Dave Hinz wrote in message ...
On 7 Oct 2004 12:30:50 -0700, Nate Perkins wrote:
Dave Hinz wrote in message ...

Oh, I agree, he either hasn't read them, or he's selective in his
comprehension. I'm trying to determine which it is so I can work
from there. If one had taken action on the suspicions in the
PDB in question, there would be guards around the federal buildings
in NYC who would have been watching the real target get attacked.

Heh, now you guys are pretending to know what I've read and what I
haven't read.

I don't have to know if you've read it or not to know that you haven't
_understood_ it, Nate.

Come on, Dave. You can do better than just attacking me and then
obfuscating.

Are you trying to deny that many cues were missed leading up to 9/11,
including (among others) the PDB?

Or are you just suggesting that because nobody spelled it out in big
bold capital letters to the president, specifying the exact time and
place, that he bears no responsibility for the colossal failure that
happened under his watch? It appears to me that you hold a very low
standard of performance for the president.

Yeah, but why use the actual facts and stuff when they aren't convenient
for misproving your nonpoint, y'see? Nate and his type can't actually
acknowledge that, or it shoots their counter to Kerry not caring
about the Intelligence Committee meetings.

What actual facts do you dispute? That the government missed multiple
warnings leading up to 9/11? Including the PDB as well as several
others? That is in fact pretty well established.

What specific aspects of the PDB do you feel are actionable, Nate? Provide
the wording and the suggested logical action that was not taken. This
isn't the first time I've asked what specifically you think was "missed"
in the PDB.

I think I've already addressed this at least once previously, and
again above. I have already said that although the memo titled "Bin
Laden Determined to Attack in US" did not specify an exact time and
place. And I have already said that my opinion is that sufficient
warning existed in the PDB and in multiple other sources that alarm
bells should have been going off for this administration. They
weren't. Obviously, your opinion and expectation of the president
differs from mine, but the observation that multiple intel and
priority failures led up to 9/11 is not subjective ... it is a matter
of fact to any reasonable person.

Recently, the Bush campaign and his supporters are repeating all over
the stump that the US will be less safe under Kerry. That only Bush
will be resolute in protecting them against the terrorists. That if
Kerry is elected, that the terrorists will hit us again. Personally,
I think that's pretty ironic -- considering that the ONLY major
domestic terrorist attack actually occurred while BUSH was supposed to
be protecting us.

Oh, so all of the other OBL attacks, which Clinton ignored and which made
OBL that much more bold didn't actually happen? boggle

I am not sure what your statement has to do with the section you're
replying to. Perhaps you are trying to blame 9/11 on Clinton? No,
that would be just too silly.