![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Political thought
Apr. 9th, 2004 01:02 pmOK. Since 9/11, the attacks on US soil by terrorists have been used for far-reaching policy changes. Some changes not at all connected to terrorism, such as requesting lists of library books being taken out by whomever. In other words, we have a very active and amorphous high-level policy justified by one event.
Before 9/11, the Bush administration didn't do very much against known terrorists plotting against the US while on US soil. The report mentioning a number of Al Qaeda cells active in the US, under investigation by the FBI, did not prompt the Administration to do anything more than let events unfold. In other words, we had a negligent and not very active high-level policy despite evidence that more action needed to be taken.
Any comments?
Before 9/11, the Bush administration didn't do very much against known terrorists plotting against the US while on US soil. The report mentioning a number of Al Qaeda cells active in the US, under investigation by the FBI, did not prompt the Administration to do anything more than let events unfold. In other words, we had a negligent and not very active high-level policy despite evidence that more action needed to be taken.
Any comments?
