How DARE you say 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch!

Oh boy…popcorn all around! This from the Bush Legacy Revisionism Tour ™.

Chris Matthews asks Ari Fleischer about how Bush left the economy. Fleischer answers 9/11! 9/11! Then the money shot…

Matthews: We were attacked on your watch. If you start getting into who was attacked when, we suffered the worst domestic calamity in history on your watch.

Fleischer: Chris, how dare you!

Priceless!

add to del.icio.us : Add to Blinkslist : add to furl : add to ma.gnolia : Stumble It! : add to simpy : seed the vine : : : TailRank : post to facebook

About these ads

90 thoughts on “How DARE you say 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch!

  1. Olbermann just played the entire clip. Wow. I cannot believe that Fleischer got so many bullshit talking points in one single sitting.

    I am going to look for the whole thing…it is priceless. Honestly, what a fucking liar Fleischer is!!

  2. Tweetie, how about that economy question – did you get an answer or did you let Flyshit urinate all over you for the rest of his segment, as this clip demonstrates.

  3. Nope…no answer on that economy thing other than Bush inherited a Clinton recession, but thanks to tax breaks, there were 55 continuous months of growth. I think I forgot the other turds he laid…all in a matter of seconds.

    It was stunning.

  4. “How dare you!” A journalist of true class and stature would have said…September 11, 2000 what? Let’s see, Inauguration on January 20th, 2001. Twin Towers leveled September 11th, 2001. So, Ari, answer the question. Do you need a minute to change your Depends?”

  5. “How dare, you.”

    OMG, how dare you? Why is GWB entitled to the biggest fucking “do over” on the planet?

    If he’d ever thought about doing his job, he might have averted 9/11 itself. And we were attacked after 9/11 — anthrax.

    We cannot allow these morons to continue spouting the “we haven’t been attcked since 9/11″ bullshit.

    If that happened — even once — on Obama’s watch, they’d fucking lynch him.

  6. What I saw on Olbermann was a kind of montage of Ari claiming that Obama should be “grateful” and “thankful” that Saddam Hussein is no longer around. (To which I answer, “Yes, but George W. Bush is still around.” But I don’t have my own TV show.)

    Ari also claimed, “After we were struck on Sept 11th, and to make sure Saddam did not strike again…”.

    Yes, he actually implied that Saddam attacked us on 9/11. Didn’t say it outright, but as Keith said at the end, “Boy, was Ari stoned.”

  7. MsJ,
    Excellent clip at 5:45! Thanks! This unedited version shows Ari at his worst!

  8. MsJ, thanks for the clip. Watch it at time index 16:00. Fleischer says this:

    “The issue is…but after September 11th, having been hit once, how could we take a chance that Saddam might not strike again? And that’s the threat that has been removed, and I think we’re all safer with that threat being removed.”

    He’s trying to imply, without directly stating it, that Saddam was the one who attacked us on 9/11. of course we know it’s wrong, but he’s trying to leave a hint of that claim in this wording.

    Gotta run, TDS is on.

    Good night all.

  9. Damn, you mean to tell me that the Bushalini’s are still claiming that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center. All I can say is that Fleischer is just another Regressive Republican. Nothing new came out of his mouth. Just repeat, repeat and re-repeat.

    • I just saw the Hardball repeat, and forced myself to watch this interview in full. Like Wayne says, AF actually still trying to spin the “Saddam attacked us on 9/11″ bullshit. AND he’s actually trying to make us believe that the Bush administration never said Saddam had nukes. I’m SO happy these idiots are always in front of a camera.

  10. The worst domestic calamity and the worst economic down turn. Dubya: 2 for 2.

  11. Of course, this begs the question of, “What if 9/11 was an inside job?”

    If that were the case, duh, no wonder we haven’t had another similar attack. No matter that Bill Maher pointed out that numerous chemical facilities are totally unguarded, etc.

    If 9/11 were an inside job, and it accomplished its goal of consolidating power, then it explains why no other attacks occured. They weren’t necessary. We had our “Goldstein.”

    The only thing the Bush Administration did not have was complete control over the “ministry of truth.” But we have witnessed its beginnings…….

  12. You can always count on Ari for some interesting history lessons. All completely ass-backwards, of course, but this is what makes it so interesting.

  13. Yeah, but BnF, they have completely ostracised anyone who claims that “tin foil” hat theory so that it never even gets to be an option that is debated. Even among other progressives! Very nicely put away.

  14. Haha I love how there’s this movement to make Bush appear better than he was during his Presidency. Talk about a waste of time and energy, it’s like trying to make Bernie Madoff look like a philanthropist.

