Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

ABC docudrama will blame Clinton and Dems for 9/11.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:34 AM
Original message
ABC docudrama will blame Clinton and Dems for 9/11.
Claiming it's based on the 9/11 Commission Report.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID...

This is the first Hollywood production Ive seen that honestly depicts how the Clinton administration repeatedly bungled the capture of Osama Bin Laden.


The miniseries also has a scene in which the CIA has crucial information identifying some of the 9/11 hijackers in advance of 9/11, but refuses to share the information with the FBI because of the wall put up by certain Democrat officials to prevent information sharing between government agencies.


We need to be ready to respond. We need to be ready topoint out how Clinton repeatedly tried to catch or kill bin Laden but his hands were tied by the Republican Congress. We need to show how they criticized his efforts at every turn.

We also need to be ready with the REAL 9/11 report that most people have never read. Especially Chpater 8 "The System was Blinking Red", which points out how Bush completely ignored the threat.

We need to be ready to point out how the Clinton Administration tried to warn Bush about the threat of bin Laden and Bush completely ignored it.

I find it very interesting that this mockumentary is coming out just before the 2006 Elections. Who's behind this? We need to find out. Get your Google on!

Arm yourselves with Facts! Be prepared! NGU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. the 9/11 commander in chief denies responsibility by proxy nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberaldemocrat7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
69. The RepubliKLAN party failed to defend America
The REPUBLIKLAN Party appears the only party that has actually DEMONSTRATED their weakness on national defense on the day that 4 terrorists crashed their planes into 2 towers, the pentagon and in a field in Pennsylvania on Sept 11, 2001.

2750 dead people attest to the weakness of the REPUBLIKLAN Party on NATIONAL DEFENSE!

So Karl Rove can infer, speculate, yell, shout as much he wants about the Democrats on national defense but his party has DEMONSTRATED their weakness already and that appears a serious reason not to vote Republiklan this November.

Now tell what I said here to the Republiklans, and the press and swing and independent voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. Whorowitz spin
Most Americans have already had enough of Bush's incompetence in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. I saw a few clips of this it's called Path to 9-11
It gave me bad vibes almost immeadiately but I didn't know why.. I wont watch it at any rate imo it's too soon.. Thanks for the heads up though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
4. A good place to start is Will's Data Dump
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

What would be useful combat material is a series of links to the information in the first 1/2 of this article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Excellent! Why didn't I think of that? Bookmarked. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pa28 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
53. Recommended both threads. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #53
95. Truly. What you said.
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. Not only that, it was advertised as ABC also aired
Pearl Harbor. We are up against a tremendous political machine, make no mistake about it. America is on the brink of irrevocable dictatorship and the fight is right now, not 2008 as some want to obsess on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
32. Exactly - the fight is now
If Dems don't take back Congress in 2006 the USA is in very, very deep trouble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NotGivingUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
70. Absolutely right! If it doesn't happen now, it ain't happenin',
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
99. ABC leads in promoting fascism n/t
ABC spawned Rash Limbaugh,Sean Hannity,and Mark Levin. Between them, they have succeeded in polarizing our electorate and creating a large segment of the population that only listens to lies and hatred. ABC Radio still consistently attacks all the elements that our necessary for America to continue as a democracy.
Its an evil network and should be known as such to all normal Americans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
122. yeah
I was waiting for them to broadcast some BS propaganda about 9-11... they're bringing out the big guns
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
6. Peter Bergen's book
on Usama bin Laden puts to rest any nonsense about the Clinton administration failing to capture UbL. The book uses part of the 9-11 commission's report to do so. The 9-11 failures are the rightful property of the bush-CHENEY administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Which one? I found 4 by him about bin Laden on Amazon. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. "The Osama bin Laden
I Know," (2006), Free Press. It's a valuable book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Thanks, H2O Man! You're always a great resource!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
9. Oh I See... EARLY October Surprise!!
Is there NOTHING they won't stoop to???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. Here's some names we need to research and find Repuke
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 12:03 PM by johnaries
connections:
http://abc.go.com/specials/pathto911.html

Writer Cyrus Nowrasteh (The Day Reagan Was Shot)
Former ABC News anchor John Miller, now the FBI's Assistant Director of Public Affairs, was also a consultant on the project. His book, The Cell, co-authored with Michael Stone, was optioned by ABC for use in the teleplay. In addition, The Relentless Pursuit by Samuel Katz was also optioned.

The Path to 9/11 is executive-produced by Marc Platt (Empire Falls). The producers are Hans Proppe (Anne Frank) and Cyrus Nowrasteh (also the writer); and Governor Thomas H. Kean (Chair, The 9/11 Commission) is senior consultant. The director is David L. Cunningham. The miniseries is a production of UHP Productions, Ltd.

edit to add: I found another DU thread from Friday with some more info:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nashyra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. Boycott Disney
Boycott ABC start an internet brush fire on a boycott. ABC is a major coporation trying to sway the election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
12. We Need to Flood ABC with Disaproval of this Propaganda
This needs to be dealt with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. I plan to hit our local affiliate
with Will's Data Dump.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. We should. We got Sinclair to back down from airing that anti-Kerry film
We can do this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tabatha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:10 PM
Response to Original message
14. bush failed too
Bush invaded a country and still did not capture OBL.
What's their point?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OzarkDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #14
34. Clinton succeeded, Bush failed
and he failed deliberately, by dismantling the terrorism tracking system that Clinton set up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orwell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
18. I asume this won't be released until after...
...the midterms because we know how our news media doesn't want to sway voters with splashy headlines at the last minute.

