Ya won't hear this on Fox

[Clintonista]

In the days after 9/11 when all air traffic was gounded. when people were at risk of death because they couldn't get transplant organs shipped to thier doctors. when thousands of Americans were stranded around the world many in very uncomfortable circumstances. the Bush White House did the unthinkable:

They green lighted the departure of 140 Saudi's. Some related to Bin Laden. ALL without FBI scrutiny!

Americans be damned! W needs to bend over for the Saudi's:">

can you imagine the right wing outrage (that would have been justified) if Clinton or Gore had done that??!!

FOR THAT ALONE W SHOULD BE DEFEATED. WHEN YOU PUT YOUR FAMILIES FINANCIAL INTEREST (PAPPY BUSH MADE MILLIONS WITH THE SAUDI'S THROUGH THE CARLISLE GROUP) ABOVE THE SAFETY OF YOUR OWN CITIZENS THAT'S AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE

SO WHEN YOU RIGHT WINGERS ASK WHO'S SOFT ON AMERICAN SECURITY THE ANSWER IS

W
________
Honda Super Cub specifications (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_Super_Cub)

[NYIndependence]

Quote:They green lighted the departure of 140 Saudi's.
Of all the inaccuracues in your post, this is the statement you made that comes closest to bng right. However, it falls well short of bng correct. Certain Saudi citizens and diplomats were permitted to fly within the United States. While I disagree with this action, it is very different from the claim you make.
Quote:ALL without FBI scrutiny!
"We did everything that needed to be done," said John Iannarelli, a bureau spokesman. "There's nothing to indicate that any of these people had any information that could have assisted us, and no one was accorded any additional courtesies that wouldn't have been accorded anyone else."

All the above information was found at the politically neutral Urban Legends site Snopes.com. Go see for yourself. Click here for enlightenment And while you're at it, get me some reports of anyone who died while waiting for an organ transplant from September 11th-September 16th(?)
________
hotels in mexico (http://mexicohoteles.org)

[wookibender]

Quote:Certain Saudi citizens and diplomats were permitted to fly within the United States. While I disagree with this action, it is very different from the claim you make.

False.

Quote:Bin Laden family's US exit 'approved'
source
THE United States allowed members of Osama bin Laden's family to jet out of the US in the immediate aftermath of September 11, even as American airspace was closed.

Former White House counter-terrorism tsar Richard Clarke said the Bush administration sanctioned the repatriation of about 140 high-ranking Saudi Arabians, including relatives of the al-Qaida chief.

"Somebody brought to us for approval the decision to let an aeroplane filled with Saudis, including members of the Bin Laden family, leave the country," he said.

Mr Clarke said he checked with FBI officials, who gave the go ahead. "So I said: Fine, let it happen."

He first asked the bureau to check that no-one "inappropriate" was leaving.

"I have no idea if they did a good job," he added.

Dale Watson, the FBI's former head of counter-terrorism, said that, while the bureau identified the Saudis who were on the plane, "they were not subject to serious interrogations".

The plane is believed to have landed in ten US cities picking up passengers, including Los Angeles, Washington DC, Boston and Houston. At the time, access to US airspace was restricted and required special government approval.


Who are you going to believe?

Snipes.com Urban Legend
Or Richard Clarke, Former White House counter-terrorism tsar


Quote:can you imagine the right wing outrage (that would have been justified) if Clinton or Gore had done that??!!
Sure!
Quote: FOR THAT ALONE W SHOULD BE DEFEATED. WHEN YOU PUT YOUR FAMILIES FINANCIAL INTEREST (PAPPY BUSH MADE MILLIONS WITH THE SAUDI'S THROUGH THE CARLISLE GROUP) ABOVE THE SAFETY OF YOUR OWN CITIZENS THAT'S AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE

Yes, yes, But Republicans don't give a crap about anything but thr tax cuts, bank accounts and impeaching democrats over blow jobs. They can't even tell the Republican forum anything good that Bush has done for the County or the Average Amercian citizen. I have asked for weeks now with still no response. They are a sad group of selfish brainwashed individuals.
________
korean girl Cams (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/webcam/asian-girls/)

[Clintonista]

NYI,

Check out the next issue of Vanity Fair and read Michael Issakopf (sic?)

