The 8/6 PDB Memo Leaves NO DOUBT

About several things.

One thing everyone needs to keep in mind and which I HOPE I hear stressed in accounts is the that the very nature of a PDB is ESSENTIAL to understanding just how big a bombshell this is. A PDB is the Presidents daily NEED TO KNOW document. This document is used to update the President on the most pressing things that need his attention and/or decisions about in the immediate future. This document is created in order to brief the Pres. on upcoming/current events, decisions, policy etc. It's often used to shape policy and/or actions/responses to CURRENTLY IMPORTANT ISSUES IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE. If it's in the PDB it's relevant RIGHT NOW for some reason. Any historical info in a PDB is given in CONTEXT of something CURRENT and is also given in anticipation of DISCUSSION w/ others about the topic for some CURRENT reason.

Here's a great link and Discussion about PDB's that is a MUST READ to understand how important this is.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1379735

A MUST READ Article:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116 /

The actual 8/6 PDB:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf

1. Condi is quite clearly guilty of perjury. The last two paragraphs of the memo quite clearly, to any REASONABLE person cannot be considered historical information. They are talking about preparation for a terror attack in the US by sleeper cells CURRENTLY in the US.

The whole beginning of the PDB is leading up to these two paragraphs. The historical information given before these two paragraphs were given to put them in CONTEXT FOR IMMEDIATE DECISION MAKING.

2. LIHOP can no longer in any way be easily disregarded.
3. The admin. is either staggeringly incompetent or criminal.

that bin Laden wanted to do something in the US ?

OK, and...

that is really unrealistic. Of course it's all worth being looked into, AS IT IS. But how about waiting till there is real tangable evidence before placing unproven guilt anywhere

What "conspiracy" stuff? LIHOP? Did I say it was DEFINITELY LIHOP? No, I said it can't easily be dismissed and it can't.

How about reading my post and point out something you disagree with instead of mouthing off ignorantly...

..."disruptors"?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist, and I totally agree with every bit of your post.

Condi DEFINITELY perjured herself.

...sounds like something you might hear from Karl Rove.

Karl Rove. I thought this accusation, disruptor, Karl Rove, was against the rules hear. As if the GOP isn't happy that this huge community of democrats is not used by the party effectivly because of association with extremism.

Read my post and tell me which points you disagree with. Or is that too difficult for you?

I and most other DUers, I would guess, truly want to believe the best, but we fear the worst.

the tangible evidence led me. If you don't think there is any, you simply haven't been paying attention.

It may be unbelievable, but it is not unrealistic. In fact, it becomes more apparent every day that official complicity is the most reasonable explanation.

Just because someone claims that something is a conspiracy does not mean it isn't true, and when facts are presented to support a conspiracy theory then it's no longer a theory but a fact.

Or something like that.

composes these theories. It's cloudy extremism. Just put your objective filters on for a second and really think about what would be neccessary for these dozens of people at the highest reaches of government, and media apparently, to be in on an elaborate en comunique with muslim extremists, and nobody finding out before hand who ISN'T ok with a national tragedy of thousands of Americans dying

and allowing something to happen means nobody has to be in touch w/ anybody. You just sit on your hands and allow it to take place.

How about pointing out which part of my post you disagree with, or is that too difficult? Use cut and paste and make sure everything I said is in context.

The behaviors of one covering one's eyes, sticking one's fingers in one's ears and yelling, "I don't hear you" every time one is in the presence of hard evidence in order to prevent you absorbing any of this evidence does not mean there isn't hard evidence. There is hard evidence. Tons of it. The religious belief there is no hard evidence about 9/11 responsibility is the exact same as the religious belief in creationism.

The put options vs. airline stocks in the days before 9/11. The complete lack of fighters in the air on 9/11. The statements of the neo-cons wanting a "new Pearl Harbor." It goes on and on and on. Claiming there is no evidence for LIHOP is just as credible as fundamentalist claims the Earth is 6000 years old.

It's so important for some to believe that there is no evidence, when to anyone who tries to keep on top it knows, there is so much it's impossible to digest it all.

This coincidence theory is faith-based.

I mean, which requires more faith: believing that the boneheads in chief missed a gigantic warning about immediately impending danger, or that the evil bastards in chief were being told of an opportunity to sit back and let an excuse to enact PNAC, starting with Iraq, happen? I don't know the answer. One of the problems of characterizing Bush as a bonehead is that he is underestimated, not just as a politician, but as an agent for what many leftists often think of as evil. That may be Daisy's problem. I don't know. It would certainly be a problem for someone who does not believe in evil.

I agree with you and Beetwasher that this document was saying loudly and clearly that something BIG was going to happen and required immediate attention, otherwise it would not have been in the briefing. Until very recently, I also had a problem believing that anyone could be willing to allow violence to Americans to occur just to "wake them up" to the necessity of PNAC. I would imagine a lot of people are waking up, but not at all in the way the PNAC-ers had intended.

PS: To be clear, I've woken up. I believe they let it happen on purpose. But I can understand why it takes people a long while to get here. People don't want to think anyone is such an asshole that they'd let something like 9/11 happen.

Daisy and others who can't make that leap, just think about two things: 1) Maybe they weren't expecting a disaster quite as big as the one that actually happened. That doesn't mean they weren't expecting any disaster at all. 2) An administration that is willing to tailor evidence to fit their theories just to start a war is capable of true awfulness--if the word "evil" is too potent for you.

it has to matter when Bush does nothing. However, Clinton admin acted to prevent millenium attacks with scant more information than in that Aug 6 PDB. He acted to bring together the various intel parties and piece together the information from their various sources. But of course, Bob Kerrey would never want you to know that.

It's becoming less and less likely that anyone could be THIS INCOMPETENT. You see, that's the thing it's boiling down to. Either believe them and their plea of incredible incompetence or believe the only other option; complicity. There's no in betweeen. For me anyway, up until this memo, the scales were fairly balanced, with a slight lean to a semi-LIHOP (ie. they got played, they thought it would be smaller), I'm now in my full LIHOP interpretation of events. They KNEW SOMETHING WAS COMING FOR SURE and did not even do what was necessary to stop it (NO WARNINGS TO FAA AND TRANS. SEC!?!!?!). My only question now is were they truly aware of the scope.

The fact that it's in a PDB is utterly damning for me too.

All they had to do was let them get away with it--they knew what the attackers' plans were.

let's say all they knew was 1) Bin Laden was planning an attack in the U.S. 2) It might involve highjacking a plane 3) NYC is mentioned and the WTC and Pentagon are well-known attractive targets.

On the morning of 9/11, AFTER THEY KNEW FOUR PLANES HAD BEEN HIJACKED and AFTER THEY KNEW THE NORTH WTC TOWER had been slammed - THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING. No evacuations of the second tower and Pentagon. WHAT THE F*** TANGIBLE EVIDENCE DO YOU NEED that this misadministration is at the very LEAST *GUILTY OF DERELICTION OF DUTY* ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????

conspiracy stuff than most folks here, daddy `O ~

belated welcome from conservative underground!

The fact that OBL would like to commit a terrorist attack inside the US is a "duh" of course. What beetwasher is pointing out is that facts everyone knows don't go into the PDB, especially not the bulleted and detail-deprived versions the Bush admin uses.

Anything in Bush's PDB's is there because it's Important, with a capital I, and needs attention now. This argues that if OBL was the subject of this PDB there was some new and compelling reason to put him there. "Grass is green, water is wet, and by the way OBL wants to kill Americans" is not something that gets into a PDB.

If it's important for SOME REASON RIGHT NOW!

Correct!

I guess you don't care that because of negligence on the part of the Bush administration, 3,000 people died on 9-11.

Explain to us why you're here again?

PDBs are not given to simply give "historical" information except in context of something current. Right on Beetwasher!

"It did not warn of attacks inside the United States."
- Condi Rice, sworn public testimony to 9-11 Commission

"FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks."
- August 6 PDB

The whole beginning of the PDB is leading up to the last two paragraphs. The historical information given before these two paragraphs was given to put the paragraphs in CONTEXT FOR IMMEDIATE DECISION MAKING.

of PDB's....They need to do a little more research. Your explanation is absolutely correct Beetwasher...

friends are attempting to muddy the waters to deflect criticism away from their Chimperor.

Please note, here, The World's Greatest Lists of Media Contacts - not one but TWO of 'em - in the following thread:

LINK:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1380003

and it all fits so nicely

http://www.memoryhole.org/

In that case she told the truth because it WAS a historical document - one that gave context to the information on page two, which was a giant red flag of warning that nobody acted upon. Somebody calls our UAE Embassy to say "Bin Laden's a-comin' and he's got explosives." and the Crawford Regime lets out a big yawn. Condi was probably told 1) they would keep the PDB classified and 2) If they HAD to release it, they's keep page two under wraps. Problem is, too many people had already seen it for that ruse to work. I gotta' wonder if they set Condi up.....

As for the non-LIHOPers, I'm hoping they can offer a plausible explanation for the following sequence of events:

In May 2001 the U.S. State Department met with Iran, German and Italian officials to discuss Afghanistan. It was decided that the ruling Taliban would be toppled and a "broad-based government" would control the country so a gas pipeline could be built there.

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/7969.pdf.
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/features/fex20867.htm


Even as plans were being made to remove the Taliban rulers from power, Colin Powell announced a $43 million "gift" to Afghanistan.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-091701scheer.column
http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-02-02.html


In July 2001, the private plot formulated in May for toppling the Taliban was divulged during the G8 summit in Genoa, Italy. Immediately after the conference, American, Russian, German and Pakistani officials secretly met in Berlin to finalize the strategy for military strikes against the Taliban, scheduled to begin before mid-October 2001

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,556254,00.html


In September 2001 the "catastrophic and catalyzing" modern-day Pearl Harbor envisioned years earlier by the PNAC came to pass when the WTC and Pentagon were attacked. The finger of blame was pointed at Osama bin Laden, a former CIA operative with ties to Afghanistan. Suddenly, the U.S. "gift" of $43 million to the Taliban in May was cast in a new light. Coincidentally, Pakistan had participated in the plan to attack Afghanistan and the chief of Pakistan's Inter Service Intelligence agency was later linked to a 911 hijacker after wiring him $100,00 just days before the WTC fell.

http://cryptome.org/rad.htm
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=1454238160


In October 2001, with flags waving, crowds cheering, and anthems playing, the "War On Terror" and the hunt for Osama began when Afghanistan was attacked right on schedule of July's secret meeting

Taken alone the 8/6 PDB is damning, but taken in context of everything else, it's practically treasonous...

I want to know where I can write to reserve my tickets for the treason trial. I want to be in the courtroom when they announce sentence.

I rarely discuss things in absolute terms...;-)

should never be in any position of responsibility.
Missing the implications of this treat represents a disqualification for office.
Where the hell does the buck stop.

What would cause a PDB workup from any of the various intel departments on a particular situation? According to Ben Vista's exchange with Rice this memo was self generated by CIA. Any thoughts?

They are why this PDB was created. To give the president context to discuss in more detail the info in those paragraphs so that he can make decisions on what to do about the info in those two paragraphs. Obviously the intel agencies had new info, the info alluded to in the last two paragraphs and wanted the Pres. to know about and probably act on that info.