XPost: alt.terrorism.world-trade-center, soc.culture.usa, alt.activism   
   XPost: soc.culture.iraq   
   From: pinkfloppybitsdatstank@hotmail.com   
      
   Edw wrote:   
   > "CH"  wrote in message   
   > news:q%VXb.28355$1S1.10001@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...   
   >> .impervious wrote:   
   >>> In news:RJUXb.27935$1S1.4193@nwrddc01.gnilink.net,   
   >>> CH attempted to impart some wisdom, instead sputtering:   
   >>>   
   >>>> .impervious wrote:   
   >>>>> In news:6fSXb.14629$5W3.4187@nwrddc02.gnilink.net,   
   >>>>> CH attempted to impart some wisdom, instead sputtering:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> You   
   >>>>>>> don't. In fact, Clinton prevented an attack.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> And just which attack was this? Can you elaborate?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> i, for one, would be glad to.  Clinton prevented attacks on the UN   
   >>>>> Headquarters in New York, the Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, the FBI   
   >>>>> Building, the Israeli Embassy in D.C., the LA and Boston airports,   
   >>>>> the George Washington Bridge, and the US Embassy in Tirana,   
   >>>>> Albania (which is considered American soil).  also, there was the   
   >>>>> much-hyped Millenium Bomber...  Clinton took out al-Qaeda cells   
   >>>>> in more than 20 countries, and CREATED a national security post   
   >>>>> to oversee and coordinate all federal counterterrorism activity.   
   >>>>> his first and second crime bills were practically entirely   
   >>>>> comprised of anti-terrorism legislation, and he created a   
   >>>>> national stockpile of drugs and vaccines in case of biological or   
   >>>>> chemical attacks.  after the Embassy bombings, Clinton issued a   
   >>>>> Presidential Directive authorizing the assassination of Osama bin   
   >>>>> Laden.  by any measure,   
   >>>>> he was the first President to aggressively tackle the problem of   
   >>>>> terrorism.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Looks like he kinda missed the boat on al queda though and that is   
   >>>> my point. al queda should have been taken out during Clintoon's   
   >>>> term not covered up with a bunch of federal funding. When you only   
   >>>> take defensive measures when you are being attacked...it looks   
   >>>> like he kinda missed the boat.   
   >>>   
   >>> did he miss the boat kind of like, say, Bush?   
   >>   
   >> Bush took action. Clinton took defensive measures, big difference.   
   >>   
   >>> i mean, what do you   
   >>> want? the capture of Osama?  Bush hasn't done that, either.  a   
   >>> complete end to terrorism worldwide?  nope for Bush, either.  would   
   >>> you settle for a reduced risk of terrorists attacking us?  well, i   
   >>> guess Bush nearly has him beat, there...  he did, after all,   
   >>> capitulate to Osama's number one demand and remove our troops from   
   >>> Saudi Arabia.   
   >>>   
   >>> Clinton aggressively pursued terrorists.  period.   
   >>   
   >> Clintoon aggressively pursued squat. He may have "pursued"   
   >> terrorists but nothing was aggressively done.   
   >>   
   >>>  not just   
   >>> defensively, but offensively.  he took decisive measures to prevent   
   >>> and punish terrorist attacks both here and abroad.   
   >>   
   >> He took the easy way out, that is what he did. He lobbed a few cruise   
   >> missles around as a show but never ever took the actions that were   
   >> necessary   
   >>   
   >>>  to claim   
   >>> otherwise is to attempt to re-write history.   
   >>   
   >> I don't need to, history stands on its own.   
   >>>   
   >>>>>  wanna guess who thought up the idea of a Department of   
   >>>>> Homeland Security?  wanna guess who scoffed at the notion?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> were you even LIVING here at the time?  i mean, do you fucking   
   >>>>> know anything at all?  or have you just picked up the party lie -   
   >>>>> i mean, line - that Clinton sat on his ass while terrorists took   
   >>>>> over the world?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> there IS NO TERRORIST THREAT.  Bush rules through fear, and that's   
   >>>>> why you think he's out there fighting terrorists...  he's not.   
   >>>>> he's certainly not preventing anything.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Then why am I not scared? You watch waaaaaay to much TV   
   >>>> dude...........   
   >>>   
   >>> if you're not scared, it's because there is no terrorist threat.   
   >>> what does television have to do with my statement?   
   >>   
   >> It just seems like you must watch waaaaay too much.......   
   >>   
   >>>>> look at it this way:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> in the year 2000, your chances of dying in a terrorist attack on   
   >>>>> the US were a big, fat zero.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> in the year 2002, your chances of dying in a terrorist attack on   
   >>>>> the US were a big, fat zero.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> in the year 2003, your chances of dying in a terrorist attack on   
   >>>>> the US were a big, fat zero.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> the only year you did have a chance was in 2001, and your chances   
   >>>>> were still 1 in 100,000.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> in 2001, you had a greater chance of dying:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> - from pneumonia (1 in 4,500)   
   >>>>> - by suicide (1 in 9,200)   
   >>>>> - in a homicide (1 in 14,000)   
   >>>>> - in a car accident (1 in 6,500)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> where was the government?  why wasn't anyone freaking out about   
   >>>>> this apparent pneumonia epidemic?  where were the Orange Alerts?   
   >>>>> why didn't we bomb anybody?  looking at just the suicide rate, it   
   >>>>> means we were a greater danger to OURSELVES than terrorists were   
   >>>>> to us in 2001.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> ha-ha I find it a little pathetic that you do not know the   
   >>>> difference between normal causes of death and targeted killing of   
   >>>> civilians for political purposes, you are one of those people that   
   >>>> will need to be shown the dead bodies before you believe that   
   >>>> these people are out to get us. There is 3000 in NY already, how   
   >>>> many more will it take   
   >>>> before you realize the implications of being wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> i find it a little more than pathetic that you fail to see that   
   >>> naturally-caused deaths were responsible for far more deaths than   
   >>> terrorism, and nothing was done to prevent them.   
   >>   
   >> Sure things were done to prevent them and a lot of them are   
   >> avoidable. The point is the next time we are attacked it may not be   
   >> just airplanes. Are you prepared to live like they do in Israel and   
   >> Palestine? Now that is fear......   
   >>   
   >>> there is no objective reporting on television.  my news comes from   
   >>> facts, not speculation.   
   >>   
   >> Well then your "facts" have clouded your judgement. That is obvious.   
   >   
   >   
   > Are you so stupid you don't see that you're countering facts, rather   
   > politely presented, with mere slogans?  You've lost.  Go away.   
      
   What facts moron? Do you mean like the health statistics quoted above? You   
   are one confused little puppy.   
      
   --   
   Cliff   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)