Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
There comes a point where you have to trust someone. In this case I have no reason to trust or distrust, they are an unknown. In that case I have to use my logic to decide if it makes sense. Now we know how fast both parties wish to blame the other for terrorists attacks, and how no one wants to take the blame for it. This article would require both parties to cover up, which just doesn't flow with how they operate. Since most of this happened under Clinton, you would think the Republicans would have been happy to place blame. Instead they would have helped cover it up. Plus there is the motive factor I mentioned before. As such I do not discount the possibility of truth, but I give the government the benefit of the doubt.
|
While I agree for the most part about both sides hoping to expose the other, it appears not to be the case in this particular incident. It started with the clinton administration but somehow some prominent republicans got involved with the 'coverup' about it and that is supposed to be why it was continued in the bush admin.....to avoid upsetting the congressional majority of republicans.
Davis' next book is supposed to name these particular republicans though it should come out now to expose them. Any democrats still in office that were involved should be outed also.