Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-30-2004, 06:23 PM   #1
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Default Hey Cons, here is a messenger for you to blame

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html

L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator in Iraq, said in a speech six months before the September 11, 2001 attacks that the Bush administration was "paying no attention" to terrorism.
I suppose you are going to say he is biased. Perhaps he had an agenda like Dick Clarke did. Perhaps the message will resonate now since it is coming from a source that you can not demonize.
Come on guys.... start blaming the messenger. Anyone want to admit that Bush was lax on terrorism. As stated soooo many times before, Bush was interested in missile defense not terrorism. Clinton held terrorism in check and Bush simply let it slip away.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:01 PM   #2
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/....ap/index.html


I suppose you are going to say he is biased. Perhaps he had an agenda like Dick Clarke did. Perhaps the message will resonate now since it is coming from a source that you can not demonize.
You read and see what you want to see. You have yet to make a post
where you are not biased, Bumble.

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Come on guys.... start blaming the messenger. Anyone want to admit that Bush was lax on terrorism.
O.K. Just as soon As you leftist Anti-American's start admiting you despise America.

I don't blame you for your ignorance Bumbleroot.
I blame your educationers(tm) and your personal ignorance.
Did I mention your Father and Mother?


Originally Posted by bumbleroot
As stated soooo many times before, Bush was interested in missile defense not terrorism. Clinton held terrorism in check and Bush simply let it slip away.
Stated by whom?

Bumbleroot,
You are ignorant. Proven.

9/11 Means nothing more then politics to your type. You care nothing about
casualties unless a country like America suffers. Then you're all in..

Do you think you make a difference? You don't because your additude lacks
expression. You love to hate, and that alone makes you a simpleton.
You're just a simpleton Bumbleroot. Welcome to your reality.


Let me link you to 9/11.

For the WTC Jumpers



"WHEN THE DEVIL HAD FINISHED ALL THE TEMPTING HE LEFT HIM, TO AWAIT ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY"
-Luke 5:13

He came back,
This time for me.
On the 110th floor I was so close to God
I could almost grab his beard.
Never before has heaven been this close to hell.
I can feel its fire on the floors below
Raising ash and paper and smoke
Thick as Satan’s laughter.
At the window, shattered,
I look for salvation and he tempts me,
Dares me to jump,
Whispering a psalm in my ear
He spits as he speaks:
“He will bid his angels watch over you.
With their hands they will support you.”
I mumble “Amen,”
Close my eyes and sense the rush of air.
I cannot breathe until I finally feel
Those hands of angels
Hard as cement against my face.
Originally Posted by Zolmaz
May they all rest in the comforting hands of God for eternity
God Bless America, The Sleeping Giant has been awaken
God Bless President Goerge W. Bush and his Resolve
God Bless our Troops and their Families
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:14 PM   #3
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
You know what Bumble? In the late eighties I said that there would be an attack on the US. Why? Because terrorists were active at that point and I lived overseas; other countries had beefed up security and were serious about it, but the US was living in a bubble and not taking any precautions. It was just a matter of time. I had tickets to fly on Pan Am 103 two weeks after it was blown up. I had just flown into Heathrow two days before Lockerbie. The terrorist threat to me was real. I acknowledged it back then when I came back stateside. Do you see me running to the press?

Reagan blew it, Bush Sr. blew it, Clinton blew it even more and got blown in the process and Bush Jr. followed his predecessors. Americans were as a whole a fairly gullible lot that believed terrorists would never strike home. Had one president enforced strict airline security prior to 9/11, you would have been one of the ones whining about it, saying the government was exercising too much control. This isn't something that can be pointed at one president, and as it has been brought up before, why didn't Clinton do anything in the 8 years prior? He had a lot longer than the 10 months that Bush did and he was advised of the danger as well.

