Ed, the now-famous pre-9/11 warning to which you refer came in a Presidential Daily Brief, dated August 6, 2001. Title: "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US". However, that item did not contain anything specific in terms of timing, location, or the nature of the threat. The only mention of aircraft hijacking was in reference to the use of that tactic in an attempt to gain release of the "blind sheikh" who plotted the 1993 WTC attack.

What people who point to that vague warning and ignore is that, in fact, a more specific warning had been received by the Clinton Administration almost 3 years earlier, following the attacks on our embassies in Africa. PDB dated December 4, 1998, contained an item entitled "Bin Ladin Preparing to Hijack US Aircraft and Other Attacks". I never heard anyone complain that Clinton & Co did nothing to beef up airport security or harden cockpits as a result of that warning. If he had started the ball rolling then, might we have avoided 9/11? Maybe . . . but it's certain that no matter what Bush did in the 5 weeks he had between a warning about AQ attacking the US and 9/11, there would not have been time to implement significant changes in airport or aircraft security.

Highly recommended reading, from former Senator Bob Kerrey, in today's Wall Street Journal: "The Left's Iraq Muddle". And remember, Kerrey was a member of the 9/11 Commission (who kept asking "What were we waiting for?"), and thus has a good bit more expertise in the area than your average politician. And he's also a Democrat.

But I still think he should've married Debra Winger.

Last edited by L. Brown; 05/22/07 01:41 PM.