"Exactly. I'm a bit surprised that more aren't recognizing this. It seem rather simplistic to view this as a historical/isolated event without ongoing risks to either people or methods. I would hope someone is considering those security questions. I am not entirely sold that this is what's going on but for the moment I'll give Rumsfeld and Bush the benefit of the doubt."
__________________________________________________________
I guess you want to give Bush the benefit of the doubt for lax border control, Sandy Berger getting a light sentence.
Don't u think the family members of 3000 people who died would like to know the real truth... not the 9/11 Whitewash. How does naming specific people in Gov who were responsible for passing this info along and did not do so interfere with national security? It does not.
I guess you want to give Bush the benefit of the doubt for lax border control, Sandy Berger getting a light sentence.What an abuse of power, I didn't know Bush heard this case and determined the sentence. You would think the media would be all over that.
How does naming specific people in Gov who were responsible for passing this info along and did not do so interfere with national security? It does not.
Do you watch many Congressional hearings? Surely you don't think they are about to politely ask for a specific answer and then dismiss the witness. There will be all kinds of background questions on the creation, methods, scope of operations, etc. I am not interested in the Jersey girl melodrama about 3,000 dead...there is a good chance there is a lot of information that could hurt our security at risk here.