Why Are Republicans So Relentlessly Cruel to the Poor?

[jc456]

I did read them. The question is, did you?

Apparently, I'm just not dumbing this down enough for you. I apologize for assuming a higher level of intelligence and perception for you than you actually have. Let me dumb it down and spell it out:

There's a difference between "The Mormon Church" and "individual Mormons". Learn it.

No kidding. My beef is with The Mormon Church. I like/love most individual Mormons except for the super-stinky self-righteous ones. Maybe I didn't make that clear enough.

And yet again, I'm forced to ask why leftists think being obtuse is a brilliant debate ploy, particularly against someone who has no intention of letting you deflect and move the goal posts.

There is no one on this board who is confused about the fact that you have a "beef" - which you apparently mean an unreasoning, fiery hatred - with the Mormon church. However, the topic under discussion here is whether or not the Mormon church donated money to political campaigns, or individual Mormons did so. For someone who claims to "love" individual Mormons, you sure do have a lot of trouble with constantly conflating them with the institution.

Furthermore, you are once again being an incredible hypocrite. I can't begin to imagine a Mormon who is more "super-stinky self-righteous" about his Mormonism than you are about your anti-Mormonism.

I don't know much about Mormon doctrine. Could you ask one of these Mormon friends you claim to have whether or not their church teaches the "splinter in your neighbor's eye" concept?

Right back at ya, baby. Substitute liberal for Mormon and see how you stack up.

First of all, are you admitting that "liberalism" is your religion?

Second of all, there's no equivalency here. I think leftists are stupid and wrong, but at no point do I rant and rave and spew about how awful I think it is that they're granted the same rights as everyone else, even if they insist on exercising them in service of their stupidity. Furthermore, I do not lambaste people for a behavior while manifesting the exact same behavior. I am many things, but a hypocrite isn't one of them. You, however, cannot say the same honestly.

First of all, I don't have a religion.

Second, I don't think I'd have to look very far into your previous posts to prove you wrong but since you wouldn't see it anyway, why bother.

or, I'm sorry, I can't challenge you in a debate and therefore give up.

Thanks for playing today., You now admit you were wrong.

 

[francoHFW]

Bush left us open to attack

He made no effort to enhance antiterrorist protections despite being repeatedly warned about the threat......he had better things to do

3000 Americans died

Remain ignorant if it makes you feel better. But the CBS report I posted states differently, it's just that it doesn't fit in your "blame Republicans" for everything mantra. Nor does it support your left-wing brainwashing sites that I'm sure you frequent daily.

Want to blame Bush for 911? Fine, now let's see you blame Bill Clinton for the first WTC attacks. Let's see you blame Bill Clinton for the Oklahoma City bombing. Let's see you blame Bill Clinton for all the planning of 911 that went on while he was President.

What's that I hear.... crickets? I thought so.

Problem is, there is no evidence for that, while for Booosh and 9/11 there is plenty...

What a complete moron you fake teacher you. I just posted a report showing that Bush had no idea of the attack, and your stupidity tells you to say just the opposite of the report, making false claims of evidence you didn't (and won't) provide.

You are about as much of a retired teacher as I am a retired astronaut. How can you say such stupid things repeatedly and try to convince us that you're anything less than a welfare queen?

Why would I lie, ignoramus? BTW, you ought to try reading your own link- and there is plenty more like this. Booosh, Cheney, and Rummie were total incompetents like you...obnoxious too.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot."

Guess what- a policy wonk like Gore would have been all over this and the real estate bubble too. Great job, GOP and silly dupes like you...Presto no ME OR Wall St catastrophe.

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

 

[JoeNormal]

No kidding. My beef is with The Mormon Church. I like/love most individual Mormons except for the super-stinky self-righteous ones. Maybe I didn't make that clear enough.

And yet again, I'm forced to ask why leftists think being obtuse is a brilliant debate ploy, particularly against someone who has no intention of letting you deflect and move the goal posts.

There is no one on this board who is confused about the fact that you have a "beef" - which you apparently mean an unreasoning, fiery hatred - with the Mormon church. However, the topic under discussion here is whether or not the Mormon church donated money to political campaigns, or individual Mormons did so. For someone who claims to "love" individual Mormons, you sure do have a lot of trouble with constantly conflating them with the institution.

