Island Dog Posted July 22, 2004 Share Posted July 22, 2004 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks unveils a report on Thursday that points to "deep institutional failings" and missed opportunities by both the Bush and Clinton administrations to thwart the hijackings, according to U.S. officials. A U.S. official who has reviewed the commission's final report said it would confirm there was no collaboration between Iraq and al Qaeda, the group behind the attacks against the United States, but list contacts between the two. The commission will also detail al Qaeda's contacts with Iran and Pakistan. People familiar with the report said it found more active al Qaeda ties with Iran than with Iraq. The U.S. official said the report does not lay blame on either Republican President Bush or former Democratic President Bill Clinton for failing to prevent the attack. "Rather than finding that there was a failure at the presidential level, what they find ... is that there are failings, 'deep institutional failings within our government,"' the official said, quoting from the report. The Sept. 11 commission, made up of five Republicans and five Democrats, was determined to present a unanimous report on the attacks in 2001 that killed almost 3,000 people. But the document seemed certain to set off a bitter election year debate on whether the Bush administration could have done more to avert the suicide hijackings. The commission will also sharply criticize Congress for failing in its oversight role on terrorism and intelligence issues and will propose reorganizing the way committees are structured. Former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, who testified before the commission, said the report left many questions unanswered. "The commission decided unanimity was more important than controversy. They did a very workman-like Washington report," Clarke told ABC's "Good Morning America" show. MISSED "OPERATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES" The report includes a list of 10 missed "operational opportunities" by the CIA and the FBI to penetrate the attack plot carried out by 19 members of Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda organization, but it will not specifically say the attacks were preventabl http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?t...storyID=5744418 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted July 22, 2004 Share Posted July 22, 2004 watching it right now on tv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Island Dog Posted July 23, 2004 Author Share Posted July 23, 2004 I guess the 9/11 report doesn't matter since it didn't confirm any of their conspiracy theories about Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nemo Posted July 23, 2004 Share Posted July 23, 2004 and it also debunked alot of Michael Moore's crapumentary. deepisland, now that we made those comments, they'll all come in saying this is all bush propaganda etc.... :whistle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashel Posted July 23, 2004 Share Posted July 23, 2004 Any idea what the 10 missed "operational opportunities" were? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted July 23, 2004 Veteran Share Posted July 23, 2004 although the purpose of this article isn't to point fingers of blame for 9/11, it appears that Sandy Berger nixed 4 opportunities to get Saddam and/or Al Qaeda Reading the report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, we couldn?t help thinking of Justice Scalia?s great dissent in Morrison v. Olson. It?s the case in which the Supreme Court upheld the idea of an independent prosecutor. Justice Scalia warned of the danger that unleashing an uncontrollable prosecutor against a president could shake his courage. ?Perhaps the boldness of the President himself will not be affected ? though I am not so sure,? he warned. Well, look now to what the 9/11 report has to say about the man to whom President Clinton, under attack by an independent counsel,delegated so much in respect of national security, Samuel ?Sandy? Berger. The report cites a 1998 meeting between Mr. Berger and the director of central intelligence, George Tenet, at which Mr. Tenet presented a plan to capture Osama bin Laden. ?In his meeting with Tenet, Berger focused most, however, on the question of what was to be done with Bin Ladin if he were actually captured. He worried that the hard evidence against Bin Ladin was still skimpy and that there was a danger of snatching him and bringing him to the United States only to see him acquitted,? the report says, citing a May 1, 1998, Central Intelligence Agency memo summarizing the weekly meeting between Messrs. Berger and Tenet. In June of 1999, another plan for action against Mr. bin Laden was on the table. The potential target was a Qaeda terrorist camp in Afghanistan known as Tarnak Farms. The commission report released yesterday cites Mr. Berger?s ?handwritten notes on the meeting paper? referring to ?the presence of 7 to 11 families in the Tarnak Farms facility, which could mean 60-65 casualties.?According to the Berger notes, ?if he responds, we?re blamed.? On December 4, 1999, the National Security Council?s counterterrorism coordinator, Richard Clarke, sent Mr. Berger a memo suggesting a strike in the last week of 1999 against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Reports the commission: ?In the margin next to Clarke?s suggestion to attack Al Qaeda facilities in the week before January 1, 2000, Berger wrote, ?no.? ? In August of 2000, Mr. Berger was presented with another possible plan for attacking Mr. bin Laden.This time, the plan would be based on aerial surveillance from a ?Predator? drone. Reports the commission: ?In the memo?s margin,Berger wrote that before considering action, ?I will want more than verified location: we will need, at least, data on pattern of movements to provide some assurance heaccording to the commission report, Mr. Berger was presented with plans to take action against the threat of Al Qaeda four separate times ? Spring 1998, June 1999, December 1999, and August 2000. Each time, Mr. Berger was an obstacle to action. Had he been a little less reluctant to act, a little more open to taking pre-emptive action, maybe the 2,973 killed in the September 11, 2001, attacks would be alive today.led in the September 11, 2001, attacks would be alive today. link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshalus Veteran Posted July 24, 2004 Veteran Share Posted July 24, 2004 Does it actually say that in the official report? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John S. Veteran Posted July 24, 2004 Veteran Share Posted July 24, 2004 (edited) I've not read the report but the article states it does The report cites according to the commission report Here's the whole report 585 pages :blink: : Edited July 24, 2004 by adonai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts