I guess you all have heard about the ABC 911 miniseries censored by democrats

[jyro]

read this article written in 2001
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

[Trip McNeely]

Yeah because they dont want the public to know what CLINTON ignored and failed to do, seeing as the first time this happened was in his term. :rolleyes:

[mikeb]

Clinton's lawyers now demand that the film be yanked:

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/09/in_new_letter_clintons_lawyer_demands_abc_yank_fil m

[black01gt]

http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c205/FeatMike/thatexplainsit.jpghttp://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c205/FeatMike/Arabsareassholes.jpghttp://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c205/FeatMike/Picsfromoldlaptop035.jpg



:rolleyes:

[Sgt Beavis]

The more Clinton crys foul, the more people that are going to watch.

I hope an unedited version comes out on DVD.

They writer for this miniseries was on Hanity last Friday. He spoke about the scene that the Clintons really have a problem with. The one where they CIA had Bin Laden in their sites and Berger told them they were on their own. Well that scene is an amalgamation of TWELVE different chances the Clintons had to take Bin Laden down. Obviously there isn't enough time to show all twelve opportunities, so they made one scene to make the point. I'm sure Bill and Hillary just want ABC to show all 12 times so the truth is really heard...

[black01gt]

Clinton Clinton Clinton (for obvious election time reasons)...not a Goddamned word about Bin Laden thumbing his nose at Bush for 5 years now after telling him "yes I killed your people...in America...and I'm gonna do it again...whadda you gonna do about it..." Time for more brainwashing of the weak minded voters. :D Disgusting!!!

[line-em-up]

Yeah because they dont want the public to know what CLINTON ignored and failed to do, seeing as the first time this happened was in his term. :rolleyes:

I think it's really funny how when someone blames Bush for something, the bush kissers point out how he is just the president, that it's not his fault, yet they love to lay blame on Clinton when it was Tenet that refused to attack. :rolleyes:

[Pro Trash]

Well it is a doco-drama which means fiction based on truth. I think Clinton's administration is to blame for some of 9-11 as is Reagan's for he sponsored Afghanistan against the Russians in the mid to late 1980's then never helped them them nor did H. Bush when they were taken over by the Taliban which backed Bin Laden. The issue I had was where they intended to show where a member of Clintons staff essentially hung up on the CIA while they were requesting permission to kill Bin Laden, this is not true and never happened. The average person watching it wouldn't unerstand this though. I also would like to know why is it that if we are so dedicated to the destruction of Bin Laden why has he not yet be apprehended or killed?

[jyro]

12/5/2001

By MANSOOR IJAZ

President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.

The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.

As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history.









http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

[Pro Trash]

12/5/2001

By MANSOOR IJAZ

President Clinton and his national security team ignored several opportunities to capture Osama bin Laden and his terrorist associates, including one as late as last year.

I know because I negotiated more than one of the opportunities.

From 1996 to 1998, I opened unofficial channels between Sudan and the Clinton administration. I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.

Among those in the networks were the two hijackers who piloted commercial airliners into the World Trade Center.

The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening.

As an American Muslim and a political supporter of Clinton, I feel now, as I argued with Clinton and Berger then, that their counter-terrorism policies fueled the rise of Bin Laden from an ordinary man to a Hydra-like monster.

Clinton's failure to grasp the opportunity to unravel increasingly organized extremists, coupled with Berger's assessments of their potential to directly threaten the U.S., represents one of the most serious foreign policy failures in American history.









http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm


I don't recall mentioning Clinton not capturing Bin Laden, I was speaking of him not killing Bin Laden so please read before you respond off topic. I assign blame to Clinton but I blame Reagan, G.H. Bush, G.W. Bush and Clinton for not doing what was in our best interests in the Middle East prior to 9/11 and W. Bush for not making the best decisions post 9-11. Please refrain from using the word liberal in describing my opinion. I approve of Bush for the most part but let's be honest, anyone who essentially wants to blame Clinton for 9-11 and not take into consideration other politicians that dropped the proverbial ball relegates themselves to partisan ignorance by choice.

[hotrod66stang]

Lmao! I'm laughing at the irony here. If we say anything about Bush, y'all call us unpatriotic or conspiracy theorists. I know this isn't immediately funny to anyone else who doesn't like Bush, and that's only because you don't know who Alex Jones is. I'm not saying that Clinton didn't know, or that none of that happened, but if one of us were to quote the same person that this thread is based on, we would be stoned to death and labeled as a "conspiracy theorist."

Please do yourselves a favor and visit the mainpage of that website, Infowars.com where you'll get to see an animated picture of the WTC blowing up and the caption " 9-11: The road to tryanny, They knew, They not only let it happen... They made it happen. Now we live in a police state." (edit, it's not on the main page anymore, but it is on the bottom of other pages.)

I believe a lot of what the guy says, as he uses INTERNATIONAL intelligence and media, instead of just what we're fed here, but I find it amusing that right-wingers would use a conspiracy theorist for the basis of an argument after ridiculing them so much. You're quoting the same man who says that 9-11 was an inside job, to an extent.

[revoautowerks]

Lmao! I'm laughing at the irony here. If we say anything about Bush, y'all call us unpatriotic or conspiracy theorists. I know this isn't immediately funny to anyone else who doesn't like Bush, and that's only because you don't know who Alex Jones is. I'm not saying that Clinton didn't know, or that none of that happened, but if one of us were to quote the same person that this thread is based on, we would be stoned to death and labeled as a "conspiracy theorist."

Please do yourselves a favor and visit the mainpage of that website, Infowars.com where you'll get to see an animated picture of the WTC blowing up and the caption " 9-11: The road to tryanny, They knew, They not only let it happen... They made it happen. Now we live in a police state." (edit, it's not on the main page anymore, but it is on the bottom of other pages.)

