Nine Ways Republicans Are Ruining the Country

[ECW]

Say it loud, say it often, "Republicans are bad on national security." Every Democrat running for national office -- and local offices too, why not? -- should say, "I'm running because Republicans are bad on national security."

Then they should go on to say, here's why I'm saying it:

1. 9/11 happened on their watch. Of course, we can't say, absolutely, that it would not have happened if they had not been asleep at the wheel. But we can say that they did not do all they could have done to prevent it. We can say that Bush literally pushed away the warnings.

2. George Bush and the Republicans failed to get Osama bin Laden. We got both Hitler and Hirohito in less time than we've been chasing bin Laden. Every day that bin Laden's out there, he's proof that you can attack the United States and get away with it. That's a bad message to send, and believe me, people in the terrorist world have heard it loud and clear. That's very bad for national security.

3. George Bush and the Republicans gave Osama bin Laden what he wanted. Bin Laden wanted the US to get into a quagmire. He wanted our troops tied down in an Islamic country so that an insurgency could do to them what the Afghanis did to the Russians and to the British before them.

A modern, hi-tech army is very good at invasions. It's also good for fighting back against other armies. But a modern hi-tech army is not good at occupying a country against the will of the population. Even if the army is as violent and ruthless as the Soviet occupiers of Afghanistan were.

4. George Bush and the Republicans squandered America's power and prestige. Before 9/11 most people in the world probably thought that America's intelligence services were able and astute, agencies to be feared. The Bush administration has made them appear bumbling and inept. They did this, first, by ignoring their warnings and then, second, by making them the fall guys for 9/11.

After 9/11 most of the world feared America's wrath and America's might. By failing to get bin Laden and his gang, then by attacking the wrong country, unleashing chaos, and getting our armed forces into a situation that they can't win, the administration showed the world they have less to fear than they imagined.

5. The Bush administration empowered Hezbollah. The 'insurgency' in Iraq was Hezbollah's textbook and their inspiration. If Iraqis could do that to Americans, surely they could do the same to the Israelis. And they have. It's not yet on the record, but it's clear from everyone's conduct, that the administration encouraged the Israelis to 'unleash' their forces against Hezbollah. They probably thought Israel's modern hi-tech armies would quickly smash their enemy.

6. The Bush administration radicalized Hamas. Hamas was elected. Sworn to the destruction of Israel or not, they should have been encouraged to become responsible players with carrots as well as sticks. Instead the administration put them up against the wall, hoping to starve the Palestinian people into voting for a different group. Would that work if someone tried to do it to us?

7. Bush and the Republicans tied down our forces in Iraq while Iran and North Korea invested in nuclear technology. That made North Korea feel secure enough to test ICBMs. If they had been successful, they would have had a delivery system for their nuclear weapons. That would be incredibly bad for national security. Iran, with American forces tied down in Iraq, feels secure enough to defy the UN as well as the US. Very bad for national security.

8. By the way, every major European nation has had successful arrests and real trials of real, dangerous terrorists. People on the level of this group that the British just took down. The most ferocious terrorist arrested in the United States since 9/11 has been the shoe bomber. Ten, twenty, forty, a hundred billion dollars, a trillion dollars, and the best we have to show for it is the shoe bomber?! Republicans are bad on national security.

9. We have trashed the bill of rights. We have trashed the Geneva conventions. We have a president and a vice president willing to go the mat to fight for the right to torture people.

We have spent a fortune on illegal wiretaps.

We have spent a fortune on collecting everyone's telephone data.

And what have we achieved by all of this?

A quagmire in Iraq. Dishonor. Debts. An empowered al Qaeda. A new war in Lebanon. The inability to stand up to Iran and North Korea. Osama bin Laden at large, an inspiration to extremists everywhere.

Republican are unimaginably bad on national security. Say it loud. Say it often, it's the truth, Republicans are bad on national security.

That about says it all. The Knowledge Is Here (http://www.alternet.org/story/40438/)

[Rider]

ECW - Point by point, OK?

1. No one saw 9/11 happening. Not Democrats or Republicans or intelligence agencies. You know that. Yah, Bush was asleep at the wheel for almost a whole 8 months before it happened.

2. OBL is hiding, almost certainly in Pakistan. What would you suggest we do? Besides, capturing him might be a big mistake because the left would almost certainly want to declare victory and abandon the war entirely. Also, it would have no negative effect on the Islamofacists anyway. He would become a martyr.

3.Â*Â*You're correct on this. Invading Iraq was not a mistake. Failing to wage real warfare was the mistake.

4.Â*Â*The Bush administration has made the intel community look bad? That's a new one! They were in trouble because they WERE bad. This was in the making since the Democrats had their way with the Church Commission under Carter's reign (you know, the guy who gave us Islamofacist Iran). And, Europe would be satisfied with nothing less than total surrender to the terrorists (like they have).

5.Â*Â*Oh yah, Bush empowered Hezbollah. How long did it take you to dream that up?

6.Â*Â*Same as 5, just substitute Hamas for Hezbollah.

7. Oh, my mistake- I thought that N Korea and Iran had been working on nuclear programs for many years.

8.Â*Â*Might be because most of the worst terrorists are still in Europe where they feel safe, eh? Say, for instance, Londonistan?

9.Â*Â*Now calm down and breathe into this paper bag. You'll feel better in a few minutes. After that could you please provide us with a list of all the citizens who've been so abused, and maybe a list of all the devastated rights?
The Geneva Convention? Just sit down and keep breathing into that bag.

I know that you've had fun rattling your cage. I had fun, too.

[ECW]

ECW - Point by point, OK?

1. No one saw 9/11 happening. Not Democrats or Republicans or intelligence agencies. You know that. Yah, Bush was asleep at the wheel for almost a whole 8 months before it happened.



Back at ya.

Was 9/11 preventable? Add New Yorker writer Lawrence Wright, author of "The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11," to the growing ranks of those answering a resounding "Yes!" to that simple but highly-charged question.

The failures of the CIA, FBI, the National Security Agency and many other branches of government to share information -- and the concomitant failure to stop the 9/11 hijackers -- have already been well-documented by others, but few have offered Wright's coherent focus on what the New York Times accurately describes as "the stupidity, hubris and dereliction of duty that occurred within the United States government." In particular, Wright's relentlessly detailed account of the flawed investigation of the October 2000 bombing of the American destroyer USS Cole -- a seminal and largely misunderstood event in the run-up to the 9/11 attacks -- amply demonstrates how "jealousy and turf wars" were used by U.S. intelligence operatives as "an excuse to hide information that should have been shared."

"9/11 could have been stopped with a functional intelligence community," Wright states forthrightly. "But instead, things were hidden for no reason from people with a vital need to know them."

When the Cole pulled into the port of Aden, Yemen, for refueling on Oct. 12, 2000, "The Al Qaeda presence there was very well-known," says Wright. His claim is buttressed by on-the-record testimony from, among others, military intelligence analysts associated with the secret Able Danger program. The Able Danger team had already identified five different Al Qaeda cells by then, including one active in Aden.

They had also brought this information to Gen. Peter Schoomaker, then-head of the Special Operations Command (SOCOM), now chief of staff, U.S. Army, as well as to high intelligence officials at the Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees the Fifth Fleet to which the Cole had been tasked. It remains unknown what -- if anything -- the high Pentagon officials did with this information, but clearly none of it was ever conveyed to the Cole's commander, Kirk Lippold.

As a result, a fiberglass boat filled with plastic explosives pulled alongside the destroyer and blew a forty-by-forty-foot hole in its side, killing 17 crew members and injuring 39 others.

"You had 17 dead sailors," says Wright. "And they had pertinent information that might have stopped 9/11." Such actions "look like obstruction of justice," he adds, "It's an outrage that no one has been held to account."

In his book, as well as a recent New Yorker article, Wright explains how the CIA withheld vital information from FBI agents who were in Yemen investigating after the attack on the Cole. In particular, the spy agency lied about its knowledge of a terrorist planning meeting in Malaysia that took place before the Cole bombing, which had been attended by two Al Qaeda operatives named Khaled Al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hamzi. It also failed to reveal that the men -- both of whom ended up on planes involved in the 9/11 attacks -- were living in Los Angeles, information that the CIA was legally bound to share with the bureau.

