Release the August 6th 2001 PDB!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Tony Parkinson, Apr 10, 2004.

  1. This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    airplanes on the WTC and other targets.

    Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a plateful
    of pretzels in order to not act on this.
    Tony Parkinson, Apr 10, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tony Parkinson

    David Lo Guest

    In article <>,
    Tony Parkinson <> wrote:
    >This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    >Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    >very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    >airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    >
    >Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a plateful
    >of pretzels in order to not act on this.


    I think it would be good to get Bush impeached; but I'm not sure he's
    losing any sleep on this one having heard Condi casually describe it
    before the commission as a kind of a ``historical'' document and as
    ``frustratingly vague'' because no one told her when it would happen
    or where.

    But of course, the politicians and the media do not want to hold her
    or Bush responsible for not having an active domestic defense program,
    protecting important, probable sites with a potential loss of a large
    number of human lives against terror attacks. If the president has
    around-the-clock personal security protection in place, I don't see
    why they should not expect analogous measures to have been designed
    and implemented for at least a few places in the NYC and DC in order
    to protect the security of the American people.

    It is pointedly clear thought that the national security agency has
    never bothered with domestic security. The top people there were only
    thinking of foreign adventure like Iraq. They were thinking of oil
    and other strategic interests that America should get a hold of.

    Furthermore Condi was hired specifically to handle Bush's information
    outflow, i.e., propaganda management since the man himself wouldn't
    know what to say or think, unlike Clinton (not that i don't think
    Clinton contributed greatly to the dumbing down of the presidency).

    This administration may have fallen asleep at the wheel. But that may
    not be it. Its culpability could be greater.

    It could be more culpable if, for example, it was aware of something
    like this would happen (based on intelligence), they then did some
    kind of political computation, and decided that its occurrence could
    help them get the popular support they needed to whip up a string of
    foreign wars they have long yearned for but couldn't pursue without a
    pretext: The Project for the New American Century (PNAC).

    lo yeeOn
    David Lo, Apr 10, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tony Parkinson

    Guest

    (Tony Parkinson) wrote in message news:<>...
    > This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    > very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    > airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    >
    > Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a plateful
    > of pretzels in order to not act on this.


    It is foolhardy to believe that anyone in such a position is ever
    asleep at the wheel for more than 15 seconds. Has anyone considered
    that in light of a good deal more evidence, he may have welcomed the
    event (if in fact it was even purpetrated by those claimed) to further
    the ongoing globalist agenda?

    It is also sad and half-blind for factions to be blaming one another
    for that tradgety, when the true cause no matter whom was used, is a
    fallen, proud and hypocritical nation being judged by God. It was
    only a little shot over the bow, and you haven't seen anything yet in
    terms of horror and judgement. He will deal with the Arabs used to
    inflict America too when they no longer serve His purposes, don't
    worry. It doesn't take much reading to see that by the time the
    biggest dung hits the fan, America is already either long gone or so
    unimportant as to not merit any mention.
    , Apr 10, 2004
    #3
  4. Tony Parkinson

    Marc Mulay Guest

    ""...Yet ANOTHER whack job hiding behind a "handle" on the WWW, afraid to use his name...anthromorphizes
    his concept of some "supreme being"*.

    Regards,

    Marc Mulay

    * Everybody has her or his own spiritual belief system, for some it's televangilism, for others it's drinking goats milk,
    sleep
    facing Mecca and the stray sheep best be nervous. I have mine; quiet, deeply personal amusement in observing humans as they
    persist in completely misinterpreting the intent of the worlds organized religions, yet fundamental sorrow at the deception
    and damage done on a
    moral level to billions through time. http://www.spark-online.com/april00/esociety/mulay.html




    wrote:

    > It is foolhardy to believe that anyone in such a position is ever
    > asleep at the wheel for more than 15 seconds. Has anyone considered
    > that in light of a good deal more evidence, he may have welcomed the
    > event (if in fact it was even purpetrated by those claimed) to further
    > the ongoing globalist agenda?
    >
    > It is also sad and half-blind for factions to be blaming one another
    > for that tradgety, when the true cause no matter whom was used, is a
    > fallen, proud and hypocritical nation being judged by God. It was
    > only a little shot over the bow, and you haven't seen anything yet in
    > terms of horror and judgement. He will deal with the Arabs used to
    > inflict America too when they no longer serve His purposes, don't
    > worry. It doesn't take much reading to see that by the time the
    > biggest dung hits the fan, America is already either long gone or so
    > unimportant as to not merit any mention.
    Marc Mulay, Apr 10, 2004
    #4
  5. Tony Parkinson

    Malev Guest

    On 9 Apr 2004 21:19:53 -0700, (Tony Parkinson)
    wrote:

    >This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    >Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather


    <etc ...etc>

    From what I've been able to gather, 3 million americans claim to have been
    abducted by aliens.
    From what they were able to gather, a year ago countless idiots in this NG were
    telling us about the imminent finding of WMD in Iraq.
    Malev, Apr 11, 2004
    #5
  6. Tony Parkinson

    El Kabong Guest

    "Malev" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 9 Apr 2004 21:19:53 -0700, (Tony Parkinson)
    > wrote:
    >
    > >This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > >Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather

    >
    > <etc ...etc>
    >
    > From what I've been able to gather, 3 million americans claim to have been
    > abducted by aliens.
    > From what they were able to gather, a year ago countless idiots in this NG

    were
    > telling us about the imminent finding of WMD in Iraq.


    Another strange occurence comes to mind about this.
    A customer of mine told me his sister is a flight controller
    who is in the NY area. When the first of those airliners on
    9/11 veered off course, he said his sister told him in a matter
    of seconds every fight controller in the entire country was alerted.
    She had told him they have triple backup systems, satellite cameras
    and loads of technology and orders to immediately alert the US
    Air Force which is what they did. However, fighter jets were scrambled
    minutes later and never even arove to the scene. This is very curious.
    And I saw Gail Sheehy, the author of "Middletown America" speak on C-SPAN
    telling everyone that the airliner that eventually hit the Pentagon had
    flown around for hours before it hit. I wonder why the 9/11 commission
    is not addressing these particular items.

    Link to the book:
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375508627/102-2466038-5665731
    ?v=glance
    >
    El Kabong, Apr 11, 2004
    #6
  7. "Tony Parkinson" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    > very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    > airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    >
    > Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a

    plateful
    > of pretzels in order to not act on this.


    You'll find yourself mighty disappointed to find out that the PDB
    mentions nothing of using planes to attack the WTC. IT mentions
    hijacking a plane in order to leverage the hostages against a release
    of Sheik Omar Abdal Rachman (sp?) but nothing at all what you might
    think. Impeachment? It's a laughable to suggest such a thing.
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Apr 11, 2004
    #7
  8. Tony Parkinson

    Malev Guest

    On Sat, 10 Apr 2004 20:40:27 -0500, "El Kabong" <> wrote:



    >And I saw Gail Sheehy, the author of "Middletown America" speak on C-SPAN
    >telling everyone that the airliner that eventually hit the Pentagon had
    >flown around for hours before it hit. I wonder why the 9/11 commission
    >is not addressing these particular items.


    Because it's bollocks.
    Malev, Apr 11, 2004
    #8
  9. Tony Parkinson

    tinydancer Guest

    "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
    news:Y62ec.21923$...
    > "Tony Parkinson" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > > Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    > > very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    > > airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    > >
    > > Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a

    > plateful
    > > of pretzels in order to not act on this.

