Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

If There Is Another Terrorist Attack On His Watch, Bush Is Toast

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 04:53 PM
Original message
If There Is Another Terrorist Attack On His Watch, Bush Is Toast
I am sick, sick, sick from the lies. If there is another attack, the blame falls squarely on BUSH the LIAR.

Are you safer now than you were two years ago???

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/12/20031211-1.html

President Discusses Year-End Accomplishments in Cabinet Meeting
Remarks by the President After Meeting with the Cabinet
The Cabinet Room
<12/23/03> 10:51 A.M. EST

THE PRESIDENT: I want to thank the members of my Cabinet for coming for what will be the last Cabinet meeting of the year 2003. I've just heard from each Cabinet member about the accomplishments in the year 2003. This has been an historic year. America is safer, America is more prosperous, America is a better place because of the actions this administration has taken....


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3775771/

NBC: Terror threat to extend through January
Officials say al-Qaida operatives may be fully trained airline pilots
NBC, MSNBC and news services
Updated: 2:25 p.m. ET Dec. 23, 2003

<snip>Most troubling, the officials said, were indications that al-Qaida may already possess a radiological weapon, or so-called “dirty bomb.” They did not elaborate.

Experts said a potent dirty bomb could spread radioactive material for a half-mile in all directions. People in the fallout zone would be bombarded with radiation levels that they would not otherwise be exposed to from natural sources for a full year.

While a dirty bomb may not be particularly deadly, the psychological impact of such a device could be devastating, experts said.

The point of a dirty bomb is not mass casualties,” terrorism specialist Roger Cressey, chief of staff for President Bush’s Critical Infrastructure Protection Board from November 2001 to September 2002, said in an interview. “It's much more to instill fear and panic into the general population."


http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6068775.htm

Looting of Iraqi nuclear facility indicts U.S. goals
If we feared the loss of radioactive materials, why not guard them?
TRUDY RUBIN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Jun. 12, 2003

TUWAITHA, Iraq - On a dusty road, just outside of Baghdad, lies one of the great mysteries of the Iraq war.

<snip>The administration knew full well what was stored at Tuwaitha. So how is it possible that the U.S. military failed to secure the nuclear facility until weeks after the war started? This left looters free to ransack the barrels, dump their contents, and sell them to villagers for storage.

<snip>

The Tuwaitha story makes a mockery of the administration's vaunted concern with weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. military hastened to secure the Ministry of Oil in Baghdad from looters. But Iraq's main nuclear facility was apparently not important enough to get similar protection.

<snip>

Hisham Abdel Malik, a Iraqi nuclear scientist who lives near Tuwaitha and has been inside the complex, told me that in buildings "where there are radioactive isotopes, there is looting every day." He says the isotopes, which are in bright silver containers, "are sold in the black market or kept in homes." According to IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming, such radioactive sources can kill on contact or pollute whole neighborhoods.

How could an administration that had hyped the danger of Saddam handing off nuclear materials to terrorists let Tuwaitha be looted? Maybe the hype was just hype ... or maybe the Pentagon didn't send enough troops to Iraq to do the job right.

Either answer is damning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
impeach the gop Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 04:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Everything is" historic"
or "evil" to the smirk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
auntpattywatty Donating Member (154 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Bush will put the usa undermartial law - end of story!!n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
41. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
dusty64 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #41
53. Wow, you haven't
Edited on Wed Dec-24-03 08:15 AM by dusty64
been tombstoned yet. I do think if there is another "attack" the Constitution will be suspended, they've already said so. The media and "opposition" parties will go along with it due to spinelessness and fear of not being a "good American". They've already gotten away with SO much, whats one more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jedicord Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. If We're "Safer"...
Why are we currently under the biggest terrorist threat alert since 9/11?

