Skip to comments.Bush answers on 9/11 overdue (ANDREW GREELEY'S WEEKLY BARRRRRRRRRRFFFFFFFFF)
Posted on 05/23/2003 10:29:29 AM PDT by Chi-townChief
After the Bay of Pigs disaster when the CIA tried to invade Cuba, President John F. Kennedy took personal responsibility and ordered an independent investigation. In fact, the invasion had been planned during the Eisenhower administration, and JFK could easily have blamed the mess on his predecessor.
After the Pearl Harbor attack, President Franklin D. Roosevelt established an investigative commission chaired by Supreme Court Justice Owen D. Roberts, a Republican who had been the prosecutor for the notorious Teapot Dome scandal.
Patently, President Bush is not going to assume responsibility for the World Trade Center catastrophe. His political allies blame former President Bill Clinton (as they are blaming him three years later for the current recession). Moreover, Bush continues to stonewall attempts to set up an independent investigation of what went wrong, and continues to sit on the 900-page report prepared by a bipartisan congressional committee.
The White House excuse for this cover-up is that discussion about what went wrong in the months before the destruction of the World Trade Center would interfere with the ''war on terrorism.'' There are several things wrong with this argument. First, if there is not something to hide, why not release the report? Second, FDR and JFK had real wars to fight--the former against imperial Japan, the latter a cold war against world communism. Third, the ''war on terrorism'' is a metaphor (just like the ''war on drugs,'' the ''war on AIDS,'' the ''war on hunger,'' the ''war on poverty'') for a struggle against international criminals. It is a useful political label for a president who wants to be re-elected as a wartime leader and to land on an aircraft carrier dressed in flight gear (even though he was in effect AWOL for at least a year during the Vietnam War). The metaphor conceals what is different in the struggle against Islamic fundamentalism when compared to the war against imperial Japan. Admitting the mistakes the administration made in July and August 2001 will not give aid and comfort to anyone, and certainly not to al-Qaida.
Instead, the president continues to respond to terror with his cowboy rhetoric: We will get Osama bin Laden. We will get the Mullah Omar. We will get the terrorists who blew the hole in the USS Cole. We will get the anthrax killer. We will get Saddam Hussein and his sons. Most recently, we will get the killers who attacked the compounds in Saudi Arabia.
The latter will be quite a trick since the killers were suicide bombers, and Bush will have to bring them back from the dead to haul them into court.
No one seems to notice that we have not found bin Laden or the mullah. The Cole terrorists escaped from a jail in Yemen--undoubtedly with the help of some elements in the Yemeni government (although Attorney General John Ashcroft, with the usual display of sanctimony, has indicted them). We have not found--or perhaps not arrested--the anthrax killer. Saddam is hiding somewhere, probably in a bunker in Baghdad with his sons. Thirty of his top aides are still on the loose.
The people Bush proposed to smoke out and ''get'' are still free. Moreover, some of the CIA officials who ''dropped the ball'' in the summer of 2001 have been promoted. Yet the media who were so eager to pry into the private life of President Clinton seem disinclined to uncover the real story of what happened during that summer and whether the same people who dropped the ball then are still dropping it.
Nor have they paid any attention to the president's claim out there on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln that al-Qaida was on the run. After the explosions in Saudi Arabia and Morocco and the threats in Kenya, it would appear that they are not on the run at all. It would also appear that if one continues to believe Bush's rhetoric, one is accepting as true statements that might be less than true. Finally, it is high time that someone in this country remembers FDR and JFK and wants to know what is really happening. What's the president trying to hide?
Yes, he could have - however, if JFK had actually gone through with the original Eisenhower plan, it would have been even odds or better that Greeley's spiritual cousin Fidel would have gone the way of Mussolini.
As for 9/11 info, I believe that Greeley and people like him will pore through it looking for national security information creeping out so they can indignantly scream, "GOD, why is Bush telling this to our enemies !?!?!"
Nor should he.
BTW... catastrophe?!?! This makes it sound like a natural disaster. This was an ATTACK. It should forever be called the WTC ATTTACK.
Have any of these liberal reporters ever heard of Top Secret or need to know basis for defense purposes?
The hearing will commence on May 22 at 9:00 a.m. and resume on May 23 at 9:00 a.m. Additional information, including an agenda and prepared testimony, will be posted on this site as it becomes available.
The hearing will take place in Hart Senate Office Building, Room 216, located northeast of the Capitol adjoining the Dirksen Senate Office Building and bounded by Constitution Avenue, C Street, First Street, and Second Street N.E. Visitors should use the 2nd Street Entrance between Constitution and C Streets, NW.
Attending the Hearing
This hearing is open to the media and the public. Seating will be provided on a first-come, first-served basis. Doors to the hearing will open at 8:30 AM, although the Hart Building is open to the public beginning at 7:00 AM. All visitors will be subject to standard security procedures enforced by the Capitol Police.
This hearing will not be Webcast live from this site; however, archived video will be posted following the hearing. Complete transcripts will also be posted shortly after the hearing's conclusion.
"The President of a great democracy such as ours, and the editors of great newspapers such as yours, owe a common obligation to the people: an obligation to present the facts, to present them with candor, and to present them in perspective. It is with that obligation in mind that I have decided in the last 24 hours to discuss briefly at this time the recent events in Cuba.
On that unhappy island, as in so many other arenas of the contest for freedom, the news has grown worse instead of better. I have emphasized before that this was a struggle of Cuban patriots against a Cuban dictator. While we could not be expected to hide our sympathies, we made it repeatedly clear that the armed forces of this country would not intervene in any way.
He calls THAT accepting responsibility? Looks like JFK was Clinton before Clinton was JFK....
Andrew Greedy is intimately familar with sexual perverts hiding out in the church, given the fact he IS one (check out a selction of novels he's written sometime)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.