| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Angry Young Man!" |
| Date: |
10 Sep 2006 10:57:04 AM |
| Object: |
ABC TV is Asking For It |
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking parts,
more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production values and
acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic is compelling. But
something strange starts happening around hour three of the miniseries, when
the film none-too-subtly suggests that then-President Clinton was too busy
dropping his trousers and later struggling not to lose his shirt in
impeachment hearings to pay much attention to what was going on in the
world, terrorism-wise. The film shows real news footage of Clinton's denials
of "sexual relations ... with that woman, Monica Lewinsky" in 1998 while
O'Neill and other CIA and FBI agents were desperately scrambling to find Bin
Laden and thwart more attacks.
And then the partisan politics begin to emerge in the script - big time.
According to "The Path," the Clinton administration was too concerned with
such trifles as respecting international laws and treaties, protecting civil
liberties, following diplomatic protocol, displaying cultural sensitivity
and pursuing larger goals (like Mideast peace) to bring down the bad guys.
But the main problem with "The Path" is that the interspersing of real news
footage with dramatized scenes, a technique employed throughout, makes a
hopeless muddle of the line between fact and "dramatization."
Although it claims to be based in part on the 9/11 Commission Report,
writer-producer Nowrasteh, a self-described conservative, said in an
interview with frontpagemag.com that the report goes back only as far as
1998, and that he did his own research for the years 1993 to 1998.
Yet even if there are not outright lies in the film, as some are claiming -
Albright, for one, has called a scene depicting her actions as "false and
defamatory" - there are many omissions. Notably, one of the most famous
images of Sept. 11, President Bush's frozen response while visiting a
Florida classroom when he was told of the attacks, is not depicted.
Bush's fumbling and bumbling is not depicted.
Bush's arrogance is not depicted.
Bush's opportunistic photo op at ground zero is not dipicted.
Hell, if you believe any of this republican drool, you'd think Clinton was
still President and Bush was still Governor of Mexico Del Norte.
The worst part is these lamebrain, shitheaded conservatives want to send out
100,000 copies of this crap to schools.
*Let's do a made up docu-drama called, "George Bush, The Hippy-Dippy Years"
for PBS;
George naked and smoking dope in his dorm with 3 ghetto hookers. George
getting his 3 DUIs. George torturing squirrels in Kennypunkport.
Laura killing her boyfriend in the bathtub with a pickax.
Condi Rice chasing rich white boys in high school.
Cheney dressing up as a female cheerleader at his draft board to get out of
Vietnam.
Rumsfeld sleeping with Saddam.
How about Bush Senior taking money from a Jap Spy to crash his plane into
the USS Yorktown and then bail out?
Rush Limbaugh getting arrested for bringing a boat full of Viagra into
Miami.
Sean Insannity passed out drunk behind St. Patrick's Cathedral with an
alterboy.
Ann Coulter masterbating with O'Reilly's dildoe.
Let's go for it.
.
|
|
| User: "iceman" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 11:30:09 AM |
|
|
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic is
compelling. But something strange starts happening around hour three of
the miniseries, when the film none-too-subtly suggests that then-President
Clinton was too busy dropping his trousers and later struggling not to
lose his shirt in impeachment hearings to pay much attention to what was
going on in the world, terrorism-wise. The film shows real news footage of
Clinton's denials of "sexual relations ... with that woman, Monica
Lewinsky" in 1998 while O'Neill and other CIA and FBI agents were
desperately scrambling to find Bin Laden and thwart more attacks.
And then the partisan politics begin to emerge in the script - big time.
According to "The Path," the Clinton administration was too concerned with
such trifles as respecting international laws and treaties, protecting
civil liberties, following diplomatic protocol, displaying cultural
sensitivity and pursuing larger goals (like Mideast peace) to bring down
the bad guys.
But the main problem with "The Path" is that the interspersing of real
news footage with dramatized scenes, a technique employed throughout,
makes a hopeless muddle of the line between fact and "dramatization."
Although it claims to be based in part on the 9/11 Commission Report,
writer-producer Nowrasteh, a self-described conservative, said in an
interview with frontpagemag.com that the report goes back only as far as
1998, and that he did his own research for the years 1993 to 1998.
Yet even if there are not outright lies in the film, as some are
claiming - Albright, for one, has called a scene depicting her actions as
"false and defamatory" - there are many omissions. Notably, one of the
most famous images of Sept. 11, President Bush's frozen response while
visiting a Florida classroom when he was told of the attacks, is not
depicted.
Bush's fumbling and bumbling is not depicted.
Bush's arrogance is not depicted.
