07-09-2003 01:59									#61
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov That's not the issue--if you want to assume negligence, go ahead. If so, it still won't absolve the Bush Administration from being just as negligent, perhaps even moreso. However, it is indisputable the intelligence and recommendations were passed on: http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/30/n...ml?pagewanted=1

But Clinton knew of Bin Laden before Bush did. And Clinton was Prez before Bush was, so it was his responsability before it was Bush's. You can't just pass over Clinton and only blame Bush!

Bush did not have any precise intel that he could have acted upon. He did not know the how, when or where. Clinton on the other hand, had 2 perfect opportunities where he knew precisely where Bin Laden was living. He should have acted on those opportunities.

The bottom line is that Clinton was more worried about his political image than about protecting the American people. And as a result, 3,000 Americans paid the price on 9-11.

	07-09-2003 02:06									#62
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat But Clinton knew of Bin Laden before Bush did. And Clinton was Prez before Bush was, so it was his responsability before it was Bush's. You can't just pass over Clinton and only blame Bush! Bush did not have any precise intel that he could have acted upon. He did not know the how, when or where. Clinton on the other hand, had 2 perfect opportunities where he knew precisely where Bin Laden was living. He should have acted on those opportunities. The bottom line is that Clinton was more worried about his political image than about protecting the American people. And as a result, 3,000 Americans paid the price on 9-11.

And which of this is somehow proof that a blowjob was the cause of Clinton's supposed negligence? Dodging the point again. I would also argue that the real distraction to Clinton's presidency was the impeachment push by the Republicans, not the actual hummer. So one could easily assert the Republicans share in the blame for things falling through the cracks prior to the attacks. If they hadn't been so hell-bent on getting the President, he could have been doing his job more effectively instead of wasting his time defending himself against a politically-motivated, partisan impeachment battle.

And whether or not Clinton was negligent first doesn't excuse Bush from being equally negligent after him. Clinton had, among other things, authorized assassinating Bin Laden and had begun implementing increased airport security standards. What did Bush do prior to fight him besides hold meetings and give $100 million plus to the Taliban? If you hold Clinton negligent, Bush becomes just as negligent by default--being the "new guy" isn't an excuse.

	07-09-2003 02:08									#63
	Tired of ads?

Also:

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/worl...ator030624.html

"W A S H I N G T O N, June 24— When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones had recently spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the al Qaeda leader.

But the administration failed to get drones back into the Afghan skies until after the Sept. 11 attacks later that year, current and former U.S. officials say.

Top administration officials discussed the mission to kill bin Laden as late as one week before the suicide attacks on New York and Washington, but they had not yet resolved a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the armed Predators and whether the missiles would be sufficiently lethal, officials told The Associated Press."

Looks like Clinton wasn't the only one missing opportunities.

	07-09-2003 02:16									#64
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Looks like Clinton wasn't the only one missing opportunities.

Again, Clinton knew of the situation and was President before Bush. He bares the blame first. If Clinton had tried to kill or capture Bin Laden, then 9-11 might have been averted.

Even if Bush had succeeded in killing Bin Laden a few months before 9-11, it probably would have been too late to stop the attack. The time to stop the 9-11 attack was under the Clinton Presidency.

	07-09-2003 03:10									#66
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Man, Diplo is really trying (and failing miserably) to pin it all on Clinton...interestingly, when the Missile strike on Afghanistan was called in '98 after the embassy bombings, many accuse Bill of wag the dog at the time..yu, see how sex scandals can stop a prez? After all, having Tom Delay say you are trying to kill Osama just to distract from Monica is a pain in the butt.

	07-09-2003 03:42									#67
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ned And what would we call Deep Throat today?

Probably "Deep Throat: Part XXIV"

	07-09-2003 05:14									#68
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Diplo, under Bush, all investigation by the FBI into the Saudi money --> terror pipeline was quashed. At least under Clinton it existed.

Last edited by chegitz guevara on 07-09-2003 at 05:25

	07-09-2003 05:21									#69
	Support Apolyton

Is that avatar the People's Attack Dog, Che?

Where did you get it?

	07-09-2003 05:22									#70
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Also: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/worl...ator030624.html "W A S H I N G T O N, June 24— When President Bush took office in January 2001, the White House was told that Predator drones had recently spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times and officials were urged to arm the unmanned planes with missiles to kill the al Qaeda leader. But the administration failed to get drones back into the Afghan skies until after the Sept. 11 attacks later that year, current and former U.S. officials say. Top administration officials discussed the mission to kill bin Laden as late as one week before the suicide attacks on New York and Washington, but they had not yet resolved a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the armed Predators and whether the missiles would be sufficiently lethal, officials told The Associated Press." Looks like Clinton wasn't the only one missing opportunities.

Let's see...Taking a small remote control plane designed only for surveillence and fitting it with a weapon system and deploying it to actual operations in only nine months! Boris, you're right! Bush did an excellent job. Thanks for pointing it out to those who are smart enough to read between the lines.

	07-09-2003 05:24									#71
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Oh yeah...Clinton couldn't do this in eight YEARS??? So where does blame really lay??

	07-09-2003 05:25									#72
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Is that avatar the People's Attack Dog, Che?

It's a dingo!

quote: Where did you get it?

DINGOS ATE MY BABY!

	07-09-2003 05:26									#73
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by PLATO Oh yeah...Clinton couldn't do this in eight YEARS??? So where does blame really lay??

And exactly how long have we been using surveilance drones?

	07-09-2003 05:55									#74
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Agathon Is that avatar the People's Attack Dog, Che? It's a dingo! quote: Where did you get it? DINGOS ATE MY BABY!

	07-09-2003 06:13									#75
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by The diplomat But Clinton's "private matter" did prevent him from doing his job. Read the book "Losing Bin Laden". If Clinton had been doing his job instead of getting a blowjob, 9-11 might not have happened!

Right up there with all his enemies in Arkansas who died suddenly and mysteriously.

	07-09-2003 18:49									#76
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Diplo, under Bush, all investigation by the FBI into the Saudi money --> terror pipeline was quashed. At least under Clinton it existed.

Didn't you hear, the Bush administration learned drug users were funding OBL!!!