| Author |
Message |
    
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 746
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 9:52 am: | 
|
My posts were meant for cjc's and Scrotis post re - Clinton and Bin Laden.
Your post is directly out of FOX news and MSNBC take on the Bin Laden audio. Instead of pointing out the true enemy they point at Democrats. Hillary is not the face of the party. The party has many many faces - which is why there is no one talking point play book ala republicans. Gore on the other hand is one who most people should take very seriously. His last speech was classic, timeless and totally on point.
speech here
It baffles me that you can so easily dismiss the eloquence and intelligence and ideas behind this speech and yet put weight behind a man who says things like this -
Unbelievable |
juju's petals
Citizen
Username: Jujus_petals
Post Number: 218
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:00 am: |
|
Cheney's response on Fox was also a little disturbing.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060120/ap_on_go_ot/us_al_qaida_tape
I'm not sure who is scarier. Just wish our folks presented a better understanding of the subtilties of diplomacy. Not saying we should negotiate but do we have to sound as nutty as the terrorists, too? I'm surprised Cheney didn't follow his comments with ". . and then we'll grind their bones to make our bread."
Not that I don't want them wiped off the face of the earth . . . but I'm not the vice president. Shouldn't he sound more, well, vice presidential? You know, like when he told a senator from Vermont to perform an impossible task on himself?
|
Smarty Jones
Citizen
Username: Birdstone
Post Number: 186
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:03 am: |
|
Hoops, given that I don't watch Fox, MSNBC, CBS, or any other Entertainment Media "news outlets", I wouldn't have the first clue about what you are talking about.
Second, where did I give any weight behind what Dubbya has to say? You make a lot of assumptions that have no relevance to my post.
Third, did I read you correctly Hoops, in that you find Bin Laden's comments to have "eloquence and intelligence and ideas behind [his] speech"????
|
bettyd
Citizen
Username: Badjtdso
Post Number: 34
Registered: 12-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:25 am: |
|
I wish the man responsible for 9/11 was either dead or behind bars, preferably the former. I am amazed that he is still around four plus years after the attack.
After this tape came out, the Bush Adminisration used it as support for all of its positions: he's on the run, he's weak, not in control anymore on the one hand, and, on the other, be afraid, he's out there, plotting and planning more attacks, therefore we need warrantless wiretaps, permanent enactment of the Patriot Act, etc.
If all of our resources post 9/11 had been directed to Afghanistan and obliterating OBL and Al Qaeda, along with the help of many sympathetic allies, instead of attacking a country which had not attacked us and which had no connection to 9/11 and Al Qaeda, I can't help but believe OBL would now be dead or captured and Al Qaeda would be essentially obliterated. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 393
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:28 am: |
|
Hoops-
The non-Dems do recognized the true enemies. Why do you think we are fighting them? Instead of helping, most Dems stick to partisan politics....
The terrorists are our enemies. Most of the Dems only care about elections (and look how far t heir positions have gotten them).
Need proof?-Joe Libermann (sp)
-SLK |
tjohn
Supporter
Username: Tjohn
Post Number: 3968
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 10:32 am: |
|
Oh, the ultimate silliness - "Most of the Dems only care about elections" as if Republicans don't. I think the trace amounts of civic virtue to be found in Washington, D.C. are fairly even distributed across the parties. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5080
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 11:18 am: |
|
Hoops -- Sudan was trying to get into our good graces. We could have accepted Bin Laden if we recognized him as a true enemy of the state instead of a criminal with all beholden rights in US courts that we afford our citizens. Clinton didn't do that.
I've found on the Web before (but curiously can't now) a Meet the Press interview with Albright where she was asked why the US didn't avail itself of the offer and try to capture/snuff Bin Laden itself. Albright's answer is 'seared in my memory' to quote a famous loser. She said "I can't answer that question."
The Clinton legacy is clear. |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4238
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 12:16 pm: |
|
I just don't understand how, knowing only what we knew in 1999, that would have all worked. Is there a precedent somewhere of us nabbing a foreign national because he was an "enemy of the state" and taking care of him, absent any war crime or other criminal act?
