Re: Obama, "The War on terror is Over," except for the Terrorists we caught (made up) last week.

[Josh Saunders]

In article <iLaqr.1625$oK2....@newsfe13.iad>
"Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners" <Dog Meat : It's What's for
Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote:
>
> http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07/id/438268

"Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
"going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""

Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
both hands sitting on the toilet.

And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
FBI on some kind of hocus pocus bomb scare made up to divert
attention away from Obama starting up his election run?

[Jeff M]

On 5/8/2012 4:32 PM, Josh Saunders wrote:
> In article<iLaqr.1625$oK2....@newsfe13.iad>
> "Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners"<Dog Meat : It's What's for
> Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote:
>>
>> http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07/id/438268
>
> "Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
> Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
> been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
> "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""
>
> Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
> bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
> both hands sitting on the toilet.
>
> And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
> FBI

I guess you don't know that Congress has an oversight responsibility for
federal agencies like the FBI, and that the Senate Intelligence
Committee, including Sen. Feinstein, are routinely briefed on
intelligence matters.

> on some kind of hocus pocus bomb scare made up to divert
> attention away from Obama starting up his election run?

The Dems, such as Feinstein, don't want to divert attention away from
Obama's campaign. Quite the opposite, in fact. They want to attract as
much attention to it as they possibly can. Sheesh!

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
news:8sqdnVet95B-DzTS...@giganews.com:

> On 5/8/2012 4:32 PM, Josh Saunders wrote:
>> In article<iLaqr.1625$oK2....@newsfe13.iad>
>> "Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners"<Dog Meat : It's What's for
>> Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07/id
>>> /438268
>>
>> "Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
>> Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
>> been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
>> "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""
>>
>> Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
>> bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
>> both hands sitting on the toilet.
>>
>> And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
>> FBI
>
> I guess you don't know that Congress has an oversight responsibility
> for federal agencies like the FBI, and that the Senate Intelligence
> Committee, including Sen. Feinstein, are routinely briefed on
> intelligence matters.

Like the pending attacks on 9/11, mon ami? ;)

>> on some kind of hocus pocus bomb scare made up to divert
>> attention away from Obama starting up his election run?
>
> The Dems, such as Feinstein, don't want to divert attention away from
> Obama's campaign. Quite the opposite, in fact. They want to attract
> as much attention to it as they possibly can. Sheesh!
>

--

It's too bad the people who really know how to run this
country are so busy cutting hair and driving taxis!!

George Burns


Sleep well, tonight.....

RD (The Sandman)

[Jeff M]

On 5/8/2012 4:55 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
> news:8sqdnVet95B-DzTS...@giganews.com:
>
>> On 5/8/2012 4:32 PM, Josh Saunders wrote:
>>> In article<iLaqr.1625$oK2....@newsfe13.iad>
>>> "Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners"<Dog Meat : It's What's for
>>> Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07/id
>>>> /438268
>>>
>>> "Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
>>> Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
>>> been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
>>> "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""
>>>
>>> Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
>>> bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
>>> both hands sitting on the toilet.
>>>
>>> And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
>>> FBI
>>
>> I guess you don't know that Congress has an oversight responsibility
>> for federal agencies like the FBI, and that the Senate Intelligence
>> Committee, including Sen. Feinstein, are routinely briefed on
>> intelligence matters.
>
> Like the pending attacks on 9/11, mon ami? ;)

Um, I think it was the President and his senior staff that got the CIA
briefing entitled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" about a month
before the attacks on 9/11/01. Too bad they apparently weren't paying
much attention, although it give me my first visit to NYC.

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in news:lLadnbjhU-
sSBTTSnZ2dn...@giganews.com:

Yep, that's the briefing I had in mind. The Intelligence Committee saw
virtually everything the president saw.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners]

"Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in message
news:lLadnbjhU-sSBTTS...@giganews.com...

Gee you mean like the attack in 1993 on the WTC under Clinton! Wow what a
secret , Bin Laden wanted to atttack the US like he already did , and
CLinton let his Hijacking Terrorists train in US Flight schools before Bush
was even running for President

[RD Sandman]

"Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners" <Dog Meat : It's What's for Obama's

Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in news:8_gqr.36$0u6...@newsfe07.iad:

Yes, the terrorists had been training in flight schools but Bush was
president, albeit for just a few months, when the knowledge was coming up
through the FBI that there were "students" who were interested in
guiding a plane while it was in flight but had little or no interest in
learning how to land.

[Jeff M]

On 5/8/2012 5:17 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in news:lLadnbjhU-

I'm not sure, but I don't think they get anything like the President's
Daily Briefing, nor do I think they are briefed on intel at anything
close to a daily basis, as the President is. Their job is oversight,
not action. The President is the one has to move the chess pieces
around the board.

[Jeff M]

Yes, like that. Only the terrorists responsible for the first WTC
attack were caught, convicted and sent to prison, without getting
thousands of Americans killed or spending well over a Trillion dollars
to do it.

> Wow what
> a secret , Bin Laden wanted to atttack the US like he already did , and
> CLinton let his Hijacking Terrorists train in US Flight schools before

> Bush was even running for President.

There was nothing illegal about them taking flight training, since the
Bureau of Future Crime isn't open yet. Even so, someone in the FBI
picked up on it, and Clinton's counter-terrorism coordinator did try to
warn incoming Bush officials of the general terrorist threat. However,
he was rebuffed, in much the same way the "Bin Ladin Determined To
Strike in US" PDB was ignored, until it was too late.

[emoneyjoe]

Nobody in their right mind would have imagined
in their worse nightmare that 20 people would plan
and execute such a suicide mission, democrat or
republican.

[Jeff M]

Actually, it was the scenario for a number of military exercises, as
well as the plot of a Tom Clancy bestseller, well before 9/11.

[emoneyjoe]

Maybe like movies and the news media giving
nuts and kids new ideas on weird crime.

[GOD LLC]

On May 8, 5:32 pm, "Josh Saunders" <jsaund...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> In article <iLaqr.1625$oK2.1...@newsfe13.iad>

> "Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners" <Dog Meat : It's What's for
> Obama's Dinner  @ White House.org> wrote:
>
>
>

> >http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07/id...

>
> "Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
> Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
> been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
> "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""
>
> Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
> bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
> both hands sitting on the toilet.
>
> And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
> FBI on some kind of hocus pocus bomb scare made up to divert
> attention away from Obama starting up his election run?

Reagan was another Hollywood piece of shit. Senate Intelligence should
be destroyed with the CIA. Prolly why google does not carry
alt.politics.obama

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in

news:GZCdnbCcy9DHMTTS...@giganews.com:

Yep, and on matters of intel, he does it along with reps of that
committee.

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in

news:tcednbEAB5tXLTTS...@giganews.com:

Very true. Now, it only we had been able to do that for the attacks on
the barracks in the Beirut bombing or the USS Cole.

>> Wow what
>> a secret , Bin Laden wanted to atttack the US like he already did ,
>> and CLinton let his Hijacking Terrorists train in US Flight schools
>> before Bush was even running for President.
>
> There was nothing illegal about them taking flight training, since the
> Bureau of Future Crime isn't open yet. Even so, someone in the FBI
> picked up on it, and Clinton's counter-terrorism coordinator did try
> to warn incoming Bush officials of the general terrorist threat.

Of a *general* threat. Nothing specific. The original agent who picked
up on the flight schools was rebuffed within her own agency.

> However, he was rebuffed, in much the same way the "Bin Ladin
> Determined To Strike in US" PDB was ignored, until it was too late.

Which again was really non specific and not actionable.

[RD Sandman]

Jeff M <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in

news:gPudnTGL_JX-RjTS...@giganews.com:

That was the Japanese(?) pilot and the White House. Problem is one does
not energize forces on a novel or on scenarios that haven't occurred.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA04D9E0F6...@216.196.121.131...

Just imagine of Clinton and his Incompetent AG Janet Gas & Burn em Reno had
not given those Bin Laden Buddy hijackers Visas to come here in the first
place

[Peter O'Malley]

In article <UXFqr.6435$ax3...@newsfe05.iad>
"Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog

Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @ White House.org>

wrote:

Yes, that was very forward thinking of Bubba to focus on the
future while he was having his weiner polished.

[RD Sandman]

"Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat :

It's What's for Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in

news:UXFqr.6435$ax3...@newsfe05.iad:

Or if their mothers and fathers had been given contraceptives a couple of
decades before 2001. Just how far back do you wish to take it?

[Lookout]

Actually it was bush and Bush Sr who gave them passports. Those two
got some outrageous christmas gifts from the OPEC cartels and we had
to give them something in return.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:XnsA04F60A53...@216.196.121.131...

==============

So It wasn't Clinton's CIA & FBI's job to screen Foreigners that Clinton
gave Visa's too that come here to train in flight schools. Just a year
before 9-11 ?
Thanks for admitting Clinton was incompetent. Oh that's right, it was Bush's
Fault Clinton let then into the US in 2000. I forgot you have Bush
derangement Syndrome.
Your tongue is brown again from all that Clinton sphincter licking.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"Lookout" <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:rtsnq7dfgqg6eug4e...@4ax.com...

Clinton Admin. Knew of 9/11 Hijackers


Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 2:50:47 PM by

More than a year before the 9/11 attacks, Clinton administration
intelligence officials had identified four of the 19 9/11 hijackers as a
terrorist threat - including al-Qaida team leader Mohamed Atta and his
partner Marwan al-Shehhi, whose planes destroyed the World Trade Center and
killed over 2,700 people.

But the critical information was not acted on, at least in part, because of
prohibitions against intelligence sharing implemented by former Deputy
Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, who was reportedly installed in her post at
the insistence of then-first lady Hillary Clinton.

In the summer of 2000, a military team, known as Able Danger, had prepared a
chart that included visa photographs of Atta and al Shehhi and recommended
to the military's Special Operations Command that the information be shared
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rep. Curt Weldon and a former
intelligence official told the New York Times.

"We knew these were bad guys, and we wanted to do something about them," the
former intelligence official said.

However, the recommendation was rejected and the information was not shared,
in part, said the Times, because the four suspects had entered the United
States on valid entry visas.

But Rep. Weldon and the unnamed intelligence official also cited what the
paper described as "a sense of discomfort common before Sept. 11 about
sharing intelligence information with a law enforcement agency."

In fact, such intelligence sharing was strictly prohibited under Ms.
Gorelick's policy, known at the Justice Department as "The Wall," which, in
the spring of 2000, had also prevented the CIA from tipping off the FBI that
two additional 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, had
entered the country.

Al-Midhar and al-Hamzi were identified by the Able Danger team as well, the
Times said.

In its final report, however, the 9/11 Commission made no mention of the
fact that the Clinton administration had identified key members of the
hijack team, even though, the Times noted, that information had been shared
with 9/11 Commission members.

The account by Weldon and the Times intelligence source is the first
assertion that Atta and al Shehhi - who caused the most destruction in the
worst attack ever suffered on U.S. soil - had been identified by the Clinton
administration.

In testimony before the 9/11 Commission last year, then-Attorney General
John Ashcroft blasted Gorelick's "Wall," saying, "The single greatest
structural cause for September 11 was the wall that segregated criminal
investigators and intelligence agents"



"[Ms. Gorelick] built that wall," said Ashcroft, "through a March 1995
memo."

The Gorelick memo stipulated, in part:

"We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will
more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more
limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go
beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an
unwarranted appearance that [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] is
being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal
investigation."

Ms. Gorelick is expected to be a leading candidate for attorney general
should Mrs. Clinton win the 2008 presidential election.





1 posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 2:50:49 PM by areafiftyone

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]



It'll still be Bush's fault. Even if Gore had won the election in 2000, it
would still be Bush's fault.........

[Lookout]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 14:20:41 -0400, "Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for

Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @

Care to show us proof that any laws were violated?

Or should we wait until you get your head out of your ass.

[Lookout]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 14:22:18 -0400, "Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for

Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @

White House.org> wrote:

>
>
>"Lookout" <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:rtsnq7dfgqg6eug4e...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 11:29:59 -0500, RD Sandman
>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Or if their mothers and fathers had been given contraceptives a couple of
>>>decades before 2001. Just how far back do you wish to take it?
>>>
>> Actually it was bush and Bush Sr who gave them passports. Those two
>> got some outrageous christmas gifts from the OPEC cartels and we had
>> to give them something in return.
>>
>
>
>Clinton Admin. Knew of 9/11 Hijackers
>
>
>Posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 2:50:47 PM by
>
>More than a year before the 9/11 attacks, Clinton administration
>intelligence officials had identified four of the 19 9/11 hijackers as a
>terrorist threat - including al-Qaida team leader Mohamed Atta and his
>partner Marwan al-Shehhi, whose planes destroyed the World Trade Center and
>killed over 2,700 people.
>

Were they here illegally?