Isn't that why such "liberal bulwarks" as the NYT held so many damaging stories about * during the 2004 election cycle. Isn't it?



Never mind...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zonkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
19. This reminds me of the right's responses to Farenheit 911. No one watched
any of those movies. And no one will watch this tv movie either except those who already drink the koolaid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. What bothers me is it's claim to be based on the 9/11 report,
when it's really based on these other books mentioned in the blurb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zonkers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. It'sTV -- they have no shame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
22. But...but...Bush and Coulter have said Osama is irrelevant
so why should anyone have been looking for him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
23. Why will this be shown on a national network and the Raygun story was not?




Silly me. Rhetorical question. I know the answer. Saint Ronnie's disciples wouldn't allow his story to be shown on a national network, even if it was a gloss over.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stepnw1f Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
24. Kick
we need a massive internet campaign to stop this shit! With November coming, you all know what happens when propaganda like this goes unchallenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:41 PM
Response to Original message
25. You've got to wonder just how stupid they think the sheeple are
So whatever Clinton did allegedly prevented Bush from doing a single thing in the next 9 months? Absurd on its face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackBeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:42 PM
Response to Original message
26. Since Republicans can't process facts, I guess my response would be:
So was the first attack on the World Trade Center Poppy Bush's fault?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Well, actually, al Qaeda is Poppy's fault.
bin Laden was actually working WITH Americans in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union previously. He got pissed off at the US over our forces in Saudia Arabia during Desert Storm. So, in a way, you could say that al Qaeda IS Poppy's fault.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackBeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. You know that. And I know that, as well.
But try explaining that to a Republican. I can gauren-damn-tee you that they will accuse you of believing "conspiracy theories".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #26
110. Clinton was only in office 36 days when the first wtc attack took place
Clinton did not have the Hart /Rudman report..as little lord pissy pants had..

the guy who designed the cells for Osama was allowed into the USA under papa bushes administration..while being on the most watch list and not only got into the USA he got into our Army ..and worked with the CIA as an informant. a bad one at that..and While on active duty with the US ARMY under bush papa..he took his
r& r each summer..and went to Afganistan and trained with Osama's mujahadin..

fly

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
27. What about the marine base in Lebanon that was bombed during...
Reagan's tenure? :wtf:? FUCK ABC! I WILL BOYCOTT ANYTHING DISNEY!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
30. "9/11 was Clinton's fault" - by William Pitt
DATA DUMP: "9/11 was Clinton's fault"
by William Pitt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The two great myths that have settled across the nation, beyond the Hussein-9/11 connection, are that Clinton did not do enough during his tenure to stop the spread of radical terrorist organizations like al Qaeda, and that the attacks themselves could not have been anticipated or stopped. Blumenthal's insider perspective on these matters bursts the myths entirely, and reveals a level of complicity regarding the attacks within the journalistic realm and the conservative political ranks that is infuriating and disturbing.

Starting in 1995, Clinton took actions against terrorism that were unprecedented in American history. He poured billions and billions of dollars into counterterrorism activities across the entire spectrum of the intelligence community. He poured billions more into the protection of critical infrastructure. He ordered massive federal stockpiling of antidotes and vaccines to prepare for a possible bioterror attack. He order a reorganization of the intelligence community itself, ramming through reforms and new procedures to address the demonstrable threat. Within the National Security Council, "threat meetings" were held three times a week to assess looming conspiracies. His National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger, prepared a voluminous dossier on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, actively tracking them across the planet. Clinton raised the issue of terrorism in virtually every important speech he gave in the last three years of his tenure. In 1996, Clinton delivered a major address to the United Nations on the matter of international terrorism, calling it "The enemy of our generation."

<a lot more>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nozebro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
31. why would Clinton have wanted to "capture" a CIA asset? EOM

nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #31
38. You mean like "it was the GOP who created Osama in the 1st place"?
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
33. Who should we email?
Is this part of the news or infotainment division?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
35. OK, I'll go with that.
It's our fault. But that's forgivable. At least we would have brought the perpetrators to justice. And at least we would not have invaded Iraq, and committed war crimes. At least we would not have condoned torture, and cluster bombs and depleted uranium.

You are war criminals.

Even if it were not for the August 6th 2001 presidential daily briefing where they ALL BUT SPELLED IT OUT FOR YOUR LITTLE ASSES, we would only be liable for not having stopped them. That is forgivable.

Even so, you have to stretch the truth a long long ways to make it look like, on your watch, it was our fault.

I'll go with that. But you are still the criminals for what you did with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. Furthermore, why didn't you want a 9/11 commission?
If it were our fault, you certainly would have welcomed a full commission to uncover just whose fault it was.

But no. Not only did you fight that commission, but you had to traipse in holding hands toghether, and NOT UNDER OATH.

No clothes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #39
63. Best rebuttal ever.
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 03:04 PM by Straight Shooter
:thumbsup:

Also remember that bush refused to testify, then he refused to testify alone, then he refused to have his testimony recorded in any manner whatsoever, then he refused to testify under oath.