Furthermore, you are once again being an incredible hypocrite. I can't begin to imagine a Mormon who is more "super-stinky self-righteous" about his Mormonism than you are about your anti-Mormonism.

I don't know much about Mormon doctrine. Could you ask one of these Mormon friends you claim to have whether or not their church teaches the "splinter in your neighbor's eye" concept?

Right back at ya, baby. Substitute liberal for Mormon and see how you stack up.

First of all, are you admitting that "liberalism" is your religion?

Second of all, there's no equivalency here. I think leftists are stupid and wrong, but at no point do I rant and rave and spew about how awful I think it is that they're granted the same rights as everyone else, even if they insist on exercising them in service of their stupidity. Furthermore, I do not lambaste people for a behavior while manifesting the exact same behavior. I am many things, but a hypocrite isn't one of them. You, however, cannot say the same honestly.

First of all, I don't have a religion.

Second, I don't think I'd have to look very far into your previous posts to prove you wrong but since you wouldn't see it anyway, why bother.

or, I'm sorry, I can't challenge you in a debate and therefore give up.

Thanks for playing today., You now admit you were wrong.

Are you retired? I'm not and I actually have to try to get things done in between babysitting this feeble exchange. Go play with someone who has the time.

 

[JoeNormal]

For one thing, because those of us outside of the church have to make up the tax money that evaporates thanks to deductions for huge families and the tax exempt contributions to the church. For another, we are treated as second class citizens in our home state because of the crappy influence of the church in political affairs.

Okay, again, we need to address this "tax money evaporates" assertion you keep throwing around. You really need to come to grips with the fact that people's income belongs to THEM, not to the government. To say that "tax money evaporates" when people aren't compelled to give it to the government to spend is to imply that the government has an implicit right to ALL of your money, and what you keep is what they are generously allotting you.

As for "deductions for huge familes", tell me something: do you claim deductions for your offspring, or did you when they were young enough? Why or why not?

Do you claim deductions for charitable contributions you make on your taxes? Or do you feel that that is "evaporating tax money" and burdening other people by doing so?

In regards to your continued hatred of living in a place where you are outnumbered by Mormons, I will say it again: Move. I've been to Utah, and I feel pretty safe in saying that the Mormons are not holding you at gunpoint and forcing you to live there.

There's that black and white, right wing thought that I've been waiting for. I can see the value that the government provides from the tax money that I contribute so that means I give them the implicit right to take ALL of my money. Uh, yeah, right.

As for leaving, I did manage to escape for 5 years. I came back when my parents needed some help and in the meantime, life happened and now I'm stuck for a while. Don't worry though, as soon as it's feasible for me to leave, I'll be gone with bells on.

Excuse me, I'M exhibiting "black and white thought"? Hypocrite much?

Is it just that you really don't see your own egregious behavior while nitpicking others, or you simply don't think yours matters because, after all, YOU are right?

I thought I made it clear the I saw different members of the church in different ways. Did you miss that? Or does everything just get filtered through your black and white lens?

No, you made it clear you THINK you do, and then you also made it clear that you ACTUALLY do the exact opposite.

Hmmm, maybe that's why I said you're a hypocrite.

Maybe this statement regarding the church as an organization that I made earlier will ring a bell.

"I'll offer this disclaimer before proceeding: Some of my closest friends over the years have been members of the church and I can honestly say that they are wonderful people. However there is a faction of their membership that is so super-stinky self-righteous that it would take 100 members doing 100 good things to change my perception of the organization itself. They don't have those numbers so my negative perception persists."

 

[jc456]

And yet again, I'm forced to ask why leftists think being obtuse is a brilliant debate ploy, particularly against someone who has no intention of letting you deflect and move the goal posts.

There is no one on this board who is confused about the fact that you have a "beef" - which you apparently mean an unreasoning, fiery hatred - with the Mormon church. However, the topic under discussion here is whether or not the Mormon church donated money to political campaigns, or individual Mormons did so. For someone who claims to "love" individual Mormons, you sure do have a lot of trouble with constantly conflating them with the institution.