The reason Clinton had a pre-9/11 mindset was perfectly obvious -- he WAS pre-9/11. |
Innisowen
Citizen
Username: Innisowen
Post Number: 1387
Registered: 3-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 12:18 pm: |
|
OK, OK. We all have unsheathed our ideological and political swords.
Yup, we sure have Al Qaeda on its knees over there.
OBL is still free and his whereabouts are unknown.
Al Qaeda cells are becoming more like "franchises," carrying out actions on their own, with OBL's blessing or direction.
Our borders are still open: the administration can't seem to develop a strategy and tactics to secure them.
Domestic railways, ports, major chemical and petrochemical facilities remain a big security concern and therefore a tempting target.
OBL warns us: it's not because Al Qaeda can't breach our security that they haven't attacked yet. They spend years planning before they act. And they seem to have breached the security of our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan an increasing number of times in the past year.
Remind me how fighting the terrorists in Iraq makes sure we don't have to fight them here?
We're waging a war in Iraq based on our assumptions and our style but on their terms.
When they attack us here, it will also be on their terms. They won't be looking to fight us, but to destroy something. There won't be battles, just terrorist attacks. They won't have battalions and divisions going after us in the field. They'll slip in and out or they will die in the attacks, like the 9/11 terrorists.
They'll just set off a bomb, destroy something, wreak havoc, and then disappear.
Tommy Franks, Richie Myers, and their successors will probably have nothing to do when the next attack hits home here, except to help in the clean-up.
For me the Iraq war is merely a distraction to keep our attention glued somewhere else. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 747
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 12:29 pm: |
|
Smarty - not OBL, Gore. I provided his speech in my link. Sorry for confusing you. It is obvious you did not visit the links.
I agree that you think they are all boobs. As Emily Litella says - 'Nevermind'.
|
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5081
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 12:39 pm: |
|
Khobar Towers and African Embassies getting blown up is part of what was 'known' in 1999. |
Dr. Winston O'Boogie
Citizen
Username: Casey
Post Number: 1883
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:04 pm: |
|
but the WP article you posted says the offer was made in '96. the main thrust of the argument seems to be blaming Clinton for not being clairvoyant. |
Smarty Jones
Citizen
Username: Birdstone
Post Number: 188
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:06 pm: |
|
I read both your links....not sure why you insist on making assumptions in all your posts directed at me?
Do you really think that Al Gore has all his marbles? Am I the only one that remembers that the closest we've come to McCarthiasm in recent history, was the Tipper Gore hearings (ie trials)attempting to censor Music? This....from the Democratic Party???? That was the turning point for me, from a life-time of voting Democrat, to voting Republican.
Although I do consider myself a free agent in 2008, but if Al Gore is on the ticket.....FUGHADABOUT IT..... |
Nohero
Supporter
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 4971
Registered: 10-1999
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:09 pm: |
|
"That was the turning point for me, from a life-time of voting Democrat, to voting Republican." Pardon my saying so, but -
From a censorship standpoint, that really turned out well, didn't it? |
GOP Man
Citizen
Username: Headsup
Post Number: 265
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:15 pm: |
|
that's a cheap shot nohero. I assume you're referring to Bush's FCC cracking down on indecency on TV. that's completely different. The PMRC were a bunch of PC busybodies trying to keep artists from exercising their right to free speech. The current FCC on the other hand, is doing the important work of keeping bear breasts off football telecasts. very different, and I think all right thinking people understand that. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10349
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:18 pm: |
|
Didn't know bears had breasts.  |
GOP Man
Citizen
Username: Headsup
Post Number: 266
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:22 pm: |
|
typical lib. can't argue with my points, so he critiques my typos. |
Smarty Jones
Citizen
Username: Birdstone
Post Number: 189
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:28 pm: |
|
Nohero, probably not the thread to discuss this, but I don't see your point. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 748
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:31 pm: |
|
Smarty - I made no assumptions. You asked me if I was talking about OBL when clearly the comment I made was about Gore. I pointed to my post and where I posted his speech. If you did actually look at the link sequentially then you would not be confused about what I was originally discussing.
