Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by KenH, Aug 10, 2005.
hijackers were in 1999...and did nothing:
Bill Clinton ignored the rise of Islamofascism during his administration and on 9/11/2001 about 3,000 people died because of his negligence.
Before 9/11...did anyone do enough?
I thin kwe're jumping the gun. The news story doesn't say that the Clinton Administration knew. The story says that the 9/11 commission wants to know if the Clinton Administration knew the four hijackers were part of an al-Qaida cell.
Was Bill Clinton the president in September of 2000? This is from the article:
Weldon said that in September 2000 Able Danger recommended that its information on the hijackers be given to the FBI "so they could bring that cell in and take out the terrorists." However, Weldon said Pentagon lawyers rejected the recommendation because they said Atta and the others were in the country legally, so information on them could not be shared with law enforcement.
Does the Clinton administration's Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick ring a bell with anyone and her wall of separation in sharing intelligence information?
I say open it all up again from Clinton to Bush
both sides are holding back and I think more
so on the Bush side...anyone that gets a big
bold warning at his ranch and basically does
nothing is more than quilty...oh yeah historical
data..like bush would know that..he likes it
simple and he got it in simple bold letters.
BIN LANDEN INTENDS TO ATTACK IN THE UNITED STATES
Bush: Ho hum..lets see I did a 8 minute mile
yesterday ..I need to get that down another
30 seconds..wow! feeling kind of fat..I better
go work out...and that tree over there! give
me my chainsaw we don't need no stinkin trees
I just knew you'd come running to the defense of your boy Clinton, ASLANSPAL. If this story explodes like it very well might, not even you and Howard Dean together will be able to save your boy Clinton.
We love you, ASLANSPAL, you're a hoot!
Truth of it is - They STILL aren't doing enough! PROTECT OUR BORDERS & DEPORT ILLEGALS!
Clinton: What do you mean those fellars are going to attack the US? (excuse me Monica) Well lets pop in to MacDonalds and have a talk about it (not now Monica). Get me a dozen donuts from Krispy Kreme (NO Monica).
Now, what were we talking about? Do they have an aspirin factory we can bomb?
I was just thinking the same thing.
As much as I dislike Clinton, this seems to be stretching it.
Look at how many people here are up in arms over the Patriot Act... and that after 9/11. The howls from all quarters but especially ours would have been deafening if he had done anything that might be construed as empowering government to gather info on political enemies.
The Patriot Act and attempts to free intelligence gathering on American citizens doesn't worry me all that much right now. The press is liberal and obviously looking for any hint of abuse by Bush. Besides that, conservatives are much more "rule of law" than liberals. Liberals are much more likely in government to presume that the ends justify the means. Therefore a President Hillary worries me. If holding 500 FBI files illegally didn't bother her, imagine what she might do with legalized intelligence gathering on "anti-government" groups... which could very well include pretty mainstream "religious right" groups.
Scott brings up a good point here. Intelligence gathering is not akin to criminal investigating. Information gathered on someone in the course of intelligence gathering does not qualify as probable cause. Any information gathered via intelligence prior to having probable cause cannot be used to charge or detain a person for a crime.
I know it stinks in thie case, but unless we rewrite the Constitution, that's the way it is. I suspect the biggest reason this stinks is due to hindsight, not foresight.
Seems to me the question is: Did the staff of the 9/11 Commission and the Commission itself Coverup for the Clinton Ad. particularly since Jamie Gorelick was on the committee?
The ASP strikes again!