|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
 Posted - 04/12/2004 : 17:35:13 [Permalink]
|
Robb, it's the government's job to protect us. They failed. What part of that do you disagree with?
The neo-cons are busy blaming Clinton for the build-up of terrorism, yet they take NO accountability for 9/11 happening on their watch. They can't have it both ways. You notice I never said the Clinton administration is blameless; I believe the problem traces back to decades of failed foreign policy among multiple administrations (among other things.)
The Bush administration lied over and over. Why should we believe Dr. Rice NOW, when she's covering her own ass and the President's up-for-re-election ass?
Were the Bushies waiting for an email with the date, time and place of the terrorist attack? Or could they maybe have paid more attention and dug deeper to find out more details?
Seriously: was there ANYTHING AT ALL that could have been done in the years leading up to 9/11 to prevent it? If you don't think so, then why are we bothering to fight the war on terrorism NOW?
I'm really, really fed up with the knee-jerk defense of the terrible things this administration has done. It's as if the entire Republican party has drunk from the same supply of drugged Kool-Aid (tm) because they keep repeating the same nonsense.
Edited because my writing sucked. |
| Edited by - Renae on 04/12/2004 17:48:58 |
 |
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2004 : 20:05:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
How did the Bush administration provoke the attacks on 9/11?
I don't know anything about what the Bush administration did or didn't do.
However, I'd like to say that, if some country wants women to wear masks over their faces it's not the business of the USA. The plane bombs were the result of America trying to push Western ideas/products on their world. |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2004 : 21:16:01 [Permalink]
|
"However, I'd like to say that, if some country wants women to wear masks over their faces it's not the business of the USA."
I disagree, but then again I agree... you'll see. They are not only making them wear masks, but gassing hundreds of people (I'm pretty sure, but not completely that this is something that is not being debated). He is evil, there is no question about that, and something should be done about all dictators like that.
However......
First, unless the people want our help, we should not force it upon them. Its like saying, "Do you want some more cake", then them saying "No", and then we go and shove it down their throats. There was even a country who ASKED us to invade them, they wanted to take down their dictator. There is only one problem, that country didn't have a large oil supply.
Second, the U.S. in all its glorious stupidity thinks it should control the world by making others not. If the world (U.N.) does not agree with the action in another country, we should not take it. We are not the dictators of democracy (I like how that sounds). |
Why continue? Because we must. Because we have the call. Because it is nobler to fight for rationality without winning than to give up in the face of continued defeats. Because whatever true progress humanity makes is through the rationality of the occasional individual and because any one individual we may win for the cause may do more for humanity than a hundred thousand who hug their superstitions to their breast.
- Isaac Asimov |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/12/2004 : 21:57:34 [Permalink]
|
The USA doesn't make them wear masks. No, the goal of many freedom loving Americans is to deny women their freedom of choice.The US government even gassed it's own citizens. Far more than hundreds. Do we win the contest for authoritarian dictatorship? Be fair and don't dodge the question please.
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 05:51:35 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
The Bush administration lied over and over.
Can you document the lies this administration has told?
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
Seriously: was there ANYTHING AT ALL that could have been done in the years leading up to 9/11 to prevent it? If you don't think so, then why are we bothering to fight the war on terrorism NOW?
Yes, there could have been something we could have done to prevent it. The FBI, CIA, and other agencies did not say to the president anything that was conclusive other than Bin Laden wants to attack the US, (Really!). I doubt President Bush had time to go under cover and root out the terrorists himself. He relies on information from other people. It is real easy to connect the dots after the fact. The fact is the terrorists are the murderers and nobody else is to blame.
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 12:58:23 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
First, unless the people want our help, we should not force it upon them. Its like saying, "Do you want some more cake", then them saying "No", and then we go and shove it down their throats. There was even a country who ASKED us to invade them, they wanted to take down their dictator. There is only one problem, that country didn't have a large oil supply.
Second, the U.S. in all its glorious stupidity thinks it should control the world by making others not. If the world (U.N.) does not agree with the action in another country, we should not take it. We are not the dictators of democracy (I like how that sounds).
Thank you, Ricky. I knew I liked you. |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 13:04:53 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by @tomic
The USA doesn't make them wear masks. No, the goal of many freedom loving Americans is to deny women their freedom of choice.The US government even gassed it's own citizens. Far more than hundreds. Do we win the contest for authoritarian dictatorship? Be fair and don't dodge the question please.
@
You hear your neighbor beating her child, you don't rush over and kick in the door, you call the authorities. They investigate.
We can't patrol everything. There are laws and organizations who do that. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 13:37:20 [Permalink]
|
Here's an interesting tidbit:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040413/pl_nm/security_commission_dc_14
Here's a man who is more than happy to blame the Clinton administration for not doing enough to stop terrorism yet, when it was his job to fight it, he rejected requests for increased counter-terrorism funding. I see that Cleopatra wasn't the only Queen O' de Nile.
Perhaps if he spent less time on doctors saving lives with "partial birth abortions" and other ideological favorites he could find more money to fight real threats.
Oh but who could know ahead of time what was going to happen? Well not John Ashcroft that's for certain. He was unconcerned with providing the funding that may have led to agents knowing what was going to happen. Who could've known indeed!
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 17:54:44 [Permalink]
|
Robb, entire books have been written on the subject of Bush's lies. I couldn't begin to describe the truly corrupt actions of his administration. If you don't believe me, research it yourself and draw your own conclusions (which you should probably do anyway, even if you DO believe me.) 
The first thing that pops into mind is the deliberate withholding of part of the cost of the Medicare prescription drug bill. The bill was presented to congress without a key part of the funding--which was omitted because the White House pressured Richard Foster, Medicare analyst, to omit it. So Congress passed a proposal they thought would cost $395 billion, but the estimate is likely closer to $594 billion. Sounds like lying to me.
Don't believe me? Here's a link.
http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040317-105828-3087r.htm |
|
|
|
Woody D
Skeptic Friend
Thailand
285 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 20:25:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
The first thing that pops into mind is the deliberate withholding of part of the cost of the Medicare prescription drug bill. The bill was presented to congress without a key part of the funding--which was omitted because the White House pressured Richard Foster, Medicare analyst, to omit it. So Congress passed a proposal they thought would cost $395 billion, but the estimate is likely closer to $594 billion. Sounds like lying to me.
Lying or not!
Talk about Ashcroft ("Perhaps if he spent less time on doctors saving lives with "partial birth abortions" and other ideological favorites he could find more money to fight real threats." @) spending time on unnessassary things. Why is it the edict of congress to be in the health care business. I don't want to pay for someone elses drugs. It's not what I pay congress to do.
Sure, NOW they are trying to find out what happened, wasting time and money interviewing people (after the fact). Why weren't they watching the store too?
nlm |
www.Carabao.net
As long as there's, you know, sex and drugs, I can do without the rock and roll.
Mick Shrimpton
|
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 20:33:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Robb wrote:
Yes, there could have been something we could have done to prevent it. The FBI, CIA, and other agencies did not say to the president anything that was conclusive other than Bin Laden wants to attack the US, (Really!). I doubt President Bush had time to go under cover and root out the terrorists himself. He relies on information from other people. It is real easy to connect the dots after the fact. The fact is the terrorists are the murderers and nobody else is to blame.
Well, from what I read there were signals passed through, only the administration decided they were to vague to follow up. And it may have been a very understandable mistake, it's still a mistake they made.
Also, that information didn't reach the president Bush does make him accountable. IMO part of the job of the men/women in power is to select the people and guarantee the structure so that the right information reaches them.
And yes, such conclusions are real easily made after the fact. But I think it is very important to examine what went wrong, so that it becomes possible to improve your system. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 20:35:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
Who gets the blame when a ship sinks?
It is always the highest person up which must take responsablility. George W. Bush must act as a link between the CIA and the FBI, and all other things which are in his control.
