titled The Deafness Before The Storm. It was timed for tomorrow's 9-11 anniversary. Why? Eichenwald argues that the famous August 6 Presidential Daily Brief, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US," was the final in a series of PDBs through which the CIA attempted to alert the White House to the imminent threat, which Richard Clarke has described as George Tenet having his hair on fire during the summer. The Bush White House would not release those earlier PDBs. Eichenwald has
read excerpts from many of them, along with other recently declassified records, and come to an inescapable conclusion: the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.
According to Eichenwald, the first warning was May 1, when
the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.
Please keep reading.
The Neo-Conservatives tried to dismiss the CIA's warning, attempting to describe them as the result of a disinformation campaign by Osama bin Laden intended to distract the US from focusing on Saddam Hussein.
Two more snips:
On July 9, at a meeting of the counterterrorism group, one official suggested that the staff put in for a transfer so that somebody else would be responsible when the attack took place...
and this
That same day in Chechnya, according to intelligence I reviewed, Ibn Al-Khattab, an extremist who was known for his brutality and his links to Al Qaeda, told his followers that there would soon be very big news. Within 48 hours, an intelligence official told me, that information was conveyed to the White House, providing more data supporting the C.I.A.’s warnings. Still, the alarm bells didn’t sound.
I realize that there is a ban on 9-11 Conspiracy Theories at Daily Kos.
It seems to me that an op ed published by THe New York Times on the anniversary of the 9-11 attacks should not be classified as a conspiracy theory, but rather something worthy of attention. And Eichenwald, who is currently a contributing editor at Vanity Fair, is himself a former Times reporter.
Read the piece.
Disclosure: I was contacted by a publicist for Eichenwald asking if I wanted to interview him or get a review copy of his book, for which this op ed clearly serves as a promotional piece. I declined. Nevertheless, I think this op ed warrants attention, and as a result wonder what else might be in the book.
Peace?