Do we agree?

[BeFree]

Don't we all agree that it was the failure of Bushco that 9/11 even happened?
That Bushco could have stopped the attacks had they done their job of protecting America?

[SDuderstadt]

1. I agree...

I have said repeatedly that I believe that the Bush administration was asleep at the wheel and didn't do near enough to take the threat seriously and prevent it. I was was dumbfounded when Bush's approval rating soared after 9/11,especially after he sat on his ass after being apprised that our country was under attack.

In the past, you have insisted that "Bushco did it". Are you now abandoning that claim?

[BeFree]

4. No abandonment

Am just trying to find common ground.

[rhymeandreason]

15. I have never been able to understand

how anyone who watched Mr. Bush's first televised address after the attack could take this guy seriously as a "leader". He had the panic-stricken aspect of a rabbit about to be mowed down by a Mack Truck. It was pathetic and demoralizing.

[SDuderstadt]

18. I couldn't agree more...

how he managed to escape the approbation he deserved at that point is inexplicable. He should have been pilloried.

[Marksbrother]

2. I disagree.

What you are saying is equivalent to saying that it was a failure of the robber that the robbery even happened.

[BeFree]

5. Yes

The robber did fail. It would not have happened if the robber had not acted the way he did. The robber knew better. He failed to act 'better.'

[Marksbrother]

7. In the 9/11 case, the robber didn't fail, he succeeded.

That's the difference.

[whatchamacallit]

3. I agree they failed to protect America

The question is, was that failure intentional?

[BeFree]

6. That is the follow up question

But we all know the answer to that, eh? There being scads of evidence that actions taken and not taken led to the situation.

I'm here just interested in where and on what we all can agree.

[Marksbrother]

8. Why would you expect perps to NOT take action?

If the perp doesn't take action, he isn't a perp.

[BeFree]

9. Huh?

What is it you are saying... I don't quite get where you are going with this.
It seems a little CGI'ish.

Please explain, while keeping it in the context of this thread, bro.

[Marksbrother]

23. If you're trying to say that 9/11 was an inside job and that

the perps could have called it off at any time prior to commencing it, I agree. Otherwise, your statement is premised on facts
that aren't in evidence. I.E., it hasn't been proven that 9/11 was carried out by Osama or Chavez, Castro, or anyone else except
BUSHCO. If you have proof that OBL carried it out, I'd be interested in knowing what it is, and I'll give it careful, respectful
consideration.

"Bushco could have stopped the attacks had they done their job of protecting America?"

[BeFree]

25. Thanks

I guess the line of this thread is an either/or/no matter who did it, we can all agree that if Bushco was doing what it was supposed to do - protect America - no matter who did it, it should have been stopped. It could have easily been stopped.

My idea is that a consensus of all of us is gained and that the consensus is that Bushco was a miserable failure and that Afghanistan was borne of that failure.

[Marksbrother]

26. If Bushco was doing what it was supposed to do, it wouldn't

have carried out a false-flag terror operation that included intentionally taking the lives of innocent Americans.

[jberryhill]

10. That was a primary conclusion of the 9/11 Commission, btw

It's odd that people who regularly call the report a "whitewash" do not seem to be at all familiar with the fact that the report is a scathing indictment of the Bush Administration.

[BeFree]

11. Scathing?

A slap on the hand was all it was.
Who got fired? Who left government service in shame?

No one got scathed, they got away with being inept with just a slap on the hand.

[SDuderstadt]

12. Maybe you don't understand the powers of a commission.

It's rather silly to expect the outcomes you wanted from a GOP- controlled executive and legislative branch.

[BeFree]

13. Huh?

Who is happy with what the Commission did?
Is it silly to expect good government?
It's silly to attack Bushco and it's heavy handed control over the OCT?

[SDuderstadt]

14. yeah, it is...

you keep trumpeting this long debunked theme that assumes an all-powerful regime that controlled all sources of information and access to evidence that betrays little understanding of how government actually works. It's more than silly to claim the "consensus view" is , instead, the equivalent of Pravda and that somehow, people yearned to tell the truth and were completely thwarted by "Bushco". as I have stated before, the idea of an "OCT" is a strawman created by the "truth movement" so they can pretend they don't have to defend the huge holes in their goofy claims.

[procopia]

16. patently absurd

<<the idea of an "OCT" is a strawman created by the "truth movement" so they can pretend they don't have to defend the huge holes in their goofy claims.>>

Are you saying government officials didn't tell us OBL and 19 highjackers with boxcutters were responsible for 9/11? The majority of the truth movement have made no claims whatsoever except that the OCT is unbelievable.

[SDuderstadt]

19. There are plenty of sources ...

other then the government for information about OBl and his culpability for 9/11. Maybe you should try actually reading them, rather than pretend everything emanates from "Bushco". By your own admission, you said there was ''no need" to even read the 9/11 Commission Report. If you want to stay uneducated about 9/11, that is your choice. But, don't expect the rest of us to take you seriously. "The Looming Tower" would be a great place to start.

[Marksbrother]

24. Plenty of "info" about OBL, but no proof of his 9/11 culpability.

That a man who was so sickly even in 2001 that he was in a military hospital just hours before the events of 9/11 took place
was still able to direct 19 young Arab men to defeat the entire U.S. national defense and security system is just plain goofy.
Actually, OBL may well have still been in the hospital at the very hour that the 9/11 events commenced.

That said, the bottom line remains that no credible evidence substantiates the argument that OBL had anything to do with
9/11, other than serve as the #1 Patsy/Scapegoat and object of propaganda vilification for purposes of whipping up war fever.

[LARED]

17. I would agree, and add

congress (both houses) are to blame and the previous administration and congress failed in their duties. The idiot Bush was President for not even 8 months when America was attacked. It is impossible for his administration to have mucked up things that much all by himself in such a short time.

[BeFree]

20. Ahh

Bushco. Bushco includes Rumsfeld, Cheney (former SoD), Poppy Bush (former head of the CIA) and a host of others left over from the detritus of the Nixon and Reagan administrations that brought us the bad government operations of the Viet Nam war and Iran/Contra.

Curious that you would blame Clinton and not even profess to know what Bushco is.

[SDuderstadt]

21. So, are you claiming. . .

that George H. W. Bush was somehow part of a 9/11 MIHOP ? Are you referring to the same George H. W. Bush that declined to invade Baghdad? That George H. W. Bush?

[LARED]

22. So curious in fact I can't for thelife of me figure out what

you are talking about.

What does Bushco and Clinton have to do with each other?

I had no idea Bushco was so expansive it included the Vietnam war. Is Johnson involved as well?

[BeFree]

27. Yeah, curious

Quote: "It is impossible for his administration to have mucked up things that much all by himself in such a short time. "

Which clearly infers Clinton had something to do with what a mess Bushco made of 9/11. I pointed out how Rumsfeld, Cheney, et al. were old pros at working in the government, and they were back in office from practically day one of W's term.

Clinton was partly to blame for Bushco's failure to stop 9/11 from happening the way it did? Care to explain further?

[BeFree]

28. Question, Lared

How long would Bill have to have been out of office before he could not share the blame. Obviously 8 months was not enough. Would 12 months work for you? 18? How many?