Pre war intelligence?
Warrantless wiretapping?
Secret foreign prisons?
No-bid defense contracts?
What?
2006-11-10 01:36:09 · 9 answers · asked by Dastardly 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If anything really deserves investigating it is allowing Bin Ladens's family members to fly from the U.S. right after the attacks on the World Trade Center. We had American citizens being lodged in a local hockey arena for over a week following the attacks who were unable to get home but the family of the mastermind of the attacks were given passage out of the country. WTF????
2006-11-10 01:59:53 · answer #1 · answered by Bob D 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Pre-war intelligence? That's been through thoroughly, and despite the Clinton budget cuts for intelligence, despite the severe cutbacks in how we obtained our intelligence, the US intelligence estimate (amazingly, our enemies don't cooperate with our desire to know their secrets!) was the same for most of the Western intelligence services as well as the UN.
Warrantless wiretapping? National security Signal intelligence tapping of telephone calls initiated from foreign phone numbers identified as being tied to terrorists or terrorist suspects is quite legal and well within the inherent powers of the Presidency. Especially during war. The Congress was quite aware of the program, and had been kept apprised of the program as a courtesy - they have no powers of oversight over recognized Executive branch powers. Try reading and understanding the Constitution, it will help you.
Secret foreign prisons? There was limited secret imprisonment of special high level terrorists who were captured as part of the war on terror. So, what rules, laws or conventions were allegedly broken by this? None that I can see. Step up and prove this was illegal, or drop it.
No-bid defense contracts? Like Clinton's no-bid contracts to Halliburton (yes, this is a well known fact), the US did no-bid contracts to support their efforts in the War on Terror because 1. this is an American company - the only American company equipped to handle such a large effort, 2. The only ones we could trust. The European company is deeply in bed with the European goverments who were deeply in bed with Saddam. Not who you want having control of supplying the US military. It was about expediency and practicality.
None of these are worthy of investigation, they are merely bogeymen in the fevered imagination of leftists.
What SHOULD be investigated is who is leaking secret info from the government to the NY Times, info that is harming our war efforts and aiding our enemies.
2006-11-10 10:12:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The details of the secret meetings Cheney convened in 2001 with his Energy Task Force and oil execs to discuss "energy policy" Transcripts or notes from these meetings may be a Rosetta stone to deciphering later events.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/15/AR2005111501842.html
2006-11-10 09:54:56 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If the Democrats expect to stay in power long they had better focus on the issues. If they turn their attention to prosecuting President Bush they will find themselves booted out of office in the next election. The voters chose the democrats for change—not a witch hunt.
2006-11-10 09:43:03 · answer #4 · answered by damdawg 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
It is a mess all together. I stiil cannot beieve we are still in Iraq. It is amazing that e had to see a change in the House & senate to get them to change a little with policy. 150,000 Iraq's & Thousands of US soldiers dead for oil and to try to secure the Middle East. If we were to break down what was really going on over in Iraq there would be no doubt of how many interests are involved.
2006-11-10 09:43:22 · answer #5 · answered by snitzelgrooven 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The war in Iraq which has already caused undue loss of lives and destruction of resources! The number of people who have lost their lives is only next to the loss in the Vietnam war (estimated at around 3 million)!
2006-11-10 09:43:04 · answer #6 · answered by Sami V 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
can't be pre-war intell...before bush got in the dems were screaming for sadaam's removal.
can't be warrantless wire-tapping since clinton was involved in it purely against his own enemies..
can't be secret prisons, since there aren't any.
can't be no-bid defence contracts...since there weren't any//
next.
2006-11-10 09:40:22 · answer #7 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Let's wait and see, he still has some time left to ram a few other things through.
2006-11-10 09:39:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
9-11, it was inside job
2006-11-10 09:39:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