  15. We’re still in a war we never needed and the country is bankrupt…and yet the apologists/revisionist historians emerge. It must be the same kind of campaign bin Laden has been waging…..force the properly thinking to use their energy defending themselves so that they can’t spend it any other way. Thanks dipshits. Good Americans, one and all. NOT.

    http://www.gonzogeek.com

  16. I’ll explain it all to you:

    1. If it was bad and it happened when W was president:

    a. If it happened between 2001 and 2007 it was Bill Clinton’s fault.
    b. If it happened between 2007 and 2008, it was Obama’s fault.

    2. If it was good then Bush deserves 100 percent of the credit.

    See, that was easy! :)

  17. Both these guys are morons, and pawns for that matter. Bush? Obama? Does it matter? NO IT DOESN’T! They too are both pawns that have specific media pawns for each of them and their parties. This whole economic problem is planned and has been planned for some time now. Destroy and rebuild, that’s what is happening. If 9/11 was an inside job then be sure that they (the controlling elite pushing for a global new world order) are not done. It doesn’t matter who the president is or who’s watch it is because he doesn’t call the shots; they do. They must bring chaos, confusion, and terror to control the masses.
    If 9/11 was not an inside job then be sure that they(the terrorists) are not done yet. Either way we need to wake up and be prepared for the worst no matter who’s “watch” it is.

    • What were the Anthrax attacks Ari?

      The Anthrax attacks were absolutely acts of ‘terror’. At least that was the intention AND the result. No matter WHO committed them.
      You can’t have it both ways Ari. If they were NOT ‘terrorist’ attacks (as you proudly announced there were NO more attacks after 9/11), then they were an enormous crime perpetrated against people high up in our own government to which was never fully investigated, or at the very least, a minimal investigation occurred that was allowed to drop (or was blocked)..

      OR, it was a loud and very clear message to the two members of the Senate who could potentially slow down the process of ramming through the “Patriot” Act to get out of the way – in which they did.

      For crying out loud, the JonBenet Ramsey murder case, a 6 year old killed 13 years ago in her house, is still being actively investigated with the third new DA being assigned to the case.. Certainly letters containing ‘militarized’ Anthrax (a much more lethal Anthrax than was sent elsewhere, and was traced to our own military facility in Maryland) which were sent to two leading U.S. Senators – Leahy and Daschel, a major political crime, following the attacks of 9/11, should have been given equal if not MUCH more priority than that… I mean, come on.. If someone was REALLY attacking our government, wouldn’t they want to know who did it? Unless they already knew.. Unless it was a faction in our own government who actually did the sending. That would explain the ‘investigation’ just disappearing. Perhaps it was a part of Cheney’s “Executive Assassination Ring” …

      Are we ever going to know the truth?

      And I still want this answered for me.. Why is it that Dick Cheney and his staff, (GW as well), started taking CIPRO (antibiotic of choice for Anthrax) a couple of weeks BEFORE the Anthrax attacks..? Why doesn’t anyone else find that strange? Is Cheney supposed to be a psychic as well? You don’t start all taking powerful antibiotics for no reason..

      From Judicialwatch:

      Dick Cheney started taking the anti-anthrax drug Cipro one week before the first anthrax attack took place and 3 weeks before it first appeared at Capitol Hill at the offices of the senators most vocal in their opposition to the Patriot Act.

      From the Washington Post:

      …At least some White House personnel were given Cipro six weeks ago. White House officials won’t discuss who might be receiving the anthrax-treating antibiotic now.

      On the night of the Sept. 11 attacks, the White House Medical Office dispensed Cipro to staff accompanying Vice President Dick Cheney as he was secreted off to the safety of Camp David, and told them it was “a precaution,” according to one person directly involved….

      There is just so much to this story, and questions that have to be asked – and people who have to answer. And Ari Fleischer is part of the problem. He’s quite a liar.., as was Cheney, as was Bush, as was Rove, as was Gonzales, and on and on and on and on…….

  18. Why does Chris “tingle up my leg” Matthews hate America so much? He has his Magic Boy Obama and his Democratic Congress. The Muslim terrorists would have attacked us even if the Rovian/Diebold election tampering had not occurred.

    • Johnny, I am missing your point. Your comment is apropos to…what, exactly?

      Fleischer said Saddam struck us on 9/11 and we couldn’t let it happen again. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.

      Fleischer said HOW DARE YOU say this happened on their watch.

      Your comment has no point in relation to the post.

  19. isn’t it pathetic how the bushies can’t concede that THEIR admin failed us on 9/11. so as a response, they invade and irrelevant country, turn on Americans by spying and PATRIOT act-ing, and blame the dems. sickening.

    what does it mean when a large portion of our country can’t admit how badly Bush failed us and our constitution? it’s like they just glaze over when they’re reminded that 9/11 was a BUSH blunder. I say all of this as a traditional conservative/libertarian, embarrassed and angered by the GOP.

  20. I looove it. Ari is so on the defensive here that he can’t hear a word that Mathews is saying. How typical of the Bush administration. They only saw and did what they wanted and damn the torpedoes, no one can say anything about it.
    Does anyone else here think that Bush was just a figurehead?

