Ace, I love your terms "destrosphere" and "sinistrophere" for right and left!

It makes us sound skill and sweet and them evil--that's about right!

(and yes, I know the Latin background...)

(and yes, I know the Latin background...)

Does it involve Puerto Rican hookers? Because etymology has always been one of my favorite subjects.

Ace,
TKS has the latest update re Weldon's return of service. It appears that the ball is back in the "Ommission's" court. This could be ping pong or serve and volly tennis. Take a look.

Once upon a time everyone thought the Gorelick wall was just a quaint part on Janet Reno's garden. Now we know PDD 24 was the key piece that blocked Intel from talking to investigators. Why was it put in place. Why was Goelick given a seat on the Commission, she should have been a witness if the goal was to find the facts. Until those questions are answered, does it matter much whether Atta was mentioned once or twice.

Next serve ...

The game is far from over, did you just think the 9/11 Ommission was going to punt and roll over dead?

But don't get the bats out, yet. -- Open source journalism will find the answer.

Dextrosphere ... why, I came up with that in one of my old comments , Ace. Where's the credit? Ain't ya gonna share the love?

If the blog flap does no more than bring scutiny to the Gorelick Wall and the mentality it reflects, then it will have been worthwhile.

But dollar to a donut says there's more to it than that.

This, and an assortment of other things, like the antics of Sandy Burglar, indicate a major effort to avoid pinning blame for 9/11 on Clinton Administration policies. Who is being protected? I doubt there is anything prosecutable in these disastrous decisions, so that it out. Bubba's legacy? He's already cashed in on the book, so that should hardly matter enough to corrupt such an important issue. Hmmm.

Then there is that other Clinton. The one who said we were getting her for free if we elected her husband and thus must be considered part of the administration to a far greater extent than most First Ladies. Especially since she is likely to pursue the presidency herself in 2008.

If a presidential candidate was regarded as part of a previous administration whose policies had directly enabled 9/11, what chance in hell would she have of ever being elected to anything ever again?

So, it's pretty understanding that the Democrats on the 9/11 Commission might help draw attention away fromt he role of Clinton Administration policies, but what the hell is wrong with the Republicans on that same commission? Can they be so obsessively devoted to keeping things non-partisan they'll let the genuinely guilty off the hook?

The republicans probably got some skeletons in their own closet...

I'm of the mind that a full-throttle "feces throwing monkey fight" might be in order here though. There is too much at stake to NOT have it...

...and the dems always look like boobs when they really get cranked up and start foaming at the mouth (ex. recent Maxine Waters comments), so there would be some genuine entertainment value there as well.

So far, there is nothing to justify retreating from the story.

Of course, it hasn't been proved, and no one in his right mind is claiming that the story is absolutely, positively true in every respect just because Curt Weldon says so. Weldon only claims to be the conduit, and so everything he says on the subject is known to be hearsay.

The story belongs to the Able Danger members and their commanders, the DoD lawyers who allegedly blocked the disclosure to the FBI, and to a lesser extent to the 9/11 Commission participants.

But regardless of the quality of the evidence advanced so far, the Left has begun its usual spin.

The first reaction is that Weldon is not credible. This is to be expected. Kathleen Willey, Juanita Brodderick, Paula Jones, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinski and even Ken Starr weren't credible either, until actual DNA evidence turned up. (Of course, Joe Wilson, Richard Clarke, Dan Rather, Mary Mapes and Bill Burkett are to be believed ipse dixit.) But none of this matters because, as everyone knows, Weldon is not the story.

The next reaction will be that Able Danger did not exist. They will make fun of the idea, and compare it to Area 51, Elvis sightings, etc. This will fly for a while because as a secret operation, most of its participants will refuse to talk, and documents relating to it will be classified.

Once the Left is forced to address the merits of the story, they will claim that the the story has been changed, that it's inconsistent, that it has been embellished, etc. They did this to the Swift Vets. The unstated (false) assumption is that all of the critics are acting in concert, that they have all coordinated their story in order to bring down the opposition. The reality is that when you get a couple of dozen people honestly telling a story as they remember it, you get inconsistencies, even when they are all acting in good faith. This is the nature of things. This will fly as long as the facts are incomplete and the Left can connect the dots as they see fit.

Then, if all of the Left's challenges fall apart, and documentary evidence is produced and credible whistleblowers come forward on the record, then they will say that the story only proves that it's George Bush's fault. You can expect them to become very enthusiastic about the story at this point.

I think it is really rich that JPod thinks"some of us on the Right" may owe the 9-11 staff an apology. He jumped in faster and harder than anyone to point the finger at the "corrupt" (his word) Commission.

But now he reads Time and thinks that the story is over. He should stick to devining the political ideology of Will and Grace.