Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ABC to President Clinton: NO COPY FOR YOU (No Copy To Albright & Berger)

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
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:33 AM
Original message
ABC to President Clinton: NO COPY FOR YOU (No Copy To Albright & Berger)
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 10:45 AM by kpete
ABC to President Clinton: No Copy For You


According to a source, President Clinton's office has asked for, and been denied, a copy of ABC's 9/11 revisionist wight wing fantasy.

So, let's get this straight: Rush Limbaugh and a bunch of right wing bloggers get to screen the movie. Former President Clinton does not.

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_09_03_atrios_archive.html#115755652730199733


edited to include:
ABC Refuses to Provide Copies of Path to 9/11 to Clinton, Albright, Berger

ABC has been aggressively advancing its inaccurate and politically slanted miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” to the right wing. Big players like Rush Limbaugh have been provided copies, as have obscure right-wing bloggers like Patterico.

But ABC has refused to provide a copy to President Clinton’s office. Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former National Security Adviser Samuel Berger have also requested copies of the film from ABC, and both have been denied. Both Berger and Albright are harshly criticized in the film in scenes that, according to former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, are “180 degrees from what happened.”


You can read the full text of Berger’s letter here http://websrvr80il.audiovideoweb.com/il80web20037/ThinkProgress/2006/Berger%20letter.pdf
and Albright’s letter here. http://websrvr80il.audiovideoweb.com/il80web20037/ThinkProgress/2006/albright%20letter.doc

more at:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/06/abc-dvd/



The White House is asking networks to break into soaps for the president later today. Stay tuned.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTViOGMwNjUzMmQwNjhiYTYwOWMwODI2ZTZhMTNmYTE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
1. Pathetic
Unbelieveable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
2. this is bad - hopefully Bill will kick up a fuss?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
12. it is disrespectful if indeed this happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
37. Can't BC sue for libel if (when) it's full of lies? Can WE?.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bos1 Donating Member (997 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #37
54. probably not
public figures in the USA are largely fair game, especially politicians.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 08:06 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. How about Berger, then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Counciltucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:35 AM
Response to Original message
3. Well that should satisfy conservatives...
...and officially eliminate ABC from their list of "liberal media."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JHB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. _NOTHING_ would eliminate a major network from being "the liberal media"
Even if it went ALL RUSH ALL THE TIME, it's too useful as a punching bag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #10
28. Exactly. Just another "Big Lie" ... undeterred by truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. They DENIED the EX-POTUS a copy of a program he requested???
He should call his best friend, Pappy Bush, and see if they'll do it for him.

If Clinton cannot demand and get a copy of a tape, he has little or no influence left at all.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. not only that, but a 'program' that accuses him (inaccurately) of
allowing bin Laden to escape capture.

I guess they don't want reality getting in the way of their fascist wet dream. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #7
26. Right! It accuses him of allowing Bin Laden to escape...
Then, why isn't he screaming at the top of his lungs to get a copy? Maybe he should make the call himself and let some little CEO's schlub assistant deal with saying no to him personally. Tell me that's one call that won't go through! Time to make it betweem the POTUS and the CEO.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. Hmmm...seems they've got something to hide.....nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. No f-ing way.
What evil little jerks they are!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cooley Hurd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:41 AM
Response to Original message
8. K&R - it's painfully obvious that ABC has no interest in...
...the truth.


Hey, ABC - remember this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AspenRose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #8
46. Wow...now THERE's an archaic relic
Something I haven't seen on TV since puberty (80s)!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LaurenG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
9. Interesting
Why would they deny him a copy. Was it a statement meant to insult him. Were they trying to hide a "surprise". This makes no sense and seems immature and hateful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
11. Send their ratings down the toilet...
I will no longer watch their channel EVER!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
13. I am so done with letting these bastards disrespect President Clinton.
Their political gaming cost us 9/11 in the first place.

:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Julius Civitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
14. This is what happens when they let Freepers make movies
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 10:46 AM by Julius Civitatus
This whole propaganda operation of ABC stinks to high heaven.

BOYCOTT ABC/DISNEY NOW!

Let them know we are paying attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
15. They are making him the scapegoat, but he can't get a pre-release
to build a defense.

Now we know who is behind this.... KKKarl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
16. CLEAR YOUR CALENDAR BILL ..YOU HAVE ALOT OF REBUTTAL AHEAD..
tough lesson Bill..when you go kissy face with the *hes...they will fuck you every time...they are cornered rat bastards Bill...and you are now their whipping boy!!

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
electprogdems Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
17. I can't think of a stronger statement of where ABC stands.
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 10:49 AM by electprogdems
I hope current democratic leadership is taking notice. I hope they aren't kidding themselves that after this, the Dean scream, Gore's internet statement, that the media is in anyway friendly and will help to get a Democrat elected, or even be neutral.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. i sent abc another letter about this specifically. let them know
already we know, clinton has been denied. film about blow job and dissing clinton. abc will not win on this. they will be the loser, big time. they have done every single thing they could to set themselves up for a loss. too much and too many smoking guns that is too clear a path to bush propaganda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #17
48. Anything But Candor is the network's new acronym. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
19. The more bad press this ABC thing gets the more people will think
that 9/11 was caused by Bush and Cheney and start researching for the truth. 36% think that Bush let 9/11 happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. clinton doesnt get preview, rightwing blogs do
if abc couldnt have fucked up any more. that is too obvious. d*mn they are stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #19
25. please send this to every republican you know!!
these are some of the warnings bush ignored the summer of 2001/Marianivsbush


this is from the lawsuit of MrsMariani who filed a lawsuit against bush..for his failures on 9/11,
these are some of the warnings bush got the summer of 2001 that bush ignored...yes this is directly from the court documents!


http://www.911timeline.net/marianivsbush.htm

(2) April to May 2001. U.S. government received 'specific' threats of terrorist attacks against U.S. targets or interests



Condoleezza Rice admitted that the U.S. government had received "specific" threats that "al Qaeda attacks against U.S. targets or interests…might be in the works. There was a clear concern that something was up, … but it was principally focused overseas. The areas of most concern were the Middle East, the Arabian Peninsula and Europe." (cited in CNN 5-16-2002 "Timeline: Events leading up to September 11") She did not elaborate on where the intelligence originated, but the Independent of London, reported that the information had been relayed to Washington by British intelligence sources. (Bennetto and Gumbel 5-18-2002)



(3) June 6, 2001. German intelligence warned CIA



The German intelligence agency, the BND, warned both the CIA and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." This intelligence reportedly came from Echelon, a high-tech electronic surveillance system used by the intelligence agencies of several nations to glean through electronic communications for certain keywords. It was first reported by the German daily newspaper, Frankfurter Algemeine Zeitung on September 13. Its sources were reportedly from the BND itself. (Stafford 9-13-2001; Thomas 5-21-2002) According to Gordon Thomas (5-21-2002) of Global – Intel, the original source of information actually came from Israeli Mossad agents operating in the U.S. who had infiltrated al Qaeda. According to his account the Mossad also informed British and Russian intelligence about the attacks, who then in turn notified the CIA. Thomas's sources are allegedly informants within the Mossad itself.

(4) July 16, 2001. British intelligence sent a report to Tony Blair warning of imminent attacks. The report was also sent to Washington


The British Cabinet Office Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) sent a memo authored by the heads of British intelligence agencies, MI6, MI5 and GCHQ, to Tony Blair and other cabinet ministers, warning that al Qaeda was in the final stages of preparing for a terrorist attack. The memo suggested that the attacks would likely be aimed at American or Israeli targets. The report did not indicate however that the agencies had any knowledge with regards to the "timings, targets and methods of attack." According to the Times of London, the warning was "based on intelligence gleaned not just from MI6 and GCHQ but also from US agencies, including the CIA and the National Security Agency, which has staff working jointly with GCHQ." The newspaper added, "The CIA sometimes has a representative on the JIC. The contents of the July 16 warning would have been passed to the Americans, Whitehall confirmed." (Evans 6-14-2002)

(5) June 23, 2001. Arabic News Network reported that bin Laden had predicted a 'severe blow' to the United States.



"According to the June 23rd AirlineBiz.com report, the Arabic satellite television network MBC claimed that 'the next two weeks will witness a big surprise.' An MBC reporter who had met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on June 21st predicted that 'a severe blow is expected against U.S. and Israeli interests worldwide. There is a major state of mobilization among the Osama bin Laden forces. It seems that there is a race of who will strike first. Will it be the United States or Osama bin Laden?' " (Grigg 3-11-2002)

(6) Summer 2001. Jordan's General Intelligence Division (GID) warned Washington of an attack planned on the U.S mainland using aircraft.



According to John Cooley (5-21-2002), author of the book, Unholy Wars: America, Afghanistan, and International Terrorism, Jordan's intelligence agency, GID, intercepted al Qaeda communications indicating that a terrorist operation, code-named 'Al Ourush al Kabir' or 'The Big Wedding,' was being planned for within the U.S. and would involve aircraft. Cooley confirmed the validity of this warning. (see also Bubnov 5-24-2002)

(7) Summer 2001. Iranian man warned U.S. authorities of a planned terrorist attack during the week of September 9, 2001



Online.ie reported "German police have confirmed an Iranian man phoned US police from his deportation cell to warn of the planned attack on the World Trade Centre" during the week of September 9. He reportedly called several times. Very little information was given about the 'Iranian man' other than the fact that he was 28-years old. No other news agencies independently reported the incident. (Online.ie 9/14/01; cited in Anova 9-14-2001; Ruppert 11-2-2001; 11-24-2001; 4-22-2002)

(8) August 2001. Moroccan intelligence warned Washington about "large scale-operations in New York in the summer or autumn of 2001"



According to reports published in November 2001 by a French magazine and a Moroccan newspaper, Morocco's royal intelligence informed Washington that one of its agents, who had penetrated al Qaeda, learned that bin Laden's organization was preparing "large operations in New York in the summer or autumn of 2001." The agent, who is said to be presently in the U.S. helping its intelligence agencies, also informed Moroccan intelligence that bin Laden was 'very disappointed' with the first WTC bombing which failed to bring the two towers down. John Cooley (5-21-2002), who reported this in the International Herald Tribune wrote that as of 5-21-2002, he had not independently verified this warning. (see also Bubnov 5-24-2002)




(9) August 2001. Israel warned U.S. about large-scale attacks on the U.S. mainland





"Israeli intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States last month that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent." (Jacobson and Wastell 9-16-2001; Davis 9-17-2001; Stafford 9-13-2001; Serrano and Thor-Dahlburg 9-20-2001; Martin 1-5-2002; Martin 1-16-2002) According to Gordan Thomas (5-21-2002), this information was based on intelligence gleaned from Israeli Mossad agents who had penetrated or were spying on the al Qaeda operatives. Thomas's sources are allegedly informants within the Mossad itself.



(10) August 2001. Intelligence sources warned Argentine Jewish leaders of imminent attacks



According to Argentine Jewish leaders, the Jewish community in that country "received a warning about an impending major terrorist attack against the United States, Argentina or France just weeks before September 11." Forward quoted Marta Nercellas, a lawyer for the Delegación de Asociaciones Israelitas Argentinas, or DAIA, Argentina's main Jewish representative body: "It was a concrete warning that an attack of major proportion would take place, and it came from a reliable intelligence . And I understand the Americans were told about it." (Forward 2-5-2002)



(11) August 24, 2001. Russian intelligence warned of possible hijacking



Russian intelligence warned the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots were specifically training to crash airliners into planned targets. This was reported by the Russian Izveztia on September 12 and translated for From The Wilderness Magazine by a former CIA officer. (cited from Ruppert 11-2-2001; see also Ruppert 11-24-2001; 4-22-2002; Martin 1-5-2002; Martin 1-16-2002) According to Gordan Thomas (5-21-2002) Russian intelligence received this information from the Israeli Mossad.

