HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama places a brilliantl...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu May 23, 2013, 08:30 PM

Obama places a brilliantly phrased dagger to the heart of the Bush administration in speech today

OBAMA:
In the 1990s, we lost Americans to terrorism at the World Trade Center; at our military facilities in Saudi Arabia; and at our Embassy in Kenya. These attacks were all deadly, and we learned that left unchecked, these threats can grow. But if dealt with smartly and proportionally, these threats need not rise to the level that we saw on the eve of 9/11.



on the eve of 9/11 alluding to the fact the previous administration was AWARE OF the threat, but its response to intel of an imminent threat was tragically inadequate.



complete transcript:
http://www.boomantribune.com/story/2013/5/23/155133/069

48 replies, 10310 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 48 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama places a brilliantly phrased dagger to the heart of the Bush administration in speech today (Original post)
kpete May 2013 OP
leveymg May 2013 #1
lastlib May 2013 #6
Buzz Clik May 2013 #13
Left Coast2020 May 2013 #17
Cha May 2013 #2
Occulus May 2013 #29
magical thyme May 2013 #3
Rosa Luxemburg May 2013 #48
Hekate May 2013 #4
rightsideout May 2013 #7
snappyturtle May 2013 #9
treestar May 2013 #19
Laelth May 2013 #21
madrchsod May 2013 #5
indepat May 2013 #8
snappyturtle May 2013 #10
calimary May 2013 #15
snappyturtle May 2013 #16
xtraxritical May 2013 #12
90-percent May 2013 #11
Lone_Star_Dem May 2013 #14
ProSense May 2013 #18
HiPointDem May 2013 #20
Enrique May 2013 #22
exboyfil May 2013 #31
merrily May 2013 #36
Blue State Bandit May 2013 #23
NoMoreWarNow May 2013 #46
Octafish May 2013 #24
grasswire May 2013 #37
JayhawkSD May 2013 #25
Niceguy1 May 2013 #26
Ezlivin May 2013 #27
Myrina May 2013 #28
formercia May 2013 #30
djean111 May 2013 #32
Utopian Leftist May 2013 #33
NCTraveler May 2013 #34
merrily May 2013 #35
HiPointDem May 2013 #39
merrily May 2013 #40
HiPointDem May 2013 #41
merrily May 2013 #43
HiPointDem May 2013 #44
mlevans May 2013 #38
truedelphi May 2013 #42
SunSeeker May 2013 #45
Berlum May 2013 #47

Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 08:43 PM

1. Daggers are nice, but bring on the Grand Jury and subpoenas

C'mon Barack and Eric, if you can convene a Grand Jury for a trifling little episode like that described by AP, you can certainly do something about a counter-terrorism operation and leak to AQ that was so recklessly managed that it ended up killing 3,000 people.

As the President said himself this afternoon, time to get over the GWOT, and on with a more sane, accountable system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #1)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:11 PM

6. the dagger, alas, is metaphorical.........

War Crimes trials, OTOH, would so very concrete--and WELCOME!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #1)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:35 PM

13. Shall we start a pool on when those subpoenas will be coming?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #1)

Thu May 23, 2013, 11:31 PM

17. Absolutely! A Grand Jury on War Crimes with all the network...

...reporters soaking it all in.

Repukes wanted wall-to-wall 9/11 coverage? Well we can give them wall-to-wall court trials on all the "libural" media networks, except Cluster Faux.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 08:51 PM

2. It was absolutely what needed to be said, kpete..

thank you! "Tragically Inadequate"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #2)

Fri May 24, 2013, 10:49 AM

29. Apparently not tragically inadequate enough to prompt a trial.

Unlike a joint.

ed.: repealing the AUMF is good, but is a half measure unless and until we examine whether it was abused. I will be eighty before that maladministration, those bandits in this tame hour, are brought to justice...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:04 PM

3. how about criminally negligent?

And how about lying us into an illegal, unnecessary and unfunded war?

Word daggers are nice and all, but really why not just send a strongly worded letter advising that if they ever do it again we might get serious and investigate?

meh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to magical thyme (Reply #3)

Fri May 24, 2013, 07:31 PM

48. Bush and cheney should have resigned over 9/11

They basically failed yet the majority of the American public rallied around these creatures! Duped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:05 PM

4. This was a major speech on the Obama Doctrine

I had to leave the house before it was over, so will have to look it up online later tonight to watch it in its entirety. But I can tell you, it was a major production.

President Obama is so thoughtful, so measured, so unlike that damn cowboy that preceded him, that I still cannot believe our luck.