>
>But the critical information was not acted on, at least in part, because of
>prohibitions against intelligence sharing implemented by former Deputy
>Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, who was reportedly installed in her post at
>the insistence of then-first lady Hillary Clinton.
>

"reportedly? Care to try and prove that or are we to assume that you
don't have to back up your statements?

>
>In the summer of 2000, a military team, known as Able Danger, had prepared a
>chart that included visa photographs of Atta and al Shehhi and recommended
>to the military's Special Operations Command that the information be shared
>with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Rep. Curt Weldon and a former
>intelligence official told the New York Times.
>
>"We knew these were bad guys, and we wanted to do something about them," the
>former intelligence official said.
>
>However, the recommendation was rejected and the information was not shared,
>in part, said the Times, because the four suspects had entered the United
>States on valid entry visas.
>

So they did nothing illegal. What was law enforcement supposed to do
if they weren't doing anything illegal?

>
>But Rep. Weldon and the unnamed intelligence official also cited what the
>paper described as "a sense of discomfort common before Sept. 11 about
>sharing intelligence information with a law enforcement agency."
>
> In fact, such intelligence sharing was strictly prohibited under Ms.
>Gorelick's policy, known at the Justice Department as "The Wall," which, in
>the spring of 2000, had also prevented the CIA from tipping off the FBI that
>two additional 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, had
>entered the country.
>
> Al-Midhar and al-Hamzi were identified by the Able Danger team as well, the
>Times said.
>
> In its final report, however, the 9/11 Commission made no mention of the
>fact that the Clinton administration had identified key members of the
>hijack team, even though, the Times noted, that information had been shared
>with 9/11 Commission members.
>

Maybe because they did nothing illegal?

>
> The account by Weldon and the Times intelligence source is the first
>assertion that Atta and al Shehhi - who caused the most destruction in the
>worst attack ever suffered on U.S. soil - had been identified by the Clinton
>administration.
>

SO they identified him.

>
> In testimony before the 9/11 Commission last year, then-Attorney General
>John Ashcroft blasted Gorelick's "Wall," saying, "The single greatest
>structural cause for September 11 was the wall that segregated criminal
>investigators and intelligence agents"
>

Which was how things were done then.

>
>
>"[Ms. Gorelick] built that wall," said Ashcroft, "through a March 1995
>memo."
>
>The Gorelick memo stipulated, in part:
>
> "We believe that it is prudent to establish a set of instructions that will
>more clearly separate the counterintelligence investigation from the more
>limited, but continued, criminal investigations. These procedures, which go
>beyond what is legally required, will prevent any risk of creating an
>unwarranted appearance that [the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] is
>being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal
>investigation."
>
>Ms. Gorelick is expected to be a leading candidate for attorney general
>should Mrs. Clinton win the 2008 presidential election.
>
>
>
>
>
>1 posted on Tuesday, August 09, 2005 2:50:49 PM by areafiftyone
>
>[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]
>
>
>
>It'll still be Bush's fault. Even if Gore had won the election in 2000, it
>would still be Bush's fault.........
>

So you can't prove anyone did anything illegal during Clinton's time,
is that correct?

Then how can you blame Clinton?

[RD Sandman]

"Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat :
It's What's for Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in

news:oHTqr.115$FL5...@newsfe03.iad:

The infamous wall of separation between intelligence agencies.

[RD Sandman]

"Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat :
It's What's for Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in

news:TFTqr.6776$ax3....@newsfe05.iad:

Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many of
the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course, those on
that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't we all just
get along? ;)

[Lookout]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:52:48 -0500, RD Sandman

Which is how it had been done for decades.

[RD Sandman]

Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:jl2oq75196vdqncqo...@4ax.com:

What he is talking about was Gorelick's wall of separation between
intelligence agencies. One of the things that some feel was a big cause
of the 9/11 fiasco. You can read all about it in the 9/11 Report.

[RD Sandman]

Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:be4oq71lrot07f9pa...@4ax.com:

Her claim was since the 80s. However, it was over that wall that she had
to recuse herself from the 9/11 hearings.

[Lookout]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 15:02:47 -0500, RD Sandman

Which had been in place, I believe since back in the Hoover days.
And I believe that came out in the hearings.

