Berger removes documents

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 10:49 pm

President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a Justice Department investigation after removing highly classified terrorism documents and handwritten notes from a secure reading room during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings, The Associated Press has learned

OK spin doctors have at it!!

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 11:08 pm

Ok I am not playing dumb here but anyone have any idea what type of documents we are talking about? Obviously it was major or it wouldn't have been taken. Just wondering who it implicates and for what?

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 11:17 pm

secure reading room

it had to be a plot :twisted:

...who was the inside man inside the room :shock:

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:56 am

He just took them home for a little light reading before turning in. Must have forgotten to check them out with the Secure Librarian. :lol:

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 8:42 am

Just for the record NC she is a he.

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 8:45 am

DEHog wrote:Just for the record NC she is a he.

DOUGHHHHHHH!!! Let me quickly edit my last post. :oops:

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 8:56 am

Wow so what they are trying to say is that There was another president in office before Bush, and Wow maybe the terrorist were plotting this while Clinton was in office and wow Clinton and his people knew something about terroristic activity.

WOW THAT IS AMAZING....... :shock:

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:14 am

I agree Gambit!!!!!

And they planted that Children's book there for Bush to read when the attacks were going on!!!!!!

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:47 am

Funny Redskins rule how this post is about Clinton and a screw up in his administration, even if it's just one of his staff covering their @ss. But you turned it around to be President Bush's fault.
Is stealing classified documents something you want from you administration?

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:58 am

I'm just saying the 9/11 attacks were being planned while Clinton was in office, but since they happened on Bush's watch he takes all the blame.

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:16 am

NikiH wrote:Funny Redskins rule how this post is about Clinton and a screw up in his administration, even if it's just one of his staff covering their @ss. But you turned it around to be President Bush's fault.
Is stealing classified documents something you want from you administration?

When are you Conservatives going to stop blaming Clinton? You conservatives have been after Clinton ever since he took office. You slam him and his staff for anything and everything you can think of. Out of all the times you tried to get him only one comes out to be true and that was a personal issue. And now, I gotta here it again: His staff is stealing documents and covering their own butt. I can't believe it. I can't believe it because I've been hearing this horsecrud for years now and only one case turned out to be true after the thorough investigation. Maybe if you Conservatives hadn't slammed Clinton and his staff so hard I could believe this to be true.

And to answer your question I don't want stealing documents to be a part of my administration. Rather, I would want reading documents to be a part of my administration. It has been said that Bush had some kind of report presented to him at his Ranch that said terrorist were going to use commercial planes to attack Americans on American soil. He didn't read it because the title was a bit vague. Of course, President Bush did find time to read a childrens book when the oppurtunity presented itself.

gambit187 · Post by **gambit187** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:21 am

Redskins Rule wrote:
NikiH wrote:Funny Redskins rule how this post is about Clinton and a screw up in his administration, even if it's just one of his staff covering their @ss. But you turned it around to be President Bush's fault.
Is stealing classified documents something you want from you administration?

When are you Conservatives going to stop blaming Clinton? You conservatives have been after Clinton ever since he took office. You slam him and his staff for anything and everything you can think of. Out of all the times you tried to get him only one comes out to be true and that was a personal issue. And now, I gotta here it again: His staff is stealing documents and covering their own butt. I can't believe it. I can't believe it because I've been hearing this horsecrud for years now and only one case turned out to be true after the thorough investigation. Maybe if you Conservatives hadn't slammed Clinton and his staff so hard I could believe this to be true.

And to answer your question I don't want stealing documents to be a part of my administration. Rather, I would want reading documents to be a part of my administration. It has been said that Bush had some kind of report presented to him at his Ranch that said terrorist were going to use commercial planes to attack Americans on American soil. He didn't read it because the title was a bit vague. Of course, President Bush did find time to read a childrens book when the oppurtunity presented itself.

So Redskin Rule do you think that Osama Bin Laden was not a wanted man during the Clinton years.

Funny side story. Check out "Hannibal" when the foreing detective was at home on his computer looking at the FBI top ten on his computer. He was looking at FBI or Interpols top 10 list and Osama Bin Laden was on there right next to Hannibal Lecter.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:27 am

Not that I disagree or agree. I started this topic to see how it would get spun.

What was President Clinton doing when terrorists attacked Kobar towers, the USS Cole, or the Kenya Embassy ??

My point is they're plenty of blame to go around...for everyone

tsaler · Post by **tsaler** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:40 am

DEHog wrote:What was President Clinton doing when terrorists attacked Kobar towers, the USS Cole, or the Kenya Embassy ??

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Saying 'there will be no sanctuary for terrorists,' President Clinton on Thursday said the U.S. strikes against terrorist bases in Afghanistan and a facility in Sudan are part of "a long, ongoing struggle between freedom and fanaticism.

...

American cruise missiles pounded sites in Afghanistan and Sudan Thursday in retaliation for the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.

