NBC airs clip of Clinton/Wallace interview...

[Tellurian]

Calls Clinton combative when asked about connecting Bin Laden dots...then focuses on shaking finger..
and finishes with a challenge: "Instead of What to DO Next."

Hey, it's FREE air time on nbc..

Take em' up on it, as long as you get to talk about The CGI..first!

[Sydnie]

1. the "wag the finger" has become the new "wag the dog"

The memo must have gone out yesterday and they have embraced it with both arms. Ugh.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Keep asking:

What did Bush do in those first 9 months that brought 9/11 on? We still don't know who Cheney was meeting with in those Energy meetings, nor who they had spoken to during those preceding months, nor what they said.

[Tellurian]

7. Well you see, they pick up on every word ..

Bill should play a game with them. If he contacts nbc..and finishes what they asked..
"Instead of what to do next" answer that and just before they cut away from the interview,
blurt out, "just like Cheney's secret Energy talks." as the next teaser!

[Atman]

8. Oh, silly poster...those energy meetings had nothing to do with Iraq!

Those were simply policy meetings, and the president and mister Cheney must be able to get unvarnished advice from industry experts without the fear of...of..BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAAAA! :rofl: :rofl:

Sorry...couldn't help myself. I thought I'd be able to type that with straight face.

[Tellurian]

10. Who Cares...where are the minutes of the meeting?

As they've ignored subpeonas..Above the Law, are they?
silly poster..hee!

[ProfessorGAC]

16. I've Always Had A Fair, But Challenging Question About That

I've know some CEO's in my time. I honestly can't imagine that any CEO would not be PROUD of being someone who was asked to give advice to the President or VP of the United States. So, why would they need anonymity? It would seem it would be good for business to be seen as that important.

That excuse never washed with me, and i've never heard any commentator bring that up. The Bush Mob keeps talking about the need to get unvarnished advice. Who would give them anything but, especially if they were going to get credit and notoriety from it?

It's a stupid excuse and nobody has challenged them on it. The press could have asked that question without sounding partisan. It's simply a logical question, with no political leanings intrinsic. Isn't it?
The Professor

[Tellurian]

18. I believe Ken Lay participated in that meeting..

he was a key component in that meeting.
Enron, is sort of self-explanatory.

[ProfessorGAC]

20. Me, Too

But, Lay was a raging megalomaniac. There is no way he would have been afraid to tout his advice to the leaders of the free world. Unless, of course, there was something to hide.

That brings me to question two: Just like the cyborgs who are ok with spying on americans, "If you have nothing to hide, then why worry about releasing the notes?"
The Professor

[Tellurian]

22. Cheney declared the meeting..

and the transcripts of the closed door meeting.."classified".
How convenient?..

[Tellurian]

30. Professor..

I believe it's a dead issue.
They've ignored subpoenas for the minutes of the meeting..
and have labeled the meeting as classified and a threat to
National Security..if the info is released.

You're beating a dead horse..

[ProfessorGAC]

33. Not Really My Point

I guess i'm looking for ways to turn their own langauge against them. It's a way to shut down the idiots who say "If you've got nothing to hide. . ."
The Professor

[go west young man]

31. Here's a UK Gaurdian article from 2001 that shed's a bit of light

on why the meetings were probably secret. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,579174,00.html

[go west young man]

32. and another from Asia Times Online.

http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/CK20Ag01.html

[ProfessorGAC]

34. Yeah, I Knew That

I remember that article, too. My point isn't why it's secret, or to complain that it shouldn't be. Things are what they are. But, i can't understand why the media has never really turned their own arguments against them. If they have nothing to hide, then why the secrets? By their own logic, they must have something to hide.
The Professor

[Tellurian]

35. The explanation you ask for is a simple one..

They control the media..as in, they own it!

[Tellurian]

5. Could be a great 'thingamajig' during the campaign...

copyright the words..

'Wag the Finger' @ your favorite Republican today!

[Tellurian]

2. They asked...opportunity knocking??

If someone has a tvo of this mornings Today Show broadcast,
these were the final words from the (?)narrator(?)

"Instead of What to do (about Bin Laden) NEXT."

[Tellurian]

28. ..

:kick:

[patricia92243]

4. Were they saying Clinton should be saying what to do next? I thought that

was the decider's job.

[Tellurian]

6. When I heard it..you can take it either way..imo

He said it so fast, I wrote it down right away..
I couldn't believe my ears..he!

[qanda]

9. I heard it too

And screamed at the television, "That wasn't the question!!!!"

[Tellurian]

12. Exactly...

But it does leave the door open!

aka..opportunity!

[City Lights]

11. I sent NBC some emails asking them to ask bush 2 questions:

1) Why did you demote Richard Clark?

2) What specific steps did you take between January 20, 2001 and September 11, 2001 to combat the threat of OBL and al-Qaeda?

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

[Tellurian]

13. Yes, inquiring minds want to know..

I sent them an e-mail 6 mos ago..

When are you going to pink slip Katie?

[City Lights]

14. And you got results!

:hi:

[Tellurian]

15. Yes, it was a happy day..

:toast:

Meredith is by far and away an introspective interviewer.

[blm]

24. Why he refused to read HartRudman Report on Global Terror handed to him on

Jan 30, 2001?

That's the question no reporter seems willing to ask him, because NO NEWSMEDIA took the report seriously enough to write an indepth report on the TWO AND A HALF YEAR STUDY OF GLOBAL TERRORISM.

The Bush administration and the Corporate Media are GUILTY of not doing their jobs and they will blame anyone elese but themselves.

[Tellurian]

25. If memory serves..Gore personally handed the report

directly into Cheney's hand..

I read the report myself. The first and weakest line of Defense mentioned was Airport Security.
With urgent recommendations for immediate tightening.

The (new) online version, I read last year, of the Hart-Rudman Report is a sanitized version
hardly recognizable from the original.

[blm]

26. That must have been a preliminary report. Hart-Rudman wasn't in final form

until a week AFTER Bush took office.

[City Lights]

27. Totally agree with you...

...we could probably compile quite of a list of questions left unasked by our press corpse.

[Tellurian]

29. I just e-mailed my questions..

to nbc..

1.) Why are President Clinton's Presidential Papers held as classified?

2.) Why are the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission not being implemented?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

17. I saw this too and thought, yes, another right wing hit job. And as what

to do next...Clinton isn't President anymore.

[Tellurian]

19. Well, good advise IS still good advise..

to a Americans begging for leadership from someone acting in their Best Interests.
Which IS a breath of fresh air and a contradiction of the current leadership.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

21. Clinton did actually give advice. He said that 20,000 troops on the ground

in Afghanistan was not enough.

[Tellurian]

23. I don't see a problem with that..

Do you?

After all, Bush has sequestered all of President Clinton's presidential papers in the Archives.

When has he ever had the chance to address what went on pre 9/11 anyway?