The best part of the 9/11 Commission findings;

They come out NOW, three years later, with the footage of the 9/11 terrorist being wanded at the airport.

Subtext:
There is information that WE have had for a long time, that YOU have not seen before. We know stuff you don't know.

If I were a Bush basher I'd think that was a good reason to keep my piehole zipped.

Ace, I wonder if there's perhaps a whole series of similar points to be made about the Times. As far as I know, the Times's having failed to rouse the nation and prepare us to protect ourselves from the emerging terrorist threat is unexplored territory. And it's not like you would be the one holding the Times to a higher standard. The Times and, ohmigod, the Times's hordes of coffeeshop intellectual readers put the Times on a pedestal. This is "the newspaper of record," the one that claims to deliver "all the news that's fit to print." The Times is at or near the pinnacle of bien-pensant intellectualism in America. As long as you kept making that point as you breakdanced all over the Times, no one could at all claim that you were being unjust by holding the Times directly responsible for the nation's being unprepared for the threat of al-Qaeda.

More, it's not just that our premier journalistic organization didn't prepare the nation to fight al-Qaeda; the Times didn't even engage itself to prepare its own, eponymous city's government and people for the sort of civil emergency the attack represents. Didn't the Times fail the people of New York City? After the first (1993) attack on the WTC, didn't the Times fail over the following eight years to provide wise counsel or even just a focused, discerning selection of news that would have led an intelligent man like Rudy Giuliani to realize the great steps New York City needed to take in order to be prepared for the day that terrorists might return to finish what their predecessors had started?

Free Spyware Remover