9/11: Revealing the Truth, Reclaiming Our Future

[tommie gorman]

If that were true, well the Patriot Act could just bite me!    I like all the other idiots in this country have the right of freedom of speech(flag burners etc...)! 

[paladin]

If my previous story link is not credible enough for you then here is great story from the Washington Post that outlines 10 opportunities that Clinton had to take down bin Laden.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A127-2004Jul20.html

You need to go and reread this article as it said that 6 of the opportunities were on the Bush

administation, not all 10 on Clinton.  The below quote is from that article.  I do agree that Clinton and Bush both screwed up.

The report, to be released publicly tomorrow, includes a list of 10 "operational opportunities" that the government missed to potentially unravel the Sept. 11 plot, said a government official who has read the document. Six of the incidents listed came during the Bush administration and four were during the Clinton years, this official said.

[FiosFiend]

congratulations. you have 20/20 hindsight. wow.

if clinton had taken down bin laden, he would have been called evil, warmongering, criminal, etc. for meddling in other countries affairs, proceeding without due process of the law and and and. now that he decided to play by the rules, he is wrong as well. what a surprise.

it's like law enforcement. we got the man that did it sounds better than we got the man that would have done it, especially when someone says prove it.

It's not 20/20 hind sight.  bin Laden was directly linked to the Embassy bombings in Africa and the USS Coal.  These all occured within the timeline that Clinton would have been considering.  Clinton had the evidence and he had the intelligence.  He knew how dangerous bin Laden was yet he did nothing.  Hind sight has nothing to do with it.

[FiosFiend]

You need to go and reread this article as it said that 6 of the opportunities were on the Bush

administration, not all 10 on Clinton.  The below quote is from that article.  I do agree that Clinton and Bush both screwed up.

The report, to be released publicly tomorrow, includes a list of 10 "operational opportunities" that the government missed to potentially unravel the Sept. 11 plot, said a government official who has read the document. Six of the incidents listed came during the Bush administration and four were during the Clinton years, this official said.

If you read the 9/11 commission report you'll find that the 4 under Clinton where the most significant.  Had any of them been acted on 9/11 probably would not have happened.  The most significant of the 4 under Clinton was a joint CIA/Afghan Tribal plan that involved the capture of bin Laden by Tribals under the guidance of US Special Forces.  This had been in the planning for months and was halted on the eve of execution because the administration thought that  "The risk of civilian casualties was too high".  A report that I read about this claimed that a spy satellite image showed playground equipment in the camp where bin Laden was staying and they (the Clinton administration) where concerned about how it would look if any children got caught up in the raid. 

Another of the Clinton failings occurred when the administration had verifiable intelligence that bin Laden was on a hunting  trip in Afghanistan.  They literally had him in the gun sights of an unmanned Predator packing a Hellfire missile.  That one was called off because one of bin Laden's hunting buddies was a Prince from the UAE. 

All of the missed opportunities after these two are pretty much insignificant.  However, I will agree that Bush has certainly missed opportunities as well.  The terrorist's where largely ignored by Clinton and Bush until 9/11 happened.  At least Bush is dogging them now.

[resopalrabotnick]

USS Cole please.

clinton had info linking jihad joe to the bombing. fine. and i am sure that info was also given to the countries he was suspected to be in. problem is none of them went and nabbed him. for us forces to violate other countries terrain, other allied contries terrain even just to nab some criminal is incredibly unpopular internationally. or why do you think the only us forces chasing druggies in colombia are those few giving support to the local government instead of a battalion of armored cav going after every single drug lord there?

[paladin]

All of the missed opportunities after these two are pretty much insignificant.  However, I will agree that Bush has certainly missed opportunities as well.  The terrorist's where largely ignored by Clinton and Bush until 9/11 happened.  At least Bush is dogging them now.

[j3grizz]

Not taking sides here but if you will notice everything in the USA has to be a cause and effect deal now. Have you ever been driving down the road and see a cross on the side where someone has been killed in a wreck? Well, everyone knows there should have been a red light there and many complaints have been put in. BUT, until someone gets KILLED or something terrible happens this is only when something gets done. Isn't that a shame. I'm sure both parties knew they were dangerous and didn't want to make an unpopular decision. Isn't it a shame as well that instead of doing ther jobs and doing what is right they didn't because of what people may think!!

