Op-Ed Column: Olbermann Schools Media on Bush's 9/11 Record

Turning to the ongoing argument over whether the present or prior administration was more culpable for 9/11, Keith Olbermann did something novel for TV news on Wednesday night: investigative journalism. And he did it well. In fact, Olbermann did something none of his peers in the mainstream media have managed to do in the more than two years since the 9/11 Commission released its report. He gathered precisely what we do know about the Bush administration's performance leading up to that cloudless day in September - much of which has lain dormant in the commission's report, treated by the mainstream media like a museum piece rather than a usable historical record - and compared these facts and the words and actions of White House officials to their myriad assertions they did everything they could to protect us from that attack.

The result is devastating. Here's a synopsis of the Bush administration's actions before 9/11:

• Ignored warnings and a detailed game plan from the outgoing Clinton administration entitled "Strategy for Eliminating the Threat from al Qaeda," which included "diplomatic, economic, military, public diplomacy and intelligence tools."

• Potentially passed on a chance to have Bin Laden handed over to them in February 2001.

• Downgraded counterterrorism from a cabinet-level job, wherein the only meetings counterterrorism advisor Richard Clarke could get were with deputy secretaries, which led to sweeping inaction and short-sightedness that delayed the first high-level meeting on al Qaeda until September 4, 2001.

• After it was confirmed Bin Laden was behind the bombing of the USS Cole, Bush "ordered no military strike, no escalation of existing Clinton measures" and "until September 11th, even when Mr. Bush was asked about the Cole, an attack carried out on water by men in a boat, he offered a consistent prescription for keeping America safe, one he reiterated upon taking office: 'To protect our own people, our allies and friends, we must develop and we must deploy effective missile defenses.'"

• Denied a request from the executive director of the Hart-Rudman Commission to brief Bush and Cheney on the terror threats they had uncovered.

• On February 26, 2001, former National Commissioner on Terrorism, Chairman Paul Bremer, said the Bush administration will "stagger along until there's a major incident and then suddenly say, 'Oh my God, shouldn't we be organized to deal with this?" Obviously, this statement did not compel the administration to change course.

• Failed to heed the warning in February 2001 that, as stated in the 9/11 Commission, "Bin Laden wanted the United States to attack [after the Cole bombing], and if it did not he would launch something bigger."

• In April 2001, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz declares that administration counterterrorism efforts should be focused on Iraq instead of al Qaeda.

• Sat on the now infamous presidential daily briefing of August 6, 2001, which reported "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York." According to the 9/11 Commission, "[Bush] did not recall discussing the Aug. 6th report with the Attorney General or whether Rice had done so....We have found no indication of any further discussion before 9/11 among the President and his top advisors of the possibility of a threat of an al Qaeda attack in the United States....Tenet does not recall any discussion with the President of the domestic threat during this period....Domestic agencies did not know what to do, and no one gave them direction. The borders were not hardened. Transportation systems were not fortified. Electronic surveillance was not targeted against a domestic threat. State and local law enforcement were not marshaled to augment the FBI's efforts. The public was not warned."

• After the events of 9/11, Rice, Cheney and Bush all claimed they couldn't possibly have anticipated terrorists flying planes into buildings. Yet this was on the intelligence community's radar as far back as 1994, with numerous incidents and findings to warrant such a concern.

• On September 10, 2001, Senator Diane Feinstein requested a meeting with Dick Cheney to "press the case for aggressive counterterrorism measures." She is told that Cheney will need six months to prepare for the meeting.

• Also on September 10th, "the NSA intercepted a communiqué from Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia, stating 'Tomorrow is zero hour.' That communiqué was only translated into English on September 12th."

Keep in mind that Olbermann's report did not take into account the Bush administration's woeful record on counterterrorism following 9/11, or even its actions since the 9/11 Commission released its report on July 22, 2004. Nearly a year and a half after that report, the 9/11 Commission issued a report card grading the administration's progress in the interim. It received five F's, 12 D's and two "incompletes." This administration and its Republican counterparts in Congress should not only be held to task for falsely presenting themselves as tough on "terror," but they should be pilloried for suggesting their opponents have a weaker track record, whether referring to former President Clinton or members of the Democratic Party presently in Congress or those currently seeking positions in the House or Senate in November.

It was not difficult for Olbermann to pull these facts together. With all due respect to his fine report, professional presentation and polish aside, a high school student with equal access to footage and editing capabilities could have pieced these facts together as well. So why is it that the New York Times or Washington Post, CNN or MSNBC (save Olbermann), or any of the big three network newscasts have failed to present us with one such simple report to dispel the obfuscations and lies and underscore the abject incompetence that is the undeniable fabric of this administration's 9/11 record? Why is it that former President Clinton's concrete assertions about his actions and those of this White House have been chalked up to little more than partisan squabbling during an election season?

Imagine if these leading national news outlets had presented such comprehensive yet succinct reports prior to the 2004 presidential election, when this White House, with the mainstream media cheering along the way, trumpeted its utterly bogus supremacy on protecting the American people from terrorism. Imagine if members of this administration and fellow partisans in Congress were presented with these facts every time they attempted to assert their alternative reality. Some in the mainstream media might, laughably, argue that Olbermann's report was biased. But when facts are claimed to be the subjective tools of journalists, then Orwellian logic rules the day. What is biased, what is subjective, and what is irresponsible is failing to present the American public with just that: facts. Ones uncluttered by partisan spin. To sift through the talking points and disinformation and, yes, lies, and arrive at something as close to the truth as what the record tells us. To avoid falling into the trap of, or willfully partaking in, this administration's version of reality, which has proven at nearly every turn to fall in direct opposition to the facts.

I can only hope that Mr. Olbermann (should he remain on the air) is able to inspire, or even shame, many of his peers into acting more like journalists rather than the carnival barkers and court stenographers they seem more than eager to emulate.

Olbermann begins his special report by saying, "In a sense, we are all still detainees in the wake of 9/11." An apt metaphor, indeed. To this day, we are still denied our basic right, as citizens of a democracy, to a press that acts as our informant, our equalizer. One that tells us exactly what this administration has done and actions it continues to take in our name. And not only after the fact, when crimes have already been committed or misleading anti-democratic legislation has already been passed. Yet, with cover from the mainstream media, this White House has refused to acknowledge its failures, hold its members accountable and is now attempting to pass the buck for its abominable counterterrorism record to the prior administration. All the while maintaining its despotic course to certify America as a rogue nation in the eyes of the world.

Finally, Olbermann's report clocked in at ten minutes. To put that in context, within the first ten minutes of NBC Nightly News on the same night, anchor Brian Williams presented a report on trans-fats. And though trans-fats are certainly unhealthy, isn't the steady diet of lies we are fed by this White House as it starves us daily of our democracy more newsworthy?