Is Richard Clarke a comedian?kr@cker wrote:
as opposed to your infallible sources? who? a bunch of out of work stand-up comedians like Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher?
BBC?
CBS?
Is Richard Clarke a comedian?kr@cker wrote:
as opposed to your infallible sources? who? a bunch of out of work stand-up comedians like Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher?
Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2006-09-29 09:15:53)
I see what you're saying and agree on that, but the info was incredibly vague, considering that everyday a threat is made to the US, and it still doesn't completely absolve Clinton from failing to take action all the opportunities he had, nor does it absolve him from the fact thatit was his policy to keep the intel agencies from talking to each other, basically they all had enough info to figure out what the attack was, but were not allowed to share to see the whole picturecpt.fass1 wrote:
When it's your duty to protect a country and you're in office and the country on it's own soil gets attacked. You Fail, it doesn't matter oh clinton could have taken him down it's all Clintons fault, blah blah blah. I don't care how many things pass Bush's desk and if the memo was on a sticky note saying, Attack on 9/11. You look into that, I love the spin into this is "Clinton's Fault" it makes no sense at all. Grow a freaken brain..
I tend to find myself laughing at them...sergeriver wrote:
Is Richard Clarke a comedian?kr@cker wrote:
as opposed to your infallible sources? who? a bunch of out of work stand-up comedians like Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher?
BBC?
CBS?
Last edited by messfeeder (2006-09-29 09:24:52)
the more he (Clarke) speaks, the funnier his monday morning quarterbacking gets, BBC is an outright joke, wasn't it BBC that first decided to refuse to use the words "suicide bomber" and "terrorist", as for CBS see "rathergate"sergeriver wrote:
Is Richard Clarke a comedian?kr@cker wrote:
as opposed to your infallible sources? who? a bunch of out of work stand-up comedians like Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher?
BBC?
CBS?
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-09-29 09:25:29)
So, name a reliable source.kr@cker wrote:
the more he (Clarke) speaks, the funnier his monday morning quarterbacking gets, BBC is an outright joke, wasn't it BBC that first decided to refuse to use the words "suicide bomber" and "terrorist", as for CBS see "rathergate"sergeriver wrote:
Is Richard Clarke a comedian?kr@cker wrote:
as opposed to your infallible sources? who? a bunch of out of work stand-up comedians like Al Franken, Jon Stewart, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher?
BBC?
CBS?
and that wasn't a jab about using ain't, it's slang most identified with where I live and I was just curious
It doesn't matter how many threats are made to US everyday, if he saw the tiny memo he should have done something.kr@cker wrote:
I see what you're saying and agree on that, but the info was incredibly vague, considering that everyday a threat is made to the US, and it still doesn't completely absolve Clinton from failing to take action all the opportunities he had, nor does it absolve him from the fact thatit was his policy to keep the intel agencies from talking to each other, basically they all had enough info to figure out what the attack was, but were not allowed to share to see the whole picturecpt.fass1 wrote:
When it's your duty to protect a country and you're in office and the country on it's own soil gets attacked. You Fail, it doesn't matter oh clinton could have taken him down it's all Clintons fault, blah blah blah. I don't care how many things pass Bush's desk and if the memo was on a sticky note saying, Attack on 9/11. You look into that, I love the spin into this is "Clinton's Fault" it makes no sense at all. Grow a freaken brain..