|
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10350
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:32 pm: |
|
That was a typo? |
mrmaplewood
Citizen
Username: Mrmaplewood
Post Number: 286
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:38 pm: |
|
A lude one at that. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 749
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:45 pm: |
|
The Bears havent been to the superbowl since 1985. I guess the NFL is doing a better job then the FCC. |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 1443
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:51 pm: |
|
Why do you guys force me to post this stuff.
 |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 2990
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 1:52 pm: |
|
I've gotta chime in to say that my feelings on the OBL tape are for the most part limited to what Guy said: when a dude offers you a truce, it's probably because you're kicking his butt.
Yes, we should have gotten him a long time ago, but I think what's more relevant and interesting right now is the weakness his offer of a truce implies. Perhaps it's a purely calculated chess move of some kind?
Also, I think Tipper was right that this nation's moms and dads need help from the government in shielding our children from the perils of bear breasts. Just thinking about 'em gives me the heebie-jeebies. |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5082
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:05 pm: |
|
Clinton his "war" on Al Qaeda began as far back as 1993, and it's 1999 before Clinton lobs a bomb at Osama. His first clue was the 1993 WTC bombings, after that he had plots that were foiled before Osama started scoring very deadly hits after 1996 and at some point it turned from being a law enforcement issue. Clinton decides after Khobar and African embassies that we're off that law enforcement kick and begins lobbing cruise missiles I guess. |
Hoops
Citizen
Username: Hoops
Post Number: 750
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:09 pm: |
|
Well lets continue to rehash 6 year old prior administration issues. The question is since he did begin lobbing cruise missiles in 1999 and since Bush took over in 2000, then why did Bush ignore the problem? |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5083
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:11 pm: |
|
 |
Garcia
Citizen
Username: Photojournalist
Post Number: 27
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:14 pm: |
|
bush was golfing, in between meeting with jack abramoff and taking his money.. |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10351
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:22 pm: |
|
One of the more interesting aspects of all this is the Cole attack that happened just before the elections on October 12, 2000. Bush took office just over three months later and could have taken action at that time if terrorism was really on his radar. He didn't.
Cjc and others will say that Clinton should have invaded Yemen or taken some other forceful action. However, given the Presidential election less than a month away I can hear the reaction from the GOP, basically "he did it for political gain and to help Gore" "Foul, foul, foul!!!!"
|
jeffl
Supporter
Username: Jeffl
Post Number: 1532
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 2:58 pm: |
|
I don't get the "We must really have him on the ropes. He's trying to negotiate from a weak position. He must know that we've got the upper hand" argument.
Does anyone have any doubt that a weak OBL with a weak organization can still cause the worst damage ever to be inflicted on the US? When you have 100s of young men and women willing to suicide for their cause and the technology for biological weapons and explosives is readily available and it's impossible to screen these individuals and devices from coming across our borders...it wouldn't take much strength.
9/11 took how many terrorists, some box cutters and a few flying classes to kill 3,000 people? It didn't take wealth (which he has) or sophisticated weaponry or a complex network.
I just think it's foolish to think that we have him on the ropes in any way. A wounded animal is probably more dangerous. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 395
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:17 pm: |
|
ENOUGH ALREADY!!!!! 
In short, alot more could of have been done between past and present presidential administrations to deal with terrorism but obviously nothing was. The 911 CR made this clear.
The question is what do we do now?
Bush took it head on. Yes, mistakes were made but at least he is doing something, unlike the majority of the Dems/left and even some Republicans who have alot to complain about and be "outraged" over but offer no viable solutions.
Well, if you have a better idea on how to deal with this new threat lets hear it....or shutup...
OBL is hurting and he knows it.... |
Garcia
Citizen
Username: Photojournalist
Post Number: 28
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:24 pm: |
|
here's a viable solution: kill bin laden. why hasn't our president done this? it doesn't even seem like bush is trying anymore. if bush was a real man and a real president obl would be dead for years. |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 399
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:34 pm: |
|
I agree Garcia, but did I miss the memo that we stopped hunting for him? Ever heard of "mutltitasking?" I do recall many saying that it wouldn't really matter if we got OBL anyways since "thousands" will take his place anyways. Doesn't it matter that we have basically crushed the entire Al Qaeda network, taking alot of top losers out?
