Posted on 09/29/2005 6:37:50 PM PDT by strategofr
Oh, come on. Yes you do. It is a hard choice, but I trust you DO know the correct one. Our side is not the one so full of blind rage against our enemies that we are unable to think. Democrats certainly would go the other way, but then, they are idiots. You are not an idiot, and you would choose to protect your country, which is exactly what Rumsfeld is doing.
I would never put myself in the position to make that decision. *I* couldn't do it.
So, the sophisticates here KNOW why this should be buried, and anyone who doesn't instinctivly know, even though we have NO information to on which to base an opinion, is a rube?
That is pretty simple to understand. Anything which weakens the RATS is good for National Security. Anything which protects, hides their treason or furthers their treason is bad for National Security.
Getting to the bottom of how and why the walls restricting intelligence gathering and its use does not compromise any present or future capability.
Exposing the treasonous actions of Clinton, Gorelick and crowd will definitely increase National Security. We need to be writing our elected leaders to get to the bottom of this asap.
And I thought you had forgotten....... :-)
Thanks, I appreciate it.
I would be more concerned if FReepers just took what I share with them without any doubt at all. I hope that my posts and rants encourage thinking instead of blind acceptance of a particular agenda, like every Democrat must in order to belong to that gang of nuts.
So, when, if ever, should certain facts be added to history?
Since there is zero evidence this was anything other than typical, random, idiotic ghetto violence I would reluctantly rule out your hypothesis. Hey we were all rooting for an Islamic connection since there is little but Evil that is connected with that gutter religion.
I don't want to know HOW we got the information. Actually it warms my heart to know that SOMEONE had this info. I want to know why it was buried and who buried it.
Why don't you decide for yourself?
What would YOU choose?
Prevent another 9-11, or put Clinton enablers in prison?
I wont judge your answer, but I hope YOU will.
Hummmmmm. A member of this administration, are we?
Lets just say we disagree.
No, I never forget.
But those thread rumblers were enough for you to know that I couldn't choose a life over the greater good. You saw I didn't budge on sticking up for that soldier.
>>>Hey we were all rooting for an Islamic connection since there is little but Evil that is connected with that gutter religion.
Not me. I was always stuck on the IAC connection.
Lynn Stewart with the history of the Sheik is a major connection of the alliance between IAC and Islam (terroristic).
There is also a history that is not spoken or hidden in NJ...So zero public evidence is not a shock.
It will just get shelved with all the other Urban Legends our great state has turned into.
Data mining generates enormous amounts of heat, and precious little light. That so-and-so's name comes up in the gross data is only interesting in hindsight. At that point it just a drink from a firehose.
It's the analysis that is key and the algorithms, logic and rule sets that show the nuggets in the pan. It's precisely this process that will become useless if exposed. That Atta's name showed up in the mix is not interesting. Lots of names showed up. What is interesting is *why* a name might or might not get caught in the filters. This *does* affect current operations, not just old Able Danger stuff.
That is a short question deserving a long answer, which I am probably not qualified to give.
All I can say is that IMHO, historical facts which threaten national security should stay secret as long as that is true. There are secrets dating back beyond WW-II that would best remain so. Consider the proliferation of Nuclear technology for example; First we had it, then everyone had it. We caught and killed a few, (Rosenburgs and such) but did we get everyone? Did we get the organizations responsible for training these people? If so, how? These are things best not known, because I guarantee you, not everything this country does to defend itself would square with the Bill of Rights, and you would not like it if it did. That is the best answer I can give you.
I choose both. If possible. If not, well the clinton enablers will eventually do themselves in, the islamofacists need our help for that.
But my POINT was, how can people who do not possess all the facts, or enough of the facts make a reasonable decision? We can't. So you'll have to forgive the rubes who would like a little more information. If people in the know think letting that info out is dangerous, they will have to say so, and expect to suffer a bit of a firestorm over their refusal. That comes with the pay grade I'm told.
It stinks to me too. But I'm afraid there are revelations that would not only bring down Clinton appointees and damage Clinton himself, but could bring down some very high-ups in the Bush administration and eventually Pres. Bush himself. (because he's the man in charge)
Not good enough. In fact your argument is highly specious.
The issue has nothing to do with how information is mined and gathered. It has everything to do with the following two points:
1. Establish for fact that 9-11 terrorists and their plans were known in 1999 and 2000.
2. Establish for fact that the identity of the 9-11 terrorists and their plans were or were not passed to the FBI.
If these two points are established in the affirmative, then the final issue points to Gorelick and ultimately the Clinton administration.
You cant.
All you can do, is vote for people you trust, then hope that they put people into positions that can also be trusted. Is there anyone on this thread who believes that Rumsfeld is anything less than a patriot? Does anyone believe that he or Bush for that matter would not have very good reasons for wanting Able Danger to go away? And if so, why would we vote for such people at all? I say we should trust with the horse we rode in on. Not because we are 'rubes' or blind followers like the liberals, but because we trust those who we placed in power through our votes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.