"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Bush should resign.
LOL. Yeah, whatever.

Yeah, we'll be in terrific shape when Bush's term ends. We should wait
until then for the Bush cancer to remove itself from our body politic.

Harry,

There's a lot of interesting stuff that's about to be released in the
next several weeks that will turn the entire 9/11 Commission Report
completely on its ear.

This "Able Danger" story is growing legs, and even the news media is
starting to ask questions again as to why so many important items were
left out the 9/11 report.

When you tie in the "Able Danger" story with the Sandy Berger sentencing,
and the just-released-to-Congress report from Goss on CIA intel failures,
the airwaves will be flooded with news about an enormous coverup headed
by the likes of Berger, ben Veniste, and Jamie Gorelick.

Nobody will care about Chavez, or Plamegate, or Bush's poll numbers,
or...





Yout boy Bush is an utter failure as a president. Trying to shift the
blame to the Clinton Administration is beyond old.

Shifting the blame isn't the intent of rehashing the issue.

"It's not the crime. It's the coverup"

I'm willing to let the cards fall as they may. If Bush administration
officials were involved in covering up intelligence failures, then they
should burn. If Clinton officials and Dems like ben Veniste and Gorelick
were involved, then they should burn.

Do you realize that German intelligence arrested two Iraqis in Germany about
6 months years prior to 9/11?

Iraqi Spies Reportedly Arrested in Germany 16 March 2001
Al-Watan al-Arabi (Paris) reports that two Iraqis were arrested in Germany,
charged with spying for Baghdad. The arrests came in the wake of reports
that Iraq was reorganizing the external branches of its intelligence service
and that it had drawn up a plan to strike at US interests around the world
through a network of alliances with extremist fundamentalist parties.

The most serious report contained information that Iraq and Osama bin Ladin
were working together. German authorities were surprised by the arrest of
the two Iraqi agents and the discovery of Iraqi intelligence activities in
several German cities. German authorities, acting on CIA recommendations,
had been focused on monitoring the activities of Islamic groups linked to
bin Ladin. They discovered the two Iraqi agents by chance and uncovered what
they considered to be serious indications of cooperation between Iraq and
bin Ladin. The matter was considered so important that a special team of CIA
and FBI agents was sent to Germany to interrogate the two Iraqi spies.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you catch that part?

"(Iraq) had drawn up a plan to strike at US interests around the world
through a network of alliances with extremist fundamentalist parties."

If intel was suppressed by anyone within the CIA or FBI in order to conceal
the fact that Iraq played a role in 9/11, don't you believe that it's
important to find out who quashed the info...and why?

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
I can hardly imagine the disasters the next POTUS will face in cleaning
up after Bush.

Don't worry. I'm sure his brother is up to the task.



This country is sick of the Bush family. Jebbie ain't going anywhere.


1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

About 12 yrs ago, I spent some time hitchhiking and taking busses all
over Venezuela so I got a good look at the country and the people. Gas
was very cheap then simply because they have lots of oil and they
refine it themselves. Chavez could easily sell cheap gas to the US
poor just as Mini-marts sell milk as a loss leader.
This does not make Chavez a good guy. Chavez has indeed done some good
things for the poor of his country and it would be difficult to do
worse than his predecessors. Taking a single look at the slums above
Caracas made me realize something was radically wrong with such a
situation in such a rich country. Once again, doing some good for the
poor does not make Chavez a good guy.
Human Rights Watch has condemned Chavez many times for his abuse of
power to suppress freedom of speech. Lefties always seem to do this,
they start out well but then cannot handle criticism. Castro looked
good at first but then came the arrests and firing squads. I wonder
when Chavez will start the firing squads. Maybe Venezuela will be
lucky and he wont be a Castro style megalomaniac. Chavez has the
opportunity to do some real good if he suppresses his dumb-ass rhetoric
and resists his paranoid tendencies.
Health care in Cuba is no good deal. Get a look at the care facilities
there and you'd think yourself lucky to be in the US. People dont tie
inner tubes together and cross stormy waters to get out of a nice place
in spite of what Harry Krause thinks.

