home

Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Was It Ever?)

By TChris, Section War on Terror
Posted on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 09:33:32 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

by TChris

In February 2002, the president said that there were thousands of al Qaeda terrorists "still roaming around" and "we're going to be steady and relentless until we achieve the objective of getting the al Qaeda killers and bringing them to justice." Having failed to attain that objective, the president has flip-flopped, essentially declaring victory in the war against al Qaeda.

The White House today released an updated version of its plan for combating terrorism that focused more on decentralized networks of extremists than on Al Qaeda ...

Osama bin Laden is evidently no longer a person of great interest to the president.

Also absent from the report was any mention of Osama bin Laden. Instead, it recounted among the administration's successes that "most of those in the Al Qaeda network responsible for the Sept. 11 attacks, including the plot's mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, have been captured or killed.''

So bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11? He isn't even worthy of a mention? How does that square with the remarks of White House homeland security adviser Fran Townsend?

"The greatest threat to us is this ideology of violent extremism, and its greatest public proponent is Osama bin Laden,'' Ms. Townsend said.

< Seeking Justice at Guantanamo | Mean Spirits in the GOP >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Was It Ever?) | 21 comments (21 topical)
    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 12:13:26 PM EST
    While the President may be correct in his analysis that the war on terrorism is expanding to other regions, he fails to see that his approach to the issue...particularly his decision to invade Iraq and the fact that progress in the troubled country seems elusive...may well be creating the new threats. Further, as he heightens his rhetoric in order to win votes by inferring that the origin of these extremists is Islam, he foments more animosity in more countries and the terrorism equation keeps growing. If we concede that the President is sincerely motivated...and I might be inclined to concede as much...it nonetheless doesn't make him right. Additionally, if his approach is wrong and it is actually inciting more terrorists, then his convictions simply amplify the problem and diminish the potential for him to chart a new course. In the end, his rhetoric may well be more dangerous if it is sincere...but one cannot argue that his recent remarks aren't political. The fact that his politics stem from his ideology is no comfort to the many Americans that simply reject his conclusions. In fact, that merely makes it all the more important to counter his politics. Read more here: www.thoughttheater.com

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#2)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 12:56:01 PM EST
    And the architects of the deaths of untold thousands go unpunished. Who will be held accountable for the deaths on September 11, 2001? As long as George Bush is "protecting" us, no one. They are STILL OUT THERE. Maybe in a cave, maybe in a villa, maybe in a secret prison. Who will bring some justice forward for this terrible crime? Will the families of 3000 people never receive their due process for the deaths of their loved ones. What is our government for? Certainly not to protect us if they cannot solve this crime after 5 years. How would anyone here feel if their loved one was killed by some nutjob and the authorities just let them go? Our current fascists in power could care less about anything other than perpetuating their own power base.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#3)
    by Che's Lounge on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 01:01:35 PM EST
    They divert resources from AQ to Iraq. We get hit again by AQ. They blame the left for being soft, and leaving us vulnerable, despite their bottomless money pit. Fox news reports, we decide. BAAAAAH. SSDD.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#4)
    by roxtar on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 04:08:24 PM EST
    So now the Administration is reduced to this: Throwing a dart at the wall, then drawing a target around it and screaming "Bullseye!" Pathetic.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#5)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 04:26:02 PM EST
    thoughteater - So, you concede that al-Qaeada is now decentralized, mostly because we keep killing their top leaders, but you still insist that our attacks are creating more terrorists.. What to do? I know. Let's do the Democrat Far Left thing, withdraw from the ME and wait until they attack is inside the US, again. I mean, do you have any other plan? If so, let us know. Che writes:
    We get hit again by AQ
    Have I missed something? You wrote:
    Will the families of 3000 people never receive their due process for the deaths of their loved ones. What is our government for? Certainly not to protect us if they cannot solve this crime after 5 years.
    Uh, this wasn't a "crime," although you desperately want to call in that so you can insist on the terrorists being treated like someone who robbed a 7-11. It was an ACT OF GUERRILLA WARFARE. And we are responding. So, your complaint is?? Big, big, really, really difference

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#6)
    by Sailor on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 06:02:09 PM EST
    just like bush, ppj doesn't care about catching the person responsible for 9/11.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#7)
    by Sailor on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 06:06:01 PM EST
    White House anti-terror chief: 'We are due for another attack' And why? Because bush attacked iraq, a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, no AQ collaboration and no WMDs. bush has let the taliban resurge in afghanistan while he has ignored the man responsible for 9/11.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#8)
    by Sailor on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 06:23:20 PM EST
    Uh, this wasn't a "crime,"
    See the definition below, or just think of the 'war crimes' and 'crimes against humanity' that bush has done. crime  [krahym] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation -noun 1. an action or an instance of negligence that is deemed injurious to the public welfare or morals or to the interests of the state and that is legally prohibited. 2. criminal activity and those engaged in it: to fight crime. 3. the habitual or frequent commission of crimes: a life of crime. 4. any offense, serious wrongdoing, or sin. 5. a foolish, senseless, or shameful act.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#9)
    by dutchfox on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 07:34:37 PM EST
    Sailor et al. Did you see this from Mother Jones... Lie by Lie: Chronicle of a War Foretold: August 1990 to March 2003 The first drafts of history are fragmentary. Important revelations arrive late, and out of order. In this timeline, we've assembled the history of the Iraq War to create a resource we hope will help resolve open questions of the Bush era. What did our leaders know and when did they know it? And, perhaps just as important, what red flags did we miss, and how could we have missed them? This is the first installment in our Iraq War timeline project. http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/index.html

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#11)
    by Sailor on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 07:07:47 AM EST
    the 8-6-01 PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside United States." Do you remember the response to that dire threat?
    Yeah, bush said to the briefer "OK, now youve covered your ass" and went back to 'clearing brush.' BTW, Pakistan just made a treaty with the taliban and promised not to prosecute OBL.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 07:09:43 AM EST
    RePack writes:
    Bonus question: After being warned by the outgoing administration that bin Laden was the most dangerous problem for the United States, what did the Bush administration do in the following eight months to deal with it?
    Glad you asked. Normally you aren't this cooperative.
    RICHARD CLARKE: ....I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration. ...the Bush administration decided then, you know, in late January, to do two things. One, vigorously pursue the existing policy, including all of the lethal covert action findings, which we've now made public to some extent. QUESTION: Were all of those issues part of alleged plan that was late December and the Clinton team decided not to pursue because it was too close to ... CLARKE: There was never a plan, Andrea. What there was was these two things: One, a description of the existing strategy, which included a description of the threat. And two, those things which had been looked at over the course of two years, and which were still on the table. CLARKE: No, it came up in April and it was approved in principle and then went through the summer. And you know, the other thing to bear in mind is the shift from the rollback strategy to the elimination strategy. When President Bush told us in March to stop swatting at flies and just solve this problem, then that was the strategic direction that changed the NSPD from one of rollback to one of elimination
    Link Now from this we can see that there was a huge amount of work going on, and that there never was a "plan" from the Clinton Administration. Indeed, here we see the strategy being changed from a reactice criminal justice strategy...catch'em after they have killed.... to a proactive...break'em up before they kill. And then we have this:
    "At the special meeting on July 5 were the FBI, Secret Service, FAA, Customs, Coast Guard, and Immigration. We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future." That had been had been George Tenet's language. "We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance. Thus, the White House did ensure that domestic law enforcement including the FAA knew that the CSG believed that a major al Qaeda attack was coming, and it could be in the U.S., and did ask that special measures be taken."
    Link So Bush changed the strategy, increased funding 500% and all of the various enforcement agencies have been put on alert two months and six days before 9/11. Now a rational person would agree that Bush has his team working, and law enforcement fully briefed. RePack, do you really enjoy embarassing yourself by making irrational and incorrect statements that can be so easily disproven?

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#13)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 07:27:50 AM EST
    Sailor - Read my response to RePack. It covers your comment totally. BTW - Your link doesn't work. And your parsing of words is funny. You know, I know and everyone else knows that a crime, such as robbing a 7-11, and an attack against the country, is not the same. But feel free to demonstrate your ability to make trivial points. RePack and Sailor and et al - Jump on Bush over his Gay Rights position, on his Women's Rights position... on his National Health Care position...On his Immigration position... on his inability to reform Social Security and not pursuing that issue.... and I will join you. But your continual and wrong headed attacks on him over national defense are totally, completely, 10000% wrong. And even if the Demos take the House in the next election, nothing will be accomplished because you have no plan, all you have is hatred. And hatred builds nothing. Hatred corrodes the soul and clouds the mind. You have become the flip side of the far Right.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#14)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 07:28:10 AM EST
    Now from this we can see that there was a huge amount of work going on, and that there never was a "plan" from the Clinton Administration.
    Jim, your brain is dead. You failed to answer the question of who was president on 9/11, you failed to explain why the Bush administration didn't hold a single meeting or create a single document on bin Laden, and you failed to elucidate on the president's respons to the 8/6/01 PDB. (Except to say that Clinton was responsible for what took place eight months after he left office. When does his term end?) If you were not here, I would not believe the things I have heard about Bush-fellatio-syndrome (BFS).