Did it register on anyone in the Left community that he actually recommended that Congress reduce his powers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #4)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:19 PM

7. That was a great speech!

Carefully crafted. I believe it was needed to head off criticism since it seems the Right-Wingers are hitting from all sides these days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #4)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:04 PM

9. Yes I certainly heard him loud and clear on reducing presidential powers.

I remember a Bill Moyers show with John Nichols as one of the guests and he thought it would be highly unlikely that any president would forsake or repeal the powers bush created. I know that following President Obama's taking office that he urged the repeal of AUMF so hopefully Mr. Nichols is a happy camper tonight....I know I am.. Even called the WH this aternoon and told them so! I think the lines were busy as I had to wait quite a little bit to talk with staffer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #4)

Fri May 24, 2013, 03:46 AM

19. But he's trying to be a dictator

Arrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hekate (Reply #4)

Fri May 24, 2013, 07:40 AM

21. It certainly did.

I have to admit that I was quite impressed, and somewhat stunned, by the President's speech yesterday.

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:08 PM

5. och...that has to hurt....

is obama gearing up for a summer campaign against the republican obstruction in the house and senate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 09:45 PM

8. Dos words are likely to make the repubs fighting mad, maybe mad enough to thwart,

sabotage, and obstruct BHO's every initiative to improve the economy, lower unemployment, and otherwise execute his powers of his office: to wit, no longer hope the pugs will play nicely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to indepat (Reply #8)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:06 PM

10. It is a good move on the President's part. Maybe NOW the electorate will see

the repubs for the obstructionists that they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snappyturtle (Reply #10)

Thu May 23, 2013, 11:11 PM

15. Nope. WAY too subtle. Most of 'em won't get it.

But they will know enough to take umbrage about it, mainly because it came out of President Obama's mouth.

Sadly, most of the good guys won't get it either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to calimary (Reply #15)

Thu May 23, 2013, 11:13 PM

16. It wasn't subtle,imho, but, it may be too "deep" for those who don't truly listen.

Edit to add: I liked his speech because I see it changing the pre-emptive war doctrine of bush's in that it woould make going to war more difficult & not on the whim of a President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to indepat (Reply #8)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:33 PM

12. You mean even more "thwarting" than the last five years? How is that even possible?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:20 PM

11. Simple question

Is there no other legal mechanism to hold GW Bush, et al, accountable for their treason besides President Obama?

A Nuremberg kind of trial or the World Court or the United Nations?

Or along the lines of Vincent Bugliosi's book, The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder, published May 2008. It was a recipe for Attorney's General FROM ANY STATE to bring GWB to court if that state lost a soldier in Iraq.

I just recalled in the middle of writing this post, that I sent a modest campaign contribution to somebody running for AG (in perhaps Vermont or New Hampshire? Somewhere in New England not CT, MA, RI or ME)? that pledged to prosecute GWB. It was a woman, independent? green? Dem primary? I forget. 2006-2009 time frame.

Could all this be an Obama LBJ/FDR classic play; "I AGREE WITH YOU. NOW MAKE ME DO IT."?

Bush's treason is just as rotten in the present as it was ten years ago. I don't think you can run out the clock on treason?

-90% Jimmy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu May 23, 2013, 10:51 PM

14. I'm interested in seeing where this second term will go.

No reelection to worry about. The GOP have lowered the bar on both discourse and civility until one has to dig deep in the mud to even find it at this point.

If one were to give up on what may possibly happen in the fantasy we had a semi decent Congress and just focus on feeding the Democratic hungry in all states... Well damn, we could possibly see some real improvement in 2016, and possibly some bit of improvement as soon as 2014.

I know they're working on Texas already, but there are other states out there who could swing too. All they need is a little 'miracle grow' sprinkled on their local Democratic enthusiasm.

Feed us Seymour, we're hungry!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lone_Star_Dem (Reply #14)

Fri May 24, 2013, 01:06 AM

18. The good thing

"I'm interested in seeing where this second term will go."

...is this comes at about four months into his second term. The President laid out some concrete actions he will take, and he has plenty of time to work with Congress on the rest.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 05:31 AM

20. what dagger? prosecute bushco & stop pursuing its policies.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 07:47 AM

22. if that's a dagger, it hits Clinton's heart just as hard

but i don't personally think it's a dagger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #22)

Fri May 24, 2013, 10:55 AM

31. i was thinking the same thing

Obviously you can point to some lost focus in the Bush administration, but I cannot say it was a blanket policy shift that, in 8 months, led to 9/11. You also can't argue that Bush was doing anything to improve our security prior to 9/11 to such a threat either (focus was on Iraq and Russia).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #22)

Fri May 24, 2013, 01:51 PM

36. If not harder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 09:08 AM

23. Obama comes out as 9/11 Truther!

Move over Alex "Tornado Gun" Jones, it's the LIHOPer in Chief!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue State Bandit (Reply #23)

Fri May 24, 2013, 06:51 PM

46. Sure seeems that he is implying that the govt saw the threat on the eve of 9/11

 

which is clearly LIHOP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 09:15 AM

24. Bush KNEW and Terrorists FLEW

Jim Hatfield wrote Bush afraid of bin Laden aerial attack at G-7 summit in Geneva in April 2001. It was the last thing Hatfield, author of "Fortunate Son," wrote that got published before his suicide cough murder. Bush was too chicken to sleep in the anti-aircraft missile protected luxury hotel on land, so the little coward stayed offshore aboard a U.S. destroyer.



Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?

By James Hatfield

Editor's note: In light of last week's horrific events and the Bush administration's reaction to them, we are reprising the following from the last column Jim Hatfield wrote for Online Journal prior to his tragic death on July 18:

July 3, 2001—There may be fireworks in Genoa, Italy, this month, too.

A plot by Saudi master terrorist, Osama bin Laden, to assassinate Dubya during the July 20 economic summit of world leaders, was uncovered after dozens of suspected Islamic militants linked to bin Laden's international terror network were arrested in Frankfurt, Germany, and Milan, Italy, in April.

German intelligence services have stated that bin Laden is covertly financing neo-Nazi skinhead groups throughout Europe to launch another terrorist attack at a high-profile American target—his first since the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen last October.

According to counter-terrorism experts quoted in Germany's largest newspaper, the attack on Dubya might be a James Bond-like aerial strike in the form of remote-controlled airplanes packed with plastic explosives.

Why would Osama bi Laden want to kill, Dubya, his former business partner?

CONTINUED...

http://web.archive.org/web/20060906150015/http://www.onlinejournal.org/Special_Reports/Hatfield-R-091901/hatfield-r-091901.html



I'd download the copy off of the Wayback Machine. For some reason, I can no longer find it at Online Journal.

The amazing Amy Goodman still hosts an interview with the feller.

BTW: John Ashcroft lied when asked why he stopped flying commercial in July 2001:



Ashcroft Flying High

WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001

Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.

In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.

"There was a threat assessment and there are guidelines. He is acting under the guidelines," an FBI spokesman said. Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department, however, would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it.

A senior official at the CIA said he was unaware of specific threats against any Cabinet member, and Ashcroft himself, in a speech in California, seemed unsure of the nature of the threat.

"I don't do threat assessments myself and I rely on those whose responsibility it is in the law enforcement community, particularly the FBI. And I try to stay within the guidelines that they've suggested I should stay within for those purposes," Ashcroft said.

Asked if he knew anything about the threat or who might have made it, the attorney general replied, "Frankly, I don't. That's the answer."

CONTINUED...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/national/main303601.shtml



These are just two examples that aren't mentioned anymore on ABCNNBCBSFauxNoiseNutworks people should know about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #24)

Fri May 24, 2013, 02:28 PM

37. thank you for preserving those tidbits

Remember, remember....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 09:31 AM

25. Who cares? Words are cheap. Prosecution I would applaud.

He has been scoring cheap verbal victories such as this against an already defeated opponent ever since the day he took office. They feel good and cheer up his base, but they serve no useful purpose. They don't imnprove the state of the union, they don't reverse the Bush atrocities, they don't restore the constitution, and they don't bring justice.

These are even cheaper words because they are against someone who is no longer an opponent, who has been out of office for more than four years and is not active in the political scene. It is pointless to cheer him for beating a dead horse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JayhawkSD (Reply #25)

Fri May 24, 2013, 09:50 AM

26. shhhh

You might upset the delicate flowers around here lol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JayhawkSD (Reply #25)

Fri May 24, 2013, 10:36 AM

27. It's like Rosa Parks talking but never getting on the damned bus

"When I get on it, I'm not sitting in the back!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JayhawkSD (Reply #25)

Fri May 24, 2013, 10:39 AM

28. And on paper, he's maintaining the same Bush policies ...

.... or in some cases, expanding them (killing American citizens 'on foreign soil' who 'plot against America') to even more despicable heights.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 10:51 AM

30. Junior needed 9/11 or an incident like it to implement the Neocon Agenda.

as Hitler used the Reichstag fire to implement his Leibensraum Agenda.

