So many people have asked why Bush just continued to sit in the classroom when informed about the 9/11 attacks. Likewise, so many people seem to wonder if Bush was warned about the attacks prior to their occurence. And if you are among those who have been wondering if Bush was in fact given the warning, here is the OBVIOUS truth: Bush WAS warned about the attacks, and he did nothing to prevent them. THAT is why he continued to sit in the classroom; because he HAD been warned about the attacks, and he felt guilty that he had done NOTHING to prevent them. And although the media tried to cover it up by playing it off as nerves, the fact is Bush himself could not have made it more obvious. For example, did you not notice the shameful, pondering look on Bush's face as he sat in the classroom, a look that clearly said, "why did I not do anything when I recieved the warning? If only I had done something..." Are you telling me that NOBODY else noticed this??
2007-09-09
13:09:15
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
people should not even be questioning this anymore, and frankly there never should have been any question in it. Bush made it SO obvious that he had been warned in advance about the attacks that I can't even believe I am the only person that I know of who reached the immediate conclusion that he was warned about the attacks.
2007-09-09
13:13:24 ·
update #1
Dave, I am not undermining the number of threats that the government recieves. But the fact is that the Bush administration has always had enough people employed to investigate the legitimacy each and every threat it recieves. Bottom line there is/was absolutely NO excuse for the administration to ignore any threat, even prior to 9/11, regardless of how passive it seems/ed. WTF are these people getting paid for??? To sit on their @$$ and ignore warnings?
2007-09-09
13:30:37 ·
update #2