Tuesday, September 26, 2006
"Bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism....”
You should already know what it is.
The debate rages but here's a few links worth peeping in case you need help figuring out the real:
A 2001 memo to Rice contradicts her statements about Clinton & Pakistan.
Condi Rice and George Bush did NOTHING after the CIA warned them that Bin Laden was determined to strike in the US. (related: read more at ThinkProgress)
"George Bush knew Al Qaeda was a problem for just as long as Bill Clinton did. So why didn't Bush take Osama on or before September 11?"
Maybe because Bush's mindset was the same then as when he recently told Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes that capturing Bin Laden was ‘Not A Top Priority Use of American Resources.’
And possibly because the Bush administration’s pre-9/11 focus was Missile Defense, Not Terrorism.
So for whatever reason, Bush didn't try to stop Bin Laden in 2001 and now he's made terrorism worse.
Bonus reading:
"The Rise of Jihadistan"
Five years after the Afghan invasion, the Taliban are fighting back hard, carving out a sanctuary where they--and Al Qaeda's leaders--can operate freely. (click here to read more from Newsweek)
Also peeped right on the Newsweek site yesterday: the reason why here in the US we don't know what the f-ck is really going in the war or anything else in the world. I was shocked when I saw that but luckily I wasn't the only one who noticed it.
