Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 67
  1. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    The list of "signees" says it all. Give me a break...
    What does it say?
  2. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    Could someone decipher this phrase for me?
    There probably should be an apostrophe in there don't you think?
  3. TxDot's Avatar
    Posts
    892 Posts
    Global Posts
    916 Global Posts
    #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG View Post
    What does it say?
    It's the same list of people that no matter what the President does they find a way to twist it around and cast him in the worst possible light.
    GSM Treo 600 > Unlocked GSM Treo 650 on T-Mobile - Attempting to use a BB Curve

    Technology is neither good nor evil, good people will find good uses for it and evil people will find evil uses for it. Phil P.
  4. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by TxDot View Post
    It's the same list of people that no matter what the President does they find a way to twist it around and cast him in the worst possible light.
    Where does it say anything about Bush in there?
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG View Post
    Read more.


    What's that?
    Ah, my mistake. Sorry. I just assume you make things up.
  6. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    Ah, my mistake. Sorry. I just assume you make things up.
    Thanks for admitting your mistake. But remember that old saying about when we ***-u-me.

    Do mean making stuff up like this?



  7. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever View Post

    I remember when Bush lawyers sent similiar stuff to Michael Moore to shut him up...oh, wait. He never did that.
    Just wondering how much of Moore's film was based on untrues? I really don't know, so this is why I am asking?
    Last edited by NRG; 09/08/2006 at 10:36 AM.
  8. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG View Post
    Thanks for admitting your mistake. But remember that old saying about when we ***-u-me.

    Do mean making stuff up like this?





    http://www.infowars.com/saved%20page..._bin_laden.htm


    President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

    I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

    From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

    Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center...

    Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history....


    it may as well have been clinton sitting in that chair in that classroom...
  9. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    http://www.infowars.com/saved%20page..._bin_laden.htm


    President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

    I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

    From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

    Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center...

    Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history....


    it may as well have been clinton sitting in that chair in that classroom...
    http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_...tatement_5.pdf


    Source: 9/11 Commission Report

    Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

    Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.
  10. #30  
    Source: 9/11 Commission Report

    Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

    Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.


    Damn! A let there be truth SMACKDOWN!
  11. #31  
    There's a smackdown going on, all right. The Socialist Democrats have threatened a major broadcast company with losing their license. "There's a chill wind blowing across this country..." Where's that ***** Alec Baldwin now?

    Google this name: Michael Scheuer. No lover of Bush is he. But he was heavily involved.
  12. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Source: 9/11 Commission Report

    Former Sudanese officials claim that Sudan offered to expel Bin Ladin to the United States. Clinton administration officials deny ever receiving such an offer. We have not found any reliable evidence to support the Sudanese claim.

    Sudan did offer to expel Bin Ladin to Saudi Arabia and asked the Saudis to pardon him. U.S. officials became aware of these secret discussions, certainly by March 1996. The evidence suggests that the Saudi government wanted Bin Ladin expelled from Sudan, but would not agree to pardon him. The Saudis did not want Bin Ladin back in their country at all.


    Damn! A let there be truth SMACKDOWN!

    smackdown? oh please, dat. you`re desperate to cover for your hero. OF COURSE the clinton administration is going to deny that!!!! DUH! you think they would ever actually ADMIT they were clueless and screwed up?

    i think the ultimate smackdown on dems is the fact that al qaeda was allowed to increase their strength through the clinton years. 911 can be, in LARGE part, attributed to the woeful failures of democrat foreign policy when they held office.

    smackdown? theres the smackdown on you.
  13. #33  
    9/11 Commission? Two words: Jamie...Gorelick.
  14. #34  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    smackdown? oh please, dat. you`re desperate to cover for your hero. OF COURSE the clinton administration is going to deny that!!!! DUH! you think they would ever actually ADMIT they were clueless and screwed up?

    i think the ultimate smackdown on dems is the fact that al qaeda was allowed to increase their strength through the clinton years. 911 can be, in LARGE part, attributed to the woeful failures of democrat foreign policy when they held office.

    smackdown? theres the smackdown on you.
    Clinton is by no means my hero. He is after all a DLC dem.

    The Clinton admin gave plenty of warning and intelligence regarding Bin Laden and AQ to the incoming Bush admin and they did NOTHING with it.
  15. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #35  
    the libs are constantly trying to claim that this war should be a policed effort, rather than a war...

    see this article on how effective clinton`s "policing efforts" on terrorism before and after the 1993 wtc attacks were.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/

    The tape proves the Clinton administration was aggressively tracking al-Qaida a year before 9/11. But that also raises one enormous question: If the U.S. government had bin Laden and the camps in its sights in real time, why was no action taken against them?

    “We were not prepared to take the military action necessary,” said retired Gen. Wayne Downing, who ran counter-terror efforts for the current Bush administration and is now an NBC analyst.

    INTERACTIVE


    • Global dragnet
    Key figures and developments in the hunt for al-Qaida

    “We should have had strike forces prepared to go in and react to this intelligence, certainly cruise missiles — either air- or sea-launched — very, very accurate, could have gone in and hit those targets,” Downing added.

    Gary Schroen, a former CIA station chief in Pakistan, says the White House required the CIA to attempt to capture bin Laden alive, rather than kill him.

    What impact did the wording of the orders have on the CIA’s ability to get bin Laden? “It reduced the odds from, say, a 50 percent chance down to, say, 25 percent chance that we were going to be able to get him,” said Schroen.

    A Democratic member of the 9/11 commission says there was a larger issue: The Clinton administration treated bin Laden as a law enforcement problem.



    .THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION TREATED BIN LADEN AS A LAW ENFORCEMENT PROBLEM....


    Bingo.


    so you can clearly see that the liberal`s weak notions of policing terrorism and overtolerance is a dead solution. it has already failed in the past - woefully so - and without question allowed al qaeda to step up to be able to slaughter 3000 americans. you let multiple attacks on wtc as well as the us cole go unanswered, which encouraged bin laden to become bolder and more daring. bin laden has even stated that the US pullouts during several situations of world conflict during clinton`s administration helped fuel his belief that america did not have the willpower to endure a war. So al qaida grew bolder. nice work, dems. and you claim the left will be a sure shot in the next election? pfft.


    i dont care how you spin republicans. however imperfect they may be, JUST AS DEMOCRATS CLEARLY ARE, the repubs are STILL, a stronger bet than democrats when it comes to pursuing the war on terrorism.
  16. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Clinton is by no means my hero. He is after all a DLC dem.

    The Clinton admin gave plenty of warning and intelligence regarding Bin Laden and AQ to the incoming Bush admin and they did NOTHING with it.

    but why did clinton, DO NOTHING about it? they had bombed the wtc multiple times before 9/11, when the know-it-all dems held office!!! WHY THE HELL was nothing done? what was it going to take for them to get up off their dead asses if they KNEW he was so dangerous?
    Last edited by vw2002; 09/08/2006 at 01:17 PM.
  17. #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    but why did clinton, DO NOTHING about it? they had bombed the wtc multiple times before 9/11, when the know-it-all dems held office!!! WHY THE HELL was nothing done? what was it going to take for them to get up off their dead asses if they KNEW he was so dangerous?
    I'll point you to the posts I made in the other thread you started on the same subject.

    Perhaps we should ask the mods to merge the two threads.
  18. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #38  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    you let multiple attacks on wtc
    I would beg to differ here sir. 1st attack happened 1 month into Clinton''s presidency. And if I am not mistaken almost all of the perps have been convicted in a court of law. 2nd attack well that was 8 months into Bush's presidency and we are still waiting on convictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    as well as the us cole go unanswered, which encouraged bin laden to become bolder and more daring.
    The cole happened 1-2 months before the end of Clintons presidency. But when did the US learn of who was responsible for the attack? Kinda hard to strike at when you have no target don't you think?

    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    bin laden has even stated that the US pullouts during several situations of world conflict during clinton`s administration helped fuel his belief that america did not have the willpower to endure a war.
    I actually believe he stated the Beirut bombings, which was under Reagan.

    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    So al qaida grew bolder. nice work, dems. and you claim the left will be a sure shot in the next election? pfft.


    i dont care how you spin republicans. however imperfect they may be, JUST AS DEMOCRATS CLEARLY ARE, the repubs are STILL, a stronger bet than democrats when it comes to pursuing the war on terrorism.
  19. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #39  
    ".....One Clinton Cabinet official said, looking back, the military should have been more involved, We did a lot, but we did not see the gathering storm that was out there..."


    I mean, what else is it going to take for dems to get the point?

    they STILL failed to do the job! period.
    I gotta have more cowbell
  20. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by vw2002 View Post
    ".....One Clinton Cabinet official said, looking back, the military should have been more involved, We did a lot, but we did not see the gathering storm that was out there..."


    I mean, what else is it going to take for dems to get the point?

    they STILL failed to do the job! period.
    I you feel that way, then you should feel the same way about Bush. If not, then you are being very biased w/ this statement.
    Last edited by NRG; 09/08/2006 at 01:56 PM.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions