Condi Beats 9/11 Commission

[Psychoblues]

Certainly, here goes.

The present testimony, completeness and truthfullness of the witnesses called to testify before the 9/11 Commission and the ability and willingness of the Commision to cross-examine and verify as truth the information given is as important to the future of our national security as are the decisions of the past to either ignore facts or discard the information as erroneous or without urgency.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Certainly, here goes.

The present testimony, completeness and truthfullness of the witnesses called to testify before the 9/11 Commission and the ability and willingness of the Commision to cross-examine and verify as truth the information given is as important to the future of our national security as are the decisions of the past to either ignore facts or discard the information as erroneous or without urgency.

No, this testimony bears not one iota going forward. The people who need to know, know what happened. This commission was an unnecessary witchhunt.

Your focused on blame. Though, of course, you'll deny it.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr

So whose fault is 9/11's , the system's, yeah, george bush could have fixed it in a few months, but clinton had eight years. Life is not a game of musical chairs. George Bush was standing when the music stopped, but only the dems are playing that silly, childish game.

Hmmmm.... Sounds like you're saying that the Bush administration has no blame nor accountability for 9/11 attack on the U.S. because Bush was in office for 8 months, while Clinton was in office for 8 years. Sounds like you're saying that it doesn't even matter that the Bush administration was in office at the time of the attack and for the previous 8 months.

Is it possible that Clinton administration may have some culpability for the 9/11 attacks? Wouldn't it also be possible that the Bush administration would have culpability for the 9/11 attacks as well?

The point is to identify the culpability of each administration, and determine what's the best recourse for resolving these issues and ensuring the future safety of the U.S.

The first step is to eliminate these partisan defend your party at all cost efforts, and instead to identify the culpability of each administration (Both Clinton and Bush).

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
Hmmmm.... Sounds like you're saying that the Bush administration has no blame nor accountability for 9/11 attack on the U.S. because Bush was in office for 8 months, while Clinton was in office for 8 years. Sounds like you're saying that it doesn't even matter that the Bush administration was in office at the time of the attack and for the previous 8 months.

Is it possible that Clinton administration may have some culpability for the 9/11 attacks? Wouldn't it also be possible that the Bush administration would have culpability for the 9/11 attacks as well?

The point is to identify the culpability of each administration, and determine what's the best recourse for resolving these issues and ensuring the future safety of the U.S.

The first step is to eliminate these partisan defend your party at all cost efforts, and instead to identify the culpability of each administration (Both Clinton and Bush).

If Kerry wins, and the day after his Inauguration we get nuked by OBL, I pray that you are here bashing Kerry for his 'part' in not ensuring the nation's safety.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The fact that Bush was in office is not enough to condemn him, and if you condemn him and demand apologies from him, then clinton owes one too. What matters is what is the best policy for terrorism going forward. Kerry the Appeaser, Or Bush the Confronter and Taker Carer of Business.

 

[Psychoblues]

No, you're wrong, rtwngAvngr. But it is exactly that that you fear so that so illuminates your own attitude and reluctance to pursue truth while ignoring those things that may protect you in the future. I come from an MBO (management by objective), Win/Win (self explanatory) and TQM (Total Quality Management) background. In each of these managerial theories it is embraced that all accidents are preventable and all failures indicate derilection in procedure and/or policy. In each of these managerial theories it is embraced that all accidents and failures be thorougly researched, examined and competent changes be made to exact future success. And it is there that I question the soundness of the MBA in charge. I don't think they have a damn clue as to any of these theories or at least have no overwhelming need to abide comprehensive review short of insistense by the American people. What is the reason for that? This commission, the 9/11 commision "should" find out about that.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr
The fact that Bush was in office is not enough to condemn him, and if you condemn him and demand apologies from him, then clinton owes one too. What matters is what is the best policy for terrorism going forward. Kerry the Appeaser, Or Bush the Confronter and Taker Carer of Business.

Once again you duck the essence of the message and try to convert it into wrangling partisan attacks.

