Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Shoes for Journalists
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 16 of 28 (491598)
12-18-2008 5:01 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by Jazzns
12-17-2008 4:49 PM


Jazzns writes:
quote:
The only foreign terrorist attack on US soil in decades happened on his watch.
Ahem. The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. It's why the Clinton Administration was so focused on Al Qaeda: They had attacked us once before.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Jazzns, posted 12-17-2008 4:49 PM Jazzns has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 12-18-2008 6:49 AM Rrhain has not replied
 Message 19 by Jazzns, posted 12-18-2008 11:27 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 17 of 28 (491601)
12-18-2008 6:49 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Rrhain
12-18-2008 5:01 AM


... and promised to try again, which makes Bush (admin) ignoring of AQ before 9/11 and his use of the attack afterward as a political fear totem that much more heinous.
But aren't US embassies considered "US soil" as well?
In any event, this is about shoes (and the Iraq invasion as cause)
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Rrhain, posted 12-18-2008 5:01 AM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 12-18-2008 11:52 AM RAZD has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 18 of 28 (491612)
12-18-2008 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by DevilsAdvocate
12-17-2008 7:10 PM


Re: Unprofessional who?
Actually some of us military members...
Yea of course. When you join the military the president becomes your boss. That obviously produces a different dynamic.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 12-17-2008 7:10 PM DevilsAdvocate has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 19 of 28 (491613)
12-18-2008 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Rrhain
12-18-2008 5:01 AM


My mistake
Your right. I had forgotten about that.
All the more reason we should have been paying attention then.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Rrhain, posted 12-18-2008 5:01 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 20 of 28 (491620)
12-18-2008 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by RAZD
12-18-2008 6:49 AM


Hi RAZD,
... and promised to try again, which makes Bush (admin) ignoring of AQ before 9/11 and his use of the attack afterward as a political fear totem that much more heinous.
I think you may have some facts confused, RAZD. Both the Clinton admin and the Bush admin, by default, are responsible for the delays and lack of info.
TIME MAG CHARGES: BUSH ADMIN 'DELAYED' CLINTON PLAN TO ATTACK AL QAEDA
From Time Mag:
quote:
Draft Presidential Directive to Eliminate al Qaeda
Approved By National Security Principals Sept. 4, 2001 ”Just One Week Before 9/11
----
Plan Developed in Last Days of Clinton Administration, Presented to Bush Administration in January 2001
----
Proposals Were "Everything We’ve Done Since 9/11"
New York - A bold plan for the U.S. to attack al Qaeda was delayed by a Bush administration "policy review process" and was approved just a week before September 11, a TIME special report reveals. The plan, developed in the last days of the Clinton administration, was passed along to the Bush administration in January 2001 by Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and Richard Clarke, a career bureaucrat who had served in the first Bush administration and risen during the Clinton years to become the White House’s point man on terrorism. In the words of a senior Bush administration official, the proposals amounted to "everything we’ve done since 9/11."
TIME’s special report offers the fullest account of how ambitious the plan was, and how the Bush administration delayed the plan.
On Dec. 20, 2000, Clarke presented a strategy paper to Berger and the other national security "principals." But Berger and the principals decided to shelve the plan and let the next administration take it up. With less than a month left in office, they did not think it appropriate to launch a major initiative against Osama bin Laden. "We would be handing [the Bush Administration] a war when they took office on Jan. 20," says a former senior Clinton aide. "That wasn’t going to happen." "If we hadn’t had a transition," says a senior Clinton Administration official, "probably in late October or early November 2000, we would have had [the plan to go on the offensive] as a presidential directive." Now it was up to Rice’s team to consider what Clarke had put together.
Also:
quote:
Plans to capture bin Laden tied up in politics: After the U.S.S. Cole was bombed, the secretive Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, N.C., drew up plans to have Delta Force members swoop into Afghanistan and grab bin Laden. But the warriors were never given the go-ahead; the Clinton Administration did not order an American retaliation for the attack. In fact, despite strong suspicion that bin Laden was behind the attack in Yemen, the CIA and FBI had not officially concluded that he was, and would be unable to do so before Clinton left office. That made it politically impossible for Clinton to strike”especially given the upcoming election and his own lack of credibility on national security. "If we had done anything, say, two weeks before the election, we’d be accused of helping Al Gore," a former senior Clinton aide told TIME.
Now, given that the thread is about shoes, I feel Clinton deserves a size 12 right across the grill too.

"All great truths begin as blasphemies"
"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by RAZD, posted 12-18-2008 6:49 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Jazzns, posted 12-18-2008 12:26 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 22 by RAZD, posted 12-18-2008 8:45 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 23 by Rrhain, posted 12-18-2008 11:30 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 25 by dronestar, posted 12-22-2008 9:12 AM onifre has replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 21 of 28 (491623)
12-18-2008 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by onifre
12-18-2008 11:52 AM


Clinton no angel, but...
I am anything but a Clinton supporter. In fact it can be argued that the current financial mess we are in has roots back to his presidency and his support for the drumbeat of deregulation that has been going on since Regan.
But it is all to convienent, and common among conservatives, to use Clinton as a punching bag for anything negative that happened during the Bush years. Presidential terms are not protected from the actions of their predecessors but the responsibility ultimatly falls upon them for their failures where there is evidence that they could have taken action despite the failings of past presidents.
We now know that W's administration knew about the threat from AQ, knew that they may use planes as bombs, and knew that the WTC and Pentagon were potential targets. Should Clinton have done more while he was prez? Sure. But that does not change the fact that Bush, with the knowledge readily at hand, failed to protect America from attack.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be. --Thomas Jefferson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 12-18-2008 11:52 AM onifre has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 22 of 28 (491647)
12-18-2008 8:45 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by onifre
12-18-2008 11:52 AM


Thanks onifire
quote:
New York - A bold plan for the U.S. to attack al Qaeda was delayed by a Bush administration "policy review process" and was approved just a week before September 11, ...
Curiously, the Bush administration took the attack as coming from Iraq, and refused to consider that AQ was behind it. They were either woefully confused about who was behind it or deliberately misportrayed it.
quote:
After the U.S.S. Cole was bombed, ... the Clinton Administration did not order an American retaliation for the attack. ... "we’d be accused of helping Al Gore," ...
And everyone was talking about "Wag the Dog" at that time, and anything he did would be viewed in that light. That was the reaction to the use of a predator drone to attack OBL by Clinton iirc, but I agree that he should have proceeded anyway - that is what leadership is about.
Now, given that the thread is about shoes, I feel Clinton deserves a size 12 right across the grill too.
And a pair of bedroom slippers for good measure.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 12-18-2008 11:52 AM onifre has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 23 of 28 (491652)
12-18-2008 11:30 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by onifre
12-18-2008 11:52 AM


onifre writes:
quote:
TIME MAG CHARGES: BUSH ADMIN 'DELAYED' CLINTON PLAN TO ATTACK AL QAEDA
Ahem. Freepers? You're using freepers as a source? You can reject everything they say out of hand:
quote:
the Clinton Administration did not order an American retaliation for the attack.
This is simply a lie. The Clinton administration did not deny operations on bin Laden.
Not once.
What was denied were actions on old intelligence that couldn't be trusted. Isn't that what we've been arguing for? Not going to war over sexed-up intelligence?
Need I remind you of the December 1999 Memorandum of Notification authorizing the CIA to use lethal force to capture bin Laden?
And notice the contradiction: The same people complaining about Clinton supposedly not trying to get bin Laden are the same people who claim that the air strike against bin Laden in August of 1998 (that only missed because bin Laden changed his plans at the last minute, leaving the target area literally just a couple hours before the strike) was nothing but a "wag the dog" action because of Lewinsky.
You can't have it both ways. This is why freepers are rejected out of hand.
And note the conflation of time regarding the USS Cole: It happened a month before the election. We didn't know who did it. We still don't because Yemen has stonewalled the investigation. Those complaining about it would seem to be upset that we were not psychic.
Haven't we been complaining about a war that was started on no evidence? And now we're complaining that Clinton didn't start a war because we didn't have any evidence?
You don't get to have it both ways.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 12-18-2008 11:52 AM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Jazzns, posted 12-19-2008 1:02 AM Rrhain has not replied

  
Jazzns
Member (Idle past 3911 days)
Posts: 2657
From: A Better America
Joined: 07-23-2004


Message 24 of 28 (491657)
12-19-2008 1:02 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by Rrhain
12-18-2008 11:30 PM


