simple yes or no answer place own opinions as well.
2006-10-04 04:34:06 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I don't think he did either of those things. It would have come out eventually and he would be dead and burried already. However, I agree with another post that says he LET IT HAPPEN. They had plenty of warnings and knowledge that SOMETHING was going to happen. Instead of being proactive and stepping up security and trying to stop it, we were complacent and sat around with our thumbs up our butts doing nothing. We then had to become REACTIVE which never works well.
This situation is VERY SIMILAR to the way FDR treated Pearl Harbor. There was EVERY warning that the Japanese were not going to settle this politically and that they would strike the United States. There was every opportunity to alert Pearl Harbor of this possiblity (and some did try to alert them!) but things were done haphazard and were not received in time. Had the government put out a warning to Pearl and other vulnerable targets on the WEst Coast, the Japanese raid would have been far less effective. It would have been met with a more concerted effort to thwart it and the radar operators would have given plenty of warning to get planes in the air to fight the air raid. In the end, the attack on Pearl Harbor, whether well defended or not, would have led to the United States entering World War II. But FDR needed an extreme show of cruelty to be able to motivate a very stagnant and worried economy into the mobilized giant of America. Even the Japanese Admiral Yamamoto knew that bombing Pearl Harbor was a mistake. There are several journals of his and his officers that show he did make the statement you see in movies "I fear we have but awakened a sleeping giant"
Anyone else see a similarity?
2006-10-04 05:23:27 · answer #1 · answered by ThinkingMan2006 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He didn't create it, but he let it happen. The administration was notifed months before 9/11 about the impending attack and did nothing. Condi Rice is being targeted now about her meeting with Tenet on July 10, 2001 (2 months before 9/11) where he informed her of this, and she brushed him off. Then you have Bush waving off the CIA guy who informed him, telling him 'OK, you've done your job'.
2006-10-04 04:37:59 · answer #2 · answered by Arnold M 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes---He paid Gore and Kerry to handle the job.It just came out on the news this morning. BIG SCOOP. Heads are beginning to roll over this!
2006-10-04 04:48:03 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope. We were bombed because he didn't pay up. When he was 1st put into office terrorists wanted him to pay 50 million dollars. He said "Hell no" so they bombed us. Clinton payed them 180 million over his 8 year term.
2006-10-04 04:47:51 · answer #4 · answered by Cara Arlene 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
One of the dumbest questions on the planet. Who would even think about asking this.
2006-10-04 05:03:50 · answer #5 · answered by Henry H 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Here's what's REALLY going on with 911!...
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/911/Robert.htm
Here's the secret and evil group that's been in control of everything for way too long!...
http://www.rense.com/general58/suspre.htm
2006-10-04 06:12:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
How many times can this questions be asked? The answer is stil NO!
2006-10-04 05:29:49 · answer #7 · answered by JB 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think we knew it was coming and didn't do anything to stop it, as far as I'm concerned we still haven't done enough.
2006-10-04 05:16:09 · answer #8 · answered by marquita 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. I think bush is too dumb to make some sort of under cover conspiracy.
2006-10-04 04:35:49 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Put down the Kool Aid. It will kill you!
2006-10-04 04:35:40 · answer #10 · answered by Robby216 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