I believe a lot of what the guy says, as he uses INTERNATIONAL intelligence and media, instead of just what we're fed here, but I find it amusing that right-wingers would use a conspiracy theorist for the basis of an argument after ridiculing them so much. You're quoting the same man who says that 9-11 was an inside job, to an extent.


Some of Alex Jones' stuff is very interesting and will make you think a lot about what has transpired in the past 5 years. It can be really eye opening as long as you read and watch with an open mind. Visit the site, watch the movie.....I promise you will take some knowledge away from it.

[hotrod66stang]

Visit the site, watch the movie.....I promise you will take some knowledge away from it.Not the people from this site. That's why this is so ironic, they never believe anything that isn't said by a republican.

[revoautowerks]

Not the people from this site. That's why this is so ironic, they never believe anything that isn't said by a republican.

I understand that a lot of his info may be overwhelming to some people, but there is always two sides to every story. I dont consider myself a democrat or a republican, just an educated person that is concerned for our country.

[jyro]

The issue I had was where they intended to show where a member of Clintons staff essentially hung up on the CIA while they were requesting permission to kill Bin Laden, this is not true and never happened.

"I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening."

[jyro]

Please do yourselves a favor and visit the mainpage of that website, Infowars.com where you'll get to see an animated picture of the WTC blowing up and the caption " 9-11: The road to tryanny, They knew, They not only let it happen... They made it happen. Now we live in a police state." (edit, it's not on the main page anymore, but it is on the bottom of other pages.)


it's just linked on the infowars page, they had no part in writing it.

[Denny]

The issue I had was where they intended to show where a member of Clintons staff essentially hung up on the CIA while they were requesting permission to kill Bin Laden, this is not true and never happened. The average person watching it wouldn't unerstand this though. I also would like to know why is it that if we are so dedicated to the destruction of Bin Laden why has he not yet be apprehended or killed?

How do you know if someone did or didn't hang up on the CIA?

Bin Laden's current freedom is a question that I can't answer. :(

[HobieF3]

read this article written in 2001
http://www.infowars.com/saved%20pages/Prior_Knowledge/Clinton_let_bin_laden.htm

You know that's en EXTREME tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist's website you are qouting, right???

I'd love to see the reaction by the dfwstangers far right if one of the dems qouted that site for anything anti-Bush LOL.

I'm not saying the info is correct or incorrect, but no one would give it a chance on this site if it was the other way around, lots of partisanship around here.

As far as Bin Laden goes, you can't soley Blame Bush, Clinton, Bush, or Reagan or members of their administrations. LOTS of people dropped the ball and even aided/funded/trained his organization.

As far as blocking the movie, their is bi-partisan support with that one. Remember a few years ago with the Reagan docu-drama. It sets a scary precedent if you allow these types of fictionalized films to be aired. The average citizen isn't very engaged and would take something like that as fact. Might as well air the story about Bush being AWOL if that's the direction people would like to head, truth, bahh, the fiction is more entertaining :rolleyes:

I wonder why they would want to air something like that before November 2006, I mean, it's not as if there is anything important they might be influencing...wait ;)

[Pro Trash]

"I met with officials in both countries, including Clinton, U.S. National Security Advisor Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger and Sudan's president and intelligence chief. President Omar Hassan Ahmed Bashir, who wanted terrorism sanctions against Sudan lifted, offered the arrest and extradition of Bin Laden and detailed intelligence data about the global networks constructed by Egypt's Islamic Jihad, Iran's Hezbollah and the Palestinian Hamas.
The silence of the Clinton administration in responding to these offers was deafening."

Jyro I am not questioning that which you have stated, once again please read my comment and try real hard to focus. There was never a time a CIA operative setting on a hill calling Washington via sat link and requested permission to kill Bin Laden was hung up on as the doco drama wishes to show. I am not sure if you realize this in your argument but you do realize the US does not have a policy that allows for political assassination in an open forum, that is what England helps us with :D . Do I feel Clinton could have done more, yes, do I feel he is partly responsible for 9-11 yes, do I think you simply wish to ignore the obvious and keep re-visiting the obvious while ignoring the particulars yes. I grasp the idea that Clinton missed several opportunites to deal with Bin Laden, I also recognize a long list of others who failed to deter persons of his character from coming to power behind the scenes as well.

[line-em-up]

http://electioncentral.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/sep/07/full_text_of_letter_from_bill_clinton_lawyer_to_ab c_obtained

By Greg Sargent | bio
We've just obtained the full text of a blistering letter that Bill Clinton's attorney, Bruce Lindsey, has written to Disney chief Bob Iger protesting ABC's forthcoming 9/11 docudrama, "The Path to 9/11." The letter demands that the network pull the miniseries unless it corrects all its errors: "The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies our country has ever known." The full text of the letter -- which was first written about in today's New York Post -- after the jump.



Here's the full text of the letter:

September 1, 2006

Dear Bob,

As you know, ABC intends to air a two part miniseries, “The Path to 9/11,” which purports to document the events leading up to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. ABC claims that the show is based on the 9/11 Commission Report and, as Steve McPherson, President of ABC Entertainment, has said: “When you take on the responsibility of telling the story behind such an important event, it is absolutely critical that you get it right.”

By ABC’s own standard, ABC has gotten it terribly wrong. The content of this drama is factually and incontrovertibly inaccurate and ABC has a duty to fully correct all errors or pull the drama entirely. It is unconscionable to mislead the American public about one of the most horrendous tragedies our country has ever known.

