May 20, 2002 - A Second Serving
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). Thank you.
The BuzzFlash Mailbag is updated on an ongoing basis, with the newest material and comments on top. Again, 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.
Dear BuzzFlash,
Now
that the cat is half-way out of the bag, we've all noticed how the
repugnants have immediately turned the tables and begun blaming the Democrats
for "politicizing" this nightmare. Of course, we savvy Buzzheads
know that this is but a temporary diversion, a knee-jerk response that
is no surprise.
This morning on CNN I tuned in half-way during a discussion of four talking heads. The banner at the bottom said something like: "9/11 Missed Clues?" but guess what the discussion was about??
THE PREPARATIONS FOR THE COMING WAR WITH IRAQ.
So here we go: This despicable, inept and illegal bunch, to cover their gross incompetence and probable total responsibility for this tragedy, will try to circle the wagons yet again, in the name of patriotism for gosh sakes, to prove just how they can and will "protect Americans at any cost."
Well, we've paid too high a price already and gotten nothing but a country in shambles.
We won't fall for it this time, Georgie Boy.
WE MUST IMPEACH HIM.
elaine in Petaluma
Dear BuzzFlash,
Why doesn't BuzzFlash run an item asking why planes were not scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base on Sept. 11 to defend DC even though the government knew about the highjackings for at least 50 minutes before the plane hit the Pentagon? This lack of action is unprecedented in recent US history, as planes are always sent up to intercept any suspicious airliner.
G. Moses
Dear BuzzFlash,
Subj: Cheney Carries out THREAT to Daschle About Investigating 9-11
Cheney, weeks ago, THREATENED Tom Daschle that if Daschle and Congress asked for a thorough investigation of 9-11, that Cheney and the White House would CLAIM that Congress and Dems were 'interfering with the war on terra.'
Well, Cheney must be SCARED that such an investigation will ensue (as well it SHOULD), because he has now issued the THREAT that he told Tom Daschle he would...
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30200- 1051897,00.html
"..."An investigation must not interfere with the ongoing efforts to prevent the next attack, because without a doubt a very real threat of another perhaps more devastating attack still exists."
"The people and agencies responsible for helping us learn about and defeat such an attack are the very ones most likely to be distracted from their critical duties if Congress fails to carry out their obligations in a responsible fashion."
Now, we're certain that the Bush White House, in true Operation Northwoods Style, could easily incite (another) 'terrorist attack' should it find it politically expedient to do so.
After all, WHO's Daddy used to be the head of the CIA?
It appears by Cheney's threat, above, that it is willing to do just that to protect its own colletive butts against any investigation of 9-11.
SO - WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?? WHAT ARE THEY AFRAID WILL BE FOUND IF A FULL INVESTIGATION ENSUES? Very InterestinK.
Congress and Democrats should IGNORE Cheney's blustering and get on with a full investigation, and bring out in the open Cheney's previous THREAT to Tom Daschle and Cheney's subsequent carrying out of that THREAT, above, whilst they're at it...just to let Americans KNOW that the Bush Administration, and Cheney in particular, must have a LOT to hide, if they would make such threats to inhibit any investigation into 9-11.
- a Buzzflash Reader
Dear BuzzFlash,
Two for your site:
This one by Bob Woodward plainly lays out that the White House has conveniently and subtly changed the title of the August 6 memo to deflect attention that bin Laden was planning to strike "IN" the U.S. rather than just "at" the U.S., presumably overseas.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35744-2002May17.html
Also, Bill Kristol has a very tough piece in the Weekly Standard demanding an investigation and pointing out that no one has wanted to take responsibility, and that the White House has suspiciously maintained that "no one" was to blame.
David Durrett
Dear BuzzFlash,
Since the dictator's minions are now saying that there was a report ready and on Condisleazy's desk on Sept. 4 that outlined a plan to attack Al-Queda, I wonder if someone in the "administration" warned the Saudis about this plan, who then warned the Taliban, who then attacked us first. Just a thought.
elaine in Petaluma
Dear Buzz:
I suppose we’re going to find out if this pResident is actually Teflon-coated. If 3,000 lives were lost because of possible incompetence or worse, could there be anything more hideous, more criminal attached to this man? Surely the Senate and the press will have the fortitude to thoroughly investigate this revelation. How could any legitimate, ethical person object to such an investigation? What are the Republicans afraid of? If it was all so innocent and vague, then the research results will prove such. If not, well then……
L.A. Sullivan
Dear BuzzFlash,
Where does Ari Fleischer get off saying that questioning Bush about his knowledge prior to 911 crosses the line? Since when does questioning any president cross the line? Does Ari think that questioning Clinton crosses the line? Is Bush some sort of god that we aren't supposed to question?
