Question for "objective" right-wingers.....

[Care4all]

George Bush was in office barely 8 months when America was attacked on 9/11/2001. Bill Clinton was using American planes to attack civilians in a defenseless European country while the same terrorists that he dismissed in the first attack on the World Trade center were attending flight school under his freaking nose. Clinton's idiot Attorney General even issued an order that prevented the FBI from sharing information with the CIA under threat of arrest and imprisonment. If President Bush made any errors it was not firing every dumb assed political appointee in the Clinton administration but he thought he would be a nice guy and keep the idiots on.

So, your conclusion is that 9-11 was all Clinton's fault.......Interesting.

It's actually a lie.

Maybe you should tell it to this guy.
By the way when you say something is a LIE maybe you'd be more believable if you substantiated your claim.
Here is the Gorelick Memo...
Gorelick Memo that created the wall between FBI & CIA thus no knowledge of the 9/11 bombers shared with the FBI!!!
looks especially imprudent 10 years later.
1995 memo she wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” GORELICK WALL!
Here read what NOT my words but other sources:
Jamie Gorelick’s wall barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall.
Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.
So, a year before the 9/11 attacks, a special unit in the U.S. military was aware of the presence of an al-Queda cell in Brooklyn, New York, and sought to share its information with the FBI but was stopped cold.Why?Because (as described in the April 16, 2004 Washington Times piece) “on March 4, 1995, [Jamie Gorelick, the then number 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department, sent a 4-page directive] to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that ‘go beyond what is legally required,’ in order to avoid ‘any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance’ that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.”
Could 9/11 Have Been Prevented? The Gorelick Memo and What We Knew

There that easy to prove you are NOT believable and there was a legal obstacle.
Oh and the reason for the Gorelick Memo.

(CNSNews.com) - A senior U.S. government official has told CNSNews.com that the 1995 memo written by former Assistant Attorney General Jamie Gorelick and currently at issue in the 9/11 Commission's investigation of U.S. intelligence failures, also created "a roadblock" to the probe of the 1996 Clinton re-election campaign fundraising scandal.

The memo's relevance in the investigation of the fundraising scandal has received scant attention in the media, but four different sources, including the government official, have explained and corroborated details of the connection for CNSNews.com.

The CNSNews.com sources question whether the guidelines purportedly put in place by Gorelick in 1995 for Justice Department investigations were actually intended to shield President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and top Democratic campaign fundraisers from the subsequent congressional investigations of the illegal fundraising activities.

However, there appears to be no evidence at this point that the Gorelick memo was written for that express purpose.

Because the memo created a barrier for U.S. intelligence agencies to share information with the FBI, one of its unintended consequences may have been to prevent the FBI from receiving the necessary intelligence to stop the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the worst in American history.
Gorelick Memo Allegedly Impeded Probe of Clinton Fundraising Scandal

NOPE, merely propaganda by CNS, THE MOST UNTRUSTWORTHY news source other than WND OUT there in the blogosphere. The PRESIDENT, was made aware, the top of the FBI and CIA and NSA ALL knew of an impending and imminent attack was coming.

 

[easyt65]

Any loss of American lives is a tragedy......

That stated, it should raise some skepticism in any objective mind as the WHY it has taken the Benghazi select committee, about 2 additional months (and they're still going strong in their so-called investigation) to find out more about the loss of 4 American live.......than it took the 9-11 commission to investigate the loss of almost 3,000 American lives......???

ACTUALLY....

- Considering the WH and State Department modified the CIA's original report declaring it to be a terrorist attack, eliminating all references to the term 'terrorism' and then aggressively engaging in a deceptive PR campaign involving lying to the American people and the world to conceal the fact that this was a terrorist attack...

