Blame, deflect, minimize, rationalize, project. I've never seen a group use Freud's defense mechanisms to the extent of the NEOCONS as a means of justifying their fvcked up ideology, truly unbelievable and fascinating at the same time.
http://allpsych.com/psychology101/defenses.html
2006-09-07 04:55:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dr.Feelgood 5
·
3⤊
7⤋
Jamie Goerillik in the Clinton Justice Department established the wall preventing communication between law enforcement and intelligence agencies,
Clinton had several chances to get Osama and ignored intelligence provided by Masood from the Nothern Alliance who were fighting Al Queda and the Taliban. There was a state of War with Al Queda and assorted groups in 1996 because of the Fatwa issued as Referenced today by George Bush. Clinton ignored the Fatwa as he ignored Masood. The Embassy's in Africa were blown up on Clintons Watch as was the USS Cole and the Khobar Towers. It is the Liberals like yourself that are YELLOW Like Bill Clinton you do nothing
2006-09-07 04:34:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Read chapter 4 in the 9/11 commison report. Anyway, it's way past the time to lay blame. We are under serious threat from terrorist sanctions and the transition into a new President is going to give them the prime opportunity to attack our soil again. Shall we forget 9/11 and call Republicans cowards or stand up as a Nation, as American's United, and fight the carnage and hatred that has split our nation apart?
2006-09-07 04:26:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by fire_side_2003 5
·
5⤊
0⤋
1. Liberals are anti-war and anti-America and have hampered every effort to fight terrorists. So who is the coward? Republicans who are leading the fight or the Liberals who are holding us back?
2. Clinton could have had Bin Laden and didn't take him.
3. Clinton was so busy taking money from the Chinese Communists that he was too busy to look for trouble. Our embassies were attacked under Clintons watch. The first attack on the World Trade center was done by a Radical Muslim on Clintons watch. Clinton didn't want the FBI or the CIA talking to each other or to local police so he build the 'Wall'. That legally prevented our people from talking to each other and comparing intelligence. Clinton was (still is) on the take for anybody with a few bucks. He saw his job as President to get rich and powerful and not to protect America or Americans.
Only a coward fears the facts. You obviously haven't followed the news. We are winning the war on terrorists and on Liberals.
2006-09-07 04:30:20
·
answer #4
·
answered by Zee HatMan 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
How do you know who Clinton voted for? You couldn't tell from what he says. First he gives a speech saying that he turned the Sudan down when they offered him Bin Ladin because of a lack of indictment. Then he takes it back and says that never happened. Most of this plot was hatched under Clinton. Neither Clinton or Bush WANTED it to happen. Why must Americans assign blame for tragedies? Let's fix the problem and the holes in our security. Why aren't we talking about that?
2006-09-07 04:45:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by MEL T 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Honestly, I think there were enough failings to go around. Republican, Democrat, and other.
People didn't forsee 9/11. They should have. Both sides have used this as a political football. I could give plenty of examples from each side. Some criticism is sincere, some not.
We better wake up and realize that the terrorists don't see us as two separate camps. They'd be happy to kill any of us. We're all the same to them.
We should find the problems in the system and fix them, fast. We can assign blame later.
Otherwise, we're going to be hit again.
2006-09-07 04:20:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
It's called the blame game sweetie. No politician can stand up and admit when they did something wrong. There always has to be someone else to blame. Just watch the news sometime when some major event happens. You'll see the news anchors all trying to figure out who's fault it was. Then when the politicians talk about it, they'll try to say who's at fault. We live in a country full of p-ussy politicians. If we had a woman president, I guarantee the blame game wouldn't happen near as much.
2006-09-07 04:22:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
The president of Sudan offered to arrest and extradite Bin Laden to the US. Clinton refused.
When the Sudan offered to open up their country to the FBI and CIA for counterterrorism in 1997, Clinton didn't respond. Bin Laden was in Sudan at that time.
In July 2000, Clinton was again offered Bin Laden and he again refused.
In December 2000, Clinton was once again given Bin Laden's wereabouts and did what? NOTHING
You know what. Do your own homework.
2006-09-07 04:56:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by C K Platypus 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
If you want to blame someone, you can blame every President back to Truman for supporting the Shah of Iran. Our support for the dictator Shah led to the Islamic revolution which in turn led to 9/11.
The war on terrorism ends with the fall of Tehran.
2006-09-07 04:26:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because President Clinton does share some of the blame in that he oversaw the largest drawdown in US forces in history, did little or nothing in response to terror attacks against US interests around the world, and gutted and compartmentalized the intelligence services. This emboldened and enabled the terrorists to execute the 9/11 attacks virtually unfettered.
2006-09-07 04:26:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by mzJakes 7
·
6⤊
1⤋
No, but he had more than ample opportunity to prevent the attacks. The warnings came long before Bush arrived in the White House? Do you remember the bombing of the USS Cole? Probably not. It got swept under the rug, dwarfed by all the hoopla about Clinton's disgraceful indiscretion with Miss Lewinsky. He stood in the White House Rose Garden and swore to America that he would catch and punish those responsible. And that was the end of it. He no more kept that promise than the one he made to God when he married Hillary. He had many chances to bring Bin Laden to justice. He was offered Bin Laden by other countries, but declined to take him into custody. He could have been our greatest hero, but instead he chose to slip into quiet obscurity rather than protect his country. So whose the coward now?
2006-09-07 04:25:37
·
answer #11
·
answered by Emm 6
·
5⤊
2⤋