K, heres what I don't get, people wanna say al kaida was planning 9-11 in 1996 and that was when clinton was president,
then they say what was his policy to stop terrorism,
ok,
heres my question, did President Bush (R) have on his desk in august 2001 a report that said
bin laden determined to drive a plane into a building
---
Now I don't give a sh8t one way or the other about Clinton we can throw him under the bus for not responding to the USS Cole and all that other stuff, I'm fine with that, I'm not a clinton supporter or defender, if he didn't respond he has to live with that.
So here's my question for all the (R) who want to attack Clinton,
isn't it hypocritical to do so since President Bush (R) had that report on his desk that said bin laden determined to ram a plane into a building
What was his policy to stop it?
2007-08-22
03:53:33
·
24 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Yes he had the report, but you know good and well it's Bill Clintons fault because he didn't stay there and hold Georges hand. George thought the same way neo-conservatives do. When he saw it he said "Thats some of Clintons old papers." Wadded them up and threw them in the trash.
2007-08-22 04:03:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Enigma 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
Yes there were reports that Bush knew there were threats from Bin Laden and yes Clinton could have gone after Bin Laden years before 9/11 happened. History repeats itself. The US had reports the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor but yet did nothing about it. Yes, we are a world power and often with power comes arrogrance that no one can do anything to us.
I happened to work on Wall Street and saw everything on 9/11 with my own two eyes. I saw people jumping 80, 90 or 100 stories to their death, airplane parts in the middle of the street and just a feeling of absolute horror. The fact of the matter here is not that someone could have done something about it, the fact is it happened and thousands of people died as well as thousands maybe more scared for life from what they saw or had to see a friend or family member go through.
2007-08-22 04:03:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Eric G 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
Something should have been done when the WTC was bombed.
Something should have been done when the USS Cole was bombed.
It is difficult to kill people on a here say report on someones desk, but we ignored 2 direct hits. The President didn't ignore a hit on his watch. President Bush blew up Afghanistan and Iraq and he'll take out Iran if necessary. The President of Iran is begging for a fight. He publicly said Israel should be removed from the map and so should America.
I promise you one thing, Israel will not stand still for another Holocaust. They'll blow Iran off the map and so will George Bush.
2007-08-22 04:20:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jeancommunicates 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
There are numerous threats each day on the United States which are looked into as much as possible to see if they're valid threats and should be taken seriously. I'm sure the president didn't think someone could take over the plane with boxcutters. If it was anyone's responsibility it was the FAA's.
2007-08-22 04:24:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Clinton is to blame as well as Bush. I believe Bush did have a report on his desk in August (and quite coincidentally, he took A MONTH LONG VACATION in August, too.)
So yes, both President's are at fault. Just because I point out Clinton's errors in it doesn't mean I won't get on Bush, too.
2007-08-22 03:58:37
·
answer #5
·
answered by Still Beautifully Conservative 5
·
5⤊
0⤋
Oh what could desire to no longer likely make sense approximately Bush letting Bin Ladin bypass? Oh particular, as all of us comprehend, no longer something propels a political profession extra advantageous than failure to capture the main needed guy in united states of america! Are those the comparable human beings telling us our own government blew up the twin towers??? It shames and discredits the liberal media to no end to be humoring those goofballs and giving them a voice.
2016-10-09 00:57:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Are we forgetting that Clinton attempted take out Bin Laden's terrorist camps in 1998, but the GOP Congress protested. ("NO BOMBS FOR MONICA" & "WAG THE DOG")
They were more concerned with focusing on the President's sexcapades. The media took over and the government was basically shut down.
2007-08-22 04:52:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Aside from the obvious lack of hard data, how about the fact that the CIA and the FBI were ordered, THAT'S RIGHT, ORDERED, to not communicate with each other on matters such as this one. What kind of lunacy went into the decision to give that order? What the heck were Richard Clarke and George Tennet thinking?
2007-08-22 04:04:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
8 months into office to find out in August a so called report was placed on his desk saying that there was to be an attack by terrorists into a building? How many buildings are in the US? Should Bush have told the FAA to ground all flights until we find the suspected culprit(s)? He got a report in August, the attack happened in September ..... A rapist is running rampant in Phoenix's easy valley, has been for over a year. One man always strikes young girls only... in one part of town only.... yet we can't stop him or find him. Think about that for a moment.
2007-08-22 04:00:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
On Aug. 6, 2001 a briefing, titled "Aug. 6, 2001. The briefing, titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Inside U.S.," was presensted to Bush, Rice and other Bush officials.
The declassified intelligence report said the FBI had detected "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings."
An intelligence report received in May 2001 indicating that al Qaeda was trying to send operatives to the United States through Canada to carry out an attack using explosives. That information had been passed on to intelligence and law enforcement agencies.
• An allegation that al Qaeda had been considering ways to hijack American planes to win the release of operatives who had been arrested in 1998 and 1999.
• An allegation that bin Laden was set on striking the United States as early as 1997 and through early 2001.
• Intelligence suggesting that suspected al Qaeda operatives were traveling to and from the United States, were U.S. citizens, and may have had a support network in the country.
• A report that at least 70 FBI investigations were under way in 2001 regarding possible al Qaeda cells/terrorist-related operations in the United States.
The two-page document became the highlight of national security adviser Condoleezza Rice's testimony Thursday before the commission investigating the attacks.
Rice told the commission Thursday that the briefing included mostly "historical information" and that most of the threat information known in the summer of 2001 referred to overseas targets.
She said she did not recall any reports about al Qaeda using aircraft as weapons before September 11.
Former counterterrorism aide Richard Clarke had testified two weeks before that the White House had ignored warnings about bin Laden's terrorist organization. Clarke said the Bush administration, including Rice, was aware of al Qaeda threats but did not treat them as "urgent."
The commission asked that the presidential daily briefing be declassified after Rice's testimony.
"This was the commission's hope," spokesman Al Felzenberg said Saturday.
"The White House has now complied. The White House agreed to release the documents. This is what the commission had hoped."
The August briefing was delivered to Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.
Some commission members said the administration was given enough information about bin Laden's intentions and capabilities to have warned the public that an attack was possible.
2007-08-22 04:14:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Global warming ain't cool 6
·
1⤊
2⤋