Bush's opportunistic photo op at ground zero is not dipicted.
Hell, if you believe any of this republican drool, you'd think Clinton was
still President and Bush was still Governor of Mexico Del Norte.
The worst part is these lamebrain, shitheaded conservatives want to send
out 100,000 copies of this crap to schools.
*Let's do a made up docu-drama called, "George Bush, The Hippy-Dippy
Years" for PBS;
George naked and smoking dope in his dorm with 3 ghetto hookers. George
getting his 3 DUIs. George torturing squirrels in Kennypunkport.
Laura killing her boyfriend in the bathtub with a pickax.
Condi Rice chasing rich white boys in high school.
Cheney dressing up as a female cheerleader at his draft board to get out
of Vietnam.
Rumsfeld sleeping with Saddam.
How about Bush Senior taking money from a Jap Spy to crash his plane into
the USS Yorktown and then bail out?
Rush Limbaugh getting arrested for bringing a boat full of Viagra into
Miami.
Sean Insannity passed out drunk behind St. Patrick's Cathedral with an
alterboy.
Ann Coulter masterbating with O'Reilly's dildoe.
Let's go for it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "sleeper" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 12:07:22 PM |
|
|
"iceman" <iceman@hotmail.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:9u437.v0s.17.1@news.alt.net:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic
[snip]
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
it is obviously a vehicle for ratings. maybe abc is betting on the
controversy attracting viewers.
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining why
you won't be buying their products.
--
http://www.kexp.org
listener-powered and commercial-free.
.
|
|
|
| User: "2667Dead" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 12:57:58 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:07:22 -0000, sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels>
wrote:
"iceman" <iceman@hotmail.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:9u437.v0s.17.1@news.alt.net:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic
[snip]
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
it is obviously a vehicle for ratings. maybe abc is betting on the
controversy attracting viewers.
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining why
you won't be buying their products.
ABC is presenting it without sponsors.
Funny how these corporations go all socialist when it comes to
supporting the fascist right.
--
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Adam Albright" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 02:49:22 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:57:58 -0700, 2667Dead
<zepp22112667@finestplanet.com> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:07:22 -0000, sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels>
wrote:
"iceman" <iceman@hotmail.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:9u437.v0s.17.1@news.alt.net:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic
[snip]
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
it is obviously a vehicle for ratings. maybe abc is betting on the
controversy attracting viewers.
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining why
you won't be buying their products.
ABC is presenting it without sponsors.
Which means they couldn't sell it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 02:59:15 PM |
|
|
"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:p0r8g2de2qs441e2l3jvood7goe4ppcrgr@4ax.com...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:57:58 -0700, 2667Dead
<zepp22112667@finestplanet.com> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:07:22 -0000, sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels>
wrote:
"iceman" <iceman@hotmail.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:9u437.v0s.17.1@news.alt.net:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic
[snip]
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
it is obviously a vehicle for ratings. maybe abc is betting on the
controversy attracting viewers.
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining
why
you won't be buying their products.
ABC is presenting it without sponsors.
Which means they couldn't sell it.
Or the sponsors bailed out and that's what I'm hearing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "iceman" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
12 Sep 2006 01:04:27 AM |
|
|
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:n8_Mg.46$vJ2.23@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
"Adam Albright" <AA@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:p0r8g2de2qs441e2l3jvood7goe4ppcrgr@4ax.com...
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 10:57:58 -0700, 2667Dead
<zepp22112667@finestplanet.com> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:07:22 -0000, sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels>
wrote:
"iceman" <iceman@hotmail.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:9u437.v0s.17.1@news.alt.net:
"Angry Young Man!" <tossEdwards@bush.net> wrote in message
news:kBWMg.27$ah7.0@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...
The miniseries was a massive undertaking, with close to 250 speaking
parts, more than 300 sets and a budget of $40 million. The production
values and acting skills cannot be faulted, and of course the topic
[snip]
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
it is obviously a vehicle for ratings. maybe abc is betting on the
controversy attracting viewers.
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining
why
you won't be buying their products.
ABC is presenting it without sponsors.
Which means they couldn't sell it.
Or the sponsors bailed out and that's what I'm hearing.
Worse. Bush people paid ABC to come up with a mini-series that blamed 9/11
on Clinton. See Voice of the White House at TBRnews.net.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "sleeper" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
14 Sep 2006 11:56:36 PM |
|
|
Well Done <WellDone@WellHoned.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:pq4eg2dsv5j44e92vkkfk04aavvhnjn8jp@4ax.com:
sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels> wrote:
<snip>
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining
why you won't be buying their products.