About 12 yrs ago, I spent some time hitchhiking and taking busses all
over Venezuela so I got a good look at the country and the people. Gas
was very cheap then simply because they have lots of oil and they
refine it themselves. Chavez could easily sell cheap gas to the US
poor just as Mini-marts sell milk as a loss leader.
This does not make Chavez a good guy. Chavez has indeed done some good
things for the poor of his country and it would be difficult to do
worse than his predecessors. Taking a single look at the slums above
Caracas made me realize something was radically wrong with such a
situation in such a rich country. Once again, doing some good for the
poor does not make Chavez a good guy.
Human Rights Watch has condemned Chavez many times for his abuse of
power to suppress freedom of speech. Lefties always seem to do this,
they start out well but then cannot handle criticism. Castro looked
good at first but then came the arrests and firing squads. I wonder
when Chavez will start the firing squads. Maybe Venezuela will be
lucky and he wont be a Castro style megalomaniac. Chavez has the
opportunity to do some real good if he suppresses his dumb-ass rhetoric
and resists his paranoid tendencies.
Health care in Cuba is no good deal. Get a look at the care facilities
there and you'd think yourself lucky to be in the US. People dont tie
inner tubes together and cross stormy waters to get out of a nice place
in spite of what Harry Krause thinks.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Bush should resign.
LOL. Yeah, whatever.
Yeah, we'll be in terrific shape when Bush's term ends. We should wait
until then for the Bush cancer to remove itself from our body politic.
Harry,

There's a lot of interesting stuff that's about to be released in the
next several weeks that will turn the entire 9/11 Commission Report
completely on its ear.

This "Able Danger" story is growing legs, and even the news media is
starting to ask questions again as to why so many important items were
left out the 9/11 report.

When you tie in the "Able Danger" story with the Sandy Berger
sentencing, and the just-released-to-Congress report from Goss on CIA
intel failures, the airwaves will be flooded with news about an
enormous coverup headed by the likes of Berger, ben Veniste, and Jamie
Gorelick.

Nobody will care about Chavez, or Plamegate, or Bush's poll numbers,
or...




Yout boy Bush is an utter failure as a president. Trying to shift the
blame to the Clinton Administration is beyond old.

Shifting the blame isn't the intent of rehashing the issue.

"It's not the crime. It's the coverup"

I'm willing to let the cards fall as they may. If Bush administration
officials were involved in covering up intelligence failures, then they
should burn. If Clinton officials and Dems like ben Veniste and Gorelick
were involved, then they should burn.


The Bush Administration has been involved in one disaster after another,
and to date about all you have done is rationalize those failures and
attempt to pin them on the previous administration.

Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as if
terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

There were coverups after the '93 WTC bombing, the '95 OKC bombing, the '96
downing of TWA800, and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole.

FOI Act lawsuits surrounding those events are running into continuous
stone-walling from the FBI, DoD, NTSB, CIA, and State Departments.

Goss is purging the dead wood from the intel agencies, and the new folks
won't be so eager to cover the rear ends of their predecessors.

Lt. Shaffer is the first example of the new atmosphere emerging among the
intel community.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Bush should resign.
LOL. Yeah, whatever.
Yeah, we'll be in terrific shape when Bush's term ends. We should
wait until then for the Bush cancer to remove itself from our body
politic.
Harry,

There's a lot of interesting stuff that's about to be released in the
next several weeks that will turn the entire 9/11 Commission Report
completely on its ear.

This "Able Danger" story is growing legs, and even the news media is
starting to ask questions again as to why so many important items
were left out the 9/11 report.

When you tie in the "Able Danger" story with the Sandy Berger
sentencing, and the just-released-to-Congress report from Goss on CIA
intel failures, the airwaves will be flooded with news about an
enormous coverup headed by the likes of Berger, ben Veniste, and
Jamie Gorelick.

Nobody will care about Chavez, or Plamegate, or Bush's poll numbers,
or...



Yout boy Bush is an utter failure as a president. Trying to shift the
blame to the Clinton Administration is beyond old.
Shifting the blame isn't the intent of rehashing the issue.

"It's not the crime. It's the coverup"

I'm willing to let the cards fall as they may. If Bush administration
officials were involved in covering up intelligence failures, then they
should burn. If Clinton officials and Dems like ben Veniste and
Gorelick were involved, then they should burn.

The Bush Administration has been involved in one disaster after another,
and to date about all you have done is rationalize those failures and
attempt to pin them on the previous administration.

Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as if
terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

There were coverups after the '93 WTC bombing, the '95 OKC bombing, the
'96 downing of TWA800, and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole.

FOI Act lawsuits surrounding those events are running into continuous
stone-walling from the FBI, DoD, NTSB, CIA, and State Departments.

Goss is purging the dead wood from the intel agencies, and the new folks
won't be so eager to cover the rear ends of their predecessors.

Lt. Shaffer is the first example of the new atmosphere emerging among the
intel community.





You're just proving my point. Again.

The point is that as the *accurate* and *truthful* intel comes forward, the
argument for invading Iraq will just be made stronger.

But most importantly we'll have learned that trying to fight terrorism as a
law enforcement issue is an ill-conceived idea and should never be tried
again by future Presidential administrations.

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as if
terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

If this is the case, why has it taken so long to figure it out, and release
the information? It seems suspiciously "timely".

