Criminal Negligence in the Bush Administration Pre-9/11

John Glaser, September 11, 2012

Kurt Eichenwald reminds us in the New York Times that the infamous briefing declassified for the 9/11 Commission entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” was just one of many, many pre-9/11 classified warnings that an attack was imminent. He writes that “the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed.”

The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

But some in the administration considered the warning to be just bluster. An intelligence official and a member of the Bush administration both told me in interviews that the neoconservative leaders who had recently assumed power at the Pentagon were warning the White House that the C.I.A. had been fooled; according to this theory, Bin Laden was merely pretending to be planning an attack to distract the administration from Saddam Hussein, whom the neoconservatives saw as a greater threat. Intelligence officials, these sources said, protested that the idea of Bin Laden, an Islamic fundamentalist, conspiring with Mr. Hussein, an Iraqi secularist, was ridiculous, but the neoconservatives’ suspicions were nevertheless carrying the day.

So before there were war crimes in the Bush administration, there was criminal negligence. And the neo-cons were blinded by their zeal long before they got a blank check from the worst attacks on US soil ever.

Update: See my blog post from last year’s 9/11: Turning 9/11 into State Worship.




19 Responses to “Criminal Negligence in the Bush Administration Pre-9/11”

  1. And the Obama/Holder regime let the war criminals slide. There's something woefully abhorrent in Babylon-On-The-Potomac. So 9/11/01 is simply a testament to political expedience and the Amerikan people are dupes.

  2. Where is the part where Clinton refused Bin Laden on a silver platter three times? That seems to be missing, again.

  3. Just like the Bush / Ashcroft regime let the terror collaborators slide. In case you don't know who I'm referring – that's Clinton, Gore, Reno, Holder, and the rest of the Democrat cabal.

    And why isn't Holder and Reno in jail for murdering all those Branch Davidians?

  4. Hi Falcon:You make the excellent point.

  5. And the 'Dupes' ^^ …replied

  6. [...] Criminal Negligence in the Bush Administration Pre-9/11 By John Glaser [...]

  7. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAKE UP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    THERE WASN'T ANY Criminal Negligence… THERE WASN'T ANY NEGLIGENCE AT ALL.. EXCEPT FOR THE NO SHOW FLIGHT 93 AND THE PERFECT DEMOLITION OF BLDG. 7, THE EXECUTION OF DR.s Don Craig Wiley, Bruce Ivans and others…..

    STOP DRINKING THE KOOL AID…………………. The Bush/Cheney crew was looking for "Interested Parties" for Iraqi oilfields from DAY ONE of their reign…..as revealed by Bush treasury secretary Pauil O'Neil……. Bush wanted to attack Iraq and was saying to those around him… Fund a way, find a way…… See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inyCkCvqRO0

    All the negligence disappears when you realize the "New Pearl Harbor" was the administration POLICY…

    Nice to see Rommy has Michael Hayden as one of his four foreign policy advisers…… Michael Hayden was head of NSA prior to and on 911. NSA is the govs big ear… Monitors all communication.
    After the attack, did he get demoted or fired…?? No… HE WAS PROMOTED..!! He was given the TOP intelligence job….DIA.. Director of the CIA… WHY…..??? It is a riddle… unless you view the event as that administration's policy……. Then it all makes sense……. Here is the work of ordinary citizens … http://www.newsgarden.org/columns/anthrax/anthraxhttp://jackwhites911studies.org/911photostudies1….

  8. Just like the Bush / Ashcroft regime let the terror collaborators slide. In case you don't know who I'm referring – that's Clinton, Gore, Reno, Holder, and the rest of the Democrat cabal.

  9. i agree, the whole pre 9/11 failure was a team effort, to politicize it is folly

  10. also, im sick and tired of all these " government was responsible for 9/11" nuts , get a clue people, there is absolutely NO solid evidence to back up the paranoia

  11. What seems to be missing from the dialogue is the fact that during the Summer of 2001, months prior to the 9/11 attacks, Bush Administration officials advised Pakistan's Secretary Niaz Niak that "before th snow flies in October we will attack Afghanistan." So, the Afghan/Osama/ connection yet continues to be the official justification for attacking Afghanistan, even though the US attack against Afghanistan was planned long before the event. Many think that the real reason for the attack was failing negotiations with Taliban for building the proposed Trans-Afghan-Pipeline. The Taliban were favoring Bridas of Argentina as they offered a better deal than the US concern UNOCAL. Washington decide toput negotiations on a pro-US track, regime change must first take place…hence our planned attack to dislodge the Taliban.

  12. @ Bruce

    It helps to substantiate your claims by citing the source of the info. Not that, that would help with the Tin Foil hat crowd. Their cerebral cortex is atrophied.

  13. [...] [...]

  14. United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

  15. This is amazing to have and read it.

  16. You should do some reading. Architects and engineers say those buildings came down because of demolition. I'd say those people are the most knowledgable, and no nuts. See http://www.ae911truth.org, if you dare.

  17. I'm not sure you can convict neglegance, can you? But you sure can convict murderers and people part of the cover up, after they are out of office.

  18. ?"…> What Architects and Engineers? Cite it!

    As and architect and structural engineer, the 'Demo' theory, is bogus, for both of the towers and bldg '7'.

  19. The last few years have seen the development of an interesting legal mechanism called the gun trust. Talk to a gun trust lawyer to find out how you can protect your firearms from future changes in gun laws