Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why is CBS tickling "able danger" story?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 05:45 AM
Original message
Why is CBS tickling "able danger" story?
They are keeping this alive for some reason. I'm still confused about the implications. Is this an attempt to foist 9-11 off onto Clinton or will it lead to something real?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, I don't know how the 9-11 Commission's negligence to look
into the matter can be considered a flaw of the previous Administration? I think the key is the right-wing shill who was put on the Commission, and who may have been responsible for stifling important information -- like Able Danger.

You have to remember that there was an appropriate transition of power in January 2001. Richard Clarke wrote about how the Bush Administration was properly apprised of the "terrorist" situation in his book, "Against All Enemies." The administration responded by demoting his position and delegating everything to Cheney. And Cheney had his own agenda.

I still believe that in those energy meetings, you'll find a clue as to why the WTC was attacked in the first place, though I think by now it's obvious that it's during these transitions of power where we seem to be the weakest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
burythehatchet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Kissinger would have proud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Last Lemming Donating Member (806 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. Kissinger
IS proud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:17 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. well they just had Shaffer on ..
Edited on Wed Aug-17-05 06:17 AM by annabanana
And he is insisting that the DOD is "determined to get to the bottOm of this"

So Is DOD only going to gt to where the info wasn't transmitted, and ignore that Clarke was shouting and pleading for a meeting with Rice and NEVER GOT ONE??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Sibel Edmonds hinted that the state Dept. is not to be trusted.
Connect the dots. Any government agency who blinks at this point, probably has some paper shredding to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Perky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. If the Commisision "swore" their witnesses" Then this
Coud be leading to perjury indictment
If the sworn officials knew that able danger was tracking atta and otheres and failed to diclose such information whene asked if anyone had any prior knowledge about Atts...Game is over.


Obstruction....Perjury

See its not that they even knew. It this whole thing of the Bushies being unable to afmit they made a mistake. The fact that they were bit tracking Atta is understqndable and even foregivable, Its the lying about it that is unconscionable,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 06:19 AM
Response to Original message
4. It's clearly partly that
What I don't understand is why they feel defensive about it all of a sudden - unless this is just another pathetic attempt to change the discourse.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-17-05 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
8. Rush is alreadyon this one: yes, it's the Clenis
who put in place the wall that could have prevented 9-11. Oh, and while we're we're on the subject, he dredged up Clinton Administration "failures" on the Millenium Bomber to prove it was all of a piece.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC