quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

 "Bush has kept us safe from attack since 9/11"

Yeah,but letting 9/11 happen was more than enough fuck-up,just plenty.

And the 4000 plus GI`s(who were killed in Iraq,for nothing more than bush`s ego) and their families?

Are they safe and sound?

The "tough tactics" have turned into the terrorist`s best recruiting tool ever and terror attacks world-wide are way up.

And he let bin-laden get away with 9/11.

He let the Cole bombers get away.

The countries that actually had something to do w/ 9/11....Saudi Arabia and Dubai?....

bush/cheney let them slip by too.They`re even doing business with them.Sad.

And the taliban(who bush claims was destroyed)are on the rise and getting stronger.Another huge failure.

bush(and neo-con policy) has been an utter failure.
[/quote


OK....I see you probably don't care too much for President Bush.

However,  you say Bush "let 9/11 happen.  And how did he do that?  Those terrorists were in country training for their mission of destruction during the Clinton Administration!  And look back on the legislation that put up a giant wall between the FBI, CIA and other government intel agencies, preventing them from sharing intel that might have enabled us to line up the dots.  All done under democrat leaders...some of whom are still around today.

As far as the bringing up the death toll of our warriors in Iraq...what kind of person would think that Bush would sacrifice for "ego".  Gimme a break..the man is our President...I saw the deep emotional impact on him in the ruins of the Towers, and the total change in the agenda of his Prsidency with one priority..to protect all of us from another such attack.  Within two more weeks, hopefully, he would have succeeded in that mission and the torch will be passed to Obama.

I don't think I have ever seen anything connecting the governments of Saudi Arabia and Dubai to 9/11.  Do you condemn entire countries because a handful of its natives do an evil deed?  If that is the case German has been getting a bum rap for Hitler...it's really the fault of Austria!

Bin Laden is holed up in a "cave" in Pakistan...not a suite at a spa in Switzerland.  He is a figurehead, of course, and should be killed.  However, he is reduced to uTube video statements...  Islamic radical terrorists have been active for twenty years around the globe...the Moslem Brotherhood killed Sadat and spawned Al Quida is one of its offspring.  Radical Islam is a lot bigger than Bin Laden...and will be a cancer on this planet for decades to come.
Killing one man accomplishes nothing....unless moderate muslims assert themselves and say "enough is enough" with brother killing brother.

Ohh...and that attack on the U.S.S. Cole you refer too...that happened in October, 2000.  I do believe President Clinton who might have been getting a BJ at the time was Commander In Chief.  Ohh yea... and the perpetrators WERE CAUGHT and executed by Yemen.  Just want to be helpful with some "facts".
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58874-2004Sep29.html

Yep...Bush has done a terrible job if "what have you done for me lately" is a guiding rule for our lives.  Seriously, think about the impact on the economy from the 9/11 disaster and how George Bush pushed through the tax cuts that gave stimulus and recovery...Over the past year the economy has gone through financial crisis and the risks out there are still huge.  However....once again...do you think the sub-prime debacle that precipitated this issue started with Bush? Barney Frank, Cuomo et al pushed the banks under threats of lawsuits to give loans on easier and easier terms to people who could not afford to own a home.  Obama represented such a group in Chicago
These Congressional and agency officials are relaxed the rules governing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and it was downhill from there.   Bush actualy warned...as did McCain, about the problems coming from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac...who also doctored their books.

George Bush did not do the job I thought he would do and, in many respects, was a disappointment.  However, take a step back from ideological passion and study the history....and history did not begin eight years ago as many liberals seem to think. You can go back to Jimmy Carter days and see some of the mustard seeds of todays problems being planted by government.   Government IS the root of most of the evil we face today...not the cure.

(in reply to Owner59)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

More "change" for the Obama administration?? The good news is the Clinton cronies have almost all been given jobs. The well is almost dry. I say Monica Lewinski for Education secretary...

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArticMaestro

Vendaval, so you are saying that he was totally out of the loop and had no idea that the policy of Extaordinary Renditions had been implemented?  

No, I disagree with the guilt by association tactic.  Have you never disagreed with policies or procedures implemented by management in a place of employment or with decisions made by coworkers or others in the same pay bracket? 


I don't think he was out of the loop.  If he knew we were sending people to be tortured overseas, and opposed it and said nothing, the quote you give is completely meaningless, contradicted by his actions. 

Can you show that he did know about the policy and participated in the discussions?  Can you show his opinion either pro or con on the matter back in 1995?
 

Furthermore we can see that he puts political loyalty above his principles and the law. 

I do not see evidence of that.  Isn't doing what your boss tells you the basic premise of any job description?



All 6 of the duties you listed would have involved him in the decision to Extraordinarily Render people. 

But can you demonstrate that or is it only an assumption?


Sure Panetta would be great working on the budget, no complaints about that at all.

Balancing the budget and negotiating with Congress likely occupied most of his time and energy. 


If the purpose of CIA will be to make Obama look good, Panetta is a great choice.  If the goal for the CIA is to provide the best intell for us to deal with the challenges we face, Panetta has nothing to recomend him at all.   Obama is losing my respect fast over this. 

You are entitled to you opinion but I do not agree with you.

quote:


Sure Panetta would be great working on the budget, no complaints about that at all.

Balancing the budget and negotiating with Congress likely occupied most of his time and energy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArticMaestro

Owner 59, thats a pretty hard post to respond to, but I will try.   How is saying "ramzy yousef" a rebutal?   You are making words, but running from the point I made.  It is basic critical thinking.  That Clinton put a guy on trial, in no way negates that he turned others over for torture with no trials.  But, also bush has put people on trial. 

Also Clinton did attack Iraq many times.  Saddams Iraq was "innocent'?  Thats just nonsense. 

Panetta was part of sending people off to be tortured, with no trials, so was Clinton.  Pretending it was just Bush is ridiculous and partisan. 

If that is the quality of debate you engage in, we probably won't talk much.  It would be a waste of time.  Everyone reading this can see you ducked the point, and have no real reply.

quote:


If Clinton broke the law,show the crime and show the victim.

quote:

The attempt to tie Panetta to torture has failed and that`s why Obama wants him .Because of all the otherwise qualified people who are now dis-qualified by being associated bush`s smelly taint.

quote:

And it is important to realize that the Clinton Admin. was not the beginning of Extraordinary Rendition but rather goes all the way back to the 1880s! PBS Frontline series has a fascinating timeline and references for those wanting to pursue the matter further.

I do not approve of the practice no matter who is sitting in the White House or Congress.