The BOZOs in Charge are responsible for 911 and all the death

They keep fanning themselves that they are winning the war on terror!

They keep trying their best to blame Clinton on their mess. What is the natter with these folks? I guess the term best to decribe them is the buck stops over there.

The conservatives are to blame for 911 and ALL the deaths that occurred as a result of their national security failure. Just look what the wingnuts are responsible for, the republican party is 100 percent responsible for the death of 2900+ people who gave their lives in NYC because they were more concerned over which way he hung and where the stains went and what type of cigars he used than the security of this great nation.

The terrorists must've been laughing their heads off. They knew all to well that nobody but Clinton's people were paying attention to them and every time he did something, the Repubs screamed Wag the Dog and accused him of just trying to distract from their ceaseless investigations and nightly RW talk shows, talking about his sex life.

They have to be smarter than that (our godly selected administration that is), or are they? Do they really think the American people are that fricking stupid? (sometimes I really wonder knowing all too well that some folks are watching FOX news and gurgling and burping then regurgitating the right wing mantra that is so common from the likes of Ann Coulter and her RW friends and talking heads). The enemy we face today is not the enemy that attacked us on 9-11. The threat is more broadly dispersed and more internationally embedded.

Al-Qaeda has historically taken its time planning the spectacular simultaneous attacks that have become its calling card, spending five years planning the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa and close to three years preparing for 911. Another attack on U.S. soil may already be in the works. These people have a huge amount of patience and time is on their side.

Now, with the present administration jumping up and down and refusing to take responsibility, they are in essnce opening this nation up for yet another attack that may dwarf the attack of 911 that they are soley reponsible for.

Its time to put the real adults in charge.............now is the time to bring back honesty and real integrity to the presidency and this great nation.

3000 alone during 9/11 under *'s watch.

* and his thugs are all sociopaths and a pathological liars.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:eyes:

I guess I'm toast

What a beauty. That's two beauties I've seen here today.

:-)

are saying very WRONGLY that CLinton didn't go anything. Hello? The people responsible were arrested and are in jail. Hello again? After capturing Yosuf, the Clinton admin got his computer and they were the FIRST to find out the names OBL and al Qaeda! Before 1993 WTC bombing, no adminstration even knew they existed.

And to really "rub the salt into the RW's wound," Clinton wanted to set up some type of Terrorism Dept. and all the Repugs said NO!

Tom Delay was the ring-leader.

These present thugs lied through their teeth and the truth will come out.

Just why the hell are we in Iraq? What "freedom" are we defending?
Is the world safer? Read the news...it's more dangerous than ever for the idiot in charge to go off on a tangent in Iraq when they should have kept the troops in Afghanistan and tried to get OBL. Meanwhile, all that wasted time and we have a bunch of NEW terrorists running around. Sure, we are much safer now. <smirk>

Saw your other posts, troll-boi.

This post is very stupid.If Al-Qaeda took 5 years to plan attacks who was prez most of the time before 9-11? The pubes can take your logic and cream you with it!! A little more thought please.

You kinda missed the point of where the RW'ers were screaming wag the dog every single time Clinton attempted to do anything. Did you somehow forget that very important fact? Remember, this happened on Bush's watch, not Clintons. The planning fopr 911 could have been done anywhere. You don't happen to believe for one minute these Al Queda folks got up one morning and decided, hey, lets fly some airplanes into some buildings just for fun do you? It took planning, and years of it, but keep in mind, it happened on Dumbyas watch, and he ignored the warnings that were given to him.

Saying this happened on Bush's watch will not cut it with the electorate. The pubes blaming it on Clinton likewise will not fly as far as getting votes. I think Clark and his shananigans will be forgotten in a few weeks (if not days). This is the wrong road to the whitehouse. Dean had it right with his positive message about why we should win and not why they should lose. I don't make many posts because this line of thought does not seem to be represented on this board.

it has been crushed by Clarke's book, corroborated by former Secretary Paul O'Neill, and verified by the intelligence agencies.

Criticism of the Bush terrorism record hits as the heart of his campaign message. He can't run on his record-this is the nail in his coffin.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

O'Neill and Clarke have not been discredited, except by those right-wing rags that are the equivalent of Pravda during the Soviet Union.

I LOVE debate, but you have to put your money where your mouth is.

Matter of fact Frist has already backed down from his slanderous bullshit about Clarke.

What's your point again?

The man has backed out, he has....???

Frist said in a speech from the Senate floor, alleging that Clarke said in 2002 that the Bush administration actively sought to address the threat posed by al-Qaida before the attacks.

Frist later retreated from directly accusing Clarke of perjury, telling reporters that he personally had no knowledge that there were any discrepancies between Clarke’s two appearances. But he said, “Until you have him under oath both times, you don’t know.”

A few hours after accusing Clarke of perjury, he admits that he has no idea -- not just no idea whether he perjured himself, which is a fairly technical question, but no idea whether there were any inconsistencies at all.

voice when she is lying.

Condoleezza Rice's Credibility Gap

A point-by-point analysis of how one of America's top national security officials has a severe problem with the truth

March 26, 2004
Download: DOC, RTF, PDF

Pre-9/11 Intelligence

CLAIM: "I don't think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile." – National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, 5/16/02
FACT: On August 6, 2001, the President personally "received a one-and-a-half page briefing advising him that Osama bin Laden was capable of a major strike against the US, and that the plot could include the hijacking of an American airplane." In July 2001, the Administration was also told that terrorists had explored using airplanes as missiles.
CLAIM: In May 2002, Rice held a press conference to defend the Administration from new revelations that the President had been explicitly warned about an al Qaeda threat to airlines in August 2001. She "suggested that Bush had requested the briefing because of his keen concern about elevated terrorist threat levels that summer."
FACT: According to the CIA, the briefing "was not requested by President Bush." As commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste disclosed, "the CIA informed the panel that the author of the briefing does not recall such a request from Bush and that the idea to compile the briefing came from within the CIA."

ALL SOURCED!

http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=40520&printmode=1

...we'll lower ourselves to have a discussion with you.

"O'Neil ran from it"?? Right. He actually got so frustrated with the NeoCon Junta, particularly after he was told not to investigate any Saudi connections to terrorism, that he chose to leave the FBI and head up security at the World Trade Center. He was last seen running back into the burning structure to try to help more people get out.

"Clarke is reeling from them"?? Reeling from what, exactly? He's landed a knock-out punch and the NeoCons don't even realize they've been completely incapacitated. But don't worry...I bet Clarke has a lot more where that last punch came from.

would say he did very well.

FIRST one to actually apologize to the victims' families.

Clarke is very credible and he ain't no Dem.
He's worked for Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and the current idiot.

Bunkerboy and his gang of thugs haven't/won't and have been doing their damnedest to prevent ANY investigation.

The facts are with Clarke and O'Neil and others. Bunkerboy has as much to support their lies as his AWOL military records.

They knew the truth would come out.

Just who is/was pretzledent? Hint: It isn't/wasn't Clinton.

The repukes cannot blame Clinton, because, regardless of when or where it began, Clinton successfully prevented it! Clinton handed bunkerboy all the info and means necessary to continue Clinton's successful policies, but bunkerboy ignored the whole thing because of his hardon for Iraq.

Maybe you should go back and review your history from other than FOX or Limpballs.

to come forward, write books etc. How are the thugs going to discredit all these well-respected people?

O'Neill
Clarke
Wilson (book out soon)
Thielmann (worked for CIA and quit bec he was so angry at the lies)

the Repubs tried to block ANY terrorism funding that Clinton requested. Get YOUR facts straight and keep your right-wing talking points to yourself. We're way too smart for them.

It's kind of like the official Nazi newspaper in the '30s

Have you tried to get news from another source or is that your main source of information?

You're a fucking laugh a minute, pal. What, is your white robe at the cleaners tonight and you can't go meet with the Grand Wizard?

WP: Bush's Efforts to Offset Clarke Stymied

Republicans Say Administration Struggling for Momentum After Ex-Aide's Assertions

Sunday, March 28, 2004; Page A23

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29992-2004Mar27.html

Bush's Support Over Handling of Terrorism Drops, Poll Shows

March 27 (Bloomberg) -- Voter approval of President George W. Bush's handling of the war on terrorism fell by 8 percentage points after criticism from his former anti-terror chief, a Newsweek poll found.

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=aZ3UVmo7TeQI&ref...

He can't refute that with anything credible.

Hard to believe someone who says they get their news from Newsmax also thinks "Dean had it right..."

:silly:

f

than frikkin' Newsmax!

You're right about one thing we wont check those out. We know which sites are biased, and we don't need to raise our blood pressure unnecessarily.

The rethugs didn't think terrorism was much of an issue.

insider like Chimmpy...

Someone who refers to (what is ostensibly) his own party as "the pubes?" I've always thought of "pubes" as something that sometimes gets stuck quite uncomfortably in the elastic of my underwear. :eyes:

That is dingleberrys

Sounds like a word a child would use as an insult on the playground.

Didn't he say something about "too bad DU doesn't like debate?" If he's so hot for debate, why doesn't he start one before he's banned?

Talking points from Right-Wing websites do not constitute debate.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Are you going to make a cogent argument or just post until you grace the DU graveyard?

you're grasping at straws, poor baby. :cry:

The monkey is going down.

I also want to hear why Kerry should win instead of why Bush should lose.

and give us his accomplishments. I doubt you'll find any. And shouldn't you be serving in Iraq right now? Why are you still here-you should be supporting the Moron-In-Chief by fighting his war!

Why be so defensive about poor Bush? Poor, poor Bush. Everybody is always pickin' on him.

A buffoon. A slacker. An arrogant, obnoxious school-boy with a talent for touting failures as successes. Anyone who understands presidential elections understands that it is always a referendum on the incumbent. Is Bush's slogan really, "Vote for me because Kerry would be worse?"

It's all about George and the job he has done. 2.5 million jobs lost when 4 million should have been created; a differential of 6.5 million jobs. A prescription Medicare bill built on fraud against the American taxpayer; now a full 140 billion over the amount they used to con the Congress. A war in Iraq at a cost of 160 billion dollars and counting as well as almost 600 US deaths and counting; 3300 casualties and counting. A war in Iraq that the president now jokes about? Apparently the joke is on us.

"Kerry would be worse." I don't know. George seems to have set that bar awfully high.

Mr. TopGun.

post comments bashing Clinton and there are NEVER any sources. We have the facts on our side.

I'd like to know what drugs they're on - and some of the American people who buy into their sh*t.

Abhorrent stupidity....

Who stood idly by while we opened a concentration camp in Cuba?

Who did nothing when American citizens were stripped of their right to due process...for that matter, who stood idly by while the POTUS decided that he could, unilaterally, declare people "unlawful combatants" by fiat?

Who stood mute while Bush & company pissed away 80 years of diplomacy?

Who groused, but did nothing, while Bush and his PNAC masters did everything they could (economically, politically, and militarily) to convert America from a republic to a plotocratic empire?

Who? You tell me.