What a jerk, but no one will call him on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #3
43. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #43
51. it's interesting
that you would pick a thread that clearly points out how the administration's actions have made the world less safe. That there are nuclear materials now floating around precisely because of Bush's irresponsibility.
The evidence is irrefutable. Guess that must really strike a nerve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SlavesandBulldozers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. I disagree
ANother terrorist attack on america would only further consolidate power with Bush. He would use it, as he used 9/11, to justify the execution of plans that pre-exist the attack. Furthermore, the right-wing would become even more intolerant of dissent, and we would slide further into isolationist empire-building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsUnderstood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I agree with the disagree
When a child is threatened they do not turn from the parent, they turn to the parent. Look at how well the first strike did for Bush--his popularity shot up. Look at Rudy G. popularity after he solidified New York after 9/11. I don't think he was that popular before the tragedy.

Another strike will prove Bush right--that this is (his words, not mine) a fight of good vs. evil and will give our government the opportunity to impose more restrictions on our freedom.
Very few would say "Bush should have seen it coming" and he can always point to his alert system as the scape goat.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Silverhair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
54. Yes. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BenZodiac Donating Member (44 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
5. a lot will depend on cicumstances...
Did it happen during a raised terror alert?
If Yes, that makes them look "smart". If not, makes them look "clueless".

Was it planes into buildings again?
People won't stand for any attack that looks like last time. Incompatance. But if its a unique or "creative" attack, people might not toss blame so fast.

How many Americans/emergency personel/children die? What do they attack?
Huge/Mass casualties of innocents will unite the nation in mourning, while smaller attack wouldn't as much. Attacks of schools, etc brings more sympathy than attacks of Enron headquarters in Texas.

Do we catch any of the attackers alive?
Big factor in media coverage/spin.

Does it screw up the economy?
9/11 caused nobody to travel. Will that happen again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plm135 Donating Member (19 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. unless there is direct evidence
that the administration did something wrong that led to the attack succeeding, then America will rally behind him. Its just that simple.

I am beginning to believe we are stuck with 4 more years of Bush, no matter what happens.

Having said that, I still hold out hope, and if we cant win the presidency back I really hope we put some energy into retaking the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K-W Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. I definately disagree
People will get stupid with fear and fall back on the conservative=security notion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. That Might Be True, If. . .
. . .it weren't an election year coming up. But, if the dems have any guts, they would use the reminder as a campaign wedge.

Then people would be reminded that they are NOT safer with a repub in charge because despite all the bluster, all the bombs, all the tough talk, we are just as vulnerable as before.

I think it is, as the first poster mentioned, toast time for Li'l Georgie if it happens.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K-W Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. If you are right, why isnt Bush being impeached right now?
The republicans have never been good for security. They have never been good for much of anything. That never stopped people from percieving them as better for the economy, national security, crime prevention etc.

Look at how the US reacts to the events of today. It seems awefully clear to me that the reaction to another terror attack would be the same as the last one. And that would be easily parlayed into support by the Bush publicity machine.

Heck, the terror alerts themselves should be indicators that something is wrong, yet somehow terrorist warnings boost Bush's ratings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. A Few Flaws In Your Reply
First, the impeachment has to come from within the Congress and his boys, controlled by the same puppetmasters, are not going to introduce articles of impeachment.

Secondly, the number of people who perceive them as better for the economy is statistically identical to those who think it's Dems.

And, that is a last 25 year phenomenon. Before that, it was Dems who were thought better for the economy, but Repubs for business. (Not the same thing.)

The reaction to the last attack was one of utter surprise. Now, we have a guy who has been saying for 2+ years, "follow me and i will keep you safe". He had no such promise to keep before 9/11. Now he does. The idea that no public opinion shift will occur, now that he's written a check he has to cash, is purely speculative on your part.

Lastly, his ratings only went up by Gallup. Zogby, ARI, ORC, and NYT all show him at the same level as before the Saddam capture.

You're thinking a little syllogistically and trying to equate past events to future events, even though the context would be completely different.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
K-W Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Not flawed, your disagreeing with me doesnt make my reply flawed
if Bush was unpopular, the party would turn on him in a second. The republicans arent going to sink with W. If the american people wanted impeachment, the republican congress would be all over it, so they could spin it as a bush issue, not a republican issue.

Please give me your source for those statistics on economy. I have grown up in a liberal state and live in New York City and I still run into the general opinion that conservatives are better for the economy constantly.

