am i paranoid to worry that the 8/6/01 document thing is subterfuge?

[eek]

The fact that the demands to declassify this memo are so quickly getting a big deal,
*but* without much of the usual smeary spin, makes me think it is sleight of hand.

They had to have known that this would be a big deal; they're all too wily not to.

Knowing that people would scream for the now-famous 8/6/01 memo be declassified, it diverts our attention from whatever they're really getting away with.

Or... maybe they know that this document isn't really all that big a deal , so they're letting everyone get all yelly about it. Then if anything else comes up they can point to this and say 'Oh pooh. You remember what happened when we gave you that 8/6 memo! It was such a tempest in a teapot. Must we really go through all that again?"



So Friends, I ask you :
am i :tinfoilhat:
or :think:

[Carni]

1. No, I tend to think you're right

I think the title of the document is worse than it's contents.

I also think the release of the document will lead people to believe that the title was misleading and that much ado was made "for political purposes."

I think it's a bait and switch!

[skooooo]

2. Isn't this one of the documents Clarke said should be....

...declassified? If so, I wouldn't worry about it. Besides that, the more they declassify, the more they will have to declassify, imo.

[mike1963]

3. Yes, whatever remains legible after their redaction will be innocent.

:grr:

[RapidCreek]

9. The commission itself is a bait and switch

and that which it produces is nothing more than the script of that grift.

RC

[kentuck]

4. Why were they hiding it all this time ???

Obviously, they thought it would not reflect positively on them. How could it? I think they were afraid and embarrassed by what the memo said. It's pretty plain. They ignored it.

[H2O Man]

5. The title alone shows

that Dick Clarke was telling the truth. It is not going to be a huge overwhelming document beyond that. But appreciate it for what it is: another thread in the rope that will be used to drag this administration out of the white house. It is the hundreds of "little things" that added together that will cause the American electorate to toss bush out of office. And that is the stuff of real life.

[slinkerwink]

6. that's what I was worried about too

[Old and In the Way]

7. I think they are going to try and come clean and say,

"yeah, we knew something was going to happen, but we weren't going to let a small attack deter us from planning the front line fight against terror, namely SH and Iraq". and "We weren't going to follow that wuss Bill Clinton's lead, nosiree. We knew America would need a bloody nose to get angry enough to really fight the terrists."

Total BS, but I don't think they can let the perception that they did nothing stand. So I expct a new offensive offensive from this criminal administration.

Rohrbacker, apparently, is market testing the new explanation now....

[Beetwasher]

8. No Way

They are scared shitless of this document being declassified...

[Plaid Adder]

10. I think they're just trying to make them stonewall and look worse.

I doubt there is really a smoking gun in there. If there were, they wouldn't have ever turned it over. But I think probably the WH will try to avoid releasing it, because they are paranoid about releasing ANYTHING, and that will make them look like they're hiding something. If they do wise up and release it, the title alone is enough to piss a lot of people off, regardless of what's in the memo. So for us it's a win/win, really; but I would not expect the earth to tremble once it's made public.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[seabeyond]

11. the dem commissioners have seen it

they want it out. if it were to clear them, or make bush look good or was a diversion, they would know and that isnt how they are representing it

[Beetwasher]

12. Good Point, I have to think Ben Veniste Has Good Reason

To want it declassified...

[shance]

13. It may not be a smoking gun, but honest speculation is important as well a

as instincts, observation of patterns, and so-called "paranoia" are the rule these days and not the exception, or so Ive been told.

:)

[spanone]

14. This could be a very Rovian setup. Low or wrong expectations.

I'm sure they know that they are gonna have to give it up.

[Beetwasher]

15. MORE ON THIS: and why it's IS probably a big deal

Read the Yahoo article.

Kerrey gave us a big hint as to the nature of the memo:

"Another panel member, Bob Kerrey, summarized the secret memo as saying "that the FBI (news - web sites) indicates patterns of suspicious activity in the United States consistent with preparations for hijacking.""

--snip--

Condi's response leaves lot's of wiggle room which I'll explain:

"But Rice insisted the document was an overview of al-Qaeda's past activities and held no information that officials could have used to prevent the September 11 attacks."

Read it carefully. You MUST parse words and semantics with these liars. AQ's PAST ACTIVITIES could be something they did YESTERDAY. Get it? So, maybe the the document could theoretically be described thusly: "It was not a particular threat report. And there was historical information in there about various aspects of al-Qaeda's operations," she said."

IOW, the setting up of cells in this country already happened, thus it could be HISTORICAL INFORMATION. Even though those cells may still be around and currently planning activities too.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/us_attacks_memo

[PROGRESSIVE1]

17. Very Interesting!

[Gman]

16. The commission knows what the memo says

and that it probably detailed a threat from OBL. Therefore, Bush was made aware (much as Clinton was in Dec 2000), Bush and others did discuss it, and did nothing there by LIH(OP?).

Never ask a question you don't know the answer to in this situation. That's what Kerry et al are doing. Its to embarrass Bush.