9/11 is not Bush's fault!!!!

[TheDudeDVant]

Btw....Kappa if you dont like MY post.....I go by Elfie in the MA also, feel free to come pwn me Elfie

Thanks for the invite, but I have been doing just that since AW..   lol  

You know it really had nothing to do with you. I am just tired of Grunherz's lies and fabrications he has to use when attempting to make up for content. I thought it a funny way to say that I was not responding to him in the forum but would still play with him in the MA. Nice of you to come to his defence though. Seems he has a few willing to do just that and I suppose that is normal act. I understand it as folk leaning toward the underdog and I can live with that. I felt pity for him once too.. haha
The end.

[RedTop]

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
..... To me, even if we were attacked under Clinton's watch, wanna take a gander on who I would hold ultimatly responsible? Clinton, absolutly.......

News flash........................ ........we we're

[Elfie]

Thanks for the invite, but I have been doing just that since AW.. lol

Actually, iirc you played FR while I played RR, so no.....you havent been doing just that since AW And since I dont recall seeing you in the MA on my 6....you havent been doing that here either

What you tryed to do here Kappa is to force an  admission for something that no one knows. At least, none of us know. You so desparartely want Bush to be to blame. The only people who do know are the ones who were in the room with the President when he got the memo and I dont think that would include anyone on these boards.

I'm not jumping to Grun's defense here, I am hauling up the BS flag on YOUR posts. No one in America could have imagined the type of terrorist attack that occured on that fateful day. No one in America took AQ and OBL seriously.  No where in that memo does it specify that an attack is imminent, nor does it give what type of attack it might be, or where. The memo just states that OBL is determined to make an attack inside the USA. There is no information in that memo that would allow for positive action to take place that would lead to avoiding the attacks on 9/11.

Otoh, during the Clinton administration they could have killed OBL on at least 3 different occasions. Predator drones found him at least 3 different times, yet the Clinton admin declined to do anything about him. Intelligence services had their budgets slashed during the Clinton era. With better intel before 9/11 the attacks might have been prevented.

Dont get me wrong here, I am not blaming Clinton for 9/11. Imo the blame for 9/11 belongs on the perpetrators shoulders.

Could 9/11 have been prevented? Yes....IF there had been better intell and IF there had been better communication between intelligence services. When it comes to terrorists America has a history of underestimating the enemy and that is a deadly mistake and one I am sure we wont make again.

[Elfie]

To me, even if we were attacked under Clinton's watch, wanna take a gander on who I would hold ultimatly responsible? Clinton, absolutly. 9/11 is/was larger than party lines..

Ever hear of the USS Cole or the 2 Embassies in Africa that were attacked?

USS Cole incident, an American warship attacked while in a port, 37 dead American sailors that is an act of war. 2 embassies in Africa attacked, again, acts of war......all 3 incidents happened while Clinton was on watch. Clinton actually had at least 3 opportunities to kill OBL and did nothing.

Maybe you should be holding Clinton responsible for 9/11 since he could have killed OBL years before 9/11 happened.

Pointing the finger after the fact does absolutely nothing to bring back those 3000 dead Americans.

 

What I wanted in this thread? I wanted to see if there were any gungho Bush supporters here with any guts.. That could freely admit what our POTUS did after the memo which was nothing.

You dont know that Bush did *nothing* anymore than I do. Towards the end of that memo it states that there are 70 investigations going on. If Bush said lets keep those investigations going and add some resources to help them along. That would be *something*. Did Bush say anything about that? I don't know, and niether do you. Did Bush say something like.....AQ is no threat, lets move on to more important business? I dont know and again, niether do you

You are assuming that Bush did nothing whatsoever. You have no proof one way or the other, no one does. If he did in fact do *something* (no matter how small or large) it obviously wasnt enough to prevent the attacks.

*edit* for spelling

[TheDudeDVant]

CLAIM: "The threat reporting that we received in the Spring and Summer of 2001 was not specific as to...manner of attack."

