Cheney is a traitor that endangers our troops to cover his own rear end for incompetence and war crimes.

The Hague awaits, traitor.

Dick Cheney was an integral part of the worst administration in American history and he was a large part of WHY it was the worst administration in history. If he’s to be tried, the Hague should get in line for he should be tried here, if not for criminal acts then for the wrongs and damage he did to our nation. Blunder after blunder, failure after failure – that is the record of the Republicans in the White House 2001-2009. They added almost $7 trillion to the national debt, mismanaged our economy resulting in market crashes, record foreclosures, doubled unemployment in their terms and left spiralling number, screwed the pooch in Afghanistan, blundered into the no WMD trap in Iraq, in their actions served the purposes of Al Qaeda and Islamic radicals.

Heckuva job in delivering Idiocracy.

Cheney was awesome on ABC, really enjoyed the give and take. He praised Obama for his Afghan policies, even though he did dig a little regarding the length of time he took. He flat out laughed out loud at Biden’s attempt to rewrite history “Iraq will be one of Obama’s great accomplishments”, and rightly so. Both Biden and Obama opposed the surge that led to the current successes we see there, plus the SOFA was negotiated and signed by Bush, not Obama. Biden is a joke.

Biden claims Cheney is trying to rewrite history, but didn’t provide an example that I could see.

Words just words from the Obama administration. yes, he has said “we are at war with AQ” and I applaud Obama for strengthening the troop levels in Afghanistan and his uptick of drone attacks in Pakistan. But when he says that KSM is going to be tried in criminal court he is making KSM a criminal and not an enemy combatant. That the HIG is not yet functional is pretty shameful.

I laugh at the commentary about how come a VP is out criticizing the administration. I certainly don’t recall David Gregory criticizing former Vice President Al Gore when he went on national television and spewed: “HE BETRAYED OUR COUNTRY” from Al Gore, regarding WMD in Iraq when the Bush administration inherited the intelligence that Iraq had WMD from the Clinton/Gore administration. Ah, yes the good old double standard of the media.

David Gregory has to shut down Rachel Maddow, and again, why is Rachel a panel member on MTP? The sole republican on MTP’s panel is doing a terrific job.

TfT I would love a pair of those “rose colored glasses” you have on this morning.

Cheney ” did dig a little regarding the length of time (Obama) took” in Afghanistan. 2002-2009 in Afghanistan, from the loss of bin Laden at Tora Bora to the comeback of the Taliban while Bush/Cheney and the Neocons blundered into Iraq. If Cheney wasn’t re-writing history he certainly was ignoring reality.

I guess I needed to be a little more explicit for the lefties on board:

“how long he took to make the decision regarding troop increase to Afghanistan”

I guess you didn’t watch the interview, too bad, it was terrific.

Don’t talk to me about the loss of getting OBL given the history of the Clinton administration, please.

Bush inherited the US policy of “regime change in Iraq’ from the Clinton administration, supported by a vote of 100-0 in the US Senate. Iraq is mostly secure, stable, governable with upcoming elections….thank you Bush/Cheney and our outstanding military. Lefties will never understand the underlying policy of Iraq; history will get it right though.

Draft-dodger Cheney is in zero position to talk about military affairs. Cheney represents all that is crazy about the radical America-Hating/Terrorist-Enabling right wing.

I wonder why Harold Ford Jr. is on MTP when his contract was supposedly terminated. He is giving a lesson on kissing up to the President. He might as well just look into the camera and beg for his old friend’s political support.

Biden isn’t fit to hold Cheney’s jock strap. I’d take him in a debate v ANY lib any day. I would vote him for pres. any day. And for those of you who think he’s a war criminal, please state specifically why. And don’t give me he said there were WMD’s because Clinton, Kerry, UK, and MANY more said their were also.

Yes, Michelle – they did. In 1998. And Bush and the neo-conjobs used that evidence in 2003 to market the Blunder in Iraq like a new P&G laundry soap and gave us the greatest military/strategic/foreign relations eff up in our history. Don’t give me your ‘logic’ on that one – you don’t have any. I’d put Biden against Impotent Dick Cheney anytime, because ol’ Dick’s jockstrap is empty. That you’d vote for him for president is amazing — amazingly ignorant.

I don’t understand how we can say we are fighting for Democracy and then ababdaon that grat idea of Democracy and Civil Rights when I suits us. Will there really be that much of a difference if we treat these criminals, terrorists, enemy combatants if they are tried by the Militaty or by a Federal Court? Calling the shootings at Fort Hood terrorism isn’t necessarily accurate; this is a man that had demonstrated that he was mentally ill and should have been dealt with sooner than he was and then maybe this tragedy could have been prevented. Should Tim McVeigh have been tried in a Military Court becasue what he did was an act of terrorism. Stop making this a political issue because it’s not and it doesn’t help.

Oh come on Bill – get real. You can’t have it both ways. The PDB that the left always references was an historical look into the 90s yet you lefties claim Bush caused 9/11 because he didn’t pay attention. If the truth be told, and if Bush was as childish as Obama is, he could rightly claim that he inherited 9/11. Thanksfully Bush/Cheney were men — real men.

Biden wanted to break Iraq into three countries, didn’t support the surge, wanted to withdraw troops, voted to defund the war, etc. and yada yada yada.

I’d vote for Cheney in a heart beat as well, not just the former VP but his most intelligence daughter as well. She was awesome on FNS this morning, hope you caught her.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 11:13 am

Draft-dodger Cheney is in zero position to talk about military affairs.

And you served, when? And I also assume you’re a politician and journalist… that’s why you’re qualified to criticize, right?

Man, I really hate that “argument”… it’s soooo stupid.

Uh, I’mNotBlue: this isn’t about me, it’s about war criminal Cheney, m’kay? Let me make it REAL SIMPLE for ya: he dodged serving his nation FIVE TIMES! He was and is a COWARD. Now, you shoot your hole off on all manner of subjects, so I suppose you’re a journo, right? Silence, dear, is also a virtue, one you might want to practice.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 12:06 pm

Ah… so you’re able to comment on Cheney, and what he should have done vis-à-vis the military… but you’ve never served, you’re not a politician, and you’re not a journalist.

So I suppose the follow up question is… why can you talk about things you haven’t done yourself, but Cheney can’t? See, it’s about consistency, and the same rules for all. If Cheney is wrong for talking military strategy because he never served, why aren’t you wrong for criticizing him if you haven’t done the same thing?

He was and is a COWARD.

Are you a coward then too?

Now, you shoot your hole off on all manner of subjects, so I suppose you’re a journo, right?

Do I need to be?

Silence, dear, is also a virtue, one you might want to practice.

Nah.

I’m not a journo, or a writer, or a politician. I’m just another rube from flyover country that (even with my limited mental capabilities) can run out of fingers counting and reciting all the ridiculous, blatant, stupid stories & lies Joe Biden has been caught in. If his lips are movin’ he’s lyin’.

He’s a frickin’ idiot, just ask him because any answer he gives will prove it.

^ Honey, I never said whether I served or didn’t as it isn’t germane to the topic. Nor do I care if you served (with the Taliban, no doubt), because that, too, isn’t germane. What is germane is that Cheney never served and did everything he could to avoid serving. On every military issue, he has been proved a failure, he is a fuk-up of the highest order. So not only is Cheney a coward, he’s a screw-up. Which is why Republiscum luv him.

To the poster who parakeets the Dim points: “this isn’t about me, it’s about war criminal Cheney, m’kay? Let me make it REAL SIMPLE for ya: he dodged serving his nation FIVE TIMES!”

Two answers to that, it ain’t dodging if you do it legally, and there was no hint of illegalities in Ms. Seelye’s NYTimes story. I have no doubt that the poster above would go for the 3-A if he had the chance, but it’s not about him, OKAY? No Mr. Mackey issues here.

What is IS all about is Øbama. If “Cheney was in no position to talk about military affairs,” then Øbama shouldn’t be in the same area code to talk about it. So unless you have something original to say, you may also want to practice the silence you preach.

MichelleF – Five deferment Dick would not need a jockstrap…for obvious reasons.

And another thing. How about if ALL you morons quit using that ridiculous “war criminal” horseshit. Just because the adults are not in charge right now, it doesn’t mean all arguments have to sound like teenagers….

Dick “Five Deferments” Cheney also should be ashamed to talk about terrorism. After all, it was under the Bush-Cheney admin that the US was attacked, even though Bush-Cheney had been warned an attack was coming. And where oh where is bin-Laden? Where oh where is the anthrax killer? Where oh where are the Iraqi WMD? Cheney is a maroon, dontchaknow, a maroon.

Uhhhh….do deferments make a coward out of Bill Clinton?

^ No, because Clinton did not support the Vietnam war. Coward Cheney DID support the war but he was too much of a chickenshit to fight in it. Sort of like George WTC Bush, who simply walked off the field of battle.

You need to put the crack pipe down Parakeeta, it seriously affects your thinking process.

Bottom line in the debate between V.P.’s… Cheney is a leader, like his decisions or not he made them as a leader, Bidens just another greasy politician that says whatever he thinks people want to hear.

Spine vs. spineless….

What battlefield did W walk off of pray-tell?

^ Typical wingnut attacks. I see no reason to engage with a freeptard.

^ Uh, Miss Bush deserter her post, dontchaknow, she just picked up her purse and went AWOL. Not to worry, though, Daddy took care of Junior’s mess, as usual.

Tim,

You associate having a “spine” with lying, cowardice and sadistic acts. Cheney is America’s face of evil. And parakeeta is correct. When Cheney had the opportunity to serve this country against communism he refused to do so five times, because he did not want to risk his own life. He is a coward and chickenHawk as are most of the media figures you look up to at Fox News.