I am sorry if you don't see Bush as a "real man" and am curious how you define one as such. But hopefully he will notify you first when the OBL is taken out!  |
cjc
Citizen
Username: Cjc
Post Number: 5084
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:35 pm: |
|
You gotta be kidding me, right? He doesn't even seem to be trying anymore? What do you think the strike in Pakistan was all about -- not trying? If anything, Bush would love to hold up Bin Laden's head at the least for the political bump it would give him.
By HANS GREIMEL
Associated Press Writer
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- One is believed to be a chemical
weapons expert, another allegedly plotted assassinations. A third
planned attacks targeting U.S. troops, while a son-in-law
publicized their exploits in the name of al-Qaida and recruited new
militants.
Now this top group is believed to have been wiped out by a U.S.
missile strike. If true, it's far from a death blow to al-Qaida,
but analysts say it could weaken the terror group's operations in
Afghanistan, which has seen an alarming rise in suicide attacks.
The strike apparently missed al-Qaida's second-in-command, Ayman
al-Zawahri. And an audiotape aired Thursday, the first public
communication from Osama bin Laden in over a year, suggests the
terror network's top leaders are alive.
But the possible demise of four top lieutenants reported by
Pakistani officials would rob al-Qaida of people holding the reins
to daily operations.
"It's a very significant blow to al-Qaida," said Rohan
Gunaratna, a terrorism expert at the Institute of Defense and
Strategic Studies in Singapore. "These are very experienced
leaders and to replace them in the short term will be very
difficult."
The Jan. 13 attack on an Islamic holiday gathering in Damadola
killed 13 villagers in the Pakistani hamlet near the Afghan border,
and possibly four or five foreign militants whose bodies were
reportedly spirited away by sympathizers.
None of the militants' bodies has been traced, but Pakistani
officials say they likely included Midhat Mursi al-Sayid Umar, an
al-Qaida explosives expert with a $5 million bounty on his head.
He allegedly tested chemical weapons on dogs and trained
hundreds of fighters at a terror camp in Afghanistan before the
fall of the Taliban in late 2001. Terrorism experts believe that
among his students were the suicide bombers who killed 17 U.S.
sailors on the USS Cole in 2000.
Another likely victim is Abdul Rehman al-Maghribi, a Moroccan
believed to be al-Zawahri's son-in-law, who acted as a PR man for
the terror group, distributing CDs and videos to publicize its
exploits and attract new followers.
But the biggest quarry could be Khalid Habib, al-Qaida's
operations chief along the Afghan-Pakistan border -- from where
militants can launch attacks on U.S. forces and Afghan government
targets. Pakistani officials also accuse him of planning two
assassination attempts on Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.
"You can say he's the No. 3 leader," Gunaratna said. "As the
chief operations officer, he decides who gets hit and when."
Violence in Afghanistan's south and east spiked last year,
killing about 1,600 people, including a surge of at least 20
suicide attacks in less than four months -- a change of tactics by
the militants, who may be mimicking comrades in Iraq.
Afghanistan's Defense Ministry spokesman, Gen. Mohammed Zahir
Azimi, said it was too early to tell what effect the missile strike
would have on the insurgency in Afghanistan.
But Assadullah Wafa, governor of Afghanistan's Kunar region
bordering the area around Damadola, said the attack would seriously
damage morale.
"I can't imagine there will be any retaliatory strikes," he
said. "They will regroup and then keep a low profile to make sure
they're not hit again."
Based in Wafa's home province is another suspected casualty of
the attack, Abu Obaidah al-Masri. He is believed to be in charge of
planning attacks on U.S.-led coalition forces in the area, which
Pakistan says are forbidden from crossing the border in pursuit of
militants.
Talat Masood, a retired Pakistani general, said the loss of four
top operatives would keep al-Qaida on the defensive in Afghanistan
and away from the planning board.
"They have fewer and fewer hiding places," Masood said.
"People should be more hesitant to give them sanctuary."
But the attack has strained Washington's ties with Pakistan, a
key ally in the war on terror. Pakistan has caught over 700
al-Qaida suspects in the past four years, including Khalid Shaikh
Mohammed, alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks in the United
States.
Thousands of Pakistanis have taken to the streets to protest the
attack, including more than 1,000 in the northwestern city of
Peshawar on Thursday. They denounced the United States and called
for the resignation of Musharraf, accusing him of being an American
puppet. More rallies were planned Friday.
"Pakistan should not fight against al-Qaida because this is
America's war," said Qazi Hussain Ahmed, head of an anti-U.S.
religious alliance.
But that anger may cool with confirmation that al-Qaida leaders
actually were at the blast site and not just villagers.
"It shows that U.S. intelligence might not have been so bad
after all," said Ralph Cossa, president of the Pacific Forum think
tank. "But I don't think we can fool ourselves into thinking this
is a death blow. Al-Qaida's a snake with many heads."
The war on terror has forced al-Qaida to decentralize, experts
say. Isolated on the remote Afghan-Pakistan border, bin Laden and
al-Zawahri remain powerful symbols for followers but are probably
unable to direct operations around the world.
Masood predicted the U.S.-led coalition would step up military
actions in the region to keep the pressure on al-Qaida, regardless
of public opposition in Pakistan.
"They will not be deterred by negative fallout," he said.
"They think it's just collateral damage."
Should be easy to get one man, or at least find him. Where's Jimmy Hoffa? We don't know because no one tried to find out, I guess. |
Garcia
Citizen
Username: Photojournalist
Post Number: 29
Registered: 3-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:39 pm: |
|
getting obl would be huge psychological victory for us and a huge psychological defeat for them. the whole world got the memo when bush simultaneously said (reprinted above) that he doesn't think about obl much anymore and then shifted all our resources into iraq. not sure how much clearer it could have been that america gave up the hunt. bush sucks.a real cowboy would have done it himself. |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 1444
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:43 pm: |
|
"he doesn't think about obl much anymore and then shifted all our resources into iraq. not sure how much clearer it could have been that america gave up the hunt. bush sucks.a real cowboy would have done it himself."
I think Robert Livingston is back . |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 401
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:55 pm: |
|
I agree, but listen Garcia, if I am a great sworsdmen and I end up slicing off the one arm and both legs of my enemy, also a swordsmen, I wouldn't really worry too much anymore if he is a threat and begin setting my sights on his minions... |
Guy
Supporter
Username: Vandalay
Post Number: 1445
Registered: 8-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 3:58 pm: |
|
Scrotis thanks for the segue way
 |
Scrotis Lo Knows
Citizen
Username: Scrotisloknows
Post Number: 402
Registered: 10-2005
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 4:18 pm: |
|
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
tom
Citizen
Username: Tom
Post Number: 4239
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 4:37 pm: |
|
two countries? Are we still beating that Osama-in-Iraq mule?
Sheesh. Don't you people ever learn anything? |
Dave
Supporter
Username: Dave
Post Number: 8451
Registered: 4-1997
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 4:38 pm: |
|
Let's ask a real Python, shall we?
http://www.pointrichmond.com/montypythonbush.htm
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=40&ItemID=7740 |
Bob K
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 10353
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 6:14 pm: |
|
Cjc, Jimmy is under the west goal post at Giant Stadium. Geesh, everybody know that. Where have you been boy? |
mamatamu
Citizen
Username: Mamatamu
Post Number: 110
Registered: 7-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 8:35 pm: |
|
Hoops,
thanks for that link
The quotes were really disturbing.
like this one:
10. "I just want you to know that, when we talk about war, we're really talking about peace." —Washington, D.C. June 18, 2002
and
That old "we don't negotiate with terrorist" line is hollow but catchy.
baffling?
yes |
ffof
Citizen
Username: Ffof
Post Number: 4387
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 21, 2006 - 7:42 am: |
|
Bring 'em on. |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page