(12) August 31, 2001. Egyptian president warned U.S. that something was brewing



Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak warned the U.S. that "something would happen" 12 days before the terrorist attacks. (AP 12-7-2001; MacFarquhar and Tyler 6-4-2002; Martin 1-5-2002). Egypt had also warned the U.S. on June 13. (Martin 1-16-2002). The U.S intelligence denied that they had received this information soon before the attacks and instead alleged that the only warnings that had been given to them from Egypt occurred between March and May of 2001. (MacFarquhar and Tyler 6-4-2002)

(13) September 1, 2001. Russian intelligence warned the U.S. again about 'imminent attacks'



"Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Russian intelligence to warn the U.S. government 'in the strongest possible terms' of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings" (We do not have a reference to the original source. See Ruppert 11-2-2001; 4-22-2002 based on MS-NBC interview with Putin, September 15. See also Martin 1-16-2002; Thomas 5-21-2002) According to Gordan Thomas (5-21-2002) Russian intelligence received this information from the Israeli Mossad.

(14) Early September 2001. Mossad chief warned CIA of possibility of attacks



According to Gordon Thomas (5-21-2002), Mossad Chief Efraim Halevy warned both the CIA and FBI of the possibility of near term attacks. George Tenet presumably thought that it was "too non specific."




(15) September 5-6, 2001



Commenting on the U.S. intelligence failure, the French Le Monde reported: "The first lapse has to do with the processing of intelligence items that come out of Europe. According to our information, French and American officials did in fact hold important meetings in Paris from the 5th to the 6th of September, that is, a few days prior to the attacks. Those sessions brought representatives of the American Special Services together with officers of the DST (Directorate of Territorial Security) and military personnel from the DGSE (General Overseas Security Administration). Their discussion turned to some of the serious threats made against American interests in Europe, specifically one targeting the U.S. Embassy in Paris. During these talks, the DST directed the American visitors' attention to a Moroccan-born Frenchman who had been detained in the United States since August 17 and who was considered to be a key high-level Islamic fundamentalist. But the American delegation, preoccupied above all with questions of administrative procedure, paid no attention to this 'first alarm,' basically concluding that they were going to take no one's advice, and that an attack on American soil was inconceivable. It took September 11 for the FBI to show any real interest in this man, who we now know attended two aviation training schools, as did at least seven of the kamikaze terrorists." (cited in Ridgeway 5-28-2002)

(16) September 7, 2001. Mossad chief warned CIA a second time of possible attacks



According to Gordon Thomas (5-21-2002), Mossad Chief Efraim Halevy sent another alert to the CIA warning of possible terrorist attacks. The message was received in Washington on September 7.

(17) September 3-10, 2001. Anonymous caller informed a radio talk show that Osama bin Laden's organization would be launching imminent attacks against the U.S.



"MSNBC reports on September 16 that a caller to a Cayman Islands radio talk show gave several warnings of an imminent attack on the U.S. by bin Laden in the week prior to 9/11." (We do not have a reference to the original source. See Ruppert 11-2-2001)

(18) September 10, 2001.



