Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush gave us the Smoking Gun today!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:29 PM
Original message
Bush gave us the Smoking Gun today!
In his comments to the press corps, he denies his knowledge of a coming attack on america:

"What I wanted to know was, was there anything specifically going to take place in America that we needed to react to."

"that PDB said nothing about an attack on America."


Yet in those same statements, he admits his knowledge of a coming attack on america:

"You might recall the hijacking that was referred to in the PDB, it was not hijacking the airplane to fly into a building, it was hijacking of airplanes in order to free someone that was being held uh, ha, as a prisoner in the United States"

Bottom line - a hijacking of airplanes is an attack on America.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Mari333 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. and the press will give him a pass. Im tired of waiting for justice. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onecitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
19. me too
after listening to crowly girl on cnn, i just gave up. something illegal is going on here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #19
23. MANY illegal things and we have all been BETRAYED
by the Filthy Busheviks. Though to most of us here on DU, being betrayed by these Scum who aren't even American but British Monarchs/Romnan Emperors, was no surprise at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. A hijacking is a hijacking is a hijacking.......
Whether it was supposed to "free someone" or destroy the WTC makes no difference considering he did absolutely NOTHING but patiently wait for it to occur.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bucknaked Donating Member (818 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
3. "Bin Laden" should have been all he had needed to hear...
Edited on Sun Apr-11-04 02:37 PM by bucknaked
...if you're to believe the folly of the right, which is them saying that Bush took terrorism more seriously than Clinton, or any other Democrat.

That memo, is clear proof that he didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Yes indeed--in fact wasn't that name EXTREMELY FAMILIAR
to Bush? How can anyone except that he felt justified in just ignoring news about a former business partner? Has anyone noticed this as rather unusual behavior?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
4. Now that is going too far. He vacationed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:03 PM
Response to Original message
6. So now he is using the PDB as a reason NOT to take action?
Because we didn't have every last detail of the plan known, that was reason to continue on and enjoy the vacation?

And why the reference to multiple planes? Every instance of past terrorist hijackings were single events. Why would he think that there would be more than one?

A $400BB/year military and only 14 planes on alert 9/11/01.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bushknew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. What will it take to convince the American people?

No WMDÕs, the PDB memo, Richard Clark, what else will it take to convince them?

I donÕt know.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ladyhawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:23 PM
Original message
I've noticed that people like to engage in wishful thinking.
They want to believe George W. Bush only has our best interests at heart, so that is what they will believe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bushknew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:28 PM
Response to Original message
9. WeÕre beating a horse that just wonÕt die.

ThatÕs how I feel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Steven_S Donating Member (810 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
20. And if you add to that...
The profound tendency of many people to hear what they want to hear and not much else then it does, indeed, make it difficult to convince them that he is not overly concerned with our best interests.

But you knew that! :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stanwyck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
8. Chris Matthews showed video of Bush
ont he day after the August briefing about Osama Bin Laden attacking the U.S., and his statements (from the golf course were: Saddam Hussein is a terrifying man who has to be held accountable for weapons of mass destruction. No mention of Bin Laden. His stubborness and intractibility make him blind to what is best for our country. He would rather thousands more die than admit he's wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
10. The title of that PDB is damning
"Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States."

and I don't care how they try to spin it.

Put this on top of the next very huge question: Why was the routine security measures suspended when they knew planes had been hijacked the morning of September 11th? The U.S. Air Force "stood down". Why? They could have prevented or reduced the impact of those hijacked planes.

Did they not even think about just the title, let alone the contents of that and other PDBs on September 11th? Of course they did. They chose NOT to react. Why?

Someone gave the stand down order. Our government has a network of employees and/or advisors. Incompetence is not a reasonable answer. Aborted emergency procedures whether deliberate or accidental would still have been discovered by each step of the command chain - which is how all emergency systems are organized. So the buck stops with Bush*. No one else. If he wants to blame Cheney, because Cheney was the real person in charge, then he should be man enough and say so. If he wants to continue to pretend he is/was the top of the command chain, then he has to accept the responsibility that he did not fulfill his oath of office. He should resign or be impeached, and sent to jail for murder.

I'm an old lady. I have no experience in terrorism. I did not have the opportunity to read or listen to advisors about an imminent threat on our soil. But yet, I knew that morning what needed to be done, and I would have made damn sure our security measures were being followed and then find out who gave the initial stand down order.

