Ah The Glory Days Of The Clinton Admin - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-24-2005, 10:00 AM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




it said "BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE WITHIN THE U.S."

this memo is common knowledge and was circulated in august 2001.
What in the world was he to do about it? The only thing he could have done in response to this vague, unspecific threat, that might have prevented 9/11 would be to declare martial law and send military fighters over every inch of the United States. Wouldn't people have loved having their freedoms taken away?
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:01 AM   #32
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Dude, read what I wrote. I clearly outlined earlier in the thread what the "failure to protect his people" was, and it wasn't Monica. The failure to protect his people came when he allowed his feds to murder a 13 year old, fleeing boy and unarmed woman at Ruby Ridge, and the when he allowed his feds to attack a compound full of innocent women and Children that eventually resulted in most of their deaths. It was also "failure to protect his people" when he didn't allow his soldiers in Somalia to fire their weapons, even in defense.

So are you saying that Clinton should have personally been at Ruby Ridge with a bullhorn shouting out orders? Those situations went bad but to say he allowed it to happen is a stretch. Much the same way everything that goes wrong now can't be blamed completely on Bush.
__________________

__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:01 AM   #33
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
And yet occasionally ignored federal law when it came to his own people; the people of this nation whom had sworn to protect.
Funny how putting a human face on someone makes it harder to accept killing them, right? In the 1990s, we had the threat of domestic terrorism, which culminated with Oklahoma City. The threat, in my view, started after the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine in 1987, which allowed for fanatical viewpoints in the media with no requirement for balance (hence, why AM radio is still a bastion of fanaticism) and grew with the advent of the internet.

Anyway, if we applied the Bush Doctrine to Oklahoma City, we should have just gone in and blew up every last one of those compounds...but we won't, because they're Americans and we have humanized them.

Iraqis and Afghanis, on the other hand, who cares if we blow them up? They're not real anyway, are they? That's what postmodernist philosopher, Jean Baudrillard, would probably say. He wrote a very provocative text called "The Gulf War Did Not Take Place," and literalists, obviously, jumped all over it. The point of the text was not to deny that it happened, but to argue that, to the average American, the war wasn't real; it was merely a series of TV images for the American public and mostly a wargame for the leaders, as it relied on air raids and intelligence over physical combat.

Quote:
One of the points that Baudrillard tries to make with this book is that what's considered real is now simply images of what is real: we see "a masquerade of information: branded faces delivered over to the prostitution of the image, the image of an unintelligible distress." This is a challenge to the tendency of many people to absolutely believe what they see on their screens. This point also works in with another of Baudrillard claims that the war was so heavily edited when it was shown on television that what Americans saw wasn't even close to the real war. He arrived at this conclusion after talking with many soldiers about what really happened on the ground.
As such, when it comes to Americans being attacked or killed, we are genuinely incensed, while when it comes to foreign civilian casualities, we generally don't care. "Collateral damage" for the cause of "freedom." After all, they don't really exist anyway.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:03 AM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by AvsGirl41




Clinton received the blame for Somalia, but as a friend of mine (who is rather into Mogadishu) aptly puts it, "It was a political football left over from the Bush administration."
As I said in a previous post, it wasn't the fact that troops were sent into Somalia that cheesed me; it was the fact they were forbidden to fire their weapons. That order was given by the Clinto Admin.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:03 AM   #35
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 05:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

I simply stated a fact. Liberals don't seem to care about Clinton's affair with Monica, or even that he lied to a federal grand jury about it. Am I wrong? Does any perosn who identifies themself as a liberal care about these things?
I don't care about the affair; I care about the lie. Instead of lying he should have looked the American people in the eye and said it was none of our damn business whether or not he had an affair.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:06 AM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


As I said in a previous post, it wasn't the fact that troops were sent into Somalia that cheesed me; it was the fact they were forbidden to fire their weapons. That order was given by the Clinto Admin.
How can in one breathe you get on Clinton for letting the feds fire at Ruby Ridge and at Waco and the next get on him for giving the no shoot order in Somalia? Seems a little hypocritical.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:07 AM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
sulawesigirl4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7,416
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by joyfulgirl
I don't care about the affair; I care about the lie. Instead of lying he should have looked the American people in the eye and said it was none of our damn business whether or not he had an affair.
Exactly.

