Re: OT-The cellphone hanging video

"J. Carroll" <nohow@haha.cam> wrote in message
news:nGioh.32569$Gr2.10120@newssvr21.news.prodigy. net...
> Gunner wrote:
>> On 7 Jan 2007 09:06:19 -0800, fredfighter@spamcop.net wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Gunner wrote:
>>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...34279766935521
>>>>
>>>> "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
>>>> show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
>>>> biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
>>>> nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
>>>> terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however,
>>>> that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase
>>>> his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep
>>>> trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D,
>>>> NY), Oct 10, 2002
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Checkmate!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gunner
>>>>
>>>
>>> Is this the same Hillary Clinton who invested $1000 in cattle
>>> futures, let her broker (who was later convicted for using rigged
>>> trades to launder money for other people) do all the trading for her
>>> and walked away two years later with $100,000?
>>>
>>> She's your authority?
>>
>>
>> Ayup..the woman the Democrats are turning themselves inside out over
>> because they think she can walk on water.
>>
>> But speaking of democrats..if you dont like that one (and you will
>> note that the operative term "if left unchecked" followed by
>> "checkmate" seems to have gone directly over your head) perhaps you
>> will like these better..or not...snicker...
>>
>
> You and Goober ( by proxy ) are both guilty of negligent homocide by any
> definition. Let me repeat that. NEGLIGENT HOMOCIDE. You know the
> definition
> Gunner and there isn't much of an argument here.
>
> Speak of democrats ad infinitum. You are so full of crap you haven't a
> clue
> and you are guilty by association, another Bush concept, extre
> constitutional.
> Mission accomplished for the retarded.
>
>
> EARLY 2001 - WHITE HOUSE DEPARTS FROM EFFORTS TO TRACK TERRORIST
> MONEY: The new Bush Treasury Department "disapproved of the Clinton
> Administration's approach to money laundering issues, which had been an
> important part of the drive to cut off the money flow to bin Laden."
> Specifically, the Bush Administration opposed Clinton
> Administration-backed efforts by the G-7 and the Organization for
> Economic Cooperation and Development that targeted countries with
> "loose banking regulations" being abused by terrorist financiers.
> Meanwhile, the Bush Administration provided "no funding for the new
> National Terrorist Asset Tracking Center." [Source: The Age of Sacred
> Terror, 2003]
>
> APRIL 30, 2001 - BUSH ADMINISTRATION SAYS BIN LADEN FOCUS WAS
> "MISTAKE": The Bush Administration released the government's annual
> report on terrorism, but unlike previous Administrations, it decided to
> specifically omit an "extensive mention of alleged terrorist mastermind
> Osama bin Laden. A senior State Department official told CNN the U.S.
> government made a mistake in focusing so much energy on bin Laden."
> Similarly, AP reported in 2002 that the Bush Administration's "national
> security leadership met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior
> to the Sept. 11 attacks yet terrorism was the topic during only two of
> those sessions." [Source: CNN, 4/30/01; AP, 6/29/01]
>
>
> The federal government was rapidly increasing its counter-terrorism
> efforts at the time President Bush took office. As the New York Times
> reported, Attorney General Janet Reno ended her tenure as "perhaps the
> strongest advocate" of counterterrorism spending. Similarly, Newsweek
> and the Washington Post reported National Security Adviser Sandy Berger
> was "totally preoccupied" with the prospect of a domestic terror
> attack, telling his replacement that they need to be "spending more
> time on this issue" than on any other. The focus changed dramatically
> when the Bush Administration took office.
>
>
> ADMINISTRATION SHIFTED LAW ENFORCEMENT'S FOCUS OFF OF
> COUNTER-TERRORISM: The New York Times reported that in the lead-up to
> 9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft "said fighting terrorism was a top
> priority of his agency," yet upon entering office, "he identified more
> than a dozen other objectives for greater emphasis within the Justice
> Department before the attacks." On Aug. 9, the Administration
> distributed a strategic plan to the Justice Department highlighting its
> new goals from a list of Clinton Administration goals. The item that
> referred to intelligence and investigation of terrorists was left
> un-highlighted. [Source: NY Times, 2/28/02]
>
>
> ASHCROFT OVERRULED EFFORTS FOCUSED ON COUNTER-TERROR: Newsweek reported
> that "in the spring of 2001, the attorney general had an extraordinary
> confrontation with the then FBI Director Louis Freeh at an annual
> meeting of special agents." The two talked before appearing, and
> Ashcroft laid out his priorities for Freeh: "basically violent crime
> and drugs," recalls one participant. Freeh replied bluntly that those
> were not his priorities, and began to talk about terror and
> counterterrorism. "Ashcroft didn't want to hear about it," says a
> former senior law-enforcement official." [Source: Newsweek, 5/27/02]
>
>
> BUSH ADMINISTRATION TERMINATED PROGRAM THAT TRACKED AL QAEDA: "In the
> months before 9/11, the U.S. Justice Department curtailed a highly
> classified program called 'Catcher's Mitt' to monitor Al Qaeda suspects
> in the United States." [Source: Newsweek, 3/21/04]
>
>
> SO LITTLE CONCERN FOR COUNTER-TERROR THAT A WHITE HOUSE TASK FORCE
