i say that he has no intelligence and he thinks i am talking about the CIA.

then i point out that i was talking about him and he calls me stupid because he still thinks i am talking about the CIA

think he will get it this time

You seem to think using caps makes a difference, why can't I?

What you really mean is you would need to have intelligence in order to recognize it in order to avoid it. Col wouldn't know intelligence if it bit him in his militarized behind.



God forbid Col would ever concede even when he seems to be conceding.



No, he is actually saying you have no intelligence, none what so ever.

  

Stupid is as stupid does. Looking at the quote above, need I say more?

Among many things he conveniently forgets, intentionally or otherwise, is what a liberal hot button "racial profiling" was at the time (still is, sadly). Before 9/11, attempting to do so would have produced a firestorm of protest even louder than the protest over domestic surveillance of possible terrorist contacts after 9/11.*

*I happen to know exactly what would have happened in every circumstance in history had that circumstance not occurred, provided it didn't actually happen. If pretending to know hypothetical outcomes is good enough for Gene, it's good enough for me.

This is what I mean when I say you have no idea what you are talking about.

We just finished dealing with the Chinese and the attack on our recon aircraft. Iraq was making noise and North Korea was making noise as well. The terrorist had been planning the attack on America for five years so what do you focus on? China, North Korea, Iraq, and Iran were all testing the new president with only eight months in office.

The biggest threat at the time was China followed by North Korea and Iran with Iraq bringing up a distant rear and AQ way behind Iraq.

You col. gene say that with all of that going on our president should have known that AQ was going to attack us at home when they have only been only been able to set off two car bombs in the US and that was during Mr. Clinton’s watch.

AQ in the Philippines came up with a plan to hijack airplanes and then refined that to blowing them up over the ocean so no one would be able to pin it on AQ. This was discovered after a plane was bombed but was able to land with only a few deaths meaning that the plan was not perfect. The plan was later refined to hijack planes and crash them into buildings in America. This part was not in the computer that was captured by the Philippine police. So yes, there were plans to attack America but the last credible intel we had was blowing up planes over the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. We had hints that they might use the planes as missiles but all the information pointed to just blowing them up.

Since all of the above is public knowledge it means that you are a political hack not interested in the truth but in attacking the president for doing more than the last president did. You forget I was a democrat for decades before I realized that the liberals are more interested in power than serving the American people. I have never seen you write anything critical of Mr. Clinton who cut programs that kept us safe. It was Mr. Clinton who refused to kill ben Laden, capture him or take him when offered by two governments. During this time AQ was planning and training for the 9/11 attack. Mr. Bush was only running the country for 8 months and by the time Mr. Bush took over, the planning was done, the troops were in place, and they just waited for the date to attack. Once they are within our borders it is ten times harder to find and stop them. The chance to stop the attack was lost because Mr. Clinton did not want to get into a war on terror.

we have been in a war on terror for at least thirty years.


mr clinton just didn't want to protect the usa.

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree...if you get my gist.

LMFAO.

TW: Glad somebody got it.

Isn't it great how you can take a few selective, vague quotes from a book and somehow have all the inside knowledge of the workings of the CIA and White House. 

LOL.  These posts should start going under the comedy section because they have absolutely no credibility otherwise.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Tuesday, August 28, 2007
i say that he has no intelligence and he thinks i am talking about the CIA.

then i point out that i was talking about him and he calls me stupid because he still thinks i am talking about the CIA


Since what I said is what the CIA said, you are saying the CIA does not know what they are talking about. I posted verbatim the warnings from the CIA to Bush which Bush Ignored and which were proven accurate on 9/11.

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Isn't it great how you can take a few selective, vague quotes from a book and somehow have all the inside knowledge of the workings of the CIA and White House.


These quotes are not vague and any President that would receive them from the Director of the CIA and IGNORE then is criminally negligent given the attack on 9/11:

Let’s take a look at some of the warnings Bush and Rice ignored and failed to act upon to protect our country.

All this is from At the CENTER of the STORM by George Tenet. I sight to page for each warning. The material in Quotes is the exact text and anything in parentheses is what I have added.

P 136.

“On Jan 13, 2000 (7 days before Bush took office) John McLaughlin, Jim Pavill and Tenet briefed Pres Elect Bush, Cheney and Andy Card. “We told them that out biggest concerns were Terrorism, Proliferation and China. I don’t recall Iraq coming up at all.”

P 138

“ The Vice President’s presence may also have had an unintended chilling effect on the free flow of views as important policy matters were debated.”


P 139

“The Pakistanis always knew more then they were telling us and they had been singularly uncooperative in helping us run these guys (al-Qaeda) down.”


p. 143

“On January 25, 2001 Dick Clark sent a memo to Condi Rice saying there was an urgent need for an NSC Principals Meeting to review his strategy against al-Qaeda”. ( This meeting was never held)

P143

“If we were going to switch from defense to an offensive posture against the Terrorists, we need new covert action authority.” (One of the issued was permission to use the new Predator equipped with the hell Fire Missile from President Bush. Tenet tried over and over again to get Bush to enable the CIA to use this new system).


P 144

“Feb 2001 Usama Bin Ladin and his global network of Lieutenants and associates remain the most immediate and serious threat, Tenet told Rice.”



P 145

“During the spring of 2001, at one of the innumerable Deputies meetings John McLaughlin expressed frustration at the lack of action.”

P145

“May 30, 2001 meeting with Condi Rice Rich (would not further identify) ran through the mounting signs f a coming attack. They were truly frightening.”


