War on Terror

[Gonz]

Reagan presided over the second biggest recession in American history (of course you'll blame it on his predecessor) and George I directly caused the second war in Iraq and the distrust that the Iraqi people have for us.

Lets see, Carter had the evening news make up something called teh "MISERY INDEX". It fell away under Reagan. Whoa, there, 4 years of a Democrat President & the following Republican Prez had a recession. 8 years of a Democrat Prez & GW had a recession. Since Presidents can't cause recessions in their first two years of office, I see a democrat pattern.

George the first, directly responsible? I agree he didn't go far enough however, the UN resolution called for removing Iraq from Kuwait, not saddam from power (too bad). As far as teh trust part goes, yep, G1 fucked 'em big time. Must be why I never voted for him

 

[freako104]

Reagan presided over the second biggest recession in American history (of course you'll blame it on his predecessor) and George I directly caused the second war in Iraq and the distrust that the Iraqi people have for us

When Reagan inherited the economy, was it in the shitter? I think he tripled the National Debt(I forgot what it was called). I thought George the I only did Kuwait. After that there was some civial war or rebellion in Iraq which we apparently encouraged.

 

[The Other One]

Of course. All Clinton's fault. Don't you ever get tired of sounding like a broken record?

"Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil"

A military intelligence specialist who says he personally told 9-11 commission staff about the fact Defense Department investigators tracking al-Qaida were prevented from passing along information on the presence of Mohamed Atta and three other future hijackers in the U.S. more than a year before the terrorist attack has gone on the record about the incident.

Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer was involved in the Army's "Able Danger" efforts to identify and target al-Qaida on a global basis using advanced technology and data analysis, which began in 1999. He told Fox News he personally briefed commission staff in October 2003 about the Atta findings.

Though Atta's sleeper cell was identified in 2000, the information was not shared with the FBI apparently due to the Clinton-era "wall of separation" between intelligence and law enforcement. There reportedly also were concerns about the fact Atta was in the country legally at the time.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45811

WASHINGTON, Aug. 16 - State Department analysts warned the Clinton administration in July 1996 that Osama bin Laden's move to Afghanistan would give him an even more dangerous haven as he sought to expand radical Islam "well beyond the Middle East," but the government chose not to deter the move, newly declassified documents show.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/17/i...3d3848ee1&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss

 

[chcr]

 

[The Other One]

 

[flavio]

"Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil"

You seem to passing by a few great examples of this. Heres a good one....

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.
Source...

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/

 

[Gonz]

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

Oh Look, BILL CLINTON

 

[chcr]

NM

 

[flavio]

Oh look George Bush...

the information was presented to President Bush in August

 

[A.B.Normal]

Oh Look, BILL CLINTON

[Homer Simpson] Oh look,that dog has a fluffy tail..hee..heee[/Homer Simpson]

 

[flavio]

"Hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil"

Here's another example you missed....

(RE: Bin Laden family being allowed to leave the country on 9/13)
And I also wanted the FBI to sign off even on the concept of Saudis being allowed to leave the country. And as I recall, all of that was done. It is true that members of the bin Laden family were among those who left. We knew that at the time. I can't say much more in open session, but it was a conscious decision with complete review at the highest levels of the State Department and the FBI and the White House.

More....

 

[The Other One]

Here's another example you missed....

Like YOU must've missed these quotes. Who could be saying them, you ask yourself?

“I take responsibility for it. I don’t think it was a mistake, and I’d do it again.”

“It didn’t get any higher than me,” he said. “On 9-11, 9-12 and 9-13, many things didn’t get any higher than me. I decided it in consultation with the FBI.”

“This is a tempest in a teapot,” he said, adding that, since the attacks, the FBI has never said that any of the passengers aboard the flight shouldn’t have been allowed to leave or were wanted for further investigation.

Does he seem familiar? You cited him recently in a Michael Moore-like effort to criticize President Bush.

Richard Clarke, who served as President Bush’s chief of counterterrorism, has claimed sole responsibility for approving flights of Saudi Arabian citizens, including members of Osama bin Laden’s family, from the United States immediately after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. In an interview with The Hill yesterday, Clarke said.....

Clarke's sworn testimony before the 9/11 Commission in March, describing how the FBI approved the flights for the bin Ladens and other Saudis to leave the U.S., may have strengthened the premise .....of President Bush's rumored relationship with Saudi officials as the motivating factor in the president allegedly allowing relatives of terror mastermind Osama bin Laden to fly out of the country following the Sept.11, 2001 terror attacks. But Clarke's interview with The Hill newspaper, published on May 26, contradicted that previous testimony.

http://www.thehill.com/news/052604/clarke.aspx
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialR...alReports\\archive\\200406\\SPE20040601a.html

At the height of the presidential campaign season, Clarke has made irresponsible and untrue allegations that the Bush White House was indifferent to the threat posed by al Qaeda in the months leading up to the 9/11 attacks. Whether his charges are the result of a momentary lapse in judgment in an otherwise distinguished civil-service career, or the hallmark of personal ego and greed in trying to sell a book while settling scores with a Bush White House that demoted him, the 9/11 commissioners cannot be deterred in their task to find out the truth about what happened on his watch to America's counterterrorism efforts.
http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200403230855.asp

 

[flavio]

Like YOU must've missed these quotes. Who could be saying them, you ask yourself?


Does he seem familiar? You cited him recently in a Michael Moore-like effort to criticize President Bush.

Looks like you only read the Republican news eh? I love the ads like this and "Meet Republican singles". Very cute.

Try some of these for a change.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Looks like you only read the Republican news eh? I love the ads like this and "Meet Republican singles". Very cute.

Try some of these for a change.

Nice to see you back, flavio. One question, though...Why are you attacking the ads, instead of debating the facts? Trying to misdirect again?

 

[flavio]

Nice to see you back, flavio. One question, though...Why are you attacking the ads, instead of debating the facts? Trying to misdirect again?

I supplied a link with plenty of facts. I also find humor in The Other One's attempts at insults and his right wing news.

 

[chcr]

Looks like you only read the Republican news eh? I love the ads like this and "Meet Republican singles". Very cute.

Try some of these for a change.

Well, see your propaganda is propaganda while my propaganda is the bright, shining truth.

 

[The Other One]

Looks like you only read the Republican news eh? I love the ads like this and "Meet Republican singles". Very cute.

Try some of these for a change.

I think Dickie Clarke chose which news outlet to give his interview to. If he was interviewed by a liberal rag I doubt they would've run the story once they figured out it didn't support their agenda.

 

[flavio]

I think Dickie Clarke chose which news outlet to give his interview to. If he was interviewed by a liberal rag I doubt they would've run the story once they figured out it didn't support their agenda.

I think the point is with heaps of evidence showing how Bush screwed things up you're not being very honest when you try to blame 9/11 on Clinton.

 

[freako104]

I think Dickie Clarke chose which news outlet to give his interview to. If he was interviewed by a liberal rag I doubt they would've run the story once they figured out it didn't support their agenda.

Heavy conservative rags would do the same since they too have an agenda and if his statements dont support it, it would run maybe once if that.

 

[The Other One]

I think the point is with heaps of evidence showing how Bush screwed things up you're not being very honest when you try to blame 9/11 on Clinton.

Heap it on the table if you've got it, flavaflav.

In the meantime, look to where the blame REALLY lies:

Pentagon lawyers during the Clinton administration ordered the destruction of intelligence reports that identified September 11 leader Mohamed Atta months before the attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center, according to congressional testimony yesterday.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20050921-102450-4688r.htm

More than a year before the Sept. 11 attacks, a small, highly classified military intelligence unit identified Mohammed Atta and three other future hijackers as likely members of a cell of Al Qaeda operating in the United States, according to a former defense intelligence official and a Republican member of Congress.

In the summer of 2000, the military team, known as Able Danger, prepared a chart that included visa photographs of the four men and recommended to the military's Special Operations Command that the information be shared with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the congressman, Representative Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, and the former intelligence official said Monday.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/09/p...&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

It was during the briefings on Able Providence that I was provided additional information about Able Danger. I was told that Able Danger had amassed significant data about Al Qaeda and five worldwide cells - one of which had linkages to Brooklyn and has been referred to as the Brooklyn cell. I was told that Able Danger identified the Brooklyn cell - to include Mohammed Atta and three other 9/11 hijackers - more than one year before September 11, 2001. Additionally, I was informed of an effort to share specific information with the FBI about Al Qaeda in September 2000 - one year before 9/11 - and that three meetings for that purpose were abruptly cancelled hours before they were scheduled to take place.
http://curtweldon.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=34698

Did a small intelligence group within the Defense Department identify hijacker Mohamed Atta as a member of a terrorist cell operating in the U.S. almost two years before he and 18 other terrorists killed more than 3,000 people on U.S. soil in 2001? And if so, why didn't this explosive information make it into the September 11 Commission report, which was supposed to be the definitive analysis on the worst terrorist incident in U.S. history? Depending on whom you talk to, this story is either proof the Clinton administration was asleep at the switch while terrorists planned attacks, or it's a case of false memory syndrome.
http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20050826-090148-3114r.htm