It's remarkable to me that in a fairly long thread about assigning blame for 9/11, not one of you people has mentioned the 19 radical Muslims who actually hijacked the planes, and their financial and political backers in the Middle East. Are you all insane?

Olsen wrote:

"...A need in the Bush administration to allow something terrible to happen in order for them to start the war with Iraw [sic] and implement a lot of other politcal suppress [sic] activities that they already had planned."

Two things, Olsen: 1) Get your doctor to increase the dosage on your anti-psychotic prescription, and 2) the explanation is much simpler - we got caught with our pants down and that's all. It's happened before and it will happen again. And let me clue you in - when you're president and somebody sneak attacks your largest city, destroys a chunk of it including a symbol of the country and its way of life, and kills thousands of its citizens, you go to war. And if you're not sure exactly who did it, you pick the likeliest candidate(s) and go to war with them, just to make your point. If you're lucky you get to take them one at a time - and Bush has in fact been lucky like that. Afghanistan and Iraq down; Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia still to go.

The day radical Muslims were able to begin exploiting the corrupt political environment of the Middle East to arrange attacks on the US homeland was the day they guaranteed that the Middle East would be forced to transform politically. We're pursuing the only rational strategy here - holding a gun to the head of every regime in the Middle East. Those regimes and their countries will pay a tenfold greater price for any future attacks than we will, and they know it. And they'll cooperate or we'll flatten them.

I recommend everyone go to the website: www.flight93crash.com for some really interesting information on that event that was ignored by the press in their rush to support the government.

I do hope there is an ultimate cosmic balancing or karma--and Bush and his crowd end up paying for all the evil they have pushed into the world.

lede and lead are synonomous in this context. Lede was coined back when the type used to print newspapers was made from lead (the metal). To not confuse the first few sentences of a story with the type used to print the story, newsrooms referred to the former as the lede.

acty, 3000 deaths are worth alot to them when they come to NYC to take advantage of those people for their own political agenda. I dunno -- I think the biggest problem is that Americans won't push for these changes. They all said they were New Yorkers and they would never forget. And while we are reminded of what happened everyday we walk by that hole in Lower Manhattan, the rest of the country has forgotten.

It's "lead." Not "lede."

Heather, you actually think Bush has a "pretty face"?!?!?!?

D, 3000 deaths to the bush administration is (sadly) worth nothing to them. if it will make them richer and more powerful, they will do whatever it takes. sad but true.

Yeah, with regards to Bush, sometimes a pretty face hide a repulsive personality.

I feel that Bush knew something would happen and then allowed something to happen regards 9/11. From his record as the "execution governor" of Texas to his eagerness to go to war (which, unless he is a complete idiot, means thousands of deaths), I feel he is callous to life. Perhaps this is cynical, but anyone who hangs around people who obsess about power will end up being cynical about human nature (of those types of people). I am not saying I am cynical of everyone, just those who obsess with having power over others.

if anyone is on the hook now, it's Congress. they're the only ones that can make the kind of sweeping changes and provide the oversight the report calls for.

of course, we all know they won't, so I really hope the 9/11 families stick together and keep their campaign moving ahead, this time to replace all those members of Congress who don't do what needs to be done.

I agree with one of the 9/11 mothers I heard on the BBC last night (her son was one of the firemen who died in the towers) -- that the report blames the entire government, and thus blames no one. The report is more about "moving on" and "closure." No individuals on any level of government are held accountable (e.g., no blame for those who bought the firement the malfunctioning Motorola walkie talkies). Saudi Arabia are our pals again.

This report may be the end of the 9/11 Commission but it's not the end of inquiry into 9/11. It does not bring "closure" for the families or for New Yorkers. One glaring ommission from the report: Who financed the attack? If we can't pinpoint that, who's to say they can't fund another?

I'm no fan of Bush and his right-wing cronies, but it's a bit cynical to say that they actively allowed 3,000 deaths because they knew it would bolster their case for a war they wanted. Perhaps they inadvertently "allowed" 9/11 by failing to focus on national security and worrying more about tax cuts than security briefings titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the United States," but even the biggest Bush hater shouldn't accuse W, Cheney, et. al. of allowing 9/11. That's not to say that they didn't exploit 9/11 after the fact at every available opportunity, but I'd hold off on calling the president a murderer.

Yeah, Olsen. First the cabal around Bush steals the election, then they jump on 9/11 to scare the population into doing whatever they want. Meanwhile, they are wrecking this country, and the world. People without shame or responsibility. Not surprising that a lot of stupid men support them. Being stupid and spiteful appeals to lot of men, even if it is against their ultimate self-interest.

I think the 9/11 Commission (being political appointees) is chickenshit (or whitewashing). There was a need in the Bush administration to allow something terrible to happen in order for them to start the war with Iraw and implement a lot of other politcal suppress activities that they already had planned.