[RD Sandman]

Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:rn8oq71en2gj4d0u2...@4ax.com:

No, since the 80s, yes. She enforced some of it and refused to let the
barriers down while she was there.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"Lookout" <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:rn8oq71en2gj4d0u2...@4ax.com...

================

You believe wrong.


Jamie Gorelick's wall

The disclosure that Jamie Gorelick, a member of the September 11 commission,
was personally responsible for instituting a key obstacle to cooperation
between law enforcement and intelligence operations before the terrorist
attacks raises disturbing questions about the integrity of the commission
itself. Ms. Gorelick should not be cross-examining witnesses; instead, she
should be required to testify about her own behavior under oath.
Specifically, commission members need to ask her about a 1995 directive she
wrote that made it more difficult for the FBI to locate two of the September
11 hijackers who had already entered the country by the summer of 2001.

On Tuesday, Attorney General John Ashcroft declassified a four-page
directive sent by Ms. Gorelick (the No. 2 official in the Clinton Justice
Department) on March 4, 1995, to FBI Director Louis Freeh and Mary Jo White,
the New York-based U.S. attorney investigating the 1993 World Trade Center
bombing. In the memo, Ms. Gorelick ordered Mr. Freeh and Ms. White to follow
information-sharing procedures that "go beyond what is legally required," in
order to avoid "any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance" that the
Justice Department was using Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
warrants, instead of ordinary criminal investigative procedures, in an
effort to undermine the civil liberties of terrorism suspects.

At issue was the oft-noted wall of separation that prevented
counterterrorism agents and federal prosecutors from communicating with one
another prior to September 11. Information collected under special FISA
warrants, which do not require a probable cause, was generally not to be
shared with personnel responsible for enforcing federal criminal laws -
where probable cause must be demonstrated for a warrant to be issued. As
lawyers David Rivkin and Lee Casey noted on our Op-Ed page yesterday, the
practical effect of the wall was that counterintelligence information was
generally kept away from law enforcement personnel who were investigating al
Qaeda activities. But Ms. Gorelick's memo clearly indicated that the Clinton
administration had decided as a matter of policy to go even beyond the law's
already stringent requirements in order to further choke off information
sharing.

As Mr. Ashcroft noted during his testimony before the September 11
commission, all of this had a devastating effect into the investigation of
al Qaeda operations in this country in the summer of 2001. For example, in
late August, when the CIA told the FBI that Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf
Alhazmi had entered the country, FBI investigators refused to permit
criminal investigators with considerable knowledge about the most recent al
Qaeda attack to join the manhunt. Also, a criminal search warrant to examine
the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, whose interest in flying aircraft had
attracted attention, was rejected because FBI officials were afraid of
breaching the wall.

Ms. Gorelick has been among the most partisan and aggressive Democratic
panel members in questioning the anti-terror efforts of the Bush
administration. The nation deserves a full accounting from Ms. Gorelick of
why the Clinton administration felt it necessary to go the extra mile in
order to hamper the capability of law enforcement and intelligence agents to
talk to one another. If Ms. Gorelick fails to provide this, her actions
would bring into serious doubt the credibility of the commission
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/apr/15/20040415-094758-5267r/

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"Lookout" <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:be4oq71lrot07f9pa...@4ax.com...

=================

Liar.

[Meat : It's What's for Obama's Dinner @whitehouse.org Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House]

"Lookout" <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:ah2oq71ih1qidugu8...@4ax.com...

[Jean]

In article <oHTqr.115$FL5...@newsfe03.iad>,

"Fried Dog Leg: It's What's for Dinner @ Obama's House" <Dog Meat : It's

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/09/politics/09intel.html

--
American Legislative Exchange Council Wanders from Mission: http://goo.gl/GgZoM
Cookie! http://www.bakesmartonline.com/bethel/order.php?id=524&size=1727l
Michael Hastings Buzzfeed http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings
http://www.sundance.org/video/meet-the-artists-12-karin-hayes-victoria-bruce/

[Rob Dressler]

In article <gotermite-CCE36...@news.eternal-
september.org>

It's still Bush's fault, right? Well isn't it?

[Lookout]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 16:39:43 -0500, RD Sandman

This is a MINOR event in all of what happened when bush started his
stupid wars.

