The 9/11 Commission (which did not do a very good
job in terms of thoroughness) repeatedly wanted the
Administration (this one and future ones) to be more
pro-active, more robust in investigation.
When it is, and when it regularly consults with Congress
(as has been the case all along), it is now cited as being
too robust and aggressive. Well, make up your mind.
What is it we want?
The NY Times did not need to report this in such detail.
It chose to.
The same paper that gave us Judith Miller, who was hailed
as a hero, then pushed away as a lapdog for Bush, and
Jayson Blair, and others in recent years, is now giving
My feeling is that if we take terrorism seriously, and
Congress is consulted (as it was and has been), and
members of both parties are aware, then, it is something
we should keep track of.
In our high tech, 24/7, instant communication world,
there isn't much that is secret anyway anymore. Strangers
can get our personal info pretty easily. Check your junk
mail today, that's all because someone knows what you like,
where you shop, what you eat, how much you make, and
where you vacation, and they never had to ask you. They
buy your information.
Get rid of the leakers and prosecute them if they broke
the law. This isn't about Bush or Cheney, it's about our
national security, and the lives of soldiers are on the
line. If they don't like the Bush policy, the leakers should
quit, and then, free of their legal obligation to conceal
secret information, tell what they want and do it upfront.
Not via the NY Times and Bill Keller.