MV
Dear Buzz,
Well it didn't take Karl "Reichminister Goebbels" Rove very long to get the propaganda arm of bu$h inc busy. In hours, what was first being reported as a bipartisan congressional inquiry into possible intelligence shortcomings in the bu$h administration (pun intended), suddenly became the irresponsible second guessing of our heroic national leader at a time of war, by highly partisan members of the left-wing lunatic fringe (like the senate MAJORITY leader). Those of us with even a modicum of political awareness have come to expect that sort of hyperbolic defensiveness from the bu$h politburo. Like Josef Stalin, whenever bu$h inc is confronted with the truth, it decrees that the truth-tellers are "enemies of the people" and sics its trained media-attack-hounds on them.
As inured as I have become to bu$h inc's cynical and exploitative propaganda attempts (i.e. the 9-11 photo for sale), I was still not prepared for what I witnessed this morning. As I was drinking my morning cup o' coffee and flipping through the TV channels, I paused momentarily on NBC. Some female morning personality (I don't know her name) was interviewing a cherubic little girl, about six years old. I gathered the girl's father was killed in the terrorist attacks. The host said to the little girl, "Now, didn't you say that even if the president did know something before 9-11, you would forgive him? Can you tell us why you would forgive him?" I barely made it to the sink before I threw up. They really have no shame.
Dave Collins
[BuzzFlash Note: We saw it, too, and can verify that it was the most disgusting, exploitative piece of orchestrated propaganda we'd seen in a very long time. At one point, following the interviewer's lead, the little girl said she liked to "draw pictures of her daddy" as a way to remember him. Perhaps she should send a few of those pictures to Bush, so he can "remember" her Daddy and be reminded of the events leading up to 9-11 that he did absolutely nothing about.]
Dear BuzzFlash,
My question is...if the alert was so general why was John Ashcroft ordered not to fly commercial plane and instead flew a private jet to take a vacation and the rest of the public was not given any such warning?
Ari said the plans to bomb Afghanistan was so important to the resident he started planning it 1999 during the campaign and was the first priority when the resident took office.. reason ... saying terrorism was their first priority and ready for his signature days before 9-11. The exact same plan that was executed after Sept. 11. If that is the case, why then, when Bush came to office, one of the first things he did was send $40 million dollars to the Taliban if he was planning to bomb them? This does not make any sense. Why then did U.S Ambassador to Pakistan "Wendy Chamberlain and Afghanistan's oil minister Usama Aminuddin indicate the oil pipeline project is international Project Number One for the Bush Administration? (Chamberlain who maintains close ties to the Saudi ambassador to Pakistan, a one-time chief money conduit for the Taliban), has been pushing Pakistan to begin work on its Arabian Sea oil terminus for the Pipeline.
The interim government headed by Karzai has ties with UNOCAL and the Bush administration and that is why the CIA pushed him to be the Afghan leader over rival Abdul Haq who was more popular with a wide cross-section of the Afghan people, including the Northern Alliance. (CIA tipped off the Taliban last October about Haq and got him assassinated.)
What about Karzai working with an Afghan American Zallmay Khalilzad on the CentGas project. Now Khalilzad is Bush's Special National Security Assistant and recently named Special Envoy for Afghanistan and no mention was made about his relationship with UNOCAL. And Condoleezza Rice, a former member of the board of Chevron, is no innocent bystander in the future CentGas deal.
What about Khalilzads relationship with Enron? And Cheney's Halliburton....who would have been the chief benefactor in the CentGas deal?
Why were Taliban envoys received at the White House....Why did UNOCAL pump large sums of money to the Taliban with Bush's knowledge if he was to fight terrorists.
What is the CIA's connection to the ISI months before Sept.11?
What about Rahmatullah Hashami coming to Washington bearing a gift carpet for Bush from the one-eyed Taliban leader offered the Bush administration to hold on to bin Laden long enough for the US to capture of kill him, but inexplicably the administration refused.
Why so under-report the interfaces between the Bush administration, UNOCAL, CIA the Taliban, Enron, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and the Bush Family?
Connect the dots, it's obvious. This plan had nothing to do about terrorism, It's about Oil Stupid!
The only thing Bush didn't know was that the attack would kill 3,000, instead of a couple hundred, which would have been acceptable to him.