Business and the economy have become almost synonomous today.

You are thinking vastly too optimistically. This administration has committed huge crimes, done massive damage to our countries infastructure and freedom. They have been an absolute miserable failure, yet they still enjoy relatively strong popularity. It seems rather far fetched to me that suddenly that fact is going to change.

Bush is going to run on fear. Another attack would ratchet up the fear in this country to a level never before seen. People will not be thinking rationally. They will get massively patriotic. Bush will follow the attack by attacking another country or something. People will get behind the troops. Bush will look like a leader. He will look like a strong brave cowboy and people will support him because they are desperate for the illusion of leadership and control. The worse things get the more people tend to vote against thier interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
26. You're both right...
because none of us has a working crystal ball.

We don't know how most people would react to another major attack.

Will Bush&Co be run out on a rail because their vaunted laws and wars didn't work?

Or, will people look to them for more of the same, because they haven't finished the job yet?

Everyone will get conflicting messages from the White House, Congress, Democrats, various curmudgeons of all parties, and the media.

They will use the extended version of Occam's razor and will respond to the message that is simplest and most reasonable at first glance.

It's that "meme" thing.

And we have not fully gotten the meme across that after two wars and PATRIOT, the world is NOT a safer place.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. Exactly, hence my thread title
Edited on Tue Dec-23-03 06:44 PM by Stephanie
If it happens AGAIN on Bush's Watch, he is toast. IMO.

**We have to repeat this over and over until it sinks in. If it happens AGAIN on his watch...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #12
42. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
fineyounglib Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #9
55. Not Safer before 9/11
Not Safer makes no sense and is a bad argument.
While we are not yet were we need to be, we certainly have more securty checks in place. The problem is Dean keeps running his mouth about this issue and Bush just sits back a smiles. Wait until Ridge gives Bush the "List" of things that Home Land security has done since it's inception and say October when it get posted in every newspaper in the country.

Not safer is a loose loose argument, what do we wait for another attack.. sic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zomby Woof Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
8. naw
His ratings will shoot up, because of FEAR, which trumps reason in America.

I will say I almost (almost) missed these old standby "Bush Is Toast" threads, but alas, it still isn't true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. I Have Nothing To Get Through My Head
Edited on Tue Dec-23-03 05:24 PM by ProfessorGAC
I understand everything better than you. EVERYTHING>

It's punk americans, like you, that they want to kill. The ones, like me, who would rather the world be a better place, aren't the ones they hate.

It's haters like you who get hated back. Me, i don't need the military fighting battles for me, because i'm no coward. I think folks with your mentality are the frightened rabits.

Be gone.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crushbush04 Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #14
19. Let me get this straight...
YOU think the terrorist will strike other americans because and let YOU be because YOU want to make the world a better place?
Tell YOU what, maybe YOU should put that sign on YOUR neck so they and everybody else will be able to see who YOU are. I am sure no one will want to mistake YOU for anybody else!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeahMira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #19
59. No, YOU get it straight...
YOU think the terrorist will strike other americans because and let YOU be because YOU want to make the world a better place?

We all know that if another attack comes Americans will die together: liberals, conservatives, right-wingers, left-wingers, Democrats and Republicans.

If any of us are spared, we will mourn all those who die, just as we mourned those who died on 9/11, even by golly those who died at the Pentagon.

We simply believe with all that's in us that there is another way, and that if that way is taken all of us, citizens of the U.S. and citizens of other nations, might live until such time as the Creator has determined that we should die.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #14
44. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #44
50. LOL!!
Fair and balance is like saying Ann Coulter's thingy doesn't hang down to her knees like a wet paper sack.

Don't let issues like a real president that was elected by the people and not appointed get you down, kid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. MIke, Mike, Mike - your fearless leader says "America is safer"
But in fact America is NOT safer. Instead of rooting out terrorism by finishing the job in Afghanistan, your leader chose instead to fulfill the dreams of his neo-con handlers and invade Iraq. This did NOT make us safer, as you can see by today's news. Do YOU feel safer, Mike? We "catch" S. Hussein, and two days later we're on Orange Alert. Did "catching" him make us safer, Mike? And where's Osama?

