NRO contributor: Bush’s policies have kept the country safe for ‘8+ years’ since 9/11.
NRO contributor: Bush’s policies have kept the country safe for ‘8+ years’ since 9/11.
On Thursday, Vets for Freedom Chairman Pete Hegseth went onto the Corner to criticize President Obama for his speech on national security. Not surprisingly, he praised Vice President Cheney’s address, calling it a “gutsy, straightforward, and yet sophisticated approach.” To underscore his point, he wrote, “Laying aside the debate over what is and what isn’t ‘torture,’ it’s hard to argue with 8+ years of safety since 9/11.” The problem, as the site Best of Both Worlds points out, is that it hasn’t been eight years since 9/11:
9/11 happened on 9/11/2001. We’re in 5/22/2009. That’s less than 8 years. In his mind, George Bush kept the country safe for 2 presidential terms. Some other dude was President right up till 9/11.
Atrios Thers adds, “NRO contributor attempts to count to 8, fails.” As Matt Yglesias has written in the past, “The overwhelming majority of Americans to ever be killed by foreign terrorists were killed during Bush’s presidency. And even if you give him a pass on 9/11 itself it’s still the case that his conduct of the ‘war on terror’ led to the deaths of thousands more Americans.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
These guys are pathetic. Trying to rewrite history. Bush and Co. were totally incompetant. SIGH>
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:40 pmToday’s lesson for Republicans…
When the big hand is on the 12 and the little hand is on the 9 it is nine o’clock.
Tomorrow we will learn about a calendar and how to keep track of dates!
Good job on the lesson today… here’s a cookie!
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:10 pmIf there is ever a rethuglican who can man up and accept responsibility for his actions, I will respect him. To date, it has never happened. They are too small to admit wrong and they always blame others when it is obvious they are the problem. There is no wonder that the party of thugs is disintegrating before our eyes.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:17 pmI;d also like to point out the frequent and lazy claim that 3,000 Americans were killed on 9/11.
In fact there were nationals from 90 nations who were killed, and the largest foreign contingent were the British, numbering a few hundred.
There was nothing exceptional in the subsequent increase in security measures, other than a number of the initiatives were farcical (don’t trust police, EMT’s or pregnant women with strollers, they may be terrorists in disguise!–was one public announcement offered to New yorkers).
And as we should all damn well know, and as the ADD-afflicted media bobbleheads always fail to note whenever this idiotic meme is brought up;
1) Worldwide terrorism increased 100% year on year for 4 years until the Bush administration simply stopped reporting the numbers.
2) Britons, the Spanish and Australians were the targets of bombings specifically linked to those nation;s cooperation with US policies, post 9-11, so THEY weren’t any safer.
3)Americans abroad weren’t any safer.
4)The US actually blew the cover of a couple of British anti-terrorist operations to score some bull$hit domestic political points (which was also a significant aspect of EVERY Bush policy), so that didn’t make US allies any safer, either
8 years had passed between the 93 bombing and 9/11. It was a safe bet years would pass before another attempt could be made on US soil, so it was a safe bet some extra and evident security measures would guarantee security until the end of Bush’s term, by default
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:18 pmIt’s not healthy for a country to have this many people so ignorant and proud of it.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:19 pmListen Peter, being a chicken hawk like Dick Cheney is not, “gutsy, straightforward, and yet sophisticated.”
It is cowardly, crooked and incredibly stupid! Just like yourself.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:20 pmi’ll repeat it again – i just found this bit of logic to be thought provocative:
if it was ‘torture’ (or EIT) that has kept the US safe, and that was stopped in ‘05, then there was nothing keeping US safe the whole of the bushco 2nd term… not?
…
almost time for SNL… g’nite all…
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:22 pmFor Peter Hegseth;
When people say, “Elections don’t matter” they should remember the fact that 9-11 did not occur on President Clinton’s watch, and it had nothing to do with being lucky, it had everything to do with a president who recognized threats to our National Security and prevented attacks from occurring. President Clinton recognized the danger of Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda network, and he was proactive rather than reactive.
