SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: zax10/21/2015 11:24:05 AM
1 Recommendation

Recommended By
bentway

  Read Replies (2) of 1577080
 
Don’t let the GOP rewrite history: The Bush White House ignored 9/11 warnings
posted by Sky Palma October 20, 2015 Featured, History, Politics

deadstate.org



With another Bush in the current running to be president, the foreign policy that arose in the wake of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks was destined to be bandied about by bloggers, political memes, and campaign rhetoric.

Jeb Bush had no choice but to participate, and he recently got some help from Donald Trump after he decided to adopt the tactic of tying Jeb to the fact that the Nation’s worst terror attack in history was executed on his brother’s watch. Now, the question surrounding whether or not George W. Bush was partly responsible for 9/11 is raging full force again, and it’s a legitimate debate – provided that one side isn’t trying to rewrite history.

The August 6, 2001 brief that was titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” turned out to not be the smoking gun revelation pointing to White House slackage when it came to pre-9/11 intelligence. The White House’s defense of the declassified document, saying it “was primarily a history of Al Qaeda, not a warning of imminent attack” was fairly accurate. Those of us who do adequate reading and pride ourselves on being intellectually honest have abandoned that talking point.

But there are lesser-known briefings that screamed of what was to come, and a somewhat overlooked op-ed first published in the September 1o, 2012 edition of the New York Times is now getting passed around the Internet this week.

In the piece titled “ The Deafness Before the Storm,” writer and journalist Kurt Eichenwald relayed some details from other documents he was able to read, and he came to one conclusion:

…the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.

</snip> Read the rest here: deadstate.org
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext