It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Everyone knew 9/11 was pending

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 08:04 AM
link   
Meaning the World Intelligence community and the Bush Administration.

Odigo says workers were warned of attack

By Yuval Dror


Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.

Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company's management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in the FBI.

"I have no idea why the message was sent to these two workers, who don't know the sender. It may just have been someone who was joking and turned out they accidentally got it right. And I don't know if our information was useful in any of the arrests the FBI has made," said Macover. Odigo is a U.S.-based company whose headquarters are in New York, with offices in Herzliya.

As an instant messaging service, Odigo users are not limited to sending messages only to people on their "buddy" list, as is the case with ICQ, the other well-known Israeli instant messaging application.

Odigo usually zealously protects the privacy of its registered users, said Macover, but in this case the company took the initiative to provide the law enforcement services with the originating Internet Presence address of the message, so the FBI could track down the Internet Service Provider, and the actual sender of the original message.

Haaretz Daily

A review of the Bush team's deliberations and actions in the summer of 2001, based on interviews with current and former officials and an examination of the preliminary findings of the commission, shows that the White House's impulse to deal more forcefully with terrorist threats within the United States peaked July 5 and then leveled off until Sept. 11. [Note: Bush's *month-long* vacation in Crawford was in AUGUST.] The review shows that over that summer, with terror warnings mounting, the government's response was often scattered and inconsistent as the new team struggled to develop a comprehensive strategy for combating Al Qaeda and other terror organizations. The warnings during the summer were more dire and more specific than generally recognized. Descriptions of the threat were communicated repeatedly to the highest levels within the White House. In more than 40 briefings, Mr. Bush was told by George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, of threats involving Al Qaeda.


NY Times

I've never heard a single logical reason as to why a pResident, whose supporters (APOLOGISTS) swear that the administration was short changed on set up time because of the not-zealous-enough-litigation on the 2000 election theft, would take a month long off site vacation 7 months after he started!?!?!




posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 08:44 AM
link   
ive read similar reports about Odigo. I don't think it was limited to only two people, but I don't know that for sure. it's no coincidence that the company is israeli-based, likely to have mossad ties.

i miss reading ha'aretz. thanks for providing the link. it's probably the best israeli newspaper on the web and it's got an english version unlike the majority of israeli newspapers.

I also recall that vacation, as well. kinda odd, yes. and I will do something very rare for me, and that is to defend bush on this level. that vacation he took makes me think that
a) he was being set up for distraction and/or discussion of coming events
b) he knew what was was about to happen and that he wouldn't be able to take a break like that for a long time. even though he did in 2002, im sure it was nowhere near as relaxed as it was in 2001



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Nevermind. Not in the mood. Edited out.

[Edited on 4-5-2004 by Djarums]



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Haaretz is one of my favorite news sources as well. I have found them to be, considering the environment they operate in, the most fair minded news sources going!


Condi Rice's other wake-up call
Former Sen. Gary Hart says he, too, warned Rice about an imminent terror attack on two occasions before 9/11.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By David Talbot

April 2, 2004 | Richard Clarke was not the only national security expert who warned Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld and other Bush administration officials about terrorist threats before 9/11. Former Senator Gary Hart also directly told senior Bush officials loudly and clearly that, in his words, "The terrorists are coming, the terrorists are coming." Hart was co-chair (with former Sen. Warren Rudman) of the U.S. Commission on National Security, a bipartisan panel that conducted the most thorough investigation of U.S. security challenges since World War II. After completing the report, which warned that a devastating terrorist attack on America was imminent and called for the immediate creation of a Cabinet-level national security agency, and delivering it to President Bush on January 31, 2001, Hart and Rudman personally briefed Rice, Rumseld and Secretary of State Colin Powell. But, according to Hart, the Bush administration never followed up on the commission's urgent recommendations, even after he repeated them in a private White House meeting with Rice just days before 9/11.

Hart, who is now advising the Kerry campaign on national security issues, spoke with Salon this week about the Bush administration's failures to heed his warnings and why he feels the country is still at grave risk. Even at this late date, says Hart, Bush has failed to sufficiently coordinate federal, state, local and private sector security efforts, leaving open American ports as possible entry points for weapons of mass destruction and exposing such prime targets as petrochemical facilities located near major urban areas. And two and a half years after 9/11, Hart observes, no government official has been held responsible for the disastrous security failures of that day. The Bush White House, he charges, is locked in a strange and delicate dance with intelligence officials, maneuvering to place blame on the CIA but fearing if it does so too blatantly, the Bush team's own failings will be exposed.
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Salon Interview with Gary Hart

I knew that the bipartisan Hart/Rudman team's findings were presented to the Bush team; I didn't know until reading this that they briefed them directly. THAT makes it even more inexcusable.

EXCERPT

After your briefings, do you think the administration responded adequately to your warnings?

Well, let me just go through the history of things. Because we also sent copies of the report to every member of Congress. And we lobbied specific members of Congress, including Joe Lieberman, who took it very seriously. And in the spring of 2001, some members of Congress introduced legislation to create a homeland security agency. Hearings were scheduled. And our commission, which was scheduled to go out of operation on Feb. 15, 2001, was given a six-month extension so we could testify with some authority. Which we did in March and April.

And then as Congress started to move on this, and the heat was turned up, George Bush -- and this is often overlooked -- held a press conference or made a public statement on May 5, 2001, calling on Congress not to act and saying he was turning over the whole matter to Dick Cheney.
So this wasn't just neglect, it was an active position by the administration. He said, "I don't want Congress to do anything until the vice president advises me." We now know from Dick Clarke that Cheney never held a meeting on terrorism, there was never any kind of discussion on the department of homeland security that we had proposed. There was no vice presidential action on this matter.

In other words, a bipartisan commission of seven Democrats and seven Republicans who had spent two and a half years studying the problem, a group of Americans with a cumulative 300 years in national security affairs, recommended to the president of the United States on a reasonably urgent basis the creation of a Cabinet-level agency to protect our country -- and the president did nothing!

By the way, when our final report came out in 2001, it did not receive word one in the New York Times. Zero. The Washington Post put it on Page 3 or 4, below the fold.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Executive Summary of U.S. Commission on National Security Report

Excellent summary on what the Administration, as well as every member of Congress, was given. Congress did action the findings of this exhaustive research....but was halted by the Bush Administration as referenced above.

The Full Report: U.S. Commission on National Security



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Hell, i could have told you an attack was comming clear back in 96. Even the military knew, due to the rising luncacy in the middle east, the admins lack of concern for the terror threat (i.e. Clinton back then), and the subsequesnt attacks against US military, plus the threats and intelligence we recieved, we KNEW an attack, a BIG one, was comming for US soil, against American citizens.

The exact day, granted, i couldnt have told you, or the method, but I knew damn well, that the govornment was ignoring a very deadly threat that we knew ould plague us later.

I blame Clinton as much as i do Bush for what happened. Sudan offered up Bin laden to Clinton, and he REFUSED.

At the very least, Clinton should be tried and executed for grandscale criminal neglegent manslaughter.

Bush should be hung simply for being a willing party.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 01:48 PM
link   
I've constantly heard this NewsMax/Free Republic/Drudge/Limbaugh tall tale spun from all our resident Republicans since coming to this board, and I've refutiatied it every time with the truth. But now with you too?
It's rough.....you ruined my mental picture of kicking back with you -a fatty- and a Starbucks triple expresso talking "bout Da real"!!


CLINTON DID NOT REFUSE OSAMA!

Here is how the U.S. tried to capture bin Laden beginning in 1995:

1995: The U.S. determined bin Laden was a terrorist financier. He was living in Sudan, Africa's largest country. The Clinton administration tried persuading Sudanese officials to expel bin Laden, but then stopped those efforts after the officials decided bin Laden couldn't be brought to the United States without an indictment.

1996: Bin Laden left Sudan for Afghanistan.

