but even boneheaded moves have reasons usually. Was he trying to cover
up Clinton administration carelessness about al-Qaeda? Or?

Dana

On Apr 1, 2005 6:02 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't think it's anything that sinister. It sounds like he took the 
> documents intentionally, but not for any particularly nefarious purpose. It's 
> not like he was selling them to an Al Qaeda operative. He destroyed some of 
> the documents, but again, it doesn't look like there is any big secret that 
> he was trying to hide. It just seems to be a bonehead move on Berger's part.
> 
> >Gruss wrote:
> >The fact that this isn't happening says that something is up and none
> >of them want whatever that is coming out.  This is what politicians
> >sound like when they're all scared.
> >
> >It's like being in the jungle at night when all of the noise stops.
> 
> 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble 
Ticket application

http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48

Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:152613
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to