U.S. officials say the six sites attacked in Afghanistan were part of a network of terrorist compounds near the Pakistani border that housed supporters of Saudi millionaire Osama bin Laden.

...

[It is believed that] bin Laden, who has been given shelter by Afghanistan's Islamic rulers, was involved in the bombings of the east African embassies.

In the Sudanese capital, Khartoum, the El Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries factory -- which U.S. officials say was housing chemical weapons -- was also attacked.

...

The president said he ordered the strike against bin Laden and his compatriots because of 'compelling information they were planning additional terrorist attacks against our citizens and others with the inevitable collateral casualties and .. seeking to acquire chemical weapons and other dangerous weapons.'

...

In Afghanistan, a spokesman for the ruling Taliban, Mullah Abdullah, said that 'bin Laden is safe and no damage has been done to any of his companions.' Bin Laden has been living in Afghanistan with the permission of the Taliban, a fundamentalist Islamic group that controls most of the country.

...

'We recognize these strikes will not eliminate the problem,' [Secretary of Defense William] Cohen said. 'But our message is clear. There will be no sanctuary for terrorists and no limit to our resolve to defend American citizens and our interests -- our ideals of democracy and law -- against these cowardly attacks.'"

- CNN, August 20, 1998.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 10:42 am

I was not blaming Clinton for one damned thing. Outside of the fact that was presented here. I didn't say that he was responsible for 9/11. I still blame the terrorists for that.
Don't label me as a conservative, have you not seen the discussion I had about gay marriage. My view on that alone makes me anything but.
My point here is that YOU not me turned this around. This article was about stolen documents. It was not about who should have done what. Because if you start doing that you could blame the people at the DMV, the people at immigration, the people who let these jerks on the plane. It's not about blame.
You and I will never agree on some things, but on the issue of Clinton's one disgression, I think it's a major one. And not because of political affiliation or preference. Because I have a son. I do not want his idea of things to go in that direction. I'd have had a whole lot less trouble with him and his little tryst had it occured on his own time and not in the oval office.
Think about it, had it been you and it was made public that you did this kind of thing in your office you would have been unemployed pretty darned quick.

DEHog · Post by **DEHog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:32 am

Niki I totally agree...remind me at camp to share a story with about the attack on the Emmbassy in Kenya

Ding,Ding,Ding we have a winner!! You are correct Tim, Clinton launched a few crusie missles. Of course when the bombing in Kenya happened he was to busy dealing with the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy". Just once I'd like to hear what you have to say instead of throwing the party lines at us!

tsaler · Post by **tsaler** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:00 pm

DEHog wrote:Ding,Ding,Ding we have a winner!! You are correct Tim, Clinton launched a few crusie missles. Of course when the bombing in Kenya happened he was to busy dealing with the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy". Just once I'd like to hear what you have to say instead of throwing the party lines at us!

I don't really have much to say about this.

You don't have time for people like me, remember?

I didn't know CNN was the party line, either. I was just posting information for the benefit of the discussion.

Besides, you shouldn't be misled into believing that I only write what the Democrats say to write, and that I only say what the Democrats say to say. My opinions are mine.

:roll:

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:11 pm

I've yet to see one opinion come from you tsaler. You post things any person could find on a Democratic party website. I think for myself as well. I don't agree with everything the Republican party has to say. And I don't agree with everything the Democratic party has to say. I make up my own mind. As far as Sept 11th goes, you will never get me to blame our president. I know that Al Gore could not have handled a country in chaos the way George W. did. I saw that with my own eyes. That is why he gets my vote, not because he happens to be republican.

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:18 pm

NikiH wrote:I know that Al Gore could not have handled a country in chaos the way George W. did. I saw that with my own eyes. That is why he gets my vote, not because he happens to be republican.

NikiH, how do know that, I mean I think Bush handled it great, but I also think Gore would have done just as well. Guess it's mute cause we will never know will we.

tsaler · Post by **tsaler** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:37 pm

NikiH wrote:I've yet to see one opinion come from you tsaler.

Give me a break. You are not the judge of what is my opinion and what's not. Do I have to agree with everyone else to have an opinion? Why is what everyone else spews independent opinion, but my words are party line?

You post things any person could find on a Democratic party website.

Which is interesting considering I have used only one Democratic website as a source (johnkerry.com). The rest were from news. Apparently truth is rhetoric now.

I think for myself as well. I don't agree with everything the Republican party has to say. And I don't agree with everything the Democratic party has to say. I make up my own mind.

Thinking for yourself doesn't mean you disagree with parts of each political party. There's a lot more to it than that.

As far as Sept 11th goes, you will never get me to blame our president.

I've never tried to get anybody to do anything here.

I know that Al Gore could not have handled a country in chaos the way George W. did.

You must be particularly clairvoyant.

I respect everyone else's opinions here as being just that: opinions. I don't understand why you, as well as others, do not give me the same respect. You act like I'm just regurgitating things that some Democratic machine tells me to, and that's far from it. Just because I am extremely opinionated does not I am opinionated extremely. I feel like Rodney Dangerfield!

