Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Apr 1, 2004.
So the FBI had wiretaps/intercepts months before 9/11 that they hadn't analyzed yet, so she began translating these days AFTER the attack.
Sine the FBI had the evidence in their possession they "knew" about the attack beforehand.
This is like saying that the FBI knew who the Uni-Bomber was years ago, because they had the evidence to convict him in their possession the entire time.
I think this is another person capable of failing a criminal logic course.
Or more evidence of an FBI that didn't have the translation resources that it sorely needed.
Question is, why is the WH so eager to quash these kinds of statements? They've got no problem leaking classified info when it suits them, so why the reticence when it comes to the facts surrounding 9/11?
The article says the information was there before the 9-11 attacks
but no one bothered to translate it until it was too late and this person
was hired. Bush and team has been asleep at the wheel on so many
issues its hard to understand why anyone but an idiot or a Fascist
would consider voting for this fool in November 2004
Actually, this woman's 2002 complaints centered on the translation service purposefully not translating documents, so they could get more budget the following year.
Check this out from an earlier thread.
Seems to me it is more a failing of the FBI. If they had asked Bush for more translators and were turned down, that would be one thing, but this article doesn't say anything to that effect.
I just love all these experts who have perfect 20/20 hindsight
Oh please, put the spotlight on me for a minute...I know something new...
What a joke
What's even funnier is watching people lap it up
ignored foresight eventually turns into hindsight...
And they run around trying to blame each other like "Why did you let this happen?" This was a terrorist attack, that sad fact is, there is very little we can do stop them. And to have hearings and paint headlines, as if the Bush administration handed them the keys to the plane... you're right, they lap it up. A few of them even come on chat forums and call other members fascist idiots.
Oh get off it. Where did such an unprovoked exchange happen?
I agree there's very little you can do to stop a determined, professional organised terrorist attack, especially if the attackers are suicidal. But even if that's the case, don't you think we ought to do something?
It seems the Bush administration mightn't have done anything and perhaps ignored specific threats because they were focused on Iraq.
You mean like this guy...
Way to add to the discussion. Why don't you work on another personal insult aimed at me again? You bring so much to the table.
are you seriously equating "Bush administration [...] perhaps ignored specific threats" w/ calling a fellow poster a "fascist idiot?"
This seems to me like a personal attack which, as you may know, is not permitted here. Having checked back on some of your other posts in this forum, I notice they have been in threads which have been locked for similar reasons. This forum can only work if people stick to arguing the issues.
Oops, my bad. I'll try not to attack the other posters here.
edit: Is the title of this thread just a little ludicrous?
Yes it is, almost sounds like Bush got a fax memo months before from al-Qa'ida at the White House telling him all about it...
the thread title is the same as the article headline
The problem is Bush is running like he has the only answer to the terrorist problem and voting for anyone else is like voting FOR terrorism. This is clearly untrue.
OK, if something makes it into print it's gospel
what do you suggest i do when posting a newspaper article?
You could put the title in quotes to suggest it came from somewhere else... Oh wait, you did that already!
Uh... right here.
Not that I would expect anything more from our public education system...
I don't believe that the Bush admin ever ignored or intentionally allowed anything to happen.. you might, but that's the nature of this forum. Most of the members jabber on in their democratic/liberal rhetoric and its pointless to even argue against it. You don't even see the futility of pointing the finger for an event that NO ONE could have stopped... it didn't matter who was in the White House (Clinton was president during the first WTC attack). So now we have to realize that we're a target and pointing a finger does not help that at all, and it certainly isnt a solution to the problem at hand.
The FBI, CIA.. who ever, was probably understaffed. It certainly appears that way.. but it would have been impossible to man the CIA in a way that every piece of evidence was analyzed and processed so that these attacks could have been prevented. Its a field of static that they're sorting through, trying to figure out what's a real threat... its just not possible to catch everything. I dont care what the commissions or news reporters think
no one is to blame for this intelligence failure. When the terrorists want to do it again, they will
the only thing we can do is fight back.
So in your opinion there is no point to the current investigation going on at the moment into possible intellegence failures?
You don't even think its worth waiting to hear its findings before reaching your own conclusion?
I'll admit I'm disillusioned with the American political system... so in a word, yes. I don't believe anything but political agenda will be found in this study.
There's a definite logic flaw in creating a commission to study an agency's shortcomings. If you contend that there is a flaw in the system, that there is corruption and that the US leaders can't be trusted.. why does that go away when they appoint a commission?
I don't see how anyone can argue that the study will prove anything.
We have to do something though, right? We have to study something, or figure it out... it helps the American people feel safer. "Something is being done, to prevent this in the future." That's bull****... it won't change a thing.
If it turns out I'm wrong.. then I'll admit it, and praise our leaders and revel in the fact that there will never be another attack.
Wow, and I thought I was cynical about the political process!
Surely with views like this you don't believe what anyone tells you about anything ever, no matter what "evidence" given to support it. How does that work for you?
To be honest I think it's a get-out from holding your leaders accountable, and I'm sure they relish people thinking this way - it allows them scope to carry on any way they see fit.
IMHO, it's too easy to say "They're all corrupt, and nothing I or anyone else does or says will make any difference".
If things are that bad I assume you don't vote?