The Go To Scape Goat
I'm sure when the house of cards finally completes its fall the fantasy world folk will, surely as the sun rises in the morning , say "Its Clintons fault!"
Well, here is what you might want to say to that. Damned Liberal media!
You might want to throw this in for good measure.
posted by Ron at 11:06 PM
29 Comments:
interesting you post this now, perhaps you are worried about the ABLE DANGER story that the media is ignoring could you imagine what the media would be doing with this story had it implicated W ? Dan rather would be creating all sorts of documents to fry Bush. ANd I dont care what wanybody says what Sandy Berger did was an obvious cover-up. Why on earth would a former National Security advisor who's job it is to know what is confidential important to national security and knows that nothing can be removed from the archives remove even a paper clip? That story still bothers me to this day he no doubt removed something very incriminating not even he could be so stupid as to risk his entire career by stealing something unless it was something extremely damning....okay start calling me names, think for a moment if Condi rice 5 years from now had done what Sandy Berger did you guys would understandably be going crazy as would I.
mark
very good mark...
the able danger story is already showing how the policies of the Clinton Administration made the US intelligence agencies impotent...
Mark, hope to see you at my blog, but since I did such a good job there showing how Clinton was responsible on my blog:
Why isn't this the biggest story since 9-11.
Able Danger was a military intelligence unit set up by Special Operations Command in 1999. A year before the 9/11 attacks, Able Danger identified hijack leader Mohamed Atta and the other members of his cell.
But Clinton administration officials stopped them -- three times -- from sharing this information with the FBI.
The problem was the order Clinton Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick made forbidding intelligence operatives from sharing information with criminal investigators.
So our great military did what it needed to do to stop 9-11. The problem was that the Clinton Administration, Jamie Gorelick and all the lefty lawyers made so many rules to "protect" everyone, that they let 9-11 happen.
Why is it so wrong to propose that it is the Clinton administration that allowed 9-11 to happen. Look at these facts:
1. We could have had osama bin laden but Clinton lawyers said we could not put him up on trial for anything...
2. Along with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1996 Khobar Towers attacks in Saudi Arabia, and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, the Embassy Bombing is one of the major anti-American terrorist attacks that preceded the attacks of September 11th. The comparatively restrained response of the Clinton Administration, at the time embroiled in the Lewinsky scandal, which included the cruise missile strikes of Operation Infinite Reach and the arrest and prosecution of some of the perpetrators, has sometimes been cited as a factor in emboldening al Qaeda to undertake the September 11th terrorist attacks of 2001, and also raised political debate in the United States about whether to respond to terrorism with a military or law enforcement paradigm.[1]
So while the left says 9-11 is Bush's fault, an event planned while Clinton was President, there are plenty of facts to show that there were PLENTY of opportunities to stop this in the 1990's and early 2000's.
So why isn't the story about Able Danger not a front page story every day on the New York Times?
A story about a mom protesting in Texas is more important than a story showing how the greatest terrorist attack in US history could have been stopped...
In addition, the 9-11 commission seems to trying to cover up any knowledge of Able Danger. What is there to hide? Are they trying to protect Jamie Gorelick and others in the Clinton administration? Why did the Republicans on the commission go along with it?
Please comment on this very very important story. If there would have been an administration in the White House that didn't have hippie lawyers running everything, 9-11 would not have happened....DID YOU GET THAT???
First of all I consider myself a "hippie" and most of my friends through my life have been what could be described as "hippies" so it doesn't have a bad connotation to me. As Liberal doesn't. Actually they both have quite positive connotations to me. Better take a sematics course if that high school offers one game.
Did Sandy Berger break the law? Throw him in jail or fine him or something. That's what we do with law breakers. It's fine with me.
Did the Clinton Administration make mistakes? I think it's safe to assume they did. Did it "cause" 9-11. No more than the moral soliders battle against Bill Clintons penis when we should have been having a national discussion on vital issues of the day. No more than the "wag the dog" shit , "lets get back to the dress stain", when we should have been talking about vital national interests. We dropped the ball as a nation.
I find it interesting that you made NO comments on the actual post. The only relevant point you made was to confirm my theory that it would turn out to be Clintons fault. I'm right again!:-)
I find it also interesting game that you are so anxious to have someone comment of your irrelevant post. Why should anyone when the only reason you want to do it is prove your superiority and superior knowledge of the "facts"? I can promise both of you you can type til your fingers fall off and you won't change any minds here....unless you are ready to engage in a dialogue and be as open as you expect others to be.
When you say dialogue...do you mean agree with you...and it is too bad that no one's mind can be changed at this site...that means no one here is thinking...and when I say hippie and liberal...its not necessarily name calling, just being descriptive...when I write those words, in my mind, I see an image, and since I am writing it, it sends the picture and message I am trying to make...
