Michele

Dammit, Deuce! But you still rawk! Glad it was nothing worse.... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

haven't heard anything yet....but if worst comes to worst, I'm sure something can be put together on Saturday... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Bill, the ACLU opposed this act pretty strongly. Excepted: The American Civil Liberties Union opposes this legislation. We urge members of the House to vote against H.R. 1710. Instead of being a tool to prevent "another Oklahoma City" the portions of the legislation that violate civil liberties have little to do with preventing such a bombing attack in the future. They are instead a collection of measures--many of which have been offered before--attached to legislation promulgated as anti-terrorism legislation. Indeed, much of the bill is little more than a number of misguided immigration restrictions totally unrelated to terrorism. Now, I know situations are fluid, but it wasn't simply the republicans who stood "in the way"... Further reading on the analysis of this bill by David Cole, Professor, Georgetown University Law Center here Excepted: ...it also prohibits a wide range of First Amendment protected activities, resurrects "guilt by association" as a guiding principle of criminal and immigration law, and creates an unprecedented "alien terrorist removal procedure" that would deny immigrants the most basic of due process protections -- the right to confront the evidence the government seeks to use against one. This memorandum briefly addresses those provisions of the bill that raise the gravest civil liberties concerns. Both of these positions mirror your own difficulties to the Patriot Act passed last year...and I somehow doubt you are a republican . Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