Furthermore, the government had intelligence that an attack was going to happen, but the information they received was that it was targeted at American interests overseas. A week and a half before 9/11, my brother-in-law, who was stationed at an Arabic military base--assisting their government, was evacuated to Germany. My sister didn't hear from him at all for several days. When we finally heard from him, he said they had been evacuated because of a terrorist threat. Low and behold, one week later, 9/11. I knew that our government did NOT know the attack was going to be on US soil.

It happened and guess what? It will happen again. Go call the press! We are still not prepared for those type of attacks. Airline security has already been relaxed. When something like this happens, you need to sit down and regroup, realize what you could have done (had you known--hindsight is 20/20) and act accordingly. As a country, we spend too many taxpayers dollars rehashing so we can POINT fingers. It is useless. You just want blood and to say that Bush was to blame--well guess what? It isn't going to happen. Al Queda is the one to blame. If Kerry had been president on 9/11, he would have had the same intelligence that Bush had.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:22 PM   #4
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
You read and see what you want to see. You have yet to make a post
where you are not biased, Bumble.
So now you attack me? Why not answer the post instead? Of course I am biased. I am liberal. However, this charge here has you fuckers by the balls and there is no way out. ADMIT YOU WERE WRONG. Bush blew his duties prior to 9/11.

Reagan blew it, Bush Sr. blew it, Clinton blew it
Attacks on American soil prior to 9/11- One!
All evidence shown shows Bush was interested in Missile defense. He slacked. This was not his concern. Even after Clinton and his cronies told Bush and his cronies that terrorism should be his main concern IT WAS NOT!!!!
Now you are trying to be revisionist. Shall I go back in here and show where you guys said Richard Clarke was lieing and use the words of Paul Bremer to back up Richard Clarke's words? Do I have to lead you guys to the water on that one or are you going to accept that your CONSTANT EXCUSES seem to be falling apart.
As I have said before and again and again. The truth ALWAYS PREVAILS. The truth is prevailing and it is painting a picture of a less than superhero president that just seems to get you Bush whackers down.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:25 PM   #5
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Ummm..how many attacks while Clinton was in the hot chair? What did he do--NOTHING! He had Osama in his sights, what did he do---NOTHING! Get the picture Bumble????? Read MY post, how can you excuse 8 years of apathy? How do you explain away those 8 years, when you are trying to crucify Bush over 10 months????? Bill was more concerned with blow jobs than terrorism and by trying to save his ass from impeachment.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:35 PM   #6
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
Clinton held terrorism in check and Bush simply let it slip away.
LOL
USS Cole
Oklahoma City Bombing
WTC bombing
Khobar Towers? hear of it?
Unibomber anyone?
for the conspiracy theorists
Flight 800
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:37 PM   #7
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Bumbleroot,
You really don't have a clue.

If you recall, Bush jr was in office for eight months before 9/11. Correct? yes.
During that time bush was undergoing the election BS through the senate in florida
where they had 7 recounts. And had democrat lawyers swarming all over the place
trying to steal the election. CORRECT? Yes!

Do you remember when this ended? Look it up.

Now, do you remember that we had a Plane bumped down by a chinese fighter
during this time frame? HUH? No? Oh geez.

And what about appointing his administration?

I guess Bush was supposed to be clairvoyant. And know everything.


Bumbleroot. You prove again that you are ignorant about 9/11 and that
you hate America and our Armed forces.

Why don't you come clean and tell us why you hate America so much?
I insist. /Tell us all why you hate America so much.



God Bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 07:59 PM   #8
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Not only were the "World" trade towers attacked, But also other targets.
The Pentagon? The Media has forgotten the Pentagon.

When the Fucked up media refers to 9/11 they refer to the Towers. Yet,
why isn't the Pentagon ever mentioned?

I know why. Because our main central war station is what they hate. Leftist Media!

The PENTAGON!


Huh? The terrorist attack was only against innocent civilians. *Say's the Media*

Fact is, Our military was attacked. War? Fuck you if you cannot handle war.
War has been declared by our enemies, not by the USA. They want us dead.

The Pentagon attack.

Reason all you want about, *Them terrorists are just angry people and we should give them shelter*
Fuck pacifism, and lets start killin. They called a Jihad, lets exact it the way
they want it.

Nukes? No problem. The chemical and bio weapons went somewhere.


What happens when Bio or Chem weapons are used in the USA>? Should
we pay the terrorists?, According to the pacifist left, *YES*. Thank god they are not in power.

I have more to say but this thread has been to long. *See'Ya*



God Bless America
Zolmaz Zo'Boto (Master of the free air he breathes, and of the taxes he pays)
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 08:13 PM   #9
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Ummm..how many attacks while Clinton was in the hot chair? What did he do--NOTHING!
Umm- 39 days into Clinton's presidency the WTC was attacked. WE CAUGHT ALL OF THOSE GUYS AND THEY ARE ALL IN JAIL TODAY STILL. We also caught many other terrorists while Clinton was in office.

Here you go guys. I back up what I say- something from Snopes showing you guys are WRONG AGAIN...
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm
REad it and weep fuckers- youi lose again.

OH BY THE WAY- THIS THREAD IS ABOUT GEORGIE BOY AND HIS MERRY BAND OF DO-NOTHINGS- Why do you guys think that someone else's actions excuse Bush's?
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 08:13 PM   #10
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
I think Bumble has a sore ass again. Maybe we should take up a collection
to buy him medication since he is out of work.
Maybe a tube of Ben-Gay? After this thread he will need it.

Oh Wait. I forgot,
He hates corporations like Pfizer. Hmm. Maybe we could pitch in to get Bumbleroot
a few leaves foraged by an environmental extremist. lmfao, Maybe that will cure
his sore ass.


God bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 08:27 PM   #11
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Umm- 39 days into Clinton's presidency the WTC was attacked. WE CAUGHT ALL OF THOSE GUYS AND THEY ARE ALL IN JAIL TODAY STILL.
Well, WTG Clinton. You found the problem, but failed to administer the cure.
And the terrorists went on. Didn't they Bumble? Who funded them>?

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Here you go guys. I back up what I say- something from Snopes showing you guys are WRONG AGAIN...
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.htm
REad it and weep fuckers- youi lose again.
I read it. Now what?

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
OH BY THE WAY- THIS THREAD IS ABOUT GEORGIE BOY AND HIS MERRY BAND OF DO-NOTHINGS-
Do nothing. Are you serious? Were at war, and you're calling GWB a DO-NOTHING?
With people like you Bumble, who needs the comedy channel. Don't let it go to
your head either. Sheesh, Simpleton.

Originally Posted by bumbleroot
Why do you guys think that someone else's actions excuse Bush's?
Because Bush is the problem in the Whole wide world? And over the last 1000-years
Bush is to blame. Honest! just look at the Bush heritage. He was decendant from
germans for god sakes.

Bush is actually part of the same blood line that Hitler was from. I'm serious.

Adam, was President Bush's father, and Eve was his Mother. How much more
proof do I need? It's perfectly clear that Bush is related to Hitler. Done Deal..




Z...
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 08:34 PM   #12
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Do nothing. Are you serious? Were at war, and you're calling GWB a DO-NOTHING?
We are at war with a NON-TERRORIST STATE. In fact, nobody but George Knows why we are actually there. The ONLY ONES in the world that said Iraq was terrorist was George and Dick. And they have no proof of that. They have and had proof to the contrary.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 08:55 PM   #13
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Originally Posted by bumbleroot
We are at war with a NON-TERRORIST STATE. In fact, nobody but George Knows why we are actually there. The ONLY ONES in the world that said Iraq was terrorist was George and Dick. And they have no proof of that. They have and had proof to the contrary.
You're wrong again Bumbleroot. I know it sucks to be wrong so much, but
you can expect nothing but "LAUGHTER" from me.

How can I rebuke lies. What can I say, Have a nice day?


Have a wonderful and happy day with Alice, 'Bumbleroot.
You're the bestest socialist Liberal ever. *Salute* I love you man.



God Bless America
Zolmaz.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 09:06 PM   #14
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Alauradana
You know what Bumble? In the late eighties I said that there would be an attack on the US. Why? Because terrorists were active at that point and I lived overseas; other countries had beefed up security and were serious about it, but the US was living in a bubble and not taking any precautions.

Reagan blew it, Bush Sr. blew it, Clinton blew it even more and got blown in the process and Bush Jr. followed his predecessors. Americans were as a whole a fairly gullible lot that believed terrorists would never strike home.

It happened and guess what? It will happen again.
Holy shit! I agree with this posting 100%!

/sing Swing low sweet chariot, comin' for to carry me home! Swing low...
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2004, 09:11 PM   #15
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Welcome Back to the Emarr board Lurikeen.

Have a Fun and Wonderful time on the rides.
Just don't be a punk and bail again.
You have no reserve left.
*Salute*

GBA
Z.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 07:04 AM   #16
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Bumbleroot I just have one question for you. What are you going to do when Bush is re-elected in 2004? I am really afraid you are going to have a stroke or something. Start on Paxil now and you should be neutralized and mellowed out by November 2004. I am really worried about you.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 08:23 AM   #17
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
Originally Posted by chuk
WTC bombing
To be fair, Clinton had hardly even settled into office by that point. And, the conspirators were convicted. The one who fled to Egypt was also returned to the U.S.

I don't honestly think any president "blew it off" while in office. Nobody imagined an attack of the scale 9/11 was on. It was simply unheard of, one of those things people are afraid to consider because it's just too horrible to think about.

With that said... I won't lambast Bush for not paying attention pre-9/11, at least not with the current evidence. However, there have been some suggestions hints were dropped that pointed to such an attack. If it turns out there were clues to it and nothing was done to investigate it, we should all have a problem with that.

After all I'm fairly sure that was generally the policy we had. Follow any leads, but otherwise don't worry about it. We had enough faith in the FBI and CIA that any terrorist plot of significant scale would be unearthed before it came to fruition. Misguided or not, for years this generally worked, while not 100% effective. But then again no policy is.

Some will point out that there hasn't been a "terrorist attack" on U.S. soil since 9/11. I will point out the numerous terrorist attacks on U.S. citizens who are overseas as a direct result of the policy preventing attacks over here. In a globalized world it doesn't matter where they happen, but rather who they happen to.

Back to my point - I'll give Bush the benefit of the doubt, that he went along with previous policy and couldn't have done anything. However, if it turns out there was enough evidence that would merit an investigation, and he did not have it looked into, the blood of about 3,000 Americans is partially on his hands.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 09:00 AM   #18
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Quote Bumble : We are at war with a NON-TERRORIST STATE. -- Did you forget the Taliban/Afghanistan????

Ares & Luri - For once we are in agreement, 9/11 cannot be thrown in anyone's lap. It was a combined act of ignorance over several presidencies.

As far as Clinton taking care of the 93 WTC attack--he didn't get them all and one of the Al Queda henchmen funded the attack--why didn't he go after Al Queda then? Look at this from the FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/terrorists/teryasin.htm

Abdul Rahman Yasin is wanted for his alleged participation in the terrorist bombing of the World Trade Center, New York City, on February 26, 1993, which resulted in six deaths, the wounding of numerous individuals, and the significant destruction of property and commerce.


REWARD

The Rewards For Justice Program, United States Department of State, is offering a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to the apprehension or conviction of Abdul Rahman Yasin.


SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ARMED AND DANGEROUS
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 09:12 AM   #19
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
The Interpol page Chuk linked didn't mention him. I'd like to see what evidence links him to the attack, first, just to settle my sense of curiosity.

