Rummy just confirmed the truth of Clarke's book while under oath!

NNN0LHI

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:19 PM
Original message

Rummy just confirmed the truth of Clarke's book while under oath!

Edited on Tue Mar-23-04 04:19 PM by NNN0LHI

He just testified under oath that there were not enough good targets in Afghanistan to bomb. Now where have I heard that before?

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

kentuck

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:20 PM
Response to Original message

1. I heard that !

I started to post that also, Don. good catch!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

handywork

(176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:21 PM
Response to Original message

2. Do you guys know???

Are Bush and Cheney going to testify on TV as well??? and are they still doing the hour thing?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

htuttle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #2

7. No, they refused to testify in public

They will be testifying in private, with a 'selected' portion of the commission. In other words, they will select the portion of the commission who they are willing to talk to. They refused to 'visit' with the entire commission. Actually, it's not testifying at all. They refused to be under oath, too.

As far as I know, it's still an hour, but Bush promised that he would answer a few questions past an hour, if needed. How gracious of him...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

handywork

(176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #7

8. whaaaat?!?!?!

Thats fucked up. whats the fucking point then?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

arcane1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:39 PM
Response to Reply #8

10. to flood the media with Clinton testimony

with only a bare snippet of Bush. That way they can talk about Clinton all the live long day!

:grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bread and Circus

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #7

9. They refused to be under oath, too. -- could it be because they are lying?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

handywork

(176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #7

11. and there is nothing that could be done about this???

Who was in charge of the commission in the first place?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

htuttle

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #11

14. hahaha...that is the best part

The Bush administration is in charge of the commission.

Neat trick, eh?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

handywork

(176 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #14

16. That my friend is totally sweet!!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

The Backlash Cometh

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #7

13. Maybe the 9/11 plaintiffs will have better luck with their civil lawsuit.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

underpants

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:21 PM
Response to Original message

3. Rummy:"As I have said There just aren't a lot of targets in Afghanistan"

Direct quote

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

jimshoes

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #3

15. Roughly translated that means...

Sure we could have gone into Afghanistan with a relatively small force and taken out Bin Laden, but then we would not have gotten to blow off all our cool high tech bombs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

9215

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:22 PM
Response to Original message

4. On 60 minutes I think

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Beetwasher

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:22 PM
Response to Original message

5. Can Someone Explain WTF That is Even Supposed to Mean???

Wouldn't OBL and the training camps and the entire Taliban gov't be considered targets??????

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ChavezSpeakstheTruth

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #5

6. Um - I'd say so

and we knew about them when President "I'm responsible for original sin" Clinton was in office

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

JohnyCanuck

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 04:43 PM
Response to Original message

12. What, no weddings or birthday parties

They could find to drop a bunker buster on?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gator_in_Ontario

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Mar-23-04 05:22 PM
Response to Original message

17. Sweet Jesus

the nimrod just said the 'cost/benefit' ratio did not make hitting al quaeda pre 9-11 an option?!? What about the cost/benefit ratio of invading Iraq???

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Thu May 16th 2024, 07:14 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.