He was warned Bin Laden was determined to strike inside the US a month before 911.
The FBI had the 20th hijacker Moussaoui in custody for weeks before 911 and requested FISA warrants repeatedly in the weeks before 911.
Why did FBI HQ deny those requests if Bush was doing his best to protect the nation?
2007-11-24
14:00:33
·
10 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Anyone????
2007-11-24
14:04:09 ·
update #1
come on RC...that doesn't explain why those warrants were denied!
2007-11-24
14:05:15 ·
update #2
Babe----your babble doesn't answer the question of why those warrants were denied!!
2007-11-24
14:08:34 ·
update #3
Lee---thats why we need a new impartial investigation into it......
2007-11-24
14:12:19 ·
update #4
Why don't you cons ever explain why those warrants were enied.....why didn't the 911 commission try to answer it?
2007-11-24
14:14:01 ·
update #5
Random maniac......they are public statments made by a retired FBI agent who ws working in the FBI field office in Minneapolis.....where they caught Moussaoui the 20th hijacker.The Bush administration sure didn't mind using his trial for propaganda purposes!
The FBI agents name is Coleen Rowley.......you can read her public comments at patroitsquestion911.com.......you might also want to read what some of the other intel experts have to say about 911 there!
2007-11-24
14:21:34 ·
update #6
none of you cons ever try to explain why those warrants were denied!!!!
Instead you blame Clinton!
Yet if Clinton had issued the order to take out osama you would have claimed he was wagging the dog to distract from the monica saga!
2007-11-24
18:10:14 ·
update #7
No but only because they do not believe Bush betrayed the US. they will inevitably blame Bush and falsely claim that Clinton allowed Bin Laden to go free even though Clinton had no legal standing to capture Bin Laden.
2007-11-24 14:07:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7
·
4⤊
6⤋
Ahmed Chalibli, Yellow Cake Uranium, WMD, secret power coverage conferences Violations of FISA courtroom rules Greeted as liberators, The rebuilding will pay for itself, challenge accomplished, No plan for the aftermath, the final throes of the insurgency, Terri Shiavo, Anthrax Osama no longer Captured illicitly diverted $seven-hundred million from Afghanistan to Iraq Katrina, Harriet Myers, Heckuva job Brownie, Paul Bremmer, Scooter Libby, Alberto "I forgot each little thing I did yet particular i'm efficient to do my job" Gonzales, $312 Billion that went lacking, Jack Abramoff, Valerie Plame, loss of Habeas Corpus Torture coverage gay Prostitute/Reporter Jeff Gannon Gitmo, Abu Graib, Extrodainary renditions, secret prisons colour coded warnings that magically disappeared after elections, duct tape, Walter Reed, Emails deleted,
2016-10-18 00:48:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No matter how hard you try...you can't pin 9-11 on Bush, when it was CLINTON who laid down the law about the FBI and CIA not being allowed to talk to each other.
Those "warrants" may have been denied due to lack of evidence to support them in court, and that meant the FBI DIDN"T HAVE THE FULL STORY !
Clinton had every right to accept Sudan's offer of bin Laden. He didn't look at it as a threat to the US, and 3000 people paid with thier lives for his incompetence...and thier blood is on his hands. You want to call someone a betrayer, it's Slick Willie, plain and simple.
Facts are a really hard things for liberals to accept.
2007-11-24 14:26:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by commanderbuck383 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
Strike where in America? Any dates or specifics? No there were none. What is so hard for you people to understand that this country is a little bigger than a bread box? Would you have been happy if he had shut the country down in anticipation of something happening? We get thousands of these warnings a year, which one should they take serious. You are being unreasonable and just plain foolish.
2007-11-24 14:07:08
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
3⤋
They didn't ask Bush for warrants,its just another example of how our system failed us again.And,we could go back even further and ask the same question of Clinton on another 9/11 mastermind,,,Osama, he is their leader,right,we had him dead to rights and someone let him go.It wasn't Bush.Sorry.
2007-11-24 14:30:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ronboy 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Ask Jamie Gorelick about those "wall" things.
2007-11-24 14:11:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Confucius say: "it is hard to explain what did not happen".
NOTE: disagreement on methodology does not equate to betrayal which indicates the flawed logic of liberal/Marxist ideologues.
2007-11-24 14:49:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Caninelegion 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Bush not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect The bright lites who support him blame Clinton for allowing atacks and think Saddam Hussein planned it
2007-11-24 14:14:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
5⤋
lmfao...clinton had eight years and did bupkus and bush had a year and gets villified for providing a bonafide response....rofl...only from the mind of a liberal. there was no betrayal...you need to stop reading the pelosi press releases and face reality.
2007-11-24 14:12:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by koalatcomics 7
·
5⤊
5⤋
Might it just be possible someone in the administation planned and executed 9/11?
2007-11-24 14:09:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by LEE 3
·
2⤊
5⤋