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  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Sinfest Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't believe I ever said that the reason we didn't do a plan to capture Bin Laden was because of bureaucratic bullshit. I said that Clinton or the Admin (it turns out to be Tenet) called off attacks on Bin Laden when the military was ready and Bin Laden was located (though I used "cornered", which I admit is too strong a word.


The reason some intel related directly to the 9/11 attacks wasn't acted on had to do with bureautratic bullshit.




Oh, and Clinton missed Bin Laden.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MsFrisby



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 3966
Location: a quiet little corner of crazy

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You STILL have not supported the idea that it was CLINTON'S fault that TENET and ADVISORS did not act on the intelligence he had.
_________________
A person's character is their destiny.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought I had something where Albright and Bergman was involved. Let me check.


Oh, and I had not been differentiating between Clinton and Clinton Administration. I hope that is okay.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Neraren



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 409

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's a novel idea Ags. How about you check BEFORE you start spouting total bullshit, and we can prevent this situation in the future. Kthxbyethread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agamemnon wrote:
Quote:
December 1998: US Locates bin Laden; Declines to Strike US intelligence learns that bin Laden is staying at a particular location in Afghanistan, and missile strikes are readied against him. However, principal advisers to President Clinton agree not to recommend a strike because of doubts about the intelligence and worries about collateral damage. In the wake of this incident, officials attempt to find alternatives to cruise missiles, such a precision strike aircraft. However, US Central Command Chief General Anthony Zinni is apparently opposed to deployment of these aircraft near Afghanistan, and they are not deployed. [9/11 Commission, 3/24/2004]



But I need to find Bergman and Albright for ya. BRB

[edit] Er...Berger
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.


Last edited by Agamemnon on Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:44 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Neraren wrote:
Here's a novel idea Ags. How about you check BEFORE you start spouting total bullshit, and we can prevent this situation in the future. Kthxbyethread.


Hey, you try finding the sources to something you heard on the news or radio. It's not always instantaneous there dude.

And how about some consideration too, dammit. I do not attack people here yet continually get attacked. Is that so much to ask?

[edit] Oh, and in case you still read this, I have found many a source claiming that Albright and/or Berger or referenced to the Clinton Administration, were involved in calling off an attack on Bin Laden. It's just that those sources would not be sound, so I am trying to trace the source of those sources. Excuse me for trying to be dilligent.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.


Last edited by Agamemnon on Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:55 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17281
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agamemnon wrote:
I don't believe I ever said that the reason we didn't do a plan to capture Bin Laden was because of bureaucratic bullshit. I said that Clinton or the Admin (it turns out to be Tenet) called off attacks on Bin Laden when the military was ready and Bin Laden was located (though I used "cornered", which I admit is too strong a word.


The reason some intel related directly to the 9/11 attacks wasn't acted on had to do with bureautratic bullshit.


that, and the fact that bush didn't like to read long reports.




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?

and i take it you don't dispute that clinton at least _tried_ to get bin laden - which is not at all what this miniseries is apparently claiming?
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mouse wrote:
Agamemnon wrote:
I don't believe I ever said that the reason we didn't do a plan to capture Bin Laden was because of bureaucratic bullshit. I said that Clinton or the Admin (it turns out to be Tenet) called off attacks on Bin Laden when the military was ready and Bin Laden was located (though I used "cornered", which I admit is too strong a word.


The reason some intel related directly to the 9/11 attacks wasn't acted on had to do with bureautratic bullshit.


that, and the fact that bush didn't like to read long reports.


ABC's docudrama goes after Bush as well.




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.

Quote:
and i take it you don't dispute that clinton at least _tried_ to get bin laden - which is not at all what this miniseries is apparently claiming?



I don't think the mini series is claiming that Clinton did nothing to go after Bin Laden. In fact, I believe the mini series focuses on the lapses that led to 9/11. If what I heard is correct, the pursuit of Bin Laden is not a huge part of the story.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mouse



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 17281
Location: under the bed

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 12:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agamemnon wrote:
mouse wrote:
Agamemnon wrote:
I don't believe I ever said that the reason we didn't do a plan to capture Bin Laden was because of bureaucratic bullshit. I said that Clinton or the Admin (it turns out to be Tenet) called off attacks on Bin Laden when the military was ready and Bin Laden was located (though I used "cornered", which I admit is too strong a word.


