[cyncooper]

I looked for a date on this article on the Insight page but don't see it. Clearly it was written prior to 9/11 so I googled the title and found the article also posted here where the date of June 18, 2001 is listed.

More refutation to Clarke's assertions that the threat of terrorism was being ignored.

I saw as I searched that one of the arguments the left is raising today is the assertion that the Bush administration ignored the Hart-Rudman report, and by implication, they ignored dealing with the concern at all. .

[Ditter]

Good find!

[CedarDave]

My enthusiasm has just been somewhat dampened. I didn't know much about "Insight" magazine, but find out that it is a conservative publication. That means that the usual suspects will claim it's just a publication for drumming up support for George W. Bush, then and now, and anything printed has to be be reviewed in that light, i.e. with skepticism. I know it won't change the facts of the story, but the left-wing media will dismiss it with a shrug and a sneer.

[Ann Archy]

Clarke is a JUDAS to this country's safety.....typical RAT.

[Ben Ficklin]

It was Newt Gingrich that approached Clinton about the need for a Commission to study and make recommendations regarding national security and terrorism. Clinton formed the Hart-Rudman Commission and gave Newt a seat.

The Commission's report was called the Road Map to the 21st Century and consisted of 3 reports. The first report contained what most members could agree on. The second report contained what many members could agree on. The third contained what some could agree on.

As for the accusations that Bush ignored Hart-Rudman, it is true. But, so did everyone else in Washington, with the exception of Sec of Defense Cohen, who spoke often about the Commission's report. Had any politician suggested re-organizing the govt, he would have been crucified as trying to pull a fast one to benefit his party. Thornberry of Texas was the first to introduce legislation, and before 9-11. Lieberman introduced legislation in the Senate subsequent to 9-11.

Shortly after Bush took office, Hart and Rudman approached the Whitehouse and Bush put Cheney in charge with the promise to get back. Hart and Rudman complained that after 9-11 they coundn't get an appointment with the Whitehouse.

The dems will use this against Bush but Bush really isn't to blame. He had to wait until the push for re-orginization got traction in Congress before he moved on it, or "got out in front of it".

It is interesting to note that the Bush Doctrine of Preemption is found in the Phase 2 Commission report. I think Newt did that.

Everyone should read at least the Executive Summaries of the reports.

[Plutarch]

Great pick up!

[MEG33]

Great find,cyncooper!

[MEG33]

FYI

[madison10]

Awesome find. Thank you! Reading it is rather spooky in light of Sept. 11. So was Clarke removed from the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office? or is that the cyber security position that Mr. Cheney spoke about? The article says Clarke was the only one in that office.

Hmmm...so Homeland Security was in the beginning stages at the time of this articles printing? I would say the Bush administration was on top of the whole terrorist issue.

This is priceless: "Clarke, Clinton's former national infrastructure chief whom Bush kept on [mega mistake], now admits that his first attempt under the Clinton administration to deal with infrastructure defense was a set of policies 'written by bureaucrats' and that they were wholly inadequate..."

[america-rules]

Good Job !

[Tennessean4Bush]

Wait. I thought the Bush team was uninterested in terror before 9/11.

[FRgal4u]

Great find!


Ping this to drudge, drudge is probably the MOST influential reporter in the non-mainstream media.

A link ot a mention on his page will get a lot of views.

[endthematrix]

"water supplies, transportation, energy, banking and finance, telecommunications, public health - all of these rely on computer and fiber-optic lines, the switches and routers that come from them," notes National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice. These are vulnerable."

The enemy drinks from a well, walks, uses candle light, campfires, cash, carrier pigeons and a hole in the ground. It has become increasing difficult for a world power and technological advanced military to deal with this low tech enemy...It's time to get savage on these scum!

[Ethyl]

Why didn't Insight Magazine or J. Michael Waller bring this up again, like FOX News did in their 2002 article?? Where are they now?

[Richard Kimball]

Thanks for finding this article. I just sent it to a rabidly Democrat friend of mine, with the following note:

I found this article from Insight Magazine, dated June 18, 2001, three months before the attacks on the World Trade Center. I'm sending this to you because I know that you are a Democrat, but I also know that you are fair minded, and will at least consider the context of the article, particularly with consideration of the fact that it was written well before we were aware of what was coming.

I would also mention that during my time with the Austin Fire Department, we were briefed about the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. The intent in that attack was to take down both towers. The bomb was supposed to take out a corner support of one building, which would drop one tower into the other, and then both towers would collapse taking out numerous other buildings and several city blocks. The death toll, because the collapses would occur immediately when the towers were fully occupied would have been well over 50,000, as opposed to the 3,000 that were killed. A fact not known by the general public is that the only reason the initial plot did not succeed was because the men delivering the bomb parked the van in the wrong place. According to our briefing, the bomb would have worked as planned had the van been parked at the designated spot.

Additionally, as I have long suspected, Richard Clarke claims in his new book that there was possibly an Al Qaida connection to Oklahoma City, as Terry Nichols was in the Philippines when Ramzi Yousef was, and that he came back from there with the knowledge of how to build the bomb that destroyed the Murrah building. This is not theoretical to me, as Timothy McVeigh's trial revealed that the backup target was the Pickle Federal Building on East 8th Street in Austin. This building was approximately five blocks from my fire station, and in my first in response territory.

I believe that President Bush is taking the most prudent approach to Homeland Security, and that the current panel on government response to terrorism is little but election year grandstanding.

I know that we disagree on politics quite a bit, but I respect your opinion, and would like to get your reaction to this article.

Again, thanks for this great find.

[FairOpinion]

Excellent find.

The link to the article gives the date, confirming it:

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2001/06/18/SpecialReport/Preparing.For.The.Next.Pearl.Harbor.Attack-161098.shtml

[StriperSniper]

Amazing post.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Excellent Richard Clarke refutation ~PING!~

[rewrite]

You've got a steak dinner at the Longhorn comin' to Ya' the next time you're in Nashville TN for finding this little jewel...good huntin'!

[onyx]

I know you're a fabulous researcher,
but you hit the Mother Lode on this one.

[rewrite]

You have e-mail Rush and Sean with this, haven't you?