Redskins Rule · Post by **Redskins Rule** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:03 pm

NikiH wrote:Funny Redskins rule how this post is about Clinton and a screw up in his administration,

Hey Niki.....when you wrote that I took it as Clinton's Admnistration being screwed up somehow.

even if it's just one of his staff covering their @ss.

And when you finished off that sentence with that statement I took it as: even though it is not Clinton himself it still has something to do with Clinton because this guy was in his administration.

So right there I have in my head that Clinton is at fault somehow. How else am I supposed to interpret that?

Is stealing classified documents something you want from you administration?

When you finished off your post with that question I thought you were trying to blame Clinton for stealing classified documents.

Maybe I just misunderstood you, but maybe I didn't.

NikiH · Post by **NikiH** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 1:50 pm

Every time I've seen you post Tsaler, I've seen quotes and more quotes. I don't typically post a quote when this is involved. I say what I feel. I'm sorry if you feel attacked not my intention at all.

As far as the news goes you can find it to say whatever you'd like basically, just depends on where you look.

Thinking for myself means I have the right to agree or disagree with certain parts of their policies and agendas. Is there anything you don't agree with that is a major issue for Kerry?? If you say no then I am in doubt, could be wrong, that you think for yourself.

It seems you posting all the quotes is trying to get someone to change their mind, maybe it is the political activist in you and you don't even know it, but it surely seems that way from the outside.

The AL Gore is my opinion, I love how you say I can have an opinion and then you belittle it. Doesn't exactly support your cause on that one.

Redskins Rule
The only reason this is about Clinton is because those documents have to do with him. I did not mean to insinuate that Clinton was at fault for the documents ending up missing. I was actually refering to the contents of the documents as far as he is involved. And the fact that this person has been named his staff member. Administration means his staff on a whole. Not just him. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

tsaler · Post by **tsaler** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 2:12 pm

NikiH wrote:Every time I've seen you post Tsaler, I've seen quotes and more quotes. I don't typically post a quote when this is involved. I say what I feel. I'm sorry if you feel attacked not my intention at all.

It's fine. I post quotes as either evidence for my opinion or to contribute information to the discussion, the latter of which being what I did in this thread. I did feel a bit attacked, but no offense taken. Often times, I am attacked by others (not here, specifically) for not posting quotes and evidence. Rather than deal with that, I had hoped to avoid personal attacks and such nonsense by giving evidence to begin with. That seems to have backfired a bit.

As far as the news goes you can find it to say whatever you'd like basically, just depends on where you look.

Correct.

Thinking for myself means I have the right to agree or disagree with certain parts of their policies and agendas. Is there anything you don't agree with that is a major issue for Kerry?? If you say no then I am in doubt, could be wrong, that you think for yourself.

Actually, I didn't even vote for John Kerry in my state primary. I'll outline a few things about his policies that I don't really agree with:

First off, it bothers me a lot that Kerry has been on both side of the Iraq war issue, though I understand why and do not think he is a flip-flopper or indecisive as a result. He voted in favor of the war but voted against giving emergency funding to our soldiers on the ground. I would have done the exact opposite.

Kerry also wants to make the United States energy independent within 10 years. I would like to see that accelerated a bit, though obviously 10 years is better than 20 years and so on.

I really don't disagree with him all that much though, which is why I support him, campaign for him, registered voters for him, and will be casting my vote for him on November 2nd. That doesn't mean I don't have my own opinions though, does it?

It seems you posting all the quotes is trying to get someone to change their mind, maybe it is the political activist in you and you don't even know it, but it surely seems that way from the outside.

I'm not trying to get anyone to change his or her mind. I'm simply posting quotes, information, and opinions in order to have a good, quality discussion and hopefully we'll all be able to learn something new as a result.

If you recall, the main reason why I posted the gargantuan list of quotes from Kerry's website is that Brandon alleged that "NOBODY" knew where Kerry stood on the issues. I said that I knew, and I asked him if there was anything he wanted to know. He said there was, asked a few questions, and I posted some of Kerry's own platform to respond.

The AL Gore is my opinion, I love how you say I can have an opinion and then you belittle it. Doesn't exactly support your cause on that one.

First off, "I know that Al Gore could not have handled a country in chaos the way George W. did" doesn't sound like an opinion. It's presented as indesputable fact, which it is obviously not.

I also don't consider commenting on your clairvoyance, since you claim to "know" that Al Gore couldn't have done the job George Bush has done, to be belittling anything. If you "know" something completely hypothetical and non-existant, I imagine you would be pretty clairvoyant.

I apologize if you felt belittled though. That was obviously not my intention.

BossHog · Post by **BossHog** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 2:40 pm

Play nice kids... let's not let this escalate to flammatory proportions.

... or you know where to take it.

tsaler · Post by **tsaler** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 2:41 pm

BossHog wrote:Play nice kids... let's not let this escalate to flammatory proportions.

... or you know where to take it.

I'm sure nothing like that will happen.