When a president recognizes a threat to our national security and is proactive in dealing with such a threat, the president can work with and push intelligence and law enforcement agencies to cooperate, in order to prevent a potential national tragedy such as the 2000 millennium hijacking and bombing plots.
However, when Republican President George W. Bush Jr., was warned of threats to our national security by Al-Qaeda, as indicated by a Presidential Daily Brief, Bush was on vacation and remained on vacation and did not ask even one follow-up question regarding a dangerous threat to our national security. Bush also failed to convene his National Security Counsel in order to address this existential threat. As a direct result of this negligence, it was not happenstance that a tragedy such as September 11th occurred. It was inevitable, because the entire Bush/Cheney Administration was deliberately indifferent towards terrorism prior to September, 11th.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:31 pmIf a member of my family was in the military and that loved one died in Iraq, I would blame Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Wolfowitz, Richard Pearl, Lieberman, Powell, William Kristol, and all the neocons who lied us into invading Iraq.
On this Memorial Day, remember that Bush and Cheney lied to our troops, America, and the world about WMDs and Saddam Hussein. Over 6,000 American troops are in the grave because of Bush and Cheney’s lies.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:34 pmSafety? Tell that to everyone who has died because of these wars. They also forgot about the anthrax I see :(
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:36 pmDespite what these self-appointed “spokepersons” on the right may think about resurrection, stain removal products or room deoderizers, beating this old, dead horse will not bring it back to life, will not remove the stain of past torture from the rugs or make the stench of the last eight years of deception and immoral bevavior go away. These pompous proclaimations display a fundamental disconnect with our current reality. They exhibit a sadly nostalgic view of life which hopes in vain for a re-emergence of a convenient “what was”,rather than seeking to address the inconvenince of “what is”.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:41 pmLook they blame Clinton for 9-11, and now blaming Obama for Gitmo, and lords know what else. Blame and deny that’s all they know. Look at Cheney, he scared, and the rest of them also. Their hypocritical and in your face bulls***.
Right now I know the GOP are praying for another 9-11. They are sick.
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:48 pmseason of reruns now…
just remembered something – caller to ed schultz the other day wondered if obama would be allowed HIS due, should there be an attack during his term(s)… evidently not, as that’s another purpose of the cheeeney torture tour – to set the blame for the “next one”…
it’s bad enough the guy won the presidential election; there will be hell to pay if he manages to avoid another terrorist attack…
May 24th, 2009 at 12:10 amthat’d REALLY grind the frighties butts, wouldn’t it…?
Never mind that Bush and Cheney did NOT keep us safe. It was on 911 that the worst terrorist attack in US history occurred, but never mind that.
Since when did “keeping safe” become our core value?
Because a draft dodging pig like Cheney says so?
When did Americans start listening to cowards for instruction on morality and courage?
I’ve searched the speeches, sayings and quotes of our countries heroes and founding fathers from the 1700’s to the dawn of the 21’st century, when the Bush administration seized power, and I can find no quotes, no sayings, no speeches, in which “keeping safe” was an American core value.
I do see quotes like “Give me liberty or give me death”, as stated so forcefully by Patrick Henry to the Virginia assembly, but I can find none that say “Give me liberty, as long as I don’t get hurt”.
The principle of “keeping safe at all costs” I just cannot seem to find.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:13 amwisdomofwords Says:
“It’s not healthy for a country to have this many people so ignorant and proud of it.”
Wiser words are rarely spoken.
But one has to ask why are the masses so ignorant?
The string pullers are masters at the propaganda game. Remember they use things like “think tanks” to come up with $hit like “W kept us safe fer 8 years”. Then they spew it through the media channels and most people swallow it without thought…kinda like most of our trolls.
Bush was a stooge and we all know that. I think all he wanted out of the deal was a legacy. About the only positive thing that can be garnered from BushCo is that no major attacks on US soil have occurred since 9-11 (besides Anthrax). That’s all puppet masters got so they’re going with it.
