On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:27:24 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:19:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Those miles of boom in Maine supposedly failed inspection although
they meet ASTM standards and were considered "superior" by an
independent inspector. I suspect they failed cuz they were not made
from "free range nylon". Ya know, it's sorta like all those school
busses in katrina that couldn't be used for evac cuz they didn't have
seat belts, all them peeps died courtesy of Mayor Nagin and Dem Gov
Blanco. Way to go Dems, Keel them poor people and drive em to ruin to
put em on welfare.

Anyone want to tell Froggy who created the MMS? Under which president?
Anyone??


Who did absolutely zero to CHANGE it in the last 16 months? (hint: it
was Mr Change)
If it was so corrupt Obama should have fixed it BEFORE he started
proposing more offshore drilling. It is not a question of a long
process that wasn't finished. Fixing MMS had not even started so he
must have been happy with them.

he DID appoint a different director of the MMS. that was a failure.
unlike bush, who, after murdering 4400 US troops in afghanistan, stood
by his rich buddy rumsfeld, obama has the insight to know when changes
are needed.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:02:38 -0400, bpuharic wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 01:27:24 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:19:22 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
Those miles of boom in Maine supposedly failed inspection although
they meet ASTM standards and were considered "superior" by an
independent inspector. I suspect they failed cuz they were not made
from "free range nylon". Ya know, it's sorta like all those school
busses in katrina that couldn't be used for evac cuz they didn't have
seat belts, all them peeps died courtesy of Mayor Nagin and Dem Gov
Blanco. Way to go Dems, Keel them poor people and drive em to ruin to
put em on welfare.

Anyone want to tell Froggy who created the MMS? Under which president?
Anyone??


Who did absolutely zero to CHANGE it in the last 16 months? (hint: it
was Mr Change)
If it was so corrupt Obama should have fixed it BEFORE he started
proposing more offshore drilling. It is not a question of a long
process that wasn't finished. Fixing MMS had not even started so he
must have been happy with them.

he DID appoint a different director of the MMS. that was a failure.

Oh you mean he did something AFTER the blowout.


unlike bush, who, after murdering 4400 US troops in afghanistan, stood
by his rich buddy rumsfeld, obama has the insight to know when changes
are needed.

How is that going. The time last I looked BOTH wars are still going on
and Osama is no closer to being captured than he was on Sept 12 2001.

Yeah, thanks GWB for not capturing him when he had the chance. I guess in
some people's mind 8 years = 16 months.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:07:08 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

How is that going. The time last I looked BOTH wars are still going on
and Osama is no closer to being captured than he was on Sept 12 2001.

Yeah, thanks GWB for not capturing him when he had the chance. I guess in
some people's mind 8 years = 16 months.

... or Clinton not taking him when Sudan offered him up to us.
(already suspected in the FIRST WTC bombing in 93)

Umm... that's rewriting history just a bit...

The government of Sudan, employing a back channel direct from its president
to the CIA, offered in early spring 1996 to arrest Osama bin Laden and place
him in Saudi custody, according to officials and former officials in all
three countries.

The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to accept the offer in
secret contacts that stretched from a meeting at an Arlington, Va., hotel on
March 3, 1996, to a fax that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later.
Unable to persuade the Saudis to accept Mr. bin Laden and lacking a case to
indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the Clinton administration finally
gave up on the capture.

Clinton was actually trying to follow US law.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:34:28 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 10:07:08 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

How is that going. The time last I looked BOTH wars are still going on
and Osama is no closer to being captured than he was on Sept 12 2001.

Yeah, thanks GWB for not capturing him when he had the chance. I guess
in
some people's mind 8 years = 16 months.

... or Clinton not taking him when Sudan offered him up to us.
(already suspected in the FIRST WTC bombing in 93)

Umm... that's rewriting history just a bit...

The government of Sudan, employing a back channel direct from its
president
to the CIA, offered in early spring 1996 to arrest Osama bin Laden and
place
him in Saudi custody, according to officials and former officials in all
three countries.

The Clinton administration struggled to find a way to accept the offer in
secret contacts that stretched from a meeting at an Arlington, Va., hotel
on
March 3, 1996, to a fax that closed the door on the effort 10 weeks later.
Unable to persuade the Saudis to accept Mr. bin Laden and lacking a case
to
indict him in U.S. courts at the time, the Clinton administration finally
gave up on the capture.

Clinton was actually trying to follow US law.


If they used the same level of proof they used on David Koresh they
could have just ambushed him and killed him for resisting arrest.
What you are really saying was the DoJ and CIA was so much asleep at
the switch that they couldn't build a case.

... or was it that they did not want to offend the Saudis?


Koresh was a maniac. He didn't deserve to die, but don't put him out to be
some kind of American hero standing up to Big Gov't.

I'm not saying anything. The fact is that no case could be made. Clinton
regretted, publically, his failure to do so.

Saudis? I believe bin laden was no longer a citizen at that point.

On 6/18/10 12:33 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:20:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If they used the same level of proof they used on David Koresh they
could have just ambushed him and killed him for resisting arrest.
What you are really saying was the DoJ and CIA was so much asleep at
the switch that they couldn't build a case.

... or was it that they did not want to offend the Saudis?


Koresh was a maniac. He didn't deserve to die, but don't put him out to be
some kind of American hero standing up to Big Gov't.

Certainly he was a nut but the country is full of them.
Who was the biggest threat to America?


Dick Cheney, even though he wasn't veep then.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 06:23:58 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Koresh was a maniac. He didn't deserve to die, but don't put him out to
be
some kind of American hero standing up to Big Gov't.

Certainly he was a nut but the country is full of them.
Who was the biggest threat to America?


Dick Cheney, even though he wasn't veep then.

