Replies

Unlike Gephardt and Daschle, Graham has no further political ambitions. Plus note what he also says here:

. I have not seen the specific document from which he was briefed on August the 7th, but we heard a summary of it, and if that summary is correct, it had some important information, but not exceptional information in terms of what I'm certain that the White House already knew, about the threat of Osama bin Laden.

Which is exactly the point the White House is making. However, this won't prevent the Demmycrats with Presidential ambitions (Dashle, Gephardt, Hillary, etc.) from making it sound almost like Bush knew in advance that airplanes would be flown into the WTC Towers and the Pentagon. BTW, one other point. Even most of the hijackers themselves didn't know their planes would be flown into buildings. Only the hijackers doing the actual piloting knew this. The rest of them thought they were just along on a standard hijacking. This is also what the intelligence agencies thought when they got some evidence that a hijacking might be in the works. NONE of the intelligence agencies (nor did most of the hijackers themselves) had any inkling that the planes would be used as flying bombs.

Katt, the mantra now has changed (as of the talk shows last night) to "we only want to fix anything that went wrong in the intelligence agencies." Here is the problem: If the failure was that the FBI and CIA were not "sharing data," why was that? Because in the wake of Watergate we passed a whole bunch of "reforms" aimed at prohibiting the CIA from "domestic spying." If we turn around and allow the FBI to "share" data and information, it is fine with me, but I have a feeling many civil libertarians will scream bloody murder, because it in essence authorizes domestic spying by the CIA.

DemocRATS trying to close that can of worms?

You bet. The biggest worm of all probably began screaming like a stuck pig when the daylight began filtering down into that can. He even sent the she-worm out to "demand immediate answers".