(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What reasonable people remember AFTER the 1st WTC are the numerous attacks that KILLED innocent Americans the also understand that prosecution did NOT stop attacks.... lets recap for those with short term memory loss... USS Cole, American Embassies in Africa and finally WTC 2. What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

Really? No other attacks? So I guess the anthrax attacks were a figment of my imagination?

(05-17-2009 07:53 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What reasonable people remember AFTER the 1st WTC are the numerous attacks that KILLED innocent Americans the also understand that prosecution did NOT stop attacks.... lets recap for those with short term memory loss... USS Cole, American Embassies in Africa and finally WTC 2. What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

Really? No other attacks? So I guess the anthrax attacks were a figment of my imagination?

Yes, but thank you for sharing..... for reality check out this NY Times article

NY Times Anthrax Suicide

.... apparently it was a disgruntled and frustrated bureaucrat and not foreign terrorists enemies .....

NY Times Portrait of Anthrax Suspect

(05-17-2009 08:38 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:53 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What reasonable people remember AFTER the 1st WTC are the numerous attacks that KILLED innocent Americans the also understand that prosecution did NOT stop attacks.... lets recap for those with short term memory loss... USS Cole, American Embassies in Africa and finally WTC 2. What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

Really? No other attacks? So I guess the anthrax attacks were a figment of my imagination?

Yes, but thank you for sharing..... for reality check out this NY Times article

NY Times Anthrax Suicide

.... apparently it was a disgruntled and frustrated bureaucrat and not foreign terrorists enemies .....

NY Times Portrait of Anthrax Suspect

Well, nobody ever said it had to be one of those "Muslims". It was a terror attack. It occured AFTER the WTC attack. Unless your claim is only Muslims can be terrorists and not anyone else-which is rediculous.

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

You obviously didn't read your own rebuttal, none of the attacks you mentioned (USS Cole, the African Embassies) occurred on US Soil. The first WTC bombing attempt was not only foiled by the Louis Freeh and the FBI, but those responsible for it are in JAIL.

Shrub and Cheney failed for 8 years to bring Bin Laden down. Not only that putting American troops in Iraq is exactly what Bin Laden wanted so that he could direct attacks against American troops in a part of the world close to his base, not thousands of miles away from it. Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq.

Once the courts rule that the torture photos must be released it will be all down hill for 5 Deferments and possibly Shrub as well. Investigations will begin and Reslugs will be ratting each other out to stay out of jail. Eventually the stench will rise all the way up the foodchain and the top of that chain is 5 Deferments.

(05-18-2009 07:14 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

You obviously didn't read your own rebuttal, none of the attacks you mentioned (USS Cole, the African Embassies) occurred on US Soil. The first WTC bombing attempt was not only foiled by the Louis Freeh and the FBI, but those responsible for it are in JAIL.

Shrub and Cheney failed for 8 years to bring Bin Laden down. Not only that putting American troops in Iraq is exactly what Bin Laden wanted so that he could direct attacks against American troops in a part of the world close to his base, not thousands of miles away from it. Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq.

Oh pretty please, quit calling him Shrub. Regardless of your stance that alone is making you sound like a retread.

(05-18-2009 07:14 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 01:01 AM)onlinepole Wrote:  It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

You obviously didn't read your own rebuttal, none of the attacks you mentioned (USS Cole, the African Embassies) occurred on US Soil. The first WTC bombing attempt was not only foiled by the Louis Freeh and the FBI, but those responsible for it are in JAIL.

Shrub and Cheney failed for 8 years to bring Bin Laden down. Not only that putting American troops in Iraq is exactly what Bin Laden wanted so that he could direct attacks against American troops in a part of the world close to his base, not thousands of miles away from it. Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq.

In the 8th ground we were taught that the Russian embassy in Washington was foreign soil and that American embassy in Moscow was American soil. Any attack on the embassy was an attack on that country and their sovereignty.

In high school we were taught any attack on a American ship at sea was equivalent to an attack on American soil. (Remember the Maine 1898 Spanish American War, the British passenger ship Lusiitania 128 Americans killed prior to WW I)

Shocking the lack of understanding of basic international law common for centuries, Please tell us you are not a graduate of Northern Illinois University, that would be embarrassing.