Furthermore, you are once again being an incredible hypocrite. I can't begin to imagine a Mormon who is more "super-stinky self-righteous" about his Mormonism than you are about your anti-Mormonism.

I don't know much about Mormon doctrine. Could you ask one of these Mormon friends you claim to have whether or not their church teaches the "splinter in your neighbor's eye" concept?

Right back at ya, baby. Substitute liberal for Mormon and see how you stack up.

First of all, are you admitting that "liberalism" is your religion?

Second of all, there's no equivalency here. I think leftists are stupid and wrong, but at no point do I rant and rave and spew about how awful I think it is that they're granted the same rights as everyone else, even if they insist on exercising them in service of their stupidity. Furthermore, I do not lambaste people for a behavior while manifesting the exact same behavior. I am many things, but a hypocrite isn't one of them. You, however, cannot say the same honestly.

First of all, I don't have a religion.

Second, I don't think I'd have to look very far into your previous posts to prove you wrong but since you wouldn't see it anyway, why bother.

or, I'm sorry, I can't challenge you in a debate and therefore give up.

Thanks for playing today., You now admit you were wrong.

Are you retired? I'm not and I actually have to try to get things done in between babysitting this feeble exchange. Go play with someone who has the time.

nope, I work on a computer all day. I do all my work in between the posts. I multi-task very well.

 

[JoeNormal]

Right back at ya, baby. Substitute liberal for Mormon and see how you stack up.

First of all, are you admitting that "liberalism" is your religion?

Second of all, there's no equivalency here. I think leftists are stupid and wrong, but at no point do I rant and rave and spew about how awful I think it is that they're granted the same rights as everyone else, even if they insist on exercising them in service of their stupidity. Furthermore, I do not lambaste people for a behavior while manifesting the exact same behavior. I am many things, but a hypocrite isn't one of them. You, however, cannot say the same honestly.

First of all, I don't have a religion.

Second, I don't think I'd have to look very far into your previous posts to prove you wrong but since you wouldn't see it anyway, why bother.

or, I'm sorry, I can't challenge you in a debate and therefore give up.

Thanks for playing today., You now admit you were wrong.

Are you retired? I'm not and I actually have to try to get things done in between babysitting this feeble exchange. Go play with someone who has the time.

nope, I work on a computer all day. I do all my work in between the posts. I multi-task very well.

News flash: No you don't.

 

[Papageorgio]

Remain ignorant if it makes you feel better. But the CBS report I posted states differently, it's just that it doesn't fit in your "blame Republicans" for everything mantra. Nor does it support your left-wing brainwashing sites that I'm sure you frequent daily.

Want to blame Bush for 911? Fine, now let's see you blame Bill Clinton for the first WTC attacks. Let's see you blame Bill Clinton for the Oklahoma City bombing. Let's see you blame Bill Clinton for all the planning of 911 that went on while he was President.

What's that I hear.... crickets? I thought so.

Problem is, there is no evidence for that, while for Booosh and 9/11 there is plenty...

What a complete moron you fake teacher you. I just posted a report showing that Bush had no idea of the attack, and your stupidity tells you to say just the opposite of the report, making false claims of evidence you didn't (and won't) provide.

You are about as much of a retired teacher as I am a retired astronaut. How can you say such stupid things repeatedly and try to convince us that you're anything less than a welfare queen?

Why would I lie, ignoramus? BTW, you ought to try reading your own link- and there is plenty more like this. Booosh, Cheney, and Rummie were total incompetents like you...obnoxious too.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot."

Guess what- a policy wonk like Gore would have been all over this and the real estate bubble too. Great job, GOP and silly dupes like you...Presto no ME OR Wall St catastrophe.

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

So you got no answer, thanks for the stupidity.

 

[francoHFW]

Only in Dupeworld.

LOL!!!!

Sub humans cannot debate issues. They can only parrot, insult, and change the subject to the latest left wing parroting...

So why don't you quote my argument and the facts, scumbag? LIAR. Just like your BS Fake News
media. Great job. You're a total dupe. That's a political insult, unlike your stupid typical RW personal insult, hater dupe. You believe a pile of crap- that's why you vote for the greedy idiot lying New BS GOP and hate half the country.

