Tigermike 3,057 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 This clears both the Clinton & Bush administrations but makes Dean look even more foolish for his remarks, don't you think? WASHINGTON (AP) -- The chairman of a federal commission looking into the September 11 attacks said Thursday mistakes over many years left the United States vulnerable to such an attack, but he resisted pinning blame on the two most recent presidential teams."We have no evidence that anybody high in the Clinton administration or the Bush administration did anything wrong," http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/12/18/...n.ap/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that BUSH KNEW!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Which remarks, Mike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,057 Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 Which remarks, Mike? That President Bush knew? That he was warned by the Saudi's. Remember those? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Was he asserting that as his belief? In the comment, did he stress repeatedly that it was simply a theory he'd heard? Did he also say that it wasn't proven? I posted this on another thread but I'll do it again. Here's what he said: Caller: "Once we get you in the White House, would you please make sure that there is a thorough investigation of 911 and not stonewalling?" Howard Dean: "Yes there is a report which the president is suppressing evidence for, which is a thorough investigation of 911. Diane Rehm: "Why do you think he is suppressing that report? Howard Dean: "I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is? But the trouble is, by suppressing that kind of information, you lead to those kind of theories, whether they have any truth to them or not, and eventually, they get repeated as fact. So I think the president is taking a great risk by suppressing the key information that needs to go to the Kean Commission." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,057 Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 Was he asserting that as his belief? In the comment, did he stress repeatedly that it was simply a theory he'd heard? Did he also say that it wasn't proven?I posted this on another thread but I'll do it again. Here's what he said: Caller: "Once we get you in the White House, would you please make sure that there is a thorough investigation of 911 and not stonewalling?" Howard Dean: "Yes there is a report which the president is suppressing evidence for, which is a thorough investigation of 911. Diane Rehm: "Why do you think he is suppressing that report? Howard Dean: "I don't know. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Now who knows what the real situation is? But the trouble is, by suppressing that kind of information, you lead to those kind of theories, whether they have any truth to them or not, and eventually, they get repeated as fact. So I think the president is taking a great risk by suppressing the key information that needs to go to the Kean Commission." Al, Spin it any way you want, Dean put it out there, he knew what he was doing and knew what he was suggesting. He left the comments out there to put doubt in peoples minds. He did not care about truth or accuracy. The truth had absolutely nothing to do with it. If enough people thought it possible that President Bush knew, then Dena might pick up some votes. You know it and he knew it. Howard Dean: "Yes there is a report which the president is suppressing evidence for, which is a thorough investigation of 911. There has already been an investigation and the findings are out. There are many theories about it. The most interesting theory that I've heard so far -- which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved -- is that he was warned ahead of time by the Saudis. Looks like he wanted that theory to get some attention and air time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 Mike, I believe he's talking about a report that was forwarded to the commission as well as Congress earlier this year or late last year in which 28 pages were removed. His point is that these conspiracy theories grow when the administration intentionally suppresses information necessary to conduct an investigation. His job isn't to be a Bush apologist but he didn't say anything that was untrue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,057 Posted December 21, 2003 Author Share Posted December 21, 2003 ,,,,, but he didn't say anything that was untrue. Correct, he did not say anything that was untrue. But if you knowingly spread gossip and innuendo you are just as guilt of gossip and innuendo as the person who started it. His point is that these conspiracy theories grow when the administration intentionally suppresses information necessary to conduct an investigation. No Al, I believe his point was to cast doubt in the minds of voters. His point was to keep the internet rumors flourishing. He is "the internet candidate" isn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 If you repeat a rumor and then say "...which is nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved..." it doesn't sound like you're doing a very good job of promulgating that rumor. If Bush wants to stop the rumors then he should be forthright with the information. I'm wondering why you're more concerned over a non-issue like what Dean "said" instead of the issues surrounding why it was said, namely, Bush's obfuscation of the facts surrounding 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUloggerhead 2,255 Posted December 21, 2003 Share Posted December 21, 2003 No, the best way for Bush to stop the rumors is to not give them any credence by refusing to talk about them -- in short, just ignore them. Let the perpetrators of all the rumors & theories prove them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 Mike, I believe he's talking about a report that was forwarded to the commission as well as Congress earlier this year or late last year in which 28 pages were removed. His point is that these conspiracy theories grow when the administration intentionally suppresses information necessary to conduct an investigation. His job isn't to be a Bush apologist but he didn't say anything that was untrue. (Byrds Music Playing) To everything, SPIN, SPIN, SPIN. There is a season, SPIN, SPIN, SPIN... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 You WERE dropped on your head as a child, weren't you!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM4AU 336 Posted December 22, 2003 Share Posted December 22, 2003 If you feel better thinking that, Oh, Master of Spin, then have at it. If you believe a shred of that quote about what Dean was "actually" saying then maybe the one dropped on their head was you. More like dribbled like a basketball! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.