^ Same2u, you are so right. Seana Hannity? Coward — refused to serve. Wilma O’Really? Bad back. Rush Limbaugh? “Oh, Doc, I Can’t Serve — Got a Pimple on My Ass!” William Kristol? Dodger. The right wing in America likes to start wars, but they aren’t partial to, you know, fighting them.

^ Not to mention The Great Coward, Rhonnie “Dodged Fighting in WWII, HAHAHA!” Rheagan. That limp-wristed sissy! He doctor-shopped to find ANYONE who would say he had “bad eyes.” Imagine! Dodging serving one’s country in WWII!

Sweet Jesus, I really hope you people don’t have children.

And if you do have children, I pray that they do not become as corrupt as their father.

Just to keep things in perspective here is a list of the terror attacks under Mr. “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is” Clinton.
————————————

Oct. 12, 2000 – A terrorist bomb damages the destroyer USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen, killing 17 sailors and injuring 39.

Aug. 7, 1998 – Terrorist bombs destroy the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In Nairobi, 12 Americans are among the 291 killed, and over 5,000 are wounded, including 6 Americans. In Dar es Salaam, one U.S. citizen is wounded among the 10 killed and 77 injured.

In response, on August 20 the United States attacked targets in Afghanistan and Sudan with over 75 cruise missiles fired from Navy ships in the Arabian and Red seas. About 60 Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from warships in the Arabian Sea. Most struck six separate targets in a camp near Khost, Afghanistan. Simultaneously, about 20 cruise missiles were fired from U.S. ships in the Red Sea striking a factory in Khartoum, Sudan, which was suspected of producing components for making chemical weapons.

June 21, 1998 – Rocket-propelled grenades explode near the U.S. embassy in Beirut.

June 25, 1996 – A bomb aboard a fuel truck explodes outside a U.S. air force installation in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 U.S. military personnel are killed in the Khubar Towers housing facility, and 515 are wounded, including 240 Americans.

Nov. 13, 1995 – A car-bomb in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills seven people, five of them American military and civilian advisers for National Guard training. The “Tigers of the Gulf,” “Islamist Movement for Change,” and “Fighting Advocates of God” claim responsibility.

February 1993 – A bomb in a van explodes in the underground parking garage in New York’s World Trade Center, killing six people and wounding 1,042.
——————————————–

Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with. But to Parakeeta’s point the US had been first attacked under Bush: You are 100% wrong. We were first attacked in 1993 by bin Laden and Clinton didn’t catch him. We were subsequently attacked several more time. Why do you reserve your outrage only for Bush? You do remember that war was declared on the US long before Bush was in office don’t you? You seem to be cherry picking where your craziness is being directed and not being intellectually honest. You can harp all day long about some memo that stated bin Laden wanted to attack the US but it doesn’t change the fact there obviously wasn’t anything in that memo that would have led to preventing of the attack, because if there was then it would have been prevented, by either Clinton or Bush. As you can see by the long list of attacks under Clinton we didn’t have the most stellar anti-terror policies.

On a side note: Draft dodging isn’t something exclusive to any one party, so you both look stupid. It’s not an argument worth having. Just because you believe in a certain ideology, or support various military actions, it doesn’t make you fit to serve in the military. I wouldn’t have wanted neither of them with me when I was in Iraq.

Also, just so nobody forgets, Democrats started the Vietnam war. :-P Ike/NIxon had advisers in country to assist the S. Vietnamese in military strategy but Kennedy and eventually Johnson led us into war. So following Parakeeta’s logic Clinton should have been chomping at the bit to go. :-D

^ Uh, the first attack on the WTC, just thirty days after Clinton took office. Were the perps arrested? Yes. Tried? Yes, in civilian courts. Convicted? Yes, by a jury. Jailed? Yes, they were — for life.

Now. How about the perps who took DOWN the World Trade Center under Bush? Where is bin-Laden? Has he been found? Arrested? Tried? Convicted? Jailed?

You do realize that the it’s the same group that attacked the WTC both times right? And that OBL is the leader of that group?

^ Yes, and that Bush called OBL “Public enemy Number One.” Funny thing, though, Bush let OBL go at Tora Bora and then Bush downgraded OBL to “Well, I Can’t Say I Really Think Much About Him.” Republicans! Never count on them to (a) be competent or (b) defend America because (c) they hate America and want America to fail.

Again you are cherry picking where you are directing your craziness. Clinton blew several attempts to to have OBL to brought to the US.

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/dec/05/opinion/oe-ijaz05

So your points in A, B, and C could be directed to Democrats as well. I’m not going to say that not pursuing OBL into Pakistan was a good decision. It wasn’t. I would have marched our Army right into Pakistan a long time ago. I think it’s ridiculous not to have our troops in Pakistan now. If they aren’t going to do anything to prevent people from using those mountains as safe havens, then we should. That being said however, directing all of your outrage at Bush and Republicans makes you silly. Or maybe you are just a shill who isn’t intellectually honest? :-|

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 12:43 pm

I wonder if you’re being willfully obtuse and ignorant… or if it’s just part of your hateful and spiteful nature. Either way, I’ve proven you a hypocrite. You apply one set of rules for someone like Cheney, and another for yourself. Of course, Biden never served… Obama never served… so I assume you call them the same names you call Cheney, right?

Nah… just cut to the chase next time. “I hate Cheney,” is much easier than having to come up with some bogus hypocrisy to explain yourself.

(PS- Nor do I care if you served (with the Taliban, no doubt) Yes, everyone who disagrees with you is a terrorist. Stay classy Keeta…)

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 12:48 pm

I assume you speak of Clinton and Gore similarly, right? USS Cole, Trade Center the first time, Bin Laden, etc. Consistency, yet again… right?

same2u says:
February 14, 2010 at 1:06 pm

I’m sorry, I forget… of the Democrats currently in charge who sent more men and women to Afghanistan… how many of them served? Obama? Biden? I forget. Enlighten me.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 2:05 pm

So Clinton has his entire Presidency to find Bin Laden… and doesn’t do much of anything.

Funny… you seemed to ignore that. Why is that? Oh, that’s right… hackery at its most obvious.

^ More wingnuttery. In seven years Bush/Cheney failed to (a) find bin-Laden or () find the anthrax killer or (c) find WMD in Iraq. Cheney was a draft-dodger of unequal vigor, a creature who cheered on wars yet failed to fight in them. Where is bin-Laden? Where are the WMD? Speak, old chap, speak!

@Colby: A sitting Vice-President from one party would never “debate” the Vice-President of the previous administration, especially if they were from another party and there were major points of contention.

Al Gore was vocal in opposition to the 2nd Iraq War and Mr. Cheney did not sit down with him; George H.W. Bush toed the Reagan line on taxes and he didn’t do Sunday shows opposite Walter Mondale. It’s just not the way things are done… something about demeaning the office, elevating critics, endangering the former’s place in history and well, if they battle in sound bites, nobody (on either side) loses the war.

Thank God we had Bush/Cheney when the terrorists attacked us on US soil after all the attacks during the Clinton years. Afterall, using Obama’s logic, Bush inherited 9/11.

LOL at timzank and the “kids” comment. Bravo

The fact that the Bush Administration reversed the Clinton Administration’s emphasis on fighting terrorism is irrefutable, outside of the frightened little minds of conservatives.

“internal Department
of Justice (DoJ) documents obtained by the Center for American Progress
demonstrate. The Bush Administration actually reversed the Clinton
Administration’s strong emphasis on counterterrorism and
counterintelligence. Attorney General John Ashcroft not only moved
aggressively to reduce DoJ’s anti-terrorist budget but also shift DoJ’s
mission in spirit to emphasize its role as a domestic police force and
anti-drug force. These changes in mission were just as critical as the
budget changes, with Ashcroft, in effect, guiding the day to day
decisions made by field officers and agents. And all of this while the
Administration was receiving repeated warnings about potential
terrorist attacks.”

5/8/98 – FBI Strategic Plan:

Mission statement from internal FBI Strategic Plan dated 5/8/1998 in
which the Tier One priority is counterterrorism. This document clearly
proves that the FBI under the previous Administration was making
counterterrorism its highest priority. As the document states “Foreign
intelligence, terrorist, and criminal activities that directly threaten
the national or economic security…To succeed we must develop and
implement a proactive, nationally directed program.”

4/6/00 – DoJ Budget Goals Memo:

Official annual budget goals memo from Attorney General Janet Reno to
department heads dated 4/6/2000 detailing how counterterrorism is her
top priority for the Department of Justice. In the second paragraph,
she states, “In the near term as well as the future, cybercrime and
counterterrrorism are going to be the most challenging threats in the
criminal justice area. Nowhere is the need for an up-to-date human and
technical infrastructure more critical.”

5/10/01 – Ashcroft New DoJ Budget Goals Memo:

Official annual budget goals memo from Attorney General Ashcroft dated
5/10/2001 (directly compares to the 4/6/2000 Reno memo). Out of 7
strategic goals described, not one mentions counterterrorism, a serious
departure from Reno.”

Media Matters on NYT 9/11 report.

“Tenet briefed Condi Rice about a potentially catastrophic terrorist
attack on the United States on July 10, 2001. Rice ignored the
briefing, just as she and Bush both ignored the August 6 “Bin Laden
Determined to Strike in US” memo, when Bush told the CIA briefer who
delivered the memo to him that he had “covered his ass” and then went
fishing for the rest of the day. Rice not only ignored the briefing,
but also misled the 9-11 Commission and then lied when confronted with
the evidence by Bob Woodward.”

Once again conservatives scramble to obfuscate the facts to serve their narrow agenda, regardless of the harm to our country.

Cheney conducted torture from his office hour by hour on some occasions, he is a traitor to the CIA and our nation, both by exposing the secret identity of a covert agent working on weapons of mass destruction proliferation (insert tired false talking point here that the fact someone else also spilled the beans makes a dime worth of difference), and the fact he made upwards of twelve unprecedented visits to Langley to hover over agents and beseech them for the excuse he needed to invade Iraq.