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/index.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. p.s. Mike, read my first post. He allowed looting at Iraqi nuke sites
They protected the OIL Ministry, but not the known nuclear sites in Iraq. If Bush had really invaded Iraq because of WMDs, wouldn't he have secured the nuclear sites FIRST? And kept them secured. Now we are being warned about dirty bombs. Whose fault is that? Oh well, at least the Oil Ministry in Iraq is safe, if not your hometown. Where do you live, Mike? Be honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
15. The first thing they would say is : "It wasn't al Qaeda .."
Because if it was al Qaeda, then the opponents of Mr bush could argue that it might not have happened if he had spent all the time that he had expended on Saddam and instead, had hunted down the real terrorists, then maybe it wouldn't have happened. So write it down: it will not be the al Qaeda if we are attacked. It will be a new terrorist group that we have never heard of...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
20. I'm not sure that I agree.
Edited on Tue Dec-23-03 06:01 PM by AlinPA
I believe the media would cast him as a "leader in tough times". Smokin' 'em out and all that crap. "Fighting against a brutal enemy". Churchillian and all that crap. People would would it eat it up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joanski01 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
21. It sounds to me like the only
people who are full of fear are the Chickenhawk Republicans. They're going to get us!!!! They're going to get us!!!!! Let's kill them all before they get us!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crushbush04 Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
22. Are'nt you hoping...
for another terrorist attack to prove just how incompetent bushy really is and how right and knowlegable you are?

Get a grip folks and lets come up with a way to beat the bushman that doesn't involve the MASS MURDER of innocent people.

The future of the free world is at stake!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. You're so very clever, posing as a DUer.
Jesus. That is the stupidest, most offensive post I have EVER read on this board.

FYI I live in lower Manhattan. I breathed the dust of the dead for months on end. Where do you live?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crushbush04 Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. Maybe I should model...
since you think I am a such a poser. Slightly offended. Feelings a little hurt . Anyway I live uptown used to work downtown but after that relatvely minor event .. you know...9/11...I now work in midtown
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 06:27 AM
Response to Reply #28
39. i suppose it would make no sense
to point out that she said absolutely nothing along the lines of what you implied, because you already know that. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guaranteed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 04:13 AM
Response to Reply #22
38. Don't get angry at us because your man
isn't doing his job. If there's another attack, it's his fault, and no one else's. That is a FACT. He went off to Iraq, and neglected his duty, against our warnings and wishes. So I hold him, and all of you Republiclowns, totally responsible for any more terrorist attacks.

Lie in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:22 AM
Response to Reply #22
48. standard freeper arguments:
"Get a grip"
"Get over it"
"Get it through your head"

And of course they know our most secret thoughts, as in "we'r hoping for another terror attack".
Oh and the anger of course: "plenty to go around, don't hold back".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeahMira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #22
57. No further proof needed...
Edited on Wed Dec-24-03 08:41 AM by LeahMira
Are'nt you hoping for another terrorist attack to prove just how incompetent bushy really is and how right and knowlegable you are?

You're reading it wrong. We have all the proof we need of his incompetence and we're worried that his incompetence is so obvious that any terrorists will feel that they have absolutely nothing to fear if they choose to attack the U.S. again.

The U.S. has spent literally billions of dollars and hundreds of lives taking out a dictator who posed absolutely no threat to this nation. That is not to say that dictators who oppress and kill their own citizens and threaten neighboring nations should not be dealt with in the severest of terms, but the situation in Iraq is an entirely separate situation and one that, IMO, should have more properly been dealt with by the nations of the Middle East backed by the United Nations.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is losing jobs, many more of our own people are a whisper away from bankruptcy and possibly homelessness, and many more have already fallen through the social cracks.

When our seniors can no longer afford health insurance, when our children are no longer learning what they need to know for the future, and when young couples can no longer afford a home of their own, and when all of us (including the media) are constrained from expressing our opinions if those opinions are not the ones "approved" by the administration, the rest of the country will wake up and realize that this nation is governed by an incompetent. When we all come to realize that we have spent so much of our strength and resources, both human and material, in a war that has done nothing to address our safety and that we are still vulnerable to attack from the enemy that we aren't going after, perhaps then the rest of the country will understand the horrible truth.

No one here will take any delight in saying, "We told you so."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. maybe...maybe not. (but I'll bet that they've run the numbers...)
a lot would depend on where, when, who, how, and how many dead-
Remember, they aren't called "sheeple" for no reason...they flocked to fearless leader last time like a gaggle of scared geese.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
25. More on the Looted Iraqi Nukes
http://www.msnbc.com/news/912073.asp
WMDs for the Taking?
While U.S. troops pushed on to Baghdad, Iraqis were looting radioactive materials from once protected sites
By Rod Nordland
NEWSWEEK

May 19 issue — From the very start, one of the top U.S. priorities in Iraq has been the search for weapons of mass destruction. Weren’t WMDs supposed to be what the war was about? Even so, no one has yet produced conclusive evidence that Iraq was maintaining a nuclear, biological or chemical (NBC) arsenal.
<snip>

Some of the lapses are frightening. The well-known Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, about 12 miles south of Baghdad, had nearly two tons of partially enriched uranium, along with significant quantities of highly radioactive medical and industrial isotopes, when International Atomic Energy Agency officials made their last visit in January. By the time U.S. troops arrived in early April, armed guards were holding off looters—but the Americans only disarmed the guards, Al Tuwaitha department heads told NEWSWEEK. “We told them, ‘This site is out of control. You have to take care of it’,” says Munther Ibrahim, Al Tuwaitha’s head of plasma physics. “The soldiers said, ‘We are a small group. We cannot take control of this site’.” As soon as the Americans left, looters broke in. The staff fled; when they returned, the containment vaults’ seals had been broken, and radioactive material was everywhere.

U.S. officers say the center had already been ransacked before their troops arrived. They didn’t try to stop the looting, says Colonel Madere, because “there was no directive that said do not allow anyone in and out of this place.” Last week American troops finally went back to secure the site. Al Tuwaitha’s scientists still can’t fully assess the damage; some areas are too badly contaminated to inspect. “I saw empty uranium-oxide barrels lying around, and children playing with them,” says Fadil Mohsen Abed, head of the medical-isotopes department. Stainless-steel uranium canisters had been stolen. Some were later found in local markets and in villagers’ homes. “We saw people using them for milking cows and carrying drinking water,” says Ibrahim. The looted materials could not make a nuclear bomb, but IAEA officials worry that terrorists could build plenty of dirty bombs with some of the isotopes that may have gone missing. Last week NEWSWEEK visited a total of eight sites on U.N. weapons-inspection lists. Two were guarded by U.S. troops. Armed looters were swarming through two others. Another was evidently destroyed many years ago. American forces had not yet searched the remaining three.

http://www.latimes.com/la-fg-iraqnuke22may22001423,0,1600144.story
Dangerous Loot South of Baghdad
Iraqis close to a nuclear research site become ill after materials are pilfered. Doctor says symptoms point to acute radiation syndrome.
May 22, 2003, L.A. Times
By John Hendren, Times Staff Writer

Since early April, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, has repeatedly requested that the U.S. secure nuclear material at Tuwaitha. This week, the Bush administration agreed to make arrangements to allow the IAEA to return to Iraq to inspect the site.

American troops are now guarding the research center, but the looting has continued, and scientists are worried that missing nuclear material could result in a slew of safety and health problems.

"We're concerned about the health and safety of these people, and then we're also concerned about environmental contamination and we're also concerned that this material could be used for illicit use — a 'dirty bomb,' or even a nuclear bomb," said IAEA spokesman Mark Gwozdecky in a telephone interview from Vienna.

<snip>

Inside a 10-foot-high chain-link fence, a platoon of U.S. troops guards the remains of the nuclear reactor destroyed by the Israelis. Army Staff Sgt. Robert Gasman says his job is to keep looters out, but with a platoon of just 40 men and a fence that runs as far as the eye can see, he admits it's a losing battle. Looters break through nightly; they are often released within a few hours of being caught.