It's been well documented and could have ONLY been approved at the White House.

Let's assume it's accurate. If so, what's your gut reaction?

am curious

regards
________
Mercedes-benz m102 engine (http://www.mercedes-wiki.com/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_M102_engine)

[NYIndependence]

Assuming it's accurate (and in light of Clarke's statement it is), I think the Bush administration made the wrong decision.
________
marijuana vaporizer (http://weedvaporizer.info/)

[WantaghDem]

an uptick in the grade....
________
Prilosec Side Effect (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/prilosec/)

[NYIndependence]

Before I read Clarke's statement, I felt that allowing the Saudis to fly within the country was wrong, so how was it an upgrade when I said it was wrong for them to be allowed out of the country?
________
universal health warehouse (http://uhwh.com/)

[WantaghDem]

"Of all the inaccuracues in your post, this is the statement you made that comes closest to bng right. However, it falls well short of bng correct. Certain Saudi citizens and diplomats were permitted to fly within the United States. While I disagree with this action, it is very different from the claim you make."

You clearly tell him here that he is wrong - about more than one thing, actually. It doesn't matter what you think about the actions, you were clearly stating that he was wrong.

Which, in fact, he wasn't.

I don't know why you said this; we have known about these flights for at l a year or more. We have known for certain that Saudis as well as members of the bin Laden family who were in the United States on September 11 were allowed to fly around the country, pick everyone up, and leave the country without ever bng interviewed by law enforcement - even though they were clearly "persons of interest" in the investigation of the worst terrorist attack on US soil, and they were present on US soil when it happened. We have known about this for a long time, and yet you automatically defended the Administration with incorrect (here I'm bng kind) information.

And it was an "uptick" - not an "upgrade" or even a "rise" because you really didn't admit to bng wrong...you offered a tepid qualification.
________
Coach Handbags (http://icoachhandbags.com/)

[libsrdangerous]

Even WantaghDem. The Saudi's should never have been allowed to leave the U.S. Blame it on Bush's "need to get along" weakness. However, it's inexcusable. We need a REAL conservative in the White House. No weakness and no forgiveness of the guilty.

[WantaghDem]

...on the Bush family's employment BY the Saudi Royal Family....and on the FACT that the Saudis were the ones who FINANCED 9/11!
________
ZX14 VS HAYABUSA (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Which_bike_is_quicker_kawasaki_zx_-14_or_suzuki_hayabusa)

[UnionYes]

On a recent "Meet the Press" Tim Russert asked Cheney about the Saudi's leaving the country. Incredibly, Cheney denied having any knowledge about the event. Now really.....

[Yonivore]

You think the President and Vice President have first hand information on everything that has occurred since September 11, 2001?

Even if he was aware of such an event, unless he knew all the facts and was able to adequately discuss it, it would be stupid to say anything that would further engage Russert on the issue.

Any official would be acting prudently to do the same.

Now, if you can show where Tim Russert informed the Vice President, in advance, that this was going to be a topic of discussion (which often happens precisely because people such as the Vice President are engaged in a whole plethora of issues on a daily basis), I would buy the argument that his denying any knowledge of the event was dubious. ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. Bush
________
Side effects from depakote (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/depakote/)

[WantaghDem]

In the days following 9/11 when flights were prohibited, it took National Command Authority to allow any flights into, out of or within the US.

That means that they HAD to have known about it.

This is an old story, and they've been lying about for over a year.
________
LovelyWendie (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

[wookibender]

Yonivore...
I don't understand why you got to argue a stupid thing about Cheney not knowing.....

WHO @#%$ CARES......

The point is that the White House (All of the Bush adminstration) is responsible for these Saudi's leaving the country during the no fly zone after 9/11. That is just bad judgement and reaks of conspiracy if you ask me.

And then to stonewall the 9/11 investigation... The Bush administration has a lot to hide for some reason.
________
Lovely Wendie99 (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

[Yonivore]

Quote:"Yonivore...
I don't understand why you got to argue a stupid thing about Cheney not knowing.....