Spring 1997: A U.S.-Saudi effort was launched to persuade Afghanistan's Taliban leaders to expel bin Laden. The Saudis tried using bribery and threats to get Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar to hand over bin Laden.

The United States also began trying to convince the Taliban to send bin Laden to a country where he could stand trial. U.S. efforts employed inducements, warnings and sanctions.

May 1998: U.S. policy-makers asked the military to plan options for striking bin Laden in Afghanistan.

August 1998: Following unsuccessful missile strikes against bin Laden and Al Qaeda fighters, U.S. officials decided future military action needed to be based on better intelligence.

September 1998: Omar reneged on the agreement with Saudi Arabia, struck during the summer, to hand over bin Laden. The U.S. continued until September 2001 to try diplomatic persuasion on the Taliban to hand over bin Laden.

Sept. 10, 2001: Bush administration officials agreed that the United States would try to overthrow Afghanistan's Taliban rulers if a final diplomatic push to expel bin Laden failed.

Summarized from a report by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States

www.freep.com...



Also,

Myth: The Sudanese offered to turn bin Laden over to the U.S., and Clinton refused
Saudis Balked at Accepting U.S. Plan

WASHINGTON The government of Sudan, using a back channel direct from its president to the Central Intelligence Agency in the United States, offered in the early spring of 1996 to arrest Osama bin Laden and place him in custody in Saudi Arabia, 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 hotel in Arlington, Virginia, 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, the Clinton administration finally gave up on the capture…



This is what Clinton's Administration did, starting in 1995:

I. Actions Already Announced by the President
(1) Pass the Omnibus Counter-Terrorism Act of 1995
This bill would provide clear Federal criminal jurisdiction for any international terrorist attack that might occur in the United States; provide Federal criminal jurisdiction over terrorists who use the United States as the place from which to plan terrorist attacks overseas; provide a workable mechanism, utilizing United States District Judges appointed by the Chief Justice, to deport expeditiously alien terrorists without risking the disclosure of national security information or techniques; provide a new mechanism for preventing fundraising in the United States that supports international terrorist activities overseas; and would implement an international treaty requiring the insertion of a chemical agent into plastic explosives when manufactured to make them detectable.
(2) Provide more tools to federal law enforcement agencies fighting terrorism

Amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to Ease access to financial and credit reports in anti-terrorism cases. This legislation provides for disclosures by consumer reporting agencies to the FBI for counterintelligence and counterterrorism purposes. The FBI has no mechanism for obtaining credit reports for lead purposes in counterterrorism cases. These reports are available to used car dealers and other merchants. The FBI currently has authority under the Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978 to obtain similar records pursuant to a "National Security Letter" signed by a high-ranking FBI official. the same procedures and safeguards would apply to credit records under this proposal.

Amend Federal law to adopt, in national security cases the standard currently used in obtaining a "pen register" in a routine criminal case. This proposal would extend the relaxed standard for obtaining "pen registers" and "trap and trace" device orders which already exists in routine criminal cases, to national security cases. A "pen register" is a device which records the number dialed on a telephone. A "trap and trace" devices is similar to "Caller ID," providing law enforcement with the telephone number from which a call originates. Neither "pen registers" nor "trap and trace" devices permit law enforcement to monitor actual conversations being conducted. the current, higher-than-regular standard impedes the ability of the FBI to obtain surveillance coverage of terrorists and spies.

Pass legislation to require hotel/Motel and common carriers to provide records necessary for fighting terrorism. This proposal would require hotel/motel and common carriers such as airlines and bus companies to provide records to the FBI pursuant to authorized national security requests just as they must do now for virtually all state and local law enforcement. The FBI must now rely on the voluntary assistance of motel, hotel, and other innkeepers or common carriers regarding records of terrorists who may have stayed at the establishment or used the common carrier. The FBI has found that, while some of these entities voluntarily provide such information, an increasing number refuse, absent a court order, a subpoena, or other legal protection. In a counterterrorism case being conducted pursuant to the Attorney General's guidelines for FBI Foreign Intelligence Collection and Foreign Counterintelligence Investigations, there is no legal mechanism, e.g. subpoena, available to obtain these records.

Fully Fund the FBI's "digital telephony" initiative to assure court-authorized law enforcement access for electronic surveillance to digitized communications. This proposal would appropriate funds to implement recent amendments to statutes governing secure telephone transmission (digital telephony). These amendments require telephone carriers to install and maintain sophisticated equipment which would permit law enforcement to continue to conduct legal electronic surveillance.

Create and allocate funds for a special FBI counterterrorist and counterintelligence fund. This proposal will fund costs associated cases which arise in connection with terrorism crises, including logistics and other support.

Create an interagency Domestic Counterterrorism Center headed by the FBI. This proposal will establish a partnership effort between the Justice Department, including the FBI, and other federal and state law enforcement authorities to coordinate efforts within the United States.
(3) Conduct terrorism threat assessment of every federal facility in the country within the next 60 days. The President has directed the Attorney General to conduct this assessment and report her recommendations in 60 days. The assessment has already begun.

(4) Direct GSA to replace the federal building in Oklahoma City.

(5) Direct the FBI Director, the Attorney General, and the National Security Adviser to prepare a Presidential Decision Directive authorizing any and all further steps necessary to combat foreign and domestic terrorism.


II. New Legislative Proposals
(1) INVESTIGATIONS
Hire approximately 1000 new agents, prosecutors, and other federal law enforcement and support personnel to investigate, deter, and prosecute terrorist activity.

Pass legislation to require, within 1 year, the inclusion of taggants in standard explosive device raw materials which will permit tracing of the materials post-explosion. This proposal would require the inclusion of microscopic particles in certain raw materials, thereby permitting law enforcement to trace the source of the explosive even after a device has been detonated.

Require the BATF to study and report on 1) the tagging of explosive materials for purposes of identification and detection; 2) whether common chemicals used to manufacture explosives can be rendered inert for use in explosives; and 3) whether controls can be imposed on certain precursor chemicals used to manufacture explosives. In light of recent bombing incidents, there is a need to develop technologies that will make it possible to detect concealed explosives. Additionally, if bombings do take place, a means of providing some clues is needed to lead investigators to those responsible for the explosion. Moreover, since explosives can be manufactured using common agricultural and household materials, it is important to determine whether such materials can be manufactured in a manner so that their use in explosives is unlikely. Finally, the study would determine whether any reasonable controls can be placed on precursor chemicals, e.g., ammonium nitrate, which have many legitimate uses.

Amend the Posse Comitatus Act to permit military participation in crime-fighting involving weapons of mass destruction. This proposal would amend Federal Laws, which severely limit the role of the military in domestic law enforcement, to permit military participation in criminal cases involving chemical, biological, and other weapons of mass destruction; areas in which the military has specialized expertise.

Amend the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1968 to constitutionally enhance use of electronic surveillance to fight terrorism. This proposal would: permit any federal felony to be used as a basis for an electronic surveillance order; ease restrictions on the use, in American court proceedings, of information from electronic surveillance conducted by foreign governments; forbid suppression of electronic evidence unless law enforcement acted in bad faith in obtaining the evidence; authorize emergency electronic surveillance in situations involving threats by domestic terrorist organizations, authorize roving wiretaps where it is not practical to specify the number of the phone to be tapped, such as where a target uses multiple pay phones; allow the FBI to obtain records of local telephone calls, without the need for a court order, as they can own obtain records of long-diastase calls; and require telephone companies and/or service providers to preserve evidence until a court order could be obtained. None of these changes would alter the requirement for probable cause prior to engaging in electronic surveillance.

(2) PROSECUTION

Amend Federal law to criminalize the use of all chemical weapons to include all forms of chemical weapons. This bill would amend federal law to include chemical weapons in non-gaseous form. Under existing law, chemical weapons in gaseous form are covered, but those which are in liquid or solid form are not. Thus, for example, an individual who introduces dioxin in solid form into the water supply of a city would not be chargeable under current law.

