I can't agree with you here, though I have my own bones to pick with the Bush administrations deficencies. Bush had not been in office long enough for his programs to take effect, Cheney was tapped to deal with terrorism if I remember right and they were working on their policies regarding it.
Having said that, I do agree that even if their policies had been in place, as they are now, they are woefully inadequate to this day and have the potential to be as dangerous to civil liberties as to terrorists.
You're quite correct. I found sources confirming that Cheney was the one tasked with examining the terrorism problem. What I was remembering was this:
"In July 1998 he {General Charles G. Boyd, formerly US Air Force} became executive director of the Hart-Rudman National Security Commission (->), "which already foresaw the growing terrorist threat to the United States well before the September 11, 2001 attacks."
http://www.bens.org/who_CharlesBoyd.html http://www.bens.org/who_board.html Larry K Smith, Chief Operating Officer is with BENS since 1992.
He was Counselor to Secretaries of Defense Les Aspin and William Perry in 1993 and 1994 and served as Chief-of-Staff
for Senator Gary Hart (->) from 1978 to 1982, who received an early warning (->) on an attack in September 2001 and informed Condoleeza Rice (->) on this info, who ignored it.
(-> early warnings) "
http://globalresearch.ca.myforums.net/viewtopic.php?t=30 I'm not sure how I would react to someone predicting a terrorist attack, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't ignore it. As a Minnesotan, I think that the FBI national offices treated Colleen Rowley very shabbily. As an American, I think that more than one head should have rolled in the national security area after 9/11.