Do you think the Dems and repugs on commision ..

[NicRic]

agreed not to blame eachothers Presidents ,once again letting bush off the hook .Did they even mention that bush failed to even meet with anyone to discuss the possibility of an attack .I was listening to CSPAN and a repug caller blamed Al Gore for not doing his job while V.P. It was great when the reporter on the show had a copy of the report Al gore made on security and the lack of ! I have this feeling that a silient agreement was made ,and the Dems on the panel ,gave bush,once again a pass ! How stupid can they be ,bush is in office and we want him out of office badly ,President Clinton is no longer in office and the ignorant repugs are going to blame him anyway. So once again it appears our Dem leaders where out smarted , another missed oppertunity , IDIOTS !!!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. Quit blaming our leadership

How in the hell can you call them idiots when you don't even have any fucking clue what in the hell is going on. You don't have any proof they made an agreement. You don't even have suspicious evidence with which to make the claim. All you have is a speculative opinion. So lay off, alright?

[Q]

3. Actually there WAS an agreement...

...Dems agreed not to release their minority report and any information that proves BUSH* manipulated Iraq intel until AFTER November. They've agreed not to pursue many things related to the Bush* administration...like the Saudi/bin Laden/ Bush family relationship and the 'missing' 28 pages on the Saudi terrorism connection in the original 9-11 report.

[shockingelk]

4. NicRik is speaking of the 9/11 commission report

The SSCI report is the two part one where a deal was struck to examine the administration's use of the intelligence in exchange for having the potentially most damaging findings wait until after BushCo is defeated in Nov.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. Proof?

And what do we get in return?

[NicRic]

6. Gee I thought this was a discussion forum...

you know where you talk about your thoughts and ideas on certain issuses .You are correct I have no "evidence" .However I do have the actions of our so called Dem leadership ,which has time and time again gone easy on this pResident .Starting from the stolen election on. Perhaps you have had your ears and eyes closed for the last few years,I have not ,and you dont have any fucking clue as far as what I do or dont know ,talk about ASSumptions, it appears its only OK when you make them !

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. My point is...

how in the hell can you call them idiots based on an ASSumption of your own? You're ridiculing them for something you don't even know whether or not they've done. That's not discussion - that's ignorance.

On edit: It's not an assumption to think you don't have any proof. Unless you present it to us, we have no choice but to believe you don't have any. So be out with it, or I'll continue to believe you don't have any.

[sadiesworld]

9. Whoa...

ease up on the caffeine dude. :)

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

10. I'm not the one

calling very intelligent people who've done more for us than most people here can comprehend "idiots" based on nothing more than baseless speculation. I think she needs the caffeine.

[skypilot]

2. That is certainly

...the impression I get. Especially after I heard that the commission had determined that there were four missteps on the part of Clinton and SIX on the part of Bush. I truly believe that there was an agreement to just drop the subject of who had screwed up the most. Clinton gets a raw deal in this though, because in their attempt to not compare, contrast or assign more blame to one side of the other, things like the Hart/Rudman report aren't being mentioned much and suddenly there's no more talk about how Clinton was "obsessed" with terrorism. A clear example of Bush's incompetence dragging others down.

[dennis4868]

11. You are 100% right....

I was going to say the same thing myself.....there was all this talk in the intelligence community before the 911 report came out that Clinton was totally obsessed with fighting terrorism and killing OBL....Clarke said that they had many meetngs each week on this issue and it took up most of Clinton's time. And now the PARTISAN 911 commission says that both Clinton and Bush did not take the threat seriously......that is complete and utter bullshit!

[skypilot]

12. It's a fucking travesty.

Commissioner Ben-Veniste was on the BBC News last night saying that the commission "didn't pull any punches". All I could think of was Bush testifying with Cheney at his side and neither of them under oath. Yeah, that commission really put its foot down. And now Clinton has to get smeared with the same shit as Bush so that people don't notice how especially bad Bush smells. Fuck that.

[dennis4868]

13. Ben-Veniste....

was my only hope that the truth would come out but it seems as though he sold his soul to the devil like all the others :-(

[shockingelk]

5. I've read patches from a lot of it

And it is some truly bizarre prose. You can tell where someone said "OK, the only way we're going to put that in there is if we can insert this word here and also add this paragraph.

This is the most obvious instance I've seen: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=2047008&mesg_id=2047008

He4re's another example, p. 335 - added "possibly":

At the September 17 <2001> NSC meeting, there was some further discussion of "phase two" of the war on terrorism. President Bush ordered the Defense Department to be ready to deal with Iraq if Baghdad acted against U.S. interests, with plans to include possibly occupying Iraqi oil fields.

The sentence already indicates it was a contingency plan he ordered - he either ordered a plan to occupy oil fields or he didn't. "some" and "possibly" only serve to lessen the impact of the revelation that a week after 9/11 Bush ordered the Pentagon to draw up plans to sieze Iraq's oil fields.