Sunday, July 27, 2003

9/11 report and "no smoking gun"

So how can we know there's "no smoking gun" when we can't look in every room in the house?

First, the 28 pages from the Saudis (with whom the Bush family has long had very tight relations) is redacted.

Second, we don't know what the White House knew and when they knew it.


Oh—and the biggest smoking gun of all—no AQ Iraq connection at all—YABL in the justification for the war.

As Carie Lenack of Families of September 11 told Jennifer Barret of Newsweek:

Carie Lemack: I was hoping we’d gain more information, but it doesn’t seem like we’re getting much more … I feel like, in an era where we’re holding CEOs accountable for losing $3 million, I’d hope we’d want to hold people accountable for losing 3,000 lives.
But the administration has still chosen to classify the part about who funded the terrorists. And the fact that President Bush has chosen to classify it for what he says is national security makes me question just whose security he is protecting: our nation’s or the Saudis’? (via Leah back)

There are three morals to the story in the 16 words fiasco:

First, the Bush administration has consistently distorted intelligence for political ends.

Second, Bush himself has problems taking responsibility when things don't work out well.

Third, Bush himself has problems with the truth.

The first two are all on full display in the handling of the 9/11 report. We'll have to see about the third.