(Bill) Do you really think so? In this situation, the "gang" (AQ/OBL) didn't exist. MAK existed. In 1989, when Azzam was assassinated in a car bomb, there was a fundamental ideology split between MAK (which existed) and OBL, who took some members and left. Granted, OBL had a hand in the development of MAK and it's existence, but he was not the head guy. The "gang", as you put it, only existed after 1988, and by then, Reagan was out of office. If you look at the timeline I put in my response to quade, you will see when AQ became very active - and that was after Gulf War 1. Further, it was the non-response of Clinton to known attacks that allowed OBL, imo, to gather more and more strength. He solidified his alliances, created funding sources, and garnered recruitment during that time. Thus a fullfledged terrorist parastate was developed and born. I think that, instead of money, there are other issues which need addressing. For instance, if someone gave me millions of dollars, I am not likely to become a terrorist; nor you, nor anyone I know. Therefore, there is a fundamental issue which is not being addressed, and focussing simply on money is not the answer. Identifying, preventing and stern consequences may yeild far more than just looking to see who was in office at which time. After all, it began with Carter...who is considered a very peaceful man by all accounts. Again, I don't think we can lay this at any single party's feet. It spans decades, and at least 4 administrations (2 democratic, 2 republican). However, I do think that, having had the opportunities where others did not Clinton should said "damn the polls, I have to get this vile man...". He didn't...and because of his ineffective single attempt, OBL and AQ saw an opportunity to strike at us without consequence. I have long held that 9/11 was a crisis Clinton longed for - his personality is best suited for that, moreso than Bush. However, it occurred on Bush's watch, rather than Clinton's. Bush has the opportunity which had presented itself in a far smaller way to Clinton. And Bush is doing something about it. Clinton didn't. And I think it's a shame, too. I also think it's a shame that republicans are being blamed for the creation of OBL...fankly, I think a guy can get laid and still do his job...it's just that Clinton didn't do his job, irrespective of where his pecker was. He just didn't do his job. Why is it a pity that a debate boils down to responsibility? If I am tasked on handling a situation, understanding how it occurred in the first place is paramount. In that way, we can prevent it from occuring again. Any of the incidents posts and resultant discussion is exactly that - learning from the past, so as not to repeat it. Honestly, this has been an interesting exchange, and I understand your position more. I hope you've learned more from me, as well. And I have been thinking that my next project will be how does one become a terrorist, what motivations/conditions/attitudes must occur with which sort of personality so that I can understand how this happens better. So how is this bad? Hear, hear! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Hi, quade... OBL was placed on the FBI's Most Wanted list June 07, 1999. If there was ample enough evidence at that point, it had been known for many years that OBL was a significant danger. By the time he had been placed on the list, AQ/OBL was known for the following: ~ 1993: Bin-Ladin was involved in operations against US troops in Somalia (Blackhawk Down). ~ 1993 (February) thought to have been involved in some of the planning of the first WTC bombing. ~ 1995 it is thought that OBL financed something called a "Gulf Battalion" organized by the IGR (Iranian Guards of the Revolution). It seems OBL had convinced Yemeni Sheik Abd-al-Majid al-Zandani to strategically position troops of the "Gulf Battalion" in al-Zandani's camps in Yemen for rapid use in Gulf countries when circmustances permited. ~ 1996 OBL is suspected by the US of being responsible for bomb attacks on American troops in Dharan, Saudi Arabia. ~ In mid-1996 a meeting of various leaders gatehred by OBL obtained an agreement "to use force to confront all foreign forces stationed on Islamic land," and to form a planning committee of sorts. ~ 1996 (August) OBL publically issued his fatwah "Declaration of War" against the United States. ~ 1996 (November) while denying culpability, he praised the bombings in Riyadh and the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, and promised other attacks would follow. He finally admitted the Blackhawk Down attacks on U.S. military personnel in Somalia and Yemen, declaring that "we used to hunt them down in Mogadishu". ~ 1997 (February)OBL states in a broadcast interview that "if someone can kill an American soldier, it is better than wasting time on other matters." ~ 1998 (February) OBL announces the new alliance of terrorist organizations, the "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders." The Front included the Egyptian al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the Harakat ul-Ansar, among other groups. The Front declared its intention to attack Americans, including civilians, anywhere in the world, as well as our allies. ~ 1998 (May) he stated at a press conference in Afghanistan that we would see the results of his threats "in a few weeks." ~ 1998 in August orchestrated bombings of the US Embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, that killed at least 301 individuals and injured more than 5,000 others (here's his "few weeks"). Additionally, he has been implicated in teh following plans which were either interrupted or stopped somehow. ~ 1994 Pope john Paul assassination during his visit to Manila ~ 1995 President Clinton assassination during Philippines visit ~ 1995 "Project Bojinka" discovered in Manila; designed to bomb in midair US trans-Pacific flights (sound familiar?) (remind me to someday tell you about the guy who ran this one...interesting link to WTC 93...) ~ 1999, New Years Eve bomb Los Angeles International Airport in 1999. (bad guy was arrested crossing the boarder several days earlier...) Also plotted to carry out terrorist operations against US and Israeli tourists visiting Jordan for millennial celebrations in late 1999. I don't think it was resistence he got from republicans; his omnibus act in 1995 was thwarted by pressure from the ACLU, claiming it would inhibit constitutional rights, and so forth. And yes, I honestly think he honestly thought we were not in such great danger; the economy was booming, we had never (prior to 1995) had a terrorist attack of any sizeable impact on our soil, and the public had its' head up its' a$$ as a general whole. However, that is not what the president is there for - he is there to ascertain dangers and handle issues...and Clinton did neither, despite pressure from many areas (as Gawain pointed out). When presented with opportunities, he did nothing - with the exception of one single attack which garnered nothing. And in his doing nothing, it allowed OBL/AQ the thought that they could go bigger, without consequence. Thus, 9/11/01. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Good deal. O.K., so let me change the circumstances to a less complicated scenario for a moment. Your position is the cop, knowing where a murderer is, having the ability to go and arrest him, and yet not apprehending him, is actually less responsible than the gun manufacturer who made the gun 12 years before, and who sold the gun legally to another person, who then sold the gun to the murderer? Does that translate to your position? (and no, I am not trying to bring in a gun debate - it's just the only example I can think of right now!) Maybe it did. And maybe he didn't realize the danger. If memory serves (again, I am working noteless) when the Saudi government asks if you want this guy, and you say no, I just have a sincere difficulty understanding that. Call me simplistic, or naive...but that really was a dropping of the ball, irrespective of the reasons given. If you are excusing Clinton because there was an outcry - a "Wag the Dog" (and yes, I remember that well), all you are indicating is that he didn't have the moral ability to do what was right regardless of his poll numbers and public perception, and yes, I think there is even more culpability contained therein, as well. I have never said Reagan didn't contribute to the making of OBL and AQ; what I have said is that the contributions began as far back as Carter, continued through Reagan and Bush Sr, began to manifest itself in attacks during the Clinton administration, and has progressed from there to what we have today. And I will reiterate that AQ was not established until 1988, and did not begin their attacks until shortly thereafter. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Bill, with all due respect, I think you missed the point. Billions were given to the ISI, who then passed it on to several different groups, among them the MAK. AQ was an offshoot begun as a split in ideological issues, and established in 1988 (will 2x check that when I have my notes handy). Therefore, AQ didn't exist until 1988 (or thereabouts), and so no funding could've come their way because they didn't even exist. As I said in my previous post, the funding was a foreign policy decision, made by Carter originally, and increased by Reagan, as a direct response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan at a time when the Cold War was on (but being won). Now, as you and I may have a fundamental disagreement on that point, let me ask you something else in a different way. If someone had the opportunity to apprehend a mass murderer, one folks had been warned about for many years, and declined to apprehend that person, is he not more culpable for the resultant issues then someone who never had the chance? Is there more responsibility placed on someone who never had an opportunity to catch the bad guy over the person who could've done so (not once or twice - but four times...)? And were you able to get that quote? I know you're jumping, but I would really be interested in that. Thanks again! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

