In article <r_GdnbOwiKuSk-TcRVn-tg@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:

"David Fritzinger" <dfritzinnospam@mac.com> wrote in message
news:dfritzinnospam-761A17.18290821102004@orngca-news02.socal.rr.com...

In article <tpmdnROyS8WS3OXcRVn-gQ@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:

"David Fritzinger" <dfritzin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b82925bb.0410211456.3071ba7a@posting.google.com...

Gactimus <gactimus@xrs.net> wrote in message
news:<1098373498.1flly/iOp2LEPnct3ScsBQ@bubbanews>...

Lars.Traeger@epost.de (Lars Tr?ger) wrote in
news:2efef090.0410200809.382c6bb@posting.google.com:

Jason McNorton <jmcno@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:<MPG.1bdfb71a6b0b9fc6989748@news-40.giganews.com>...

In article <BD9B4337.C302%SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID>,
SNIT@CABLE0NE.NET.INVALID says...

You do realize under whose watch 9/11 happened... right?

You realize it was planned for 3 years? And the gore's nonsense
really
hurt the transition?

I'm not saying anyone was aware of the islamic threat at the
time.
clinton put aside the embassy bombings, first WTC attack, OKC
(which
was likely islamic involved), possibly TWA 800, and the Cole to
make
the situation seem far safer than it was.

You do realize that Shrubya was told that "Bin Laden Determined
to
Strike in U.S."?

Well duh. He was determined to stike in the US ever since the first
Gulf
War.

Well, duh! He was given this warning on August 5, 2001, about a
month
before 9/11. And, he was warned about al Qaeda by Clinton, Richard
Clarke, etc. But, to Bush, building the (non-functional) Star Wars
system was more important.

Gee, I see you are kind of ***** by the pasting you took from our
last conversation.

8^)

Hmm, here is where I start to blast your argument David so be
prepared, I
am
sure that you will follow with insults and curses.

No curses, IIRC, and only one incident of insults. The accusations of
your dishonesty were well deserved.

O.k., Bush was warned. Warned of what specifically?

Are you saying that he was warned of 9/11? Did he know what planes
would
be
hi-jacked and what method would be used?
Did he know the targets of the hi-jackers? Did he know the time?

None of the above.

O.k., then just exactly what was Bush supposed to do?

Listened to Clinton.

Listened to Clarke.

9/11. Now, I am not saying Bush could have stopped 9/11, because no one,
including me, knows if they could.

However, he gave very little thought toward al Qaeda

until it was, um, forced upon him. You can glean that from Richard
Clarke's book.

A bunch of political mumbo jumbo from a disgruntled employee...wow!!!

Too bad everything he said proved to be right.

listen to the White House and Fox.

So tell us what Bush should have been doing. He hadn't even been in
office
for a year yet.

Yet, conservatives are willing to blame Clinton for WTCI,

had been in office for only 5 weeks. What should Bush have done?
Something to show he was fighting terrorism and al Qaeda, instead of
fighting the now defunct Soviet Union.

If you are going to use this argument that Bush was warned, then be
prepared
to dwell deep into this and soon you will find out that
there wasn't much anyone could have done to prevent 9/11. You need to
remember, these men trained and were in the U.S. long before Bush took
office.
So if Clinton knew about Al Qaeda's motives, why didn't he do more to
have
them removed from the U.S.?

And, Clinton didn't know when or where 9/11 would happen either.
However, he did warn Bush that al Qaeda was a major threat. He was
basically ignored.

How the hell do you know if he ignored it? You are listening to some
very
biased information.

Yeah, biased information that says he hardly had any meetings on
terrorism,

any information you can share that he actually did do something?

How do you know it is accurate? How do you know he ignored it? What was
he
supposed to be doing?

Multiple sources say it was accurate.

How do you know it isn't?

I think sometimes you liberals only hear what you want to hear, and
reject
any questioning that may oppose your
arguments.

BWAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAAHAA!!!!

Do you realize the University of Maryland just released a study showing
Bush supporters are totally ignorant of what is actually happening in
the world. For example, 75% of Bush supporters still believe Iraq had
WMD. The reference is here.

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_04/html/new_10_21_04.html
#1

So, don't tell me about people who only hear what they want to hear.

Saying Bush was warned and making this argument that 9/11 could have
been
prevented, if that is what you are saying, is ridiculous

Boy, you are angry. Why is that?

Why would I be angry???

Because your dishonesty was amply demonstrated in our last exchange,
which is why you ran away.

Actually, I've never said that 9/11 could be prevented,

Did you notice the part where I said "if that is what you are saying"?

because, quite

frankly, we don't know.

exactly, we don't know.

However, as I've said before, Bush did rather

ignore the danger of terrorism before it was rather strongly brought to
his attention.

What was he supposed to do? How many threats do you think our
intelligence
gathers on a daily basis?

He should have listened to Clinton,

biggest foreign threat,

"unClinton".

Lets say you are the mayor of New York, and the previous mayor warned
you
that there were going to be murders. And left it at that. Do we
blame
you
for every murder?

Can you say strawman? I knew you could...

Can you say run away? My example fits this perfectly, and you know it.

No,

as usual, it was a dishonest strawman,

expect from you. It is not the same, and if you have a brain in your
head (or a bit of honesty in your soul), you will know it.

outgoing president telling the incoming president the state of the
world, as he saw it,

policy staff, saw them.

it, to their ultimate distress.

Oh, and the talk about the Star Wars...give credit to Reagan. It was
talk
like that that helped push the Soviets into financial ruin. And
personally
I see nothing wrong with researching more into a system that could
knock
out
any incoming missle attack. I don't see why you would have a problem
with
that. Especially when countries that hate the U.S. are working on
having
long range nukes, like North Korea, Iran...which it wouldn't do any
good
because they would cease to even exist if they ever did attempt it.
Regardless, I think this nation should be doing more into looking into
programs that protect us from such threats.

I am against Star Wars because it is a waste of money,

How do you know?

How many billions of dollars have we put into a system that still
doesn't work? That's how I know.

that could well

be spent in better ways to protect the US.

Do you have any better ideas on preventing incoming missles?

How much of a problem are incoming missiles now?

in effect. Missiles get fired, we will know where they came from.

Perhaps it might have had

some use when our enemy was the Soviet Union, but not now.

Believe it or not, the world was safer when we had two superpowers in
some
ways.

I do believe it.

A far more

dangerous possibility would be a bomb (nuclear, biological or chemical)
brought into our cities. And, now Bush is deploying it, even though it
doesn't really work. That is my problem with Star Wars.

So why not continue to research?

Continuing the research is one thing, but Bush is trying to deploy a
non-working (or, to be extremely generous, a barely working) system.

the worst, that gives us a false sense of security, at the best, it
merely wastes money that could be better spent on other things.

BTW, nice attempt to change the subject.

You are the one who brought up starwars!!!