• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Commentary: Good riddance to them all

A

Anonymous

Guest
And more Bush cronies are being investigated. How long before this one resigns? Orlando Cabrera, the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing, (mentioned in the story below) has already announced his resignation. He wants to spend more time with his family, you know. :roll:

By all accounts, Housing Secretary Alphonso Jackson is a tough, hands-on manager who gets what he wants. "He's not flying at the 50,000-feet level," says a former senior official in the Housing and Urban Development Department. "He is definitely into the weeds." Yet when it comes to dealing with contracts at HUD, Jackson insists he never gets involved -- "I don't mess" with contracts, he said in a sworn interview with federal investigators last year. But his record as secretary, and as deputy secretary before that, suggests otherwise.

Behind the scenes, Jackson has helped to arrange lucrative contract work running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars for friends and associates who went to work at HUD-controlled housing authorities in New Orleans and the Virgin Islands, according to people familiar with his actions. Indeed, one of Jackson's good friends, Atlanta lawyer Michael Hollis, appears to have been paid approximately $1 million for managing the troubled Virgin Islands Housing Authority. Before landing at the authority, some sources said, Hollis had no experience in running a public housing agency.

Jackson's past efforts to aid his friends are causing him no end of headaches. For several months, a federal grand jury, Justice Department prosecutors, the FBI, and the HUD inspector general's office have been exploring Jackson's role in contracting decisions at the housing department. According to people familiar with the investigation, federal agents are focusing on Jackson's relationship with one friend in particular, William Hairston, a stucco contractor from Hilton Head Island, S.C.

In interviews several weeks ago with National Journal, Hairston acknowledged that Jackson had helped him land a lucrative job around January 2006 at the Housing Authority of New Orleans, or HANO. HUD and a former HANO official have said that Hairston was paid about $485,000 for working as a construction manager at HANO during an 18-month period. As it turns out, new information uncovered by National Journal suggests that Hairston was paid even more than that. HSD, a Georgia company that was affiliated with Hairston, was paid $186,280 under a direct contract with HUD, federal procurement records show. A HUD document identified Hairston as a representative of HSD.

Federal investigators are digging deep into Jackson's relationship with Hairston, a sometime golfing buddy of the secretary's. According to the people familiar with the inquiry, federal investigators are also reviewing allegations that Hairston did work on Jackson's vacation home in Hilton Head. Investigators recently questioned at least one Jackson associate on that issue; National Journal could not confirm the allegations.

Apart from Hairston, investigators are exploring the circumstances under which HUD awarded management contracts for the Virgin Islands authority, the sources said. The grand jury is seeking information on Hollis and on a HUD contractor that initially employed him in the Virgin Islands, according to a copy of a grand jury subpoena obtained by National Journal. Hollis refused to answer questions about whether Jackson had aided him.

Jackson, 62, declined to answer a list of detailed written questions submitted to Jerry Brown, his press spokesman. The questions covered Jackson's relationships with several people and his role in decisions to award them HUD-related work. Brown said that the secretary would "have no comment until the investigation is concluded." Asked if Hairston had worked on Jackson's Hilton Head home, Brown said, "We have no comment."

Jackson's problems appear to be largely of his own making. Last year, in a speech to a group of minority real estate executives in Dallas, he bragged about how he had once killed a contract award because the contractor had criticized his friend President Bush. Jackson soon apologized, saying he had made up the story, but HUD's inspector general, Kenneth Donohue, launched an investigation.

In the end, the matter proved a big embarrassment but did not appear to create any legal problems for Jackson. In a lengthy report, Donohue said that his investigators found "no direct evidence" linking political favoritism to HUD contracting awards.

Jackson's testimony during that investigation, however, and later statements before a Senate committee could prove troublesome. In a July 24, 2006, interview with Donohue's office, the secretary denied, under oath, intervening in contract awards. On May 3, moreover, he told the Senate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, "I don't touch contracts." Those denials are at the heart of the current probe. Simply put, investigators are exploring whether Jackson lied when he said he did not get involved in HUD contracting. Federal criminal investigators would not comment on their inquiry.

Like Jackson, others caught up in the inquiry are not talking. His former deputy chief of staff, Scott Keller, was among several close Jackson associates who refused to be interviewed or respond to e-mail questions from National Journal. According to people familiar with the investigation, Keller is considered very knowledgeable about Jackson's role in both the New Orleans and the Virgin Islands contract awards under investigation. In fact, Keller, often described within HUD as Jackson's "right-hand man," was the principal HUD contact with the Housing Authority of New Orleans before resigning in August. Separately, Hairston, the Hilton Head contractor, did not respond to recent e-mail questions and telephone messages.

Jackson has worked in housing and community development for decades. He is given high marks for his dedication to promoting economic development and pushing for affordable housing for the poor. He ran public housing authorities in St. Louis, Washington, D.C., and Dallas before going into the private sector in 1996. A Texan and a longtime friend of Bush's, Jackson became HUD's deputy secretary in June 2001. He moved into the secretary's chair at the sprawling $35.2 billion agency in March 2004.

The following account, dealing with Jackson's role in the New Orleans and Virgin Islands contract awards, is based on information from current and former housing officials, other sources, and government documents. At least four associates of Jackson have benefited from contracts awarded at the New Orleans and Virgin Islands housing authorities. Both agencies have been long troubled and are under HUD's supervision.


A Falling Out in New Orleans
From the time that HUD began managing HANO's affairs in February 2002, Jackson took a hands-on approach. He installed George Miller, a longtime HUD contractor who had worked at two public housing authorities, as HANO's receiver. Miller had known Jackson when the latter ran the D.C., housing authority in the 1980s, but he says they were not close friends.

The secretary, however, would soon have a close associate in a key management post at HANO. Jackson, according to people familiar with his actions, arranged for an old friend, Lori Moon, to serve as Miller's deputy receiver. Although Miller stayed for only six months, Moon began a long, and lucrative, run as a top official at the New Orleans housing agency. "It could very well be true," Miller said in an interview, "that Mr. Jackson told me about her."

Moon and Jackson had worked together on public housing issues for many years, and she is considered a first-rate public housing manager. She worked for Jackson at the housing authorities in St. Louis, Washington, and Dallas. When Jackson left the Dallas Housing Authority, Moon became the agency's executive director.

In New Orleans, Moon did not contract directly with HANO or HUD when she went to work at HANO in early 2002. Initially, she was part of Miller's receiver team. After Miller left, Moon approached yet another public housing expert, Nadine Jarmon, to help manage HANO. Moon then went to work for Jarmon. HANO records show that Moon was well paid for her expertise -- reaching $215 an hour at one point. In 2004, according to HANO records, Jarmon's company paid her $264,000.

Moon has been questioned by federal agents and is not under investigation, according to an associate. She has been told that she is only a "witness," the associate said. But Moon knows a lot, and the federal investigation could well force her and Jackson to take sides against one another -- something that could spell trouble for the HUD secretary. Because Moon, it turns out, played a central role in selecting William Hairston to work at HANO. She also arranged the hiring of a company, Columbia Highlands, whose part-owner, Noel Khalil, has financial ties to Jackson.

In an interview, Moon said that she, not Jackson, selected Columbia Highlands, based in Atlanta, to work for HANO as a development and construction manager. She said that Khalil had done superb construction work for the Dallas Housing Authority when she was the chief executive there. Public records show that Moon brought Columbia Highlands into HANO in September 2002 under a small procurement contract that was not bid and lasted only three months. The company later won a competitive bid for long-term work and was paid $3.3 million through March of last year.

Khalil also runs another company, Columbia Residential, an Atlanta housing development firm. Before joining HUD, Jackson was a "partner/consultant" for Columbia Residential, according to his spokesman, Brown. Jackson's public financial disclosure reports show that, under a separation agreement, Columbia Residential owes him $250,000 to $500,000 "for past services." In an August 2001 memo, Jackson recused himself from HUD matters having "a direct and predictable effect on the ability or willingness" of Columbia Residential "to satisfy its obligation to compensate me for prior services rendered."

