Could we lose the "gate" suffix?

Everytime there's some kind of political scadal or crime, somebody adds a "gate".

It's incredibly stupid.

Why don't you run along and conduct a poll of the People on whether or not "gate" is an appropriate suffix to use....then come back and comment on the topic.

This news item is just another link in the chain that describes how ineffective the intelligence and justice agencies were in rooting out terrorists BEFORE they committed their murders at the end of the 90's. Lots of good Americans that wanted to do a good job, but were handcuffed by perceptions, the whole "can't offeeeeeeend anyone" mentality, restrictions like the Toricelli (sp?) Act.......and the "wall" erected by Gorelick (sp?).

....AND, of course, the UY "I don't believe it, therefore it's not true" mentality just had to get slapped around a bit.

Still trying to blame 9/111 on Clinton?

He wasnt in office at the time.

Take personal responsibility and try not to shift blame for your party's fuck ups.

The September 11th attacks weren't anyone's fault but the terrorists'. However, there were some stupid policy decisions made under the Clinton administration that, potentially, made it less likely that the attacks would be detected and stopped.

>>>However, there were some stupid policy decisions made under the Clinton administration that, potentially, made it less likely that the attacks would be detected and stopped.

And yet it happened under W what with his fixation on useless Star Wars.

I don't know what your point is, Um Yeah...President Bush could have done nothing to stop the attacks. The Star Wars Project is completely irrelevant to this discussion, but what I will say is that you may not think it's so useless once we have North Korea and Iran pointing nukes at us, along with China and Russia who already do (and have been using some fightin' words about the US recently). I'll sleep much better at night knowing I'm behind a missile shield.

What his point is? He HAS no point other than to lie about what others have said. I HAVE NEVER blamed Clinton for the 9-11 attacks....never....but continue your lies. Frankel, according to UY, we should never develope anything in the defense of this country that is currently not working as planned. Anything that doesn't work as planned should be scrapped.....unless it's a social program.

Case in point....this time you've accused me of blaming Clinton for 9-11, I did not do. I have pointed out a fact, nothing more.....and if you feel differently than what I have pointed out...attempt to refute the fact or shut the fuck up BEFORE you attempt to lie about what I said.

Or do you think that the wall of information separation between intelligence agencies didn't exist at the end of the 90's? Or do you refute the notion that there were lots of good Americans that actually wanted to do the work, but were handcuffed by various policies and procedures that I have laid out?

Or do you just have nothing to say, as usual, and would rather just lie?

.President Bush could have done nothing to stop the attacks.

The least he could have was read his terror related memos.

"The least he could have was read his terror related memos."

I agree with Um Yeah.

The absolute least Bush could have possibly done, was to at least do more then Clinton did.

I kinda like how you put that, Um Yeah.

>>>The absolute least Bush could have possibly done, was to at least do more then Clinton did.

Yep, at least Clinton did SOMETHING.

Unless you dumbasses still think those cruise missiles were wag the dog.

The least he could have was read his terror related memos.

You mean those memos that said NOTHING that was actionable? "You know, terrorists are out there and are trying to kill Americans" NO SHIT!!! The ACLU would've had a field day on him...and so would you. Tell me, oh mighty one, what do YOU say Bush should've done about a memo that said that AQ was trying to attaack the U.S.? Preemptively strike a country on such a flimsy piece of intelligence that anybody could've told him wihtout a memo? What would you have had him do? DO take into account that 9-11 hadn't happened yet and that there were no empty camps to blow up that would've stopped 9-11. PLUS...anyone that actually read the memo really knows that it said nothing more than what ANYONE could hve told him. Bin Laden was Determined to strike the U.S. OH MY GOD!!!!!!! Nuke Afghanistan because OBL wsa determined to strike us. Did you read the memo? Did you see that there was ZERO actionable intelligence in it? Did youi see that the ONLY specific information that wasn't "background" was this gem that y'all idiots think is important:

Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate (Osama) Bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden 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".

THERE IT IS!!!!!! Bush ignored a vague threat that covered 4 years that ANYONE that paid attention to all the bombings in the 90's could've told him. IMPEACH him now!!!!

Wait a minute!!!! Didn't the memo actually say that OBL was trying to hijack aircraft to use them as weapons? Well....in the same vague fashion....NO.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ... (edited)... service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other US-held extremists.

THERE IT IS!!!!!!! IMPEACH Bush NOW!!!! He ignored a memo saying that a terrorist wanted to commit an act of terrorism SINCE 1998, by hijacking aircraft TO GAIN THE RELEASE OF HIS TERRORIST BUDDIES (not to ram 'em into buildings). Didn't think you actually read it.

Now you can shut up about the memo until the next time you lie about it and I have to prove you incorrect again....and again...and again.

Ah...more of the whole cruise-missiles into empty camps? What exactly did that do? Oh yeah...nothing. Who said "wag the dog"...I clearly, every time you bring up a buncha missiles lobbed onto empty camps, say that they did NOTHING. They were wholly ineffective in stopping anything or dealing with anything. Dumbasses? Only dumbasses think blowing up an empty camp was "doing something". AWWWWWW....the poor baby OBL had to move to another camp to finish his plans.

>>You mean those memos that said NOTHING that was actionable? "You know, terrorists are out there and are trying to kill Americans" NO SHIT!!!

It did specifically say Bin Laden and that his guys were looking to attack us in our own country.

Dunno what W and guys like expect a memo that says "Oh the attack will happen at this time at this place, heres there profiles and dna have a nice day".

>>Who said "wag the dog"

You retarded?

It did specifically say Bin Laden and that his guys were looking to attack us in our own country.

Tell me something I didn't know back in '93 or '96 or '98 or 2000. Good to see you never read the memo or you'd see that there was nothing ACTIONABLE, you know....nothing to go on, no specifics that anyone could do anything about, nothing that wasn't already known. Or did you just drink too much kool-aid? Yeah, I get it....OBL has been trying to kill Americans since '97 or '98...that sure is a whole lot to work on.

Profiles? Now you gonna advocate profiling?

Ad hominems....and nothing more. Nothing ever changes. Don't even know what "wag the dog" means? I clearly didn't mention anything having to do with wag the dog concerning OBL/AQ and missile strikes. Missile strikes that hit nothing and DO nothing are not wag the dog, they're ineffective missile strikes that do nothing and hit nothing.....period.

You retarded?

>>Good to see you never read the memo or you'd see that there was nothing ACTIONABLE.

See above post.

>>Don't even know what "wag the dog" means?

There are many many things you dont know.

As for profiling id at least go as far as adult males.

Having a beard and being brown wont help much, you find Sikhs get more crap because most people cant tell the difference.

See above post....you mean the one where I showed that there was nothing actionable? Good to see you're seeing that there was nothing specific and actionable there to point at but the obvious.

Good to see that you don't know what "wag the dog" means. Chalk it up with Nazis, Fascists, felons, anything having to do with the military....

As for profiling id at least go as far as adult males. Well....THAT is not "profiling" dipshit. Profiles limit the search to something FEASIBLY workable. You've just limitted the search to about 130 million Americans and half of the "visitors". Guess we'll have to hire a buncha storm troopers to go to 130 million doors. Good thing YOU don't come up with profiles or nothing would ever get solved.