[BILL_C]

And why hasn't Bergler been indicted??? Why should a Rat get preferential treatment???

Bush can't indict anybody.

Although it's pretty obvious, no one, and I mean no one will believe it, not even Jack Cashill.

Let's see, we have bombings, we have an airplane shot down with what hundreds of people say was a missile, and we call it a conspiracy theory.

We have the 9/11 Commission with one of Clinton's people who had to be on the Commission (Jamie Gorelick).

We had Sandy Berger stuffing TOP SECRET documents in to his underwear and stealing them as he was preparing for the 9/11 hearings.

So you ask WHAT WERE THEY TRYING TO HIDE?

Isn't it OBVIOUS that the bombing, the airplane shootdown with what HUNDREDS of witnesses say was a missile were terrorist attacks sponsored by a foreign government? The government was Iraq. Jayna Davis spelled it out clearly in her book, THE THIRD TERRORIST. John Lehman during the 9/11 hearings holds up her book and tries to make sense of it all, but he fails miserably, because the unthinkable happened.

Clinton simply made the decision that YOU, the American public, was not going to be told that this was terrorism. Instead, it's a center fuel tank explosion. Instead, it's a right wing nut case named McVeigh, even though the truck bomb was too small to have destroyed the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. And we have to ignore the dozens of witnesses who swore they saw McVeigh and Nichols in the company of EIGHT IRAQI defectors from GULF WAR I. What did the government do with these Iraqis who cheered when the Federal Building was blown up? Nothing, not one thing.

Now you can't believe it's true that President Bill Clinton ORDERED Federal Agencies to ignore and surpress all ties to Middle Eastern terrorism in those couple of incidents, but he clearly did just that. You try to figure WHY the Military raised hell about ABLE DANGER being publicized. You can't figure out for sure WHY we invaded Iraq. You can't because you don't believe that the ties of terrorism lead back to Iraqi attacks against the United States.

Crazy Theory? Tell me something else that explains hundreds of people taking out a full page ad in 2000 that accuses the FBI, the NTSB, the CIA of lying. They say they don't know why, but they know the government is lying.

WHY?

Because Clinton did NOT want to fight Iraq in the mid 1990's. Peace, prosperity, re-election. There are still people writing letters to the editor saying they miss Clinton. The problem is that Clinton did NOT take care of business, he let and encouraged the problem to grow into 9/11.

And Bush can't let you know either, the truth is unbelievable but the consequences might be more severe than anybody can predict. So we play these games and we listen to our press wonder, trying to explain what in actuality is very simple: Clinton screwed us royally a decade ago.

[Lancey Howard]

I agree in spirit with most of what you say, but frankly, it's basically old news around here. We know that Clinton was a corrupt snake in the grass who failed miserably to address the terrorist threat and who, in fact, actually enabled the 9/11 attacks with considerable help from Gorelick.

What I kept looking for as I read your post was your explanation for why the Bush Justice Department is as corrupt as Clinton's was, and even more importantly, why Bush is apparently too weak to do anything about it.

Regards,
LH

[Cicero]

Well, I'm with you on why clinton didn't want this exposed, and I'm with you on the continuing problems in the FBI, which was complicit in many of these things. But why is Bush playing the game?

[STARWISE]

How would word getting out about what we all clearly know .. how badly the Clintons hurt us .. hurt Bush?

[Donna Lee Nardo]

Thanks for the great post. Very provocative.

[savedbygrace]

Good post, Bill. Thanks.

[sam_paine]

Because Clinton did NOT want to fight Iraq in the mid 1990's. Peace, prosperity, re-election.

With all due reverence to the fallen civilians, in the scheme of war, the actual TWA/OKC attacks were pinpricks---if they did not create the "secondary explosion" of public fear.

Had they killed air-travel, or frightened everyone out of gov't buildings...(hey!)... then Iraq would have been credited with a huge blow to Great Satan.

By diverting the aftermath, Clinton at once diminished himself--but also the attacker's accomplishment.

So, if that is true, then by outing Clinton, Bush43 would hand those victories over to Saddam, posthumously.

In any event, for whatever justification, Bush has brought justice to Saddam, Qusay and Uday, at extreme personal sacrifice...in an honorable, if clandestine, manner that Washington, Lee, Lincoln would understand.

Call me a convoluted Bushbot, but I can see where Clinton did not have the strength to respond against Saddam---we might have lost. Everything happens for a reason.

[badbass]

I've always thought that Iraq being behind something big had to be the reason that Bush was wanting him so bad. I don't doubt what you've said at all. I think Bush II is protecting Bush I to some extent as well.

[windchime]

In addition to Gorelick, the Clinton crony, Richard Ben-Veniste, was on the 9/11 Commission.

Richard Ben-Veniste: Partisan hack

Lawyer, Heal Thyself