Yes, Bush hit the trifecta with this one. Full speed ahead with the pipeline project and dam the Afghan people, who were carpeted with bombs as promised and oops, the poor American fools who should of stayed home on Sept. 11... just collateral damage I suppose.
And Where's Osama bin Laden? Is he not important anymore? I guess not, as long as the pipline gets built and he doesn't interfere.
These questions must be asked.
Kathy
Dear BuzzFlash,
Hello, does anyone know what this word means?
Kamikaze
Jeff Costello
Dear BuzzFlash,
It appears only the British newspaper - "The Independent" - makes mention of the fact that Pres. Bush was at his ranch for weeks prior to the 9/11 catastrophe while all these memos were circulating. Perhaps he was too busy clearing brush (or whatever they do at ranches in Texas). That's an interesting angle - surprised our papers are not picking up on it.
Natalie
Dear BuzzFlash,
It seems mighty ODD that Republicans and the GOP didn't see any problem with those "people and agencies" being DISTRACTED from investigating and preventing terrorism while Bill Clinton was President.
The GOP and Richard Mellon Scaife, et al, had those SAME "people and agencies" all busy investigating The Clintons and Monica Lewinsky, during the Clinton years. This undoubtedly had the same effect - DISTRACTING them from investigating and possibly preventing terrorist attacks.
FUNNY how it wasn't a problem to 'distract those people and agencies' to investigate Bill Clinton.
But, when those 'people and agencies' might be distracted to investigate Bush & Cheney - that's suddenly DIFFERENT!
It seems the old adage "Pretentious Hypocrisy is the Hallmark of Republicans" still holds true...
...A Buzzflash Reader
Dear BuzzFlash,
Where does Ari Fleischer get off saying that questioning Bush about his knowledge prior to 911 crosses the line? Since when does questioning any president cross the line? Does Ari think that questioning Clinton crosses the line? Is Bush some sort of god that we aren't supposed to question?
MV
Dear BuzzFlash,
If you'd lost a loved one on 9-11, how would you feel if Bush sat on information that he and his administration were themselves taking to heart (in Genoa, in Ashcroft not flying commercially, in W being on a one month vacation so early into his presidency)? You'd be devastated. You'd be nonplused. Politics would be the furthest thing from your mind.
Calling Bush's refusal to release to the public vital information "political" -- that I can understand. However, I don't see how that term applies to survivors and surviving family members of 9-11 who would obviously like a little information about what our leaders knew before the tragedy took place. For the Bush administration to call survivors' motivations "political" goes hand-in-hand with promoting one's own political causes at survivors' and their loved ones' expense. It doesn't get much more macabre than that, but then, Bush always surprises.
Michelle Winter
Dear BuzzFlash,
http://www.msnbc.com/news/754067.asp
Why is Newsweek even asking if Clinton deserves some responsibility? (To deflect blame of course.) Why not ask themselves if they deserve some blame for not reporting Dubya's dismantling of Clinton's anti-terror teams.
And get a load of the Newsweek banner ad at the right. Rudy, Dubya, and some firefighters all looking serious and presidential. This is blatant deliberate propaganda to me. What do you think?
Jim Stewart
Chicago
IL
[BuzzFlash Note: When greed is your purpose, everything else must support it. Investigative journalism that might lead to the impeachment of a president who loves deregulation, is not in the best interests of media companies who want to make greater profits. Therefore, no investigative journalism and constant support of everything the president does.]
Dear BuzzFlash,
The news that Bush ordered a formal plan to eradicate al Qaeda before September 11 (put on his desk September 9, according to MSNBC) may be the smoking gun in the midst of all the questions being asked about what the administration knew and when. It may be, as RA in LA suggests, that the reported plan is a sham, a story planted to make it appear that Bush was doing something about al Qaeda and just didn't quite have time (can't blame him for that, right?). But planting a story like that would be highly dangerous because the other implications is raises are so damning. If Bush considered al Qaeda dangerous enough to draw up top secret plans to make war against it "in 60 countries" (including military action in Afghanistan if the Taliban wouldn't surrender bin Laden), why wouldn't the warnings the CIA and FBI received have been given top priority? You'd think in those circumstances the discussions with Rumsfeld, Cheney, Pentagon, intelligence, et al. would be "all al Qaeda, all the time." If then, Bush's fault was just in being too "complacent," as the papers are saying, about the threats, it suggests an intentional complacence. That level of complacence rises to complicity. Perhaps he didn't want to be distracted from the war he'd already planned. But of course there's the question of how Bush expected to sell such a war with no warning to the public, especially considering that his approval ratings at the time were tanking and Congress was divided against him.
