http://www.newsday.com/news/columnis...7122823.column

Extract

He couldn't even watch Bush and Cheney at the 9/11 hearing yesterday
because they wouldn't show their faces in public at a hearing that was
supposed to be investigating how we in New York were hit. Bush and Cheney
have been saying that they didn't have even a troubling dream that the
attack was coming.

In the meeting yesterday, neither were under oath.

They should have been, for the only way they have out is to cheat and lie.

They also wanted no recordings; how can you insist that you never said it
this way or that way if they have it on tape?

Their testimony was behind closed doors, with no record, on a day during the
American crusade against Muslims in the Middle East. Ten U.S. dead, as last
night fell on New York.

These are the people running your country and a war that could have no end.
The new Vietnam? Of course not. Vietnam was only one country. This time, we
are up against a world religion. And your president and vice president would
not appear where they could be seen, their smirks, their glares, and they
would not speak under oath because that is obvious: if they lied, they could
be charged with perjury. They are yours. Good morning, suckers.

Jim wrote:

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnis...7122823.column

Extract

He couldn't even watch Bush and Cheney at the 9/11 hearing yesterday
because they wouldn't show their faces in public at a hearing that was
supposed to be investigating how we in New York were hit. Bush and Cheney
have been saying that they didn't have even a troubling dream that the
attack was coming.

In the meeting yesterday, neither were under oath.

They should have been, for the only way they have out is to cheat and lie.

They also wanted no recordings; how can you insist that you never said it
this way or that way if they have it on tape?

Their testimony was behind closed doors, with no record, on a day during the
American crusade against Muslims in the Middle East. Ten U.S. dead, as last
night fell on New York.

These are the people running your country and a war that could have no end.
The new Vietnam? Of course not. Vietnam was only one country. This time, we
are up against a world religion. And your president and vice president would
not appear where they could be seen, their smirks, their glares, and they
would not speak under oath because that is obvious: if they lied, they could
be charged with perjury. They are yours. Good morning, suckers.



Kind of makes you want to puke. The POTUS and Vice POTUS, unwilling to
appear alone, unwilling to tell the truth, unwilling to let the voters
know how slime-coated they are.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Kind of makes you want to puke. The POTUS and Vice POTUS, unwilling to
appear alone, unwilling to tell the truth, unwilling to let the voters
know how slime-coated they are.

Clinton's testimony was not under oath and was conducted behind closed doors
with two others, his lawyer Bruce Lindsey and his National Security Advisor
Sandy Berger.

"Joe" wrote in message
...


Clinton's testimony was not under oath and was conducted behind closed
doors
with two others, his lawyer Bruce Lindsey and his National Security
Advisor
Sandy Berger.

I'm not sure if I'd want to acknowledge Mr. Bill as a precedent. The whole
world knows the level of honesty and integrity upon which he insisted as his
personal standard.

Joe wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Kind of makes you want to puke. The POTUS and Vice POTUS, unwilling to
appear alone, unwilling to tell the truth, unwilling to let the voters
know how slime-coated they are.

Clinton's testimony was not under oath and was conducted behind closed
doors with two others, his lawyer Bruce Lindsey and his National Security
Advisor Sandy Berger.

Did this concern matters of life and death?
Hell no, what kind of reasoning is this?

Clinton did it! Clinton did it! Clinton did it!
That boat's left port. Get over it.
--
_______m___õ¿~___m_________________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take,
but by the moments that take our breath away".
--George Carlin--

We're talking about the President of the United States of America, so
I would hope the President is treated with respect not for the man he
is (because anyone can question that), but for the position he
represents. Whether it's George Bush, Bill Clinton, or whoever, the
office is to be respected.

If the commission finds that the President is responsible and/or
liable for what happened on 9/11, at that point in time he should be
subject to a complete hearing. Requiring the President to be subject
to a complete hearing with a sworn oath and in front of the public is
disgraceful to our country, especially in the eyes of other countries
that hate us. I'm not saying it should never be done, but there's a
process in reaching that point that requires a lot of data gathering
and parsing of those results (which we're doing now).

And you suggest our latest war is worse than Vietnam? Well, I think
it's way too premature to decide that, because we don't know what
events will unfold. But you're right, over time we may find this
whole war on terror to be much greater than the Vietnam War.

Nonetheless, the region and world religion you're worried about
upsetting is responsible for several attempts at blowing up the world
trade center, the USS Cole, several embassies around the world, etc.
I'm not too worried about upsetting them, because I think they already
are.

-Dustin

On Sun, 02 May 2004 22:44:43 GMT, "Jim" wrote:

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnis...7122823.column

Extract

He couldn't even watch Bush and Cheney at the 9/11 hearing yesterday
because they wouldn't show their faces in public at a hearing that was
supposed to be investigating how we in New York were hit. Bush and Cheney
have been saying that they didn't have even a troubling dream that the
attack was coming.

In the meeting yesterday, neither were under oath.

They should have been, for the only way they have out is to cheat and lie.

They also wanted no recordings; how can you insist that you never said it
this way or that way if they have it on tape?

Their testimony was behind closed doors, with no record, on a day during the
American crusade against Muslims in the Middle East. Ten U.S. dead, as last
night fell on New York.

These are the people running your country and a war that could have no end.
The new Vietnam? Of course not. Vietnam was only one country. This time, we
are up against a world religion. And your president and vice president would
not appear where they could be seen, their smirks, their glares, and they
would not speak under oath because that is obvious: if they lied, they could
be charged with perjury. They are yours. Good morning, suckers.

On Sun, 02 May 2004 20:14:01 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:

I'm not sure if I'd want to acknowledge Mr. Bill as a precedent. The
whole world knows the level of honesty and integrity upon which he
insisted as his personal standard.

That may be, but Kean said this of his testimony: "And he was just totally
frank -- totally frank, totally honest, and forthcoming." And Hamilton
said: "He was exceedingly generous with his time, very candid in his
discussions of even the most delicate kinds of relationships ..."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terro.../9-11_4-8.html

On Mon, 03 May 2004 01:15:31 +0000, Dustin wrote:


We're talking about the President of the United States of America, so I
would hope the President is treated with respect not for the man he is
(because anyone can question that), but for the position he represents.
Whether it's George Bush, Bill Clinton, or whoever, the office is to be
respected.

That is easily overlooked after the damage several of our recent office
holders have done to the office, but I would agree that there is something
demeaning to the office by the act of swearing to tell the truth. We
should be able to assume the President is telling the truth.

Heh yeah in a sense you're right, this ideal view of the presidency is
definitely not the same as it was many years ago. I think it weakens
the country when our president is seen on television being forced to
answer questions in an interrogation, no doubt. But the true fault
lies in the people who put these characters in office. I was one who
voted for Bush because I felt the alternative was much, much worse
(picturing Al Gore handling 9/11 is extremely scary), but lets face
it, we haven't had a reasonable candidate to vote for since the US
population became truly incompetent and elections started being
decided based on who has the "presidential look" on television and of
course the media bias.

On Sun, 02 May 2004 21:32:37 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Mon, 03 May 2004 01:15:31 +0000, Dustin wrote:


We're talking about the President of the United States of America, so I
would hope the President is treated with respect not for the man he is
(because anyone can question that), but for the position he represents.
Whether it's George Bush, Bill Clinton, or whoever, the office is to be
respected.

That is easily overlooked after the damage several of our recent office
holders have done to the office, but I would agree that there is something
demeaning to the office by the act of swearing to tell the truth. We
should be able to assume the President is telling the truth.

Joe wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...


Kind of makes you want to puke. The POTUS and Vice POTUS, unwilling to
appear alone, unwilling to tell the truth, unwilling to let the voters
know how slime-coated they are.


Clinton's testimony was not under oath and was conducted behind closed doors
with two others, his lawyer Bruce Lindsey and his National Security Advisor
Sandy Berger.





1. Clinton was not POTUS when 9-11 took place.
2. Clinton is not POTUS now.

Straw dog.