STORM2K

ASHCROFT ROASTS THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION

If there is one man the Bush-haters hate more than Bush, it's John Ashcroft. To the left, he might as well be the devil himself. Anyway, Attorney General John Ashcroft testified yesterday before the 9/11 Blame Commission and dropped a bombshell. And it's about time somebody said it...these "hearings" have turned into a partisan debacle, so the Bush administration is fighting back.

Ashcroft blamed the Clinton administration for leaving America open to attack, saying that the attacks of 9/11 happened because "for nearly a decade our government had blinded itself to our enemies." The Democrats on this commission and their buddies in the media want to start assigning blame, then let's put it where it belongs. Ashcroft went on to say that once in office, he moved to overturn a failed policy that was restricting American agents from killing Osama Bin Laden, allowing only capture. For eight long years, that was the Democratic approach...treating terrorism as a law enforcement problem. "Even if they could have penetrated Bin Laden's training camps, they would have needed a battery of lawyers" to take action, he said. This hits the nail right on the head folks. The media is roasting the Bush administration over some vague memo before 9/11 when the Clinton administration had Bin Laden in their sites on several occasions? Spare me.

If these people want to pin the 9/11 attacks on somebody, they're talking to the wrong administration.

-------------------------------------------------------------

Furthermore, Gorelick who is on the 9/11 Commission should resign. She should be a witness and testifying, instead of someone who is passing judgement. She was deputy director to Janet Reno under the Clinton Administration and re-enforced the handcuffs (wall) on the CIA and FBI resulting in them not sharing intel. She even put it in a memo which was introduced to the Commission today by FBI Director Mueller. End of story!!

Well, I hated John Asscroft before this, but he does make a point about the Clinton administration needing to take at least some responsibility for 9/11.

It makes me sick to my stomach that the 9/11 commission is trying to place blame on Americans for the tragedy of Sept 11. The terrorists are THE ONLY ONE RESPONSIBLE. Not the Bush administration, not the Clinton Administration. Our country had no idea that someone could ever do this to us. Plain and simple.
...Jennifer...

Way to go Ashcroft for calling this lousy commission for what they really are!

mrschad wrote:It makes me sick to my stomach that the 9/11 commission is trying to place blame on Americans for the tragedy of Sept 11. The terrorists are THE ONLY ONE RESPONSIBLE. Not the Bush administration, not the Clinton Administration. Our country had no idea that someone could ever do this to us. Plain and simple.
...Jennifer...

Way to go Ashcroft for calling this lousy commission for what they really are!

Excellent Post Jenn

Furthermore, Gorelick who is on the 9/11 Commission should resign. She should be a witness and testifying, instead of someone who is passing judgement. She was deputy director to Janet Reno under the Clinton Administration and re-enforced the handcuffs (wall) on the CIA and FBI resulting in them not sharing intel. She even put it in a memo which was introduced to the Commission today by FBI Director Mueller. End of story!!

You got that right! She has NO business on the Commission.
IMO they need to forget the "looking back and blame game" and decide what needs to be done to prevent future terrorist attacks. It's easy to place the blame on someone, but that does not change the fact that 9/11 happened, nor does it change the fact that it could happen again unless some changes in policies are made.

No offense to anyone, but I am so tired of the beating of the dead horse syndrome blaming Clinton for everything. He's been out of office for years, and he is not solely to blame for it all. Bush must share blame, as well. Again, no offense intended, but it's getting old. Both men have good points, and both have faults.

sunnyday wrote:No offense to anyone, but I am so tired of the beating of the dead horse syndrome blaming Clinton for everything. He's been out of office for years, and he is not solely to blame for it all. Bush must share blame, as well. Again, no offense intended, but it's getting old. Both men have good points, and both have faults.

You truley and honestly think everyone is beating a dead horse and blaming Clinton for it all? Have you watched TV lately.. Or picked up a paper? I sure havent seen NEAR as much blame thrown Clintons way thus far as Bush's

mrschad wrote:It makes me sick to my stomach that the 9/11 commission is trying to place blame on Americans for the tragedy of Sept 11. The terrorists are THE ONLY ONE RESPONSIBLE. Not the Bush administration, not the Clinton Administration. Our country had no idea that someone could ever do this to us. Plain and simple.
...Jennifer...

Way to go Ashcroft for calling this lousy commission for what they really are!

Thank you Jen for that post!

I think that the commission is needed, they need to ask tough questions and I think that we are getting more information now than if the commission wasn't created at all. Still, I can't see how after all of this time they can really place blame on one group, person, etc. Comments should be saved until after their hearings and they report their findings and opinions.

sunnyday wrote:No offense to anyone, but I am so tired of the beating of the dead horse syndrome blaming Clinton for everything. He's been out of office for years, and he is not solely to blame for it all. Bush must share blame, as well. Again, no offense intended, but it's getting old. Both men have good points, and both have faults.

Not the point!! I disagree. The 9/11 Commission is TRYING to lay the blame for the bombing of WTC and the Pentagon at Bush's feet. France, Germany and Russia (and some Dems) blame the United States for "stirring the pot" of terrorism and making it worse (insert Paolo here). "If they'd leave us alone we would leave them alone" is the thinking today. Have we all forgotten that during the ENTIRE period of the planning of 9/11 we, in the United States, were doing NOTHING to stir the pot? As a matter of fact, we were busy trying to appease Palestinian suicide bombers in order to bring some type of peace to the Middle East. It seems the whole world is trying to lay blame for terrorism on anyone or anything except for the people who carried it out. I am certain that wherever Bin Laden is he is VERY pleased with the current state of affairs not only in the US, but all over the world!

I can't stand Bush. But neither he nor Clinton are to blame for 9/11. A cascade of events occurred that were probably not entirely preventable.

Now...Ashcroft: This man is everything of what's wrong with this administration. He ought to read the constitution and have some respect for individual freedoms instead of barnstorming around the country trying to shove the totally uu-American Patriot Act down our throats.

I have no problem with the Patriot Act. I have nothing to hide.

southerngale wrote:I have no problem with the Patriot Act. I have nothing to hide.

True...who does? But here's a potential scenario. You have a work colleagues of middle east descent (parents) who is a political activist in this country. The thing is, lets say he is actively working against Bush or for that matter whoever is president. Not saying this will happen but the Patriot Act will allow the govt to assume YOU are a potential terrorist and your home can be searched....at any time. Is this the kind of govt you want? Lots of folks in Nazi Germany said: "I'm not a Jew so who cares?" Remember, the same govt who comes after someone you're against today can come after you tomorrow. And while you may be a supporter of the current administration, someday there will be an admin you can't stand....and they'll also have the Patriot Act at their disposal. There are reasons our basic freedoms were written into the constitution!

southerngale wrote:I have no problem with the Patriot Act. I have nothing to hide.

Same here! And sorry weatherfella, I disagree that the Patriot Act will be used for that purpose.

weathafella wrote:

southerngale wrote:I have no problem with the Patriot Act. I have nothing to hide.

True...who does? But here's a potential scenario. You have a work colleagues of middle east descent (parents) who is a political activist in this country. The thing is, lets say he is actively working against Bush or for that matter whoever is president. Not saying this will happen but the Patriot Act will allow the govt to assume YOU are a potential terrorist and your home can be searched....at any time. Is this the kind of govt you want? Lots of folks in Nazi Germany said: "I'm not a Jew so who cares?" Remember, the same govt who comes after someone you're against today can come after you tomorrow. And while you may be a supporter of the current administration, someday there will be an admin you can't stand....and they'll also have the Patriot Act at their disposal. There are reasons our basic freedoms were written into the constitution!

9 out of 10 times me and the other two here agree but with this you make a very good point weathafella about the patriot act and i kinda agree. Its not about having something to hide. Its a matter of our freedoms for me and yes should the wrong person get into office they could use this any way they see fit.

Who would be that "wrong person" be though? Because if a Dem gets into office the Patriot Act is history and we are back to square one. And the terrorists will be allowed free reign in this country once again to train in our flight schools.

Oh, I could be swayed on this one too. I remember McCarthy!!!

Lindaloo wrote:Who would be that "wrong person" be though? Because if a Dem gets into office the Patriot Act is history and we are back to square one. And the terrorists will be allowed free reign in this country once again to train in our flight schools.

My point is that the patriot act could use some better wording. I dont think it should be tossed out but it could be worded better to protect our right's as american citizens and no that does not include those who have come here from elsewhere nor should it include arabs either. Maybe that way they will get off thier arses and start putting some pressure on thier homeland govts. And yes i do agree i dont wanna see a democrat come in and just dismantle the whole thing and put us back to square one.

Pburgh wrote:Oh, I could be swayed on this one too. I remember McCarthy!!!

I agree Karan - it's a fine line that we're walking here.

I think that even without the Patriot Act, we DID HAVE the information needed to perhaps prevent 9/11. However, we didn't have the right mechanisms in place to share and digest it all.

Pburgh wrote:Oh, I could be swayed on this one too. I remember McCarthy!!!

Would that be General McCarthy? Until I know I can't respond. LOL!!

Don't stereotype the Patriot Act. When this site was attacked it fell under the Patriot Act. It is not just about people of Middle Eastern background nor Arabs as KOW so blatantly put it.