 

[Papageorgio]

Okay, again, we need to address this "tax money evaporates" assertion you keep throwing around. You really need to come to grips with the fact that people's income belongs to THEM, not to the government. To say that "tax money evaporates" when people aren't compelled to give it to the government to spend is to imply that the government has an implicit right to ALL of your money, and what you keep is what they are generously allotting you.

As for "deductions for huge familes", tell me something: do you claim deductions for your offspring, or did you when they were young enough? Why or why not?

Do you claim deductions for charitable contributions you make on your taxes? Or do you feel that that is "evaporating tax money" and burdening other people by doing so?

In regards to your continued hatred of living in a place where you are outnumbered by Mormons, I will say it again: Move. I've been to Utah, and I feel pretty safe in saying that the Mormons are not holding you at gunpoint and forcing you to live there.

There's that black and white, right wing thought that I've been waiting for. I can see the value that the government provides from the tax money that I contribute so that means I give them the implicit right to take ALL of my money. Uh, yeah, right.

As for leaving, I did manage to escape for 5 years. I came back when my parents needed some help and in the meantime, life happened and now I'm stuck for a while. Don't worry though, as soon as it's feasible for me to leave, I'll be gone with bells on.

Excuse me, I'M exhibiting "black and white thought"? Hypocrite much?

Is it just that you really don't see your own egregious behavior while nitpicking others, or you simply don't think yours matters because, after all, YOU are right?

I thought I made it clear the I saw different members of the church in different ways. Did you miss that? Or does everything just get filtered through your black and white lens?

No, you made it clear you THINK you do, and then you also made it clear that you ACTUALLY do the exact opposite.

Hmmm, maybe that's why I said you're a hypocrite.

Maybe this statement regarding the church as an organization that I made earlier will ring a bell.

"I'll offer this disclaimer before proceeding: Some of my closest friends over the years have been members of the church and I can honestly say that they are wonderful people. However there is a faction of their membership that is so super-stinky self-righteous that it would take 100 members doing 100 good things to change my perception of the organization itself. They don't have those numbers so my negative perception persists."

So the majority of those members you like and you call them wonderful people, but because of a few people, you have a negative perception of the church.

That is one of the silliest things I have read in awhile.

 

[jc456]

Only in Dupeworld.

LOL!!!!

Sub humans cannot debate issues. They can only parrot, insult, and change the subject to the latest left wing parroting...

So why don't you quote my argument and the facts, scumbag? LIAR. Just like your BS Fake News
media. Great job. You're a total dupe. That's a political insult, unlike your stupid typical RW personal insult, hater dupe. You believe a pile of crap- that's why you vote for the greedy idiot lying New BS GOP and hate half the country.

 

[francoHFW]

Problem is, there is no evidence for that, while for Booosh and 9/11 there is plenty...

What a complete moron you fake teacher you. I just posted a report showing that Bush had no idea of the attack, and your stupidity tells you to say just the opposite of the report, making false claims of evidence you didn't (and won't) provide.

You are about as much of a retired teacher as I am a retired astronaut. How can you say such stupid things repeatedly and try to convince us that you're anything less than a welfare queen?

Why would I lie, ignoramus? BTW, you ought to try reading your own link- and there is plenty more like this. Booosh, Cheney, and Rummie were total incompetents like you...obnoxious too.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot."

Guess what- a policy wonk like Gore would have been all over this and the real estate bubble too. Great job, GOP and silly dupes like you...Presto no ME OR Wall St catastrophe.

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

So you got no answer, thanks for the stupidity.

Duh.
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Jump to Bush administration - Clarke and his communications with the Bush ... No longer would Clarke'smemos go to the President; instead they had to ...
‎Background · ‎Government career · ‎9/11 Commission · ‎Post government career
Ex-Counterterrorism Czar Richard Clarke: Bush, Cheney and ...
https://www.democracynow.org/2014/.../ex_counterterrorism_czar_richard_clarke_b...
Jun 2, 2014 - former top counterterrorism official under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush before resigning in 2003 in protest of the Iraq War.
Donald Trump, George W. Bush, and Responsibility for 9/11 - The ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/...george-w-bush.../411175/
Oct 19, 2015 - George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack—and it's time ... National Security Council counterterrorism “czar” Richard Clarke ...
Unheeded Warnings: George W. Bush and 9/11 | The National Interest
nationalinterest.org/feature/unheeded-warnings-george-w-bush-9-11-14122
Oct 17, 2015 - ... experts including Richard Clarke, then still in the White House as an .... However, the administration of George W Bush completely ignored ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A. Clarke: 9780743260459: Amazon.com: Books
Clarke, a veteran Washington insider who had advised presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, andGeorge W. Bush, dissects each man's approach to ...
CNN.com - Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings ...
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/clarke.bush/index.html?PHPSESSID...
Mar 23, 2004 - Former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke joins ... CNN's Kathleen Koch on how President Bush warns that John Kerry will ...

