Harland Harrison (whom I'm voting for in Nov) wrote:

> Why argue over whether or not "person of interest"
> means "witness" in government double-speak?

The "double-speak" here isn't the government's. The persons in question
turned out not to be witnesses at all, and their exodus turned out not to
involve political intervention. Moore at least could claim that he hadn't
read the 9/11 report before he insinuated to the contrary.

> Moore alleges that the house of Saud and the
> Bin Ladens had improper influence on both Presidents Bush
> through their business deals with the Bush oil companies. [..]
> Moore concludes that Bush ultimately attacked the wrong country

It's just not tenable to suggest we should have invaded Saudi Arabia, or to
suggest that Saudi business dealings with the Bushes are the reason we
didn't.

Brian Holtz
LP candidate for Congress, CA14 (Silicon Valley)
http://marketliberal.org