Despite several requests to view the miniseries, we have not been given the courtesy of seeing it. This is particularly troubling given the reputation of Cyrus Nowrasteh, the drama’s writer/producer. Mr. Nowrasteh has been criticized for inaccurately portraying historical events in the past. In response to previous criticism, he has even said, “I made a conscious effort not to contact any members of the Administration because I didn’t want them to stymie my efforts.” Indeed, while we have not been given the courtesy of a viewing, based upon reports from people who have seen the drama you plan to air, we understand that there are at least three significant factual errors:

-- The drama leads viewers to believe that National Security Advisor Sandy Berger told the CIA that he would not authorize them to take a shot at bin Laden. This is complete fiction and the event portrayed never happened. First of all, the 9/11 Commission Report makes clear that CIA Director George Tenet had been directed by President Clinton and Mr. Berger to get bin Laden (p. 199 & 508-509). Secondly, Roger Cressy, National Security Council senior director for counterterrorism from 1999-2001, has said, on more than one occasion, “Mr. Clinton approved every request made of him by the CIA and the U.S. military involving using force against bin Laden and al-Qaeda.”

In addition, ABC’s own counter-terrorism consultant, Richard Clarke, has said that contrary to the movie:

1) No US military or CIA personnel were on the ground in Afghanistan and saw bin Laden;

2) The head of the Northern Alliance, Masood, was nowhere near the alleged bin Laden camp and did not see bin Laden; and

3) CIA Director Tenet said that he could not recommend a strike on the camp because the information was single-sourced and there would be no way to know if bin Laden was in the target area by the time a cruise missile hit it.

As Clarke and others will corroborate, President Clinton did in fact approve of a standing plan to use Afghans who worked for the CIA to capture bin Laden. The CIA’s Afghan operatives were never able to carry out the operation and the CIA recommended against inserting Agency personnel to do it. The Department of Defense, when asked by President Clinton to examine the use of US troops to capture bin Laden, also recommended against that option.

-- The drama claims that former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright refused to sanction a missile strike against bin Laden without first alerting the Pakistanis and notified them over the objections of the military. Again, this is false.

-- Using newsreel footage of President Clinton, the drama insinuates that President Clinton was too pre-occupied with the impeachment and the Lewinsky matter to be engaged in pursuing bin Laden. This allegation is absurd and was directly refuted by ABC News consultant Richard Clarke in his book, Against All Enemies: “Clinton made clear that we were to give him our best national security advice without regard to his personal problems. ‘Do you recommend that we strike on the 20th? Fine. Do not give me political advice or personal advice about the timing. That’s my problem. Let me worry about that.’ If we thought this was the best time to hit the Afghan camps, he would order it and take the heat.”

While these are three examples that we are aware of that are utterly baseless, they are clearly indicative of other errors in the substance and bent of the film. Indeed, the overall tone in the advertisements we’ve seen for this drama suggest that President Clinton was inattentive to the threat of terrorism or insufficiently intent upon eliminating the threat from bin Laden. Note that the 9/11 Commission Report says:

-- We believe that both President Clinton and President Bush were genuinely concerned about the danger posed by al Qaeda.” (p. 349)

-- “By May 1998 … clearly, President Clinton’s concern about terrorism had steadily risen.” (p. 102)

-- “President Clinton was deeply concerned about bin Laden. He and his national security advisor, Samuel ‘Sandy’ Berger, ensured they had a special daily pipeline of reports feeding them the latest updates on bin Laden’s reported location.” (p. 175)

-- “President Clinton spoke of terrorism in numerous public statements. In his August 5, 1996, remarks at George Washington University, he called terrorism ‘the enemy of our generation.’” (p. 500)

We challenge anyone to read the 9/11 Commission Report and find any basis for the false allegations noted above or the tenor of the drama, which suggests that the Clinton Administration was inattentive to the threat of a terrorist strike.

Frankly, the bias of the ABC drama is not surprising given the background and political leanings of its writer/producer, Mr. Nowrasteh, which have been well-documented on numerous conservative blogs and talk shows in his promotion of this film. Mr. Nowrasteh’s bias can be seen in an interview he gave to David Horowitz’s conservative magazine Frontpage, during which he said:

"The 9/11 report details the Clinton’s administration’s response – or lack of response – to Al Qaeda and how this emboldened Bin Laden to keep attacking American interests. The worst example is the response to the October, 2000 attack of the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen where 17 American sailors were killed. There simply was no response. Nothing."

But as Sandy Berger told the 9/11 Commission: “[T]o go to war, a president needs to be able to say that his senior intelligence and law enforcement officers have concluded who is responsible.” And as the 9/11 Commission report repeatedly acknowledges, the US did not have clear evidence of bin Laden’s connection to the attack on the USS Cole before the end of the Clinton Administration (p. 192, 193, 195 & executive summary).

While ABC is promoting “The Path to 9/11” as a dramatization of historical fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated obligation to “get it right,” we urge you to do so by not airing this drama until the egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we could easily assist you with given the opportunity to view the film.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Lindsey

Chief Executive Officer

William J. Clinton Foundation

Douglas J. Band

Counselor to President Clinton

Office of William Jefferson Clinton

Cc: Ms. Madeleine K. Albright

Mr. Samuel R. Berger

Mr. Richard A. Clarke

Mr. Stephen McPherson

Mr. George J. Mitchell

Mr. John D. Podesta

Mr. David Westin

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States

[Denny]

As Terrel Owens says, "Get yer popcorn ready!"

[AL P]

Interesting points on both sides of the fence. But IMO if you are going to blame Bush for any of this shit you have to blame Clinton too, he had plenty of chances. All this bullshit about legal letters and censoring a movie is just grandstanding to set Hillary up for whatever plans she has. Anybody who thinks Clinton won't lie to get her in office needs to be reminded that he is just another politician.

In the end you can't blame either one of them too much. No one thought that something like 9/11 was going to happen. It was the worst attack in our history. Kind of hard to prepare for the worst case scenario, mainly because you don't know of the magnitude.

