Today(Friday, October 29) a tape with Osama Bin Laden talking on it surfaced. In the tape Bin Laden says this: "Despite the fact that we are into the fourth year after September 11, Bush is still misleading you and hiding the real reason from you, which means that the reasons to repeat what happened remain." (full article here) Bin Laden himself is telling us that Bush is lieing about 9/11 and that because he is doing so the reasons for another 9/11-attack remain. In another tape found about a week ago(I think) an American member of Al Qaeda says that more terrorist attacks are to come - Attacks so bad that "you'll forget 9/11 even happened." The election comes down to this: Who do you think will be best at preventing these attacks? Do you really want the man who knew a month prior to 9/11 that the attacks were to happen to remain president for another four years? What if he's on vacation again when he gets another terrorist-attack security briefing? What if he decides to ignore it and continue with his vacation again? I'm going to be in New York next weekend and after hearing these threats from Al Qaeda, I have to say that i'd feel much safer with John Kerry as president right now.
Do we have solid proof that Bush knew about 9/11 a month before it happened? Moreover, did they really have concrete evidence 9/11 was going to happen? Imagine what would have happened if Bush had started attacking Al Qaeda without concrete evidence that 9/11 would happen? People would say things that like "preemtive action" and "war mongerer"...sounds familar now though. I'm not saying Iraq has gone well, or even that it was right to go in the way we did, or that the administration doesn't have a few ulterior motives. But maybe the amount of evidence they had suggesting 9/11 would happen was equal to or less then what Great Britan told us about Hussein having WMDs?
We have not had an attack on our soil since 9/11. If an attack is attempted and Bush successfully prevents it, I think this could be really good for him. We should have no problem preventing these attacks though. The CIA and FBI are now more closely involved and attempts have been to strengthen our intelligence.
Ha ah! I've been saying that Bin Laden would come back just before the elections for months! Now, lets see how this could influence the American people.
He had his chance, 3000 people died. And Lyn; Bush received a his daily presidential briefing memo on August 6th, 2001 alerting him that Osama bin Laden was determined to strike in the US using airplanes as bombs. Futhermore, attorney general John Ashcroft told the FBI in the months prior to 9/11 that "he did not want to hear about the threats anymore", according to former acting FBI director Pickard, who advised him. In addition, former FBI assistant director Dale Watson said that Ashcroft was "not supportive" of bulding up the capacities to combat terrorism. In fact, Ashcroft cut counterterrorism funding by 12% on Sept 10th, 2001, one day before 9/11. That's the evidence. If they're going to pre-empt to strike a country with no links to Al Qaeda, the terrorist network that inflicted 9/11 upon the US, such as Iraq in an unjustified war, by that logic, they should pre-empt and take all real threats very seriously before they happen. And as crazy as it seems, bin Laden owned Bush with his phrase about him sticking in the elementary school classroom to read a childrens book while a tower had been struck by two planes, in which he knew exactly what was happening.
On August 6, 2001(about a month before the 9/11 attacks) George Bush recieved a security briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determed to Attack Inside the US"(as said by Condoleezza Rice). What did the report contain? [*] The declassified intelligence report said the FBI had detected "patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings." (US knew Al Qaeda members were in the US learning how to fly) [*] An intelligence report received in May 2001 indicating that al Qaeda was trying to send operatives to the United States through Canada to carry out an attack using explosives. That information had been passed on to intelligence and law enforcement agencies. [*] An allegation that al Qaeda had been considering ways to hijack American planes to win the release of operatives who had been arrested in 1998 and 1999. [*] An allegation that bin Laden was set on striking the United States as early as 1997 and through early 2001. [*] Intelligence suggesting that suspected al Qaeda operatives were traveling to and from the United States, were U.S. citizens, and may have had a support network in the country. The report did not say "they will hijack airplanes and fly them into the World Trade Center on September 11"(obviously) but they were given enough information that Al Qaeda was planning an attack. They should have alerted American citizens and everyone should have been on high alert. I don't think the US did enough. I think there was time for fighter jets to catch the hijacked commercial jets and either (A) take control of the plane or (B) shoot the plane down. A hundred lives are "better" than 3,000. Also, The US said after the attacks that they never suspected terrorists to hijack airplanes YET on the very morning of 9/11 the FBI were training on how to deal with a situation where an airplane was used as a weapon and run into a US building. As for what you said about Bush attacking Al Qaeda, that's not what I'm talking about. I don't think Bush should have started sending troops over there but he should have been on higher security alert here. Way more should have, and could have been done to at least try and prevent the attacks. What is John Ashcroft doing telling the FBI he doesn't want to hear about the threats anymore? He should have been begging them for all the information they have so that he can become more aware. It's ridiculous. No matter what anyone says, I don't see how anyone could vote for George Bush after making such a huge mistake like this one. And as everyone knows, this isn't the only big fuck-up coming from him.
Bush probobly knew about it. Most politicians are not to be trusted. When there was a ware in my country the enemy took over one city and made a masker. Some people say that the president knew about it, and he even helped arange it, other people concider im a hero. I think the same thing is with bush. If he can atack people in Iraq, what do "a few" people dead mean to him if he could use it to do alot of speaches. Politicians usualy sit in the confort of their ofices and the army fights wares. Do you know what ware is anywhay? The leagal way for politicians to kill people for theyr own benifit.
Tomorrow and Mark-- all right, Bush obviously had something on them, but do we know if any of this information stood out from all the other intelligence that ends up being incorrect--i.e. Saddam's WMDs? Also, what do you mean by alerting Americans? Do you mean they should have said, "Hey we think Al Qaeda is going to attack us on September 11--quit your lives for a day?" Imagine the panic that would cause. Widespread panic is not a good thing. Like people have said, when alls said and done it's easy to pick out these mistakes, but imagine all the information the FBI and CIA get. Imagine how much of it turns out to really be nothing. It's harder to pick out threads of similarity. Could they have done better? Yes. Would it have been any different of Gore or Kerry were president? I doubt it.
Every threat with that magnitude should be taken seriously. Obviously he should have taken a note that said a wanted terrorist who obviously hates America, and his radical-muslim-extremist terrorist organization wanted to use planes filled with hundreds of people to as bombs on US soil very seriously. Do you seriously think they constantly get threats to that extent? I think not. As for your comment about them saying "Hey we think Al Qaeda is going to attack us on September 11--quit your lives for a day?", they didn't know it was going to happen that day. What the hell are they, mindreaders? Alerting Americans would not cause widespread panic, it'd create a higher level of alert on the part of citizens, and could also discourage terrorists if they think the risk of being caught is too high. I know if I was planning on robbing a bank and the police put out a notice to all banks and public that someone might try to pull a heist, I know I'd be discouraged. Knowledge is power, as one wise man said. The FBI and CIA may get threats like this everyday, but obviously something such as the widespread killing of thousands of people should not be taken lightly. You're making this sound as if all threats are on a level playing field. When an ex-employee of a work building threatens to blow up the building, it is not on the same scale as a terrorist netowrk wanting to use planes to bomb America. Most people who say that are bluffing, unless mentally deranged. But if a terrorist network that is determined to kill Americans makes a threat, that should be taken much more strictly than anything else. If Gore was President, I'd bet the house that he would've appointed the right staff (most likely from the same Clinton staff that prevented terrorism in the states for the eight previous years), instead of appointing some incompetent idiot who lost to a dead man in an election (Ashcroft), who "didn't want to hear about these threats anymore". Secondly, Gore, who knows what it's like to be in such a high position in government, would have scheduled those meetings with his counter-terrorism experts, and would not have vacationed. Vacationing to the extent that Bush did (42% of his first eight months) is unacceptable, that's left for after four-to-eight years of hard work in the White House. You vacation when you deserve it, not when you're the most important man on earth during your tenure as jobholder of the most powerful position in the world. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED.
They are going to say things like that no matter if they have the ability to do it or not. Those tapes are not meant to inform, but scare people. They can do just about anything they want because America doesn't give a fuck. I know, I could go to any mainstream concert in this U.S. right now and sneak anything I want in. Those are concerts, think about elementary schools. This whole mess starts and ends with religion. That's sad.
September 11 was one of the most ridiculous failiures in US intelligence and defense. It takes about 10 minutes to scramble F-15s or F-16s. Wheras airliners fly in the Mach .8 to Mach .85, jet fighters can reach speed in excess of Mach 2. They couldn't have avoided the first tower crash with military power. However, they could've had avoided the Pentagon and Tower 2 strikes. And, if their intelligence services would've done their job, they'd have all avoided.
I doubt whether the tape is authentic.I mean like those guys know all the sh!t about deady chemicals they can also use computers to make fake tapes.Anyway I'll support Bush cause he is the best for my country-India as he has been successful is pressurising Pakistan to stop exporting terrorism to Kashmir and The North-Eastern states of India
There's no way you could make a fake type like that in a month. Plus, there would be a few glitches or something in them, which would have been pointed out by now. Plus, Osama is too ugly. No one would take the time to zoom in and edit the tape.
If you owned a small semi-defenseless country, and the most powerful country on earth with the largest military who are just looking for targets, comes up to you and says "do this, or we'll bomb you.", I'm sure you'd comply. Unless you were a moron.
Yep, Bush got a briefing and he knew SOMETHING was up... So, since they knew the planes were hijacked and headed towards NYC and Washington, why wouldn't they have fighter jets intercepting the planes as they were heading towards the Pentagon/WTC....But of course that would thwart their chances of taking advantage of this situation and their chances for increasing their hold in the Middle East! Heres a New York Times article on this.....the first flight went off course about 8:15 or so, fighters weren't in the air until 9:25!! Yes, there are laws, but at the end Wolfowitz said they could have shot down the last plane if necessary......then why couldn't he shoot down the other ones after the first plane hit the WTC? NYT Article
If you owned a small semi-defenseless country, and the most powerful country on earth with the largest military who are just looking for targets, comes up to you and says "do this, or we'll bomb you.", I'm sure you'd comply. Unless you were a moron. [/b][/quote] So you mean to say that Pakistan is defenseless? Pakistan has a lotta Nuclear Warheads to bomb your @$$es
bin Laden and his supporters send those tapes right to al-Jazeera—it's 100% legit. [/b][/quote] How come the Al-Jazeera guys manage to find those and the US army struggles? I just heard reports that Laden is hiding in Karachi man thats scary. He may be just about 750 miles away from my home but he is still spooky