times before. They have been repeatedly debunked, and yet you continue to say this, as if nothing had happened. If you're not going to discuss, if you just want to lecture, then carry on- but I doubt anyone's going to listen to you.

 

[bknight]

What the ****! NOTHING NEW?

We learn that Bush claimed in this interview that the CIA had told him the al Qaeda terrorist attacks that were about to take place were going to occur overseas. But the CIA claims in over 40 warnings that the president was told the attacks would likely take place inside of the US.

So someone lied, the CIA when they said they gave the information to Bush that the attacks would take place in the US, or is lying now, Bush, claiming the CIA told him the attacks would take place overseas.

Either the CIA lied and committed treason, or President Bush is lying now and is a mass murderer. So what is it?

The CIA knew by the third week of July 2001 that the Bush administration was going to do nothing to prevent the al Qaeda terrorist attack that was just about to take place inside the US. In the last week of July, the CIA knew for sure that the attacks were aimed at targets inside the US, i.e., at the meeting the last week of July, Tenet asked: Where will this al Qaeda attack take place? The meeting went silent when Blee replied, "They are coming here."

While Cofer Black claimed in a radio interview that it was not the fault of the CIA the attacks on 9/11 took place because the Bush administration did nothing to prevent these attacks, it is clear that the CIA could have prevented these attacks on 9/11 without this order from the administration.

All they had to do was rescind their order to their spy inside the FBI, Tom Wilshere, to withhold the Kuala Lumpur information from the FBI criminal investigators. The last time for the CIA to have done this was when they were informed on August 22, 2001, that al Qaeda terrorists Mihdar and Hazmi were inside the US. Wilshere himself could have given this information to Michael Maltbie on August 24, 2001, and Wilshere could have ordered the people under his direction at the FBI ITOS, FBI SA Agent Dina Corsi and FBI SSA Rod Middleton, to give this information to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt who wanted to start an FBI criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, and not shut down his investigation. Almost 3000 people were murdered because the CIA did not rescind this order to Wilshere, who was secretly taking orders from the CIA while working at the FBI, while effectively he was in charge of all FBI investigations of al Qaeda terrorists.

paloalto, it is very simple to prove your assertations. Just post evidence of this allegation. I haven't followed you or your comments but that is how you win decusiions, present evidence not your beliefs. So where are your evidence(s)

 

[Oystein]

Please read my post. I listed what was new. ...
Bush claimed he was told the attack would take place overseas. How can I make this any simpler? ...

Are you actually saying that Bush's claim he was told the attack would take place overseas is new??

Were you previously laboring under the assumption that Bush's position was that the CIA had warned him about planned attacks inside the USA?

Then please link to a post where you thought this was the position or claim of the Bush administration! That would make this simpler.

 

[paloalto]

Reply to posT:

paloalto, it is very simple to prove your assertations. Just post evidence of this allegation. I haven't followed you or your comments but that is how you win decusiions, present evidence not your beliefs. So where are your evidence(s)

In the the interview, Bush says he was told that the attacks would take place overseas. We now know that was a complete and total lie.

CIA warnings on an attack inside the US.

https://www.businessinsider.com/911...d-bush-cheney-attacks-bin-laden-qaeda-2022-11

https://www.politico.eu/article/attacks-will-be-spectacular-cia-war-on-terror-bush-bin-laden/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/michael-morell-911-cia-afghanistan-intelligence-matters/

The CIA and FBI HQ knew Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside the US to take part in an al Qaeda terrorist attack on August 22, 2001. and knew these attacks would cause mass casualties. See DE 939 entered into the Moussaoui trial.

According to the 9/11 Commission Report, the CIA was notified on June 12, 2001, that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had recruited a number of al Qaeda terrorists in the summer of 2001, that he was sending into the US to link up with al Qaeda terrorists already inside of the US, to carry out a massive al Qaeda terrorist attack, an attack that the CIA and FBI HQ had been warned about since April 2001.

The CIA knew that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed had helped finance the original attack on the World Trade Center Towers in 1993. The CIA had his Bojinka plot and knew he had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting. KSM stayed right at the condominium, with Mihdhar and Hazmi, where the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting had taken place, according to the Guantanamo “Charge Sheet for Hambali.” This charge sheet was secretly obtained from Guantanamo by Wikileaks and given to the New York Times. The New York Times has never explained why they did not print the information in this Charge Sheet.

Philippine intelligence gave the CIA the details of the Bojinka plot when Abdel Hakim Murad gave them these plans. Philippine intelligence uncovered this plot after the apartment in the Philippines caught fire where Ramzi Yousef was building bombs with Murad and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. This plan had two parts. The first part of this plot was to blow up aircraft going to the US. The second part was to hijack multiple large aircraft in the US and fly these into iconic buildings in the US, including the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon, and CIA Headquarters. [9/11 Commission report].

 

[paloalto]

Are you actually saying that Bush's claim he was told the attack would take place overseas is new??

Were you previously laboring under the assumption that Bush's position was that the CIA had warned him about planned attacks inside the USA?

Then please link to a post where you thought this was the position or claim of the Bush administration! That would make this simpler.

I had no idea of documented proof of what Bush claimed the CIA had told him. This interview is the first I knew that had documented what Bush claimed he had been told by the CIA.