If the admin did plant this story thinking it would help them, they may regret it.
Linda
Dear BuzzFlash,
You better leave my President alone! When he took the oath of office (purely ceremonial, not like it's a real oath like Bill Clinton took and then lied about Monica) in January 2001, he started with a clean slate. Anything that the FBI or CIA told Bill Clinton became null and void. Dubya didn't have to nation build, seek peace in the Middle East, honor treaties, or follow the Constitution, and the Supreme Court is on our side, believe me. If you keep blaming him for 9/11, our President will have John Ashcroft arrest you as traitors and lock you up without a trial. Congress gave him that power, you know, so look out. We're watching you. The walls have ears.
Dana
Hey Buzz:
I think you need to start cutting President Bush some slack. Yes, he may have been a wee bit lax in acting on the intelligence he'd gotten prior to 9/11. But that was then. It's a whole new ballgame now.
In the months since 9/11, while the rest of us have lapsed back into a normal state of distractedness, our Commander in Chief and his troops have maintained a tireless vigilance. Every plot by al Qaeda has been, and will continue to be, anticipated and thwarted long before it's born.
In fact, US Central Command have so improved their intelligence capabilites, they can now anticipate and thwart any future members of al Qa'eda from being born as well. The strategy: Prevent the parents of would-be terrorists from marrying and infecting the world with their demon spawn.
Consider the following article from Saturday's Times of London:
US
jets 'fire on wedding celebration by mistake'
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-299516,00.html
Feel safer now? I sure do!
Norm Portland, OR
Dear BuzzFlash,
This is my editorial that I wrote to my local paper and plan on emailing to all cable shows--maybe you could encourage others to write and email some of these points to keep the media focused on the right things.
***STEVIE G***
What happened to the buck stops here. Nobody could forsee planes as bombs, but what was done to prevent hijackers from getting on planes. What about Ashcroft isn't he responsible for the FBI (he stopped taking commercial flights well before Sept.11th because of a threat to airplanes)--if Reno was AG the Republicans would be all over her. Perhaps if Bush had not been on vacation for the month before the attacks he might have been better informed. Also, maybe if he didn't require his people to only give him 3 page summaries instead of full reports he would have known more. Government by "Cliff Notes" is probably a bad Idea. Maybe if Bush was more open to reading full documents he would have known more. He said he would surround himself with good people and delegate like a CEO--maybe that is a bad idea. Most of his businesses failed- like his first oil companies- which had to be rescued by his dad's rich friends. It happened on his watch so he has some responsibility as CEO in Chief of America. If a company fails the CEO gets blamed. America's intelligence failed so Bush and Ashcroft must step up to the plate and take responsibility for what went wrong and make sure it doesn't happen again. Republicans were blaming Clinton for not getting Osama earlier, but not questioning Bush about anything. If Clinton Knew about Al Queda then Bush knew too. If Clinton didn't do enough then neither did Bush. If Clinton is to blame then so is Bush. Maybe both are at fault, or neither is at fault. We just don't know. We need a fair open investigation of what went wrong and how we can fix it, but this administration is the most secretive since NIXON-so don't hold your breath.
thank you,
stevie
gardiner
somerdale,nj
Dear BuzzFlash,
Not only have we heard about the shocking news of the past couple of days that the president may have been forewarned about 9-11-01 and did not heed the warnings strongly enough, but now we find out from Bush and Condoleeza Rice that, in fact, Bush had been planning to arm then Northern Alliance to fight Osama Bin Laden prior to 9-11-01. Ms. Rice said that she had the plans on her desk dated 9-10-01 ready for Bush's review and approval when he returned from his trip to Florida. It has always been my contention that Bush had planned to go into Afghanistan prior to the 9-11 terrorist activity. And he has proven that today. And if he had plans to fight Al Queida and Bin Laden, then he must have been taking these threats seriously. Just not serious enough to protect our mainland.
Last night one of the talk show hosts said we shouldn't be taking these "selected memo's" from the FBI and CIA now being released without having the whole picture. That is what some members of congress have been asking for all along: a complete investigation into what went wrong. That is what I am asking for today. A complete full investigation of the 9-11 tragedy. Let the chips fall where they may.