And speaking of lies...does anyone who identifies themselves as conservative care about the fact that Bush lied in order to bring us to war?
__________________
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono

sulawesigirl4 is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:07 AM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail



So are you saying that Clinton should have personally been at Ruby Ridge with a bullhorn shouting out orders? Those situations went bad but to say he allowed it to happen is a stretch. Much the same way everything that goes wrong now can't be blamed completely on Bush.
But they are blamed completely on Bush, by several people here. Just yesterday, someone told me that Bush was responsible for the horrible things that occurred at Abu Gharib (sp?), even though he didn't order, condone the actions and was even prosecuting those who did it.

Clinton's appointee, Janet Reno, gave the orders to storm at Ruby Ridge, and it resulted in those deaths.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:09 AM   #39
Refugee
 
unosdostres14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ogacihC
Posts: 1,558
Local Time: 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


How can in one breathe you get on Clinton for letting the feds fire at Ruby Ridge and at Waco and the next get on him for giving the no shoot order in Somalia? Seems a little hypocritical.
Hypocrisy is the Republican way!

"I am anti-big government. I'm all for states rights!"

(Picks up newspaper and sees news about homosexuals getting married)

"We must have a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage! This cannot be left upto the states!"
__________________
unosdostres14 is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:11 AM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by sulawesigirl4


Exactly.

And speaking of lies...does anyone who identifies themselves as conservative care about the fact that Bush lied in order to bring us to war?
Most conservatives, like me, believe that he acted on what may have been wrong intelligence from several sources.

Frankly, I don't think that the intelligence was wrong. I believe Saddam did have WMD and that he had them moved into Syria in the weeks before the war. Even Charles Duelfer wouldn't say that he's sure I'm wrong - he saw and even commented on satellite photos that showed large tucks moving large amounts of "unidentified material" from Iraq to Syria.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:12 AM   #41
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
u2bonogirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Back on the blue crack after a long break
Posts: 6,726
Local Time: 08:18 AM
Ive come to the conclusion that politicians lie all the time
__________________
u2bonogirl is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:12 AM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


But they are blamed completely on Bush, by several people here. Just yesterday, someone told me that Bush was responsible for the horrible things that occurred at Abu Gharib (sp?), even though he didn't order, condone the actions and was even prosecuting those who did it.

Clinton's appointee, Janet Reno, gave the orders to storm at Ruby Ridge, and it resulted in those deaths.
I hear what you're saying. I guess it depends on the individual's view of accountability and political beliefs. A Bush backer will say what you said, he didn't directly condone the actions whereas a Bush basher would say he had to have known, he's the president. Same goes for Ruby Ridge and almost anything other hotspot event in history, it's all personal opinion.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:14 AM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:18 AM
I don't have time to read this nonsense now.


Clinton is reponsible for a small amount of body fluids while in the Whitehouse.


This Administration is responsible for drenching the walls in blood for personal gain.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:17 AM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


How can in one breathe you get on Clinton for letting the feds fire at Ruby Ridge and at Waco and the next get on him for giving the no shoot order in Somalia? Seems a little hypocritical.
Think about it. It's not hypocritical at all.

Clinton gave the order in Somalia not to fire - at all. These soldiers were in a place which was very hostile to American involvement, and yet they weren't given the right to defend themselves?

I didn't say he should've told the feds at Ruby Ridge not to fire if they were fired at. But the 13 year old boy was fleeing - and was shot in teh back. The woman was unarmed and shot in the head. Neither of those cases was self defense.

As for Waco, the ATF should have never been given the orders to assault the compound full of women and children in the first place; they should've arrested Koresh in town, away from the others. They originally said Koresh hadn't gone to town in 3 weeks, but we later learned that wasn't true.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 06-24-2005, 10:18 AM   #45
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
I don't have time to read this nonsense now.


Clinton is reponsible for a small amount of body fluids while in the Whitehouse.
and the death of the fleeing boy and unarmed woman at Ruby Ridge, and the many women and children deaths at Waco...
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com