Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: America You Suck

Posted 10 years ago on May 10, 2013, 5:30 p.m. EST by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

What the fuck America we bury the dead and let them rest in peace this boston bombing nonsense just goes to show anything i loved in America died on 9-11.

Officials in the county where the remains of suspected Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev have been buried say they were stunned to learn of the burial and they are looking into whether the law was followed in the process. http://boston.com/metrodesk/2013/05/10/boston-marathon-bombing-suspect-tamerlan-tsarnaev-buried-doswell-virginia-according-two-sources/WJZCb0rTWtLFZTMzKzST4L/story.html “As long as everything was done legally, there’s really very little we can do,” said Floyd Thomas, chairman of the board of supervisors of Caroline County. “What we would do is make sure that all of the laws regarding this particular burial were adhered to. If they were not, then I believe we would have to look at undoing what happened.”



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by shadz66 (19985) 10 years ago

''How Elites and Media Minimize Dissent and Bury Truth'', by Paul Craig Roberts :

''Those few Americans who are free of the constraints imposed by dogmas on their ability to think and to process information have a huge responsibility for their small number. The assault on the rule of law began in the last years of the Clinton regime, but the real destruction of the US Constitution, the basis for the United States, was achieved by the neoconservative George W. Bush and Obama regimes. Wars without declarations by Congress, torture in violation of both US and international law, war crimes in violation of the Nuremberg standard, indefinite detention and assassination of US citizens without due process of law, universal spying on US citizens without warrants, federalization of state and local police now armed with military weapons and uniforms, detention centers, “your papers, please” (without the Gestapo “please”) not only at airports but also on highways, streets, bus terminals, train stations, and at sporting events.''

[Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy in the Ronald Reagan administration & an associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was a columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. His latest book, ''The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West'' is now available. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/ ]

e tenebris, lux ...

[-] 4 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

If not for the lies of George Bush, the Boston Marathon bombing would likely never have occurred. Why not direct you anger at the greater criminal? Tamarlan is dead, but Bush still deserves to be tried.


[-] 0 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

You want to blame Bush for Boston, are you serious? This wasn't just failure; it isn't just incompetence - it is the intentional sacrifice of life to the political whim and purpose of a pro-Muslim administration.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

If Obama was pro Muslim, why would a Muslim attack here? Obama continues the Bush legacy of never ending war. Let's include him as a reason for Muslim terrorism as well. They're both guilty as hell.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Sure. 9/11 was commissioned and planned and trained for when Clinton was President. Boston was planned and orchestrated when Obama was President.

Never let the truth stand in the way of a partisan malicious lie.

[-] 0 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 10 years ago

Yea, and Gore refused to stop the election certification process in 2000 despite 15k sigs of constituents and maybe 6 congress people against it. It only needed a senator to stop the certification, and Gore was, as well as house speaker, and opponent of gwb in the election; but still saw the election certified.

[-] -1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

So Bush skates free? Amazing.

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Here is what is hilarious. Under Obama, debt has increased dramatically, wages are flat, AND the stock market is booming. Guess who he is making richer and richer?

Old white men! Just too funny!

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

For 9/11 and the Boston Bombing? Yes absolutely. He hasn't been in office for 5 years now. Boston is ALL Obama.

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

I guess you missed the part where he sat there like a fuckin jack ass for 2 minutes after getting the news on 9/11.

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

And Boston? Bush's fault? Spin that for me.

He may not have reacted well, but he didn't cause it, Clinton did.

[-] 0 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 10 years ago

I never said anything about Boston.

Bush Bush Bush Clinton Clinton Bush Bush Obama Obama ... Seeing a trend here, an oligarchy disguised as democracy. Have fun.

[-] -2 points by linden (-16) 10 years ago

still blaming bush ?

[-] 3 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

Did he suddenly become innocent?

Did what he did, suddenly go away?

Did the things he set in motion suddenly reverse themselves?


[-] -1 points by linden (-16) 10 years ago

obama is responsible for his failures.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago
[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

And this relates to the OP how? Obama is Mr Drone Strike. Obama is Mr Keep Gitmo open. Obama is fighting the "Good War in Afghanistan."

This is on Obama, completely. I don't remember any bombing while Bush was in charge. Do you?

You're pathetic. Loser.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Here's the info about when drone strikes began. Under Bush's watch, 22% of deaths resulting from drone strikes were children.


[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Quote: "Obama increased drone strikes dramatically. end quote. Your link, you own it.

Look behind the curtain, you are a sap being played by the Wizard.

What a douche. Wake up. Have some self respect.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

You might have missed this graph from the same link.


There is no difference between either administration. Both are owned by the same corporate donations.

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Then apologize for even bringing Bush into Obama's mess. The Boston Bombers were radicalized ENTIRELY during Obama's Admin. Not one speck of their radicalization occurred when Bush was in office.

Just say you we're wrong, because you are.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Are you actually serious?

The NATO stoush with Russia over Chechnya was in the late 90's.

You're a failure even as a troll.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

And again, how is that Bushes fault?

This I gotta hear.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Don't be assigning a position to me that I never presented, and then expect me to defend it.

I'm just shooting down your BS as you post it. This post included.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Say it. " Bush had nothing to do with Boston." I bet you are too cowardly to say it. And then say " Boston occurred on Obama's watch."

Both statements are the truth. Should be easy to say.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Bush was told by the FBI and CIA that a conventional hijacking might occur. There is not one shred saying the planes were to be used as bombs. Airport security was tightened.

And all this from the liberal New York Time's, not your biased un fact checked rant link.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

In the past few days, government officials have acknowledged for the first time thatan F.B.I. agent in Phoenix had urged the F.B.I. headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools. That memorandum also cited Mr. bin Laden by name and suggested that his followers could use the schools to train for terror operations, officials who have seen the memorandum said.

Administration officials reached this evening said the warning given to Mr. Bush did not come from the F.B.I. or from the information developed by the Phoenix agent. Instead, it was provided as part of the C.I.A. briefing he is given each morning, suggesting that it was probably based on evidence gathered abroad.

The C.I.A. had been listening intently over the July 4 holiday last year, after what one investigator called ''a lot of static in the system suggesting something was coming.'' But then the evidence disappeared as quickly as it had arisen, and by August, officials have said, little was heard from Al Qaeda.

The warning of the hijacking was given to the president at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., where he was on vacation.

Taken together, the news of the C.I.A. warning and the information developed separately by the F.B.I. explains Mr. Bush's anger after Sept. 11 that intelligence gathered on American soil and abroad was not being centrally analyzed and that the agencies were not working well together.

Several times he has told audiences that he is working on solving that problem, and these days he is briefed jointly by the F.B.I and the C.I.A., ensuring that each hears information from the other agency.

It was not clear this evening why the White House waited eight months after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington to reveal what Mr. Bush had been told.

But Mr. Fleischer noted that in the daily flow of intelligence information the president receives, the warning of what appeared to be the threat of a conventional hijacking was not as serious as it appears in retrospect. ''We were a peacetime society, and the F.B.I. had a different mission,'' he said. Mr. Fleischer said the information given to the president in Texas had prompted the administration to put law enforcement agencies on alert. But there was no public announcement. Bush was wared about the possibility of a conventional Nonetheless, a senior administration official said tonight that there was speculation within the government that heightened security -- if it truly existed in August and September -- might have prompted the hijackers to use box cutters and plastic knives to avoid detection.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

And Bush got non specific warnings, not how, who, when. Basic generalized warnings but no substance, no places to look. Not how it was gonna be done, nothing.