  21. 9-1-1 could have happened to anyone. It was Bush who decided to use it to trash the constitution rather than to cement our friendships around the world.

  22. 9/11 happened 8 months into Bush’s watch, after being planned for YEARS under that useless playboy Clinton. It may have happened under Bush, but put the blame where it belongs, Clinton’s idiotic view of terrorism as a police problem and his failure to take Bid Laden when he had the chance

  23. Roger Troy

    ^^ Hey look a Bush apologist decided to stop on by.

    I love the:

    “his failure to take Bid Laden when he had the chance”

    Tora Bora ring a bell anyone?

  24. Don’t these tolls realize how stupid they sound when they say “We haven’t been attacked since 9/11/2001 when there was Anthrax goign around in November of 2001.

    It is a flat out fucking lie.

  25. 9/11 had nothing to do with who was President at the time… it was not his fault. I mean, was Franklin Roosevelt responsible for Pearl Harbor?

    I will give him credit for no attacks on American soil since… He can have credit for that, and take credit for the financial debacle (to some degree) that we’re in right now…. Had his boys been watching the banks closer, we may have mitigated much of the damage done by financial institutions… Of course, lack of oversight by government has led to two other debacles…

    1. The S&L crisis in the 80’s
    2. The depression

    • tzugidan,

      Two words: Anthrax attacks.

      Tell me this, why does the Boy King get the biggest fucking do-over in history? 9/11 WAS Bush’s fault — he ignored increasingly alarming warnings his entire [p]residency. That’s just part of what makes him the worst president EVER.

  26. poor Ari, he must have no life if all he has to do is run around defending a douche bag

  27. Useless playboy.

    You mean the sitting president who got to spend how much time being interrogated about a consensual blow job which took time away from his running the country?

    The same interrogations which the Republican’s salivated over?

    The same blow jobs which Newt Gingrich was getting from his own intern (page, whatever she was)…the same intern (or whatever she was) he left his wife for – the one he went to the hospital and sat next to her hospital bed when she had cancer and said he wanted a divorce?

    Fuck you and your hypocritical sense of morality.

    Had your ideology not taken a president away from governmental business to deal with nothing but bullshit (VINCE FOSTER! WHITEWATER! BLOWJOBS!!) he would have had more time to devote to his office.

    Who was it that caught the people from the first World Trade Center bombing?

    Who never caught bin Laden?

    Enough said.

  28. No one remembers the anthrax scare. The Goopers have rewritten it out of history.

    Botch kept us safe after 9/11…well, except for that little anthrax thing, but forget about that.

    Sorry, no. I will not forget about that little thing.

  29. The real question is how did George Bush and his entourage get elected, not once, but twice. Now I know you will all say he wasn’t it was tampering with the votes etc. But the fact remains that enough people did vote for him to get him to almost 50%

    In 4 or 8 years will we the people remember any of this?

    My daughter who was always pretty liberal in high school and college got her first real job in 1999. She voted for George Bush in 2000 because she was shocked at how much of her income went to taxes and Bush was promising to lower her taxes. She’s not stupid, but she fell the old GOP line.

    How do we wake Americans up and make sure they research what are leaders really want to do?

  30. You’re a nutbag. 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch. It’s not even the point. The bottom line is the middle eastern factionists didn’t hate Bill Clinton personally and they did hate the Bush family personally. I had no interest in taking on the Middle East. The Bush family seems to have a personal stake in taking on the Middle East. You’re a strange bird. I hope you end up in the institution you are heading for. I’d like to not run into you again.

  31. The Bush family seems to have a personal stake in taking on the Middle East.

    OMG, now we have the dumbest people posting here.

    The Bush family is in bed with the Saudis and specifically the bin Laden family! This started long, long ago as they are both oil familes. The Carlyle Group?

    Good god…can we please get some REASONABLY informed people commenting? It’s is an embarrassment to have a comment this patently stupid on this blog.

    Jeez, I am still shaking my head that that ignorant comment.

    • After 9/11, when all air space over the US was shut down, who do you think was in the only airliners flying overhead? The Saudis and specifically, the Bin Ladens who were quickly flown out of the US before ANY FBI agents could talk to them. This being right after the attacks by supposed Middle Eastern terrorists… What was THAT about..?

      From The Boston Globe from 2004:

      Never before in history has a president of the United States had such a close relationship with another foreign power as President Bush and his father have had with the Saudi royal family, the House of Saud. I have traced more than $1.4 billion in investments and contracts that went from the House of Saud over the past 20 years to companies in which the Bushes and their allies have had prominent positions — Harken Energy, Halliburton, and the Carlyle Group among them. Is it possible that President Bush himself played a role in authorizing the evacuation of the Saudis after 9/11? What did he know and when did he know it?