The crimes go on and on, like installing a secret agency at the Pentagon to go around the CIA, who refused to play his games; that’s why he’s out there leading the charge. It’s his rear end in the slammer, not clueless Shrub.

^ Ah, TFT, 9/11 happened during the Bush/Cheney regime, dontchaknow.

Aside from all the bullshit, it’s pretty clear we can all agree on one thing. Biden has never been right about anything.
Ever.
He’s been on the wrong side of everything his whole life.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 3:04 pm

And just remember… while Obama has been in office for over a year, we haven’t given him enough time to fix or change things. That’s why so much of what he’s promised hasn’t happened yet. We need to remember that a year isn’t enough time.

Except, when it comes to Bush. For him, less than a year was enough time to completely change the defense system… either for the better or worse.

Sure it’s hypocrisy… but it’s the best we can do when attacking Bush/Cheney, while ignoring Clinton and Obama.

^ More hypocisy. You want to blame Clinton for the first WTC attack, which occurred 30 days into his first term, but you do not want to blame Bush for the 9/11 attacks, which occurred 240 days into his term. How’s that work?

“Oct. 12, 2000 – A terrorist bomb damages the destroyer USS Cole in the port of Aden, Yemen, killing 17 sailors and injuring 39.”

CIA didn’t confirm Al Queda’s involvement until January 26th, 2001, six days into the Bush presidency. Bush took no action to respond.

“Aug. 7, 1998 – Terrorist bombs destroy the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. In Nairobi, 12 Americans are among the 291 killed, and over 5,000 are wounded, including 6 Americans. In Dar es Salaam, one U.S. citizen is wounded among the 10 killed and 77 injured.”

Several suspects arrested and imprisoned.

“June 25, 1996 – A bomb aboard a fuel truck explodes outside a U.S. air force installation in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 19 U.S. military personnel are killed in the Khubar Towers housing facility, and 515 are wounded, including 240 Americans.”

Four participants with ties to Osama bin Laden were captured, convicted in U.S. federal court, and sentenced to life in prison without parole in October 2001.

“Nov. 13, 1995 – A car-bomb in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia kills seven people, five of them American military and civilian advisers for National Guard training. The “Tigers of the Gulf,” “Islamist Movement for Change,” and “Fighting Advocates of God” claim responsibility.”

Saudi Arabian authorities arrested four Saudi nationals whom they claim confessed to the bombings, but U.S. officials were denied permission to see or question the suspects before they were convicted and beheaded in May 1996.

“February 1993 – A bomb in a van explodes in the underground parking garage in New York’s World Trade Center, killing six people and wounding 1,042.”

Four followers of the Egyptian cleric Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman were captured, convicted of the World Trade Center bombing in March 1994, and sentenced to 240 years in prison each. The purported mastermind of the plot, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, was captured in 1995, convicted of the bombing in November 1997, and also sentenced to 240 years in prison.

“Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with.”

The federal budget on anti-terror activities tripled during Clinton’s watch, to about $6.7 billion. On or about Jan. 20th, 2001, as the Clinton administration transitioned to the Bush, NSC chief Sandy Berger briefed Condi Rice extensively on the terrorism threat posed by bin Laden, telling her she would be spending more time on this threat than she ever imagined. At the Dept. of Defense, William Cohen was performing the same courtesy for Don Rumsfeld, again with a sharp reminder of the terrorist threat in the form of a hand-written letter to Rumsfeld containing the phone numbers of people in the Pentagon Rumsfeld needed to speak to directly on the subject.

The response of the Bush administration was to cease Predator drone surveillance flights to track bin Laden, reassign the cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean with the specific mission of targeting bin Laden, reassign the AC-130 gunships on scramble alert that could be on top of bin Laden after a six hour flight, suspend the special forces operations targeting bin Laden already based in Uzbekistan for the purpose (a treaty that was crafted and signed by Bill Clinton).

In May, June and July, the sole remaining Clinton appointee, CIA Director Tenet, was frantic with concern over incoming intelligence indicating a huge terrorist attack on American soil. Vice-President Dick Cheney was head of a new counter-terrorism task force, yet held no meetings. Attorney General John Ashcroft refused FBI requests for hundreds of new agents to be assigned to counter-terrorism; his concerns were drugs and pornography, yet in late July he stopped flying commercial airliners due to a “threat assessment.” The general threat assessment was considered to be the most severe in decades according to CIA’s Tenet; members of the Senate Intelligence Committee were briefed on the situation on July 5th.

Also in July, an Arizona FBI agent wrote the ‘Phoenix Memo,’ expressing concern about possible Al Qaeda members taking flying lessons in this country towards the end of terrorist attacks. One of the two FBI officials to see it before the attacks was New York counter-terrorism chief John O’Neill; contemporaneous with the timing of this memo was O’Neill’s remarks to the authors of ‘Bin Laden: The Hidden Truth,’ wherein O’Neill expressed his outrage with the Bush administration’s thwarting of counter-terrorist efforts in the interests of protecting its Saudi sponsors. John O’Neill would soon quit the FBI in disgust, only to die at his new job as chief of security at the WTC.

Hart Rudman comittee came up with anti-terror plan and it was approved by President Clinton and Congress in 2000. It dealt with all terror scenarios, from combat in the mid east resulting in the bombing of the Fed Ex Headquarters to a small pox attack on OK city. It even included airplanes as weapons, no surprise since a right wing wacko tried to kill Clinton the same way. GWB took office in 2001 and he had the findings of the comitte and the green light to implement the plan. He did not. Instead he had Dick Cheney review the plan and refused to discuss it with Congress.

^ September 11, 2001, 3,000 Americans die from an al-Queda attack, one that George WTC Bush was warned about on 06 Aug 01, but did nothing to stop. End Of Story.

“Again you are cherry picking where you are directing your craziness. Clinton blew several attempts to to have OBL to brought to the US.”

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_bill_clinton_pass_up_a_chance_1.html

^ Really? On 06 Aug 01 Bush was warned by the CIA that bin-Laden intended to attack the US IN THE US. Clinton was gone, baby, he was out of office and Bush was president. Why didn’t Bush act? He was warned and did nothing. Stop being dishonest and accept that Bush-Cheney screwed up, mkay?

Once again, and for the last time, but the left will NEVER ACCEPT THE FACT, but the PDB was an historical look at the threat from OBL from the 1990s (that would be the Clinton years).

Using the Obama/dem/media meme: Bush inherited 9/11.

^ The document said “bin-Laden determined to strike in the US.” Now, what part of that do you struggle with? “Determined to” is future tense, not retrospective. Stop lying and accept that your boys, Bush and Cheney, were incompetent. Stop Hating America and start accepting the facts.

Three words right wingers hate: GOD BLESS AMERICA!

You know, I haven’t seen this much America Hating ince the Republican National Convention in Manhattan back in 2004. Man, there was a whole lot of America-Hating by cowardly Republiscum going on back then!

parakeeta, it’s almost sundown in most places, go check in at the desk with Nurse Ratched and get some sleep…

JamesA1102 ,

Your response to those terror attacks proves the point that Clinton’s crack anti-terror policies failed to stop them. They had a reactionary policy not a preventive policy. And you have to ask yourself if you believe Clinton in 2002 in his original speech or do you believe his revised version 2 years later. I believe what he originally said. If bin Laden wasn’t implicated in any crimes against America, say the 1993 bombing of the WTC, then why even discuss him in the meetings? We know Clinton used rendition, why not use it on bin Laden (If he was in fact implicated in the original WTC attack)? Again I want to reiterate I’m not placing sole blame for 9/11 on him. I blame our entire federal government from 1990 to 2001.

In regards to the “George Bush did nothing in response to the USS Cole attack” From Wikipedia but the citations appear solid: In November 2001, the Navy opened an Anti-Terrorism and Force Protection Warfare Center at Naval Amphibious Base (NAB) Little Creek, in Virginia Beach, VA, with the objective of developing tactics, equipment and training to combat terrorists.[28]

On 3 November 2002, the CIA fired a AGM-114 Hellfire missile from a Predator UAV at a vehicle carrying Abu Ali al-Harithi, a suspected planner of the bombing plot. Also in the vehicle was Ahmed Hijazi, a U.S. citizen. Both were killed. This operation was carried out on Yemeni soil.

On 29 September 2004, a Yemeni judge sentenced Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri and Jamal al-Badawi to death for their roles in the bombing. Al-Nashiri, believed to be the operation’s mastermind, is currently being held by the U.S. at Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[29] Al-Badawi, in Yemeni custody, denounced the verdict as “an American one.” Four others were sentenced to prison terms of five to 10 years for their involvement, including one Yemeni who had videotaped the attack.

Then in October 2004, the Navy consolidated the forces it deploys for anti-terrorism and force protection under a single command at NAB Little Creek. The new Maritime Force Protection Command (MARFPCOM) was activated to oversee the administration and training of the expeditionary units the Navy deploys overseas to protect ships, aircraft and bases from terrorist attack. MARFPCOM aligned four existing components: the Mobile Security Forces, Naval Coastal Warfare, Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD), and Expeditionary Mobile Diving and Salvage Forces.[30]

On 3 February 2006, 23 suspected or convicted Al-Qaeda members escaped from jail in Yemen. This number included 13 who were convicted of the USS Cole bombings and the bombing of the French tanker Limburg in 2002. Among those who reportedly escaped was Al-Badawi. Al-Qaeda’s Yemeni number two Abu Assem al-Ahdal may also be among those now on the loose.[31]
Search Wikinews Wikinews has related news: Conspirator of USS Cole attack freed from prison

On 17 October 2007, al-Badawi surrendered to Yemeni authorities as part of an agreement with al-Qaeda militants. Following his surrender, Yemeni authorities released him in return for a pledge not to engage in any violent or al-Qaeda-related activity, despite a $5 million reward for his capture. Two other escapees remained at large.[32][33]

In June 2008, the United States charged Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri with planning and conducting the attack. The US planned to seek the death penalty in his case.[20] On February 5, 2009, the United States dropped all charges against al-Nashiri “without prejudice” to comply with President Obama’s order to shut down the military prison at Guantanamo Bay.[citation needed] The government reserves the right to file charges at a later date.