My whole point is that it was a massive fuck up in our government. I"m not absolving anyone, and this shouldn't even be an issue. The only reason it's being raised is it's an election year, and everyone is trying to make there party clear of this atrocities.. Clinton isn't even a player right now and the Republican's are trying to scapegoat him to get more votes, and the Dems are trying to totally push it on the Republican party and point out how they failed us. Where Us as American's need to focus on future issues and worry about other things then protection. Which 5/10 our government fails us on anyway..kr@cker wrote:
I see what you're saying and agree on that, but the info was incredibly vague, considering that everyday a threat is made to the US, and it still doesn't completely absolve Clinton from failing to take action all the opportunities he had, nor does it absolve him from the fact that it was his policy to keep the Intel agencies from talking to each other, basically they all had enough info to figure out what the attack was, but were not allowed to share to see the whole picturecpt.fass1 wrote:
When it's your duty to protect a country and you're in office and the country on it's own soil gets attacked. You Fail, it doesn't matter oh Clinton could have taken him down it's all Clinton's fault, blah blah blah. I don't care how many things pass Bush's desk and if the memo was on a sticky note saying, Attack on 9/11. You look into that, I love the spin into this is "Clinton's Fault" it makes no sense at all. Grow a freak en brain..
Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2006-09-29 09:35:16)
Last edited by T0rr3nt (2006-09-29 09:41:45)
No such thing. We are only allowed to know what they want us to know.......the same goes for Richard Clarkes book.sergeriver wrote:
So, name a reliable source.
Yes that and the weeklyworldnew as wellusmarine2005 wrote:
No such thing. We are only allowed to know what they want us to know.......the same goes for Richard Clarkes book.sergeriver wrote:
So, name a reliable source.
review the senate transcripts of the 9-11 hearings, Condoleeza Rice told the senate committee that the interdepartmental policy preventing information to be shared between the agencies made it impossible to identify the threat to anything more specific than "somone wants to do something somewhere", Jamie Garelick asked why they were not aware of the memo's that created these walls between the agencies, to which condy replied (I'm paraphrasing here) "you should, your signature was at the bottom", that line of questioning stopped so fast the airbags popped out, so I guess my source would be CSPAN's live direct feed to the senate hearingsergeriver wrote:
So, name a reliable source.kr@cker wrote:
the more he (Clarke) speaks, the funnier his monday morning quarterbacking gets, BBC is an outright joke, wasn't it BBC that first decided to refuse to use the words "suicide bomber" and "terrorist", as for CBS see "rathergate"sergeriver wrote:
Is Richard Clarke a comedian?
BBC?
CBS?
and that wasn't a jab about using ain't, it's slang most identified with where I live and I was just curious
Probly because he wasnt allowed due to the sensitive nature of the information. Its obvious you've never held a job where information security was important. And to the rest of you, must be nice to be so blissfully ignorant. I, like a REAL American can see the faults with every president with an unbiased eye. Clinton wasnt perfect. But the fact that he owns up to it while Bush supposedly can do no wrong speaks volumes to the difference. But hey, most of you morons are gonna keep supporting him and the repubs as they continue to pull the economy out from under your feet and had your job to some illegal who will do it for 1/2 the price.Aenima_Eyes wrote:
HAHAHA! So true! Didn't Bill and Hillary nab the silverware too?usmarine2005 wrote:
QFTAenima_Eyes wrote:
Here Mr. Bush. . .we had 8 years to get shit done and we had better things to do. Now, we're gonna leave you this memo so if and when the shit hits the fan everyone will blame you. Cheerio!
8 years of terrorist attacks all over the world. And while we steal the furniture, here is a poorly written memo.
The only thing I have to ask DICK Clarke is this. . .if the threat was SOOOOOOOO great at that time and you knew SOOOOOOOOO much about it. . .why only a memo, sir? Why didn't you hold press conferences then? Why didn't you storm into the Oval Office and demand to be heard? If you KNEW American lives were in grave danger why didn't you do more than type up a piece of paper?