      Let’s go back to Sept. 13, 2001, and look at several scenes that were taking place simultaneously. Three thousand people had just been killed. The toxic rubble of the World Trade Center was still ablaze. American airspace was locked down. Not even Bill Clinton and Al Gore, who were out of the country, were allowed to fly home. And a plane bearing a replacement heart for a desperately ill Seattle man was forced down short of its destination by military aircraft. Not since the days of the Wright Brothers had American skies been so empty.

      But some people desperately wanted to fly out of the country. That same day, Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States and a long-time friend of the Bush family, dropped by the White House. He and President George W. Bush went out to the Truman Balcony for a private conversation. We do not know everything they discussed, but the Saudis themselves say that Prince Bandar was trying to orchestrate the evacuation of scores of Saudis from the United States despite the lockdown on air travel.

      Meanwhile, a small plane in Tampa, Fla. took off for Lexington, Ky. According to former Tampa cop Dan Grossi and former FBI agent Manny Perez, who were on the flight to provide security, the passengers included three young Saudis. Given the national security crisis, both Grossi and Perez were astonished that they were allowed to take off. The flight could not have taken place without White House approval.

      The plane taking off from Tampa was the first of at least eight aircraft that began flying across the country, stopping in at least 12 American cities and carrying at least 140 passengers out of the country over the next week or so. The planes included a lavishly customized Boeing 727 airliner that was equipped with a master bedroom suite, huge flat-screen TVs, and a bathroom with gold-plated fixtures. Many of the passengers were high-ranking members of the royal House of Saud. About 24 of them were members of the bin Laden family, which owned the Saudi Binladin Group, a multibillion-dollar construction conglomerate.

      All this occurred at a time when intelligence analysts knew that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, that Saudi money was one of the major forces behind Al Qaeda, and that the prime suspect — Osama bin Laden — was Saudi as well.

      • Muse, thank you for your thoughtful reply. I was too floored to provide hard data.

        This site, I am very proud to say, has always had pretty thoughtful, intelligent people. I was honestly floored to see that level of ignorance.

        Good job, Ms. Muse. Good job.

  32. How do we wake Americans up and make sure they research what are leaders really want to do?

    We need to have real journalism again. Corporate owned talking heads have a vested interest in a given outcome. As much as they love their meme of Liberal Media, it is anything but. You get Limbaugh coast-to-coast for free for hours every day. There is no liberal show which runs like that. Not for demand but for access. Access of the public airwaves, I might add.

    The people who bitch about taxes are those who make the most money. If you see someone on television, you can bet your ass that they make 10x what you do (hell, 10x what *I* make and I do ok!!), so make that 20x or more what the average American makes.

    It is difficult to deal with the right wing. They are a party of fear, divisiveness, and victimhood. If those three things were not there, they would not exist at all. People who need the government to take care of them, but not take from them are delusional. It takes money for defense, highways, and all that. They want the protection of the government without paying for it.

    More and more people are waking up, but that fear factor coupled with non-stop propaganda is a tough nut to crack. I think more and more people are seeing what the GOP is all about these days, though. Thank goodness, too!!

  33. 9/11 could not have happened on gw’s watch because he was still on vacation from his yale education.

    Plus, he was busy reading his favorite childhood story, The Very Hungry Caterpillar (which was published around 1972). How dare bin laden interrupt his childhood reading!!

  34. The Bush/Cheney cabinet engaged in cronyism, lying to the public, circumventing the constitution, denying civil liberties/rights and outright negligence, much of which would be illegal if they were taken to task for it. It looks as if nothing much is going to get done about it.
    Obama doesn’t want to look backward and it would surely further divide the parties but I seem to remember a recent republican witch hunt where Clinton was impeached by the house, acquitted by the senate over what? Lying about extra marital oral sex. It is amazing when you think about it. As for the rewriting of GW’s presidential legacy, they all do that (even Reagan) to some extent just not quite as delusional about it as GW (there’s more to “erase”). Funny I didn’t know anyone listened to Ari anymore but then there he was. Nice site. Laura

  35. I can’t think of the last time I wanted to say, “Go, Chris Matthews, go!” Ari Fleischer is Ari Fleischer, I guess. However, I do think he brought up a good point: I’d like to know what is in Obama’s signing statements. Just because Bush abused the privileges associated with the Presidency doesn’t mean Obama is absolved of responsibility if he should choose to repeat those abuses and then call it precedent.

  36. You cannot lay blame on the just president unless you actually know what happened. Take a look at Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank passing legislation to make banks provide loans to people who could NOT afford a home. Then look at all the money they received from Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac… and these organizations were giving large campaign contributions to guess who? An where did the CEO of Fannie Mae end up? Just do your homework and you will discover that the “person” to blame wasn’t who you thought it was, instead you find that you can lay blame on those in the party in charge now.

    • m236th,

      You can’t lay blame on Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank unless you actually know what happened.

