Alliedassault - View Single Post - Twenty Things We Now Know Four Years After 9/11

TGB! · 08-30-2005, 10:57 PM

[quote:45633]Similarly, nothing was done as a result of the government's own intelligence warnings. The August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing, entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," talked about al-Qaida wanting to hit the nation's capital, preparations for airline hijackings, casing of buildings in New York, terrorists in the U.S. with explosives, etc.[/quote:45633]

Lord - the oft-repeated PDB mantra. Theres NOTHING in the PDB that suggests any IMMINENT attack is going to occur or a specific one for that matter. What it DOES read as is a primer of BIN LADEN and his past operations against the United States. You can easily good PDB and read it for yourself (you being anyone who believes the PDB was some sort of SMOKING GUN for 9/11) -

[quote:45633]The neo-cons -- most from PNAC and similar organizations, such as the American Enterprise Institute -- had urged Clinton to depose Saddam Hussein in 1998, but he demurred, seeing a mostly contained dictator there, whereas Osama bin Laden, and those terrorists like him, actually were successfully attacking U.S. assets inside the country and abroad.[/quote:45633]

"Mostly contained" being Liberal SPeak for "sure he's abusing the OFF program, effectively murdering millions of his people and using the funds to restart his weapons program" -

The PNAC references - straw men arguments meant to distract from the main issue. Noone kvetches about the NUMEROUS liberal think tanks who offer policy to Democratic leaders - not a SINGLE word is said.

[quote:45633]We know that those advisers warned Blair that he was about to involve the U.K. in an illegal, immoral and probably unwinnable war[/quote:45633]

Please. The Downing Street Memo at BEST can be described as one BRIT's assessment of his meeting with foreign reps. Had it been a DOMESTIC REPRESENTATIVE - then by all means open up the flood-gates, let loose them Dogs Of War. The DSM is damaging in and of the simple fact that it does present a trigger happy admin, but the charges of FIXING intel - prove it. This memo could have come from IRAN and the left would have hailed it as the second coming.

[quote:45633]The Big Lie Technique -- repeating the same falsehoods over and over and over --[/quote:45633]

Kinda like this entire article - the irony hurts my ass.

I love the oft-repeated - "Saddam had no AQ link" - which is like excusing a Drug Dealer because instead of selling the cocaine that you THOUGHT he was selling - he was instead selling heroin. "Oh AQ - no no never dealth with THOSE guys (please god dont let them ask me about the other terrorist activities I've sponsored").

[quote:45633]No, the reasons had more to do with American geopolitical goals in the region involving oil, control, support for its ally Israel, hardened military bases and keeping Iran from having free rein in the region.[/quote:45633]

Lord knows the oil is flowing out of IRAQ now.

[quote:45633]Bush may have sacrificed thousands of American dead, tens of thousands of American wounded, and more than 100,000 Iraqis as "collateral damage"[/quote:45633]

Furhter proof that this article is taking its info from the same oft-repeated lies, liberal prop. - the author of the report that first claimed the 100K mark - has pretty much had that report (and his impartiality) blown out of the water. The survery ADMITEDLY only sampled a SMALL number of households in regards to how many dead they have "lost" - and the report itself says at MAX 100K - so basically youve got a report using a questionable report to create another questionable report. Good on ya.

[quote:45633]We know that Bush's war has been a thorough disaster - [/quote:45633]

In comparison to what war - the First Gulf War? - Sure any war looks like a disaster compared to that. Hell the CIVIL WAR was a disaster than and should never have been fought.

[quote:45633]We know that Bush's Middle East agenda also is suffering because the U.S. military is spread way thin in Afghanistan and Iraq, the desertion rates are high, soldiers are not re-upping at the usual clip, recruitment isn't working and illegal scams are being used to lure youngsters into signing up[/quote:45633]

GTFO - scams? Link - no I didnt think so. Military recruitment isnt BRISK - but its not in dire straights either. Some recruitment goals wont be met - but it wont affect the MILITARY's ability to conduct the IRAQ reconstruction either.