U.S. intelligence intercepted conversations from al Qaeda that were extremely specific. USA Today, reported "Two U.S. intelligence officials, paraphrasing highly classified intercepts, say they include such remarks as, 'Good things are coming,' 'Watch the news' and 'Tomorrow will be a great day for us.' " This information was contained with 13,000 pages of material from the National Security Agency that was handed over to the Congressional 9-11 inquiry. It is unclear when these intercepts were reviewed by U.S. intelligence. They may not have been reviewed until after 9-11. (Diamond 6-3-2002)

(19) September 11, 2001. Employees at Odigo Inc, received warnings predicting the attacks hours before they happened



The Israeli company, Odigo, Inc. was apparently warned two hours before the attacks. Odigo CEO Micha Macover told the Ha'aretz that 'two workers received the messages predicting the attack would happen.' The FBI was quickly notified but it is presently not clear if U.S. authorities are still investigating the incident. The company's offices in Israel are located suspiciously near the Israeli Institute for Counter Terrorism which broke story of the insider trading scam on 9-11. (McWilliams 9-28-2001; Seberg 9-28-2001; Ruppert 2-11-2002; 4-22-2002)
Evidence that U.S. authorities were concerned

(1) 1994. FBI videotaped an informant being recruited as a suicide bomber by two men, one of whom was linked to Osama bin Laden



Summarizing a letter written by former FBI Special Agent James Hauswirth, the Los Angeles Times wrote, "The 27-year FBI veteran said in the letter reviewed by the Los Angeles Times that the Phoenix office had evidence of Islamic potential terrorists operating in the region as far back as 1994. That year, two men were videotaped by FBI agents recruiting a Phoenix FBI informant as a suicide bomber, the letter says. One of those men, according to a source, was linked to a terrorist in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing." ( Los Angeles Times 5-27-2002)

(2) 1996-2001. The FBI was investigating suspected terrorists enrolled in flight schools



In 1996, after the Philippine police had discovered the 'Bojinka' plot (see above), US officials began investigating al Qaeda terrorist suspects who were training in U.S. flight schools. "Since 1996, the FBI had been developing evidence that international terrorists were using US flight schools to learn to fly jumbo jets. A foiled plot in Manila to blow up U.S. airliners and later court testimony by an associate of bin Laden had touched off FBI inquiries at several schools, officials say." (cited in Fairnaru and Grimaldi 9-23-2001; Martin 1-16-2002; Shelon 5-18-2002)



(3) 1996 or 1997. FBI Counter terrorist specialist John O'Neil warned of terrorist capabilities



Soon after the late John O'Neil had become head of the FBI's New York unit, he warned, "A lot of these groups now have the capability and the support infrastructure in the United States to attack us here if they choose to." (Loeb 9-12-2002) John O'Neil, who was described as one of the FBI's 'most pugnacious' agents, resigned from the FBI shortly before 9-11. He subsequently took a position as head of the WTC security, where he is believed to have died on the day of the attacks while attempting to rescue other people in the towers. September 11 had been his first day on the job. (Loeb 9-12-2002) John O'Neil had complained that the Bush administration had impeded his investigations into suspected Saudi terrorists. (Brisard and Dasquie 2001in Godoy 11-16-2001; Marlowe 11-19-2001)
(4) 1997. FBI was investigating Middle Eastern flight school students in Phoenix



Summarizing a letter written by former FBI Special Agent James Hauswirth, the Los Angeles Times wrote: "In 1998, the office's international terrorism squad investigated a possible Middle Eastern extremist taking flight lessons at a Phoenix airport, wrote Hauswirth, who retired from the FBI in 1999."

(5) 1998. The FAA issued a warning that al Qaeda may attempt to hijack commercial airlines



In 1998, Federal Aviation Administration warned airlines to be on a 'high degree of alertness' against possible hijackings by members of Osama bin Laden's organizations. (AP 5-26-2002). May 18, 1998. FBI memo observed that an 'unusually' large number of Middle Eastern men were attending flight schools. The memo revealed that an Oklahoma FBI pilot had warned his supervisor "that he has observed large numbers of Middle Eastern males receiving flight training at Oklahoma airports in recent months." The FBI pilot further observed, "This is a recent phenomena and may be related to planned terrorist activity." Washington 5-30-2002)