      Just sayin’…

  37. Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com

  38. $5 Billion in Lobbying for 12 Corrupt Deals Caused the Multi-Trillion Dollar Financial Meltdown

    Here are 12 deregulatory steps to financial meltdown:

    1. The repeal of Glass-Steagall

    2. Off-the-books accounting for banks

    3. CFTC blocked from regulating derivatives

    4. Formal financial derivative deregulation: the Commodities Futures Modernization Act

    5. SEC removes capital limits on investment banks and the voluntary regulation regime

    6. Basel II weakening of capital reserve requirements for banks

    7. No predatory lending enforcement

    8. Federal preemption of state enforcement against predatory lending

    9. Blocking the courthouse doors: Assignee Liability Escape

    10. Fannie and Freddie enter subprime

    Fannie and Freddie are not responsible for the financial crisis. They are responsible for their own demise, and the resultant massive taxpayer liability.

    11. Merger mania

    12. Credit rating agency failure

    Go to the link above and read all the details. I only left one of them in the list above.

    Oh, and by the way, Phil Gramm, a Republican, has his fingers in many of the items on this list.

    Step away from the right-wing talking points and learn the truth about this whole thing. You cannot state one simplistic thing (those damned poor people who got loans they couldn’t afford!) as the reason for this mess. It goes way, way, way deeper than that. CDO’s, derivitives, know what those are? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

  39. wow! just when I thought I was an informed Dem and had heard it all about GOP corruption throughout the ‘Shrub’ admin…I didn’t know about White House officials taking Cipro before the outbreaks started.

    Ari really needs to get a life…at this point, there’s no use in trying to salvage the reputation of those involved in said admin…we know (the majority of the country do, anyway) what they are, what they’ve done and, hopefully, we are smarter than to let it happen again.

    Whoever it was that made the comment about the GOP taking over airways was right…I’m so sick of hearing the usual rant about how all media is run by the Left and doesn’t give the poor, poor (sorry is more like it) GOP any chances to properly defend themselves. When, in reality, what they’re saying is that they think all media outlets should be as biased as FoxNews is.

    Speaking of those wretched d-nuggets, believe it or not, I actually know someone who never knew that Shrub gave an apology speech because it was never aired on FoxNews (that’s the only station she’ll watch)…she didn’t even believe me about it, because I’m “such a liberal left-wing loonie”, she heard it from a mutual friend of ours…THEN she believed it! Crazy how snowed some of these Repubs are about the whole affair, still!

    BTW, nice blog!

  40. And now, these lying sacks of neocon, Republican shit are continuing on the Bush Revisionism Legacy Tour ™ by saying that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Oklahoma City Bombings. These people have no shame, and will lie with a straight face over and over. This was our government for eight years. Lies, lies, and more lies.

    As a result, more than 4000 American’s have dies, tens of thousands are injured, more than 100,000 Iraqi’s have died and millions are displaced.

    This is beyond belief!

    • ambrosiavenus, every time I learn yet another discrepancy in the ‘official story’ that makes absolutely no sense I become absolutely infuriated all over again. I just for the life of me cannot figure out why people don’t ask more questions and demand the answers.. There is just too much that doesn’t fit. That’s not ‘conspiracy’, just the reported facts!

  41. Wow, you people are fucking douchebags. You obviously have no idea how lucky we are to b a nation that doesn’t have to worry about being bombed or attacked. I guess none of you remember the 11th. That is the most un-American thing I have evr witnessed; this isn’t America, this is politics. Obama is going to fail and we are going to be attacked again.

    • Ultra stud? ROTFLMAO!!! Uh, huh. Sure, stud. Whatever you say.

      YOU are the fucking douchebag! We ALL remember 9/11. That has nothing to do with this post.

      Bush lied us into war because of 9/11. He took the goodwill we had throughout the entire fucking world and blew it. We would have had a true multilateral effort to find bin Laden but no, Bush invades Iraq under false pretenses.

      It is YOU who is unAmerican and a fucking traitor to your country for not only not speaking out against your government, but for allowing it to do what it did and then being an apologist.

      Fuck you!

    • ultraastud464, what makes you say “You obviously have no idea how lucky we are to b a nation that doesn’t have to worry about being bombed or attacked”? I think you missed the point—we WERE attacked! The Bush administration had warnings and did nothing. They not only did nothing, they blocked efforts of others who TRIED to sound warnings. Afterwards they put it to their advantage to put other things in place which shredded our Constitution, dissolved our freedoms, and bypassed our laws—all in secrecy and to the financial of their corporate friends. As an American, that should alarm and disturb you.

      In the next breath you say that Obama will fail and we will be attacked again.. I thought you just said we didn’t need to worry about being attacked…

      Of course I remember September 11th. I watched it as it happened in a state of shock as did most other Americans. More shocking yet was to see what the Bush administration after it happened – all 7 1/2 years afterwards. We are still learning just what they did. Don’t kid yourself.. It wasn’t in the best interest of this country, or the rest of the world..