They want to say it's Clinton's fault? If it were Clinton's fault, then damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead to find out what went wrong. Instead, compared to over $60 million Congress allotted to investigating Clinton, the bush administration and Congress allotted only $3 million to investigating September 11, 2001, and only after great pressure was brought to bear, they grudgingly allotted $15 million.

Fifteen million to investigate the greatest catastrophe on American soil, ever. Sixty-plus million to investigate a sitting president and they came up with ...... squat. A none-of-your-business affair, compared to an event that changed America forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #63
88. They're all wearing special "emperor has no clothes" glasses.
Whenever you look through them, the emperor appears to have clothes on.

Yes, it really was so obvious when that whole affair came down. The poster below this reminded me that they tried to have Kissinger head it. Ha ha...ha...ha... Not even funny. And that is the kind of stuff that gets the LIHOP theory to sprout.

What we're up against is the dumbing down. And it isn't going to reserve quickly. It started right at world war two.

I don't know. We can only try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #39
87. Don't forget after stonewalling, dubby picks
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 06:00 PM by DemonFighterLives
Kissinger to head comish



:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
36. It was BUSH who gave Osama what he wanted (US troops out of Saudia A.)
It was BUSH who let Osama get away in Tora Bora.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Triana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
37. Follow the money...
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 01:07 PM by Triana
Who the Hell is Cyrus Nowrasteh (other than a writer who got his start on *another* soap opera, "Falcon Crest"), and what is HIS interest in producing such a film? Who funded it? Who and what is David Cunningham, the director?

Who ARE these people and WHAT organization, political agenda and MONEY is behind the production of this film? Inquiring Democratic minds should find out.

They're swiftboating Clinton on 9-11 in order to win elections in 2006 and 08 and to keep people in fear and loathing - to spread FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt). That much is obvious. WHO/WHAT is behind this film? That's what I want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MetaTrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #37
46. Looks like Nowrasteh is one of those who fled Iran
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 01:40 PM by MetaTrope
after democracry broke out.

Here's one stunt he was involved in:

After a false bomb threat halted a press screening of ''Veiled Threat'' on March 8, a dispute exploded between the A.F.I. and the film makers. The chronology of events, charges and countercharges is complicated. Basically the A.F.I. says it dropped ''Veiled Threat'' because the film makers irresponsibly sought publicity that endangered the entire festival. The film makers say they were censored.

Five days before the bomb threat, Cyrus Nowrasteh, the film's American director and writer was quoted in The Los Angeles Herald-Examiner as saying the film makers had ''had the specter of death threats hanging over us for a long, long time.'' As Mr. Nowrasteh explained recently, he was referring to his lead actor, Behrouz Vessoughi, who had been warned not to return to Iran. But, he continued, ''all anti-Khomeini Iranians live under that specter.''

After the threat, the A.F.I. asked the producers not to speak to the press and suggested that for security reasons the film be shown in a theater on the A.F.I. campus, placing it apart from the other feature films. When a schedule of public festival screenings appeared and ''Veiled Threat'' was not listed, the film makers complained in public and all the screenings were canceled.

No one's actions were beyond reproach. The film makers seemed eager to compare their problem with Salman Rushdie's. The A.F.I. shunted the film aside with all the timidity of those bookstore owners who were willing to sell ''The Satanic Verses'' under the counter but refused to display it. Meanwhile, the film lost its British, French and Italian distributors. ''Veiled Threat'' was suddenly dangerous.

But viewing the film makes it clear that ''Veiled Threat'' is as political as a movie of the week that latches onto the latest headline in the most superficial, exploitative way. The story concerns an evil Iranian mullah in Los Angeles who extorts money from an anti-Khomeini journalist. The journalist hires a down-and-out private investigator who stoops to blackmailing the pro-Khomeini mullah with homosexual videotapes...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ishoutandscream2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
40. I tell ya, the media is librul, librul, librul!
:sarcasm: :sarcasm: to the extreme.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OffWithTheirHeads Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
41. It IS Clinton's fault.
And we all need to start saying it. Every time ANYTHING goes wrong, Blame Clinton. By doing so we can take away the power of this Bullshit RW talking point. My dishwasher broke, Damn you Bill Clinton. If we all say it long enough and loud enough, the absurdity of it will become apparent for all to see, not just intelligent people who post here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tinfoilinfor2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #41
44. Bumper sticker...
I Ripped My Pants Today: DAMN YOU BILL CLINTON!

Do a whole series like that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
42. Let's contact Media Matters and get them working on this.
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 01:17 PM by johnaries
They have an excellent research staff.

edit to add contact info:
http://mediamatters.org/contact_us
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Retired AF Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:22 PM
Response to Original message
43. I blame the entire govt
both Dem's and Repugs. The Philippines army first unconverted the plans of airliners crashing into the world trade towers in 95. Clinton sat on it and did nothing. When bush took office he knew that he was to damn stupid to be a president and did nothing also. 3000 people died because of one president doing nothing and the other to damn stupid to breathe on his own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #43
47. Did nothing?
Produce your case. The airliner information was given directly to the bush administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #43
49. exCUSE me? Did nothing? On the contrary, Clinton almost got
him and Republicans criticized him for even trying:
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/10/18/column.b...

Clintons most public response, of course, were the cruise missile attacks of 1998, directed against Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and the Sudan, following the terrorist bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

Operating on limited intelligence -- at that time, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Tazikistan refused to share information on the terrorists whereabouts inside Afghanistan -- U. S. strikes missed bin Laden by only a couple of hours.