Maybe it's just time to ignore your wrangling posts, and only focus on those willing to have a logical discussion.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

It's fine to want to know. But the motive of half the commission is primarily to make sure bush comes out smelling like crap. Even if they have to spin and be rude to do it. They failed today. Condi kicked their asses.

you mba management types are all the same, possessed by an arrogance in your systems and procedures. Accidents do, in fact, happen. And you must admit you cannot hold an employee negligent when the problem is systemic and process related.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
Once again you duck the essence of the message and try to convert it into wrangling partisan attacks.

Maybe it's just time to ignore your wrangling posts, and only focus on those willing to have a logical discussion.

Everyone knows bush was in office. The question is: so what? I'm not ducking. You can't argue so it seems like I'm ducking, that's all.

 

[Psychoblues]

Just to set the record straight, rtwngAvngr, I just barely got my High School diploma. I literally and honestly tried to fail my Senior year but that's another topic. I have had some continuing education including a few college level courses. My experience, however, comes from job related endeavors, military involvement, political office that I've held and paying attention for about 40 years. I'd suggest that you get yourself some of that.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Just to set the record straight, rtwngAvngr, I just barely got my High School diploma. I literally and honestly tried to fail my Senior year but that's another topic. I have had some continuing education including a few college level courses. My experience, however, comes from job related endeavors, military involvement, political office that I've held and paying attention for about 40 years. I'd suggest that you get yourself some of that.

Look. I don't care who you are. You can go suck cock.

 

[Psychoblues]

Sorry, once again, to have rankled you, rtwngAvngr. I thought I was dealing with an adult.

 

[_dmp_]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
I thought I was an adult.

What i can't figure out is how people, like yourself, can throw out passive-aggressive comments about others; not saying anything SPECIFICALLY inflammatory, but said to cause trouble nonetheless. THEN...oh THEN...when they flame BACK you try to take the HIGH road. You are just LIKE WonderWench...that Biznatch used to do the same shit.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Sorry, once again, to have rankled you, rtwngAvngr. I thought I was dealing with an adult.

Deal with this statement of mine from above:

"And you must admit you cannot hold an employee negligent when the problem is systemic and process related."

You agree with that right, as an MBA?


Or are you going to attack me, say something, irrelevant, or accuse ME of not addressing the issues?

 

[Psychoblues]

I'll repeat, I am not an MBA or even have an associate degree or even much education beyong the College of Hard Knocks but I can agree with your statement. To hold any victim (that's who you are referring to, aren't you?) of culpability or accountability to systemic or process induced failure is only embraced by the most closed minded and conservative of my managerial acquaintances. Those victims, IMHO, are genearally the most vulnerable and least equipped to understand that their problem was not of their own making. Does that answer your question?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
I'll repeat, I am not an MBA or even have an associate degree or even much education beyong the College of Hard Knocks but I can agree with your statement. To hold any victim (that's who you are referring to, aren't you?) of culpability or accountability to systemic or process induced failure is only embraced by the most closed minded and conservative of my managerial acquaintances. Those victims, IMHO, are genearally the most vulnerable and least equipped to understand that their problem was not of their own making. Does that answer your question?

I was talking about bush being held accountable by partisan hacks like you for a systemic problem. I'm not quite sure what you're bloviating about.

 

[Psychoblues]

Once again, sorry to repeat but it just must be said, I thought I was dealing with an adult. I think my statements and questions are clear. It is you that tend to anticipate, falsely, my propensities and/or positions. But like you've already done, go ahead an misconstrue that as well.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Originally posted by Psychoblues
Once again, sorry to repeat but it just must be said, I thought I was dealing with an adult. I think my statements and questions are clear. It is you that tend to anticipate, falsely, my propensities and/or positions. But like you've already done, go ahead an misconstrue that as well.

Thanks for clarifying, arrogant jackass.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

What victims are you talking about? The 9/11 victims are not the victims of the 9/11 commission. Bush is. That's where you got confused.

 

[Psychoblues]

Wanna go on the road with that, rtwngAvngr? I've successfully managed a few local acts and been involved with a few national and international ones. I think you have promise. Your wit, comprehensive understanding of the issues and delivery are perfect for right wing bars, lounges and campaign finance creating endeavors. I'll bet even the people of Crawfordsville, Texas would buy you a beer. In fact, I know at least one of the will.