In 2009 a US federal judge Kimba Wood released $13.4 million in frozen assets belonging to Sudan to be awarded to 33 spouses, parents, and children of the sailors killed in the attack. The money was awarded based on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002. Previously, the court had found Sudan culpable in facilitating the attack on the destroyer. Said John Coldfelter, father of Kenneth Coldfelter who was killed in the bombing, “It’s about time something was done. It’s taken so much more time than we thought it should take.”

Still waiting for one of the “Support the War by Staying at Home” Republicans to explain why it is Clinton’s fault that George “Deserter” Bush allowed America to be attacked EIGHT MONTHS into that cowards term. Oh, well, the Keyboard Commandos never can explain that.

This TfT person says some very unkind things on here!
I would never use the word “heartbeat” in the same sentence as “Cheney” given the man’s history of coronary problems.
I don’t know if he/she was trying to be funny, but I’m not laughing!
Also nice to see she goes down that road with the unread PDB.
It may have been an historical report, but it was also prescient.
Too bad Shrub was on vacation with Barney at his “ranch” in Texas.
That was in his intensive book reading phase.
After all, he had to have some answer when the WH Press Corpse (get it?!!) asked him what he did on his summer vacation!

^ Georgette Bush was a bigger lady than Rhonnie Rhegan, and Rheagan was ALL GIRL.

Well let’s see here. When we (lefties) go on and on about Bushie you (righties) say that we are talking about the past. But I do believe one or more of the posts here are blaming Clinton for 9/11. Hmm is that ok? I do believe it was Bush that was in office when 9/11 happened but it was still Clinton’s fault. It would be nice if you Repugs could stick to facts as they really are and not what you would like them to be.

I doubt that 9/11 was planned within the nine months Bush was in office. It took time to set up false identities, get driver’s licenses and passports, take flying lessons and so on. This was going on under Clinton’s nose. Did the Bush administration drop the ball? Yes. Did the Clinton administration drop it too? Yes. Plenty of blame to go around.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 6:19 pm

Let me ask you an honest question… have you read anyone else’s post, or do you ignore things that look like they might disagree with you?

Wow… what an angry, ill informed, arrogant, person you are. There are many questions, examples, and statements above directed at you… yet you brush off each one, with another round of snide, nasty, hateful, un-American (yes, un-American… respect for people of different backgrounds and believes is a core principal… you demonstrate the opposite) comments.

Get a grip, dude.

TinaFromTampa says:
February 14, 2010 at 6:25 pm

Are you still stalking around here? Wow! Explain to me how you’re not pathetic? Just give me a reason!

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 6:32 pm

So what you’re saying is that you’re a misogynist too? Shocker.

blueblogger says:
February 14, 2010 at 8:05 pm

Reading is fundamental. If you want to claim that Bush was solely responsible for 9/11, and/or “letting” Bin Laden get away, you need to be confronted with the actual facts of the situation. I know you don’t want to talk about that, because it means you’d have to think critically about a Democrat… and maybe even criticize him too… but the facts are facts. Sorry if that doesn’t work for you.

^ You right wing extremists are so crazy. You hate America, you want America to fail, you want America to lose both wars (wars, BTW, you refuse to fight in). Well, you say “that’s okay, because the head of the GOP, Osama bin-Laden, agrees.” How sad. How very, very sad. You worship Osama, you LOVE Osama, he is your master.

“blueblogger says:
February 14, 2010 at 8:05 pm

Reading is fundamental. If you want to claim that Bush was solely responsible for 9/11, and/or “letting” Bin Laden get away, you need to be confronted with the actual facts of the situation. I know you don’t want to talk about that, because it means you’d have to think critically about a Democrat… and maybe even criticize him too… but the facts are facts. Sorry if that doesn’t work for you.”

Baby, who was president on 9/11, Bush or Clinton? Bush, right? Nuff said.

Okay, so let’s recap: Clinton, who was predietn for 30 days when the WTC was bombed, is responsible for that attack, but Bush, who was president for 240 days when 9/11 went down, isn’t responsible. Got It.

No wonder normal Americans HATE Republicans.

How ImNotBlue could accuse anyone of being a troll… is actually hillarious.

parakeeta Baby, who was president on 9/11, Bush or Clinton? Bush, right? Nuff said.

That is what I said. Sorry if it confused you. I said that people on here blame Clinton and Bush was president. Get it?????

Look I know I am not the brightest bulb on here but I at least remember my presidents!!!

The terrorists were setting up identities, getting fake IDs, and learning to fly in Florida while Clinton was in office. And none of that counts? Clinton is totally blameless?

Cheney should be hanged in a public square for High Crimes. Period.

Hey – the Blues are extra-cretinic today, eh?? Something straight out of Dan Quayle!

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 9:48 pm

*Sigh* I get it. That’s all you’re gonna say. Facts are gone. Information is gone. Just repeat the babble. Got it. Moving on.

parakeeta says:
February 14, 2010 at 10:11 pm

No wonder normal Americans HATE Republicans.

Can you define “normal America” for me. I’m not sure the polls reflect that.

TinaFromTampa says:
February 14, 2010 at 10:24 pm

I didn’t accuse you of being a troll… just a stalker… which you’ve already admitted to previously. What’s the problem? You’re posing as another person, and stalking her for site to site… we all know this already.

blueblogger says:
February 14, 2010 at 10:24 pm

So, whose fault is it (according to you) that the economy sucks right now? Obama has been in office for over a year… so it’s his fault right?

Nachi says:
February 14, 2010 at 11:56 pm

You never told me how you got kicked off the Howard Stern site… I’m interested to know.

Aw, but the Blue guiys (?) are especially nasty today. They’re fearful of any Valentine’s Day. Terrified that some stranger will poke them with a homosexual cattle-prod. It’s an old GOP fear – deeply- rooted in Murcuhn history. Still a big clump of the Party today.

INB: Yeah, stalker NotsoAnonymous (who herself admits she posts here under my tvnewser identity) is a site pest who is in need of serious help. I have asked her lib buddies at tvnewser to encourage her to get some much needed help to deal with her obsession, but alas, to no avail.

I am waiting for the post on Ann Coulter and her comments on Slow Joe last night on Heraldo’s show. Funny how the left gets all up in arms when their guys are attacked, but the left is the number one offender of the name calling games. See MSNBC as prime example.

Biden projecting again when he says: “They are not entitled to their own facts” when Biden makes stuff up all the time. Funny.

For the love of God, Republicans, STOP HATING AMERICA!

I didn’t know Sean Penn and Danny Glover were republicans, when they go all over the world kissing the asses of dictators and telling us we should be more like them.

Nachi says:
February 15, 2010 at 12:35 am

Well, (1) aren’t the “blue guys” Democrats? (2) One of my least fears are homosexuals. Actually, I’ve been a supporter of gay marriage from the beginning… so, perhaps you’re thinking of your old Stern buddies… you know, before you got banned. (3) Valentine’s Day, while being a manufactured holiday, is one of my favorites. Why? CANDY! INB loves the candy… red hots, conversations hearts, jelly beans… sign me up!

“Your response to those terror attacks proves the point that Clinton’s crack anti-terror policies failed to stop them. They had a reactionary policy not a preventive policy.”

Tripling the anti-terrorism budget is reactive? Predator drone surveillance flights to track bin Laden is reactive? Assign the cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean with the specific mission of targeting bin Laden is reactive? Assign the AC-130 gunships on scramble alert that could be on top of bin Laden after a six hour flight is reactive. The special forces operations targeting bin Laden based in Uzbekistan is reactive? I guess anything short of invading a country is considered reactive.

“Again I want to reiterate I’m not placing sole blame for 9/11 on him. I blame our entire federal government from 1990 to 2001.”

To quote factcheck.org: “Did Bill Clinton pass up a chance to kill Osama bin Laden? Probably not, and it would not have mattered anyway as there was no evidence at the time that bin Laden had committed any crimes against American citizens.”

“In regards to the “George Bush did nothing in response to the USS Cole attack” From Wikipedia but the citations appear solid”

Yes they do. And every action that was taken was taken after 9/11 not before.

“Predator drone surveillance flights to track bin Laden is reactive? Assign the cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean with the specific mission of targeting bin Laden is reactive? Assign the AC-130 gunships on scramble alert that could be on top of bin Laden after a six hour flight is reactive. The special forces operations targeting bin Laden based in Uzbekistan is reactive?”

They are being reactive! They are sitting there waiting for something to happen so they can react to it! Also, why would they do any of that if bin Laden hadn’t been been implicated in any crimes against American citizens? Obviously he was implicated in something or none of that would have happened. So they chose to do that instead of taking the Sudan up on their offer? Please. Again, I’ll take Clinton at his word in 2002 and not the revised version that he gave to the 9/11 commission after a team of lawyers told him what to, and what not to, say.

“And every action that was taken was taken after 9/11 not before.”

It took 13 months for the Navy to get it’s new school up and running. I’m sure the Navy would welcome your criticism about how it took them to long to develop tactics to deal with terrorists while at sea, develop a curriculum, train instructors and build a new school. You’re right 13 months is way to long. They should have done it in 3. What a coincidence! Clinton was in office for 3 months after the Cole attack. He should have gotten it going.

Sorry Dubya wasn’t fast enough in getting to all of those responsible in AQ fast enough for you in regards to the Cole. I just don’t know why all those boats and planes and SF people on standby didn’t stop it. They knew exactly where every one was. I mean, come on! They were sitting there waiting for something to happen.

