"It is my understanding that the point of the commission is to "take to task" those responsible for protecting the US before 911. Can we not wait for the commission to summarize and publish their findings?
"
Again, Rob, you're talking to a point that I'm not making. I was commenting (again, read the post) about Condi Rice not appearing on the record and in public. That would prevent a public accounting and, thusly, prevent the admin from being taken to task. Timeline had nothing to do with my post.
DL wrote: "...nobody in the administration has even said so much as a 'whoops'!
rvg: "True. But isn't it rather pointless and politically retarded for Bush to accept responsibility for 911 before the final report- in light of the fact that Clinton does indeed share in the blame?"
A Clarke-style "we screwed up" would go a long way towards restoring some margin of credability to this admin. They don't need to say "this happened because of us", just acknowledge that mistakes were made. This "Perfect terrorist" notion they are pushing is provably false (For instance: Z. Moussoui was kicked out of a flight school 50mi from my old home town and reported to the FBI for wanting to learn how to "fly planes, but not take off or land them")
" It wouldn't surprise me if you've had formal training in debate. "
Or it just might be that about this set of issues I happen to be right. Funny how strong arguments get when they are true. The "yew jus' a-know haw tu tawk all good an stuff" thing doesn't get mileage with me.
"You're a tactician but I'm on to you....ding-a-ling-a-ling"
'ding-a-ling-a-ling'? Hmmmm.... I'll have to look that up
Current Events » in reply to Waiting.
Be my guest, hell should freeze over sometine in the next 10,000MY
The whole thread (56 posts)
- Seven new NATO members
- It should have zero members.
- re: Seven new NATO members
- Your own post says it all.
- re: Your own post says it all.
- PS We do have a flame board.
- What's your hurry?
- Brass tacks
- Rusty Nails
- Donors pledge $4.4 bln to Afghanistan this year [Link]
- Use of Denial tactic No.1
- No deal, sparky
- re: No deal, sparky
- How about answering some of *my* questions?
- Arguing for argument's sake?
- Well, a simple "No, Davin, I'm not going to answer any questions that would have me back up my narrow, misleading and selectively quotes statistics" would suffice
- oh, and BTW
- Arguing for argument's sake?
- How about answering some of *my* questions?
- re: No deal, sparky
- No deal, sparky
- Rusty Nails
- Whatta maroon
- re: Your own post says it all.
- Your own post says it all.