(6) 199? – 2001. According to anonymous sources it was widely known that important warnings were being ignored



The New American magazine interviewed three federal law enforcement agents who confirmed that the FBI had foreknowledge of the attacks. They spoke only on conditions of anonymity, although two of them told the magazine that they would be willing to testify to Congress. One agent stated that it was widely known "all over the Bureau, how these were ignored by Washington... All indications are that this information came from some of most experienced guys, people who have devoted their lives to this kind of work. But their warnings were placed in a pile in someone's office in Washington...In some cases, these field agents predicted, almost precisely, what happened on September 11th. So we were all holding our breath…hoping that the situation would be remedied." (cited in Grigg 3-11-2002)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. they silence the ones who know
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. they can not silence all of us!!


911 skeptic wins Florida Primary
http://bowman2006.com /


Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. is President of the Institute for Space and Security Studies, Executive Vice President of Millennium III Corporation, and retired Presiding Archbishop of the United Catholic Church. He flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam and directed all the “Star Wars” programs under Presidents Ford and Carter. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President’s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers' ROTC Award of Merit (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech.

911 skeptic, has vowed to reopen 911 investigation.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5lN5Vi8xUM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-50047043090414...





xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Fury as academics claim 9/11 was 'inside job'
by JAYA NARAIN Last updated at 18:10pm on 5th September 2006


The 9/11 terrorist attack on America which left almost 3,000 people dead was an "inside job", according to a group of leading academics.

Around 75 top professors and leading scientists believe the attacks were puppeteered by war mongers in the White House to justify the invasion and the occupation of oil-rich Arab countries.

The claims have caused outrage and anger in the US which marks the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attacks on Monday.

But leading scientists say the facts of their investigations cannot be ignored and say they have evidence that points to one of the biggest conspiracies ever perpetrated.

Professor Steven Jones, who lectures in physics at the Brigham Young University in Utah, says the official version of events is the biggest and most evil cover up in history.

MORE:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/new...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Count Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
20. Strategy worked for Mel Gibson before - advanced copies sent to all RW
of his movies, leaving the critics with the guesswork. By the time it was out, the noise machine proclaimed it a must see - and it was seen.
Not saying the two are the same thing, but the strategy employed sure smells the same. I wonder if the author of this 911 POS - who wants to change the Hollywood paradigm wasn't involved in both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Double T Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
22. Anyone catching a wif of another RW neocon.........
'swiftboat style attack' on the 'BIG DOG' and by extension the Democrats. Might be time to put the 'BLOCK' on ABC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
23. Damn liberal media!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
24. Bill should rebutt the book this is based on. PUBLICLY.
This was a book, right?
he can say - it's not exactly the 911 Commission report and this is what's wrong with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #24
35. Exactly! -- What show WOULDN'T want the former POTUS on?
And, he should do it on every channel BUT ABC or its affiliates. I'd love to see him do OPRAH, 60 Minutes.... all the shows that people actually WATCH. And, while he's there... see him spreading the Democratic Party Message (as opposed to the Hillary, Billary, or DLC message) as well. Free PR! And, I'd also like him to appear, not as the wussed-up Pappy-Bush loving DINO he seems these days, but as the Democratic firebrand that used to give it back twice as hard as it was dished out during his first campaign.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. He's supposed to be on with Couric this week. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
29. also they are back to blow job. something to remember
the american people felt the repugs went too far. they thought it was stopping clinton from doing his job for no reason. this will bring that out again, how the republicans who boast of being the party to fight, would allow clinton to because of the damn thing he had going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
30. Is there any questions now?
That ABC is in cahoots with the 911 coverup done by this administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
31. Looks like ABC is setting themselves up to get hit with a libel suit.
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 11:41 AM by w4rma
All of these folks have notified ABC, in writing, before airtime, of *many* undeniable factual differences from the 911 report. And there will be many more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
42. Well, Good. Maybe Something CAN Be Done!
Thank you for a ray of hope!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacebird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #31
51. can ABC hide behind "docuDRAMA" not "documentary"?
in a suit against libel? Will that fly in a court case?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #31
53. agreed
Their fictitious slanders against Clinton may well be libel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #53
58. Lawsuits are necessary here...if TRUTH is to get out on 9-11
and not just BushCo propaganda using M$M and military 'psyops'.

