Clinton officials rip ABC’s ‘The Path to 9/11’ - Page 2

estranged4life · #16 09-08-2006, 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Sorry my friend....where TIME once stood for excellence in journalism, now it is just a space taker in the collective column of news.......

maybe that is why a new (12 week) subscription can be bought for $5

irishgrl · #17 09-08-2006, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by estranged4life

maybe that is why a new (12 week) subscription can be bought for $5

Congrats~ you get the GOLD STAR~~

estranged4life · #18 09-08-2006, 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl

Congrats~ you get the GOLD STAR~~

I wouldnt pay for another magazine (ie-Entertainment Weekly) that I wouldnt want to read...TIME isnt worth the $5 or the Gold Star.

desertangel · #19 09-08-2006, 02:29 AM

loosechange911.com is another one.

In 1993 or 94, someone gave me a copy of a right wing newsletter that came out of Texas. An article stated Clinton's administration was going to methodically remove our rights to freedom and privacy under the palpable guise of being in the interest of national and world safety. Talk about a spin... AND a 9/11 conspiracy! Truly frightening.

irishgrl · #20 09-08-2006, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by desertangel

loosechange911.com is another one.

In 1993 or 94, someone gave me a copy of a right wing newsletter that came out of Texas. An article stated Clinton's administration was going to methodically remove our rights to freedom and privacy under the palpable guise of being in the interest of national and world safety. Talk about a spin... AND a 9/11 conspiracy! Truly frightening.

doncha love how the truth just SMEARS all their faces with egg?

SuzeQuze · #21 09-08-2006, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl

doncha love how the truth just SMEARS all their faces with egg?

Yes, but it shocks me that they just let it dry there and pretend it didn't. Although I'm learning not to be so shocked because these people don't believe in "reality" like most people do, they think they create reality and then tell people what it is.

strandinthewind · #22 09-08-2006, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

That is not relevent to the fabrication that he had the opportunity to get Bin Laden and refused.

That is not a complete fabrication

He had many opportunities - some I think we will never know about.

The man did not walk on water

SuzeQuze · #23 09-08-2006, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

That is not a complete fabrication

He had many opportunities - some I think we will never know about.

The man did not walk on water

I never said he walked on water. How do you know he had many opportunities?

strandinthewind · #24 09-08-2006, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

I never said he walked on water. How do you know he had many opportunities?

Well, we were attacked how many times - and successfully at that. I mean if you're gonna fault W for 9/11 - then Clinton must be faulted as well. Certainly there were warning about those attacks

And - Clinton sent more than one missle to get OBL - but missed. That sucks.

SuzeQuze · #25 09-08-2006, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, we were attacked how many times - and successfully at that. I mean if you're gonna fault W for 9/11 - then Clinton must be faulted as well. Certainly there were warning about those attacks

And - Clinton sent more than one missle to get OBL - but missed. That sucks.

Were all of those attacks by Osama? Also, Clinton never said "I don't know where he is, it's not that important, it's not our priority." The fact is 9/11 is a separate attack and it occurred on Bush's watch, not Clinton's. To blame him for the wild incompetence of the current administration is misleading. He was not perfect and made mistakes. However, he told this administration on his way out that Osama and terrorism should be their number one priority in defense and they ignored him.

strandinthewind · #26 09-08-2006, 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SuzeQuze

Were all of those attacks by Osama? Also, Clinton never said "I don't know where he is, it's not that important, it's not our priority." The fact is 9/11 is a separate attack and it occurred on Bush's watch, not Clinton's. To blame him for the wild incompetence of the current administration is misleading. He was not perfect and made mistakes. However, he told this administration on his way out that Osama and terrorism should be their number one priority in defense and they ignored him.

Actually, your inability to assign any blame to Clinton for anything is what I am talking about. I am not talking about W, who certainly is a horror.

irishgrl · #27 09-08-2006, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Actually, your inability to assign any blame to Clinton for anything is what I am talking about. I am not talking about W, who certainly is a horror.

but the man responsible for bombing the WTC the first time WAS caught. On Clinton's watch.

strandinthewind · #28 09-08-2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irishgrl

but the man responsible for bombing the WTC the first time WAS caught. On Clinton's watch.

One of like seven?

In other words, we were attacked elsewhere and they were not caught. Them's the facts no matter how you look at them.

SuzeQuze · #29 09-08-2006, 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Actually, your inability to assign any blame to Clinton for anything is what I am talking about. I am not talking about W, who certainly is a horror.

You're making an assumption. And why do you have to make it personal? I'm just talking about facts. And 9/11 happened on Bush's watch, period!

irishgrl · #30 09-08-2006, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

One of like seven?

In other words, we were attacked elsewhere and they were not caught. Them's the facts no matter how you look at them.

I could probably go dig up WAAAAAAAY more than ONE time Clinton caught or fought terrorists. Why do you always have this knee jerk reaction to smear Clinton every chance you get? You are as bad as the Far Right Wackos where he's concerned