welcome to the fest
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

the disneyfication of 9/11
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
trustedfaith



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3366
Location: My own little world...

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'VE GOT THE BIGGEST BALLS OF THEM ALL!

... Shocked
_________________
I'm doing the twitter thing; you should stalk/follow me: http://twitter.com/sillygurlroo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17580
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 6:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ok, haven't read the rest of the thread yet, but this is a total non-sequitor:
Agamemnon wrote:

Quote:
Agamemnon wrote:
Quote:
Agamemnon wrote:
Oh, and Clinton missed Bin Laden.


yeah. so you don't think his advisors had reasons to believe that maybe the intel wasn't _quite_ as perfect as some people claimed?


Oh, I see. This excuse works for Clinton but not for Bush.


no, i'm saying his advisors might have had valid reasons for not approving a plan, because they thought it wouldn't really get the job accomplished, and instead do things like, i don't know, put bin laden on the alert and cause him to move somewhere they had even _less_ than a 40% chance of getting him, and maybe compromising sources of intelligence that they were using to try to keep track of him? as opposed to, say, attacking a whole different country that had nothing to do with bin laden and 9/11 and thus providing a whole new training ground for terrorists.


Then I'd like a little bit more consideration for the Bush Admin and it's handling of intel. You seem to like to throw out the phrase of "ignoring" intel when the same sure could be applied to Clinton in the years before 9/11.


ok. clinton's people had intel that said they had a 40% chance of capturing bin laden. 40% is less than half, so the chances that the plan would _not_ work were greater than the chances that the plan _would_ work. the guy on the ground may have been hot on the plan, he may have felt it was the best chance we had - but that absolute "best chance" was still less than 50/50.

so i think the clinton people had a reasonable basis for rejecting the plan, based on the intelligence they had.

on the second occasion, they missed bin laden even after intel said they would be able to get him - which suggests that they had good reasons for not blindly accepting the assertions of the people in the field on how good their sources were. remember, the attack was on a bin laden compound - he just left early. so the intel at least had _some_ basis in reality.

you have somehow equated this with the bush people ignoring intel (prior to 9/11), then cherrypicking intel, misusing intel, and still ignoring intel they didn't like (after 9/11). oh, and things like accepting intel from people that everyone else said were rotten sources. and attacking countries that had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, based on that twisted intel, even though there was very good evidence that it was wrong.

sorry, from the information you presented, clinton's people acted in accordance with the intel they had; the bush people have misused it in every possible way.

NOT THE SAME THING. so no, the bushies don't get a pass.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17580
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i did watch the thing - well, at least the first two hours, then i switched to the season premier of the wire. dennis, you will have to tell us how it comes out, since you get to see the second part tonight - we have to wait till saturday.

i noticed that they started with a disclaimer, stating that this was a docudrama, not a documentary, and sources other than the 9/11 report were used, and some things were changed for "dramatic purposes". i also noticed that this diclaimer was written only (no voice-over) - and that since this was shown commercial-free, it was only aired twice (at the beginning and at the half-way point). so one must wonder how many people were aware of it.

i also noticed that donnie wahlberg makes a kick-ass cia field op. he can take bin laden out for me _any_ day.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Teh Digital Dragon



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1888
Location: THE WORLD OF LARNING.

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The second part was...interesting. There were moments of genuine emotional impact, and there were important points brought up, but I felt a little bit more uncomfortable about the mix of documentary and drama than with the first one.
_________________
"You cannot run away from a weakness; you must sometimes fight it out or perish. And if that be so, why not now, and where you stand?"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9668

PostPosted: Mon Sep 11, 2006 11:54 pm    Post subject: blah blah blah they should give me my own teevee show blah Reply with quote

The 9/11 commission report -- not a particularly partisan collaboration, nor very unstudied -- was somewhat vindicating of Clinton; analysis of his intelligence policies showed none of the evidence of outright neglect that is constantly alluded to by the political talk radio and right-wing blogs that we've now discovered to be behind Agamemnon's errant premises and violently skewed historical perspectives used in this thread. Yet, these selfsame pundit jockeys will tirelessly point to the exact same report to defend Bush from slippery claims involving complicity in the attacks. Why ignore, at convenience, the parts that defend Clinton?

It's a prominent double-standard, a tendency for them to inflate and conflate all villainization of Clinton, one that plays out here because a good chunk of them have been contorting themselves in a somewhat chronic and pressured attempt to alleviate pressure on Bush's imploding image, by pathologically scapegoating the Democrat who came before. They madly desire for the intelligence failures that led to 9/11 to have been something that they can say were mostly inherited by the outright fault of the preceding administration, despite the murkiness of that particular claim.

I'm only willing to comment on that so far as to say that I'm madly entertained by their rational fugue.

I absolutely love watching people get their daily enabling fix for cognitive dissonance -- it's an outright morbid fascination of mine -- and I'm amused that anyone could fail to understand by now that partisan talk radio and rabidly political blogs are among the most efficient means towards being greatly misinformed and untenably biased.

TL;DR edition:

Trusting political talk radio to inform you is an incredibly efficient way to be full of shit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kame



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 2565
Location: Alba Nuadh

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:00 am    Post subject: Re: blah blah blah they should give me my own teevee show bl Reply with quote

Sam wrote:

TL;DR edition:

Trusting political talk radio to inform you is an incredibly efficient way to be full of shit.


Sam, at this moment, were it humanly possible, I'd clap so damn hard you'd here it 3500 miles away.
_________________
bi-chromaticism is the extraordinary belief that there exists only two options
each polar opposite to each other
where one is completely superior to the other.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 12:03 am    Post subject: Re: blah blah blah they should give me my own teevee show bl Reply with quote

Sam wrote:
talk radio -- quick shit
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10947
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 1:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mouse wrote:
i also noticed that this diclaimer was written only (no voice-over)

Odd, it definitely had a voice-over at my house. Maybe that's a per-affiliate decision or something.
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Xilonen



Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 465
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dogen wrote:
mouse wrote:
i also noticed that this diclaimer was written only (no voice-over)

Odd, it definitely had a voice-over at my house. Maybe that's a per-affiliate decision or something.


was there? i remember it being written only...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Dogen



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 10947
Location: Bellingham, WA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yep! I remember because they over-stressed the "time compression" like it was more important than the "composite characters" or "invented from scratch dialogue".
_________________
"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17580
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Tue Sep 12, 2006 5:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hm...that _is_ interesting. definitely very quiet at _my_ place.

you know, it occurred to me last night - clinton was in office when the wtc was attacked the first time than bush was when it was attacked the second...which doesn't mean anything, of course, just struck me as interesting.
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group