Is the Bush administration covering up it’s failures on September 11 to ensure a victory in 2004? This provocative Newsweek article claims so:
Even as White House political aides plot a 2004 campaign plan designed to capitalize on the emotions and issues raised by the September 11 terror attacks, administration officials are waging a behind-the-scenes battle to restrict public disclosure of key events relating to the attacks.
AT THE CENTER of the dispute is a more-than-800-page secret report prepared by a joint congressional inquiry detailing the intelligence and law-enforcement failures that preceded the attacks—including provocative, if unheeded warnings, given President Bush and his top advisers during the summer of 2001.
The report was completed last December; only a bare-bones list of “findings” with virtually no details was made public. But nearly six months later, a “working group” of Bush administration intelligence officials assigned to review the document has taken a hard line against further public disclosure. By refusing to declassify many of its most significant conclusions, the administration has essentially thwarted congressional plans to release the report by the end of this month, congressional and administration sources tell NEWSWEEK. In some cases, these sources say, the administration has even sought to “reclassify” some material that was already discussed in public testimony—a move one Senate staffer described as “ludicrous.”
… Some of the report—including some dealing with matters that had been extensively aired in public, such as the now famous FBI “Phoenix memo” of July 2001 reporting that Middle Eastern nationals might be enrolling in U.S. flight schools—were “reclassified.” Hill has since submitted proposed changes to the working group, pointing out the illogic of trying to pull back material that was already in the public domain. But officials have indicated the “review” process is likely to drag on for months—with no guarantees that the “working group” will be any more amenable to public disclosure.
… The tensions over the release of 9-11 related material seems especially relevant—if not ironic—in light of recent reports that the president’s political advisers have devised an unusual re-election strategy that essentially uses the story of September 11 as the liftoff for his campaign. The White House is delaying the Republican nominating convention, scheduled for New York City, until the first week in September 2004—the latest in the party’s history. That would allow Bush’s acceptance speech, now slated for Sept. 2, to meld seamlessly into 9-11 commemoration events due to take place in the city the next week.
This last paragraph puts the President’s address tonight into sharp relief: barely minutes went by before he began once again to connect Saddam Hussein to al Queda, a link which still has not been substantiated. Again and again he made reference to September 11, and with spurious, recursive logic, insisted that by invading Iraq we had made the world safer against terrorism. To put it bluntly, he’s flat making stuff up.
Where are the connections between Iraq and Sept. 11? There are none. And saying that his actions have prevented terrorism is ridiculous – unless, of course, Nancy Reagan’s psychic has been giving him certain knowledge of the future. This is his tactic – strike where you wish, then insist that it was “pre-emptive” and that the target “was going to do something really, we’re sure he was.” When you think about it, his reasons are completely without merit – at least, for this country. I can certainly imagine rogue nations using such reasoning, but America? But, speaking about these creative foretellings before an audience of scared and cowed people equals re-election. ‘Cause if you don’t vote for him, you’re not patriotic.
Also today, there has been talk about the awarding of a contract to Bearing Point to create an ecomonic structure in Iraq, which will build a stable, growing economy within 3 years.
Mr. Bush, why didn’t you hire them to fix OUR economy?
Plans for Iraq include bringing universal health care to its people.
Mr. Bush, where is OUR universal health care?
Etc., etc., etc.
::sigh::
