Bush White House had ignored repeated warnings about the threat posed by Osama bin Laden.

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2817905

Michael Isikoff writes in Newsweek: "In the summer of 2003, Warren Bass, an investigator for the 9/11 Commission, was digging through highly classified National Security Council documents when he came across a trove of material that startled him. Buried in the files of former White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, the documents seemed to confirm charges that the Bush White House had ignored repeated warnings about the threat posed by Osama bin Laden. Clarke, it turned out, had bombarded national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice in the summer of 2001 with impassioned e-mails and memos warning of an Al Qaeda attack--and urging a more forceful U.S. government response. One e-mail jumped out: it pleaded with officials to imagine how they would feel after a tragedy where 'hundreds of Americans lay dead in several countries, including the U.S.,' adding that 'that future day could happen at any time.' The memo was written on Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2001 -- just one week before the attacks on New York's World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

[Flatulo]

1. I absolutely believe we should re-open the investigation into the

intelligence failures and inactions that led to the attacks.

Bush should not be able to leave office with this story buried in the obituary section. This administration's horrible incompetence should be exposed to the light of day.

[noise]

2. Diversionary media tactics

IMO, 9/11 is not about Clinton vs. Bush, Berger vs. Rice or Clarke vs. Rice. IMO, 9/11 is more about deep state politics with D vs. R conflict played up by the media to distract the public.