posted on August 10, 2007 04:02:05 PM
Thanks for the advice, Kiara. I actually spoke to someone at Vendio when I decided to chang the ID and they had me go through all kinds of contorsions to do so. I am not the only one using this computer, so will have to be diligent about logging on.
posted on August 10, 2007 05:07:28 PM
""""but there are always those troublemakers that have to have their nose in the personal doings of others and bring it to the forefront, perhaps hoping that lurkers or sockpuppets will take note - especially when they are unable to deal with an opposing opinion."""
All to true...but they end up with more trouble than they planned on
Here's yet ANOTHER false statement by the Lyinglinduh referring to me:
""she uses her userid all these years and then whines when someone uses a 'nickname' for her CURRENT userid. LOL"
NOW here's where she shows NO PROOF of that statement whatsoever...another lie by the Queen of Liars, linDUH
posted on August 10, 2007 05:14:34 PM
linduh, ""Linda_K
posted on August 10, 2007 11:03:20 AM new
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It appears, CC, that YOU are one where another 9-11 style attack WILL be necessary BEFORE you wake up and 'get it'.""
Another pro-terrorist Anti-American post.
It's sickening!
""What kind of a sick bastard would write such a thing?""
posted on August 11, 2007 06:04:48 AMThose of you who are CONFUSED about who the enemy is....and who's planning on doing what to our nation.
I am not confused about who the enemy is. The "enemy" is an organized group of thugs that is able to coordinate their efforts to bring about destruction. It is not a single group of people in Iraq, Iran or the Middle East. You will never be able to fully eliminate this enemy through military means despite what you believe. The war on terror or whatever Bush wants to call it at any given time will be on an ongoing battle against good and evil. The best way to fight this War on Terror is by first protecting the homeland - making sure we have sealed boarders, making sure we don't have terrorists cells in the US, making sure we document foreigners that come in to this country and leave when they are suppose to.
You don't go attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11.
Furthermore unlike you, I do not get all bent out of shape and go run and hide underneath my bed everytime Osama Bin Ladden appears on TV with his "I am going to attack America" film. You listen to his every word, like it is going to happen tomorrow. You are the reason why Osama keeps making the films. He wants to instill fear in people and based on your posts he is doing exactly that.
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on August 11, 2007 06:06:14 AMUp to your old flattery tricks again, eh LD??
Aw come profe, we all need to make Linda feel like she is important around here. We can't let her genius go unnoticed
Absolute faith has been shown, consistently, to breed intolerance. And intolerance, history teaches us, again and again, begets violence.
---------------------------------- The duty of a patriot in this time and place is to ask questions, to demand answers, to understand where our nation is headed and why. If the answers you get do not suit you, or if they frighten you, or if they anger you, it is your duty as a patriot to dissent. Freedom does not begin with blind acceptance and with a flag. Freedom begins when you say 'No.'
posted on August 11, 2007 06:45:46 AM
"You don't go attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11."
Did you tell that to clinton when he BOMBED Iraq for the same reason? I bet not.
Somehow I see you FULLY supporting that action...and believing HIS statement that Iraq had a nuclear weapon program.
"THUGS"??? Oh my gawd. Your ignorance know no bounds. There are islamic NATIONS behind the terrorists in Iraq. WAKE UP YOU FOOL.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on August 11, 2007 06:50:51 AM
Wait, oh wait a minute Oh Genius-lying-linduh-who-can't-answer-questions !
Are you saying CLINTON had Iraq bombed because of 9/11 ????
Sure looks like it! What a dork! You are SO confused but that damn Alzheimer's will do that to ya !
"Linda_K
posted on August 11, 2007 06:45:46 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You don't go attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11."
Did you tell that to clinton when he BOMBED Iraq for the same reason? I bet not.""
posted on August 11, 2007 06:56:39 AM
Linda_K
posted on August 11, 2007 06:30:18 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROFLMHO......there are NO liberal posters here who would EVER be considered anywhere NEAR genius level.
Try not to delude yourselves.
And most don't even have any common sense either. ""
Common sense? Wanna talk common sense?
How much "common sense" is there in loving and enjoying all the billions in tax money being spent in Iraq to maim and slaughter Americans, enjoying the tax free status of ultra wealthy Americans and corporations, YET whining and moaning about relatively small amounts of money being spent on needy AMERICANS IN America.
Delusional people are those who say that now "It's Clinton's Fault" we're in the chaos of Iraq.
And the closer we get to the elections in '08 - the more some dems/liberals don't want to be SEEN as cowards by the voters, afraid to actually DO anything to combat the terrorists. They'll stop supporting the SURRENDER, radical liberals. And they'll support more time being given to the mission. And they'll continuing funding the wars as they already have been doing.
Their numbers WILL continue to grow as more WAKE up to the reality of changes on the ground. It's begun already....and we don't even have our Sept. report.
Liberals KNOW they won't get elected IF they don't at least pretend to support our troops and their mission.
Even old obama was trying to convince voters HE would be willing to BOMB Pakistan. Not a normal liberal dove position. He's trying to show he's willing to take on the terrorists - even WITHOUT our allies approval.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
Ann Coulter
[ edited by Linda_K on Aug 11, 2007 07:37 AM ]
posted on August 12, 2007 06:18:01 AM
Oh, no!, I see my posts may have driven linduh to her other pole (as in bi-polar )!
She accuses others of being confused but NOW she blames Bill Clinton for starting the Iraq carnage/debacle.. AKA "war".
Linda_K
posted on August 11, 2007 06:45:46 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"You don't go attacking a country that had nothing to do with 9/11."
Did you tell that to clinton when he BOMBED Iraq for the same reason? I bet not."""
And now, humiliated once again....she goes into hiding.....so sad....
Oh, and if she thinks others are confused...WHO wrote the title to this thread ???
LOLOLOL!!!!
[ edited by mingotree on Aug 12, 2007 06:19 AM ]
posted on August 12, 2007 09:23:12 AM
Boredom is the result of an idle mind and an idle mind is the Devil's workshop, don't they say?
And besides they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not.
posted on August 12, 2007 10:23:57 AM
"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man, which debt he proposes to pay with your money."
-G.Gordon Liddy
Boy is THAT the truth. Just read what any liberal/dem candidate is saying in their campaign speeches lately. They're talking about RAISING our taxes for some NEW socialist program they've come up with. Gotta love the 'make you promises' and then make you pay for them libs.
Could they ALL just stop spending for a while? lol NOT raise our taxes....and let us continue to reduce the deficit as we've been doing?
BEFORE they start some new socialist programs....we need to deal with providing the funds to support the ones we already have....ie: SS/Medicare/Medicaid/etc.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nope, probably not....they're the TAX AND SPEND party.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on August 12, 2007 02:33:06 PM
""Could they ALL just stop spending for a while? lol NOT raise our taxes....and let us continue to reduce the deficit as we've been doing?""
I F we've been reducing the deficit then why would taxes have to be reduced ? Only traitorous anti-Americans would be against paying taxes.
"""BEFORE they start some new socialist programs....we need to deal with providing the funds to support the ones we already have....ie: SS/Medicare/Medicaid/etc.""
...and the war in Iraq, corporations who pay no taxes, tax cuts for the ultra-wealthy
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on August 12, 2007 04:42:47 PM
I contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle.
-Winston Churchill
posted on August 12, 2007 05:09:52 PM
"Do you really think Bill Clinton started the Iraq war? LOL"
Glad that you asked, he sure failed to prevent it.
From an article from Tony Phyrillas, columnist, in a site nominated for best political blog:
The deaths of 3,000 Americans five years ago was the culmination of an eight-year campaign of terror waged against the U.S. by Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida network. Attack after attack went unanswered by Bill Clinton. His weakness emboldened our enemies. The assaults escalated to the horrific events of 9/11.
The attacks on U.S. soil by Muslim fanatics came nine months into the presidency of George W. Bush, but they were planned, rehearsed and financed while Bill Clinton was president.
The attacks of 9/11 were successful because our enemies saw weakness in Bill Clinton (and by extension, the American people). They were successful because Clinton and his top advisers were negligent. Our enemies succeeded because Bill Clinton defanged the CIA and FBI during his tenure in the White House. They succeeded because the U.S. military rusted under another oblivious Democrat who put all his faith in the hands of the United Nations.
The path to 9/11 was clearly delineated for anyone willing to pay attention. It was Bill Clinton's job to connect the dots and respond accordingly to protect American lives. Clinton failed us.
On Feb. 26, 1993, during the second month of Clinton's presidency, a powerful bomb exploded in a parking garage under the World Trade Center, killing six people and injuring 1,040 others. Clinton considered the plot to bring down one of the nation's most recognizable buildings as a "law enforcement" matter instead of the opening salvo of a global war to wipe out the United States and Western civilization.
It would be the first of many mistakes Clinton and the left-wing cabal he installed in the State and Defense departments would make.
On Oct. 3, 1993, 19 Americans died and 84 were wounded in an ill-planned mission to Somalia to capture warlord Mohammed Aidid. The bodies of American servicemen were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu by Aidid's militia. The failed mission was the basis of the best-selling book "Black Hawk Down," later made into a movie.
Instead of sending adequate troops to hunt down Aidid after the murder of U.S. servicemen, Clinton decided to cut and run, the same policy that leading Democrats are advocating today. Clinton's decision to abandon Somalia sent a message to terrorists all over the world that the United States doesn't have the stomach to fight. Somalia remains a terrorist haven to this day.
