Well bashing executives is fashionable indeed but its nothing more than superstition. Executive or not, anyone who has ever held a leadership position knows what I'm talking about. Everybody in the organization cant be informed about everything all the time. The only benefit to me "peddling such a cover story" is to illuminate a very clear and likely possibility other than the grand conspiracy asserted or implied by Sibel. Did it ever occur to her that she may have been fed intentionally false documents just to see if she was being honest in her translations? I have no idea what actually happened. I am not at all against a congressional inquiry into the matter. The only thing I know is that it should not be played out in public for national security reasons. There are certain things that the public has no right to know and are not in the publics best interest to reveal. Sibel's attempts to get the information public undermine the very national security she claims to be so concerned about.
There is only one circumstance under which I would advocate making this kind of investigation public and that would be if some portions of our government were actually complicit in the 911 attacks. I don't think Sibel suggested that or has ever stated that there is any evidence of that.
Your rationale about my "cover story" being identical to what a liar would say gives absolutely no credence to the fact that it is very likely true. Citing a plausible explanation as a likely cover-up without giving it any consideration is characteristic of conspiracy theories.
It's obvious to anyone who has looked into it that the whole point of Sibel's story is to "blame the Jews".
Here we have her friends on the professional left arguing that Mossad has infiltrated the FBI for the purpose of suppressing information, and only Sibel was "johnny on the spot" to find this out.
Or, examining it from the point of view of the Iranian religious police, poor old Sibel is being prevented from speaking out by the International Jewish Conspiracy headed by John Ashcraft and financed by Dick Cheney.
"Bashing Executives" may or may not be popular, but it's been my observation that as you move up the chain of command in the government, less and less is known about more and more. Presumably, if you could get to the top, nothing will be known about everything.
Sure puts the President in a bind!
I encourage some serious modifications of the way we select executives in the career levels of the agencies of the federal government. I am tired of these ignoramuses who float along 6 inches above the water, and are too busy to think about where we should go next.
There is only one circumstance under which I would advocate making this kind of investigation public and that would be if some portions of our government were actually complicit in the 911 attacks. I don't think Sibel suggested that or has ever stated that there is any evidence of that.How about if they were just afraid of publicity because of Bush's business ties to the Bin Ladens and the aid that his father is now famous for giving directly to OBL himself?
Personally, I think that is what happened. Someone just felt ANY publicity concerning Bin Laden was bad for Bush. It's like a public corporation disclosing it is experiencing increased competition from a part of its business it spun off years ago.