Freepers?
OMG, I didn't even notice the reference. I didn't click on it mostly because I don't care and am tired of Clinton being an excuse for everything.
But yea, basically it just makes that whole post nothing more than a regurgitation of Clinton bashing to recuse Bush from responsibility.
Same old; wash, rinse, repeat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Rrhain, posted 12-18-2008 11:30 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 25 of 28 (491843)
12-22-2008 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by onifre
12-18-2008 11:52 AM


more shoes please . . .
Onifre writes:
Now, given that the thread is about shoes, I feel Clinton deserves a size 12 right across the grill too.
Absolutely correct Onifre, but I think Clinton should get a Bruno Magli in the nose more for this reason:
After 9/11, the profoundly misinformed and apathetic American public meekly asked "why did the terrorists do such an act". The Bush II administration replied vapidly "because the terrorists hate our freedoms". 90% of Americans believed this childish explanation from the immoral simpleton in office.
However, Bin Laden himself said the three ACTUAL reasons for 9/11 was:
1. US military bases in Saudi Arabia that despoiled the holy land.
2. US support of Israel human rights violations against Palestinians that cause repression, torture and death.
3. The US supported sanctions against Iraq that murdered hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children in the 1990s.
Number 1 is a debatable grievance from Bin Laden. But, number 2 and 3 are legitimate grievances. Clinton enthusiastically supported these horrible crimes. And when America causes horror in the world, sometimes there is blowback. Forget about PREVENTING 9/11, I assert Clinton indirectly CAUSED 9/11. Save some shoes for Reagan and Bush I for supporting the extreme Mujahideen that spawned Bin Laden to begin with. And don't forget Bush II actions. His and probably Obama's administration's (recycled Clintonians) continued war crimes will hopefully not revisit another blowback tragedy onto American soil someday.
regards

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by onifre, posted 12-18-2008 11:52 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by onifre, posted 12-29-2008 3:04 PM dronestar has not replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 26 of 28 (492238)
12-29-2008 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by dronestar
12-22-2008 9:12 AM


Re: more shoes please . . .
90% of Americans believed this childish explanation from the immoral simpleton in office.
Well thats because they got cool flags to put on their cars(pick up trucks) and bumper stickers with "If you don't like it you can leave it" catch phrases that made them feel warm inside.
Plus, Toby "douche-bag" Keith got a number 1 song (on the country charts) from it.
Number 1 is a debatable grievance from Bin Laden.
Debatable only by those unwilling to accept the fact that we have no interest in Saudi Arabia other than greed.
Note to all "gun-happy patriots": I'm not making a case for the support of the attacks, only for Bin Ladens' reason.
Forget about PREVENTING 9/11, I assert Clinton indirectly CAUSED 9/11.
That is considered blasphemy by most of the liberal left, but preach on. Just be cautious, Rrhain lurks about.
Save some shoes for Reagan and Bush I for supporting the extreme Mujahideen that spawned Bin Laden to begin with.
For them I reserve steel toed boots.
His and probably Obama's administration's (recycled Clintonians) continued war crimes will hopefully not revisit another blowback tragedy onto American soil someday.
No! Not the messiah!? You mean to tell me that Obama is just going to continue to support a war crime such as the invasion of Iraq? But...we were told...this can't be...

"All great truths begin as blasphemies"
"I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks
"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by dronestar, posted 12-22-2008 9:12 AM dronestar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by xongsmith, posted 09-15-2009 12:40 PM onifre has not replied

  
dronestar
Member
Posts: 1407
From: usa
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 27 of 28 (524258)
09-15-2009 11:27 AM


Iraqi shoe thrower released
Iraqi shoe thrower released
http://news.yahoo.com/...ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iraq_shoe_thrower
I would like to take a collection up for this brave man. When the entire American corporate-media acted as stenographer/filthy-whore for the white house, he alone stood up and showed the emperor was naked.
Alas, he is a hero not only in the Arab and Muslim worlds.

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 28 of 28 (524268)
09-15-2009 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by onifre
12-29-2008 3:04 PM


Re: more beer please . . .
Debatable only by those unwilling to accept the fact that we have no interest in Saudi Arabia other than greed.
Well i must mention that when i was working in Kendall Square, Cambridge, the People's Republic of Massachusetts, i had occasion to encounter a Prince of Saudi Arabia, at the famous F&T bar during one of my 9 beer lunches. he was very funny & told me some jokes i still tell back to others, to inflict them as well!, ...well maybe i remember only one of them now.

- xongsmith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by onifre, posted 12-29-2008 3:04 PM onifre has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024