Try again, Kilo.
* al-Harithi was a suspected planner.

Yeah. On par with OBL and KSM in that regard of how much “suspected” qualifies something.

* Firing one missile at one vehicle does not impress me as a “military” reaction. And apparently Wikipedia agrees.

WTF do I care ?

* As mentioned previously, the investigations into the bombing started under Clinton. Therefore, Bush did nothing to contribute to the situation.

Lucky everyone involved stayed motionless for the next couple of years after that determination of aQ involvement was made and no further investigations were necessary in order to find, capture and kill them.

Neither President contributed anything you moron as this isn’t how the universe works.

WTF you think happens ? That the US goes through peak and trough periods in intel gathering based on whether the President has his own magnifying glass and plenty of time to study the sat photos himself ?

* Finally, it seems that had Bush struck at Al-Qaeda early in his term, when it was determined that they were responsible, it might have put them on the run and disrupted their plans for 9/11.

Comment by WC — June 14, 2007 @ 11:31 am

No, you’re talking bullshit now. And not even with any conviction either, as per the lack of specificity, detail, references or any followup which would suggest this is anything more than a throw-away, uninformed guess.

Comment by Kilo — June 14, 2007 @ 4:15 am

From Wikipedia, subject “U.S.S. Cole Bombing”:

Both the Clinton Administration and the Bush Administration have been criticized for failing to respond militarily to the attack on the USS Cole before September 11, 2001. The 9-11 Commission Report cites one source who said in February 2001, “[bin Laden] complained frequently that the United States had not yet attacked [in response to the Cole]… Bin Ladin wanted the United States to attack, and if it did not he would launch something bigger.”

.
.

According to Dr. Rice, the decision not to respond militarily to the Cole bombing was President Bush’s. She said he “made clear to us that he did not want to respond to al Qaeda one attack at a time. He told me he was ‘tired of swatting flies.’”

.
.

On November 3, 2002, the CIA fired a AGM-114 Hellfire missile from a Predator UAV at a vehicle carrying Abu Ali al-Harithi, a suspected planner of the bombing plot.

Try again, Kilo.

* al-Harithi was a suspected planner.

* Firing one missile at one vehicle does not impress me as a “military” reaction. And apparently Wikipedia agrees.

* As mentioned previously, the investigations into the bombing started under Clinton. Therefore, Bush did nothing to contribute to the situation.

* Finally, it seems that had Bush struck at Al-Qaeda early in his term, when it was determined that they were responsible, it might have put them on the run and disrupted their plans for 9/11.

Then what did he plead guilty to?
Comment by yep — June 13, 2007 @ 7:16 pm

The removal of the copies he was known to have removed. The thing that everyone here, you included has indicated they are aware of.

Spot the difference ?
Knowledge of the existance of these records beforehand + knowledge of their disappearance = you can declare they have been removed.

Not knowing WTF was there before during or after = you can’t.

Fk his trousers, he could have dragged 10 garbage bags full of papers out of that joint. If nobody ever bothered to record what original documents were held, then didn’t record who they were issued to then didn’t record whether they were returned then I don’t know that could even qualify as “theft”.

Theft implies that the party you took an item from had title and possession of it to start with. What is described there is akin to how a homeowner treats dog turds on their lawn.

Again he pleaded GUILTY to stealing documents from the archive.
Comment by yep — June 13, 2007 @ 7:17 pm

Yeah, just not the ones you are referring to. The finding in that matter was that all he took was copies.
Have you swapped sides in this arguement or what ? Cause this ain’t helping.

And that answer is still waiting for you to read it. Start with google and wikipedia.
Comment by Kilo — June 13, 2007 @ 6:32 pm

But I want YOU to tell us.
Comment by WC — June 13, 2007 @ 8:30 pm

Comment #75

Kilo, wikipedia is about as reliable as Tony Snow. I wouldn’t bet the farm on that source.

Comment by bogtrotters — June 13, 2007 @ 6:53 pm

What bet ? I’ve suggested it as an easy way to find links to stories that have been reported worldwide for some years.
I’ve suggested them to a guy who thought nothing had happened on that front.

BTW, peer reviewed articles and a requirement to cite a source for every claim made makes it a hell of a lot more reliable than anything else you got going.

Comment by Merlin — June 14, 2007 @ 2:46 am

add michael to the list

Comment by Buck Fush — June 11, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
“IGNORE THE TROLLS CLUB.”

good idea, guys!!

Why not take this list you started and expand it to include the rest not listed yet, and also as Trolls change their “handle.” Then automatically (cut & paste) post it on every thread on TP about, say, every 25 posts. All of us anti troll folks can post it if we see it hasn’t been posted in a while. Especially on troll heavy threads. “Members” can add their names as they wish forswearing communication with the trolls. Repetition is the name of the game! (Put the word “Reminder” on top in bold)
What do you think folks? Shall we band together formally? If I don’t hear from anyone I will begin to post it anyway.

IGNORE THE TROLLS CLUB
Members:
Buck Fush, JPV, Merlin

Reminder
Don’t Read A Trolls Post
Don’t Respond To A Trolls Post

IGNORE THE TROLLS – Debate good, Trolls bad

Here are the trolls currently posting on TP.
m12, Patrick1, Jake, Valiant Venus, Pres. Clinton, MAF54, Mr. President,

Shane’s back!!

Oh, my, the party of family values putting up two serial adulterers–one of whom also loves to cross-dress and who lived with a gay couple for a while.
Yes, America just loves the G(rotesque)O(rnery)P(erverts).

Is this sentence supposed to make any sense?

If you’re going to keep on referring to someone as a burglar, you might learn to spell the word first. And “crimes?” I thought Sandy Burger was implicated for doing one thing wrong–not several. Oh, well, of course, outing a CIA agent and putting her various contacts around the world at risk is not a serious crime if committed by Republiscum.

I, too, just love the way our semi-literate trolls like michael and vilevenus frequently put down public school education. If their English writing “skills” (or shall we say “lack of such”) are any indication of what private schooling is like, I’m certainly glad my parents didn’t waste the money on it.

Comment by Kilo — June 13, 2007 @ 6:32 pm

But I want YOU to tell us.

Comment by Zooey — June 13, 2007 @ 4:13 pm

And I can’t wait for him to announce how smart he is and how no one here approaches his debate prowess. That part always cracks me up

Comment by dbadass

Oh, I love the part where he makes fun of our “public” school educations. Like private schooling at christian schools is good. No extracurriculars, no music, art, band, languages. No accelerated programs. No speech therapy, no remedial programs. Of course michael’s mother homeschooled him because he couldn’t give up the diaper or learn how to relate to other kids. Poor bastard.

sandy burgler who, in an attempt to cover up his boss’ incompetence in these matters. committed crimes 1000 times more offensive than the bogus crap Libbywent down for. but the burgler roams free.

Comment by ct

Thanks for answering the question for all of us ct.

Yes, ct is dumber than a box of rocks. Case closed.