Donna Woods
Dear BuzzFlash,
WHEN THE BULDINGS WERE STILL BURNING AND BODIES WERE YET TO BE FOUND, THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION GATHERED UP THE BIN LADDIN FAMILY FROM ALL AROUND THE US AND FLEW THEM OUT OF THE COUNTRY. THE ADMINISTRATION MOVED TOO SLOW ON ENRON AND 9/11, BUT THEY MOVED PRETTY FAST TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR BUSINESS PARTNERS. HOW CONNECTED TO THE SAUDI'S IS THIS ADMINISTRATION FINANCIALLY?
THEN WHEN WE NEEDED DNA SAMPLES FROM THE FAMILY IT WAS TOO LATE.
NubianNewYorker
Dear BuzzFlash,
why isn't anyone talking about the aspirin factory story. remember when president clinton was severely ridiculed when he tried to stop osama by bombing a factory in africa. windbag jokes about this all the time saying clinton bombed an aspirin factory. rub monkey boys nose in that!
philip vaughn reynoldsburg, ohio
Dear Buzzflash,
(We love the mailbag.) Just a little something dim george and his caretakers, cheney, and such, aught to know. WE the people of America and the world want to know, WHAT'S THE STORY!!!!! Not just the Congress and Senate, but *WE* have to know. Who dropped the ball??? Too many people have died, needlessly for someone's stupidity. We're sure george stole the election with the intention of thinking he could do a better job than anyone else in protecting America. O.k. so he was wrong, but no one else should have to die so he can look presidential. *Tell the truth george, and if impeachment is the answer to you and your crew, that goes with the job you all stole!* We can't bring back loved ones, but we can sure try to prevent something like this tragedy from happening again.
Loyal Buzzflash Readers
Dear BuzzFlash,
Good for you, Senator Clinton. If the Bush administration still wants to appear innocent of knowing about 911, then why did Ashcroft order his people to avoid commercial flights just prior to that tragic day? Why did Ashcroft take a charter plane for his vacation and avoid commercial airlines if he wasn't worried. Remember also that Cheney was asking Bush about his order to shoot down that jetliner because it was headed to the White House. Remember that Bush did not care how many civilians would lose their lives. So how can he hide behind a lie that says he would not have put the American people at risk. He indicated to Cheney and even Cheney said that he WOULD put their lives at risk. This is very important to publish since the corporate media is too afraid to tell the truth.
M.
Ridings
Houston,
Texas
Dear BuzzFlash,
I just saw Michael Moore on CNN....speaking impromptu from the Cannes Film Festival to a CNN reporter, he very succinctly and in less than thirty seconds described how the Taliban met in 1997 with oil company executives in Houston to discuss putting a pipeline through Afghanistan. I'll summarize what he said as best I can: "....while Bush was governor of Texas. And who was at the meeting? Haliburton. And who was the CEO? Dick Cheney. And who did the feasibility study? Enron. I mean, come on. This information is in the Washington Post, the New York Times. Why aren't YOU guys covering this? You won't even show this (meaning his interview) on CNN!"
Well, they did it, can you believe it???!!! Michael Moore you're my hero. Good job. I hope they replay that snippet.
Maybe it's the beginning of the end for Bush and Co.
elaine in Petaluma
Hi Buzz:
Well, it's Saturday, just two days after the news of Bush's pre knowledge of 9/11 and all the poll results are out. And, of course, the polls all favor Bush - why doesn't this surprise me? What will it take to bring down those numbers -- maybe Bush caught with his pants down with some dolly, while smoking crack, drunk and ripping up the holy bible? I don't think so....The media controlled by Corporate America bought and paid for him and will attempt to protect him until hell freezes over. No matter how much Bush and his corporate over the hill administration mess up, they will come out smelling like roses, the well being of our Country be damned.
I always try to be optimistic but this will blow over just like Enron did. Why can't one reporter ask why after taking office in January 2001, eight short months later he was on a month's vacation, safe and secure in Crawford and Dickie was off shooting birds in Montana? Coincidence, sure... Now, Cheney and all the Republicans are bashing the Democrats for making this a political issue and I'm sure, as before the Dems will back off with their little tails between their legs, thus again reinforcing those high poll rating for Bush. Dickie and Condi are scheduled to be all over the Sunday talk shows, propping up their boy while condemning the Democrat's horrible attack of Bush. What a joke.
My hope is the polls are as rigged as the election was. Too many people I talk to are very down on the current resident of the White House - the November mid term election should shed some light on how people are really feeling.
Regards,
Marlene W.
Dear BuzzFlash,
In the last few days the Bush people have injected politics into their "war effort." It DOESN'T MATTER if, as they say, the Democrats did it first. They responded politically which says that THEIR approach is now coming from a political concern. AND they have Karl Rove running the foreign policy! What does that tell us?