    >
    > You'll find yourself mighty disappointed to find out that the PDB
    > mentions nothing of using planes to attack the WTC. IT mentions
    > hijacking a plane in order to leverage the hostages against a release
    > of Sheik Omar Abdal Rachman (sp?) but nothing at all what you might
    > think. Impeachment? It's a laughable to suggest such a thing.
    >
    >



    So what you are saying, in effect, is that in order to take any action what
    so ever, bushbaby needs an exact date, time, and place?

    td
    tinydancer, Apr 11, 2004
    #9
  10. "tinydancer" <> wrote in message
    news:x94ec.27830$...
    >
    > "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
    > news:Y62ec.21923$...
    > > "Tony Parkinson" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > > > Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    > > > very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    > > > airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    > > >
    > > > Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a

    > > plateful
    > > > of pretzels in order to not act on this.

    > >
    > > You'll find yourself mighty disappointed to find out that the PDB
    > > mentions nothing of using planes to attack the WTC. IT mentions
    > > hijacking a plane in order to leverage the hostages against a release
    > > of Sheik Omar Abdal Rachman (sp?) but nothing at all what you might
    > > think. Impeachment? It's a laughable to suggest such a thing.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    > So what you are saying, in effect, is that in order to take any action what
    > so ever, bushbaby needs an exact date, time, and place?
    >
    > td


    Apparently. It seems that "traditional hijackings" by known terrorist
    organizations were not much of an issue to these guys, but if they'd
    known that -- gasp! -- they would be used as "missiles" then they
    would have taken action. Or more action, as Rice continually claimed
    that the administration *was* taking action, she just can't quite say
    what that action was. The PBD in fact does mention the WTC, and
    New York as well.

    Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    plot before it happened. Of course, he would have had to point at
    some specific action that had been taken, and it's a matter of public
    record that squat-diddly was done. At least at the admin's instigation.
    So, as usual, he hid behind a wall of secrecy and succeeded in convincing
    another few million voters that he's a lying SOB.

    However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    so quickly, I don't know. The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.

    Not that any of this will make a damn bit of difference to the White
    House, seeing as how they'll never accept responsibility for anything
    at all. But at least the release of the Aug 6 briefing underscores one
    thing that most of us have known all along: Condaleeza Rice was lying
    through her teeth when she said that the document wasn't a warning.

    RstJ
    Robert St. James \(el corazon del demonio\), Apr 11, 2004
    #10
  11. Tony Parkinson

    Bo Raxo Guest

    "Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <> wrote
    in message news:cx5ec.11774$rg5.38067@attbi_s52...
    >
    >

    <snip
    >The PBD in fact does mention the WTC, and
    > New York as well.


    The only mention of the WTC is this:
    "...Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his
    followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef
    and 'bring the fighting to America.' "

    So while it's true to say it mentioned the WTC, that's rather misleading in
    terms of threat assessment.

    >
    > Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    > he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    > plot before it happened.


    No, he should have said that there were two failures:

    First, the FBI flubbed the Phoenix memo. Find somebody to fire, better yet
    two or three people, and toss Mueller to the dogs while you're at it. Sorry,
    Bob, that's life in the fast lane, good luck with those speaking
    engagements.

    Second, he should have said that airport security was inadequate. That
    there was a special commission just a couple of years before that
    recommended several changes including reinforced cockpit doors. But the
    costs (something like six dollars a ticket) were deemed too much. There
    might have been some issue since, IIRC, Gore chaired that commission, but
    that just would give Bush a chance to look honest and bipartisan when
    dealing with this national crisis.


    <snip>
    > However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    > field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    > disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    > in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    > so quickly, I don't know.


    Most of the hijackers were identified by federal investigators within hours.
    Very quickly, security tapes showing some of them in (IIRC) Boston were
    available, and their descriptions probably came from there.

    >The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    > FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    > probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    > in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.


    Who are the "New Jersey Girls"? What the heck are you talking about?

