Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Path to the Next 9/11

I hate using buzzwords, pop-phrases, and other Republican spew, I really do. Hold up... Actually, I love using it against them. In ABC's "The Path to 9/11," there was something of a direct implication that the Clinton administration had a golden opportunity to take out bin Laden years before the horrible attacks of five years ago. This is known by all sources (even the ones stated to have been directly involved!) to be completely made up and straight out of... well... Disneyland!

Liberals, eat your heart out. While I can't say that the call went all the way to the White House, it is most certainly under this administration. During a Taliban funeral, this administration completely failed to take out nearly 200 members of the Taliban, including what were believed to be several "high ranking members."

Can I honestly say that they called the White House and were hung up on? No, not really. Can I dishonestly say it? You betcha. Therefore, I present to you my own screenplay; The Path to the Next 9/11.

Predator Drone Operator: "Sir, you need to take a look at this!"
Predator Duty Supervisor: "What the hell am I looking at, soldier!?!"
Operator: "Sir, it's a Taliban funeral. Intel indicates several high ranking members are there. This is the biggest opportunity since the war started! I have Hellfires armed and ready, sir."
Supervisor: "Excellent. I'm calling for authorization." ::dials White House::
Some Dick: "What do you want?"
Supervisor: "Mr. Vice President, this is Predator Field Command. We have a large grouping of Taliban at a funeral and a target on them. We can take them all out with your command."
Some Dick: "Do you think I'm here to swat flies? Go fuck yourself." ::call is disconnected::
Operator: "Sir, do we have clearance to fire?"
Supervisor: ::dejected:: "No, we don't. Carry on with surveillance."

I need to be clear. There really is no truth to this... well, except for the opportunity, and the screw-up, and that it happened under Bush (like so many screw-ups). I would point out though that while they were told not fire based on rules of engagement, a high ranking Pentagon official has already weighed in on the matter and stated that no such rules exist. Specifically, while they are not permitted to fire upon targets with religious significance, they may break those rules based upon the value of the target as weighed to the value of the target in question. In this case, someone screwed up.

In the meantime, I recommend that liberal bloggers everywhere pull a Coulter and deliberately misquote my post here as pure fact, as opposed to mere speculation.


Post a Comment

<< Home