[resopalrabotnick]

Not taking sides here but if you will notice everything in the USA has to be a cause and effect deal now. Have you ever been driving down the road and see a cross on the side where someone has been killed in a wreck? Well, everyone knows there should have been a red light there and many complaints have been put in. BUT, until someone gets KILLED or something terrible happens this is only when something gets done. Isn't that a shame. I'm sure both parties knew they were dangerous and didn't want to make an unpopular decision. Isn't it a shame as well that instead of doing ther jobs and doing what is right they didn't because of what people may think!!

thank you!

i agree wholeheartedly. the cole and embassy bombings were just 2 more acts overseas by crazed <snip>. before 9/11 noone would have supported a massive undertaking against terrorism. they would have called it imperialism, blood-for-oilism, racism etc. hell even after 9/11 people were making a stink about racial profiling, sueing cops because they pulled over suspicious looking middle eastern folks. should law enforcement rely solely on things like racial profiling? no. but it wasn't a bunch of tourists from sweden that drove those planes into the towers either...

<hr>

edit: racial slur

[tommie gorman]

Personally, I do not think that Hillary Clinton, I mean Bill Clinton( he was the president, right?) had the nads to pull this kind off thing off any way. I also doubt that Gore had them either. Maybe Kerry did, but I think he would have pulled our skirt up and ran, leaving a scared looking U.S.A. for the whole world to see again. And leaving the Iraquies wondering why we bothered again.Any one with any authority at all knows that to have power, you have to show power. Just my thoughts again. 

[Dark06]

u guys still at it give it up already

[tommie gorman]

Do not enter if you don't want to read. Ok.

[cholla]

fred ;I think most of us know about the Patriot Act(the unPatriot act is a better description) but would prefer jail to not having free speech.Following the course of true patriots like Patrick Henry.

I see the topic has went to binLaden & whether Clinton could have had him killed.I think that is certainly possible.I don't have anything good to say about Clinton.

To me I don't think it would have made a difference.If you kill binLaden he is just replaced by the next Middle Eastener in line with about the same religious views.

The same is true for Saddam.Just wait & see what happens to Iraq after the USA spends I think we will leave Billions behind I think the bill will be at least a Trillion in Iraq.

Certainly there aren't any US citizens that need any help with that kind of money.Were all rich you know.For anyone that fails to recognize it that was sarcasm.

I think we will see a new Saddam(by another name) in Iraq soon after the US withdraws.So it will have all been for nothing.I can't prove this but I think time will.

[tommie gorman]

Aren't we still in several foreign countries like S. Korea, maybe since Korean war? Never know, we might keep a base over there. 

[cholla]

tommie gorman ;I haven't checked to see if there is still a US base in S.Korea.I sure wouldn't be suprised to find one.

If it was up to me & it's not likely to be .There would be no US bases in foreign countries .We would dismantle them all & keep the troops here.The one exception would be the naval one in Cuba for obvious reasons.

Then I would get the act that won't let US troops do thing domestically repealed.& use them for basically everything that needed to be done.

Then we would just defend ourselves from our own soil.

Of course I would give the UN the boot & send them where they shoud be Geneva.

I would send most of the foreign embassies packing.Then we would see if the citizens of the USA could be self-sufficient.I think we could.

[tommie gorman]

A young friend of mine just finished a tour about 3 years ago. Army. They want us there so the North doesn't come in. No problems there. He said it just rains, and it's boring. That was before his twin brother and him did another one in Iraq. His brother's first was in Afganistan. Now he is a civilian hired security for something in Iraq.

[FiosFiend]

tommie gorman ;I haven't checked to see if there is still a US base in S.Korea.I sure wouldn't be suprised to find one.

If it was up to me & it's not likely to be .There would be no US bases in foreign countries .We would dismantle them all & keep the troops here.The one exception would be the naval one in Cuba for obvious reasons.

Then I would get the act that won't let US troops do thing domestically repealed.& use them for basically everything that needed to be done.

Then we would just defend ourselves from our own soil.

Of course I would give the UN the boot & send them where they should be Geneva.

I would send most of the foreign embassies packing.Then we would see if the citizens of the USA could be self-sufficient.I think we could.

Cholla I just figured you out.  I feel like an idiot for not seeing this before.  You're an isolationist.  Let's build a wall around the US, starting with the Mexico side and seal ourselves off from the rest of the world.  Someone get Walmart on the phone and tell them to shut down their operations in China we're resigning from the rest of the world.

Seriously, I'm not that far from being an isolationist.  I used to hate Pat Buchanan but allot of the things he has said over the years are starting to come to pass.  And, yes we do have a base in South Korea and Japan as well.

[cholla]

FiosFiend ;Isolationist would be close I have posted the term protectionist describing my general political stand on the USA & other countries.Yeah Walmart would be pretty screwed by what I would like to see ,China too.Because part of the Isolationism would be basically to declare the USA's foreign debts null & void .With a try to collect them if you can.This probably isn't going to please some I would be for annexing Mexico & Canada Dividing them into states. so the whole North American continent would be the USA..Completing the Manifest Destiny Doctrine.Might as well add Cuba too. Before this riles anyone up I don't see this happening so its just my opinion on it.

