Gail, what kind of drugs are you on? Is the Kool-aid spiked today?

You are in need of mental help!!!

Gail has a point–

Things that happened in Bush’s tenure were Clinton’s fault. Things that happened BEFORE Obamas tenure are Obama’s fault.Things that happened in Clinton’s tenure were Clinton’s fault.

The only peson totally without blame is Bush.

Gail,

I guess you forgot about the first terror attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 during Clinton’s administration.

At least one person (and I believe more) died plus hundreds were injured in that attack.

I remember the 1993 attack one month after Clinton took office.
Unlike GW, He never blamed the previous administration.
He hunted down the perpetrators, and they are rotting in prison.

I don’t recall Bush blaming Clinton for the second WTC attack.

However, my original point about Gail’s claim was that NO terror attacks occured in the continental US during Clinton’s administration.

Gail Ahumada:

“In early 2001, that administration gave the incoming Republicans repeated warnings about the dangers posed by Osama bin Laden and al-Quaeda. The Republicans underestimated that risk and failed to protect us against the 9/11 attacks.”

I’m giving Barack Obama and the Democrats fair and clear warning that something bad might happen sometime, somehow and they will be held accountable if they fail to prevent it.

“Distracted by the challenges of having invaded the wrong country at the wrong time, they let bin Laden and his top aides escape from Afghanistan.”

Usama bin Laden’s escape from Tora Bora in Afghanistan was December 11, 2001, not an especially challenging time for an invasion into Iraq that began March 20, 2003. One must assume Democrats are better at national security than they are at reading calendars. Those chronological suckers can be very confusing documents to some of the lesser lights.

BALDFACED LIAR!! Bill Clinton had EIGHT YEARS to do something about bin Laden, and did NOTHING!! Clinton was offered bin Laden on a silver platter by Somalia and refused. bin Laden himself that Clinton’s weak cut-and-run response to the “Blackhawk down” incident in Somalia inspired him and convinced him that attacks on the US would not be answered. The US suffered several terrorist attacks during Clinton’s tenure: the 1993 WTC bombing, the USS Cole and the African embassy attacks to name a few, and Clinton did nothing, exactly as bin Laden predicted. I guess he was busy with monica. And when did Clinton give Bush “repeated warnings” about bin Laden and al-Qaeda?

You also are either ignorant or lying through your teeth about Iraq. Why then did Clinton/Gore spend eight years warning us about Iraqi WMDs? Why did John kerry advocate invading Iraq in 1997 without the UN if necessary? Why did Clinton send all those cruise missiles into iraq? Iraq harbored Abu Nidal, a terorist who had blown up airports in Vienna and Rome, whose plan to hijack the Achille Lauro resulted in the murder of wheelchair-bound American Leon Klinghofer. Iraq sponsored terrorist attacks in Israel, a country visited by many Americans. Iraq used chemical weapons on iranians and on their own people. Iraq fired on American aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone every day for 10 years. Iraq ordered the assassination of George H Bush and American diplomats in the Phillipines. Iraq harbored Yasin, who helped in the 1993 WTC bombing. Iraq openly celebrated 9/11, and promised it was just the beginning. On 9/11/02, Iraq demanded more suicide attacks on Americans. After 9/11, Abu al-Zarqawi moved to Iraq to plan further attacks. Go read the 9/11 Commission report for a detailed listing of iraq-al Qaeda linkages. Don’t forget eight years of Clinton administration warnings on Iraqi WMDs.

If America suffers another terrorist attack, it will be because of the incredible delusion of fools like you Gail, fools so ignorant they can no longer separate fantasy from reality.

Tim–

Now you’ve got the blame placed EXACTLY where it belongs. Not Bush…….. Gail. Since nobody’s buying all the Clinton crap you put out, let’s blame HER !!!

tim jones notes that Clinton had eight years and did nothing about bin Laden. In contrast to Clinton however Bush started a war killing 4000+ American soldierS and tens of thousands Iraq civilians. In contrast to Clinton, Bush’s war put our nation’s economy on the rocks and apparently sending the world economy into a long, deep recession. In contrast to Clinton, Bush made a mockery of US foreign policy and has done immeasurable harm to our nation’s image worldwide. But like Clinton, Bush had EIGHT YEARS to do something about Bin laden and did NOTHING!

