Editorial from the NY Post of April 14,2004 titled
National Disgrace:
Here is just a link as i have seen i broke a rule:
National DisgraceQUOTE
In a 13-page report titled "Threats and Responses in 2001," the commission staff paints a picture of alarm bells going off throughout Washington in the months before 9/11 about an imminent "spectacular" terror attack by Osama bin Laden.
But the intelligence reports all talked about attacks occurring against targets overseas.
QUOTE
In sum: The briefing paper was written specifically for the president in direct response to an order from the president!
Front page of the morning paper and what a read.
1. Do you find this editorial to be accurate to any extent? (we already know the author seems bias but that doesn't mean he isn't telling some truth)
2. Does it appear that some members of the 9/11 Commission have a political agenda?
3. Do you trust the 9/11 Commission with being non-partisan in its assessment?
(fixed problems)