Washington ? According to a White House source, former Nixon Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, 79, was selected by the Bush administration to head the commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks because his party loyalty is thoroughly reliable.

It is a loyalty made all the more interesting because Dr. Kissinger and the president’s father are not on good terms, a result of past disputes. But the larger problem concerning loyalty emanates from his international consulting firm, Kissinger Associates. The company’s client list has not been publicly disclosed, but reputedly includes oil companies and Persian Gulf nations.

It is Kissinger’s loyalty to his company, its associates and employees, and its clients that make this very loyal man an odd choice for the Sept. 11 investigation. Why would he act contrary to the interests of his company? Why would he launch an investigation that could be critical of Saudi Arabia or the oil and oil-related companies that have so much at stake in the Middle East?

Vice President Dick Cheney, the former head of oil equipment giant Halliburton, was instrumental in the selection of Kissinger. Why would Cheney choose him? The specter of impropriety hovers over the appointment even if there is nothing to hide. Both the president and vice president have strong ties to the oil industry, which means they have strong ties to the oil-producing Persian Gulf states. So it should have been important to them to select someone to head the investigation who doesn’t have similar ties.

Former Sen. Warren Rudman, R-N.H., comes to mind. Prior to Sept. 11, he and former Sen. Gary Hart, D-Colo., authored an important report that explicitly warned us of the likelihood of horrific terrorist attacks. And there are many other highly qualified and respected Republicans who could have been appointed.

Dr. Kissinger has done good service for this nation, albeit some of it controversial. He made mistakes and he often fell into the ambassador’s trap of being an honorable man sent abroad to lie for his country. In short, Kissinger is a good man for some jobs, but the wrong man for this job.

Our source said his controversial past and lack of impartiality make him an unlikely candidate to produce a critical analysis of Sept. 11. Though, on the other hand, Democrats such as the Al Gore’s running mate, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, have not opposed the appointment, stating with tactful understatement: “Dr. Kissinger, I am sure, does not want this latest act of public service to end in a way that people say it was done incompletely.”

In the end, America needs not only to know the truth, but believe what is reported to be the truth. Dr. Kissinger’s connections and credentials are such that the report, when issued, will forever remain controversial, forever feeding the flames for conspiracy theorists. The Warren Commission that investigated the Kennedy assassination began with far less controversy and nonetheless ended with a permanent cloud. The Kissinger Commission will begin with a cloud and most assuredly will end with a cloud.

Prediction: The Sept. 11 investigation will produce some revelations, but will be remembered more for what it is suspected of not revealing.