Obama had a name, an address, a reason. Way way different. And Bush had been in office 7 months. Obama 5 years.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile." -- Condoleeza Rice May 16 2002 Press Conference:

"The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning." -- CIA Intelligence Report for President Bush, July 2001

Warnings about 9/11 were sent to the Bush / Cheney administration from

Afghanistan (under the Taliban) Argentina Britain Cayman Islands Egypt France Germany India Israel Italy Jordan Morocco Saudi Arabia? Russia USA (FBI investigations of the flight schools)


[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Hmmm, let me see now. Within minutes of the attack, we had photos of Mohammed Atta and his henchmen. Or don't you recall that? The FBI had already given the names of the Saudi nationals in their report about the flight schools, and their shenanigans on the gambling boats in New Orleans.

Or are you one of those vacant mouth-breathers that needs reminding of the obvious?

[-] -1 points by Sockpuppet33 (-4) 10 years ago

freemarket5555 Real loose with the facts hey?

Quote: "And Bush got non specific warnings, not how, who, when. Basic generalized warnings but no substance, no places to look. Not how it was gonna be done, nothing"

"not how:: The threats were that commercial aircraft would be used as weapons and flown into buildings.

not "who": Bin Laden had announced he was planning a major terrorist event against the U.S.

not "when": Imminent

"Basic generalized warnings but no substance": Intelligence sources were hearing tons of "terrorist chatter"

, "no places to look": Up in the sky, major airports and Afghanistan where OBL was known to be.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

You mentioned Bush and drone strikes in a thread dedicated to the Boston Bombing. They aren't connected but you mentioned Bush for an incident 5 years after he left. Did you not?

If you want to end this fairly, just say "Bush had nothing to do with Boston." Then you would be correct.

And all that stuff about Grozny and Mikhail Evstafiev? That's 2009. OBAMA.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Twist it any way that you like, but it was you that said bush was not responsible for any drone strikes. I proved that to be BS.

When shown that the issues that radicalised the Chechens happened in the 90's, you said that was on clinton's watch.

You're a republicon shill. Admit that, and move on.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

It happened on Obama's watch. The FBI knew about him in 2010-11, warned by the Russians. Bush had been gone for 3 years. Tamerlan was still boxing in 2009, still trying to be an American.

So again, how is it Bushes fault. What,you afraid to answer? Yep

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

See above. And find where I mentioned Boston was on Bush. You can't, because it didn't happen. Now, digest some facts, for a change.

Stanford Journal of International Relations 32 • Fall 2009 Mikhail Evstafiev A Chechen man picks up a loaf of bread in Grozny. Given the U.S.'s recent record of militarily intervening in cases of international human rights abuse, its failure to take a decisive stance regarding Russia's invasions of separatist Chechnya in the 1990s came as a surprise. Despite reports of major human rights abuse perpetrated by Russian soldiers against ethnic Chechens, the U.S. took a noncommittal stance, making only the occasional rhetorical appeal to Moscow. U.S. ambivalence toward the Russo-Chechen conflict arose from a strategic interest in supporting the new democratically-elected Russian government, courting an important ally in the War on Terror, and avoiding a "re-frosting" in relations between the U.S. and Russia.

The Russo-Chechen conflict unmasked the hypocrisy of U.S. foreign policy, to which the U.S. will eventually have to answer when a similar conflict occurs elsewhere. (end quote)

And if you're saying that Obama's to blame because he was aware of these two Chechens, then how's about we discuss Bush being told by several secret services all over the planet about the imminent islamist attack on the twin towers.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Too chickenshit to answer? You said the drone strikes are on Bush. You post a link. I destroy it. . You mention Chechnya inthe late 90's, why? CLINTON was in office in the late 90's. So how is Bush responsible for a bombing by some radicalized Chechen that occurred 5 years after Bush left office and Chechnya was radicalized on Clinton's watch.

If you don't explain you are a dog worm coward, a wimp hiding behind your own gutless lack of courage.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Are you frothing at the mouth when you get like this?