      Thanks for visiting though…

  42. Bush supporters in this country have GOT to stop thinking that his presidency began on Sept 12, 2001. It didn’t! He was in charge of our national defense, and he dropped the ball big time.

    It is a fact that two former Clinton Administration officials, George Tenet and Richard Clarke, who were asked to stay on and work in the Bush Administration, tried to warn everybody that something big was going to happen, and that it would probably involve airplanes. Just because no one knew the exact date, time and location of the attack was no reason to do nothing, which is precisely how Bush handled it. He did nothing.

    Did you know that on Sept 10, 2001, two significant but since-ignored things happened? First, Sec of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that an audit had shown that the Pentagon could not account for over two trillion dollars that had been appropriated to it over the years. Second, Attorney General John Ashcroft submitted his Justice Dept budget request to Bush. It included increases in spending on sixty-eight programs. None of them had anything to do with stopping terrorism. He also passed around a memo listing his seven top priorities. Terrorism was not on that list, either.

    The attacks of 9/11 did not happen because the Bush Administration wanted them to happen; they happened because the Bush Administration did not want them to not happen. So they did nothing to prevent them from happening, in case they were going to anyway.

  43. Hmmm lets see now I heard that Mr Bush was warned over and over by his aids and others about the heated chatter about attacking the US-where Bushy darling preffered not to be bothered over it. We have had the Port authority screaming at the government to do something about having more security on their waters-they were ignored. Bush deary boy appointed Condolizza whatever her name is as National Security Advisor who was totally unfit for the Job. The Twin towers were attacked before. We have movies like ‘Excecutive Decision’ that screams of middle eastern terrorists attacking the the Eastern Seaboard that in reality would happen and did happen! What more evidence does anyone need that Bush did absolutely nothing for this country except treat the white house as his own personal boys club and pleasure palace!

  44. I know, I’m putting my neck under the guillotine blade, here, but could Ari Fleischer have been implying that the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks did not happen as a result of negligence on George W. Bush’s Watch, which was what was implied in the question Chris Matthews was asking?

    That is a supposition based on educated, contextual inference. I know it’s more fun to tear people apart by taking what they say literally and then applying strict logic to it. I think, in fairness, however, that might not render the most accurate analysis of the situation under discussion.

    Whether or not the governmental negligence that occurred, making the 9/11/2001 terrorist attacks possible, is attributable to the administration of President Bush or President Clinton or some combination of the two is a subject that is more-or-less open to debate.

    I, personally, believe that the negligence Matthews was implying occurred – and which, no doubt, did occur – is attributable, at least in part, to both administrations, though I believe Clinton did not do all that could be done to cripple Al-Qaeda and/or warn the incoming administration of the threat from that terrorist group, thus making him primarily responsible for the negligence in question.

    I think a fair treatment of this topic in the context of historical fact, rather than political ideology, would serve the purpose of honest inquiry, and I’m given to wonder if that is your intent, here, or if you’re just in the business of bashing Bush and anyone who ever associated with him.

  45. noonien, while I love my share of Bush bashing, for every single thing he has inflicted upon not just US but the world, what completely infuriated me was the HOW DARE YOU say that 9/11 happened on his watch.

    It did.

    He was presented with information, told the people who actually had a clue that they had “covered their ass,” and went back to clearing brush.

    Bush was the most absent president in history (he logged over 1000 days off, which, for those who do not want to do math in their heads is ALMOST THREE YEARS of the eight years he was president) during periods when we actually needed a working president.

    Of course, more and more is coming out to prove what many have said that Bush was little more than a puppet figurehead for Cheney (can’t want to see what happens to that Sy Hersh story about assassins – because if it is true, Cheney is done. There is not getting around that one.)

    Do feel free to intellectually tear apart everything Bush. No matter how you wrap it around your mind, it still was bad. Very bad. How many people can say that their lives are better after Bush left? Single digit percentages of American’s, that’s who. Bad doesn’t even start to cover the clusterfuck that was the Bush regime.

  46. 9/11 happened on Bush’s watch.

    if we get attacked again in the next 4 years:

    x/xx will happen on Obama’s watch.

    Does that mean that Obama had control over the whole situation? Are you going to take the same defense that the people you are arguing with now are taking? Probably.

    Sorry Obamabots… Bad things happen. It can’t be Bush’s fault forever.

  47. I can understand why Bush has to take the blame for 9/11. Remember the saying, “uneasy lies the head that wears the crown”. Obama is only human. Too much should not be expected of him less we get dissappointed.

