Tigermike 3,053 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 "Once he makes up his mind, he's full of indecision." http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthom...t20030922.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Maybe if the Bush administration had been honest about Iraq, Clark wouldn't appear "indecisive." Let's see...I suspect that my wife is having an affair so I hire a private investigator. He tells me my suspicions are correct. Over her protests, I file for divorce. It's later shown that the PI was wrong. He followed the wrong person and my wife was, indeed, NOT having an affair. Do I: (a) Continue with the divorce so as not to appear "indecisive" or (b ) Stop divorce proceedings so as not to appear "stupid?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,053 Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 Maybe if the Bush administration had been honest about Iraq, Clark wouldn't appear "indecisive." Now that is about as "Democratic" as it gets! Let's see if I get this, Clark changes his views more often than Madonna changes lovers & it is all because of Bush. No pun intended, having Bush & Madonna in the same sentence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 The question I would ask of you is, "Why is it right to start a war based on, at the very best, BAD INFORMATION?" I'm not talking about information that, months later, proved to be bad, but information that was known AT THE TIME of the decision to be bad? Look, if this were Clinton, Gore, McCain, Dean or anyone else, I'd hold the same position that I do now. In all honesty, though, it probably would've taken me a little longer to get here, but I'd be here, nonetheless. My objection is not because I started out being anti-Bush, I voted for him for crying out loud. But, it's because he flat out lied about this and almost everything else he's done. His policies have been terrible for the vast majority of Americans, our environment, and many, if not most, of our neighbors in the world. THAT is why I'm ardently anti-Bush and pro-Anyone else, because, in my opinion, Anyone else can't do any worse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarolinaTiger 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 hey TA. exactly what has bush lied about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,053 Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 hey TA.exactly what has bush lied about? Aks him about the Patriot Act, the Dems & their boys the ACLU have been screaming about how it has been misused, but there are NO instances of misuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AirForceforAU 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 Gen. Wes Clark is a good guy with a plan, ever read a biography of him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 hey TA.exactly what has bush lied about? I have posted on this topic numerous times. I am not going to re-post it again. Look under my profile and click the link that reads 'Show All Posts.' If that doesn't do it for you, then type "Bush AND Lies" into your search engine. The next trick is to then go to the search results. Aks him about the Patriot Act, the Dems & their boys the ACLU have been screaming about how it has been misused, but there are NO instances of misuse. Mike, I'm not trying to be rude, but, you are in terrible denial about George W. Bush. If we were discussing football and you were a Bama fan, this is about the time I'd expect to hear you say, "Oh, yeah? Well, how many NC's does Auburn have?" LINK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,053 Posted October 29, 2003 Author Share Posted October 29, 2003 "It was found to be unsubstantiated. The other claimed an agent made false charges; that is still being probed. " :roll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 29, 2003 Share Posted October 29, 2003 "It was found to be unsubstantiated. The other claimed an agent made false charges; that is still being probed. " :roll: That was referring to just two cases that involved the FBI of the hundreds filed. But, when you have your mind made up, it doesn't take much to reinforce what you already want to believe. From the DOJ's report: Among the report's findings: The FBI in New York City made little attempt to distinguish between aliens who were subjects of the FBI terrorism investigation (called "PENTTBOM") and those encountered coincidentally to a PENTTBOM lead. The OIG report concluded that, even in the chaotic aftermath of the September 11 attacks, the FBI should have expended more effort attempting to distinguish between aliens who it actually suspected of having a connection to terrorism from those aliens who, while possibly guilty of violating federal immigration law, had no connection to terrorism but simply were encountered in connection with a PENTTBOM lead. The INS did not consistently serve the September 11 detainees with notice of the charges under which they were being held within the INS's stated goal of 72 hours. The review found that some detainees did not receive these charging documents for weeks or more than a month after being arrested. This delay affected the detainees' ability to understand why they were being held, obtain legal counsel, and request a bond hearing. The Department instituted a policy that all aliens in whom the FBI had an interest in connection with the PENTTBOM investigation required clearance by the FBI of any connection to terrorism before they could be removed or released. The policy was based on the belief - which turned out to be erroneous - that the FBI's clearance process would proceed quickly. The OIG review found that instead of taking a few days as anticipated, the FBI clearance process took an average of 80 days, primarily because it was understaffed and not given sufficient priority by the FBI. In the first 11 months after the terrorist attacks, 84 September 11 detainees were housed at the MDC in Brooklyn under highly restrictive conditions. These conditions included "lock down" for at least 23 hours per day; escort procedures that included a "4-man hold" with handcuffs, leg irons, and heavy chains when the detainees were moved outside their cells; and a limit of one legal telephone call per week and one social call per month. BOP officials imposed a communications blackout for September 11 detainees immediately after the terrorist attacks that lasted several weeks. After the blackout period ended, the MDC's designation of the September 11 detainees as "Witness Security" inmates frustrated efforts by detainees' attorneys, families, and even law enforcement officials to determine where the detainees were being held. We found that MDC staff frequently - and mistakenly - told people who inquired about a specific September 11 detainee that the detainee was not held at the facility when, in fact, the opposite was true. With regard to allegations of abuse at the MDC, the evidence indicated a pattern of physical and verbal abuse by some correctional officers against some September 11 detainees, particularly during the first months after the attacks and during intake and movement of prisoners. Although the allegations of abuse have been declined for criminal prosecution, the OIG is continuing to investigate these matters administratively. By contrast, the OIG review found that the detainees confined at Passaic had much different, and significantly less harsh, experiences than the MDC detainees. According to INS data, Passaic housed 400 September 11 detainees from the date of the terrorist attacks through May 30, 2002, the largest number of September 11 detainees held at any single U.S. detention facility. Passaic detainees housed in the general population were treated like "regular" INS detainees who also were held at the facility. Although we received some allegations of physical and verbal abuse, we did not find the evidence indicated a pattern of abuse at Passaic. The OIG report offered 21 recommendations dealing with issues such as developing uniform arrest and detainee classification policies, improving information-sharing among federal agencies on detainee issues, improving the FBI clearance process, clarifying procedures for processing detainee cases, revising BOP procedures for confining aliens arrested on immigration charges who are suspected of having ties to terrorism, and improving oversight of detainees housed in contract facilities. The OIG has asked the Department and its components to formally respond to these 21 recommendations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,053 Posted October 30, 2003 Author Share Posted October 30, 2003 But, when you have your mind made up, it doesn't take much to reinforce what you already want to believe. Sounds like you are talking about yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 But, when you have your mind made up, it doesn't take much to reinforce what you already want to believe. Sounds like you are talking about yourself. Mike, I understand that Bear Bryant has more wins than Tommy Tuberville, but what does that have to do with Bama's current woes??? You're drinking the same Kool-Aid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexbo 104 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Let's see...I suspect that my wife is having an affair so I hire a private investigator... You are comparing the regime of Saddam Hussein with a marriage maybe gone bad???????????????????????????????????????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Let's see...I suspect that my wife is having an affair so I hire a private investigator... You are comparing the regime of Saddam Hussein with a marriage maybe gone bad???????????????????????????????????????????? Is that what you REALLY think the analogy was for??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexbo 104 Posted October 30, 2003 Share Posted October 30, 2003 Is that what you REALLY think the analogy was for??? Oh you were talking about Clark and his "marriage" with Bush, I guess. My bad, I guess when I see anything related to Clark I skip over it, he is a non issue and has zero credibility as a national political figure as far as I am concerned... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.