"Given all the alarm bells, I just can't understand why they would tolerate the presence of two known Al Qaeda members in California," says Wright. "Everyone in the CIA knew they were Al Qaeda, but they did nothing! Had this information been given to the FBI, they could have uncovered the 9/11 plot at that time."

How to explain this astonishing failure? One theory has it that the CIA may have been trying to turn the two Al Qaeda members into double agents as a means of infiltrating the terror group. "Half the guys in the bureau think CIA was trying to turn them to get inside Al Qaeda," Wright told me. "It's never been proven, but it's extremely suggestive that this was a failed CIA operation to recruit them." If so, that would at least explain why, when FBI Cole investigator Ali Soufran repeatedly queried the CIA about the meeting in Malaysia -- attended not only by the Cole bombers but also by the two 9/11 hijackers -- the information about al-Mihdhar and al-Hamzi was withheld.

And what of the other, egregious and repeated intelligence failures that resulted in the worst terror attacks ever on U.S. soil? Were they also due to bureaucratic bungling and turf wars, as some have suggested? Were they instead the result of a bipartisan attempt to cover up ongoing intelligence failures dating back several administrations? Or, as some have suggested, was the intelligence community simply drowning in the tsunami of pre-attack "threat assessments" and warnings that were flooding in during the months leading up to 9/11?

"What is the explanation?" Wright asks rhetorically. "Turf wars? A bipartisan cover-up? Drowning in threats? Can I choose 'All of the above'?"

Wright cites a post-attack report on the CIA failures by the Department of Justice's inspector general. "There are lots of reasons to release the report and lots of culpability there," he says. "The CIA failed in its moral and legal obligations. Yet the report is still secret."

Nor is the National Security Agency blameless, says Wright. "NSA also has lots of complicity," he says. "The agency had crucial information that it did not share with the FBI either." The NSA, for example, had been monitoring Al Qaeda telephone calls after the U.S. embassy bombings to a number in Yemen. "That number was called by Osama bin Ladin both before and after the embassy bombings. Khaled al-Mihdhar was the son-in-law of the guy who owned the phone. He called there from California eight times! Had the NSA shared its information, the FBI could have mapped the entire global Al Qaeda network."

In conclusion, Wright says he believes that "all the clues were there, but the pieces were in different people's hands and were never put together." More disturbingly, he believes that we are no safer today than we were five years ago.

"So many in the U.S. intelligence community are demoralized and drifting away," he reports. "Moreover, the reorganization of our intelligence hierarchy has done nothing to make the situation better. Instead, it's only muddied things further. The lines of responsibility are not at all clear. Who's responsible? Who's in charge? It's only gotten worse since 9/11

"They say that each bureaucracy creates its own culture, and that it eats its young," he muses. "But our intelligence community is a sick culture. It does not reward creative, courageous and aggressive people. The people within it who really know things have been stigmatized and excluded -- and I don't know how to fix it."

Al Qaeda, on the other hand, is "not a fractured structure like our intelligence community," says Wright. "Our own confused response pales in comparison to their discipline."

If "The Looming Tower" has any message, says Wright, it's this: "9/11 was not just an intelligence failure, but failure of understanding. We didn't know or even care who these people were! We had NO appreciation for the entire situation and just didn't take it seriously. I can only hope that the book will increase our level of understanding and we can then act appropriately."

on edit: fixed quote above

[CheesyMuslim]

Sorry bout that,

1. But the way I heard it, oh Billy Boy Clinton put the walls of separation between all our security forces, CIA, NSA, FBI, to hide all his covert crap from each of these entities.
2. Clinton is the reason of 911, and no other even comes close to taking blame like Billy Boy does.
3. Well he and Gore Boy.
4. OBL is being protected from Saudi Arabia, their money is protecting him, tons of it are going to crooked politicians in the Pakistan area.
5. No one will dare stand up to those men in Saudi Arabia, oil.
6. This thread should of read, * GW Bush's Nine Reasons He's to Blame for Everything Bad*.
7. This plagiarized thread, is sad testament, to the lefts dissolvement.

