| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"osprey" |
| Date: |
01 Feb 2004 12:31:44 AM |
| Object: |
Miserable Failures |
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
....Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
....In the last fifty years, every democratic president has been a
miserable failure. At best, republican presidents have been flawed
leaders, but if the negative effects of every republican president
over the last fifty years were added together, it could not match the
damage done by a single democrat. With the exception of JFK’s
tax cuts
....Judson Cox is a political columnist from the mountains of North
Carolina. He is quickly gaining recognition as one of the most popular
and influential voices of his generation. As a college student, and a
young entrepreneur, he has a unique perspective on matters of
politics, economics and culture.
This is just round two. Continue to watch the circus as the liberal
clowns entertain us with excuses, diversions, distortions, evasion,
blaming, twisting, and last but not least...denial
Ladies and Gentlemen...Children of all ages...
in the center ring...our first liberal clown is....
.
|
|
| User: "Shawn \Me\ Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 09:10:51 AM |
|
|
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
(osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 09:18:54 AM |
|
|
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
Did you see that he tried to take credit for "possibly destroying the WMD"
ROFL
So, where are the ones that were never accounted for? You never did answer
that.
Did they vanish?
As far as wagging the tail, Clinton done that a lot. EVERY single time, he
decided to use military force, was during a time when a scandal was being
revealed.
Clinton's failures are coming to light. If you wish to prove them wrong,
you go argue with the authors and editors
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn \Me\ Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 07:18:03 PM |
|
|
In article <BfadnR1X6_nUhYDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
Did you see that he tried to take credit for "possibly destroying the WMD"
ROFL
So, where are the ones that were never accounted for? You never did answer
that.
Did they vanish?
I did answer your question in a previous posting. According to David Kay,
who we all know is Bush's hand-picked WMD inspector, the WMD either
decayed naturally or were sent outside of Iraq. I am guessing that
Saddam stashed what remaining WMD he had, if any, in Syra or another
friendly nation. As I said though, that's just a guess.
As far as wagging the tail, Clinton done that a lot. EVERY single time, he
decided to use military force, was during a time when a scandal was being
revealed.
Clinton's failures are coming to light. If you wish to prove them wrong,
you go argue with the authors and editors
The fact is that if Clinton's proposal to fund a plan to go after bin
Laden had been supported by the Republicans in the House, then there's
a good chance, bin Laden would have been jailed or killed long before
the 9/11/01 attacks took place. The failure is on the hands of the
Republicans in the House who spent far more time looking into bogus
things such as Watergate and Monica Lewinsky than they did assessing the
risk that bin Laden and Saddam posed to us.
.
|
|
|
| User: "osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
03 Feb 2004 01:41:21 AM |
|
|
"Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<srhi-72554A.20180302022004@news-60.giganews.com>...
In article <BfadnR1X6_nUhYDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
You mean the same targets that were not military targets, that Clinton
had to apologize for?
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
Did you see that he tried to take credit for "possibly destroying the WMD"
ROFL
So, where are the ones that were never accounted for? You never did answer
that.
Did they vanish?
I did answer your question in a previous posting. According to David Kay,
who we all know is Bush's hand-picked WMD inspector, the WMD either
decayed naturally or were sent outside of Iraq.
Which is a strong possibility
I am guessing that
Saddam stashed what remaining WMD he had, if any, in Syra or another
friendly nation. As I said though, that's just a guess.
I happen to agree with you and feel that is a very strong possibility.
But that also doesn't mean Bush lied either. I still feel Bush and
our administration felt a urgency to get in there.
As far as wagging the tail, Clinton done that a lot. EVERY single time, he
decided to use military force, was during a time when a scandal was being
revealed.
Clinton's failures are coming to light. If you wish to prove them wrong,
you go argue with the authors and editors
The fact is that if Clinton's proposal to fund a plan to go after bin
Laden had been supported by the Republicans in the House, then there's
a good chance, bin Laden would have been jailed or killed long before
the 9/11/01 attacks took place. The failure is on the hands of the
Republicans in the House who spent far more time looking into bogus
things such as Watergate and Monica Lewinsky than they did assessing the
risk that bin Laden and Saddam posed to us.
Sorry but I think that is more speculation than fact. I feel that all
sides failed, including Clinton.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
03 Feb 2004 11:34:16 PM |
|
|
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
You mean the same targets that were not military targets, that Clinton
had to apologize for?
Targets like bin Laden.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
03 Feb 2004 11:46:05 PM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq08o$a6t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin
Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal
Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional
Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging
the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
You mean the same targets that were not military targets, that Clinton
had to apologize for?
Targets like bin Laden.
No, he turned his back on that. Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 12:18:06 AM |
|
|
In article <49idnRubA6PlG73dRVn-gg@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq08o$a6t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin
Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal
Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional
Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging
the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
You mean the same targets that were not military targets, that Clinton
had to apologize for?
Targets like bin Laden.
No, he turned his back on that. Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
More lies from Osprey.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 12:30:46 AM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq08o$a6t$1@bolt.sonic.net...
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin
Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal
Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional
Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging
the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
Right.
You mean the same targets that were not military targets, that Clinton
had to apologize for?
Targets like bin Laden.
No, he turned his back on that.
You attack Clinton because he destroyed a suspected chemical weapons factory,
and you attack him because he didn't try to capture a suspected terrorist.
You just hate Clinton.
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 09:18:21 AM |
|
|
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
05 Feb 2004 11:09:11 PM |
|
|
Bob <no@email.address> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
Mansoor Ijaz is a Pakistani-American pursuing his own finanacial
interests. he was trying to scam some money from the US in exchange
for "turning over" bin Laden. The US yalked to Sudan. There was no
such offer to turn over bin Ladan.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 09:47:17 AM |
|
|
In article <A18Ub.5146$uS3.2567@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, Bob
<no@email.address> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
This story lacks any support whatsoever. Further, this was pre-911 so
did you expect Clinton to be a mind reader?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 11:38:55 AM |
|
|
"David Barnes" <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:040220040747175190%dbarnes111@yahoo.com...
In article <A18Ub.5146$uS3.2567@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, Bob
<no@email.address> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm
This story lacks any support whatsoever. Further, this was pre-911 so
did you expect Clinton to be a mind reader?
Why not? You expected Bush to be a mind reader. From other comments you
made about Bush, 9/11 was his fault.
And from what I recall, you and other liberals feel that Bush could have
prevented 9/11.
So why can't we expect Clinton to be a mind reader? You expected Bush to be
one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Barnes" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 09:26:20 PM |
|
|
In article <m_OdnXFk0J0QsLzdRVn-gQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David Barnes" <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:040220040747175190%dbarnes111@yahoo.com...
In article <A18Ub.5146$uS3.2567@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, Bob
<no@email.address> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.ht
m
This story lacks any support whatsoever. Further, this was pre-911 so
did you expect Clinton to be a mind reader?
Why not? You expected Bush to be a mind reader. From other comments you
made about Bush, 9/11 was his fault.
I never said it was his fault.
And from what I recall, you and other liberals feel that Bush could have
prevented 9/11.
I feel he knew about it, to a great extent. No specifically, but
enough that he could have done more. Remember this - he saw it coming
enough to protect his own people, but not us. What more does it take?
So why can't we expect Clinton to be a mind reader? You expected Bush to be
one.
Not at all. We already knew he was aware of it. He warned his people
BEFORE 9/11. He warned US, afterwards.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
04 Feb 2004 11:05:52 PM |
|
|
"David Barnes" <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:040220041926201848%dbarnes111@yahoo.com...
In article <m_OdnXFk0J0QsLzdRVn-gQ@comcast.com>, Osprey
<noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"David Barnes" <dbarnes111@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:040220040747175190%dbarnes111@yahoo.com...
In article <A18Ub.5146$uS3.2567@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, Bob
<no@email.address> wrote:
"Ray Fischer" <rfischer@bolt.sonic.net> wrote in message
news:bvq3im$g16$1@bolt.sonic.net...
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
Even turned down a offer to have him turned
over.
That's a lie. There was no such offer.
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.ht
m
This story lacks any support whatsoever. Further, this was pre-911 so
did you expect Clinton to be a mind reader?
Why not? You expected Bush to be a mind reader. From other comments you
made about Bush, 9/11 was his fault.
I never said it was his fault.
Excuse me? Oh but yes you have.
And when I started to question you on specifics, you started making fun of
me asking you questions like
Show us how Bush knew the date, the time, the method of delivery, who was
going to carry it out, and where.
If I am not mistaken, you were saying those specifics were not important.
And from what I recall, you and other liberals feel that Bush could have
prevented 9/11.
I feel he knew about it, to a great extent. No specifically, but
enough that he could have done more. Remember this - he saw it coming
enough to protect his own people, but not us. What more does it take?
Ok, now you are changing your words. And I might add, you are wiser now.
That is better. So you have a feeling. O.k., you are entitled to that.
I don't know, I am not in the White House.
You don't know either.
We can speculate all we want. Bottom line is David, and you know this too.
Most of us, the motives to our "opinions" are based on our political
preferences.
Which actually blinds us from being unbiased.
So why can't we expect Clinton to be a mind reader? You expected Bush
to be
one.
Not at all. We already knew he was aware of it. He warned his people
BEFORE 9/11. He warned US, afterwards.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tally Ho" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 05:05:05 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 7:18:54 -0800, Osprey wrote
(in message <BfadnR1X6_nUhYDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>):
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did nothing.
Did you see that he tried to take credit for "possibly destroying the WMD"
ROFL
Why is that funny? Based on the results, sounds true.
So, where are the ones that were never accounted for? You never did answer
that.
Did they vanish?
As Clinton said, he destroyed them. That is the obvious conclusion.
As far as wagging the tail, Clinton done that a lot. EVERY single time, he
decided to use military force, was during a time when a scandal was being
revealed.
Clinton's failures are coming to light. If you wish to prove them wrong,
you go argue with the authors and editors
You are the first to make this claim.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 05:12:05 PM |
|
|
"Tally Ho" <tally@ho.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.BC42C621001AA301F03055B0@news.west.cox.net...
On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 7:18:54 -0800, Osprey wrote
(in message <BfadnR1X6_nUhYDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>):
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal
Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing
the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did
nothing.
Would you care to provide proof of that? Or do you just like making things
up.
And be prepared to show us specifics.
Did you see that he tried to take credit for "possibly destroying the
WMD"
ROFL
Why is that funny? Based on the results, sounds true.
What results?
His comments were
We may have gotten them all
We may have gotten some
We may not have gotten them
Some results
So, where are the ones that were never accounted for? You never did
answer
that.
Did they vanish?
As Clinton said, he destroyed them. That is the obvious conclusion.
No, he didn't say that. You are not paying attention.
As far as wagging the tail, Clinton done that a lot. EVERY single time,
he
decided to use military force, was during a time when a scandal was
being
revealed.
Clinton's failures are coming to light. If you wish to prove them
wrong,
you go argue with the authors and editors
You are the first to make this claim.
Nope, I provided the sources that include the editors and authors.
I hope you are prepared to back up your statements that Bush knew about Bin
Laden and it was his fault.
I have had plenty of experience in this argument and have yet to find anyone
that can prove that Bush knew and it was his fault.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn \Me\ Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 07:52:40 PM |
|
|
In article <WvidnUdzL8mGGoDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did
nothing.
Would you care to provide proof of that? Or do you just like making things
up. And be prepared to show us specifics.
If Bush wasn't aware of the threat bin Laden posed to the United States,
then please explain to me why bin Laden has been on the FBI's 10 most
wanted list since June, 1999.
Bush knew full well of the threat that bin Laden posed. Don't believe me?
Well, its on the FBI's own web site right now. I remind you that the FBI
is a branch of the DOJ which Bush's man Ashcroft heads up.
Here's the cite:
http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
So you tell me why Bush and the Republicans in Congress did nothing to
capture bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks occurred. The FBI's own web
site provides chrystal clear proof that bin Laden was a known threat
as early as June, 1999, otherwise he would not have been included on
the 10 most wanted list at that time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Osprey" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 08:36:44 PM |
|
|
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-4707CF.20524002022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <WvidnUdzL8mGGoDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did
nothing.
Would you care to provide proof of that? Or do you just like making
things
up. And be prepared to show us specifics.
If Bush wasn't aware of the threat bin Laden posed to the United States,
then please explain to me why bin Laden has been on the FBI's 10 most
wanted list since June, 1999.
Bush knew full well of the threat that bin Laden posed. Don't believe me?
Well, its on the FBI's own web site right now. I remind you that the FBI
is a branch of the DOJ which Bush's man Ashcroft heads up.
No, the accusation many make is Bush was aware of the attacks coming on 9/11
That is what I am refering too.
Here's the cite:
http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
So you tell me why Bush and the Republicans in Congress did nothing to
capture bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks occurred. The FBI's own web
site provides chrystal clear proof that bin Laden was a known threat
as early as June, 1999, otherwise he would not have been included on
the 10 most wanted list at that time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn \Me\ Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 09:39:26 PM |
|
|
In article <i4Cdna3Ji4H3lYLdRVn-hg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:srhi-4707CF.20524002022004@news-60.giganews.com...
In article <WvidnUdzL8mGGoDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did
nothing.
Would you care to provide proof of that? Or do you just like making
things
up. And be prepared to show us specifics.
If Bush wasn't aware of the threat bin Laden posed to the United States,
then please explain to me why bin Laden has been on the FBI's 10 most
wanted list since June, 1999.
Bush knew full well of the threat that bin Laden posed. Don't believe me?
Well, its on the FBI's own web site right now. I remind you that the FBI
is a branch of the DOJ which Bush's man Ashcroft heads up.
No, the accusation many make is Bush was aware of the attacks coming on 9/11
That is what I am refering too.
The Israeli Mosad warned the FBI that bin Laden was planning an attack.
Hell, even the FBI's own men warned upper management. Witness the
Phoenix Memo.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
03 Feb 2004 12:26:37 AM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
If Bush wasn't aware of the threat bin Laden posed to the United States,
then please explain to me why bin Laden has been on the FBI's 10 most
wanted list since June, 1999.
Bush knew full well of the threat that bin Laden posed. Don't believe me?
Well, its on the FBI's own web site right now. I remind you that the FBI
is a branch of the DOJ which Bush's man Ashcroft heads up.
No, the accusation many make is Bush was aware of the attacks coming on 9/11
That is what I am refering too.
***** Heishman is playing his little games again, insisting that
Bush couldn't have known that there was attack planned for the morning
of 9/11/2001. As if that is supposed to be an excuse.
Here's the cite:
http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
So you tell me why Bush and the Republicans in Congress did nothing to
capture bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks occurred. The FBI's own web
site provides chrystal clear proof that bin Laden was a known threat
as early as June, 1999, otherwise he would not have been included on
the 10 most wanted list at that time.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 06:41:38 PM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Tally Ho" <tally@ho.com> wrote in message
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
That was Bush's fault. Get real. He was aware of Bin Laden and did nothing.
Would you care to provide proof of that? Or do you just like making things
up.
Hypocrite.
And be prepared to show us specifics.
Why? You don't show any specifics.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
03 Feb 2004 12:28:50 AM |
|
|
Osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
"Shawn "Me" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You mean the factories?
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I guess you are just going to have to prove the experts who are writing the
books, and the editors who printed the articles wrong.
Clinton failed in many ways, 3000 people plus, died as a result.
See what a sleazy ***** Heishman is. He'll blame everything on
Clinton or Democrats and excuse any level of incomptance done by
Republicans. Never mind thet Bush was warned about terrorist threats.
Never mind that the Republicans in congress didn't want to allow
Clinton the money to go after bin Laden. ***** Heishman wants to
make excuses.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Snubis" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 08:03:39 PM |
|
|
On Sun 01 Feb 2004 10:10:51a, "Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote in news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com:
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
The facts don't support you.
