Author Topic: Rudy Giuliani: "We Had No Domestic Attacks Under Bush; We've Had One Under Obama  (Read 6497 times)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

See, yo're making it all about "aliens"?

PATHETIC!!! Man, that's sad.  You start reading here.  A repub congressman admitted that we had atta before 911, his whole cell, and that FBI was ordered to drop it by exec order.  Then, in 2005 and the shit hit the fan, the congressman changed his story when the families and media went nuts that atta was allowed to operate freely.

PLEASE man, don't go changing the story to aliens and every other thing.  Focus on the fact that yes, atta was allowed to operate freely and actions to stop his cell were directly halted by white house. A repub in the know admitted it, then later said "i dont rememebr" once bush got in hot water over this.

fuckkit... you're a child on this matter... I love your posts on obama, but fo ryou to revert to ALIENS in the middle of a specific discussion on able danger?  Pathetic dodge man...

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Probably the same place as if Clinton did the same thing no Straw? 

I don't understand your statement

I was not aware that Clinton was ever offered Bin Laden (though it's a popular lie among the uninformed right)

http://mediamatters.org/research/200407230005

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
man, you asked what got me pissed off.  THIS pisses me off.  You want to talk about aliens when faced with shit like this.

fuck it.  enjoy your obama bashing.

i can't let myself get all worked up ... youre emotionally tied to 911... to believe it was allowed to happen makes you feel vulnerable in light of the fear you felt that day... a common thing among people near it... i can understand not wanting to accept those who were sworn to protect you, let you be so scared so that you'd be okay with a war for their profit...

it's cool.  i'll see you on the obama threads... but i get too worked up when talking 911 with people who want to talk about aliens, instead of repub congressmen questioning why bush stopped atta from being arrested a year before 911...

peace

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger

See, yo're making it all about "aliens"?

PATHETIC!!! Man, that's sad.  You start reading here.  A repub congressman admitted that we had atta before 911, his whole cell, and that FBI was ordered to drop it by exec order.  Then, in 2005 and the shit hit the fan, the congressman changed his story when the families and media went nuts that atta was allowed to operate freely.

PLEASE man, don't go changing the story to aliens and every other thing.  Focus on the fact that yes, atta was allowed to operate freely and actions to stop his cell were directly halted by white house. A repub in the know admitted it, then later said "i dont rememebr" once bush got in hot water over this.

fuckkit... you're a child on this matter... I love your posts on obama, but fo ryou to revert to ALIENS in the middle of a specific discussion on able danger?  Pathetic dodge man...

Did you even read the damn link you gave me? 

It completely destroys your claims and if anything the people there said that it goes back to Clinton and Gorelick wall.   

WTF is wrong with you 240? 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
man, you asked what got me pissed off.  THIS pisses me off.  You want to talk about aliens when faced with shit like this.

fuck it.  enjoy your obama bashing.

i can't let myself get all worked up ... youre emotionally tied to 911... to believe it was allowed to happen makes you feel vulnerable in light of the fear you felt that day... a common thing among people near it... i can understand not wanting to accept those who were sworn to protect you, let you be so scared so that you'd be okay with a war for their profit...

it's cool.  i'll see you on the obama threads... but i get too worked up when talking 911 with people who want to talk about aliens, instead of repub congressmen questioning why bush stopped atta from being arrested a year before 911...

peace

No, all I am asking you to do is present a SHRED of credible evidence that is not disputed or contradicted by a plethora of other information.

FACE IT:  You have zero evidence of a coherent 9/11 conspiracy that stands up to an ounce of credibility, logic or fact. 

If you have a valid CT, present it, name names, places, dates etc and we will discuss it.  But when you send me a link that completely contradicts your own assertions, what do you want me to make of that?   

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
I guess Clinton was lying then Straw? 


tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
bay, props for the clip.

I think many republicans seem to ignore the fact Bush was warned by our allies and our own intel agencies.  They knew 5 of the hijackers names, the attack date, and targets.  They redacted many of the details (blacked out).  But germany's ambassador told their newspaper that he told Bush personally of 5 of their names.

Seems a lot like "letting it happen" to me.  When a foreign ambassador delivers that kind of info, and you just sit on it (when your sworn job is to protect), it makes ya wonder...

Hell, after that memo, bush CALLED off the FBi atta suirveilance in hollywood, FL.  I'd llove to hear 333386 and friends explain that one ;)
This is the problem with you libtards you condemn bush for not following intel in one instance and condemn him for following it in another.

You little bitches sit back and complain bout 333 and how he will condemn obama for anything but you do the same thing with bush  ::) and then when you do say something about obama its to draw a moral equivalency to bush to justify obamas actions even though you bitched about it when bush did it.

silver line much?  ::)

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
No, all I am asking you to do is present a SHRED of credible evidence that is not disputed or contradicted by a plethora of other information.

