ACLU alert on new Ashcroft plan

Fang-Face says:

Re:Clarification
I’m just putting a little context and clarification to the information.

Your context is a half truth. Here’s the whole context. The Clinton/Reno pair attempted to implement a highly intrusive and probably unconstitutional measure to monitor the private activity of web surfers. It was not implemented. The Bush/Ashcroft pair, demonstrating that they have no capacity to learn from the lessons of history, have resurrected it.

I’m willing to bet that Bush supporters who still blame all of the U.S.’s current problems on Clinton will turn a blind eye to their “hero” attempting to implement a Clinton program, or will praise it fulsomely as a much needed measure to protect their cowardly asses.

Oh, and by the way, you aren’t intimating in your message that Anonymous shouldn’t have full first amendment protection of anonymity, are you?

Here’s
some more context on that Clinton/Bush thing. Feel free to point out how Pitt can’t possibly make any sense because his political leanings tilt in the wrong direction.

In truth, however, September 11 became a political football on September 11.
Conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan, in the immediate aftermath of the
attacks, blamed the Clinton administration. “The decision to get down and dirty
with the terrorists, to take their threat seriously and counter them
aggressively, was simply never taken,” wrote Sullivan. Senator Orrin Hatch
referred in 1996 to the terrorist threats, threats which compelled Clinton to
attempt the passage of a comprehensive anti-terrorism bi ll that would have gone
a long way to stopping 9/11, as “Phony threats.” After September 11, he joined
the ‘Blame Clinton’ chorus.

During his administration, Clinton offered legislation that would give the
Treasury Secretary broad powers to ban foreign nations and banks from accessing
American financial markets unless they cooperated with money-laundering
investigations that would expose and terminate terrorist cash flows. The
legislation was killed by Texas Republican Senator Phil Gramm, who was chairman
of the Banking Committee. At the time, he called the bill “totalitarian.” It was
revealed later, of course, that Gramm killed the bill because it would have
blocked Enron officers from laundering stolen stockholder money through the same
offshore conduits the terrorists were using. Gramm, from Texas, was beholden to
Enron, and killed the bill at their behest. Of course, he joined the ‘Blame
Clinton’ chorus after the attacks, and never mind the facts.

–William Rivers Pitt, 9/11 Nonsense, 17 March 2004

According to an editorial in the New York Post, John Kerry is to blame for
the attacks of September 11. Yes, you read that right. John Kerry did it. The
article, written by Paul Sperry and titled “The Warning Kerry Ignored,” claims
that Kerry was given a warning some months before the attacks of security
problems at Logan Airport, where two of the planes originated, and failed to
handle them properly. He sent the warning, received from an FAA agent in Boston,
to the Department of Transportation’s Office of the Inspector General. According
to this FAA agent, and according to Sperry , this wasn’t good enough. Because of
Kerry’s failure, the article argues, 3,000 people are dead.

Hm.

The Bush administration received a blizzard of warnings before September 11
that something huge was about to happen. The security agencies of Germany,
Israel, Egypt and Russia delivered specific warnings about airplanes being used
as bombs against prominent American targets. FBI agents were raising alarms in
Minnesota and Arizona. Donald Kerrick was a deputy National Security Advisor in
the late Clinton administration. He stayed on into the Bush administration. He
was a three-star General, and absolutely not political. He has reported that
when the Bush people came in, he wrote a memo about terrorism, al Qaeda and
Osama bin Laden. The memo said, “We will be struck again.” As a result of
writing that memo, he was not invited to any more meetings. No one responded to
his memo. He felt that, from what he could see from inside the National Security
Council, terrorism was demoted.

–William Rivers Pitt, 9/11 Nonsense, 17 March 2004

Richard Clarke was Director of Counter-Terrorism in the National Security
Council. He has since left. Clarke urgently tried to draw the attention of the
Bush administration to the threat of al Qaeda. Richard Clarke was panicked about
the alarms he was hearing regarding potential attacks. Clarke is at the center
of what has since become a burning controversy: What happened on August 6, 2001?
It was on this day that George W. Bush received his last, and one of the few,
briefings on terrorism. According to reports, the briefing stated bluntly that
Osama bin Laden intended to attack America soon, and contained the word
“hijacking.” Bush responded to the warning by heading to Texas for a month-long
vacation. It is this briefing that the Bush administration has refused to
divulge to the committee investigating the attacks.

There was not a single Republican member of Congress who ever raised a single
question or put a query to the Clinton National Security Council about its
efforts against terrorism before the attacks. When the Clinton team left office,
their National Security group conducted three extensive briefings of the
incoming Bush people. The attitude of the Bush people was, essentially,
dismissive, that it was a “Clinton thing.” Condoleezza Rice has admitted that
the massive file on al Qaeda and bin Laden left for her by outgoing National
Security Advisor Sandy Berger went completely unread until the attacks had taken
place. This happened despite the fact that Berger told her during one such
briefing, “I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on
terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject.” One
FAA agent delivered a security warning that was forwarded to the proper agency
by the Senator who received it. Meanwhile, dozens of alarm bells were blaring in
the White House, and especially in the Oval Office, about impending attacks
using airplanes against prominent targets. This particular chapter of the 9/11
blame game would be uproariously hilarious if it were not so completely absurd.

–William Rivers Pitt, 9/11 Nonsense, 17 March 2004

Fang-Face says:

Re:Clarification
Here’s a truth for you. One of the principles of leadership is: you’re in charge, it’s your fault.

Here’s another truth. Clinton wasn’t the president when the towers came down, Bush was.

Here’s a third truth: the first amendment protects us from each other as much as from Big Brother.

Fang-Face says:

Re:Clarification
The failures in intelligence and security are the result of the Bush adminstration, not the Clinton administration. It doesnt’ surprise me that you can’t understand that. Perhaps you should take a break from the ideology of whatever wrong-wing sources you patronize as well.