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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Augustus Gloop who wrote (14205)	4/12/2004 3:25:51 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Agustus, you're right, of course. It is more important to look forward in order to increase our odds of stopping these failures in the future. The past can, however, teach us a way through to a better future. Clarke did say "no" when asked whether more intense Bush Administration anti-terrorist actions could have stopped 9/11. The facts that have emerged, however, do not reveal a clear yes or no answer. The fact is that the one failing that Rice said led to our failure to increase the chances of stopping 9/11 was the failure of our intelligence agencies to develop and to share information. That's exactly why Clarke said we needed to have the principals getting everyone together and demanding that all information be developed and shared. And that's exactly why Rice ran into herself when she said those meetings were not necessary. In a bureaucracy things often move only when people feel that their heads will roll if they don't. That means the boss has to be leaning on the employee bureaurcrats. Clarke knew that and he knew the importance of getting the very top tier bosses in charge. That's the basis upon which I base MY opinion.