Just 199 Days Left: The Catastrophe of 9/11 Could Have Been Avoided…Obviously
By Mark Grueter
---------------------------------------
One of the dumbest, most sinister things we hear these days is that “9/11 could not have been prevented.” Of course it could have been prevented. To deny this is to reveal a steadfast and scary belief in fate, destiny, the Spirit, and the futility of human decision-making. This Hegelian Logic would have us believe that people have no control over the course of human events because everyone knows that some nebulous overriding force guides history. Sorry, victims.
The truth is, 9/11 could have been prevented and I don’t think it’s possible to overstate this fact. Any adult who can think at all can likely list several ways whereby 9/11 would have been prevented. Mohammed Atta and many of the other individuals who crashed the planes, already identified as security threats, might not have been allowed to board their respective air crafts, as they shouldn’t have. Does anyone seriously suggest that such a measure would not have prevented 9/11? Bush could have listened to Richard Clarke’s and many others' strategies for dealing with al Qaeda. Wreaking havoc on their cells and operations in and around Afghanistan was one of the recommendations. And it seems plausible enough to assert that cutting off their communications alone could have thwarted the attack. But essentially, Bush did nothing. And if he did do something, anything, will someone please come forward to tell us what it was?
The Bush people, along with many Democrats, insist that the problem leading to the events of 9/11 was “systemic” or “structural” and therefore no individuals are to blame (other than the terrorists themselves of course). Washington always blames “Washington” for society’s ills but rarely are any specific individuals held accountable. This is why nobody has been fired and why nobody in our government has apologized: they affect to believe that they have nothing to apologize for. Clarke apologized, but only after leaving office.
Part of the now infamous, recently released August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US” reads thus: “FBI information…indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country [America] consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.”
This memo, taken together with all the other information we now know that was available at the time, should lead any clear-headed observer to render the government derelict. During the summer of 2001, an FBI agent in Arizona wrote a memo about a number of young, Middle Eastern men who were attending flight schools, possibly for terrorist purposes. And ten days after the August 6 briefing, the FBI arrested Zaccarias Moussaoui on immigration charges after he raised concerns by attending a flight school in Minnesota. Also, officials have said that so-called “chatter” - various intelligence intercepts of suspected terrorist communications - had increased that summer.
Richard Ben-Veniste, a member of the 9/11 commission, ridicules Condoleezza Rice’s sworn assertion that neither she, Bush, or their cohorts had any idea that al Qaeda could use planes as missiles. Ben-Veniste says al Qaeda had a “history of using planes as weapons,” and that he would “be surprised if Dr. Rice didn't know” about a no-fly zone in place over Genoa, Italy, for the spring 2001 G8 meeting, spurred by fears that terrorists would crash planes “into the buildings where the leaders were meeting.” In fact, he says, “there was a specific 1999 National Intelligence Council report that proposed the possibility of jihadists, or al Qaeda suicide squad members, crashing explosives-laden planes into the Pentagon, the CIA and the White House.".
Ah, but Ms. Rice assures us that nothing could have been done because the intelligence did not indicate exactly “where,” “when,” what time and by what “means” an attack would be attempted. On Sunday, Bush seconded this notion by saying the August 6 briefing was not “actionable intelligence.” Meaning what? That he would only have “acted” if he had been handed an itinerary and a map? Had he known exactly when and what objects they planned on attacking, the President would now be complaining that he had been given the wrong airline or flight number.
This would all be laughable if it were not so frightening and if it didn’t involve the death of 3,000 innocents and the infliction of a permanent scar on the flesh of the American body politic. What more evidence does one require to determine that the Bush people are not to be trusted?
Iraq, perhaps, where the situation is becoming increasingly precarious? Indeed all of the ongoing carnage in Fallujah and elsewhere is overshadowing the alarming news coming out of the 9/11 commission. Sunday morning on Meet the Press, civilian administrator Paul Bremer and Lt. General Ricardo Sanchez looked like they had just seen an apparition. Bremer was terse; he appeared nervous, uncertain, a bit dazed. This may prove that he does have a pulse, but his answers (that everything is just fine) demonstrate that he’s delusional; “We liberated a country of 25 million. Only a couple thousand are against us.” Even if much of the Left exaggerates how bad things are, it certainly doesn’t do anyone any good to grossly exaggerate how smoothly things are running.
Many questions remain unanswered. Is the Bush team really committed to seeing this through to the end? Do the American people have the resolve to see it through? It will require several years, more money, more troops, more deaths. And, assuming we do, is it even possible to achieve the ostensible objective: a unified, democratic and secular Iraq?
Click here for the previous column.
---------------------------------------
Mark Grueter is a writer living in New York City and the Managing Editor of Canon Magazine. He can be reached at [email protected].
©
2004 Me Three