Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:And the so called "strong belief" was conviniently placed right before the election, oddly one of the candidates platform was on homeland security. Sounds to me like "crying wolf" to win elections at DC's expense.
Short Hand wrote:NO Tom Ridge got a call from whom ever... TOLD to raise the threat level. This is a plain and simple fact laid out. Period.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:To bad the White House didn't raise any threat level within government in Summer 2001. And yes, the color system was not there, but computers, faxes, and phones were.
sndsgood wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:To bad the White House didn't raise any threat level within government in Summer 2001. And yes, the color system was not there, but computers, faxes, and phones were.
if you want to go that route we could also say to bad clinton didn't take bin laden out when he attacked the uss cole.
sndsgood wrote:so your saying attacking one of our warships and killing what was it 15-20 of our soildiers isn't worth going after????? dude i know your not american but i know if some guy came over and killed a few dozen canadians id be all for your guys going and taking a group of terrorist out.
my point was you could go back even further then clinton if you wanted and find someone who should have probalby done something before hand. they new about osama wayyyyyy before bush was in office. but he takes all the blame because he was in office at the time.like he went over there himself and poked osama in the eye with a stick.
Short Hand wrote:sndsgood wrote:so your saying attacking one of our warships and killing what was it 15-20 of our soildiers isn't worth going after????? dude i know your not american but i know if some guy came over and killed a few dozen canadians id be all for your guys going and taking a group of terrorist out.
my point was you could go back even further then clinton if you wanted and find someone who should have probalby done something before hand. they new about osama wayyyyyy before bush was in office. but he takes all the blame because he was in office at the time.like he went over there himself and poked osama in the eye with a stick.
17 Sailors were lost. AND it was in October of 2000... IF I remember correctly.. CLINTON was 2 months away from leaving office....... AT this point Osama Bin Laden had not masterminded any plots to kill Americans yet. No one knew what he was capable of. Get your facts straight.
J03Y wrote:Short Hand wrote:sndsgood wrote:so your saying attacking one of our warships and killing what was it 15-20 of our soildiers isn't worth going after????? dude i know your not american but i know if some guy came over and killed a few dozen canadians id be all for your guys going and taking a group of terrorist out.
my point was you could go back even further then clinton if you wanted and find someone who should have probalby done something before hand. they new about osama wayyyyyy before bush was in office. but he takes all the blame because he was in office at the time.like he went over there himself and poked osama in the eye with a stick.
17 Sailors were lost. AND it was in October of 2000... IF I remember correctly.. CLINTON was 2 months away from leaving office....... AT this point Osama Bin Laden had not masterminded any plots to kill Americans yet. No one knew what he was capable of. Get your facts straight.
Clinton signed a directive authorizing the CIA to apprehend Osama and bring him to the United States to stand trial after the 1998 United States embassy bombings.
Not to mention he was connected with many other incidents dating back to the late 70's - early 80's.
sndsgood wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:To bad the White House didn't raise any threat level within government in Summer 2001. And yes, the color system was not there, but computers, faxes, and phones were.
if you want to go that route we could also say to bad clinton didn't take bin laden out when he attacked the uss cole.
sndsgood wrote:ahhhh so since he didnt run on a platform of security we should assume that anyone who attacks us will go free?
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:sndsgood wrote:ahhhh so since he didnt run on a platform of security we should assume that anyone who attacks us will go free?
Not really, it's more like don't cry wolf to win elections.
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:sndsgood wrote:ahhhh so since he didnt run on a platform of security we should assume that anyone who attacks us will go free?
Not really, it's more like don't cry wolf to win elections.
sndsgood wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:sndsgood wrote:ahhhh so since he didnt run on a platform of security we should assume that anyone who attacks us will go free?
Not really, it's more like don't cry wolf to win elections.
by crying wolf are you referring to the threat level alert system? which the democrats demanded? and then when they got what they wanted they cried it was being used as a fear tactic?
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:sndsgood wrote:Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:sndsgood wrote:ahhhh so since he didnt run on a platform of security we should assume that anyone who attacks us will go free?
Not really, it's more like don't cry wolf to win elections.
by crying wolf are you referring to the threat level alert system? which the democrats demanded? and then when they got what they wanted they cried it was being used as a fear tactic?
Looks like it flew over your head on the convenient timing, especially when it was not needed.