Please Go Away »
Posted By tehranchik 10 months, 2 weeks ago in Political NewsLet's leave aside the fact that if Dick Cheney and his alleged boss had been more vigilant--if they had listened to the Clinton appointees like Sandy Berger who warned about Al Qaeda, if they had paid attention to their own intelligence reports (notably the one on August 6, 2001)--the September 11 attacks might never have happened. Actually, I can't leave that aside...but in any case, it is sleazy in the extreme for Cheney to predict another terrorist attack. For several reasons:
Read Full Story at swampland.blogs.time.com »
849 Views Share Story 71 Comments Report
Submitted By:
tehranchik
Well, I'm from and live in the Pacific Northwest. I did live in the middle east during the late 70's and early 80 ...
Who Also Submitted: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 71 (view all)
-
100%
djn3nunez310 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dickies been playing that "We're going to be attacked again" fear card since 2002. Played it against Kerry in 2004. Played it against all Democrats last year too. So it's no suprise.
Reply
What is suprising is the psuedo-cons who forgot their own mantra on another terrorist attack in this country. "Not if, but when...." -
17%
b-happy10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"f they had listened to the Clinton appointees like Sandy Berger who warned about Al Qaeda, if they had paid attention to their own intelligence reports (notably the one on August 6, 2001)--the September 11 attacks might never have happened."
Reply
If we do get hit again by a terrorists just remember that line I quoted and just change a few names around. THat quote is basically saying that 9/11 was Bush's fault because he didn't do all he could do to stop it. So we can safely say that if we do get hit again then it will Obama's fault because he didn't listen to advice from Dick Cheney. And because he didn't listen to the advice, Obama didn't do all he could, just like this guy is saying Bush didn't do all he could. Works both ways.-
75%
dunkirk10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
To torture and eavesdrop on everybody? We got attacked on 9-11 because Dumya ignored ALL warnings of terrorist activity. Its very clear the REPUBLICANS actually believed that terrorism wasnt as big a problem as Clinton said it was. When Dumya took office he had a list of top priorities, fighting terrorism wasnt ON that list, instead he wanted to revive Star wars from the ronnie raygyun era. We then had them spinning the attack into a terrorist behind every Bush (that actually may heave been true given the events that followed with that administration). What appears to really gnaw at the REPUBLICANS tho is Obamas refusal to break the Constitution and follow the law of the land. It seems they are more interested in trying to e able to say He's doing it too then upholding the Constitution.
Reply
-
-
100%
jovial10 months, 2 weeks ago
-
100%
StevieGee10 months, 2 weeks ago
-
-
Neutral
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry man, it doesn't work that way.
Reply
This type of thing is NOT a two way street. We are not allowed to blame the Democrats for any wrong doing. Anything and everything that goes wrong under Obama's watch is clearly the fault of Bush. You may as well just get use to that and accept it. I understand that it's sick and wrong, but it is what it is. -
100%
djn3nunez310 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Before you start blaming the new administration better look into the reasons we might be attacked again.
Reply
If somebody from Iraq goes postal in a suicide attack here becuase an innocent family member was blown away during the invasion or occupation, who's fault is that going to be?
Or what if a family member of somebody who was rendered to another country and tortured or held at Gitmo and tortured goes postal, who's fault will that be.
Or, because the resources were pull from the fight in Afghanistan/Pakistan to Iraq and Al Queda regenerates itself and launched another attack, who's fault will that be?
Obama's ?
-
-
100%
rightfromwrong10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cheney should be on trial for war crimes and the extra money he made from his affiliation with Haliburton in a non-compete contract for them should be taken away from him and given to support those soldiers he sent over to Iraq on a phony war and have come back him injured and broken people. Haliburton should be fined for leaving the USA for Dubai.
Reply
The likelihood of an attack happening in America is much higher simply because of the invasion of Iraq and even moderates now hate the USA-
0%
b-happy10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"The likelihood of an attack happening in America is much higher simply because of the invasion of Iraq and even moderates now hate the USA"
Reply
I completely disagree. Even though they may hate us now for taking the battle to their homeland, it's safe to say that Bush has put Al Quaeda into hiding. When Bin Laden has to live in the mountains of Afghanistan because he fears for his life, I would think that it's a sign of Bush kicking ass on his terrorists friends. Financially, Al Quaeda is doomed. Without money there is no way of financing attacks like 9/11.
If Obama sits back and takes it easy on the terrorists then there will be more attacks. If he keeps the pressure on them then we will be safe. Easy as that. So far, Obama is turning out to be Al Quaeda's buddy.
-
-
-
-
67%
slate10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
They just happened to pass on the ONE that would come back and attack us under Bush's watch so you'd have a chance to say "At least Clinton and his administration caught and punished those responsible for the 1993 attack on the Towers" and give Clinton a pass as you do your usual round about to get on the subject that you hate Bush..
Reply -
50%
soeze_keyser10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Maybe if the Clinton administration had paid more attention then 9/11 would not have happened? There will be more attacks on the US the WTC was attacked in 93 by Islamic extremists and they just regrouped and waited. 9/11 happened on Bush's watch and he took action. But it was planned under Clinton's watch, so it really doesn't matter who is president, they will attack us.
Reply-
-
100%
djn3nunez310 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
But it was planned under Clinton's watch, so it really doesn't matter who is president, they will attack us
Reply
Clinton's dire public warnings about the threat posed by terrorism, and the actions taken to thwart it, went completely unreported by the media, which was far more concerned with stained dresses and baseless Drudge Report rumors. When the administration did act militarily against bin Laden and his terrorist network, the actions were dismissed by partisans within the media and Congress as scandalous "wag the dog" tactics. The news networks actually broadcast clips of the movie "Wag the Dog" while reporting on his warnings, to accentuate the idea that everything the administration said was contrived fakery.
