The attempt to put 9/11 on Clinton's watch

[mmmjvpssm]

Back when Rudy Guiliani said there were no attacks on Bush's watch I said it wasn't a mistake. I said it was an attempt to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. After all, if there were no attacks during Bush's watch, that big attack called 9/11 that happened sometime around the turn of the century. The voters are getting younger and younger and yes, the day will come when a large proportion of voters don't know the exact year 9/11 happened. But when they're watching Fox News, or sadly even the so called "liberal media" and somebody says there were no attacks on Bush's watch what are they to think? But it's not only the "no attacks on Bush's watch" that are attempts to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. "Bush kept us safe" also implies that the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States didn't happen on his watch. And as for "only one attack under Bush" statement, voters who don't remember 9/11, and don't remember the exact year, when they hear "only one attack" and they've been hearing over and over and over again that Bush kept us safe, they're going to assume that it was some small rinky dink attack. They're certainly not going to think "that must have been 9/11"

 

[blastoff]

We're not woooorthy!

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Back when Rudy Guiliani said there were no attacks on Bush's watch I said it wasn't a mistake. I said it was an attempt to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. After all, if there were no attacks during Bush's watch, that big attack called 9/11 that happened sometime around the turn of the century. The voters are getting younger and younger and yes, the day will come when a large proportion of voters don't know the exact year 9/11 happened. But when they're watching Fox News, or sadly even the so called "liberal media" and somebody says there were no attacks on Bush's watch what are they to think? But it's not only the "no attacks on Bush's watch" that are attempts to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. "Bush kept us safe" also implies that the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States didn't happen on his watch. And as for "only one attack under Bush" statement, voters who don't remember 9/11, and don't remember the exact year, when they hear "only one attack" and they've been hearing over and over and over again that Bush kept us safe, they're going to assume that it was some small rinky dink attack. They're certainly not going to think "that must have been 9/11"

WTF does this even mean?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The attempt to put 9/11 on Clinton's watch

Back when Rudy Guiliani said there were no attacks on Bush's watch I said it wasn't a mistake. I said it was an attempt to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. After all, if there were no attacks during Bush's watch, that big attack called 9/11 that happened sometime around the turn of the century. The voters are getting younger and younger and yes, the day will come when a large proportion of voters don't know the exact year 9/11 happened. But when they're watching Fox News, or sadly even the so called "liberal media" and somebody says there were no attacks on Bush's watch what are they to think? But it's not only the "no attacks on Bush's watch" that are attempts to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. "Bush kept us safe" also implies that the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States didn't happen on his watch. And as for "only one attack under Bush" statement, voters who don't remember 9/11, and don't remember the exact year, when they hear "only one attack" and they've been hearing over and over and over again that Bush kept us safe, they're going to assume that it was some small rinky dink attack. They're certainly not going to think "that must have been 9/11"

And we’re also seeing the same thing now with the attempt to place the December 2007 recession on ‘Obama’s Watch.’

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Everything is Bush's fault. Ok, got it.

 

[mmmjvpssm]

The attempt to put 9/11 on Clinton's watch

Back when Rudy Guiliani said there were no attacks on Bush's watch I said it wasn't a mistake. I said it was an attempt to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. After all, if there were no attacks during Bush's watch, that big attack called 9/11 that happened sometime around the turn of the century. The voters are getting younger and younger and yes, the day will come when a large proportion of voters don't know the exact year 9/11 happened. But when they're watching Fox News, or sadly even the so called "liberal media" and somebody says there were no attacks on Bush's watch what are they to think? But it's not only the "no attacks on Bush's watch" that are attempts to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. "Bush kept us safe" also implies that the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States didn't happen on his watch. And as for "only one attack under Bush" statement, voters who don't remember 9/11, and don't remember the exact year, when they hear "only one attack" and they've been hearing over and over and over again that Bush kept us safe, they're going to assume that it was some small rinky dink attack. They're certainly not going to think "that must have been 9/11"

And we’re also seeing the same thing now with the attempt to place the December 2007 recession on ‘Obama’s Watch.’

Yeah, they are doing it with other things too. More then just a few times I've heard that it was Obama who bailed out the banks. That was Bush. But it happened just weeks if not days before Obama took office and so people are easily mislead in that case

 

[mmmjvpssm]

Everything is Bush's fault. Ok, got it.

I never said everything was Bush's fault, but a terrorist attack that happened on his watch, yeahm he's at fault

 

[mal]

Back when Rudy Guiliani said there were no attacks on Bush's watch I said it wasn't a mistake. I said it was an attempt to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. After all, if there were no attacks during Bush's watch, that big attack called 9/11 that happened sometime around the turn of the century. The voters are getting younger and younger and yes, the day will come when a large proportion of voters don't know the exact year 9/11 happened. But when they're watching Fox News, or sadly even the so called "liberal media" and somebody says there were no attacks on Bush's watch what are they to think? But it's not only the "no attacks on Bush's watch" that are attempts to push 9/11 back onto Clinton's watch. "Bush kept us safe" also implies that the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States didn't happen on his watch. And as for "only one attack under Bush" statement, voters who don't remember 9/11, and don't remember the exact year, when they hear "only one attack" and they've been hearing over and over and over again that Bush kept us safe, they're going to assume that it was some small rinky dink attack. They're certainly not going to think "that must have been 9/11"

KSM, the Mastermind behind 9/11, first Attacked the WTC in 1993... On Clinton's Watch with an Iraqi Agent by the name of Ramzi Yousef...