Regards,
SirJamesofTexas

[Rider]

ECW- Chesswarsnow points out that our domestic and foreign intelligence were prevented from cooperating. This lunacy stems from the Church commission back in the late '70's.
As for the piece that you site in reply to my point, could you please provide a link to Mr. Wright's warning to us all prior to 9/11/2001?

[PittsburghAfterDark]

You'll notice that the OP doesn't have the balls to list where this drivel came from.

I, being your intrepid defender of freedom given talent on loan from God to defend America from left wing surrender monkies, will give you some insight to AlterNet.org.

Here's some articles from this cesspool of left-wing lunacy.....

In the Heart of America's Love Affair with Firepower (http://www.alternet.org/story/40344/)
David Holthouse, Intelligence Report
The Knob Creek machine gun shoot in Kentucky attracts thousands of neo-Nazis and other extremists. But the orgy of firepower helps everyone get along just fine.

Yes folks, anyone that wishes to fire a machine gun in an event covered by network news reporters is a neo-Nazi and "other" extremeist.Â*Â*

You'll also note how the author claims this is an "intelligence report" like he dropped behind enemy lines or launched a satellite that discovered this instead of turning on FOX News, CNN or MSNBC.

Yes, even the ultra right-wing History Channel sent R Lee Ermey to Knob Creek to film a segment of Mail Call. This secret cabal of Neo-Nazis and extremeists just a couple of miles from Fort Knox, Kentucky are a tremendous threat to America. Publicity seeking shoots like this truly have something to hide.

Abolish the TSA, Saves Lives (http://www.alternet.org/story/40437/)
Becky Akers, AlterNet
The Transportation Security Administration exists not to prevent terrorists from bringing down planes but to prevent passengers from realizing the government is powerless over such catastrophes.

It's unwise to even try to screen airline passengers to prevent terrorism or hijackings according to this site.

Cuban Exiles Wage War of Terror (http://www.alternet.org/story/40370/)
Frank Joyce, AlterNet
Anti-Castro terrorists based in Florida have carried out thousands of attacks against civilians, often with the full knowledge and support of the U.S. government.

Wow, just f'in wow.Â*Â*Now that's news! :D

Public Stoning: Not Just for the Taliban Anymore (http://www.alternet.org/story/40318/)
John Sugg, Church and State
Christian reconstructionists believe democracy is heresy and public school is satanic -- and they've got more influence than you think.

I'm sure anyone that went to church this weekend didn't really play softball afterwards, have brunch, a picnic or attend a theme park which are all common summer activities for your or any other church.

You went off into the woods and stoned someone to death and plotted how to destroy public education on the way home.Â*Â*

Oh damn, wait, or was this the week to decry democracy as heresy?Â*Â*I forget sometimes if the conversation is supposed to be destroy public educationÂ*Â*this week or if it's declare democracy as heresy week.Â*Â*

It's summertime, sometimes my plotting schedule gets out of whack.

Three Ways (Out of 100) That America's Screwing Up the World (http://www.alternet.org/story/40175/)
John Tirman, AlterNet
From the lack of body counts in Iraq, to drug wars to torture, the United States is making the world a worse place to live in.

Just 3?Â*Â*What about the other 97?

As you'll notice one of our resident left-wing, extremeist, moonbat, surrender monkies gets his "news" from the furthest regions of Kooksville by authors recently released from an assylum.Â*Â*I have to wonder, do you think he met them while the were all in patients or in after care, it's very hard to guess.

From the heartland I am your humble PittsburghAfterDark.

[ECW]

ECW- Chesswarsnow points out that our domestic and foreign intelligence were prevented from cooperating. This lunacy stems from the Church commission back in the late '70's.
As for the piece that you site in reply to my point, could you please provide a link to Mr. Wright's warning to us all prior to 9/11/2001?


Gladly. Sorry for that oversight.

[/quote]link (http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/40005/)

[ECW]

You'll notice that the OP doesn't have the balls to list where this drivel came from.

