March 25, 2004
Important Note: Because we can't always determine your intentions, we need to ask a favor of you when you send us email. If you DO NOT WANT YOUR EMAIL PUBLISHED in the Mailbag or in the Contributors section, please write "CONFIDENTIAL" in the Subject line or at the top of your email. That way we'll know it's just a comment to BuzzFlash. Additionally, if you submit a mailbag item and DO NOT WANT YOUR NAME associated with your submission, sign your email "A BuzzFlash Reader." If you send email unsigned, we will post your name with your submission, or, if that's not available, your email name (not the full address, just what's on the left side of the email address). Please try and keep your word count under 400. If your letter includes hypertext links, please include the entire URL. We can only post a small percentage of what is sent to us. The opinions expressed in the Mailbag are not necessarily those of BuzzFlash. Thanks again for your email and your patience.
Subj: The 9/11 Hearings
what a disappointment these hearings are.does anybody know how to ask a direct question? ONE direct question requiring a direct answer? it does not seem like it. each board member starts by saying thank you for being here. thank you for your great service to the country. is this really necessary.this is followed by a a verbose speech with a question implied somewhere in the middle. Kerrey today used up all his allotted time with rhetoric and ended without asking Tenet a single question. I don't think Condi would have much to worry about from them. this just seems to be the American way of doing things.it all looks very impressive but getting to the bottom of things is not really on the agenda. am I alone in feeling this way?
Subj: Mantra of Convenience
So much for the “9/11 changes everything”mantra!
Subj: Is Condi "the" key?
Does it seem to you like the bush administration is trying to protect condi rice in particular? I mean besides bush.
They are trying to keep her from testifying in front of the commission. And McClellan was at the gaggle giving her credit for the report in which Dick Clarke supposedly had a big hand. What, after all, would happen if Condi were to testify under oath? I didn't know she was bound by the truth, anyway.
Subj: The real reason Condi won't talk
*Maybe* you'll publish *this* letter <grumble, grumble>.
The real reason Condi won't talk? Because she's afraid that she have been *shown* to have lied to Congress, a criminal offence.
When? In the weeks after 9/11, when she said, and when Dick Cheney said, and Rummy said, "we had no idea that anyone would use planes as weapons, and fly them into buildings".
The proof that they lied to Congress? Excerpt, from the Military District of Washington *official* US Army Website:
2 star General Kerrick backs what Clarke has said..............
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Bush's Lame Excuse
Bush says that if he'd had prior knowledge of the Al Qaeda plan for 9/11, he'd have acted. Only trouble is that Bush, as Richard Clarke has made appallingly clear, willfully ignored the intelligence that might have led to prior knowledge. "I didn't see anything or I'd have done something about it," he protests. But he made sure he wouldn't see anything by wearing an ideological blindfold the whole time and refusing to listen to anyone except his fellow ideologues.
Clarke's revelations (especially since they're so consistent with what we've heard in the past from Generals Zinni and Clark, and from Joseph Wilson, Ray McGovern, David Kay, and Paul O'Neill) ought to bring down the Bush administration. But what ought to be and what is have been exceptionally far apart recently. We should do what we can (e.g., support the MoveOn ad) to make what ought to be happen.
Subj: September 11th and Our National Scandal
The Palm Beach Post had an article stating that Condi Rice turned to Dick Clark after the Sept. 11 terrorist attack and said, "Please sit here in my chair and direct this operation." This is the National Security Advisor and she did not have a clue as to what to do. Our national security is a prime example of The Peter Principle. For those who may not be familiar with this book, it says that people are promoted beyond their capability for many reasons i.e. nepotism, friendship etc. That is the Bush Administration in a nutshell!
Sandy in Florida
Subj: Powell slips, 'crusade' re-enters US lexicon on war
A BuzzFlash Reader
Subj: Senator Daschle's Statement
Welcome aboard, Senator and welcome to your proper duties as minority leader. It's about time!
Derek in Phoenixville, PA
Subj: Iraq a Mistake ?? . . . a Bush Boo-boo . . . Bah Humbug!!
If I put Sugar in the Salt Shaker . . . that is a mistake. If I dial the wrong telephone number . . . that is a mistake. What the United States has allowed Bush to do is the largest armed robbery and murder committed by an administration . . . with the permission of many of our members of Congress . . . in the history of this Country.