 

[LaDexter]

George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack

That's like saying the Clintons "didn't do all they could" to keep the Whitewater partners out of prison...

 

[Papageorgio]

What a complete moron you fake teacher you. I just posted a report showing that Bush had no idea of the attack, and your stupidity tells you to say just the opposite of the report, making false claims of evidence you didn't (and won't) provide.

You are about as much of a retired teacher as I am a retired astronaut. How can you say such stupid things repeatedly and try to convince us that you're anything less than a welfare queen?

Why would I lie, ignoramus? BTW, you ought to try reading your own link- and there is plenty more like this. Booosh, Cheney, and Rummie were total incompetents like you...obnoxious too.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot."

Guess what- a policy wonk like Gore would have been all over this and the real estate bubble too. Great job, GOP and silly dupes like you...Presto no ME OR Wall St catastrophe.

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

So you got no answer, thanks for the stupidity.

Duh.
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Jump to Bush administration - Clarke and his communications with the Bush ... No longer would Clarke'smemos go to the President; instead they had to ...
‎Background · ‎Government career · ‎9/11 Commission · ‎Post government career
Ex-Counterterrorism Czar Richard Clarke: Bush, Cheney and ...
https://www.democracynow.org/2014/.../ex_counterterrorism_czar_richard_clarke_b...
Jun 2, 2014 - former top counterterrorism official under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush before resigning in 2003 in protest of the Iraq War.
Donald Trump, George W. Bush, and Responsibility for 9/11 - The ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/...george-w-bush.../411175/
Oct 19, 2015 - George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack—and it's time ... National Security Council counterterrorism “czar” Richard Clarke ...
Unheeded Warnings: George W. Bush and 9/11 | The National Interest
nationalinterest.org/feature/unheeded-warnings-george-w-bush-9-11-14122
Oct 17, 2015 - ... experts including Richard Clarke, then still in the White House as an .... However, the administration of George W Bush completely ignored ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A. Clarke: 9780743260459: Amazon.com: Books
Clarke, a veteran Washington insider who had advised presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, andGeorge W. Bush, dissects each man's approach to ...
CNN.com - Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings ...
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/clarke.bush/index.html?PHPSESSID...
Mar 23, 2004 - Former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke joins ... CNN's Kathleen Koch on how President Bush warns that John Kerry will ...

Again, your claim is the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

If you can't answer the question or don't understand the question or just want to play stupid, it is all good with me. You are confirming what everyone already knows.

 

[JoeNormal]

There's that black and white, right wing thought that I've been waiting for. I can see the value that the government provides from the tax money that I contribute so that means I give them the implicit right to take ALL of my money. Uh, yeah, right.

As for leaving, I did manage to escape for 5 years. I came back when my parents needed some help and in the meantime, life happened and now I'm stuck for a while. Don't worry though, as soon as it's feasible for me to leave, I'll be gone with bells on.

Excuse me, I'M exhibiting "black and white thought"? Hypocrite much?

Is it just that you really don't see your own egregious behavior while nitpicking others, or you simply don't think yours matters because, after all, YOU are right?

I thought I made it clear the I saw different members of the church in different ways. Did you miss that? Or does everything just get filtered through your black and white lens?

No, you made it clear you THINK you do, and then you also made it clear that you ACTUALLY do the exact opposite.

Hmmm, maybe that's why I said you're a hypocrite.

Maybe this statement regarding the church as an organization that I made earlier will ring a bell.

