Letter Sent to Sept 11. Commission (Conditions for Rice testimony)

[54anickel]

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8312248.htm

snip>

Nevertheless, the president recognizes the truly unique and extraordinary circumstances underlying the commission's responsibility to prepare a detailed report on the facts and circumstances of the horrific attacks on September 11, 2001. Furthermore, we have now received assurances from the speaker of the House and the majority leader of the Senate that, in their view, Dr. Rice's public testimony in connection with the extraordinary events of September 11, 2001, does not set, and should not be cited as, a precedent for future requests for a national security adviser or any other White House official to testify before a legislative body. In light of the unique nature of the commission and these additional assurances, the president has determined that, although he retains the legal authority to decline to make Dr. Rice available to testify in public, he will agree, as a matter of comity and subject to the conditions set forth below, to the commission's request for Dr. Rice to testify publicly regarding matters within the commission's statutory mandate.

The necessary conditions are as follows. First, the commission must agree in writing that Dr. Rice's testimony before the commission does not set any precedent for future commission requests, or requests in any other context, for testimony by a national security adviser or any other White House official.

Second, the commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice.....

snip>
I would also like to take this occasion to offer an accommodation on another issue on which we have not yet reached an agreement - commission access to the president and vice president. I am authorized to advise you that the president and vice president have agreed to one joint private session with all 10 commissioners, with one commission staff member present to take notes of the session.


more..

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. pffft...

Who the fuck do these people think they are?

They are OUR elected officials. It's disgusting that we are going through this period in our history where we are ruled by people who believe that they are royalty and not elected officials.

[calimary]

2. BATTLE STATIONS, guys... 9/11 Commission contact info at bottom:

(FROM DUer bigtree – 3/2004) Use the responses to strike back at the attacks, here and elsewhere.

“MEET THE PRESS”: [e-mail]

MSNBC-Phone: [phone]

Opinions: mailto:[e-mail]

News: mailto:[e-mail]

Letters to the Editor: mailto:[e-mail]

MSNBC on the Internet
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
________________________________________________________________

CNN- (404) 827 – 1500

CNN TV: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv /

CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/feedback/dotcom /
_________________________________________________________________

[e-mail]

Readers' Representative Office: http://www.latimes.com/services/site/la-comment-readersrep.story

Los Angeles Times
202 W. 1st St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012
[phone]

The Times Orange County
1375 Sunflower Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1697
[phone]

Los Angeles Times
Valley Edition
20000 Prairie Street
Chatsworth, CA 91311
[phone]
Los Angeles Times
Ventura County Edition
93 S. Chestnut Street
Ventura, CA 93001
[phone]
_________________________________________________________________

New York Times:

To Write The Publisher or President: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html#o

Letters to the Editor: http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html#a

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
E-mail to [e-mail] .

OP-ED/EDITORIAL
For information on Op-Ed submissions, call [phone] or send article to [e-mail]" target="_blank">[e-mail] . To write to the editorial page editor, send to [e-mail] .

NEWS DEPARTMENT
To send comments and suggestions (about news coverage only) or to report errors that call for correction, e-mail [e-mail] or leave a message at 1-888-NYT-NEWS.
The Editors
[e-mail]
[e-mail]

The Newsroom
[e-mail] ; [e-mail]
[e-mail] ; [e-mail]
[e-mail] ; [e-mail]
[e-mail] ; [e-mail]

PUBLIC EDITOR
To reach Daniel Okrent, who represents the readers, e-mail [e-mail] or call [phone].

TO WRITE THE PUBLISHER OR PRESIDENT

Arthur Sulzberger Jr., Chairman & Publisher:
[e-mail] .

Janet L. Robinson, President & General Manager:
[e-mail] .
_________________________________________________________________

USA Today:

Letters to the Editor: http://www.usatoday.com/marketing/feedback/feedback-online.aspx?type=1...

USA TODAY / USATODAY.com
7950 Jones Branch Drive
McLean, VA 22108-0605
_________________________________________________________________

Washington Post:

How can I contact Washington Post writers?: http://washingtonpost.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/washingtonpost.cfg/php/endu... *&p_li=

How do I submit a letter to the editor?: http://washingtonpost.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/washingtonpost.cfg/php/endu... *&p_li=

How do I submit an Op-Ed piece?
http://washingtonpost.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/washingtonpost.cfg/php/endu... *&p_li=

How do I contact the Ombudsman?: http://washingtonpost.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/washingtonpost.cfg/php/endu... *&p_li=

The Washington Post
1150 15th Street Northwest
Washington, DC 20071
__________________________________________________________________

More:

National Newspapers: http://newslink.org/--news.html

Television by state: http://newslink.org/stattele.html

Radio by State: http://newslink.org/statradi.html

Networks-

Radio: http://newslink.org/netr.html

Television: http://newslink.org/nett.html

(CBS) 60 Minutes:

ADDRESS:
60 Minutes
524 West 57th St.
New York, NY 10019

PHONE: [phone]

TRANSCRIPTS: 1-800-777-TEXT

VIDEOTAPES: 1-800-848-3256

CBS “60 Minutes” email info:

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/60minutes/main3415.shtml - go to the bottom of the page and click on "feedback" and you're in.

***********ALSO NOTE: www.takebackthemedia.com – for the most comprehensive, extensive list of media contacts. ****************************************
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
301 7th Street, SW
Room 5125
Washington, DC 20407

Washington Office*
Tel: [phone]
Fax It is vital to get these criminals under oath.
: [phone]

email: [e-mail]

And don't forget your reps in Congress:

www.senate.gov

http://www.house.gov/writerep/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And finally , PLEASE NOTE MY SIG LINE – TO CALL YOUR REPS, TOLL FREE!!!

[calimary]

10. As a matter of fact, here's what I just emailed 'em...

Gentlepeople:

Will you REALLY stand for the White House dictating the conditions under which you can question only one of them about the worst terrorist strike ever to hit our country?

Will you REALLY do that to the families of the victims?

Will you REALLY do that to the restless spirits of the victims, themselves?

Will you REALLY do that to ALL AMERICANS WHO ARE SEEKING TRUE, UNBIASED, UNFILTERED, UNCONDITIONAL JUSTICE?

Will you REALLY send that message to the rest of the world?

As a parent, I am honor-bound NEVER to reward or reinforce bad behavior in my kids. Is that what you plan to do, here?

MOST sincerely and urgently,
(signed)

[TeeYiYi]

34. Excellent letter calimary! .....n/t

TYY

[Habibi]

39. I also emailed them

Not as eloquently as you, Calimary, but I put my two cents in respectfully.

:hi:

[The Sushi Bandit]

41. You just posted a valuable resource

Mahalo!

[calimary]

42. Thanks, guys... I needed this. I am more depressed today, than ever.

Last week, about Thursday, I was actually seeing a light at the end of the tunnel. Today, that light has dimmed. Maybe it's the polls. Or bush's huge money advantage. Or bush's huge media advantage. Or bush's huge luck advantage. Or bush's huge America-is-ignorant-and/or-apathetic advantage.

SHEESH! If it weren't for DU, I'd go mad.

[Chicago Democrat]

57. Have hope! We can win.

We can! I know this! I have an inside line and my special sources tell me to tell you that ....(shhh Kerry's gonna win)

:0

;)
:)

::):

[calimary]

74. I'm praying every day!

I pray you're correct. Thanks for the bucking up. Man do I need this today! God Bless DU. And you, too, Chicago Dem. And you guys ALL, who have helped to buoy me up. I feel like a pretty heavy lift today, though.

[porkrind]

82. Thanks for the links,

I just sent off a few emails.

[notadmblnd]

3. What?

The chimp can't speak without his handler present?

[underpants]

4. One meeting with each (POTUS and VP) or one total?

I am authorized to advise you that the president and vice president have agreed to one joint private session with all 10 commissioners, with one commission staff member present to take notes of the session.

[leftchick]

7. one joint meeting! Together!

It shocks me the shit these assholes get away with. Cheney will be there to hold chimpy*s had and keep him in line!!

:grr:

[dennis4868]

16. Yeah....

kind of like when i was sent to the principles office and my dad would be there with me holding my hand....hahaha!

[54anickel]

8. I would that that "joint private session" to mean one total. n/t

[CaptainClark23]

5. and up goes my blood pressure

[Gin]

6. They better make this "ONE" shot...their BEST shot...these fools in the WH

are such cowards. Conditions are put on everything. That in itself shows they are nothing but liars.

I would not want to be any of them for one minute....the cowardly way they behave and live is too high a price to pay for the perks of being in the white house.

[fryguy]

9. commission should reject this crap

who the hell do the bushites think they are to dictate how an independent commission should conduct itself. isn't that one of the reasons for making it INDEPENDENT!

nice that they are serving up a sacrifice to avoid any other people from being called...what happens when, in her testimony, she makes it clear that there are a slew of people who had hands in this whole thing? conveniently, all of them will be protected from testifying. and, as a result, the commission will never be able to actually find out what might have gone wrong so that it can be fixed before another 9/11-type attack.

[calimary]

12. WRITE/CALL/EMAIL/FAX them!

Tell 'em NO DEALS! ALL OR NOTHING!!

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States
301 7th Street, SW
Room 5125
Washington, DC 20407

Washington Office*
Tel: [phone]
Fax It is vital to get these criminals under oath.
: [phone]

email: [e-mail]

And don't forget your reps in Congress:

www.senate.gov

http://www.house.gov/writerep/

[calimary]

13. By the way, I just called, and said "NO DEALS! EVERYBODY must testify!"

And the lady answering said "we're working on it."

For whatever that's worth...

[antigop]

59. I just called

The woman who answered the phone first put me on hold, then said they are experiencing a huge volume of calls, and asked me to put my comments in writing.

CALL/FAX/E-MAIL IF YOU HAVEN'T! PUT THE PRESSURE ON!

NO DEALS!

[wildwww2]

78. The 1st Bu$h disaster pardoned the Contra criminals in his midst

So this is just another slick ass way of doing the same kinda of thing. Making bogus conditions so only one criminal takes the fall. And then the squatter in Al Gore`s White House will pardon her treasonous self. We cannot allow this to happen. Or it is surely checkmate on our republic. And we the people lose it forever to Bu$h Inc.`s media and military controlled country.
Peace
Wildman
Al Gore is My President

[54anickel]

11. So if Condi's testimony leads to more questions from other officials

it's too bad - game over.

Second, the commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice.

[BrotherBuzz]

71. I don't know squat, but...

Doesn't the commission still have the power of subpoena? I mean, they are giving up their right to request someone to testify, but I wonder if they still have to power to demand someone to appear. I would think a subpoena trumps any agreement the commission strikes with the White House. Like I say, I don't know squat.

[BadGimp]

14. Condition # 2 is a real barn burner!

"Second, the Commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice."

What a pant load!

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

23. "What Is Bush Trying To Hide?"

This should be repeated over and over until it sinks into the sheeple's collective conscious.

[mac56]

25. "We don't like people who act like they have something to hide...

They make us nervous." - GWB

[TeeYiYi]

37. OMG . . . he talks like Smeagol ! .......n/t

TYY :eyes:

[Buns_of_Fire]

44. Smirky's got the "Imperial We" down pat, doesn't he?

So far as I and Queen Victoria are concerned:

We are not amused.

[catmandu57]

15. We don't need no stinkin deals

Subponae the lying bitch to testify that should be the deal. The pressure is so great right now for them to come clean that if they didn't the perception would only get worse that they are hiding something.

I'm hopeful that whoever did this has something up their sleeve, and is not just lobbing softballs.

[MSgt213]

17. Dear Commissioner's I'm writing you to tell you that Dr Rice will not

answer any questions, but asked the following questions.

1. Who do you think you fucking are to question us?

2. Who do you think you work for that you can question us?

3. Who do you fucking think you are?

4. Would you perfer I have the IRS to audits of all your tax returns for the last 25 years?

There will be a 160 second time limit set on Dr. Rice's appearance. Thank you for your cooperation.

GWB
President

[Qutzupalotl]

18. Question

I see that this offer is contingent upon the commission's agreement to not request additional public testimony from any WH official. If further questions are needed--and they will be--could congress summon Bush, Cheney or Rice to testify? (Since that's not the commission, I mean.) Or would that result in another legal battle?

With the R's in control, it's not bloody likely they'll be called, is it?

Frankly, they ought to reject this offer and strike that sentence you have bolded.

[lebkuchen]

19. Why does the Bush administration insist on conditions for truth telling?

It's like insisting on a bowl of all-black M & M's in one's dressing room before a sold out 150,000 seat concert. This isn't rock and roll, and government officials aren't prima donas.

Testimony under only oath and no conditions. That's all the public expects.

[damnraddem]

28. Oh, you misunderstand. The WH doesn't set conditions for truth telling.

No, they're setting conditions for telling lies.

[nolabels]

40. ap·ro·pos

but something tells me even the notion of this gang being posted up as trite with lies is starting be worn out

Someone direct me to latest episode of the Twilight Zone :crazy:

[Ganja Ninja]

29. I don't get why all the conditions either.

These guys should have to testify under the same conditions Clarke did. If they won't then so be it. Let them answer to the court of public opinion.

[54anickel]

20. Crap, I think they are buying it

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aurjWEs.8XhQ&refer=us

The commission said it ``welcomes the decision of the president and the vice president to meet in one joint private session with all 10 commissioners'' and to let Rice testify under oath.

``These decisions represent a significant contribution by the president to the work of the commission, consistent with our mandate to ``provide a full and complete accounting'' of the events before Sept. 11, the panel said in a statement on its Web site.

``I suppose all the protestation that this violates separation of powers has gone by the wayside,'' Senator Charles Schumer, a New York Democrat, said on the Senate floor after the announcement. ``We all knew that was a smokescreen.''

A Democratic resolution urging Rice to testify is now moot, he said.

Senator Richard Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, said the agreement is ``a positive and good thing.''

``Now the commission can ask hard questions it needs to ask,'' Durbin said.

[hang a left]

79. They are all hiding MIHOP

Every fucking one of them, including the commission. I have gone through some recent revelations, maybe this administration aren't the ones who ordered MIHOP, but they knew. And don't think that commission doesn't know either, they are all covering up for the perps every last one of them. I am so glad that the commission finds that the president has made a significant contribution, and I am so glad Durbin thinks this is positive and good. Fuck YOU! All of you traitors to our country!

[BiggJawn]

21. We ought to IMPEACH the whole lot.

Blow Job or NOT.

But the ReTHUGs control the House, so THAT will never happen. Gee, Karl, why not throw some other "conditions" in there, like....

Dr. Rice will give all of her answers in Klingon, and no, you are not entitled to have a translator present.

All questions directed to the Pretzeldent and his TinMan during their joint session will be strictly limited to inquiries concerning their golf games...

[robbedvoter]

22. I thought deals were for criminals - not government employees

Nu? is anyone gonna raise hell about this? Daschle? Pelosi? Kerry? Bueler? Anyone?

[fryguy]

24. with these guys

who can tell the difference between the two.....

[damnraddem]

30. Deals are for criminals, not government employees? But ...

with the Bushistas, how can the two be distinguished?

[frylock]

26. thanks, but no thanks..

she needs to testify unconditionally, otherwise this is a complete waste of time.

[damnraddem]

27. Well, it creates a test for the Commission:

if they accept these conditions, they give up all pretence to be looking for the truth about 9/11.

[TeeYiYi]

45. Excellent point. . . .

You should write or call the 9/11 Commission with that suggestion. I read in another post that they've already accepted the terms of the WH. I think you might be on to something regarding the true motives of the Commission. Her testimony is no longer worth bartering for since she's already spouted her opinions to everyone and their dog who would listen. If they have a question, they can subpoena Ed Bradley's video edits. They shouldn't accept this deal, and if they do, they're obviously not interested in the real truth.

TYY

[Carni]

58. Sent this to the commission

To whom it may concern,

The White House conditions for the testimony of Dr Rice before the 911 commision are COMPLETELY OUTRAGEOUS!

As a patriotic American I have never in my life been so outraged and ashamed of my own government as I am right now, this minute.

The below is what I just read regarding the conditions set forth by this administration in exchange for Ms Rice's testimony;

"First, the commission must agree in writing that Dr. Rice's testimony before the commission does not set any precedent for future commission requests, or requests in any other context, for testimony by a national security adviser or any other White House official."

"Second, the commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice"

I have to note that mob informers get these types of deals in exchange for their testimony!

Is that what we have running the Whitehouse these days? A Mafia?

This is OBSCENE- how DARE these people conduct themselves in this fashion!

So basically under this "deal" Rice could testify that Bush himself flew the planes into the WTC towers and no one could question him, prosecute him, or hold future trials on the matter?

I cannot believe this is the America I grew up in...

It is your moral and ethical duty as public servants appointed to protect the safety of the American people to refuse this "deal"

[TeeYiYi]

60. Good job Carni ! . . .

This is my favorite line:

So basically under this "deal" Rice could testify that Bush himself flew the planes into the WTC towers and no one could question him, prosecute him, or hold future trials on the matter?

I hope everyone at DU writes something to someone on this subject. I don't think it will change anything at this point but perhaps the media will step up and say something. I know, I know . . . when pigs fly. But the more people that call them on their bullshit, the better. Power in numbers . . .

TYY

[Carni]

66. Thanks

Of course I just noticed that I spelled "commission" wrong in the first paragraph LOL (Oh well... what the hell!)

I have written different places until I am blue in the face in the last three years. It doesn't sem to help but it can't hurt! :)

[Thione1n]

75. Mahatma Ghandi said:

"Whatever you do might seem insignificant, but it is very important that you do it."

If everyone lived their lives by that dictum, I think that we would have a better world.

[newyawker99]

85. Hi Thione1n!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[MGKrebs]

31. Would the Bush/Cheney testimony be under oath?

[PaDUer]

61. Nope..

NOT under oath!!

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

67. Do you know this or are you just guessing?

The letter doesn't say anything about under oath for anyone. It just says that Rice's testimony will be in public and Bush/Cheney's in private.

[kayell]

32. Gee, do ya think they have something to hide???

Red flags should be going up all over town over this garbage.

[GreatCaesarsGhost]

33. more bush B S - Bait and Switch

[worldgonekrazy]

35. This was my favorite line:

Furthermore, we have now received assurances from the speaker of the House and the majority leader of the Senate that, in their view, Dr. Rice's public testimony in connection with the extraordinary events of September 11, 2001, does not set, and should not be cited as, a precedent for future requests for a national security adviser or any other White House official to testify before a legislative body.

So let me get this straight. The REPUBLICAN speaker of the house and the REPUBLICAN senate majority leader reassured a REPUBLICAN president of something? Yeah...thats real credible.

[fryguy]

49. or how about this...

"Republican leaders focused their praise on Bush. "We applaud the decision of the President to allow the National Security Adviser, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, to testify before the 9/11 Commission," House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, both Republicans, said in a joint statement. "This is a unique event given the extraordinary nature of September 11, 2001."

Wait a tick - they're applauding the WH flip-flopping on the issue? And of course this is an event of an extraordinary nature, which is precisely why condi and EVERYONE ELSE INVOLVED should testify in public and under oath so the inDependent commission can once and for all discover what went wrong....

[DoYouEverWonder]

36. Excuse me, Any White House Official?

That's a pretty broad term. Especially since it is the White House that is under investigation.


NO DEALS! ALL OR NOTHING!!

[The Stranger]

38. No official transcript means it can always be disputed -- same tactic they

use against Clarke.

[frankly_fedup2]

43. Well, they agreed and she is

going to testify

http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20040330_893.html

[fryguy]

47. so much for independent

looks like the commission has officiall become bushco's lap dog. anyone be surprised if, after they release their findings, they all get high paying jobs with halibutron et al?

[kayell]

48. Sold out

damn, what a bunch of crap. If the commision can't seek further public testimony from White House officials, the American public and press damn well better seek - no, DEMAND - that they testify.

-----

oops sorry, I briefly imagined that I was in an alternate universe where the American public and press gave a damn.

[fryguy]

51. or where the press

actually investigates and reports news, and rather than serve as a mouthpiece for their administration-masters...

[54anickel]

54. This part is pretty sickening -

"The administration's reversal shows that it was using executive privilege as an excuse to keep Dr. Rice from testifying," said Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. "But the dedication and bull's eye integrity of the commission has succeeded and now hopefully we will be a lot closer to the truth."

snip>

Hastert and Frist added, "We do not believe Dr. Rice's testimony ... should be seen as setting any precedent, and it should not be cited as setting precedent for future requests for a National Security Adviser or any other White House official to testify before a legislative body."

[porkrind]

83. Frist is disgusting.

Let the sun shine in !!!

No deals, just the truth. This is like watching "law and order" with plea-bargaining scumbag perps.

This is the integrity we get from our highest governing office? Cover-your-ass dealmaking? Time for some serious public anger to clean out the moneylenders.

[pacifictiger]

46. does anyone know WHEN

she will actually be testifying?

[grasswire]

50. don't forget this part...

"I want to reiterate once again, however, that Dr. Rice would be made available to the commission with due regard for the constitutional separation of powers and reserving all legal authorities, privileges, and objections that may apply, including with respect to other governmental entities or private parties."

What does that mean? She can refuse to answer certain questions?

[Marymarg]

52. Sounds like a bluff

I think they were making an offer they thought would be turned down so they could claim that they made a good faith offer that was turned down by the bad old 9-11 commission that is just on a witch hunt.

I really think they thought it would be turned down. They could not want Rice to testify.

So the tables are turned on them if the ofer is accepted.

[Habibi]

62. Maybe

but I can't see them taking that chance, if they really didn't want her to testify.

[TryingToWarnYou]

53. Makes me ill...

I emailed the commission with a request that they basically grow some balls and dont let these people dictate conditions on an investigation. Its so obvious they have something to hide, otherwise, they would be there testifying. Bush should have been the first one there day one...all of his people should have been. Blood on the hands doesn't come clean too easily though.

[OneBlueSky]

55. it's all a whitewash . . . always has been . . .

there's plenty to hide, and the Commission is going to go right along with letting them hide it . . . this was never intended to be a thorough and independent examination of 9/11 . . . it's just a show to mollify the families and let the press report that something significant has happened . . . we may someday learn what happened on 9/11 and why, but it won't be through this commission . . . shameful . . .

[mmonk]

56. My email was short and sweet

No deals

We the people.

[Reciprocity]

63. Letter

The two things I take away from this is...
1 Bush and Chaney will meet the commission together.
2 neither will be under oath.

[Insider]

64. unbelievable line:

Other White House officials with information relevant to the commission's inquiry do not come within the scope of the commission's rationale for seeking public testimony from Dr. Rice.

am i understanding this right, that other officials who KNOW SOMETHING RELEVANT are not available? are they so very bold to put this in writing? unbelievable.

only one question, america: why? i refuse to watch the news show, so i have no clue what their rationale is. why all this stonewalling? why would they not come forward with all they have about this tragic attack? why?

[Reciprocity]

65. "unbelievable line:"

I think the reason is Rice will confirm that Bush did not have one meeting on terrorism until 9/4 proving Clarke allegation that this was not an important issue.

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

68. No

This is in reference to public testimony only. Private testimony by other members of the administration is unrestricted. I don't think this is good, but it also isn't as bad as most people here are making it out to be. Unless, of course, one doesn't trust the commission to do it's job unless it's in full public view.

[Bridget Burke]

70. Will it be private "testimony"?

That is, risking perjury? The meeting with Bush&Cheney will NOT be testimony. Ms. Rice's previous meeting was NOT testimony.

Just little chats in private. How cozy.

[WhereIsMyFreedom]

77. My mistake for using testimony

I do not know if the private stuff is testimony or 'conversation'. It seems that most people are saying that all the private stuff is not testimony, but I've not seen it reported anywhere.

[Iceburg]

69. Truth must be TOLD - Not SOLD

Under no cirmcumstances should the 9/11 commission accept the proposed terms. The truth must be told (however ugly) if America is to reclaim any honourable status in the world.

Please use the resources provided by your comrade

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=453222&mesg_id=453232&page=

Tap out your letters 'til it hurts. Young men and women will continue to die in Iraq while the lies of the Bush Administration live on.

[Thione1n]

72. I wrote the 911 commission

[displacedtexan]

73. The American President Is A Coward!

He ran and hid in a hole on 9/11, and now he has to have big Dick hold his hand during his testimony.

What a coward! I'm embarrassed.

[Disturbed]

76. White Wash

I knew from the beginning that this would be a sham.

"``Now the commission can ask hard questions it needs to ask,'' Durbin said."

Yeah, right!!! The will gently throw her nerf balls. She will spin her usual crap.

This commission is not about truth. It's about sweeping the screw ups of Bushco under the proverbial rug.

The Plutocracy has decided that Bushco will be re-selected because they are good for the Multi-National Corps.. Look forward to a Police State.

[goforit]

80. The 911 commission needs to play HARDBALL!!!

Condi most certainly not the only WH official that
has the scoop on the real CRIME at hand!!!

[teryang]

81. There will be multiple inquiries into 911

No one will be satisfied with the results of this commission. The wh is attempting to forestall any future subpoenae from any future court, commission or committee by doing this.

The questions about 911 will never go away.

[TrueStory]

84. Exposed: The Hypocrisy Of The 9/11 Commission

a 1 year old article on Informationclearinghouse, but still valid

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3061.htm


The Commission is restricted to $3 million for their investigations. By comparison, the government spent over $47 million by March of 1999 investigating Clinton's Whitewater and Monica Lewinski dealings

Evan Daniel Ravitz: 04/22/03


The first public hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist
Attacks Upon the United States was held on March 31 - April 1, 2003 at
the U.S. Custom House, One Bowling Green, New York City.

The Commission is restricted to $3 million for their investigations
-see the end of http://www.9-11commission.gov/about/107-306.title6.htm

By comparison, the government spent over $47 million by March of
1999 investigating Clinton's Whitewater and Monica Lewinski dealings,
according to the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/counsel1.htm

This restriction in funds, after the Bush Administration resisted
having an independent commission, and then tried to appoint Kissinger
to head it, shows how serious they are about knowing what happened.