“They are being reactive! They are sitting there waiting for something to happen so they can react to it! ”

No they are not. They were all proactive programs to find and target bin Laden. You’re just rewriting history to fit into your narrow-minded narative.

“I’ll take Clinton at his word in 2002 and not the revised version ”

So you take his word for the version that fits into your preconceived bias and not the one that independent fact checkers say is more accurate.

“Also, why would they do any of that if bin Laden hadn’t been been implicated in any crimes against American citizens?”

Because at the time they did those things there evidence that he had committed crimes. See there is this pesky thing called linear time. You arrest someone after you have evidence that they committed a crime, not years before.

“It took 13 months for the Navy to get it’s new school up and running. ”

13 months prior to November 2001??? That would have been during the Clinton administration. So I guess it was just BS to say that Clinton did nothing to respond to the USS Cole as well as BS to give Bush credit for a program that Clinton started.

“Sorry Dubya wasn’t fast enough in getting to all of those responsible in AQ fast enough for you in regards to the Cole.”

It’s not that he wasn’t fast enough, it’s that he did nothing. So don’t sit there and rewrite history to blame Clinton for everything and absolve Bush of all responsibility.

“No they are not. They were all proactive programs to find and target bin Laden. You’re just rewriting history to fit into your narrow-minded narrative.”

We’ll have to agree to disagree. I say they were waiting for something to happen so they can react to it. You say just by the presence of them they are being proactive.

“13 months prior to November 2001??? That would have been during the Clinton administration. So I guess it was just BS to say that Clinton did nothing to respond to the USS Cole as well as BS to give Bush credit for a program that Clinton started.”

Clinton was in for 3 months after the Cole. Whether he was the one to sign off on the program; I don’t know. I was telling you to direct your ire of the school not being opened fast enough at the Navy.

“So you take his word for the version that fits into your preconceived bias and not the one that independent fact checkers say is more accurate.”

I’ll take the word of the president as originally spoken. I’m more inclined to believe what someone originally says not what they say 2 years later after being told how to revise it.

“It’s not that he wasn’t fast enough, it’s that he did nothing.”

You obviously didn’t read the page that outlined everything that was done in regards to the Cole attack. It’s not that he didn’t do anything. You can’t rewrite history and say that nothing was done under Bush in response to the Cole attack.

“Because at the time they did those things there evidence that he had committed crimes.”

http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&complete_911_timeline_counterterrorism_before_9_11=huntForBinLaden

There is more than enough there to hang blame for everything that has happened in regards to terrorism on both Clinton and Bush. I’ve stated several times that I think Clinton is just as much to blame as Bush. You seem more preoccupied with laying everything at the foot of Bush.

“We’ll have to agree to disagree. I say they were waiting for something to happen so they can react to it. You say just by the presence of them they are being proactive.”

Yes we’ll agree that you are spinning wildly.

“Clinton was in for 3 months after the Cole. Whether he was the one to sign off on the program; I don’t know.”

Before you said it took 13 months to get the school up and running. So it had to be Clinton to who had to be the one who signed off on the program.

“I was telling you to direct your ire of the school not being opened fast enough at the Navy.”

I’m not going to blame the Navy for Bush’s inaction on the Cole.

“I’ll take the word of the president as originally spoken. I’m more inclined to believe what someone originally says not what they say 2 years later after being told how to revise it.”

Told how to revise it??? Who told him to revise it??? You don’t know. You’ll just pulling this stuff out of your butt because you want to blame Clinton despite independent fact checking organizations disputing your premise.

“You obviously didn’t read the page that outlined everything that was done in regards to the Cole attack. It’s not that he didn’t do anything. You can’t rewrite history and say that nothing was done under Bush in response to the Cole attack.”

I read the page and every thing were actions taken after 9/11. My problem is that he did nothing before and pulled back efforts to track bin Laden as well.

“There is more than enough there to hang blame for everything that has happened in regards to terrorism on both Clinton and Bush. I’ve stated several times that I think Clinton is just as much to blame as Bush. You seem more preoccupied with laying everything at the foot of Bush.”

No actually you’re backpeddling. You started by trying to pin everything on Clinton including the discredited story that he passed up an offer by Sudan to hand over bin Laden. If you had read the link that you yourself provided is quoted Richard Clarke (who’s in a better position to know that either you or me) that this story was a “fable”.

“Yes we’ll agree that you are spinning wildly.”

And I say your spinning. We’ll have to agree to disagree.

“Before you said it took 13 months to get the school up and running. So it had to be Clinton to who had to be the one who signed off on the program.”

I said there was a 13 month gap between the attack and the opening of the school. Neither of us no who signed off on the program.

“Told how to revise it??? Who told him to revise it??? You don’t know. You’ll just pulling this stuff out of your butt because you want to blame Clinton despite independent fact checking organizations disputing your premise.”

You seriously doubt that he just up and recanted his original statement without any outside influence? Please. Politicians don’t do or say anything without a team of advisers telling them to. How do you misspeak about something that important? There are other government officials, like Mansoor Ijaz who wrote the LA Times piece and opened up communications with the Sudan and Clinton’s original statement, who were equally involved. It’s contested but not discredited, except to people, like yourself, who think Clinton is without blame. Read those reports. There are numerous incidents where Clinton’s administration failed to act. Just as there are numerous incidents where Bush failed to act. Unlike you, I’m not going to place blame on just one person for anything in regards to our countries failure to combat terrorism. I’m disputing the notion that just Bush is responsible. If you interpret that as me placing blame sole blame on Clinton, then that is your problem, not mine. Never once in anything I’ve posted have made that assertion.

“And I say your spinning. We’ll have to agree to disagree.”

No, you may be entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts. Tripling the anti-terrorism budget, Predator drone surveillance flights to track bin Laden , the cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean, AC-130 gunships and special forces operations based in Uzbekistan were all proactive actions to hunt down and kill bin Laden. You can repeat that they were not until you’re blue in the face but not matter how many times you repeat the lie is not going to make it the truth.

“I said there was a 13 month gap between the attack and the opening of the school. Neither of us no who signed off on the program.”

Please first you tried to blame the non-response to the Cole on Clinton but I pointed out that the CIA didn’t confirm that the Cole was attacked by Al Queda until 1/26/01 after Bush was President. Then you brought up this Navy school opening in November of 2001 as an action that Bush took. But when I pointed out that November 2001 was after 9/11 you said: “It took 13 months for the Navy to get it’s new school up and running. …You’re right 13 months is way to long. They should have done it in 3. What a coincidence! Clinton was in office for 3 months after the Cole attack. He should have gotten it going”. Then I pointed out the 13 months prior to 11/01 Clinton was the President. Now you are changing your tune again. And to get back to the original point, Bush was informed in the first week of his presidency that Al Queda was responsible for the attack on the USS Cole and he did nothing to strike at Al Queda in response.

“You seriously doubt that he just up and recanted his original statement without any outside influence? Please. Politicians don’t do or say anything without a team of advisers telling them to. How do you misspeak about something that important? ”

I don’t know and the truth is you don’t know either. But what I do know is that Richard Clarke who was in a much better position to know than either of us called it a fable and that factcheck.org say that it is not true.

“There are other government officials, like Mansoor Ijaz who wrote the LA Times piece and opened up communications with the Sudan and Clinton’s original statement, who were equally involved. It’s contested but not discredited,”

No it is discredited. Mansoor Ijaz is and never was a government official. He’s a Pakistani businessman and the 9/11 commission reviewed his claims. They concluded, “Sudan’s minister of defense, Fatih Erwa, has claimed that Sudan offered to hand Bin Ladin over to the United States. The Commission has found no credible evidence that this was so”. It is only people that want to blame Clinton that don’t think it is discredited.

“There are numerous incidents where Clinton’s administration failed to act. Just as there are numerous incidents where Bush failed to act. Unlike you, I’m not going to place blame on just one person for anything in regards to our countries failure to combat terrorism. I’m disputing the notion that just Bush is responsible. If you interpret that as me placing blame sole blame on Clinton, then that is your problem, not mine. Never once in anything I’ve posted have made that assertion.”

Please, the propose of you’re original post was to blame Clinton and make excuses for Bush as evidenced by your statement, “Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with.” Plus you posted a list of terror attacks the took place during Clinton’s presidency without noting any of the actions that the Clinton administration took to respond. You can blame Clinton for failing to get bin Laden but at least he tried. The Bush administration didn’t even try and ignored all warnings of the attack on 9/11 worse they cut programs that Clinton had put in place to get bin Laden and prevent such attacks.

They were all sitting there waiting for something to react to. Reactive policy. Say what you want. It’s the truth. We aren’t going to get anywhere on that.

You don’t know if Clinton ordered that school. You can credit him for it if you want. I was merely stating that there was a 13 month gap between the attack and the school. You seem to think our response was not punctual enough. You can also say Bush didn’t act fast enough. Point is he acted. You can’t dispute that. You don’t know if those actions would not have made without 9-11. You can assume it but there is no way of knowing. Your Bush derangement syndrome is showing.

You can say it’s discredited if you want but Clinton sure didn’t think so. Or he wouldn’t have mentioned it. He’s in more of a position of to know more than Ricard Clarke. Contested not discredited.

My original post was disputing the claim that our war on terror began with 9-11. As stated in this sentence: “But to Parakeeta’s point the US had been first attacked under Bush: You are 100% wrong.” Clinton’s responses to those attacks weren’t, and are still not, relevant to the point I was making. You can stomp and throw a fit all you want. The point I was making was an accurate and valid one. All the predator drones in the world wouldn’t have stopped 9/11. The terrorists were in the country training during the Clinton administration taking pilot lessons. The Clinton administration also ignored warning signs. You may not want to admit it but it’s true. Blame goes to both.

