Sins of Commission -Behind the effort to blame Bush for September 11

The Wall Street Journal-Opinion Journal ^ | 3/22/04

[alloysteel]

The members of the commission were to be named by a "bi-partisan" selection committee, with input from Bush and the Republicans, and Tom Daschle and the Democrats.

Bush has also nominated a number of highly qualified candidates to serve on Federal courts, some seriously needing to be filled. Would the names of a few people to sit on a commission be the hill you want to die on?

All Bush's better nominees were forced off the panel, for "conflict of interest" reasons, and hacks were sent up instead. Strangely, none of these were found to have "conflicts of interest".

[Jim Noble]

It is so obvious that this politically motivated. Why didn't we hear him speak out in over two years?

I share your scorn for this pusillanimous weakling.

Call him the poltroon he is, and I'm right there with you.

No laws against books, though.

Hillary doesn't share your taste in books, I'm sure. And her Justice Department, even less so.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Yep. The entire world knew UBL was a threat when he was interviewed in a world exclusive interview, by CNN's Nic Robertson in August of 1998, televised in it's entirety to the world via CNN and CNN International.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Like this conflict of interest

[freeperfromnj]

No laws against books, though.

Unless you're Newt Gingrich! Then the double standard applies.

[tkathy]

Maybe the reps should run some ads specifically featuring the positive accomplishments in Iraq, with actual schools, hospitals, businesses, oil pipe lines, etc.

[palmer]

You will recall that Bush declared that UBL would have to be dealt with after the Cole bombing during the campaign, didn't you?

Got a link? I'll trade you for a bunch of "we need missile defense now" links.

[Brilliant]

The DNC is shamelessly using 911 for political reasons.

[alloysteel]

And Roy Disney gets along famously with Michael Eisner on the corporate board of Disney, too. Some diametric opposites can have interests in the same corporations which are producing some pretty generous revenues, and be reluctant to give up their position just because they are not ideologically congruent.

[Diogenesis]

HISTORICALLY IGNORED BY CLARK FOR REASONS UNCLEAR

1992 Bombing in Israeli Embassy in Argentina, March 17,1992
1993 Attempted Assassination of Pres. Bush Sr., April 14,1993
1993 First World Trade Center bombing, February 26th, 7 Killed, Hundreds injured
1994 Air France Hijacking, Dec 24,1994
1995 Attack on US Diplomats in Pakistan, Mar 8,1995
1995 Saudi Military Installation Attack, Nov 13, 1995
1995 Kashmiri Hostage taking, July 4,1995
1996 Khobar Towers attack
1996 Sudanese Missionarys Kidnapping, Aug 17,1996
1996 Paris Subway Explosion, Dec 3,1996
1997 Israeli Shopping Mall Bombing, Sept 4, 1997
1997 Yemeni Kidnappings, Oct 30,1997
1998 Somali Hostage taking crisis, April 15,1998
1998 U.S. Embassy Bombing in Peru, Jan 15, 1998
1998 U.S. Kenya Embassy blown up, 100's murdered
1998 U.S. Tanzania Embassy blown up, 100's murdered
1999 Plot to blow up Space Needle (thwarted)
2000 USS Cole attacked, many U.S. Navy sailors murdered
2000 Manila Bombing, Dec 30,2000

[section9]

No. And I just saw Condi Rice rip your hero a new one on national television. Just another ass-clown looking for his fifteen minutes of fame.

Look, I remember Bush being asked about Al Qaeda and the Cole bombing by David Letterman on the David Letterman Show in October of 2000. If you are seriously going to peddle the proposition that Bush was ignoring AQ, you need to do better than scream "where's your link!"

The fact is, the Bush Administration came up with a strategy to attack AQ in Afghanistan, not the Clinton people. This poor chump is just trying to deflect attention away from the criminal malfeasance of his freinds in the Democratic Party. Trying to hang your hat on this guy's testimony is a huge mistake.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[palmer]

While I was searching for these Bush missile defense links:
http://www.pstripes.com/dec00/ed123000d.html
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010126-6.html

I found this from Feb 2001:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20010213-1.html
We have no higher priority than the defense of our people against terrorist attack. To succeed, America knows we must work with our allies. We did not prevail together in the Cold War only to go our separate ways, pursuing separate plans with separate technologies.

My statement about Bush's priorities was wrong.

[wayoverontheright]

As for Mr. Clarke, he is now flacking his book by blaming the Bush Administration for failing to capture Osama bin Laden while offering the novel sociological insight (in last week's Time magazine) that "maybe we should be asking why the terrorists hate us."

It is the WRONG QUESTION TO ASK. The question is WHY DID THEY ATTACK US, and the answer is ,BECAUSE OF A PROFOUND LACK OF RESPECT.

[section9]

Oh, Christ, that's only the half of it. It's fun to watch Rice tag along with this guy on the morning shows and rip him to shreds, however. This should tell everyone that the WH information warfare people are up to the job. This guy wanted to get his book's pro-Kerry argument out without answer. Too bad. Condi is in the game, and she is pissed!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Milligan]

They want to go back to the law enforcement days of the Clinton Administration.

[mewzilla]

Note to the WSJ: What took you so long?

[EQAndyBuzz]

"Fact is, they ignored it"

Well there were probably other things on their mind, like finding their telephones and everything else that the Clintonistas and their cabal stole or switched around to make it difficult for the incoming administration to funtion.

Fact is, Clinton spent eight years playing good Socialist and was the enabler for Al Quaedas birth.

[palmer]

You need to read my #32

[bushfamfan]

I don't worry about their reports that the Clintoon administration 'warned the Bush administration of al Qaeda'. That is just laughable since they had a full 7 yrs. to deal with al Qaeda and Bin Laden after the first WTC bombing and the Bushies can sure hit back on this effect. I guess they are pretty desperate, but Clintoon and Demonrats will get the blame and this attempt to smear this administration is not going to do them any good.

[StillProud2BeFree]

Yep it's not a good idea to piss off a very very intelligent lady like Condi. She shows a lot of class and consistently rips him to shreds in such a way that he may not realize it for a week.

That's one smart lady.