[jwalsh07]

I'm not interested in placing blame as much as I'm interested in government finding a way to work together and give the necessary tools to the CIA and FBI etc., in order to do their job right.

That would seem to be the original idea. Unfortunately, it has morphed into a show trail.

The genesis of jihadism began in Iran in 1979 when a weak US President named Jimmy Carter allowed the jihadists to hold America hostage for over a year.

This commisssion is fixated on 8 months in 2001 and one President George W Bush.

An honest look would be examining the Church Commisssion, the hostages in Iran, a tepid response to Lebanon and airline hijackings and bobings, 8 years of a Clinton administration that allowed jihadism to flourish and a Congress that stood by and let it all happen for 25 years.

Why does Dickhead Clarke get more time than George Tenet, James Woolsey, Louis Freeh, et al?

Inquiring minds want to know.

[freedumb2003]

An honest look would be examining the Church Commisssion, the hostages in Iran, a tepid response to Lebanon and airline hijackings and bobings, 8 years of a Clinton administration that allowed jihadism to flourish and a Congress that stood by and let it all happen for 25 years.

Don't forget Somaloia. We can draw a straight line from our "withdrawal" with our tils between our legs and 9/11.

If this commission doesn't come out with that as it's first bullet point (pun intended) then we will know for sure that it is the sham it no doubt is.

[CyberAnt]

It just still smells like jealousy. Remember how the dems howled because Clinton didn't get to have a 9/11 on his watch. We know Clinton had many events on his watch, and chose to meet with Monica instead. It was his choice.

Like Rush was explaining today - first they said Bush was "a cowboy", he was "reckless", and he "rushed to war" .. now they're trying to say the opposite - that Bush didn't do anything. They simply can't have it both ways. They can try - but it just won't work.

However, I've read quite a few reports about how Clarke gave one type of information to several government committees, and then another type of infomation was written in his book. Both Saxby Chambis and Christopher Shays have made that statement on the record.

I believe Clarke is discredited to the point that it won't take much more information to totally destroy the lying information in his book. That's what happened to O'Neill. The media went nuts and then after a couple of weeks, O'Neill was totally discredited and the story was over.

I believe it will happen the same way this time. Hillary's plans to smear Bush will never work out - never!! She's fighting against God .. and HE ALWAYS WINS!!