[RD Sandman]

Lookout <mrloo...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:iuoqq7578lra108ri...@4ax.com:

No, it wasn't. You consider it a minor event because you are a liberal
moron.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

[pyotr filipivich]

RD Sandman <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> on Fri, 11 May 2012
14:17:13 -0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It'll still be Bush's fault. Even if Gore had won the election in
>>>>>>>2000, it would still be Bush's fault.........
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you can't prove anyone did anything illegal during Clinton's
>>>>>> time, is that correct?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then how can you blame Clinton?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>What he is talking about was Gorelick's wall of separation between
>>>>>intelligence agencies. One of the things that some feel was a big
>>>cause
>>>>>of the 9/11 fiasco. You can read all about it in the 9/11 Report.
>>>>>
>>>> Which had been in place, I believe since back in the Hoover days.
>>>> And I believe that came out in the hearings.
>>>
>>>
>>>No, since the 80s, yes. She enforced some of it and refused to let
>>>the barriers down while she was there.
>>>
>> This is a MINOR event in all of what happened when bush started his
>> stupid wars.
>>
>
>No, it wasn't. You consider it a minor event because you are a liberal
>moron.
>

>If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
>from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
>You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

Obama: War on Terror is Over.
May 11, Man dressed in Afghan Army uniform kills US Soldier.

I guess the Taliban didn't get the memo that they're to give Obama
some space till he gets re-elected. OTOH, what was it Osama said a
about staying with a weak horse (i.e. the US.)?

--
pyotr filipivich
Old farts these days - not like when I was a boy! We used to
have us Real Geezers in those days! Now, they'll let anybody
with a little gray hair be an old fart!

[Gunner Asch]

On Tue, 08 May 2012 17:32:14 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners" <Dog Meat : It's What's for Obama's
>Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in news:8_gqr.36$0u6...@newsfe07.iad:
>
>>
>>
>> "Jeff M" <NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in message
>> news:lLadnbjhU-sSBTTS...@giganews.com...
>>> On 5/8/2012 4:55 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
>>>> Jeff M<NoS...@NoThanks.Org> wrote in
>>>> news:8sqdnVet95B-DzTS...@giganews.com:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/8/2012 4:32 PM, Josh Saunders wrote:
>>>>>> In article<iLaqr.1625$oK2....@newsfe13.iad>

>>>>>> "Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners"<Dog Meat : It's What's for

>>>>>> Obama's Dinner @ White House.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/cia-airplane-bomb-plot/2012/05/07

>>>>>>> /id /438268
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who heads the Senate
>>>>>> Intelligence Committee, told reporters Monday night that she had
>>>>>> been briefed Monday about an "undetectable" device that was
>>>>>> "going to be on a U.S.-bound airliner.""
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dianne Feinstein, inside trader whose husband got rich on the
>>>>>> bodies of your dead children, couldn't find her fat ass with
>>>>>> both hands sitting on the toilet.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And we're supposed to believe this dumb bitch was briefed by the
>>>>>> FBI
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess you don't know that Congress has an oversight
>>>>> responsibility for federal agencies like the FBI, and that the
>>>>> Senate Intelligence Committee, including Sen. Feinstein, are
>>>>> routinely briefed on intelligence matters.
>>>>
>>>> Like the pending attacks on 9/11, mon ami? ;)
>>>
>>> Um, I think it was the President and his senior staff that got the
>>> CIA briefing entitled "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US"
>>
>> Gee you mean like the attack in 1993 on the WTC under Clinton! Wow
>> what a secret , Bin Laden wanted to atttack the US like he already did
>> , and CLinton let his Hijacking Terrorists train in US Flight schools
>> before Bush was even running for President
>>
>
>Yes, the terrorists had been training in flight schools but Bush was

>president, albeit for just a few months, when the knowledge was coming up
>through the FBI that there were "students" who were interested in
>guiding a plane while it was in flight but had little or no interest in
>learning how to land.

Unfortunately it was a Democrat cunt that set terrible restrictions
between the government agencies so they couldnt share data.
One of Clintons Cunts.

And 911 resulted

Gunner

--
"The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry
capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency.
It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an
Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense
and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have
such a man for their? president.. Blaming the prince of the
fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of
fools that made him their prince".