Earlier this year, HANO awarded a $127 million competitive contract to a team, including Columbia Residential, for redevelopment of the St. Bernard public housing project, which has been closed since Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans in August 2005. In written responses to National Journal last month, Brown said that Jackson was not part of the panel that selected the Columbia Residential team and that he played no role in picking the panel members. Internal HANO records show that the Columbia Residential team barely won the evaluation, nosing out a competitor, 68 points to 67 points.

In the interview with National Journal, Moon said that Jackson and other HUD officials never told her about Jackson's financial ties to Khalil. Had she known, she said, she would not have selected Columbia Highlands for management work at HANO. Perhaps more damaging, Moon also strongly disputed some of the information that Brown provided to NJ last month about Jackson's role in selecting Hairston, his friend and South Carolina contractor, as a construction manager at HANO.

Brown's account, which downplayed Jackson's role in Hairston's hiring, said, "During a conversation with the secretary on the status of rebuilding in New Orleans after Katrina hit, Ms. Moon said she was in desperate need of a construction manager because there was a severe shortage of reputable local contractors, which is why Ms. Moon asked if the secretary knew of anyone outside the region. The secretary thought about it and asked a staff member to pass the names of three construction managers to Ms. Moon. William Hairston was one of the names."

But Moon said in an interview that the secretary's office gave her only one name -- Hairston, who was then, she said, affiliated with the Georgia company HSD.

People familiar with what happened next said that Moon rejected a proposal from HSD to work at HANO. A person close to the situation said, "The proposal that came was not something we could really use." Moon, according to this account, told Jackson's top aides that she could not use Hairston. But Jackson's aides continued pressing, essentially asking Moon, according to this account, "Can you use [Hairston] in any capacity?" Finally, she relented. Hairston became a subcontractor for another firm, NKA Contractors, the company that Moon worked for and that was owned by her close associate Nadine Jarmon.

From January through April 2006, Jarmon paid Hairston $93,755, but she and Moon did not always see eye-to-eye with him. Indeed, in the spring of 2006 Hairston angered Jarmon and Moon by reporting to HUD headquarters that he had cut costs at HANO by more than $14 million in only a few months. "We were mad that William [Hairston] went to D.C. behind our backs," Jarmon said in an interview, "and claimed that we weren't doing the job." Jarmon and Moon were soon out of the picture at HANO. Moon had expressed a desire to move on, and Jarmon's contract was not renewed.

Hairston acknowledged in an interview in early October that he had clashed with Moon but said, "I was there because they needed someone with construction experience."

After Moon and Jarmon left HANO, Hairston remained on the job. On June 13, 2006, HUD awarded a no-bid, $561,280 contract to HSD for "construction oversight services," according to the Federal Procurement Data System, the government's online repository of contract information. Within two months, that contract was canceled, but HSD was paid $186,280, according to the government database. About the same time, public records show, HANO awarded a contract to Hairston's South Carolina concern, Hairston Construction Services. In total, HANO paid Hairston $392,000 for his work, which ended in June 2007.

Why did Jackson push for Hairston? He "was concerned that construction was not happening quickly enough after Katrina and, frankly, he wanted to help his friend," says one person with intimate knowledge of Hairston's dealings at HUD headquarters. "He thought this guy Hairston could manage it, and he wanted him on board in New Orleans. That's pretty much it."


Virgin Islands Connections
Hairston is not the only Jackson friend whose dealings with the HUD secretary are under scrutiny. A federal grand jury subpoena obtained by National Journal shows that investigators are also examining contract awards at the Virgin Islands Housing Authority based in St. Thomas -- specifically, no-bid work handed to Michael Hollis, the prominent Atlanta lawyer, entrepreneur, and Jackson friend.

The subpoena demanded that a witness produce, among other material, "all original documents or records" related to "Michael Hollis individually or in his corporate capacity" and "Smith Real Estate Services," an Atlanta firm that also worked at the Virgin Islands authority and employed Hollis as a special adviser, beginning in 2004.