“There were no attacks by foreign terrorists on the continental United States during 8 years of the Clinton administration.”

First WTC bombing, OKC bombing, TWA 800, USS COLE

HKCHAS
You and Gail are damn ignorant fools.

help,

Only a damn ignorant FOOL would expect us to be able to read your mind and guess why you think that Gail and HKCHAS are damn ignorant FOOLS. Tell us why you think so since I cannot find any reason to believe what you have stated. Or, are you just going to come back and call me a damn ignorant FOOL also?

SVPPB- You got one right. WTC was, indeed, a FOREIGN terrorist attack on the continental United States. The OKC bombing was a DOMESTIC terrorist attack (there is a difference), TWA 800 was caused by an electrical short above the center fuel tank (and Lee Harvey Oswald DID act alone) and the USS Cole is a ship and while owned by the United States it is not the continental United States. The letter clearly says “foreign terrorist” and “continental” United States. In the actual terrorist attacks you mentioned many people were caught, tried and imprisoned (and even executed) under said administration.

— Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum

Si will pretty much post anything even when knowing it is a lie.
What other explanation could there be for Si’s gross mistakes. Oh, wait. Could be Si’s stupid.

Is that stupid,”Clinton was offered bin Laden on a silver platter” still floating around?

“fools so ignorant they can no longer separate fantasy from reality”.
You’re describing yourself Tim. You’re also applying post 9/11 thinking to pre9/11 events. Go to snopes.com.

Bill Clinton:

President Clinton led the fight against terrorism over strong opposition from Republicans in Congress and the pro-Republican Media. Here’s a partial - yet incredibly long - list of accomplishments against terrorism for which the Clinton Administration gets almost no credit or even recognition. President Clinton:

– sent legislation to Congress to TIGHTEN AIRPORT SECURITY. (Remember, this is before 911) The legislation was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the airlines.

– sent legislation to Congress to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF TERRORIST FUNDING. It was defeated by Republicans in the Senate because of opposition from banking interests.

– sent legislation to Congress to add tagents to explosives, to allow for BETTER TRACKING OF EXPLOSIVES USED BY TERRORISTS. It was defeated by the Republicans because of opposition from the NRA.

When Republicans couldn’t prevent executive action, President Clinton:

– Developed the nation’s first anti-terrorism policy, and appointed first national coordinator.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the Israeli Embassy in Washington.

–Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Boston airport.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up Lincoln and Holland Tunnels in NY.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the George Washington Bridge.

– Stopped cold the planned attack to blow up the US Embassy in Albania.

– Tried to kill Osama bin Laden and disrupt Al Qaeda through preemptive strikes (efforts denounced by the G.O.P.).

– Brought perpetrators of first World Trade Center bombing and CIA killings to justice.

– Did not blame Bush I administration for first World Trade Center bombing even though it occurred 38 days after they had left office. Instead, worked hard, even obsessively — and successfully — to stop future terrorist attacks.

– Named the Hart-Rudman commission to report on nature of terrorist threats and major steps to be taken to combat terrorism.

– Tripled the budget of the FBI for counterterrorism and doubled overall funding for counterterrorism.

– Detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries

– Created a national stockpile of drugs and vaccines including 40 million doses of smallpox vaccine.

– Robert Oakley, Reagan Counterterrorism Czar says of Clinton’s efforts “Overall, I give them very high marks” and “The only major criticism I have is the obsession with Osama”

– Barton Gellman of the Washington Post put it best, “By any measure available, Clinton left office having given greater priority to terrorism than any president before him” and was the “first administration to undertake a systematic anti-terrorist effort.”

Here, in stark contrast, is part of the Bush-Cheney anti-terrorism record before September 11, 2001:

– Backed off Clinton administration’s anti-terrorism efforts.

– Shelved the Hart-Rudman report.

– Appointed new anti-terrorism task force under Dick Cheney. Group did not even meet before 9/11.

