OUCH! Widow Indicts Bush For 9/11

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Hind sight is great but let's be fair. What do you really think the reaction of the american people would have been if before the attack (when nobody believed such an attack could happen), Bush et al. had suddenly gone around warning people not to fly and not to got to work because terrorists may try to crash jets into a building? Bush would have been ridiculed and accused of creating a false sense of panic!

Well, if you handle intel like that, then you're a dumbass. It's like issuing a travel advisory against going to Hawaii or the Phillipines in Decermber 1941.

The appropriate response would have been to increase security and scrutiny measures within the FAA, and push the FBI and CIA to engaging in some minimal level of scrutiny of potential threats, etc.

A lot of people seem heel-bent on justifying the "collective heads up our asses" intel posture that prevailed until September 11 on partisan grounds. Warning the public is useless - you light a fire under the asses of the responsible agencies who are tasked with dealing with those problems.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course, John... and in the end, of course, the leftyish Dems are right and the Republicans are always wrong... it is che we are talking about .

Whether what Che posted is completely factual or not, he DID implicate Clinton as being one of those who made serious mistakes in this regard.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yeah, but in the end... he comes out smelling better.

[MrFun]

What do you want Chegitz to do -- paint Clinton as evil incarnate, and THEN you would be satisfied with his objectivity?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yep... if Bush is then Clinton should be too... then he'd be a true commie .

[MrFun]

Bush is not evil incarnate, and neither is Clinton.


Does that satisfy you -- or are your panties still bunched up??

[Defiant]

C'mon Berzerker,
If I didn't know you better I would say you were trolling. I will admit that our intell communication was horrid to say the least. It was mentioned that our intell gets thousands of possibilities for terrorist action whether plane, trains, bridges, landmarks, water supplies, shipping containers and the list goes on. You know as well as I that we can't protect everything all the time, the logistics are impossible. Where the error occurred is in the assimilation of information between the different defense departments, which now I hope we are getting better at. Hell, 9/11 was planned two years prior, you gonna lay any responsibility on Clinton.
Even if our gov't realized that the first tower was no accident and sent up fighters, I don't think there was enough time to stop the second flight from hitting the towers and that's assuming the figther pilot would have pulled the trigger on a commercial airliner.
9/11 was a dispictable act of terrorism which I hope we are now trying to prevent the next from ever occuring.
Besides, your football picks are stinking up the turf.

[Berzerker]

Defiant -

Besides, your football picks are stinking up the turf.

Last time I looked we were tied.

I agree we can't protect everything, that wasn't the point this woman was making. Seriously, did you know the USA was at war with Al Qaeda prior to 9/11. We heard about the Cole, the African embassies, but not much of anything about the organisation behind these attacks. We've been at war with these people for ~8 years prior to 9/11 and I suspect most people never heard of them. Something's wrong with that picture... The government simply was not informing us of the dangers and the result was alot of dead Americans... According to this woman, The Bush administration had received warnings that something big was going to happen in August of 2001 one month before 9/11 but neither Clinton or Bush told us about the nature of the threat. For me, this isn't about the bickering going on between the Dems and Repubs but the fact Americans were treated like children whose parents want to protect from fear by not telling us about an existing threat. Hey folks, if your plane is hijacked by Arabs, it isn't because they want to fly to Libya for asylum. Hey folks, these people tried to hijack an airliner a few years back to use as a flying bomb.

John T -

Actually, it is very reasonable not to expect the inconcievable, even if you are warned. Nobody really expected the Japanese to bomb Pearl Harbor, and nobody would've really believed that there would be a foreign terrorist attack on US soil.

A warning would have been nice, true? If the American people were being kept in the loop, the passengers on those planes could have prevented the attacks as they did on UA 93. The people in those towers could have evacuated after the first plane hit, not gone back to work because they thought it was an accident. What about the bombing of the World Trade Center in '93?

Didn't your parents ever warn you about something to which you replied (in mind if not by mouth) "bull****", only to find out they were right? If not, consider yourself incredibly unique.

Can't remember, but if that was analogous, we wouldn't have reason to blame anyone but ourselves and the government wouldn't bother warning us about anything because we are like children. On the other hand, had there been a campaign to educate Americans about this threat not unlike the cold war campaign of educating Americans of the threat from the Commies I suspect people would have reacted differently on 9/11. If I was told that a well-organised group of Arab men sought to attack us and one of the tactics they may or have employed was hijacking airliners for use as flying bombs, I sure would have had a different reaction had I been onboard one of those airliners on 9/11. I wouldn't have deluded myself into believing these guys merely wanted asylum somewhere...