How is it partisan when the investigating intelligence committee is headed by a Republican? That might help make a possible cover up a partisan issue for the Repubs. If anything expand it to make it a truly independent non partisan issue.
But a partisan politics game in 1998 about a blowjob is OK? At least here, you're investigating the death of 3,000 American citizens, not the death of a cheap Gap dress.
Bullsh-t. How is investigating how the terrorists smuggled in weapons going to make a political difference? But don't you think it's of pressing importance to know that? How is the republican, GWB appointed head of the committee, going to use it for political gain? Perhaps, after the fact, somebody not connected with the committeee like Howard Dean or whatever could attempt to use it (if it was sufficiently critical of the Bush administration -- and htere is no indication that it is or will be) for political gain...........big deal. That is no reason to suppress the work of the committee. It "might" be used against the President in an election? Big deal, the democrats aren't in control of the committee. This is not a spanish inquisition like the Starr investigation. Not the "same coin" at all.
Yeah, I want to repeat it too... True or False: Bill Clinton, as Chief Executive of the United States, lied before a Grand Jury about something that everyone knew he was doing? Of course, I'd rather dis the blue dress. Seems to me that it's better to drag a c*m-stained blue dress through the ringer of partisan politics before running a national sorrow and tragedy through that same kind of ringer. Hey, I'd like to see some kind of investigation which would serve a constructive purpose for our homeland defense. How do you keep the vultures off though? The blame certainly extends back through Clinton's and maybe even Father Bush's terms as Presidents, but my hunch is that the hyenas will settle upon current President Bush as a whipping boy pre-Election 2004.
Originally posted by SamFisher How is investigating how the terrorists smuggled in weapons going to make a political difference? <b>If it could only step there, fine. This would be important knowledge, but you know it won't stop there. Would you consider post-poning until after the election?</b> But don't you think it's of pressing importance to know that? <b>Pressing? I don't know. It's already been 2 1/2 years.</b> How is the republican, GWB appointed head of the committee, going to use it for political gain? <b>He's not.</b> Perhaps, after the fact, somebody not connected with the committeee like Howard Dean or whatever could attempt to use it (if it was sufficiently critical of the Bush administration -- and htere is no indication that it is or will be) for political gain...........big deal. <b>I imagine it will be critical of the last three presidents, as in "the buck stops here."</b> That is no reason to suppress the work of the committee. It "might" be used against the President in an election? Big deal, the democrats aren't in control of the committee. This is not a spanish inquisition like the Starr investigation. <b>Do you really doubt that it won't be used in an exagerated fashion to tarnish Bush's image and popularity as a run-up to the re-election?</b> Not the "same coin" at all. <b>It's a political dubloon: it's politically expedient for the Republicans to defer while it's politically expedient for the Democrats to proceed. Looks like the same damn coin to me!</b>
Sure, we could definitely postpone till after the election. The more time the better. That's what the committee wants: More time, the Republicans are saying "time's up" for their own selfish reasons. That's right, it's been 2.5 years (of course, thanks to foot dragging, the committee has only been around for some of that), and we still don't have a freaking clue about very important aspects of the most devestating attack on American soil. There's a statute of limitations on this type of thing now? You don't get it, who cares what democrats want it to proceed, or why..the political side effects are of no consequence to the importance of the investigation itself. They don't have any power here anyway. it's the Committee itself that wants to continue---which is headed by a Republican. Obviously he is not acting for partisan reasons. However, Republicans want to stop it, and they have the power to do so and claim that they will. .
Wow. It's suddenly about politics when we want to know why 3,000 Americans were murdered, sparking the invasion and occupation of two sovereign nations and transforming the political climate of the entire planet? Gimme a break. Comparing this -- *THIS* -- to some god-damn perjury case is absolutely ridiculous. I honestly cannot believe the comparison is being made. This is more unbelievable than the disinterest Republicans have in investigating Sept. 11. You would think that true "patriots" would want to know why 3,000 of their fellow Americans were slaughtered. But then again, from a political standpoint, they've already gotten all the political benefit from the situation -- an investigation would only bring bad news. And squelching bad news for political gain is obviously more important than what should matter most.
This is the other side of the coin to which I referred... Great. Translated, you think it's better to put millions of Americans at risk of another terrorist attack by not learning everything we can about our failures than risk some political fallout.