BTW- W is/was a deluded freak as you will surely agree if you read the link. See why religion has no place in government?
May 24th, 2009 at 12:20 amhttp://www.counterpunch.org/hamilton05222009.html
The fact that they were so prepared to use 9-11 as their justification and tool for nearly all that they have done sure as hell should tell people something.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:30 amWhy is it that so many f ucktards think George W. Bush ought to get the biggest damned do-over in history?
May 24th, 2009 at 12:32 amI think daddys boy is getting the biggest “make-over” in history Zooey.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:38 amIf these idiots ever learn how to add, the next challenge should be teaching them about evolution. Then later after much time and hard work, they could be introduced to the idea of a Constitution.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:38 amBaby steps people.
We have to teach them to walk before they can run.
Laying aside the debate over what is and what isn’t “torture,” it’s hard to argue with 8+ years of safety since 9/11. Yet, somehow, the interrogations we used to get valuable intelligence have “undermined” our safety. President Obama should tell that to the special operators I served with overseas — and who are still serving — who killed and captured truckloads of so-called jihadists on the battlefield with the intelligence from American interrogations. Or tell that to the American’s who were saved through intelligence we gathered that prevented attacks on our homeland.
Pete Hegseth is making a false argument here. He is conflating the successful rapport-building techniques with the illegal war-crime approach of torture and saying that Obama was denigrating all of that. He was not. Obama denounced the illegal interrogation methods (the ones that employed what is internationally known to be torture) and praised the successful legal methods. The legal methods were the ones that produced results which, arguable, could be said to have saved lives (though none stopped any imminent attack, so the opinion is subjective.)
May 24th, 2009 at 12:48 amWayne Ant Schneider Says @ 20
Another stellar post Wayne.
I wonder how much dung-slinging Obamas’ way will come at vet speeches this Memorial Day weekend?
May 24th, 2009 at 12:58 amThat George Bush was on suave cowboy…..when him and his army came to town everyone headed for the hills and we haven’t seen them since. Where is that bad boy Bin Layinlowden? What a bunch of pouting little cry babies! Nothing is ever right….always some thing wrong with this and that boo frickin who! Everyone needs a good asskicking ever now and again (both in reality or figuratively) so they remember what it feels like……………one tends to be a little nicer and appreciative of what they have….
May 24th, 2009 at 1:04 amThank you, Mycelium.
May 24th, 2009 at 1:04 amBecause if Bush doesn’t get his do-over, then those same people that supported him for eight years would have to face a number of unpleasant facts: like that they completely bought into his bullshit for eight years. Or that they are piss-poor judges of character. Or that they are weak-willed and easily dominated. Or that they have the critical thinking skills of a soapdish, well . . . you start to get the idea.
Personally, I think anyone who supported so much death and destruction by the Bush administration are a goddamn festering boil on the history of this great nation and if they had a shred of intelligence or decency, they would kill themselves out of sheer embarrassment for what they’ve done to it.
May 24th, 2009 at 1:32 amJesse Ventura
May 24th, 2009 at 1:33 amMay 18th, 2009
Rebuttal to Elizabeth Hasslebeck on “The View”
9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!
May 24th, 2009 at 1:44 amStupid. And evil. I’m tellin’ ya. Stupid and evil.
May 24th, 2009 at 2:12 am.Intel experts: Dick Cheney was wrong about Bush administration moves
By Jonathan S. Landay And Warren P. Strobel / McClatchy Newspapers | Sunday, May 24, 2009 | http://www.bostonherald.com | U.S. Politics
WASHINGTON – Former Vice President Dick Cheney’s high-profile speech Thursday defending the Bush administration’s policies for interrogating suspected terrorists contained omissions, exaggerations and misstatements, according to intelligence officals and the historical record, including:
Cheney said waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques produced information that “prevented the violent death of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of innocent people.” He also quoted Director of National Intelligence Adm. Dennis Blair as saying the information gave U.S. officials a “deeper understanding of the al-Qaeda organization.”
