Then pretend like it wasn't his fault?
The FBI had the 20th hijacker in custody for weeks before 911!Why did FBI HQ deny FISA warrants requested by its field office in Minneapolis?
I mean if Bush TRIED to protect america before 911 why wasn't the plot foiled?
2007-11-15 13:21:15 · 9 answers · asked by Jeff S 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Citicop you guys never answer the simple questions I asked!
2007-11-15 13:27:43 · update #1
figures coward cons giving thumbs up but won't even try to explain it!
2007-11-15 13:32:11 · update #2
thanks poet for bringing up a few more of the un-answered questions about 911!
2007-11-15 13:36:06 · update #3
sorry KH but I feel the ONLY way for America to regain any of its former glory and greatness is through an honest impartial,and transparent investigation of how 911 happened!
2007-11-15 13:40:58 · update #4
American citizens deserve the TRUTH about what happened!
2007-11-15 13:43:58 · update #5
Ms scarlet-Covering up the truth does not help heal the rift within our nation it only causes the rift to become greater!
2007-11-15 14:01:13 · update #6
No one saw it coming.
Not even Bill Clinton, who had the opportunity on more than one occasion to take out Bin Laden, but didn't.
2007-11-15 13:25:23 · answer #1 · answered by Citicop 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
Many possibilities
1. Bush and all of his supposed experts that were supposed to guide him are all a bunch of incompetent buffoons, which from everything the W admin has done, looks to be true.
2. Bush and the neocons chose to ignore the warnings in order to start another war, rob U.S. taxpayers, and further undermine the rights of all Americans with the patriot act.
3. The attacked was planned by Bush and the Neocons, not terrorists, carried out, and blamed on the terrorists for reasons explained in #2. After all, GW's brother was in charge of security at the WTC during the months leading up to and ending on 9-11, and the towers look like they were demo'd, and numerous experts doubt the official story, which is as unbelievable as the magic bullet theory.
4. Of course the repub answer is always that everything is the fault of the Clinton's.
2007-11-15 21:33:21 · answer #2 · answered by poet1b 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
It was the only way to create the Patriot Act.
Statement Number One: "The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
Statement Number Two: "To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve."
first statement is a quote from Hitler's right hand man, Hermann Goering, explaining at his war crimes trial how easily he and his fellow Nazis hijacked Germany's democratic government. The second statement is a quote from Bush's right hand man, John Ashcroft, defending the Patriot Act and explaining why dissent will no longer be tolerated in the age of terrorism. If that doesn't send chills down your spine, nothing will.
2007-11-15 23:59:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You might ask Clinton's deputy Attn General, Jamie Gorelick, why national security was lax before 9/11. And after 9/11, Gorelick gets a seat on the 9/11 commission to cover her ***.
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05226/553271.stm
2007-11-15 23:47:00 · answer #4 · answered by John W 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not a Bush fan, but we have to be smart here.
Bush, Clinton, or whomever is president, is not the only person that runs this country. A country's success, or demise, does not rest on the shoulders of one person. A leader is only as good as the people who report to him or her.
Many organizations give input and produce work, services, information to others. Perhaps we should not pin our hopes on one person entirely, and look at this intelligently. This Democrat vs Republican crap is old, divides our nation, and has us arguing childishly with our fellow countrymen. Everybody loses.
2007-11-15 21:34:38 · answer #5 · answered by K H 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Truth is that Clinton had info and could have stopped it before it ever happened. He was more interested in screwing around with the interns than worrying about Nat'l security. Frankly I am ready for a Bush/Clinton free few years in the White House.
2007-11-15 21:57:48 · answer #6 · answered by Only hell mama ever raised 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hey John W, you might want to open your eyes and quit it when thinking in terms of left/right!!!! The elite are protecting themselves. All on the commision were just protecting the Goverments secrets!! Especially Zelicow the director!!!!
2007-11-16 02:26:18 · answer #7 · answered by Jay H 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Check the reports...he was more focused on a long vacation directly after becoming president.
Everyone saw it coming. He and Condi thought that the Intelligence was "farfetched".
2007-11-15 21:34:27 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
I agree with poet1b. I think it was possibility #3 on his list.
2007-11-15 21:41:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