Maybe it's me, but I thought it was really cheap to use 9/11 footage in the film they ran just before McCain's speech. I was particularly offended by the clip of the plane hitting the second tower. That's essentially a clip of people being murdered and I believe there are very few occasions when it should be run. A political convention isn't one of them.

No, it wasn't just you.

No we didn't need to see that. We didn't need to have Rudy Giuliani saying that "I didn't hear the Democrats mention 9/11" either. It's disgusting that the Republicans are still using 9/11 as a scare tactic to win votes, especially when we look at the facts.

Bush was warned about Osama Bin Laden and the potential threat posed by Al-Qaeda. The white house even received a memo warning about a strike by Al-Qaeda but Bush was going on vacation and had "more important things" to consider such as clearing brush on his ranch.

After the fact Bush did strike against Afghanistan but then diverted most of the troops to a war with Iraq which had nothing to do with 9/11.

I hope people aren't follish enough to buy this BS yet again.

The Republicans wanted to remind you and all the other bedwetting pinko Americans that the terrorists will attack America again if Obama is elected, probably with nuclear bombs the next time, because Obama and the Democrats don't actually care how many Americans get murdered, actually want Al Qaeda to win, and are against the flag, apple pie, and motherhood.

Just thought I would explain.

"The white house even received a memo warning about a strike by Al-Qaeda"

What specific measures did the Clinton Administration take after receiving the identical PDB in December of 1998?

When, how, and by whose authority were those measures countermanded and removed by the Bush Administration?

What was US troop strength in Afghanistan on January 1, 2002?

January 1, 2003?

Today?

Source(s)?

If Republicans REALLY cared a lot about 9/11 shouldn't they have nominated Rudy as their presidential candidate?

thewolf05827:

"The white house even received a memo warning about a strike by Al-Qaeda"

What specific measures did the Clinton Administration take after receiving the identical PDB in December of 1998?

When, how, and by whose authority were those measures countermanded and removed by the Bush Administration?

What was US troop strength in Afghanistan on January 1, 2002?

January 1, 2003?

Today?

Source(s)?

Why don't you do your own homework?

Clinton's administration ran circles around Bush when it came to terror-prevention. How quickly we forget the FOILED PLOT TO BOMB THE WORLD TRADE CENTER, something that was foiled on Clinton's watch.

Of course, the fact that the most devastating terrorist attack in U.S. history happened on Bush's watch can't be tied in any way to the guy who was actually in charge. That would be unamerican. But linking it to the Democrat that came before him, and who actually DID HIS JOB? Why, that's just peachy, ain't it.

You may find that reading the thread for context can be helpful.

Or you can just shriek off-topic bullshit.

Whatever.

George Kaplan: Why don't you do your own homework?

LeRoy: George, TheWolf never does 'his own homework'. This is his 'modus operandi' as a 'drive-by poster'. He just likes to disagree, just for the sake of being disagreeable. He never bothers to back up or document any of his claims. Maybe you'll get used to him after a while. Or maybe not.

Maybe when you're a little older, Leroy, you'll learn that it isn't my job to support the factual claims made by other posters.

Then again, maybe you won't.

Progressive Bulldog said: The white house even received a memo warning about a strike by Al-Qaeda

LeRoy: I find it hilarious that you were disputing this very well-documented fact, and that you are now claiming that it is 'not your job' to support your own assertions.

Progressive Bulldog finished his sentence with this: but Bush was going on vacation and had "more important things" to consider such as clearing brush on his ranch.

LeRoy: This part of his sentence is opinion and interpretation on the part of Progressive Bulldog. But it does strike me as being pretty accurate. There was, you know (well, you probably DON'T) testimony during the 9/11 hearings that then Attorney-General John Ashcroft told Counter-terrorism honcho Richard Clarke that he 'simply didn't want to hear about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda'.

But that kind of stuff doesn't bother you, Wolfie. You know it was all that Bill Clinton feller what done it. It was all HIS fault!!

"I find it hilarious that you were disputing this very well-documented fact"

Consider a reading-comprehension course, Leroy. I did no such thing.

TheWolf: you'll learn that it isn't my job to support the factual claims made by other posters.

LeRoy: Then do tell. WHAT WAS THE FACTUAL CLAIM HE MADE THAT YOU ARE DISPUTING?????

Sucks to be you, doesn't it Leroy?

I imagine you are posting from your parents' basement. Now you find yourself completely unable to even say what factual claim Progressive Bulldog was making that you find so objectionable.

Perhaps because all the factual claims he made were, uh, factual.

All you had was a series of silly questions, and as the next poster pointed out, you weren't even willing to do your own homework on those.

Are you flunking out of school?

I flunk students who don't turn in their homework.

Would have to say you are flunking on Fray.