How much money HUD paid to Hollis and Smith Real Estate Services is not clear. When asked to produce the contracts and payments to Hollis and the Smith concern, HUD's press office directed National Journal to file a request under the Freedom of Information Act. That request is pending. Meanwhile, information in the Federal Procurement Data System indicates that Hollis was paid about $1 million as the executive administrator of the housing authority. Smith Real Estate Services appears to have received about $3.5 million for working at the housing authority. NJ could not determine what the Smith firm paid Hollis.

Pamela Smith, the company's president, did not respond to questions about Hollis, Jackson, or the amount of money her firm had received for working at the authority. But in an e-mail to National Journal, her attorney, Ralph Caccia, wrote that her company had "completely complied" with federal rules governing contract awards. He also said that Smith "will cooperate fully with" the federal investigation "and respect its confidentiality."

HUD took over the financially struggling Virgin Islands Housing Authority in 2003. Federal investigators, it was learned, are examining information that Jackson, through his top aides, helped Hollis land his initial work in the Virgin Islands with Smith Real Estate Services. One knowledgeable source said that a top Jackson aide, Scott Keller, made it clear to others within HUD that "Mr. Jackson wanted Hollis" assigned to the Smith Real Estate Services contract. Hollis, this person also said, was not reticent about mentioning his ties to Jackson.

HUD officials, speaking with the guarantee that they would not be identified, said there was no indication that Hollis had any experience running a public housing agency before arriving in the Virgin Islands. He got on-the-job training, they said, working under the Smith Real Estate Services contract. HUD officials later gave Hollis a direct contract to serve as executive administrator in February 2006. In announcing his appointment, HUD noted in a press release that Hollis had worked as an adviser to the Smith company. "As a result," the release said, "Hollis is knowledgeable of [the housing authority] and its many challenges."

Hollis's lucrative contract with HUD was first reported in May in The Virgin Islands Daily News. The newspaper said that HUD had paid Hollis $450,000 last year, or more than four times the salary of his predecessor. The paper also reported that the contract allowed Hollis to claim $62,000 every six months for meals, airfare, lodging, and other expenses. The story did not link Hollis to Jackson. However, less than two weeks later, HUD replaced Hollis with a career department employee.

When reached in Atlanta, Hollis had little to say. The founder of the now-defunct Air Atlanta, the country's first African-American jet airline, Hollis declined to answer most questions, including how he had obtained the HUD work. He said he had negotiated his contract with Orlando Cabrera, a senior HUD official, and "people on his procurement staff." Asked if Jackson was instrumental in helping him line up the HUD business, Hollis said that question should be directed to Cabrera. "That is all I am going to say on that," he declared.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Probably accounts for reasoning behind the latest poll numbers:
Friday, November 23, 2007
Among all likely voters—as opposed to the partisan subsets--the Economy (73%), Government Ethics and Corruption (73%), and Health Care (64%) are of greatest importance.

More voters trust Democrats (46%) than Republicans (41%) to shape economic policy. On Health Care, Democrats have an eight-point advantage, with 46% trusting the Democrats more, 38% trusting the Republicans more. Democrats also have an edge on Corruption, 41% to 29%. But as usual, a large slice of the electorate (30% in the current poll) are Not Sure that either party is more trustworthy when it comes to ethical conduct of government affairs.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/trust_on_issues__1/trust_on_issues
 

Steve

Well-known member
Red Robin
Quote:
So far only you and her have said that Bush and Cheney are worse than our enemies.


Steve Wrote
They join Kathy and SteveC on the over the left edge club


Frankk
SteveC was banned for little to nothing so maybe you can trump something up to get these two banned.


Sorry I forgot to include you,..

I neither banned SteveC nor forced him to make the comments he made that got him booted...

But any one who believes our President and Vice President killed Americans on Sept 11, or are worse the terrorists has more then a screw loose.. I just can't understand how a person can be that blinded by hatred... but then I can't understand how a terrorist can be blinded by their hatred of Americans either...

so in the same way hatred of America can effect seemingly normal people, as it can terrorists..

but I would never stoop to saying you are worse then the terrorists...
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
Red Robin
Quote:
So far only you and her have said that Bush and Cheney are worse than our enemies.


