A news article from the AP today says Al-Qaida in U.S. That there is new highly credible evidence of plans to launch a major attack this summer in the U.S. Of course the intelligence does not name a time, place, or method of attack. This sounds very similar to the circumstances and intel. that was available prior to 9/11. So, for all those politicians, media, and everyone else who were so quick to blame Bush and his administration for not stopping 9/11, here’s your big chance. I eagerly await the announcemnt that the plot has been uncovered and all the details exposed. It should be a piece of cake after learning so much from the previous attack. Well, I’m waiting.
Why has the Bush administration churned through 6 counter terrorism czars?
They don’t resign for better jobs. They resign because they know how the sausage gets made.
1 quit to work for Kerry (Beers)
1 wrote a book about what a clown show is the administration (Clarke)
If we were mind readers maybe we could know plans. What are we supposed to do? We cant control people. We cant control what all people are going to do at all times. We cant know who is going to do what. For you all you all know; I have a trunk full of bombs and am planning on blowing up a flower garden today…prove I dont. How could you?
Things that can be done to prevent terrorism:
-
Don’t threaten to veto attempts to fund terrorism on 9.9.01
-
Pay attention to presidential daily briefings, even if you are on vacation
-
Don’t shift the focus of the FBI from counter terrorism to gun violence, drugs.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing10/staff_statement_9.pdf
Well I suppose the US govt under the Homeland Security could just start arresting anyone they thought even looked suspicious…kinda like Germany during WWII…hmm this whole thing is getting kinda crazy…I wish people would do other things instead of trying to kill each other…sigh…
That’s the point. It’s easy to place blame after the fact. Hind sight is 20/20. Bush was flamed for not preventing 9/11. I’d like to see one of those blamers step up to the plate this time and show us how it’s doing.
He was not blamed; he didn’t fly the planes.
He should be held responsible, because this is part of his job.
The attacks were preventable:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/17/eveningnews/main589137.shtml
For the first time, the chairman of the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks is saying publicly that 9/11 could have and should have been prevented, reports CBS News Correspondent Randall Pinkston.
“This is a very, very important part of history and we’ve got to tell it right,” said Thomas Kean.
“As you read the report, you’re going to have a pretty clear idea what wasn’t done and what should have been done,” he said. “This was not something that had to happen.”
Congress wanted to appropriate $600M from STI towards anti-terrorism. When informed, on 9.9.01, the SoD threatened to veto the budget.
On 9.10.01, John Ashcroft denied FBI Director Pickard further review of the 2003 budget, after AG Ashcroft decided not to increase counter terrorism funding.
On 8.6.01, during the longest vacation in the history of the Presidency, President Bush received a PDB titled, “OBL determined to Attack the United States”.
Sandy Berger, Richard Clarke, President Clinton, CIA Director Tenet all warned this administration about OBL.
Richard Clarke wrote that Dr. Rice seemed puzzled during discussions of OBL.
Vice president Cheyney fell asleep during the August 6th PDB.
President Bush suspended predator flights over Afghanistan upon enetering office.
There are no analogs to this with WWII.
Grumpy,
We don’t know all the details of the most recent warning. We don’t know if the current information is more or less than that of Summer 2001. Your challenge is a bit premature. What we do know is that there was a LOT of information available in early 2001, and that this administration wasn’t even trying (really) to investigate or stop the threat. This administration has to gaul to try and take credit for taking on a problem that came to the forefront only because it ignored it (and bungled it) in the past.
–Dopey
What does this have to do with anything?
Is Roosevelt running for president again?
Does this mean the President is not responsible?
while i understand what you are saying, if(god forbid) another attack should occur, i think it would be the death knell bush’s run as president. with the amount of money spent revamping various sectors of the intelligence community, the creation of a department aimed solely at preventing future attacks, plus the idea that the world is a safer place based on events since 9/11, another attack would completely undermine my confidence in the ability of bush to protect the u.s. it would be a serious blow to the notion that bush is the right man to keep america safe.
if homeland security wasn’t created in order to prevent future attacks, then what is it for? so in other words, yes, i believe the measures that have been instituted are intended to prevent future attacks.
do i think they are full proof? no but there is definitely an idea of “full me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me”. if something else happened, that would be two major incidents under one person’s watch. rally the first time, but the second time would have me questioning whether someone was the right person to be in charge of protecting the country.
Good point about Roosevelt, etc.
We treat our presidents like dog-poop and then wonder why we’re not impressed with the quality of candidates in each election.
We’ve made our own bed, now we lay in it.
Rather than look at the president, I look atmyself and others. Why have you (I) done to make America a better, more peacful, more friendly place to live? Who have you (I) helped today?
Sorry. I’ll climb down off the soap box and join the crowd of finger-pointers, whiners, complainers, and arm-chair leaders. My bad.
Oh don’t you worry, brian286: Bush’s “measures” virtually insure that we’ll have future terrorist attacks. Of course, it would also be convenient for the current administration to heroically “prevent” an incumbent “terrorist plot” just in the nick of time–say, prior to November. In keeping with their policy of non-disclosure, they’ll have to keep the whats and wheres vague, but let us know of their victory.
In either case, this is win-win for the admin. If bombs blow, they’ll say “See? We need to keep beating the shit out of the world and doing whatever the hell we want to keep this stuff from happening again (Mojo-zen, Brian286, Wants2 logic)”. Sure, gang, that will work. If bombs don’t blow, then they’ll say “It’s working! Vote for us in November”.
Ah me. I guess I am just getting cynical in my middle age.
So, based on your statement, it would be logical to say that if there is another successful attack on the US it could be the work of Kerry, knowing that it would probably get him the White house.
Commie, I suggest that you not post unless you have something logical to say. And I have never seen anything logical in any of your posts.
“That’s the point. It’s easy to place blame after the fact. Hind sight is 20/20. Bush was flamed for not preventing 9/11. I’d like to see one of those blamers step up to the plate this time and show us how it’s doing”
Blaming Bush for 9/11 is just stupid and I don’t think that’s what people have been doing. I think he and his administration are being criticized/blamed for not taking the threat of terrorism seriously. Big difference, though for some reason people can’t seem to see it.
Will you get off the PDB? Ever read it? There was nothing in it that was actionable. That document has been so distirted by the finger waggers. I could pull bits and pieces of posts off of this very thread and rearrange it to pinpoint the next attack. Nothing in your posts addresses the issue. Clarke, etc. said there was enough info to prevent 9/11. Well. why didn’t they. Where are theynow?