Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumGeorge W. Bush did NOT keep us safe: Eddie Schultz on the matter.
64 warnings came across the view of the Whitehouse during the eight months prior to 9/11 occurring. Bush and his minions did NOTHING to address these warnings.
Richard Clarke was ignored:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/sep/05/living-with-911-richard-clarke
On that horrible day, it was Richard Clarke who managed the nation's security all the while the frat boy was reading My Pet Goat and hiding from danger. Dick Cheney went into action bravely defending himself inside the Whitehouse Bunker.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Poor Jeb. He has to say something about his brother. "He kept us safe." When people ask him to fill in that comment with some specifics, he better be ready with great deflections, because there is not one shred of evidence his brother kept us safe from anything or anyone. In fact, there are some very good arguments that George Dubya created a more dangerous world by alienating our traditional allies, destabilizing a large part of the Muslim world, etc. Jeb's vulnerability is huge when it comes to his brother's actions, and I wonder if the Republicans will allow him to be the nominee.
annabanana
(52,791 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)But someone needs to take this clip of Jeb's brotherly love moment and attach it to some video of the planes hitting the towers. These towers images overwritten by text stating the date AND who was in the White House at that time. This would be followed by a clip of Richard Clark telling how he'd briefed W on the impending attacks - only to be told: Fine, you've covered your ass.
I've seen these various video bits. I know they're on YouTube. I just don't have the technical savvy to edit and string them together in chronological order.
ffr
(22,669 posts)Just on Bush's watch alone:
IIRC Reagan had abysmal numbers too, with terrorist attacks on a marine compound, 241 dead in one attack alone.
Ronald Reagans Benghazi, by Jane Mayer. When militants struck American officials in Beirut under Reagan, Congress pointed fingers at the perpetrators, not at political rivals. - The New Yorker
Thespian2
(2,741 posts)how anyone with at least one working brain cell can vote for any REPUBLICAN...
With psychopath Prick Cheney as president, no American could possibly feel safe...sorry, I should explain... W was too damn lazy to care about being president...
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Stuart G
(38,420 posts)One lie after another, after another, after another..etc
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)There was also nothing wrong with our intelligence. It didn't need to be "fixed" with the Patriot Act.
The threat was discovered and was reported but it was ignored.
You have to flashback to that time. The Republicans were convinced Clinton was wagging the dog about Middle Eastern terrorism to distract everyone from "Monica, Monica, Monica" 24/7. When Bush/Cheney got in they said they didn't want to HEAR about terrorism because they assumed it was all bogus. People who talked about it were thought of as former Clinton people trying to make their former boss look good. Richard Clark's position as a terrorism expert was eliminated and he was assigned to cyber terrorism. They were more interested in preventing industrial espionage. (Mainly to protect beloved Corporate America from lowlife hackers.)
After the attack Bush/Cheney then went from claiming there was no threat to exaggerating the threat to generate fear to present themselves as the heroes that would keep us safe.
Mobilizing the military didn't do a thing to keep us safe. If you remember, Bush said early on most of the response was going to be invisible. Going after networks and money supplies using police methods.
The Pentagon was hit and there was a blood lust to see the "Arabs" pay for it so the military inserted itself to provide "Shock and Awe" to give Republicans a wargasm but the military never thwarted an attack.