COL Gene

HYPOCRISY ON JOE USER

HYPOCRISY ON JOE USER



On August 24th I posted this Blog which elicited many truly asinine comments that demonstrate the hypocrisy of many who Blog on Joe User-




Bush & Rice Should be Impeached for NOT Protecting America!

The United States spends Billions of dollars each year to collect and process intelligence for one propose—To provide the President and National Security Advisor information to help defend this country from attack.

In my Blog I documented scores of such warnings provided Bush and Rice by the CIA in the six months before the 9/11 attack on our country. When I pointed out that these warnings were ignored by both Bush and Rice, many on this site defended the inaction of the President and National Security Advisor. Statements such as there was no actionable intelligence were presented. In fact the CIA warnings identified the group that was planning the attacks, they said they were near term and in some cases even identified the use of air planes as missiles that they planned to use in their attack. The only thing they did not contain was the exact date and place. Others claimed the information George Tenet presented about all the warnings was just fluff for his book. This despite those warnings were the end result of thousands of people we employed to do just want they did - providing warnings that Bush and Rice ignored. We should have saved the money and effort because the intended use of the intelligence gathered and presented to the President and his principal security advisor was IGNORED.

In addition, this intelligence and the warnings were NOT presented to the appropriate intelligence committees in Congress at the time for any needed legislative action to help protect our country. In fact the most important warning was kept secret for over 5 years. That warning was provided by the CIA Director on July 11, 2001 that said the danger was so great that the United States needed to be placed on a WAR FOOTING in order to try and prevent Bin Laden from carrying out his intended attacks on our country.

Bottom line the President and National Security Advisor failed to act on the CIA warnings and, as we all know, Bin Laden was successful in attacking our country on Sept 11, 2001. Thus all the warnings that Bush and Rice ignored and failed to provide to Congress were CORRECT! When I document this many on this Blog Site either attack me or attempt to discredit the warnings provided by the multi billion dollar intelligence agency that exists for the express purpose of providing the very information that Bush and Rice IGNORED! WHAT HYPOCRACY on the part of anyone that would defend the failure of Bush and Rice to fulfill their NUMBER ONE responsibility - the security of America!
40,281 views 154 replies
Reply #126 Top
SHOW US WHERE CLINTON TOLD BIN LADEN he was about to attack him!




i watched the news for three hours before the missiles hit. if i can watch the news and know. then i think that ben laden can watch the news and know too don't you .
Reply #127 Top
HOW do you answer the Bush failure to approve the use of the Armed Predator Drone?

Reply #128 Top
SHOW US WHERE CLINTON TOLD BIN LADEN he was about to attack him!


Why does he need a warning when bin laden already attacked?  Keep being an apologist for democrats gene, it's just hilarious.


Reply #129 Top
You can't avoid a cruise missile and the idea that AQ got an intel report telling them a cruise missile had been launched against, GIVING THEM TIME TO LEAVE THE BLAST RADIUS, is a hollywood type mind creation, and is ridiculous.

They were either not in the right place, or the cruise missile missed.

When did Clinton know about AQ? He knew about them in 1993 when they attacked the World Trade Center in 1993. When did he see the damage a terrorist attack could do inside the United States, 1995 when Oklahoma city was bombed, by an American terrorist.

The original plan of the first WTC attack, was to break the foundation of the first tower, to the extent that it collapsed into the second tower, and collapsed them both, destroying the buildings in the shadowed area, perhaps causing a domino effect certainly causing a major disaster, perhaps even larger than the 9/11 attacks.

In 1998, they destroyed the US embassy in East Africa. Killing 300.

In 2000 they attacked the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen.

All the evidence you really need about Clinton failing to act against a sworn enemy of the United States is here.

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/9/10/181819.shtml?s=ic

Where Clinton was in a shitstorm of the Lewinsky scandal, entirely of his own making by the way, through poor choices and "CEO type misconduct" unable to execute the decision to get UBL because he was having coffee talk and some under the desk cigar action.

Come on, your job as the President isn't to get blow jobs during office hours. It's to keep the country safe. Granted Bush has walked all over the Earth with the military and spent billions on this never ending war on terror and occupation of Iraq.

Clinton should have done a better job, a more persistent job of, nabbing UBL or decapitating him, and nipping AQ in the bud, if he had, we'd be living in a different world. But his concern was one worded after the failure of the Israelis and Palestinians to stop killing each other, a battle that continues to this day. That word is "Legacy" It would seem Bush could give a rats ass about "Legacy" and for that I give him credit as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#First_World_Trade_Center_bombing

Reply #130 Top
You can't avoid a cruise missile and the idea that AQ got an intel report telling them a cruise missile had been launched against, GIVING THEM TIME TO LEAVE THE BLAST RADIUS, is a hollywood type mind creation, and is ridiculous.



you can't avoid a cruise missile that takes one hour to get to it's target and you have three hour notice it is on the way. why.
Reply #131 Top



ANSWER THIS QUESTION:

HOW do you answer the Bush failure to approve the use of the Armed Predator Drone?
Reply #132 Top
HOW do you answer the Bush failure to approve the use of the Armed Predator Drone?


why do you want to give the cia unsupervised use of this weapon when the military doesn't have it.
Reply #133 Top


Reply By: danielost Posted: Monday, September 03, 2007
HOW do you answer the Bush failure to approve the use of the Armed Predator Drone?


why do you want to give the cia unsupervised use of this weapon when the military doesn't have it.

To help locate Bin Laden and his Lieutenants so that he could have been eliminated and thus help to prevent 9/11![/B]
Reply #134 Top
why do you want to give the cia unsupervised use of this weapon when the military doesn't have it.


Reply #135 Top
Reply By: danielost Posted: Monday, September 03, 2007
why do you want to give the CIA unsupervised use of this weapon when the military doesn't have it.


The issue is NOT if the CIA or the Military were to use this weapon system to eliminate Bin Laden and al-Qaeda. Bush did not approve of it to be employed. WHY!!!!!! The Military had been using the unarmed version for combat Intel.
Reply #136 Top
"you can't avoid a cruise missile that takes one hour to get to it's target and you have three hour notice it is on the way. why."

You can't tell me there is any way UBL knew that a missile was on the way. There is no way to intercept that kind of information, unless the person who told the CIA told UBL and AQ as well.

As I said, they were either not there, which is how I explain it, or the missile missed. Given the sophistication of the Tomahawk and the accuracy of military GPS I believe they weren't there.

I believe I can partially explain why the Predator was not entered into service armed before 9/11. First, they had issues with weapons compatibility, second, the air force is was inherently against programs which remove pilots from the cockpit, which the armed predator does. During the testing, weather gave them a lot of trouble trying to fly it. The aircraft has a low survivability rate, i.e. 53 of the 139 delivered up to March 2007 have been lost. They are cheaper then a combat fighter, and being unmanned not subject to the same scrutiny when they do lose them, but thats a huge ratio of losses, 1/3 1/4, means they need to refine the role it performs or the design.

Finally there is also mention in this wiki article about the host country not clearing them to arm the drone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RQ-1_Predator
http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=122

Weapons system integration takes time to develop and test. This was pioneer stuff, mounting weapons on unmanned aircraft is a first and it never goes fast. Before 9/11 the urgency of the country, the civilian and military leadership, to develop such a weapon, just wasn't there.
Reply #137 Top
Dan

I believe you are correct about the issues with development time. I was not aware of the survivability rate. However, Bush did approve the use of the armed version one week after 9/11 and Tenet had been trying to get a policy decision out of Bush for almost 8 months prior to 9/11 without success.
Reply #138 Top
You can't tell me there is any way UBL knew that a missile was on the way. There is no way to intercept that kind of information, unless the person who told the CIA told UBL and AQ as well.


you mean you can't intercept cnn that is where i watched it for the hour of flight.
Reply #139 Top
Dan

I believe you are correct about the issues with development time. I was not aware of the survivability rate. However, Bush did approve the use of the armed version one week after 9/11 and Tenet had been trying to get a policy decision out of Bush for almost 8 months prior to 9/11 without success.




if bush gave the cia unsupervised use of that weapon then that was very wrong.
Reply #140 Top


Reply By: danielost Posted: Monday, September 03, 2007
Dan

I believe you are correct about the issues with development time. I was not aware of the survivability rate. However, Bush did approve the use of the armed version one week after 9/11 and Tenet had been trying to get a policy decision out of Bush for almost 8 months prior to 9/11 without success.




If bush gave the CIA unsupervised use of that weapon then that was very wrong.


Tenet requested use to identify and take out Bin Laden. That is not what I would call "Unsupervised use". Just more of your BS!
Reply #141 Top
Agreed, nothing in the military is unsupervised, we have nukes. The question is was it supervised to the level required. I'd trust the air force, who obviously was tasked to fly the damn things, to do just that, the flying. Certainly that's smarter than having guys who just finished basic, or air force pilots, or anybody not trained in MP doing MP duties at Abu Gharib.

Unsupervised, I can't believe that you are even arguing this point daniel.

"if bush gave the cia unsupervised use of that weapon then that was very wrong."

Why don't you tell us why that's wrong? Rather then just sticking one liners to us.

The predator unmanned version is a few years old now, going on a decade, the armed version, just needed testing and verification, as well as a purpose. Before 9/11 the line was Americans, are concerned but managing it. Until the towers were hit.

Gene er, colonel, it is quite clear that the support and need for a weapon able to strike, without warning, quickly, immediately, and routinely was needed before the ground war was won in Afghanistan. This weapon proved to be the predator. However, before 9/11, there was neither the perceived need, urgency or "battle tested" ability of this weapon.

Nobody goes into war fighting with untested equipment, except when Rumsfeld, say so. I.e. in the case of troops deploying without fucking body armor, or humvees without armor plating, as it proved the case, necessary, early in the post war occupation. The air force wouldn't want to make guarantees about the ability of the predator when it was untested in the field.

Development still continues of course, but there is a lot that the predator cannot do. I won't participate in any potentially treasonous discussion about capabilities but the fact remains the predator is but one piece in the air force's collection of aircraft which perform certain roles. The geography of the region make it uniquely suited but perhaps not the best equipment to use in all situations.

Certainly there are plenty of AQ who are dead because of it.

Reply #142 Top
"if bush gave the cia unsupervised use of that weapon then that was very wrong."

Why don't you tell us why that's wrong? Rather then just sticking one liners to us.




absolute power corrupts absolutely. thus the more unsupervised abilities you give any agency the bigger the problems will be. especilly agencies that
Reply #143 Top
"absolute power corrupts absolutely. thus the more unsupervised abilities you give any agency the bigger the problems will be. especilly agencies that"

Great, now prove he did give the agency absolute power. Obviously they haven't gotten Bin Ladin, and even if they had it didn't prevent 9/11. I'm not sure I can even reason or debate with you as your position doesn't make any sense at all.

Reply #144 Top
if he had given them unsupervised use of this weapon what would stop them from using against a president or Senate or congressmen that they felt was bad for the country.
Reply #145 Top
Bush did not give the authority to use the system to hunt and kill Bin Laden and his top people to anyone prior to 9/11. WHY!!!!!! Even if the system did not function all the time, it could have succeeded in locating Bin Laden and killing him and other top al Qaeda leaders. To fail to use it like Bush did prior to 9/11 INSURES it will not work to locate and kill Bin Laden!
Reply #146 Top
So you go from this...
"absolute power corrupts absolutely. thus the more unsupervised abilities you give any agency the bigger the problems will be. especilly agencies that"

to this...
if he had given them unsupervised use of this weapon what would stop them from using against a president or Senate or congressmen that they felt was bad for the country.

Where is the proff that he gave anybody unsupervised use of anything? As we are saying, he did not. So what's your point?
Reply #147 Top
Bush did not give the authority to use the system to hunt and kill Bin Laden and his top people to anyone prior to 9/11. WHY!!!!!!


Where is the proff that he gave anybody unsupervised use of anything? As we are saying, he did not. So what's your point?


Reply #148 Top
Lol. Oh Daniel you are a funny guy.
Reply #149 Top
CLINTON DID NOT KILL BIN LADEN.

WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

DO TELL US, O' DELUDED ONE, WHAT ACTIONABLE INTELLIGENCE DID TENET KNOW IN JUNE THAT HE DIDN'T KNOW IN JANUARY? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DIDN'T HE KNOW IT, IF HE KNEW ANYTHING NEW AT ALL, SOONER?

WHY DIDN'T WJC BRIEFLY SLIP HIS DICK OUT OF ML's MOUTH & TAKE CARE OF "OFFICIAL" BUSINESS? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WAS OBL EVEN AROUND FOR BUSH TO DEAL WITH?

WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IS PRECIOUS OXYGEN BEING CONSUMED BY YOU FOR NO PURPOSE? WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply #150 Top
Do get control of your ! points or I'm going to run for congress and pass a law as to using 2 or less consecutive "!" online.

Thanks!!