Unpleasant Truth

RECEIVED Tue., June 21, 2016

Dear Editor,
    While I enjoyed Louis Black's editorial ["Page Two: All or Nothing Is No Way Forward," June 17] advocating support for the "lesser of two evils" candidate, and thought he eloquently made the case, I wanted to respond to the line "there is no way of knowing how Gore would have responded to 9/11." True, but was that attack simply inevitable? Unavoidable?
    The Clinton national security team told the incoming Bush team that al Qaeda would be agenda item No. 1 every morning, but that idea was dismissed. Our intelligence operatives knew something big was coming, definitely an attack on American soil, and that one likely mode was hijacking aircraft to crash into a building. They even knew about the guys in flight school who apparently had no interest in learning about landing the 747. They desperately tried to get the Bush White House to respond to their warnings and dire predictions. But again, the threat was not taken seriously. For many working in intelligence, the attack was not a surprise.
    A different national security team might have continued the Clinton-era vigilance regarding al Qaeda, and been receptive to the numerous attempts to raise the alarm. It's not unrealistic to suggest the possibility that had Gore become president, the 9/11 attack would have been prevented. Just like how that type of attack has been prevented for the last 15 years.
    Suddenly I realize I agree with Trump on this matter, (i.e., Bush administration failure). Argh, that makes the unpleasant truth even worse!
John Silberberg
One click gets you all the newsletters listed below

Breaking news, arts coverage, and daily events

Can't keep up with happenings around town? We can help.

Austin's queerest news and events

New recipes and food news delivered Mondays

Eric Goodman's Austin FC column, other soccer news

Information is power. Support the free press, so we can support Austin.   Support the Chronicle