Ares & Luri - For once we are in agreement, 9/11 cannot be thrown in anyone's lap. It was a combined act of ignorance over several presidencies.
Yes and no.

First, can we say for certain there is nobody at fault? I don't think all the facts are in to make such a judgement at this time. I'm not as eager to say "Yes it was unfortunate but oh well" as you are. It's not something to brush aside lightly.

Second, we can hardly call it ignorance. The policy of "ask questions first, shoot later" was not problematic; the 9/11 plot exploited it's weaknesses, but the policy was not flawed as a whole. It was remarkably efficient in cost, resources, and time. The policy of "shoot and ask questions at the same time" as we've adopted now might prevent a few attacks, but is the increase in cost (resources, political capital, manpower, etc.) worth it? We're not putting a price on 3,000 lives, since we cannot say with certainty that either [a] such policy has prevented a recurrence of 9/11 or that [b] such an attack ever would have occurred again anyway. It may well be we could have gone on as if nothing happened and seen the same results. I haven't seen any convincing evidence otherwise.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 09:39 AM   #20
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in510795.shtml

Read his guilt by his own admissions. They had him in custody and released him. There is no doubt as to his participation.

Ignorance is what it was all about. This whole country was ignorant to the fact that terrorists would/could strike. Ignorance is not the same as stupidity. Ignorance is not being aware of. For whatever reason, Americans did not believe there would be a terrorist attack on American soil. I suspected it because I had been living overseas--it was a reality there. Did you honestly think that 9/11 would happen prior to that date? I am willing to bet you felt secure in the US and it was one hell of a shocker to wake up to that morning. Even though I had suspected it as a possibility many years before, I was complacent living in the US feeling secure and not thinking about it when it occurred.
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 10:05 AM   #21
AresProphet
Priest of Hiroshima
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,932
Send a message via MSN to AresProphet
I just wondered. Really, I didn't see anything about that guy on the page Chuk linked, which made me curious as to how he was connected.

Ignorance is what it was all about. This whole country was ignorant to the fact that terrorists would/could strike. Ignorance is not the same as stupidity. Ignorance is not being aware of. For whatever reason, Americans did not believe there would be a terrorist attack on American soil. I suspected it because I had been living overseas--it was a reality there. Did you honestly think that 9/11 would happen prior to that date? I am willing to bet you felt secure in the US and it was one hell of a shocker to wake up to that morning. Even though I had suspected it as a possibility many years before, I was complacent living in the US feeling secure and not thinking about it when it occurred.
It's always a possibility, but everyone had faith in the ability of the government to prevent the worst of the attacks.

The general idea everyone has, is that the bigger the plot, the more complicated it is. And the more complicated it is, the easier it is to foil. Both of these are false notions but they are deeply ingrained into modern culture. So, we figured that the worst of it would be from internal sources (McVeigh) and relatively low scale, because how could a notorious terrorist possbily get into our country, let alone kill anyone?

So evincing that we were "shocked" by the attack doesn't mean anyone ignored the problem. Is it ignorance to be caught offguard? No, it's human nature. Ignorance implies intentional disregard; bring a dictionary to the debate if you like but the connotations are enough.

And no Presidential administration intentionally disregarded terrorism; the thing picked on is that Bush lessened it's priority in favor of missile defense. That comes pretty close though.
__________________
One of the wonders of the world is going down
It's going down I know
It's one of the blunders of the world that no-one cares
No-one cares enough


Attachment 181
AresProphet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 10:16 AM   #22
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
I really don't think there's an answer that will make Bumbleroot happy here, unless it's:

OMG BUSH IS LIEING!

So yeah, Bush was in office when it happened. There may or may not have been conclusive evidence that this exact sort of attack at this exact location was going to happen at this exact time, but Bush should have been psychic and known what was going to happen.