Even so, Clinton was accused of only firing missiles in order to divert media attention from the Lewinsky hearings. A longer campaign would have stirred up even more criticism.


Several more examples at the link. Good source!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #43
51. That is so not true
I remember Clinton having press conferences about bin laden after both embassy attacks and trying to get people's attention focused on how important it was. Republicans were on "dick watch" instead, and called everything Clinton did or said "wag the dog". After OKC, Democrats tried to pass much of the legislation that eventually made it into the Patriot Act, Republican NRA types freaked out and 'Klintoon' was born. Kerry wrote the New War in 1997, and proposed a variety of money laundering legislation to track international crime and terrorists - the Republican banking buddies fought that tooth and nail. If you take out the traditional definition of enemy and look at who has actually done the most harm to the PEOPLE of this country - it's Republicans, hands down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
45. See this DU thread re book/documentary "Triple Cross"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

This is truly Alice In Wonderland, Puzzle Palace, 'compartmentalized', MADNESS OF KING GEORGE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ananda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. What I don't understand..
.. is why Clinton isn't outraged about this, speaking out,
and filing a lawsuit against ABC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:41 PM
Response to Reply #48
52. Section 3 of the 9-11 Report
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 02:09 PM by EVDebs
There were only 33 Federal FAA Air Marshals as of 9-11. Today there are "thousands", the number is classified as is all info on the Air Marshals now. Lovely. This doesn't exonerate Clinton, just shows that Presidential control of the bureacracy isn't 'all powerful'. The Air Marshal program begun under Reagan, was allowed to disintegrate especially under PDB Aug 6th when Bush could have DONE SOMETHING. The fact that HE DIDN'T under HIS watch merely makes the blame Clinton strategery all the more pathetic.

Clinton, reading that PDB, probably would have done something like put military in mufti as de-facto marshals on US planes under a NSAM. We have no evidence Bush did ANYTHING AT ALL.

Maybe a woodpile in Crawford to show for it...Also, Clinton got CIA funding for his run for prez according to Rachel Ehrenfeld's book Evil Money (p. 180) via Jackson Stephens who also cross invested in the BCCI Worthen Bank connection:

"Bill Clinton had full knowledge of Stephen's involvement with BCCI when he accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Stephens family for his campaign". page 180

Stepens himself is a US Naval Academy grad in the same class as Jimmy Carter and Stansfield Turner.

Maybe they just know how to squeeze Bill the right way in order to maintain the silence.

Ptech's connections to 9-11

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID...

are another avenue to investigate how FAA connected Ptech was able to gain such access. Was it set up during Clinton's administration through the 'intelligence' community in order to gain cross party culpability ? Clearly if it happened then, only those "insiders" who controlled the operation's continutiy despite administrations--read PNACers et al--would keep the secret agenda going.

BTW, we already know Clinton was no angel. Any real investigation is going to turn over some rocks Dems would rather not. Our heroes all have feet of clay. But the villains still need to be exposed.

History demands it.

CIA, Drugs, and Wall Street
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/economy/dontblink...

mentions ABC as the "CIA's network". I wonder why...follow that drug money ?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Biernuts Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #48
100. Because you never win a pissing contest with anyone who buys
ink by the 55 gallon barrel. (or modern equivalent)

Besides, what's his defense? "I prevented 9-11 by decisive pre-empetive actions against Al Qaeda." "I sent in missile strikes and killed Bin Laden and the only collateral damage was a few Emirs on a first-class hunt - Then I had my way with their women (but don't tell Hill that last part, she thinks I was in Arkansas building that library!)"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
50. I think we've got to boycott ABC and let their sponsors know
that we will not tolerate rightwing bullshit being shoved down our throats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #50
66. Let's do it. Can moveon help? This worked before when
one network was going to run a biased Kerry "documentary" right before the election. I still think focused economic boycott is one of the few powerful tools we have left. Really....let's get it going! Organize a no ABC week....better yet, every Wednesday should be no ABC until the elections if they are still considering running some sort of deceptive documentary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #66
72. I'll have to cheat if LOST is still on Wednesdays
:blush:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #72
90. Except for Wednesdays then. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #66
83. Good idea! Here's Move On's contact info.
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 05:42 PM by johnaries
http://tinyurl.com/gc4wb

Send them the links to the FrontPage articles:

Nowrasteh's interview: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID...
Early screening review: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID...

edit: Crap! I forgot to send them Will's post. Can someone send it to them?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
54. Anyone know who the advertisers will be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DesertRat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
55. Don't Blame Clinton by Joe Conason
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gully Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:01 PM
Response to Original message
56. Look at this spin:
"The Path to 9/11" is not a partisan miniseries or a conservative miniseries. It simply presents the facts in an honest and straightforward manner (the producers have backed up every detail of the miniseries with copious amounts of research and documentation), and the facts are that for seven years, from 1993 to 2000, the Clinton administration bungled the handling of the world-wide terrorist threat. The miniseries is equally honest in depicting the Bush administration. It shows a few points where administration officials, following in the tradition of the Clinton years, do not follow certain clues about the terrorist plot as zealously as they should have. Nonetheless, "The Path to 9/11," by honestly depicting the unfolding of events over eight years, makes it clear that most of the conspiracy leading up to 9/11 was hatched during the seven years of the Clinton administration, and that since Bush was in power for only eight months when 9/11 occurred, he can hardly be blamed for the entire disaster.

piff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suziedemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
57. In a debate with Gore Bush said we were too much at war under Clinton.
He said we needed to respect other cultures and not be involved in wars all over the place like Clinton was in Somalia, etc. Of course he was lying about his intentions. So out of character for Bush, don't you think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElboRuum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
58. I'm so f'n sick of this bullshit. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
59. ..and who was in charge when this happened????????
I'm so tired of this Clinton shit. He was crucified over a goddamned blow job. Bush* blows up the fucking world and takes not a whiff of blame. Fuck'em one and all.

