Posted on 09/11/2006 2:02:14 PM PDT by mware
Edited on 09/11/2006 4:11:51 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I will not be here for the first hour of tonights program. Thought I would put it up for those FReepers overseas that are viewing it now.
For those who wish to see the clips the Clinton lawyers complained about, Click here
I never said it was pre 9/11.
Having brought it up, though, I think GW would agree with me that it is in fact pre-mm/dd of the NEXT attack.
The 9/11 terrorists got through pre-9/11 security by simply filling out the correct forms and smiling at the security camera. The next terrorists will get through in the same manner....by simply using our freedoms against us.
"Trusted Traveller" and all that "ATM Security" garbage is NOT the way. Snooping bomb-maker phones, flying hellfire missiles in Pakistan, JDAMing terrorist training camps, and most of all, alert low-level agents and citizens.....these will make us safe.
re: Trusted Traveller
You got me thinking again. (Shame on you!) What would have kept Mohammad Atta (etal) off the Trusted Traveller list?
I have a friend who had the same name as a terrorist, and he just filled out a form that said he's not a terrorist, and he was removed from the airline watchlist.
We focus on the machines to check your ID....but we haven't talked at all about whose ID gets put on "the checklist" and who can be taken off.
If I just wanted to make people "feel" safe, I'd put expensive fancy machines out on the floor. If I wanted to make people "BE" safe, I'd profile and sneak-n-peak and put out a watchlist at topless bars and radio shacks and such!
Thanks.....gonna start digging in a while and see what I can find.
based on my travels, I get the impression EVERYONE is being photographed as they pass through customs. This is in addition to the other cameras.
This is not the lame, 9/10 efforts.
We are moving fromt the PC profilers to the actual competent customs agent who kicked that one guy back.
Our biggest problem is the 5th columnists inside who advocate making sacrifices at the temple when there are tigers at the city gates.
Believe me. I've read the books, I know the story. You've now put me in a position of having to defend Bill Clinton, not an easy task, but the phrase to remember was "failure of imagination". 9/11 changed everything. Except for a small group of well-informed experts, the entire world...Democrats, Republicans alike, didn't take the threat seriously enough. Could Clinton have stopped it? Very likely. Even if he had gotten bin Laden, however, there's no gurantee that the kill would have stopped the attacks.
Berger and Albright screwed up bigtime, and it was the exclamation point on a long line of foreign policy failures. The entire government could and should have taken the threat more seriously.
China and the Soviet Union were bitter enemies in 1980. China even boycotted the Moscow Olympics and that was supposed to be the first summer Olympics with Communist China. China did not boycott the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics.
Just getting to this thread - I thought the mini series was great. Loved Heaton's performance. Now I want to know more about this Bodine Ambassador idiot.
Well, yes. But some appointments are overtly political and others go to professional diplomates. I don't think there is any evidence that Clinton chose Bodine, rather than ratified a State Dept. recommendation.
Yes, you are right. My mistake.
If you have, as you claim, "read all the books", then where is the excuse, from you, for Clinton refusing to take OBL from the Sudanese, THREE TIMES, when they offered him to Slick? Such a decision was far above the pay grade of the likes of Sandy Berger and Madeline Albright and neither of them had been offered OBL; but Clinton was and he refuse the offer.
Neither did he nor any of his "team" do ANYTHING whatsoever, but talk, when the American embassies in Africa and the USS COLE were struck by terrorists.
From the first WTC attack through the USS COLE attack, Clinton did NOTHING in retaliation. If he had, yes, 9/11 would most probably NOT happened. And the fact that YOU refuse to admit that, even to yourself, says quit a lot about you.
And BTW, 9/11 didn't change the way ANY Dem thinks; they still have a 9/10 mentality...........just like you.
Berger was there to cover Bill's arse; Maddy was there for affirmative action reasons.
You may try again, to answer my question, but this time, you'd better use accurate facts and details. What you proffered this time around, was even worse than your original post.
Given what we know about Cheney's no-nonsense attitude, it is more likely that in reality he conducted himself more like they have Clarke behaving himself in the movie. Every time I see Clarke's face on t.v., I think he comes across as seeming to be a publicity seeker.
"And BTW, 9/11 didn't change the way ANY Dem thinks; they still have a 9/10 mentality...........just like you."
And what evidence have I offered of that? My original post stated that the important part of the movie was not a glorified blame-game but that it shows the errors in process and mentality that built up to 9/11, and therefore shows what must change in order to prevent the same. Please point out how refusing to take part in a worthless and unproductive session of Monday morning quarterbacking shows that I somehow have "9/10 mentality". If you want to have a measured talk about what needs to be done in the future, I'm all for it.
But frankly I'm not interested in engaging in a meaningless finger-pointing game with no object that includes personal insults hurled at me.
It might interest you to know that Clark is now a consultant and employee of ABC.
--Let me put a smily face on on this Clarke treatment. Yes its a lie all right. However most of the Sheeple out there watching this probably don't even know who he was. They just see someone in the government - the Bush admin at this point - who is saying the right things. So it makes Bush look good indirectly to the sheeple that don't follow all the details.--
Conversely, Bush would look like an idiot to the sheeple, for keeping the inept Tenet as CIA dir. - this movie is devastating to Tenet.
Tenet was a holdover from Clinton so it looks bad for him more so than Bush. Bush was only in for 8 mths before 9/11. Most people would not expect an incoming Pres to immediately fire the head of the FBI. This movie focuses on terrorism which is only part of the FBI's job.
Excellent points.
bump
not proven; yet not investigted either. At least Jayna brings up the circumstantial evidence and makes a good case. THAT in itself ought to be investigated. But, Gov't won't do any investigation on this; not even Bush.
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.