Replies

remember Coleen Rowley? She was the whistle-blower on the Mussoui(sp?) flight school memo. Do think it not strange that her account of who knew what and when was taken as gospel by the press, the 9/11 panel,et al, while Schafer's account of who knew what and when can hardly be mentioned without skepticism?

Nice insight. Unfortunately, such hypocrisy is both common and unsurprising.

You are absolutely right. But let us turn to that horrible interrogative pronoun that requires interpretation, WHY? When faced with two possible whistle-blower stories why would the MSM and the 9/11 panel choose one over the other. If the aim of the MSM and panel was to attack Bush in an election year (as I believe it to have been) then surely either story of "missed dots" could be used to blame Bush. In other words, why choose a story that implicates the FBI (Coleen's story)to blame Bush over a story that blames DoD lawyers. If you ask me the FBI blame game allows for incompetence without bringing the "WALL" into the mix, while Schafer's story implicating the DoD Lawyers also implicates the sharing of info climate. Thus the choice was obvious: hang the Muller's FBI, try to peg it to Bush, and keep all discussion away from intel sharing (or lack thereof).