I don't find it 'interesting' that this is coming out just before the elections, it's the pattern this ONCE honorable and democratic nation has stooped to. There is no justice anymore, just politics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
60. So they ignore everything Richard Clarke said. They ignore everything
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 02:37 PM by w4rma
the Clinton administration told Bush during the transition (which was to make taking down Bin Laden a priority). And they ignore the FBI Presidential Daily Briefing, that Richard Perle titled himself to try to get the Republican leadership's attention: Bin Laden determined to strike in US (given to George W. Bush on August 6, 2001). Because Bush and the Rethugs had been ignoring all of these people (they even demoted Perle for trying to warn Bush about Bin Ladin) up until after 9.11 and even then they wanted to ignore Bin Laden and just blame 9.11 on Iraq to use it as an excuse to invade Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #60
108. And everything Paul Bremer said "I knew some day they'll get in
trouble for doing nothing about it"
How about Cheney's terra commission which never met?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
61. Clinton ordered Osama killed, but the CIA farmed the
job out to Afghan tribesmen who lacked enthusiasm for the job,
and it didn't get done.

Clinton wanted cruise missile strikes, but the NAVY required
ten hours advance notice.

11-7-00 Sandy Berger asked the DoD for commando raids on the
al Qaeda camps; this was opposed by Secy of Defense Cohen and
by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.

Richard Clarke had a plan to go after al Qaeda militarily and
by disrupting their finances. Finally the Clintonistas decided
that handing off a half-done war to the Bush regime was not fair,
and they postponed the plan. Clarke took it to Condi, and she
ignored it, demoted Clarke, and instituted a policy review that
was still going on when 9/11 happened.

Under Gore 9/11 could not have happened. Clarke's plan would have
been instituted, and the nation, expecting reprisals, would have
been on alert.

Gore would not have ignored warnings from 11 countries, 3 FBI
offices, and the CIA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
62. I emailed the president of our local affiliate
and requested it not be run and dumped a lot of information and links in the email. May as well fight back in anyway I can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:02 PM
Response to Original message
64. In the words of Kirsten Powers,
"George Bush was in office on 911."

She seems like she knows how to deliver a stunning SMACKDOWN. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
65. "Democrat officials." I'm surprised no one mentioned this yet. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Initech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #65
68. I stopped reading the article at "pro-American"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYCGirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #65
73. The article is from the nuttiest of the rightwing mags. It's no surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justice Is Comin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:21 PM
Response to Original message
67. And urine face told that CIA agent
"alright you covered your ass". Now go about your business.

I'm sure they'll have that in the docubullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FARAFIELD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
71. Just ignore it!!
First off all you have to do is know a little about the cast and crew to know what the POlitical Bent of the Show will be. Second you should remember that clamoring about it just brings it more publicity, and third, sure it is probably crap, but you shouldnt complain before youve seen it. I have another NOTE, i read the book "without precident" by Kaen and Hamilton and they talked about how they wouldnt do anything without the other co-chair,we dont see Hamilton as consultant so that should tell us a lot. I would just caution you to neither talk or care about it, ABC doesnt even have a vehicle to advertise it as most of the fall shows wouldnt have premiered and they dont have MNF anymore. just let it die if we complain to much and boycott and what not, the right wingers will be able to say "the movie the CLINTON people dont want you to see" etc. This isnt the passion of the christ where church goers and assorted right wingers can flood the movie theatre, it will only matter what the neilson families watch, so if you dont give it free publicity my guess is not many will
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
savemefromdumbya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
74. Maybe Clinton should do something about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:03 PM
Response to Original message
75. !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
76. The Clinton's need to respond. I'm sick of Dems not standing up.
I'm willing to stand up for people like John Conyers or Dems who fight back but Bill Clinton spends all his time defending the Bushes. I want the Bushes IN JAIL! The Clinton's don't. That's a problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
77. Bush has had 5 years to capture OBL, if it was so easy,
we would have him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
78. So you all are reading a RW shill and want to start a protest
without even viewing the piece, discussing writing your affiliates and talking of boycotts. Geez, why don't you watch, judge, then critique after. And yes, not all was perfect in the Clinton administration on bin-Laden, though Clinton and his people were far more focused on the task. Personally I think the constant RW attacks against Clinton, especially their "wag the dog" cries whenever Clinton tried to do something against terrorism, made some in the Clinton Admin a bit gun shy. Imagine if he had carried out that attack on bin-Laden, missed the target and did kill some UAE royalty - RW would've roasted him. They still roast him today over the "aspirin factory" and shooting cruise missiles up a camel's butt.

