Progress Report: 9/11 Report To Offer Broad Indictment

[Guest guest]

> Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:35:54 -0700

> Progress Report: Report To Offer Broad

> Indictment

> " American Progress Action Fund "

> <pr

>

 

 

Center for American Progress - Progress Report

#160;

 

 

by David Sirota, Christy Harvey, Judd Legum and

Jonathan Baskin

 

 

 

July 22, 2004

9/11 COMMISSIONReport To Offer Broad

Indictment9/11Shameless HypocrisyIRAQMilitary Broke

Due To Bush Mismanagement

UNDER THE RADAR

 

9/11 COMMISSION

Report To Offer Broad Indictment

 

By all accounts, the 600-page report due out today by

the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks will

" answer some crucial questions about the nation's

worst-ever terrorist attack " and offer important

recommendations for reforming our national security

apparatus and better defeating terrorism. The

bipartisan commission has the broad support of the

American people, but its investigation has been

impeded by the Bush administration at every

turn.#160;Now, as previews of the report suggest

substantive changes to improve our ability to fight

terrorism, the administration and its allies are

already opposing key recommendations and playing

politics with the findings. On Tuesday, House Speaker

Dennis Hastert (R-IL) " said that Congress will be

unlikely to consider any major changes this year, and

Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge signaled

administration opposition to the idea of a new

intelligence chief. " Without having read the report,

Ridge told Fox News, " I don't think you need a czar. "

For a refresher course on the history of the 9/11

Commission, check out American Progress's #160;9/11

Commission Primer.

 

REPORT TO OFFER BROAD INDICTMENT: Beyond its

discussion of " the hijacking plot and the government's

failure to detect it, " the report will allegedly

" sharply criticize Congress for failing in its role as

overall watchdog over the nation's intelligence

agencies, " and " raise questions about the Bush

administration's legal approach to al Qaeda detainees

apprehended overseas. " It will also list ten " missed

opportunities " to derail the suicide hijacking plot,

four during former President Clinton's eight-year term

in office and six in the first eight months of

President Bush's administration, according to a

government official cited by the Washington Post.

(This has not stopped the GOP from already suggesting

the report condemns Clinton). The commission's

recommendations are expected to include the creation

of a new, Cabinet-level " intelligence czar, " and

" major changes in 'both the structure and the culture'

of the FBI. " According to an excerpt obtained by the

WP, the report also recommends the Bush administration

adhere more closely to the Geneva Conventions in its

treatment of detainees, rejecting " claims of some Bush

administration officials that some detainees are not

entitled to Geneva protections as a matter of standard

practice. "

 

BUSH'S CHANGE OF HEART: Yesterday President Bush told

reporters, " I look forward to receiving the report, "

saying he welcomed a " full discussion " of the panel's

findings. But the president has not always been so

welcoming to the commission. From the beginning, the

White House has vocally opposed the commission,

bullying congressional opponents by insinuating the

panel would divert resources from the war on terror

and " brush[ing] off " requests for full funding and

access to relevant documents. Now that the report's

release is upon us, Bush praises its work as " very

useful, " but his administration has done everything it

could to discredit the commission's findings and

distract from the truth. In fact, the report's release

this morning will represent the culmination of a long,

difficult process, carried out against the will of the

Bush White House.

 

WHAT WE KNOW SO FAR: So what is it the Bush

administration is so fearful the public will learn

from the 9/11 commission? Here's what we know so far:

Prior to 9/11, the Bush administration underfunded

counterterrorism, ignored terror warnings which

reached " the highest levels within the White House, "

prioritized missile defense and other traditional

threats despite repeated advice to the contrary, and

failed to act on specific intelligence indicating al

Qaeda was planning an attack in the United States.

During much of that time, President Bush was enjoying

one of the longest presidential vacations in White

House history. Since the attacks, the White House has

repeatedly misled the American people as to its

pre-9/11 focus on counterterrorism, including claims

it had no " inkling whatsoever that the people were

going to fly airplanes into buildings " despite

evidence directly contradicting that claim.

 

CONFIRMED - BIN LADENS FLOWN OUT ON WHITE

HOUSE-CONNECTED PLANE: The White House and its allies

have sought to downplay the administration's decision

to allow planeloads of Saudi nationals #8211;

including relatives of Osama bin Laden #8211; to leave

the country in the days and weeks after the attack on

9/11. Right-wing partisans have even tried to smear

those who point out that the flights occurred. But

according to a passenger list released today by Sen.

Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ), it is now fully confirmed

that " at least 13 relatives of Osama bin Laden,

accompanied by bodyguards and associates, were allowed

to leave the United States on a chartered flight eight

days after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. " They were

flown out of the country on an aircraft that has been

" chartered frequently by the White House for the press

corps traveling with President Bush. " Lautenberg, in a

statement, said that Bush " needs to explain to the

American people why his administration let this plane

leave. " One of the passengers, Omar Awad bin Laden,

had lived with Abdullah bin Laden, a nephew of Osama

bin Laden who was involved in forming the U.S. branch

of the World Assembly of Muslim Youth in Alexandria,

described by the FBI as a " suspected terrorist

organization. "

 

9/11

Shameless Hypocrisy

 

Within one day of the politically-timed leak about an

investigation into a missing National Archives

document, the White House has been caught in a lie

about the matter. When the leak first was made public,

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, " the first

we became aware of it was upon seeing the media

reports. " Today, however, AP reports the " Justice

Department notified the office of White House legal

counsel Alberto Gonzalez about the probe before news

of it leaked to the media Monday. " The New York Times

quotes an anonymous administration officials who says

top Bush aides were informed of the investigation.

This is the same Justice Department headed by Attorney

General John Ashcroft #8211; a man who said on

10/16/03 that " Leaks are a serious matter... if

[people] purposefully leak information [they are]

suborning the national security in the interests of

the United States to some interests of their own. "

Ashcroft has so far said nothing about his

Department's politically timed leak of an

investigation that started 10 months ago, but was

leaked just 48 hours before the release of the 9/11

Commission report, which is expected to be critical of

President Bush.

 

WHERE IS THE REPUBLICAN OUTRAGE?: When the Clinton

administration was leaked information about criminal

probes, Republicans launched blistering attacks. Sen.

Kit Bond (R-MO) said on 7/30/94 that such leaks

" violated the ethical standards that any

administration must set in order to deserve and retain

the confidence of the American people. " Rep. Jim Leach

(R-IA) said on 7/28/94, " No American, including the

president of the United States, is entitled to insider

information on the development of criminal referrals. "

Rep. Bob Livingston (R-LA) told the Washington Times

on 8/9/96 that giving a heads up to the White House

about criminal investigations constituted

" inappropriate contacts between the White House and

the FBI " and represented a " gross violation " of bureau

policy that tainted long-standing efforts by the FBI

to remain impartial. On 8/1/96, Rep. Dan Burton (R-IN)

held a hearing on the topic of leaking information

about an investigation to the White House and asked

rhetorically, " Doesn't this fly in the face of [the

FBI's] so-called policy of being non-partisan? " There

has been no such outrage today from these same

Republicans about the White House being leaked

politically-sensitive information about an ongoing

Justice Department investigation.

 

MEET TOM DAVIS #8211; CONGRESS'S LATEST HYPOCRITE:

Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA), one of the principal attack

dogs during Whitewater, yesterday said his Government

Reform Committee would investigate the Berger matter.

Though CBS News reports, " law enforcement sources say

they don't expect any criminal charges will be filed, "

Davis seems to believe his committee's extra action is

warranted because the matter was a " disturbing breach

of trust. " This was a departure from Davis's refusal

to hold any hearings or investigations into the

administration's leak of the name of an undercover CIA

operative who was working on WMD issues. When ranking

Democrat Henry Waxman (D-CA) asked for hearings into

that leak, Davis declined, saying on 10/3/03, " I know

Ashcroft very well, and I'm sure he'll go by the

book. " Davis also had his spokesman claim on 9/30/03

that an investigation into the administration leak

(unlike an investigation into the Berger matter,

apparently) " should be conducted by career FBI

agents. " Davis also did not explain why his committee

has refused to undertake a probe into Vice President

Cheney's office's now-admitted " coordination " of

federal contracts for his former employer, Halliburton

(a company he still owns stock options in, and from

which he still receives deferred compensation).

 

COPIES STILL EXISTED AND WERE GIVEN TO 9/11

COMMISSION?: Despite Republicans' best effort to

ascribe a criminal motive to Berger's loss of two

documents, David Gergen, a top adviser to Presidents

Nixon, Reagan and Clinton, pointed out just how

ludicrous such a conspiracy is. As he noted to CNN

yesterday, " What [berger] lost and what is missing now

are copies of original documents and the originals are

still there and they've been made available to the

9/11 Commission. There had been no break in the paper

trail. There is no harm to national security here.

Nothing has occurred which has impaired or threatened

national security and there's no advantage to anybody

because the documents are in front of the 9/11

Commission, the originals. " Gergen noted how the

investigation had started in October, but was only now

being leaked, and highlighted the political nature of

that timing: " Now, 48 hours or so before the 9/11

Commission report...Berger hasn't talked to the

Justice Department since April and suddenly this

becomes an issue, is that not suspicious? "

 

WEAPONS OF MASS DISTRACTION: This week's coordinated

conservative attack on Berger is just the latest in

the GOP's persistent campaign to distract the public

from the 9/11 Commission's findings, which could be

damaging to President Bush. When Attorney General John

Ashcroft was faced with a " harsh review " for the lack

of attention he paid to al Qaeda before 9/11, he

responded by smearing commission member Jamie Gorelick

for writing a 1995 memo which he later admitted made

information sharing easier, rather than more

difficult, as he charged at the time. The

administration made a similarly bald-faced attempt

#160;to discredit counterterrorism expert Richard

Clarke when he exposed Bush's lack of interest in

terrorism before 9/11. They have also resorted to

discrediting the commission as a whole: when a staff

report said there was no " operational relationship "

between Saddam and al Qaeda, Vice President Cheney

tried to discredit the finding by saying he " probably "

had information the commission did not.

 

IRAQ

Military Broke Due To Bush Mismanagement

 

President Bush's mismanagement of the war in Iraq is

costing $12.3 billion more than he last announced, and

with the resulting equipment strains and cancelled

training, America's troops are paying the price of his

failure. According to a new report by the Government

Accountability Office, the Pentagon has already spent

the $65 billion allotted for war and is facing " a

$12.3-billion shortfall through September for the

costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and its

worldwide effort against terrorism. " The GAO report

also " warned that the budget crunch is having an

adverse impact on the military. " For example, in Iraq,

the military has " deferred the repair of equipment

used in Iraq, grounded some Air Force and Navy pilots,

canceled training exercises, and delayed

facility-restoration projects. The Air Force is

straining to cover the cost of body armor for airmen

in combat areas, night-vision gear and surveillance

equipment, " according to the GAO report. And the

strain is beginning to weigh heavily on morale, as

soldiers " have begun to question openly not only their

mission, but also the leaders who sent them to Iraq in

the first place. "

 

ROSY-SCENARIO PLANNING A FAILURE: One reason for the

perilous shortfall: in going to war in Iraq, Bush and

his administration dangerously assumed best-case

scenarios. When Bush requested war money, he assumed

that troop levels would drop by Sept. 30, and " a more

peaceful Iraq would allow the use of more

cost-effective but slower sea lifts to transport

troops and equipment, and that troops rotating in

would need fewer armored vehicles than the service

members they replace. " That didn't happen. An

exploding insurgency and increased violence means

" troop levels will remain at 138,000 for the

foreseeable future, the military is heavily dependent

on costly airlifts and the Army's force has actually

become more dependent on heavily armored vehicles. "

#160;

 

STATE DEPARTMENT: The State Department this week

criticized the Department of Defense for taking the

wrong focus in reconstructing Iraq. Specifically,

State Department officials who have taken over the

$18.4-billion Iraq reconstruction plan from the

Pentagon concluded DoD had been putting " too much

emphasis on big-ticket construction projects and not

enough on creating jobs for Iraqis. "

 

INCREASED CASUALTIES: The U.S. military death toll in

Iraq reached 900 this week; the number of American

service members injured is approaching 6,000. Since

the transfer of power on June 28, " American troops in

Iraq have been dying at a rate of two a day. "

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld admitted it's

impossible to predict when the casualty count will

begin to drop, but he thought the risk will be lighter

once Iraq's own security forces become better trained

and equipped to fight the insurgency. That can't

happen if Iraqi forces lack the basic necessities to

do their jobs. Pentagon figures show both the new

police force and the reconstituted military are

lacking basic weapons, vehicles, communications gear

and body armor they need to take over security duties.

Anthony Cordesman, an Iraq expert with the Center for

Strategic and International Studies, blames the

problem on a lack of planning: ''The U.S. wasted

precious time waiting for its own forces to defeat a

threat that it treated as the product of a small

number of former regime loyalists and foreign

volunteers, and felt it could solve without creating

effective Iraqi forces. "

 

RECRUITS NEEDED IMMEDIATELY: The New York Times

reports, " In what critics say is another sign of

increasing stress on the military, the Army has been

forced to bring more new recruits immediately into the

ranks to meet recruiting goals for 2004, instead of

allowing them to defer entry until the next accounting

year, which starts in October. " This means " recruiters

will enter the new year without the usual cushion of

incoming soldiers, making it that much harder to make

their quotas for 2005. " Lt. Gen. Franklin L.

Hagenbeck, the Army's top personnel officer, admitted

the strain the war has put on the armed forces, " I

worry about this every single day - recruiting and

retention. "

 

NO BLUE HATS: The Los Angeles Times reports, " In

another setback for U.S. efforts in Iraq, the United

Nations has been unable to secure enough troops to

protect a U.N. contingent headed to the country to

help with elections and rebuilding. " Due to ongoing

danger and costs " as well as the continuing

unpopularity of the U.S. invasion, " countries did not

come forward with troops. " If other countries are

unable to provide the troops, the job will fall to the

U.S.-led coalition now patrolling the country. That

outcome would be embarrassing for the Bush

administration, which has been struggling all year to

show it has international support for rebuilding

Iraq. "

 

BULLETS OVER BAGHDAD: The Washington Post reports this

morning that the U.S. military is running short on one

crucial wartime need: bullets. The Pentagon

underestimated both production need and the level of

resistance soldiers would face in Iraq. Until U.S.

production can be brought up to speed, however, " the

Army is taking unusual stopgap measures " such as

buying ammunition from foreign governments like

Britain and Israel. This isn't the first time the

Pentagon has been caught unprepared in this war and

had to scramble at the last minute: shortages in the

production of Interceptor body armor meant soldiers

weren't fully protected until 15 months after the

beginning of the war. And last September, the Army's

vice chief of staff admitted the military

miscalculated the number of armored Humvees troops

would need, leaving many soldiers unprotected.

 

WASTING MONEY ON UNSCRUPULOUS HALIBURTON: Money that

could have been spent on soldiers or equipment to

fight the war was instead shamefully squandered on

Halliburton, which " overcharged the government for

gasoline imports in Iraq and fell behind on tasks such

as producing water for troops. " A new report by the

GAO shows Halliburton " overcharged the government by

more than $165 million. " For example, " assigning

Halliburton Co. rather than the military to truck fuel

into Iraq pushed up costs by $167 million, or 90

percent. "

 

NO MONEY FOR TROOP FAMILIES: Republicans in the House

of Representatives voted to block spending for

military housing. In a near party-line vote#160;

(212-211), GOP lawmakers killed $500 million meant for

constructing houses for troops' families. " Without the

expansion, the program is expected to exhaust its

current $850 million spending limit by November.

Supporters said that would delay new housing for

50,000 military families over the next two years. "

 

 

 

 

 

MEDIA #8211; O'REILLY'S GAY CONTRADICTIONS: As

reported in the Chicago Tribune, Fox News's Bill

O'Reilly " says he is uncomfortable with the practice

of outing gay political figures--except, it seems,

when he is doing the outing. " On his show Monday

night, O'Reilly chastised guest Michael Rogers for

publicizing the names of gay congressional staffers

working for politicians who oppose gay marriage.

O'Reilly said, " We're uneasy with this kind of

exposition. Somebody's personal sex life should have

nothing to do with any kind of a policy. " Yet, just

minutes later on the same show #8211; and for at least

the third time in the last year #8211; O'Reilly

" described one of the justices on the Massachusetts

Supreme Judicial Court as a lesbian, a claim that the

justice herself, through a spokeswoman, denies. " On

shows in November, last week, and again on Monday,

O'Reilly has referred to " the lesbian judge on the

Supreme Court who dissented " in the court's landmark

ruling in favor of gay marriage. O'Reilly has never

named the judge, but of the three dissenting justices

in that case, only one--Justice Martha B. Sosman--is a

woman. Despite Justice Sosman repeatedly refuting the

claim, a Fox spokesman said the network stood by

O'Reilly's claim, saying it was based on " more than

one independent source. " The network, of course,

refused to identify any source at all.

 

ECONOMY #8211; GREENSPAN'S CONTRADICTIONS: The

Washington Post reports Federal Reserve Chairman Alan

Greenspan " said yesterday that continuing wage

sluggishness reflects the fact that many workers are

ill-prepared to take advantage of the opportunities

that the economy offers. " Earlier this year, it was

Greenspan who told Congress he supported even more

Bush tax cuts, and said they should be paid for by

further reducing discretionary spending. This is the

same spending that funds things like education and job

training, which the White House has already

dramatically underfunded. Of course, Greenspan's other

past comments call into question whether he really

cares about average workers. In the face of massive

job loss, Greenspan said on 7/15/03 the manufacturing

job loss " does not really matter. " Similarly,

Greenspan on 7/18/01 told Congress he supported

abolishing the federal minimum wage.

 

HEALTH CARE #8211; NEW MEDICARE LAW COULD HIT SOCIAL

SECURITY: A new Congressional report finds that the

Medicare drug benefit that President Bush pushed

through Congress last year could eat into Social

Security benefits. The " new law ties the rise in drug

insurance premiums to drug price inflation, while

increases in Social Security are pegged to the overall

rate of inflation. " #160; Since drug prices go up much

faster than overall inflation, seniors will find their

Medicare drug premiums eating up more and more of

their Social Security checks.#160; In addition, a new

American Progress report from Georgetown University's

Jeffrey Crowley raises concerns about restricted

access to medically necessary drugs under the new

Medicare law.#160; To learn more and urge your

Congressman to overhaul this bad bill, visit the

American Progress Action Fund.

 

HEALTH #8211; REPORTS BLASTS ADMINISTRATION'S MAD COW

POLICY: An investigation by the Center for Progressive

Regulation (CPR) has found that the Bush

administration's response to concerns about Mad Cow

disease in the American beef supply have been

inadequate and endanger public health. The report, to

be released today, is highly critical of the

administration's largely " symbolic " response to the

issue. CPR president Tom McGarity accuses the

administration of caring " more about public relations

than food safety...Instead of protecting the

beef-eating public, the administration seems more

focused on protecting the beef industry's profits. "

McGarity says the series of " firewalls " the

administration has put in place are not enough to

prevent infected beef from reaching the public. In

particular, the report criticizes a loophole in

regulations which " permits slaughterhouses to get away

with doing no testing whatsoever for mad cow

contamination in edible meat. " For the entire report,

check out CPR's web site later today.

 

#160;Don't Miss

DAILY TALKING POINTS: 9/11 Commission Report: Strong

Guidance for a Safer America

 

MEDICARE: New prescription drug law could limit access

to necessary medications

 

ALTERMAN: Think Again: 'As Goes Kansas...'

 

COLUMN: Mad Cow 'Firewalls' Just a Smokescreen

 

MILITARY: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Rep. Rahm

Emanuel (D-IL) seeking investigations into

unscrupulous insurance companies preying on U.S.

troops.

 

SUDAN: Saying, " Let's call it what it is: genocide, "

the Philadelphia Inquirer calls for swift, decisive

action in Darfur.

 

LITERATURE: San Francisco literary group McSweeney's

offers daily reasons to dispatch Bush.

 

Contact The Progress Report.

 

 

 

 

#160;Daily Grill

 

House Government Reform Committee Chairman Thomas M.

Davis III, Virginia Republican, yesterday called the

actions of Samuel R. Berger " a disturbing breach of

trust and protocol " and said his committee will soon

begin an investigation into the matter, despite CBS

News reporting " law enforcement sources say they don't

expect any criminal charges will be filed. "

 

- Washington Times, 7/22/04; CBS News, 7/20/04

 

VERSUS

 

In 2003, when he was asked to hold hearings into the

administration's leak of an undercover CIA operative's

name, Davis declined, saying, " I know Ashcroft very

well, and I'm sure he'll go by the book. " He had his

spokesman claim an investigation into the

administration leak " should be conducted by career FBI

agents. "

 

- St. Louis Post Dispatch, 10/03/03; Roll Call,

9/30/03

 

#160;Daily OutrageThe White House lied about receiving

leaked information about a criminal investigation.

#160;Archives

Progress Report