WHO @#%$ CARES......"
Well, apparently UnionYes cared. I was just responding to his statement. What is your concern in my expressing an alternative explanation?
Quote:"The point is that the White House (All of the Bush adminstration) is responsible for these Saudi's leaving the country during the no fly zone after 9/11. That is just bad judgement and reaks of conspiracy if you ask me."
Yeah, and President Clinton is responsible for passing up several opportunities to capture or kill bin Laden. Bad judgement or conspiracy?
Quote:"And then to stonewall the 9/11 investigation... The Bush administration has a lot to hide for some reason."
Hey, loose lips sink ships. Alot of the questions bng asked could have compromised the prosecution of the war on terrorism, compromised intelligence sources, compromised in-progress investigations.

Conspiracy or prudence?

It's all a judgement call. But, the fact remains, no one in any of these threads has produced one iota, one scintilla, one conclusive FACT that the Bush Administration is doing anything but what it believes to be in the National Security interests of the United States of America.

Those that are presdisposed to think he is some kind of conspiratorial, New World Order, Illuminati, Skull and Dagger, kind of anti-christ will find all sorts of ominous evidence in everything he does. I believe that's the nature of bng President of the most powerful nation in the world; the only super power. But, quite frankly, I find it amazing these are the same people that usually accuse him of bng an intellectual midget. Folks, Bng an evil genius and a stupid President would, to me anyway, seem to be mutually exclusive. (By the way, it's a variation on the same characterizations levelled at President Ronald Reagan - - if you will recall). The anti-Bush crowd needs to make up thr minds. Is he stupid or, is he devious?

Or, is he nther?

I believe that Saddam Hussn, the Ba'athist regime, and Iraq policies and behaviors in the years since the Gulf War did not demonstrate a nation that was acting in good faith with it's unconditional surrender, the terms to which it agreed, and international demands vis-a-vis, the 17 some odd U.N.S.C resolutions. And, given thr prior behaviors, it is reasonable to assume thr defiance and dect were concealing a concerted effort to develop programs and plans that got them into the FIRST war.

Put on top of that a belief the Iraqi regime was in cahoots with terrorist organizations, that they were developing weapons of mass destruction (which they'd previous shown a willingness to use), and that we were just brutally attacked by a terrorist organization, and you have a hard case to prove this was anything other than a desire to protect us from further assault.

All Saddam Hussn had to do was realize how seriously we viewed the attacks on September 11, and said to himself, "you know those bastards just might attack me this time...I'd better show my cards." That he didn't is ther a testament to extreme stupidity or to the probability that he actually did have something to conceal.

Another observation I've made. This whole time between Iraq's surrender in the 90's, the subsequent attacks on the World Trade Center, the U.S.S. Cole, and other Western interests worldwide - - there was a consistent, collective, publicly expressed belief on the part of damn near the entire Free World, President Clinton and the Demoncrats included, that Saddam Hussn presented a clear threat to global stability and security...thus, the 17 resolutions and various congressional acts supporting action, in the event Iraq continued to defy the resolutions and continued to present a threat.

It's as if the whole world was viewing Iraq as the Playground Bully and wishing that something could be done about him. They fretted and fretted for years over this man...all through the Clinton administration.

Then, when President Bush comes into office and the nation suffers the worst attack, on its soil, since Pearl Harbor - - he decides that not only is he going to go after those that did the deed, he's also going to take out this Playground Bully everyone's been whining about for years.

All of a sudden all the whiners say, "Hey! You can't do that! What did Saddam Hussn ever do to you? You big bully!"

Fickle leftist whiners. Jeeze! ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. BushEdited by: Yonivore at: 9/20/03 10:14 am

________
MeToU (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/MeToU)

[Yonivore]

Well wookie? You asked. ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. Bush
________
MadisonQT (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/MadisonQT/)

[Bill OReilly]

What's going on: Fox News seems to think it runs United States
The network might as well be on Bush's payroll.
By GEORGE POAGUE


Welcome to the United States of Rupert Murdoch.

At l that's how it seems. The incredibly arrogant Fox News Channel now regards itself as the U.S. government -- although its attitude is closer to the thought-police style of the old Soviet Union -- with the power to silence anyone who criticizes it.

Here's a couple of recent examples.


By now you've probably heard about Fox's lawsuit against satirist Al Franken over his forthcoming book, "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right." Fox maintains that the words "fair and balanced" are copyrighted by the cable channel.
The hysterical lawsuit also accused Franken of bng "shrill," "unstable" and lacking "serious depth or insight." Knight Ridder columnist Brian Lambert wrote: "Have Fox's lawyers ever watched thr own channel? It's essentially programmed by and for the shrill, unstable and depthless."

Lambert added: "This, I remind you, is from the people who employ Sean Hannity and Bill O'Rlly and give Matt Drudge and Ann Coulter more air time than most non-Republicans."

It's widely rumored that talkmster O'Rlly spurred his network to file the suit. You see, Franken tore O'Rlly a new orifice at a couple of impromptu debates this year, and Mr. "No Spin Zone" wants revenge. The suit speculates that Franken was ther "deranged" or "intoxicated" when he verbally clobbered O'Rlly.

As I've said before -- with apologies to Edward G. Robinson in "Little Caesar" -- right-wingers can dish it out, but they can't take it. The Fox gang is used to having wimpy, mealy-mouthed liberals as punching bags. When an aggressive, articulate liberal like Franken rips into them, they don't know what hit them.


Fox as Big Brother, take two: A recent column by Cynthia Tucker noted that a man recved a visit from the FBI after he was observed reading a column by Hal Crowther entitled "Weapons of Mass Stupidity." I found a copy on the Internet.
Crowther pulls no punches in his long deconstruction of Murdoch's network.

"Fox News is an oxymoron," he writes, "and Cheech and Chong would have made a more credible team of war correspondents than Geraldo Rivera and Ollie North. Nther 'Saturday Night Live' nor the 1976 film 'Network,' Paddy Chayefsky's corrosive satire of TV news, could even approach the comic impact of Geraldo embedded, or of Fox's pariah parade, its mothball fleet of experts who always turn out to be disgraced or indicted Republican refugees."

Crowther adds that Fox slants the news "for the Bush administration as faithfully as if they were on the White House payroll. ... Fox serves -- voluntarily -- as the propaganda arm of a controversial, manipulative, image-obsessed government. ... I swear I hate to stoop to Nazi analogies; but if Joseph Goebbels had run his own cable channel, it would have been indistinguishable from Fox News."

I've quoted Crowther rather extensively so you can see the kind of opinions that can get you in trouble with the feds these days. Will you get a visit from the FBI for reading these words and -- gasp! -- maybe passing them on to your friends?

Crowther says out loud what I've thought for years -- that Fox News is a fraud. It is not a news organization. It is to a real cable channel what the Weekly World News is to a real newspaper. (The WWN recently reported that Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction" are man-eating dinosaurs, raised by the evil dictator in his own "Jurassic Park." I take Fox's reporting about as seriously as I take Saddam's dinosaurs.)


Word came Friday night that a federal judge in New York had denied Fox's request for an injunction to block Franken's book. U.S. District Judge Denny Chin said the book was a parody protected by the First Amendment.
He added that Fox's case was "wholly without merit, both factually and legally."

"It is ironic," the judge said, "that a media company, which should be protecting the First Amendment, is seeking to undermine it."

Franken said, "In addition to thanking my own lawyers, I'd like to thank Fox's lawyers for filing one of the stupidest briefs I've ever seen in my life."

Will this teach Fox a lesson? I hope so. But Rupert Murdoch has billions of dollars to spend on frivolous lawsuits.

What happens when Fox trains its legal guns on people who don't have Al Franken's money, celebrity or access to high-powered lawyers?

That's what scares me.


________
Wholesale Vaporizer (http://vaporizerwholesaler.com)

[Yonivore]

So, Fox fails miserably in it's attempt to stifle Al "Harvard-Stationary" Franken, and it means they think they're running the United States of America?

Wow! ?Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.? - - President John Fitzgerald Kennedy

?We will make no distinction between those who committed these acts and those who harbor them.? - - President George W. Bush
________
How To Roll A Blunt (http://howtorollablunt.net/)