Man, this thread keeps breathing....gotta love it. Figured I'd throw a couple things into the mix to stir things up:

1. Listened to the 9/11 news conference today. It's good to hear that they are taking the non-partisan tack. If they laid any blame, nothing would have come of their recommendations...assuming that something will happen now. It was actually surprising, since the actual hearings that I saw had an extreme partisan slant.....Kerry & Bienvenista (spelling?) were completely rude. It's wasn't the actual questions, it was the utter disrespect that they showed in their tone. They had total wood at the prospect of tacking this thing on Bush, so much that they lost their objectivity. Perhaps they were humbled by the republicans on the committee that reminded them that their boy had 8 years to handle this problem, including the Sudan/Bin Laden offer, and Bush had 8 months. I didn't say that I was going to be non-partisan.

2. Kind of concerned that no one from the left seems to show any concern about the findings concerning Saddam's quest to obtain uranium. Do they not realize that uranium is the missing link keeping one of these nutcases from turning Manhattan into a pile of dust? I remember when I found out a while back that we had proof that the Syrians/Sudanese (one of them) were brokering a deal between China and Hussein to obtain long-range rocket fuel. This is not the stuff that they fuel the SCUDs with. This is the grade of fuel that they pump into ICBMs. I brought this up in an argument/discussion and it didn't seem to sink in. Saddam was attempting to acquire fuel for weapons meant to traverse continents, not countries. Is there any confusion about what exactly he wanted this for? But, Hussein wasn't an imminent threat....or was he? Perhaps his threat was his willingness to sell his weapons to the terrorists. Perhaps he already sold some of those weapons to the terrorists. But, that shouldn't be a problem, since Hussein wasn't an imminent threat.

3. How about that story about 3 nucs being found in Iraq? For a minute, I was so pumped....before, they printed that it was a bogus story leaked by a local arab newspaper. Oh well.

4. I guess no one wants to bite on the Berger issue that I referenced last night. It's getting even tastier w/ reports that he asked the monitors that oversee people viewing these classified docs to step away so he could make personal calls (clearly against their policies). Those same monitors noted that he took an inordinate amount of trips to the restroom. They are also stating that they actually saw him stuffing the papers into his pants. But wait, this was just sloppiness on his part, right? The Dems, including Clinton, keep deflecting the issue by talking about "the curious timing". That way, they don't admit that he breached high level security protocols, which should land him behind bars. That tactic should sound familiar to Clinton. Rather than ever admit that he broke the law, he spent the entire time clamouring about the vast right wing conspiracy. Perhaps they did circle the wagons when they smelled blood, but Clinton was the one who drew that blood....or was that cigar residue?

OK, it's late and I'm done bantering.