RNC's Phase II can't find anything -- but we hear the Saudis got an earful

Every time we turn around, there's more information that "everyone knew." It doesn't seem credible that the Senate Intelligence Committee "can't find anything" in the Phase II investigation.

* * *

Strange, it appears everyone, including overseas intelligence and the Saudis, knew about bin Ladin.

What's the Senate Intelligence Committee's "big plan" to assign stupid committee staffers to the House of Saud to "keep contact" with what is going on?



The interesting news is that the United States informed Saudi Arabia in 1998 that Bin Ladin might use an aircraft.

Wow: All this time, Rice has left us with the impression that "nobody knew. . ."

* * *

Rice's crocodile tears over "nobody knowing" or "nobody could have imagined" raise additional questions to her reliability.

She heeds to be called to testify under oath about 9-11, Iraq WMD, the Iraq invasion, and the CIA detention centers. She was in a position to know what was going, given her role as NSC advisor.

* * *

Because the MDWDC knew the risk, we have to ask: What other information did the intelligence community have, but the leadership failed to rely on.

Bluntly, there's no credible argument that the "intelligence community got it wrong" as they were the source of the information for the Saudis.

In turn, there's no basis to argue the Senate Phase II investigation is focused on the right thing -- one cannot "do an investigation of the intelligence community" when the real problem lies with the White House malfeasance.

* * *

So what happened after 1998?

Recall it was the FAA which said it got 53 warnings about potential attacks in just prior to 9-11.

Are we saying that the United States, "Didn't bother to tell our own people, but would tell the Saudis?

That's non-sense.

We know that the Military District of Washington, DC [MDWDC] had the information: They used the potential "air craft collision scenario" to simulate an aircraft crash-fire inside the Pentagon.

* * *

What appears to be the case -- the 1998 information was well known to PNAC, and they deliberately "did nothing" because they wanted the "big event":

To find a new enemy

To give the military a new battle

Provide a new focus

Put US power to work after the Cold War

Fulfill the PNAC dream of refocusing the military on a "needed" new enemy

To mobilize the nation

To justify military funding to defense contractors [providing valuable campaign contributions; kickbacks; and stock gains on the NYSE]

To have a new goal, focus in the confusion of "not having an enemy" after the Cold War ended.

Go after the oil in Afghanistan, which later proved to be an illusion

* * *

What else does the RNC know that it "hasn't done anything about"?

Malfeasance: When someone fails to do something that they should.

The issue isn't whether people knew. The issue is: Why hasn't there been allegations of malfeasance brought in the wake of 9-11?

The oath of office is there as a promise, not as something to conveniently ignore. Or did someone's stock gains "justify" the silence, inaction, and additional malfeasance?

* * *

This nation's leadership "had the foresight" to plan for the Iraqi invasion before 9-11; but not the foresight to plan for 9-11, despite the 1998 information?

That is not a credible assertion.

Bungled Iraq post-invasion plans; bungled 9-11 response. No surprise -- same crew, same PNAC, same smoke and mirrors.

* * *

This was a foreseeable scenario which PNAC wanted. It gave them the self-justification to shut down the FBI.

* * *

The same PNAC-RNC crew that "did nothing" was the same crew that clamped down on the FBI to "report no problem" and "fail to forward the information." That is, until you realize -- the DSP and NSC had the information back in 1998.

* * *

Curious, despite the "problem of the wall" [that is an illusion], the Saudis found out.

Another set of excuses to knock down walls that should be there; and maintain barriers to oversight that should be removed.

Government cannot credibly claim there is a "communication problem" or that the "civil liberties need to be knocked down by letting the CIA engage in domestic surveillance."

The inability of the CIA to conduct domestic surveillance prior to 9-11 didn't stop the Saudis from finding about in 1998; there's no reason the President couldn't have been told. It is most likely the information that is being suppressed is related to what they knew, and failed to act on.

we judge the "legal arguments" used to justify knocking down the wall between the CIA and FBI are based on non-sense; and the wall should be replaced.

The CIA, FBI, NSC have collectively lied. They are not to be trusted. They've lied about what was going on about 9-11; who was told; and what did or didn't happen.

There's no reason to drop the "burden of that collective inaction" on the very people who once could rely on the American Constitution as a shield.

It is outrageous that the government, despite the well known information in 1998, failed to act; and has dropped the "burden of that malfeasance" on the public by way of the "Patriot" Act.

It is time to throw the Patriot Act in the trash; and throw the principals in the NSC in jail -- they've diverted attention from their problems, and have trashed the constitution.

They've failed to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States. Every time they have a problem, they find someone else to absorb the intrusions.

This needs to end.

* * *

Vote 2006.