If truth is the best defense againsst libel/slander, then ABC is defenseless !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mccoyn Donating Member (512 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #31
57. I bet there are going to be many disclaimers.
I'm sure their lawyers put in enough disclaimers to avoid libel. I plan to repeat those disclaimers in every conversation about the show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oilwellian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
32. What was the Republican congress doing under Clinton?
Why weren't the republican lead intelligence committees screaming for Clinton to pay more attention to the terrorist threat? Oh that's right...they had their heads in his crotch. Fucking wankers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. clinton was trying to ge things done, repugs saying no not a threat
as they "had their heads in his crotch. Fucking wankers."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:20 PM
Response to Original message
36. Does all this come under
that "Fairness Doctrine" that Clinton did away with? I hope not.

This sounds like war to me and abc started it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Samurai_Writer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. Clinton didn't do away with the Fairness Doctrine!
The FCC repealed it in 1987. From Wikipedia:

The Doctrine was enforced throughout the entire history of the FCC (and its precursor, the Federal Radio Commission) until 1987, when the FCC repealed it in its Syracuse Peace Council decision which was upheld. The Republican-controlled commission claimed the doctrine had grown to inhibit rather than enhance debate and suggested that, due to the many media voices in the marketplace at the time, the doctrine was probably unconstitutional. Others, noting the subsequent rise of right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh, suggest the repeal was more likely motivated by a desire to get partisans on the air.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #40
44. I always read on DU about
Clinton having a hand in getting rid of the "Fairness Doctrine" so this is different information..thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warrens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:32 PM
Response to Original message
38. Editor & Publisher has a copy
They thought it was pretty bad too. I imagine Bill could get copies for the asking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
41. Is There NO LEGAL Recourse?
Holy hell, this is just bizzare!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave123williams Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
43. Please refer to him as "President Clinton" not 'former president Clinton'

He's earned the right to be called, simply, "President Clinton" for the rest of his life. Judges, Governors, Mayors and so forth have the same honorific right once they've held office. Presidents, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cobalt Violet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
45. ABC: Asshole Bullshit Corportation.
And I use to think it stood for American Broadcasting Company.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. USED TO Are The Key Words
Edited on Wed Sep-06-06 05:34 PM by Dinger
ABC= American bu$h Campaign
ABC= "Architects" Bring Corruption (o.k., that's a dumb one, but I'm not that creative here sorry)
ABC= All Bullshit Channel
ABC= Arrangement Before Campaigns
ABC= Awfully Boring Channel
ABC= Anal Bloodsucking Chumps
ABC= Attorneys Better Come! (quick, they'll need 'em!)
ABC= Always Bring Corruption
ABC= Anal bu$h Channel
ABC= Anti-Intellectual Channel


Best I could do on short notice, sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
47. Clinton, R's "My Pet Whipping Boy" nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
50. A little guilt starting to kick in?
ABC is damaging their own credibility here.

What a petulant move, reminiscent of a certain member of the administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Erika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-06-06 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
52. We should all scream like Hell
Most Americans enjoyed a higher standard of living under Clinton than any republican president. He also contained terrorists and paid a peace dividend.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleClarkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-07-06 02:59 AM
Response to Original message
55. I think it was Scarborough or some other conservative
who had someone on their show who said that there were plenty of reasons to criticize Clinton's performance before 9/11 without making shit up. So even some conservatives aren't impressed.
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 Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:13 AM
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