There were things Clinton Admin could've done better. For one Clinton should've ignored the RW and fired Freeh's ass from the FBI.

Freeh and his useless minions hated O' Neill and finally got his ass out of the FBI. There was a possibility O' Neill would've smelled out the 9-11 plot if he had been allowed to do his job.

It was misinterpretation of the rules in the CIA and FBI that meant some fools in the CIA failed to notify the FBI of two of the terrorists being in the country.

The story that will never be told is how the country's security was allowed to detoriate under a Repug congress. It was their fault that air marshals weren't funded and airlines were allowed to make airport security a joke where the screeners suffered high turnover because of wages that made a McDonald's wages look good.

Sometimes I think we at DU are as shrill as the Freepers on Michael Moore for prejudging. This DU'er intends to watch the ABC docudrama and judge for myself. If I find it unfair then I intend to tell ABC. But I'm sure not going to depend on some RW shill to inform me!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #78
86. Normally, I would agree with you about pre-judging the movie
without seeing it. However, read the interview with the writer and producer and his "vision" of the movie becomes quite clear. Further, the ads are claiming that it is based o the 9/11 Commission report, whereas obviously most of it is not since the report only goes back to 1998 and this movie goes back to 1993. This fact alone, that it misrepresents the report, is enough to oppose the movie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #78
89. It's got to be BS
Watch it at your own risk.
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
79. ABC is run by a bunch of whores
Thank don't care about their ratings as much as they do destroying any chances that Democrats have to win an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
80. The "wall between agencies" thing is total BS, BTW
The FBI, CIA, and DIA all had their own intelligence on this. If ANY of that intelligence had been followed up by ANY single one of those agencies, there would have been no 9/11. All three actually stopped their investigators from pursuing these leads. They basically shut down anyone who might have gotten to the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MetaTrope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #80
94. As I recall, at the time the FBI was busy digging up landfills
still trying to frame Lee Wen Ho.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Biernuts Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #80
101. The wall was emphasized by Jamie Gorelick, herself a -11 commission
member. She started in the Clinton Admin as the DoD General Cousel and then was moved to Dep Attorney General under Reno.

It was in the Justice Department that she reinforced the rules that restricted the info flow between the IC and Law Enforcement. It was because the focus at that time was on taking cases to trial and contaminating them with intel information subjected sensitive sources & methods to discovery by the defense - then the government had to choose between continuing the case or protecting the intel.

After 9-11, cases became less important than stopping the attack in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #101
103. The memo I read
only dealt with a few cases from the '93 bombing and didn't exclude anything. Gorelick set up an intermediary to screen information coming from an FBI intelligence operation which used FISA. The intermediary was there to ensure that information didn't contaminate those few prosecutions. If anything, Gorelick made it easier for information to pass about law enforement. Nothing in the memo had anything to do with the CIA.

PAGE 4:

"The AUSA (Assistant United States Attorney)will also serve to insure, in conjunction with the FBI and OIPR, that information which reasonably indicates that a significant federal crime has been, is being, or may be committed is appropriately disseminated to criminal investigative personnel, the USAO, and the Criminal Division pursuant to the procedures set forth above."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Count Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #80
102. Ashcroft's BS defense at the comission. Totally debunked.
This is freeper BS . May I remind you, Ashcrofy is the guy who couldn't nail one single terrorist but arrested thousands of innocents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 05:01 AM
Response to Reply #80
118. correct - walls within, not walls between
Indira Singh, corroberating Sibel's story:

"I have spoken with Sibel because what I have uncovered in Ptech connects with some of the things that she has discovered. Sibel is not allowed to disclose content but she can ask me questions. I know some of the things that she mentioned there connect directly to what I discovered."
-- Indira Singh, after reading Sibel Edmond's letter to Thomas Kean, giving testimony before the 9-11 Citizens' Commission headed by Cynthia McKinney


"...there are walls within the FBI, walls within the CIA, behind which these operations take place..."

"We have agent Robert Wright of the Chicago FBI, whos giving congressional testimony, and, umm, he stands on the steps of the Capitol, bursts into tears, apologizes to the 9-11 families, the victims, that he didnt do everything he could to prevent 9-11 from happening, that his investigations were repeatedly shut down. And I almost fell over, because he announced that his investigation was the investigation into Yassan Khadi, the same Sheikh Yassan Khadi who was the money man behind Ptech. And, umm, you could not ask for a more direct connection to 9-11 than that."

...

"In fact, and this has to be made very clear, there are some extraordinarily real patriotic Americans and good people in the FBI, as has been said by, I believe, Agent Colleen Rowley, one of the FBI whistleblowers bosses, that theres a wall in the FBI, and this has been validated to me by various attorneys in Houston, who are very close to the power bases, and are pretty ticked-off at whats happening in this country and are speaking out, as are many CIA agents who are very concerned that it has gone too far, as are many NSA agents who are concerned that its gone too far, and FBI agents. So we have a lot of people who are speaking out, theyve kept quiet too long; theyre afraid, theyre afraid of whats happening to this country. And when I say the Third Reich, what is happening to this country, they say, and I will identify they if pressed, they say, will make the Third Reich look like a tea party."

...