Dude, we KNOW why they died, 20 crazy terrorists hijacked those planes. What people are asking is "why weren't they caught?" This is ridiculous....it is not minority reports, we don't know for certain when a crime is going to be committed. Intelligence gathering is hit or miss, just look at the lack of WMD, when all intelligence pointed to him having them. The tragedy happened, look into it for sure, revamp the way the agencies share information, but I do not think you will find anyone at actual fault. DD
You are correct about Clinton. He did lie and deserves to be brought to taks for lying under oath. But the investigation wasn't about that. The investigation started without any regard to that and went through many twists and turns before that was even considered. So it wasn't an investigation about whether the President lied under oath. You are also right that undoubtedly some people will harp on the investigation for political reasons, but that's no reason not to investigate. This is too important to scrap just because some people will use the investigation for their own gain.
No, we don't. We don't know why, becaue we don't know how the system failed. That is the most important thing. What weapons did they use? How did they get them on board? Did they have assistance here in the US? Who was the 20th hijacker? Why didn't he get here? How did these guys get in? We don't know sh=t. We know bits and pieces here and there, but that's it. You think you know, but most of what you think you "know" is conjecture and hypothesis. Seriously, you are just being stupid about it at this point. It's pretty much indefensible to halt the inquiry out of fear that it might implicate President Bush or his administration or the Republican party; look at this thread, the onlyl rationale on display for this act of political cowardice consists of "whatever!" Smart....
It's easy to dismiss those guys as crazy. We rationalize that if they're crazy, they were just lucky that day. But deep down, we know their plan was cold and rational. They were obviously organized, highly trained and discplined. They took *years* to formulate this simple plan -- based only on what they knew about vulnerabilities in airport security. "Evil-doers" are not always maniacal, illogical idiots. Sometimes, they are calculating and smart. And unless we're brutally honest about what *really* went wrong Sept. 11, 2001, we'll never be any safer from them.
It wasn't the blowjob. It was a President lying under oath Why should liberals worry about the Patriot Act? If you've got nothing to hide...? Oh, because its about something else, about principles? Well there you go. Let it die already.
Aren't you putting the cart before the horse? The purpose of the investigations was to prove the allegations-- since Clinton was denying them. The Grand Jury didn't come first; it came later. Yes, investigation was ongoing but investigations weren't launched by the Grand Jury appearance of President Clinton. On a side note.... This may be a minority opinion, but I have a different take on the 9/11 tragedy: it was a simple operation. 19 guys who were already here or who could get here easily under the lax policy of an open society that had been in place for years. Their only weapons were box-cutters. Their mission lasted less than an hour. Airline schedules are easily available. Flying lessons are easily available. This did not take extensive planning or particular skill-- just treachery. The toughest part was finding 19 murdering zealots who were ready to go with the plan-- and we're not sure that all 19 knew it was a suicide mission. A commission won't tell us how to tighten airport security. A commission won't tell us how to tighten immigration laws. A commission won't tell us how to improve security on flights. What we need to do in the future is pretty plainly evident-- and we've done most or all of it. More enforcement of the laws in place is obviously needed. The commission may have a higher purpose, but it's results will become a political football subject to distortion. Who needs it, really?
This is where I quit reading. It's really sad that people today still aren't able to understand what happened with the Clinton impeachment. Some people just don't 'get it'.
This just keeps getting better. So because the Clinton supporters obfuscated the issue in a perjury matter, that stands as reason for the Bush supporters to do the same in a war matter? I have to say, of all the automoatic support Bush/USA at any cost threads Ive seen, with the possible exception of the Pax Americana bragging threads in the early days of the war, this one is the the most notable for the manner in which some Bush supporters have shown that they really don't care much about anything like facts, arguments, consistency, etc. when those get in the way of supporting the President. The same people who have been citing 9-11 as the reason for any and every action the administration chooses to make for the last 2 years, irrespective of whether it was done honestly, intelligently, accurately, or whatever are now the one's saying 'let's move on.' without even investigating the matter, because it might not be solvable, or it has gotten partisan!?!?! Partisan!?!?!? The committees demanding that Bush et al quit dragging their feet and getting in the way of the investigation for over a year are failry equally composed on Republicans and Democrats, and all studies show that the party which has been incredibly partisan about the war and all things related to it since the beginning has been the Republicans...but now you'll supprt the administration in yet another attempt to undermine the investigation into what we have all heard is the excuse and cause of all our actions?!?!!? Unbelievably obvious and weak. Motives clear for all to see.