In his statement April 21, however, Blair said “these techniques hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.” A 2004 CIA inspector general’s investigation found no conclusive proof that the information helped thwart any “specific imminent attacks,” according to one of four secret Bush-era memos released last month. And FBI Director Robert Muller said in December that he didn’t think that the techniques disrupted any attacks.
Cheney said his administration “moved decisively against the terrorists in their hideouts and their sanctuaries, and committed to using every asset to take down their networks.” In fact, the Bush administration began diverting U.S. forces, intelligence assets, time and money to planning an invasion of Iraq before it finished the war in Afghanistan, leaving Osama bin Laden and his chief lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahri, at large nearly eight years after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
There are now 49,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan fighting to contain the bloodiest surge in Taliban violence since 2001, and extremists have launched a concerted attack on nuclear-armed Pakistan.
Cheney accused Obama of “the selective release” of documents on Bush administration detainee policies, charging Obama withheld records that Cheney claimed prove information gained from the harsh interrogation methods prevented terrorist attacks.
In fact, the decision to withhold the documents was announced by the CIA, which said it was obliged to do so by a 2003 executive order issued by former President George W. Bush prohibiting release of materials that are subject of lawsuits.
Cheney said only “ruthless enemies of this country” were detained by U.S. operatives overseas and taken to secret U.S. prisons.
A 2008 McClatchy investigation, however, found that the vast majority of Guantanamo detainees captured in 2001 and 2002 in Afghanistan and Pakistan were innocent citizens or low-level fighters of little intelligence value who were turned over to American officials for money or because of personal or political rivalries.
Cheney denied there was any link between the Bush administration’s interrogation policies and the abuse of detainees at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib jail, which he blamed on “a few sadistic guards.” But a bipartisan Senate Armed Services report in December traced the abuses at Abu Ghraib to approval of the techniques by senior Bush officials, including former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
Article URL: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view.bg?articleid=1174363
May 24th, 2009 at 2:53 amthey knew it was coming and they did not stop it.
the needed it to attack iraq
40 years of oil and to be a war president to go down in history as a great president.
americans are naive
we fell right into the terrorists hands and started two unwinable wars.
now tell me who out smarted who?
the afghan’s kicked the russians out now we are about to get our butts kicked like we did in nam.
the afghans are fighters and have the mountains to hide in like the viet cong had the jungle.
most americans dont even know or knew who the viet cong were.
one trillion dollars gone and 4000 lives and counting.
plus 4 million iraqis displaced
hotbed for future terrorist.
the industial military complex has to be happy very happy.
profits galore.
the selling of capitalism dont you love it americans.
May 24th, 2009 at 3:59 amLike someone else has already posted, the right wing is hoping for another attack on our soil.
May 24th, 2009 at 5:36 amThey will be sorely dissappointed when Obama’s numbers go up after such an event.
The truth is, world terrorism tripled under Bush’s watch. So Republicans have to lie about their accomplishments.
Compare/contrast: The Clinton Administration stopped cold the Al Qaeda millennium hijacking and bombing plots, which would have been bigger than 9/11.
Clinton stopped cold a planned attack to kill the Pope, a planned attack to blow up 12 U.S. jetliners simultaneously, a planned attack to blow up UN Headquarters, a planned attack to blow up FBI Headquarters, and many other terrorist plots.
While Americans were enjoying unprecedented peace and prosperity, the Clinton Administration detected and destroyed cells of Al Qaeda in over 20 countries–all without using torture, shredding the Constitution, or creating a supermassive bureaucracy.
Needless to say, Cheney-Bush can present no list of terrorist plots foiled, for the simple reason that no terrorist plots were detected or foiled.
Da Banksta
May 24th, 2009 at 5:41 amIf the Cheney gang stopped torturing other human beings on or right before 2005, was America “less safe” in the period before Obama took over? If torture did foil plots and save lives, wouldn’t Cheney have leaked that information by now? Leaking classified information was a hallmark of the Bush Administration.
