Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (119351)	11/12/2003 5:45:51 PM
From: Noel de Leon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"The line that Clinton took bin Laden seriously but Bush et al brushed aside the threat, is going to be credible only to those predisposed to think well of Clinton and ill of Bush to begin with. The whole thing smells of a big CYA for the Clinton administration,...." Denying what happened doesn't make it go away, nor does it prove that who ever wrote the article was pro Clinton and anti Bush II. The questions are: 1) Did Clinton warn Bush II and his staff about bin Laden and US plans to neutralize him. 2) Did Bush II and his staff ignore these warnings only to be rudely awakened on September 11? The answer to both questions is yes. This is a recognition of historical fact. "... which, on September 11, 2001, became a prologue - and does not show well in that light." This is 20/20 hindsight. Good propaganda.