> NEVER MET: In January of 2001, the U.S. Government's bipartisan
> Commission on National Security gave the White House a report that
> warned of an attack on the homeland and urged the new Administration to
> implement its specific "recommendations to prevent acts of domestic
> terrorism. The Administration rejected the Commission's report,
> "preferring to put aside the recommendations." Instead, the
> Administration waited until May of 2001 to appoint Vice President
> Cheney to head a task force "to combat terrorist attacks on the United
> States." But according to the Washington Post, neither "Cheney's review
> nor Bush's took place." Meanwhile, Newsweek reported that when senators
> "sent a copy of draft legislation on counterterrorism and homeland
> defense to Cheney's office on July 20," they were told by Cheney's top
> aide "that it might be another six months before he would be able to
> review the material." [Source: Salon, 9/12/04; White House release,
> 5/8/01; Washington Post, 1/20/02; Newsweek, 5/27/02]
>
>
> WHITE HOUSE BEGAN EFFORT TO CUT COUNTER-TERRORISM PROGRAMS: The New
> York Times reported that in its final 2003 budget request, the
> Administration "called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of
> which directly involved counterterrorism...In his Sept. 10 submission
> to the budget office, Ashcroft did not endorse FBI requests for $58
> million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence
> analysts and 54 additional translators. Ashcroft proposed a $65 million
> cut for a program that gives states and localities counterterrorism
> grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and
> training." By comparison, "Under Janet Reno, the department's
> counterterrorism budget increased 13.6% in the fiscal year 1999, 7.1%
> in 2000 and 22.7% in 2001." [Source: NY Times, 2/28/02]
>
>
> ADMINISTRATION LEFT "GAPS" IN MILITARY'S REQUEST FOR COUNTER-TERROR
> FUNDS: The Washington Post reported that in its first budget, the White
> House left "gaps" between "what military commanders said they needed to
> combat terrorists and what they got." Newsweek noted that, among other
> things, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld elected not to re-launch a
> Predator drone that had been tracking bin Laden. When the Senate Armed
> Services Committee tried to fill those gaps, "Rumsfeld said he would
> recommend a veto" on September 9. [Source: Washington Post, 1/20/02;
> Newsweek, 5/27/02; NY Times, 2/28/02]
>
>
> ADMINISTRATION STOPPED PREDATOR FLIGHTS TRACKING AL QAEDA IN
> AFGHANISTAN: AP reported "though Predator drones spotted Osama bin
> Laden as many as three times in late 2000, the Bush administration did
> not fly the unmanned planes over Afghanistan during its first eight
> months." Additionally, "the military successfully tested an armed
> Predator throughout the first half of 2001" but the White House "failed
> to resolve a debate over whether the CIA or Pentagon should operate the
> armed Predators" and the armed Predator never got off the ground before
> 9/11. [Source: AP, 6/25/03]
>
>
> WHILE CUTTING COUNTER-TERROR, THE WHITE HOUSE SENT FUNDING TO THE
> TALIBAN: At the same time the White House was trying to cut
> counter-terrorism funding, it gave "$43 million in drought aid to
> Afghanistan after the Taliban began a campaign against poppy growers."
> As the 5/29/01 edition of Newsday noted, the Taliban rulers of
> Afghanistan "are a decidedly odd choice for an outright gift of $43
> million from the Bush Administration. This is the same government
> against which the United Nation imposes sanctions, at the behest of the
> United States, for refusing to turn over the terrorist mastermind Osama
> bin Laden." [Washington Post, 9/23/01; Newsday, 5/29/01]
>
>
> MAY 2002 - BUSH ADMINISTRATION MOVES TO PREVENT INDEPENDENT INQUIRY
> OF 9/11: Months after 9/11, Vice President Cheney went on Fox News to
> announce the Administration's full opposition to an independent 9/11
> commission. As CBS News noted, the White House "opposed a commission"
> from the start, claiming "it would tie up officials waging the war on
> terror - and endanger U.S. secrets." [Source: Fox News, 5/19/02; CBS,
> 9/20/02]
>
>
> "The new administration seems to be paying no
> attention to the problem of terrorism. What
> they will do is stagger along until there's a
> major incident and then suddenly say, 'Oh my
> God, shouldn't we be organized to deal with
> this?" - Paul Bremer, George W. Bush's future administrator in Iraq, Feb.
> 26, 2001.
>
>
> Trent Lott Questioned by the Observer, London England, January 2001
>
>
> Do you think it is fair that President Clinton is being accused of not
> preventing the attack on the USS Cole?
>
>
> LOTT: Well, in reality that is the way it is in America
> and it is what makes us a great nation. True leaders must
> handle difficult situations or have competent people
> who handle those situations.
> Sources did give information of a general nature to the
> Administration and it is obvious that an attack still occured.
> This is a more 'impeachable' offense than what was brought
> before the Congress.
> Fortunately, George Bush will in just a few days become
> our President.
> I can assure you that such situations will not be
> mishandled by his Administration.
> However general the information might be, the President-elect
> will act with authority to prevent such tragedies.
>
>
> And then there was 9-11-2001
>
>
>
> --
>
> John R. Carroll
> Machining Solution Software, Inc.
> Los Angeles San Francisco
> www.machiningsolution.com
>
The wingers are not interested in the facts.

"ATP*" <waxwingslain@azurepane.com> wrote:
>
>The wingers are not interested in the facts.

You're starting to sound just like Henry.