Steve Wrote
They join Kathy and SteveC on the over the left edge club


Frankk
SteveC was banned for little to nothing so maybe you can trump something up to get these two banned.


Sorry I forgot to include you,..

I neither banned SteveC nor forced him to make the comments he made that got him booted...

But any one who believes our President and Vice President killed Americans on Sept 11, or are worse the terrorists has more then a screw loose.. I just can't understand how a person can be that blinded by hatred... but then I can't understand how a terrorist can be blinded by their hatred of Americans either...

so in the same way hatred of America can effect seemingly normal people, as it can terrorists..

but I would never stoop to saying you are worse then the terrorists...

:roll: No one has said the President/VP killed anyone on 9/11. All those people who actually killed Americans that day are dead. But the man who planned and executed that attack, Osama Bin Ladin, is still alive, and apparently well. Even though our tough talking president said he'd get him, he's still out there somewhere, putting out edicts, encouraging attacks on Americans. Why is that, you think, Steve? Why hasn't Bush captured/killed the man responsible for thousands of Americans dying on 9/11? Could it possibly be that he's not interested in capturing or killing Osama? That he used 9/11 as an excuse to do what he was itching to do: overthrow Saddam? The Taliban are taking over Afghanistan again. We have about 15,000 troops there, the source of the 9/11 attack. That's compared to 160,000 in Iraq, who did nothing to us.

The conflict in Afghanistan has reached "crisis proportions," with the resurgent Taliban present in more than half the country and closing in on Kabul, a report said on Wednesday.

If NATO, the lead force operating in Afghanistan, is to have any impact against the insurgency, troop numbers will have to be doubled to at least 80,000, the report said.

"The Taliban has shown itself to be a truly resurgent force," the Senlis Council, an independent think-tank with a permanent presence in Afghanistan, wrote in a study entitled "Stumbling into Chaos: Afghanistan on the brink."

"Its ability to establish a presence throughout the country is now proven beyond doubt," it said. "The insurgency now controls vast swaths of unchallenged territory including rural areas, some district centers, and important road arteries."

Senlis said its research had established that the Taliban, driven out of Afghanistan by the U.S. invasion in late 2001, had rebuilt a permanent presence in 54 percent of the country and was finding it easy to recruit new followers.

It was also increasingly using Iraq-style tactics, such as roadside and suicide bombs, to powerful effect, and had built a stable network of financial support, funding its operations with the proceeds from Afghanistan's booming opium trade.

"It is a sad indictment of the current state of Afghanistan that the question now appears to be not if the Taliban will return to Kabul, but when," the report said.

"Their oft-stated aim of reaching the city in 2008 appears more viable than ever."

TROOP BOOST

NATO has a little over 40,000 troops operating in Afghanistan as part of the International Security Assistance Force. The United States and Britain are the largest contributors, with 15,000 and 7,700 soldiers, respectively.

Those numbers pale in comparison to Iraq where at the peak of operations there were nearly 200,000 troops on the ground and where around 160,000 remain.

While Iraq is showing the first signs of an improvement in security, Afghanistan's situation is becoming more precarious, Senlis argued, underlining the need for a rapid increase in troop numbers in a country that is larger than Iraq.

"In order to prevent NATO's defeat at the hands of the Taliban, a rejuvenated 'coalition of the willing' is needed," the report said, calling the proposal 'NATO Plus'.

"Every NATO state is mandated to contribute to this new force, with a firm level of commitment that will provide a total force size of 80,000."

Bolstering NATO's presence in Afghanistan, and getting member countries to contribute more, is expected to be a major issue on the agenda at a NATO summit in Romania in April.

Before then, Britain, which is responsible for security in the restive south of Afghanistan, where violence has been greatest, is expected to unveil new security strategies, including a possible increase in troops and proposals to deter Afghan poppy farmers from selling their crop to the Taliban.

Senlis said that without the troop "surge," and renewed efforts to win over the Afghan population and make reconstruction take hold, the country was in danger of falling back into the hands of the Taliban.
 

Steve

Well-known member
ff
No one has said the President/VP killed anyone on 9/11.


actually SteveC and Kathy have both made that claim.. or at least that we as Americans did it... under the orders of Bush../.Cheney,...

but it was you and Tex that compared our president to Terrorists

so try to change the subject all you want...I stand by my entire post!
Steve wrote:
:
Red Robin
:So far only you and her have said that Bush and Cheney are worse than our enemies.



Steve Wrote
:They join Kathy and SteveC on the over the left edge club



Frankk
:
SteveC was banned for little to nothing so maybe you can trump something up to get these two banned.



Sorry I forgot to include you,..

I neither banned SteveC nor forced him to make the comments he made that got him booted...

But any one who believes our President and Vice President killed Americans on Sept 11, or are worse the terrorists has more then a screw loose.. I just can't understand how a person can be that blinded by hatred... but then I can't understand how a terrorist can be blinded by their hatred of Americans either...

so in the same way hatred of America can effect seemingly normal people, as it can terrorists..

but I would never stoop to saying you are worse then the terrorists...
 

Steve

Well-known member
ff
Why is that, you think, Steve? Why hasn't Bush captured/killed the man responsible for thousands of Americans dying on 9/11?


Given the confines of working with in international law, it is doubtful Osama will be captured.. Would you like US to attack and invade Pakistan? ...or even Iran to capture Osama...

I am still angry enough about Sept 11 to advocate bombing the hell out of both those countries just to make a point...that Muslims had best not ever do it again.. but feel that the liberals in this country that can't support our troops now, would have a complete hissy fit if the President actually did what would be required to get Osama's head on a platter...
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
ff
Why is that, you think, Steve? Why hasn't Bush captured/killed the man responsible for thousands of Americans dying on 9/11?


Given the confines of working with in international law, it is doubtful Osama will be captured.. Would you like US to attack and invade Pakistan? ...or even Iran to capture Osama...

I am still angry enough about Sept 11 to advocate bombing the hell out of both those countries just to make a point...that Muslims had best not ever do it again.. but feel that the liberals in this country that can't support our troops now, would have a complete hissy fit if the President actually did what would be required to get Osama's head on a platter...

Confines of international law?????? When did that ever stop Bush?
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
I guess the question was to difficult.

Would you like US to attack and invade Pakistan? ...or even Iran to capture Osama...

The Paks don't even go into the disputed area where Osama was supposed to be. Given what he instigated, I would let no one harbor him. Bush pulled out of Afghanistan to go to Iraq. He took his eye off the prize and lost it. I would not have let that happen. It was a mistake in resource allocation plain and simple. It was about as bad as Schwartcoph allowing Saddam subdue the Kurds in Gulf I.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
ff said:
The majority of people put at GitMo were not our enemies. They were people going about their business, snatched up in dragnets, ratted out by their enemies and hauled off to a foreign prison. That's why most of them have been let go without charges or trials. The Bush/Cheney junta held some of them for years and then just turned them loose. Their kids grew up without them. Their jobs, if they had one, were gone. Their familes, in some instances, disappeared. Do you care? Apparently not.

Of those that have been released there have been many that have went back and started killing our troops again.

If people there are innocent of no crimes that is a shame, but in times of war there will be collateral damage. The people have to accept this as partly there fault for allowing leaders such as the Taliban and Saddam to control them. They should have risen up years ago to take control of their country. Since they did not do that, it is unfortunate that some innocent people will be contained but as a nation trying to protect its own people that is not our problem that is their problem for not getting rid of leaders who were enemies of the U.S. and Terrorist in general.

The Iranians should learn from the lesson of the Afghanistan and Iraqi people. If they do not do something about their Leader the U.S. will and they also will suffer collateral damage.
 

Steve

Well-known member
Steve wrote:
I guess the question was to difficult.

Quote:
Would you like US to attack and invade Pakistan? ...or even Iran to capture Osama...


Tex wrote:
The Paks don't even go into the disputed area where Osama was supposed to be. Given what he instigated, I would let no one harbor him. Bush pulled out of Afghanistan to go to Iraq. He took his eye off the prize and lost it. I would not have let that happen. It was a mistake in resource allocation plain and simple.,...