[quote:45633]We know that Gonzales, then Bush's White House Counsel, and Pentagon lawyers beholden to Rumsfeld, devised legal rationales that make torture of suspects official state policy.[/quote:45633]

Further over-stating of fact. GONZALES did his JOB - he investigated the legal limits the military could go to get information out of suspects. That is his JOB. Why those on the left cant get around that is beyond me. We're not talking about CANDY MAKING - we're talking about the legal limits of intense interrogation and what limits there are in regards to it. Suggesting because the President wanted to know how far the military could go is somehow trying to fix a policy of TORTURE is BRUTALLY dishonest.

[quote:45633]and many clearly unconstitutional provisions[/quote:45633]

Like?

[quote:45633]Unless those can be repealed, that vote will be a nail into the coffin housing the remains of the Bill of Rights.[/quote:45633]

Shocking - a TON of rhetoric. . .and not a SINGLE example of this "shredding of the Bill Of Rights".

[quote:45633]14. THE OUTING OF COVERT AGENTS[/quote:45633]

I love this one - since its either willfully being IGNORANT, or it really has no intention of being truthful or honest, and just wants to lie for lyings sake. At this point during the ongoing investigation (you know those troublesome little things that we have to fully determine a persons guilt before bringing charges and yanno - having a trial - all that silly stuff about innocent until proven guilty) KARL ROVE is NOT a suspect, or being investigated as the Special Prosecutor has said - so either Liberals know something that FITZ doesnt - or they are once again pouncing where they dont need to be pouncing. ROVE had conversations with two reporters regarding PLAME - none of which were initiated by the WHITE HOUSE or ROVE's staff. ROVE - in his attempts to JUSTIFIABLE protect the office of the President - cautioned COOPER against pursuing WILSON's story, as his credibility and non-partisanship might be in question - specifically in regards to who helped get WILSON assigned to the very plum role of following up on the NIGER claim. If ROVE should be terminated and charged for that - by all means - but Liberals need to cup their own balls and accept the responsibility for initiating such a precedent.

[quote:45633]Sophisticated statistical analysis along with wide-scale exit-polling - [/quote:45633]

You those exit polls which were Republican voters REFUSED to participate in the polling - those exit polls which were called the most INACCURATE in YEARS. . .THOSE poll numbers?

[quote:45633]the integrity of our elections will be suspect into the far future.[/quote:45633]

More irony. The revered "exit polls" - by the authors own ADMISSION - overstated the results of John Kerry in 26 STATES! Uh huh - physician heal thyself.

[quote:45633]So far as we know, the Bush Administration has no plans for how to retire that debt [/quote:45633]

Other than cutting it in half. Yea - dumb plan. Stupid stupid plan. Damn 5% Unemployment rate. POS economy. like the depression all over again.

[quote:45633]Head Start[/quote:45633]

HEAD START is broken. It has ZERO accountability and it is under the Department of Health and Human services - which means that NONE of those who are caring for or attending to the nations most at-risk children have any need for advanced schooling that we require of teachers in public schools. That asshole BUSH has actually suggested that TEACHERS have MINIMUM their AA's - and eventually their BACHELORS. God damn shifty eyed crook.

[quote:45633]Social Security[/quote:45633]

Broken. Admitted that it will run out in 2080 if left apace. BUSH's plan MAY have been faulty - but at least he had the balls to say - "We need to do SOMETHING folks". Yea - dumb BUSH.

[quote:45633]If a Democrat president and vice president had behaved similarly to Bush and Cheney, they'd have been in the impeachment dock in a minute.[/quote:45633]

Well - we did have one who behaved in such a way. . .and he escaped the gallows (despite more proof of his illegal activities than of BUSH's - funny that).

This article is trash - and I sincerely hope it was posted only to give some folks something to piss on. If so - thank you kindly NINTY.

