We dunno cuz they haven't been declassified. According to Clarke, they were implemented after 9-11 (hard to imagine Rice, et al not setting the record straight if that isn't true) so it's reasonable to assume the recommendations were prudent steps that shoulda been taken.
At this point, Frum can't show those recommendations were held up by confirmation delays. According to Woodward, Bush said he didn't consider Al Qaeda terrorism an urgent matter. News stories have reported that Clarke and Tenet stressed the urgency in the days and months before 9-11, so how is it Democrats' fault that Bush discounted the warnings and failed to act? Did Bush not have the needed personnel in place in the summer of 2001?
Frum's sophistry is easily recognized as garbage by anyone who's following the story. How is it that you believe it's worth spreading?
Current Events » in reply to And what recommendations were those? Be specific.
What recommendations?
The whole thread (56 posts)
- Seven new NATO members
- It should have zero members.
- re: Seven new NATO members
- Your own post says it all.
- re: Your own post says it all.
- PS We do have a flame board.
- What's your hurry?
- Brass tacks
- Rusty Nails
- Donors pledge $4.4 bln to Afghanistan this year [Link]
- Use of Denial tactic No.1
- No deal, sparky
- re: No deal, sparky
- How about answering some of *my* questions?
- Arguing for argument's sake?
- Well, a simple "No, Davin, I'm not going to answer any questions that would have me back up my narrow, misleading and selectively quotes statistics" would suffice
- oh, and BTW
- Arguing for argument's sake?
- How about answering some of *my* questions?
- re: No deal, sparky
- No deal, sparky
- Rusty Nails
- Whatta maroon
- re: Your own post says it all.
- Your own post says it all.