While I agree, I can also see the mistake it would be to end our operations in Iraq and start another regional conflict in Pakistan.
what if Osama isn't there would you go into Iran to get him?
 

Goodpasture

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Of those that have been released there have been many that have went back and started killing our troops again.
Do you have hard evidence of this? And if you do, can you imagine anyone being detained in Gitmo who would NOT come back to try to destroy those who kept him incarcerated in a dog kennel for several years, illegally, while torturing and abusing him? I am a Viet Vet and as loyal as they come, but if they had done that to me, I would be doing everything I could to remove those who attacked and imprisoned me like that.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
Steve wrote:
I guess the question was to difficult.

Quote:
Would you like US to attack and invade Pakistan? ...or even Iran to capture Osama...


Tex wrote:
The Paks don't even go into the disputed area where Osama was supposed to be. Given what he instigated, I would let no one harbor him. Bush pulled out of Afghanistan to go to Iraq. He took his eye off the prize and lost it. I would not have let that happen. It was a mistake in resource allocation plain and simple.,...

While I agree, I can also see the mistake it would be to end our operations in Iraq and start another regional conflict in Pakistan.
what if Osama isn't there would you go into Iran to get him?

I wouldn't have to go anywhere. I would send idiots like you.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
Tex
I wouldn't have to go anywhere. I would send idiots like you.

typical liberal response,.. when you can't honestly answer the question, you throw out an insult...

Here is the deal, steve. I don't have to answer your stupid questions. I can end them just the way I did.

....typical control freak response.
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
Tex
I wouldn't have to go anywhere. I would send idiots like you.

typical liberal response,.. when you can't honestly answer the question, you throw out an insult...

....typical control freak response.

Here is the deal, steve. I don't have to answer your stupid questions. I can end them just the way I did.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Goodpasture said:
can you imagine anyone being detained in Gitmo who would NOT come back to try to destroy those who kept him incarcerated in a dog kennel for several years, illegally, while torturing and abusing him? I am a Viet Vet and as loyal as they come, but if they had done that to me, I would be doing everything I could to remove those who attacked and imprisoned me like that.

Sounds like we should not let them go then. Even you say you would continue the fight and return to kill American Soldiers.


Goodpasture said:
Do you have hard evidence of this? .

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/24/terror/main645493.shtml

A list of a few
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/d20070712formergtmo.pdf

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=3902

And I will say, we have spoken to this in the past. You know, we don't always get that right. We have had individuals that we have transferred back that were turned back to the fight. We have had individuals that have, you know, persuaded us that they were an innocent bystander, and as soon as they were released, they returned to the fight.



Q Has it happened in the last couple of years since you've been doing these more organized ARBs?



SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: Yes.



Q Can you say how many, approximately?



SR. DEFENSE OFFICIAL: I can tell you that we have confirmed 12 individuals have returned to the fight, and we have strong evidence that about another dozen have returned to the fight.
 

Steve

Well-known member
tex
Here is the deal, steve. I don't have to answer your stupid questions. I can end them just the way I did.

....typical control freak response.

tex as far as I am concerned I could give a rat's --- what you think or how you respond, but I am sure that most who read your response will see how idiotic you really are... or how you and a few other liberals on here can denigrate the conversation...

BTW It's not yours to end... ...

Why is it liberals feel the compulsive need to silence to opposing view???
 

Tex

Well-known member
Steve said:
tex
Here is the deal, steve. I don't have to answer your stupid questions. I can end them just the way I did.

....typical control freak response.

tex as far as I am concerned I could give a rat's --- what you think or how you respond, but I am sure that most who read your response will see how idiotic you really are... or how you and a few other liberals on here can denigrate the conversation...

BTW It's not yours to end... ...

Why is it liberals feel the compulsive need to silence to opposing view???

Silence you? Who would I argue with? You asked a question:

what if Osama isn't there would you go into Iran to get him?

I had already said:


I would let no one harbor him.

When my youngest was 3 I didn't have to repeat as much as I have to repeat to you.
 

Latest posts

Top