Transcript of Aug 6, 2001 PDB

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Can someone explain to me why the page numbers at the bottom of the pages are redacted? We are seeing the whole thing, right?

Those redactions are rather odd. But they may not be page numbers in the first place (does Dubya even understand the concept of page numbering? )...

 

[Gaard]

This article is from May 17, 2002

Bush Aides Seek To Contain Furor

The Aug. 6 briefing, according to officials with first-hand knowledge, was different. Along with current intelligence, it had a 1 1/2-page analysis -- largely speculative -- of what bin Laden might have been planning. The summary analysis was requested by Bush, according to White House spokesman Ari Fleischer.

You don't suppose that we've just been given the analysis, do you?

Maybe I'm just seeing black helicopters.

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: Gaard
This article is from May 17, 2002

Bush Aides Seek To Contain Furor

The Aug. 6 briefing, according to officials with first-hand knowledge, was different. Along with current intelligence, it had a 1 1/2-page analysis -- largely speculative -- of what bin Laden might have been planning. The summary analysis was requested by Bush, according to White House spokesman Ari Fleischer.

You don't suppose that we've just been given the analysis, do you?

Maybe I'm just seeing black helicopters.

After some research, I found this translations of a German newspaper article, dated Oct. 1 2002, giving a timeline of mistakes made prior to 9/11:

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." Therein the CIA chief explains that al Qaeda has decided to carry out attacks within the United States, and that presumably members of the terrorist organization have been in the country for some time. It is unclear whether the CIA director informed the president about the statements of arrested al Qaeda members. According to their confessions, the terrorist organization for some time has been thinking about hijacking planes and using them as missiles.

That 11 1/2 pages could be a typo or mistranslation. Or the German paper could just be flat out wrong.

Furthermore, wouldn't Dick Clarke or 9/11 Commission members have said something if the whole PDB wasn't released?

 

[Gaard]

Furthermore, wouldn't Dick Clarke or 9/11 Commission members have said something if the whole PDB wasn't released?

Good point. I hadn't thought of that.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Once again Scrappleface tells the truth!!

read the frickin PDB:

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America.""

hello? anyone home? this was ON TV for crying out loud...oops, in 1997 and 1998.
yep, urgent new info..

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks[/b].

So i guess this means Bush didn't make Al Qaeda his highest priority while Clinton was President.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft

to paraphrase Scrappleface:
PDB reveals CIA uses TV to obtain critical information.
Bush guilty of not making terrorism priority #1 during Clinton Presidency.

yep, that's one smoking gun memo if i ever read one. gear up the impeachment machinery! we can't wait until an election to remove Bush from office!!

dream on.

 

[DealMonkey]

Rice characterized the briefing document for the president as an "analytic report" that summed up bin Laden's methods of operation. "It was not a warning," she said. "There was no specific time or place mentioned."

Oh, I guess it's only a warning if it mentions specific times or places? Is Condi waiting for her official al Qaeda attack announcement to arrive in the mail? Ridiculous . . . That PDB was most definitely a warning, with giant red flags sticking out of it and strobe lights flashing and a synthesized voice saying "Go to defcon 5 . . ." over and over.

 

[josphII]

Originally posted by: replicator
"The PDB article did not warn of the 9/11 attacks," the White House said in a statement released Saturday night. "Although the PDB referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons."

cnn

I think it did warn of the 9/11 attacks in my opinion. Obviously they didn't have a date and the exact plan, but all the other elements are there.

From the memo:
"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."

I know in hindsight that people can more easily point fingers, but it is obvious that the administration didn't take it seriously. Whether or not it would have made much difference isn't really the case anymore. It is whether or not they could/should have done more.

except the wtc wasnt a federal building

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Rice characterized the briefing document for the president as an "analytic report" that summed up bin Laden's methods of operation. "It was not a warning," she said. "There was no specific time or place mentioned."

Oh, I guess it's only a warning if it mentions specific times or places? Is Condi waiting for her official al Qaeda attack announcement to arrive in the mail? Ridiculous . . . That PDB was most definitely a warning, with giant red flags sticking out of it and strobe lights flashing and a synthesized voice saying "Go to defcon 5 . . ." over and over.

You know that........I know that..........half the country knows that.........but do you think that makes any difference at all to the sheep that follow this A- hole President? You here them in here day after day. I think the sheep have hired Cad to bay for them because he seems to be here 24/7, only to get occasional relief from the so called heart surgeon. I still am dumfounded Heartsurgeon has so much time to post here with all his fabricated Bush BS support. He must not have much of a medical practice. Any doctors I know of don't have any time for the folly that goes on in here. Leads me to believe he must be a wannabe... working as a janitor in a doctors office, sniffing bedpans.

 

[josphII]

Originally posted by: fjord
Once again, Clarke claimed that the Bush administration did not give priority or prudent attention to terrorism and Al Qaeda--despite numerous intelligence spikes throughout 2001, prior to 9/11.

Rice did not directly rebutt Clarke's claim, instead she claimed the administration was not culpable or blameworthy due to faulty intelligence sharing and structurally flawed institutional problems. Further, she claimed no "silver bullet" could have prevented 9/11, so Bush admin is in the clear of any negligence, and should not be open to any criticism.

No silver bullet is a euphamistic way of saying no single piece of intelligence gave them the EXACT date and time and place and names of the perps--but this is totally disengenuous. The job of the National Security Advisor is to take all those disparate pieces of information and pull them together to get a picture of the pattern of that intelligence.

Did the Bush administration *really* understand and deal with terrorism prior to 9/11? Clearly the answer is no.

Clarke's testimony under oath stands unchallenged.

The August 6th PDB memo supports his claims 100%

Personally, I think the problem is not so much that the Bush admin was unattentive or negligent, or even inept before 9/11, but more that after the fact--they went into a campaign of smear and coverup--which points further to their corruption.

After 9/11 the Bush administration has been more than a total disaster. It is one thing to be a failure at true leadership, it is something else to actively take a whiz on democracy.

except by himself ~2 yrs earlier!

 

[Gaard]

Bush Gave No Sign of Worry In August 2001

But if top officials were at battle stations, there was no sign of it on the surface. Bush spent most of August 2001 on his ranch here. His staff said at the time that by far the biggest issue on his agenda was his decision on federal funding of stem cell research, followed by education, immigration and the Social Security "lockbox."

...

In the White House Rose Garden on Aug. 3, before leaving for the ranch, Bush summarized the achievements of his first months in office and set a three-part agenda for September. His first goal was completing work on legislation dealing with "education and the disadvantaged." His second priority was the federal budget. And third, he said, "beginning in September, I'll be proposing creative ways to tackle some of the toughest problems in our society." There was no mention of terrorism or even foreign affairs as a priority.

 

[Gaard]

Remember when the commission was threatening to subpoena the WH? This article is from back then. I know it's at Common Dreams website and many have a problem with them but they are just reprinting an article originally published in the NYT. Unfortunately, it'll cost you to get the article from them. :frown:

9/11 Panel Threatens to Issue Subpoena for Bush's Briefings

The commission has described the briefings as vital since they would show whether the White House had warnings of a catastrophic terrorist attack. The White House has acknowledged that one briefing Mr. Bush saw in August 2001 referred to the possibility of a Qaeda strike with commercial airplanes.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: josphII

Originally posted by: fjord
Once again, Clarke claimed that the Bush administration did not give priority or prudent attention to terrorism and Al Qaeda--despite numerous intelligence spikes throughout 2001, prior to 9/11.

Rice did not directly rebutt Clarke's claim, instead she claimed the administration was not culpable or blameworthy due to faulty intelligence sharing and structurally flawed institutional problems. Further, she claimed no "silver bullet" could have prevented 9/11, so Bush admin is in the clear of any negligence, and should not be open to any criticism.

No silver bullet is a euphamistic way of saying no single piece of intelligence gave them the EXACT date and time and place and names of the perps--but this is totally disengenuous. The job of the National Security Advisor is to take all those disparate pieces of information and pull them together to get a picture of the pattern of that intelligence.

Did the Bush administration *really* understand and deal with terrorism prior to 9/11? Clearly the answer is no.

Clarke's testimony under oath stands unchallenged.

The August 6th PDB memo supports his claims 100%

Personally, I think the problem is not so much that the Bush admin was unattentive or negligent, or even inept before 9/11, but more that after the fact--they went into a campaign of smear and coverup--which points further to their corruption.

After 9/11 the Bush administration has been more than a total disaster. It is one thing to be a failure at true leadership, it is something else to actively take a whiz on democracy.

except by himself ~2 yrs earlier!

Care to back up that opinion or are you just bleating the GOP talking points?

 

[conjur]

Panel Says Bush Saw Repeated Warnings

By the time a CIA briefer gave President Bush the Aug. 6, 2001, President's Daily Brief headlined "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US," the president had seen a stream of alarming reports on al Qaeda's intentions. So had Vice President Cheney and Bush's top national security team, according to newly declassified information released yesterday by the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.