Should Dean expose 9/11 during the general election?

[DeanIsAPitbull]

During the general election, should Governor Dean--if he is to be the Democratic nominee for president--actively work to expose the 9/11 coverup and Bush's prior knowledge of the attacks? Should Dean bring documents (ie affidavits etc) to the debate and actually hold them up to the camera and calmly speak about 9/11 and the contradictions present in the Bush Administration? What if Dean's numbers are initially lagging vs Bush in the GE, could Dean use something like this as an "ace up his sleeve"?

[Sir_Shrek]

1. Yes...n/t

...

[cthrumatrix]

15. Does Rove write questions and submit them to DU for an answer?

It sure seems that way with all the polls and other.

[DeanIsAPitbull]

21. Excuse me?

[cthrumatrix]

39. some of these questions, polls etc....might as well be the GOP taking

polls within DU...I've wondered at times

[cthrumatrix]

20. How about just expose shrub for the miserable leader and crappy

record on the economy ....there are enough people out of work who would like to see him out of work as well.

[montanacowboy]

2. He should pledge

to open public hearings on 9/11 as one of the first things he will do as President - supoena all the Buishitas, bring the cockroaches out into the daylight - and have it on national TV -
that is what he HAS to do

[ramapo]

18. Probably the most he can do

He can't hammer away at this because he'll get the crap beaten out of him. Nothing wrong with pledging a new era of transparancy

[bryant69]

3. It's a tricky one

It could go both ways. It's easy enough for someone in the Bush camp, if not the President himself, to say, "Look at Dean. Has he no shame? He's willing to use the deaths of 3,000 to trash the president. What would he have done differently? what did Clinton do to protect us from terrorism?"

Now I know there are answers to all those questions. But will people listen to them?

On the other hand, it is frusterating that the Republicans are basically going to run "Vote for Bush if you don't want Terrorists killing your kids" campaign. Particularly since the Bush administration's record on Terrorism is not that great.

Bryant
check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[DeanIsAPitbull]

11. I agree, it is tough.

How would people react? Alot of it depends on how Dean would deliver the information to the American people vis a vis the debates. And what type of information he had. I think just bringing up the fact that the Bush Admin received a memo in August re: a possible attack would be a good start.

[NewJeffCT]

25. Then, the nominee just brings up

Then, the eventual Dem nominee just brings up that Bush basically ignored the Hart-Rudman report (yes, Gary Hart is a Democrat, but Warren Rudman is a staunch conservative Republican...)in favor of Star Wars, saying that Clinton was too obsessed with terrorism and Osama... then, said that Clinton had special forces on the ground hunting Osama in Afghanistan which were pulled back when Bush took over, after which the Bush Regime gave the Taliban an award for fighting drugs.... and, then the Bush Regime ignored repeated warnings about an *imminent threat* of a terror strike...

[KFC]

4. Depends what he has

If he can back it up with solid documentation, sure. Otherwise, no.

[DFLforever]

5. No, he's already done as much as he can do

and done it quite masterfully. He's let the media see that there's a cat hidden in the bag...

[xultar]

6. Hell Yeah! That would be AWESOME! n/t

[Indiana_Dem]

7. No. He should pledge to do it if elected. n/t

[forgethell]

8. If he's got them he should use them.

If he's making accusations without considerable documentary proof, he's going to look like a fool, and lead us all into disaster.

and then, of course, if he has them, how did he get them. We're using that pretty well against the Repukes about the leaked judiciary memo. Republicans can learn.

[LiberalVoice]

9. The truth shall set you free...

or in this case win the presidency.:grouphug:

[GreenPartyVoter]

10. Wish Michael Moore's film

would do it for him (or whoever takes the nod).

[AntiCoup2K4]

22. If the corporations are deliberately blocking the release of Moore's film.

...then he should circumvent their stall tactics and put it out on the net. Circulate a few bootlegged DVD's. One way or another, that film MUST be seen before election day.