On Nov. 13, 1995, five Americans were killed when a bomb exploded at a U.S.-operated Saudi National Guard training center in Riyadh. Osama bin Laden denied involvement, but praised the attack.
In February 1996, the government of Sudan offered to turn over Osama bin Laden and his top al-Qaida lieutenants to the United States. Bill Clinton passed up a chance to bring the terrorist mastermind to justice, allowing bin Laden and his henchmen to escape to Afghanistan, where they would continue to plan for 9/11.
In June 1996, 19 Air Force personnel were killed and 300 Americans and others were wounded when terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the Khobar Towers, a military housing complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia.
The Taliban came to power during the Clinton administration, capturing Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, in September 1996. The Taliban would offer sanctuary to bin Laden and his terrorist network.
Powerful bombs destroyed the U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya on Aug. 7, 1998, killing 257 people, including 12 Americans, and injuring 4,500 others. Clinton knew bin Laden was behind the bombings. Clinton knew bin Laden vowed to bring the war home to America. Clinton's response? He ordered cruise missile strikes against empty terrorist training camps in Afghanistan and blew up an aspirin factory in Sudan. Osama bin Laden would live to fight another day.
On Oct. 12, 2000, the USS Cole was attacked in the port of Aden in Yemen. Terrorists drove a speedboat full of explosives into the side of the destroyer, killing 17 sailors and wounding 39 more. No response from Clinton.
History has been far too kind to Bill Clinton. It's understandable that Bill Clinton would gloss over his sorry record of fighting terrorism. This is the same man who lied to the American people about his Oval Office dalliance with a female intern. It's the liberal media that deserves much of the blame for covering up the failure of the Clinton administration to protect this nation.
The warning signs were there. Clinton chose to ignore them. Because of Clinton's negligence, thousands of Americans died."
posted on August 12, 2007 07:12:59 PM
Broad Effort Launched After '98 Attacks
By Barton Gellman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 19, 2001; Page A01
Beginning on Aug. 7, 1998, the day that al Qaeda destroyed the U.S. embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, Clinton directed a campaign of increasing scope and lethality against bin Laden's network that carried through his final days in office.
• In addition to a secret "finding" to authorize covert action, which has been reported before, Clinton signed three highly classified Memoranda of Notification expanding the available tools. In succession, the president authorized killing instead of capturing bin Laden, then added several of al Qaeda's senior lieutenants, and finally approved the shooting down of private civilian aircraft on which they flew.
• The Clinton administration ordered the Navy to maintain two Los Angeles-class attack submarines on permanent station in the nearest available waters, enabling the U.S. military to place Tomahawk cruise missiles on any target in Afghanistan within about six hours of receiving the order.
• Three times after Aug. 20, 1998, when Clinton ordered the only missile strike of his presidency against bin Laden's organization, the CIA came close enough to pinpointing bin Laden that Clinton authorized final preparations to launch. In each case, doubts about the intelligence aborted the mission.
• The CIA's directorate of operations recruited, trained, paid or equipped surrogate forces in Pakistan, Uzbekistan and among tribal militias inside Afghanistan, with the common purpose of capturing or killing bin Laden. The Pakistani channel, disclosed previously in The Washington Post, and its Uzbek counterpart, which has not been reported before, never bore fruit. Inside Afghanistan, tribal allies twice reported to their CIA handlers that they fought skirmishes with bin Laden's forces, but they inflicted no verified damage.
• Operatives of the CIA's Special Activities Division made at least one clandestine entry into Afghanistan in 1999. They prepared a desert airstrip to extract bin Laden, if captured, or to evacuate U.S. tribal allies, if cornered. The Special Collection Service, a joint project of the CIA and the National Security Agency, also slipped into Afghanistan to place listening devices within range of al Qaeda's tactical radios.
The lines Clinton opted not to cross continued to define U.S. policy in his successor's first eight months. Clinton stopped short of using more decisive military instruments, including U.S. ground forces, and declined to expand the reach of the war to the Taliban regime that hosted bin Laden and his fighters after 1996.
Not until the catastrophe of Sept. 11 -- when terrorists used hijacked airliners to destroy the World Trade Center and damage the Pentagon -- did President Bush obliterate those boundaries…
posted on August 12, 2007 07:13:47 PM
By Joe Conason
Jan. 15, 2002 | When terrorists first tried to take down the World Trade Center with a truck bomb in February 1993, there was no organized outcry of recrimination against George Herbert Walker Bush, who had left the Oval Office a scant six weeks earlier. Nobody sought political advantage by blaming Bush for the intelligence failures that had allowed the terrorist perpetrators to conspire undetected for more than three years…
