Bush dropped the ball

[TexasTiger 14,289]

Clarke was the president's chief adviser on terrorism, yet it wasn't until Sept. 11 that he ever got to brief Mr. Bush on the subject. Clarke says, prior to Sept. 11, the administration didn't take the threat seriously.

"We had a terrorist organization that was going after us! Al Qaeda. That should have been the first item on the agenda. And it was pushed back and back and back for months.

"There's a lot of blame to go around, and I probably deserve some blame too. But on January 24th, 2001, I wrote a memo to Condoleezza Rice asking for, urgently -- underlined urgently -- a Cabinet-level meeting to deal with the impending al Qaeda attack. And that urgent memo-- wasn't acted on.

"I blame the entire Bush leadership for continuing to work on Cold War issues when they back in power in 2001. It was as though they were preserved in amber from when they left office eight years earlier. They came back; they wanted to work on the same issues right away: Iraq, Star Wars. Not new issues, the new threats that had developed over the preceding eight years."

Clarke finally got his meeting about al Qaeda in April, three months after his urgent request. But it wasn't with the president or cabinet. It was with the second-in-command in each relevant department.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/19/...ain607356.shtml

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Bush's focus was not the protection of this country, but a multifold agenda that included the removal of Saddam and the occupation of Iraq. It is easy to believe his intent was not to harm any Americans, rather than believe he had his sight set on a goal that had nothing to do with preservation of life. Just before the election, in 2000, Bush Sr. went to Kuwait twice for reasons undisclosed or pursued by the media. Remember fuel prices rising in early 2000, with the cold weather in the Northeast, which caused the economy to feel inflationary pricing? While it seems after Bush Jr. announced his intention to seek the office of pResident Bush Sr. meet with rulers of Kuwait, whether or not it was about oil prices only God knows. The price of a barrel of oil could, easily, be manipulated by none other than Dubya's father, whom the Kuwaiti's worshipped, by meeting with the leaders of that nation and suggesting that shipments to the U.S. be delayed or slowed down. Or, just simply raise the price.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=16312

Oil is well with Bush

By Tom Flocco

© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

Given the continuing heating oil cost crisis in the Northeast and rising gasoline prices throughout the country coupled with the reported role Kuwait is playing in that process, a report by the Chinese Xinhua News Agency that former President Bush visited Kuwait just seven weeks ago notches a few rungs higher on the "curious" list. This second trip to Kuwait by Bush since his son's presidential aspirations became apparent should start to raise some eyebrows.

I saved this for just an occasion

Then further down on the same page:

Storm On The Horizon

With good cause, the Clinton-Gore administration is worried that skyrocketing oil prices will cause a series of inflationary problems leading to higher interest rates by the Federal Reserve Board, a potential stock market collapse and millions of highly stressed American budgets -- right before the November election. In a March 2 interview with Fox News, former Energy Secretary James Schlessinger said, "oil inventories for summer need to be built now and we are not doing so. I think it could cause trouble (in November) for the party in office if this continues."

[MDM4AU 338]

O-M-G!!!!

BUSH KNEW! BUSH KNEW!!!

Here we go again from the left!

:yawn:

[TexasTiger 14,289]

O-M-G!!!!

BUSH KNEW! BUSH KNEW!!!

Here we go again from the left!

:yawn:

Read it again. He didn't know. He was clueless by choice. BTW, Richard Clarke served 5 Republican Presidents and doesn't consider himself a member of the "left."

[MDM4AU 338]

The part about the left was about YOU and your leftist buddies. :roll:

So, was CLinton clueless by choice or was that a VRWC?

You libs kill me.

[MDM4AU 338]

The libs will be having a party tonight watching "60 Minutes" a la "Super Bowl Party." I can see it now. High fiving, cheering, etc. It wouldn't surprise me if some even painted their faces!

[TexasTiger 14,289]

The libs will be having a party tonight watching "60 Minutes" a la "Super Bowl Party."  I can see it now.  High fiving, cheering, etc.  It wouldn't surprise me if some even painted their faces!

Facts don't mean a damn thing to you, do they? If you saw GWB poke your mother in the eye you would find a way to blame Bill Clinton.

[TrueBlue72 0]

Liberals aren't necessarily gullible , but most gullible people are liberals

[TexasTiger 14,289]

Liberals aren't necessarily gullible , but most gullible people are liberals

According to David Kay, Bush's man looking for WMDs, the gullible people are Neo-Cons who listen to Iraqi defectors.

[MDM4AU 338]

Liberals aren't necessarily gullible , but most gullible people are liberals

According to David Kay, Bush's man looking for WMDs, the gullible people are Neo-Cons who listen to Iraqi defectors.

So this FORMER Bush aid, would he be considered a Bush Defector?

[MDM4AU 338]

The libs will be having a party tonight watching "60 Minutes" a la "Super Bowl Party."  I can see it now.  High fiving, cheering, etc.  It wouldn't surprise me if some even painted their faces!

Facts don't mean a damn thing to you, do they? If you saw GWB poke your mother in the eye you would find a way to blame Bill Clinton.

PRECISELY, what does you and your ilk throwing a party have to do with Facts? Except that I stated a fact and it obviously hit a nerve with you.

Hope no-one spilled anything on your rug during the festivities.

If Bush were to single handedly solve the World Peace problem, you TexasTiger would find a reason to hate him. "He didn't solve it on his first day. What kind of President is he?" This is why everything you and your socialist friends on this board posts gets laughed at and disregarded as irrelevant.

Look, Bush sent troops to Afghanistan long before he sent troops to Iraq. GET OVER IT. So he didn't act as fast as you would have liked. I feel the man did the right thing in BOTH PLACES. You trying to convince me otherwise with your whiney little posts is laughable.

You and your liberal, hate-mongering friends love to point out Bush's actions on the same intel that Clinton had and how it was sooo wrong. Why didn't he do a better job. Of course, you don't care because he is no longer in office and an "EVIL CONSERVATIVE" is in office. Clinton had three chances to get UBL and he "dropped the ball." That is a fact that means absolutely nothing to you.

Do you honestly believe Kerry will do a better job? He has flipped so much on his decisons NO-ONE knows what he stands for. But again, Facts mean nothing to YOU because Kerry is a Dem.

And lastly,

Facts don't mean a damn thing to you,...

Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?

The next time you feel like calling me out on this board, remember one thing...

I COULDN'T CARE LESS ABOUT YOUR OPINION SO FIND SOMEONE ELSE TO WHINE TO.

Buh-Bye, now!

[MDM4AU 338]

I also love the Liberal tag word this year "neo-con" like it's so damaging. You might as well be calling us "poop-heads". It's just as harmless and silly!

[AUloggerhead 2,516]

Read it again. He didn't know. He was clueless by choice. BTW, Richard Clarke served 5 Republican Presidents and doesn't consider himself a member of the "left."

Well, maybe ... and maybe not. Here's a link that suggests Clarke may not be as neutral as he would like the general public to believe: Link

...

Moran told ABC's "This Week" that Clarke's close relationship with the Kerry aide "discredited" him in the eyes of critics, with the White House maintaining that "this is essentially a Democrat making these arguments" that Bush dropped the ball in the war on terrorism. 

...

Let's also not forget that Clarke has a book to sell. Aside from the fact that creating public controversy is a proven way of helping book sales, Clarke could also be hoping to snag a position in a future Dem administration (should one be elected, that is.)

As for the political neutrality of Mr Clarke, would someone truly non-partisan make this claim without laughing? clinton would have prevented 9/11

[Tiger in Spain 0]

Clinton had three chances to get UBL and he "dropped the ball." That is a fact that means absolutely nothing to you.

This is the root of the problem. Had Clinton paid half as much attention to preventing terrorist attacks as he did to getting "Lewinskied" in the oval office, we wouldn't be in this situation today.

[rexbo 104]

If you saw GWB poke your mother in the eye you would find a way to blame Bill Clinton.

That's the whole point, GWB would never poke anyone's mother in the eye; Clinton and Kerry would poke whatever and whomever it took to get themselves in power (or money, or even a few seconds of satisfaction, as the case may be...)

[Ranger12 53]

Bottom line is this: where was the war on terrorism when Clinton was in office? He had 8 years to do something about Al Qeada and chose not too. Bush was in office less then a year when he was forced to act because of Clinton's inactions.