Bush was even handed a memo saying Bin was going to attack in the USA...why did Bush know this and went on vacation instead of trying to stop the 9-11 attacks?
2006-09-23 12:52:46 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Ha ha! Typical deluded Republicans...
Still unable to say it...
9-11 HAPPENED ON BUSH'S WATCH...
9-11 BUSH HAD FAIR WARNING AND *
MONTHS TO DO SOMETHING...
9-11 IS BUSH'S FAULT!!!
BLAME BUSH? HECK YEAH!
2006-09-23 12:57:12 · update #1
Maybe the same reason Bush had Bin Laden's kinfolk safely escorted out of the country when 9-11 hit? Funny how Bush was on vacation when Katrina hit. Funny how Bush is out of tune with what the American public want done on the border issues. In light of 9-11, the first order of priority would have been to secure our borders and ports. Bush STILL does not have this covered! Our people are sitting ducks waiting for the next terrorist to easily make his way over our borders and blow us to kingdom come! The safety of our people is at stake here! The INS has no idea who all is in this country and what they are up to. I say get the illegals and others who broke the law to get here the hell out of here! Our national security is at stake! The safety of our people is far more important than any other issue I can think of! If we have money to rebuild Iraq, what about our country? New Orleans and the coast lay in ruins while the president sees fit to worry about another country! His whole job performance is down the tubes with me! I am also sick of the partisan crap! I say lets elect someone who represents the majority of us! I don't care if they are republican or democrat or whatever! Just that they can make GOOD decisions for our people!
2006-09-23 13:06:59 · answer #1 · answered by Marie 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The memo did not say that bin Laden was in Iraq. Bush did not want to have to makea decision of this importance. He was unsure of the target and a correct way of dealing with it. That has been the creed for this administration since the beginning. They always want to let the situation get bad and then say, "Well we were working hard behind the scenes, but the local governments and the previous administration failed." It is true that Clinton could have done more to get bin Laden, but when Bush took office, he took on all the responsibilities that were left. This country needs leaders, not finger pointers.
2006-09-23 13:01:16 · answer #2 · answered by DLUVDAIMPERIAL 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
1. he didn't care
2 he cared about his vacation and didn't think he should change anything
3 he didn't think we would be attack
4 he thought it was a joke
5 he thought it was a hoax
6 he did not care about stopping bin Lenin until the attack happen
7 he wanted to wait until we were attack to do anything
8 he was not going to do anything before we were attack
9 so he wanted to wait until we got attack and 5,000 people altogether died
10 then he waited three weeks after we were attacked to go into war
he is one of the worse presidents and this is the reason because of how he handle the 911 situation I hope we never see a situation again.
what kind of president is always on vacation when there is a crises
who is running this country to begin with Bush undid all the good that clintin did he was a good president as far as securituy. Then what I like about Clinton is that he had the privacy law and and he had when people can't find out peoples privacy. the thing with bush that he undid all the good that bush did.you now can find out peoples social security number and employer can find out your medical and you family history. because of that there was a big lawsuit of hippo law was created it was a lawsuit of the suppreme court. this is why the hippo was created all because of bush. People were are disability until hippo was created thats to the supreme court people can now get job. They could not before. people can be seach for no cause at place at business. This is because of George Bush so yea and look at new orleans he did nothing does he do anything. does he do anything to help anyone.
2006-09-23 13:07:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
What I would really like to know is why people aren't putting the blame on the ones who actually carried the act out. I'm sure President Bush could have done more, maybe not. The knowledge they had at the time wasn't specific enough and hindsight is a learning tool.
2016-03-27 05:17:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
How you prepare for an attack that could happen anywhere and at anytime or any method of attack. The FBI and CIA may have known an attack could happen soon but didn't know all the specifics to stop an attack. Clinton had the same warnings and if he really wanted to get Bin Laden he could have. We weren't prepared for that kind of attack. Bush was ultimately responsible but blame the government too.
2006-09-23 17:42:50 · answer #5 · answered by Minot_1997 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
hahaha... don't you love it... here is what they want us to believe:
that Bush "had no way of knowing"
but with Clinton the threat was apparently "crystal clear and something should have been done"...
apparently bin Laden was only a threat in the 90s and all of a sudden no one should have done anything when Bush was elected...
while I wish one of them would have did something... both sides blame the other side a lot, while in truth... no one really saw it coming...
2006-09-23 13:08:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush did do something. He froze the gas reserves. That way gas prices went up making more money for him and his rich friends, and Bush had plenty of fuel for the war he wanted to start.
2006-09-23 13:06:37 · answer #7 · answered by BUPPY'S MEME 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The man is not a mind reader ya know ? How was he supposed to know exactly where and when those planes were going to hit the towers, and the one in P.A. and the missile that hit the pentagon, how was he supposed to know exactly that all of those things were going to happen and unfold exactly as they did ? Don't you think that if he DID know, he would have taken precautions ? Thats an unfair question
2006-09-23 13:00:30 · answer #8 · answered by odafintutuola 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Clinton had eight years.Nobody had a crystal ball.There were warnings of attack but no one I repeat NO ONE thought they could pull off anything of the scope they did.Both administrations are to blame for these oversights and anyone who says different is a fool.
2006-09-23 12:58:23 · answer #9 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Typical idiot Lib. Try checking history before spouting off with stupidity
2006-09-23 13:03:10 · answer #10 · answered by jadamgrd 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