Piano World Home Page Forums Restricted and Archives The Coffee Room What Is Scaring Him?

It seems to me that if it is true that 9/11 was the most devastating event to occur to this country since WWII, the understanding why it was not prevented -- when there was so much information available -- is extremely important. It is important for us to know what happened, why and who is accountable for the inability of the FBI, CIA and the rest of the intelligence community to protect this country. And it is important to make the changes that need to be made -- and allowing those who failed to develop their own reform may likely not be in the best interest of the nation. Do you ask a dysfunctional family to diagnose and treat its own dysfunction?

Therefore, the hearing begun today by the Congress is extremely important. As are all of the other investigations which should come. And there should also e a formal Special Investigation -- just as there was after Pearl harbor, the Kennedy assassinatiuon and other major catstrophes. Yes, security must be maintained, but there is much which can be released and heard by the public that will not compromise our security.

And yet, Il Duce Bush2 is not only luke warm to the idea of the joint Intelliegence Committee's investigation, but opposes other investigations altogether.

One has to wonder why? Why is he afraid of the Congress and the people digging deep to find out what happened? Indeed, why is he not leading the movement to investigate?

What is he afraid of?

He's afraid of subjecting the country to even more depressing sleaze and trash left over from the Clinton presidency. The stupid screwups and incompetence is the result of the Clintons gutting the agencies and tying their hands. All this is going to do is bring out even more examples of how devastating the Clintons were to this country. Bush figures its best to just move forward and fix the problem instead of looking back at more Clinton sleaze.

By the way George, now that you've read where Hillary prostituted her self respect once again, this time by claiming she used to be a duck hunter, are you anywhere near ready to concede that both of the Clintons are nothing more opportunistic, self serving trash who would lie about anything, use anyone, and endanger the very safety of our country in order to have personal gain, and to promote their Socialist Marxist agenda?

Janet Reno

But darn it Larry, they were just so entertaining!

Like watching a train wreck! :p

MAYBE because they have other important things to do right now, like protecting the country. Sure, it would be great to launch a full-blown investigation, but right now that is NOT our number one priority. Our priority is to keep the country safe from terrorists, who's strikes are looming not to far in the distance. An investigation like that one can be very costly, as well, and can be distracting for Congress and every party involved. I think that, yes, an investigation is called for, but now is not the time.

At the beginning of WWII, Admiral Kimmel and General Short (the commanding officers of the navy and army installations at Pearl Harbor, and I hope I don't have their services reversed) were placed on leave, with the intention of investigating their roles in failing to prepare for the Pearl Harbor attack. It was realized at the time that an impartial investigation as to their responsibility/culpability would be difficult, if not impossible, in the midst of the conflict. The investigation was concluded after the end of the war.

This situation, however, is different. Nobody thought that anyone was going to get the drop on us again during the war. Here, though, we need to determine what we can do to change our procedures to better protect against other terrorists, a far more difficult task than keeping our eyes peeled for the approach of an enemy naval task force. Nobody, the previous administration and the current one included, is likely to look good in this. Still, it will take an investigation based outside the administration to equally balance competing claims and explanations from the various departments within the administration, to restructure things to give us better awareness of likely threats. It shouldn't be done to assign blame, but to figure out how to make things work better.

During the breaks in the still ongoing (but without me, thank goodness)arbitration, I found out that the arbitrator was a retired Major General, and was also a former member of the CIA, having been stationed in Russia in the 1950's and 1960's. His take on current events was quite interesting. He criticized the current agency for being far, far more political an organization that it was when he was in it. He placed the agency's current intelligence problems not on Bush, not on Clinton, but rather on Jimmy Carter and then CIA Director (Stansfield Turner?), along with the liberals in Congress, who he claimed completely gutted the clandestine espionage capability of the agency. He posited that it takes about 30 years to really entrench a good espionage network, and what capabilities we had were at that time essentially reduced to zero. He believed that the current failures were directly related to this agency evisceration, and that even if the agency started to re-establish it capabilities immediately after the Carter Administration (which it obviously didn't), we would still be suffering due to the "thirty year" timeframe.

Well, it seems that Clinton had far more to do with it than George wants to have to accept. Remember Vince Foster, George? He's the one who committed suicide and then after he died drove himself to a park to lie down . You remember. He had just been called as a witness in the Whitewater scandal that was just starting to take off. Go here to read about someone who is scheduled to testify next month about the Clinton's involvement in all of this.

Wonder if we'll be reading about *his* "suicide" between now and then.......

Larry,

I'm not sure...., but are you insinuating that Vince Forster was eliminated by the Clinton Administration?

Yep.

Take a look at what really happened.

Larry, you are assuming I am a Clinton supporter. Why? Because I find Bush2 incompetent and seemngly corrupt?

I was VERY pleased yesterday evening when I heard the Congressional Committee has decided to widen its probe all the way back to Reagan.

We were attacked. We are (supposedly) at war. Our civil liberties are being diminished. The entire country is in shock. It is now clear we should not have been attacked -- that there was more than enough information which would have stopped the attack if the FBI (in particular) and the CIA had been doing their jobs.

Something went wrong somewhere. The seeds of the problem were undoubtely planted long ago. We need to find out what went wrong, why it went wrong and what to do about it -- and as fast as we can.

I ask those of you who think there is more important things to do because we are fighting a war -- what is more important than making sure we are not attacked again.

As much as I dislike Bush2 (could anyone tell that? I've try to be subtle! <g>) I cannot understand why he is not leading the charge to find out what is going on and how things need to be changed. It is our intelligence network that will stop the terrorists in the future -- not several thousand troops on Afganistan. What could be a more important facet of this war than making sure the intelligence community is doing its job? They are the front line against terrorists in this country. So far, they have failed and we are paying the price.

The only thing I can think of that would keep Bush2 from not wanting as thorough and extensive investigatin as possible is that he is afraid of the political ramifications. Why is he not leading the charge? Why is he not demanding to know what went wrong?

When Reagan was informed of the Iran Contra debacle led by Oliver North, he went on TV, took responsibility and then said HE wanted a thorough investigation. Why doesn't Bush2 do the same thing -- especially when the stakes are so much higher?

This is just the sort of thing I am talking about George. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Tell the truth George - Bush has agreed and openly called for an investigation. He wants a joint committee of Congress to conduct one investigation. Many in Congress (some with Presidential aspirations) want to run their own little rodeo, along with the usual grandstanding and photo-ops, not to mention the statesman-like thoughtful glances at the red light on top of the TV camera.

'Fess up. What do you want - a political circus or the truth?

Jolly,

Might you be suggesting that some of these honorables see an opportunity for <gasp> political grandstanding along with being seen in public with all their side men and dancing girls?