Politics & Government - 29 December 2006

My husband is in Iraq and I just received 2 letters from him and when I opened them, they smelled like cigarette smoke. Could the smell of smoke just be from people that work in the post office or where ever they have outgoing mail lying around? I don't think my husband is smoking but the letters stink!

2006-12-29 04:34:08 · 7 answers · asked by His Angel 4 in Military

Will we do it or will the Iraqi's? And can they handle it alone?

2006-12-29 04:31:05 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

2006-12-29 04:28:55 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2006-12-29 04:27:36 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Military

Published on Sunday, April 11, 2004 by the King Features Syndicate
White House Hindering 9/11 Probe
by Walter Cronkite

Last week, this column trod, perhaps too softly, on the issue of the veracity of President Bush and his administration.

Since then, questions concerning their truthfulness -- or, at the minimum, their candor -- have multiplied alarmingly.

In this regard, the independent commission investigating 9/11 has smoked out the Bush administration as nothing has since George W. came into office pledging to return integrity to the White House. From the beginning of the commission's work, the White House has thrown in its way one roadblock after another regarding funding, duration and its access to people and documents. And time after time the White House has relented in the face of political pressure, but only as much as needed to reduce that pressure.

We recently witnessed a tug of war over National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, who refused to appear before the panel (whose members have top-secret security clearance), under oath, to answer questions raised by Richard Clarke, both in his book and his testimony. It was, Rice and the White House insisted, a matter of principle that a presidential adviser not be so required -- the principle being the independence of the executive from the legislative branch and the president's right to protect the confidence of his advisers.

The fact that this commission was not a congressional body caused a lot of people to question the applicability of that principle, but be that as it may, it was the basis, we were told, of the president's stand -- until the pressure built up again, raising fears it could undercut the president's re-election campaign. Once again, the White House relented.

Then came the news that the administration had withheld from the 9/11 commission thousands of pages of counterterrorism documents (two-thirds of the total) from the Clinton administration that presumably reveal what the Democrats had done and, more importantly, what they had passed on to the incoming Bush administration.

President Bush's spokesman, Scott McClellan, trying to explain the White House policy, was quoted by The New York Times as saying some documents had been withheld because they were "duplicative or unrelated," and others because they were "highly sensitive." McClellan added a comment revealing the arrogance of the White House toward this whole investigation, saying, "We are providing the commission with access to all the information they need to do their job."

Well, that created a new firestorm, and the following day the White House backed down again, or seemed to. Members and some staff of the commission can go and read the documents in question, McClellan says, but he wouldn't say whether the White House would actually hand over copies. Furthermore, commission members and others felt that this raised a question about whether the White House has withheld similar Bush administration papers.

Once again, the president and his team have resisted cooperation with the commission, claiming principle, budget constraints, secrecy, irrelevance, duplication -- everything but the kitchen sink -- as its reasons, only to relent under pressure. The entire history of this investigation raises the question of whether the administration recognizes any principle higher than re-election.

There is no reason why this commission of important and responsible leaders from both sides of the political aisle should have to accept these continued insults to its integrity by an administration that demonstrates repeatedly its own lack of integrity so flagrantly.

When the commission's work is done, will the nation feel confident that it knows what can be known about how and why 9/11 happened, and what truly needs to be done to prevent a recurrence? Not at this rate. That assurance might have to await an assessment by a future body unhampered by the meddling of an administration whose resistance arouses suspicions that it has something -- perhaps much -- to hide in failing to protect the nation on 9/11.

Walter Cronkite was anchor of "CBS Evening News" for 19 years.

© 2004 Walter Cronkite

###

Printer Friendly Version E-Mail This Article

FAIR USE NOTICE

2006-12-29 04:27:27 · 5 answers · asked by Paul I 4 in Government

2006-12-29 04:25:55 · 27 answers · asked by WHITE POWER! 1 in Immigration

what will Bush do next to make them stronger

2006-12-29 04:23:13 · 9 answers · asked by breastfed43 3 in Other - Politics & Government

Emperor Bush and the Nazi Thugs(REPUBLICANS) have done all of the following
1.Oppressed the american poor and middle class
2.Sent soldiers to fight an imperialistic war
3.Built Concentration Camps(GITM, AND ABHU GHARIB)
4.Condoned Torture
5.Stripped away civil liberties, (PATRIOT ACT)
6.To top it off they only have lower IQ"S than a rat or dog
7.Their beliefs and values are simular to the roman empire, and the russian gulags, and of course nazi germany

2006-12-29 04:22:03 · 36 answers · asked by Drake Heisner 1 in Politics

2006-12-29 04:21:56 · 5 answers · asked by Snowshoe 3 in Politics

I mean Im a republican, and dont like guys or anything, but damn he looks like a Crest kid. Do you think he had any work done on them? God I'd like to rip those things out and have them put in my mouth.

2006-12-29 04:21:01 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Elections

2006-12-29 04:17:21 · 4 answers · asked by josh.isaiah 2 in Law & Ethics

Can any liberal finally just confess they were acting stupid by saying that? Do any of you have so much as an ounce of courage to say you went over the top with lunacy and hyperbole?





I doubt it, that would take moral character and I haven't met a leftist liberal with any of that yet.

2006-12-29 04:14:44 · 19 answers · asked by netnazivictim 5 in Politics

Every time I ask some one to briefly summarize the difference, people talk themselves into a circle and I end up walking away. It seems no one really knows. What do you think?

2006-12-29 04:14:40 · 13 answers · asked by Susan 1 in Politics

2006-12-29 04:14:30 · 10 answers · asked by breastfed43 3 in Politics

My father recently died and his widow turned down the asbestos settlement. Can his first wife claim the settlement?

2006-12-29 04:14:15 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

2006-12-29 04:14:14 · 11 answers · asked by Drake Heisner 1 in Politics

But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce then under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.”- Declaration of Independence – Sorry, I had to steal it.

This means because I have found North Dakota to be the least violent state per capita, it is my duty to give North Dakota to the French Canadians and drive the Bloody British out of Pennsylvania once and for all! Thereby obtaining a star for The Monarchy of Pennsylvania without US having to do any sewing.

Is my understanding correct?

The federalliez tried to straighten out North Dakota years ago by placing monuments, it never worked. They do say "A" which means in French: We don't like the lower 49. They are prejudicial against white folk as three whites walking down the street in North Dakota constitutes a war party. I say we get rid of them! If at all possible.

2006-12-29 04:14:00 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2006-12-29 04:13:02 · 6 answers · asked by gwendolynn93 1 in Other - Politics & Government

IN BOTH COUNTRIES.

Does defending Bush include turning a blind eye to the horrors of WAR. And the reality of loosing control of Baghdad????

2006-12-29 04:11:40 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

2006-12-29 04:10:39 · 6 answers · asked by brian h 1 in Law Enforcement & Police

2006-12-29 04:09:55 · 25 answers · asked by hose_b 3 in Politics

I don't know. I think he should but than I don't think it solves anything.

2006-12-29 04:09:36 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics

as President

Demorcrats

1. Obama
2. Clinton (Hilary)
3. Kerry

Republicans

1. Rudy Giuliani
2. McCain
3. Jeb Bush (I know he is not running.. but just for assumption)

2006-12-29 04:07:20 · 19 answers · asked by mystery t 4 in Politics

2006-12-29 04:07:16 · 18 answers · asked by Brian M 2 in Other - Politics & Government

Bush/Cheney '04: The Last Vote You'll Ever Have To Cast

2006-12-29 04:06:52 · 7 answers · asked by Snowshoe 3 in Politics

Does Christian discipleship have any place in war planning?

2006-12-29 04:06:47 · 9 answers · asked by Murphy 3 in Military

I am Greek. After WW2, we had a civil war in greece between supporters of communism and supporters of capitalism. People were very divided. This age of turbulence resulted in a cruel dictatorship. When the dictatorship fell, the dictators, like Saddam, were condemned to death. But the execution would probably cause more division and civil war. So, it was decided that the sentence remained as such, but the executions were abolished ever more. So the dictators remained in jail for the rest of their lives to remind that awful period and to help us avoid it in the future, and democracy was well established, as well as national reconciliation. I believe, as always, Greece gave a lesson of democracy and respect for human rights then and is still doing the same. Don't you think Iraq should follow this lesson, in order to avoid the -otherwise inevitable- violence and civil war?

2006-12-29 04:06:01 · 21 answers · asked by cpinatsi 7 in Politics

My Grandfather died (in November) - we know for sure that he had a will and my Aunt was deamed the Trustie. Now how long does she have before she HAS to read his Will? Yes there is a large sum of money involved.

2006-12-29 04:05:30 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

2006-12-29 04:03:50 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

I am looking for #% of actual turnout in mid-term & Presidential terms! Then the common reasons of voter apathy or not partaking in the process!

2006-12-29 04:03:49 · 7 answers · asked by bulabate 6 in Other - Politics & Government