DOH!!! Lets hear it..
09-05-2006, 10:33 PM
#1
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Least Coast :(
Posts: 8,159
Car Info: 08 sti
DOH!!! Lets hear it..
Soo lets hear the excuses..
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
oh the comedy of it all....
http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/
President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws
clinton.sm July 30, 1996
Web posted at: 8:40 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess. (1.6 MB AIFF or WAV sound)sound icon
"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.
But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
lott
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, doubted that the Senate would rush to action before they recess this weekend. The Senate needs to study all the options, he said, and trying to get it done in the next three days would be tough.
One key GOP senator was more critical, calling a proposed study of chemical markers in explosives "a phony issue."
Taggants value disputed
Clinton said he knew there was Republican opposition to his proposal on explosive taggants, but it should not be allowed to block the provisions on which both parties agree.
"What I urge them to do is to be explicit about their disagreement, but don't let it overcome the areas of agreement," he said.
The president emphasized coming to terms on specific areas of disagreement would help move the legislation along. The president stressed it's important to get the legislation out before the weekend's recess, especially following the bombing of Centennial Olympic Park and the crash of TWA Flight 800.
"The most important thing right now is that they get the best, strongest bill they can out -- that they give us as much help as they can," he said.
Hatch blasts 'phony' issues
Republican leaders earlier met with White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta for about an hour in response to the president's call for "the very best ideas" for fighting terrorism.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emerged from the meeting and said, "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."
Hatch called Clinton's proposed study of taggants -- chemical markers in explosives that could help track terrorists -- "a phony issue."
"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping.
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said it is a mistake if Congress leaves town without addressing anti-terrorism legislation. Daschle is expected to hold a special meeting on the matter Wednesday with Congressional leaders.
clinton.sm July 30, 1996
Web posted at: 8:40 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess. (1.6 MB AIFF or WAV sound)sound icon
"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.
But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
lott
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, doubted that the Senate would rush to action before they recess this weekend. The Senate needs to study all the options, he said, and trying to get it done in the next three days would be tough.
One key GOP senator was more critical, calling a proposed study of chemical markers in explosives "a phony issue."
Taggants value disputed
Clinton said he knew there was Republican opposition to his proposal on explosive taggants, but it should not be allowed to block the provisions on which both parties agree.
"What I urge them to do is to be explicit about their disagreement, but don't let it overcome the areas of agreement," he said.
The president emphasized coming to terms on specific areas of disagreement would help move the legislation along. The president stressed it's important to get the legislation out before the weekend's recess, especially following the bombing of Centennial Olympic Park and the crash of TWA Flight 800.
"The most important thing right now is that they get the best, strongest bill they can out -- that they give us as much help as they can," he said.
Hatch blasts 'phony' issues
Republican leaders earlier met with White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta for about an hour in response to the president's call for "the very best ideas" for fighting terrorism.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, emerged from the meeting and said, "These are very controversial provisions that the White House wants. Some they're not going to get."
Hatch called Clinton's proposed study of taggants -- chemical markers in explosives that could help track terrorists -- "a phony issue."
"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping.
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-South Dakota, said it is a mistake if Congress leaves town without addressing anti-terrorism legislation. Daschle is expected to hold a special meeting on the matter Wednesday with Congressional leaders.
09-06-2006, 10:59 AM
#4
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lastweek Lane - Watertown, NY
Posts: 10,133
Car Info: 02WRXpseudoSTiWannabeWagon
Dre,
Though I hate to give Clinton any credit, and though I sincerely hate politicians - be they Repub or Dem, I can't fault congress that much. What would they stand to gain in their constituents' eyes? Given hindsight, it would seem most appropriate to pass those laws back then. Then maybe 9/11 may not have happened. However, we were living in a sort of Utopia back in 1996 and no one, to include Bin Laden, could have imagined how devasting 9/11 would have been (I don't recall where I read, but apparently the atk on the WTC had tremendously greater effect than even OBL had imagined.) IMO, congress never votes according to 'their conscience' as they'd have us believe, but according to what they think will best please their voters.
Bottom line, even given the first attack on the WTC in 1993, all Americans still felt we were nice and secure in 1996. Maybe Clinton's error was that he failed to raise the alert enough [meaning that he should have emphasised how critical this was, not only to our elected representatives but to us as well.]
Though I hate to give Clinton any credit, and though I sincerely hate politicians - be they Repub or Dem, I can't fault congress that much. What would they stand to gain in their constituents' eyes? Given hindsight, it would seem most appropriate to pass those laws back then. Then maybe 9/11 may not have happened. However, we were living in a sort of Utopia back in 1996 and no one, to include Bin Laden, could have imagined how devasting 9/11 would have been (I don't recall where I read, but apparently the atk on the WTC had tremendously greater effect than even OBL had imagined.) IMO, congress never votes according to 'their conscience' as they'd have us believe, but according to what they think will best please their voters.
Bottom line, even given the first attack on the WTC in 1993, all Americans still felt we were nice and secure in 1996. Maybe Clinton's error was that he failed to raise the alert enough [meaning that he should have emphasised how critical this was, not only to our elected representatives but to us as well.]
09-07-2006, 09:05 AM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Zoomass: Riot Capital of New England
Posts: 909
Car Info: '97 Legacy
there were harbingers of anti-american terrorist attacks throughout the 90's
1993- Mir Aimal Kansi opens fire on cars waiting at a stoplight outside the CIA headquaters, killing 2 CIA agents.
1993- First World Trade Center bombing. Kills 6 and injures over a 1000
1993- Failed NYC landmark bombing
1994- Rashid Baz opens fire on Brooklyn Bridge. Kills Jewish student and wounds 4 others
1997- Armed muslim radical opens fire on observation deck at Empire State Building. Kills one and injures a few others.
bill might have also prevented USS Cole bombing
1993- Mir Aimal Kansi opens fire on cars waiting at a stoplight outside the CIA headquaters, killing 2 CIA agents.
1993- First World Trade Center bombing. Kills 6 and injures over a 1000
1993- Failed NYC landmark bombing
1994- Rashid Baz opens fire on Brooklyn Bridge. Kills Jewish student and wounds 4 others
1997- Armed muslim radical opens fire on observation deck at Empire State Building. Kills one and injures a few others.
bill might have also prevented USS Cole bombing
Last edited by spedmunki; 09-07-2006 at 09:17 AM.
09-07-2006, 09:49 AM
#7
VIP Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Lastweek Lane - Watertown, NY
Posts: 10,133
Car Info: 02WRXpseudoSTiWannabeWagon
Mr spedmunki, you're absolutely right. However, I remember clearly that I remember very vaguely [each of those incidents]. I remember them, but I can't say why they never got my full attention. All I can think of was the 'spin' or emphasis put on them by the media or the administration. When you whisper "fire" in a crowded movie theater, chances are that nothing will happen.
Once, I came upon a website that detailed each of the 'attacks', incursions, or incidents at the White House. I was surprised by how many there were and struck with the question of whether each of them were nutcases or intentioned radicals. Most curious is that I'd never heard about any of them until I found that webpage.
Once, I came upon a website that detailed each of the 'attacks', incursions, or incidents at the White House. I was surprised by how many there were and struck with the question of whether each of them were nutcases or intentioned radicals. Most curious is that I'd never heard about any of them until I found that webpage.
09-07-2006, 11:25 AM
#8
iClub Silver Vendor
iTrader: (25)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Participating in some Anarchy!
Posts: 15,494
Car Info: 2005 LGT wagon
There's a huge difference in saying that something should be done vs actually getting it done.
Clinton asked for action. How strong was his request?
I don't remember at any time him standing at a podium demanding action, or more importantly, leading the way in taking said action.
What was the US response to the 1st Trade Center attack?
Essentially nothing.
What was the US response to the African embassy bombings?
Essentially nothing.
What was the US response to the USS Cole attack?
Essentially nothing.
Does this excuse the then GOP Congress from responsibility?
No.
Clinton asked for action. How strong was his request?
I don't remember at any time him standing at a podium demanding action, or more importantly, leading the way in taking said action.
What was the US response to the 1st Trade Center attack?
Essentially nothing.
What was the US response to the African embassy bombings?
Essentially nothing.
What was the US response to the USS Cole attack?
Essentially nothing.
Does this excuse the then GOP Congress from responsibility?
No.
09-07-2006, 03:22 PM
#9
VIP Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The Least Coast :(
Posts: 8,159
Car Info: 08 sti
The smell of excuses is strong in this thread...
Fact of the matter is that BC identified issues, he sought expert advice (one is to assume) on how to fix those issues. He came back with a bill that would acceptably mitigate some of the risks that were identified.
THe bill got slammed shut by the ***got politicos in congress.. The same ***got politicos who are all of a sudden all about pissing away rights to privacy, war rights, huge budgets to fight wars, etc...
**** the retards who supported them then, **** the retards who support them now..
And a special **** you to the retards who had/have their heads up their asses when it comes to proper risk assesment and mitigation. That includes the bandwagon jerkoffs who support "security theatrics" and promote a sense of fear and false security.
There are plenty of **** yous to go around.. so i suggest everyone line up and take their **** you. It will make things easier for me..
Fact of the matter is that BC identified issues, he sought expert advice (one is to assume) on how to fix those issues. He came back with a bill that would acceptably mitigate some of the risks that were identified.
THe bill got slammed shut by the ***got politicos in congress.. The same ***got politicos who are all of a sudden all about pissing away rights to privacy, war rights, huge budgets to fight wars, etc...
**** the retards who supported them then, **** the retards who support them now..
And a special **** you to the retards who had/have their heads up their asses when it comes to proper risk assesment and mitigation. That includes the bandwagon jerkoffs who support "security theatrics" and promote a sense of fear and false security.
There are plenty of **** yous to go around.. so i suggest everyone line up and take their **** you. It will make things easier for me..
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ddavis
Suspension, Handling, and Brakes
5
08-22-2014 02:29 PM
foothill5
Bay Area
33
03-03-2009 01:33 AM