Dem congressman claims at least 40 ISIS members have returned from Syria

knothead wrote:Chrissy said: He just happened to be in the seat at the time, the ball was already rolling.


You have proven time and again your inability to judge fairly . . . . . the political risks Obama took by making the decision to take bin Laden out were high.  People like you would have a heyday had it gone wrong . . . in fact, i seriously believe you would have preferred a botched mission by Seal team Six so you could celebrate a failure by this president . . . . it did not happen that way Chrissy.  We will never know but we can speculate . . . . would your political heroes have made that brave call? Maybe maybe not . . . take that drone strike but don't send in a Seal team?  . . . . . we will never know.
You, as always, are charming but in la la land . . . .

Considering that semi-retired President Barack Hussein Obama did not consider Osama bin Laden a major consideration. It was a botched mission, not because of what was done by Seal Team Six but what was done by President Obama.

2seaoat wrote:And the Gorlicke wall had nothing to do with anything.
[/b

Red Herring.   The chatter was international.  The FBI has no jurisdiction over the same.   The CIA, State, and Defense had primary responsibility.  If this attack happened in March of the year after the President was in office only three months, I think one could argue like Kennedy did with the Bay of Pigs that he was handed a mess, but these warnings were clear and were made in August in his eighth month of his presidency.

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

The direct warnings to Mr. Bush about the possibility of a Qaeda attack began in the spring of 2001. By May 1, the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation. Weeks later, on June 22, the daily brief reported that Qaeda strikes could be “imminent,” although intelligence suggested the time frame was flexible.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=0

Just for your edification, the FBI is secondary to the initial CIA intelligence and the red herring of distraction does not excuse the negligence.

are you saying there was no other warnings before GW took office? Because he wasn't in office that long before 9/11.

And what do you think he should have done getting a warning like that? shut the country down?

also, it is a well known fact that the two agencies could not share info between them because of that wall which was later changed.

There are threats to this country every day, should the president shut the entire country down every day just in case?

oh and Z, im all good if you want to blame whatever happens under one prez belongs to him. As long as you allow the same rule. such as crappy economy and all the other crappy shit in the last 6 years belongs to Obama. no more blame bush.