9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - Ashcroft chartered plane after same warning Condi ignored

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

Ashcroft chartered plane after same warning Condi ignored

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:16 am Post subject: Ashcroft chartered plane after same warning Condi ignored

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

This doesnt look good at all.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/4/161326/154

Quote:

Ashcroft chartered plane after same warning Condi ignored
by blue meme
Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 01:13:26 PM PDT

The White House is in full panic mode trying to find a way to spin the now-admitted fact that George Tenet did indeed brief Condi Rice on July 10, 2001 about the terror threat. The latest damage control approach has been to claim that the report was "nothing new".

So how come when then-Attorney General John Ashcroft heard the same warning a week later, he immediately stopped flying commercial aircraft?

* blue meme's diary :: ::
*

Christy Hardin Smith at FDL runs down a bunch of the story of the July 10, 2001 terror briefing Condi somehow failed to remember. She also touches on the fact that George Tenet gave the same warning to John Ashcroft exactly a week later.

It seems to me that we ought to be asking whether that story has anything to do with this one, dated July 26, 2001:

Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

Got that? July 17 -- Ashcroft briefed. July 28 -- Ashcroft flies in a charter, leased, according to the article, earlier that week.

Seems to me this could be another blockbuster. If Ashcroft decided that commercial flights were too dangerous based on the same warning as Rice (who presumably wasn't flying commercial flights either) ignored, we have ourselves some rather dramatic evidence of callous indifference and willingness on the part of the Bush Administration to put the preservation of their own hides before their duty. It will be tough for Rice to argue that the briefing was nothing new if it scared Ashcroft away from flying with commercial airlines.

And no, before any of you ask, i am not taking this as gospel. I'm only posting the story 'as is' and have not back-tracked any of it myself. Feel free to pick holes but you have to admit, on the surface it looks bad.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:31 am Post subject:

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/15662785.htm

Quote:

Rumsfeld, Ashcroft received warning of al Qaida attack before 9/11
By JONATHAN S. LANDAY, WARREN P. STROBEL and JOHN WALCOTT
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and former Attorney General John Ashcroft received the same CIA briefing about an imminent al-Qaida strike on an American target that was given to the White House two months before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

The State Department's disclosure Monday that the pair was briefed within a week after then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice was told about the threat on July 10, 2001, raised new questions about what the Bush administration did in response, and about why so many officials have claimed they never received or don't remember the warning.

One official who helped to prepare the briefing, which included a PowerPoint presentation, described it as a "10 on a scale of 1 to 10" that "connected the dots" in earlier intelligence reports to present a stark warning that al-Qaida, which had already killed Americans in Yemen, Saudi Arabia and East Africa, was poised to strike again.

Former CIA Director George Tenet gave the independent Sept. 11, 2001, commission the same briefing on Jan. 28, 2004, but the commission made no mention of the warning in its 428-page final report. According to three former senior intelligence officials, Tenet testified to commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste and to Philip Zelikow, the panel's executive director and the principal author of its report, who's now Rice's top adviser.

A new book by Bob Woodward of The Washington Post alleges that Rice failed to take the July 2001 warning seriously when it was delivered at a White House meeting by Tenet, Cofer Black, then the agency's chief of top counterterrorism, and a third CIA official whose identity remains protected.

Rice's deputy, Stephen J. Hadley, who became national security adviser after she became secretary of state, and Rice's top counterterrorism aide, Richard Clarke, also were present.

Woodward wrote that Tenet and Black considered the briefing the "starkest warning they had given the White House" on the threat posed by Osama bin Laden's terrorist network. But, he wrote, the pair felt as if Rice gave them "the brush-off."

Speaking to reporters late Sunday en route to the Middle East, Rice said she had no recollection of what she called "the supposed meeting."

"What I'm quite certain of, is that it was not a meeting in which I was told that there was an impending attack and I refused to respond," she said.

Ashcroft, who resigned as attorney general on Nov. 9, 2004, told the Associated Press on Monday that it was "disappointing" that he never received the briefing, either.

But on Monday evening, Rice's spokesman Sean McCormack issued a statement confirming that she'd received the CIA briefing "on or around July 10" and had asked that it be given to Ashcroft and Rumsfeld.

"The information presented in this meeting was not new, rather it was a good summary from the threat reporting from the previous several weeks," McCormack said. "After this meeting, Dr. Rice asked that this same information be briefed to Secretary Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft. That briefing took place by July 17."

Lt. Cmdr. Joe Carpenter, a Pentagon spokesman, said he had no information "about what may or may not have been briefed" to Rumsfeld at Rice's request.

David Ayres, who was Ashcroft's chief of staff at the Justice Department, said that the former attorney general also has no recollection of a July 17, 2001, terrorist threat briefing. Later, Ayres said that Ashcroft could recall only a July 5 briefing on threats to U.S. interests abroad.

He said Ashcroft doesn't remember any briefing that summer that indicated that al-Qaida was planning to attack within the United States.

The CIA briefing didn't provide the exact timing or nature of a possible attack, nor did it predict whether it was likely to take place in the United States or overseas, said three former senior intelligence officials.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because the report remains highly classified.

The briefing "didn't say within the United States," said one former senior intelligence official. "It said on the United States, which could mean a ship, an embassy or inside the United States."

In the briefing, Tenet warned in very strong terms that intelligence from a variety of sources indicated that bin Laden's terrorist network was planning an attack on a U.S. target in the near future, said one of the officials.

"The briefing was intended to `connect the dots' contained in other intelligence reports and paint a very clear picture of the threat posed by bin Laden," said the official, who described the tone of the report as "scary."

It isn't clear what action, if any, the administration took in response, but officials said Rumsfeld was focused mostly on his plans to remake the Army into a smaller, high-tech force and deploy a national ballistic missile defense system.

Nor is it clear why the 9/11 commission never reported the briefing, which the intelligence officials said Tenet outlined to commission members Ben-Veniste and Zelikow in secret testimony at CIA headquarters. The State Department confirmed that the briefing materials were "made available to the 9/11 Commission, and Director Tenet was asked about this meeting when interviewed by the 9/11 Commission."

The three former senior intelligence officials, however, said Tenet raised the matter with the panel himself, displayed slides from the PowerPoint presentation and offered to testify on the matter in public.

Ben-Veniste confirmed to McClatchy Newspapers that Tenet outlined for the 9/11 commission the July 10 briefing to Rice in secret testimony in January 2004. He referred questions about why the commission omitted any mention of the briefing in its report to Zelikow, the report's main author. Zelikow didn't respond to e-mail and telephone queries from McClatchy Newspapers.

Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism chief, Ben-Veniste and the former senior intelligence officials all challenged some aspects of Woodward's account of the briefing given to Rice, including assertions that she failed to react to the warning and that it concerned an imminent attack inside the United States.

Clarke told McClatchy Newspapers that Rice focused in particular on the possible threat to President Bush at an upcoming summit meeting in Genoa, Italy, and promised to quickly schedule a high-level White House meeting on al-Qaida. That meeting took place on September 4, 2001.

Ben-Veniste said the commission was never told that Rice had brushed off the warning. According to Tenet, he said, Rice "understood the level of urgency he was communicating."

_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 12:58 pm Post subject:

Let me see if I can summarize your belief system: 1. Mohammed Atta didn't do it. 2. No American Jews were killed in the Sept. 11 attacks. 3. WTC7 was intentionally demolished by a sooper seekret demolition squad. 4. Ashcroft and Rumsfeld knew that the US was going to be attacked with terrorists using aircraft as weapons. Care to put this all together for me? Yeah, I didn't think so.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:15 pm Post subject:

I just found it funny that the piece says the White House was "in full panic mode" about this. A quick look at Google News reveals a conspicuous lack of media interest in this non-story. If the White House is panicking about anything right now, it's panic over the Mark Foley scandal and other signs that their party's mid-term election campaign seems to be imploding. Silly CTs. Ever under the delusion that they're striking fear into the hearts of evil men.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:20 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Let me see if I can summarize your belief system:

1. Mohammed Atta didn't do it.
2. No American Jews were killed in the Sept. 11 attacks.
3. WTC7 was intentionally demolished by a sooper seekret demolition squad.
4. Ashcroft and Rumsfeld knew that the US was going to be attacked with terrorists using aircraft as weapons.

Care to put this all together for me?

Yeah, I didn't think so.

You might like to read Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley if you're really interested in an overview.

chek
Mega Poster

Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 2:26 pm Post subject:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Silly CTs. Ever under the delusion that they're striking fear into the hearts of evil men.

Once you realise psy-ops aren't uni-directional and to be passively accepted, you'd be surprised.
Don't Bush and Blair look so happy these days!
Boo!

Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:04 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

1. and 4. are not necessarily exclusive. Ashcroft might have started taking precautions against attacks on commercial airliners to raise the level of fear and attempt to put the blame on poor intelligence or poor handling of intelligence rather than his own complicity in a plot.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:14 pm Post subject:

chek wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

You might like to read Synthetic Terror by Webster Tarpley if you're really interested in an overview.

...an overview of DeFecToR's belief system...?

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:16 pm Post subject:

Bushwacker wrote:

Are you saying that Ashcroft used charter aircraft to scare people?

Is that what you're saying?

I just want to make sure before I bitch-slap a straw man.

Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:40 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Bushwacker wrote:

Are you saying that Ashcroft used charter aircraft to scare people?

Is that what you're saying?

I just want to make sure before I bitch-slap a straw man.

If he was party to a plan for a false flag operation to be blamed on Arab terrorists, it would do no harm to indicate prior to the event that Arab terrorists were a real and present danger, would it?

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 5:54 pm Post subject:

Bushwacker wrote:

If he was party to a plan for a false flag operation to be blamed on Arab terrorists, it would do no harm to indicate prior to the event that Arab terrorists were a real and present danger, would it?

