Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Are you concerned that the Bush regime might stage a terror attack?

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:25 PM
Original message
Poll question: Are you concerned that the Bush regime might stage a terror attack?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Either that or that they will thwart a phony one, with great fanfare
and with the explanation that they couldn't have done it without NSA wiretaps on American citizens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Africa1 Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Sure
I believe they will do anything to try and justify their illegal war,and to defend their abrogation of our rights to privacy and freedoms,and to try and legitimize perpetual war for eterninity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Agreed - that's why I chose "other" ...
Considering the logistics involved, it is much easier to pull off a phony "we stopped it before it happened" situation than the real thing.

In addition, allegedly "thwarting" an attack still in the planning stages means making up the most horrendous results, i.e. "Had this plot not been foiled, tens of thousands of Americans would have died", without having to back up a single detail - like whether the plot was even realistically feasible in the first place.

Watch for it soon at a political theatre near you ...



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #1
33. The "thwart" scenario will probably take place in the next month.
But, seriously, does anybody really believe that Bush would stage a "terrorist" strike against American people? (I'm interested only in the perspective of those whose studio apartments are NOT lined with aluminum foil)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slowry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
2. NIGHTMURRRRRR SCENURRRIO !!!!!! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
3. With absolute certainty that will happen
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yael Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. MIHOP? Nah. LIHOP? More likely...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
5. The unfortunate fact is that
the whright whing in this country knows what works for them, 1979 Iran hostages = 1980 Reagan, 9/11 = Bush's second term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #5
34. Are you really saying that the Republicans staged the Iranian hostage crisis?
holy crapoli! (somebody get a net)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azurnoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. Hardly
Edited on Sat Aug-11-07 11:34 PM by azurnoir
However, they did benefit from it in several ways, first off Carter did not campaign on the road so to speak, he ran the "Rose Garden" campaign. The failed rescue attempt in April of 1980 did not help, if memory serves me correctly as early as April it was clear that Reagan would be the Gop candidate and there are also stories that he and the Army had also cut a deal, that the Army fail in rescuing the hostages and when elected they would be "rewarded", he was and they were. To be honest that the Army failed on purpose was my first thought when I heard the news reports on the mission, I was surprised some 20+ years later to find I was not alone in that thought I also think that the stories about Reagan's people cutting a deal under the table with Iranians may well be true, they did visit Paris several times in the fall of 1980 and did meet with the Iranians. After all George H W Bush had recently been head of the CIA, why else the secretly sell or give the Iranians arms as in Iran Contra's?
The Gop has a history of playing on fear, would you deny that George2 did/does not play 9/11 to his advantage? That does not mean that he staged it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Left Is Write Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:33 PM
Response to Original message
7. Let's just say that a LIHOP would not surprise me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
8. yes, in a little over a year's time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard D Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. or sooner
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:39 PM
Original message
Other
I believe they will tell any lie to keep their little charade going. Whatever lie(s) they tell is only known to their sick, twisted minds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowRubberDuckie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
11. Bush doesn't want to lose power.
I would not put it past him to stage one just to declare martial law and cancel the elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bobbieo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. Nothing that gang would do would surprise me. I'm not
really concerned because there is not a GD thing I could do to stop it
Wish there were!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kimmerspixelated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. You know, I think the fact that we're onto them
actually helps..... the reason 9/11 was able to be pulled off is because America was this "big sleeping giant". Well, that giant is AWAKE! ...and thanks to places like DU- we are responsible for at least being able to be in control of the senate. 2006 would have been stolen again, if we hadn't been watching like hawks-...still, I'm absolutely convinced they will try-whether or not they will succeed is debatable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowRubberDuckie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. Have you not been paying attention?
They STILL have control of the senate. The democrats are letting them retain it and they aren't ever going to grow a spine and actually do something about them.
Duckie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowRubberDuckie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
18. I've decided we have very little to fear from without....
But everything in the world to fear from within. These men love power...and they want to keep it.
Duckie
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #11
27. I think
Bush is sick and tired of being President, and can't wait to get out.

And the President has no power to cancel elections - the federal government doesn't run elections.

And even if there were SOME way for him to do it, constitutionally, his term ends in Jan. '09. He's out of office then no matter what.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. The President doesn't have the power to do a lot of things
That hasn't stopped Bush from doing them anyway.

Many of his signing statements have been blatantly unconstitutional. They are still in effect nonetheless.

Don
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MonkeyFunk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. but they're all in areas
over which the President has some degree of control. Elections are an area over which the President has no control.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:42 PM
Response to Original message
12. What do you call the attack on Iraq? Wasn't that an act of terror?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal In Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
14. ANOTHER attack? Yep. I don't think there is any question this is coming.
(Remember anthrax?)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
15. Timed for maximum "return on investment."
Likely 1-3 weeks before election day. A simple videotape of Osama may not work this time if the Puke candidate is very far behind.

Those who do not believe this is possible have not been paying attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. And what would be gained by the GOP candidate?
An attack at any point would be proof positive that all of the RW talking points -- if we fight 'em over there they won't come here, a Republican president and admin can keep America safe, the fact that we haven't had another attack since 9/11 proves that the GOP have made us safer, blah, blah, blah -- go right down the toilet.

I don't think they'd want all of that to go right out the window just before an election.

An 'alleged' attack that is 'thwarted' would be much more to their advantage -- and takes much less effort.

Another attack on US soil would say ONE THING to American voters, and would say it VERY LOUDLY: "All of the money and lives spent on the War in Iraq and the War on Terror have been spent for nothing; it has not bought you a damned thing. But still vote GOP, okay?"

Nope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. True... Unless there's a way to blame it on Democrats not going along with something or other...
For example, if Congress wasn't approving more secret authority without oversight, warrants, etc., they might make it into a campaign issue: "Democrats and their policies are putting us in danger! The Democrats are encouraging terrorists! If Democrats don't change their ways and make it easy for us to do whatever we want, we could be attacked again!!" In that case, a well-timed attack would be useful to them -- "See what happens with Democrats and their policies? Vote Republican!"

Having said that, I don't think they'll do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. I take your point ...
... but I think it's too late in the game to make that one fly - kind of tough to convince the citizenry that the Bush admin and the GOP have been working all of these years since 9-11 to put national security systems in place (ha, ha) that can be completely undone by the Dems.

The only people who would be shocked and awed into clinging to the GOP after another US attack would be the real dummies out there -- and let's face it, they're going to vote GOP no matter what happens anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #17
24. Americans are still easily frightened.
And when they get scared they have historically run into the arms of the Republicans who are known to have no reservations about bombing first and asking questions later or not at all. I think it's wishful thinking to believe they would do anything else in the event of another attack. Besides, the Pukes can always say "Well, we were good for 7 years but of course nobody can guarantee 100% prevention 100% of the time. It's a dangerous world out there."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NanceGreggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Sorry, ain't buying ...
I've been hearing for years now about how all of the former Bush supporters would go running back into the arms of the GOP if something happened.

Those lowering poll numbers for Bush have been a slow but steady stream of people walking away - and they're not going to go running back based on any one incident, no matter what it is.

Those who have fled the GOP and its talking points are pissed-off; they feel they have been betrayed by their prez and their party. As a result, they are even LESS likely to buy into scare tactics than we are.

Another attack at this point would be a disaster for the Republicans. And what's more, they KNOW that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 07:00 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. One point.
Edited on Sat Aug-11-07 07:36 PM by Xap
Of course it is all anybody's guess but I would point out that it is mainly Bush they have been running from, not necessarily the Republican party, and I have a feeling that that is mainly because Bush hasn't been a big "success" like Reagan. :puke: Republicans can still muster the votes on Capital Hill to block the Dem's legislation and even advance their own McCarthyist agenda. I think FISA is evidence enough that a lot of people are still susceptible to fear tactics, even Democratic "leaders."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 08:00 PM
Response to Reply #17
29. Little Attack: You're right....BIG ATTACK (Nuke or nuclear power plant): You're wrong...
It's the big attack that would kick in "emergency powers"... :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:22 PM
Response to Original message
20. In before this gets moved to the Sept 11 forum like mine did.
I'm just sayin'. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Exiled in America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
22. Yes - whether they "make it happen" or "let it happen" I'm worried they will be involved in one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blues90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
28.  I thing GW likes being the decider and having his position , also
Both Condi and Cheney when asked have said we are safer but NOT safe yet . Why would they say this is an attack was out of the question , it gives them an out .

There is so much we don't know but do suspect and who can say how the public will react if there were some sort of attack . I doubt they would wait until the elections this would be to obvious .

I don't feel it is out of the question after all people watched as Katrina destroyed the south and to this day nothing has been done really and the public lets this go , was not this a terror attack of sorts just letting it go , it's almost like a test to see how the public would react and look how they reacted . Oh , sure there has been scorn but still they got away with it and all you really here is bits and peices or the year and date as a rememberance .

Each time bush grabs a bit more power and the hearings on Gonzo are a joke it just shows me how little power the people have in anything .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Buzz Clik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 09:41 PM
Response to Original message
32. From the Iraqi perspective, I'd be concerned. If you're talking about the US -- not so much.
I find it fascinating, however to see the number of positive responses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
35. I was positive that Mickey Mouse had a better chance than Ronald
Reagan to be president....and I bet the moon that junior didn't have a chance against Al Gore.

Now I'm not sure about anything, other than the corruption that these criminals have brought to the U.S.

Guess who Senator Mich O'Connell is married too! I just learned last night. It is Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao.

Here's an article well worth reading from a Kentucky newspaper.



When Bush chose her, Chao was making more than $200,000 a year as a "fellow" at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative, corporate-funded think tank in Washington. While she was there, Heritage scholar D. Mark Wilson issued a report titled How to Close Down the Department of Labor, in which he blasted Labor's "excessive burdens on businesses." Chao hired Wilson as deputy assistant secretary in charge of workplace standards.

She also made hundreds of thousand of dollars in speaking fees and by serving on the boards of directors for 13 corporations, several of which donated to McConnell and lobbied the Senate for favorable laws and federal contracts. Nearly all her board memberships began after they married in 1993.

Chao is staunchly conservative. Speaking at a Washington event in May, she said, "Often, people come into public service with a zeal to take immediate action. But, sometimes it's not what you do but what you refrain from doing that is important."

Few industries were happier to see Chao bring that philosophy to the Labor Department than mining, which has given more than $400,000 to McConnell's Senate campaigns, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

In early 2001, industry magazine Coal Age listed the various mining executives invited to shape the agency's agenda and wrote that they were "benefitting from high-level access to policymakers in the new administration."

At the Mine Safety and Health Administration, Chao named Utah coal operator David Lauriski as director, assisted by former McConnell aide Andrew Rajec. (Lauriski resigned in 2004, citing family concerns, after the Labor Department's inspector general questioned no-bid MSHA contracts that went to firms connected to him.)
http://www.kentucky.com/233/story/11062.html

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
36. Does this make us "concern trolls"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sueh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
37. Yes, and I want to bug their phone calls and read all of their
mail to find out what they're up to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
38. HE WILL and it will be right before the '08 election....Sept. or Oct. 2008 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
B Calm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
39. Counting the anthrax, they have already did it twice that we know of.
They will let nothing stop them from their quest for oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
40. Maybe they will wait until Hillary is elected
and start the rolling brown outs. I don't trust the mofos to play fair.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrSlayer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-11-07 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
42. No, they got what they wanted from the first one.
Now they just want to run out the clock and leave with their money.
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 Mon Apr 29th 2024, 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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