Who are the ones tied to the CIA who shorted airline ...

...stocks before 9-11? Is this really true? I read this excerpt from the book today and I nearly fainted. Can anyone other than John Dean corroborate this(a legitimate news source that's not hard right or hard left)? I don't want this part of Mr. Dean's book to be true. The book is rivetting, although there is a little bit of redundancy in reminding the reader about the secrecy of the Nixon administration.

While there is still a very slight chance of WMD being found in Iraq, and Saddam's ties to terrorism are sketchy at best, one thing that cannot be denied is that Joseph Wilson's wife, a former undercover CIA operative, had her cover blown by someone in the Bush administration, endangering her life and those she works with. The fact that heads did not roll over this one publicly indicates to me that Bush probably knew about it and maybe authorized it. And if that's the case, he should be held accountable for this crime alone. John Dean covered this topic well.

Like anything else, always consider the source and whether or not the info can be corroborated.

Excellent book with the exception of a few uneccesarily harsh opinions and cheapshots.

A Harsh but Necessary Polemic

If John Dean thinks we should all be alarmed by the Bush administration's ethics, then that's really saying something. He was exposed to the worst excesses of the Watergate scandal, and makes it very clear that he is worried about the current administration's secrecy and deception. By his own admission, Dean has written this book as a quick and hard-hitting polemic, with personal opinions based on his own experience of sleazy government conduct. While there are sufficient references, this book offers little new when it comes to evidence of the administration's horrendous misuse of information regarding 9/11, the Iraq war, and national security policy (which much of the media and the public still refuse to accept, although contrary evidence is damning and voluminous). However, we do get the advantage of Dean's learned perspective. The greatest advantage of this book is that Dean has cracked the wall of secrecy around the mysterious machinations of Dick Cheney, who is revealed to be a bitter manipulator with a smug contempt for anyone who questions his goals and actions. Dean aptly points out that Cheney's troublesome ethics should be more worrisome than those of Bush. Also, Dean mostly avoids partisanship in his writing, usually letting facts speak for themselves and pointing out ethical lapses of both the left and the right, in order to bring Bush's actions into bold relief. While Dean frequently gets harsh and vindictive, and personal opinions slow down parts of the book, that doesn't mean his targets don't deserve it. [~doomsdayer520~]

Mediocre, regardless of ideology...

1. If any of the revelations presented in this book about the workings of the government's executive branch shock/amaze/stun/astonish you, then you are truly naive and apparently have spent the previous decades snoozing peacefully with Rip Van Winkle in the caves.

2. Ditto for the author, who must have been using a barbituate drip tube for the same amount of time...Iran-Contra (mid-level employees launching an undeclared war against a foreign government in the basement of the White House), nation building efforts that were rarely subject to extensive debate (Somalia, Haita, Kosovo, etc.), the expansion of the national security state (again, without much serious attention or opposition). Where was John Dean during all of these events? More Sominex, anyone?

George Bush and Dick Cheney don't talk to many people, and run a secretive operation on many fronts...which exactly mirrors the role of Hillary, John Sununu (Bush I), and Don Regan...mmmmmmm...could this be the arrogance of power?

And will any other current candidate operate any differently?