April 10, 2004
Bush Was Warned of Possible Attack in U.S., Official Says
By ERIC LICHTBLAU and DAVID E. SANGER
NY Times


wASHINGTON, April 9 — President Bush was told more than a month before
the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that supporters of Osama bin Laden
planned an attack within the United States with explosives and wanted to
hijack airplanes, a government official said Friday.

The warning came in a secret briefing that Mr. Bush received at his
ranch in Crawford, Tex., on Aug. 6, 2001. A report by a joint
Congressional committee last year alluded to a "closely held
intelligence report" that month about the threat of an attack by Al
Qaeda, and the official confirmed an account by The Associated Press on
Friday saying that the report was in fact part of the president's
briefing in Crawford.

The disclosure appears to contradict the White House's repeated
assertions that the briefing the president received about the Qaeda
threat was "historical" in nature and that the White House had little
reason to suspect a Qaeda attack within American borders.

Members of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks
have asked the White House to make the Aug. 6 briefing memorandum
public. The A.P. account of it was attributed to "several people who
have seen the memo." The White House has said that nothing in it pointed
specifically to the kind of attacks that actually took place a month later.

The Congressional report last year, citing efforts by Al Qaeda
operatives beginning in 1997 to attack American soil, said that
operatives appeared to have a support structure in the United States and
that intelligence officials had "uncorroborated information" that Mr.
bin Laden "wanted to hijack airplanes" to gain the release of imprisoned
extremists. It also said that intelligence officials received
information in May 2001, three months earlier, that indicated "a group
of bin Laden supporters was planning attacks in the United States with
explosives."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Bush knew...
Bush knew...
Bush knew...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
... a government official said Friday.


Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.

NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

... a government official said Friday.



Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.





You meant to say, of course, that the White House has gotten so much
pressure on this, it has to release the documents. And the documents, if
not doctored, will reveal that Presidunce Bush...knew.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

wASHINGTON, April 9 — President Bush was told more than a month before

I see the Times is back in Blair mode.

Let's see --- in simple terms, removing all the filler drivel the Times et
al use to make the WH sound complicit, what we have is a briefing that says
that there is uncorroborated information that AQ people may have been trying
to get into the US since 97, but no specifics; uncorroborated reports that
terrorists may try to explode things in the US, but no specifics; and
uncorroborated reports that terrorists may try to hijack airplanes, but no
specifics.

That's not an actionable briefing. You can get the same level of insight
and speculation at any morning coffee shop.

"NOYB" wrote in message
. com...

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
... a government official said Friday.


Hehehe. One of the Democrat's "anonymous sources" again? Lemme
guess...that piece of trash Ben-Veniste? It's funny how your side makes
anonymous accusations as a way to test the waters...and it never goes
anywhere.

Nevertheless, it doesn't matter, because the White House is releasing the
PDB from August 6th, 2001.

Ummm....they are "declassifying" it first, tooth-boy. "Releasing" could be
done in 5 minutes. "Declassifying", which means "cleaning it up", will take
longer.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...



Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out, but
the rest stood.

Eisboch

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Gotta love it.How many square inches of the document will be blacked out
or deleted in ways that don't show...




Not much. Just saw it on MSNBC. Maybe a couple of names blacked out,
but
the rest stood.

Eisboch


Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan
to hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I am sure that's what *your* imaginary copy looks like. Fortunately, the
rest of the world can see the real thing.

Eisboch

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan to
hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Actually, as you well know now (and likely knew full well when you spewed
the above), the entire doc is just a touch over a page in length, contains
naught but general references, and only five instances of redaction, all of
them clearly blanking the name of some intelligence agency or operative.
So, you record is intact.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Gaquin wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Ahh. I have it:


When XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX told XXXXXXXXX XXXX about XXXXX bin XXXXX"X plan
to

hijack airliners, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX


Actually, as you well know now (and likely knew full well when you
spewed
the above), the entire doc is just a touch over a page in length,
contains
naught but general references, and only five instances of redaction, all
of
them clearly blanking the name of some intelligence agency or operative.
So, you record is intact.



You guys are kinda dense, eh?

No. Just reading and reporting the facts, jack, not listening to the spin.

Me again. (Eisboch)

"Harry Krause" wrote in message

You guys are kinda dense, eh?

Yeah, that must be it.