I think Bush is a crooked elitist f*ck. What do you think?

[ScottSolomon]

Nobody was thinking 9/11 except the terrorists.

The Columbine gunmen, Tom Clancy, the project Bojinko terrorists, the G8 summit security personell in Genoa, etc,etc all considered the idea of hijacking a plane and craching it into a building. The Columbine kids wanted to crash a plane into the WTC. There are people in the government that do nothing all day long except sit around and think of bad things that may happen. They write reports based upon the intelligence they have and they project possible scenarios based upon that intelligence.

Do I think Bush read any reports? God no. I don't think Bush reads anything. I think Bush is very much like Ronald Reagan. He is a good public face for a comitee that makes all the policy decisions and gives him a script to read. This is why you never get Bush to answer questions in an unscripted moment about anything that is beyond the general talking points of the day.

This committe is made up of Washington insiders, intelligence insiders, security insiders, and generally inteligent people. I cannot imagine that none of these people would have connected the dots - especially given the numerous warnings - that an attack was imminent on American soil ( as opposed to what Condi said ).

Why would it have been inappropriate to make sure that there were attack aircraft in the ready - in case something happened. Why would it have been wrong to put undercover skymarshalls in the air? Why would it have been disruptive to station antiaircraft guns around New York and Wasington ( like they did in Genoa ).

preparation would not have sent the public into a panic.

Did you even visit that site and take a look at what they compiled? Or are you just ready to simis it out of turn?

[xoxoxoBruce]

OK, OK, BUSH KNEW.
Whata ya gonna do about it, you nobody?

[Torrere]

Originally posted by ScottSolomon


The Columbine gunmen, Tom Clancy, the project Bojinko terrorists, the G8 summit security personell in Genoa, etc,etc all considered the idea of hijacking a plane and craching it into a building. The Columbine kids wanted to crash a plane into the WTC. There are people in the government that do nothing all day long except sit around and think of bad things that may happen. They write reports based upon the intelligence they have and they project possible scenarios based upon that intelligence.

Not everybody predicted the possibility of airplanes crashing into famous buildings: One of my government teacher's stories was that, a few years ago, he gave an assignment to his class telling them to devise a scenario of a terrorist attack. One student came up with the idea of crashing planes into buildings, and although it was a very good paper, my government teacher gave the student a B because "it wasn't very realistic".

Soon after September 11th, the student called and had the grade adjusted to an A.

I'm guessing that there is no way that crashing planes into buildings evaded the planning of our national intelligence agencies.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I'm guessing that there is no way that crashing planes into buildings evaded the planning of our national intelligence agencies.

Along with 4 zillion other possible scenarios. Now, how many of them do you think anyone above department heads heard about?

[ScottSolomon]

Well, when you have warning that Al Qaeda was in the final phase of an operation, that it was going to involve airlines and massive casualties, you would dust off all your airline scenarios. When you received field data from agents that were noticing Muslims training in numerous flight schools, you look at the scenariaos in which the muslims would need to be trained as airline pilots. Then you look at symbolic days in the future - days which may have some symbolic meaning for the terrorists - such as mid September - the time period of the Camp David Accords, or Yom Kippur, or the end of Ramadan. You reschedule fighters to be on alert near the larger cities. Then you watch the radar. You put out anotice to the FCC that any hijackings need to be reported immediately ( which is the regulation anyway ) - and you look at the direction the aircraft are traveling in. You attempt to contact the aircraft and tell them that if the exceed a 50 mile radius of approach to any large city, they will be shot down. Then, shoot down the aircraft if they don't respond.

I think it would have been a fairly easy thing to predict if my job was to sit around all day developing scenarios.

These scenarios would be the ones that got passed to Cheney.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Hindsight

[Whit]

     Scott, calm down dude.
     I'll be happy to concede that they knew something was suppose to happen on 9/11. Hell, I knew that and I'm just some guy in Arkansas. The Isrealis told us something was supposed to happen that day. Janes reported it. And yeah, the fact that planes were used is no surprised.
     So, can you prove anything? Look, I hate Bush too, but going around name-calling and making accusations that will never come to anything effects nothing and changes no ones mind. Calling someone a crooked, elitist fuck is pointless even when it's an accurate description. Cool down and I'm sure that you can resonably find something about Bush that everyone hates. Without polarizing people by getting hardcore anti-Bush. All that does is make people back Bush more.

[ScottSolomon]

I guess you are right. We should not call politicicans crooked or elitist or fucks. Even though CLinjtons was called a rapist, a murderer, and an adulterous asshole. We could not call Gore a liar or Nixon a crook. We can;t do any of that.


WhY?


Why can't you call a spade, a "spade"? The guy has got a crooked history. he was a draft dodger that made his money by getting sweetheart deals from politically connected companies. He won the election by appointment. He has lied about so many things since he came into office that it boggles the mind. He even lied to start a war. If you can;t call that kind of guy a crook, who can you call a crook?