“They were all sitting there waiting for something to react to. Reactive policy. Say what you want. It’s the truth. We aren’t going to get anywhere on that.”

Predator drone flights trying to find and track bin Laden are not reactive. A cruise-missile equipped submarine stationed in the Indian Ocean with the specific mission of targeting bin Laden is not reactive. Special forces operations targeting bin Laden based in Uzbekistan is not reactive. All are proactive and you know it. You’re just lying because you’re trying to blame Clinton and I’m not going to let you get away with your lies.

PS I’d love to see you say to the face a member of one of those Special Forces units stationed in Uzbekistan that what they are doing is reactive. Bet you wouldn’t have the guts to do so.

“You don’t know if Clinton ordered that school. You can credit him for it if you want. I was merely stating that there was a 13 month gap between the attack and the school.”

You’re the one who cited the school opening in 11/01 as some grand response by Bush to the Cole bombing. When I pointed out that it opened after 9/11, you said: “It took 13 months for the Navy to get it’s new school up and running.” Then I pointed out that 13 months prior to 11/01, Clinton was President. Now like a typical liar caught in his own lies, you’re backpeddling. As far as I’m concerned the school is irrelevant. The point is that Bush was informed on 1/26/01 that Al Queda was responsible for the Cole bombing and he took no action to respond prior to 9/11.

“You seem to think our response was not punctual enough. You can also say Bush didn’t act fast enough. Point is he acted. You can’t dispute that. You don’t know if those actions would not have made without 9-11. You can assume it but there is no way of knowing. Your Bush derangement syndrome is showing.”

More like your Bush denial syndrome is showing. The fact is he had 8 months between the time it was determined that Al Queda was responsible for the Cole bombing and 9/11. In that 8 month period there was no response. If something was planned, you’re right I have no way of knowing. But that doesn’t excuse trying to blame Clinton for the non-response to the Cole.

“You can say it’s discredited if you want but Clinton sure didn’t think so. Or he wouldn’t have mentioned it. He’s in more of a position of to know more than Ricard Clarke. Contested not discredited.”

Actually Clinton never specifically stated that the Sudanese government offered bin Laden to us. But as FactCheck.org stated, “What is clear is that the 9/11 Commission report totally discounts the Sudanese claims. Unless further evidence arises, that has to be the final word.” So it is discredited.

“My original post was disputing the claim that our war on terror began with 9-11. As stated in this sentence: “But to Parakeeta’s point the US had been first attacked under Bush: You are 100% wrong.” ”

That is a fair point and you were right to correct it. And I’ll remind you they never tried to blame the first WTC bombing on Bush despite it taking place less than 3 months after he left office.

“Clinton’s responses to those attacks weren’t, and are still not, relevant to the point I was making.”

Then why did you bother to list them if they were irrelevant? Because you were trying to blame Clinton. months after Clinton took office.

“The point I was making was an accurate and valid one. All the predator drones in the world wouldn’t have stopped 9/11.”

You’re making an assumption that you have no way of knowing. You don’t know what would have happened if those flights had not been discontinued by Bush.

“The terrorists were in the country training during the Clinton administration taking pilot lessons. The Clinton administration also ignored warning signs. You may not want to admit it but it’s true.”

The Phoenix Memo which summerized the FBI’s investigation of this was issued in July 2001. Clinton wasn’t President then, Bush was and it was his administration that ignored it. You may not want to admit it but it’s true. And if you want to continue to blame Clinton for an attack that took place 9 months after he left office than you have to also blame Bush I for the first WTC attack which took place 3 months after he left office. You can’t have it both ways.

Those policies are reactive. As a disabled vet I would say it right to their face. The mission was a reactionary one.

Factcheck.org isn’t divine scripture. Disputed not discredited.

As I stated in a previous post: “Again I want to reiterate I’m not placing sole blame for 9/11 on him. I blame our entire federal government from 1990 to 2001.”

That includes the first Bush, Clinton and Dubya. Did you get that? Let it sink in. Bush (41) rightly deserves some blame for the first WTC bombing. They were in country planning and prepping while he was in office. That’s a similar situation we find ourselves in with Clinton. Again read my above statement. I have neither Clinton Derangement Syndrome or Bush Denial Syndrome. I blame our entire government for failing to see the oncoming threats for 11 years.

I didn’t cite the school opening as some grand Bush achievement. I copy and pasted everything from Wikipedia. I then stated that if the opening wasn’t fast enough for you, you could take it up with the Navy; or blame Clinton for not going down there and building the school himself, but placing sole blame on Bush is silliness.

“Those policies are reactive. As a disabled vet I would say it right to their face. The mission was a reactionary one.”

Please, those are not reactive and you know it. You’re just saying so because you don’t want to give Clinton any credit. Special Force operations (with the operative word being operations) by their nature are not reacitive. And I was wrong, you are so blinded by your hatred of Clinton I guess you would say it right to their face.

“Factcheck.org isn’t divine scripture. Disputed not discredited. ”

Factcheck.org and the 9/11 Commission and let’s not forget Richard Clarke and everyone else involved say it is discredited. But you are so blinded by your hatred of Clinton you can’t admit it. So you can keep repeating the same lie over and over but it will never make it the truth.

“As I stated in a previous post: “Again I want to reiterate I’m not placing sole blame for 9/11 on him. I blame our entire federal government from 1990 to 2001.”

That includes the first Bush, Clinton and Dubya. Did you get that? Let it sink in. Bush (41) rightly deserves some blame for the first WTC bombing. They were in country planning and prepping while he was in office. That’s a similar situation we find ourselves in with Clinton. Again read my above statement. I have neither Clinton Derangement Syndrome or Bush Denial Syndrome. I blame our entire government for failing to see the oncoming threats for 11 years.”

Please, the purpose of your entire first post was to makes excuses for the Bushes and blame everything on Clinton. Now that I called you on your BS, you are backpeddling.

“I didn’t cite the school opening as some grand Bush achievement. I copy and pasted everything from Wikipedia. I then stated that if the opening wasn’t fast enough for you, you could take it up with the Navy; or blame Clinton for not going down there and building the school himself, but placing sole blame on Bush is silliness.”

Oh you just copied and pasted then I guess you’re off the hook. But as I said before, you can blame Clinton for trying and failing but at least he tried. Bush on the other hand cut anti-terrorism funding and the other programs that Clinton had started. He ignored the Phoenix Memo and the August 6 PDB and every other warning and did nothing. He was President, he was ultimately responsible.

My entire first post was disputing a claim that that our first attack was 9-11. Go back and read it again.That’s not the same as blaming everything on Clinton. Nor anywhere have I stated that everything is one persons fault. I’m assigning blame to 3 administrations. You want to blame everything on one.

Lots of other people involved dispute those claims. Disputed not discredited.

Clinton ignored tons of things on his watch. That is why there is shared blame.

“He was President, he was ultimately responsible.”

I’ll remember you said that for future reference.

Also what would I give Clinton credit for in regards to having SF troops on standby? You can have an operation of sitting there waiting for something to happen.

“My entire first post was disputing a claim that that our first attack was 9-11. Go back and read it again.That’s not the same as blaming everything on Clinton. Nor anywhere have I stated that everything is one persons fault. I’m assigning blame to 3 administrations. You want to blame everything on one.”

Bull. You’re backpeddling now because I proved you wrong. You were trying to excuse Bush and blame everything on Clinton.

“Lots of other people involved dispute those claims. Disputed not discredited.”

And none of those were in a position to know. Anyone that was in the know discredited them as was concluded by the 9/11 commission. It is only Clinton-haters like you who are disputing them.

“Clinton ignored tons of things on his watch.”

Tons of things??? What tons of things. You’re just pulling stuff out of your butt again because of your blind hatred of Clinton.

“Also what would I give Clinton credit for in regards to having SF troops on standby? You can have an operation of sitting there waiting for something to happen.”

Stand-by??? Who said they were on stand-by??? There you go again making stuff up because you hate Clinton.

Like it or not the record is clear. Clinton tripled the anti-terrorism budget and Bush cut it. Clinton had active programs in place to track down bin Laden and Bush discontinued them. Clinton’s anti-terrorism task force met every two weeks and Bush’ s only had one meeting prior to 9/11. Bush was told on 1/26/01 that Al Queda was responsible for the Cole bombing and he did nothing to respond. Bush ignored the Phoenix Memo and the August PDB. Bush was President on 9/11 and as Ronald Reagan said ‘If it happens on your watch, you’re responsible’.

Go back read what I’ve written. I have nothing to back pedal from. I’ve never stated anything was one person’s fault. First post was disputing a claim by parakeeta. You just didn’t like seeing a list of Clinton failures.

Go read the historycommons link. Look at some of the dates. Clinton missed things. It happened. Sorry.

What was that SF unit doing? “Targeting” bin Laden is pretty broad. That could mean 2 Uzbek’s and 1 SF person monitoring incoming intel and the rest waiting for something to respond to. You don’t know. You can assume what ever you want but obviously their commanders didn’t feel it was worth continuing.

Disputed not discredited.

I’ve not posted anything saying that Bush didn’t miss things but Clinton missed things too. Blame is shared. Bush did things in response to the Cole. You’re just mad they didn’t happen fast enough. You can scream Phoenix memo all you want but if there such amazing intel in it, it would have been acted on.

“Go back read what I’ve written. I have nothing to back pedal from. I’ve never stated anything was one person’s fault.”

I have read what you’ve written and your first post began with the snarkly line, “Just to keep things in perspective here is a list of the terror attacks under Mr. “It depends on what your definition of ‘is’ is” Clinton.” Then you wrote, “As you can see by the long list of attacks under Clinton we didn’t have the most stellar anti-terror policies.”, which is an obvious attempt to make excuses for Bush. Now that it has been proved that Bush cut Clinton’s anti-terror programs, you are backpeddling.