[Gunner Asch]

On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:54:34 -0500, RD Sandman
<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:

>>
>
>Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many of
>the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course, those on
>that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't we all just
>get along? ;)

It may behoove you to make a stand on exactly what you are.

The Great Cull is speeding towards us like a runaway locomotive......

[RD Sandman]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:3vftq714qtih034tt...@4ax.com:

You are talking about Jamie Gorelick and no, it wasn't that wall of
separation that prevented that word from getting to the Intelligence
Committee. It was the agent's superiors at the agency in Phoenix. They
simply felt the tip had no importance.


--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:dmgtq7hvri2ge7v8u...@4ax.com:

> 911 happened on Bush's watch. No matter how much you try to avoid
> it, he was the President when the event happened. He was the one who
> allowed it.
>

No, he was the only who had the watch where it happened. There was
really no set of actionable intelligence on what was going to happen on
9/11. That is no matter how hard you try to claim there was.

[RD Sandman]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:m2gtq7d9dsi2uocvs...@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:54:34 -0500, RD Sandman
> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>
>>Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many of
>>the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course, those
>>on that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't we all
>>just get along? ;)
>
> It may behoove you to make a stand on exactly what you are.

I do. For those who have not read these words before, I am a centrist, a
moderate or old school liberal with libertarian leanings.

> The Great Cull is speeding towards us like a runaway locomotive......

If it gets too close to me, some folks may die.

--

If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:blktq7hfqcvcpua1g...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:01:25 -0500, RD Sandman

> My claim was only that it happened on his watch. Please don't add
> anything to the meaning of my words.

Fair enough......

Two wars were initiated on his
> watch too.

Yep, with a joint resolution and full involvment of the Intel Committee.

Then there was the financial crisis which also started on
> his watch.

Yep......

That's one of the problems with presidents claiming that
> they were responsible for all the good things that happen on their
> watch that they had nothing to do with. They get to have the bad
> things handed to them too.

Of course.

> Excessive government spending happened much more on Obama's watch.
> Protection of citizen's rights continued to erode on his watch. The
> nation has become much more polarized on his watch. The list goes on.
> They are his to hold and accept the ultimate consequences for whether
> he had anything to actually do with it or not.

As long as one is blaming both sides and holding both sides accountable
for what happens on their watch. I simply get a tad tired with Bush
being blamed for everything from global warming to burnt toast and
lukewarm coffee in the morning. And I am neither a conservative overall
or a Republican.

[emoneyjoe]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:01:25 -0500, RD Sandman

The fact is that even if there would have been
good intelligence about the plan it would have
been ignored or discarded because no civilized
human being could ever have been convinced
that 20 brainwashed nutcases would all go to
hell for any cause.


Leftist agenda nuts sound as bad as the
Islam nuts that flew the planes of 9/11 but
they don't have Osama to lead them, they
have Obama.

[Gunner Asch]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:59:59 -0500, RD Sandman

Your opinion is noted.

Evidence shows otherwise.

[Gunner Asch]

On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:03:29 -0500, RD Sandman

<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:m2gtq7d9dsi2uocvs...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:54:34 -0500, RD Sandman
>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many of
>>>the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course, those
>>>on that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't we all
>>>just get along? ;)
>>
>> It may behoove you to make a stand on exactly what you are.
>
>I do. For those who have not read these words before, I am a centrist, a
>moderate or old school liberal with libertarian leanings.

That..is hardly a Centrist according to the Left. According to the
Left...a Centrist is Almost a socialist.

>
>> The Great Cull is speeding towards us like a runaway locomotive......
>
>If it gets too close to me, some folks may die.

Nothing I can say about that. Shrug.

[RD Sandman]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:aanuq7tqlkqt6j8je...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 12 May 2012 15:59:59 -0500, RD Sandman
> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:3vftq714qtih034tt...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Tue, 08 May 2012 17:32:14 -0500, RD Sandman
>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>"Obama's Sauteed Dog Leg Dinners" <Dog Meat : It's What's for Obama's

>>>>Dinner @ White House.org> wrote in news:8_gqr.36$0u6.12

Lot of things led to 9/11. Gorelick was not THE reason for 9/11 She was
not even the main one. She, however, was a big reason and for that
action she was asked to recuse herself from the 9/11 commission.