  48. WOW, I love reading Liberal blogs – don’t let facts get in the way.
    Clinton was more interested in blow jobs than running the country ( But, then look who he married).
    Bin Laden was offered to him, he refused on “legal” grounds.
    If the Clintonistas had so much information to hand over to Bush that allegedly could have stopped the attacks, why didn’t Clinton act on that info.? The WTC was attacked in ’93, Clinton did nothing.
    BTW, not a Bush apologist – except for cutting taxes and spurring the economy out of Clinton’s recession and fighting the terrorists as enemy combatants and not street criminals – he was a failure.

    • I love it when goofy wingers comment on liberal blogs, complaining that we don’t let facts get in the way — while posting lies, distortions, and NO FACTS. :roll:

      Please grow up and get over your CBJDS.

  49. Here is one fact, don’t have time the 100’s of others:

    In August, 2002, NewsMax.com releases secret audio of then President Clinton admitting for the first time anywhere that he had the chance to take Osama bin Laden into custody, but he nixed the idea because he couldn’t come up with a legal justification for the 9-11 mastermind’s extradition The tape was recorded at a February 2002 business luncheon on New York’s Long Island:
    “Mr. bin Laden used to live in Sudan. He was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1991, then he went to Sudan. And we’d been hearing that the Sudanese wanted America to start meeting with them again – they released him. At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America. So I pleaded with the Saudis to take him, ’cause they could have. But they thought it was a hot potato and they didn’t and that’s how he wound up in Afghanistan.” (End of excerpt)

    So, I guess he couldn’t have taken Bin Laden out of commission when admits he could have?

    • NewsMax? Don’t make me laugh.

      BTW, did you read your posted quote? If Clinton had “taken bin Laden out of commission” he would have been committing a crime because “At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America so I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America.”

      There are these funny things called laws that all people are supposed to obey, so Clinton was constrained from murdering bin Laden. Sadly, Clinton did not possess the psychic powers that would have let him know that your boy George was going to completely ignore al Qeada and bin Laden until 9/11 happened.

      Run along…

  50. Yea, no legal controlling authority, heard that before. The guy was a known terrorist, US laws as they apply to common criminals are not at issue, unless you are looking for an excuse.
    This was a criminal on the streets, but Clinton choose to treat him as such, just as Obama has banned “enemy combatants”, going back to the failed Clinton treatment of terrorists, which will cost us dearly.
    As far as Newsmax, I guess if the tape was on Salon it would be OK – I am sure Newsmax made it all up.
    Bottom line, the planning was done under Clintons nose but he couldn’t see it because all he was looking at was the top of Lewinsky’s head.

    Bush ignored Al Qeada and Clinton didn’t? Guess George figured if Billy Boy wasn’t worried for 8 YEARS, why should he worry for 8 months?

  51. Another point, if Clinton didn’t think he had the legal authority to take Bin Laden, guess the same would apply to Bushie, so what was he supposed to do to stop the attack? Actually, by the time Bush took office 9/11 was pretty well planned and even capturing UBL may have done nothing to stop it.

  52. You, like Billy Bob Clinton are confusing US civil and criminal laws for wrongdoings by bad guys WITHIN our borders with a military issue, which UBL was and is. Using Clinton’s logic, we must wait to be attacked to take action even if we know we will be attacked, wonder how that would worked out in WWII with Germany? Clinton’s problem, among many, was that he was a wishy-washy military loathing lawyer and did not want to be bothered with UBL

    • Quit changing your name, Beach Bum. You keep landing in the spam bin. Although you probably belong there.

      Hey, about the bad guys within our borders. The August 6, 2001 PDB explicitly stated that bin Laden was determined to strike within the US, but gee whiz, the Boy King couldn’t be bothered to even read the damn thing (“You’ve covered your ass”). Nor could he be bothered to incease airport security, or even look into the matter.

      But you keep on living in your little Bush “the Constitution is asswipe” Dream World ™, cuz it seems to make you wingers happy. We libs are all about the happy — but we’re also about the Constitution and the rule of law.

  53. Thank you for the welcome!

    It makes me laugh how many far right extremists and ‘Shrub’ apologists visit blogs like this, thinking they can change our minds by calling known facts lies…when the whole last 8 years of government was all based on lies.

    I have read FoxNews forum a couple of times and all I saw was people like ultrastud, roger troy and beach bum raising hell, making claims that Pres. Obama is going to send us to the Abyss and turn us all into government-dependent commies. I even read death threats directed at Pres. Obama(which of course, weren’t moderated at all). Then I read where people, from both sides, complaining that their comments didn’t get past “the filter” and they’d have to re-word their statements…many of which were very intelligent.

    Give me a fucking break already! Correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t that whole commie schpeal only work with those who are already so far right they drive on the sidewalk…those who have already fallen for Hannity and O’Reilly’s propoganda hit parade? I’ve seen very few that came across with the intelligence that Noonien expressed.

    Our country was built by rebels (who were also Deists, btw, not the purtanical types we’re taught to see them as) who fought to create a democracy…they were seen as traitors to the loyalists and still fought for what they saw as right. They’d turn over in their graves if they saw that their efforts created a Republic run by the rich, at the expense of the poor, gang-raping Justice and posing under the name Democracy.

    The new Pres. (a true patriot!) is only trying to restore what’s been taken from us and to heal the divide caused by the tyranny of lies. It burns me up when they take the facts and twist them into political hyperbole…it also makes me smile a little, with the knowledge that they only do it out of spite and the fear that the new way of doing things will blow their corruption out of the water.

    In general, those who aren’t a part of the corruption or benefiting directly from it, are simply misinformed by the straw men and red herrings tossed around randomly by those who are the corruption. I’m not saying the Left has no faults, or no liars in the midst…but it’s safe to say, we have far fewer than the other side of the aisle.

  54. C’mon you fools.
    Ari never said that Sadam attacked the “United States”
    After 911 we couldnt ake the chance that Saddam would strike again. Makes sense since he was making it look like he was going to strike someone as he always had before. His own people, Kuwait, Iran, shooting at our pilots in no fly zones…
    Sure, there were no WMDs (we think) but the man did have the technology to pursue those weapons and had used them before.
    Really, trust me, the presidents press secretary knows who attacked us on 911. A long time ago even Bush gave up trying to make the Saddam/Iraq conection. But to assert that Saddam was directly resposible for 911 in May of 2009 ?
    C’mon, you may not like Ari but hes not a complete idot. hes the only one who has the original notes of every action taken on 911. And as we all know none of them were directed at Saddam. We went to Afghanistan first and didnt go after Saddam til after a long game of cat and mouse haivng to do with everything except 911.

    Wise up.

    Zooey, these were the exact same memos that Clinton was getting on a weekly basis. Oh, wait…
    how many times did Al Queda actually attack and kill Americans before Clinton did anything ? Huh ?
    We suffered one attack from Al Queda on Bushs watch and went over there and gave em hell. Billy boy let us get our ships bombed, embassies and oh yeah, the towers too and did what ? Shot a couple missles at gos knows what ? Bombed Bosnia ?

    Thats right, think about it. The same memos saying the same thing along with at least 3 attacks on his watch while 911 was being planned.
    Did you ever read Osamas “letter to America”? In it he mentions only one president and it aint Bush

    • Given your introduction of yourself to this site — “C’mon you fools” — I won’t try to disillusion you, micky2.

      You just keep on believing…

  55. Yes, I could be a little more graphic in my reference to “coming on” you fools but I’ll spare you the disillusion that I might find you attractive in any sense at all.

    Maybe you couldsimply answer as to what the hell Clinton was doing or thinking during said activities above.

    Tell me how does one so disillusiuonal elude anyone to anthing other than the fact that your an ideological bigot who in the face of the facts can only return with the typocal moonbattery of ad hominem attacks ?
    Nice return there babe, I’l bet you really aced your pre school debate class.
    Argue the facts and the issue or continue looking like the mindless obfuscating dolt you were upon your own introdction. :-)

  56. WALLACE: Do you think you did enough, sir?

    CLINTON: No, because I didn’t get him.

    WALLACE: Right.

    CLINTON: But at least I tried. That’s the difference in me and some, including all the right-wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try. They did not try. I tried.

    So I tried and failed. When I failed, I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke, who got demoted.

    CLINTON: What did I do? What did I do? I worked hard to try to kill him. I authorized a finding for the CIA to kill him. We contracted with people to kill him. I got closer to killing him than anybody has gotten since. And if I were still president, we’d have more than 20,000 troops there trying to kill him.

    Now, I’ve never criticized President Bush, and I don’t think this is useful. But you know we do have a government that thinks Afghanistan is only one-seventh as important as Iraq.

    And you ask me about terror and Al Qaida with that sort of dismissive thing? When all you have to do is read Richard Clarke’s book to look at what we did in a comprehensive, systematic way to try to protect the country against terror.

    And you’ve got that little smirk on your face and you think you’re so clever. But I had responsibility for trying to protect this country. I tried and I failed to get bin Laden. I regret it. But I did try. And I did everything I thought I responsibly could.
    ———————————————

    Now, you want to tell me that Clinton has done half as much as Bush to try that stop al Queda or kill Bin Laden ?
    As he plainly says, he tried, obviously not enough.
    His efforts allowed the five year planning and attack on 911.
    Since Bushs efforts were put into play we have not been attacked once.
    Those are the facts baby. Whats disillusional about that ?
    Now that the moonbats are running things again what happens ? Right after that stupid a$$ release by Napolitano warning of normal everyday citizens being terrorists we are attacked on American soil by a radical Muslim who blew away one of our soldiers at a recruitment center.
    I guess Obamas apologies to the whole middle east dont seem to working too well, do they ? I dont know, maybe if he gives Hamas another 900 million that will cool things down a little

Comments are closed.