May 24th, 2009 at 6:50 amAug. 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing: bin Laden determined to attack within the United States. Bush-Cheney: ignored this report, did nothing to increase awareness within the FBI and CIA. That’s much less than “8+ years!” FBI agents were already aware of foreign nationals taking weird flying lessons (just flying, not takeoffs or landings), but no one in the Bush-Cheney administration did a thing to help connect the dots. They also did nothing to prevent the anthrax attacks and sent another 4,000-plus Americans to death in a pre-emptive war based on false intelligence. Clinton’s administration not only investigated the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the terrorists were caught, tried, convicted and punished. What about bin Laden, Al Qaeda, the anthrax attacker? Just because the GOP attempts to re-write history doesn’t mean it is so.
May 24th, 2009 at 7:33 amThe Conservatives know that “perception is reality.” They have been faster out of the box the last twenty odd years in bringing issues to the public, casting the debate in a light favorable to their few, paltry facts, while pressing its base’s hot buttons. Early in Cheney-Bush, Cheney accused the Democratic opposition of “class war” for opposing their tax giveaway to the rich, and just this past week Cheney was still out there mangling the truth and winning the perception war. Until/unless the Dems learn (or do they not REALLY care?), the Right will continue to create perceptions with the aid of its echo machinery (i.e., big media).
May 24th, 2009 at 8:01 amNo different than to ask Mrs. Lincoln if she enjoyed the play despite the fact her husband had been shot.
May 24th, 2009 at 8:40 amANTHRAX ATTACKS???
Why do they assume those are forgotten?
Maybe it’s because Americans accepted getting no answers, a botched investigation and 2 suspicious suicides with that attack.
This is despite the fact that, that particular batch of anthrax was produced by THE U.S. GOVERNMENT/MILITARY!
And let’s not forget those attacks targeted members of the media and those in government who would oppose the Patriotic Act which Cheney was trying to push through Congress.
Did Dick Cheney’s Administration ever provide us with any answers on all that?
May 24th, 2009 at 9:01 amShould we all play along at home with the game of
“Let’s just pretend that it never happened.”
For laworder
There were several attacks on American interests around the world under Clinton, Kobar Towers, USS Cole to name a couple. It also seems most, if not all the hijackers came into the US before the election, not to mention bin laden being offered to Clinton on from the Sudan. Are you forgetting the bombing of the WTC in ‘93? As to the celebrated PDB, where was the specificity that was “actionable”? What would you have let Bush do to prevent 9/11? Patriot act? FISA? intercepting e-mails, and wireless calls form the middle east into the US? Invading a country that “Never attacked us” (yet) in a “unilateral, pre-emptive, ‘war of choice’”? I think not.
May 24th, 2009 at 9:09 amI don’t see a whole lot of happy people here. What’s the problem today?
May 24th, 2009 at 9:11 amI’m happy frances although I might be happier if you had a more diverse playbook…
May 24th, 2009 at 9:12 amHey dbad,
How’s your day? Sometime it’s good to talk to positive people rather than all the negative ones.
May 24th, 2009 at 9:16 amDbad,
I have to go now, my child is graduating from one of the most prestigious prep school in the USA and then he is off to one of the many Ivy league universities. He is going to straighten out all those ill-minded professors.
Have a wonderful day.
May 24th, 2009 at 9:24 amWell good for him. I hope he doesn’t drink and drug too much at the party
May 24th, 2009 at 9:26 amPopatop Says:
For laworder
As to the celebrated PDB, where was the specificity that was “actionable”?
Gee, I don’t know, maybe the fact that John Ashcroft the then Attorney General of the U.S. stopped flying commercial airlines in the summer of 2001 because of the threats of an imminent terrorist attack might mean somebody knew something.