The attack on Iraq was not a mistake . . . it was murder with malice and to admit this as just a mistake . . . oops . . . we are sorry to have murdered and pilfered a defenseless Country and this will get the US off the hook with the rest of the world?
I don't think so. There is no way to make up for what Bush has done in Iraq, but at least the American people can make those responsible pay for their crimes. That is the least we can do for the lives taken for nothing in Iraq.
Those who have died in Iraq . . . soldiers and innocent citizens . . . died for the hubris of George Bush and his "Gang."
The mistake was in allowing a Supreme Court (members who should also be impeached) to act as a Supreme Being in the election of 2000.
Thanks Buzz, I needed that . . . :)
Subj: The semi-Republican Daschle
Wow you guys are a lot more forgiving than I am! Senator Daschle is a mega-weenie extraordinare, but a consummate politician. The political winds I feel are blowing towards change,and he can feel it. One of the first things that I want to see changed in my party, the Democratic Party, is for all these Bush Regime appeasers to disappear and for real strong Democratic Party People to rise to the top like the cream they are.
First things first tho I guess. The Democratic leadership should stand up as one unit on the Steps of Congress, and hold a press conference, telling the world that George W Bush lied to them as well as us. Enough pussy-footing around the subject,he lied to us, the people of the United States, the people of the world,friends and allies.
Secondly I am ashamed of the Democratic wing of the House,a vast majority of Democratic Congressmen voted in favor of Increasing the fines for what the FCC is describing as Obscene language,or excrementory descriptions or whatever the Hell they are calling it,lets call a spade a spade shall we,this is a direct attack on my First Amendment Right to FREE SPEECH, nothing less. If the Democrats continue to let the frigging Neocons set the Freedoms of this Country, they might as well just shift over to them now and stop with all the so called Bi-Partisan crap!
To me it seems like one big party, and me and all my Democratic friends weren't invited.
The air is going rancid, the water is fouled, the fish are dying off or being eaten wholesale,and still the smokestacks belch out tons of pollutants everyday,as sewage and chemicals pour unabated into our waterways,and old trees tumble in the woods with no noise being made, except for the sounds off cash register bells,pealing in the mansions of the rich.
Maybe if I had more money, and politicians in my pocket, I wouldn't worry about the future of my family, the world or anything either but I doubt it sincerely.
I have never felt so frustrated angry and alone as I do under this Regime and I hope that when Kerry wins this election that it counts,this time.
Subj: Sing a Song of Patriots
You've become a National Treasure. Don't change a thing. Thanks.
Wednesday, March 24, 2004
Good Afternoon, Sir. No, still no scones. I hear Halliburton got the contract so it may be some time.
As I write this, the 9/11 Committee is playing on TV, the background music to this day.
While drifting through the many, many topics that your administration has so generously provided, it struck me that my subject for today's letter was right in front of me. No, not Richard Clarke specifically, but Richard Clarke generally. My subject is heroes, real American heroes.
I'm not talking about the cops and the firefighters and the soldiers and airmen who put their lives on the line for us every day. They are heroes for sure, no argument. And they are acknowledged and thanked and praised and someone will surely take every chance to wrap themselves in the flag, put up a big sign behind them, and stand in front of them for pictures at every opportunity. Their contributions will be memorialized repeatedly during this campaign.
No, I'm talking about the heroes who are reviled and attacked and libeled every day in this country. Even after withstanding the most vicious attacks on themselves, their integrity, and their honor, they remain upright and unbowed to say NO, THIS SHALL NOT STAND!
These people do not act in the heat of the moment riding an adrenaline surge. No. They make the decisions that will change their lives and the lives of everyone who's connected to them in the cold dark hours of the night with cold sweat on their brow and anxiety in their guts, knowing full well that they will not be welcomed with their news. They know that their lives will be trashed, every decision they're made will be second-guessed, every statement will be examined and dissected and still, they persevere.
Why? Because their love and respect and hope for this country and its people runs deep and outweighs their love for themselves, their reputations, their jobs, their political parties and their futures. I think that the operative word here is 'hope,' for they would not act as they did if they did not believe that the actions they contemplate would effect a beneficial change. And that's the thing that keeps me going -- these people still hope for the future of our country. And if they, with their special knowledge and their inside information can still hope for our future as a society, can I do any less?
I raise my cup of Earl Grey today to acknowledge and thank, to name only a few: Karen Kwiatkowski, General Sinseki, Joe Wilson, Paul O'Neill, Richard Clarke, and many many more, both known, unknown, and to come. Thank you all. You are my personal assurance that I am not totally nuts or paranoid.