"...assigned me a Secret Service agent to investigate the FBIs bungling into Ptech and what was really going on. Charlie Bopp hung out with me for, until the anniversary last year when I told him I had stumbled onto the drugs and that they were giving a free pass to all those affiliated with terror financing for 9/11. And, that my promise to him to go away until they could clean up the mess was no longer on the table. We had a very, very in depth exchange where he basically broke down and admitted a lot of things to me which I probably need to tell Cynthia in private."
But he corroborated, he said its all corrupt, its all corrupt, yes. When I challenged him on the 28 redacted pages {presumably re the official 9-11 Report} he said, "Youre right, youve got it right."
So . . ."

-- Indira Singh, before the 9-11 Citizens' Commission

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #118
124. Yep. Poor Robert Wright. I feel so bad for this guy
I want to shout "HE TRIED HIS BEST AND THEY SHOT HIM DOWN". People need to know, especially the victim's families, that there were really good men and women doing their job, who would have prevented this suffering, if they had just been allowed to do their jobs.
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamthebandfanman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
81. i always just say
you think the country woulda supported a full ground invasion of a country based on an embassey bombing ?
all hell woulda broke loose here if clinton ever had tried something like that..

atleast he cruise missled their asses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WePurrsevere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
82. There aren't enough expletives for these bastards, Pfft!!! Kick! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DemonFighterLives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
84. The revisionist cult with their 20/20 hindsight is sickening
What is with these mofos?
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cigsandcoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
85. Ridiculous. 9-11 was the fault of those who did it.
I don't think the onus should be on America, but rather the maniacs who did this to us.

And yes, it's tempting to blame Bush and his band of merry idiots, but I think that detracts from where the real blame lays - Al Qaeda. We'll have a Democratic administration soon, and this will be their problem - a problem beyond partisanship, even if the response isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L A Woman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 06:53 PM
Response to Original message
91. Let's watch it first
Obviously that's a link to a conservative website and they may be excited that there are things in the mini-series that they can easily twist around, while glossing over the criticism the mini-series has of *.

It does amaze me that Clinton was expected to find Bin Laden in the three months he had remaining in office after the bombing of the Cole, yet 5 years have past since the deadliest attack on US soil and there seems to be limited criticism that * hasn't found him. OH wait, * "doesn't think about him much!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
92. Don't forget that once Bush was in office
there was an order to STAND DOWN on investigating the Bin Laden family, and of course THEY were the only ones in the air other than fighter jet ON that very day of the attack..

Hartman and someone else wrote the ultimate guide to how to deal with terrorism and handed it over to the Bush admin, who tossed it in the trash, and just in case no one remembers it, I do - CHENEY was IN CHARGE of Terrorism as soon as they stole the election. Anyone mention THAT?

This is swiftboating, but what puzzles me the most is how much of this shit Clinton puts up with, WHEN is he going to stand up and call a spade a spade? He is eloquent and charismatic and could cut these guys to pieces, instead we see him sitting next to Bush the FIRST telling us to all give up money we don't HAVE to those poor people in New Orleans, while the Govt refuses to HELP THEM.

I've lost a lot of respect for Bill, for even being SEEN standing NEXT to a Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #92
98. I lost respect for Bill when, after the stolen 2004 election, he
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 10:17 PM by petgoat
stood with the Bushes to give them legitimacy when he should have been mooning them.
When he went off with Poppy Bush on the tsunami tour, I honestly thought he was
negotiating W's surrender.

I couldn't explain Bill's conciliatory behavior, until I learned about Barry Seal,
and found that crazy freeper story about the Mena, Arkansas drug smuggling thing
was true. It was a CIA operation, and Bill was spooked up, up to his neck.

Illegal drugs are a $500 billion a year industry. You don't move that kind of
money without cooperation from international banks and governments. Mike Ruppert
says our banking system would collapse without the cash flow of the moneylaundered
drug funds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #98
115. I don't buy every story that comes down the pike
But I DO KNOW from PERSONAL experience (in the USAF when planes came in from various countries we were NOT to go near them, yet we'd watch in amazement as they would disassemble portions of the plane and pull packages out and fill pallets with them - the white stuff falling out was either heroin or cocaine)..

At one point in the 70's someone wrote an article that in the future that OIL was being replaced as the BASIS for the value of Money by COCAINE -- the OIL guys were shitting their pants, imagine the entire world economy being based on DRUGS and consumption?!

I saw it, the Bush/Reagan folks were running drugs worldwide using OUR military, how much I don't know, but I'm willing to bet that the drug laws that exist are to kill of the little guys so that the GOVT can CORNER THE MARKET..

It ain't just oil folks, there's a bumper crop of Heroin coming out of Afghanistan this year and the last, it will hit Europe first, THINK TONY BLAIR, and then the US. And people on heroin or opium don't give a fuck. They don't vote and you can jail them all day long in corporate prisons for free labor, put them on probation and OWN them.

The future economy will be drugs and corporate prisons, the rest is immaterial, and by the way, you don't need BARS to maintain a PRISON. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #115
116. Interesting post, man.
A lot of people don't know some important tidbits:

1. Financial Times cited a report that said that Osama got $600 million to $1 billion
a year from the opium trade until...

