Replies

I watched Laurie Mylroie(sp ?)
on C-Span this morning. I knew
she thinks Iraqi Intel was part
of both WTC attacks('93 & '01),
but only now do I learn who she
thinks al-Qaida is. A single
family(other than bin Laden) of
Sunni extremists from a Clan in
eastern Iran who helped Saddam
against the Iranians in their
war; 'course they move about &
live here & there. They obtained
false identities in Kuwait while
Saddam held it. So who we say
they are isn't who they really
are.

She said Bush won't make the case
of al-Qaida + Iraqi Intel = terror
because he knows the CIA & State
Dept. will undercut the case, much
less back him up.

Why won't they come clean? She
says admin. after admin. have such
intel failures to cover; both Dems
& Repubs, careerists, etc. Even
the Media who "dig out" the news,
such as the NYT & WP. Now none of
them want this to show up their
FAILURE.

She likes Bush's WOT, but she is
appalled that he can't tell us
unambiguously WHO the top players
are, & their Iraq connection.

What do you think?

I don't think that she is correct about the motivations for not disclosing this info, but the remainder is probably very accurate.

In this world-wide and very long-term chess game, the obvious moves are certainly often counter-productive. As good as she is, she is only one person and has only one point of view, and she does not have the resources and capabilities of "war-gaming" these things as well as corridors of people who study these things for a living working together.

That being said, I sympathize with her wishing that some things would be disclosed - but I don't know whether that would affect things already being done, and neither does she.
.

She likes Bush's WOT, but she is appalled that he can't tell us unambiguously WHO the top players are, & their Iraq connection.

I like her very much and I'm sorry I missed her on C-Span this morning. And to an extent I agree with her regarding the Bush Administration. I would like to think that there is a strategic reason for their choice. It may be because of the entrenched bureaucracies she refers to but I don't think men like the President, Vice President and Rumsfeld would be handcuffed by such things beyond refusing to have the debate in public. I can't blame them is they don't want to risk having their mission undermined by bureaucrats named "anonymous sources" and the media they feed.

I really can't even digest this right now; housefull of kids and siblings.

I do wish the administration would come clean about some aspects of the WOT but guess it comes down to an issue of trust.

I trust the administration and if they are keeping quiet I think it's for a good reason.