2+2=?

2»

Comments

  • Eliot Rosewater
    Eliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    miller8966 wrote:
    The Sudanese government wanted to hand over Binladen to the U.S government but Clinton would not take him for fear of offending the Saudis.....lol. WOrst president ever
    Fuck that. Clinton didn't get him because he was already sleeping with Bush 41 and Cheney needed someone to blame for his future 9/11 scheme.
  • SundaySilence
    SundaySilence Posts: 537
    miller8966 wrote:
    The Sudanese government wanted to hand over Binladen to the U.S government but Clinton would not take him for fear of offending the Saudis.....lol. WOrst president ever

    The bi-partisan 9-11 commission investigated this and reported on it. It is on page 110 in the second paragraph second line. “The Commission found no credible evidence that this so."
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    bootlegger10 wrote:
    But, it is funny all the crap that he laid in Bush's lap, mainly a recession and terrorists running around with zero accountability.

    it's also funny that that same evil terrorist was given his money, weapons, and training by... oh yeah... ronald reagan. good call dutch, anything to kill russkies! dont blame clinton for bin laden, reagan created him. also, if dubya just got dealt a bad hand and clinton blew it with bin laden... how come bush hasnt been able to catch bin laden? could it be he was distracted by iraq, in the same manner that the clinton sex life witchhunt kept him from attending to national issues?

    reagan was a dirty son of a bitch and the most over-rated president in history.
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    Using similar logic to the original post, we can now blame Clinton for 9/11 (of which I do think he played a significant role) since it happened so early in Bush's presidency.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • Abookamongstthemany
    Abookamongstthemany Posts: 8,209
    know1 wrote:
    Using similar logic to the original post, we can now blame Clinton for 9/11 (of which I do think he played a significant role) since it happened so early in Bush's presidency.


    yes, we could and I think soulsinging addressed why it may have not recieved enough focus.
    If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.

    Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
    -Oscar Wilde
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    Reagan may or may not have been a great president, but in appearance he was much more "presidential" than Bush and even Clinton.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • El_Kabong
    El_Kabong Posts: 4,141
    know1 wrote:
    Using similar logic to the original post, we can now blame Clinton for 9/11 (of which I do think he played a significant role) since it happened so early in Bush's presidency.


    how so???

    can you explain when reagan set up the arms for hostages deal when the hostages were released 20 min after he was inaugarated? obviously they were in contact w/ iran BEFORE he became president...so then why wait to release them?
    standin above the crowd
    he had a voice that was strong and loud and
    i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
    eager to identify with
    someone above the crowd
    someone who seemed to feel the same
    someone prepared to lead the way
  • 1970RR
    1970RR Posts: 281
    El_Kabong wrote:
    how so???

    can you explain when reagan set up the arms for hostages deal when the hostages were released 20 min after he was inaugarated? obviously they were in contact w/ iran BEFORE he became president...so then why wait to release them?
    Assuming Reagan made this deal to win the election, why would he have them wait until the inaugaration? They could have been released as soon as early November, since the election was all ready decided at that point. It seems that waiting would draw attention to the whole deal or was this just the Iranians way of fucking with him? Or was Reagans lucky number 444? Or maybe Carter, after learning of the Reagan plot, made a second secret deal to delay the release until the inaugaration so that the whole nefarious plot would be exposed?
  • know1
    know1 Posts: 6,801
    El_Kabong wrote:
    how so???

    can you explain when reagan set up the arms for hostages deal when the hostages were released 20 min after he was inaugarated? obviously they were in contact w/ iran BEFORE he became president...so then why wait to release them?

    When he delivered speeches, he had more of a "presidential" presence about him than the other two.

    No - I can't explain that. It doesn't even make sense even if he did talk to them earlier because, why wait all the way until the inauguration? He could have had them released after the election.

    Furthermore, why does it even matter if he talked to them before or after if he somehow managed to get them released?
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • SundaySilence
    SundaySilence Posts: 537
    know1 wrote:
    Using similar logic to the original post, we can now blame Clinton for 9/11 (of which I do think he played a significant role) since it happened so early in Bush's presidency.

    The logic of the original post was circumstantial evidence that the crime occurred. If so blame remains on the perpetrators, Reagan and Bin Laden in your example.
  • SundaySilence
    SundaySilence Posts: 537
    know1 wrote:
    When he delivered speeches, he had more of a "presidential" presence about him than the other two.

    He was a fine actor.
    know1 wrote:
    No - I can't explain that. It doesn't even make sense even if he did talk to them earlier because, why wait all the way until the inauguration? He could have had them released after the election.

    Furthermore, why does it even matter if he talked to them before or after if he somehow managed to get them released?

    Carter managed to get them released. Reagan allegedly delayed the release until he became president in exchange for arms pipelined to Iran via Israel. The same pipeline and key players, some who were convicted then pardoned by Bush, used in Iran-contra.

    Here are some news reports and letters from the released hostages that were submitted to the house in petition for investigation.

    http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_cr/h920205-october-clips.htm

    Congressional investigation ended reporting not enough evidence.

Categories