Indicate it...how? By taking a chartered flight?

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:39 pm Post subject:

There was thinking i might get a serious conversation. What the hell was i thinking? Nothing has changed since i last posted here. You are all children, and this is nursey school. _________________ "A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices." -William James

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 7:18 pm Post subject:

DeFecToR wrote:

There was thinking i might get a serious conversation. What the hell was i thinking?

Well, I don't know for sure, but it was probably something like this:

"Let me copy and paste a bunch of nonsense to the forum, contributing nothing of my own but insults and a childish running commentary, and perhaps someone will favor me with a serious conversation."

Apparently, you thought wrong.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 7:22 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

DeFecToR wrote:

There was thinking i might get a serious conversation. What the hell was i thinking?

DeFicaToR "thought wrong?" well hell call the media! Laughing

Hell Aggie that's what they do! That's ALL they do!

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 9:24 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Bushwacker wrote:

If he was party to a plan for a false flag operation to be blamed on Arab terrorists, it would do no harm to indicate prior to the event that Arab terrorists were a real and present danger, would it?

Indicate it...how? By taking a chartered flight?

Why not? We all now know that Ashcroft stopped using commercial flights, who knows how or when that information was disseminated.

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:03 pm Post subject:

Bushwacker wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Bushwacker wrote:

If he was party to a plan for a false flag operation to be blamed on Arab terrorists, it would do no harm to indicate prior to the event that Arab terrorists were a real and present danger, would it?

Indicate it...how? By taking a chartered flight?

Why not? We all now know that Ashcroft stopped using commercial flights, who knows how or when that information was disseminated.

Yes, but did ANYONE find his use of a chartered flight unusual BEFORE 9/11?

It just seems like it would have been more effective if he had said to some random person: "Psst...we're really worried about a terrorist attack in the Justice Dept... pass it on."

Or, we could do away with the necessity for all these ad hoc explanations by simply dropping the absurd notion of an "inside job".

Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 10:45 pm Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Bushwacker wrote:

aggle-rithm wrote:

Bushwacker wrote:

If he was party to a plan for a false flag operation to be blamed on Arab terrorists, it would do no harm to indicate prior to the event that Arab terrorists were a real and present danger, would it?

Indicate it...how? By taking a chartered flight?

Why not? We all now know that Ashcroft stopped using commercial flights, who knows how or when that information was disseminated.

You miss the point, that after the event not only does he look like a wise man who heeded appropriate warnings, but also if there is any suspicion of an inside job, he has something of an alibi. Of course, he had no idea that there would be forums like this, where people see no difficulty at all in holding a number of mutually contradictory ideas simultaneously.

MiniMauve
Moderate Poster

Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 220

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:59 am Post subject:

aggle-rithm wrote:

This is an exceedingly evasive response. If you have nothing to say, say nothing.
_________________
Stick to what you KNOW. All else is disinformation, intended or not.

DeFecToR
Moderate Poster

Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 782

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 7:21 am Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

DeFicaToR

DeFicaToR!!!! BRILLIANT!!!!

Thanks Jay Lord, that has seriously made my day.
_________________
"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."
-William James

aggle-rithm
Moderate Poster

Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 557

Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:14 pm Post subject:

MiniMauve wrote:

This is an exceedingly evasive response. If you have nothing to say, say nothing.

Well, I was responding to this:

Quote:

Posted: Thu Oct 05, 2006 7:16 am Post subject: Ashcroft chartered plane after same warning Condi ignored

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

This doesnt look good at all.

< links and copy/pasted text>

And no, before any of you ask, i am not taking this as gospel. I'm only posting the story 'as is' and have not back-tracked any of it myself. Feel free to pick holes but you have to admit, on the surface it looks bad.

Looking closer, it seems that defector included some more text that got included with the copy/paste job, so what he had to say may have had more substance than I thought. The missing text is as follows:

Quote:

Got that? July 17 -- Ashcroft briefed. July 28 -- Ashcroft flies in a charter, leased, according to the article, earlier that week.

Seems to me this could be another blockbuster. If Ashcroft decided that commercial flights were too dangerous based on the same warning as Rice (who presumably wasn't flying commercial flights either) ignored, we have ourselves some rather dramatic evidence of callous indifference and willingness on the part of the Bush Administration to put the preservation of their own hides before their duty. It will be tough for Rice to argue that the briefing was nothing new if it scared Ashcroft away from flying with commercial airlines.

To this, I will respond: There is no evidence that Ashcroft was afraid to fly commercial airlines. Just because he took one flight on a government jet instead of an airliner (on the advice of the FBI) doesn't mean he was afraid to fly; his personal flights were still on commercial aircraft.

Some government officials use government planes (including military aircraft, of which there is a substantial supply) instead of commercial aircraft for a different reason: They're far more likely to get to where they're going on time.

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> Critics' Corner	All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum