ABCís Path to 9/11

A Road to Understanding?

Written by JB Williams



Bill Clinton, Senate Democrats and several Clinton administration officials anxious to cover their own tails in the run-up to the mid-term elections, foolishly pretending to be the gatekeepers of truth, were successful in pressuring ABC to edit dramatic embellishments from its miniseries about the events of 9/11. These edits were not so much falsehoods as they were dramatic exaggerations. But did those edits substantially change the story? Did the important facts still come through and do we as Americans have a better understanding of the events leading up to 9/11 as a result of ABCís docudrama?


Certain dramatic scenes which attempted to depict the general tone of the Clinton administrationís misinterpretations concerning the depth and breadth of international terror threats growing throughout the 90ís, were edited out. After an all-out political offensive against ABC in the days before the special would air, those scenes were deleted from the special. But the facts remained because as is usually the case with facts, they are inescapable. One can ignore or make excuses for them, which Democrats are working feverishly to accomplish now. But the facts will still stand as a reminder to anyone seeking truth.


The events of 9/11 were an attack against Bush


This has been the mantra of many liberals for years now. Anyone who had already researched the growing threat of international terrorism, which began under Carter in 1979 in Tehran, already knew that this statement was an outright lie. Now those who had not researched the subject know it too, after watching Part I of the ABC special.


Clinton did all he could and had terrorism contained


This too has been a regurgitated lie of leftists in America. After watching The Path to 9/11, itís clear that although Richard Clarke, George Tenet, John OíNeil and others tried to do all they could to prevent a 9/11 - the Clinton administration was paralyzed, indecisive and incompetent. Numerous opportunities to capture or kill Bin Laden were repeatedly stopped by a refusal to issue top level authorization for such missions. George Tenet was clearly the intended fall-guy. He was repeatedly placed in a position of having to either issue authorization on his own, thereby setting himself up as the one responsible for any failures or collateral damage, or not issuing that authorization, which would later be claimed a failure on his part to act. The Clinton administration was more concerned with plausible political deniability than getting Bin Laden. Thus, 9/11 would not be stopped.


Terrorism is a criminal justice matter


This was the overriding view of the Clinton administration that kept intelligence agencies from sharing information, allowed Bin Laden and other terror networks around the globe to gather strength and reach and kept the New York Al Qaeda cell in business until they flew planes into American targets and generally made it possible for 9/11 to happen. This remains the view of Democrats and liberals across this country today and this is the basic reason for 9/11 as well as the reason few Americans are prepared to entrust national security to Democrats today. Until Democrats grasp the notion that we are in deed at war with international terror operations all over the world, not in a criminal pursuit of one man in one country, they will not be entrusted with national security. They canít beÖ


Bush failed to stop 9/11


This statement is true. The Bush administration did fail to stop 9/11. Thereís no need to make excuses for how or why they failed to stop 9/11. They failed. However, they have not failed since and that is a stark difference between the Bush administration and the Clinton administration. The Clinton administration had eight years to do something. Bush had seven months, not even enough time to have his cabinet in place. The WTC attack of 1993, the attack in Saudi Arabia in 1995, Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, the USS Cole in 2000, all unanswered terror attacks on the US during the Clinton years. Thereís no need to make excuses for the Clinton administration either, they failed, repeatedly.


Bush intelligence failures caused 9/11


On 9/11/01, George Tenet was head of the CIA - Louis Freeh was FBI Director until June 25th when Thomas Pickard became temporary acting director until Bush appointee Mueller was installed one week before 9/11 on September 4th - Richard Clarke was head of counter-terrorism. All but Mueller installed one week before 9/11 were Clinton administration officials, not Bush appointees. If you subscribe to the theory that our intelligence agencies failed to prevent 9/11, then you must conclude that this was a Clinton administration failure as these agencies were under the direction and operation of Clinton administration officials on that day and every day leading up to that day. However, as depicted in the ABC special, it appears that these agencies had good intel and had been desperately trying to convince the Clinton administration that we were in fact at war with international terror networks for years, unsuccessfully. Clinton, Berger and Albright repeatedly ignored the warnings of their intelligence community and repeatedly failed to react to countless attacks. To lay this at the feet of Clinton appointed intelligence officials is nothing short of cowardice. These people tried to do their jobs. The Clinton administration failed to do theirs. This is not only clear in the ABC special, but in the 9/11 Commission Report itself. Read it!


Nobody took the terror threat seriously


This is an understatementÖ The saddest news is - Democrats still donít take this threat seriously. They remain convinced today, that this is a criminal matter, that Afghanistan is the only place we should be fighting this international threat and that distinctions should be made between terrorists and those terror regimes that support, fund, train and harbor terrorists. They were wrong throughout the 90ís in this thinking. But whatís worse is they remain equally wrong even today. The same mistakes they made throughout the 90ís, they remain committed to even now. Their current criticisms of Bush are that Bush has acted too aggressively against terrorists and terror regimes around the world. That Bush is not compassionate towards the civil rights of terrorists. That Bush is a terrorist for using CIA interrogation processes, unkind terrorist detainee policies and mean-spirited military tribunals to prosecute terroristís intent upon killing innocent people at every opportunity. They remain just as wrong today as they were throughout the 90ís and they make no apologies to the American people, only to the terrorists that Bush mistreats in their eyes.


If you watched The Path to 9/11, with or without the original dramatic scenes, you can only draw one conclusion. Democrats still can not be entrusted with the war on terror or national security. There is no way to draw any other conclusion and this is why Americans have voted to remove liberals from power in every election since 1994 and will continue to remove liberals from office until some day when liberals come to realize that America comes first in America. American security, civil rights, peace, freedom and liberty come first, long before any terrorist rights.


Without strong national sovereignty and security, freedom, liberty, peace and prosperity can not exist. If and when Democrats ever come to realize this, Americans will once again trust them in positions of power. But until thenÖNO!