[SpamCop-Social] Re: Should we be surprised?

[Sp at amvireslayer]

Heid1 wrote:
> Ewe wrote:
> 
>> Heidi wrote:
>>
>>> Spamvireslayer wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=609895
>>>> Bush team tried to suppress pre-9/11 report into al-Qa'ida
>>>> Federal officials were repeatedly warned in the months before the 11 
>>>> September 2001
>>>> terror attacks that Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida were planning 
>>>> aircraft hijackings
>>>> and suicide attacks, according to a new report that the Bush 
>>>> administration has been
>>>> suppressing.
>>>>
>>>> Critics say the new information undermines the government's claim 
>>>> that intelligence
>>>> about al-Qa'ida's ambitions was "historical" in nature.
>>>>
>>>> Kristin Bretweiser, whose husband was killed in the World Trade 
>>>> Centre, said
>>>> yesterday the newly released details undermined testimony from 
>>>> Condoleezza Rice, the
>>>> former national security adviser, who told the commission that 
>>>> information about
>>>> al-Qa'ida's threats seen by the administration was "historical in 
>>>> nature".
>>>>
>>>> She told The Independent: "There were 52 threats that were 
>>>> mentioned. These were
>>>> present threats - they were not historical. There were steps that 
>>>> could have been
>>>> taken. Marshals could have been put on planes that spring. 
>>>> Condoleezza Rice's
>>>> testimony is undermined." To the consternation of members of the 
>>>> commission who
>>>> published the original report last year, the administration has been 
>>>> blocking the
>>>> release of the latest information. An unclassified copy of this 
>>>> additional appendix
>>>> was passed to the National Archives two weeks ago
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>