John H wrote:
On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 10:24:49 -0500, DSK wrote:


Jim wrote:


As I recall the grounding order came after the 2nd tower was hit. The
fact remains that the US was attack. The military did nothing (at least
nothing effective) to stop it. The "Commander in Chief" (again to the
best of my knowledge) issued NO orders to defend the country. He now
refuses to testify to the commission investigating the incident, and in
fact seems to be doing everything he can to impede the investigation.

And that's just one of several ongoing stonewall jobs. The Bush Administration is
the most secretive in history. GWB is going to have to appoint a lot of judges
willing to throw out court orders before he's in the clear. Maybe it will work for
him, it didn't for Nixon



There are a lot of websites supporting theories that he knew in advance.
I don't subscribe to this,

Me neither. If GWB had known about it in advance, he wouldn't have been so scared.



but there ARE a lot of conflicting reports
as to his actions, and many unanswered questions.

Sure. How about the Bush family's long business association withthe Bin Laden
family? How about the free passes issued to the Bin Ladens after Sept 11th? How
about all the intel on Al Queda that the Bush Administration was handed over by the
outgoing Presidential cabinet, which BushCo apparently threw in the trash?



Whatever happened to "The buck stops here"?

Very simple logic
1) Country was attack
2) Defense caught unprepared
3) Commander in Chief takes the blame

Oh, come now. Just because these neocons rant about responsibility and
accountability, you don't expect them to actually DO anything about it? That would
take some balls & some integrity. Hiding and lying are much easier... and so far,
more profitable.

DSK


Here's a site with a timeline. You'll love it. It has plenty of
innuendoes and semi-accusations suggesting a conspiracy between the
President, CIA, most of the Cabinet members, the military (including
NORAD), and even down to the actions of specific fighter pilots.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t.../dayof911.html

Scroll up a bit and note that *I* posted this site at 1:00, your post
is time stamped 1:50. If you're going to claim credit, at least do so in
a different newsgroup.

Also note that in most cases the site quotes respected news sources, and
official press releases. Speculation is identified as such.
Erroneous reports are identified as such.

But there ARE a lot of questions