You're saying the current admin is responsible for Boston.

Where's your proof?

Seems that as long as a Republicon isn't to blame, you're fine with it.

Stick to trolling. Your grasp on reality is slipping severely.

[-] -2 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Who was President inthe 90's? For Pete's sake, it was Clinton! Bush didn't take office till 2001. So how is A radicalized Chechnya even remotely on Bush? Pease answer.

And I never said he wasn't responsible for drone strikes but nothing like Obama.

I am not a shill or anyone. You clearly love fellating any dumbass Democrat, evnat the risk of the truth. I haven't lied. You have. And you are getting screwed right ow ad you get on your knees and suck.

Just open your eyes.

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Yes, I see the spittle flying now.

I feel for your poor keyboard.

I couldn't care less if Obama got ousted tomorrow, and someone NOT on a corporate payroll got to call the shots. Someone like Jill Stein.

Maybe she's responsible for keeping the NORAD defence aircraft on the ground that fateful September day in 2001? Hmmm? In your crazy world, anything seems possible.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 10 years ago

OK Glenn.

Aren't you late for a meeting with Alex?

Something about agenda 21.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Yes for Iraq and Afghanistan. Maybe you can justify invading and occupying an entire country because of the action of 19 Saudi Arabians, or the lies told by a single source regarding chemical weapons. I sure can't.

And I also blame Obama for continuing the war in Afghanistan. Political persuasion doesn't affect my viewpoint. It's really a pleasure not to have to defend the indefensible.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

9/11 is Clinton. Boston is Obama. That is the gist of the OP.

Tell the truth, it will set you free.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Let's see your evidence.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

But don't let the truth bother you. And please don't blame Obama as my stock investments continue to soar, as he creates another asset bubble by over borrowing, making old white men Richer and richer.

All his spending had done, all the QE as done is elevate stock asset prices, hasn't created jobs for middle class at all.

My 401k has tripled in the last few years, thru no great intellect by me, because you dopes elected Obama. Barack is making me rich, by creating a fake asset bubble in stock. Who gets payed for the fool? You and anyone else who doesn't own stock.

You guys, it's all Bush, Bush, Bush, even when the guy hadn't been in office for 5 years and JPMorgan is reaping record profits because Obama is feeding the stock market machine.

You are all being played the fools. OPEN YOUR EYES! Look around! Who is getting rich? Bankers! Hedge funders! Mutual funds! Follow the MONEY! The stock marketis soaring and who is benefitting? Follow the money!

Bush is long gone, 5 years gone, and yet the market is over 16000 and unemployment is still awful. Follow the money!

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Strawman much? You're still assigning stances and postions to others that simply aren't their own, and then expecting people to defend what you've created.

Follow the money September eleven 2001, and tell me again how honest the last admin was.

Then focus upon the faulty evidence used to justify an illegal invasion, which, all this time later, never achieved anything more tangible than creating another few million people that hate America.

[-] 1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

I hate to tell you this. They already hated America. They didn't and don't need another excuse. Or dint that occur to you when thy attacked us 9/11 when we weren't at war with them?

And all those newly minted people who hate America? Not one has attacked America. the ones who attacked us? All created pre George Bush.

Bush shouldn't have gone after Iraq but don't kid yourself. Obama owns everything now. And Boston is all his.

[-] 2 points by UnFriendlyObserverC (43) 10 years ago

Bush, Obama, Clinton. Don't be conned. They're just different cheeks on the same ass. Corrupt puppets who role play conflict between each other. It's much like WWF Pro wrestling.

You might be kissing GWB's ass thinking you're on his team. Newsflash, you might be on his team, but he's not on your's.

[-] 0 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

I ain't kissing his ass. I am being honest. He owns Iraq lock stock and barrel. He has to deal with it, the damage to his legacy.

You need to quit kissing Obama's ass, he is crushing America.