	(#6)
TGB! is Offline Command Sergeant Major Posts: 2,644 Join Date: Dec 2003	08-30-2005, 10:57 PM [quote:45633]Similarly, nothing was done as a result of the government's own intelligence warnings. The August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing, entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.," talked about al-Qaida wanting to hit the nation's capital, preparations for airline hijackings, casing of buildings in New York, terrorists in the U.S. with explosives, etc.[/quote:45633] Lord - the oft-repeated PDB mantra. Theres NOTHING in the PDB that suggests any IMMINENT attack is going to occur or a specific one for that matter. What it DOES read as is a primer of BIN LADEN and his past operations against the United States. You can easily good PDB and read it for yourself (you being anyone who believes the PDB was some sort of SMOKING GUN for 9/11) - [quote:45633]The neo-cons -- most from PNAC and similar organizations, such as the American Enterprise Institute -- had urged Clinton to depose Saddam Hussein in 1998, but he demurred, seeing a mostly contained dictator there, whereas Osama bin Laden, and those terrorists like him, actually were successfully attacking U.S. assets inside the country and abroad.[/quote:45633] "Mostly contained" being Liberal SPeak for "sure he's abusing the OFF program, effectively murdering millions of his people and using the funds to restart his weapons program" - The PNAC references - straw men arguments meant to distract from the main issue. Noone kvetches about the NUMEROUS liberal think tanks who offer policy to Democratic leaders - not a SINGLE word is said. [quote:45633]We know that those advisers warned Blair that he was about to involve the U.K. in an illegal, immoral and probably unwinnable war[/quote:45633] Please. The Downing Street Memo at BEST can be described as one BRIT's assessment of his meeting with foreign reps. Had it been a DOMESTIC REPRESENTATIVE - then by all means open up the flood-gates, let loose them Dogs Of War. The DSM is damaging in and of the simple fact that it does present a trigger happy admin, but the charges of FIXING intel - prove it. This memo could have come from IRAN and the left would have hailed it as the second coming. [quote:45633]The Big Lie Technique -- repeating the same falsehoods over and over and over --[/quote:45633] Kinda like this entire article - the irony hurts my ass. I love the oft-repeated - "Saddam had no AQ link" - which is like excusing a Drug Dealer because instead of selling the cocaine that you THOUGHT he was selling - he was instead selling heroin. "Oh AQ - no no never dealth with THOSE guys (please god dont let them ask me about the other terrorist activities I've sponsored"). [quote:45633]No, the reasons had more to do with American geopolitical goals in the region involving oil, control, support for its ally Israel, hardened military bases and keeping Iran from having free rein in the region.[/quote:45633] Lord knows the oil is flowing out of IRAQ now. [quote:45633]Bush may have sacrificed thousands of American dead, tens of thousands of American wounded, and more than 100,000 Iraqis as "collateral damage"[/quote:45633] Furhter proof that this article is taking its info from the same oft-repeated lies, liberal prop. - the author of the report that first claimed the 100K mark - has pretty much had that report (and his impartiality) blown out of the water. The survery ADMITEDLY only sampled a SMALL number of households in regards to how many dead they have "lost" - and the report itself says at MAX 100K - so basically youve got a report using a questionable report to create another questionable report. Good on ya. [quote:45633]We know that Bush's war has been a thorough disaster - [/quote:45633] In comparison to what war - the First Gulf War? - Sure any war looks like a disaster compared to that. Hell the CIVIL WAR was a disaster than and should never have been fought. [quote:45633]We know that Bush's Middle East agenda also is suffering because the U.S. military is spread way thin in Afghanistan and Iraq, the desertion rates are high, soldiers are not re-upping at the usual clip, recruitment isn't working and illegal scams are being used to lure youngsters into signing up[/quote:45633] GTFO - scams? Link - no I didnt think so. Military recruitment isnt BRISK - but its not in dire straights either. Some recruitment goals wont be met - but it wont affect the MILITARY's ability to conduct the IRAQ reconstruction either. [quote:45633]We know that Gonzales, then Bush's White House Counsel, and Pentagon lawyers beholden to Rumsfeld, devised legal rationales that make torture of suspects official state policy.[/quote:45633] Further over-stating of fact. GONZALES did his JOB - he investigated the legal limits the military could go to get information out of suspects. That is his JOB. Why those on the left cant get around that is beyond me. We're not talking about CANDY MAKING - we're talking about the legal limits of intense interrogation and what limits there are in regards to it. Suggesting because the President wanted to know how far the military could go is somehow trying to fix a policy of TORTURE is BRUTALLY dishonest. [quote:45633]and many clearly unconstitutional provisions[/quote:45633] Like? [quote:45633]Unless those can be repealed, that vote will be a nail into the coffin housing the remains of the Bill of Rights.[/quote:45633] Shocking - a TON of rhetoric. . .and not a SINGLE example of this "shredding of the Bill Of Rights". [quote:45633]14. THE OUTING OF COVERT AGENTS[/quote:45633] I love this one - since its either willfully being IGNORANT, or it really has no intention of being truthful or honest, and just wants to lie for lyings sake. At this point during the ongoing investigation (you know those troublesome little things that we have to fully determine a persons guilt before bringing charges and yanno - having a trial - all that silly stuff about innocent until proven guilty) KARL ROVE is NOT a suspect, or being investigated as the Special Prosecutor has said - so either Liberals know something that FITZ doesnt - or they are once again pouncing where they dont need to be pouncing. ROVE had conversations with two reporters regarding PLAME - none of which were initiated by the WHITE HOUSE or ROVE's staff. ROVE - in his attempts to JUSTIFIABLE protect the office of the President - cautioned COOPER against pursuing WILSON's story, as his credibility and non-partisanship might be in question - specifically in regards to who helped get WILSON assigned to the very plum role of following up on the NIGER claim. If ROVE should be terminated and charged for that - by all means - but Liberals need to cup their own balls and accept the responsibility for initiating such a precedent. [quote:45633]Sophisticated statistical analysis along with wide-scale exit-polling - [/quote:45633] You those exit polls which were Republican voters REFUSED to participate in the polling - those exit polls which were called the most INACCURATE in YEARS. . .THOSE poll numbers? [quote:45633]the integrity of our elections will be suspect into the far future.[/quote:45633] More irony. The revered "exit polls" - by the authors own ADMISSION - overstated the results of John Kerry in 26 STATES! Uh huh - physician heal thyself. [quote:45633]So far as we know, the Bush Administration has no plans for how to retire that debt [/quote:45633] Other than cutting it in half. Yea - dumb plan. Stupid stupid plan. Damn 5% Unemployment rate. POS economy. like the depression all over again. [quote:45633]Head Start[/quote:45633] HEAD START is broken. It has ZERO accountability and it is under the Department of Health and Human services - which means that NONE of those who are caring for or attending to the nations most at-risk children have any need for advanced schooling that we require of teachers in public schools. That asshole BUSH has actually suggested that TEACHERS have MINIMUM their AA's - and eventually their BACHELORS. God damn shifty eyed crook. [quote:45633]Social Security[/quote:45633] Broken. Admitted that it will run out in 2080 if left apace. BUSH's plan MAY have been faulty - but at least he had the balls to say - "We need to do SOMETHING folks". Yea - dumb BUSH. [quote:45633]If a Democrat president and vice president had behaved similarly to Bush and Cheney, they'd have been in the impeachment dock in a minute.[/quote:45633] Well - we did have one who behaved in such a way. . .and he escaped the gallows (despite more proof of his illegal activities than of BUSH's - funny that). This article is trash - and I sincerely hope it was posted only to give some folks something to piss on. If so - thank you kindly NINTY.