Here's my point - They are supposed to be the grown-ups running this country. But in the middle of this blast of politics they put out this week (whether the Democrats did it first or not) they announce a NEW "improved" I mean "enhanced" terrorist threat. The result is that NONE OF US have any way of knowing whether this is a REAL threat or part of the politics they have been playing. We have no way of knowing whether to be scared and hide, or to ignore this.
This is really upsetting.
Dave Johnson
Dear Buzzflash,
This is the way I see it: Bush Lied & 3000 Died on 9/11... I depend on BuzzFlash for the truth.
Marcia
Wright
Fort Wayne, IN
Dear BuzzFlash,
I think we need to learn all we can as to why investigations were stopped regarding the Bin Laden's once Bush took office. Every time I hear the republicans blame Clinton, this always comes to mind. Another question on that same matter is .. Who exactly was our Commander in Chief 9/11/01? Clinton or Bush ..... Where does the Buck stop? ...
R
Kinney
Seattle, WA
ps: he knew
Dear Buzzflash,
I guess George Bush just opened the tax bill on his trifecta winnings.
Steve
Hi, Buzz:
Here it is a few days after the 'bush debacle' was exposed and we have TWO alerts: one that al Qaeda is planning something "as big or bigger than 09/11" AND apartments in No. California have been put on alert.
Wag the dog, anyone?
Liz
Dear BuzzFlash,
HYPOCRISY
ALERT
CBS:
May 18, 2002 18:43:23
Get THIS!!:
(CBS) After first objecting to a congressional investigation of the administration's handling of warnings before the Sept. 11 attacks, the White House now says a probe could be legitimate, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Knoller, but only if it is conducted in a non-partisan manner and isn't designed to give Democrats a political advantage.
The White House doesn't want "a fishing expedition" that becomes, in spokesman Ari Fleischer's words, "an endless waste of taxpayer money in an open-ended congressional investigation," Knoller says.
<snip>
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/15/attack/main50 9096.shtml
So - Ari "The Liar" Fleischer says they don't want a "fishing expedition that becomes an endless waste of taxpayer money in an open-ended contressional investigation"
We assume Ari means a "fishing expedition that becomes an endless waste of taxpayer money in an open-ended investigation" JUST like the one that cost taxpayers $77 Million dollars and took 8+ years when Congressional Republicans went on a spree investigating The Clintons?
No, Liar Ari doesn't want THAT. Funny how things change when the boot is on the other's party's foot, isn't it? Nothing's Changed.
Pretentious Hypocrisy is STILL the Hallmark of Republicans!
A BuzzFlash Reader
Hi BuzzFlash,
Just noticed your link about Time Magazine naming Ari Fleisher Person of the Week, and I wondered if you knew anything about the possibility that Time Magazine may be padding their subscription rolls. Why would they? Maybe because now that they're blatantly a Republican mouthpiece they are trying to make the Bush agenda look popular?
I'm asking because they've been sending me a free subscription for several months now - which has been going straight from the mailbox to the trash. I have sworn off buying Time Magazine ever since they made The Thief in Chief "Man of the Century" (or was it Millennium?) It just finally occurred to me that they may be sending out a whole bunch of free subscriptions to make themselves look popular - either to bolster the Thief's bogus popularity image, or maybe there were a lot more readers who got as disgusted with Time's pandering as I did.
Just asking. :)
Maggie Bryan
Dear BuzzFlash,
The Carlyle Group will make million whether or not the Crusader is scrapped or no says the Washington Post. Here is an excerpt of the article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11748-2002May13.html
"Carlyle's leadership is well known. In addition to Carlucci, it includes former secretary of state James A. Baker III; former Office of Management and Budget director Richard Darman; William E. Conway Jr., former chief financial officer of MCI Communications Corp.; and David M. Rubenstein, a former domestic policy adviser in the Carter White House."
Hello? What about Poppy Bush? Isn't he still there or is the Post making a purposeful omission?
John Lux
Dear BuzzFlash,
This situation is becoming frighteningly intolerable. The democrats must show courage and make a move to get the CIA/FBI info/briefing documents.
Bush is coming to Berlin next week--staying at the Adlon, right across from the Brandenburg Gate near the Reichstag....lots of room for protestors, and believe me, there will be some. I can't fathom why his handlers would send him to Berlin. What's next on the list, Paris? It's as if he wants to destabalize every part of the world.
Michelle Winter