[mikeb]

No one thought that something like 9/11 was going to happen

I think this is the crux of the matter. We are all looking at things thru post 9/11 glasses. On 9/10 if you had told someone that both towers of the world trade center along with some other buildings would be leveled the next day people would have thought that you were nuts. We lost our innocence that day as far as what terrorism really is. Some have referred to 9/11 as our generation's pearl harbor. There are many to "blame" I suppose, but that doesn't really solve anything at this point.

My hope is that the US retains enough resolve (in spite of the pacifists) to carry thru what needs to be done to ensure that a similar event never happens again to US citizens.

[AL P]

I think this is the crux of the matter. We are all looking at things thru post 9/11 glasses. On 9/10 if you had told someone that both towers of the world trade center along with some other buildings would be leveled the next day people would have thought that you were nuts. We lost our innocence that day as far as what terrorism really is. Some have referred to 9/11 as our generation's pearl harbor. There are many to "blame" I suppose, but that doesn't really solve anything at this point.

My hope is that the US retains enough resolve (in spite of the pacifists) to carry thru what needs to be done to ensure that a similar event never happens again to US citizens.

Th crux of the matter is that this is all political bullshit to get people to forget the fact that our leaders are all a bunch of crooked ass fuckwads. Every god damned last one of them. If we had any guts we would have nuked Afghanistan when they wouldn't produce Bin Laden. Hell we should be attacking Pakistan right now. That gives you an idea of the depth of our resolve, IE we don't have any. We are worried about upsetting Pakistan's government.

[Casper]

Th crux of the matter is that this is all political bullshit to get people to forget the fact that our leaders are all a bunch of crooked ass fuckwads. Every god damned last one of them. If we had any guts we would have nuked Afghanistan when they wouldn't produce Bin Laden. Hell we should be attacking Pakistan right now. That gives you an idea of the depth of our resolve, IE we don't have any. We are worried about upsetting Pakistan's government.


Hells Yes!!!!!!


Welcome to the club, Al! Don't forget the overthrow of that corrupt Mexican government which poses a serious threat to our security, and why the fuck is castro still alive?

[BP]

Well it is a doco-drama which means fiction based on truth. I think Clinton's administration is to blame for some of 9-11 as is Reagan's for he sponsored Afghanistan against the Russians in the mid to late 1980's then never helped them them nor did H. Bush when they were taken over by the Taliban which backed Bin Laden.

No Jimmy Carter blame? Being a pussy for 4 years when we had justification to level Iran has more to do with our current situation in the middle east than anything Reagan ever did.

[AL P]

Hells Yes!!!!!!


Welcome to the club, Al! Don't forget the overthrow of that corrupt Mexican government which poses a serious threat to our security, and why the fuck is castro still alive?

Naaa, just seal the border. Castro is like an ant, he isn't going to hurt anyone, let him croak and Cuba will be a gimme.

[Pro Trash]

No Jimmy Carter blame? Being a pussy for 4 years when we had justification to level Iran has more to do with our current situation in the middle east than anything Reagan ever did.

YesCarter shares in this but no more or less than anyone else including Reagan, one could argue when he supplied Afghanistan then simply pulled back when the Russians left leaving the radical insurgents to become the leaders thus supporting terrorist networks, so he also caused big issues that we would later encounter. I agree with Al all the politicians are to share in what happened to our National Security that led up to the 9-11 event.

[Casper]

Hostages allowed to prevail in Iran and terrorists getting a free pass in the Sudan. It seems like there is one important constant here....



http://www.nato.int/pictures/review/9604/9604-3j.jpg

[Casper]

http://mrssatan.blogspot.com/

The author of Dereliction of Duty", "Buzz" Patterson, tells us that one of those times a phone call to Clinton, informing him that Bin Laden was in the cross-hairs, came while Clinton was watching a golf tournament. Clinton declined to approve moving in on Bin Laden. Well, Mr. Patterson should know, because he was the man carrying the nuclear suitcase for Clinton.

Patterson told [World Net Daily] he recognizes the ["Path To 9/11"] television production conflates several events, but, in terms of conveying how the Clinton administration handled its opportunities to get bin Laden, it's "100 percent factually correct," he said. link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51898)

[Pro Trash]

http://mrssatan.blogspot.com/

The author of Dereliction of Duty", "Buzz" Patterson, tells us that one of those times a phone call to Clinton, informing him that Bin Laden was in the cross-hairs, came while Clinton was watching a golf tournament. Clinton declined to approve moving in on Bin Laden. Well, Mr. Patterson should know, because he was the man carrying the nuclear suitcase for Clinton.

Patterson told [World Net Daily] he recognizes the ["Path To 9/11"] television production conflates several events, but, in terms of conveying how the Clinton administration handled its opportunities to get bin Laden, it's "100 percent factually correct," he said. link (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51898)


LOL and you believe everything a politician or advisor says? I don't beleive half the stuff they say about Bush so the same holds true for Clinton. I would be happy if they rounded up all the politicians and advsiors of said, issued them a kevlar and an m-16, put them in Iraq or Afghanistan and we'd then see what they felt was good or bad foriegn policy.

[Casper]

Just noting that someone on the inside, without a political agenda (he was an Arkansas state trooper, FCOL), thinks the film does a good job portraying the essence of what went on.

[AL P]

There was also a National Geographic documentary where they had some guy, not sure who, who said CIA was in Saudi Arabia and had Bin Laden in a spot where they could take him out. The higher ups wouldn't do it because he had children with him.

Hindsight is always 20/20 though so at the end of the day I can't blame anyone too much. No one is perfect, not even the president. As long as the mistake isn't made again then fuck it.

Bin Laden will be caught/killed, it may take another five years but he will be.