"There's no way we can catch them all," said Gasman, from the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade. "For all I know, there are looters back there now."<more>


UK Telegraph
Chirac defies Bush at G8 summit
By Benedict Brogan and Toby Harnden in Evian
(Filed: 02/06/2003) UK Telegraph

France poured cold water last night on an American and British proposal to limit the spread of weapons of mass destruction as Tony Blair and George W Bush sought to outflank Jacques Chirac at the opening of the G8 summit.

While M Chirac, the host, sought to emphasise his vision of a multipolar world, Mr Blair and Mr Bush joined forces with other members of the Iraq coalition to try to force him to make combating terrorism a central agenda item of the gathering of industrialised nations.

Downing Street and White House aides said the "action plan" would help to stop terrorists detonating a radioactive "dirty bomb" in a western capital.<more>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wapsie B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
29. But if there's an attack
that's thwarted, wouldn't that help the chimp? He'd be seen as some kind of savior. I would love to think that there is some kind of magical event that would remove chimpy from office. But as we all know this is a guy that's had one heck of a charmed life. Time after time he's failed upwards. I have yet to see the defining moment that will spell the end of the bush era. No wooden stakes to be found here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
booisblu Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 09:10 PM
Response to Original message
30. Slightly off topic, but
where was Laura Bush on 9/11? Was she in Florida too, or at the White House? Or in Texas? Google isn't giving me answers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #30
35. Laura was at the Capitol meeting with Ted Kennedy
Edited on Wed Dec-24-03 12:12 AM by rmpalmer
on education if memory serves me right.

I think if there is an attack - a lot of Americans will once again follow * like a dumb herd of cattle. Hopefully the smarter ones will have the guts to point out how AWOL endangered all of us by going after Saddam instead of Osama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gulliver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
31. I agree, and even if there isn't, Bush should be toast.
Edited on Tue Dec-23-03 09:42 PM by gulliver
We are now in much more danger than we were before September 11, IMO. North Korea, Iraq, Pakistan, Iran, you name it, Bush screwed the pooch there. We have Musharraf, Gaddaffi, Jiang Zemin, and, yes, even the guy Bush called a "pygmy," Kim Il Sung laughing at the United States as these regimes establish historic security for themselves by cutting deals with a desperate Bush Administration.

Thank you Junior, for normal relations with Libya, for a freshly prosperous Communist China, for radical nuclear Pakistan's good guy status, for North Korea's (soon to be received) booty and written non-aggression assurances.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LOL Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
32. Toast? You would think so
but then again, this is America and we're not known for looking at things realistically...people will probably buy into the Bushshit as more and more freedom is taken away until eventually he may get removed from office but there will probably be much bloodshed in the process...we tend to tolerate liars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 11:34 PM
Response to Original message
33. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
_Jumper_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-23-03 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Read this
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catshrink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Bashing the Big Dawg on your second post?
Surely you could show more restraint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
submerged99 Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
37. Chimp wins either way
I hate to say this but Chimp wins either way.

If there are no more strikes against the U.S, Chimp and Co will claim that they made the U.S safe from terrorist strikes. A fearful public will agree.

If there is a strike, Chimp and Co will claim that the evil doers are going to come into Murika and kill every man, woman and child and declare martial law. A fearful public will agree.

That's how I see it. Most people in this country will do whatever Chimp says to do if they're scared enough.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:08 AM
Response to Original message
40. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.
 
G_j Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
46. yawn..
bait not taken. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bridget Burke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #40
47. We WERE safer & more prosperous under Clinton.
The attacks of September 11th occurred under Bush's watch. His crew have done their best to stonewall the investigation. Whether their part in the event is merely total incompetence or something worse has yet to be uncovered.

The only way Bush will get another term is by cheating. Hey, it worked the first time.