[GreenPartyVoter]

33. Yep

If he really wants the message heard he should do it in late August.

[Westegg]

38. Who's blocking Moore's film?

I find this hard to believe. Please give details.

12. All the candidates should do this.

the more the merrier.

[proud patriot]

13. pledge to work with the victims families to find out what happened

and use it as an opportunity to , be stronger on National
Security . The speculation of wrong doing/Incompetence
on the part of bush and his cabinet should of prompted bush
to get to the bottom of it too , but he didn't he continues
to obstruct every step of the way .

bush's stonewalling raises more eyebrows than the accusations
themselves .

[DoveTurnedHawk]

14. Without Concrete Evidence, He'll Look Like a Fool If He Does

The best he can do without that concrete evidence is hammer on the cover-up and stonewalling...which I do think is a good idea. I think whoever the Dem nominee is -- hopefully Clark -- should hammer on that.

DTH

[Scott Lee]

16. This issue goes beyond an election.

If ANY person of power and persuasion has solid evidence that Bush Knew, it would be a national duty to expose it to the American people.

For those who may not know, if Bush had prior knowledge regarding 9/11, that act alone can be enterpreted as making war on the people of the United States...which is one of the constitutional definitions of treason. Treason is a very very serious matter, and transcends election politics.

[AntiCoup2K4]

17. If he does, then he needs to hire a lot of security & avoid small planes

Someone with the public spotlight needs to expose those bastards, but they will go after anyone who does so big time - and I'm not talking just politically. :scared:

[wuushew]

19. No, Americans just don't want to hear about scandals

how many have we had over the last three years? If media truly claims to be driven by profits and ratings, one has to except that uncovering incompetence and malfeance in the government is not a winner. He can do whatever the hell he wants once in office however.

[DeanIsAPitbull]

26. That post made no sense

scandal = profit and ratings


You contradict yourself in your own post.

[MindPilot]

23. I think he should bring it in slowly

just like he's doing. If he comes out with "Bush Knew" all at once it will be too much for everyone to absorb and will be too easy to discredit. Dean's already made the mention, at least one reporter has already confronted * with the question. The seed is planted--let it grow. Dean I'm sure will keep bringing it up.

And on your other point, I don't think there will be any debates. ANY of the Dem canidates could mop the floor with * and Rove knows it.

I really want Dean to call * on his statement about seeing the first plane hit, and ask why the President spent 30 minutes reading to school kids when he was--by his own admission--"thinking about what it ment for the country to be under attack".

[DeanIsAPitbull]

29. I think they've agreed to debates already actually

Dean could really pound Bush if they didn't have debates.


Dean: "What is he trying to hide?"

[killbotfactory]

24. He just needs to ask the question...

"Why have so few resources been put into investigating one of the worst tragedies in American history, and why hasn't Bush given his full cooperation to the investigation?"

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. YES

that goes for the Candidate, whoever it is, Dean or the left handed
widget

[Blue_Chill]

28. Is there concrete evidence or is this just a tin hat pipe dream?

What evidence could he bring that would prove this theory, as opposed to making him look like a complete nut. This is a powerful accusation to make and the burden off proof would be on Dean.

BTW - if you think Bush being against a investigation will make people assume he is guiltyand cheer for Dean, you are WAY out of touch.

[DeanIsAPitbull]

31. Dean could bring up some things

1) August '01 memo claiming al-qaeda was on the verge of a major attack. Why didn't bush move to act? Washington Post has actually confirmed this. Dean could just cite Bob Woodward.

2)Why, after being informed of the attack, did Bush continue to sit with children and read to them for 30 minutes?

3)Why, when every airplane in the country was grounded as a result of the attacks, did Bush fly bin laden's family out of the country on private jets?

[Demobrat]

No. He can bring up questions, like he did,

but since he won't have any proof the truth will have to wait until he's president and can order real investigations.

[Julien Sorel]

30. He has a difficult decision.

I'm sure once he brings these documents forth, Bush will resign in shame, and turn himself over to the Hague, where he will immediately be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

The only problem Dean will have is deciding if he'd rather crush Bush in an election, and then expose him, or do it now, and then crush whatever crash test dummy the Republicans get to stand in Bush's place. It must be nice holding all the cards, like Dean does.

I favor exposing Bush now, because the resulting scandal will certainly taint the Republicans so badly that they will lose the House and the Senate. It seems like strategically the best move.

[knight_of_the_star]

32. WHOEVER the nominee is should use that!

If they don't they would be screwing up royally!

[TNOE]

34. A RESOUNDING YES

Especially since the White House has BASICALLY admitted it:

http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/Read.asp?fn=df12162003.html

hite House Admits Pre-9/11 Warnings; Bush Still Denies It

At his press conference yesterday, President Bush was asked about charges
that he had received warnings prior to the September 11th attacks that a
terrorist incident was imminent. He answered that even asking such a
question was "an absurd insinuation."1 It was the same sentiment expressed
by Bush's National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, who said in May of
2002 that " that they would try to use an airplane as a
missile, a hijacked airplane."2
The problem for the president and the administration is that the White
House has previously admitted that the president had personally received
such specific warnings. As ABC News reported in May of 2002, "White House
officials acknowledge that U.S. intelligence officials informed President
Bush weeks before the September 11th attacks that Osama bin Laden's
terrorist network might try to hijack American planes."3 As Condoleezza
Rice said at a hastily called press conference to spin these revelations,
the President specifically received an "analytic report" on August 6th,
2001 at his Crawford mansion that "talked about Osama bin Laden's methods
of operation" and "mentioned hijacking."4 According to Reuters, that
report was congruent with "intelligence since 1998 that said followers of
bin Laden were planning to strike U.S. targets, hijack U.S. planes."5.
While the administration claims that the president's pre-9/11 warning was
actually "not a warning," the threat was specific enough for Attorney
General John Ashcroft to stop flying commercial airlines. While no warning
was issued for the general public after Bush's personal intelligence
warning, Ashcroft was flying exclusively by leased jet instead of
commercial airlines because of an official "threat assessment by the
FBI."6

Sources:

1. President Bush Holds Press Conference, 12/15/2003.
2. "Report Warned Of Suicide Hijackings", CBS News, 05/17/2002.
3. "Bush Was Warned of Hijackings Before 9/11; Lawmakers Want Public
Inquiry", ABC News, 05/16/2002.
4. National Security Advisor Holds Press Briefing, 05/16/2002.
5. Reuters, 7/24/03.
6. "Ashcroft Flying High", CBS News, 07/26/2001.

[crissy71]

35. Tricky: I think Clark has been

One of the first out of the box to challenge Little Boots on the failure of security prior to 911, and I'm not sure it's helping him at this point in the game. A lot of people I suspect aren't ready to hear that our government is a bunch of homicidal lunatics (oil shortage or no) b/c that's where the argument leads. Maybe that line of attack will gain some traction the more people find out about it, though don't count on the media to be any help.

I like what Clark is doing - start slow and build an argument that can be digested. Lets just hope that the argument can win and then progress from there

[damnraddem]

36. ANY Dem candidate should bring out data about 9/11.

It's important to take the issue away from the bungler who allowed the attack to happen.

[amazona]

37. yes as should the other candidates

The biggest intelligence failure of all time, Whistleass's inability to protect the citizens on the ground in this nation...this must be investigated and questioned by ANYONE who has the power to get media attention on this issue.

It should not be used as an "ace up the sleeve." It is something that should be done because it is right and because we are never going to have a proper investigation if our leaders don't speak out.

The more Dean and Clark hammer on this the better. The more any of the candidates hammer on it the better, it just so happens I've heard more from Dean and Clark about this topic than the others.