[BP]

Bin Laden will be caught/killed, it may take another five years but he will be.

You really think he's still alive? Ayman al-Zawahiri is obviously running the show there now. He was/is Bin Laden's doctor and is likely the last one to see him alive if so.

[ugly88gt]

and so what was Bin Laden prior to 9/11 ???

Just another terrorist that hated America....there's hundreds of thousands of them in the middle east!!!!!

[BP]

and so what was Bin Laden prior to 9/11 ???

Just another terrorist that hated America....there's hundreds of thousands of them in the middle east!!!!!

Yeah but the difference is that he has lots of money and connections. Not many other terrorists can fund an army large enough to fight off the Russians for years.

[ugly88gt]

Yeah but the difference is that he has lots of money and connections. Not many other terrorists can fund an army large enough to fight off the Russians for years.


But what had he actually done prior to 9/11 to warrent his capture???

Don't get me wrong I'm not a Clinton fan, I was personally disappointed about the whole Lewinski scandle (you would think the leader of the free world would rate a better peice of ass)

[Jester]

But what had he actually done prior to 9/11 to warrent his capture???

Don't get me wrong I'm not a Clinton fan, I was personally disappointed about the whole Lewinski scandle (you would think the leader of the free world would rate a better peice of ass)
The first bombing of the Trade Center?

[ugly88gt]

The first bombing of the Trade Center?


Not involved, athough it was found after 9/11 that Bin Laden did have links with the organization that did carry out the first bombing.


Before the attacks
A man named Ramzi Yousef entered the United States with a false Iraqi passport in 1992 . Police found instructions on making a bomb in Yousef's partner's luggage. The name Abu Barra which was an alias of Mohammed Jamal Khalifa appeared in the manuals.

Therefore his partner was arrested on the spot for his false passport and his bomb-making instructions. At the time INS holding cells were overcrowded so the authorities told Yousef to come back in one month. Yousef set up residence in Jersey City New Jersey and travelled around New York and New Jersey and called Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman a controversial Muslim preacher via cell phone. Yousef got the manuals back from his partner. He got conspirators and tried obtaining mixing chemicdals to make a bomb. After a hospital stay from a car accident Yousef got back the manuals from his car which was in a police impound.dan

El Sayyid Nosair who was one of Sheikh Rahman's men and who would later be convicted for the bombing was arrested in 1991 for the murder of rabbi Meir Kahane . A man named Mahmud Abouhalima who was later convicted in the bombing told a man named Wadih el Hage to buy the assault rifle used in the Kahane shooting. Nosair was acquitted of murder but convicted of gun charges. There were dozens of bomb-making manuals and documents related to terrorist plots found in the apartment but they had not been translated into the English language from the Arabic language .

Yousef stole or rented a Ryder van that was to be used in the attacks. If Yousef had had more funds he would have used a truck bomb. The van that he used had 8 m&sup3 (295 ft &sup3) of space which would hold up to 1 000 kg of explosives. However the van was not filled to capacity.

The bomb
Yousef's complex 600 kilogram bomb was made of urea pellets nitroglycerin sulfuric acid aluminum azide magnesium azide and bottled hydrogen . He added sodium cyanide to the mix as the vapors could go through the ventilation shafts and elevators of the towers. The van that Yousef used had four 6 m (20 ft) long fuses all covered in surgical tubing. Yousef calculated that the fuse would trigger the bomb in twelve minutes after he would use a cheap cigarette lighter to light the fuse.

He wanted to prevent smoke from escaping the towers therefore catching the public eye by poisoning people inside. He foresaw Tower One collapsing onto Tower Two after the blast would occur.

The attack
On February 26 1993 a car bomb was planted by the Islamist terrorists in the underground garage below Tower One. The bomb's fuses burnt at a rate of one inch per two and one half seconds (1 cm/s). The men spent 300 United States dollars for the materials to build the bomb.

The bomb exploded in the underground garage at 12:17 P.M. opening a 30 meter wide hole through 4 sublevels of concrete . The bomb generated a pressure of more than 1 GPa. The detonation velocity of this bomb was about 4.5 km/s (15 000 ft/s). The cyanide gas that Yousef put in the bomb burnt up in the explosion.

Six people were killed. At least 1 040 others were injured. However the towers were not destroyed as Yousef envisioned. Yousef escaped to Pakistan several hours later.

The bomb cut off the center's main electrical power line and all telephone service for New York City. The bomb caused smoke to rise up to the 93rd floor of both towers and cut off the towers' four stairwells and emergency lighting system.

Despite its relatively low death toll the bombing shocked the American public. Only once before the 1993 attack that the FBI recorded had a bomb of that force had been used. The FBI has recorded a total of about 73 000 explosions.

Yousef's friends reported the van stolen in an attempt to slow investigators down.

List of deceased
John DiGiovanni Valley Stream New York
Robert Kirkpatrick Suffern New York
Steve Knapp Manhattan New York New York
Monica Smith Seaford New York
William Macko Bayonne New Jersey
Wilfredo Mercado Brooklyn New York New York.
After the attacks
On March 4 1993 authorities announced the capture of one of the suspected bombing conspirators Mohammad Salameh and exactly one year later four terrorists were convicted for their roles in the bombing.

The capture of Salameh led authorities to Yousef's apartment where they found bomb-making materials and a business card from Mohammed Jamal Khalifa .

Khalifa was arrested in relation to the crime in December 14 1994 and was deported to Jordan by the INS in May 5 1995 . Jamal was acquitted by a Jordanian court and now lives as a free man in Saudi Arabia .

