 |
||||||
|
April 2, 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.
THIS IS PART 2 OF THE APRIL 2, 2004 BUZZFLASH MAILBAG. CLICK HERE FOR PART 1. Subj: Sen. Jim Bunning (R-Ky) says his opponent "looks like one of Saddam Hussein's sons" BuzzFlash, 4/1/04 Yes, it is unbelievable (and NOT an April Fools joke) but Sen. Jim Bunning said his opponent, Sen. Dan Mongiardo "looks like one of Saddam Hussein's sons." Please post this article as an example of Republican extremism that we can not ignore or accept. Thank you. Judy Munro-Leighton Subj: More and more are believing this You stated that "Does BuzzFlash subscribe to such thinking? Let's just say that we are closer to entertaining such a possibility than we were a few months back. Anyone who connects the factually verifiable dots, not the Bush bullying and lying, would be hard put to rule it out, as extreme as the idea once appeared." I started believing soon after 9/11 that the Bush regime DELIBERATELY did nothing to prevent the attacks, so that they would have an excuse to put into action their longtime plan to invade Iraq. Everyone I know told me that I am a "conspiracy nut." But with what has come out in the last two and a half years, more and more are starting to say that it might possibly be true. My father used to disagree, but now he says, I wouldn't be surprised. Joann Olbrich Subj: Rush Limbaugh Poll Dear BuzzFlash: I have pasted the link to a Palm Beach Post Poll about whether the prosecutors in the Rush Limbaugh investigation should be able to use his medical records to prove their case that he was "doctor shopping". The votes are overwhelmingly in Limbaugh's favor. I think the Dittoheads are stuffing the ballot box. http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/au... Regards, Vinnie From Indy Subj: Animal Farm Has anyone at BuzzFlash considered what is happening to our country the result of those in charge having used as there training manual and current guide, George Orwell's "Animal Farm"? It seems to fit. What do you think? BES Subj: Take Back America Hi Buzz Flash, Lets cut all the BS, There is ONLY ONE WAY TO TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK, and that is to eliminate the Money from Politics, Pass a law in Congress to make it a FELONY offense for any Politician, or his/ her representative, to accept anything of value, other then the Salary they are paid by the American People, Get a commitment from all of your Politicians this election, if they will not commit, vote for the one that will, If we fund these Hustlers, we the people, can call the shots, on Advertising, length of campaigns, and the direction OUR COUNTRY IS GOING IN THE FUTURE, if we don't do it now we may lose the opportunity forever. A Supporter of the best website on the internet. Robert Hi Buzz, "If Kerry Wins, Bush And His Advisors Know That They Are Vulnerable To Potential Prison Terms" Ouch, Ouch! That's an ominous editorial. Especially because I've thought the exact same things for quite some time, so to hear BuzzFlash articulate it - it's very real and scary. I definitely don't expect the truth to be outed in the 9/11 investigation either. One of the things I do expect is that they are going to find most of the fault with the Clinton Administration and pretty much clear the Bushites. I think that's part of why Condi is testifying now. Because of the way they all keep phrasing it "we need to know what went on during the 8 months before 9/11 and the 8 YEARS BEFORE 9/11. I can see the handwriting on the wall. And the media will be happy to run with that one. And the American sheeple will find that explanation quite satisfactory. See, it's easy. Clinton was in office 8 years and Bush was in office only 8 months. It's simple arithmetic, see? Little do these people know how much the Clinton administration did do regarding terrorism. Also, the part about "the notion that some radical zealots in the Bush Administration deliberately ignored the threats of a terrorist attack in order to receive the mandate to attack Iraq . . ." Well, if that may be only tolerated on the fringe edge of conspiracy theories - then consider me on the fringe edge. It's shocking to me how believable I now find that theory. I only keep thinking of that line from the PNAC - that they need a "Pearl Harbor type event" in order to swing the population in favor of all war all the time. How can one not be suspicious? So, are we really conspiracy theorists? Or do we just recognize a conspiracy when we see one? OMG. We ain't seen nothing yet. And thanks for keeping us very alert, Buzz! Barbara in NYC Subj: "Pay attention 9/11 Commission: The real reason Bush dropped the ball on Bin Laden was ENRON" Dear Buzz, RA's reader contribution is chilling and believable. I noticed that RA mentions the same article in the Newsweek of September 24, 2001 (Bush: We're at War) that I wrote about last week, which states several paragraphs into the article more or less that "Newsweek learned that senior Pentagon officials canceled flights for September 11th due to an aviation threat." I purchased the article from the MSNBC/Newsweek archives, so I have an official copy of it now. Furthermore, I found a different Newsweek article that appears to mention the same incident on makethemaccountable.com: (This text is copied from makethemaccountable.com. I haven't looked, but I am assuming this article is purchasable from the MSNBC/Newsweek website: http://www.makethemaccountable.com/whatwhen/Q01_WhySomeWarned.htm) 'We've Hit the Targets', Michael Hirsh, Newsweek, September 13, 2001 issue: “NEWSWEEK has learned that while U.S. intelligence received no specific warning, the state of alert had been high during the past two weeks, and a particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip. Why that same information was not available to the 266 people who died aboard the four hijacked commercial aircraft may become a hot topic on the Hill.” First, the echo chamber is claiming that "they" (whoever "they" are) were on high alert earlier in the summer of 2001, and they routinely FAIL TO MENTION that they were on SOME KIND OF ALERT alert right around September 11th. This is a very specific claim, and very damning if its true. Who are the Pentagon officials who canceled flights for September 11th, according to two different stories in Newsweek magazine? I would like know as well where Michael Hirsh, on the one hand, and Evan Thomas and Mark Hosenball, who wrote the first article mentioned above, got this information? And why are they still silent? Doesn't this seem kind of smoking-gunnish to you? Sincerely, A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: These guys make me so sick . . . "Bush Aides Block Clinton's Papers From 9/11 Panel" Can't turn over Clinton papers because it makes the Democrats look good & the Bushies look bad, so just say that national security prevents turning them over & of course the people lap it up. All I want to know is when does the bull stop? I can't stand it anymore! I want out. Linda Subj: watch the Bush gas price argument... Hi BuzzFlashers, I'm just tracking the rising gas prices and now I hear that the Bush camp's latest campaign strategy is to say that "John Kerry will raise your gas prices by at least 50 cents a gallon!" Funny, that's just what has happened during these past few months of the Bush administration. The fake gas price argument has been successfully won by Republicans since the Carter administration and the "energy crisis" of the 1970's! We all now know that the 'crisis' was manufactured by the oil companies. Who's now running the government? Former oil company executives!!! And, don't forget how those prices were artificially raised during the last election and how they dropped after Bush was appointed Pres. Lets not fall for this trick again! Sincerely, Anne Silberman Subj: Idiotic Statement from GWB It seems that GWB can say idiotic things over and over and is never challenged on it by the press. For instance, the following was gleaned from Dubyaspeak:
-- Side note on this quote: You have to hear Dubya when he enunciates the word "fruition"... It's an experience in itself. Albuquerque, New Mexico, Mar. 26, 2004 http://www.dubyaspeak.com/freshdubya.shtml The “oceans protected us?”Seems to me that we fought the British once in the late 18th century and once in the early 19th century and the oceans didn’t protect us. Granted, it made it more difficult for the British to wage war, but we were still attacked on our own “soils.”If fact, only the indigenous population of North America was temporarily protected by the oceans and we know how that worked out for them. Turk Meister Ad nauseum comment: This is an example of an Ivy League education! Subj: GEORGE BUSH IS A BIG EMBARRASSING FAILURE.