Make it illegal to possess explosives knowing that they are stolen. This proposal would conform explosive laws to existing firearms statutes, making it a crime for an individual to possess explosives which the individual knows are stolen.

Extend the Statute of limitations on the National Firearms Act to five (5) years. This proposal would extend from three (3) to five (5) years the statute of limitations for prosecution for violations of the National Firearms Act, which deals with explosive and incendiary bombs. This change brings the statue of limitations for these offenses in line with similar criminal provisions.

Provide the Secretary of Treasury authority to direct the use of Treasury Department aircraft to support emergency law enforcement situations. This proposal would authorize the Secretary of Treasury to authorize the use of Treasury Department aircraft in support of emergency law enforcement crises.

Amend reward statutes to reduce restrictions on making rewards. This proposal would provide the Attorney General authority to pay a reward which is not subject to the spending limitations contained in 18 USC Sec. 3059 and 3072, provided that any reward of $100,000 or more may not be made without the approval of the President of the Attorney General, and such approval may not be delegated.
(3) PENALTIES


Increase the penalty for anyone convicted of transferring a firearm or explosive knowing that it will be sue dot commit a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. This proposal will provide a mandatory penalty of not less than 10 years for any person who transfers a firearm knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that a firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence or drug-trafficking crime.

Amend 18 USC Sec. 111 to provide enhanced penalties for all current and former Federal employees against terrorist attacks. The existing statute only protects enumerated categories of current Federal employees. The proposed statute would provide enhanced penalties for crimes against all current and former Federal employees, and their immediate families, when the crime is committed because of the official duties of the federal employee.

LINK

From What I remember:


-- Clinton gives the CIA a green light to use whatever covert means are necessary to gather information on Osama bin Laden and his followers, and to disrupt and preempt any planned terrorist activities against the United States.

-- The CIA, under Clinton, trains and equips five dozen commandos from Pakistan to enter Afghanistan and capture bin Laden. The efforts collapse when a military coup overthrows the Pakistani government and installs a new one.

-- Clinton signs a secret agreement with Uzbekistan to begin joint covert operations against bin Laden and Afghanistan's Taliban regime. U.S. Special Forces have been training there ever since.

-- Clinton's unleashes cruise missile attacks on bin Laden in Afghanistan and the Sudan, following the terrorist bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Operating on limited intelligence -- at that time, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Tazikistan refused to share information on the terrorists whereabouts inside Afghanistan -- American forces miss killing bin Laden by only a couple of hours.

-- Republicans (led by Trent Lott) blast Big Dog for using THAT as a BJGate cover. The scumbags were already laying the smear for the 2000 race.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:02 PM
link   
Ahem.

Though your loyalty to the former NWO represnative and traitor Clinton is admirable, My own experience in the military under that worthless turds admin speaks otherwise.

Pint in hand:

Had Clinton given the green light to the coverts to get Bin laden, Bin Laden would have been gotten. Case Closed.


Bin Laden was no mystery name to us. Even units like mine, when we were in Saudi, were warned about his homeboys running amok.

Plenty of intelligence was available. We all knew that sucker was commin back for us.

Taking Bin laden out of Sudan was little problem. We had indictable charges against him: 1993 WTC bombings.

No real pressure was ever applied to Afghanistan by Clinton to turn the bearded punk over. Like the "pressure" Clinton put on the Saudis to start finding who blew up Khobar. Like the pressure for the 1998 Kenya Bombings, and the Cole bombing. Clinton was a pussy regarding demanding the punishment and pursuit of terrorists. I remeber all to well our wrath at his lack of motivation.

Fact: drones had sighted Bin laden several times during the Clinton Admin. WE knew damn well well the little bastard was hiding, hell, we were taking pictures og him at his goat barbeques. KLnowing where, it would have been nothing to arrange a little aerial "accident". Hell we blew up asprin factories, why the hell not?

If Clinton wanted him dead, hed be dead. If Clinton wanted him, hed have him. But Clinton refused.

Clinton should burn at the stake.

By the way, i dont even listen to Rush Limbaugh. i called in his show once and explained to him that the Gulf War was a scam, our presence in Saudi was a Scam, and that republiklannsmen were in part largely responsible for VA benefit cuts. he called me a femmenist and a communist. I dont know why he called me a femmenist, I made no such statements about women. Guess he assumed because I didnt liek republicans and didnt believe the first gulf war, I must be a female communist.

Thats the last time I listened to his crap.

Of course, i thought Clinton was the most evil, crooked, piece of # ever to occupy the office.

Then came Bush.........................



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:06 PM
link   
...but not then. That's the nut shell it encapsulated in.
I humbly disagree with all except the closer....then you get a hell yeah!



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 02:07 PM
link   
skadi, then you probably recall the horrible bombing on a US base in Riyadh, SA. the funny thing about that incident, though nothing about it is truly humorous, is that the Bin laden family got the majority of the construction contracts to rebuild the damaged area.

kinda weird, huh? get your people to break stuff in order to get your people to be paid to repair it?

I think both administrations regard bin ladens as a valuable business and geopolitical asset. let's face it, at the highest levels, these "opposite sides" are nothing of the sort. they both work from different ends of the agenda in order to put it in place.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 05:35 PM
link   
Hi BT...yep...me again.

As to Clinton and Osama being taken out or nabbed...who is the apologist now?
Since your presenting a skewed side, allow me?
You didn't happen to see this article yesterday, did you:
U.S. Could've Stopped 9/11 Attacks, Panel Chief Says

Thomas H. Kean, chairman of the commission and former Republican governor of New Jersey, said that had the United States seized early opportunities to kill Osama bin Laden in the years before Sept. 11, "the whole story would've been different."


Dude, further note here, is that even virtually all the supposed "real information" sites are preaching that Clinton did miss multiple opportunities to take out or capture Bin Laden....how ironic, eh?
Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize

Bah....this site alone records just how Bin Laden was allowed to go his merry way and why. Loads of links to articles, etc.
The Culpability of William Jefferson Clinton

This article rolled out yesterday also quoting Democratic Sen. Biden:
Biden: Clinton's Biggest 9/11 Failure – Monica Lewinsky

The ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said Sunday that President Clinton's affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky compromised U.S. national security because it left him unable to deal with the threat posed by al-Qaida.


Let's not forget that Monica wasn't the only one?
There was:
Gennifer Flowers
Monica Lewinsky
Elizabeth Ward-Gracen
Bobbie Ann Williams
Dolly Kyle Browning
Sally Perdue
Paula Jones
Kathleen Willey
Connie Hamzy
Christine Zercher
Juanita Brodderick
The Bill Clinton Legacy

Or lets get what Mr. Clarke says on this:
Who Lost Osama?

Yeah, just who is the apologist now?





seekerof



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 07:34 PM
link   
OBL was working with the CIA, so what's your point? They'd actually protected him in the past.



posted on Apr, 5 2004 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Satyr
OBL was working with the CIA, so what's your point? They'd actually protected him in the past.


Ive been saying exactly that all this time. OBL is a CIA asset. He's always been a CIA asset. Why dont the Bush loving asses in this board do some research into the ties between the Bush Family and the Bin Ladens? Oh that's right because none of you are interested in the truth. Well that explains it.



posted on Apr, 6 2004 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Are was it the republican Congress debasing political decorum, that had always stayed above the level they sank to even in the most hated campaigns or after effects of campaigns (Ask Observer)?
You yell obstructionism......those zealot neo-fascists ubstructed America!! I bet you probably LOOK like Bob Barr!

J/K!
I thought Gen Flowers was hot, same thing with Monica.

But my ex-gov. when I lived in Jersey is full of shyte.....if that jackal (Barb) kept her legs crossed, we would not have had GW and would never have had 9/11....so much for the would-have-could-have argument.
The net-net? It Goes back to that timeline concept you Wingers refuse to acknowledge: Was the world any where near accepting state sponsored assasinations, by the lone SUPERPOWER no less, 8 years ago? NO. By 1998, he was looking to snuff him regardless....that's conviction.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join