In 1995 militant Islamist Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman and nine others were convicted of conspiracy charges to bomb several New York City landmarks (see New York City landmark bomb plot ) and in 1998 Ramzi Yousef believed to have been the mastermind was convicted of "seditious conspiracy" to bomb the towers - no one was ever convicted for the actual bombing. Another man named Eyad Ismail was tried alongside Yousef for the bombing.

Six militant Islamist conspirators were convicted of the crime in 1997 and 1998 and given prison sentences of a maximum of 240 years each. The main reason that the World Trade Center did not collapse was due to the towers' strength and the fact that Yousef did not have enough money to build a more powerful bomb.

Another conspirator in the plot was Nidal Ayyad.

A granite memorial to the six victims of the bombing was erected between the Twin Towers directly above the site of the explosion. This granite memorial erected in memory of the first attack was obliterated during the destruction of the towers in 2001 .

FBI foreknowledge
In the course of the trial it was revealed that the FBI had an informant an Egyptian man named Emad Salem who was involved with the bombing conspiracy. Salem claims to have informed the FBI of the plot to bomb the towers as early as February 6 1992 information he was privy to possibly because he himself initiated the plot. Salem's role as informant allowed the FBI to quickly pinpoint the conspirators out of the hundreds of possible suspects.

Salem asserts that the original plan was to have the plotters build the bomb using a harmless powder instead of actual explosive but that an FBI supervisor decided that a real bomb should be constructed instead. He substantiates his claims with hundreds of hours of secretly-recorded conversations with his FBI handlers made during discussions held after the bombings.

Salem says he wished to complain to FBI headquarters in Washington about the failure to prevent the bombing despite foreknowledge but was dissuaded from doing so by the New York FBI office.

The FBI has not explicitly denied Salem's account.

See also
terrorist incidents
New York City landmark bomb plot
Operation Bojinka
September 11 2001 Terrorist Attack/Back history .
Further reading
The New Jackals by Simon Reeve

Reference
Ralph Blumenthal Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast New York Times Thursday October 28 (1993) p. A1; online edition by www.whatreallyhappened.com ( http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/OK/wtcbomb.html )

[Fox466]

While ABC is promoting “The Path to 9/11” as a dramatization of historical fact, in truth it is a fictitious rewriting of history that will be misinterpreted by millions of Americans. Given your stated obligation to “get it right,” we urge you to do so by not airing this drama until the egregious factual errors are corrected, an endeavor we could easily assist you with given the opportunity to view the film.

Sincerely,

Bruce R. Lindsey

Chief Executive Officer

William J. Clinton Foundation

Douglas J. Band

Counselor to President Clinton

Office of William Jefferson Clinton

Cc: Ms. Madeleine K. Albright

Mr. Samuel R. Berger

Mr. Richard A. Clarke

Mr. Stephen McPherson

Mr. George J. Mitchell

Mr. John D. Podesta

Mr. David Westin

National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States

Don't feel like looking them all up, but how many on that list are conservative, I wonder?

[BP]

But what had he actually done prior to 9/11 to warrent his capture???

Don't get me wrong I'm not a Clinton fan, I was personally disappointed about the whole Lewinski scandle (you would think the leader of the free world would rate a better peice of ass)

The USS Cole, Khobar towers, a couple of embassies being bombed. He's been the money man all along.

[jyro]

You know that's en EXTREME tin-foil hat conspiracy theorist's website you are qouting, right???

I'm quoting the LA Times article that infowars has a link to. Nothing on that exact complete link has anything to do with conspiracy theorist's .

[Paladin]

The USS Cole, Khobar towers, a couple of embassies being bombed. He's been the money man all along.

It's amazing how many people have forgotten how many arttacks happened that Bin laden was responsible for during Clintons Presidency.

They are the same people who think islamic extremists started hating us only after 9/11, not before.

I heard an interesting thought, it says that conservatives/right wingers think about 9/11 every day, but left wingers/liberals only one day a year and both are puzzled by the others thought processes. We are a distinctly divided country, that is for sure.

[Pro Trash]

It's amazing how many people have forgotten how many arttacks happened that Bin laden was responsible for during Clintons Presidency.

They are the same people who think islamic extremists started hating us only after 9/11, not before.

I heard an interesting thought, it says that conservatives/right wingers think about 9/11 every day, but left wingers/liberals only one day a year and both are puzzled by the others thought processes. We are a distinctly divided country, that is for sure.

I don't about others but I have realized since age 19 during Desert Storm and post Desert Storm in Kuwait that Islamics factions hated us. Heck the Palestinians were planning attacks on us in Doha, Kuwait in the summer of 1991 but were found out by government intelligence.

[black01gt]

They are the same people who think islamic extremists started hating us only after 9/11, not before.


No shit!!! And here I thought they attacked us out of love...then changed their minds... :rolleyes:

[hotrod66stang]

it's just linked on the infowars page, they had no part in writing it.
Yeah, I guess I should have been a little clearer as to what I meant. I wasn't trying to imply he wrote it, as he obviously didn't write most of the material on the site. I was merely speaking of the content and where it was hosted, and the general theme of the website :o .

I heard an interesting thought, it says that conservatives/right wingers think about 9/11 every day, but left wingers/liberals only one day a year and both are puzzled by the others thought processes. I don't believe that for even half a second. I seriously doubt that anyone that didn't lose someone in the attack, live in NY, or fly frequently thinks about 9/11 EVERY SINGLE day. Most days, maybe, but every day is a stretch, just as once a year is a stretch. Lets say they're giving americans a year to grieve and forget, that would mean "liberals" have only thought about 9/11 FOUR times :rolleyes:. I hope no one really believes this. As divided as we may seem, as nutty as the left might get, as red-faced as the right might get, we all think about it, we're all brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, and ultimately Americans. I just hope we can start pulling together and fight off the common enemy (loonies, lying politicians, foreign invaders, and people who wish to harm Americans), instead of fighting with each other. I'm a Centrist, so I don't get claimed by either side, nor do I claim either side . I'm just a red-blooded American :cool:

[Paladin]

No shit!!! And here I thought they attacked us out of love...then changed their minds... :rolleyes:

You joke, but when your "I hate Bush" rhetoric comes out, so does the convenient loss of memory about what caused the war on terror. In my opinion there can be no other explanation for people wavering about fighting the extremists. They are in Iraq, Afghanistan, and many other countries right now. I don't understand those who think we should leave and allow them to regroup.

