Foiled Terror Plots Against America Since 9/11

[JSojourner]

How many terrorist attacks were thwarted before 9/11?

None.  9/11 was Bill Clinton's fault.  He hates America, unborn babies, kitty cats and apple pie.

[JSojourner]

Why is this being scoffed at?  Since when is protecting the country a laughable offense?  That's really pretty sick, folks.

I don't think anyone is scoffing at the good work done by the Bush Administration, our allies, other nations and -- above all -- the people in law enforcement.

What is scoffed at is the implication that protecting America from terrorism only became a concern once we had a conservative Republican President.  And one must wonder if, by implication, we are being asked to believe that Barack Hussein Osama will be much less interested in protecting America than his Republican counterpart.

[JSojourner]

What is scoffed at is the implication that protecting America from terrorism only became a concern once we had a conservative Republican President.  And one must wonder if, by implication, we are being asked to believe that Barack Hussein Osama will be much less interested in protecting America than his Republican counterpart.

No where in this thread was any of that even implied. Save the hack remarks for another thread.

Why do you feel the need to make this personal?  There was nothing hackish in what I said. 

One of the things people do in message board forums is anticipate.  Perhaps I should just sit back and wait for someone to say something stupid and then respond.

No.  You know what?  I think I'll do as I please.  Assuming that's okay with you.

Now, if you really believe no one with a blue avatar was going to weigh in and start talking about what a great job The Decider has done and how terrible Bill Clinton was for "missing his chance to nail bin Laden"...then you're a lot purer of heart than I gave your credit for.

[JSojourner]

Sorry Phil.  You just don't get it.  That's how every message board forum I have been involved in works.  You try to anticipate what people are going to say.  And you know as well as I do that plenty of people here believe Clinton was to blame for 9/11 in that he allegedly failed to confront Al Quaeda. 

You're right.  No one said it.  Maybe because enough of us anticipated it and already defused their talking point.

And I don't know what constitutes maturity in your book -- but doing whatever the hell I want to do on a message board, regardless of what some name-calling kid wants me to do is actually a fairly adult thing.  The immature thing would be sitting around and worrying if what I say might upset poor Keystone Phil.  He's awfully popular and I would just hate to get on his bad side...

Forget it.  We're just not gonna see eye to eye on most things.  And while I wouldn't ever set out to offend you or anyone else here, I'm sure as hell not going to lose a minute's sleep over it.

[JSojourner]

Sorry Phil.  You just don't get it.

Don't get patronizing with me.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're right. Here's what I have to say now...

Bush is not Hitler.

I said that because you were going to say it at some point. You won't say it now because I defused your talking point.

Leave the kid games for the kids, pal.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, wow!

Whose being the kid now and whose name calling? Please remind me.

Please don't tell me that it's "mature" to pre-empt some attack you dreamed up to fulfill your hack quota for the day.

Take a deep breath, Phil.  Relax.  It'll be okay.

[JSojourner]

Sorry Phil.  You just don't get it.

Don't get patronizing with me.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You're right. Here's what I have to say now...

Bush is not Hitler.

I said that because you were going to say it at some point. You won't say it now because I defused your talking point.

Leave the kid games for the kids, pal.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Haha, wow!

Whose being the kid now and whose name calling? Please remind me.

Please don't tell me that it's "mature" to pre-empt some attack you dreamed up to fulfill your hack quota for the day.

Take a deep breath, Phil.  Relax.  It'll be okay.

I have nothing to relax about. I just feel sorry for those that resort to "I'm going to do whatever I want. I knew you guys were going to say x,y and z so I had to attack before you did!"

You're like sixty years old, right? Isn't it time to distance yourself from the thirteen year old girl arguments?

Hmmm...I guess not. After all, you were asking about Rin Chan earlier...

It's ok, pal. Take a deep breath. Relax.

Nothing immature happening on this end.  But foolish, perhaps.  I really shouldn't be wasting my time defending myself against you of all people.  But I have learned something.  In another thread, I was trying to clarify exactly what was and was not "troll-like" behavior.  While so many of your posts aimed at other folks are interesting, helpful and insightful...for some reason...your responses aimed at me are classically trollish.  I'm not sure why, but I accept that a group this large can never exist without certain personalities clashing.  That must be us.

I'll do my level best to give you a wide berth.

[JSojourner]

Nothing immature happening on this end.  But foolish, perhaps.  I really shouldn't be wasting my time defending myself against you of all people.  But I have learned something.  In another thread, I was trying to clarify exactly what was and was not "troll-like" behavior.  While so many of your posts aimed at other folks are interesting, helpful and insightful...for some reason...your responses aimed at me are classically trollish.  I'm not sure why, but I accept that a group this large can never exist without certain personalities clashing.  That must be us.

Classically trollish? Dude, I said that your comments about Republicans attacking Clinton were hackish and they were. You defended it with, "Well, someone was going to say it so I had to act! I'm right! You're wrong!" And then when no one said it, you resorted to, "Well, I scared them away!"

I have nothing against your personally. I really don't. You decided to get personal when I simply asked that hack statements should be saved for other threads. You decided to attack me because I'm...unpopular on the Internets! Oh no! How will I go on now? And then you said nothing "immature" on your end? Come on now.

You made some partisan hack statement in "defense" of something that never happened. When you had the chance to take it back, you decided to come after me personally. I don't go after you personally, pal. I decided to in the last post since your previous post was full of jabs.

Phil,

You have completely misunderstood.  I take it personally when someone calls me a hack.  Because, if anything, I bend over backwards not to be hackish...while still trying to retain something of my liberal identity.  If you poll most of the Pubbies and Indies here, my guess is they will back me up.  Maybe not...and if I so, I have misread myself big time.

So for me, it got personal when you called me a hack here and a "worthless hack" in another thread.  When someone gets personal with me, I get personal with them.  But I never said you were unpopular.  Anywhere.  To the contrary, I think you're one of the more well-liked people here on the forum and that's great.  All I meant to say -- and I probably could have said it better -- was that I wasn't going to equivocate or back off because of that. And that's hardly an immature thing.  The immature approach would be to kiss ass.  Hell, I get accused by liberals of kissing too much blue avatar ass already! LOL

Anyway -- it's over as far as I am concerned.