He is an elitist. He knows that he used to use drugs and alcohol in the past. But with him they were "youthful indescretions". However, other people's indiscretions don't get dismissed that easily. He signed into law a bill that barred anyone with any type of drug conviction any time in their past from getting federal financial aid. Even after they've paid their debt to society, they cannot receive federally subsidized grants or loans. You have to be one hell of an elitist to lie to a nation to start a war in which the middle class and poor will suffer the most - on both sides - then claim victory while the bodies were still piling up.

The guy is a Connecticut blue-blood with a fake Texas twang. He grew up in comfortable private schools - the best ones available. Then he got into Ivy League schools even though he was an average student. He got into the National Guard in front of thousands of other soldiers that were on the waiting list. If that is not elitist behavior, I do not know what it.

I called Bush a "fuck". I guess that is the only part of that phrase that I don;t have any reason for. I apologize to Mr. Bush for calling him a fuck.



If being critical about a president makes one back said president, then people should have been rallying behind Clinton and Nixon when the media was skewering them.

[juju]

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
Why can't you call a spade, a "spade"? The guy has got a crooked history. he was a draft dodger that made his money by getting sweetheart deals from politically connected companies.

There's nothing wrong with not wanting to die.

Exactly what "sweetheart deals" are you talking about?

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
He won the election by appointment.

You act as if that was his fault. It wasn't.

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
He has lied about so many things since he came into office that it boggles the mind. He even lied to start a war. If you can;t call that kind of guy a crook, who can you call a crook?

I'm sure he had a good reason. At any rate, it's a little early to be calling the result, isn't it? Let's just wait and see.

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
He is an elitist. He knows that he used to use drugs and alcohol in the past. But with him they were "youthful indescretions". However, other people's indiscretions don't get dismissed that easily.

I don't think he's ever said that he used drugs, has he?

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
The guy is a Connecticut blue-blood with a fake Texas twang.

That's ridiculous. What kind of a moron would invent a fake accent to cement a presidency? Do you <i>really</i> believe this?

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
He grew up in comfortable private schools - the best ones available. Then he got into Ivy League schools even though he was an average student. He got into the National Guard in front of thousands of other soldiers that were on the waiting list. If that is not elitist behavior, I do not know what it.

Well, I say good for him. Where does this connotation come from that being well-off means you're evil?

Come on, admit it. He's a pretty good guy. He seems personable enough to me. I've never seen him say anything that would suggest he thinks he's better than other people.

[wolf]

Originally posted by ScottSolomon
He won the election by appointment.

Uhhh ... he won the election by receiving a majority of the electoral vote. That's the way the system works. No matter how many times the recount was done, it came out "Bush, more ... Gore, less."

Get over it. You have another chance in 2004. Use it wisely.

[Whit]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hey Scott, Juju and Wolfs posts were perfect examples of what I mean. You caused that defense of Bush. Quit name-calling for a minute and use solid points that you can easily back and you'll do a lot better. With all the really good reasons to dislike GWB you're pushing people the other way by being bithchy with your opinions. By the by, as someone that has a problem with Bush you're making my life harder. Talking to people from the same side of the fence as you they are likely to assume I'm just a name caller too. Of course, I'm still willing to try anyway.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Juju, for "sweetheart deals" read up on Bush's business failures. You're damn good at finding stuff so I'll leave it to you. Look through them with a point of comparing how much he spent going into the companies and how much he walked away with. Taking a company that was running in the black and banrupting it within a few years and making a mint off selling it off piecemeal may not be illegal, but as a guy that could find himself out of a job it pisses me off. I think you should consider that point of view, what if that was the job you had for ten years or so? No, he shouldn't be arrested for it, but consider if you want a guy with that mentality in the White house.

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hey Wolf, we know how you feel about the second amendment, how about the sixth? Doesn't it deserve just as much protecton as the second?

[wolf]

Originally posted by Whit
Hey Wolf, we know how you feel about the second amendment, how about the sixth? Doesn't it deserve just as much protecton as the second?

The right to a speedy and public trial, representation by an attorney, being confronted by witnesses, etc.? Sure, but how does criminal prosecution apply here?

[Whit]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Actually I was referencing those people that were taken off to Guanton... er... Guantana... that base in Cuba! They get no trial, they get no lawyer. Hell, do they even get charged with anything officially?

[wolf]

Those guys? At Gitmo? Prisoners of War. Conflict still ongoing. See Geneva Convention.

[Whit]

&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Ok, I just spent some time looking and I can't seem to find any evidence that the "War on Terrorism" is anything more than a title, much like the "War on Drugs". The Geneva Convention doesn't apply if it's only called a war for political expediency. Or perhaps you believe that all these people were connected with Iraq?
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Regardless, is it okay with you when the Government comes and hauls American citizens off? Giving only the Patriot Act as a reason? Perhaps you're one of those people that believe the Government would never abuse its authority?
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;If the people they are hauling off are connected to terrorism then maybe they should prove it, in court.