[-] 1 points by UnFriendlyObserverC (43) 10 years ago

When did I every say anything good about Obomba?

I said it in 2002 and I'll say it now, going into Iraq was a stupid move. If we would have left Saddam in there, HE would have taken care of Iran for us.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

I hate to tell you this; (not really)

You're walking and talking in ever-increasing circles.

We need an administration that is FOR the people. We won't be finding that in a democrat or republican admin. Both parties have sold out to the highest bidder, and stymied the democratic process of We the People.

[-] 0 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

No, what I did is catch your your bullshit. This thread is about Boston, and Bush had zero to do with Boston. But you won't say it.

You are a coward, an Aussie pussy, who won't be honest. BTW how many Aborigines have you screwed over?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

I have indigenous blood. Did you have a point to make there?

You've been shot down in flames, mate. You're not worthy of any more of my valuable time. Whoever is paying you to come here should be asking for their money back.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

Probably not even human. There seemed to be a few similar looking usernames pop up at around the same time this month.

Freemarket5555, Richard80, Jason91, Swat5, and boxersateros777, all recent additions. I'm thinking, ignore.

Edit: I just noticed a 'socialrevolution85.'

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

This would be the 3rd attack of the bots, then?

I dunno. I just have this bullshit~o~meter that is wired to take down the crapologists.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 10 years ago

They're relentless.

And a well-tuned bullshit-o-meter is always a good tool to have. You just have to be careful not to let it keep you off-track for too long.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

True story. I do aim to run them in as many circles (or more) as they are trying to run me. Did you notice?

Not that it's important, but I like to keep up with the practise and all.

[-] -2 points by LoneRanger (-307) 10 years ago

People with well-tuned bullshit-o-meters dismiss conspiracy theorists with a quick glance at their work. There's no quack bigger than a truther, an anti-vaxer, a chemtrails advocate, a NWO advocate, etc...

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Run me around? My 401k went from $800000 to $2.4 million while you are fellating Obama and the liberals. I am now fairly rich, white, and haven't done one thing to earn it, while you get out another set of knee pads, and suck, blindly worshipping your god with your mouth and all he doing is making rich white people richer.

I laugh all the way to the bank, and so does JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, inly WAY bigger, for doing nothing really, and you can't stop swallowing.

[-] 0 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

This is evidence for Obama's connection to the Boston bombing?

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

You said" if not for the lies of George Bush, Boston wouldn't have happened."

Tamerlan wasn't radicalized till 2009, Obama, and he was radicalized in Chechnya, which was radicalized when Clinton was president.

You are a liar or stupid or both.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Bush's invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan radicalized tens of thousands of Muslims worldwide. Yes or no?

How did Clinton radicalize Chechnya? Weren't the Russians responsible for that?

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Fuck you. You said Bush lies caused Boston. Tamerlan was ok in America till 2009 and Bush was long gone and he was radicalized in Chechnya, not Iraq or Afghan.

You are a loser. You can't admit when the truth is plainly in front. Bush, Bush, Bush.

You fucked up liberals are just stupid. And you can't admit error. Bush had nothing to do with Boston, you said he did. Just admit it.

As many Iraqis are less radical as have become more radical, but still that has nothing to do with Boston.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

It doesn't matter where Tamerlan was radicalized, it matters what radicalized him. Most likely it was Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan, who many Muslims believe was a war on Islam.

[-] -3 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

You are an asshole. Plain, simple.

Then who is to blame for 9/11. Weren't no wars then.

Fuck. Just be honest. Bush had nothing to do with Boston. And I bet you are poor and blaming Bush for that.

[-] 1 points by DarkLordOfTruth (-43) 10 years ago

9/11 was caused by islamic terrorists. They are to blame.

[-] -1 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

What evidence do you need? Bush was never once told airliners could be used as bombs. Clinton was, all thruout the 90's


Read thru it. Bush was never alerted to the risk. He WAS alerted to the risk of a conventional hijacking, but not use as bombs.

• 1990-1996: Mary Schiavo, former Inspector General for U.S. Dept. of Transportation (1990-1996) resigned after the FAA tried to classify her report detailing lax security at the nation's major airports. Agents were able to sneak fake bombs, hand grenades, guns and knives through metal detectors. Congress, according to Schiavo, was not interested in making it hard on the airline industry, so they swept it under the rug!

• 1993 – A Pentagon expert postulates that an airplane could be used as a missile to bomb national landmarks. This idea is not published in the “Terror 2000" report.

• 1994 – Phoenix FBI discovers videotapes two men trying to recruit an FBI informant to be a suicide bomber, one of which is linked to Sheikh Abdul-Rahman (the blind Shiekh incarcerated in New York for his role in the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993).

• 1994 – Three planes are crashed or attempted to crash into buildings this year. A Fed Ex employee tries to crash a DC-10 into a company building in Memphis but is overpowered by the crew. A lone pilot crashes a small plane onto the White House grounds. An Air France flight is hijacked by terrorists linked to al Qaeda, with the goal to crash it into the Eiffel Tower, but French Special Forces storm plane before it takes off.

• Bob Graham asserts that since at least 1994, intelligence agencies received information indicating terrorists were contemplating using aircraft as weapons, and this information did not lead to any specific intelligence assessment of this form of threat or any government reaction to it.

• December 1994 – Ramzi Yousef plants a small bomb on Philippine Airlines flight to Tokyo as part of a trial run of Operation Bojinka.

• January 1995 – Philippines disrupts Operation Bojinka to explode 11 or 12 passenger planes over the Pacific Ocean and to crash others into prominent US buildings. Philippines warns US of targets for attack, including CIA headquarters, Pentagon, nuclear power plant, TransAmerica Tower (San Francisco), Sears Tower (Chicago), and World Trade Center. Plotter Abdul Hakim Murad is handed over to FBI in April 1995 and he identifies 10 other men in flight training who were involved.

I can't copy it all, too large, but virtually all the warnings occurred under President Clinton, in regards to airliners used as bombs. Plus it was more theory, game theory, not fact. <<<

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

So 911 was Clinton's fault because he failed to inform Bush? So does that mean Clinton is also responsible for invading Afghanistan and Iraq as well?

[-] 0 points by freemarket5555 (-182) 10 years ago

Iraq is all on Bush. He broke it, he owns it. And his legacy will reflect that, to his dishonor.

Now you be honest. 9/11 and Boston are all Clinton and Obama.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 10 years ago

Bush as well in Afghanistan with Obama a close second.

Your previous links to Clinton and warnings of the potential of aircraft as weapons doesn't make Clinton responsible for the 911 attack. Decades of standing armies in Islamic countries is the most likely cause. So let's blame every President since Nixon? What would it accomplish?

As for Obama and Boston, your argument focused on economic matters and so made no sense.

[-] -2 points by Theeighthpieceuv8 (-32) from Seven Sisters, Wales 10 years ago

Rumors abound that state portions of his body were removed, cremated, and will be utilized in the gun powder mix of Boston's upcoming July 4th fireworks display.

[+] -4 points by Stormcrow2 (-184) 10 years ago

Well what can you expect. There is no longer any loyalty towards this country anymore -

People who reside here don't give a shit anymore and the people who come to this country no longer want to assimilate but instead want to change it.

As I stated in previous posts the X, Y and melinimum generation will be in charge in 30 or so years - think it's bad now just wait you will no longer recognize this country as being an American Country.

[-] 2 points by Shule (2638) 10 years ago

I wonder what the Afghans and Iraqis say about people from the U.S. who come to their country?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

It's not a secret that Americans aren't the flavour or the month.

[-] -3 points by Stormcrow2 (-184) 10 years ago

Well if you don't like being an American - move. I don't give a shit what other people from other countries think about America.

