isn't it chilling to think if Gore won in 2000

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by estranged4life

If Gore would've won his own homestate Tennessee, Flor-I-duh would NOT have mattered what-so-ever...He could have let Shrub take Flor-I-Duh and still would have WON the election.

But that was nearly 4 years ago...I really could care less about the 2000 voting SNAFU/FIASCO anymore, If Gore would've won Tennessee then I'm sure no one else would care either.

Brilliant -

[dissention]

Originally Posted by Keith

and sadly, there are many more soldiers who have lost their lives because of Iraq. The media tends to report those who were killed after major combat operations in Iraq have ended.

And, unfortunately, the mainstream media doesn't do their job.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I am not so sure that would have happened. I know it is not popular to think it, but the Clinton/Gore Administration was set on removing SH from power and had exercised military might to make SH comply with the UN resolutions.

Hogwash.

They had a policy for Iraq that stressed regime change from within, not invading and taking over. However, that policy had all but been abandoned until the Bush administration charged in and used it as leverage to invade, even though they didn't tell the American people what the policy really said and when it had last been even looked at by the Clinton administration. Just like the myth that has been perpetuated about John Kerry advocating war on Iraq in '98, the "Clinton was set on removing Saddam" is just another myth. There's nothing to substantiate those claims but his policy of regime change from within, which I submit is 180 degrees different from what Bush and cronies advocated.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Who can say. The Clinton administration of which Gore was No. 2 did not get OBL when they had the chance if the alleged story is to be believed.

I was wondering when the talking points would appear. There is nothing to lend credence to those stories. Next.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Spin - period. There is no concrete evcidence that the US knew OBL was going to fly four airplanes on a suicide mission on the morning of 9/11/01. If there is, let's see it. There were memos saying OBL wanted to use planes as weapons or something like that and that he wanted to attack the US. Well, who did not know that even without those memos - the US gets thousands of threats a day. But, to argue W knew it was going to happen that day at that time and did nothing about it is just not supported by any facts I have ever read and I assert I have read most of them

Ha. That's the story told by Minute Rice, who said during her 9/11 commission testimony that she didn't know her job was national security advisor. That's the story told by Asscroft, who told his staff that he didn't want to hear a peep about bin Laden or terrorist attacks. So much for shaking the trees, eh?

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

I think OBL got away. There is no concrete proof it was anything other than that. So, the rest is just speculation. I mean despite the popular OBL will be "captured" on late oct. of 2004 just in time for the election, but that theory if flawed in that W's reelection would be pretty much guaranteed by "capturing" OBL at anytime Again, to argue that W let OBL get away in Afgan. makes for good conspiracy theory, but there are no facts (and I am talking facts ) to support that. If there were such facts, don't you think MM would have SCREAMED them in F-9/11

Why did he get away, again? Oh, that's right, Bush and Co. gave him a two month running start.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by diamondsnake

Just because you guys like the democrat guys better does not mean that they would have done any better with all this terrorist stuff going on today. I don't have much of an opinion on politics, but it is certainly not a fact that 900 people would not have died in war had there been a different president. For all we know 9,000 people could have died had there been different leadership.

We'll never really know.

Gore was second-in-command in the administration that warned Bush that Al Qaeda was a priority. There's no doubt in my mind that if Gore had been at the wheel, he would've jumped into action the minute that the chatter began in spring of 2001.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Well, I am still interested in knowing what your thoughts are regarding Michael Moore telling people not to re-elect senators who supported the war, but calling for the election of one such senator to President. You left me hanging on that one. That's OK though. If he couldn't answer it, I don't see how anyone else could.

I explained that three times. There's quite a difference between getting rid of Bush and getting rid of seantors. Getting rid of Bush is the priority right now, surely you don't disagree.

[dissention]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The U.S. Cole.

You? Are Losing It.

The Bush administration dropped all investigations into the Cole bombing and practically murdered John Dean because of it.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

Well, I am still interested in knowing what your thoughts are regarding Michael Moore telling people not to re-elect senators who supported the war, but calling for the election of one such senator to President. You left me hanging on that one. That's OK though. If he couldn't answer it, I don't see how anyone else could.

I've answered your question twice. Do you want me to call Michael on the phone?

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The U.S. Cole. :

The alleged Bin Laden offer was made in 1996. The USS Cole wasn't struck until 2000.

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The U.S. embassy in Kenya.

The alleged Bin Laden offer was made in 1996. The Kenya Embassy was strike in 1998.

Also, the 9/11 Commission report directly states there never was any offer to Clinton.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

supports that. The question was would an ARAB country like Saudi Arabia, The Sudan (who curently is screaming for our help mind you),

Yeah, screw those people in Darfur who are living in refugee camps and being ethnically cleansed by their radical Muslim goverment.
No WMD's in Iraq, a dictatorship but a stable one that we had a tight grip on and we invade them because "You tried to kill my daddy" and "let's secure the oil field" and well, "****, I can't find Bin Laden, so look over here, this guy's dangerous, we're going to take him out and we had already planned to do this. Hurry, my poll numbers are dropping again and the sentiment of patriotism is fading from 9/11. They're starting to ask questions."

But Africa? Why the hell should we do anything about Africa? [/sarcasm]

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by paleshadow

I don't mean to speak for Mike, but I think that what he is saying is that there is a tendency for you to change the subject in your replies instead of addressing the topic itself. I seem to recall this being referred to as the "Slippery Slope" in a Reason and Argument class I once took. It's used to take focus off a topic that the person does not want attention drawn to, cannot argue effectively, or that does not support their own point of view. It's not very subtle though. Used car salesman do it a lot.

I try to base my arguments on facts and research. "Mike" responded to this by telling my to go screw myself and telling me that I was being childish. How did your reason and Argument prof. view that?

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

.




Innuendo once again What did these people have to do with the attacks of 9/11? Are they part of Al-Q.?

If you had murdered 3000 people, wouldn't the police want to talk to your friends, family and business associates?

EDITED TO ADD:

Attorney General John Ashcroft told acting FBI director Thomas Pickard that he did not want to hear anything more about terrorist threats. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 265
After Bush was informed of the first plane hitting the World Trade Center, he went ahead with his classroom event. After Bush was informed that the nation was under attack after the second plane hit, Bush stayed in the classroom for nearly seven more minutes, continuing to read with the children. Confirmed, Commission Report at pp. 35, 38-39.
Bush failed to have even one meeting to discuss the threat of terrorism with his head of counterterrorism Richard Clarke. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 201.
Bush failed to react to the August 6, 2001 security briefing, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” Confirmed, Commission Report at pp. 260-262.
142 Saudis, including 24 members of the bin Laden family, were allowed to leave the country after September 13. Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 556, n. 25 [Note that Fahrenheit 9/11 understates the number of Saudis who left.]
Individuals were interviewed by the FBI before being allowed to leave (although the report confirms that most individuals on these flights were not interviewed.) Confirmed, Commission Report at p. 557, n. 28.

[gldstwmn]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The first WTC bombing.

The perps were tried and convicted during Clinton's second term.

[paleshadow]

Originally Posted by dissention

I explained that three times. There's quite a difference between getting rid of Bush and getting rid of seantors. Getting rid of Bush is the priority right now, surely you don't disagree.

Yes, you did thanks again, but again this post wasn't directed at you, unless you are also gldstwmn?