- Considering despite Hillary knowing it was a terrorist attack yet LYING to the committee by declaring she had no idea what it was

- Considering 5 Months of Hillary's e-mails centered on the time Benghazi occurred having been deleted as part of this cover-up

- Considering the State Department and WH initially DENIED knowing about 1) the Threat of attacks on US Embassies throughout the Middle East called fro on 9/11/12 (although it was proven that they knew about it), 2) the call to assassinate Ambassador Stevens on 9/11/12 (even though the Mayor of Benghazi stated he had warned the State Department of the threat), and 3) the 2 terrorist attacks prior to the 3rd/final attack on Stevens compound - AFTER which they reduced the number of US Security personnel on Stevens' team...

COSIDERING ALL OF THE LIES, DECEPTION, DESTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE, AND CONTINUED COVER-UP THAT HAS BEEN PROVEN, IT IS NOT SHOCKING THAT IT HAS TAKEN THIS LONG BUT THAT A PRESIDENT AND HIS ADMINISTRATION WOULD ENGAGE IN SUCH A LENGTHY, COMPLEX COVER-UP, DISCARDING THE DEATHS OF 4 AMERCIANS, JUST TO ENSURE THEY ARE NOT HELD ACCOUNTABLE OR BLAMED FOR NOT DOING THE THINGS THEY COULD HAVE DONE TO KEEP STEVENS ALIVE.

 

[healthmyths]

George Bush was in office barely 8 months when America was attacked on 9/11/2001. Bill Clinton was using American planes to attack civilians in a defenseless European country while the same terrorists that he dismissed in the first attack on the World Trade center were attending flight school under his freaking nose. Clinton's idiot Attorney General even issued an order that prevented the FBI from sharing information with the CIA under threat of arrest and imprisonment. If President Bush made any errors it was not firing every dumb assed political appointee in the Clinton administration but he thought he would be a nice guy and keep the idiots on.

So, your conclusion is that 9-11 was all Clinton's fault.......Interesting.

It's actually a lie.

Maybe you should tell it to this guy.
By the way when you say something is a LIE maybe you'd be more believable if you substantiated your claim.
Here is the Gorelick Memo...
Gorelick Memo that created the wall between FBI & CIA thus no knowledge of the 9/11 bombers shared with the FBI!!!
looks especially imprudent 10 years later.
1995 memo she wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” GORELICK WALL!
Here read what NOT my words but other sources:
Jamie Gorelick’s wall barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall.
Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.
So, a year before the 9/11 attacks, a special unit in the U.S. military was aware of the presence of an al-Queda cell in Brooklyn, New York, and sought to share its information with the FBI but was stopped cold.Why?Because (as described in the April 16, 2004 Washington Times piece) “on March 4, 1995, [Jamie Gorelick, the then number 2 official in the Clinton Justice Department, sent a 4-page directive] to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White, the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow information-sharing procedures that ‘go beyond what is legally required,’ in order to avoid ‘any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance’ that the Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.”
Could 9/11 Have Been Prevented? The Gorelick Memo and What We Knew

There that easy to prove you are NOT believable and there was a legal obstacle.
Oh and the reason for the Gorelick Memo.

(CNSNews.com) - A senior U.S. government official has told CNSNews.com that the 1995 memo written by former Assistant Attorney General Jamie Gorelick and currently at issue in the 9/11 Commission's investigation of U.S. intelligence failures, also created "a roadblock" to the probe of the 1996 Clinton re-election campaign fundraising scandal.

The memo's relevance in the investigation of the fundraising scandal has received scant attention in the media, but four different sources, including the government official, have explained and corroborated details of the connection for CNSNews.com.

The CNSNews.com sources question whether the guidelines purportedly put in place by Gorelick in 1995 for Justice Department investigations were actually intended to shield President Bill Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and top Democratic campaign fundraisers from the subsequent congressional investigations of the illegal fundraising activities.

However, there appears to be no evidence at this point that the Gorelick memo was written for that express purpose.

Because the memo created a barrier for U.S. intelligence agencies to share information with the FBI, one of its unintended consequences may have been to prevent the FBI from receiving the necessary intelligence to stop the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the worst in American history.
Gorelick Memo Allegedly Impeded Probe of Clinton Fundraising Scandal

NOPE, merely propaganda by CNS, THE MOST UNTRUSTWORTHY news source other than WND OUT there in the blogosphere. The PRESIDENT, was made aware, the top of the FBI and CIA and NSA ALL knew of an impending and imminent attack was coming.

I AM NOT a believer of ANY thing you say as YOU don't KNOW! Give me links. Substantiation for your GUESSES and FACTS NOT spleen venting!

 

[healthmyths]

Maybe a lesson in thinking and opinion sharing.
A) Sharing your opinions should be based on FACTS not guesses or "feelings".
B) FACTS come from other sources that others can view and judge the source.
C) Then based on the facts opinions should be formed and then shared along with the substantiation.

Thus your opinion is more believable and therefore maybe some others will believe what you are writing.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Because in the 911 investigation the Democrats weren't trying to protect the only potentially viable presidential candidate they have.

Interesting.....Yet ANOTHER (not-too-sharp) right winger OPENLY admitting that the Benghazi committee is nothing but, "lets-get-Hillary" witch hunt.......

(poor committee chair, Gowdy, is having a hard time spinning that the hearing is "objective")

No, I am pointing out that the Democrats have reason to cover the sleazy bitch, because no other Democrat in the mix has a lab rat's chance, and if they lose this time around, it may well be the end for them if a hard liner gets in there.

"The end"? You don't have to be THAT open about your desire for one-party rule.

I don't want one-party rule. I want the Democrats destroyed.

I believe there are 8-10 other political parties in the United States.

 

[nat4900]

It seems that right wingers on this thread will vehemently fight off leftist "hypocrisy" by.................spewing out their own hefty dose of hypocrisy.

Right wingers' summary:

a. Bill Clinton is solely responsible for 9-11
b. The Benghazi committee is doing excellent and worthwhile work in their investigation, and the fact that its taking longer than the 9-11 commission took, is strictly democrats' fault.

Yep, all is well in the purity of the souls' of right wingers, and all that is bad in the U.S. is democrats evil doings.

Do I have it right and covered it all, republican dimwits?

 

[Misty]

I don't know, perhaps those that testified before the 9-11 committee were more forthcoming?

I have a feeling that not even YOU believe that.....

No I agree with him. The 9-11 commission was a left wing run operation that yielded the results they were ordered to present to Americans.

 

[Iceweasel]

Looks like little Natalie is rating posts funny that she can't respond to. Now that's funny!

 

[nat4900]

Looks like little Natalie is rating posts funny that she can't respond to. Now that's funny!

I'll respond to ANY post from anyone over the intellectual capacity of an 8 year old...
YOU, just made the cut....barely. LOL

 

[Correll]

Any loss of American lives is a tragedy......

That stated, it should raise some skepticism in any objective mind as the WHY it has taken the Benghazi select committee, about 2 additional months (and they're still going strong in their so-called investigation) to find out more about the loss of 4 American live.......than it took the 9-11 commission to investigate the loss of almost 3,000 American lives......???

Jeb Bush has just struggled with this obvious hypocrisy.

Jeb Bush Falls Apart When Asked Why He Blames Obama For Benghazi But Not W for 9/11

1. Obama choose to destabilize a nation for no reason, and put an embassy in a chaotic situation.

2. Bush was newly in office and was not responsible for the restrictions placed on the intelligence services that might have discovered the attack before it happened.


I hope this helps you understand. I don't know why this was not clear to you.

 

[nat4900]

1. Obama choose to destabilize a nation for no reason, and put an embassy in a chaotic situation.

2. Bush was newly in office and was not responsible for the restrictions placed on the intelligence services that might have discovered the attack before it happened.


I hope this helps you understand. I don't know why this was not clear to you.