As you'll notice one of our resident left-wing, extremeist, moonbat, surrender monkies gets his "news" from the furthest regions of Kooksville by authors recently released from an assylum.Â*Â*I have to wonder, do you think he met them while the were all in patients or in after care, it's very hard to guess.

From the heartland I am your humble PittsburghAfterDark.


I took notice that Rider responded to the charges in the article while you went on to launch a personal slam and a Shoot The Messenger rampage. This is a typical neo-con tactic when they are unable to deal with the truth that shows your boy Chimpy, the standard bearer for the ongoing Reagan Revolution, is a total screw-up. Further proof is no longer needed in my decision to ignore your so-called "debate" posts.

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Oh good God ECW.

Give the neo-con, Chimpy yadda yadda yadda insults a break.

You're trite. Your artice is not credible. It stems from a site that can't seperate fact from fiction. You're defending an article from certified kooks and wondering why I don't respond? Because this is a f'in step away from saying it was the Buildibergers, Tri-Lateralists, Freemasons etc. It doesn't deserve rebuttal.

You're a walking joke ECW. I thought you hated things so bad here you left. I mean you've bitched to anyone with a title here about how you're treated and how you can't stand that your moonbat and socialist sources are called moonbat and socialist sources.

Here's a hint brother, you want some serious debate? Find a site or commentary from a source that doesn't come from the tinfoil hat crowd.

I'll give you one serious rebuttal. George W. Bush is a disgrace to the Reagan Revolution. His conservative credentials are non-existent. He was/is the lesser of two evils of Gore and Kerry. He is not a leader of a conservative movement or trying to advance a conservative agenda. He never tried to be the standard bearer of one either, neither did his father.

What's so great about your insults though is all the "great" liberal minds, if such an oxymoron ever existed this is it, in America have been rousted politically by this "chimp". So how does it feel to consistently lose to your "chimp"? I'll add to that, you couldn't properly define the neo-con movement or who is or is not a true neo-con without doing a google search on the subject.

So go ahead, send off another round of PM's to every single mod and the site owner about how I abuse you like a red headed step child. I'll tell you right now.... I'm not going anywhere. Love it, or leave it.

[ECW]

Hooray. You've discredited Chimpy. Big whoop-dee-doo. Anyone can jump on the bandwagon nowadays. So what? He's just another in a long line of failed conservative presidents who left the country in worse shape than they found it. The last one who didn't was Ike.

If the article was just so much trash, you shouldn't have had too much trouble blasting thru it but instead you take out after me. Ooooh, big man! Your cheap shots are just typical of the neo-con mind set. The politics of personal destruction. Wonder why people have such a low opinion of Chimpy and his rubber stamp Congress? They're full of people who act just like you. It took six years to see thru the lies but America finally caught on.

I'm not the only one here who sees you as abusive but, unlike most folks, I refuse to allow you to get away with your infantile behavior. I am glad you are not going anywhere because if you stick around and pay attention you may learn how mature adults discuss issues. (A clue: It's not by attacking people rather than discussing issues.) And if you don't like how I deal with your behavior maybe you should grow up. Only intransigent children get scoldings like you do.

Unless you are going to respond to the article, I'm done playing patty cake with you. Run along now. We're done listening to you whine.

[Rider]

ECW-

As for the piece that you site in reply to my point, could you please provide a link to Mr. Wright's warning to us all prior to 9/11/2001?

[PittsburghAfterDark]

Hooray... BLAH BLAH BLAH the article was BLAH BLAH BLAH trash BLAH BLAH BLAH people have such a low opinion of BLAH BLAH BLAH the lies....

I BLAH BLAH BLAH get away with BLAH infantile behavior. I BLAH BLAH BLAH may learn how mature adults discuss issues. BLAH BLAH BLAH I BLAH BLAH BLAH should grow up.

BLAH BLAH BLAH I'm done playing patty cake with you. BLAH BLAH BLAH


Okay then, glad we have that settled.

[ECW]

Hooray... BLAH BLAH BLAH the article was BLAH BLAH BLAH trashÂ*Â*BLAH BLAH BLAH people have such a low opinion of BLAH BLAH BLAH the lies....