"I'll offer this disclaimer before proceeding: Some of my closest friends over the years have been members of the church and I can honestly say that they are wonderful people. However there is a faction of their membership that is so super-stinky self-righteous that it would take 100 members doing 100 good things to change my perception of the organization itself. They don't have those numbers so my negative perception persists."

So the majority of those members you like and you call them wonderful people, but because of a few people, you have a negative perception of the church.

That is one of the silliest things I have read in awhile.

No, you'd have to follow this thread for a while to interpret it correctly. I TEND to like most members of the church but find the church as an organization to have a negative impact on my life.

 

[Billo_Really]

Again, your claim is the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

If you can't answer the question or don't understand the question or just want to play stupid, it is all good with me. You are confirming what everyone already knows.

Cut the shit! What are your thoughts on Lorenzo Ball?

Wait..................what thread am I in?

 

[Papageorgio]

Excuse me, I'M exhibiting "black and white thought"? Hypocrite much?

Is it just that you really don't see your own egregious behavior while nitpicking others, or you simply don't think yours matters because, after all, YOU are right?

I thought I made it clear the I saw different members of the church in different ways. Did you miss that? Or does everything just get filtered through your black and white lens?

No, you made it clear you THINK you do, and then you also made it clear that you ACTUALLY do the exact opposite.

Hmmm, maybe that's why I said you're a hypocrite.

Maybe this statement regarding the church as an organization that I made earlier will ring a bell.

"I'll offer this disclaimer before proceeding: Some of my closest friends over the years have been members of the church and I can honestly say that they are wonderful people. However there is a faction of their membership that is so super-stinky self-righteous that it would take 100 members doing 100 good things to change my perception of the organization itself. They don't have those numbers so my negative perception persists."

So the majority of those members you like and you call them wonderful people, but because of a few people, you have a negative perception of the church.

That is one of the silliest things I have read in awhile.

No, you'd have to follow this thread for a while to interpret it correctly. I TEND to like most members of the church but find the church as an organization to have a negative impact on my life.

Then just say you don't like the organization and don't share their beliefs. I know many atheists, they are good people, I don't share their beliefs.

 

[francoHFW]

Why would I lie, ignoramus? BTW, you ought to try reading your own link- and there is plenty more like this. Booosh, Cheney, and Rummie were total incompetents like you...obnoxious too.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that while President Bush was told last summer that bin Laden's al Qaeda network might hijack planes, "until the attack took place, I think it's fair to say that no one envisioned that [using planes as suicide bombs] as a possibility."

However, a federal report issued exactly two years before the Sept. 11 attacks contrasts with that statement.

The report, entitled the "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?," warned the executive branch that bin Laden's terrorists might hijack an airliner and dive bomb it into the Pentagon or other government building.

It described the suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks al Qaeda might seek for the 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for various federal agencies under contracts.

And it's come out that an agent in the FBI's Arizona office also speculated about using planes as weapons, writing in his case notes about Zacarias Moussaoui that Moussaoui seemed like the type of person who was capable of flying an aircraft into the World Trade Center.

It was the observation of an agent taking notes as he thought about his case - an observation whose significance simply did not register at the time.

Separately, the New York Times reports that an FBI agent in Arizona warned his superiors last summer that bin Laden might be sending students to U.S. flight schools.

The FBI failed to make a connection between that warning and the August arrest of Moussaoui - a French citizen of Moroccan descent detained in Minnesota after raising suspicions among his instructors at a flight school where he said he wanted to know how to fly, but not how to land or take off.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller has said repeatedly that he wishes the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads. Mueller has also said that nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the plot."

Guess what- a policy wonk like Gore would have been all over this and the real estate bubble too. Great job, GOP and silly dupes like you...Presto no ME OR Wall St catastrophe.

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

So you got no answer, thanks for the stupidity.

