Yep..

Post #40,310 by bepatient 5/29/02 11:35:43 AM Reply	Yep.. ...and discussed in the context of the interview with C Rice on non-specific information available now and in the past...it appears that Dem Senator Graham is indeed saying that this info should be made public...to indeed tell the public on a continual basis that they are not safe. And...the program's in general (not just Meat (heh) the Press) had Democrats backing away from statements made by H Clinton and a couple of other loons that suggested rather strongly (by holding up the Post in Clinton's case) that GW knew of impending attacks...instead focussing on a "breakdown in intelligence" and wanting to make sure that these "warning signs" won't be missed again...which has been going on since Ridge was annointed "Big Brother". Not sure where all that other crap came from that right shifted this forum...(well I do...but thats secondary ;-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,329 by Simon_Jester 5/29/02 1:37:43 PM 5/29/02 1:42:53 PM Reply	Excellent...so, what are you arguing again? So...if I understand it right, you're enjoying the fact that Democrats are complaining that vague non-specific terrorist threats were never published prior to 9/11 and that Democrats are complaining about vague non-specific terrorist threats currently being published. And you're using Senator Graham, somehow as an example. Yet, Senator Graham complains that we haven't done enough and goes into specifics on the current threats. Doesn't that imply that Senator Graham doesn't agree that vague non-specific threats are enough? BTW: I'm glad to see that the "breakdown in intelligence" that Senator Feinstein noted back in May 2001 is finally being fixed. I'm just sorry that the current administration ignored it until 2 building fell. Edited by Simon_Jester May 29, 2002, 01:42:53 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #40,333 by bepatient 5/29/02 2:01:44 PM Reply	I wasn't arguing... ...just making the observation that you characterized in your first paragraph as well as the observation on the backpedal of other Dems away from the "he knew" to the more sedate "we should have known". It really was a simple point really. I found it amusing. The claim from >both< sides that neither side was politically motivated. My friend decided to chime in about some other nonsense after that. Sen Graham aparently believes that most intel should be made public so that we free thinking adults can parse the info themselves. That is too far too the opposite end of the spectrum and, imo, could compromise alot of the sources of that intel. The system put in place by Ridge seems to be a decent balance...the threat is there...any marked increase in volume of non-specific intel reports should require notice to law enforcement and possibly public warning. He was just one of the several that I had heard criticizing Bush for not making the August 6 briefing public and/or issuing warnings based on the information contained within it. I remembered him saying it though...and knew that transcripts of those Sunday AM shows are online...so I used his. However...around here I should know that if I don't openly despise Bush and vehemently oppose anything the man says or does...that makes me an apologist. I find that even more amusing. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,372 by Ashton 5/29/02 4:28:02 PM Reply	Nah Beep, no need to despise your candidate having been IDd as The Village Idiot after selection, merely because he gave every indication before selection. (At least you voted for Something, one supposes) After all, if you were prescient you'd be rich already, and Own that Corporation. (and your sec. could write yer posts of the sort: Nyaa Nyaa Nyaaaa!) Right? Ashton Corporateless therefore presumably aimless
Post #40,383 by bepatient 5/29/02 4:53:44 PM Reply	Actually Ash... ...all of the NJ electoral votes went to Al Gore. So it would really depend on how you decide to classify >my< candidate. The 2 main candidates were both idiots. The following several were just as bad or worse. Ralph??? President?? "Unsafe at any US location" would be the next book. R, D, GDI, L...no matter...we've guaranteed that noone in their right mind would ever want to be President...so we get nutcases and idiots. Shame is...alot of folks want these nutcases to have even more authority than they already do in order to "save us" (hallelujah) from ourselves. If I were prescient, thusly rich...I don't think I would bother owning that Corporation...that requires >work<;) And I already type faster than my secretary. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,391 by Ashton 5/29/02 5:17:30 PM Reply	Damn, BeeP.. Spoken like an Ordained Skeptic! Se ya at the Roast tonight; we're featuring unborn-baby Naif as an appetizer. :-\ufffd Ashton so much to do so little reason to imagine it matters Aha!
Post #40,411 by bepatient 5/29/02 7:33:00 PM Reply	Oooh...my favorite! You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,398 by Simon_Jester 5/29/02 5:56:48 PM Reply	Grin -- I agree... Sen Graham aparently believes that most intel should be made public so that we free thinking adults can parse the info themselves. That is too far too the opposite end of the spectrum and, imo, could compromise alot of the sources of that intel. The system put in place by Ridge seems to be a decent balance...the threat is there...any marked increase in volume of non-specific intel reports should require notice to law enforcement and possibly public warning. I think Sen. Graham (apparent) idea of throwing most of the terrorist intel out to the public is bound for problems - false positives and pure bulk of unsubstantied reports will cause problems. And...for the record, my recollections confirm yours of Sen. Graham comments directly after the Washington Post came out.
Post #40,436 by Silverlock 5/29/02 9:52:30 PM Reply	What does that have to do with my original point? If I remember correctly, you never responded to the actual topic. Correct me if I'm wrong. Were the latest spate of terrorist threat warnings a ploy to defect criticism or not? Re-elect Gore in 2004
Post #40,440 by bepatient 5/29/02 10:09:04 PM Reply	Everything [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=40377\|Formal] Follow along... He should have made an announcement...even though the threats were non-specific. (Dem criticism) He makes non-specific announcemets. He only did it to scare people so they'd ignore other things.(your criticism) So... He doesn't make announcements...something happens...you tell him to make announcements...he does...now he shouldn't have because he only did it to scare people. Don't you find that just a tad silly? You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,447 by Silverlock 5/29/02 10:17:52 PM Reply	You continue to miss the point The current regime has used warnings of terrorist threats to deflect criticism. Address this point instead of your own (different) point. please. Re-elect Gore in 2004
Post #40,451 by bepatient 5/29/02 10:24:37 PM Reply	To deflect >what< criticism? The criticism that they DIDN'T ISSUE WARNINGS! So they did. And now you're telling them that they used the warnings to deflect the criticism that they didn't issue warnings. Aren't you finding this anywhere near as amusing as I am??? You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,458 by Silverlock 5/29/02 10:38:15 PM Reply	Don't play stupid It's beneath you. The point was, and remains, the current regime is using fear of terrorist attacks (the many and varied recent 'warnings') to deflect criticism. Try again. Re-elect Gore in 2004
Post #40,460 by Simon_Jester 5/29/02 10:38:24 PM Reply	Bepatient... this is annoying. You're standing here (after I cited Senator Feinstein's article) and are telling us, with a straight face that the only thing Democrats have complained about was the lack of a warning. That there was no other thing that the President could've done? Surely, if the only thing the President could do was issue warnings, then that's the ONLY thing he's done since 9/11, right?
Post #40,461 by bepatient 5/29/02 10:45:04 PM Reply	Look...its really simple. And I don't find it terribly important...its the continuing MO. One of the single largest points harped on by the Dems was that no warnings were issued in response to the non-specific threats contained in the Aug 6 briefing. Noone is saying thats the only criticism...just one of the more pronounced ones. So they issued warnings. TO get this criticism. I find that funny...ok? Very simple really. Both R & D sides seem to agree that the Intel committees need to address the failings in the systems...and to a large part Ridge's office is responsible for these things...and has been working on these issues. I happen to agree with Cheney in that the nature of the problem is way too sensitive to allow an independent panel in to make an inquiry. Independent panels can't keep secrets...and there are secrets here than need to be kept. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #40,448 by Silverlock 5/29/02 10:18:45 PM 5/29/02 10:39:45 PM Reply	Dupe post. Ignore. Re-elect Gore in 2004 Edited by Silverlock May 29, 2002, 10:39:45 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #40,442 by folkert 5/29/02 10:10:54 PM Reply	Absolutely nothing.... Did you know that a scientist discovered that a new unique speces? Yeah, the first cross between Animal and Plant... an Barn Owl and an Oak tree... A completely unexpected result came about... Down..... More.... Yet some more... Almost.. Al Gore `greg, curley95@attbi.com -- REMEMBER ED CURRY!!!`
Post #40,444 by bepatient 5/29/02 10:12:21 PM Reply	that was...um...unexpected.... rofl You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Al Gore