CIA sitting on 9/11 Report

[Lanny_MacDonald]

A report that names names and points fingers, the first of its kind from the government, is supposedly sitting on a desk gathering dust instead of circulating Washington. The document is supposed to be waiting for Bush to be re-elected or defeated before being released.

CIA being secretive?

[FlamesAddiction]

Is the CIA independent from the President?

[calculoso]

Well, we know the impact that Ralph Klein had on the Canadian Federal campaign. I can't see that this would be much different.

Why'd they even announce there was a report ready? They had to know it would have SOME impact on the election...

(edit: I'm assuming there was an announcement.. or at least a confirmation that the report was ready. I don't have access to the news story as it requires registration)

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I do believe the CIA is directed by the President. I know the Director of the agency answers to the President. So I would assume the buck stops at the President.

[dangler22]

I'm sure all the juicy stuff will be blacked out anyway just like any other document.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by calculoso@Oct 21 2004, 04:52 PM
Well, we know the impact that Ralph Klein had on the Canadian Federal campaign. I can't see that this would be much different.

Why'd they even announce there was a report ready? They had to know it would have SOME impact on the election...

(edit: I'm assuming there was an announcement.. or at least a confirmation that the report was ready. I don't have access to the news story as it requires registration)

I'm not really following. You think they shouldn't release it because it could effect the election?

[Displaced Flames fan]

Oooooh...another conspiracy theory.....

that doesn't make sense.

Why?

1. If Bush has last word on CIA issues (which he does) why would the CIA have a report pointing fingers at the Bush administration?

2. If people inside the CIA had a report that pointed fingers at the Bush administration but were being told to keep a lid on it (see point 1 for how this is unlikely) but felt it needed to get out now....why wouldn't it be leaked?

3. As 'Roos mentioned, why would the report even be known about if it pointed fingers at the Bush administration since Bush has the final word on CIA issues?

[calculoso]

Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Oct 21 2004, 05:36 PM
I'm not really following. You think they shouldn't release it because it could effect the election?

If it was a couple months before the election, I'd say they should release it and have it digested.

Since the election is Nov 2, it's too close. It'd just be a knee-jerk reaction one-way or the other (regardless of what the report says) and would not result in a true representation of what Americans actually want.

[RougeUnderoos]

Fair enough I guess, but it does seem like something (if it exists) that needs to be put out there regardless of politics. I think the article says they've been sitting on it since June.

And a knee-jerk reaction might not be so bad. If the report says "this guy, this guy and that guy screwed up royally", people need to know this before they vote.

[Flame On]

Oh right, well DIS better to cover it up isn't it. You just keep your head in the sand and keep sticking up for Bushy. He's never done anything wrong and never done anything but tell the whole truth. Honestly the amount of stuff this pres is accused of and all of it's someone elses fault, or construction or inuendo or something. I mean you can't even say "gee if that's true that doesn't look good".

• More people and countries than ever are protesting your president and want him out
• One accusation after another from people from within and without his admin
• Terrorists hit their worst ever attack under his watch
• He can't speak
• He loses all the debates (agreed by the large part by most pundits)
• He hasn't done a good job in Iraq or found Osama...i.e. the War on Terror.
• Drink driver
• Secretly wants a draft
• p*ssed off a lot of major allies governments and made others look bad
• Helped increase aids around the world by not funding contraception related humanitarian efforts
• Lost jobs and outsourced others
• poor economy
• health care spinning out of control
• Has the church running the state
• Straight up lied about many things mostly of WMD and who cares who else knew, he's in charge
• Loves automatic weapons obviously
• Can't run a company without daddy and cheney or know which companies he has (lumber)
• Oh and he's no friend to the environment

Tell me why are you ever mentioning Kerry even if everything you think about Kerry was true (and most is patently not)what do you have to lose with him!!!! :/

[Flame On]

Originally posted by calculoso+Oct 22 2004, 12:17 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (calculoso @ Oct 22 2004, 12:17 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-RougeUnderoos@Oct 21 2004, 05:36 PM
I'm not really following. You think they shouldn't release it because it could effect the election?

If it was a couple months before the election, I'd say they should release it and have it digested.

Since the election is Nov 2, it's too close. It'd just be a knee-jerk reaction one-way or the other (regardless of what the report says) and would not result in a true representation of what Americans actually want. [/b][/quote]
Sinclair.
Obviously it's all good.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by Flame On@Oct 22 2004, 05:06 AM
Oh right, well DIS better to cover it up isn't it. You just keep your head in the sand and keep sticking up for Bushy. He's never done anything wrong and never done anything but tell the whole truth. Honestly the amount of stuff this pres is accused of and all of it's someone elses fault, or construction or inuendo or something. I mean you can't even say "gee if that's true that doesn't look good".

• More people and countries than ever are protesting your president and want him out
• One accusation after another from people from within and without his admin
• Terrorists hit their worst ever attack under his watch
• He can't speak
• He loses all the debates (agreed by the large part by most pundits)
• He hasn't done a good job in Iraq or found Osama...i.e. the War on Terror.
• Drink driver
• Secretly wants a draft
• p*ssed off a lot of major allies governments and made others look bad
• Helped increase aids around the world by not funding contraception related humanitarian efforts
• Lost jobs and outsourced others
• poor economy
• health care spinning out of control
• Has the church running the state
• Straight up lied about many things mostly of WMD and who cares who else knew, he's in charge
• Loves automatic weapons obviously
• Can't run a company without daddy and cheney or know which companies he has (lumber)
• Oh and he's no friend to the environment

Tell me why are you ever mentioning Kerry even if everything you think about Kerry was true (and most is patently not)what do you have to lose with him!!!! :/

What does anything you posted have to do with this topic?

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally posted by Flame On@Oct 22 2004, 05:06 AM
Oh right, well DIS better to cover it up isn't it. You just keep your head in the sand and keep sticking up for Bushy. He's never done anything wrong and never done anything but tell the whole truth. Honestly the amount of stuff this pres is accused of and all of it's someone elses fault, or construction or inuendo or something. I mean you can't even say "gee if that's true that doesn't look good".

• More people and countries than ever are protesting your president and want him out
  
• One accusation after another from people from within and without his admin
  
• Terrorists hit their worst ever attack under his watch
  
• He can't speak
  
• He loses all the debates (agreed by the large part by most pundits)
  
• He hasn't done a good job in Iraq or found Osama...i.e. the War on Terror.
  
• Drink driver
  
• Secretly wants a draft
  
• p*ssed off a lot of major allies governments and made others look bad
  
• Helped increase aids around the world by not funding contraception related humanitarian efforts
  
• Lost jobs and outsourced others
  
• poor economy
  
• health care spinning out of control
  
• Has the church running the state
  
• Straight up lied about many things mostly of WMD and who cares who else knew, he's in charge
  
• Loves automatic weapons obviously
  
• Can't run a company without daddy and cheney or know which companies he has (lumber)
  
• Oh and he's no friend to the environment
  

Tell me why are you ever mentioning Kerry even if everything you think about Kerry was true (and most is patently not)what do you have to lose with him!!!! :/

Flame on, can I ask you something. Why does Bush get blaimed for 9/11. He was in office for aprox. 8 months correct? In those 8 months in office, you are stating that he could have prevented the terrorist attacks in some manner. If anyone should be looked at with a harsh eye it should be Bill Clinton, and not Bush.

People also protested against Reagan and well his policies resulted in the cold war, so I don't think the quality of a president should be judged on this alone.

Accusations of what?

He can't speak. Honestly he is a good public speaker, and I think his occasional Bushisms are made into something they are not.

He loses debates? So? I don't see your point here.

Hasn't found Osama. Do you want to know why. He is likely dead, and if you consider that the only way to achieve victory in the war on terror then I think you need to look at the bigger picture.

Drunk driver? Well you know what, sure it is a really bad thing, but look at the time in which it happened, it was socially acceptable to drink and drive. That isn't a lie. I bet the majority of people in the age range of 40-60 have driven after having more than a couple to many drinks, and if not a majority then quite a high number.

Secretly wants a draft? That comment doesn't even dignify a responce.

p*ssed off allies, sure but you know what, that is life, and they will still continue to work together in order to help each countries respective economies.

Poor economy, dude the economy was going into a recession when he became president. Then 9/11 threw a huge wrench in things also.

Outsourced jobs? Which would happen more if Kerry becomes president and follows through on his pledge to raise the min. wage. Really this isn't something you can blame bush for

Church running the state? Loves automatic weapons?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Mean Mr. Mustard@Oct 22 2004, 07:46 PM
Flame on, can I ask you something. Why does Bush get blaimed for 9/11. He was in office for aprox. 8 months correct? In those 8 months in office, you are stating that he could have prevented the terrorist attacks in some manner. If anyone should be looked at with a harsh eye it should be Bill Clinton, and not Bush.

Jeebus, are you serious? Bush should not be scrutinized? Yeah, he only had 8 months. He hardly got his shoes off, he certainly didn't have time to read the mail.

Bush and Clinton both deserve blame in this. If you don't see that then you really have the blinders on. Everyone should be looked at "with a harsh eye".

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Of course everyone should be looked at with a harsh eye. However George W had 8 months in office, no one can disagree with that. Clinton had the previous 8 years in office. I am just saying Clinton should be looked at more when it comes to 9/11 than Bush. Sure Bush likely could have done something, but it seemed as though Flame on was saying that Bush was to blaim for the tragedy.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by Mean Mr. Mustard@Oct 22 2004, 08:32 PM
However George W had 8 months in office, no one can disagree with that.

Laugh. I love those kinds of forceful statements. I do know how to count, and nobody's trying to deny how long he was in office before 9/11.

Anyway, many serious mistakes were made by the current admin, and it's not just the dastardly liberal media saying so. Members of his own government are saying the same thing, as well as the 9/11 commission.

If you want to look at Clinton, go ahead. The rest of us will look at the guys actually in power right now.

[BlackArcher101]

The fact that you guys are arguing about who's fault it was is evidence that this report should be released. The public should have all the information they need to make a clear and good choice for prez come voting day. This report will probably clear up some questions voters have, along with the topic in question here among CP'ers.

[FlamesAddiction]

Yeah, it only took 8 months for ol' Georgy Porgy to screw up enough to let the largest terror attack on American soil occur.

[Displaced Flames fan]

Originally posted by FlamesAddiction@Oct 23 2004, 03:20 AM
Yeah, it only took 8 months for ol' Georgy Porgy to screw up enough to let the largest terror attack on American soil occur.

Ah yes, because if Bush hadn't been in office for those 8 months, things wouldn't have been screwed up enough to allow it to happen.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan+Oct 23 2004, 03:26 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Displaced Flames fan @ Oct 23 2004, 03:26 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-FlamesAddiction@Oct 23 2004, 03:20 AM
Yeah, it only took 8 months for ol' Georgy Porgy to screw up enough to let the largest terror attack on American soil occur.

Ah yes, because if Bush hadn't been in office for those 8 months, things wouldn't have been screwed up enough to allow it to happen. [/b][/quote]
I'm just pointing out that there is two ways to look at this.

Clinton was president for 8 years and a "9/11" never happened under his watch. Nobody here can say that it wasn't because of dilligence. We have no idea how many times terror attacks were averted during the Clinton days.