Yousef was captured and Tried as a Criminal... KSM remained at large for the duration of Clinton's 2 Terms.

In 1999 Clinton was given an EXTENSIVE Report that outlined al Qaeda's (who declared War on us in 1996) Desires to use Commercial Aircraft against Specific Targets such as the Pentagon...

9 Months after leaving Office, Clinton's Inaction on al Qaeda manifest itself in a much WORSE way than it did in 1993...

KSM finished the job and took down the WTC Towers with (2) Commercial Aircraft...

He also did extensive damage to the Pentagon with another...

What did Clinton do with the information he got in 1999 to prevent this?...

Were the Cockpits of Commercial planes adjusted at all?...

Does anyone remember tighter Security @ the Airports going into place in the final 2 years of Clinton?...

Hell, as a goodbye Gift for Attacking a Medicinal Factory in the Sudan instead of just taking bin Laden from the Sudanese when offered, Clinton saw the USS Cole attacked on his way out the door of the Office he Abused and Neglected for 8 years...

History is History... And it doesn't read well for the Intern Molesting President of the 90's when 9/11 had been in the planning for half of his Presidency and was finished during his final Budgetary year... The same time frame we enjoyed a Recession that was Blamed on Bush.

But I Digress...



peace...

 

[Claudette]

Whatever happens on the watch of any given POTUS is considered theirs. Fairly or unfairly thats just the way it is.

If its good they get the kudo's.

If its bad then they get the blame.

Most people don't look at what happened before the Prez took office. They look at what happens during his or her time in office.

If the Clinton administration had taken OBL out would 9/11 have happened?? You can speculate but who really knows??

If Bush hadn't approved the first TARP would a recession have happend?? There again you can speculate but who knows for sure what would have happened??

The here and now?? Barry's policies are a failure. It didn't work FDR did back in the 30's. and it ain't workin for shit now.

He's the sitting Prez so he will get the blame just as Bush did for 9-11.

 

[mmmjvpssm]

9 Months after leaving Office, Clinton's Inaction on al Qaeda manifest itself in a much WORSE way than it did in 1993...

8 months after Bush took office we had the largest terrorist attack in the history of the United States.
The 1993 attack took place 1 month after George Bush left office. How much blame for that attack do you put at his feet

KSM finished the job and took down the WTC Towers with (2) Commercial Aircraft...
Does the first dot mean "on" the second "Bush's" and the third "watch"?

He also did extensive damage to the Pentagon with another...
Same as above"

What did Clinton do with the information he got in 1999 to prevent this?...
What did Bush do with the information he got from Clinton? You do know that that 1999 report came out before he took office don't you?

Were the Cockpits of Commercial planes adjusted at all?...
Why weren't they adjusted under Bush. Even when 9'11 was happening and they knew that the terrorists got into the cockpit why didn't they send out a message to all planes telling them to close and lock their cockpit doors. Unlocked and even open cockpit doors weren't unusual in those days. In fact if I remember correctly that was one of the reasons the terrorists chose flight 11

Does anyone remember tighter Security @ the Airports going into place in the final 2 years of Clinton?...
Does anybody remember tighter security at the airports going into place during the first 8 months of Clinton?

 

[teapartysamurai]

Everything is Bush's fault. Ok, got it.

I never said everything was Bush's fault, but a terrorist attack that happened on his watch, yeahm he's at fault

There is good reason that the blame goes to Clinton.

It was his admin that put in place the walls between intelligence agencies, MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO connect the dots to 9/11.

There is a reason the "Path to 9/11" was on ABC once and since them has never been on DVD. Because it clearly shows how the Clinton admin ignored terrorism on his watch, seeing it only as a "law enforcement" problem.

There is a reason Sandy Burgler stole documents from the national archives to help cover up this trail.

Yes, Bush didn't see this coming, but he didn't put up the roadblocks that prevented us from seeing it coming.

Also once it happened, Bush did a 180 and reacted as swiftly as possible.

Clinton, on the other hand, did little on the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the embassy attacks in Africa, and the USS Cole.

IN FACT, the ONLY time he really reacted was when Monica Lewinsky was giving a deposition, and ALL OF A SUDDEN, Clinton felt it necessary to bomb Iraq (or as Bush put it, "hit a camel in the butt") to get the Deposition off the front pages.

You libs can squawk all you want, that Bush should be to blame for everything, but we remember the chain of events leading up to 9/11.

As for the economic crisis. I guess you libs forgot who took over the Congress in 2007.

 

[8537]

People who don't understand why there needs to be a informational wall between the FBI and The CIA need to do some cursory research before flapping their gums.

 

[teapartysamurai]

People who don't understand why there needs to be a informational wall between the FBI and The CIA need to do some cursory research before flapping their gums.

Thank you for admitting 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

How about YOU try to do some research to actually justify that stupidity.

Liberals, they alway demand YOU do their research.

 

[mmmjvpssm]

Did Bush even try to improve airport security? Clinton sure did. Ever hear of the Gore Commission on Aviation Safety and Security?

http://www.avweb.com/news/safety/183045-1.html

Take a wild guess who opposed these improvements? Yeah that's right. It was the "Clinton should have done something" people

[URL="http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532"]http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532
The Clinton administration's attempts to improve airport security were similarly obstructed in Congress. The Gore commission urged U.S. air carriers to screen all passengers with computerized profiling systems, to upgrade poorly trained private security personnel and to install high-tech baggage-screening equipment. But action on key measures was stalled by lawmakers at the behest of airline lobbyists, and ultimately by the sluggish bureaucracy at the Federal Aviation Administration. Key senators on the Senate Aviation Subcommittee shot down mandated changes recommended by the White House and instead urged "further study." (Eight of the nine Republicans on the subcommittee had received contributions from the major airlines.)
[URL="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2002/01/15/clinton"]

[/URL][/URL]

 

[8537]

People who don't understand why there needs to be a informational wall between the FBI and The CIA need to do some cursory research before flapping their gums.

Thank you for admitting 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

I can't even begin to fathom the level of cognitive impairment required to read my statement and conclude what you did...

Except, I've read other posts from you so I have some perspective.

 

[teapartysamurai]

Did Bush even try to improve airport security? Clinton sure did. Ever hear of the Gore Commission on Aviation Safety and Security?

Final Report of the Gore Commission on Aviation Safety and Security

Take a wild guess who opposed these improvements? Yeah that's right. It was the "Clinton should have done something" people

[URL]http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=4532
The Clinton administration's attempts to improve airport security were similarly obstructed in Congress. The Gore commission urged U.S. air carriers to screen all passengers with computerized profiling systems, to upgrade poorly trained private security personnel and to install high-tech baggage-screening equipment. But action on key measures was stalled by lawmakers at the behest of airline lobbyists, and ultimately by the sluggish bureaucracy at the Federal Aviation Administration. Key senators on the Senate Aviation Subcommittee shot down mandated changes recommended by the White House and instead urged "further study." (Eight of the nine Republicans on the subcommittee had received contributions from the major airlines.)
[URL="http://www.salon.com/news/politics/feature/2002/01/15/clinton"]

[/URL][/URL]

Oh well, fat lot of good THAT DID, considering he made it IMPOSSIBLE to gather intelligence!

So, keep bleating! The FACT is, the reason 9/11 happened is because Clinton put up roadblocks to prevent intelligence gathering, AND ignored terrorism completely, treating it ONLY as a law enforcment problem.

 

[8537]

The FACT is, the reason 9/11 happened is because Clinton put up roadblocks to prevent intelligence gathering

quit lying.

 

[teapartysamurai]

People who don't understand why there needs to be a informational wall between the FBI and The CIA need to do some cursory research before flapping their gums.

Thank you for admitting 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

I can't even begin to fathom the level of cognitive impairment required to read my statement and conclude what you did...

Except, I've read other posts from you so I have some perspective.

Notice he doesn't even TRY to back up his mindless argument that it was a good thing, that Clinton made it impossible to prevent terrorism by putting roadblocks between intelligence communities.

I'm still waiting for you to back up that one.

And then YOU talk about cognitive impairment?

 

[8537]

Thank you for admitting 9/11 was Clinton's fault.

I can't even begin to fathom the level of cognitive impairment required to read my statement and conclude what you did...

Except, I've read other posts from you so I have some perspective.

Notice he doesn't even TRY to back up his mindless argument that it was a good thing, that Clinton made it impossible to prevent terrorism by putting roadblocks between intelligence communities.

I'm still waiting for you to back up that one.

And then YOU talk about cognitive impairment?

The CIA gather intelligence. The FBI arrests people.

Law enforcement agencies don't like standing idly by as people break the law and intelligence agencies don't like when law enforcement agencies arrest their best leads.

 

[DaGoose]

You dumbasses who try to blame Clinton for 9/11 need to watch this when that very same accusation was put to him on FOX news.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0LUZrvUKfU]‪Bill Clinton Kicks Neocon Ass on their own network!‬‏ - YouTube[/ame]

Bottom line...........

1) 9/11 happened on Bush's watch

2) Bush was warned about a planned Al-Qaeda attack by both Clinton and a report he was given

3) Bush chose to ignore the warnings he was given

4) Whether you like it or not this really was Bush's fault

5) No matter how you try and rewrite history you can't ignore the facts (see above video)

.