Citing sources is preferable.
Keep it as objective as possible.
2006-10-29 12:26:57 · 12 answers · asked by Rob in NY 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Because fr chuck.......... plucks a duck. That and they obviously are concerned that the link between Osma bin Laden, (who is STILL at large, Hussien is not?) may be MORE publicly uncovered and raise more questions about WHY this is. Hussien didn't crash into the towers. 15 of the hi-jackers were Saudis not Iraqi's. That, and why they had a canned response ready and waiting to enact and label as the "Patriot" act. If the war in Iraq is perpetual, then the powers seized by the executive branch under the Bush administration can remain status quo. ( Since the dictatorial powers of Bush are only held valid if there is a war. They were seized under the war powers act.) The entire Republican Oligarchy will stop at nothing to see that any independent over-site of 911 never takes place. It has nothing to do with money. Hitler pulled the same maneuver after the Reichstag Fire.
2006-10-29 12:58:45 · answer #1 · answered by southwind 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
waste of time and money.
No need since we know that planes hit the towers and the pentagon and one crashed in a field.
There is no need to live in the immigration issues that allowed them into the US, ( although those issues still need to be fixed)
So since it was a terrorist attack, and no one from Clinton to Bush knew where the attack was toing to be, but did know they were planning something , but that sort of info is given alot.
So why should be allow people to get more politically divided over an issue where the people in charge all agree it was a terrorst attack that could not be prevented at the time.
so what is there to investigate
2006-10-29 12:35:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Bush did everything he could to stop or block the commission, usually under "national security" claims. He finally agreed to testify himself but had to have Dick go along with him. I don't think there was a conspiracy, I think Bush was already decidering he was above the law.
2006-10-29 12:43:13 · answer #3 · answered by notme 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
To many members of the Democrat commission members had a conflict of interest
2006-10-29 12:43:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
how about you cite a source?
2006-10-29 12:29:22 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
as far as i know President Bush and Vice President Cheney "wasn't". any source that says they "was"?
2006-10-29 12:43:10 · answer #6 · answered by karl k 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It's been done... and done... and done.... But go ahead call for more investigations.. it's about the only thing Democrats know how to do.
2006-10-29 12:41:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Perhaps because it was an enormous waste of time, money and valuable resources. It was liberal grandstanding at its finest--we already knew what happened--it was beating a dead horse.
2006-10-29 12:31:51 · answer #8 · answered by Cherie 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
What reason is there for reopening it? as far as I know they answered all the questions they were looking for, and I havent heard of anyone involved in it suggesting it needs to be reopened.
2006-10-29 12:29:55 · answer #9 · answered by TLJaguar 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
You conspiracy theory nut jobs are hilarous.
Thanks for the laughs
2006-10-29 12:31:43 · answer #10 · answered by John 3 · 5⤊ 1⤋