Your post shows the effect of watching "unbiased" Fox news. It also seems to indicate early signs of Mad Cow Disease.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
E Pluribus Unum Donating Member (90 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #47
60. Don't you think that 9/11 took years to plan?
This notion that it would not have happened under a Gore admin is nuts. Before 9/11 happened nobody ever imagined of hyjacking planes and using them as bombs. Why do you think that only passengers of the last plane fought back after they learned on their cell phones what their fate was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LOL Donating Member (41 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. Why not?
The first use of airplanes by terrorists happened Thirtsomething years ago and has been going on around the world ever since. No, I think the problem is that American's in their arrogance and ignorance simply believed "It can't happen here".

Whether or not it would have occured under a Gore watch, we can only speculate. We do know that it wasn't pulled off sucessfully under a Clinton watch, not that it couldn't have happened, but I do think that our enemies have a thing for Bush and his buddies which goes back a long long time.

No, I believe that it was really lame for Bush to claim he had no idea that terrorists would use planes and innocent civilians to perform their dirty work.

Then again, this administration has certainly shown their ignorance in foreign intellegence, like when Condy made a statement that we had no idea how bad their infrastructure was before the war, something about not knowing that the lights were out most of the time and that their sewer system stunk.:hi:

We didn't know that, but we knew exactly where his WMD's were and all about Saddam's pursuits.:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBHam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. 9-11 took years to plan...
who do you think did ther planning?

who benefitted?

(shaking head)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeahMira Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #60
64. In what sense?
Don't you think that 9/11 took years to plan?

If you mean in terms of teaching people to fly airplanes and aim them where they intend they go, certainly that took some time.

If you mean in terms of getting people documents, passports, etc., and putting them in place, sure. That took some time as well.

In terms of deciding which planes to hijack, along with coordinating their planned routes and schedules, that would take a few phone calls for the information.

Do you really think the attacks that have happened elsewhere in the world since 9/11 took years to plan? I don't. Just think about all those "thumb" people who show up and create silly "events" at five minutes' notice, and then disappear into the crowds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #60
65. FYI: OBL made "airplanes as missiles" threat against Bush in *July 2001*
Edited on Wed Dec-24-03 03:37 PM by Mike Niendorff
Italy: Bush Targeted at G8
Newsday, 9/19/01
http://www.newsday.com/ny-woital192372601sep19.story

Rome - A possible assassination attempt on President {sic} George W. Bush - using a commercial plane - was uncovered by Italy's secret services at July's Group of Eight summit, Deputy Prime Minister Gianfranco Fini said yesterday.

Fini, interviewed for a television program, said Italian forces shut down airspace above Genoa and positioned surface-to-air missiles at the airport.

(more)

-----

Plot to assassinate Bush - reports
CNN, 7/9/01
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/06/20/russia.binladen/index.html

Osama bin Laden has threatened to assassinate U.S. President {sic} George W. Bush at the G8 summit meeting in Italy, the head of Russia's Federal Bodyguard Service has said, according to reports.

The Associated Press said Yevgeny Murov was quoted by Itar-Tass news agency as saying: "Bin Laden is threatening the American president {sic}, but we know what international terrorism is today and therefore all the bodyguard units concerned are preparing for this.

"We view the threats as totally serious, but hope that with joint efforts we can solve all the problems."

The Group of Eight summit is meeting between July 20-22 in Genoa, Italy. ...

Murov -- Russian President Vladimir Putin's chief bodyguard -- did not elaborate on the threats. He said agents from Russia's Federal Body guard Service had travelled to Genoa to coordinate with their coutnerparts from the other nations taking part in the summit to investigate the threats.

(more)

-----

Genoa braces for G8 summit
CNN, 7/18/01
http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/07/17/genoa.security/

The Italian authorities' security measures also include the positioning of surface-to-air missiles at Genoa's Christopher Columbus airport. Dubbed the SPADA, the land-based system consists of missiles capable of a range of 15 kilometres (9.3 miles).

The ministry said the decision to install the missiles is not excessive.

"There's no excessive precaution," military spokesman Alberto Battaglini told Reuters. "The measure ... is merely to act as a deterrent against any aerial incursion during the summit."

...

The official G8 Summit Web site said it was not so much violence by the demonstraters that they feared most, but "the possibility of a terrorist attack."