FACE IT:  You have zero evidence of a coherent 9/11 conspiracy that stands up to an ounce of credibility, logic or fact. 

If you have a valid CT, present it, name names, places, dates etc and we will discuss it.  But when you send me a link that completely contradicts your own assertions, what do you want me to make of that?   

the popular CT that 19 guys with boxcutters did it doesn't hold up either

I guess we're back to square one

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
240 - you know I like you and I hate doing this.  But here you go - SMACKED DOWN BY YOUR OWN LINK CLAIMING GWB ORDERED THE INTEL DESTROYED. 

FROM YOUR OWN LINK YOU PROVIDED!

________________________ ________________________ __________________

Weldon changes his story

A Time magazine article dated August 14, 2005, reports that Weldon admitted he is no longer sure that Atta's name was on the chart he presented to Hadley and that he was unable to verify whether this was the case, having handed over his only copy, and that a reconstruction was used for post-9/11 presentations.[19] Weldon gave a talk at the Heritage Foundation with a chart he described as the one handed over on May 23, 2002. However, a week later he referred reporters to a recently reconstructed version of the chart in his office where, among dozens of names and photos of terrorists from around the world, there was a color mug shot of Mohammad Atta, circled in black marker.

[edit] Comments by members of the Able Danger team

[edit] Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer

After Weldon's assertions were disputed, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a member of the Able Danger team, identified himself as Weldon's source. Shaffer claimed that he alerted the FBI in September 2000 about the information uncovered by the secret military unit "Able Danger," but he alleges three meetings he set up with bureau officials were blocked by military lawyers. Shaffer, who at the time worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency, claims he communicated to members of the 9/11 Commission that Able Danger had identified two of the three cells responsible for 9/11 prior to the attacks, but the Commission did not include this information in their final report.[20]

Shaffer's lawyer, Mark Zaid, has revealed that Shaffer had been placed on paid administrative leave for what he called "petty and frivolous" reasons and had his security clearance suspended in March 2004, following a dispute over travel mileage expenses and personal use of a work cell phone.[21]

As Lt. Col. Shaffer received a memorandum of OPCON status from Joint Task Force (JTF) 121, confirming his attachment to this element 1 November through 1 December 2004, and participating in the 75th Ranger Regiment's nighttime air assault of 11 November 2003, the controversy of his wearing the 75th Ranger Regiment patch as his "combat patch" is closed in his favor. In the Army Reserve, LtCol Shaffer is now assigned as the G6 of the 94th Division (Prov), Ft. Lee, VA.

Congressman Weldon has asked for a new probe into the activities undertaken to silence Lt. Col Shaffer from publicly commenting on Able Danger and Able Danger's identification of the 9/11 hijackers. Weldon called the activities "a deliberate campaign of character assassination."[22][dead link]

Shaffer has also told the story of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) opposition to Able Danger, prior to 9/11, based on the view Able Danger was encroaching on CIA turf. According to Shaffer, the CIA representative said, "I clearly understand. We're going after the leadership. You guys are going after the body. But, it doesn't matter. The bottom line is, CIA will never give you the best information from 'Alex Base' or anywhere else. CIA will never provide that to you because if you were successful in your effort to target Al Qaeda, you will steal our thunder. Therefore, we will not support this."[23][dead link]

[edit] Navy Captain Scott Phillpott

Capt. Scott Phillpott confirmed Shaffer's claims. "I will not discuss this outside of my chain of command," Phillpott said in a statement to Fox News. "I have briefed the Department of the Army, the Special Operations Command and the office of (Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence) Dr. Cambone as well as the 9/11 Commission. My story has remained consistent. Atta was identified by Able Danger in January/February 2000," he was quoted as saying.[24]

[edit] James D. Smith

Shaffer's claims were also confirmed by James D. Smith, a civilian contractor who worked on Able Danger. In an interview with Fox News, Smith reported that the project had involved analysis of data from a large number of public sources and 20 to 30 individuals.[25]

Smith stated that Atta's name had emerged during an examination of individuals known to have ties to Omar Abdel Rahman, a leading figure in the first World Trade Center bombing.

[edit] Major Eric Kleinsmith

Major Eric Kleinsmith, who was with the Army and chief of intelligence for LIWA until February 2001, testified that he was ordered to destroy Able Danger's information. "I deleted the data," he said. "There were two sets, classified and unclassified, and also an 'all source,'" which contained a blend of the two, "plus charts we'd produced." Kleinsmith deleted the 2.5 terabytes of data in May and June, 2000, on orders of Tony Gentry, general counsel of the Army Intelligence and Security Command.[26]


[edit] Other witnesses

The Defense Department announced its findings on September 1, 2005, after a three-week investigation into Able Danger. The statement announced the discovery of three other witnesses in addition to Shaffer and Philpott who confirm Able Danger had produced a chart that "either mentioned Atta by name as an al-Qaeda operative [and/or] showed his photograph." Four of the five witnesses remember the photo on the chart. The fifth remembers only Atta being cited by name. The Pentagon describes the witnesses as "credible" but did not rule out the possibility their recollections were faulty.[27][28][dead link]

[edit] The wall

Former chief assistant U.S. attorney Andrew McCarthy and others have asserted that the Able Danger intelligence was suppressed as a result of a policy of forbidding the CIA and FBI to share intelligence known as "the wall."[29] During the 9/11 Commission hearings, then-Attorney General John Ashcroft testified the wall was strengthened under the Clinton administration by Jamie Gorelick to prohibit sharing of terrorist intelligence within the federal government.[30]

This assertion was disputed by former senator Slade Gorton (R-WA), a member of the 9-11 Commission, who said, "nothing Jamie Gorelick wrote had the slightest impact on the Department of Defense or its willingness or ability to share intelligence information with other intelligence agencies." Gorton also asserted that "the wall" was a long-standing policy that had resulted from the Church committee in the 1970s, and that the policy only prohibits transfer of certain information from prosecutors to the intelligence services and never prohibited information flowing in the opposite direction.


Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
the popular CT that 19 guys with boxcutters did it doesn't hold up either

I guess we're back to square one

Why not?  This guy in Detroit, but for the faulty fuse almost blew up a plane himself singlehandidly.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
I guess Clinton was lying then Straw? 



seriously 333 - did you even listen to that audio in that ridiculous clip or did you just look at the silly pictures (why was there a picture of Monica Lewinsky in that video).

listen to the audio again and tell me EXACTLY what you hear that incriminates Clinton.

The only thing he mentions is something in 1996 but says he couldn't take him because Bin Ladne had not commited any crime against the US and we had no legal basis on which to hold him (you're an attorney right?).  

If you're up for reading or watching a video that doesn't include showing pictures of Clinton dressed as an arab then try here:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/06/18/60minutes/main624848.shtml

 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
Why not?  This guy in Detroit, but for the faulty fuse almost blew up a plane himself singlehandidly.
your logic eludes me

what's the underpants bomber got to do with validating the popular CT of 911

I'm just not following how one proves the other

please explain

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
I read that piece Straw.  My thing is that I dont confuse evil genius for incompetence.  Sure clinton probably made a few token efforts, like bombing an aspirin factory.   

As far as the clip goes, they were well aware of Bin Laden and really didnt do that much.  Again - are we trying to prosecute a legal case or defeat our enemies? 

 



240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
"Again - are we trying to prosecute a legal case or defeat our enemies? 
"

Any person or group who allowed an attack to happen by not donig their sworn jobs to prevent them = enemy of the USA.

Maybe you forget that.  *IF* any person knowlingly allowed terrorists to operate here, they are just as guilty.  if any person didn't act to stop an attack he knew was coming - he's just as guilty.

once i saw you write "Even if bush did know.." or something like that... I mean... really? ???  Anyone who didn't act to stop it is just as guilty man.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
your logic eludes me

what's the underpants bomber got to do with validating the popular CT of 911

I'm just not following how one proves the other

please explain

You said that you didnt think its plausible for 19 people with box cutters to take down a plane.  Why the hell not?  Especially considering what we just saw with the panty bomber.  It does not take much to frighten people into shock and inaction and fear.  

The passengers of the plane had no reason to believe that they were involved on a suicide mission.  

The only ones who did took control of the plane in PA after speaking to their loved ones and learning what happened in NYC.    

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
"Again - are we trying to prosecute a legal case or defeat our enemies? 
"

Any person or group who allowed an attack to happen by not donig their sworn jobs to prevent them = enemy of the USA.

Maybe you forget that.  *IF* any person knowlingly allowed terrorists to operate here, they are just as guilty.  if any person didn't act to stop an attack he knew was coming - he's just as guilty.

once i saw you write "Even if bush did know.." or something like that... I mean... really? ???  Anyone who didn't act to stop it is just as guilty man.

240 - did you read my post above yes or no containing quotations from the link you provided me?

Since that attempt failed, can you give me something at least with some plausibility to look at? 

Serious - your own link oblierated a good deal of your 911 CT's. 

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
19 guys with boxcutters didn't turn off norad, or keep the order standing in DC as the plane approached.  didn't tell the other defense group to just take the day off.  didn't set off explosions in wtc7 or report on BBC it fell an hour before it actually did.  19 guys with boxcutters didn't bet on those 2 airline stocks to fall a week eahd of time.  Hell, the pakistan genereal who wire atta $100 K just 4 days before 911...
19 guys with boxcutters didn't throw the aug 6 memo in the garbage or stall a 911 investifation for 400 days or lie on oath about norad response times that day...