********************************************************

.....PS: to the liberal racist who first mention "Muslims" and then accusing / guessing it is someone else thought .... That is some vivid imagination you are playing with there. Reckless. Dangerous. Void of logical thought.

"Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq."

Online: For the sake of argument, let us say you are correct. Would you prefer to engage the enemy on U.S. soil where the lives of unarmed American civilians are at risk?

(05-18-2009 09:04 PM)niucob86 Wrote:  "Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq."

Online: For the sake of argument, let us say you are correct. Would you prefer to engage the enemy on U.S. soil where the lives of unarmed American civilians are at risk?

No. I think attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 is a MUCH better idea.

(05-18-2009 09:04 PM)niucob86 Wrote:  "Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq."

Online: For the sake of argument, let us say you are correct. Would you prefer to engage the enemy on U.S. soil where the lives of unarmed American civilians are at risk?

I would prefer to make Bin Laden's goals as tough for him to accomplish as possible. Put a large and somewhat bogged down Army in Iraq made it easy for him. Going after him hard right after 9-11 in Afghan/Pak region instead of trying to fight a 2 front war would have been the smart play. Keeping him constantly on the move in Afghan/Pak border area would have made it difficult at best for him to coordinate attacks against the US proper. Predator drones and saturation bombing could have kept him bottled up and early on the US seemed to have a better relationship with Musharif than as the war continued to drag on.

(05-18-2009 08:24 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-18-2009 07:14 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 07:22 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  

(05-17-2009 06:29 PM)onlinepole Wrote:  

(05-16-2009 06:43 PM)NIU05 Wrote:  [quote='onlinepole' pid='4329515' dateline='1242453705']
It's not as if the CIA has never lied, overthrown democratically elected governments (Salvadore Allende, Chile) or support big time drug dealers(Noreiga, Panama).

Investigate and let the chips fall where they may. Same holds true for finding out who approved of the torture that happened. Cheney is likely trying to cover his butt and whatever legacy he has. The more he opens his mouth the guiltier he looks.

Do not underestimate Cheney. If there are hearings, the public will look FAVORABLY on those who took actions defending the country. God forbid if there is another attack, then there will be NO doubt who they will support on the issue.

.

Once the latest photos of those tortured are made public, Dick's goose is cooked.

What you reichwingers somehow fail to remember is that those responsible for the 1st WTC bombing which happened on Clinton's watch are on the inside of a prison (caught, prosecuted and convicted) while Shrub and Cheney (or is it Cheney and Shrub) failed to bring down Bin Laden despite having 8 plus years to do so. So much for the Repubs being the national security watchdogs and the Dems being "soft" on terror.

So now were supposed to trust the words of 2 of the largest failures in American political history, no chance in hell.

.... Poor attempt to re write history...... What REASONABLE people will remember as well is that there was not another attack on the US homeland under George W Bush.

You obviously didn't read your own rebuttal, none of the attacks you mentioned (USS Cole, the African Embassies) occurred on US Soil. The first WTC bombing attempt was not only foiled by the Louis Freeh and the FBI, but those responsible for it are in JAIL.

Shrub and Cheney failed for 8 years to bring Bin Laden down. Not only that putting American troops in Iraq is exactly what Bin Laden wanted so that he could direct attacks against American troops in a part of the world close to his base, not thousands of miles away from it. Bush in his inherent stupidity gave Bin Laden just what he wanted. No wonder there weren't any more attacks on US soil when Bin Laden had all the opportunities he needed in Iraq.

Shocking the lack of understanding of basic international law common for centuries, Please tell us you are not a graduate of Northern Illinois University, that would be embarrassing.


What's mystifying is that people like you voted to keep complete failure in power for 8 years and are still trying to cover the emperor that never had any clothes . Thanks for bulging deficits, deregulation which led to the bank bailouts,a 2 front war which cost thousands of American casualties and the lowest international opinion of the United States in decades. That's exactly what we needed.

O and for those who've forgotten, 9/11 wasn't the last terrorist attack on US soil during the Bush Administration. The Anthrax Mailing Attack occurred after 9/11. Daschle, Patrick Leahy, ABC, CBS, AMI and others were targeted. There may have been others attacked who haven't acknowledged receiving the letters.