it no longer is a major issue anymore than our reasons for being in Iraq. Both things happened. The issue now is what's the proper way to deal with them. For those who want a link...sorry this is MHO! And it doesnt take an Einstein or a rude moderator to figure that out!
 | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
General discussion
Bush Was Told of Al Qaeda Hijack Preparation...
White House officials were quick to say after the document's evening release that the Aug. 6, 2001, memo did not warn of the Sept. 11 attacks and that although it referred to the possibility of hijackings, it did not discuss the possible use of planes as weapons.
"There's nothing in here that we can show was tied to the 9/11 plot," a senior White House official told reporters.
But the President's page-and-a-half Daily Brief, entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside the U.S.," was likely to intensify the election-year debate in Washington over whether the Sept. 11 attacks could have been prevented in spite of Bush's insistence the U.S. government did everything it could to head them off with the information on hand."
These are NOT my words, but the words from Reuters!
[url=http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=HAGD1KWHGJMQOCRBAEKSFEY?type=topNews&storyID=4797978
Discussion is locked
8 Posts
- Collapse
- Collapse -
only person ive seen here thats rude is you gearup
maybe your gear oil is contaminated or your just rude
- Collapse -
Since you're acting like this is some kind of actionable item why don't you try telling us what you think he should have dome about it?
- Collapse -
I am glad they aren't your words Charlie, because they are utter crap - As president Bush said today, if he had an iota of knowledge that the terrorists were going tp pull the 9/11 attack off, he would have acted.
Only a cretin would believe otherwise.
- Collapse -
Hi, Steve.
I think you (and Bush, and Rice) are being simpleminded. I wish I could remember whose testimony or "talking head" discussion it was (might have been Clarke -- I just can't recall), but someone said that in the counterterrorism field you only very rarely intercept a precise description of a pending operation with all the whos, wheres, whens, and hows. If you're lucky, you begin to realize that an operaton is on, and then by piecing together information from disparate sources, you zero in on what's planned and then heighten the alert in that area in hopes of blocking the planned attack. Bush's "no actionable information" argument is simply ludicrous. The point is, the clues were there, but disinterest at the top set the tone for the troops blow, so what should have been done wasn't. It's of course impossible to know whether doing that would have blocked the attack, but there's increasing evidence (in the form of more an more bits of information that were known and never connected) to suggest that an effort MIGHT have been successful. What I do know is that when someone in business makes a very bad mistake, they're fired -- and the Bushies deserve firing.
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
- Collapse -
In a whole lots of words you clearly imply that something should have been done without suggesting what that something is. So tell us Dave, What do you think Bush have done? I dare you.
CNET Forums
Operating Systems
Software
Electronics & Gadgets
Hardware
Tablets & Mobile Devices
General Help
Roadshow Autos
Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic