I'm not getting into this political debate much, I just want to comment on what mouse said and that will be that:
Quote: "Quote: "Not to mention voting places closed off to observers for "homeland security reasons,"
Provide one example...
"
Okily Dokily. Right here in Binghamton New York, the polls on the east-side were locked away. The east side is predominantly minority. When the Press & Sun Bulletin, our local paper, asked why, they were told by our chief of police "Reasons of homeland security." In New York City, which isn't far from here, several voting halls in Brooklyn and the Bronx were closed for the same reason. In Coeur D' Alene Idaho, my girlfriend's hometown, a few were closed as well. All of these examples were in Minority areas. So yes, it did happen, most certainly.
Quote: "Quote: "First there was lots of rigging in Ohio and Florida. It's the only possible explanation why exit polls were off by more than ever in history only in "battleground states" and only where they had voting machines and only in favor of Bush."
Completely incorrect."
Actually, completely correct. In one of Ohio's districts, over 1300 people voted for George W. Bush. What's odd about this particular district is that less than 700 people were registered to vote there. When Ken Blackwell tried to learn how this could be, he publically stated that approximately 200 (+/-)
dead citizens were on the ballots. The rest of that lot are still unnacounted for and the investigation isn't slated for hearings until 2009... funny timing I think.
Quote: "Quote: " lack of voting machines and huge lines in heavily african american populated areas"
Incorrect also..."
Detroit, Jacksonville Florida, Rochester NY, Los Angeles... to name a few of the cities that suffered from this problem. The only reason you don't know about it is because the press was too busy yapping about battleground states.
Quote: "The 9/11 commision turned up one report pointing to a possible hijacking attack anywhere in America. We had no way of predicting 9/11."
Quote: "In fact there were over 52 warnings over the course of 9 months prior to 911 "
Actually,
both of you are wrong about this one. There were 39 warnings, 14 of which were tagged as vital. There was one that very specifically detailed in regards to the times of flights that were suspect and organizations possibly involved, but the other 38 all refered to planes flying into buildings in NYC, Washington DC, and Chicago (Sears tower was slated for demolition as well). There were also 47 reports that our intelligence gathered about attacks against UK targets, but MI5 intercepted and intervened. But in all fairness, and it pains me to say this, but it really isn't Bush's fault entirely. The director of the CIA at the time did
nothing in lieu of stopping 9/11. Why? Because he has to sort through several hundred suspected terrorist attacks per day and it's next to impossible to know which ones are going to happen. Still, I'm 100% certain Clinton could have prevented 9/11, and here's why:
Quote: "I hate it when people buy into the whole 'no terrorism in the Clinton years' thing. "
It's papers like the one you posted that make me wish I could flash-freeze newspaper editors through sheer mind control. Something your paper left out:
(A) May 21st 1994, a massive terrorist action to gain control of River Bend nuclear power plant in Louisiana and Catawba Nuclear Station in South Carolina at the same time was thwarted.
(B) March 3rd 1997, a sleeper cell situated in Schenectady, NY was arrested by FBI officers when the agency learned that they had planned to attack NYC Port Authority and the NYC Subway system, with additional findings of attacking Philadelphia's Septa transportation system, on unspecified dates.
Also, the bombing of the US Embassies in Africa were done by members of a Rwandan right organization angry over the US's decision to not get involved in the Rwanda Genocide. That's what we learned in college in 2000, before the political terrorism course became so popular that enrollment was impossible. Also, Al Quaeda was ranked 38th on the "most dangerous terrorist organizations" list... now their ranked 1st. Go figure.
North Korea, Syria, rebel factions in Sudan, rogue Generals in russia... these were and still are considered to be larger threats to national security than Iraq has been since 1995.
This topic is a dead horse and we keep beating it's bloody corpse. Either let it go, everyone, or unlock the US Politics thread so we can carry on there. This is
not the place for it. Yes, I know I'm not any better, but that's how I am.
Another request: Unless you live in New York or Washington DC, don't talk about the events of 9/11 as if they effected you personally. Unless you can name people who died that day, unless you can tell me what the air smelled like, unless you had fighter jets flying over your house and rumbling your desk and Apache helicopters using your elementary school's playground as a temporary refuelling zone, you have absolutely no right to talk about how aweful 9/11 was. It may have been an attack against your country, but to me, it was an attack against my friends, and I, like most other people from here, HATE people using our loved ones as guinea pigs for debate. IF I sound angry here, good, because I'm really fed up with it, on these forums and everywhere else.
Quote: "I feel bad for Kurt Cobain. Being exploited like that after your death? Not me!"
Paul Battaggilia Jr., March 25th 1978 - September 11th 2001 (misspelled his name before)
"Hell is an Irish Pub where it's St. Patrick's Day all of the time." ~ Christopher, *The Soprano's*
