If his opponents want to grant these same rights to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, why can't they afford a sitting U. S. President the same courtesy??

The 9/11 comision report is not a bible. It is a colaberation of compromises, and should not be taken as end all. Many facts have come out that controdict their findings after it was published. To use it as a tool to support your argument is flawed.
NO, I will not give you exampeles. Know one wants to accept anything that goes against there opinion. All they do is side step it and find other facts to support there own. On both sides, so whats the use.
I have not said what my veiws are but only to point out how dumb it is to support your argument with few scources.
To argue and call each other names is unproductive.
If your truely honest with yourself you would see both sides are wrong with some of their claims. If you cant see that well whats the point of arguing because you are not going to change the other persons mind.
AND YOUR OPINION IS NOT SUPIRIOR WETHER IT BE ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER.
I'm so sick of people jamming there opinions down my throat because they think they have the right facts. Well Its all opinions supported by someone els's opinion

That was just one example of how someone uses a piece of infomation to further his point of view. And it shows how anyone cand find info to support their own position. And these these are based on other peoples opinion

With that said, beans give me gas and Bushes is to blame

My point was not what source is better the point was anyone can find a scource to support there opinion it is futile to try to diprove them they just find another scource to back them up.Each side is set in there ways and will not waver

I had to take a "George W. Bush" today while out fishing. Good thing I had TP with me in the boat.

Were these results of a bi partisan investigation??
An article from The UK Guardian is not a bi partisan investigation
I am still asking for that bipartisan investigation. Not a book or an article. You only provided books and newspaper articles.
Along with name calling and snide remarks.
Neither add to your argument, by the way
It is obvious you're getting flustered.
Plus, it appears your attempt to discredit me actually makes my point.
At about the sixth paragraph down.
Now, as I have said before, read the ACTUAL reports. Do not read someone's opinion on them.
Nor a book or article about the reports.

For someone who has no difficulty telling others who disagree with them to "get educated" and to "open their minds," you seem to have difficulty doing both yourself.

I am not saying the bipartisan investigations were flawless.
Nor am I saying the threat Saddam may or may not have posed was possibly a little overstated.
Nor am I saying that there were not a host of intelligence failures.
I am saying that no bipartisan investigation has proven the intelligence was manipulated by President Bush, an impeachable offense.

And I will not ask for impeachment of a president based on books and newspaper articles.

And in my book, along with the U.S. Constitution, as an American citizen he is entitled to an assumption of innocence until such day an investigation proves him guilty, if ever.

If his opponents want to grant these same rights to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, why can't they afford a sitting U. S. President the same courtesy??

What I find confusing, reelemin, is your side of the political spectrum considers Bush the dumbest animal on two feet and yet he was somehow able to fool the world's intelligence community, a former U.S. President, along with the House and Senate, to go along with his manipulation.
Most confusing,indeed.

So, I will use your logic and declare Hillary Clinton as unfit for office as I read in a book and a web site that she was involved in the death of Vince Foster.
I know it to be true, even though investigations have not proven such a thing, because a book and an article said it was.

Anyways, this back and forth is getting repetitive and I have papers to grade.