Oversight or lack of attention to Intelligence had nothing to do with it. All the Intelligence did was to provide progress on the Op.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 11:01 AM

32. The Bush administration is laughing its ass off. It's over. They did what they wanted to do.

Bush policies, in some cases, have actually been doubled down on.
Words are meaningless at this point. And not to be confused with actions or deeds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 11:49 AM

33. I really hope the media

has picked up on this. Because these harsh words are the only ones that scare the Public-cons into cutting out the faux outrage and self-righteous moral indignation.

And I hope this is a trend for the President: CALL THEM OUT ON THEIR BULLSHIT BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 11:52 AM

34. "brilliantly phrased dagger to the heart of the Bush administration in speech today"

As Bush and Pickles smile awkwardly at each other over a glass of Ice tea.

Is this a joke.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 01:49 PM

35. The trail started with the 1972 Olympics. Government failed to protect us.

Not only Bush the Lesser, but Reagan, Poppy and Clinton.

I will let Carter off the hook because we could say that a pattern had not yet begun to form. However, if someone wants to throw him in with the others, I won't fight

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #35)

Fri May 24, 2013, 02:52 PM

39. US was responsible for the Israeli Olympic team's security at the Munich Olympics? How do

 

you figure?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #39)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:10 PM

40. Where did you get that?

I said that our government failed to protect "us." "Us" includes me. Did you think I meant that I was a member of the Israeli Olympic team?

I also said that I personally would start the blame with Reagan, not Carter. I just would not debate the point if someone wanted to lump Carter in with Reagan, Clinton and the Bushes.

I said the trail (or terrorist attacks) started there (at the 1972 Olympics).

That attack was a major terrorist attack, the first (that I know of) of many terrorist attacks that followed. It should not take a rocket scientist to figure that Middle Eastern extremists attacking Israel might have a grudge against us, too.

Some of the terrorist attacks that followed were on the US, like the U.S. Cole and the World Trade Center (1993), some including citizens of many countries, like the cruise ship that was hijacked. (Sorry, the name of that ship escapes me at the moment.)

At some point after 1972, but before 911, it might have made sense to beef up security, like restricting access to the pilots' cabin in a airplane. And I don't mean only at some point in Stupid's first 8 months in office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #40)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:36 PM

41. americans weren't attacked at the 72 olympics that i recall, and they didn't take place in the US.

 

that's why i ask. because you said:

"The trail started with the 1972 Olympics. Government failed to protect us. Not only Bush the Lesser, but Reagan, Poppy and Clinton."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #41)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:42 PM

43. Seems clear to me. I mentioned a trail of terrorist attacks

beginning in 1972. A trail does not begin and end in one spot. Then I mentioned four Presidents I blamed, excluding Carter.

ETA: no matter how you slice it, concluding I was blaming four U.S. Presidents, but not Carter, for not providing security for the 1972 Olympic team was not a fair reading of my post.

As for Americans not having been attacked in 1972, my prior post covered that, as did the terms "trail" and "beginning" in 1972.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to merrily (Reply #43)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:51 PM

44. actually, in the post i responded to you said nothing like that. it wasn't clear at all.

 

and i'm still unclear as to how the trail begins with black september at the 72 olympics.

there were terrorist attacks before 72.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 02:47 PM

38. This is, of course, not possible.

It is a well known fact that W has no heart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:37 PM

42. Obama remains a master at cementing identity politics.

And his speechifying will remain brilliant.

However what preoccupies many of us is the dagger that has been thrust into the heart of the Middle Class, in terms of the economy. Cat food committee, austerity measures, CPI chained cuts.

Then in the matter of our inherent and inalienable rights, under the Obama Administration, peaceful protesters who have been arrested now must contend with the "Order of Protection." An Orwellian piece of paper that lets you know that if you are arrested for protesting once, you may be serving some 7 years for protesting twice. Not fifteen days, as it was during the Nixon Administration - seven years.

Lawyers who have been handed the "Order of Protection" don't even know what to make of it. In addition to not protesting ever again, the person so served must avoid various unnamed officials, FOREVER, and also must refrain from being near the school where their children attend classes.

How can you avoid people who remain unnamed to you?

But in any event, all hail the Chief Executive. GO USA!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 04:53 PM

45. K & R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Fri May 24, 2013, 07:00 PM

47. "Move along. Nothing to see here. Smirk." - George AWOL Bush (R)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread