Forgive me for disagreeing while agreeing, but with the aforementioned collection of inept, foolish and contemptible dickheads, how in the world can you narrow your choice to one as being worse than the others? LOL

Source: New York Times
Author: David E. Sanger
Published: May 16, 2002
Copyright: 2002 New York Times
DL: http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/16/politics/16INQU.html

The White House said tonight that President Bush had been warned by American intelligence agencies in early August that Osama bin Laden was seeking to hijack aircraft but that the warnings did not contemplate the possibility that the hijackers would turn the planes into guided missiles for a terrorist attack.

"It is widely known that we had information that bin Laden wanted to attack the United States or United States interests abroad," Ari Fleischer, the president's press secretary, said this evening. "The president was also provided information about bin Laden wanting to engage in hijacking in the traditional pre-9/11 sense, not for the use of suicide bombing, not for the use of an airplane as a missile."

Nonetheless the revelation by the White House, made in response to a report about the intelligence warning this evening on CBS News, is bound to fuel Congressional demands for a deeper investigation into why American intelligence agencies and the Federal Bureau of Investigation had failed to put together individual pieces of evidence that, in retrospect, now seem to suggest what was coming.

In the past few days, government officials have acknowledged for the first time that an F.B.I. agent in Phoenix had urged the F.B.I. headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools. That memorandum also cited Mr. bin Laden by name and suggested that his followers could use the schools to train for terror operations, officials who have seen the memorandum said.

Administration officials reached this evening said the warning given to Mr. Bush did not come from the F.B.I. or from the information developed by the Phoenix agent. Instead, it was provided as part of the C.I.A. briefing he is given each morning, suggesting that it was probably based on evidence gathered abroad.

The C.I.A. had been listening intently over the July 4 holiday last year, after what one investigator called "a lot of static in the system suggesting something was coming." But then the evidence disappeared as quickly as it had arisen, and by August, officials have said, little was heard from Al Qaeda.

The warning of the hijacking was given to the president at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., where he was on vacation.

Taken together, the news of the C.I.A. warning and the information developed separately by the F.B.I. explains Mr. Bush's anger after Sept. 11 that intelligence gathered on American soil and abroad was not being centrally analyzed and that the agencies were not working well together.

Several times he has told audiences that he is working on solving that problem, and these days he is briefed jointly by the F.B.I and the C.I.A., ensuring that each hears information from the other agency.

It was not clear this evening why the White House waited eight months after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington to reveal what Mr. Bush had been told.

But Mr. Fleischer noted that in the daily flow of intelligence information the president receives, the warning of what appeared to be the threat of a conventional hijacking was not as serious as it appears in retrospect. "We were a peacetime society, and the F.B.I. had a different mission," he said.

Mr. Fleischer said the information given to the president in Texas had prompted the administration to put law enforcement agencies on alert. But there was no public announcement.

Nonetheless, a senior administration official said tonight that there was speculation within the government that heightened security — if it truly existed in August and September — might have prompted the hijackers to use box cutters and plastic knives to avoid detection.

The C.I.A. warning might also explain why Mr. Bush's aides were so certain that Mr. bin Laden was behind the attacks almost as soon as they happened. "We never had any real doubt," one senior official involved in the crucial decisions at the White House on Sept. 11 said several months ago.

Until recently, Mr. Bush has deflected demands for a lengthy and detailed investigation into the intelligence failures surrounding the Sept. 11 attacks. White House officials were concerned that the investigation would feed into demands by Senator Richard C. Shelby, the Alabama Republican who is the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, for the replacement of George J. Tenet as director of central intelligence.

But the news that the hijacking warning was in the president's brief, which Mr. Tenet sees and approves, and that it was linked to Mr. bin Laden is almost certain to widen the scope of the investigation.

Already, several lawmakers who have read the Phoenix memorandum written by the F.B.I. agent have described it as the most significant document to emerge in Congressional inquiries into whether the government might have been warned about possible hijackings.

Cynthia McKinney comments & interview: http://onlinejournal.com/Media/Utwater051202/utwater051202.html

The one thing that really pisses me off about the current situation is the stuff like on Politically Incorrect last night when they were talking about Carter in Cuba. You would think that if Carter did not have the White House speechwriters do his thinking for him and he did not parrot it down to the comma he is somewhere between an evil doer and a traitor. It is like Busch has some genius mind and is infallable and not subject to question. I said about that to my friend and said especially when the president is a dickhead.

So my friend that got a big increase in his military disability and a bought and paid for Busch voter says something like- "Dickheads are about like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, no one has ever seen one." Which I got hot as he ever saw me in over 30 years because when I am being serious he acts like I don't know what I am talking about. We are sitting at the computer and I say what do you mean there are no dickheads and he says there is no such thing. I go to dictionary.com and pull up this:

dick·head Pronunciation Key (dkhd) n. Vulgar Slang

An inept, foolish, or contemptible person.

And he goes on about his position and saying it is not a word. I am in disbelief because we are sitting there looking at it with its definition. He says we don't use that word and I say no wonder education is so screwed up with logic like that.

I have no problem calling Busch inept, foolish, and contemptible and I told my friend that would I be so upset if I did not think him inept and contemtible. I have no problem calling him a dickhead either when I feel it is true. I am sick of hear the President thinks this and that when he does not even choose his own clothes.

I have not said this here but I have said it before in my favorite local messageboard. Remember the old Star Trek show where they take Spock's brain out of his body and they hook it up to a computer to run an entire planet. Well if they took Busch's brain out and hooked it to a model train it would probably not be able to even run backwards. Of course it may run backwards all the time and not be able to move foward.

They tried to get legislation through that would limit your ability to comment on anything when the Patriot Act went through. The Patriot Act was a reaction. Congress is supposed to act and not react and look at how few people are upset or even know what the Patriot Act is or does. Maybe since the silence and conformance act that the Republicans thought about and try to hide failed. But the Alien and Sedition Acts that Wilson had passed and used to lock up a patriotic man that ran against him are still around. Make some copies and see if you cannot get it passed by Friday Congress. We don't want anyone to think or speak.

I don't use the word dickhead to cause a negative reaction like the corruptors do when they call marijuana a narcotic. That is completely false while I regard what I say, although an opinion, is completely true. I use the words inept and incompetent but I use them so much I need a synonym for variety.

I do not think Busch is leading the nation. The people that said we have the largest war chest in the history of politics went to him and said we might can get you elected if you do what we say. Busch is a puppet addicted to office and willing to do anything to please his electorate even if it is not for the good of the country. The ergonomic laws that passed under Clinton despite the objection of industry were hailed as great legislation for the average worker that wears his body out by doing the same thing over and over until he retires or his parts wore out. They were repealled like the first week in office and Busch had no deep convictions asking for its repeal. Maybe he had some corrupt convictions about repealling the ban on snowmobiles in national parks because they used gasoline and we want people burning that oil, but it was not conviction that got the ergonomic laws repealled. It got repealled because the people with the warchest wanted it that way and Busch is a puppet.

Personally I think Busch is the worst President in my lifetime. I do not care that you think like me. I mainly care that people think. The only reason I present my views is so that you might see my perspective. The reason I want to read your view is so that I might gain your perspective. Knowledge is limited by our time, human bodies, and desire. You can increase knowledge by investing time and study, whereas you can gain perspective by opening your mind and reasoning. A sculptor does not make a statue with a picture. They go all around and get all the perspectives.

Maybe this is a rant this is somewhat off topic, but I felt like it needed to be said.

You are free to respond although the government may change that at any time.