No Al Gore was veep and in the end he may end up being the biggest
threat to the republic ever. This TV evangelist has created a scam
bigger than the derivative market where we will be paying billions of
dollars for worthless "carbon credits" and we will be buying them from
his company. 3d world countries will be selling us trees for
outrageous prices and then cutting them down anyway.
You only have to look at the freon credit program to see that kind of
abuse. Countries now manufacture CFCs for the express purpose of
selling the credits when they destroy them

Come on! He might hype it a little bit, but adverse global climate change is
the biggest national threat we have.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:42:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 06:23:58 -0400, Harry
wrote:

Koresh was a maniac. He didn't deserve to die, but don't put him out
to
be
some kind of American hero standing up to Big Gov't.

Certainly he was a nut but the country is full of them.
Who was the biggest threat to America?


Dick Cheney, even though he wasn't veep then.

No Al Gore was veep and in the end he may end up being the biggest
threat to the republic ever. This TV evangelist has created a scam
bigger than the derivative market where we will be paying billions of
dollars for worthless "carbon credits" and we will be buying them from
his company. 3d world countries will be selling us trees for
outrageous prices and then cutting them down anyway.
You only have to look at the freon credit program to see that kind of
abuse. Countries now manufacture CFCs for the express purpose of
selling the credits when they destroy them

Come on! He might hype it a little bit, but adverse global climate change
is
the biggest national threat we have.

Do you really think taxing carbon and using the money to buy trees in
Guatemala will change that, particularly when there is no real
guarantee the trees will stay bought.


Don't know. I'm not a carbon tax expert. Something needs to get done. If
that's a positive step, I'm all for it.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 21:20:42 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If they used the same level of proof they used on David Koresh they
could have just ambushed him and killed him for resisting arrest.
What you are really saying was the DoJ and CIA was so much asleep at
the switch that they couldn't build a case.

... or was it that they did not want to offend the Saudis?


Koresh was a maniac. He didn't deserve to die, but don't put him out to be
some kind of American hero standing up to Big Gov't.

Certainly he was a nut but the country is full of them.
Who was the biggest threat to America?

The Republicans?

I'm not saying anything. The fact is that no case could be made. Clinton
regretted, publically, his failure to do so.

Saudis? I believe bin laden was no longer a citizen at that point.


The Bin Laden family was still a big player in Saudi Arabia and
Clinton was afraid to stir up anything that might have jiggled the
price of oil and crashed his rising economy.

They had disowned him, and even Bush was complicit in flying his family out
after 9/11...

In a more enlightened time we would have just had a foreign national,
working for the CIA, put a bullet in his ear.

Actually bin laden did get CIA (or other? US help) when fighting the
Soviets.

How many lives would that have saved? (Iraqi, Afghani and American)
200,000?

Total agreement there... but we really need to set a good example even if
it's not expedient.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:41:33 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The Bin Laden family was still a big player in Saudi Arabia and
Clinton was afraid to stir up anything that might have jiggled the
price of oil and crashed his rising economy.

They had disowned him, and even Bush was complicit in flying his family
out
after 9/11...

Make up your mind, either the family is part of the problem or they
were innocent


It's not my mind that is made or unmade. This was Bush's decision. I think
you'd need to ask him.

In a more enlightened time we would have just had a foreign national,
working for the CIA, put a bullet in his ear.

Actually bin laden did get CIA (or other? US help) when fighting the
Soviets.

Exactly. They knew how to get at him.

Ok... but, they didn't. Your solution is....


How many lives would that have saved? (Iraqi, Afghani and American)
200,000?

Total agreement there... but we really need to set a good example even if
it's not expedient.


That was the point of using a foreign national and having plausible
deniability. I am old enough to remember when we were very good at
that and the world was actually a lot more peaceful place.


Fidel's cigars?

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 14:19:36 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:


wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:41:33 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The Bin Laden family was still a big player in Saudi Arabia and
Clinton was afraid to stir up anything that might have jiggled the
price of oil and crashed his rising economy.

They had disowned him, and even Bush was complicit in flying his family
out
after 9/11...

Make up your mind, either the family is part of the problem or they
were innocent


It's not my mind that is made or unmade. This was Bush's decision. I think
you'd need to ask him.

I do not have a problem with him helping the Bin Laden family to get
home. I had a problem with him stopping the other 50 million families
from getting home.
I think the whole post 9-11 policy is over-reaction.

Oh... like the shoe-bomber-take-my-shoes-off bs. I hate that. Who wants to
put your feet on God-knows what. Blech. I agree. We really over-reacted, and
we gave up too much. In that sense, he accomplished quite a bit.


In a more enlightened time we would have just had a foreign national,
working for the CIA, put a bullet in his ear.

Actually bin laden did get CIA (or other? US help) when fighting the
Soviets.

Exactly. They knew how to get at him.

Ok... but, they didn't. Your solution is....


Ignore the ******* until he gets comfortable and sticks his head up,
then shoot him. I guess you have never been squirrel hunting.

Never... ewww... how could you kill a furry little guy?? I have no doubt
that there is a plan for that if we can't get good ground intelligence to
drop a 500 lbs bomb on his head.


How many lives would that have saved? (Iraqi, Afghani and American)
200,000?

Total agreement there... but we really need to set a good example even
if
it's not expedient.


That was the point of using a foreign national and having plausible
deniability. I am old enough to remember when we were very good at
that and the world was actually a lot more peaceful place.


Fidel's cigars?

If Eisenhower was still president in 1961, Fidel would be a footnote
in the history books. No missile crisis, no embargo, no Angola war and
no Granada war.
That guy knew how to get things done covertly and efficiently.

If we hadn't had the Granada "war", we wouldn't have had that movie with
Clint Eastwood, old but cool hunk of hunks.