JDG wrote:
That presumes a cover-up.
It doesn't presume a cover up. It presumes what Grahm says is true. If it's true then there _is_ a cover up. So prove him wrong.
All I am pointing out, Doug, is that you have been the *most sensitive* and the *loudest* person on this List to any perceived slight on the patriotism of Democratic Politicians.
Well, now you have accused President Bush, a Republican, of treason..... of
actively working on behalf of the enemies of America. And on what
grounds? Grounds of being insufficiently critical of Saudi Arabia - which sounds eerily familiar to the grounds of being insufficiently critical of
Baathist Iraq that you claimed were attacks upon Democrats' patriotism.
Bush _blocked_ an investigation. Through his actions, Saudis that helped commit an atrocity have escaped justice. Do you think anyone complicit in the 9/11 attacks should go free?
You cannot have it both ways. Or at least you can't have it both ways without everyone else noting your profound hypocrisy in doing so.
"Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship"
If that is true, and I have little reason to believe that it is not then Bush has given aid and comfort. You can put any patriotism spin on it that you want, impeding an investigation in order to protect a criminal is aid and comfort.
The real hypocrisy here is from someone that would be on a Democrat like stink on sh** if they had protected heinous criminals in this manner.
-- Doug _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