You don't know much about that 100K, do ya 33386?  ;)

shit, i'm caught up in this thread again!! dammit whens the nfl start?


240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
"Weldon changes his story"

EXACTLY.

He made the white house look really bad admitting the shit we knew ahead of time - you posted the CHANGED STORY he delivered 4 years later.  Sorry, I believe what he said when he answered honestly - not after a major media shitstorn and him having his ass handed to him by the GOP... he apologizes for embarassing Bush, changes his story, and that's all you post.

Classic.  Dude, you believe the shit people say when they're just answering.  not the version they release 4 years later when they start a shitstorm and just need to put it out because they made their boss look bad ;)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
19 guys with boxcutters didn't turn off norad, or keep the order standing in DC as the plane approached.  didn't tell the other defense group to just take the day off.  didn't set off explosions in wtc7 or report on BBC it fell an hour before it actually did.  19 guys with boxcutters didn't bet on those 2 airline stocks to fall a week eahd of time.  Hell, the pakistan genereal who wire atta $100 K just 4 days before 911...
19 guys with boxcutters didn't throw the aug 6 memo in the garbage or stall a 911 investifation for 400 days or lie on oath about norad response times that day...

You don't know much about that 100K, do ya 33386?  ;)

shit, i'm caught up in this thread again!! dammit whens the nfl start?



Ok, so some pakis were in on it.  How does that connect GWB to destryoing the ATTA investigation via exec order as you claimed? 

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41012
  • one dwells in nirvana
You said that you didnt think its plausible for 19 people with box cutters to take down a plane.  Why the hell not?  Especially considering what we just saw with the panty bomber.  It does not take much to frighten people into shock and inaction and fear.  

The passengers of the plane had no reason to believe that they were involved on a suicide mission.  

The only ones who did took control of the plane in PA after speaking to their loved ones and learning what happened in NYC.    

"taking down a plane" does not = 911

911 has been debated ad naseum on this site and I'm out the door for lunch

I don't believe the popular CT of 19 hijackers

other than that I have no conclusions on what exactly happened.....yet

what's odd is that you dont' trust the Govt about ANYTHING yet you believe the ridiculous CT (from our GOVT) about 911

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
"Ok, so some pakis were in on it. "

Not just 'some'.

The top general of the nation.  Musharraf's right hand man.  AND when it was annoucned on c-span in the 911 hearings, the name was deleted from all white house recordings and written transcripts.  Only the live cspan recording that day included it. 

Why would the white house hide this?  If the TOP GENERAL of ANY COUNTRY paid a guy $100k right before he attacked america, that would be automatic "bomb the shit outta them", wouldn't it?

Now, I think you might be starting to get it ;)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
"Weldon changes his story"

EXACTLY.

He made the white house look really bad admitting the shit we knew ahead of time - you posted the CHANGED STORY he delivered 4 years later.  Sorry, I believe what he said when he answered honestly - not after a major media shitstorn and him having his ass handed to him by the GOP... he apologizes for embarassing Bush, changes his story, and that's all you post.

Classic.  Dude, you believe the shit people say when they're just answering.  not the version they release 4 years later when they start a shitstorm and just need to put it out because they made their boss look bad ;)

240 - now you are in total idiot mode again.  I put in red bold the testimony from the guy who was ordered the intel destroyed in JUNE 2000!  and somehow you are making something of this? 

BTW - I am still looking to see back up your claim of GWB via exec order shutting down an investigation of ATTA, by name prior to 911. 

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 39901
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
240 - WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR THIS?
________________________ ________________________  

I think many republicans seem to ignore the fact Bush was warned by our allies and our own intel agencies.  They knew 5 of the hijackers names, the attack date, and targets.  They redacted many of the details (blacked out).  But germany's ambassador told their newspaper that he told Bush personally of 5 of their names.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19464
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Rudy didn't put his words crystal clear. So what.
Do we really want a political climate where politicians are too afraid to say anything because of the risk they may be misinterpreted and consequently crucified?

Whether Rudy really feels USA was safer under Bush is the real issue.
I don't think so.
USA has gained tremendous support around the world the last year.
As empty as paradise

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
240 - WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE FOR THIS?
________________________ ________________________  

I think many republicans seem to ignore the fact Bush was warned by our allies and our own intel agencies.  They knew 5 of the hijackers names, the attack date, and targets.  They redacted many of the details (blacked out).  But germany's ambassador told their newspaper that he told Bush personally of 5 of their names.

its very simply 333 you have to look at it from the stance of 240 politics

bush=bad
obama=good

obama does something 240 knows is wrong and 240 draws a morally equivalency to bush to justify obama

you see now it all makes sense  ;)