And in a political system, often the guy in office is the one accountable, even if his predecessor made the mistakes. Yep, nothing like political responsibility... |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 20:46:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
And in a political system, often the guy in office is the one accountable, even if his predecessor made the mistakes. Yep, nothing like political responsibility...
Fortunately this is not the case and the blame is well-earned. And what brave men not to accept any responsibility. I thought the definition of being a "man" was to accept responsibility. Their denials of responsibility make we wish we had people in office with the guts to accept it. What are we doing with such irresponsible people in these offices. I say toss them out and let's have some good ones!
@ |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
Tim
SFN Regular
USA
775 Posts |
Posted - 04/13/2004 : 23:47:10 [Permalink]
|
I couldn't agree with Ricky more when he mentioned that the terrorists hold the ultimate responsibility for the attacks of 9/11, as with the USS Cole, the US embassies in Africa and the first WTC bombing, not to mention the homegrown attack in Oklahama City.
To be honest, I don't even see the 'smoking gun' to charge the administration with anything other than a very bad lack of foresight bordering on incompetence.
Plus, I'm getting kind of tired with the "probably couldn't have been prevented, anyway" lame assed excuses. The facts are that the administration had all the facts they needed to say that something could have and should have been done before 9/11.
Look folks...The administration knew that Al Qaeda was planning attacks on US interests at home and abroad. They knew that Al Qaeda had previously planned to hijack commercial airliners. They knew that terrorists had already had the idea to use airliners as guided missiles. They knew Bin Laden and his boys were impressed by Ramsey Yousef's attack on the WTC. They knew Osama and his boys had hit us several times in the past and made no secrets of their continuing mission.
I have folders full of articles saying these same things. As a matter of fact, several of the above items were well known by the general public long before 9/11/2001. There is also plenty of evidence showing that the administrations was comprehensively warned by the previous administration and by their own people.
The fact is, folks, they dropped the ball. Hell, they never even had their eye on the ball to begin with. They just let it roll into their own end zone.
Okay, now somebody might want to start the argument that even if the administration knew these generalities, they couldn't have prevented these attacks in the first place, or they simply couldn't have stopped them with all the gaps in specific intelligence. Well, that my friends is a losing battle.
Look at all the security measures put in place since 9/11. Today, we know no more about an impending terrorist attack than we did on the tenth day of September, in the year two thousand and one. Yet today, we have a multitude of new security measures that could have as easily been attempted five, ten or even twenty years ago--or just maybe, three years ago!
Furthermore, the only new security that this administation didn't initially fight was their goddamned Patriot Act! I mean, these guys didn't want to insure federal airport security guards, air marshalls, steel cockpit doors or even their own damned Homeland Security Department, (they still fight funding Ridge and his gang, and even tried to cut the pay of our own soldiers on the front lines of our national defense).
Perhaps, Congress may have balked after being presented with the reality of funding these added security measures before 9/11, but the fact is, this administration never even asked for a token of new anti-terrorist funding.
Yes, the responsibility of terrorist attacks falls squarely on the shoulders of the terrorists. And no, this administration may not be guilty of breaking any laws concerning this topic before 9/11. On the other hand, this administration is certainly guilty of negligence, (whether it be due to ignorance, hubris or stupidity), and may even be guilty of a few real crimes that occured in an attempt to cover up or spin their own blunders.
I've never seen an administration so far out of touch with the very people they were perhaps elected to serve. I've never seen an administration so adamant about pursuing it's own agenda despite the reservations and best interests of the people. I've never seen an administrations make so many excuses and self-proclaimed stands on principle only to back down, or change their story when the political fires got a little warm. I've never seen an administration so inept.
Nevertheless, this administration is not responsible for the events of 9/11. It is only responsible for it's failure to stop such attacks, and it's actions since. Finally, it's our responsibility to make sure these people never get the chance to repeat their bungling performance of execrable, gross incompetence. |
"We got an issue in America. Too many good docs are gettin' out of business. Too many OB/GYNs aren't able to practice their -- their love with women all across this country." Dubya in Poplar Bluff, Missouri, 9/6/2004
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