I BLAH BLAH BLAH get away with BLAH infantile behavior. I BLAH BLAH BLAH may learn how mature adults discuss issues. BLAH BLAH BLAH I BLAH BLAH BLAH should grow up.

BLAH BLAH BLAH I'm done playing patty cake with you. BLAH BLAH BLAH


Okay then, glad we have that settled.


The only thing you have settled is how childish you are. Three posts and not one about the article itself. Spammer.[hr]
ECW-

As for the piece that you site in reply to my point, could you please provide a link to Mr. Wright's warning to us all prior to 9/11/2001?


Given Mr Wright is a journalist and not a government official, I'm not sure why you are asking for any warnings HE may have given before 9/11. There were warnings. Richard Clarke held an important meeting on this very subject on July 5, 2001 and the president's briefing of Aug 6 contained warnings about an imminent attack as well but, if I recall correctly, August is vacation month for Georgie and clearing brush is more important than doing the job he was selected by the Supreme Court to do. Asleep at the switch is correct. All of us paid the price for his failure on his watch.

Read Wright's book when it cames out. You may learn more then.[hr]
ECW - Point by point, OK?

1. No one saw 9/11 happening. Not Democrats or Republicans or intelligence agencies. You know that. Yah, Bush was asleep at the wheel for almost a whole 8 months before it happened.

dealt with in a previous post

2. OBL is hiding, almost certainly in Pakistan. What would you suggest we do? Besides, capturing him might be a big mistake because the left would almost certainly want to declare victory and abandon the war entirely. Also, it would have no negative effect on the Islamofacists anyway. He would become a martyr.

OBL is there because of the inability of this Chickenhawk administration to put enough troops on the ground in Afghanistan to do the job right the first time. Once you try and step on a cockroach and miss, the roach runs faster and tries more places to hide making it harder to kill him. Capturing him would bring some measure of justice for the people who died on 9/11 that your boy George PROMISED to do.

The situation in Afghanistan is already slipping away from us but you know that already, didn't you?

3.Â*Â*You're correct on this. Invading Iraq was not a mistake. Failing to wage real warfare was the mistake.

Sending troops to conquer a country is one thing. Not sending police to control the public was a mistake. Disbanding every civil authority was a mistake. Pulling custams officers off the borders was a mistake. Not securing the armories was a mistake. Expecting the people to welcome us with open arms and flowers was a mistake. Expecting Iraqi oil to pay for this debacle was a mistake. I could keep going but you get the idea.

4.Â*Â*The Bush administration has made the intel community look bad? That's a new one! They were in trouble because they WERE bad. This was in the making since the Democrats had their way with the Church Commission under Carter's reign (you know, the guy who gave us Islamofacist Iran). And, Europe would be satisfied with nothing less than total surrender to the terrorists (like they have).

Intel agencies were engaged in turf wars prior to 9/11 but the Chimpy's neo-cons come along and tried to politicize everything and then blame the Intel people when no one responded to the warnings they did come up with. Blaming the cows for running out of the barndoor they didn't forget to close about sums it up.

5.Â*Â*Oh yah, Bush empowered Hezbollah. How long did it take you to dream that up?

By allowing Israel to fight a war by proxy with Hezbollah, the Bushies opened the Israelis up to even more crap from those terrorists. Our role as a mediator and non-participant went right out the window. We always supported Israel but we had a semblence of impartiality with the Arab world until now.

6.Â*Â*Same as 5, just substitute Hamas for Hezbollah.

We encourage the Palestinians to hold elections then blast them for voting in people we don't like. All the Palestinians had to do was watch the last two presidential elections to see the neo-con ideals concerning winning elections.

7. Oh, my mistake- I thought that N Korea and Iran had been working on nuclear programs for many years.

They had and they had virtually been brought to a standstill by negotiations. Once these nutjob governments realized we could not back up what we were saying (because of the quagmire in Iraq and the losing war in Afghanistan) with military force, they said, "Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead."