The only way to stop them is to kill them.

[Paladin]

I don't believe that for even half a second. I seriously doubt that anyone that didn't lose someone in the attack, live in NY, or fly frequently thinks about 9/11 EVERY SINGLE day. Most days, maybe, but every day is a stretch, just as once a year is a stretch. Lets say they're giving americans a year to grieve and forget, that would mean "liberals" have only thought about 9/11 FOUR times :rolleyes:. I hope no one really believes this. As divided as we may seem, as nutty as the left might get, as red-faced as the right might get, we all think about it, we're all brothers and sisters, sons and daughters, and ultimately Americans. I just hope we can start pulling together and fight off the common enemy (loonies, lying politicians, foreign invaders, and people who wish to harm Americans), instead of fighting with each other. I'm a Centrist, so I don't get claimed by either side, nor do I claim either side . I'm just a red-blooded American :cool:

I call your thoughts pre-9/11 thinking and mine post 9/11 thinking. I say that i think of 9/11 everyday because of the Iraq war coverage reminds me that we cannot allow the Al Quaeda, who are in Iraq right now, to regroup and attack us again. They must be stopped.

Sorry, but if you don't think about it, then that is why the saying goes, "Those who forget history are bound to repeat it."

[Paladin]

I just saw this on the FW Star-Telegram site. I guess even liberal Bob Ray agrees with me. Liberals want to forget it, and conservatives want to try and not forget the lesson of that day.



Unity of 9-11 has evaporated in the face of war, rhetoric
BOB RAY SANDERS
In My Opinion

Star-Telegram
Bob Ray SandersFive years ago Monday, I knew before I left home that I was embarking on a new day -- a day all will remember until they die.

After arriving in the Star-Telegram's newsroom, and seeing the actions and reactions of usually skeptical and sometimes cynical journalists, it was even clearer that there would be nothing ordinary about that day.

As I dressed for work, my TV was tuned to my regular morning news show, and I noticed that the Today show had cut to a live shot of smoke coming from one of the World Trade Center towers.

In their first report, hosts Matt Lauer and Katie Couric mentioned that a "small plane" had crashed into the building. It wasn't long afterward that a second plane -- clearly a jetliner -- struck the other tower, and anyone watching knew unmistakably that this was an attack on the country.

It was one of those times in journalism when reporters and editors didn't have to be called in to work.

They just showed up, knowing that their place was to be on the job and prepared to do whatever was needed.

Many of us were watching live television when the two 110-story towers disintegrated into massive clouds of dust.

At that instant, something was put in motion in our newsroom that I doubt has ever occurred before.

I'm sure it didn't happen that Sunday in 1941, the day someone at our paper wrote the headline "JAPS BOMB PEARL HARBOR." Nor did it occur at the end of World War II, as far as I know.

Nothing similar took place that sad day in 1963 when John F. Kennedy, who had spent the night and much of the morning in Fort Worth, was assassinated 30 miles away on the streets of Dallas.

But on Sept. 11, 2001, while plans were being made to rent three SUVs to send a crew of 10 Star-Telegram staffers to New York, plans were also being made at our newspaper for a memorial service.

An American flag was hung prominently in the newsroom.

At noon that day, we paused in front of that flag -- not for a second or two, but 25 minutes -- to hear a song, a prayer and readings from the Old Testament, the Torah and the Quran.

It is the first time I can recall a prayer being said aloud inside the newsroom.

I saw news reporters, editors, designers, corporate executives cling to their faiths and openly embrace a patriotism usually present only in a more subdued manner.

We were united in horror, disgust and resolve that that moment would not -- could not -- defeat us.

Five years later, our country is far from united, split over an increasingly unpopular war and polarized by constant political rhetoric that, frankly, is intended to divide us.

Unfortunately, some Americans believe that the only thing that can reunite us is fear of more terrorist attacks on American soil. Thus, we had the president himself, in his prime-time 9-11 speech, once again connect Iraq to "the war on terror" and remind us that we are still not "safe enough."

It is proper that we remember and have our memorials, but let me caution that we must not mourn forever.

Yes, there is a time to mourn, but the Bible says there is also "a time to dance."

While I don't suggest it is yet time for us to put on our dancing shoes, I do encourage all of us to move on.

Let us remain vigilant, steadfast in our resolve to protect the nation from further attacks and committed to our democratic ideals.

But let us not be afraid or imprisoned by anxiety.

I simply refuse to live in fear.

The politicians who think they can benefit at the polls by scaring Americans or by exploiting the memory of 9-11 should be put on notice that we simply won't stand for it.

Coming Friday: The real reason the United States has not been attacked by terrorists since 9-11.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ray Sanders' column appears Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays. 817-390-7775 bobray@star-telegram.com

[BLAKE]

I just saw this on the FW Star-Telegram site. I guess even liberal Bob Ray agrees with me. Liberals want to forget it, and conservatives want to try and not forget the lesson of that day.



I was in that same newsroom that morning with a half dozen TV's all showing live video as the towers collapsed. A surreal experience to be sure. I missed the prayer though.

Regardless of what you think of Bob Ray's politics, he is one of the nicer people that I've ever met. :)

[Paladin]

I was in that same newsroom that morning with a half dozen TV's all showing live video as the towers collapsed. A surreal experience to be sure. I missed the prayer though.