    >
    > Not that any of this will make a damn bit of difference to the White
    > House, seeing as how they'll never accept responsibility for anything
    > at all. But at least the release of the Aug 6 briefing underscores one
    > thing that most of us have known all along: Condaleeza Rice was lying
    > through her teeth when she said that the document wasn't a warning.
    >



    It's a warning that Al Qaeda plan something nasty, perhaps a hijacking. And
    that some Arabs were checking out federal buildings in New York. As much of
    a Bush basher as I am, I don't see a warning there. Everybody can read it
    and judge for themselves.

    Here's the text:

    http://tinyurl.com/2bhjo


    Bo Raxo
    Bo Raxo, Apr 11, 2004
    #11
  12. Tony Parkinson

    tinydancer Guest

    "Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <> wrote
    in message news:cx5ec.11774$rg5.38067@attbi_s52...
    >
    > "tinydancer" <> wrote in message
    > news:x94ec.27830$...
    > >
    > > "Peter A. Stavrakoglou" <> wrote in message
    > > news:Y62ec.21923$...
    > > > "Tony Parkinson" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    > > > > Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    > > > > very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    > > > > airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    > > > >
    > > > > Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a
    > > > plateful
    > > > > of pretzels in order to not act on this.
    > > >
    > > > You'll find yourself mighty disappointed to find out that the PDB
    > > > mentions nothing of using planes to attack the WTC. IT mentions
    > > > hijacking a plane in order to leverage the hostages against a release
    > > > of Sheik Omar Abdal Rachman (sp?) but nothing at all what you might
    > > > think. Impeachment? It's a laughable to suggest such a thing.
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >
    > > So what you are saying, in effect, is that in order to take any action

    what
    > > so ever, bushbaby needs an exact date, time, and place?
    > >
    > > td

    >
    > Apparently. It seems that "traditional hijackings" by known terrorist
    > organizations were not much of an issue to these guys, but if they'd
    > known that -- gasp! -- they would be used as "missiles" then they
    > would have taken action. Or more action, as Rice continually claimed
    > that the administration *was* taking action, she just can't quite say
    > what that action was. The PBD in fact does mention the WTC, and
    > New York as well.



    And Washington D.C. IIRC.


    >
    > Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    > he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    > plot before it happened. Of course, he would have had to point at
    > some specific action that had been taken, and it's a matter of public
    > record that squat-diddly was done. At least at the admin's instigation.
    > So, as usual, he hid behind a wall of secrecy and succeeded in convincing
    > another few million voters that he's a lying SOB.




    Now to be fair, the man was on vacation all of August that year.


    >
    > However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    > field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    > disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    > in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    > so quickly, I don't know. The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    > FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    > probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    > in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.
    >
    > Not that any of this will make a damn bit of difference to the White
    > House, seeing as how they'll never accept responsibility for anything
    > at all. But at least the release of the Aug 6 briefing underscores one
    > thing that most of us have known all along: Condaleeza Rice was lying
    > through her teeth when she said that the document wasn't a warning.



    And it appears that Richard Clarke was telling the truth.

    td


    >
    > RstJ
    >
    >
    tinydancer, Apr 11, 2004
    #12
  13. Tony Parkinson

    tinydancer Guest

    "Bo Raxo" <> wrote in message
    news:yM5ec.4639$...
    >
    > "Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <>

    wrote
    > in message news:cx5ec.11774$rg5.38067@attbi_s52...
    > >
    > >

    > <snip
    > >The PBD in fact does mention the WTC, and
    > > New York as well.

    >
    > The only mention of the WTC is this:
    > "...Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that

    his
    > followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi

    Yousef
    > and 'bring the fighting to America.' "
    >
    > So while it's true to say it mentioned the WTC, that's rather misleading

    in
    > terms of threat assessment.
    >
    > >
    > > Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    > > he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    > > plot before it happened.

    >
    > No, he should have said that there were two failures:
    >
    > First, the FBI flubbed the Phoenix memo. Find somebody to fire, better

    yet
    > two or three people, and toss Mueller to the dogs while you're at it.

    Sorry,
    > Bob, that's life in the fast lane, good luck with those speaking
    > engagements.
    >
    > Second, he should have said that airport security was inadequate. That
    > there was a special commission just a couple of years before that
    > recommended several changes including reinforced cockpit doors. But the
    > costs (something like six dollars a ticket) were deemed too much. There
    > might have been some issue since, IIRC, Gore chaired that commission, but
    > that just would give Bush a chance to look honest and bipartisan when
    > dealing with this national crisis.
    >
    >
    > <snip>
    > > However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    > > field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    > > disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    > > in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    > > so quickly, I don't know.

    >
    > Most of the hijackers were identified by federal investigators within

    hours.
    > Very quickly, security tapes showing some of them in (IIRC) Boston were
    > available, and their descriptions probably came from there.
    >
    > >The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    > > FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    > > probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    > > in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.

    >
    > Who are the "New Jersey Girls"? What the heck are you talking about?




    C'mon Bo, get with the program. I thought you were keeping up with this
    news. The Jersey Girls are wives/loved ones of those killed on 9/11. They
    are at the hearings and were instrumental in getting them opened to begin
    with.


    td
    tinydancer, Apr 11, 2004
    #13
  14. Tony Parkinson

    tinydancer Guest

    "Bo Raxo" <> wrote in message
    news:yM5ec.4639$...
    >
    > "Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <>

    wrote
    > in message news:cx5ec.11774$rg5.38067@attbi_s52...
    > >
    > >

    > <snip
    > >The PBD in fact does mention the WTC, and
    > > New York as well.

    >
    > The only mention of the WTC is this:
    > "...Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that

    his
    > followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi

    Yousef
    > and 'bring the fighting to America.' "
    >
    > So while it's true to say it mentioned the WTC, that's rather misleading

    in
    > terms of threat assessment.
    >
    > >
    > > Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    > > he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    > > plot before it happened.

    >
    > No, he should have said that there were two failures:
    >
    > First, the FBI flubbed the Phoenix memo. Find somebody to fire, better

    yet
    > two or three people, and toss Mueller to the dogs while you're at it.

    Sorry,
    > Bob, that's life in the fast lane, good luck with those speaking
    > engagements.
    >
    > Second, he should have said that airport security was inadequate. That
    > there was a special commission just a couple of years before that
    > recommended several changes including reinforced cockpit doors. But the
    > costs (something like six dollars a ticket) were deemed too much. There
    > might have been some issue since, IIRC, Gore chaired that commission, but
    > that just would give Bush a chance to look honest and bipartisan when
    > dealing with this national crisis.
    >
    >
    > <snip>
    > > However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    > > field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    > > disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    > > in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    > > so quickly, I don't know.

    >
    > Most of the hijackers were identified by federal investigators within

    hours.
    > Very quickly, security tapes showing some of them in (IIRC) Boston were
    > available, and their descriptions probably came from there.
    >
    > >The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    > > FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    > > probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    > > in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.

    >
    > Who are the "New Jersey Girls"? What the heck are you talking about?




    C'mon Bo, get with the program. I thought you were keeping up with this
    news. The Jersey Girls are wives/loved ones of those killed on 9/11. They
    are at the hearings and were instrumental in getting them opened to begin
    with.


    td
    tinydancer, Apr 11, 2004
    #14
  15. "tinydancer" <> wrote in message
    news:%0eec.14870$...
    >
    > "Robert St. James (el corazon del demonio)" <> wrote

    <...>
    > > Bush could've saved himself a lot of heat by just admittting that
    > > he knew something was coming but was unable to break up the
    > > plot before it happened. Of course, he would have had to point at
    > > some specific action that had been taken, and it's a matter of public
    > > record that squat-diddly was done. At least at the admin's instigation.
    > > So, as usual, he hid behind a wall of secrecy and succeeded in convincing
    > > another few million voters that he's a lying SOB.

    >
    >
    >
    > Now to be fair, the man was on vacation all of August that year.


    He's been on vacation for the better part of his presidency. It seems
    like the only things he bothers to show up for are deceitful speechs
    about Iraq (yellow-cake, anyone?) and to sign tax cut legislation for
    large corporations.
    >
    >
    > >
    > > However, the FBI *was* doing something, which was to continue
    > > field investigations. The NY Times (and many other papers) had
    > > disturbingly detailed descriptions of the hijackers and their movements
    > > in articles from Sept 15. How the hell they got so much information
    > > so quickly, I don't know. The "New Jersey Girls" flat out accused the
    > > FBI of already having open files on some of them pre-9/11. That's
    > > probably true. And we certainly had Massasoui, who received payments
    > > in July-Aug from the same paymaster who financed the 9/11 gang.
    > >
    > > Not that any of this will make a damn bit of difference to the White
    > > House, seeing as how they'll never accept responsibility for anything
    > > at all. But at least the release of the Aug 6 briefing underscores one
    > > thing that most of us have known all along: Condaleeza Rice was lying
    > > through her teeth when she said that the document wasn't a warning.

    >
    >
    > And it appears that Richard Clarke was telling the truth.
    >
    > td


    Of which there was never any serious doubt, given the frothing and
    gnashing of teeth in the White House after it was published.

    RstJ
    Robert St. James \(el corazon del demonio\), Apr 11, 2004
    #15
  16. Tony Parkinson

    Guest

    Marc Mulay <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > ""...Yet ANOTHER whack job hiding behind a "handle" on the WWW, afraid to use his name...anthromorphizes
    > his concept of some "supreme being"*.


    Oops, a little dog has shit in the corner again<yawn>. I wonder what
    entices broken, hurting, unhappy people to USENET...but it's obvious
    they can't be taught or paper-trained. One day EVERY knee will bend,
    and it will be a horrific one for this poor bozo.
    , Apr 11, 2004
    #16
  17. "tinydancer" <> wrote in message
    news:%0eec.14870$...
    <snip>

    > And it appears that Richard Clarke was telling the truth.
    >


    And if you believe that, he has a bridge for sale that he can interest
    you in.
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Apr 12, 2004
    #17
  18. Tony Parkinson

    Guest

    On 9 Apr 2004 21:19:53 -0700, (Tony
    Parkinson) wrote:

    >This is going to be a blockbuster, folks, and will likely lead to
    >Bush's impeachment. From what I've been able to gather the briefing
    >very specifically warns that Bin Laden is planning attacks with
    >airplanes on the WTC and other targets.
    >
    >Asleep at the wheel is an understatment, Bush must have had a

    plateful
    >of pretzels in order to not act on this.


    Oh for gods sake, how could Bush be expected to act on this
    information, it didn't include flight numbers or seating assingments.
    --
    Like a game of pick up stick played by fucking lunatics
    , Apr 12, 2004
    #18
  19. Tony Parkinson

    Marc Mulay Guest

    Excellent support of my characterization of you! ;-)

    wrote:

    > Marc Mulay <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > > ""...Yet ANOTHER whack job hiding behind a "handle" on the WWW, afraid to use his name...anthromorphizes
    > > his concept of some "supreme being"*.

    >
    > Oops, a little dog has shit in the corner again<yawn>. I wonder what
    > entices broken, hurting, unhappy people to USENET...but it's obvious
    > they can't be taught or paper-trained. One day EVERY knee will bend,
    > and it will be a horrific one for this poor bozo.
    Marc Mulay, Apr 12, 2004
    #19
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Chris
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    18,625
    Chris
    Feb 6, 2004
  2. Chris

    Can I convert palm pdb format to text

    Chris, Feb 8, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    16,494
    Boomer
    Feb 8, 2004
  3. xnview and .pdb files

    , Aug 17, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    508
    >Andy
    Aug 17, 2005
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    723
  5. JagChan

    How do I read PDB Files?

    JagChan, May 4, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    2,693
    Fat Ass Fred
    May 9, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page