“First post was disputing a claim by parakeeta.”

Which could have been done with one line noting the date of the first WTC attack. But instead you decided to go on an anti-Clinton diatribe.

“You just didn’t like seeing a list of Clinton failures.”

That statement alone just prove that you’re coming from a blame it all on Clinton prespective.

“Go read the historycommons link. Look at some of the dates. Clinton missed things. It happened. Sorry.”

I have read the list and nothing there says that Clinton missed “tons of things” as you put it.

“What was that SF unit doing? “Targeting” bin Laden is pretty broad. That could mean 2 Uzbek’s and 1 SF person monitoring incoming intel and the rest waiting for something to respond to. You don’t know.”

See now you are just pulling stuff out of your ass again. You’re just making stuff up to try in vein to blame Clinton.

“You can assume what ever you want but obviously their commanders didn’t feel it was worth continuing.”

Yeah their commanders were the Bush Administration who discontinued the program because they didn’t care about fighting terrorism.

“Disputed not discredited.’

You can keep saying that over and over but no matter how many times you say the lie won’t make it the truth.

“I’ve not posted anything saying that Bush didn’t miss things but Clinton missed things too.”

No but you make excuses for Bush saying, “Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with” In other word, it’s not Bush’s fault, blame it all on Clinton.

“Bush did things in response to the Cole. You’re just mad they didn’t happen fast enough.”

Bush did nothing to respond to the Cole bombing prior to 9/11. And please don’t bring up the Navy School again because you’ve spoken out of both side of your mouth on that one.

“You can scream Phoenix memo all you want but if there such amazing intel in it, it would have been acted on.”

That’s the point it was good intell, so was the August PDB. The Bush administration ignored them. You’re just too much of a Bush apologist to see what’s right in front of your face. Here is an internal memo from John Ashcroft discussing the Bush administration’s 7 strategic goals and anti-terrorism isn’t even on the list: http://www.americanprogress.org/kf/ashcroftmemo.pdf

Obviously we didn’t have the most stellar anti-terror policies or all those attacks wouldn’t have occurred.

Again, you didn’t like see all the failures of Clinton’s administration to fight terror. Get over it. It happened. Go read the list of attacks. According to your earlier statements you should be blaming Clinton for all those attacks. Wouldn’t that make those failures?

Listing the attacks that happened is not a diatribe. It was a refutation of his point. Again, you didn’t like seeing that list.
——————

Things from that site that Clinton missed out on:

March 8, 1996-April 1996: US Asks Sudan for Its Files on AQ, Then Declines to Accept Them
May 18, 1996: Sudan Expels Bin Laden; US Fails to Stop His Flight to Afghanistan
After May 18, 1996-September 1996: Bin Laden Quickly Aligns With the Taliban After Arrival in Afghanistan **Remember Clinton Supported The Taliban; Read those links too**
July 18, 1996: State Department Calls Afghanistan an ‘Ideal Haven’ for Bin Laden
Late 1996: CIA Definitively Confirms Bin Laden Is Not Just Financier, but US Is Slow to Act
April 5, 1997: US Again Not Interested in Sudan’s Al-Qaeda Files
Edit event
February 5, 1998: US Rejects Sudanese Al-Qaeda Files that Could Stop Embassy Bombings

————————
Those are just some of them, there are more. As long as you keep saying Clinton is as clean as a new born baby. I’ll challenge you on it. Both are to blame. Assigning some blame to Clinton is in no way excusing Bush. You just can’t stop being partisan long enough to realize that. Not everyone is as partisan as you.

I see you are now admitting that Bush did things in response to the Cole. You just don’t like that he did it fast enough.
If that intel in the Phoenix memo was so amazing Clinton would have acted on it and not just handed it off.

Yeah, that Ashcroft memo shows that blame belongs to the Bush folks too. That’s what I’ve been saying. Blame goes to both.

-You just don’t like that he did it fast enough.-

You just don’t like that he didn’t do it fast enough.

“Obviously we didn’t have the most stellar anti-terror policies or all those attacks wouldn’t have occurred.”

Oh so now the standard is perfection. Israel has the best anti-terror policies and procedures in the world yet they still suffer from terrorist attacks. So if perfection is your standard is perfection, you must think that Israel has a lousy anti-terror policy. You must also think that the Bush administration had a really lousy anti-terror policy considering the worst act of terrorism on our soil happened during their watch. Add to that the follwing:

- the Anthrax attacks
- the shoe bomber
- the grenade attack in the Kuwait two days before the invasion in Iraq
- the Mohammad Atta fan who used his SUV to wound nine people in 2006 at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill to avenge Muslims
- the 2002 terrorist attack on the El Al counter at Los Angeles International Airport that killed two and wounded four
- the 2008 attack on the U.S. embassy in Yemen

Not to mention all the attacks on out troops in Iraq that happened atfer Bush declared victory there as well as attack on our allies in Madrid and London. Plus the fact that Bush failed to capture bin Laden.

“Again, you didn’t like see all the failures of Clinton’s administration to fight terror. Get over it. It happened. Go read the list of attacks. According to your earlier statements you should be blaming Clinton for all those attacks. Wouldn’t that make those failures?”

Clinton does bear responsibility for those attacks, never said he didn’t. But none took place on our soil and all were responded to and lead to Clinton tripling the anti-terror budget, which Bush later cut.

“Listing the attacks that happened is not a diatribe. It was a refutation of his point. Again, you didn’t like seeing that list.”

The point you were refuting was that the first WTC took place when Bush I was president. That could have been refuted with one line. Instead you choose to go on an anti-Clinton diatribe that was irrelevant to that point.

“Things from that site that Clinton missed out on:

March 8, 1996-April 1996: US Asks Sudan for Its Files on AQ, Then Declines to Accept Them
May 18, 1996: Sudan Expels Bin Laden; US Fails to Stop His Flight to Afghanistan
After May 18, 1996-September 1996: Bin Laden Quickly Aligns With the Taliban After Arrival in Afghanistan **Remember Clinton Supported The Taliban; Read those links too**
July 18, 1996: State Department Calls Afghanistan an ‘Ideal Haven’ for Bin Laden
Late 1996: CIA Definitively Confirms Bin Laden Is Not Just Financier, but US Is Slow to Act
April 5, 1997: US Again Not Interested in Sudan’s Al-Qaeda Files
Edit event
February 5, 1998: US Rejects Sudanese Al-Qaeda Files that Could Stop Embassy Bombings”

Hardly the tons and tons of stuff you claimed Clinton missed. And instead of cherry-picking the headlines, you should have read the full articles would have seen things like, “The US decides to increase its demands, and tells Sudan to turn over not just files on bin Laden, but bin Laden himself” and “It is later revealed that the US was wiretapping bin Laden in Sudan on their own”

“As long as you keep saying Clinton is as clean as a new born baby. I’ll challenge you on it. Both are to blame.”

Never said Clinton was as clean as a new born baby. Don’t put words in my mouth.

“Assigning some blame to Clinton is in no way excusing Bush. You just can’t stop being partisan long enough to realize that. Not everyone is as partisan as you.”

Oh now it is just some blame to Clinton. Please you are backpeddling again. The purpose of your original post was the blame Clinton and make excuses for Bush.

“I see you are now admitting that Bush did things in response to the Cole. You just don’t like that he did it fast enough.”

Not admitting anything. Bush did nothing to respond to the Cole attack prior to 9/11. He had 8 months to respond but he did nothing.

“If that intel in the Phoenix memo was so amazing Clinton would have acted on it and not just handed it off.”

See there you go trying to rewrite history again to blame Clinton. The Phoenix Memo was issued in July 2001. Clinton wasn’t president then, Bush was. It was Bush who failed to act on it. Just as he failed to act on the August PDB.

“Yeah, that Ashcroft memo shows that blame belongs to the Bush folks too. That’s what I’ve been saying. Blame goes to both.”

That’s not what you’ve been saying. You’re just backpeddling now because your lies have been exposed. But since you brought it up what percent of blame would you assign to Bush vs. the percent of blame would you assign to Clinton?

For 9/11: 60/40 Bush/Clinton
For our current predicament with Muslim terrorists: Split 33/33/33 between Bush/Clinton/Bush

I’m not cherry picking headlines. I’m showing you that Clinton missed things. You said he didn’t. Sorry Clinton is the GI Joe you pretend he is. Both Clinton and Bush both have failed us. You just pretend only one did. You can’t stand seeing Clinton’s list of failures because for some reason you have a fixation on him. I’ve told no lies. There is nothing to “expose”. What exactly do you claim was “exposed”? That Clinton, did in fact, make huge errors in regards to terrorism? It happened. You can get your panties in a bunch about someone criticizing Clinton all you want but he did fail us. Just like Dubya did too. No where did I claim Bush didn’t. Showing that Clinton did make errors is not giving Bush an excuse.To criticize a president it is not required that you preface it with a critique of a president from the opposition party. You do realize that right? Get over it. Clinton failed on whole list of things.

“For 9/11: 60/40 Bush/Clinton”

Ridiculous! Bush was President when 9/11 and was President for 8 months ignoring all the warnings while cutting anti-terror funding and programs to track down bin Laden. 90/10 or 80/20 would be more accurate.

“For our current predicament with Muslim terrorists: Split 33/33/33 between Bush/Clinton/Bush”

Here again you’re ignoring reality and rewriting history. First Reagan should be on that list for funding bin Laden in the first place and then walking away from Afganistan after the Soviets left. Second, you’re ignoring the disasterous Bush policies from diverting resources away from the hunt for bin Laden so he could illegally invade Iraq. Here the spilt should be 20% Reagan & Bush I/20% Clinton/60% Bush II.

“I’m not cherry picking headlines.”

Yes you are. You didn’t even read the articles of those headlines which show the full story is not as black & white as the picture you’re trying to paint.

“I’m showing you that Clinton missed things. You said he didn’t. ”

I never said he didn’t. You’re just dishonestly putting words in my mouth again. I said you could blame Clinton for failing to capture bin Laden but at least he tried. Bush never tried before 9/11 and barely tried afterward.

“Both Clinton and Bush both have failed us. You just pretend only one did. You can’t stand seeing Clinton’s list of failures because for some reason you have a fixation on him.”

Please you are the one who decided to bring Clinton in this in the first place. The article was about Biden and Cheney but you decided to change the subject an go off on an anti-Clinton rant while making excuse for Bush.

“I’ve told no lies. There is nothing to “expose”. What exactly do you claim was “exposed”?”

Please you’re been lying since your first post when tried to put all the blame on Clinton including the non-response to the Cole. And that one you’ve changed your story and backpeddled at least three times from. As well as trying to push a “fable” discredited by the 9/11 & independent fack checking organization and belittling the efforts Clinton did make to find bin Laden.

“That Clinton, did in fact, make huge errors in regards to terrorism? It happened. You can get your panties in a bunch about someone criticizing Clinton all you want but he did fail us. Just like Dubya did too. No where did I claim Bush didn’t. Showing that Clinton did make errors is not giving Bush an excuse.”

When you make a statements like, “Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with.”and “You can harp all day long about some memo that stated bin Laden wanted to attack the US but it doesn’t change the fact there obviously wasn’t anything in that memo that would have led to preventing of the attack”, it is totally making excuses for Bush.

“To criticize a president it is not required that you preface it with a critique of a president from the opposition party.”

But that is exactly what you were railing about in your first post. Your hypocrisy is showing again.

“Get over it. Clinton failed on whole list of things.”

As I said you can blame Clinton for failing to get bin Laden but at least he tried. He tripled the anti-terror budget and start several operations & programs to get bin Laden. But Clinton was not President on 9/11, Bush was. Bush cut anti-terror funding and canceled the programs Clinton had put in place. He never did anything prior to 9/11 to respond to the Cole bombing. He ignored the Phoenix Memo issued in July 2001 & the August 2001 PDB. And he had been President for 8 months when 9/11 happened so he is ultimately responsible for it.

Clinton failed. Get over it. No hypocrisy. Clinton tried and failed, just like Bush. First post was disputing a claim by parakeeta. Clinton failed get over it. Obviously Clinton’s policies weren’t that great because he failed to find the 9/11 folks that were here in country training while he was in office, just like Bush. All the major responses to the Cole came after Clinton left office. Bush did respond to it. You just don’t think the results were fast enough. He failed to get a lot of intel that could have gone a long way to exposing AQ back in the 1990′s. Clinton failed. Get over it. It happened. Not everyone is as partisan as you. Clinton failed.

“Clinton failed. Get over it. No hypocrisy. Clinton tried and failed, just like Bush.”

No while Clinton tried and failed, Bush never tried. He cut the anti-terror budget and ignored all the warnings.

“First post was disputing a claim by parakeeta.”

And his claim that the first WTC bombing took place when Bush I was president. That could have been dealt with in one sentence. But instead you decided to go on an anti-Clinton rant.

“Obviously Clinton’s policies weren’t that great because he failed to find the 9/11 folks that were here in country training while he was in office, just like Bush.”

The FBI report on that (aka the Phoenix Memo) wasn’t issued until July 2001. So you’re right, Clinton failed to see into the future to read an FBI report that wasn’t issued until 7 months after he left office.

“All the major responses to the Cole came after Clinton left office. Bush did respond to it.”

Not before 9/11. You can lie and spin about that all you want but the facts show that in the months between the CIA confirming Al Queda responsible for the Cole bombing and 9/11, Bush did nothing.

“He failed to get a lot of intel that could have gone a long way to exposing AQ back in the 1990’s.”

Maybe so. But at least he was trying. Bush never tried. He ignored all the warnings and cut the anti-terror budget and programs to find bin Laden and let the biggest terror on our soil in history happen on his watch.

Clinton failed. He didn’t need to see into the future. He needed to look at his present. The 9/11 people were in country training and planning during his term. He failed. Bush acted in response to the Cole. Wasn’t a rant. You are ranting. I chose not to deal with it in one sentence. I listed a list of attacks that Clinton failed to stop. You didn’t like the list. Get over it. He failed. The responses came after 9/11. So what? That doesn’t prove those responses never would have happened. Get over it. Clinton failed.

“Clinton failed. He didn’t need to see into the future. He needed to look at his present.”

At a FBI report that wouldn’t be issued until 7 months after he left office. Yeah that makes sense.

” Bush acted in response to the Cole.”

No he didn’t and you know it. Stop lying to make excuses for Bush.

“I chose not to deal with it in one sentence. I listed a list of attacks that Clinton failed to stop. You didn’t like the list. ”

No I didn’t like how you did it out of context as if Clinton never did anything to respond.

“The responses came after 9/11. So what? That doesn’t prove those responses never would have happened.”

And in the years since there has never been any proof, or even any claim, that any response was planned prior to 9/11.

“Get over it. Clinton failed.”

Yeah and Bush failed a lot worse because he ignored all the warnings and let 9/11 happen. And he kept on failing for the next 7 years:

- the Anthrax attacks
- the shoe bomber
- the grenade attack in the Kuwait two days before the invasion in Iraq
- the Mohammad Atta fan who used his SUV to wound nine people in 2006 at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill to avenge Muslims
- the 2002 terrorist attack on the El Al counter at Los Angeles International Airport that killed two and wounded four
- the 2008 attack on the U.S. embassy in Yemen

Clinton failed. Get over it. The fact that they were in the country training and planning 9/11 is proof enough that Clinton failed. Get over it. Clinton’s response wasn’t relevant to the point I made. Bush did fail. I never said he didn’t. The discussion is whether or not Clinton failed. He did. Get over it. All the things that you listed here about Bush failures are correct. They’ve never been in dispute here. But since you wanted me to list every single response to the attacks you listed, you should list every single response to all those attacks. Clinton failed. Get over it.

“The fact that they were in the country training and planning 9/11 is proof enough that Clinton failed.”

Yeah, you’re right. Clinton should have been staking out all those flying schools himself instead of letting the FBI investigate and issue a report about it 6 months after he left office which Bush ignored.

“Clinton’s response wasn’t relevant to the point I made. Bush did fail. I never said he didn’t.”

No you just made excuses for Bush by saying ” it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with.”

“But since you wanted me to list every single response to the attacks you listed, you should list every single response to all those attacks.”

OK Let’s start with the two biggest:
9/11 – Nine years later bin Laden still at large and invaded Iraq which had nothing to do with the attack.
The Anthrax attacks – No one ever arrested.

Clinton failed. Remember if he happened on his watch, according to you, they are 100% responsible. Those terrorists were here training. It’s his fault. He shares the blame. Clinton failed. Get over it. You have to list them all. You have to follow the same standard you expect from everyone else. Clinton failed. Get over it.

“Clinton failed. Remember if he happened on his watch, according to you, they are 100% responsible. Those terrorists were here training. It’s his fault. He shares the blame.”

Talk about pretzel logic! 100% responsible but shares the blame. But remember the Phoenix memo was issued on Bush’s watch along with the August PDB. Both of which he ignored.

“You have to follow the same standard you expect from everyone else. Clinton failed.”

The problem is your standard seems to change in everyother post. Not surprizing since you’re driven by a blind hatred of Clinton rather by logic and facts. And I never said Clinton didn’t fail, but at least he tried. Bush never tried.

According to you Clinton should be responsible for the terrorists being he training. It happened under his watch. You stated previously that everything that happens during a president’s term is their fault. That would make, according to your previous statement, their being here and training Clinton’s fault.

I’ve been stating in every single post that BOTH Clinton and Bush are to blame. You only place blame on Bush.

Clinton failed. Get over it.

“According to you Clinton should be responsible for the terrorists being he training. It happened under his watch. You stated previously that everything that happens during a president’s term is their fault. That would make, according to your previous statement, their being here and training Clinton’s fault.”

Sure you can say it was Clinton’s fault some terrorists got some flight training, big deal. But the report wasn’t issued until July 2001 when Bush was President. He was the one who ignored it, not Clinton.

“I’ve been stating in every single post that BOTH Clinton and Bush are to blame. You only place blame on Bush.”

Please in your early posts you were being a Bush apologist, now you’re backpeddling. And I’ve always said that you can blame Clinton for trying and failing, but at least he tried. Bush never tried.

I’ve not apologized for Bush for anything. Sorry. Not happened. You are on the other have been shilling for Clinton. He failed. Get over it.

BIg deal? The terrorists, under Clinton, were in country training and planning and you say big deal? The same terrorists who executed 9/11 and you say big deal? Wow. What a shill you are.

“I’ve not apologized for Bush for anything. Sorry. Not happened. You are on the other have been shilling for Clinton. He failed. Get over it.”

Yes you have. From you’re original post ” Obviously 9/11 was worse in comparison but it doesn’t look like the usually stellar anti-terror folks in the Clinton administration gave them much to work with.” and “You can harp all day long about some memo that stated bin Laden wanted to attack the US but it doesn’t change the fact there obviously wasn’t anything in that memo that would have led to preventing of the attack, because if there was then it would have been prevented”

“BIg deal? The terrorists, under Clinton, were in country training and planning and you say big deal? The same terrorists who executed 9/11 and you say big deal? Wow. What a shill you are.”

Actually they went to flight schools under both Clinton & Bush and the FBI report on it was issued under Bush who ignored it. And training is not the same as executing. Some may have trained when Clinton was President but the executuon happened under Bush. So let’s see there are reports that muslim men are going to flight train schools, the FBI under Clinton begin an investigation to see if it is any threat. The FBI investigates and Bush ignores it. As I said you can blame Clinton for failing but at least he tried, Bush never tried.