I could go on and on to rebut guys like you, but who has the time to explain EVREYTHING to someone who could likely already have their mind made up and all that information is already available to anyone who really wants to know. I sometimes think guys like you are fishing for just that, to waste people’s time and derail a thread.
That said, your point is taken that attacks happening OUTSIDE the U.S. during the Clinton Administration and the fact that (although I don’t remember the exact timeline), of course a plan of the scope of 9/11 would have had to been planned/initiated before 2001.
May 24th, 2009 at 9:29 amBUT, an attack on a U.S facility in Saudia Arabia or Yemen, as bad at those were is not quite the same as a the WTC in downtown Manhattan being destroyed and the Pentagon being attacked by hijacked domestic commercial jets.
One would think we have more control over security in the U.S. than we do in those ‘friendly’ countries of Saudi Arabia and Yemen.
Unfortunately for you the desperate “BUT CLINTON DID IT TOO” defense doesn’t absolve the Bush Administration from responsibility.
It’s sort of a childish, “BUT, JOHNNY DID IT FIRST” response.
One instance of waterboarding one individual is a crime. One attack on american soil (ala 9/11) means that Cheney’s rewrite of the facts doesn’t compute. 9/11 occurred on their watch following 60+ warnings which they chose to ignore. What I find particularly pathetic is the fact that the reichwing extremists at this point are actually hoping for another attack on american soil……and this conclusion occurring on a day commemorating the lives of our lost military – shameful! Defending the illegal torture (AND HOMICIDE) of detainees we’ve captured is a very sick, twisted, neocon strategy which simply reinforces the fact that the remainder of people left willing to call themselves “Republicans” are pathologically and emotionally tainted, sadistic individuals.
Either that or they’re serving tainted “kool-aid” along with tea at their “teabagger orgies”??
May 24th, 2009 at 9:52 amHappy Memorial Day All! This day reminds each of us of the high price we’ve paid for the Bush/Cheney “lies”. In order to ensure that these casualties have not died in vain, it’s critical for the american people to bring those responsible for their deaths to the justice they deserve (and which Cheney is out there begging for).
This is the day of accountability and reminder that engaging America’s best and brightest should ONLY be done as a ‘last resort’ and should NEVER be done for political (and personal – Haliburton, KBR-profit) motives.
May 24th, 2009 at 9:55 amI never understand the arguments following 9/11…those that say “Well, we can’t really give the Bush people credit for keeping America safe” – well, sure we can.
As Dick Cheney said (who seemed more Presidential in his speech than Obama), prior to 9/11 America was in this “everyone loves us mode”. That’s what got us attack.
Secondly, Clinton had Bin Laden served to him on a silver platter. AND HE LET HIM GO. ’nuff said.
May 24th, 2009 at 10:21 am’nuff said.
May 24th, 2009 at 10:50 am—
Things are rarely as simple as they may seems except to the simple minded…
Can we please not forget that the anthrax attacks all occurred after Sept 11, and that several Americans died and others sickened, and the whole disruption of the mail system that ensued? That one is also entirely on Bush’s watch.
May 24th, 2009 at 11:17 amdbadass, you’re so right. So many people simplify things, for example, blaming the previous administration.
However, little do they realise that there’s a whole myriad of factors going back years that’s to attribute to the terrorist threat.
They, these wacky pundits resort to namecalling and insults. Truley an art to the simple minded.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:39 pmCan we define “the terrorist threat”?
May 24th, 2009 at 12:43 pmThanks!
VinceD Says:
Truley an art to the simple minded.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Especially those who don’t understand they’ve been flattened with a few words.
May 24th, 2009 at 12:51 pmI just saw Cheney’s speech at the AEI.
I’m sorry but Cheney cleaned Obama’s clock lol.
YES it is true that some racist and ruthless elements of our foreign policy has created some problems and this should be changed. But when it comes to terrorism, all options are on the table.
I don’t know you guys will admit it, but I am a Democrat who feels SAFE when Republican are running our national security.
after 9/11, these terrorist should be lucky that they weren’t tortured FOR REAL!
Waterboarding on a couple of terrorist by trained professionals?
Oh Pooooolease
May 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pmWhatever…
May 24th, 2009 at 1:15 pmReparations4TheBlackHolocaustNOW Says:
May 24th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
You posted this exact same comment on another thread. And it was just as wrong there.
May 24th, 2009 at 2:02 pmyou must admire their dark insistence on an entire revision of historical facts, pseudo-history at its core has always been rooted in republican party lore. reagan is to be lauded for all the prosperity that occurred during the 90s while clinton gets blamed for any supposed wrongs. sean hannity tells us that the country was in better condition when W left than when he entered office in 01 (consider that please – he argued this point with jessie ventura and you could imagine the latter’s incredulity as such pathetic logical gymnastics.
thus nevermind that it is absolutely impossible, counting backwards, to reach eight plus years since 9-11. the key here is we are always bombarded with such logic as a show of strength in the bush presidency. they no longer argue about the economy, social security, education, health care – for they have already lost those arguments. rather – they keep returning to this (we kept you safe mantra) – as though there is some saving grace in it.
i mean, what is the government to do but to keep its people safe. so i suppose george washington would have been in the bottom five presidents had it not been for his keeping the country safe – darn. for this is the new mark of greatness – not how many jobs have you created, how many businesses have been started, how many persons are insured, how many students get a college education, care for the environment, – only – were they safe. how pathetic
let it be known that every administration can thus claim greatness. let me guess – james madison (war of 1812); abraham lincoln (civil war); f.d.r (pearl harbor); w (9-11). who among us think of those men besides w as being great because they kept america safe, simply – not for other accomplishments but just that.
madison – considered the father of the constitution; author of the bill of rights, one of the authors of the federalist papers, louisiana and indiana admitted into the union.
lincoln – won the civil war, emancipation proclamation, thirteenth amendment, the man kept the country together – what more need be said.
f.d.r. speaks for himself – a larger than life character. none of these men claimed greatness simply for keeping us safe,in fact on the contrary, we were not kept safe in the moment. war was waged on the mainland in the war of 1812 and the civil war – thus on bush’s criteria, lincoln and madison dont qualify as great presidents.
GOP – please drop your tortured logic. bush is the worst president regardless of your claims otherwise. for if greatness is keeping americans safe, and all presidents can atleast claim a single attack or no attack on the mainland, then all presidents were great presidents.
thus on the bushian scale of greatness, i’d cast my vote for hoover as the greatest president – remember – he kept americans safe. shhhhhhhh
May 24th, 2009 at 2:39 pmHey Mycelium, Thanks.
May 24th, 2009 at 2:55 pm9/11 was an inside job.
May 24th, 2009 at 4:35 pmWhat was an E-4B plane doing flying over the WH on that day? (youTube it)
The 3 WTC towers collapsed due to controlled demolition (YouTube WTC7)
Recently in the analysis of the dust of the WTC towers, scientists and engineers discovered the ’smoking gun’, SUPER THERMITE particles were everywhere! ( Scholars for 9/11 )
To the Pentagon: Release the footage of a 757 hitting the building! Release those videos you confiscated! I dare you to do so!
Who were the people or institutions who placed put options bids on thoses doomed airlines? The Government knows! Follow the money!
It was a false flag operation!
The World Trade Center was destroyed with directed energy weapons. See here for info on Dr Judy Wood’s analysis, and a link to her site where the court documents pending in NYC Federal Court are available for download:
9/11: Distinguishing The Propaganda From The Smoking Guns
May 24th, 2009 at 6:05 pmZooey Says:
Why is it that so many f ucktards think George W. Bush ought to get the biggest damned do-over in history?
DAMN, that was well said.
May 24th, 2009 at 8:16 pmPrecise and to the point.
AUGUST 6, MEMO TO THE PRESIDENT OF UNITED STATES-
Does everyone forget that fact?????
STOP WITH THIS BULL SHITE!!!! GWB WAS INFORMED BY THE FBI AND WHAT DID HE DO???? GO BACK TO HIS VACATION.
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS COMPLICIT IN ITS FAILURE TO REACT, NOTIFY AGENCIES LIKE THE FAA, CIA, FBI TO INCREASE IT’S SURVELLANCE OF THESE MEN IN FLIGHT SCHOOLS…..BUT THEN AGAIN WHY WOULD GWB OR CHANEY WANT TO INTERFERE WITH THERE FLASE FLAG ATTACK ??????
May 25th, 2009 at 10:56 amflavorino , you miss my point, you guys like to pretend the world had nothing but hearts and flowers for us till Bush messed it up. We’ve been at war, at least tacitly, since 1979, through several presidencies. It could be said we’ve fought Muslim extremists since the 1700s, look up the history of the Marine Corps, (”to the shores of Tripoli”) As to my “blaming Clinton” I don’t, I blame bin laden. One reason we failed to kill him in Afghanistan is we tried to get help from locals who had different loyalties, be it ideology, or money. We should have gone it alone, you know, “unilaterally”
May 25th, 2009 at 12:39 pmPopatop Says:
You didnt have a point. You regurgitated stale talking points. Unfortunatly we have NOT been fighting Islamic extremists since the 1700’s We ARMED the Muhajadeen and trained them. We fomented Islamic extremism to combat leaders like Nasser and Mossedegh. You just dont know what you are talking about.
May 25th, 2009 at 3:09 pmyou guys like to pretend the world had nothing but hearts and flowers for us till Bush messed it up.
Straw man argument.
We also acknowledge the damage done to America by Reagan’s perfidy. Did you know that Reagan’s cowardly realpolitic resulted in additional hostage taking, after the Iran stand-off was solved by his back-door deal with the terrorists? That they had evolved a value system, for trading weapons for hostages, that put specific values on hostages taken, according to the hostage’s country of origin?
May 25th, 2009 at 4:14 pmOne could say, “When the World Trade center was attacked with a truck bomb in February 1993, the Clinton security plan had failed after only one year in office. He tightened security and for the next seven years we were safe.
One could also say, “When the World Trade Center was destroyed by two airplanes and the Pentagon damaged by another on September 11, 2001, the Bush Security plan had failed after only eight months in office. He tightened security and for the next seven and one half years we were safe.”
There are a few differences (Wikipedia is my reference).
The Clinton security breach cost six lives and a thousand or so injured with no loss of WTC towers.
The Bush security breach cost 2.750 deaths and uncounted injuries (due to the widespread damage).
Also, on Bush’s watch, he declared an unprovoked war on Iraq which has cost thousands of American lives and tens of thousands of injured. An estimated 100,000 Iraqis have also died and who knows how many more injured.
Bush is the big winner(?)
May 25th, 2009 at 5:29 pmoldfuzz Says:
One could say, “When the World Trade center was attacked with a truck bomb in February 1993, the Clinton security plan had failed after only one year in office. He tightened security and for the next seven years we were safe.
He was only in office one month, not one year. Other than that, I agree with what you said.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:10 pmWe still don’t know who sent out anthrax post 9/11.
enough said.
May 25th, 2009 at 11:34 pm——————————————————————————–
Keith H. Says:
——————————————————————————–
The fact that they were so prepared to use 9-11 as their justification and tool for nearly all that they have done sure as hell should tell people something.
Makes me think the 911 truthers are on to something.
May 26th, 2009 at 10:52 amMore lies.
May 26th, 2009 at 12:25 pmSafe from what? I am convinced that both Bush and Cheney were in fact in on the covert 9-11 US operation. The purpose of the so called attack was to justify the already planned Afghanistan and Iraq invasions and to take the Constitutional Bill of Rights powers from the People in their hoax forever war on terror. The Patriot Act was in fact drafted prior to 9-11 as well.
May 26th, 2009 at 3:39 pm