DU this poll about O'Neil

[Cheswick2.0]

http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/wolf.blitzer.reports/


Do you beleive O'Neil? The poll is at the top left side of the page.

[jmaier]

1. Got it.

Thanks!

[welshTerrier2]

2. classified documents

if o'neill released classified info, he should pay the price unless he can be defended as a "whistle blower" ...

but even if o'neill's action are judged to have been illegal, it doesn't mean bush shouldn't also pay the price if the documents o'neill released showed bush lied to the american people about iraq ... bush's lies were treasonous ...

what i've been wondering about is whether any of those who voted for IWR knew about any of the documents or meetings that o'neill described ... did anyone on the senate intelligence committee have access to the national security council meetings ??

i'd like to know who knew what and when did they know it ... was this just bush and his little inner circle or was the bush plan to invade iraq from day one of his administration known by most washington insiders ??

comments ??

[ozone_man]

3. Yes, that is a very good question.

You'd think that those on the Senate intelligence committee would be privy to some the inside stuff that O'Neill had.

As far as classified documents are concerned, isn't it a responsibility to release these if there is evidence of a treasonous act? I would argue that Bush is guilty of treason.

[welshTerrier2]

4. hard to say

i'm no lawyer but my read of some of the links on the following page seem to suggest that the obligation of an "intelligence official" would have been to report the alleged conduct to the intelligence committees of the Congress ... fat lot of good that would have done ...

here's the link: http://www.whistleblower.org/getall.php?scid=96&cid=17

the last link on the page seemed most relevant ...

anyway, my key point was that no matter what happens to o'neill, bush still has to answer for the information that is now public, regardless of whether that information should have been made public or not ...

[Philosophy]

6. That can be O'Neill's only defense

If they prosecute him there is no way he is going to fall on his sword now.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cheswick2.0]

7. excuse me

I don't give a flying leap how the information gets out.
I don't mean to be rude, but there has been such a pad lock on information getting out on the facist in the whitehouse, I'd kiss Ari Fleisher if he did an expose.

[The Magistrate]

8. Indeed, My Friend

And the information is out. Attempts to stuff it back in will only spread it further. This vindictive prosecution will give the story more publicity, and greater credibility. Mr. O'Niell is a hard old fellow with a great deal of money: he can take care of himself....

[Lefty48197]

9. 144,185 (69%) - YES I believe Paul O'Neill

64,897 (31%) - I'm a Republican. Of course I don't listen to any criticism of my right wing friends.

[MoonRiver]

10. 69% YES!

:kick:

[AntiCoup2K4]

11. The fact that 31% can say "No" to this poll proves how fucked the media is

The PNAC agenda is available on their own goddamn website. There's absolutely no question that the invasion was preplanned. It was planned years before Junior stole the White House. Hell, it could easily be argued that they needed an idiot in the White House because the previous 2 Presidents, Clinton and Bush Sr had rejected the plans, and obviously Gore would not have gone for it.

It's enough to make you wonder if the Busheep support Junior because he's as clueless as they are.