Last edited by golgoj4 (2006-09-29 10:01:48)
I hate to state something SOOOOOOOOO obvious here. . .but I guess I will anyway. Has the nature of the "Sensitive information" they have kept people from leaking everything from the Valerie Plame's identity to the just recently released NIE report? Obviously it isn't very hard to do.golgoj4 wrote:
Probly because he wasnt allowed due to the sensitive nature of the information. Its obvious you've never held a job where information security was important. And to the rest of you, must be nice to be so blissfully ignorant. I, like a REAL American can see the faults with every president with an unbiased eye. Clinton wasnt perfect. But the fact that he owns up to it while Bush supposedly can do no wrong speaks volumes to the difference. But hey, most of you morons are gonna keep supporting him and the repubs as they continue to pull the economy out from under your feet and had your job to some illegal who will do it for 1/2 the price.Aenima_Eyes wrote:
HAHAHA! So true! Didn't Bill and Hillary nab the silverware too?usmarine2005 wrote:
QFT
8 years of terrorist attacks all over the world. And while we steal the furniture, here is a poorly written memo.
The only thing I have to ask DICK Clarke is this. . .if the threat was SOOOOOOOO great at that time and you knew SOOOOOOOOO much about it. . .why only a memo, sir? Why didn't you hold press conferences then? Why didn't you storm into the Oval Office and demand to be heard? If you KNEW American lives were in grave danger why didn't you do more than type up a piece of paper?
Its truly sad when even cold hard fact is usless...but what else to expect from the rocket scientist who still buy there was wmd in iraq... silly red states.
Wait a minute... I think you meant "2,000 years of terrorist attacks". You subscribe to the world war or succumb to them shit. You DO know that terrorism didn't start on 9/11, don't you?usmarine2005 wrote:
QFTAenima_Eyes wrote:
Here Mr. Bush. . .we had 8 years to get shit done and we had better things to do. Now, we're gonna leave you this memo so if and when the shit hits the fan everyone will blame you. Cheerio!
8 years of terrorist attacks all over the world. And while we steal the furniture, here is a poorly written memo.
Yeah, why are all of you calling each other moron, if Aenima_Eyes can call you worse than that.Aenima_Eyes wrote:
You're sitting here calling everyone else morons when you need to pull the plank out of your own eye.
You only see shit in black and white. You automatically assume like the asshat you are that anyone who thinks Clinton deserves some blame is in on the vast right-wing neocon conspiracy to rule the world and make Clinton look bad. All I can say to that is. . . .BWHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!
To conclude. . .here's a hint jackass. . .the economy is doing fine.
So. . .please, shut the fuck up.
Damn right.sergeriver wrote:
Yeah, why are all of you calling each other moron, if Aenima_Eyes can call you worse than that.Aenima_Eyes wrote:
You're sitting here calling everyone else morons when you need to pull the plank out of your own eye.
You only see shit in black and white. You automatically assume like the asshat you are that anyone who thinks Clinton deserves some blame is in on the vast right-wing neocon conspiracy to rule the world and make Clinton look bad. All I can say to that is. . . .BWHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!
To conclude. . .here's a hint jackass. . .the economy is doing fine.
So. . .please, shut the fuck up.
Last edited by rawls2 (2006-09-29 15:48:15)
The "8 years" was meant to cover the Clinton era FFS.Spearhead wrote:
Wait a minute... I think you meant "2,000 years of terrorist attacks". You subscribe to the world war or succumb to them shit. You DO know that terrorism didn't start on 9/11, don't you?usmarine2005 wrote:
QFTAenima_Eyes wrote:
Here Mr. Bush. . .we had 8 years to get shit done and we had better things to do. Now, we're gonna leave you this memo so if and when the shit hits the fan everyone will blame you. Cheerio!
8 years of terrorist attacks all over the world. And while we steal the furniture, here is a poorly written memo.
9/11 is only when Bush's responsibility started.Spearhead wrote:
Wait a minute... I think you meant "2,000 years of terrorist attacks". You subscribe to the world war or succumb to them shit. You DO know that terrorism didn't start on 9/11, don't you?usmarine2005 wrote:
QFTAenima_Eyes wrote:
Here Mr. Bush. . .we had 8 years to get shit done and we had better things to do. Now, we're gonna leave you this memo so if and when the shit hits the fan everyone will blame you. Cheerio!
8 years of terrorist attacks all over the world. And while we steal the furniture, here is a poorly written memo.