– Called for cuts in anti-terrorism efforts by the Department of Defense.

– Gave no priority to anti-terrorism efforts by Justice Department.

– Ignored warnings from Sandy Berger, Louis Freeh, George Tennant, Paul Bremer, and Richard Clarke about the urgency of terrorist threats.

– Halted Predator drone tracking of Osama bin Laden.

– Did nothing in wake of August 6 C.I.A. report to president saying Al Qaeda attack by hijack of an airliner almost certain.

– Bush - knowing about the terrorists’ plans to attack in America, warned that terrorists were in flight schools in the US - took a four week vacation.

– By failing to order any coordination of intelligence data, missed opportunity to stop the 9/11 plot as Clinton-Gore had stopped the millennium plots.

– Blamed President Clinton for 9/11.

slamfist:

“In the actual terrorist attacks you mentioned many people were caught, tried and imprisoned (and even executed) under said administration.”

Bring me up to snuff slam, who was the terrorist executed for the first WTC bombing? Are you seriously suggesting that the possibility of a stretch in the pokey would deter suicidal maniacs?

artofthetrio,

You forgot one more. The FBI told Clinton in December who was responsible for the Cole bombing. Clinton said that he would let the next administration have the responsibility of going after whoever was responsible. According to Condoleezza Rice, the decision not to respond militarily to the Cole bombing was President Bush’s.

Bush did do one thing. He spent about 50% of the time on vacation before 911.

John2

Icono-No one was executed for the WTC attacks that I know of. I mentioned “actual terrorist attacks” of which the OKC (Oklahoma City) bombing was one mentioned. I believe Mr. McVeigh-a Domestic terrorist-was executed at Terre Haute on 11 Jun. ‘01.

lunar,

The economic troubles during Bush’s term were caused by the 9/11 attacks, and the mortgage meltdown. The war played very little part. Your claim may be directed to the deficit spending, but the military costs alone are not to blame there. You must consider the entire spending picture when analyzing why we went over budget. Bush did fail to balance the budget, and he should have cut discretionary spending to balance it up. (Military spending is not discretionary)

You mention the lives lost during the Iraq war. Note that this Iraq war should have been prevented by Clinton. His soft stance on Saddam’s compliance with UN resolutions and inspections led to the action the Bush had to take. Clinton claimed Iraq had WMD’s. Congress approved the war. Clinton voted for the war. You cannot claim that your opposition is due to how much you value human life. If that really were the case, you wouldn’t support candidates that kill 1,000,000 American lives each year.

To say that nothing has been done about Osama in the past 7 years is an outright slap in the face to our military. They have done massive damage to Osama’s organization and it is unknown whether he is even still alive or not.

What will Obama do about Osama? We’ll see. We all hope he can bring this to a close, but we won’t hold our breath.

Gail

Not born out of fact huh? Neither are yours. Fact: Clinton did too have an attack by Al Qaeda, of course they were not called that at the time. February of 1993 the WTC towers were bombed. Wait Gail there is more. Clinton had an opportunity to capture Osama bin Laden and chose to ignore it. Oh yes there is more. Clinton trimmed down the CIA and prevented them from doing the needed searching and intelligence gathering they needed to prevent the attacks. Whether bush was warned or not, he had to get new people brought in as leaders of the CIA and had to hire more people in the CIA, which meant training and gather all the intelligence from scratch. Yes Gail Bush knew there was going to be an attack. What he didn’t know was when and where or how. It was Clinton who under estimated the risk, and I’m not so sure he didn’t withhold some critical info from Bush for political reasons. That may or may not be true, but is something to ponder. By the way IRaq was found to be partially funding or helping Al Qaeda. Though we didn’t find any I truly believe there were WMDs there, and if we would have gone in there initially instead or warning for 3 months to comply or else I think we would have found them and I do think Saddam hid them. He had plenty of time to do so. Oh yeah and Gail we went into Afganistan first. Though the world is a small world these days it is still bigger than you might think. Especially when we had to re-establish our intelligence connections that were lost during the Clinton years. Lastly to destroy your feeble assessment and so called facts. If we are attacked again during the next administration it will be Clintons fault not Bush’s. Will have Bush fail to capture Osama bin Laden? Yes. But Gail if it is such a simple task why don’t you do it. Also Gail what if Obama doesn’t change anything in our security policy, and we are attacked. You would blame Bush, and you may be right, but then again under your estimation Bush’s security policy isn’t any good so if Obama doesn’t change it. then it’s Obama’s fault. If he does change it then it is still Obamas fault. You gail are nothing more than a Clinton, Kerry, and Obama lover who is so short sighted that youy fail to see the big picture. Rather than doing what’s right for the country you wou;d rather point the finger. Yes Gail it is a known fact that republicans are better at security. Why? Because they aren’t a bunch of peace loving hippies, who would rather run and hide rather thanface the challenge. One last thing Gail have you noticed Obama avoid Fox news reporter questions. Hmm looks like your messiah is a spineless wonder after all.

Uhhh!!!…OK???

100%

You know that first WTC bombing was less than 60 days into the Clinton administration…. using YOUR logic, wouldn’t that make it Bush 1’s mistake ?

That “known fact” statement is usually followd by a lie or political chest pounding….

I know lots of democrats that wear military medals so that ” hippie” statement is wrong too, BTW , are there still hippies ? How OLD are you anyway ?

And last, if you measure courage by who talks to Fox News ( and when) , you have a warped sense of values…..

This war isn’t about freedom or national security, it’s about private contracts and corporate profits. The Iraq War costs U.S. taxpayers $100,000 per minute….Saddam must be wondering why he wasn’t as smart, ruthless and cunning…

We have found the enemy….

Let’s see….peace treaties between Israel and its enemies, Dems 2 - GOP, 0;Wars to save democracy successfully concluded, WWI (Wilson), WWII(FDR/Truman), Dems 2 - GOP 0; trade agreements negotiated, NAFTA (Dems), GATT (Dems), Dems 2 - GOP 0; successful extractions/interventions to save lives Somalia (Dems), Kosovo (Dems), Dems 2 - GOP 0;

Wars to be concluded by “secret plans;” Vietnam (GOP), Iraq (GOP), Afghanistan (GOP); GOP 3 - Dems 0; OSB and Sheik Muhammad 2 - GOP 0;GOP messes to be cleaned up by Dems, unlimited.

Yeah, the GOP is “better” on national security. NOT!

100%-Al Qaeda has been called that since sometime in the late 80’s.

HKCHAS

Since you don’t get to see my response due to this website having an error and I don’t feel like re-posting. Just know you got it all wrong on all of your counters to my point.

Hogan. I could careless about you bullet points because have nothing to do with security. However, FDR let Pearl Harbor get attacked. as one example to you flawfulness.

I’m am 100% correct in my point being true and cannot be proven wrong. Whether Al Qaeda was called that or not in the 80s has nothing to do with with my point so your point is meaningless. 100% is correct, you are wrong. Perhaps that is why you are SLAMMING your FIST.

Come on folks you can do better than this can’t you?

100%- It disturbs me the conviction you have in yourself being in fact, 100% correct, when in the first place, no one hardly ever is. Of the few posts of yours that I have read I can only gather that you are full of it. Here is a tip, copy your post with your mouse before you post it or maybe even compose the post in some other program all together such as Word or notepad if you are using a PC. I’d love to see the post that didn’t make it on the board.

I don’t have a point other than to tell you that when you say things like “of course they were not called that at the time” and in fact they were you are not 100% correct and puts the rest of your rant into question. I’m leaving for Shangri La today for the holidays so I’ll see you all when I return.

100%, please change you ID to 10% and go for the decaf at Starbuck’s instead of the caffinated

Jimmy Russell

I don’t need the green giant sprout telling me how to copy paste. I am full of myself. so there. I’m not the most articulate person in the world, but my point is:

As of right now the republicans are better at national security than Democrats. However, it won’t always stay that way. It never has and most likely never will. I never read Billingsly’s article, so I don’t know if he was face rubbing or not. I simply responded to Gail.