I agree! I'm glad we didn't have to find out how Kerry would have handled all this.
2006-08-10 05:21:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by da dude 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
Well, Lisa....maybe we need to "think outside the box".
Is it even possible to believe that George Bush, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld and the other 'secret leaders' of this country might have fabricated this whole incident just to accommodate their own agenda?
Oh, I know, I sound like a loose cannon. But give this some pragmatic, intelligent thought. If the Bush administration actually orchestrated this alleged attack by hiring 21 people to take the fall, consider the consequences:
1. It would prove the Bush theory that the 'evil empire' still does exist, and we still must be ever-vigilant, looking out for 'terrorists', regardless of what it costs;
2. It would boost Bush's approval ratings, conveniently timed prior to mid-term elections (but not close enough to look all that suspicious). Bush could say, "I told you so.";
3. It would serve as a catalyst for cementing relations between England and the United States;
4. It would add fodder to the Fox News "shout fests" and the garbage-mouths of Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, and Shawn Hannity, who need more ammo with which to browbeat any of us who might not share their radical conservative opinions;
5. Last, but not least, it will take Americans' minds off the high price of gasoline which is expected to reach $4.20 a gallon this weekend.
Hmmmmm........just a thought. As a former newspaper publisher I think it would be appropriate for some of the giant media conglomerates to do some really intense, in-depth investigation into such a possibility. That's how the 'fourth estate' supposedly serves our nation as a watchdog over government malfeasance. But the huge billion-dollar newspaper chains and Tv networks won't upset the apple cart. They'll take news release materials from Homeland Security, print it or read it verbatim, and continue the charade that America is safe from all these nutcakes (safe from all of them except George Bush, that is).
Yeah, I'm sure I'll be called unpatriotic and a bit of a fruitcake myself. But those of us old enough to remember the Watergate scandal remember how the Nixon administration did everything it could to cover up, lie, and deceive the American public - all in an effort to save itself. Where's Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein when we need them now? -RKO- 08/10/06
2006-08-10 05:25:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by -RKO- 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
If this is a war, then who will surrender so we know it's over? Safe since 9/11? Those were HIS towers that got knocked down.
Bill Clinton's World Trade Center didn't get knocked down - nor Bush I's, nor Reagan's nor Carter's.
How can you say that the guy who let it happen kept us safe? Even he doesn't think we're safe. The "terror level" has been "elevated" for 5 years - that's 5 years he's kept us in peril by his own admission!
You don't have the freedoms you did before Bush. You don't have the freedom to travel without government interference - one of the bedrocks of America since it's founding; you don't have freedom of speech, nor even thought. You don't have peace - we've been at "war" for 4-1/2 years with no end in sight.
Look, I voted for the guy twice. Sorry.
2006-08-10 05:12:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by gabluesmanxlt 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
Do you call the loss of american lives, in a war we have no business being in, keeping us safe? There have been wars in those countries continuously since before biblical days!! A war on terrorism can have no end. And why shouldn't I blame our stupid leader for the loss of american lives? Who do I blame? The hippocrites like you that support this nonsense!! You need to take a look at it from what is really going on. Just compare it to the prior LEADERSHIP!! of the Democrats that erased an out of control defecit, and ended wars within hours, Not years!! Where is our defecit now, since republicans have been running the show? Politics are ruining our country!! What happened to We the people? Not we the Democrats or we the republicans!!!
2006-08-10 06:04:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
The fact that we haven't had an attack on our soil since 9-11 is not proof that Bush has kept us safe.
That false logic is like me selling you yak repellent:
"This repellent will protect you from attacks from yaks."
"But I'm not being attacked by yaks."
"See? That's means it must be working!"
For one thing to cause another, there has no be no third variables that could have caused one or both of the other things. In this case, the mere fact that Bush has been president for the entire period since the 9-11 attack (and for some time prior to it as well) & the fact that we haven't had another 9-11 attack on our soil during that period could very well be coincidence. The cause of there being no further attacks *could* be because the U.S. has made much more convenient targets in Iraq by shipping our soldiers to where the terrorists already are. Or it *could* be that Al Qaeda took years to plan the 9-11 attack & are taking enough time to properly plan their next attack (while we waste our time attacking two-bit dictators like Saddam Hussein.) But to suggest that active measures taken by President Bush to prevent another attack is the sole reason why we haven't been attacked is naive and presumptuous.
As for keeping our freedom, are you sure that this thread isn't being monitored by our government the way your phone calls and search engine activities are? :P
2006-08-10 05:24:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dave of the Hill People 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
I don't think Bush, or the current government, is "bad", but allow me my two cents, if you will...
With any administration, you will find no shortage of "armchair" quarterbacks who could do it better. It is not until history reveals the truth of itself that we understand what they did.
When was the last time you heard somebody bad-mouthing Clinton. You know, the guy everyone wanted to impeach?
2006-08-10 05:11:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by full_tilt_boogie 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Umm.. How many 9-11s were there before 9-11? Zero.
The fact that we have not had one since does not mean we have been benefited by any wars or civil liberties taken away.
What perfect timing for the elections. I am sure the Republicans will be able to use it to maintain their leadership in the House and Senate.
2006-08-10 05:06:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
9⤊
3⤋
With the events today? Bush had nothing to do with the events today. Britain are the ones who identified and thwarted the attempt today. Don't give Bush credit for today.
Bush is the only president that has had an attack on U.S. soil (with the exception of pearl harbor.) And pearl harbor was an attack on our military not our citizens. Is that what you call keeping us safe? Get a clue.
2006-08-10 05:10:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by lizzardkingone 3
·
5⤊
3⤋
T'hey're still the WORST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE U.S.!!And what a coincidence that they say it coordinates with the five year anniversary of 9/11.That's still a month away!But it is getting close to election time when I hope there is a huge turnover in the house and senate and a return to a Democratic system.
2006-08-10 05:11:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by George Washington 4
·
3⤊
3⤋
Right on!!! You know someone has to blame someone...librals want to win the next election so even if they voted with the president they are taking it back and blaming him so they can win the next election...then the librals say whatever to the people and the uneducated say gee that sounds right and then you have a bunch of people who can't see the bigger picture voting for a libral...peace, love, acceptance...it sounds great...but its not how the world works.
2006-08-10 05:11:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by tweetz 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Not only do I think Bush and our government is bad, I think people and the world is bad.
Q. What do you do if your competitor is drowning in the pool?
A. You put a hose in his mouth.
Business and Government are dog eat dog.
2006-08-11 04:33:59
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