jfern on London Terrorist Attacks

[TX_1824]

Can you idiots please stop acting like I condone the acts?

WE are the idiots? WE didn't start this totally inappropriate thread!

Neither did I. I just made some random comment, but Pope PD decide that it needed it's own thread. Take it out on Pope PD.

You knew exactly what you were doing when you chose that one particular sentance.  Don't even try to play innocent.

Has is ever occured to you people that you are seriously over-reacting. Yeah, maybe my comments were in-approiate. But so is all this mindless "you can't criticize Bush now". The  I can. The media sure as hell hasn't, so it's up to people like me to do their ing job. I reserve the right to criticize the worse President ever whenever the  I want. Ok, my post started out sounding a lot less diplomatic than it ended up, but that's because I'm getting sick of every idiot on this forum calling me a "terrorist coddler" when Bush failed to do sh**t to fight terrorism before 9/11.

We can play political games all day and get nowhere. They first attacked us in 1993. Remember the African embassies in 1998 and the Cole in 2000. Clinton had seven years, Bush had seven months. To blame Bush for everything isn't fair. Nor, I believe, blaiming Clinton for the attacks. An unchecked determined enemy will find a way to hit you.

[TX_1824]

Bush is the one who made terrorism an issue.

Um no.......remember 9/11? Oh yeah...you have the 9/10 mentality.

I have an 8/06/01 mentality. It's called "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.".

How many countless numbers of memos does the President get, any President, about those who wish to attack us? The information agencies have known since 1993 that bin Laden wanted to attack us. How many memos from 1993 to 8-6-01 did both Presidents receive stating that bin Laden wanted to attack us? Daily? Weekly?

[TX_1824]

Don't forget that the same people who want us to get behind Bush on his invasion of Iraq, refused to support Clinton when he went to war against Iraq.

When did Clinton declare war on Iraq? He fired a few missiles and enforced the "no fly zone". He never sent in troops. Oh, and I did not support the war in Iraq. I wanted us to stay focused on Afganistan. Just because I'm Republican doesn't mean I support everything Bush does.

I didn't quote this, but I will support your stance on what Chenny said about voting Democrat. It was childish and unfortunate.

[TX_1824]

Bush is the one who made terrorism an issue.

Um no.......remember 9/11? Oh yeah...you have the 9/10 mentality.

I have an 8/06/01 mentality. It's called "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.".

How many countless numbers of memos does the President get, any President, about those who wish to attack us? The information agencies have known since 1993 that bin Laden wanted to attack us. How many memos from 1993 to 8-6-01 did both Presidents receive stating that bin Laden wanted to attack us? Daily? Weekly?

Sure they get plenty of memoes, Bush got plenty of other memos on terrorism. The title of this one indicates that someone was really trying to get his attention. Unfortatenly for the WTC, Pentagon, and 4 planes, he didn't seem to pay much attention.

You're impossible because you can't conceed any point. That is why everyone, besides MacFarlan, is vehemently arguing against you.

[TX_1824]

We can play political games all day and get nowhere. They first attacked us in 1993. Remember the African embassies in 1998 and the Cole in 2000. Clinton had seven years, Bush had seven months. To blame Bush for everything isn't fair. Nor, I believe, blaiming Clinton for the attacks. An unchecked determined enemy will find a way to hit you.

Clinton got a large anti-terorism bill passed in 1996, but it wasn't what he wanted, it was watered down by the Republican Congress. Yes, World Trade Center 1 was attacked in both 1993 and was the first thing attacked on 9/11. Who would have ever guessed that WTC 1 would be a target by Al Qaeda after it had already been attacked by Al Qaeda.

Anyways, did Clinton do enough to fight terrorism? Probably not. But he did far more than Bush did pre-9/11. Clinton was cracking down on tax havens exploited by terrorists. Bush reversed that. Clinton warned the Bush adminstration that terrorism was a high priority. Bush ignored that. The millenium terrorist attack got stopped during the Clinton adminstration.

You really might want to read some more about Clinton and terrorism.

Are you clairvoyant? You know what Bush is thinking before he does. Are you privy to every piece of information the President receives? Besides the WTC center, how many other valuable targets were out there to be attacked? If Bush locks everything down, than economic activity goes into gridlock. "Bin Laden plans on attacking the US." Ok, when and where and by whom and on what scale.? Imagine the size of enforcement needed and all those screaming about losing civil liberties and racial profilling without an event to base it on. Imagine if nothing happened? Damned if you, damned if you don't.

Today should prove that a determined enemy will attack. Blair knew Briton was a target and knew that plans were in place to attack them. He admitted as much today. However, they were still attacked and people died. Being prepared will only do so much, but eventually you may miss an opertunity to prevent an attack. Such is war.

[TX_1824]

Bush is the one who made terrorism an issue.

Um no.......remember 9/11? Oh yeah...you have the 9/10 mentality.

I have an 8/06/01 mentality. It's called "Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.".

How many countless numbers of memos does the President get, any President, about those who wish to attack us? The information agencies have known since 1993 that bin Laden wanted to attack us. How many memos from 1993 to 8-6-01 did both Presidents receive stating that bin Laden wanted to attack us? Daily? Weekly?

Sure they get plenty of memoes, Bush got plenty of other memos on terrorism. The title of this one indicates that someone was really trying to get his attention. Unfortatenly for the WTC, Pentagon, and 4 planes, he didn't seem to pay much attention.

You're impossible because you can't conceed any point. That is why everyone, besides MacFarlan, is vehemently arguing against you.

You haven't conceeded any point. Why should I care exactly how many conservatives are arguing agianst me?

When was Tweed a conservative. In that manner, when was I a conservative. But that is beside the point. I conceed that, yes there was an intelligence failure by the government as a whole. It was just as much the fault of Clinton as it was for Bush, it just happened to fall on his watch. I conceeded that the war in Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time. We should have stayed and finished the job in Afghanistan. This is the biggest problem I have with the Bush administration.

Also, I conceeded that I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976. Oh, how I was wrong there.

[TX_1824]

Are you clairvoyant? You know what Bush is thinking before he does. Are you privy to every piece of information the President receives? Besides the WTC center, how many other valuable targets were out there to be attacked? If Bush locks everything down, than economic activity goes into gridlock. "Bin Laden plans on attacking the US." Ok, when and where and by whom and on what scale.? Imagine the size of enforcement needed and all those screaming about losing civil liberties and racial profilling without an event to base it on. Imagine if nothing happened? Damned if you, damned if you don't.

Richard Clarke, who has worked on national security for 4 Presidents, 3 of them Republicans has given an inside look at the anti-terrorism efforts. You could listen to what he says, or you could mindlessly bash him. The choice is yours.

There was already a 1996 anti-terrorism bill. Sure, civil liberties groups may have opposed it, but the Republicans watered it down anyways.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree. At least it wasn't as big as 9/11, but maybe a larger attack might have been easier to stop.

Yes, politicians play politics with legislation. Both parties do it for political gains. They both put their political agendas before national security because neither one wants to give credit to the other. What is new with that? We haven't been a truly united country in a war/conflict since WWII.

I read what Clark has to say, and my response is.....uh, ok. Nothing new. I honestly don't have much to say in this regard.

[TX_1824]

Maybe it wasn't even terrorists who did it. What if Tony Blair purposely staged a terror attack in order to gain more support and make himself look like a hero?

dont take me for a quack for what i said! and jfern it's not Bush's fault. Maybe it wasnt even the quaeda! but we're meant to believe that w/ staged tapes, and responsibility videos!

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/former_mi5_agent_911_was_inside_job.htm

Oh, God. An Alex Jones desciple. This guy comes on the community access channel in Austin. He's out of his mind, but always a good laugh.

[TX_1824]

Maybe it wasn't even terrorists who did it. What if Tony Blair purposely staged a terror attack in order to gain more support and make himself look like a hero?

dont take me for a quack for what i said! and jfern it's not Bush's fault. Maybe it wasnt even the quaeda! but we're meant to believe that w/ staged tapes, and responsibility videos!

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/former_mi5_agent_911_was_inside_job.htm

I hope you really don't believe that stuff.

It's just an speculation! not that i unquestioningly believe anything

That's not even speculation. It's just plain stupidity.

I told you I take all possible speculations, not just listen to the news and unquestioningly believe what they told me! I mean, they lied about the pentagon on 9/11! how could a plane that HUGE leave a hole that small, and a neat 12ft diameter hole pierced through 3 concentric rings???

Those people and that plane must have disappeared. I've sean Close Encounters of the Third Kind. It could happen.

[TX_1824]

I guess the notion of satire is lost on you.

By the way, if your going to reference something, don't reference Alex Jones. He is not a very credible source, to say the least, and I'm being nice.