What I am concerned though is the "I don't give a shit" attitude about America coming of the people living here.

For anyone who thinks they can have a better life living outside the bordes of the US then I would recommend that they move.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

I'm not American. But many online contacts of mine who are American are deciding which country is best for them to migrate to.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2638) 10 years ago

Well, then why is it that U.S.A. people (I'm not saying American 'cause I don't want to include Mexicans, Canadians,and the whole of South America) go and make life miserable for people in other countries by making wars, and dropping drones, and more. Maybe if our Government stopped doing that and more people stopped supporting government in doing those things, then people from other countries would not come over and blow things up here in the States.

I am a U.S. citizen, born and raised here, love this country, but I've been around this world and seen it, and am pretty mad at our government being the bully on the planet. I understand why so many people are pissed at us. Our government needs to stop.

And if you do not think what happens overseas does not have a direct impact on what is happening here at home, think again.

[-] 0 points by Stormcrow2 (-184) 10 years ago

Think maybe it's because a lot of the assholes living in the US of A don't give a shit about themselves so they don't give a shit about anybody else - including foreigners.

We have a system of voting in this country and apparently not very many people use this method to rid those in charge who aren't doing a good job.

Look at who we have in Washington DC today running this country and and you wonder why the government does what it does.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2638) 10 years ago

Yes I agree with you about a lot of US Assholes. I don't know if that is a symptom or a cause.

Have you participated int the political process in the USA lately? Its totally rigged. One has a choice between an R ass or a D ass. Either way one gets an ass who is paid off by the same mob. Even at the local government level its totally corrupt. In our town we tried to save a city park from condo construction by petition a few years back after the city council wouldn't listen. We got over 180% of the signatures needed in half the time allotted, the city blew us off saying they do not need to listen to the public. I can understand why so many folks are apathetic to voting. I still vote (for the principle to maintaining the right to do so), but no long believe anything can get changed by merely voting.

[-] 0 points by Stormcrow2 (-184) 10 years ago

Why should that matter - we are talking about people who live here in America - how about commenting on that subject matter.

[-] 2 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 years ago

in 30 years??? dude generation x is closing in on 50. eddie vedder is 48.

[-] -1 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

Generation Y have been trained to consume constantly, and ask no questions.

What's gonna happen when they take the reins?

Their training has been so completely succesful that marketers are wondering if it can ever be undone.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 years ago

consumption in it of it self may not be all that bad it is the sourcing that is bad. if things were properly sourced prices would reflect the true social costs and people would consume accordingly. that is the free market notion of it anyways.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

It the waste issue, for mine, QM. There's literally millions of old 'puter monitors, printers, keyboards hard drives, cables, ad infinitum, full of toxic products, like mercury, and resources that are becoming scarce, like copper. And that's just one small sector of the waste our lifestyles produce. Think about the cars, and the way they are recycled isn't exactly environmentally sound.

We live on a finite planet. It might not be an issue for several generations, but now that we've pretty much given up on the concept of upgrading to another planet, or sending miners out there to bring back resources, we are stuck with this one for the foreseeable future.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 10 years ago

imagine if technology was built to be upgraded.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 10 years ago

The space race was responsible for huge leaps forward for more than just mankind. Lithium ion battery technology (all of our phones, tablets, ipads, netbooks use it) and the associated advances in micro-processors and tiny electronic gadgetry all came from the necessity of cramming as much as we could into a small usable space.

Imagine if all the cash spent on building the MOAB (mother of all bombs) was redirected to building something constructive?

Seems like capitalism has things arse about face, to me.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

The space race was responsible for huge leaps forward

Sad to think of all the advanced tech that is not being used/implemented.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 10 years ago

The corpoRATions would pitch a fit - fewer sales of complete and expensive systems. That is why standardization has been so stubornley fought. More parts sales if not standard - well not more sales exactly - more expensive parts ( being non-standard ).