P. 149

“On June 28, 2001 we had more then ten specific pieces of intelligence about impending attacks… the intelligence was both unprecedented and virtually 100% reliable. Over the last three to five months we had been witness to never-before seen efforts by Ayman al-Zawahiri to prepare terrorists operations.”

P 149

“All around the Moslem world important operatives were disappearing while others were preparing for martyrdom.”

P. 150-152

“July10, 2001 a meeting with Rice. There will be a significant terrorist attack in the coming weeks or months! The signs were unmistakable. The attack will be spectacular Rich told Condi and the others and it will be designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. Facilities.”


P153


“At the conclusion of the July 10th meeting Condi looked at Cofer and asked, what should we do? Cofer responded this country needs to go on a war footing now!” ( Nothing changed after this meeting In addition the Bush administration kept the very existence of this meeting secret even from the 9/11 Commission The commission and the public did not learn of this July 10th meeting until the Fall of 2006 when the Press learned of the meeting and the dire warning that was ignored by Bush and Rice).


P 156

“On July 24, 2001 King Abdullah of Jordan sent word (to Bush) in his view Bin Laden and his command structure must be dealt with in a decisive and military fashion. He offered to send two battalions of Jordanian Special Forces to go door-to-door in Afghanistan” (Bush took no action).


Page 158-159


“August 6, 2001 the Presidential daily Brief (PDB) entitled, Bin Laden determined to strike in the U.S.” (No action resulted from this PDB)


P 160

“September 4, 2001 (7 days before 9/11) meeting with Rice and Rumsfeld and others was dominated by the same subject and the issue of Bush approving the use of the weaponized Predator Drone” (Bush did not act on this request until a week AFTER 9/11)

If every reference is vague (and every one you cite is just that) and none of the references are corroborated by anything other than the author's opinion or recollection, you have nothing. You believe because you want to believe, because you have no capacity for objective assessment which considers more than factoids which tickle your fancy or suit your preconceived prejudices. You have the most selectively blind notion of "truth" I've ever run across. You make the NYT look like Fox News.

Now muster up your best debating skills and call me an idiot again.

Paladin, You get a well deserved rare AD cookie!

Gene, you fail to understand what you are reading. Even if all that Mr. Tenant wrote in his self serving book was accurate and correct neither you nor Mr. Tenant explained how all the terrorist were in place inside our country before the 2000 election. What stopped Mr. Tenant from rounding up these people since he was so worried?

Even if we had killed bin Laden in July of 2001 it would not have stopped the attack since all the money and killers were already in the US they were just waiting for the go signal which could be given by any member of the leadership. The smart move would be to take out the troops in the country then get the leadership. At least that was what I was taught from the military and the CIA classes I took years ago. Maybe that has changed but it still makes sense today.

What do you say to this or will you ignore it as you have everything else I have written?

Glad you could get AWAY with it.

I tried that line back when dabe was here and got blasted for calling her a slut.

(sigh) people need to get out more. They don't get SNL jokes, they don't get "Rain Man" jokes....I give up.

lol.

i thought you were against attacking countries that posed no threat to the USA. at that time Afghanistan didn't pose a threat to the USA.

LOL.  Everyone of those quotes are vague, and tell nothing exact.

Isn't it interesting that one of those quotes is before Bush took office, but I don't you see  you criticizing that administration for not doing anything either.  You are just sad.

Reply By: Daiwa Posted: Wednesday, August 29, 2007
“If every reference is vague (and every one you cite is just that) and none of the references are corroborated by anything other than the author's opinion or recollection, you have nothing. You believe because you want to believe, because you have no capacity for objective assessment which considers more than factoids which tickle your fancy or suit your preconceived prejudices. You have the most selectively blind notion of "truth" I've ever run across. You make the NYT look like Fox News.

Now muster up your best debating skills and call me an idiot again.”


You are an IDIOT. For anyone to defend a President who take no action after the Director of the CIA presented a series of warnings like these over a six months period from a group that had attacked our country three times in the past shows the stupidity of both you and the criminal neglect of the President. The attacks on 9/11 PROVED these warnings were correct and Bush DID NOTHING to defend our country!

again what action should you take non of those warnings even stated for a fact that these attacks were going to in the USA.

LOL.  This is the most ridiculous thing I have read today.

You are a sad individual.  As we have said, there was no actionable intelligence, there was the "wall" (that you haven't addressed), and there was the general incompetence from the CIA.  It's amazing how  you can ignore everything just to blame Bush. 

Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, August 30, 2007
For anyone to defend a President who takes no action after the Director of the CIA presented a series of warnings like these over a six months period from a group that had attacked our country three times in the past shows the stupidity of both you and the criminal neglect of the President.




Again what action should you take non of those warnings even stated for a fact that these attacks were going to in the USA.


I have answered that question. What you do NOT do is IGNORE warnings from the CIA to go on a WAR FOOTING!

Reply By: Island Dog Posted: Thursday, August 30, 2007
The attacks on 9/11 PROVED these warnings were correct and Bush DID NOTHING to defend our country!


. This is the most ridiculous thing I have read today.

You are a sad individual. As we have said, there was no actionable intelligence, there was the "wall" (that you haven't addressed), and there was the general incompetence from the CIA. It's amazing how you can ignore everything just to blame Bush.


Bush and Congress could have taken down that "wall" if they had acted on the warnings from the CIA that lead up to us being attacked on 9/11 JUST as the CIA Warned!

what is a war footing.


and how does that help in the country.


us troops are not allowed to do anything inside the country. police connected. so again we go on red alert for what, when, where,


by the way it is the job of the police to be looking for the strange things people do. the president shouldn't have to tell them to do their job.