Again, they chose NOT to react. For whatever the reason, many people in that chain have blood on their hands, and they need to take their lies and hubris and be sitting on death row.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daisey Mae Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
11. This has been an awful experience....
This DIMWIT DICK WAD promised that he would be up to the job to protect us, he promised us in the campaign before the election in 2000.... He did not even meet once WITH THE TERRORISM COMMITTEE about the issue of terrorism. When congress was acting on the Hart Ruddman Commission to form a cabinet level National Security Department ,May 6,2001, the DICK WAD ordered the congress to step down because Dick Cheney was now Chairman of The Task force of Counter-terrorism.. The DICK WAD said they had it under control and needed no help from anyone.... Then DICK WAD AND THE BIG DICK proceeded to never meet....The DICK WAD canceled all actions to prevent the attack that occurred on September 11. 2001....He didn't try to protect us because he was busy SELLING us AT THAT TIME on missile defense and tax cuts for corporations and people who made a couple of million a year..IN MAY OF 2001, HE WAS BUSY MAKING DEALS WITH THE TALI BAN FOR A PIPELINE FOR THE OIL COMPANIES and he gave 40+million dollars to the tali ban to have them protect the pipeline....When the tali ban did not fulfill DICK WADS wishes he threatened them with war.... He threatened BEFORE 9-11 ever happened... .... He shifted the tax burdens to the backs of working poor.. .
Then he shut down the VA hospitals and Head Start Programs and most
other things important to average people in order to fund his pipe dreams.. He emptied the treasury in record time and has left us with record deficits....HE LIED...PEOPLE, LOTS OF PEOPLE DIED....HE NEEDS TO FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES...as do all in his administration.... THE honest and sincere people who were part of that administration have all jumped ship and are screaming (with their HAIR ON FIRE ...) THAT all things in that administration are fanatical and against the good of the country...BUSH has no interest in middle and lower income people...(85% of the population) PRESIDENT DICK WAD has committed TREASON....LEAVENWORTH COMES TO MIND.......


ALL FOR CORPORATIONS ...ALL FOR THE RICHEST PEOPLE=BUSH
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EndElectoral Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
12. Bush's Radio Addresses Pre-911
Bush’s Radio Addresses on Terrorism before 911 – zero
Bush’s Radio Addresses on Iraq threat of WMD’s before 911 – zero

Now here are the subjects of Bush’s radio addresses after the August 10th, 2001 memo "Bin Laden to Attack Us" memo:

Aug. 11 – Stem Cell Research
Aug. 18th – Faith Based and Community Initiatives
Aug. 25th – Budget
Sept. 1 – Education Reform
Sept. 8th – Education

Here’s an excerpt from the radio address on budget from Aug. 25th 2001:

“…the federal budget is strong, healthy and in balance. In fact, the 2002 budget surplus will be the second biggest surplus in American history...The report also shows we are funding our nation's priorities, meeting our commitments to Social Security and Medicare, reducing taxes and still retiring record amounts of debt. This is a great achievement, and it happened because Congress worked with me this spring to agree to a responsible total level of spending.”

''''
Notice not one mention of terrorism or Al Quada or Iraq. Not one mention in any Radio address leading up to 911 about the USS Cole situation or terrorism.

But the best radio address is the 100 Day Progress radio address on April 28, 2001:

Bush states, “”What have we accomplished so far? I think we're making progress toward changing the tone in Washington. There's less name-calling and finger-pointing. We're sharing credit. We are learning we can make our points without making enemies. Bitterness and divisiveness in Washington poison the mood of the whole country. On the other hand, a culture of respect and results in Washington can change the mood of the country for the better.”

Reading his own words pre-911 illustrate his own ineptitude. If one looks at the Iraq Radio addresses which appear in Spetember 2002, the misinformation is in high gear. Reading these now is just unbelievable.

When are people going to wake up to this man?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nancy Waterman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. The end of May, 2001
Jim Jeffords defected. So much for how well we are all getting along in April.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
25. Hi EndElectoral!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Piperay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
13. The planes were hijacked BEFORE
they were flown into the buildings, he KNEW they were going to hijack planes so....HE KNEW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mot78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Right, and it doesn't matter if he didn't know they'd be used as missiles
As long as he KNEW there would be a hijacking he should have done SOMETHING. They even monitored the hijackers! They even had time to mobilize ON 9/11 and shoot down the planes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #13
24. Exactly, Piperay
Now that he's admitted he knew of the possibility of Al Qaeda hijacking U.S. planes, shouldn't he have taken action when told about the first hijacked plane on 9/11 instead of going into a classroom and reading a book?

We've got him dead to rights.

http://www.takebackthemedia.com/911true.html

:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeahMira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 05:43 PM
Response to Original message
17. Does it matter WHY a plane is hijacked?
"You might recall the hijacking that was referred to in the PDB, it was not hijacking the airplane to fly into a building, it was hijacking of airplanes in order to free someone that was being held uh, ha, as a prisoner in the United States"

Excuse me, but if you know a hijacking is planned, wouldn't it make sense to be sure that military planes nationwide are ready to go any day, any time, the second that a commercial plane is significantly off course?

What the heck were they doing for all the time that not one but four planes simultaneously were off course? Waiting to see what would happen? Sheesh!

What the devil difference does it make WHY planes are hijacked? Isn't hijacking a serious crime no matter what the reasons?

Would it matter if they were "just" going to fly to Cuba or Libya or wherever and hold hostages or if they were going to fly into some buildings? Would Bush prefer that a few hundred American citizens were shot one at a time until demands were met instead of a few thousand American citizens being incinerated? Wow! He really doesn't think much of American lives at all, does he?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
18. the cat that's out of the bag here:
they knew a hijacking was imminent yet they did nothing. It is obvious they wanted one to occur, to use it as a means to an (political) end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-11-04 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
21. i think we should keep kicking this until something happens
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Must_B_Free Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-12-04 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC