Sunday, March 21, 2004
Clinton/Bush aides: Bush administration ignored warnings about Al Qaeda
Bush, media to respond: Kerry indecisive and weak on national security.
This may be the last one for a while folks. There's only so long you can browse in the catalogue of the truly synapse frying corruption of the people in power before self-immolation starts to look like a viable career move. Either that or turn your gaze to something else and drink long draughts of ignorance.
One thing at least is clear, if they stay in power and are not held accountable we've lost all claim to being free people and talk of civic virtue will become the hollowest of auto-delusional prattle. If we choose to be ruled by those who hold us in such obvious contempt then we deserve to be bled as dry as they will surely bleed us. They are predators whose vices are their only virtues.
When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy hypocrisy. (A. Lincoln)
Josh Marshall states it thus:
posted by Blicero : 3/21/2004 03:39:00 AM
Senior Clinton administration officials called to testify next week before the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks say they are prepared to detail how they repeatedly warned their Bush administration counterparts in late 2000 that Al Qaeda posed the worst security threat facing the nation - and how the new administration was slow to act.Scats puts it this way:
…
One official scheduled to testify, Richard A. Clarke, who was President Bill Clinton's counterterrorism coordinator, said in an interview that the warning about the Qaeda threat could not have been made more bluntly to the incoming Bush officials in intelligence briefings that he led.
…
In his testimony, Mr. Clarke is also expected to discuss what he believed to be the Bush administration's determination to punish Saddam Hussein for the Sept. 11 attacks even though there was no evidence to tie the Iraqi president to Al Qaeda.
This may be the last one for a while folks. There's only so long you can browse in the catalogue of the truly synapse frying corruption of the people in power before self-immolation starts to look like a viable career move. Either that or turn your gaze to something else and drink long draughts of ignorance.
One thing at least is clear, if they stay in power and are not held accountable we've lost all claim to being free people and talk of civic virtue will become the hollowest of auto-delusional prattle. If we choose to be ruled by those who hold us in such obvious contempt then we deserve to be bled as dry as they will surely bleed us. They are predators whose vices are their only virtues.
When it comes to this, I shall prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretense of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy hypocrisy. (A. Lincoln)
Josh Marshall states it thus:
White House Spokesman Sean McCormick told the New York Times: "The president and his team received briefings on the threat from al-Qaida prior to taking office, and fighting terrorism became a top priority when this administration came into office. We actively pursued the Clinton administration's policies on al-Qaida until we could get into place a more comprehensive policy."
But Clark says that's baloney. And he was the one who headed up Clinton's counter-terrorism policies and Bush's. So who are you going to believe?
Now do you understand why they're stonewalling the 9/11 commission?
posted by Blicero : 3/21/2004 03:39:00 AM