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#15)
    by Che's Lounge on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 07:53:21 AM EST
    Jim, I presume you can still read.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#16)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 08:15:09 AM EST
    RePack - Your hatred of Bush has clouded your mind. What do you think all of those meetings were about? What do you think the July 5 meeting was about? They were about OBL and al-Qaeada. Or is your position that Richard Clarke was lying? Or is it your position that Condi Rice was lying? Or is it your position that the 7/5 meeting never took place? You know, I don't know what Bush said to the person doing the 8/6 PDB, and neither do you. But I do know one thing. The record clearly shows that he was totally involved and had directed his team to change the strategy to roll back, had increased funding 500% and had, through his NSA team, advised the heads of all the enforcement agencies on 7/5/2001:
    We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future."
    So besides your position that you hate Bush, what proof do you have? NONE. BTW - The quotes I provided had nothing to do with "Clinton." They were provided to show that the Bush Administration had NOT somehow ignored the information passed on from Clinton. As Clarke said:
    RICHARD CLARKE: ....I think the overall point is, there was no plan on Al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration.
    Find a better point, RePack. You lost this one totally. Che - Nice attempt to change the subject, but if you can read, you will see that RePack has made several charges that he can't support, and I am merely showing the dumbness of them. Now, if you want to worry about who shot who, I must point out that even Clinton has said that he should have picked up OBL when he had the chance.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#17)
    by Sailor on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 09:08:15 AM EST
    The Paki ambassador is denying it and ABC took down the original link but they are standing by the recorded interview:
    Q. ABC News: If bin Laden or Zawahiri were there, they could stay?
    A. Gen. Sultan: No one of that kind can stay. If someone is there he will have to surrender, he will have to live like a good citizen, his whereabouts, exit travel would be known to the authorities.
    Q. ABC News: So, he wouldn't be taken into custody? He would stay there?
    A. Gen. Sultan: No, as long as one is staying like a peaceful citizen, one would not be taken into custody. One has to stay like a peaceful citizen and not allowed to participate in any kind of terrorist activity.
    And this is undisputedPakistan agrees to 'amnesty' for al Qaeda, Taliban
    Your hatred of Bush has clouded your mind.
    no, your intense desire to beleive him no matter how many times he's lied to you has clouded your mind. remember "dead or alive" and then 'I don't really care about bin laden'? We can't help it if you are hypocrites.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#18)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 02:01:39 PM EST
    Sailor - My comments were about the Left's claims that Bush was doing nothing about al-Qaeda and OBL prior to 9/11. Read RePack's laughable and easily proved wrong comment at 10:59PM on 9/5. The Ambassador doesn't set Pakistan policy. If he does, then we have been working with the wrong people. So no, it is not "undisputed." Let us know when the head shed General himself says that. Until then....you are wrong again.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#21)
    by Repack Rider on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 02:17:35 PM EST
    Or is it your position that Condi Rice was lying?
    Again? Or still?
    The record clearly shows that he was totally involved and had directed his team to change the strategy to roll back, had increased funding 500% and had, through his NSA team, advised the heads of all the enforcement agencies on 7/5/2001:
    Show me a concrete action that took place as a result of this meeting. Who was president on 9/11? Why did the president continue to read to second graders during an attack on our country? The BFS has you really bad.

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 04:33:36 PM EST
    RePack - You get called out, caught, and put on display and you act as if no one knows..... ;-) The meeting happened. The agencies were put on notice. That's what is supposed to happen. Now, if you want to condemn all of them, be my guest. But the point is, they were told, which you evidently were unaware of, or else you just like pain.. Who was President on 9/11? What an astonishing inept comment. You start off babbling about 8/6/PDB and end with this? As for your last gasp. I can only say that I admire a man who, when things are going bad, can calmly keep on doing things that show calmness, rather than running around upsetting everything in sight. You do remember: When in trouble, fear or doubt Run in circles, Scream and shout. If that's the type of leadership you admire, then you have lost even more respect. The point of all of this was that Bush was taking actions. He has continued to do so. Most of which you don't like. TT ReP, life goes on. Sailor - When it gets some national play, let me know. You just got whamed by someone playing games.. And since you want to play 20 questions, why is it that the Left and you do not want the terrorist to abide by UN sanctions?? Can you tell me, please? Pretty please???

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 05:53:43 PM EST
    Jim, You're right, robbing a 7-11, and attacking a country do not equal the same thing.... SO, what do we do with the guy who made us invade another country based on totally inaccurate data? It's not a crime, it's WAR!! War crime tribunal! And he's not allowed to look at the evidence, because it's vital to national security that he not see it! And why stop hunting the guy who started it?! OBL is an SOB of the highest order...how can he NOT be a target? HOW CAN THAT BE?!! If Bush was so dedicated to security, why does virtually none of the Shipping cargo into this country get inspected? What about air cargo? Virtually no detection at that level either...let's not mention the borders either... Instead we have to take off our shoes, leave behind our water bottles, shampoo etc, because one idiot tried to blow up his shoes! (Unsuccessfully I might add), and because a group of people wanted to blow up planes with a combination of chemicals that were determined to NOT be sufficient to damage an airplane?! I don't mind being extra careful of terrorists...but can I only be extra-careful of COMPETENT terrorists? "thoughteater - So, you concede that al-Qaeada is now decentralized, mostly because we keep killing their top leaders, but you still insist that our attacks are creating more terrorists.." Hmmm...al-Qaeda is not really the main concern anymore...what about Hamas? The GOVERNMENT elected by it's people? Or does the democratic process only mean something when Bush says it does? What about the PLO? What about the IRA? Not much is being done to track down the IRA....doesn't matter that they are white and live in the western hemisphere does it? The war on terror....how DO you win a war on a concept anyway? When we change it's definition in the dictionary? How do you defeat dispersed groups of dissidents? Many who don't talk to each other? That means we have to suspect EVERYONE...For all we know, BUsh is on OBL payroll, and is doing everything he can to make the US look stupid! In THAT light, it all makes sense!!!Military might and abuse of power creates 'terrorists'... Hmm...at the beginning of the revolutionary war, my forefathers hid behind trees, and aimed for officers, not fighting in what was called a civilized or honorable manner...they were the terrorists of their days, because they refused to stand shoulder to shoulder in the field, and face off against a superior force...because they'd be annihilated...kind of like today, Hamas, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and their ilk know they can't hope to fight the americans shoulder to shoulder in the fields, so they fight how they know they can...guerilla tactics, IEDs, bombs.... We both kill innocent civilians, and the argument can be made that we try harder not to kill civilians, and I'm sure we do...but right now, the total body count doesn't make us look all that good... Not to mention secret prisons, ghost detainees, torture (no bamboo under the fingernails, but a rose by any other name...) It's not a hatred per se, more of a true disgust, and embarrassment that this redneck yokel moron is the one in charge of our country...doesn't that frighten/horrify YOU? The human mind is simply too inventive to cover every way that someone can attack an airplane, without completely violating every passengers rights....body cavity searches? Think anyone'll stand for that? Maybe after the Mujjahadeen sneak a pair of NAILCLIPPERS on in one of their rectums!!

    Re: Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Wa (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Sep 06, 2006 at 11:05:17 PM EST
    Are We Still 'All Americans'? La Stampa, Italy
    The shock of September 11, in fact, had produced unity and cohesion; five years later, we are forced to acknowledge that this capital of goodwill has been dissipated, wasted, and manipulated. As a matter of fact, rarely has there been such a mismatch between a historic situation and the capacity of the one who had to face it, and that is President Bush.
    From the same website. Tainted By Bush, Blair Being Forced Out. Guardian Unlimited, U.K.
    "It's too late for Blair. His legacy ... to have glued himself to a reckless venture that has wreaked havoc the world over."
    Undoubtably this website is know to some, but for those that are unfamiliar it gives an eclectic view of contempory issues. Watching America.

    Al Qaeda No Longer a Presidential Priority (Was It Ever?) | 21 comments (21 topical)