Posted on 12/17/2003 5:23:34 PM PST by Hal1950
For the first time, the chairman of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks is saying publicly that 9/11 could have and should have been prevented, reports CBS News Correspondent Randall Pinkston.
"This is a very, very important part of history and we've got to tell it right," said Thomas Kean.
"As you read the report, you're going to have a pretty clear idea what wasn't done and what should have been done," he said. "This was not something that had to happen."
Appointed by the Bush administration, Kean, a former Republican governor of New Jersey, is now pointing fingers inside the administration and laying blame.
"There are people that, if I was doing the job, would certainly not be in the position they were in at that time because they failed. They simply failed," Kean said.
To find out who failed and why, the commission has navigated a political landmine, threatening a subpoena to gain access to the president's top-secret daily briefs. Those documents may shed light on one of the most controversial assertions of the Bush administration – that there was never any thought given to the idea that terrorists might fly an airplane into a building.
"I don't think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile," said national security adviser Condoleeza Rice on May 16, 2002.
"How is it possible we have a national security advisor coming out and saying we had no idea they could use planes as weapons when we had FBI records from 1991 stating that this is a possibility," said Kristen Breitweiser, one of four New Jersey widows who lobbied Congress and the president to appoint the commission.
The widows want to know why various government agencies didn't connect the dots before Sept. 11, such as warnings from FBI offices in Minnesota and Arizona about suspicious student pilots.
"If you were to tell me that two years after the murder of my husband that we wouldn't have one question answered, I wouldn't believe it," Breitweiser said.
Kean admits the commission also has more questions than answers.
Asked whether we should at least know if people sitting in the decision-making spots on that critical day are still in those positions, Kean said, "Yes, the answer is yes. And we will."
Kean promises major revelations in public testimony beginning next month from top officials in the FBI, CIA, Defense Department, National Security Agency and, maybe, President Bush and former President Clinton.
Two questions answered....Afghanistan, Iraq.
It's not a guy thing.
And how would you know anything at all about strong men?
Right after 9/11 I gave nfo to the FBI.
To see much of it come into fruition is double edged.
If I,a silly old lady that can't even operate a puter correctly, can search and connect and forcast,why cant this government?
I may be brilliant, but I may be dead
Wow, that really puts it all into perspective.
Clinton gutted not only the military, but also the CIA and FBI, which he not only politicized, but hamstrung and tied their collective handsa. So much for your " brilliance ". Your "intelligence " wouldn't fill a doll's thimble.
About the ONLY thing you managed to get correct, thus far, is that YOU are admittedly " SILLY !
Funny, that kind of post isn't being copied and pasted to LP..........LOL.
Sure thing. Like all investigative agencies, the FBI has a unit for crackpots. LMAO!
Shelby's spent years reading thousands of Intel-related reports. I would think he has some basis for saying something is largely releasable. Even if he's inexplicably wildly off the mark, surely there's 50 percent, 40 percent, a single word - about Saudi Arabia and 9-11 that the American people are adult enough to hear.
Shelby reading thousands of intel reports -- nope. Shelby is a politician and nothing more.
Back in early 1999, Senator Shelby was the first Senate Republican to come out against an impeachment trial. He went on all the news shows and said many negative things about impeachment including something like the following; 10 or 15 Republican Senators will not vote for a perjury conviction.
One of my first posts to FR was a criticism of that stupid Shelby remark.
Well it was total BS and it was a "push" statement. A push statement similar to a "push poll" is a statement designed to push the news in a certain direction. It's not a statement designed to reflect the actual reality. Anyway, several weeks later, only 3 R senators voted against impeachment for purjury. Shelby and his little push statement were wrong.
Now fast-forward to several months back and here is Shelby again doing the bidding for the rats on the weekend network news shows and here is Shelby again helping out the rats and our global enemies by making this little BS "push" statement and insinuating that the president is protecting King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah from incriminating information. And how do we know this besides Shelby telling us this is so? We know this because the NY Times and the WP post are giving us unnamed sources that are sayign so. What BS!
Instead we're treated to Crawford photo ops with House of Saud "princes" and to pabulum about the KSA being an ally in the WOT.
You have no clue what was said at the Crawford meetings and you believe exactly what the WP and the NY Times want you to believe.
Most likely instead a deal was struck at that time. We do damage to Al-Qaeda and OBL and we remove Saddam from power and we start and Pali-Israeli roadmap. In return, they would then be in the position to start cracking terrorist heads in S.A.
BTW- There's a thread somewhere on FR today about a Saudi diplomat mixing it up with Mohammad Atta's Hamburg terror cell.
YOu would have to link me to that thread. I do know that there was wide reports of the Atta Hamberg cell using false ID's, claiming to be relatives of S.A. diplomats.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.