Dear BuzzFlash Now that we can see just how yellow Bush is, and that he is totally incompetent and unable to stand up like a man and answer tough questions, I cannot wait for the presidential debates. He will not have Tricky Dicky to hold his hand, nor any of his props from his administration, and it will be a pleasure to watch him try to defend his miserable record, and put the best spin on his long list of failures. This time he has a sorry record to run on, and I am betting that the white house will try to put down a lot of conditions before they agree to dates etc. We have a so called president who is incapable of conducting a press conference, and hardly has one, and who is a real misfit when he stands up to make a speech. One would think that English is his second language. In fact I have seen many world leaders who speak English as a second language make excellent speeches in English with great confidence. George Bush is an embarrassment in every way. A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: Article by RA in LA A question I never see asked is why did George Bush divert to Louisiana for 7 hours following the reports of the impacts in the Twin Towers and the Pentagon instead of coming to the White House to rally the nation. Did he know there were four and possibly 5 planes to be used in the attack and stayed away until it was safe to return? Is this a reality too horrible to contemplate? Vernon I appreciate everything you have in your newsletters, but the thought keeps going round in my head that: Bush's followers will vote for him no matter what he has done or not done. See, the thing is, for his devotees, all of his ineptness is part of God's plan. They don't believe in looking at things for what they are, but rather looking at things as a part of God's handiwork which cannot always be understood. So, if thousands of human beings are slaughtered, that is a part of God's handiwork for a greater "good". This is ignorance of spiritual laws of the worst order. They have vandalized the Bible and its teachings...they have slaughtered the name of God in their ignorance, because they don't think for themselves; they let their preachers think for them. I don't think that any amount of whistleblowing is going to make any difference among the "faithful". God help all of us. As for me, I'm taking my marbles and going home. The less I read or see of this stuff, the better off I am. - Jody Hoelle, Redlands, CA Subj: How Naive is Katie planning to get? Oh, my, she just noticed this morning because of some how to manuel on the Internet that al Qeada is global. I do not have anywhere near the access she has and I have know that since before 9/11. They struck the Cole and Africa on that side of the world and us on this side. They have struck all over and they have done it for years. If the Bush administration is justifying their latter day concentration on al Qeada by trying to convince us that they weren't considered a threat before 9/11 it isn't going to work? They were recruiting before and they still are. Imagine they are going after the people who killed 4 American contractors in Iraq, but they decided to let bin Ladin have a pass so they could go after Iraq. Surprise, surprise they plan to hit cities and countries? Are the Bushes just plain stupid or do they think we are. Karen Webb, Moore, Ok. Subj: Just Asking Dear BuzzFlash, Here's a couple of interesting hypothetical questions: A pregnant muslim woman is declared an "enemy combatant" and is taken to a military base to be interrogated using physical pressure during which she miscarries. Could her interrogators be subject to murder charges under the Unborn Victims of Violence Act? If she doesn't miscarry would her unborn child have the right of habeas corpus? I'm just wondering if anyone really thought this through? Russ Rigtrup Subj: I predict softballs 9/11 changed everything ! That was and is the battle cry for everything the cartel wants to ram through to benefit them, but you can bet that when it may benefit us...as in some real info...well, it didn't change that much. I predict the 9/11 panel members already have their answers and will just rephrase the non-intrusive questions that will be a window dressing for CONdi's slick non-answers. I want one of these meek questioners to ask her about her statement the day of the attacks that this was an "opportunity". Excuse me? The only way this could be seen as an opportunity is if you were in agreement with the PNAC. They will tell us nothing. I know many of us are complaining that none of the family steering committee questions have been asked in open testimony, we can only hope someone asked them in the private ones and we will see them in the published report. But don't hold your breath...I am getting that sinking feeling I got when the Congressional one was a farce. Imagine...the White House actually has a strategy to keep info from the committee. I agree with whoever wrote that it was better as far as they're (Bush L.L.C.) to be seen as incompetent rather than criminal, so they will just keep saying "We just didn't know". I have to laugh when Bush gets up there and says "if we had known" and then proceeds to act as if terrorists (if there were any) should have sent him an engraved invitation, with specific details of just what was gonna happen. Why does he think they call it "intelligence"? Of course in his case, all his