If those warnings "didn't rise to the top", just exactly were they working on? What was a worse threat.

It reminds me of Pearl Harbor. The Pentagon and White House knew there would be an attack by the Japanese that weekend. Key people stayed at their offices. They just didn't know where, suspected it might be Singapore or the Philippines. Half-heartedly warned some commanders. FDR wanted a war.

I realize that is not the common view. Read any book written since 1970 on the subject.

If Rice, et al., weren't looking at information that there would be an attack such as that on 9-11 what were they doing. The had information that Middle East nationals were taking lessons on how to fly large airplanes. Not take-off or land, but fly. And they knew an attack was coming.

Yet they ignored all of that. Bush (Cheney) wanted a war. They wanted Iraq. The only planes flying after 9-11 besides American military were one British plane bringing in some of their intelligence specialists (who were appalled at the pressure to put the blame on Iraq when it was obviously Saudi Arabia behind it) and airplanes evacuating Saudi Arabian.

If you remember the alerts we had. They'd waterboard some guy and he'd say there was an attack planned on Chicago. Massive security in Chicago. Waterboard him again and he'd say they were going to sneak knives onto airplanes. After that, so help me, at a Fourth of July picnic the knife a family was going to use to cut a watermelon was confiscated.

Obviously, if they were acting on info like that what were they looking at prior to 9-11? What had risen to the top?

I read a lot of books. The ones I've read and cited here before on that topic were very clear - the FBI and the CIA had given the NSA a lot of information, from reliable sources. Cheney wanted a reason to attack Iraq.

And Rice, on Face the Nation or one of those, said, "Who would have thought - - -?" And they got paid for that.