The reason some intel related directly to the 9/11 attacks wasn't acted on had to do with bureautratic bullshit.


that, and the fact that bush didn't like to read long reports.


ABC's docudrama goes after Bush as well.


but is it truthful in what it says about bush? the problem people are having is that what is says is not correct. it's being billed as presenting actual facts, when this is just not the case.




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.

Agamemnon wrote:
Quote:
and i take it you don't dispute that clinton at least _tried_ to get bin laden - which is not at all what this miniseries is apparently claiming?



I don't think the mini series is claiming that Clinton did nothing to go after Bin Laden. In fact, I believe the mini series focuses on the lapses that led to 9/11. If what I heard is correct, the pursuit of Bin Laden is not a huge part of the story.


ummmm..... the effort to take out bin laden _before_ 9/11 is not a big part of the story? when the whole discussion has been that the show purports to show that clinton's people had a chance to do so, and passed it by, thus allowing 9/11 to happen?
_________________
aka: neverscared!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mouse wrote:
Agamemnon wrote:
mouse wrote:
Agamemnon wrote:
I don't believe I ever said that the reason we didn't do a plan to capture Bin Laden was because of bureaucratic bullshit. I said that Clinton or the Admin (it turns out to be Tenet) called off attacks on Bin Laden when the military was ready and Bin Laden was located (though I used "cornered", which I admit is too strong a word.


The reason some intel related directly to the 9/11 attacks wasn't acted on had to do with bureautratic bullshit.


that, and the fact that bush didn't like to read long reports.


ABC's docudrama goes after Bush as well.


but is it truthful in what it says about bush? the problem people are having is that what is says is not correct. it's being billed as presenting actual facts, when this is just not the case.


I don't know. I haven't seen it. All I have to go on is Rush saying that it goes after both Clinton and Bush, though it really puts the blame on the terrorists themselves.

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.

Quote:
Agamemnon wrote:
Quote:
and i take it you don't dispute that clinton at least _tried_ to get bin laden - which is not at all what this miniseries is apparently claiming?



I don't think the mini series is claiming that Clinton did nothing to go after Bin Laden. In fact, I believe the mini series focuses on the lapses that led to 9/11. If what I heard is correct, the pursuit of Bin Laden is not a huge part of the story.


ummmm..... the effort to take out bin laden _before_ 9/11 is not a big part of the story? when the whole discussion has been that the show purports to show that clinton's people had a chance to do so, and passed it by, thus allowing 9/11 to happen?

According to Ruch, the main focus of the docudrama, with respect to the Bush and Clinton presidencies, has to do with beaucratic lapses and lack of comunication between the different branches of the intel community. You know. The stuff in the 9/11 reports.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

that might be in the 9/11 report, but the only big conversation i remember about a lack of communication between the branches of intelligence was the one used to avoid apologizing for lying about the reasons for invading iraq...


...which had nothing to do with the september 11th attacks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Agamemnon



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 907
Location: Studying somewhere. Or at least that's where I should be.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess you'll have to see the docudrama to clarifyu that then. I thought the 9/11 report done by congress talked about a lack of communication between the branches, but I certainly could be mistaken.
_________________
-Agamemnon.....but you can call me Jake.

P: They don't know we know they know we know. And Joey, you can't say anything!

J: Couldn't if I wanted to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sam



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 9556

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:10 am    Post subject: ergh Reply with quote

Agamemnon wrote:
Perhaps "Cornered" is too strong a term. Located? At any rate, more from the same site:


Okay, I have no idea what's going on anymore. You're shoveling references at me that the intel divisions did not give the thumbs up to every potential opportunity to axe Osama that they ever had, but you continue to drift further away from actually dealing with the points that I have in contention!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Major Tom



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 7562

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i would never watch a docudrama to clarify anything in a fact-based reality
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sporko



Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 2892

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agamemnon wrote:

mouse wrote:

but is it truthful in what it says about bush? the problem people are having is that what is says is not correct. it's being billed as presenting actual facts, when this is just not the case.


I don't know. I haven't seen it. All I have to go on is Rush saying that it goes after both Clinton and Bush, though it really puts the blame on the terrorists themselves.


...just...wow.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
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  Next
Page 2 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