Duh.
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Jump to Bush administration - Clarke and his communications with the Bush ... No longer would Clarke'smemos go to the President; instead they had to ...
‎Background · ‎Government career · ‎9/11 Commission · ‎Post government career
Ex-Counterterrorism Czar Richard Clarke: Bush, Cheney and ...
https://www.democracynow.org/2014/.../ex_counterterrorism_czar_richard_clarke_b...
Jun 2, 2014 - former top counterterrorism official under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush before resigning in 2003 in protest of the Iraq War.
Donald Trump, George W. Bush, and Responsibility for 9/11 - The ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/...george-w-bush.../411175/
Oct 19, 2015 - George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack—and it's time ... National Security Council counterterrorism “czar” Richard Clarke ...
Unheeded Warnings: George W. Bush and 9/11 | The National Interest
nationalinterest.org/feature/unheeded-warnings-george-w-bush-9-11-14122
Oct 17, 2015 - ... experts including Richard Clarke, then still in the White House as an .... However, the administration of George W Bush completely ignored ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A. Clarke: 9780743260459: Amazon.com: Books
Clarke, a veteran Washington insider who had advised presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, andGeorge W. Bush, dissects each man's approach to ...
CNN.com - Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings ...
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/clarke.bush/index.html?PHPSESSID...
Mar 23, 2004 - Former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke joins ... CNN's Kathleen Koch on how President Bush warns that John Kerry will ...

Again, your claim is the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

If you can't answer the question or don't understand the question or just want to play stupid, it is all good with me. You are confirming what everyone already knows.

Only fake news says Clinton ignored any clues, dupe- unlike W. He was also busy defending himself against a tidal wave of GOP bs propaganda for 8 years. You and your party are a disgrace.

 

[francoHFW]

George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack

That's like saying the Clintons "didn't do all they could" to keep the Whitewater partners out of prison...

Speaking of irrelevant GOP witch hunts...

 

[Papageorgio]

Again, your claim is the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

If you can't answer the question or don't understand the question or just want to play stupid, it is all good with me. You are confirming what everyone already knows.

Cut the shit! What are your thoughts on Lorenzo Ball?

Wait..................what thread am I in?

Lorenzo is not worth Phil Jackson's time, so he probably has talent, but do you really want to deal with his father's baggage?

 

[Papageorgio]

If the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

According to the New BS GOP, he made it all up and was wagging the dog...great job!

So you got no answer, thanks for the stupidity.

Duh.
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia
Jump to Bush administration - Clarke and his communications with the Bush ... No longer would Clarke'smemos go to the President; instead they had to ...
‎Background · ‎Government career · ‎9/11 Commission · ‎Post government career
Ex-Counterterrorism Czar Richard Clarke: Bush, Cheney and ...
https://www.democracynow.org/2014/.../ex_counterterrorism_czar_richard_clarke_b...
Jun 2, 2014 - former top counterterrorism official under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush before resigning in 2003 in protest of the Iraq War.
Donald Trump, George W. Bush, and Responsibility for 9/11 - The ...
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/10/...george-w-bush.../411175/
Oct 19, 2015 - George W. Bush didn't do all he could to prevent the attack—and it's time ... National Security Council counterterrorism “czar” Richard Clarke ...
Unheeded Warnings: George W. Bush and 9/11 | The National Interest
nationalinterest.org/feature/unheeded-warnings-george-w-bush-9-11-14122
Oct 17, 2015 - ... experts including Richard Clarke, then still in the White House as an .... However, the administration of George W Bush completely ignored ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A ...
Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror: Richard A. Clarke: 9780743260459: Amazon.com: Books
Clarke, a veteran Washington insider who had advised presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Clinton, andGeorge W. Bush, dissects each man's approach to ...
CNN.com - Former antiterror adviser says Bush ignored 9/11 warnings ...
www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/22/clarke.bush/index.html?PHPSESSID...
Mar 23, 2004 - Former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke joins ... CNN's Kathleen Koch on how President Bush warns that John Kerry will ...

Again, your claim is the reports were written two years before the attacks, why didn't Clinton have a plan in place? Seems to me if the threat was as serious as claimed, the Clinton administration would have been all over it and would have captured Bin Laden when he had been given the chance.

If you can't answer the question or don't understand the question or just want to play stupid, it is all good with me. You are confirming what everyone already knows.

Only fake news says Clinton ignored any clues, dupe- unlike W. He was also busy defending himself against a tidal wave of GOP bs propaganda for 8 years. You and your party are a disgrace.

Dude, you are the one saying he knew ahead of time, go read your post!!! LOL! You don't know what the hell you post? Are you really as dumb as you appear to be?