2. Taleban banned the opium trade in 2000, and cut production to practically zero

3. After the 2001 invasion, production was up to record levels

4. 85% of the world's opium (heroin) is now produced in Afghanistan

5. The european trade goes through Kosovo, where it is handled by former members of
the al Qaeda-allied Kosovo Liberation Army

6. The US, in the Bosnian wars, was allied with al Qaeda mujahideen who aided the KLA

7. Illegal drugs are worth $500 billion a year, an industry that can not exist without
cooperation from international banks and governments

8. Saudi oil production is worth $150 billion a year

9. Mike Ruppert says that without the cash injected by laundered drug money, the
international banking system would collapse
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #92
112. it was the Hart /Rudman report given to pissy pants shortly after
taking office..

it said no money should go to the taliban unless they turned over bin laden..and this admin ignored it entirely ..as cheney's energy group was negotiating an oil pipeline through Afganistan..on May 22 2001 this administration, against the orders in the Hart/Rudman report turned over 43 million $$ of your tax dollars over to the Taliban..with the promise that they would sign onto the oil pipelines..
negotiations were also ongoing at that time with Saddam Hussein for the oil pipeline

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symbolman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #112
114. Along with the ultimatum
where they offered a "carpet of gold, or a carpet of BOMBS.." I recall that 43 Mil being sent to them, and while reading it thinking, "WHAT THE HELL are they giving these guys all that damn money for?"

Looks like they chose from column "B", tho, eh?

Moore showed the hanky panky in his film, where the Taliban were in TEXAS of all places, playing grab ass with the oil folks.. not to mention Bush has NO Problem KISSING MEN (not very macho holding hands with men in 'dresses') when it comes to the Bush family SAUDI PALS, you know, the guys who BLEW UP the world trade center?

Thanks for the RUDMAN ref, I'd forgotten who cosponsored the bill..

They were offered Bin Laden a Number of times, even AFTER the Taliban got the 43 Mil, each time the Bush admin refused him, then let him go at Tora Bora.. Hell, they FLEW TERRORISTS OUT of that scenario where they had them cornered, AND reported it in the NEWS..

you gotta remember folks, they actually are so arrogant that they tell you ahead of time HOW they are going to Fuck you like you've never been fucked before..

Remember, Bush SAID that the person who outed PLAME was "going to be taken care of.." - INSERT Swiss Bank account number HERE :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
93. If you talk to anyone planning to watch it, recommend that instead
they watch this documentary:
9/11: Press for Truth. Based partially on the Complete 9/11 Timeline by DU'er Paul Thompson.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Buy the DVD:
http://www.911pressfortruth.com/dvd
http://cooperativeresearch.org/911_press_for_truth.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nikki Stone 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
96. Why is Disney propagandizing against the Democrats?
Hmm....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #96
111. think Jeb and orlando!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guidoo Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 10:08 PM
Response to Original message
97. More Spin...
Spin is all that article is. A right wing net rag. The op-ed is nothing but spin, and it has spun a great many here over what could be nothing. I think we need to know more about this before we attack.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
104. and, we are going to get this message out, how, exactly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
105. I'm sick of excuses.
Edited on Sun Aug-27-06 11:33 PM by Marr
That's what every Democratic politician should respond with when confronted with this sort of crap. "I'm sick of excuses. If you can't do they job, you shouldn't ask for it".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomreedtoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-27-06 11:32 PM
Response to Original message
106. Has anyone here really, TRULY seen this thing?
I would advise anyone who has any pull to call their ABC affiliate and ask if it would be possible to screen this documentary. The network almost always sends a "prefeed" of the show to the affiliates, especially in the case of controversial subject matter. Be polite and say you have concerns about the fairness of this documentary. If you're attached to a local college, or belong to some other organization that could tip this in your favor, do so.

Before somebody takes the word of a right-wing looney that this is "great," somebody better check the source material.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #106
109. Good point! One of the reasons I suggested contacting Media
Matters is that maybe they can get a screening of it and see how factual and "non-partisan" it is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerry-is-my-prez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:09 AM
Response to Original message
107. Just in time for the election....
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raydawg1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
113. who watches abc anymore?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alphafemale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 03:23 AM
Response to Original message
117. Everytime Clinton attempted to kill Bin Laden they cried "MonicaGate"
Everytime.

They still say it. Bombing an aspirin factory they chuckle. HaHa

Ef them sideways with a sandpaper wrapper
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WernhamHogg Donating Member (378 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 05:35 AM
Response to Original message
119. Of all the idiotic RW talking points
Of all the idiotic RW talking points, I always found "Clinton failed to do enough to capture/kill bin Laden" to be the most ridiculous of them all. To me, it just calls attention to the 5 years bin Laden has spent
on the loose post 9/11 -- ALL 5 years of which has been under Bush's "leadership".

Whenever I encounter this, I simply remind the "backwash" that it's been almost 5 years since George publicly promised bin Laden would be captured "dead or alive", yet you never hear of him anymore (except, of course, around elections). I also suggest that if Georgie wasn't so busy wasting precious lives, resources, time, money and equipment in Iraq, along with completely wasting the tremendous support that the US received post-9/11 (and pre-Iraq occupation) from around the world, perhaps bin Laden really would have been captured "dead or alive".

Blaming Clinton is a tactic they love to use in an attempt to deflect the blame from where it really belongs - the neocons and their enablers. Don't let them do it. Put THEM back where they belong - on the defensive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 06:52 AM
Response to Original message
120. Historians have a job cut out for them!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
121. Democratic Boycott...for f'ing ever if this turns out to be the case...
Forever, never again ABC, never ever if they pull this stunt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
123. Kick for the Monday Morning folks. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 21st 2014, 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC