[LS]

Well, consider this: ANYONE who has ANY kind of proof for ANYTHING other than the official conclusion has a big fat book contract awaiting him/her; appearances on Fox, "60 Minutes," etc. Moreover, I think it unlikely that Bush wouldn't know: no matter how Clinton "sanitized" the records, people on the inside would talk to other people on the inside and would sooner or later get up to Condi, then Bush. It's just not reasonable---IF the documents and/or witnesses exist.

Moreover, even if there was no direct evidence, if there was suspicion, can you really see Rummy or Ashcroft or Ridge refusing to reopen the investigation if there was the slightest doubt in their mind that AQ might have been involved? If for no other reason than to get further leads and evidence, they would have re-opened the investigation. But they didn't. We can't have it both ways: either the report is right, and Bush has no reason to investigate, or the report is a lie and Bush is covering up too.

[GBA]

There are quite a books that refute the official story about TWA Flt. 800. As soon as they came out, the authors were either ignored or were savaged and labeled as kooks.

And let's say that Condi and Bush and the rest of the administration "know" that the official story is a lie, but they can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt to an unreasonable press corp. On how many Clinton scandals has that scenario been played out? For example, do you believe that Vince Foster committed suicide and/or that he committed suicide in Ft. Marcy park?

You can have it several ways. Maybe Bush believes it. Or perhaps they know report is a lie but the Bush administration can't prove it. We live in a political world. Making such unprovable charges would create a host of enemies out of the people and organizations that signed off on the report, so the administration either quietly investigates or is busy enough with other things to let it go. You have to pick your battles and maybe right now Flt. 800's not the hill they want to die on.

Heck, you can't even get the democrats to admit that they publically stated that they believed that Saddam had WMDs. And look at the heat Bush has taken for the British report on the Niger uranium story that turned out to be true. For that matter, look at how Clinton is dancing around his missed opportunity to take OBL from the Sudanese.

If Bush has this much trouble getting public acknowledgment for these things, do you really expect him to, assuming that he knows but can't prove, publically refute the official story and say that a terrorist missile took out Flt. 800? And why must it be AQ? Was there even knowledge of AQ at that time?

President Bush is not responsible for fixing everything that happened on Clinton's watch. Clinton has spent his entire life covering his tracks and he's still a free man. And let's not forget Sen. Clinton is still at work in high places keeping the bodies buried.