Regardless of what you think of Bob Ray's politics, he is one of the nicer people that I've ever met. :)

He has always been nice to me in person. He wrote an article accusing FWPD of possible racism during a very high profile investigation I was the lead investigator on. I called him on it a few years later and he apologized for not getting my side of the situation. I think he is sincere in his thoughts and opinions, I just think all liberal thinking is flawed.

[line-em-up]

You joke, but when your "I hate Bush" rhetoric comes out, so does the convenient loss of memory about what caused the war on terror. In my opinion there can be no other explanation for people wavering about fighting the extremists.

Please explain what you mean so that I can respond without misinterpreting putting words in your mouth.


I don't understand those who think we should leave and allow them to regroup.

The only way to stop them is to kill them.

I agree.

[Paladin]

Please explain what you mean so that I can respond without misinterpreting putting words in your mouth.

It is just my belief that people who hate Bush are also the kind of people who have no stomach to do what it takes to stop the terrorists. The fight against terrorists is not one that can be won by diplomacy or by the UN. It must be done with force and there can be no negotiating. I don't think people who hate Bush understand or agree with that. They think the UN is a great organization that has credibility, they forget islamic extremists have been trying to kill us for years before 9/11, they think Bush has done no good, etc.

[line-em-up]

[QUOTE=90 Notch]I just saw this on the FW Star-Telegram site. I guess even liberal Bob Ray agrees with me. Liberals want to forget it, and conservatives want to try and not forget the lesson of that day.

I don't believe he is saying that. I think he's saying that we shouldn't ever forget, but living in fear as some people want us to do and giving up our freedom is not the way to do it. We should cling to our democratic ways and persevere. Unfortunately for many sheeple, fear is the only thing that will keep them aware.

While I don't like being in war and I never believed the leaders one minute about the WMD's, I do believe we need to somehow finish the job. Like Bush said in his speech the other night (which I thought was his best yet), we can't just leave and expect them not to follow us home. I don't see how we can possibly win without annihalation, though. The radicals live to kill us and they are only multiplying, not decreasing. They will not be happy until we are dead. The only long term solution I see is extermination.

[Fox466]

William, you say that you don't believe them about the wmds, so do a search on Denny in the last day or so. He posted yesterday that he, with his own hands, moved TONS of the stuff to a hazardous wasted incinerator. Not sure about you (since you're such a damned liberal and all :p ) but that is a reliable source that there was/is still wmd over there.

[BP]

William, you say that you don't believe them about the wmds, so do a search on Denny in the last day or so. He posted yesterday that he, with his own hands, moved TONS of the stuff to a hazardous wasted incinerator. Not sure about you (since you're such a damned liberal and all :p ) but that is a reliable source that there was/is still wmd over there.

He's posted photos before! Technically they aren't WMDs unless the chemicals were mixed and loaded into a dispersion device. In the wrong hands something as innocent as a drum of R-12 can be a chemical weapon (burn R-12 and it turns into phosgene gas).

[Paladin]

[QUOTE=90 Notch]I just saw this on the FW Star-Telegram site. I guess even liberal Bob Ray agrees with me. Liberals want to forget it, and conservatives want to try and not forget the lesson of that day.

I don't believe he is saying that. I think he's saying that we shouldn't ever forget, but living in fear as some people want us to do and giving up our freedom is not the way to do it. We should cling to our democratic ways and persevere. Unfortunately for many sheeple, fear is the only thing that will keep them aware.

While I don't like being in war and I never believed the leaders one minute about the WMD's, I do believe we need to somehow finish the job. Like Bush said in his speech the other night (which I thought was his best yet), we can't just leave and expect them not to follow us home. I don't see how we can possibly win without annihalation, though. The radicals live to kill us and they are only multiplying, not decreasing. They will not be happy until we are dead. The only long term solution I see is extermination.

I have never advocated living in fear.

[line-em-up]

William, you say that you don't believe them about the wmds, so do a search on Denny in the last day or so. He posted yesterday that he, with his own hands, moved TONS of the stuff to a hazardous wasted incinerator. Not sure about you (since you're such a damned liberal and all :p ) but that is a reliable source that there was/is still wmd over there.

I don't have a reason to douby Denny; he has no reason to lie. I believe him when he says he saw chemicals. I even believe that the odds of Iraq having chemical weapons was real. I just didn't buy the whitehouse's story of how they knew. I think they were just using it as an reason to invade Iraq, get rid of Saddam and install a more democratic government. I can also say that odds of you having toilet paper at your house are great. I've never actually seen it, but I'm 100% sure you have some. I'm sure every country has some kind of chemical research going on. Anyway, all this is water under the bridge. We're over there and we need to stay until there is stability. Otherwise, the lives of the 3,000 or so soldiers who've died over there will have been waisted.

[line-em-up]

[QUOTE=line-em-up]

I have never advocated living in fear.

I was refering to what Bob said.
"Unfortunately, some Americans believe that the only thing that can reunite us is fear of more terrorist attacks on American soil. Thus, we had the president himself, in his prime-time 9-11 speech, once again connect Iraq to "the war on terror" and remind us that we are still not "safe enough."
"

[Denny]

Ya, just for the record. I can't comment as to how our intellegence got wind of the chems before the invasion, but the way we found them, they weren't hidden all that well. Some areas had it hidden well, some was buried, some was dumped into the Tigurs and Euphates rivers (still pulls bad readings to this day). All I'm saying from this is that it wouldn't take much covert survaillence to spot a lot of it. They did plan on the UN inspectors finding out, though. That's why they kept the chems and their delivery instruments separated. Also, some of the Kurdish shallow gravesites had autopsies performed that not even I have heard results from.