Both Kevin and Terry have commented on W's Saddam-esque and Stalin-esque use of minders for those testifying before the 9/11 commission.

Terry points to this passage from an article yesterday in the NYT:

The federal commission investigating the Sept. 11 terror attacks said today that its work was being hampered by the failure of executive branch agencies, especially the Pentagon and the Justice Department, to respond quickly to requests for documents and testimony. ...

At a news conference, Mr. Kean described the presence of"minders" at the interviews as a form of intimidation."I think the commission feels unanimously that it's some intimidation to have somebody sitting behind you all the time who you either work for or works for your agency," he said."You might get less testimony than you would."

"We would rather interview these people without minders or without agency people there," he said.

Terry then points to this passage from W's now infamously truth-challenged State of the Union address:

...Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary; he is deceiving. From intelligence sources we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspection sites and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.

You know, it really takes a special kind of hypocrite (and we all know W is just that kind of animal) to employ police-state-style scare tactics to intimidate Congress's investigation into 9/11 after having attacked Saddam for doing exactly the same thing. Heck, W even went further and argued it showed Saddam's guilt with regard to WMDs.

Using W's logic, shouldn't we therefore draw the conclusion that, regarding 9/11 at least, this administration" clearly has much to hide."

Wish to comment on this post? Click here