The head of Russia's Federal Bodyguard Service has warned of a plot by terrorist Osama bin Laden to assassinate George W. Bush at the summit and the U.S. President {sic} may be staying at U.S. Camp Darby military base in Livorno or offshore on the American aircraft carrier USS Enterprise to avoid any terrorist risk.

The other leaders of the world's most industrialized nations -- the U.S., Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, plus Russia -- are also staying offshore on a luxury cruise liner, the "European Vision," chartered by the Italian government at a reported cost of $2.89 million.

(more)

-----

So, let's be clear: not only were the Bushies *aware* of the possibility of hijacked airplanes being used "as missiles", but less than six weeks earlier -- while Bush was visiting Genoa, Italy, for the G8 Summit -- Italian authorities had shut down the airspace over Genoa because of *precisely* this sort of threat. The source of the threat? Osama bin Laden. The target? George W. Bush himself.


MDN

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:25 AM
Response to Reply #40
49. First...you need to look up the word 'treason'...
...and secondly...how can it be that those who agree with Bush* are more 'American' than any other American? I hope you can see the flaw in this type of argument?

- As to your rant about some here 'hoping' there is another terrorist attack...that's just RWing hyperbole and the ranting of someone who thinks they belong to an invincible party. That's the way the nazis felt for a long time...until justice brought an end to their delusions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
45. see? we'r in danger - need tougher security measures:
- even less civil liberties (martial law)
- more soldiers (draft)
- more police (civilian watch / brownshirts)
- tougher military action (mini nukes)

Unless by then enough people have woken up, which i think isn't very likely.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fineyounglib Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:30 AM
Response to Reply #45
56. less liberties
Less liberties, like Rush?
Too many people are not consistant, either we are for are rights all the time, not matter who it is, or we are not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
52. Reality And The Media
I'm feeling a large disconnect between the media and the public, but how this will play out next year is not quite clear.

I think another 9/11 attack will help this regime in the short-term (and this I mean no more than two weeks) but beyond it will become a big libability. Some of the reasons are noted above, but the options this regime has compared to 2001 are not the same. There's no Afghanistan to quickly invade...to really get Osama, we're gonna have to go into Pakistan, and we're just learning what really good friends they've been, or an Iraq ready for us to use as whipping boy. Iraq will be a liability as now with Saddam out of the picture, there's no real big victory to be won here that can be shown on a TV.

Any disaster facing this regime will immediately turn the Rove machine into super-spin mode and the networks will respond with knee-jerk patriotism; as will many sheeple, but the bounce this time around won't be the same. Fools us once, shame on us, fool us twice...that's where we're at this time. If this nation goes into shutdown and a new wave of "detentions" and fear warning emerge, people aren't going to feel safe with this regime, but begin to see it for the self-serving, inept usurpers they are.

An 9/11-type attack now is too far, still, from election day to do much of a bounce...and one too close to election day could backfire depending on the type of attack. Something off-shore may get little attention while something on the West Coast will get short-shrift on the East coast and something on the East will be downplayed in the Midwest. The partisanship and regionalization of this regime is beginning to blow a lot of political capital in the middle 20% that will determine who wins a fair election.

To the tinfoil hatters...I think this regime isn't above staging something to increase and perpetutate its power, but this is playing with too much dynamite. It'd be easier starting a crisis somewhere else. Say economic, yes, economic...where there's still a disconnect between this regime's disastrous policies and how it's affecting people.

Happy Holidays
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RBHam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #52
63. two words...
martial law...

at that point, it really won't matter what any of us think...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LunaC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
58. Repeat after me.....
There are no terrorists except for those occupying the White House.

Whether or not there is another attack is directly contingent upon the Administration's need for a diversion (slamming through legislation while the shock value is still fresh ie. Patriot Act I and II) or more control (brain-washing the public with Fear Propaganda or cancelling elections.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-24-03 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
66. Well...YOU may blame him...but the RWing faithful won't...
...and they'll continue to support him...along with the corrupt American media.

- It's amazing. Right now the 'free press' is revisiting the Bush* uranium claim and other lies he told before HIS war. They're trying to leave the impression that Bush* 'may have' been right all along. They're definitely giving him the benefit of doubt.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 10:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC