…how what happened in the US under Bush’s watch was blamed on Bill Clinton?
Now, Obama isn’t even sworn in as an official POTUS and all of the country’s ills are being blamed on him (Obama).
What does this mean? No matter what a Republican does, it is always clean, sharp, and shiny to the zombies Bush-worshippers we have around here.
The people that think that the Clinton administration helped orchestrate 9-11 are as dim as those who think that Bush caused Hurricane Katrina.
For those idiots that think Bill Clinton caused 9-11 or didn’t do enough to prevent it, what the hell cave are you people living in? Do yourself and this country a big favor and purchase a copy of the “9/11 Commission Report”. Or read it for free here. It’s the final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the US. It is the authorized edition.
Straight from the back of my own copy of the book:
IN NOVEMBER 2002, the United States Congress and President George W. Bush established by law the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, also known as the 9/11 Commission. This independent, bipartisan panel was directed to examine the facts and circumstances surrounding the September 11 attacks, identify lessons learned, and provide recommendations to safeguard against future acts of terrorism.
The book is 567 pages long. Since Neo-Republicans claim to be literary scholars, I’m sure you will be able to read it. There were AMPLE warnings that this attack would happen. IT COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED DURING BUSH’S TERM. But it wasn’t. And this is the painful truth that right-wing radicals cannot accept.
Surely, Clinton could have done something to ensure 9-11 wouldn’t happen either. But to simply blame 9-11 on “Liberal policies” is outlandish and frighteningly ignorant.
Osama Bin Forgotten meant NADA ZIP ZILCH ZIPPO 無しNOTHING to Bush. He gave up after a couple of years while he was weak enough to let Cheneyhalliburton take over and turn this place literally upside down which eventually led Bush into the lowest approval rating in recorded history at 23%.
I am embarrassed to share the same oxygen and landmass with some of my fellow compatriots who speak so over-confidently about issues they don’t care enough about to learn about. The outstanding lack of curiosity and over-the-top partisanship is sickening.
Over the last seven years, those very patient terrorists have been planning another attack. It’s not IF it will happen again, it’s when. And when it happens, guess who will be blamed? Yep, you guessed it. It will be Obama’s fault.
Bush began his presidency in 2001. We were attacked on September 11th, 2001. Bush will leave very soon (2009). That’s how many years? Yep. Eight years. That’s nine months BEFORE the attack happened and 7 whole years to clean up the slop we call “Homeland Security”.
Just ask yourself the following questions. Since 9-11…,
- Has airport security really changed?
- During the last 7 years, have our borders tightened up?
- Have we taken Osama bin Forgotten, the Taliban/Al Qaeda seriously?
- Have we tried to clean up foreign policy to make both Israel and the Palestinians happy? Or at least somehow try to be more balanced in that area?
What concrete changes have actually been made under Bush – aside from the loose cannon we call the “Patriot Act”?
Again, like any other disaster on our turf, it’s always a bipartisan screw up. But I would really like to think that Bush took the 9-11 terrorist attacks just a tiny bit more seriously. As painful as this may be for your ears to hear, I have just as much love and passion for my country as you do. And I only wish Bush had that same passion.
Do you think it is possible that we will ever learn and come together as a nation? Or must we get attacked a few more times before someone wakes up?
Bill Clinton had 8 years to deal with Osama bin Laden. George W. Bush had 9 months.
Perhaps if Clinton had taken terrorism more seriously during his 2 terms in office, we would not have been attacked. Perhaps if Bill Clinton had not emboldened our terrorist enemies by giving us the image of a “Paper Tiger” we would not have been attacked.
Oh, if only Bill Clinton had loved America as much as you and I do.
9/11 happened less than 9 months after Bush was sworn into ofice. That was how much time he had to stop that attack. 9 months.
I’m betting you’ll be more patient with the incoming administration.
Also…
“Do you think it is possible that we will ever learn and come together as a nation? Or must we get attacked a few more times before someone wakes up?”
We haven’t been attacked in 7 years. We sure weren’t unified during that time. Why is it so vital to our safety now?
Greetings Earthlings,
As Zontar, your faithful scribe, is privy to all information he thought he would share the following. Zontar was present at the White House with W. eating some ribs and chicken with him when I saw him being briefed by a security official. W. was told about an imminent threat to the United States by terrorists. Since W. can’t/won’t read, he relies on his minions to tell him the good stuff. W. was unimpressed with this warning which had some very specific information in it. He told the agent that he’d done his job, but to get out of his presence, in so many words.
W. is an imbecile, moron, who was complicit by his utter disregard for this threats to the “United States” in the terrorist attacks which ensued. He should have been impeached and convicted.
Hail Dumb Fuck W!
Hail Zontar!!
Red Pill, Like I said, it was bipartisan screw up. You still haven’t answered my questions: What ever did Bush do to to aid homeland security in the last 8 years?
And 9 months is plenty of time to address the terrorists!!
- Has airport security really changed?
- Yes, somewhat. One thing is sure it has become incredibly annoying with little tangible results. If terrorists attacked the US through airlines, they would now use very sophisticated methods and probably succeed. Anyway 9/11 was more or less a “one time hit”, aimed at creating a new situation, it’s not likely that the same tactics would be used again.
- During the last 7 years, have our borders tightened up?
- Yes, somewhat. But to ensure full protection a new “Iron Curtain” would have to be built (both north and south). The costs would be incredible, every National Guard used and of course if you post an armed guard every 100 yards, patrol with dogs and have triple minefields separated by ditches and razor wire, you’ll might have some effect in deterring people to get out of the US.
- Have we taken Osama bin Forgotten, the Taliban/Al Qaeda seriously?
- a) no, Osama hasn’t been taken at all b) yes (Talibans/AQ). But they are still running and able to cause damage. Even if teh damage they could cause through sheer terrorism is probably overrated. But their ideas are still a menace at state level, in Pakistan/Afghanistan for example.
- Have we tried to clean up foreign policy to make both Israel and the Palestinians happy? Or at least somehow try to be more balanced in that area?
- the current US mindset makes it impossible to propose a “fair and balanced”t solution. Not even Obama can do it, and the appointment of Rahm has been perceived as an insult in the ME. Even adopting an “European attitude”, that is to say for example putting an arm embargo on Israel until it really negotiates a viable two states solution, would be perceived as “treason”. Curiously it’s probably the single measure that would in itself cut the sand under the feet of the Islamists and probably end the conflict on sight.
That’s my two cents.
Red Pill
you are rewriting history. OBL was perceived as a real threat only under the last years of the Clinton administration and obviously didn’t even become a top priority of the Bush administration’s first 9 months, despite – that time – direct warnings. When it became a horrifying fact that he was really dangerous, the Bush administration’s attempts to neutralize him failed either due to incompetence or/and maybe a will to keep him alive to justify other policies. Anyway the attempts made by those policies of which the most blatant was the Iraq invasion created an even more dangerous situation in the whole Islamic world, which is still not solved, despite a temporary quiet, at least in Baghdad. Besides the window of opportunity that the Afghan intervention created was rapidly misused creating a protracted war.
And yes the US HAS BEEN ATTACKED those last 7 last years, maybe not directly on its soil (probably primarily due to the weakness of its enemies who couldn’t repeat a major blow) but abroad, creating more US deaths and wounded (not counting its allies) than the 9/11 attack caused. So if you have to use a body count to measure the impact of the US retaliation, the terrorists still lead 1-0, with roughly 8000 US deaths on their account (9/11 + Iraq + Afghanistan). Not counting the wounded, PTSDs etc… The US killings of REAL terrorists goes by the hundreds at best, maybe some two thousand if you include Talibans, btw half of them detainees. And I won’t go into collateral damage.
If the US has conducted WWII that way you’d probably be speaking German or Japanese today, or both. We yurpins too, to be fair.
Old Frog
“OBL was perceived as a real threat only under the last years of the Clinton administration ”
“Percieved” is the operative word in your statement that gets to the heart of my point.
Clinton failed to percieve bin Laden and al Qaeda as a serious threat until the last years of his presidency. And the threat was obviously there the entire time.
“If the US has conducted WWII that way you’d probably be speaking German or Japanese today, or both.”
So rather than conduct the war in the way we have you think we should carpet-bomb and nuke our enemies into submission?
VirgoMonkey
8 years vs 9 months is a bipartisan screwup?
That’s like an 11:1 ratio.
Oh. Absolutely. If Bush knew the threat that our country was under considering that Clinton brushed it off, the first thing I’d do as a newly elected POTUS would be to ACT FAST!
Bush should get no free pass for ignoring all the signs coming at him either.
So, in effect, Bush was just continuing the “liberal policies” of Clinton and co.
Red Pill
1) The failure to “understand” that OBL “et alles” was a serious threat is a failure of the CIA. But to blame primarily Clinton for that is cheap, because it goes back to intelligence failures of a system that was revisited already under Reagan. What is clear is that the pre 9/11 information “crystallized” under the last year of the Clinton mandate and under the first 9 months of the Bush one. That’s why the later has the major responsability for what happened, even if the Clinton one isn’t totally free from criticism.
2) That’s what you have practically been doing in various forms (carpet-bombing). So far nukes haven’t been used (which is maybe a mistake or at least an EXPLICIT threat to use them in case of a repeat of 9/11 could be useful. The French have made it very clear : try something “9/11-like” on Paris and we nuke you).
Besides that there are plenty of experiences how to conduct counter-insurgency war and Petraeus has been quite successful in Iraq when he applied French and British experiences. Far more subtle than carpet-bombing wedding parties (even if still happens) like for example playing on political alliances among other tricks. Not good on CNN/Fox (not enough flames) but far more efficient. So you have to call it “the surge” as if 20 000 more troops really made the difference.
Anyway the major mistake was to invade Iraq instead of using US forces (to a tremendous cost) to more useful purposes. Now we face a common challenge in Afghanistan and the question is how to win. Iraq will probably return to mayhem when the US leave or at least to some “decent” Islamic dictatorship.
All those current challenges are solely the fault of the Bush administration. Of course everything has its roots in past historical mistakes of any administration, but in this case the culprits are obvious.
I’m not going to stick up for Clinton, but I was in the military (‘92-97) during his terms and we did go after them. After the embassy bombings and the USS Cole bombings, we went after them in each case. Sometimes, we sent in spec ops. Other times, we fired some cruise missiles. I agree that more could have been done, but I disagree that nothing was done while Clinton was in office.
I believe that 9/11 was set in motion before Bush was elected. If he or Gore was president, then I’m pretty sure it would have still been attempted and probably successful. The airport security personnel could have done more by just questioning the usage of the blades as carry on items. That little baggage check might have prevented all/some of it. It was really a failure on lots of people rather than a single person.
What happened after 9/11 (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) is a different story. I believe that’s all on Bush. However, I don’t place the blame for 9/11 completely on Bush, Clinton, or our intelligence agencies. (I was in military intelligence, so I feel some of that when people talk about our intelligence agencies)…
I believe 9/11 was a combination of lots of people at lots of levels being a bit complacent and unimaginative.
I was working for a major airline when 9-11 happened. And because I was an employee, every time I took a flight, I was never “checked out” – just because I was an employee! Scary huh?
Frighteningly enough, the airlines and the TSA are still as lax as ever with the exception that they may grope an elderly woman to see if she’s got something in her bra and detaining innocent Italians for having garlic on their breath.