FOI Act lawsuits surrounding those events are running into continuous
stone-walling from the FBI, DoD, NTSB, CIA, and State Departments.

You mean a potential defendant's agents and organizations moving to block a
lawsuit that could be damaging to their parent agency? Wow. That's just
unheard of.

Goss is purging the dead wood from the intel agencies, and the new folks
won't be so eager to cover the rear ends of their predecessors.

I have never seen anyone with the loyalty to cover the incompetent or
directly criminal intentions of previous employees, especially when there's
no need. It's not in their best interest, should that person's job become
up for grabs.

I find it unlikely that Bush was not knowledgeable of any or all of these
events, and as you've stated in effect, coverups can be as important as the
crimes themselves.

So why shouldn't Bush resign?

He's either incompetent, with an incompetent or misleading staff, and should
be removed, or he's a deliberately criminal man, who has assisted the
coverup already in effect.

Either way, his approval rating is low, his ethics are sad and fully
questionable, and he has lost any touch he may have ever had with the common
citizen. He is not for the people, of the people, and by the people.

Personally, I think any President, or candidate, that even mentions
something to the effect of "vote for me, or there will be an attack on the
country" (which he did during his last campaign for re-election) should be
tried, and executed for treason.

He's a liar, and a traitor.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message

Bush should resign.
LOL. Yeah, whatever.
Yeah, we'll be in terrific shape when Bush's term ends. We should
wait until then for the Bush cancer to remove itself from our body
politic.
Harry,

There's a lot of interesting stuff that's about to be released in
the next several weeks that will turn the entire 9/11 Commission
Report completely on its ear.

This "Able Danger" story is growing legs, and even the news media
is starting to ask questions again as to why so many important
items were left out the 9/11 report.

When you tie in the "Able Danger" story with the Sandy Berger
sentencing, and the just-released-to-Congress report from Goss on
CIA intel failures, the airwaves will be flooded with news about an
enormous coverup headed by the likes of Berger, ben Veniste, and
Jamie Gorelick.

Nobody will care about Chavez, or Plamegate, or Bush's poll
numbers, or...



Yout boy Bush is an utter failure as a president. Trying to shift
the blame to the Clinton Administration is beyond old.
Shifting the blame isn't the intent of rehashing the issue.

"It's not the crime. It's the coverup"

I'm willing to let the cards fall as they may. If Bush
administration officials were involved in covering up intelligence
failures, then they should burn. If Clinton officials and Dems like
ben Veniste and Gorelick were involved, then they should burn.
The Bush Administration has been involved in one disaster after
another, and to date about all you have done is rationalize those
failures and attempt to pin them on the previous administration.
Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as
if terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

There were coverups after the '93 WTC bombing, the '95 OKC bombing, the
'96 downing of TWA800, and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole.

FOI Act lawsuits surrounding those events are running into continuous
stone-walling from the FBI, DoD, NTSB, CIA, and State Departments.

Goss is purging the dead wood from the intel agencies, and the new
folks won't be so eager to cover the rear ends of their predecessors.

Lt. Shaffer is the first example of the new atmosphere emerging among
the intel community.




You're just proving my point. Again.

The point is that as the *accurate* and *truthful* intel comes forward,
the argument for invading Iraq will just be made stronger.



I don't know what drugs you offer in your office, but you are taking too
many of them.

WHERE are the WMDs?

Wait for the intel.

"Chris" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
nk.net...

Clinton officials spent 7 years in office trying to make it appear as if
terrorist attacks within our borders were not state-sponsored.

If this is the case, why has it taken so long to figure it out, and
release
the information?


Because Goss just took the reigns a couple of months ago.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 08:40:09 -0700, dbohara wrote:

Human Rights
Watch has condemned Chavez many times for his abuse of power to suppress
freedom of speech. Lefties always seem to do this, they start out well
but then cannot handle criticism.

Venezuela is not without problems, and Chavez is far from a sweetheart.
He was, after all, involved in a 1992 coup attempt, and jailed for it.
However, it is interesting that you focus on freedom of speech. Here is
what Human Rights Watch says about Venezuela's freedom of the press
(speech):

"Venezuela has a vigorous and uninhibited media. Indeed, as part of the
often heated and acrimonious debate between supporters of the government
and its opponents, members of the media have been able to express strong
views without restriction. Private television companies have often adopted
blatantly partisan positions, airing news and debate programs extremely
hostile to the Chávez government."

Clearly, the press remains free. Although, you are correct in that their
have been attempts to curb it's freedoms.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/venezu9843.htm

Tough bunch, that Human Rights Watch. You may find it interesting what
they say about this country.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/01/13/usdom9853.htm

It seems the right wing Bush administration doesn't fair very well, either.