[RD Sandman]

Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:7hnuq7hpjk4n4k5nv...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:03:29 -0500, RD Sandman
> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:m2gtq7d9dsi2uocvs...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:54:34 -0500, RD Sandman
>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many
>>>>of the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course,
>>>>those on that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't
>>>>we all just get along? ;)
>>>
>>> It may behoove you to make a stand on exactly what you are.
>>
>>I do. For those who have not read these words before, I am a
>>centrist, a moderate or old school liberal with libertarian leanings.
>
> That..is hardly a Centrist according to the Left. According to the
> Left...a Centrist is Almost a socialist.

Are you on the left? If not, why use their definitions?

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:8ettq7tlf57b8i5np...@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:38:59 -0500, RD Sandman

> I thought that you knew me better than that by now. My aversion to
> picking sides, any side, goes so far that I'm my voter registration
> lists me as "non-affiliated."

I am a registered Independent. In Arizona that is not a party but does
allow me to vote in either party's primary should I choose to do so. I
do not since I feel that if you wish to help select party candidates, you
should join the actual party. I register as an Independent as it saves
me a lot of junk mail.

My actual votes span the whole spectrum
> of political parties over the years and I don't vote for the lesser of
> two evils.

I have from time to time when no one really meets what I want in a
candidate.

I vote for the people who I think will best represent me
> and in those cases where none of them meet my criteria, I don't vote
> for any of them.

I haven't missed an election since Kennedy-Nixon where I voted for JFK.

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:njutq75bsgrj70vai...@4ax.com:

> Nutcases had been blowing themselves up for decades before 9-11 all
> over the globe. The assumption was that no one would do it in the US.
> They were wrong. Bush was wrong. He was the POTUS. He was
> responsible. It was his watch. He was the executive. The buck
> stopped there. Politicians need to be held accountable for what
> happens on their watch.
>

Then you feel that Obama is responsible for all that has happened since
January of 2009 and he needs to stop blaming the previous administration.
Did I get that right?

[Gunner Asch]

On Mon, 14 May 2012 11:58:33 -0500, RD Sandman

<rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:

>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:7hnuq7hpjk4n4k5nv...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Sat, 12 May 2012 16:03:29 -0500, RD Sandman
>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Gunner Asch <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>news:m2gtq7d9dsi2uocvs...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 10 May 2012 13:54:34 -0500, RD Sandman
>>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Too bad, you have no idea who the fuck you are responding to. Many
>>>>>of the folks in here accuse me of being a conservative. Of course,
>>>>>those on that side will sometimes accuse me of being liberal. Can't
>>>>>we all just get along? ;)
>>>>
>>>> It may behoove you to make a stand on exactly what you are.
>>>
>>>I do. For those who have not read these words before, I am a
>>>centrist, a moderate or old school liberal with libertarian leanings.
>>
>> That..is hardly a Centrist according to the Left. According to the
>> Left...a Centrist is Almost a socialist.
>
>Are you on the left? If not, why use their definitions?

Because we have to deal with their definitions as they are the same ones
the MSM uses.

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:rep3r7t9r2hmv0rcp...@4ax.com:

> On Mon, 14 May 2012 12:04:23 -0500, RD Sandman

> You did indeed. He will not get my vote in the upcoming election.
>

Thanks.

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:6cq5r7lhenk4gbnib...@4ax.com:

> On Tue, 15 May 2012 14:52:02 -0500, RD Sandman

> I don't know if it will make any difference really. He didn't get my
> vote the first time either. ;-)
>

Nor mine........and, in this case, history will repeat itself.

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:nsv8r7dn4eju44m36...@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 16 May 2012 13:57:43 -0500, RD Sandman

> You're probably right since the Republicans seem to be incapable of
> getting it together once again.
>

You missed my point but yours is probably correct. My point was simply
that I didn't vote for Obama the first and will not do so this time
either. Your point, if I read it correctly, is that you feel Obama will
win again.

[RD Sandman]

Deucalion <som...@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:jlpbr75qg5k9cunc6...@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 17 May 2012 11:10:59 -0500, RD Sandman

> The one thing that I am sure about is that the game of binary choice
> will continue and the person that I vote for will not win. The
> Republican vs Democrat play for keeping the populace divided has been
> very effective for a long...long time and I don't see it changing
> anytime soon.
>

Nor do I.......particularly after seeing it in action day after day in
here. ;)