I would have voted for Pat Buchanan if he had a snowballs chance in hell to have won.

Goes to  the fixed election hard to win from the non fixed side.

All of this is philosophical because there are a group of families with the most money world wide .These control the way that money flows & this controls a lot of politics in the USA & in the rest of the world.They will keep the USA from being an isolationist country.

On the US bases I knew we had one in Japan because of the rape cases there some years ago.I thought there was probably one in S. Korea I just hadn't checked.That kind of makes the N.Korean taking the US Navy ship in their waters for spying kind of ridiculous.It's been awhile on this & I've forgotten all the details.In the long run we got it back.

On the far side :If we (the USA could figure out how to build a Star Trek type  force Field that would protect us from what ever the rest of the to pollute the Earth.)Then I would like to resign & see what the rest did to the Earth.& before it starts the USA is a major polluter in the world.& we are responsible for a lot of it elsewhere because our companies move to countries where they are allowed to pollute.This way they can make goods for the US market cheaper so more proffit. Not to get into the almost slave wages paid.No wonder we can't compete with this in the USA.I don't want to compete but correct.I don't believe we have the right to interfer with other countries directly (unless they attack us).But if we did not allow anything to be imported from countries that pollute in ways that are against the law here & no goods made by labor paid slave wages .That is our right & would go a long way to correct it.This would kind of kill the need for outsourcing

[cholla]

Heres a couple of links on Jonestown the Kool Aid drinkers.I havn't checked the facts but it indicates that some adults as well as children were forced to drink the poison some even shot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown_mass_suicide

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/jonestown/connections_5.html

I googled it & there were 10 pages without looking for more.There are several books so This doesn't even begin to give all the information.How much is true or false is hard to tell.I just thought some might like to read a little about it.

[tommie gorman]

On Jonestown, were there any survivors. Or just a lot of summation from the evidence? Anyone?

[richcornucopia]

I think there were some defectors.

Also this from wikipedia :

Those who tried to hide were tracked down and killed by Jones's armed guards but some survivors did manage to escape into the jungle. Jones's only natural son, Stephan Jones, who happened to be away during the suicide, asserted in an interview that people were probably not coerced but wanted to remain loyal to the group and its ideals and did not want to be seen as traitors.

[cholla]

I did some more Googling on this This link has some survivors.

http://jonestown.sdsu.edu/AboutJonestown/JonestownReport/Volume6/875stacy.htm

One so called survivor at another link actually left before but got a lot of the records from the San Francisco office .Shes written some books.So there may be some profit in her story.

[FallowEarth]

Cholla, I would just like to say the the idea of Canada joining the USA has become closer to a reality with the election of the Conservative Party leader, Stephen Harper, as Prime Minister.  I would also like to say that I did not vote for him.

[tommie gorman]

Not to sound bad, but joining Mexico would benefit them more than us. 

Welfare is bad enough here, and their money system is much than ours. Maybe a republic or territory. 

[Miles_Smiles]

I think maybe Bush and the neo-cons,when they have time from thier nuking Iran plans,will turn thier,minds to South America.I think they will start building a new wall,(like the ex-Berlin one),to keep out all those lefty latins and indiginous peoples.On a more serious note,they will just do what thier kind always do----arm the anti democratic right wingers.Just like they armed the contras and for that matter Bin Laden.Then send in the cia to destabilise thier institutions!

Do you guys know that if oil stays at $50 per barrel and above, Venazuala will have more oil to sell then the Saudi's.They have huge amounts of heavy oil.Prices have to stay high though,because heavy oil isn't viable under $50 per barrel.

[cholla]

tommie gorman ;give this below a Google & read about poor Mexico.

        Mexico's economy is the world's tenth largest.

FallowEarth;I'm sure you hear more Canadian news than I do.I don't look for anything like this to happen any time soon.It should have been done in the 1800's it would have been a lot simpler then.I sure Britain would be against it .I'm betting a lot of Canadians would too.Personally I think it would be good to have all of North America one country but not at the expense of going to war with Canada to do it.I use the word expense  here in a much broader sense than money.

Miles_Smiles ;You mention the heavy oil .this is a theory of mine & I can't support it with actual facts.I think oil can be drilled from every country you just have to go to the right depth.the general population is kept unaware of this .That keeps the money flowing where "The controling Rich "want it to.Diplomatically correct.They get theirs where ever it is.A little conspiracy theory there.