Yes, we DO come to you for such "brilliant" observations.....LOL

(Hope this moron doesn't breed...)

 

[Misty]

Looks like little Natalie is rating posts funny that she can't respond to. Now that's funny!

Ya I noticed that. Lol

 

[Correll]

1. Obama choose to destabilize a nation for no reason, and put an embassy in a chaotic situation.

2. Bush was newly in office and was not responsible for the restrictions placed on the intelligence services that might have discovered the attack before it happened.


I hope this helps you understand. I don't know why this was not clear to you.

Yes, we DO come to you for such "brilliant" observations.....LOL

(Hope this moron doesn't breed...)

I answered your question seriously and honestly.

And with minimal snarkyness.


You're welcome.

 

[Iceweasel]

Looks like little Natalie is rating posts funny that she can't respond to. Now that's funny!

I'll respond to ANY post from anyone over the intellectual capacity of an 8 year old...
YOU, just made the cut....barely. LOL

You're eager to prove you're smarter than an eight year old?

 

[nat4900]

Keep it up, right wingers......Obviously you don't want to win the WH next year and to your half brains, the majority in the Senate is way over-rated, anyway....and, of course, your party is doing such a "stellar" job in the House that your contributions to governing boils down to simply bitching on a forum such as this......

(Couldn't happen to a "nicer" bunch of morons) LOL

 

[Correll]

Keep it up, right wingers......Obviously you don't want to win the WH next year and to your half brains, the majority in the Senate is way over-rated, anyway....and, of course, your party is doing such a "stellar" job in the House that your contributions to governing boils down to simply bitching on a forum such as this......

(Couldn't happen to a "nicer" bunch of morons) LOL

YOu asked a question and I answered.

Do you consider yourself an "objective leftwinger"?

 

[OKTexas]

It's really simple, Clinton built the firewall between the intel agencies that kept them form connecting the dots. In the early months of the Bush administration all they had was a bunch of disjointed information, who would you blame?

What does that have to do with ignoring Clarke?

and why the deflection?

The memo produced 4 days into the new administration wasn't ignored, hell it was produced at a time when the new administrations people probably didn't even know where to get office supplies, much less have cohesive operational departments. Was the memo given the attention needed that HIND SIGHT says it might have been, obviously not, but the security teams didn't have the advantage of hind sight, did they? Your dear leader inherited, active, ongoing operations, Bush didn't and the Clarke memo proposed future actions, with the most urgent one being more covert funding for the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. Nothing in the memo insinuated an eminent threat to the homeland. Given the information the new administration had at the time and without hind sight, what would you have done different? So far you seem to think people just starting a job should be read in and totally up to full operational speed on day one and we all know government doesn't work that way, hell it take months to hire staff and learn who all the players are.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Any loss of American lives is a tragedy......

False premise.
/thread

 

[OKTexas]

It's really simple, Clinton built the firewall between the intel agencies that kept them form connecting the dots. In the early months of the Bush administration all they had was a bunch of disjointed information, who would you blame?

Everything you conservatives are spoon fed from the likes of Limbaugh is kept real simple. Keep it simple and the message will reverberate. And none of you it seems has the intellectual honesty to question anything you hear. Despite what you believe, Clinton didn't build a firewall between intel agencies. The Gorelick memo, which you will next submit as proof of your beliefs, is not a smoking gun. It did not prevent the alphabet agencies from sharing national security intel.

Oh, ok. I guess I should defer to you instead of the folks from you heroes administration.

 

[nat4900]

I did not want this thread to be about the culpability of the Bush administration...ONLY that the investigation of the 9-11 commission was done much quicker than the Benghazi...ON-GOING.....investigation that will drag until election day of next year......for OBVIOUS reasons.

Nonetheless, here's a recap of the 9-11 briefings.

The August 6th PDB should have been read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding it, the ones the Bush administration would not release. The administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.

The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=0#