Explain why you won't be buying products from ABC 9/11 sponsors.
Go ahead. Spell it out.
according to another poster there were none, but i didn't watch it, so i
wouldn't know.
if i don't agree with content that i see on the tube, i'm free to boycott
whoever the ***** i want.
i don't buy ***** from fox "news" sponsors, either. and yeah, i tune in
from time to time just to see who's paying those assholes.
--
http://www.kexp.org
listener-powered and commercial-free.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde Anyone for tennis, wouldnt that be" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
15 Sep 2006 12:10:51 AM |
|
|
sleeper wrote:
Well Done <WellDone@WellHoned.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:pq4eg2dsv5j44e92vkkfk04aavvhnjn8jp@4ax.com:
sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels> wrote:
<snip>
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough, find
out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters explaining
why you won't be buying their products.
Explain why you won't be buying products from ABC 9/11 sponsors.
Go ahead. Spell it out.
according to another poster there were none, but i didn't watch it, so i
wouldn't know.
if i don't agree with content that i see on the tube, i'm free to boycott
whoever the ***** i want.
i don't buy ***** from fox "news" sponsors, either. and yeah, i tune in
from time to time just to see who's paying those assholes.
Apparently none that fix shift keys.
--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."
+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
.
|
|
|
| User: "sleeper" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
15 Sep 2006 08:25:04 AM |
|
|
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> waxed rhapsodic in
news:450A3363.3A9FC5CC@yahoo.co.uk:
sleeper wrote:
Well Done <WellDone@WellHoned.com> waxed rhapsodic in
news:pq4eg2dsv5j44e92vkkfk04aavvhnjn8jp@4ax.com:
sleeper <moc.sseldnim@repeels> wrote:
<snip>
the best thing to do is not watch it. if you feel strongly enough,
find out which companies are sponsoring it and send them letters
explaining why you won't be buying their products.
Explain why you won't be buying products from ABC 9/11 sponsors.
Go ahead. Spell it out.
according to another poster there were none, but i didn't watch it,
so i wouldn't know.
if i don't agree with content that i see on the tube, i'm free to
boycott whoever the ***** i want.
i don't buy ***** from fox "news" sponsors, either. and yeah, i tune
in from time to time just to see who's paying those assholes.
Apparently none that fix shift keys.
i declared war on capital letters a long time ago.
from where i sit, i'm winning.
--
http://www.kexp.org
listener-powered and commercial-free.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Crowley" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 11:51:18 AM |
|
|
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rusty D. Wyr" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 01:47:17 PM |
|
|
On 10 Sep 2006 09:51:18 -0700, "Tim Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com>
wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
Because it's fucking obvious, you intellectually challenged monkey.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rusty D. Wyr" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 02:05:23 PM |
|
|
On 10 Sep 2006 09:51:18 -0700, "Tim Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com>
wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
It's like the stink in a garbage dump, obviously. You intellectually
challenged keyboard monkey.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thaddeus Stevens" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 01:05:20 PM |
|
|
Tim Crowley wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
ABC News is part of a lager corporation, The Walt Disney Company.
http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/disney.asp
You could, in order to put the issue in perspective, ask yourself some questions about biases
inside of larger corporations that have their laundry lists of needs regularly checked and
worked by a more than friendly Oval Office and Congress.
When corporations have sought and indeed succeeded in excluding the broad masses of people from
public policy decision making in areas of concern such as access to the a air waves themselves
do we in the wider community have any say over how commercial interests essentially tell their
side of things all the time?
http://www.amazon.com/Rich-Media-Poor-Democracy-Communication/dp/1565846346/sr=8-1/qid=1157911339/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-7165573-5606337?ie=UTF8&s=books
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thaddeus Stevens" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 01:19:04 PM |
|
|
Thaddeus Stevens wrote:
Tim Crowley wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
ABC News is part of a lager corporation, The Walt Disney Company.
http://www.cjr.org/tools/owners/disney.asp
You could, in order to put the issue in perspective, ask yourself some
questions about biases inside of larger corporations that have their
laundry lists of needs regularly checked and worked by a more than
friendly Oval Office and Congress.
When corporations have sought and indeed succeeded in excluding the
broad masses of people from public policy decision making in areas of
concern such as access to the a air waves themselves do we in the wider
community have any say over how commercial interests essentially tell
their side of things all the time?
http://www.amazon.com/Rich-Media-Poor-Democracy-Communication/dp/1565846346/sr=8-1/qid=1157911339/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-7165573-5606337?ie=UTF8&s=books
This link exposes how the far right, conservative religious backing behind the production of
Disney/ABC's dog and pony show got what they wanted which was a gross distortion about
responsibility.
Remember- who was at a prime photo op up to 30 some minutes AFTER the plane crashed into the WTC
tower?
Who didn't think he needed to pay attention to national security alerts regarding plane flying
Islamic extremists?
Who was guiding (or at least pretending to guide) the ship of state for the previous nine months?
Oh, that's right--------------- it was the Ghost of Bill Clinton.
http://maxblumenthal.blogspot.com/2006/09/discover-secret-right-wing-network.html
From the above link:
In fact, "The Path to 9/11" is produced and promoted by a well-honed propaganda operation
consisting of a network of little-known right-wingers working from within Hollywood to counter
its supposedly liberal bias. This is the network within the ABC network. Its godfather is far
right activist David Horowitz, who has worked for more than a decade to establish a right-wing
presence in Hollywood and to discredit mainstream film and TV production. On this project, he is
working with a secretive evangelical religious right group founded by The Path to 9/11's
director David Cunningham that proclaims its goal to "transform Hollywood" in line with its
messianic vision.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "zzpat" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 03:15:14 PM |
|
|
Tim Crowley wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
Because it was written by right wing hacks and copies were given to 900
right wingers so they could promote it - which they did.
--
Pat
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/
Articles of Impeachment
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Crowley" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 04:11:07 PM |
|
|
zzpat wrote:
Tim Crowley wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
Because it was written by right wing hacks and copies were given to 900
right wingers so they could promote it - which they did.
So, you haven't seen the film? You really don't know, do you? I
mean, come on people. WATCH the film, THEN give your opinion. Otherwise
you just look dumb.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 04:53:53 PM |
|
|
"Tim Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157922667.078598.21050@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
zzpat wrote:
Tim Crowley wrote:
iceman wrote:
It is obviously a vehicle for propaganda.
Really? And you know this how? I mean, you haven't even seen the
thing. How do you KNOw that it is "obviously" a vehicle for propaganda?
Because it was written by right wing hacks and copies were given to 900
right wingers so they could promote it - which they did.
So, you haven't seen the film? You really don't know, do you? I
mean, come on people. WATCH the film, THEN give your opinion. Otherwise
you just look dumb.
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
.
|
|
|
| User: "zzpat" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 06:51:42 PM |
|
|
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
In fact the first hijacking took place around 8:13 am and it took Bush
until 9:45 for Bush to leave the school (and another 10 minutes before
he reached Air Force One.
In fact I bet there isn't a single Bush supporter who can say what Bush
did on 911 besides hide in caves. He sure as hell didn't make any
command decisions until AFTER the attacks were over.
--
Pat
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/
Articles of Impeachment
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 08:13:03 PM |
|
|
"zzpat" <zzpatrick@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ee288r0dja@enews3.newsguy.com...
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt in
Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
In fact the first hijacking took place around 8:13 am and it took Bush
until 9:45 for Bush to leave the school (and another 10 minutes before he
reached Air Force One.
In fact I bet there isn't a single Bush supporter who can say what Bush
did on 911 besides hide in caves. He sure as hell didn't make any command
decisions until AFTER the attacks were over.
--
Pat
Impeach Bush
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/
Articles of Impeachment
Center for Constitutional Rights
http://zzpat.bravehost.com/april_2006/articles_of_impeachment.html
Bush didn't even know what to do with Iraq after Saddam was captured.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bert Hyman" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 07:14:26 PM |
|
|
In news:ee288r0dja@enews3.newsguy.com zzpat <zzpatrick@gmail.com> wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
Seven minutes!
Well, Robin had taken the Batmobile to Burger King to pick up lunch and he
had to wait.
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde Anyone for tennis, wouldnt that be" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 09:03:25 PM |
|
|
Bert Hyman wrote:
In news:ee288r0dja@enews3.newsguy.com zzpat <zzpatrick@gmail.com> wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
Seven minutes!
Well, Robin had taken the Batmobile to Burger King to pick up lunch and he
had to wait.
***** didn't use the drive thru!
--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."
+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde Anyone for tennis, wouldnt that be" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 09:02:46 PM |
|
|
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
In fact the first hijacking took place around 8:13 am and it took Bush
until 9:45 for Bush to leave the school (and another 10 minutes before
he reached Air Force One.
Because it was a threat situation and they needed to make sure the route
out was secure.
In fact I bet there isn't a single Bush supporter who can say what Bush
did on 911 besides hide in caves. He sure as hell didn't make any
command decisions until AFTER the attacks were over.
He wasn't even in the cities that were attacked. He was a thousand miles
away. What was he supposed to do?
--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."
+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Angry Young Man!" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 09:14:01 PM |
|
|
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4504C151.651ABD06@yahoo.co.uk...
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
Bush could've ordered the second plane shot down before impact with Tower
#2.
The Air National Guard was near the plane.
Only the President could've ordered a shoot down of a commercial jet.
Thousands would have lived.
Bush was preoccupied with a goat story.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde Anyone for tennis, wouldnt that be" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 09:51:43 PM |
|
|
"Angry Young Man!" wrote:
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4504C151.651ABD06@yahoo.co.uk...
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
Bush could've ordered the second plane shot down before impact with Tower
#2.
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
Certainly that information hadn't filtered 1000 mile away to Bush.
The Air National Guard was near the plane.
Only the President could've ordered a shoot down of a commercial jet.
Thousands would have lived.
Bush was preoccupied with a goat story.
You are reinventing history.
--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."
+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Crowley" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
10 Sep 2006 11:12:45 PM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?') wrote:
"Angry Young Man!" wrote:
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4504C151.651ABD06@yahoo.co.uk...
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
Bush could've ordered the second plane shot down before impact with Tower
#2.
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
Certainly that information hadn't filtered 1000 mile away to Bush.
The Air National Guard was near the plane.
Only the President could've ordered a shoot down of a commercial jet.
Thousands would have lived.
Bush was preoccupied with a goat story.
You are reinventing history.
What part do you think he's re-inventing, liar? So, Bonde - do you
still steal from folks on Usenet or did you finally quit?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Crowley" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
11 Sep 2006 08:19:48 AM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?') wrote:
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
What gives you that idea, liar? Plenty of people knew the plane had
been hijacked. Once again, Bonde just makes ***** up off the top of his
pin head.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Moses" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
11 Sep 2006 08:33:05 AM |
|
|
People on the plane knew it. Some called family from the plane.
The president was in Florida reading stories to grade schoolers.
The military and the FAA were slow to figure out what had happened.
Tim Crowley wrote:
Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?') wrote:
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
What gives you that idea, liar? Plenty of people knew the plane had
been hijacked. Once again, Bonde just makes ***** up off the top of his
pin head.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "2667Dead" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
11 Sep 2006 09:54:20 AM |
|
|
On 11 Sep 2006 04:51:43 +0200, "Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis,
wouldn't that be nice?')" <tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
"Angry Young Man!" wrote:
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4504C151.651ABD06@yahoo.co.uk...
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
Bush could've ordered the second plane shot down before impact with Tower
#2.
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
Certainly that information hadn't filtered 1000 mile away to Bush.
So why did Andrew Card tell him America was under attack?
The Air National Guard was near the plane.
Only the President could've ordered a shoot down of a commercial jet.
Thousands would have lived.
Bush was preoccupied with a goat story.
You are reinventing history.
--
Putsch: leading America to asymetric warfare since 2001
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
For the finest in liberal/leftist commentary,
http://www.zeppscommentaries.com
For news feed (free, 10-20 articles a day)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_news
For essays (donations accepted, 2 articles/week)
http://groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/zepps_essays
a.a. #2211 -- Bryan Zepp Jamieson
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Bonde Anyone for tennis, wouldnt that be" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
12 Sep 2006 12:26:30 PM |
|
|
2667Dead wrote:
On 11 Sep 2006 04:51:43 +0200, "Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis,
wouldn't that be nice?')" <tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
"Angry Young Man!" wrote:
"Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?')"
<tributyltinpaint@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4504C151.651ABD06@yahoo.co.uk...
zzpat wrote:
Angry Young Man! wrote:
Did you watch Michael Moore's movies?
Moore didn't have to lie when he pointed out that Bush sat on his butt
in Florida seven long minutes after being told the US was under attack.
What possible difference could it make whether or not Bush jumped up and
ran around like a headless chicken or continued reading as he got
reports? You really think the president could do something at that
point?
Bush could've ordered the second plane shot down before impact with Tower
#2.
No one knew it wasn't an accident until after the second plane hit.
Certainly that information hadn't filtered 1000 mile away to Bush.
So why did Andrew Card tell him America was under attack?
When was that? I think that was after the second plane hit the tower.
--
"Throw me that lipstick, darling, I wanna redo my stigmata."
+-Jennifer Saunders, "Absolutely Fabulous"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim Crowley" |
|
| Title: Re: ABC TV is Asking For It |
12 Sep 2006 12:29:37 PM |
|
|
Bill Bonde ('Anyone for tennis, wouldn't that be nice?') wrote:
I think
No you don't. You lie and you steal, and you repeat what your masters
tell you to think. But you are incapable of thought.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|