If it was incompetence, shouldn't someone have been fired? If you have a job to do, and you screw it up and people die, shouldn't you be fired?

One reason I don't believe our government's story about who was behind 9/11 is because their story always points to an intelligence failure and, in my opinion, incompetence. Yet, nobody has been fired because of it! Why hasn't anybody been fired? I think it's becuase it was not an intelligence 'failure.' If Tenent gets the axe, he'll talk. He knew what was in the President's Daily Briefing (PDB) that was kept out of the recently released report on 9/11. But, it seems, most Americans will buy the idea that it was an intelligence failure, and we should just let it go at that.

Now we have this: Iraq Flap Shakes Rice's Image: Controversy Stirs Questions of Reports Unread, Statements Contradicted. Here is an excerpt from the article:

Democrats, however, see a larger problem with Rice and her operation. "If the national security adviser didn't understand the repeated State Department and CIA warnings about the uranium allegation, that's a frightening level of incompetence," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (Calif.), who as the ranking Democrat on the Government Reform Committee has led the charge on the intelligence issue. "It's even more serious if she knew and ignored the intelligence warnings and has deliberately misled our nation. . . . In any case it's hard to see why the president or the public will have confidence in her office."

Another incompetent? Will she--or anyone in this (mis)administration--be fired over this? What would happen to most people if they caused their boss a major public embarrassment by failing to take care of the job the boss assigned to them? It definitely appears that in this (mis)administration that a mistake leading to the deaths of thousands doesn't even get you a pink slip. So why should this latest intelligence 'failure' be any different?

Another sign that The wheels are coming off the Bush spin machine. See what this Kos post points out: Bringing in Baker. You know things are going really bad for Bush when The Fixer gets called in.

Yesterday, Wolfie hit the talk shows, and he is still trying to work the Al Qaeda-Iraq connection: Wolfowitz: Iraq Key To War on Terrorism. DOD Official Cites Links to al Qaeda. Why is he allowed to go on saying this? Especially when you read this:

"Boy, it sure didn't sound murky before the war," Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) said on CBS's "Face the Nation" when asked about the Wolfowitz statement. "There were clear connections we were told between al Qaeda and Iraq. There was no murkiness, no nuance, no uncertainty about it at all."

They are digging themselves a hole lined with American taxpayer money. From what I can gather, the US had not been able to get any good intelligence out of Iraq after the inspectors left in 1998. For a good explanation of this go, here: Ex-CIA Agent on Cheney Iraq Speech: "Longest Statement of Disinformation" Ever Fed U.S. Public. From that time on, projections (i.e., estimates, guesses) were made, but these always had best-case and worst-case scenarios for the situations. The worst-case scenarios were always publicized by this administration with no mention of the best-case. The bottom line is that we did not know what Iraq had! But now the truth is coming out. . .

It looks like reality is setting in for some: Bush, Republicans losing support of retired veterans.

This is a great article! I read this after what I wrote today: Can't People See the Emperor's Pants on Fire?
- posted by Mom/Dad @ 8:03 AM