So drink up your tea, Mr. President. The songs of the canary are heard in the coal mine and change is coming to the day.
One more thing, do you know where Condi is? The committee is looking for her.
Barbara A. Rittiman
Subj: We Must Persevere
Thanks to Leutisha Stills of Oakland for the inspiring letter to BuzzFlash. I copied her letter and emailed it to friends and relatives. Sometimes we feel that we have done all that we can to awaken America to the dangers inherent in the Bush presidency. But as Leutisha states, we must not give up. We have got to persevere!! So many fellow Americans feel that there is nothing that they can do, but wait until the elections. By then it may be too late. We must continue to put the pressure on our elected officials and to remind friends and relatives that we have to remain vigilant. Thanks Ms. Still and thanks to BuzzFlash!!
P.S. My apologies for the continued lunacy of Sen. Zell Miller. I apologize because he once fooled me and other Democrats and independents into voting for him. I understand that he is trying to organize a group of Democrats for Bush. Either Bush has something on him or he is just a red neck who's finally showing his true colors.
[BuzzFlash Note: Barbara also sends her apologies for voting for Zell "Benedict Arnold" Miller.]
Would someone please tell Zell Miller that if you continually 'oink-oink' like a Republican, no one is fooled when you put on lipstick and a dress and call yourself a Democrat. Zell, stop zig-zagging and plant your smell/stench permanently on the Republican side!!!
In regards to http://www.BuzzFlash.com/editorial/04/03/edi04020.html ... not only did "they" know about the potential of planes being used to hit targets, "they" practiced for it: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/linkscopy/ContPlan.html or http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/Contingency_Planning.html ... Nov 2000.
And as far as the intelligence community "being confused" ... well - per the President's directive in Feb. '01, it's not surprising... http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-1.htm
Anyway - I'm sure you receive a butt-ton of links on the subject ... here's one more in "parody" format I recently put together for humorisdead.com .... http://www.humorisdead.com/drudge/drudgery.html
Enjoy - keep on keepin' on ..
So many times I have wanted to reply to an article but don't know how.
Also, I cannot understand why the present administration cannot see that with all the jobs going overseas.....who is there left in the US to pay into social security and medicare?? Are they that stupid? Or are they just bent on getting rid of all those funds?
Are FREE euthanasia offers next for the senior citizens once they reach the age of retirement?
ginny.......83 and a lifelong Democrat
clarke was willing to testify under oath! that lying weasel condoleeza rice refuses to!!!!!!!!!!
a buzzflash reader
Sent to 'firstname.lastname@example.org'; 'email@example.com'; 'firstname.lastname@example.org' ; 'email@example.com':
Subj: Smoking Gun
Looks like you're down and OUT!!
Signed: When Will Democracy Mean More than Your Paycheck?
Subj: The Big Spin
Wow, the Clarke spin during and after the 911 hearings is mind boggling. Fox is in a class all by itself. Totally classless. Fox has shown it's hand from day one. I always wondered what they do after Clinton left office. The rest of the so called "news" corporations are also lining up to bash Clarke.
I guess it's not enough that these "news" organizations totally rip the public off by pretending that they are news organizations, but they also have to maximize profits by gutting any and all investigative reporting and then present these ridiculous arguing heads as analysis.
To top it off, they don't just present equal arguing heads,they have to stack the deck by having five right wing heads plus a right wing host screaming and bashing the one progressive head. These massive news organizations are raking in maximum profits because they choose to entertain rather than investigate and to make it worse they march lock step with the Bush Cartel in order to insure that they receive favorable business decisions and eventually become complete monopolies. Good luck democracy!
Subj: Re: Bush's 9/11 myths endanger US
Yesterday I sent an e-mail to Marie Cocco of Newsday. I told her I appreciated what she had to say and closed with...'as long as there is a voice from the back of the room, there is hope.'
Today I received an e-mail from her. I am sure she would not mind my sharing it with you all.
On the subject of Richard Clarke. He said that the dogs would be set loose on him. That seems to be the only way that this administration has to 'get even'. Just think how juvenile they all are. But, with that penchant, they are very dangerous people.
Thank you BuzzFlash, for all you do, and thank you Mailbaggers, for being many voices from the back of the room.
Subj: Turn of the Tide
I asked my parents to watch 60 Minutes last weekend. Both are in their seventies and quite conservative. I think JFK is the only Democrat my mother ever voted for and that probably had to do with his looks. Anyway, I also loaned them a tape of Robert Greenwald's excellent documentary "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War". Monday morning my father called to say, "We're convinced. The evidence is overwhelming." They HATE to talk about politics and I'm not sure that they will be able to bring themselves to vote for Kerry, but I'm sure that they will not now vote for Bush. My father is a WWII vet and has always believed his government. I think they don't want to know the reality behind the Bush lies because it makes them too sad.
Regardless, there are two votes that won't go to Bush from a couple of people that the GOP is assuming are a lock. We can change minds with the truth!
Subj: Smearing Richard Clarke
Since Clarke's appearance on "60 Minutes", three days ago, I've yet to hear any tv pundit make a comparison of the attacks by the present administration, to those made on Joe Wilson when he criticized them. Or for that matter, wasn't Paul O'Neill also labeled a disgruntled employee after the Ron Suskind book?
Subj: 9/11 Commission Fiasco
You’ll never hear the words that will irrefutably prove exactly who enabled the 911 attack and why because you’ll never hear this paper tiger of a “commission”say the words: secret meetings with the Taliban; bribery money to the Taliban to attempt to get a pipeline through Afghanistan; Unical, Bush and Cheney trying to cut the deal and failing that, Bush blowing his top, threatening the Taliban to carpet them with bombs when they said no. And guess what, a few months later, Al Quaeda happens to blow up the world trade center and guess where they are based. You got it: Afghanistan! On the Corporate Nazi Network (CNN) they announced just once after the Afghan war that Unical had signed the deal with Karzi and then it just disappeared from what passes as the news in this country. Bush should not be allowed to get away with saying he didn't know these nuts were a danger to the US - he was warned again and again. I’m so sorry for the 3000 families who will never be given the peace of closure and justice because of the criminality, greed and deceitfulness of this administration and its lapdog, the media, and the cowardice and duplicity of the weenie democrats who know but won’t talk. All our prayers should go out to these poor people who have lost so much. I honestly don’t know how they contain their rage.
As I was listening to Madeline Albright's testimony today, I was struck by one "fact" that the panel did not mention, nor did she. She stated that both she and President Clinton requested that the brass in the Pentagon formulate plans for invasion of Afghanistan and that their cooperation was less than exemplary. Ahem. I don't recall exactly how she put it, but it was clear that the Pentagon was taking the bit in its teeth, digging in its heels, and just generally behaving like spoiled children (counterproductive, as it were) back in the 1998-2000 time frame.
When the panel was assigning blame between the Clinton and Bush administrations (in about equal portions, it seems to me), why was not some weight given to the fact that President Clinton's presidency was crippled? His don't ask-don't tell policy with respect to gays serving in the military was a sore spot with the brass, that they ridiculed him for his military deferment during the Viet Nam era, and the right-wing smear campaign/Kenneth Starr vendetta was in full swing.
Yep, the time frame rang like a bell rang to me. Although she was too diplomatic to state it in so many words, Ms. Albright alluded to the difficulty she and President Clinton had in getting any reasonable amount of cooperation from the Pentagon.
So my question is, why were those factors not given some weight when blame was assigned? Does any rational human being think for a moment that the House/Senate would have approved any Clinton plan if he had requested authorization to use military force, as Senator Bob Kerrey suggested several times over would have been the prudent course of action? If you will recall, when Clinton threw a few cruise missiles at bin Laden the press was on his case charging that he was grandstanding and trying to deflect attention from his latest indiscretion, the blue dress episode.
It's one of those damned if you do and damned if you don't deals, big time, and I can't wait until the whole "pack" of cheats, liars, and crooks are voted out of office and they take their conniving minions with them.
Subj: The 9/11 Commission
There was once a city with a major grudge against fire and crime.
The people of this city taxed themselves and issue bonds to build the world's best police and fire department and highway patrol. Not only do these departments do a brilliant job of preventing fires and crime, but they give a lot of help to surrounding communities. Sometimes they even travel to neighboring states, a point of immense pride for the police, the local politicians and the citizens of the city.
One bright, clear fall morning, a pair of arsonists commit a shocking, brazen act. One at a time, they strike at two huge adjacent apartment buildings right in the middle of the city. When the first arsonist strikes, the police and fire departments are called. They race to the scene and begin evacuating the building and trying to extinguish the fire.
As it should turn out, the highway patrol was warned of the approach the arsonists before the first blaze was set. But no one gave the order to pursue them until the first building was set ablaze.
Once the first building is on fire, two highway patrol cars set off in pursuit of the second arsonist. They now know he's heading toward the second building from the other side of the city, traveling at 30 miles an hour. The patrolmen ride in supercharged cars that will go 150 miles an hour, and they have guns that can stop any other vehicle on the road. There are no traffic obstructions. Not only are the patrolmen experts at weaving in an out of traffic, but all other cars on the road always clear out of their way.
Still, the highway patrolmen drive at a leisurely 50 miles an hour, and as a result they arrive just as the second building is set ablaze. Over the next hour, heroic police and firefighters valiantly rush to get people out of the buildings. Most residents escape, but then both buildings collapse as TV cameras watch. The loss of life is horrifying and immense.
And then the oddest thing happens. No one asks why.
No one questions why the highway patrol didn't intercept the arsonists. Some intrepid readers of documents learn that they had a half-an-hour lead time on the first arsonist and another 15 minutes lead time on the second one. They had fast cars and guns. But the local newspapers and TV stations do nothing but run video clips of the collapse, and of the funerals. They decry arson, and applaud as the highway patrol cracks down on burglary.
The few lone voices who wonder why all of this happened are angrily told that their liberal, irresponsible questions will endanger the security of the city from other arsonists ready to attack.
Isn't this what we've done as a nation with respect to 9/11?
In the most crowded airspace in the world, a flight is hijacked at 8:13 a.m. on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. The plane's pilot signals the hijacking, and air traffic controllers are aware of it within one minute. It takes 32 minutes for anyone to order a fighter plane intercept. Finally, at 8:46, two F-15s are scrambled from Otis AFB on Cape Cod, 130 miles away, and told to fly to Manhattan.
At the same instant, the first hijacked plane slams into the World Trade Center. At 9:02 a.m., 16 minutes later, a second hijacked jet is crashed into the World Trade Center.
Let's be generous and imagine that those F-15s would have taken five minutes to get off the ground and up to a brisk cruising speed. Let's further imagine that, in that five minutes, they could have traveled 30 miles. That's an average speed of 6 miles a minute, or 360 mph. That would have given them 11 more minutes to cover 100 miles. To do it, they'd have needed to fly at 545 mph.
An F-15's top speed is 1,850 mph. The F-15s were seen in the sky within seconds of the impact by the second plane. And no one in the major media has mentioned them since, much less asked why they took so long to get there.
Does anyone really think that the "9/11 Commission" is going to make waves? The secret of 9/11 is in plain sight, but no one with any influence has the courage to say a single word about it. What this country could really use at a time like this is a free and independent press.
Subj: Still playing with words
Has anyone noticed how "artfully" the bush administration responds to the question of warnings concerning 9/11. The line goes something like this: " If we had received notice that Al Queda was planning to steal planes and use them as missiles" we would have done something.
What the bush administration did know was that Al Queda was planning on hijacking planes crashing them into buildings on American soil. Not a lot of difference, but this is their sad argument, and the press and everyone is just letting them get away with it.
I understand this administration could teach a master's course on sentence trees. And to think, I haven't used sentence trees since third grade.
Subj: Why Condi Won't Talk
Dear BuzzFlash My theory why Condi won't testify--Mayor Willie Brown of San Francisco telling people on Sept 12th that he received a warning.
Propagandamatrix cached the SF Gate article of that date. It doesn't specifically mention Rice, but apparently Rice and Brown are friends back to her Chevron days.
Subj: open letter to 9/11 Commission about Rice/Bush
What seems to be the problem? It is past time of 'asking' those two if they want to testify. It's called a subpoena, people. That process should have been started long ago when these two first balked at their 'invitation'.
This is, you know, not a tea party. It is way past the time for Mr. Bush to face the consequences of his (non)actions. For some reason you people seem to be intimidated as well by the powers that be in the White House.
Get on it.
Mary in Indiana
Subj: Re: Fox & Ethics
How can Fox justify identifying Clarke as the person giving a background brief? Isn't this unethical and just a clear example of their bias. This should prove once and for all that they are a GOP propaganda outlet with an agenda. Even you would have to admit that, wouldn't you? Now, however since Jim Angle has provided a precedent, shouldn't anyone at Fox who had a " background" conversation about Valerie Plame come forward? What does Bob Novak have to say about Fox's behavior?
Subj: 9-11 Commission
Here's a letter I sent to the 9-11 commission. So far, I don't get it. Has anyone heard anything of any substance at all yet? Seems like a bunch of doubletalk to me.
Dear Members of the 9-11 Commission:
I have listened to the 9-11 commission hearings for the last two days and mostly I have heard a lot of meaningless tap dancing on the part of the interviewees, who were then thanked profusely for their "cooperation". Meanwhile, many questions the American people want to know have not even been asked by the commission. Here are a few of them.
1. If Bin Laden, Al Queda, and terrorists from Saudi Arabia were the main perpetrators involved in 9-11, why did the U.S. retaliate against Iraq... a country that has been proven to have no involvement in these attacks? It appears to have been an attempt to use 9-11 as an excuse to attack a country that George Bush had long wanted to attack. But what makes this attack any different than the terrorist attack on our buildings? War was not declared, and we were never attacked by Iraq.
2. When George Bush was told about the 9-11 attack, why did he sit there reading stories to school children for another twenty minutes? I would have jumped up and been out of there so fast it would have made your head spin.
3. Why was the Bin Ladin family flown out of the country by the Bush administration after the attacks? What is the connection of the Bush family to the Bin Ladin family?
And finally, it appears that the main gist of the 9-11 commission's response so far is that the U.S. should have attacked terrorist organizations sooner and more fiercly.This seems remarkably similar to the policy that Ariel Sharon has so "effectively" used in the middle east. It sure has worked well there, hasn't it? He shoots them, they shoot him... and on and on until the end of time. Is this the policy the commission thinks the U.S. should be following? Don't you think some modicum of time and energy should be spent on getting to the root of the terrorist problem? How about asking why terrorists are attacking people in the first place? How about if the U.S. rejoined the world community and worked with it instead of declaring it's unilateral authority and right to wage pre-emptive attacks on anyone it deems its enemy? How about if the U.S. signed the Kyoto treaty, nuclear arms treaties, and other world agreements instead of defying the entire world on these issues? How about if the U.S. joined the world court instead of trying to thwart and get around international law? How about if the U.S. fed the people of the world instead of exploiting their countries for oil, natural resources, and a place to put U.S. military bases? How about allowing other countries to decide their own religious preferences instead of sending in Christian missionaries to convert them? How about passing laws preventing American companies from selling arms to foreign counties who are going to use them against us? And finally, how about if the U.S. ceased to back dictatorial regimes like Saddam's in the first place?
Don't you think some of these things might remove the reasons terrorism exists in the first place? People use force as a last resort when they feel there are no other options available. It sounds like the 9-11 commission and the U.S. government have no clue about this simple concept.
Subj: a funny thing happened on the way to sue Dick Cheney
Just before the 911 disaster, the GAO was about to sue Dick Cheney. timeline? I looked forward to seeing the trials on television, in hopes of seeing the Dick squirm!
Alas, it was not to be. A much larger catastrophe was to occur, it's victims entirely innocent:
Remember how pre-911 the focus was on Dick Cheney to provide the names of those he appointed to the energy commission? A huge scandal had erupted over his secret commission and his refusal to name its members, namely Ken Lay, of the Enron Titanic.
If you go to the web site, http://www.gao.gov/ then at the top, select "site map" about a quarter of the way down, in the right column, you will see the title for Walker vs Cheney.
On Friday,Sept 7th,2001 it was in the news that the GAO was getting ready to decide whether to take the Bush admin to court....
They set a Thursday, Sept 13th deadline for the administration to turn over the documents related to the meetings. Gee, that was all forgotten when, voila... Sept 11 happened.
That should be part of the 911 timeline.
Wonder if this is something to refresh readers memories about?
You can still pull up the story right now at this link: "Energy Showdown; Agency May Sue White House"
Subj: Beating around the BUSH
Dear 9-11 Citizen's watch and BuzzFlash,
I just watched for the first time on CNN-International Colin Powell and Donald Rumsfeld almost get asked pointed questions and almost get grilled by the so called inquiry team. There are lots of hints that they know that these guys are lying through their teeth, but nobody is asking the questions that are pertinent, the questions asked by the families of victims of 9-11. I don't want to hear at the end that it was Lee Harvey Oswald with a single bullet that did it!
Goddamn It, I'm an American with a conscience, doesn't that exist anymore!
otherwise noted, all original