In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al-Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Senators Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of.
Clinton, 9/11 and the Facts
http://www.truthout.org/article/clinton-911-and-fa...
-
-
89%
TheNewsseeker10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I can only strongly agree to everything said in this article! Panicing is always much easier than finding solutions. Weapons seem to be stronger than arguments, but, in fact: they aren´t!
Reply
Dick Cheney really seems to be unteachable ... -
-
40%
jimdoze10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Joe Klein is a blowhard who would have castigated Bush-Cheney for fear-mongering if they had taken extraordinary measures to act with force on any one of a multitude of intelligence leads that an administration absorbs daily. And, of course, had that administration the foresight to pre-emptively and forcibly avert that terrorist attack, the likes of Klein would have trumpeted "See people, it was all a tempest in a teapot. Nothing happened. The administration was fear-mongering."
Reply -
38%
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Let's leave aside the fact that if Dick Cheney and his alleged boss had been more vigilant--if they had listened to the Clinton appointees like Sandy Berger who warned about Al Qaeda, if they had paid attention to their own intelligence reports (notably the one on August 6, 2001)--the September 11 attacks might never have happened."
Reply
EXACTLY,
How come Bush didn't listen to Clinton's appointees who clearly told Bush that Al Qaeda was going to use jet airplanes on September 11th 2001 and fly those planes into the twin towers at around 8:00 AM. Clinton also told Bush that another plane was going to be slammed into the Pentagon on September 11th 2001 at around 9.15 AM. How come Bush didn't listen? Clinton told Bush the exact details of the attack, right down to where it was going to happen and at what times. But Bush did nothing. Clinton also told Bush that another plane would be used to fly into the White House. But Clinton told Bush not to worry about that plane because the passengers will take that plane down before it reaches Washington. Clinton somehow knew all the attack details and he warned Bush, and Bush did nothing, WHY? -
50%
Spadecaller10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In May 1945, Winston Churchill, Harry S. Truman, Joseph Stalin and Charles De Gaulle agreed that an international military tribunal should try the leaders of Nazi Germany for war crimes. It was decided to charge the men and women on four counts: crimes against peace (planning and making war); war crimes (responsibility for crimes during war); crimes against humanity (racial persecution) and conspiracy to commit other crimes.
Reply
Cheney and GWB would have to be found guilty of at least 3 out of 4 of these.-
Neutral
jimdoze10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Maybe, Maybe Not. I think you are stretching things a bit here, Spade.
Reply
But, let's say that is the case. Then did Neville Chamberlain tragically opt for "peace for our time" and, by default, condemn tens of millions so as to avoid the possibility of committing a "war crime"?
-
-
50%
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In response to my above post, it just now came to me.
Reply
How did Clinton know all the details of the 9/11 attacks before it happened? Clinton must have had inside information from Al Qaeda. I didn't know that Clinton was in the Al Qaeda information loop, that's weird!? -
33%
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Another thing just came to me.
Reply
If Clinton warned Bush of the attacks before hand, then why do some many lefties say that Bush did the attacks himself? Clinton is GOD to the Democrats and lefties, the lefties beleive everything Clinton says. So if Clinton warned Bush that Al Qaeda was going to attack us, then doesn't that prove that Bush was not behind the attacks. Boy, you lefty dems sure do send out contradictive messages. -
-
60%
crespi10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dick Cheney has been a puppet master in most of the things that led to our country's current crises.
Reply
He is now trying to wrap those strings around the American people's neck, but instead they are starting to twist around his own.
He should live out the rest of his unnatural life in prison. -
50%
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'd like to know when is Sandy Berger going to take that lie detector test that he promised he would take? That was part of the deal Sandy worked out. He promised he'd take the test to prove his innocence. We're still waiting there Sandy. And we will be waiting forever, because Sandy knows he's screwed if he does take the lie detector test. I think they should force him to take it. After all, that was part of the arrangement. Yet once again, the Dems get a pass!
Reply -
-
-
33%
4thchance10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do beleive there is a thing called REVENGE. If you consider just how awful the dems were towards Bush, all the made up lies and everything else they did in an attempt to tear Bush and his administration to pieces...One could only conclude that someone somewhere is planning revenge on the Democrats.
Reply
There's an old saying that goes like this...
"Revenge is a dish that's best served cold"
Give it some time, you must understand that revenge is coming in one form or another. It will come when they least expect it. BIG OUCH!
-
-
100%
cleare10 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
not revenge...retribution. you conservatives are the ones spouting "personal responsibility" all the time, yet you let the bush administration off the hook over and over and over again. where the heck does your buck stop???
Reply
bush and cheney and rumsfeld et al need to own the responsibility for the dismal condition they left this country in...for their abject failure in capturing bin laden, even in securing oil for the future. -
More News
The Huffington Post
Lincoln Mitchell: Improving the Health Care Bill After It Passes Will Not Be Easy
Gordon Brown: A Clear Agenda for Reform in 2010
Marie Wilson: From Right to Wrong: Daycare, Abortion and a Health Care Bill with Women at the Center
Joe Cirincione: Stephen Colbert's Secret Plan to Defend America
Tom Engelhardt: In Nightmares Begin Responsibilities: Why War Will Take No Holiday in 2010
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.