Responses in-line.

Denys


-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Paden [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 11:02 AM
To: [log in to unmask]; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: [HP3000-L] OT: Where Bush conspiracy theories come from

Denys,

There is much I could say but I won't for now due to time constraints.
There are quite a number of statements I would contest as to the
accuracy or interpretation. Instead, I would however like to offer a
couple of thoughts for now.

[DPB: you will always contest whatever statements are made that do not
completely match your thoughts and biases.  That is predictable and of
course, your right.  No need to make that statement.  :-)  ]


Democrats are not responsible for 9/11.

[DPB:  Here I take exception to the statement.  Surprise, surprise.  I
think what you meant to say is "Democrats did not hijack and fly planes
into buildings killing 3,000 people or 9/11."  I would agree with you if
that is what you meant to say, I never stated or thought otherwise.  On
the other hand, many Democrats and other assorted leftists around the
world think that George Bush either engineered the terrorist attacks,
with or without the cooperation of Israel, or believe he knew everything
about it and let it happen for his own aggrandizement or to go to war
with everybody so as to make money for his oil buddies and Halliburton
because Dick Cheney is closely tied to Halliburton and also the Bush
family is tied very closely to the bin Laden family and to Saudi Arabia
and W didn't care about New Yorkers anyway since they didn't vote for
him in 2000... (sounds of gasping for air.)

Now, if you really meant to say that Democrats are not to be in any way
blamed for 9/11, I will respectfully disagree with you.  Here is a
laundry list of issues.

Jamie Gorelick, the deputy Attorney General in the Clinton
administration is the one that composed and issued the memo that
effectively built the wall between LE agencies in 1996.  If you wade
through the various reports and accounts, you will find many references
to the fact some LEOs could not communicate important issues and
findings to other agencies and one of them even stated that because of
this people would die.  How prophetic!

John Kerry and other Democratic Senators gutted the CIA in 1980s and
1990s, effectively rendering it virtually incapable of detecting the
upcoming attacks on America.

Bill Clinton, I think he was a Democrat, had the opportunity to capture
UBL three times during his presidency.  He declined.  He also had the
opportunity to kill UBL, but Sandy (Socks) Burglar**, his National
Security Adviser, could not find him in time to get a go ahead.  I think
Bill was busy with a certain Monica Lewinsky at that time.  (I could add
so many comments here, but I am restraining myself.  Let you imagination
run...)

In 1993, after the Black Hawk down incident in Mogadishu, Somalia,
Clinton ran away.  We have since found out that Al Qaeda were the ones
who organized and trained the locals in shooting down low flying
helicopters with RPGs.  Clinton showed to Al Qaeda and other terrorists
that the US military was beatable and did not have the guts to stand up
to them and emboldened them.


The Clinton administration throughout the 1990s treated all terrorist
attacks against us as a law enforcement problem.  Every time they
attacked us and we did nothing, they grew bolder.  It is my contention
if Algore had won his home state of Tennessee and had been elected
president, his response to 9/11 would have been to send more missiles
into Afghanistan and then try, unsuccessfully, to negotiate with the
Taliban. We would have put up various sanctions against Afghanistan and
left things there. Remember the vigorous Clinton response to the USS
Cole attack, or the first WTC attack.

The sanctions against Iraq would have been lifted in 2002 and Iraq would
have been free to resume production of WMDs.  The terrorists would have
been able to go into Iraq for further training and especially the use of
WMDs.  Libya would now be closing in on nuclear weapons.  One can only
imagine the other attacks on America with Algore in charge.

The Democrats are the ones to proffer charges of racism and police state
if we try to secure our borders.  Many of the 9/11 terrorists had
extended their visas and should have been stopped or deported, yet
because of the current state of immigration law enforcement in this
country, they were free to come and go.

Even after 9/11 the Democrats are trying to issue driver licenses, a de
facto government ID card, to illegal immigrants.  The Democrats have
been demagoging the Patriot Act, which brought down the wall between the
LE organizations in this country.

I could go on and on with this, but you get the gist.  Well, probably
not.

BTW, this is not meant to absolve the Republicans in Congress.  They are
the ones who didn't stand up to the Democrats and prevent them from
doing all this crap.  In many instances, they even helped the Democrats.
I sometimes wonder about the location of the hospital where many
Republican Senators check in to get their spine removed after getting
elected.]



We can find analogous history events and learn from them however it is a
mistake not to see the differences. The events leading to WWII have no
parallels of value when compared to the events leading up to war in
Iraq.

[DPB: One who ignores history is doomed to repeating it.]

GW intended to go to war in Iraq long before we were told. The costs and
difficulties were either seriously underestimated and/or not
communicated to the US citizenry. The case for going to war was made
without either an understanding of the flaws or without regard to the
flaws in the intelligence.

[DPB:  How do you know what the President intended to do and when he
came up with decisions?  Are you a mind reader?  Can you offer any proof
of this talent?  Can you tell me what I and thinking now and when I came
to such a decision?  Can you offer any proof of your assertion?  I
remember GWB telling us the war on terrorism was going to take a long
time asking for our patience, it was going to cost a lot (blood and
treasure,) and would take us to various places.  The Democrats patience
was about 2 months.  I offer the following link:

http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/15/bush.terrorism/  ]


Rather than supporting the war in Iraq, the links you have offered, can
be seen as knocking the support out from under the case for going to
war.

[DPB: That's because you want to read them that way.]

** Here is a link to The New Republic web site, decidedly not one of
those far right, conservative sites.
http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=express&s=peretz072104

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *