The Path to 9/11: a sneak preview

[shin]

[skvorisdeadsorta]

I don't think anyone is saying "Go Bush" and quite frankly it is entirely misleading. There is a certain degree of culpability from Clinton's coasting and the problem is not just isolated to being a problem with the Bush administration, though, and I believe everyone will admit this, it has been exacerbated by the current administration's deceipt and failings. What we have is decades of legislation across the board that has been one of demonization concerning Arab states and their nationalism. I think it's time that Clinton should really face the music that the truth just isn't on his side and quite frankly I'm not going to listen to the protests of Sonny Barger, the man who was caught on tape removing files from the National Archives that didn't exactly make Clinton look all that focused concerning Bin Laden and the emerging growth of terrorism. I will admit that there is a "hindsight is 2020" thing that applies to most situations, but I don't think that Clinton get's a free pass concerning 9/11 either.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

[shin]

You're so cool, Trapper Keeper.

[skvorisdeadsorta]

Replying as intended.

[Kensterberg]

Presidents get the credit and blame for what happens on their watch. 9/11 was Dubya's disaster. He was the one with the last, best, and proximal chance to do something to avoid this strike. He was the one who presided over the ignoring of what intelligence was out there, and he's the one who has tried to say "no one imagined this could happen!" after it did, despite the fact that there was documented intelligence predicting exactly this sort of strike.

And when Clinton tried to focus the US' attention on the dangers posed by Arab terrorists, he was accused of trying to draw attention away from the dangers of a President recieving blowjobs in the oval office.

There's plenty of blame to go 'round for the 9/11 attacks, but the vast majority of it goes to the current administration. And more importantly, IMHO, they get 100% of the blame for squandering the immense goodwill which 9/11 engendered throughout the world for the US, and for the quagmire we are now entrenched in throughout the Middle East.

[kmc]

Now quick, Holzman, say something bad about the Democrats, or skvor is gonna think you're a hypocritical dumbass.

[Galactus]

Yeah, Democrats smell bad.

[Kensterberg]

The Dems have let the Bushies walk all over 'em for the last five-plus years. It would have been nice to have had an effective opposition party while the most corrupt administration since U.S. Grant's sold the country down the tubes.

So, we're guilty of having been neglected our obligation to provide a comptent alternative to Rove's band of corporate raiders and radical right-wing ideologues.

[shin]

That Donald/Hannity one cracks me up every time.

But not as much as this:

[phil]

And more importantly, IMHO, they get 100% of the blame for squandering the immense goodwill which 9/11 engendered throughout the world for the US, and for the quagmire we are now entrenched in throughout the Middle East.

And it all started when Junior uttered the infamous phrase :

"You are either with us or with the terrorists" ...

At that exact moment, I turned to Better-Half and said,
"Houston, we have a big fuckin'problem and it ain't the terrorists...!"

[skvorisdeadsorta]

Seriously Shin, you've done it.........if that's all you can come up with, you've proven my point time and time again that you CAN NOT and WILL NOT bring anything to a debate other than low ball graphics and name calling. You're fucking pedantic juvenellia when discussing politics is childish on a good day and quite frankly, at least debating with Chrisfan, no matter how frustrating, is well said and intelligent.

You and kMc will degenerate into name calling or sarcastic posts to show that your rhetorical backpedaling, proving that you can't refute it. Semantics from the Bobsy Twins of pedantic political posting 101, we salute you.

Shin, ignore me on ALL boards from now on. That up there was funny at first, but the joke's worn thin and frankly it's not very friendly and I find it offensive to see my face up there with Bush. I guarentee that I volunteer and do more fighting his policies than the democrats and YOU especially combined. Later.

[skvorisdeadsorta]

From various articles in archived news sites right after 9/11:

Fearing the media's wrath for pursuing yet another "Clinton investigation," congressional probers on both sides of the aisle remain uninterested in grilling ex-FBI Director Louis Freeh about how his agency, which had dubbed terrorism the No. 1 threat to national security in 1998, managed to miss the handwriting on the wall.

Former Attorney General Janet Reno, who makes herself available to reporters several times a week as she campaigns for the Florida governor's seat, has yet to be asked to explain how her Justice Department dropped the ball.

Doris Meissner, who headed up the Immigration and Naturalization Service under Clinton, hasn't been called upon to answer for the virtual open-borders policy that allowed the Sept. 11 hijackers to slip in and out of the U.S. at will.

Those who worked under Tenet, however, disagree - pointing to the restrictive spy recruitment policies ordered by the Clinton White House that went unchallenged by Tenet.

Less than 24 hours after the 9/11 attack, NewsMax executive editor Christopher Ruddy reported on an e-mail exchange he had that night with a former CIA field agent. It was the first report anywhere on what was likely the single most important factor in the agency's inability to predict the attacks.

"Roger," Ruddy's CIA source, had resigned from the agency in disgust because, he said, his bosses had lost interest in obtaining human intelligence, a task the veteran agent knew was key to fighting the war on terrorism.

The CIA in the mid-1990s had implemented a "human rights scrub" policy, he revealed.

"Clinton's anti-intelligence plants implemented a universal 'human rights scrub' of all assets, virtually shutting down operations for six months to a year," Roger told NewsMax.

"This was after something happened in Central America [there was an American woman involved who was the common law wife of a commie who went missing there] that got a lot of bad press for the agency.

"After that, each asset had to be certified as being 'clean for human rights violations.'

"What this did was to put off limits, in effect, terrorists, criminals, and anyone else who would have info on these kinds of people."

Roger told Ruddy that the CIA, even under new leadership, had never recovered from the Clinton administration's "human rights scrub" policy.

Roger's information turned out to be 100 percent on the mark.

One of the most persistent has been Mansour Ijaz, a Pakistani-American investment banker and one-time major Clinton contributor who acted as the White House's unofficial liaison between the U.S. and the government of Sudan during the late 1990s.

Ijaz's story is well known to NewsMax.com readers.

But it's a measure of how thoroughly his remarkable account has been swept under the rug by the prestige press that it's never garnered any headlines.

The one-time Clinton operative says officials in Sudan, where Osama bin Laden had settled after being booted out of Saudi Arabia, offered the U.S. three separate opportunities to take the notorious terrorist out of circulation - and were rebuffed by the White House each time.

"By May of 1996 the Sudanese had decided to get rid of bin Laden because he was becoming a problem there as well," Ijaz explained in May to Fox News Channel's Sean Hannity - one of dozens of interviews he has granted that mainstream reporters have ignored.

"They called the Clinton administration one last time and said, 'If you don't want him to go to Saudi Arabia, we're prepared to hand him over to you guys directly.' And the Clinton administration's response to that was 'We don't have enough legal evidence against him.'"

Ijaz explained that he had turned over reams of files to the Senate Intelligence Committee on his bin Laden negotiations with Sudan, but had not been called to testify under oath.

But committee chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., wasn't particularly interested in Ijaz's story, and even trashed the London Times for covering it last January.

"One thing we've learned is to be a little skeptical of these London-based news accounts," Graham told Fox News. "So I'm not prepared to give them an initial presumption of credibility."

Attacks on Ijaz grew sharper as it became obvious he wasn't going away, with Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri telling one interviewer that he was "a crackpot" who was "lying."

The Clinton administration's ambassador to Sudan, Tim Carney, subsequently corroborated Ijaz's account, confirming to Fox News that "there was an offer to send [bin Laden] to us." He explained that Sudan's offer was rejected because "we did not have an indictment [against bin Laden] at the time."

Dick Morris, the former political consultant widely credited with turning Bill Clinton into the first Democrat to win re-election since FDR, has written column after column for the New York Post describing how his former boss was asleep at the wheel when it came to terrorism.

The former White House political guru revealed, for instance, that when the World Trade Center was bombed by al-Qaeda-connected terrorists in February 1993, his ex-boss never even bothered to visit the site.

"When the bombing happened, he just issued a statement saying we'll fight them and all that. And then he gave it his Saturday radio address," Morris said. "It was never a big priority."

The ex-president gave the same back-of-the-hand treatment to terrorist warnings against U.S. targets in the Mideast, says Morris, who recounted a complaint by Clinton's No. 1 foreign policy troubleshooter, the U.S.'s then-U.N. ambassador.

"In 1996, I got a phone call from Dick Holbrooke," the one-time White House insider revealed earlier this year.

"He said, 'We're getting hard intelligence that terrorists are planning another hit on our guys in Riyadh. I've been trying to get a hold of the president for two weeks about this and we're getting increasing reports about [the threat]."

[skvorisdeadsorta]

I think honestly you guys need to make peace with the fact that you supported a Republican President in the 90s names Bill Clinton. If you really think that there was anything left about him you are sadly mistaken and there is much to blame him for.

I thank you for your time.

[Galactus]

skvorisdeadsorta said:

I think honestly you guys need to make peace with the fact that you supported a Republican President in the 90s names Bill Clinton. If you really think that there was anything left about him you are sadly mistaken and there is much to blame him for.

I thank you for your time.

I'm okay with that. Call him what you want he was a better president than Bush. I haven't really defended him much further then that. I wasn't a huge fan while he was in office but after five with W. I'd love to have the guy back.

[strat-0]

Since Skvor is offended by the unsanctioned use of his image, I have removed it.