Don’t know if you stop by and read my blog or just rip it without any basis like most libs do with Rush Limbaugh...I'll continue to have stimulating conversations with libs on my site, ones that have the guts to state their opinion...and they don't go under the name anonymous.
you should have a counter on your page, then we could see who has more visitors...but of course since you have lib visitors, they are automatically "smarter"
I don't make up meanings for words like some do. Dialogue:a discussion between representatives of parties to a conflict that is aimed at resolution. You aren't looking for a resolution you just want a fight. I have no idea why you come here.To show us all how dumb we are? To enjoy your chance to hate someone? I'm tired of playing with you. It is useless. I read conservative sites often to see what they have to say but I never post. What you are doing is trolling and I am about to stop feeding you. I have no respect for your hateful violent attitude as a solution to everything. I am a spiritual person. I believe in love and tolerance. Some won't take it even if you offer it. You are every bit as sickening as the islamofacist you claim to hate. You are just like them. Look in the fucking mirror! Every time I try to reach out you slam me. Fuck you you idiot go back to your own blog if you want to feel superior and may God have mercy on your dark, dark soul.
In rebuttal to anonymous and "the game", I offer this from Media Matters:
"...the Gorelick memo and the subsequent 1995 Clinton administration guidelines based on it did not prevent the group from sharing that information with intelligence agencies or law enforcement officials. As former Attorney General John Ashcroft noted in his testimony before the 9-11 Commission, the Gorelick memo provided the "basic architecture" for the 1995 guidelines established by then-Attorney General Janet Reno that formalized rules for intelligence sharing that were already in place. But, as the 1995 guidelines clearly state, the Gorelick memo and the guidelines applied only to intelligence sharing "between the FBI and the Criminal Division" within the Justice Department, not a military unit established by the Defense Department [Able Danger]:
SUBJECT: Procedures for Contacts Between the FBI [intelligence/counterintelligence functions] and the Criminal Division Concerning Foreign Intelligence and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations
The procedures contained herein, unless otherwise specified by the Attorney General, apply to foreign intelligence (FI) and foreign counterintelligence (FCI) investigations conducted by the FBI, including investigations related to espionage and foreign and international terrorism. The purpose of these procedures is to ensure that FI and FCI investigations are conducted lawfully, and that the Department's criminal and intelligence/counterintelligence functions are properly coordinated."
And if you want a source besides Media Matters I offer:
John Hinderaker of the conservative weblog Power Line similarly documented on August 17:
Gorelick's memo is limited in scope; it limits the prosecutors' ability to get information from the FBI's counterintelligence division. It would not have covered the situation at issue in Able Danger, that is, information gathered by military intelligence.
the game,
I will visit your blog. I enjoyed reading your post on Able Danger it no doubt is an explosive story no pun intebded. While I don't like to play the blame game per se i do believe it is non-sensical to blame a president who was in office for 8 and half months more than a president who was in office for 8 years (especially with all the attacks that happened under his watch WTC '93 to the USS Cole)The media no doubt is trying to bury the able danger story to protect the name "clinton" for one obvious reason a la the 08 election. The Republicans on the 9-11 commission were very non-discript Keane the chairman I believe was a moderate senator at one time. The others I cannot name but there certaintly weren't any Fred Thompson like republicans on the commission. Now I know why Bush was against the commission he knew it would be to political; full of members who were more worried about hiding things (insert jamie Gorelick) than gettin to the truth.
By the way ron I am sorry your opinion cannot be changed I thought the game and i were the members of the party of close-minded people.
mr anon, how conviently you missed the "unless" in the "mind can not be changed statement"..please go play with game. he needs some playmates.
Jim, thanks for hanging around. I think others have decided that the...."stuff" is getting pretty deep here.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Happy to be here. There is a wealth of material that refutes the Able Danger myth and discredits Schaffer's story.
The only coverup by the post 911 commissions that I know of is the coverup of who cooked the intelligence books, how and why?
It's likely that Clinton and his administration made mistakes. But at least they acknowleged the problem and tried to do something about it besides building a missile defense system.
I started a similar blog recently. If you're interested, check my profile.
looks like Ron has shown his true colors...
he has displayed the hypocracy of a true liberal...to talk about "tolerance" and "peace" and "love"...then spew all that hate when someone has a different opinion...doesn't seem very tolerant...
and incase it is not obvious...you have to be a far, far left lib who is completely blind to defend this story...even the libs who are not filled with hate who communicate with me at best say..."lets wait and see what happens"
Game, do you ever read what's posted, or do you just spew?
Even Hindraker, of all people, refutes the "wall". It's not true. It's not true. It's not true.
I know, it goes against the mindset.
talking about able danger mostly in this case...the wall concept is much harder to pin down to one event or one action...
The lack of action after attacks on our military...plain as day...
The fact the OSL (or UBL) could have been handed over three times is a big sickening...speaking of lawyers destroying the country...check out this headline (and story at my blog if you dare).
2 Illegal Immigrants Win Arizona Ranch in Court
damned you got me game. All right I admit it Im a stinky liberal hypocrite. Asking you to be open to new ideas before I offer to do the same. Shame on me!
Game, it's been mentioned before on this blog, that for several reasons, you're not worth the attention you're given.
It was also stated why.
Geez, and to think that you're a teacher.
You scream for "facts", where you don't give any real ones, but as ron said, stupid ones.
Unless you can come up with concrete stuff, you do need to go back to your own mindless blog (and I've unfortunately seen that thing, so I do know it's "mindless").
Yes, I'm name-calling again, but with reason.
Oh, and btw, fyi, the game, it's pretty clear why you chose that handle, because it's what you are. A game-player.
If you were a REAL teacher, you'd KNOW how to do REAL reasearch in an UNBIASED manner, and YOU would be able to come up with the FACTS.
As you are, I wouldn't allow you to teach my kids, be they K-college at all.
Please do go back to your own blog, where you can get away with your crap.
yes dedanna you are ubiased in all your opinions too lets just admit we all have political leanings left or right and that determines how we view things. I just wish certain facts could be stipulated to by both sides but by reading this blog I see that might be impossible. As a right wing hate mongerer I do enjoy the debate and love calling people names and being mean to the poor (those are all facts wink... wink)
Mark
PS I think i am going to the games blog from now on I'm sure you will miss me but i'll check back to see what "facts" you guys are discussing from time to time.
Dedanna only likes lib teachers who spew their hate on kids...like at my school when teachers showed Michael Moore's movie...I'm sure to you guys that is just fine...but see, my children had no idea who I voted for...the fact that I made the history teacher put up more Bush stuff on his bulletin board to combat all the John Kerry stuff might have given it away...but I was just trying to be fair and balanced...
Not sure why the libs have stopped taking their meds, but it is funny to have all these cheap and hollow ribs thrown at me, especially when none of them are backed up with anything but emotion..but that is what liberalism is...an emotional response to the world...
I wish I could be an emotionless robotron loving my president like game but woe is me I am of an inferior species. The fact is he is so smart I just can't keep up with him. Oh to be him. I'm just so jealous.
Why has not the game joined the military?
Actually, dedanna gets her stuff from neither liberal or right-winged sources (although I do call them to people's attention for discussion).
Take this one for instance.
I actually *do* research things. In an unbiased manner.
I do know how to identify a source as being liberal, right-wing, whatever. I am neither.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I am neither Republican nor Democrat (however, I do see reality, and feel that there's nothing wrong with the words "Liberal" or "Democrat", and feel there's a bit more than meets the eye with the neocons).
Oh, and FYI:
I am not in the area of Roswell, so I may miss a few things here.
I have, however, worked in Roswell, in the media. I have worked the media for the majority of my working career, to include news journalism and editorializing.
I do not appreciate journalism that is biased either way; however, I do know what I live, and what most people actually live, and I turn a blind eye to nothing.
Do any of you bother to pick apart what you read, like Ron does? I used to quite a bit; however, these days, I believe almost none of what I hear or see.
Life's a bitch, then you die. That's what it boils down to, in reality. Whoever we want to blame for it is up to us; however, I think we all need to turn to ourselves to make things better or worse. It's up to us to make a better world; to make friends for ourselves and others (to include in other countries), or enemies.
But be careful in who you choose to make enemies of, in particular when it comes to other countries. It only serves to divide, and not make better, the world.
It may interest you to know that Able Danger was in operation from 1999 until February 2001 when it was axed by the Bush administration.
Philip Zelikow served on President Bush's transition team in 2000-2001. In this capacity he was extensively briefed on Al Qaeda. He was also a long-time colleague of Condi Rice, the National Security Adviser. It is highly likely that he was aware of the axing of Able Danger.
Did you know that Philip Zelikow also became the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission? The Executive director hires the staff, he sets the direction and focus, he chooses witnesses at the hearings.
So, is it any wonder that you didn't hear anything about Able Danger in the 9/11 Report?
Goshamighty gee whiz, Ron!!! And after, I just got done commenting about someone else's language on the blog. Tsk Tsk Tsk!
The GOP makes everyone who's against their policies out to be a scapegoat which in the Bible is the animal that is released into the desert carrying the sins of the Hebrew people.
Well, hey, look at how this administration ignored the whole Israeli-Palestinian issue for like forever to concentrate on finding non-existent WMDs in Iraq, and at how we seem to be supporting the radical Israeli element in trying to exterminate the Muslims/Arabs. Looks like we've made the Iraqis the scapegoats for terrorism and let the Israeli army which retaliates on a regular basis by shooting Palestinian children off the hook. That doesn't mean that I'm against Israel or Anti-Semitic, though. I just think they shouldn't get special treatment and we shouldn't approve of ultra conservatives being in power anywhere, including Sharon in Israel.
That "language" you were posting about, btw, is a quote from somewhere else about the subject matter of where it's posted, and it's solely posted to make a point.
If you can't see it, then oh well I guess. See if you can get Ron to edit the cuss words.
Dedanna,
Well, I wondered about the language, as on Yahoo message boards, etc. there is a policy of not cussing, saying vulger things, making racial/ethnic slurs, etc.
I try not to do it online, although, I could probably make my step-dad who was in the Navy blush with my language (must read too much Stephen King-bad influence-ha!)--DemoCat
I've seen MUCH worse online...
Where you been?
Post a Comment
<< Home