The world is a much more dangerous place because Chimpy can't bring himself to negotiate with an enemy. Instead, he calls them a bunch of names and tries to bully them. There are ample examples of that kind of neo-con behavior just on this little ol' forum for you to see what I am saying is true.

8.Â*Â*Might be because most of the worst terrorists are still in Europe where they feel safe, eh? Say, for instance, Londonistan?

No. Most of the worst terrorists that we have captured are still being "interrogated" in Gitmo with no end in sight or being subject to "extaordinary rendition" by the CIA where they can be sent to a third country where THEY will torture them in our name. No trials. No justice for victims. Just incompetent dealings and extralegal maneuvering that have neither made us safer or taken care of the problem of terrorism. At least the Brits have caught, tried and imprisoned their terrorists. We've missed a step in that process.

9.Â*Â*Now calm down and breathe into this paper bag. You'll feel better in a few minutes. After that could you please provide us with a list of all the citizens who've been so abused, and maybe a list of all the devastated rights?
The Geneva Convention? Just sit down and keep breathing into that bag.

I know that you've had fun rattling your cage. I had fun, too.

I'd get you a list of people but you wouldn't be able to do anything about it even if you wanted to. Here's (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7292) a link to an article that talks about some of the ones we "know" about but there are undoubtedly many more that are still secret. What did any of this accomplish? Not a damn thing.

Our own SC now tells the Bushbots they DO have to follow the law about the Geneva Convention and the people detained in Gitmo. Put the SOBs on trial and let's get on with it. Or do we even have the right people locked up awaiting trial? America, and the world, is waiting for answers but this president doesn't have any. He's got plenty of excuses but that's about it.

[Youthofthefuture]

Failing to wage real warfare was the mistake.

Ok, first of all i am anti-war so i thought in your head....still nothing how can you possibly think that warfare would have helped?!

[Rider]

Youth wrote-Ok, first of all i am anti-war so i thought in your head....still nothing how can you possibly think that warfare would have helped?!
Huh?

[Rider]

ECW wrote-Given Mr Wright is a journalist and not a government official, I'm not sure why you are asking for any warnings HE may have given before 9/11. There were warnings. Richard Clarke held an important meeting on this very subject on July 5, 2001 and the president's briefing of Aug 6 contained warnings about an imminent attack as well but, if I recall correctly, August is vacation month for Georgie and clearing brush is more important than doing the job he was selected by the Supreme Court to do. Asleep at the switch is correct. All of us paid the price for his failure on his watch.
Well, Mr. Wright seemed to think that the attack was so predictable, I thought he must surely have written about it prior to 9/11.

Did Richard Clarke mention terrorists using commercial aircraft for guided missiles at the World Trade Center? I don't think so.

ECW, it's always so easy to connect the dots after the fact. I imagine that the White House is presented with dozens of warnings every day. I think that you are letting your dislike of Bush skew your thinking.

[ECW]

Well, Mr. Wright seemed to think that the attack was so predictable, I thought he must surely have written about it prior to 9/11.

Did Richard Clarke mention terrorists using commercial aircraft for guided missiles at the World Trade Center? I don't think so.

You know, I am going to do a bit of research and find out exactly what he did say and get back to you on this.

ECW, it's always so easy to connect the dots after the fact. I imagine that the White House is presented with dozens of warnings every day. I think that you are letting your dislike of Bush skew your thinking.


People have made that accusation before about my dislike of Bush and I will agree that it does make me more determined to point out his many failings. But since you were civilized in your assessment of my feelings, I am going to take the extra time to get more ducks in a row (see above) and present you a more complete picture of what I believe happened in the weeks before 9/11 and how I think Bush was complacent and unmindful of his responsibilities. For the sake of a reasoned argument with you, I have even forgone my usual form of simian address and used George's real name instead to show you just how serious I intend to be here.

[Rider]

ECW- I really do appreciate your attitude. There is so much rancor and vitriol in political debate these days that I'm afraid there's a lot more heat created than light. Since the Clinton administration, respect for the office of president has eroded significantly. I'm speaking of both his actions and the actions of those who were "out to get him". If attitudes toward the elected government devolve into contempt by the people, our nations will be in big trouble.