Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF fails to protect his people, Congressional hearings on the way

RyanH

New member
Ladies and Gentlemen--

Congressional hearings are finally on the way, and the Bush Administration critics were correct afterall---the President did know about the attacks prior to September 11.

In short, the Commander in Chief failed to protect his people and will be accountable to the electorate as well as Congress for his colossal failure. Also, isn't an apology in order from the distinguished Congresswoman from Georgia---Cynthia McKinney--the Congresswoman scorned just months ago for bringing the truth into the light? Moreover, for those of you who claim President Clinton failed to protect the American people--you ain't seen nothing yet as the current President's failure to act unfolds..

This quote sums it all up:
“How in the world could somebody have read this document and not had lights, firecrackers, rockets go off in their head that this is something that is really important?”
Sen. Bob Graham

and now the following from CBS news:

(CBS) Members of Congress are raising questions as to whether the Bush administration should have reacted better to warnings in August that Osama bin Laden's followers might hijack a jet.

The White House revealed Wednesday night that President Bush was briefed on U.S. intelligence in August, while at his Crawford, Texas, ranch, that bin Laden's network might hijack U.S. passenger planes.

CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin first disclosed the fact that the White House had received the bin Laden warning.

On Thursday, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer said all possible action was taken given what was known.

"All appropriate action was taken based on the threat information that we had," Fleischer said. “The president did not - not - receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen.”

Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, said the disclosures in the memos marked an important discovery in Congress' investigation into why the FBI, CIA and other U.S. agencies failed to learn of and prevent the Sept. 11 plot.

“How in the world could somebody have read this document and not had lights, firecrackers, rockets go off in their head that this is something that is really important?” Graham said of the Phoenix FBI memo.

House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., said Congress needs to find out - in hearings open to the public - what Bush and other officials knew, when they knew it and what they did with the information, in order to prevent future terrorist attacks.

"The way to do better is to understand what happened in the past," Gephardt said. "Was there a failure of intelligence? Did the right officials not act on the intelligence in the proper way? These are things we need to find out."

After the information was presented to Mr. Bush, the administration put domestic agencies on alert in the summer, just months before the Sept. 11 attacks, Fleischer said. That alert was not announced publicly but Fleischer said it may have prompted the hijackers to change their tactics.

Members of Congress pointed to three pre-Sept. 11 warning signs: the U.S. intelligence Bush received, the fact that an FBI agent had written a memo urging FBI headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools, and the arrest in Minnesota of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was believed to be training for a suicide hijacking.

Moussaoui has emerged as the lone defendant charged in the aftermath of the attacks, which killed more than 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. He is charged with conspiring with bin Laden and the 19 suicide hijackers to attack Americans.

FBI Director Robert Mueller repeatedly has said he wished the FBI had acted more aggressively in addressing the Arizona and Minnesota leads but said nothing the FBI possessed before Sept. 11 pointed to the multiple-airliner hijacking plot.

The disclosure came amid questions about whether U.S. authorities failed to recognize and respond to warnings about possible terrorist attacks before the hijackings of the four passenger planes on Sept. 11.

“We've got terrorists connected to al Qaeda out in Arizona engaging in flight training, we've got Moussaoui arrested and being interrogated in Minnesota, we've got the president being briefed while he was on vacation in Texas about the possibility of these airplanes being hijacked. I mean, was anything done about any of those things?” said Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C.

Edwards called on the administration to help Congress investigate what happened, saying there has been some tension from the White House over starting a probe.

Mr. Bush made no immediate comment on the situation. He attended a National Hispanic Prayer Breakfast in Washington and said prayer has helped Americans of faith to get through the last eight months.

“The last eight months have showed the world the American character is incredibly strong and confident. Yet, prayer reminds us that a great people must be humble before God, searching for wisdom - constantly searching for wisdom from the Almighty,” he said.
 
Ryan, the senate intelligence committee had **THE SAME** information as bush did, maybe not at the same time, but they still had **THE SAME** information. The information provided only stated that there was a possibility of hijacking commercial airliners (like what had happened in the past) and that was it. there was no time frame given of when it might happen, nor was it ever indicated that they would be used for missiles. the information given was basically like this:

RyanH, you are going to die. when? i dont know. how? who knows? will it be tommorow? or 50 years from now? all i know, is that you are going to die. (and no, i am not threatning you in anyway, just making an example here)

that is the type of information that was given. there were no specifics and bush did do what was right. he put law enforcement on quiet alert. if the president was to go on tv and give the american people warnings every time there might be a threat against america, there would be *HUGE* public panic. he did his job. and if the senate intelligence committe knew about this for so long, where have they been with this information for the past 8 months? if you want to point fingers and blame bush for a bunch of non-specific threats which america recieves on a daily basis, i can do the same with clinton. none of this would have been a problem if he took the government of Sudan up on their offer to deliver osama bin laden to the united states government, but declined because he didnt want to trouble himself.
 
RyanH said:
"All appropriate action was taken based on the threat information that we had," Fleischer said. “The president did not - not - receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers. This was a new type of attack that was not foreseen.”

Please read your own article before posting foolishness. Also, please post links to your criticism of former President Clinton for the eleven or twelve times he failed to capture or kill Osama bin Laden.

-Warik
 
RyanH said:
Members of Congress pointed to three pre-Sept. 11 warning signs: the U.S. intelligence Bush received, the fact that an FBI agent had written a memo urging FBI headquarters to investigate Middle Eastern men enrolled in American flight schools, and the arrest in Minnesota of Zacarias Moussaoui, who was believed to be training for a suicide hijacking.

**NONE** of the people listed on the FBI memo pertaining to middle eastern men at flight schools had *ANY* involvement to osama or the 19 hijackers at all! and the only reason they caught moussaoui was because of a memo from the flight school officials. they said he was suspicious cause the man had no pilot license and was enquiring about NYC flight patterns and demanded to learn how to fly a jet in a couple of week
 
p0ink said:
Ryan, the senate intelligence committee had **THE SAME** information as bush did, maybe not at the same time, but they still had **THE SAME** information. The information provided only stated that there was a possibility of hijacking commercial airliners (like what had happened in the past) and that was it. there was no time frame given of when it might happen, nor was it ever indicated that they would be used for missiles. the information given was basically like this:

RyanH, you are going to die. when? i dont know. how? who knows? will it be tommorow? or 50 years from now? all i know, is that you are going to die. (and no, i am not threatning you in anyway, just making an example here)

that is the type of information that was given. there were no specifics and bush did do what was right. he put law enforcement on quiet alert. if the president was to go on tv and give the american people warnings every time there might be a threat against america, there would be *HUGE* public panic. he did his job. and if the senate intelligence committe knew about this for so long, where have they been with this information for the past 8 months? if you want to point fingers and blame bush for a bunch of non-specific threats which america recieves on a daily basis, i can do the same with clinton. none of this would have been a problem if he took the government of Sudan up on their offer to deliver osama bin laden to the united states government, but declined because he didnt want to trouble himself.

Haven't you ever heard....."The Buck Stops Here."

The President is called the Commander in chief for a reason....the President was not only warned that the attacks would be from Mr. Bin Laden, the President was also warned that the threat would come from an airplane hijacking.

Didn't you condemn President Clinton "for not doing enough prior to 9-11?"
 
let me put this in bold to make sure you dont miss it.

WHY DIDNT THE SENATE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTE GIVE THIS INFORMATION THEY HAD, FOR 8 MONTHS, TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?!

what about possible future attacks? shouldnt they have warned the american public like they are criticizing bush for not doing?!
 
RyanH said:
the President did know about the attacks prior to September 11.

No he didn't. That would mean he would have to be psychic. There were many threats made by the terrorist organizations. The article states precautions were taken.

RyanH said:
In short, the Commander in Chief failed to protect his people

Yes, you're right...Commander in Chief CLINTON had knowledge of the EXACT location of Bin Laden following the Embassy attacks. He did NOTHING. This all could have been prevented by Clinton.

Too bad for you and your usual debate tactics that the worst terrorist attack on American Soil DID NOT involve a single firearm.
 
RyanH said:


Haven't you ever heard....."The Buck Stops Here."

The President is called the Commander in chief for a reason....the President was not only warned that the attacks would be from Mr. Bin Laden, the President was also warned that the threat would come from an airplane hijacking.

Didn't you condemn President Clinton "for not doing enough prior to 9-11?"

do you really think the president should come on tv and announce every possible threat to america? do you really think that will be in our best interest? it would bring american society to a screeching halt.

and yes, none of this would have happened if clinton fucking did his job and took up the offer from the people of sudan.
 
if he knew, why would he have people like rumsfeld in the pentagon offices and the rest of his staff in the whitehouse? do you think he would risk losing his entire staff?
 
Re: Re: COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF fails to protect his people, Congressional hearings on the way

Warik said:


Please read your own article before posting foolishness. Also, please post links to your criticism of former President Clinton for the eleven or twelve times he failed to capture or kill Osama bin Laden.

-Warik

you're only reiterating the spin from the White House. The facts show that President Bush did have credible information that there would be terrorists attacks. What did he do with these warnings? We need to get to the facts, and that's where Congress will assist the American people in doing.

As for President Clinton's so called failure to protect the American people---why stop there? Wasn't the U.S. embassy in Beirut bombed in 1983, killing 17 Americans? Wasn't the 1983 bombing of the Marine compound in Beirut, under President Reagan's watch, killing 240 Americans? Remember, the 1986 Berlin disco bombing? Or what about the 1988 sabotage of Pan Am Fliight 104 (I think is the number) which killed almost 300 people?

The Reagan Administration did not respond to any of those attacks at all except for small attacks against Libya?

Under President Clinton spending on counter-terrorims more than double and the 1993 World Trade Center bombers were caught? Can President Bush say the same thing? Hardly.
 
Top Bottom