FACT: ABC News reported, Bush Administration "officials acknowledged that U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes." Dateline NBC reported that on August 6, 2001, the President personally "received a one-and-a-half page briefing advising him that Osama bin Laden was capable of a major strike against the US, and that the plot could include the hijacking of an American airplane." Rice herself actually admitted this herself, saying the Aug. 6 briefing the President received said "terrorists might attempt to hijack a U.S. aircraft." [Sources: ABC News, 5/16/02; NBC, 9/10/02]

 

CLAIM: "When threat reporting increased during the Spring and Summer of 2001, we moved the U.S. Government at all levels to a high state of alert and activity."

FACT: Documents indicate that before Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush Administration "did not give terrorism top billing in their strategic plans for the Justice Department, which includes the FBI." Gen. Henry H. Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff until Oct. 1, 2001, said during the summer, terrorism had moved "farther to the back burner" and recounted how the Bush Administration's top two Pentagon appointees, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, "shut down" a plan to weaken the Taliban. Similarly, Gen. Don Kerrick, who served in the Bush White House, sent a memo to the new Administration saying "We are going to be struck again" by al Qaeda, but he never heard back. He said terrorism was not "above the waterline. They were gambling nothing would happen." [Sources: Washington Post, 3/22/04; LA Times, 3/30/04]

CLAIM: "We increased funding for counterterrorism activities across several agencies.

FACT: Upon taking office, the 2002 Bush budget proposed to slash more than half a billion dollars out of funding for counterterrorism at the Justice Department. In preparing the 2003 budget, the New York Times reported that the Bush White House "did not endorse F.B.I. requests for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence analysts and 54 additional translators" and "proposed a $65 million cut for the program that gives state and local counterterrorism grants." Newsweek noted the Administration "vetoed a request to divert $800 million from missile defense into counterterrorism." [Sources: 2001 vs. 2002 Budget Analysis; NY Times, 2/28/02; Newsweek, 5/27/02]

CLAIM: "We decided immediately to continue pursuing the Clinton Administration's covert action authorities and other efforts to fight the network."

FACT: Newsweek reported that "In the months before 9/11, the U.S. Justice Department curtailed a highly classified program called 'Catcher's Mitt' to monitor al-Qaida suspects in the United States." Additionally, AP reported "though Predator drones spotted Osama bin Laden as many as three times in late 2000, the Bush administration did not fly the unmanned planes over Afghanistan during its first eight months," thus terminating the reconnaissance missions started during the Clinton Administration. [Sources: Newsweek, 3/21/04; AP, 6/25/03]

I see. Instead of this administration documenting and revealing unto to the world steps taken after the Aug 6 memo, the administration down plays the memo  and says the memo was 'historical information' and was not considered a 'warning'.

It is time for the president to drop his political posture and reassure the country that his first and foremost concern is not his re-election but the safety of Americans at home and abroad. Instead of passively noting that it is the job of the 9/11 commission to figure out whether anything could or should have been done differently, he must demonstrate that he is asking those questions of himself. Instead of preparing — as the administration seems to be preparing — to blame the C.I.A. and F.B.I. for everything that went wrong, he needs to ask whether the structure of the Bush White House itself is part of the problem.

Perhaps no other administration would have responded differently to the skimpy document Mr. Bush received in August 2001. But most other presidents did not limit critical briefing papers to little more than a page, give political advisers such a prominent place in the White House and so dramatically restrict the number of policy makers who had access to the Oval Office. All of Mr. Bush's recent predecessors had at least one of those flaws, but no one else had them all.  http://foi.missouri.edu/classdeclass/silentprez.html

I dunno.. I have looked really hard to find some sort of policy shift or change that occured after the memo in question. I have thus far been unable to find that change. I suppose it to be much easier to sit back and believe nothing more could or by all reasonable accounts should have been done..

[TheDudeDVant]

Found some good humor though..

Really what happened to the Aug. 6 Memo:

[vorticon]

TheDudeDVant-


i am determined to hack into your pc.




what are you going to do?

[TheDudeDVant]

Originally posted by vorticon
TheDudeDVant-


i am determined to hack into your pc.




what are you going to do?

I've already done it. You cant get to my pc here. Besides, few would know where 'here' is.. 8)