What Bush should have done was to set aside every other matter of state and every other interest to combat something that the majority of Americans wouldn't have viewed as a tangible, impending threat at that point. If 9/11 had never happened, how many people would have blasted him for spending this much time, effort, and taxpayer money on something they didn't consider a "hot topic"? If our security upgrades had happened without this attack, how many people would have viewed them as moves directed at revoking our rights and privileges?

I won't discredit your messenger or your source. While I feel that all media is biased to an extent, I'll put a little more stock in CNN than your average media source. I will agree that Bush didn't pay enough attention to terrorism, but by the same token, I don't think he can be held solely responsible for the attacks on 9/11. I think he paid as much attention as he reasonably could, given the information he had available to him at the time and the other interests that he had to tend to.

Everyone expects him to show the most consideration to their particular cause, but it's just not feasible for one man to be able to adequately handle every single situation, given the other people he has to go through to get anything done. If he had absolute power and time were not an issue, then maybe, but that's not the country we live in. I will not crucify the man for not being Superman. What you ask of him, on a grand scale, is impossible.

I don't have to be pro-Bush or pro-Kerry or pro-whomever to see that. I'd feel the same way if it were a democratic president in office.
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 10:19 AM   #23
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Quote Bumble : We are at war with a NON-TERRORIST STATE. -- Did you forget the Taliban/Afghanistan????
So we are at war with the Taliban. That is not Iraq. We are at war with Iraq- Iraq is a non-terrorist state. Hence we are at war with a non-terrorist state. Don't try to weasel your way out of it by changing the subject.

Alaura I like your tactics. You are so blatantly hypocritical its sad.
First you say
Ummm..how many attacks while Clinton was in the hot chair? What did he do--NOTHING! He had Osama in his sights, what did he do---NOTHING! Get the picture Bumble????? Read MY post, how can you excuse 8 years of apathy?
Then when you get owned you say
Reagan blew it, Bush Sr. blew it, Clinton blew it even more and got blown in the process and Bush Jr. followed his predecessors. Americans were as a whole a fairly gullible lot that believed terrorists would never strike home.
Seems to me like you change your story to pacify the inactions of your man as they are shown to you. Don't excuse Bush by saying "They all did it".
Bush slacked. He slacked as Bremer put it. He slacked as Richard Clarke said it. He slacked as many have said and I have shown government documents on this board showing how his focus was elsewhere. Clinton had his focus on terrorism except Trent Lott and Newt Dingwich did all they could to counteract Clinton's efforts to lead the country.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 10:50 AM   #24
kanibaal
korpse
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 796
Umm- 39 days into Clinton's presidency the WTC was attacked. WE CAUGHT ALL OF THOSE GUYS AND THEY ARE ALL IN JAIL TODAY STILL.
So to show Bush responded as best as he could, we should dig up the ashes of the 19 hijackers and place them in jail forever? Bumbler, please tell me you are not trying to make it like Clinton was so great because he caught those terrorist. Bush and Clinton both responded like any president would. Funny thing is, Clinton went on to lower spending for the agencies that deal with terrorist intelligence even after all the strikes al-qaeda made on us...

STOP DEFENDING CLINTON, he isnt president anymore. If anything tell us what you feel Bush could do better because all I see is whining about how bad you feel Bush is.
kanibaal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2004, 11:29 AM   #25
Alauradana
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 1,460
Scroll up, read the link I posted, Iraq, a country that you say has NO TERRORIST connections, was harboring the TERRORIST who was involved in the first WTC attack in 93.

I am not being hypocritical. I said that ALL of those presidents were involved in the terrorist threat. This all started way back in Afghanistan in the 80's when Reagan was in. Who do you think trained Osama??? The good ole USA. They helped those guys to oust the Russians from Afghanistan. Nothing in my post has changed. You are trying to place it all on one president, Bush, just because you act like a child, "I don't like him". You don't even have any good argument to back your nonsense. Same way earlier when you tried to say that estate tax was a war tax--PUH-LLEASE!! You don't own anyone on this board!!!
Alauradana is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:58 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.