--
€
.
|
|
|
| User: "Shawn \Me\ Hearn" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 09:38:16 PM |
|
|
In article <33059db08ec9a31a17370dbf1dea29a0@news.teranews.com>,
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote:
On Sun 01 Feb 2004 10:10:51a, "Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote in news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com:
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
The facts don't support you.
Then prove it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Snubis" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
02 Feb 2004 09:29:57 PM |
|
|
On Mon 02 Feb 2004 10:38:16p, "Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote in news:srhi-0DFCF6.22381602022004@news-60.giganews.com:
In article <33059db08ec9a31a17370dbf1dea29a0@news.teranews.com>,
Snubis <snubis@wp.pl> wrote:
On Sun 01 Feb 2004 10:10:51a, "Shawn \"Me\" Hearn" <srhi@comcast.net>
wrote in news:srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com:
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into
custody when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as
a criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for
the security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated
the War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle
East, but by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign
leader invited to the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of
the world and led to the current Intifada which has killed thousands
of Israelis. His refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein
allowed the funding and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden.
it is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal
Clinton submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional
Republicans also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand
intelligence gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton
of wagging the dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted
attacks on Saddam's military sites.
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
The facts don't support you.
Then prove it.
You made the claim. *You* prove it.
--
€
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tally Ho" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 05:02:29 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 1 Feb 2004 7:10:51 -0800, Shawn \Me\ Hearn wrote
(in message <srhi-F15E1B.10105101022004@news-60.giganews.com>):
In article <8912d58d.0401312231.2fd53bc4@posting.google.com>,
noneedtoknow@mail.com (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. He refused to punish
those responsible, even refusing to take Osama bin Laden into custody
when Saudi Arabia offered him. He chose to view terrorism as a
criminal matter even when terrorists declared war on the United
States. His refusal to deal with bin Laden, his refusal to take
Islamic terrorism seriously, his handling of Somalia, his hampering
and gutting of Intelligence agencies and his callous disregard for the
security of our nation allowed the 9/11 attacks and necessitated the
War On Terror. Clinton pledged to bring peace to the Middle East, but
by having Yasser Arafat as the most frequent foreign leader invited to
the White House, he legitimized him in the eyes of the world and led
to the current Intifada which has killed thousands of Israelis. His
refusal to overturn the regime of Saddam Huessein allowed the funding
and training of Islamic terrorists world wide.
Absolutely not true. The main people behind the first WTC attack were
apprehended, tried in a real court (not a military tribunal) and
sentensed and are now in jail for life.
Plus they were a lone group of rogues. They were connected with Al-Queda.
Also not true is the claim that Clinton did nothing about bin Laden. it
is the Republicans in congress who refused to support a proposal Clinton
submitted to them to take out bin Laden. The congressional Republicans
also failed to support Clinton's proposal to expand intelligence
gathering efforts. The Republicans also accused Clinton of wagging the
dog's tail each time Clinton launched targetted attacks on Saddam's
military sites.
When Clinton left office, he warned Bush's people about Bin Laden. They said
Bin Laden wasn't a threat and cut spending to resources that were watching
him.
You Republicans will stop at nothing to foist your lies on people.
I think they are hoping to cover up for their screwups.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Adam H." |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failures |
01 Feb 2004 12:51:34 AM |
|
|
On 31 Jan 2004 22:31:44 -0800, (osprey) wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
Thread drift is one thing. The reason this was posted ONLY to
alt.abortion is....what, precisely?
Oh, yes. It's because Bobby's a bit of a prat.
[snip, pretty irrelevant here]
---
"The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation."
-Pierre Trudeau, 1967
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ray Fischer" |
|
| Title: Re: Miserable Failure |
01 Feb 2004 03:08:32 PM |
|
|
osprey <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
http://truthnews.com/world/2003090067.htm
...Clinton was president during several attacks by Al-Queda and its
affiliates, including the bombing of the World Trade Center, the
attacks on the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers.
The criminals were captured, tried, and are in prison.
Meanwhile Bush has been wasting time, money, and lives attacking Iraq
while bin Laden plans new attacks.
--
Ray Fischer
rfischer@sonic.net
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
