Driving in to town today I saw a kid driving a big new dually pick-up the size of a locomotive sporting Texas vanity plates reading “SEPT 11.”
I figured that the kid never considered that a piece of every dollar he puts into that 38 gallon fuel tank goes to Arabia into the pockets of the same people who financed the Sept. 11 attacks.
Or maybe he’s proud of that and is plotting to drive his truck into some target.
But the words “nine-eleven” are still potent, and so are hijacked themselves by many with an axe to grind, like former Vice-President Cheney, who spoke them twenty-seven times in his speech at the American Enterprise Institute last week.
Cheney was doing a hatchet job on President Obama, trying to ratchet up the fear factor to titillate his creepy base, who seem to think that everybody thinks just like them, the losers.
Apparently Richard A. Clark heard Cheney’s rant because he wrote an op-ed piece for the Washington Post last week that rips Cheney a new one. Clark’s tenure in Washington dates back to the Reagan administration, and he retired in 2003 after serving as chief counter-terrorism advisor under Clinton and George W. Bush.
I will paste up John Amato’s ‘Crooks and Liars’ post on the article here, which should give you a link to it. Check out the George Tenant story he opens up with. I also highly recommend the Digby’s Hullabaloo post that‘s linked here too. A real eye-opener, it tells me that the Bush administration knew that they blew it all along, and that their primary consideration was covering their ass after ignoring warnings about Bin Laden.
Crooks and Liars
Richard Clarke speaks the truth: 'The Trauma of 9/11 Is No Excuse'
By John Amato
"At least Bush kept us safe," is the war cry from conservatives whenever they try to find something good to say about the Bush Administration and their eight disastrous years of rule. They forget about everything that came before Sept. 11th apparently. That's not supposed to count. It's true that it's difficult to keep a nation completely safe and it's hard to assign blame, but let's not forget that George Tenet seemed to know a little about who the hijackers were after we found out who hit us.
According to the Washington Post’s Bob Woodward, on the morning of 9/11, as aides rushed over to George Tenet’s table at the St. Regis Hotel restaurant to tell him the news of the World Trade Center strike, the CIA director was overheard to say: “I wonder if it has anything to do with this guy taking pilot training.”
That being said, the media is very afraid to ever bring the facts up that Richard Clarke pointed it out in the Washington Post in a column called: The Trauma of 9/11 Is No Excuse
Top officials from the Bush administration have hit upon a revealing new theme as they retrospectively justify their national security policies. Call it the White House 9/11 trauma defense.
"Unless you were there, in a position of responsibility after September 11, you cannot possibly imagine the dilemmas that you faced in trying to protect Americans," Condoleezza Rice said
last month as she admonished a Stanford University student who questioned the Bush-era interrogation program.
And in his May 21 speech
on national security, Dick Cheney called the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, a "defining" experience that "caused everyone to take a serious second look" at the threats to America. Critics of the administration have become more intense as memories of the attacks have faded, he argued. "Part of our responsibility, as we saw it," Cheney said, "was not to forget the terrible harm that had been done to America."
I remember that morning, too. Shortly after the second World Trade Center tower was hit, I burst in on Rice (then the president's national security adviser) and Cheney in the vice president's office and remember glimpsing horror on his face. Once in the bomb shelter, Cheney assembled his team while the crisis managers on the National Security Council staff coordinated the government response by video conference from the Situation Room. Many of us thought that we might not leave the White House alive.
I remember the next day, too, when smoke still rose from the Pentagon as I sat in my office in the White House compound, a gas mask on my desk. The streets of Washington were empty, except for the armored vehicles, and the skies were clear, except for the F-15s on patrol. Every scene from those days is seared into my memory. I understand how it was a defining moment for Cheney, as it was for so many Americans.
Yet listening to Cheney and Rice, it seems that they want to be excused for the measures they authorized after the attacks on the grounds that 9/11 was traumatic. "If you were there in a position of authority and watched Americans drop out of eighty-story buildings because these murderous tyrants went after innocent people," Rice said in her recent comments
, "then you were determined to do anything that you could that was legal to prevent that from happening again."
I have little sympathy for this argument. Yes, we went for days with little sleep, and we all assumed that more attacks were coming. But the decisions that Bush officials made in the following months and years -- on Iraq, on detentions, on interrogations, on wiretapping -- were not appropriate.
Careful analysis could have replaced the impulse to break all the rules, even more so because the Sept. 11 attacks, though horrifying, should not have surprised senior officials. Cheney's admission that 9/11 caused him to reassess the threats to the nation only underscores how, for months, top officials had ignored warnings from the CIA and the NSC staff that urgent action was needed to preempt a major al-Qaeda attack.
Thus, when Bush's inner circle first really came to grips with the threat of terrorism, they did so in a state of shock -- a bad state in which to develop a coherent response. Fearful of new attacks, they authorized the most extreme measures available, without assessing whether they were really a good idea...read on
I've talk to Digby many times about this and she brought up the Cuban Missile Crisis and what would Bush and Cheney have done if it had happened under their watch instead of Kennedy's. Would we all still be standing here today?
I have been desperate for someone other than bloggers to say this for years. Here's
Despite all of Cheney's attempts at redemption and the ongoing conservative insistence that their policies "kept the country safe" the truth is that they behaved hysterically and irrationally after the attacks and reinforced every bad American stereotype in existence. Because of their blindered conservative worldview, they simply assumed that anything that had been done by someone other than the airbrushed version of Ronald Reagan had to be wrong and that anything other than schoolyard bully tactics were a form of weakness.
It's true that 9/11 did present an opportunity. America could have shown mature and intelligent global leadership. But it didn't. It behaved like a wounded adolescent giant, its leadership carrying on with "bullhorn moments" and talk of wanted posters and playing cards while an irresponsible media entertained the masses with war porn.
It was an embarrassing --- and dangerous --- display. If there was ever a time for the leadership of this country to play it cool it was then. And they failed the test in almost every way. Good for Richard Clark for calling them out on this.