I dunno if there's anything official about it, but Saturday is likely when most people will be there. Maybe something at the end of the day, after the record attempt, sorta toward sunset? I just passed the word out to someone there, and asked him to check around and get the vibe from those already there. I'll be back if I hear anything. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

She finished the day one over par. Dunno the standings, though. Not too shabby for being nervous and playing on a wet course. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

GOOOOOOOOOO Annika! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Anne, that's the most excellent news! Go JUMP!!!! (well, both Mark and the sky...but maybe not at the same time!!! ) Hugs, girl! ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaa Thanks, FFF. That made me laugh out loud! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Egggggggggggggzakkkkkkkly!!!!! Go kick some ass and don't bother with names....you'll be fine! And let us know how it goes! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

When I went to the site, this came up... I'm in windows XE (??), but use netscape (I think). Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Um, I've never watched it....and don't intend to.... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Well, my parents never did. Ever. Never never never. Ewwwwwwwwwww..... My brother and I are adopted.... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Hi, Bill... So, the only place where I can find Bush's statement of non-concern is in the March 13, 2002 press briefing. (You mentioned the date in a previous post here...Previous post). You mention the exact quote earlier in this thread, too...so I searched for it in context. The full transcript of the press conference is here: Full transcript Excerpted from above, including the question asked (in italics).... "Mr. President, in your speeches now, you rarely talk or mention Osama bin Laden. Why is that? Also, can you can tell the American people if you have any more information -- if you know if he is dead or alive. Deep in your heart, don't you truly believe that until you find out if he is dead or alive, you won't really want to make..." "BUSH: Well, deep in my heart, I know the man's on the run if he's alive at all. And I -- you know, who knows if he's hiding in some cave or not? We hadn't heard from him in a long time. And the idea of focusing on one person is really -- indicates to me people don't understand the scope of the mission. Terror's bigger than one person. And he's just -- he's a person who has now been marginalized. His network is -- his host government has been destroyed. He's the ultimate parasite who found weakness, exploited it, and met his match. He is -- you know, as I mention in my speeches -- I do mention the fact that this is a fellow who is willing to commit youngsters to their death. And he, himself, tries to hide, if, in fact, he's hiding at all. So I don't know where he is. Nor -- you know, I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. I'm more worried about making sure that our soldiers are well supplied, that the strategy is clear, that the coalition is strong, that when we find enemy bunched up, like we did in Shah-e-Kot mountains, that the military has all the support it needs to go in and do the job, which they did. And there will be other battles in Afghanistan. There's going to be other struggles like Shah-e-Kot. And I'm just as confident about the outcome of those future battles as I was about Shah-e-kot, where our soldiers are performing brilliantly; we're tough, we're strong, they're well-equipped, we have a good strategy. We are showing the world we know how to fight a guerrilla war with conventional means." "QUESTION: Do you believe the threat that bin Laden posed won't truly be eliminated until he is found either dead of alive? BUSH: As I say, we hadn't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, you know, again, I don't know where he is. I'll repeat what I said: I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run. I was concerned about him when he had taken over a country. I was concerned about the fact that he was basically running Afghanistan and calling the shots for the Taliban. But, you know, once we set out the policy and started executing the plan, he became -- we shoved him out more and more on the margins. He has no place to train his al Qaeda killers anymore. And if we find a training camp, we'll take care of it -- either we will or our friends will. That's one of the things that's part of the new phase that's becoming apparent to the American people is that we're working closely with other governments to deny sanctuary or training or a place to hide or a place to raise money. And we got more work to do. See, that's the thing the American people have got to understand -- that we've only been at this six months. This is going to be a long struggle. I keep saying that. I don't know whether you all believe me or not. But time will show you that it's going to take a long time to achieve this objective. And I can assure you I am not going to blink, and I'm not going to get tired, because I know what is at stake. And history has called us to action and I am going to seize this moment for the good of the world, for peace in the world and for freedom. (End excerpt) I ran a word search, and didn't find the word "priority" there at all. You cite several quotes from him using that particular word, twice from the same day. But I honestly can't find it anywhere. When I run a search for your entire quote "I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." - Bush, 3/13/02" I turn up a lot of speculative postings from people at Freerepublic (shudder), and things like that, but no transcripts with specific word in it. Can you please link to a full transcript of that quote so I can read it in total? I appreciate it. I really looked, but couldn't find it. Thanks! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

I thought I'd add a few comments about OBL and his funding, activities, and timeline so all are aware as to what actually transpired in the development of this most incredibly evil man. In 1979, during Carter's administration, Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan. Something like 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 different Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's decade+ fight between 1982 and 1992. These mujahadin were actively working to repel a Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Carter, according to some sources, gave the green light for black budget ops funding to the CIA for Afghanistan as early as June, 1979. If offical sources are accurate, the US supported several fundamentalist extremist groups throughout the 1980s and into the early 90s with training, cash, and weapons somewhere in the neighborhood of $4-6 billion. The secret Black Budget of the CIA is said to have grown to $36 billion per year when Reagan became president in 1980, but only some of this money went to support secret operations in Afghanistan. In March 1985, President Reagan authorized military aid to the mujahadin indirectly through the ISI. The goal was clear and concise: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. Pakistan ISI met with, trained, and funded the rebels. However, they were assisted by (and indeed perhaps trained, as well) the CIA. They did not directly, as far as I can determine, train or fund the mujahadin (covert ops, dontcha know)... OBL came into town primarily because the Soviet invasion offended him and his strident muslim views. He was, in effect, a mercenary. He brought a group of men with him and contributed sizeable amounts of his personal fortune (reportedly some $300 million, although reports vary to as little as $200 to as much as $500). At that point, and I can't find my notes right now, he connected with a spiritual leader who was assassinated in 1989, and also forged a strong alliance with Mullah Mohammed Omar (who became his right hand man). BTW, AQ was not founded until sometime in 1988, and was an offshoot of MAK ( Mahktab al-Khidmat). OBL left AFghanistan in 1989, returned to Saudi Arabia, and lived in various countries, including Sudan (1991-1996. He was expelled from the Sudan in 1996 (IIRC), because of the pressure the US placed on him due to suspected involvement in teh assassination of Hosni Mubarak. OBL had already been stripped of his Saudi citizenship, and was welcomed back into Afghanistan, where he brought money and jobs to them, in his creation and construction of highways and other infrastructure. From what I can see, there is no direct assocation between Reagan saying "hey, give OBL some $$ and see what happens"; rather, it was a foreign policy decision (right or wrong) which allowed support to the ISI (Pakistani intel) to distribute and train the mujahadin in an attempt to repel the Soviet troops. The attacks on the WTC (1993, Clinton), Khobar Towers (1996, Clinton), USS Cole (October 2000, Clinton, 17 killed), the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (1998, Clinton) involvement in the "Black Hawk Down" Somalia situation (1993, Clinton), suspected in 3 bombings targeted at US troops in 1992 (Clinton), and the attacks on US troops in Dharan, Saudi Arabia (1996, Clinton), as well as WTC (2001, Bush). There are several indications that OBL and AQ were involved in teh Bali bombing, and several other attacks since 9/11). In any event, funding for OBL/AQ cannot, imo, be attributed directly to Reagan only. Considering the amount of attacks during Clinton's years in office, and his several opportunities (and his refusal of said opportunities) to capture/apprehend him, I would say that far more liability lands on Clinton's head than can be laid on GWB. And certainly moreso on Clinton rather than Reagan (who I didn't like at all.). Just my take on it all... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Yep. 1985 Story here... Achille Lauro US troops captured the "mastermind" in Baghdad not too long ago... Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Dear holy shit. Oh man. Oh shit. Nothing else to say. Except thanks for posting that. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Yes, please. On a different note: Not being there, and not hearing the comments, I would like to offer a thought. I know that when I fuck up, either in the air or in my life, I already feel badly and know I fucked up. Sometimes, people pointing it out, and ribbing me about it gets taken the wrong way. I got sued on a file (my second deal, 3 years ago), and was given a seriously hard time about it. It wasn't my fault, etc., but for about a year I was called "lawsuit Sally". It bothered me incredibly, and made me rethink my abilities. Finally, someone pulled me aside, and told me everyone knew the story, and that it was all in fun. Took me a long time to get past that, though. Sometimes, people don't realize how hurtful something they say really is. I know, thick skin and all that, but there comes a point where, if you already feel badly, whacking someone around is no longer appropriate. Sometimes, the people doing the whacking really don't know they are being as heavy-handed as they are. And sometimes, the person being whacked around is already doing enough whacking in their own head that outside stuff is superfluous and just compounds the issue. Friendships strained and confidence lessened. I'm willing to bet Sebazz feels badly enough; I am also willing to bet that the folks were mostly goodnaturedly teasing, and didn't realize that it was as hurtful as it is. And I am finally willing to bet that Sebazz handled a situation which could've been deadly in a manner which was beyond capable and fine. He can teach me a thing or two; and I look forward to learning from him. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

If you still need a ride, I am sure there are many folks who're willing to do it. If they can't get to you before you leave, you might want to check with manifest about a lady named Kim White - she runs a shuttle service that helps out jumpers who need rides. Gawd, I hope I can get there....should be seriously amazing fun, and would adore meeting you! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

Wouldn't that be the neatest thing? I would so love to have a good shot to give my Dad and Mom and brother...might help them see why I do this thing, see the beauty of the sky like I see it, transmit to them the intense amazing-ness of this sport... Maybe if I get lucky, really really really lucky, I will have an opportunity to play in the sky with him...I'm irish, it could happen!!! Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~

~~~~Vibes~~~~~ Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~