life, that is precisely what has happened...people do the thinking for him, the real work...and then he gets up and acts like it was his! I am so sick of the attacks on Clarke and Kerry and O'Neill and Foster by anyone who interviews them. Has anyone noticed that they no longer ask a guest to state his case, elaborate on issues or anything else we really want to hear? They just rattle off a bunch of pro-Bush accusations that the guest must answer to defend his/her position or else..you guessed it..you're a LIAR. There is no debate, no information to be had, just ruthless attacks. The opposite applies when it is a Repug...just let them ramble the whole time with the latest talking points, or feed them to them if they stray, and it's perfectly alright for the wrong-wingers to simply never answer the question. It's disgusting. I would love for some brave news person to ask Rummy what exactly is a "better" target or a "decent" target? And he calls the people in the Twin Towers "innocent victims"...what does he call the "soft targets" and "collateral damage" that we have killed in Afghanistan and Iraq. I have a question I would like someone to ask Kofi Annan...since there wasn't a consensus to go into Iraq...why did the U.N. award the total control of the operation, after the fact, to the U.S. and U.K. alone?! Were they bullied by them telling them that they were the only ones who could "handle" it? I also would like to say that since we all know the Grand Canyon has now become the world's greatest creationist landmark...that the only evolution that Bush et al believes in is the evolution from WMD to WMD related program activities. Someone should do a 30 second commercial showing the smirking chimp delivering some of his best lines like "I hit the Trifecta", "Bring it on!", "What difference does it make?", "Who cares what you think" and my favorite, "I saw the first plane hit the tower" along with his baboon troop shouting in the background "Privatize the profits, socialize the costs!" over and over.... Thanks BuzzFlash for all you do, thanks Shirley in St. Louis for coming out early and hard, thanks to Chewgababy for doing a lot of our homework for us, thanks to Turk Meister for always being concise and right on the damn money, thanks to elaine in Petaluma, I still have your brilliant acronym for the Patriot Act on my printer, thank you to Karen Webb in Oklahoma with her insight....oh, just thanks to you all for keeping our collective sanity. I have my BuzzFlash.com bumper sticker prominently displayed and wear my T-shirt with pride. Suzanne
Bailey Subj: Letterman calls the White House a bunch of liars. Twice. The Washington Post has a nice story under the title "White House Spins The Boy Who Yawned" <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43501-2004Apr1_2.html>. The article states that David Letterman calls "the White House a bunch of liars. Twice." A BuzzFlash Reader PS Really like your site. Keep up the good work. Subj: Sibel Edmonds I just did a search on "Sibel Edmonds." I searched on CNN, Fox News, New York Times, CBS News, and a few new mainstream "news" outlets and NOTHING came up. I got a few results from last year. But nothing coming out about her "outrageous lie" comment made two or three days ago. Where's the left wing news media bias I keep hearing about? Tony Romano RE: BuzzFlash Reader's letter "Defining the race to November -- with our wallets/pocketbooks" Dear Buzz, This is a late reply to the BuzzFlash reader who urged us to start punishing the media for the terrible job that they do (http://www.BuzzFlash.com/mailbag/04/03/mai04083.html -- Subj: Defining the race to November -- with our wallets/pocketbooks). I think about this a lot myself because I am almost constantly furious at the television news media, and this is bad for my blood pressure. First, as I have pointed out to several News organizations that do not believe there is an appetite for liberal radio, there is at least--at least!--a solid 20% of likely or registered voters who have been STRONGLY against the Bush for many, many months, once the initial support for him after 9/11 eroded. (Just because they like to ignore us doesn't mean we don't exist--right?!) I KNOW that more than 20% of the electorate are pretty pissed off at Bush, but 20% solidly against Bush is a non-trivial number of people. I myself have written numerous letters to CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS but rarely Fox (what would be the point). Occasionally I have actually gotten a response. (I even got a few sympathetic responses from individuals who agreed but knew that the stations themselves would not give credence to our points of view.) But for the most part, I get the feeling that liberal anger is ignored and treated as not worthy of worrying about. I suspect my letters are deleted --"Oh not that angry woman from Boston again!". In fact, what I see on TV news, especially the cable stations, is a systematic devaluation and ridiculing of liberal positions, if they are even presented at all! They start from the premise that Republican/conservative pundits and representatives are truthful, believable, rational, and represent the mainstream opinion. They rarely challenge the frequent and absolutely egregious statements made by the likes of sniveling, chinless-wonder Ed Gillespie, smooth talking French guy Marc Racicot (pronounced "Rah-See-CO" in France), and David "Babyface" Drier. They let them get away with murder (and this is probably literally true). Conversely, the Democratic/liberal pundits and representatives (if they even manage to get on the show) are treated as marginal and odd, on the one hand--if the news program doesn't feel too threatened by them. On the other hand, liberals are demonized and accused of lack of patriotism, child molestation, and devil-worship IF the network news and the Republicans feel threatened that viewers might actually see their point! I am so disgusted with mainstream news and the SCLM that I have mostly turned it off. I get most of my news from the Internet, NPR, and BBC. And, since I am one of those liberals who doesn't work for a living (I got laid off in December and high-tech jobs are not coming back that quickly in Massachusetts), I am able to listen to Air America on the web. But this isn't the way it should be. We royally pissed off liberals are an untapped market, and we should show them we are here! So I had an idea. BuzzFlash would have to be agreeable, but I am wondering if devotees of BuzzFlash would like to start local meetups to strategize about targeted media boycotts. (Personally, I find CNN SO DISGUSTING that they would be my first choice. I would like to hit their pocketbook but even more than that, I would like to hit their reputation as "the most trusted news network" [sic!!!] and humiliate them out of their sickening sycophancy.) A Devoted BuzzFlash Reader Leslie in Boston Subj: Thank you to Maureen Farrell Kudos to Maureen Farrell for her article on Jim Wilkinson. Great work. I wasn't aware of this creep, Jim Wilkinson, tho I knew of some of the creepy stuff he had done. It's pretty scary to realize that one person was involved in all those events. Love you Maureen! bill Subj: Bush's acts of treason I just read your editorial about the vulnerability of the Busheviks to criminal prosecution. There's one great Bush crime, for which the circumstantial evidence is becoming overwhelming, which I haven't heard anyone talk about. I'm talking about the "escape" of Osama from Tora Bora. We now know that the green light for Iraq had already been given. The Vulcans had decided from the beginning that the "Pearl Harbor event" of 911 was good for TWO little wars -- Afghanistan AND IRAQ! Only one little thing could put a damper on their lovely plan: victory in war number one BEFORE the start of war number two. Were the great evildoer of 911 already in the bag, the American people would never have gone for "disarming" Saddam in '03, no matter how many smoking guns Condi Rice turned into mushroom clouds. There must have been total panic in the NSC when they thought they might actually "get" Osama in early '02. Did they really have him between the "hammer and the anvil"? If so, how did he get away? As usual, the Bush administration's OFFICIAL defense is, "we're not corrupt traitors who would let a mass murderer get away just so we can start an illegal war in Iraq, we're just incompetent." Of course, it's possible to be both corrupt AND incompetent. Neal Subj: "Bush administration is truly scary, and frightening dangerous" America's "liberal" news media somehow has not found any time to have Mr John Dean on the TV networks or cable to talk about his new book -"Worse Than Watergate", yet all week long this same "liberal" news media has found plenty of time to show Bush's lead propagandist Karen Hughes talking about her puff piece book adoring Bush - on CNN, on the major networks, on the early shows, and on, and on, and on. ------------------------------------------------------------ Quotes: "To say that the Bush-Cheney secret presidency is undemocratic is an understatement. This administration is truly scary and, given the times we live in, frighteningly dangerous." --John Dean, in his new book, "Worse Than Watergate" http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/03/31/dean/ A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: The demands on the Ruling Class never end. I think of this as the American Tea Torture - one cup at a time. Never give in. Never give up. Thank you, Buzz. ======================================== Thursday, April 1, 2004 George W.
Bush Mr. President, Your tea, Sir. Hot enough? Good. I hear you've gotten it settled with the committee. The mind boggles! Not to be rude, Sir, but apparently taking an oath to tell the truth doesn't seem to be a really popular thing in your circle. How is Karl going to spin this? Being above the requirement to tell the truth to the country that you lead seems a bit regal for an American, doesn't it, Sir? It somehow smacks of elitism and arrogance and has an air of throne room about it. Sir, you've got that smirky look again. You know, the one that drives everyone crazy. Karl and Karen warned you about that, didn't they? Did you really mean all that stuff about how neat it would be to be a dictator, Sir? Well, sure it's probably easier but is it right, Mr. President? Of course I know you're the President, Sir. We're not permitted to forget it. But that's exactly the point, isn't it? Aren't you supposed to be serving us? Serving us as the Nation? Leading us to support the Constitution in order to form a more perfect union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity and all that patriotic stuff? Or was that only something soothing and inspiring that they taught the common folk in public school so we'd be glad to go to work and proud to march to war. The True Blue Americans, like you and your family and friends who knew what it was really about, went on to family-supplied positions of power in order to govern, some might say control, the rest of us. Noblesse oblige and all that. Is that what it's really all about, Sir? If it is, then all of this hoopla and fuss must be infuriating. Well, I can imagine! It's got to be hard to maintain, sometimes. Honestly. Listening to us, the earnest and blind, blather on and on so sincerely with all that nonsense about Democracy and Freedom of Speech and equality! Can you believe it? If I were in your place, I don't know if I'd be able to keep my cool when we got truly annoying. I mean, even your mom and dad have lost it on occasion, especially when the governed have gotten downright rude and complained about you and demanded their 'rights'. Even the best of us weep when we're pushed beyond endurance... Never mind. That's why you have Mr. Cheney, Sir. You can count on him to keep things straight. Just look to him for guidance and direction. He wouldn't steer you wrong. Look how well he's done on all those TV shows. Sir? You have that faraway gaze again. Is it the voices? Ask them if they know where the scones are. Most sincerely, Barbara
A. Rittiman
Dear BuzzFlash, In reference to your headline:
It is not only citizens of developing nations, but also of fully "developed" nations (such as the UK) who must pay the non-refundable $100 for a non-guaranteed visa. I know this as I am about to go through this process myself. I am not trying to compare my personal financial situation to that of someone in a developing nation, however I am a student and $100 hits hard. Apart from the expense, the process demands that I leave my passport at the Embassy while they ponder my case. This could take anything from 10 to 60+ days, an element about which I am less than happy, especially since I currently live in France, but I should in theory apply for my visa in London. Sincerely, A BuzzFlash Reader Subj: By corporations and for corporations So now we hear that the Bushittes were concentrating on missile defense rather than terrorism before 9/11. Good one, I like that piece of propagaaaaaanda. Can anybody spell the names of the big corporations poised to make billions on these missile systems that Bush was pushing before 9/11: Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed and TRW? Between 1998 and 2001, twenty billion was earmarked for missile defense. 200 Billion over the next fifteen years was being flirted with and given a boost by the right-wing cabal within the Bush administration, who aimed to utilize this program to advance their goal of world domination. And let's not forget Raytheon's Patriot missile in the Gulf War. The Patriot missiles were later exposed as ineffective, regardless of HW Bush and the Pentagon's accuracy lies. These corporations were licking their chops before 9/11 for the 200 Billion in potential government contracts [no doubt paybacks from Bush for the large campaign donations.] We really we needed more inaccurate Patriot missiles and rip-off failure Star Wars projects from these corporations. More Government by the corporations and for the corporations, huh? ~ Cathy Subj: The Jobs!! Today on Yahoo the news story of "all the jobs being created". The figures they use are 308,000 jobs created! The economy is improving, life is good, and we will all live happily ever-after, with BU$H in charge. YEEAAAH RIGHT!!!! Now lets look at REALITY. The 308,000 jobs is over a 7 MONTH period. For the job market to stay EVEN, it must add 150,00 jobs EVERY month, or else we are in the negative column. So in light of this fact, 7 months at 150,00 per, we should have 1,050,000 jobs just to maintain the basic level. GROWTH is anything ABOVE this amount. The BU$H Cartel now knows the art of dispensing info, just give them small "bits", 30 second news spots, only the daily and monthly death rates in Iraq, instead of the total. This way the people don't see the whole picture, and that way it doesn't look so bad after all. Sid Subj: Kerry
I admit if feels worrisome but try not to. Kerry is notorious for laying down in the middle of a race and then burning up the track at the end. So long as Bush's numbers don't surge too far too fast it's all good. Rosamond Hi Folks, http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/04/02/hart/index.html Above is an interview with Gary Hart from Salon (or it may already be on BuzzFlash by now). Well worth reading. Corroborates exactly with what Clarke and all the others are saying. Here's just one little sample: ---------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------- Sound familiar? This gets no coverage in the media. And unless I missed something - why in god's name did they not call Gary Hart before the 9/11 commission? Because he completely corroborates Richard Clark's testimony. Too many people are saying the exact same thing. When's the dam going to break? Barbara in NYC **SMOKING GUN/BREAKING NEWS*** I PRESENT TO YOU THE SMOKING GUN. THANK YOU.
Subj: NEW: Bush State Department Omitted bin Laden in 2001
Source: http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/04/30/terrorism.state.dept/ David |
||||||
 |
||||
| DAILY BUZZ | ||||
| INTERVIEWS | ||||
| ANALYSIS | ||||
| MEDIA LINKS | ||||
|
Unless
otherwise noted, all original |
 |
|||
