BuzzFlash Mailbag - April 13, 2004

Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 400. If your letter includes hypertext links, please include the entire URL. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.

Like much of the World, I listened to every word of Condoleezza Rice's testimony this morning.

I heard one effort after another to s-t-r-e-t-c-h answers and filibuster. In fact, I heard the same answer given seven times to seven different questions - a non-answer.

I was struck that the National Security Advisor serving directly to the President of the United States explained away her responsibility and accountability that since she was not told exactly at what time, and at what location an attack against the United States was going to take place, that she and the administration shouldn't be held accountable.

Hello. Is there anyone out there?

On several occasions, I heard her speak as a professor rather than as a national leader and lecture about "actionable intelligence." I heard her speak of "historical" documents.

But I never heard her willing to acknowledge that mistakes were made, when it is obvious to the World that major and serious mistakes were made.

Once again, I was amazed that no one seemed to be in charge. I was amazed that it seemed the major figures including the National Security Advisor were frozen and incapable of follow-up or demanding of more detailed analysis and taking action. This was a severe failure of leadership. And the true smoking gun seems to begin to display itself each time that Condo Rice speaks.

Condo Rice doesn't get it.

Who was and is in charge?

If the President was in charge, then he would have taken action, forced questions to be answered, and the resulting action probably would have stopped the 9/11 disaster. And if the President were in charge today, he would accept the responsibility rather than try to spread the blame or point the finger elsewhere.

We see the same results in dealing with this week's calamitous but very deadly results in Iraq as well.

No there is no plan in Iraq. And the results have been deadly. And there was no plan before 9/11 and the results there were deadly also.

We can't depend on having any better results [unless] the senior team including the National Security Advisor quit waiting for everyone to do their jobs for them. Let's be frank, there will seldom if ever be an instance in which the level of detailed "actionable intelligence" is provided - the threshold claimed by Condi Rice. We won't have the luck to have situations just laid in our laps for our own defense.

There has never been an administration in our nation's history which has been given such ease. This business of national defense is tough, demanding, and detailed and requires the pointedness of a Dick Clarke rather than the aloofness of Condi Rice. No wonder we didn't stop 9/11.

No wonder, we also were lied to so successfully concerning the reasons for War in Iraq. Condi Rice, and this entire administration's senior team, were simply not willing to do the hard work - the detailed work - that is not academic theory, but rather grimy reality. And this President was not willing to demand the level of detailed facts and hard work of his staff.

For all of the pizzazz claimed by this administration concerning the great MBA approaches of this President, I was not impressed in the least by Condi Rice nor any of the approaches regarding either 9/11 or Iraq.

And it is this lack of credibility and work ethic that undermines every policy including the Patriot Act that I now feel that Condoleezza Rice must resign. She should be the first firing over 9/11. And behind her must go the Vice President who claimed the mantle of responsibility after May 1, 2001. I would like to say that the President honestly should follow, but at this point in time, I think it might cause a Constitutional crisis of sorts.

Who is in charge? There seems to be no one at home.

Bill Burkett

This link is from Sept. 2002. It quotes a report detailing the JULY briefing that the White House is refusing (so far) to de-classify. And if you read this link carefully, it states that the July brief was based on "a review of five months of intelligence information." This corroborates Richard Clarke's assertion that he warned the administration in January/February 2001. This sure looks like a "silver bullet" to me, Condiliar Rice.

Thanks for the incredible work you are doing. Keep it up, Buzz, and you marvelous BuzzFlash Mailbaggers. It's only a matter of time before the Bush house of cards crumbles.

elaine in Petaluma

Bush recalls his first thoughts on hearing the 9-11 events. Near the end of this White House press release, Bush replies to a youngster named Jordan about the plane crashing into the trade center. He admits first thinking that it was "one terrible pilot." Pretty lighthearted view, no?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/print/20011204-17.html

On December 4, 2001, Bush was asked, "How did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?" Bush replied, "I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower--the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly myself, and I said, well, there's one terrible pilot.

Can this be credible after the now declassified brief of August 2001? Does the President really posit that, while as we now know, he had been briefed that al Qaeda was in the U.S. and was possibly planning to hijack a plane, and that they were casing buildings in New York City, does the President still hold that he didn't connect the dots on 9/11, during his time listening to a goat story?

Does he now still claim that he didn't connect the dots for those critical twenty or more minutes AFTER the fact on 9/11? Damned if he did, because he took no action. Damned if he didn't. because that would mean that he is tragically ( ! ) incompetent.

How often was he on the campaign trail for the Republican Party? How many days did he reside in the White House? Where was he when the war broke out? Where was he when Rice got hammered by the investigation board? At his ranch! Fishing! Hunting! Playing Bronco Billy!

Even after the partial PDB was released, he lies again & says he never saw any intelligence documents predicting attacks on the US mainland before the 11 September 2001.

Many of us have expressed our frustration with the public's attitude of indifference toward Dubya's policy failures and shortcomings, noted by his inexplicably high ratings in the polls. How, we wonder, can he maintain those numbers in the face of damning criticism? Well, the answer is pretty simple. It's censorship.

Studying the major newspapers from coast to coast on a weekly basis, it becomes undeniably clear that the managing editors choose with great specificity wire services articles with a pro-Bush bias -- reflecting their corporate viewpoint instead of public enlightenment -- particularly in the red states. Editorials and commentaries are generally written with pro-Bush bias as well.

When the public is inundated with nothing but pro-Bush propaganda on a daily basis, week after week, month after month, can it reasonably be expected to form an independent opinion? Certainly, the network news occasionally reports a negative piece on Dubya, but that can be attributed to the "liberal media" and therefore derided, discounted, and ignored. Adding to the cacophony of misdirection practiced by newspaper staff, then there are the conservative commentators like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, George Will, Brit Hume, and Robert Novak, as well as the pro-Bush Fox News Network and now discredited CNN. It's like a subtle form of the Chinese water torture: drip, drip, drip, day by day by day.

I will provide a striking example. The Charlotte Observer ran an online poll on April 9th asking whether Condi Rice or Richard Clarke is more believable. The response was overwhelming: approximately 65 percent trust Rice's testimony over Richard Clarke's. It matters not that Clarke's testimony has the support of dozens of individuals both in and out of government, or that the documents themselves and the Joint Congressional Committee's report verify his honesty and credibility. Over a period of six months, that particular newspaper has published pro-Bush articles, editorials, and commentary, even letters to the editor, 85 percent of the time -- helping to form the public's opinion without its knowledge. How many of its readers can be counted on to search out alternative news sources on a consistent basis? A relative minority, to be sure.

The only difference between our Fourth Estate and that of China or Russia is that we have more news outlets. But the consolidation of our media has abandoned honest, objective reporting and instead has abetted the vested interests of the corporate elite -- the brazen pursuit of the almighty dollar at the expense of social programs.

We simply cannot continue to be fed a diet of black is white, up is down anymore. The only way to fight this insidious form of censorship is to take the fight to the source, the Murdoch's, the Black's, and the others. If each one of us would take the time to complain loudly to our local dailies about their lack of objectivity -- and do so on an ongoing basis, not just a single letter or phone call or letter to the editor, but a sustained campaign -- perhaps we can change this stifling climate of misdirection. It will take time, but we do not have a choice. I am confident that if individuals have the true picture, not the one-sided view they receive now, those polls will reflect the public's enlightened view. A case in point is the change in attitude about the war in Iraq; the majority would still support the war if the sensationalist-minded media had not reported the mutilation of the four bodies last week. That was the turning point.

George Bush Took 416 Campaign Trips in First 3 Years. That's over 100 MORE trips than Clinton in the same time period, and you know how much they screamed about Clinton making campaign trips. There was a post I made a week or two ago about Bush spending 42% of his 1st eight months before 911 on vacation, and speculated that when adding in all the campaign trips Bush was 'on the job' for only around 25% of the time. Well, I was Wrong ... Some quick math.. if you take 416 over three years that comes to 138 days each year Bush spent campaigning, and 138 days comes to 38% (37.9) of a 365 day year. Ok, we know from the report in the earlier post that in the eight months before 911 George Bush spent 42% of that same time on vacation. So ... if you add the 42% Bush on vacation to the 38% Bush out campaigning, that means Bush was awol from work 80% of the time in the eight months before the 911 attacks. That bears repeating ... Prior to 911 president George W. Bush only worked 20% of the time. For easy reference, if you base that on the average 40-hour work-week, that means ... From January 2001 to September 2001 President George W. Bush averaged 8 hours a week on the job!! Taking the same analogy further, to give you an even better idea, that means before 911 for president George W. Bush the average 'work-day' was 1 hour and 36 minutes.

This is in response to the testimony of Dr. Rice on April 8, 2004. Dr. Rice, While there may not have been one thing you could have done to stop the attack, there was one thing you could have done to mitigate it. You might have told the American people the truth. It might not have stopped the attack. But many more people might have survived it. Imagine the following: You're at your job. Things are moving right along and suddenly BAM!!, the building shakes, alarms go off. People, startled, look around at each other, wide-eyed. Workers in cubbies stand up to check with each other. It goes through your mind: OK, people, do we evacuate or is this a drill? A false alarm? I have a customer coming in 15 minutes or I have this report to finish, etc. Nah, it looks like no one else is going down. Wait, there's a group gathered. Let's go see what's going on. Should we leave? And so it goes. Until the boss gets off the phone and announces, "everybody out" or "Just a test" or "No longer a problem" or...whatever. Most of us have been there in one way or another. Earthquakes on the west coast, hurricanes on the east, tornadoes and floods down the middle. Fire, accident, psychotic former employees, the list goes on. Those moments of uncertainty, the desire to do what the group does, the indecision. This all takes time. Sometimes precious moments. When I saw that TV picture of the first burning building that morning, I was stunned. I didn't know what to think. Precious time trickled away as I watched the drama on the screen. How precious, we would all soon find out. The instant I saw that 2nd plane, I knew what the situation was -- we were at war. With whom, about what, I had no idea. But we were at war. And this was with no warning, no 'head's up.' If the government had announced that a severe threat existed, was expected soon and detailed some of the areas of threat, what do you think those people in WTC 1 would have done? In WTC 2? You know what they would have done the moment they felt that first impact? They would have known. They would have gotten the hell out. They would have known. There would have been few, if any, hallway conferences. They would have known. The people in WTC 2 would have known. They would not have assumed WTC 1 was a horrible accident. They would have known. Most of the people in both buildings would have gotten out and gotten out right then, not after the second plane hit. And nobody, but nobody would have had to go back into those buildings. Jesus wept! And I'm not even going to go into what else might have been different had our once-superb North American Air Defense system been on alert and primed. What else don't we know that's going to kill us? In sorrow,

The Bush team keeps saying that they didn't know that Al Qaeda was going to use airplanes as missiles.

My question is why hasn't anyone in the media been observant enough to point out the obvious thing that was in the memo about hijackings?

"Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York"

The memo clearly states that hijackings were a possibility. This means that they were told about possible hijackings---If you act to stop the hijackings, you stop the planes from flying into the WTC. I'm not saying that they would have stopped 9/11, but it seems to me if they acted to beef up security because of the hijacking threat, then maybe they could have.

The press continues to let the Administration frame the debate as to "planes used as missiles," when clearly the debate should center on hijackings. Surely the media can't be this oblivious to this---can they?

thank you,

Subject: Fwd: interesting from the archives re 911 and Cheney

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL
Willie Brown got low-key early warning about air travel

http://www.unknownnews.net/010912911.html
Unknown News
Iinteresting site, has summary of Hart-Rudman and a Jake Tapper article from Salon
... the White House announced in May that it would have Vice President Dick Cheney study the potential problem of domestic terrorism -- which the bipartisan group had already spent two and a half years studying -- while assigning responsibility for dealing with the issue to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, headed by former Bush campaign manager Joe Allbaugh.

http://www.thememoryhole.org/tenet-911.htm
The Memory Hole > CIA Director Warned Congress About 9/11 Attacks

http://www.thememoryhole.org/faz-article.htm
The Memory Hole > German Intelligence Says US Knew in Advance About 9/11

http://www.unknownnews.net/010726911.html
UNKNOWN NEWS
keeping ashcroft off of commercial airlines. what is most interesting here are comments of not knowing anything, but he was the one assigned by bush to head up the security detail (and also Allbaugh, his campaign manager)
"I don't do threat assessments myself and I rely on those whose responsibility it is in the law enforcement community, particularly the FBI. And I try to stay within the guidelines that they've suggested I should stay within for those purposes," Ashcroft said.

Asked if he knew anything about the threat or who might have made it, the attorney general replied, "Frankly, I don't. That's the answer."

If you cut through all the spin surrounding President Bush's August 6th PDB, it seems to boil down to the following major points:

Tell me if I am wrong, but the only contention of the above points that I am aware of is the dispute over whether the subject of the August 6th PDB was prompted by the President's specific inquiries. Regardless, some of the most obvious questions should be:

I have a hundred more questions. But, I would sure like to see the "threat matrixes" during that time.

Maybe they could help explain why intelligence officers "running around with their hair on fire" backed up by an alarming PDB did not warrant any action from the President. Or not.

Kevin Phillips on NOW with Bill Moyers said that when Bush took office in 2001 he put in place a policy to expedite visas for Saudis. This process did NOT even require a photo. Phillips said that TWO of the 9/11 hijackers came into the United States this way.
Why is this not a HUGE scandal?

Subject: the real Aug 6 2001 PDB is 11 and a half pages long--the majority, including page numbers, has been redacted

On another note, found this on Daily Kos... have seen it several places, but this is first with a link -- a German newspaper says the Aug 6 PDB is more than 1-2 pgs long which is what the White House released! "According to an article published in Die Zeit, the German newsmagazine, in October 2002, the original PDB is 11 1/2 pages long. English translation here, original German here. Crawford, Aug. 6, 2001. U.S. president George W. Bush is on vacation. He wants to spend the whole month at his ranch in Texas. Every morning, however, he still receives his Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB, wherein the CIA informs the president about the country's security situation. On this morning, the report is straight from the CIA director. His PDB runs 11 and one-half printed pages, instead of the usual two to three, and carries the title, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Take a look at the pdf itself. The page numbers at the bottom of the pages have been redacted. The White House apparently has released only the first and last pages of an 11 1/2 page document. If 911 is becoming Watergate, then the 9-page gap is a weirdly creepy version of Rosemary Woods' "18 minute gap." Someone should tell Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus." Link for German paper in English http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/diezeit100102.html

"To announce that there be no criticism of the President, or to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - President Theodore Roosevelt

Buzz:

Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia calls to my mind a scene from the film To Kill a Mockingbird. As Atticus Finch begins to leave the courtroom, an elder, exiled to the balcony seats along with his fellow African-American spectators, orders Finch's small children to stand. "Your father is passing" is all that needs be said to transmit the reverence and respect the victims of racism and injustice feel for Finch.

I say to the people of this nation, "Stand up, Sen. Byrd is passing." Those of us living in the United States have watched this great man emerge as the most courageous, most sage, most principled political leader of the day. We had best heed his words before we are lead to ruin by fools.

Sincerely,

Oh no! Powell has Rice disease! I saw Powell on CNN today and Candy Crowly asked him if the things going on in Iraq today should have been anticipated a year ago by the Bush Administration? Powell said, "I don't think anyone could have predicted this."

Helloooooo! Before we went into Iraq people were predicting exactly what has happened! The Bushies poo-pooed each and every one

Did anybody catch the impromptu comments of Bush?? He said--paraphrased-- that the PDB only indicated that there was "intent" on the part of Al-Queda to attack the US and that they already knew that, ergo, no action was required. Isn't that wording the exact change they have gone to in explaining our action in Iraq? First we had actual WMD's, then when none surfaced the White house shifted its rhetoric to "intent to acquire," and from that logic, we have justified our excursion into Iraq? How can that logic holdup? If "intent to acquire" can justify massive expenses and deaths in Iraq, then how can Al-queda's intent to attack the US NOT lead to action, immediate and pervasive? Just asking?

German TV stations N24 and NTV have reported that 90% of the German aide organizations have left Iraq, and the rest are leaving today and tomorrow. The aide situation is desperate, since the organizations there have not been able to work at all for the past few days.

After the apparent murder of the two German Embassy security guards, the only Germans remaining in Iraq now are the Embassy employees and journalists. The NTV journalist said that he and his colleagues are also afraid of abduction, that the roads to the airport in Baghdad are hardly passable, and that less flights are leaving every day, so that even the journalists are monitoring the situation carefully.

According to the report humanitarian aide organizations of all nationalities are either leaving or considering leaving the country.

In addition, N24 reported that all foreign projects in Iraq seem to be on hold at the moment, including those repairing the water and electricity infrastructure, since the workers are afraid of violence and of being kidnapped.

As of today, the hostages include Chinese, Japanese, Israelis, Spaniards, Koreans, Italians, 'Bulgarians and other nationalities, and the hostage takers are threatening to behead them.

The Presidential Daily Briefing (PDB) of August 6, 2001 warned the president that there were active al Qaeda cells in the United States who were conducting surveillance of buildings in New York City and planning to hijack U.S. commercial jetliners. Yet the president defends his inaction by claiming that the information was too vague and would require a huge leap of faith. His defense seems to be that he would have had to envision the worst case scenario then assume it was likely to happen.

Looking for tax information on the 1,600-acre Prairie Chapel ranch property in Crawford, Texas on the McLennan County website http://www.mclennancad.org/.

Check down toward the bottom (past the many-times-noted-in-bartcop.com Vacationer-in-Chief):

"...A recent report by the General Accounting Office found that, so far, Barrett's investigation of the former San Antonio mayor [Cisneros] has cost $20,509,928, plus whatever has been spent over the past six months.... " The cost of that investigation, which led to Clinton's impeachment and eventual acquittal by the Senate, cost $72,768,285 through the end of September, according to the GAO."

How is Duh-bya still in office? (I know, I know: complicit conservative corporate media....)

Thanks for a great interview with John Dean, and for keeping this book on the front burner. It is even more important that Clarke's book.

One comment particularly resonated with me, when you mentioned the GOP never forgiving the Democratic Party for impeaching Nixon. I have always believed that, while it's true the GOP hated Bill Clinton, it was really Hillary that made their blood boil. She had been a promising young Republican lawyer and ended up helping to prepare the briefs against Nixon.

I do not see how he sleeps at night... there is not a shred of decency in his body.

Military Families Speak Out is asking for letters to Bush from its members. This is mine.

Please finally come clean with America, admit your lies and mistakes and get us out of Iraq. Americans are suffering and dying every day because of your arrogance and thirst for power and oil. You can stop this if you only will!

While you were on your little Easter vacation, cynically praying for peace, my 51 year old husband found out he would not be coming home this past weekend as promised. He spent his second Easter in Kuwait. Through your lack of leadership, his Tennessee National Guard unit is now entering their fifteenth month away from their jobs and families and their thirteenth month in your dirty little war. Is this an example of the compassionate conservativism you promised? Since they had been told they were going home, of course they have had no mail for a month, all their vehicles and equipment have been turned over to their replacements and most of their personal belongings have been sent home. The few creature comforts of their tents (refrigerators, microwaves, DVD players, cell phones, etc.) which they, of course, had to purchase themselves, had already been sold to incoming troops. At least the thin little mattresses (that they had to purchase themselves) are still on their cots.

What did you do this weekend? It seems like I heard you rode around in your pick-up truck and went fishing. Well, the 1175th Transportation Company (mostly men around your age) scoured Kuwait for trucks that would run and equipment to use. They borrowed radios and tools. They washed the few clothes that they had not sent home. Some had to go to the PX to buy underwear. They took up collections in their tents to buy new DVD players to have something to pass the time waiting. Waiting, waiting for what? It seems, Mr. President, that there is insufficient ammunition for them to take their band of ragtag trucks and equipment across the border to Iraq. Totally demoralized troops, barely serviceable vehicles and inadequate ammunition does NOT sound like a plan to me!

How many more have to die before you admit you were wrong? Saddam Hussein was never a threat to the United States and you knew it. You have the blood of thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of Americans on your hands. You are responsible for untold stresses on families and soldiers. I know your number one priority is getting re-elected, but please for once in your life, do the right thing. Bring them all home now! Forget about the oil, forget about your politics, forget about your grudges, and just get us out of there!

Why hasn't anyone noted that the only good use for a silver bullet is for killing werewolves?




MEDIA WATCH	DAILY BUZZ	P.M. CARPENTER	MAUREEN FARRELL	CARTOONS
ANGRY LIBERAL	INTERVIEWS	SOUTHERN STYLE	CONTRIBUTORS	MAILBAG
EDITORIALS	ANALYSIS	ALERTS	PERSPECTIVES	ABOUT
SEARCH	MEDIA LINKS	HEADLINE ARCHIVES	HEADLINES	EMAIL BUZZFLASH
	HELP KEEP BUZZFLASH BUZZ'N!

Unless otherwise noted, all original content and headlines are © BuzzFlash. Contact BuzzFlash for reprint rights.