On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:51:50 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Mr. Clinton took the politically safe path by treating the February 1993
bombing of the World Trade Center as a criminal matter rather than the
terrorist attack that it really was. As a result, he shut the CIA out of
the investigation. Administration blundering enabled Khalid Shaikh
Mohammed, a top bin Laden aide who coordinated the September 11 attacks,
to escape capture in Qatar.

Your hindsight is quite remarkable, but I believe it's been four years
since 9/11 and bin Laden is still free. Perhaps, if this CIC was
distracted by Iraq, the most powerful country on earth would have captured
the SOB.

As for the CIA, it seems you have more faith in it than the present
administration. They are eviscerating it as we speak.

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 11:02:37 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:51:50 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Mr. Clinton took the politically safe path by treating the February 1993
bombing of the World Trade Center as a criminal matter rather than the
terrorist attack that it really was. As a result, he shut the CIA out of
the investigation. Administration blundering enabled Khalid Shaikh
Mohammed, a top bin Laden aide who coordinated the September 11 attacks,
to escape capture in Qatar.

Your hindsight is quite remarkable, but I believe it's been four years
since 9/11 and bin Laden is still free. Perhaps, if this CIC was
distracted by Iraq, the most powerful country on earth would have captured
the SOB.

As for the CIA, it seems you have more faith in it than the present
administration. They are eviscerating it as we speak.

Should we just invade Pakistan and get him? Is that what you folks are espousing
now? Then, when he goes to Syria, you'd say, "See, we told you he wasn't there!"

It's getting to be quite laughable!

John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:24:03 -0500, John H wrote:

Should we just invade Pakistan and get him? Is that what you folks are
espousing now? Then, when he goes to Syria, you'd say, "See, we told you
he wasn't there!"

It's getting to be quite laughable!

"You folks?" And just what "folks" would that be? Wattage dimming a
little in your area?

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 15:51:41 -0500, thunder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 13:24:03 -0500, John H wrote:

Should we just invade Pakistan and get him? Is that what you folks are
espousing now? Then, when he goes to Syria, you'd say, "See, we told you
he wasn't there!"

It's getting to be quite laughable!

"You folks?" And just what "folks" would that be? Wattage dimming a
little in your area?

The question?

John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Mar 2005 14:51:50 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Mr. Clinton took the politically safe path by treating the February
1993
bombing of the World Trade Center as a criminal matter rather than the
terrorist attack that it really was. As a result, he shut the CIA out of
the investigation. Administration blundering enabled Khalid Shaikh
Mohammed, a top bin Laden aide who coordinated the September 11 attacks,
to escape capture in Qatar.

Your hindsight is quite remarkable, but I believe it's been four years
since 9/11 and bin Laden is still free. Perhaps, if this CIC was
distracted by Iraq, the most powerful country on earth would have captured
the SOB.

As for the CIA, it seems you have more faith in it than the present
administration. They are eviscerating it as we speak.

Goss is doing a bang-up job of ridding the CIA of dead wood.