who's to blame

Well, terror89, you give me one good reason why Bush, would implement his ‘ axis of evil campaign ‘? No guesses…you’ll probably say ‘ to rid the world of terrorism on the USA (but not the world since the Bush Administration is, at present, financing and helping 19 terrorist groups (the easily brainwashed yank know them as so-called ‘ freedom fighters’), around the world)…or is there other motives behind such a campaign apart from this on moral grounds? If you care to study your countries foreign policy (I presume you are a yank?), you will see America, has never ever helped any other country unless it gains greater in return….usually this of exploitation and commercial gain.

Are you suggesting no ‘ western ‘, sorry ‘ US Government ‘, is not capable of killing its own citizens for the greater goal of wealth ? If you think they are not, then you truly are naive to the point of stupidity…as mentioned, easily brainwashed. Remember, it was less than 3,000 citizens that were killed in 9/11….not a lot compared to the number of Iraqi and Afghanistan citizens that have been killed since the USA ‘ illegally ‘ invaded Iraq and Afghanistan….to date, around 68,000 citizens have been killed….but of course, their lives are worth considerably less than any US citizen…aren’t they ? (oh, why did the USA, attack Saddam and Iraq, in 1991…oh, yes, he ‘ illegally invaded another country ‘…just to refresh your memory, it was, Kuwait).

There is plenty of evidence in which to ask questions, which have not yet been answered by the Bush Administration, as to why British and US Intelligence knew 3 – 4 months in advance the WTC was a potential terrorist target…but Bush, did nothing about it, despite being advised by US Intelligence and top officials of the CIA. Is it just a shear coincidence that major financial/insurance contracts were implemented prior to 9/11….massive reductions in shareholder prices in the airline company involved in 9/11, vast movement of money in the US Markets of key oil and gold reserves (amounting to several billions) prior to 9/11, construction contracts drafted up by the Bush Administration to the Osama Bin Ladin family totally 3.4 trillion dollars…guess what, prior to 9/11, military and defence contracts to the Saudi Arabia Royal family for a counter-measure missile defence system culminating in several billion….yes, you guessed right, prior to 9/11….so, with all the wheeling and dealing going on prior to 9/11, one must ask….was there some greater plan ahead to justify such actions…..oh, yes, 9/11 itself….very, very strange, eh….or is it? Guess what though….all the people that will gain out of all this will be…..go on, have a guess….yes, you guess right again….. you are getting good at this….people within the Bush Administration and/or the Republican Party. Mind you though, there are many way in which to ‘ fool the average yank ‘, by blaming such actions…as the crime committed on 9/11..on a person out with the, States…but linked indirectly (the cover-up), to your wheeling and dealing.

But of course, in the western world, it wouldn’t be prudent or wise (if you treasured your life), to question the USA Government, too much regarding 9/11, as they have covered their tracks so well, the only method left is this of the conspiracy theories or believing what the Bush Administration has said, despite the vast amount of evidence contradicting such a lie ….in which they have told us regarding the ‘ true perpetrators ‘, of 9/11.

Yeah, I don't agree that Bush was SOLELY to blame. The problem was institutional... Our government's counter-terrorism establishments and procedures needed reformed. And the one thing I fault Clinton for is that he didn't do more to educate the public. If the public had been educated, they would have been more supportive of reshaping the government and altering our world-view in such a huge way.

And I simply am amazed by some of these ridiculous conspiracy theories, too. They're pretty outlandish [to say the least].

However, I certainly think that Bush dropped the ball. He should have listened to the outgoing Administration. For whatever reason, he didn't.

The 9/11 Report lays it out... Clinton had a few unfortunate mis-steps, but from 1993 on, what can be said is that terrorism was one of his big issues. Countless times in his speeches he reminded America that terrorism was the greatest threat to the nation. And all the while, they developed newer and better strategies. Clinton held at least one (and often two) meetings a week that discussed the subject of terrorism exclusively. Bush held only TWO before 9/11.

He aggressively sought more effective weaponry (ex. Predator Drone, which was finally fully developed just after Bush entered office, but he never used it), he ordered submarines to patrol near Afghanistan in the Indian Ocean for immediate-strike capability (Bush called them off), he tripled the expenditures on counter-terrorism, and in response to the 1998 embassy bombings in Africa, he effectively declared war on Al-Quaida. Just so you know, Clinton's response was more than just mere missiles... the primary part of it was economic. The most notable thing he did that Bush-folk so often forget is that he spearheaded the effort to use international cooperative efforts to bankrupt terrorist organizations. And wouldn't ya know it?... BEFORE 3,000 people died!

All this talk about how he should have done more militarily is revealed as revisionist propaganda when the impeachment witch-hunt is pointed out. I find it quite amusing that a lot of these folks today moaning and whining about how Americans should support our president in this time of war, ugh, they were the first people saying that Clinton was only firing missiles off so they could serve as a distraction from the impeachment proceedings.

Anyways, documents released have shown that the Clinton Administration had plans for a full military response that was to be enacted after the bombing of the USS Cole. But being so close to the transition to a new Pres, they decided to pass it on to Bush's Administration because they didn't want to do the same thing to Dubya that his father did to Clinton: Leave him with a full-blown mess he didn't want or escalate (as in Somalia). The war plan was given to Bush for him to implement, who gave it to Cheney, who promptly ignored it.

Sandy Berger (in January 2001): "I believe that the Bush Administration will spend more time on terrorism generally, and on al-Qaeda specifically, than any other subject."

Now the righties are saying that it was Clinton's fault that there was not enough communication between the FBI and CIA. Well, they're right that there wasn't enough communication, but this is just getting ridiculous. They claim that he erected a "firewall" between the CIA and the FBI, restricting their capabilities. Then when told that that's a lie debunked in the 9/11 Commission Report itself, I saw one person say "well, he just should have done more!"

Er... yeah.

I suppose it all comes down to one incredibly simple question... One that I've not seen a single pro-Bush person ever truly answer:

What did Bush do about terrorism in the first nine months of his presidency?

Add-ons would be: Why did they not implement Clinton's plans? Why did they talk more about drilling in Alaska and missile defense shields than terrorism? Why did 3,000 innocent people have to die before the Administration got its act in gear and start back up where Clinton left off?



You mention...


1993 WTC Attack

Four followers of the Egyptian cleric Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman were captured, convicted of the World Trade Center bombing in March 1994, and sentenced to 240 years in prison each. The purported mastermind of the plot, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, was captured in 1995, convicted of the bombing in November 1997, and also sentenced to 240 years in prison.


Khobar Towers Bombing

On 21 June 2001, just before the American statute of limitations would have expired, a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia, indicted thirteen Saudis and an unidentified Lebanese chemist for the Khobar Towers bombing. The suspects remain in Saudi custody, beyond the reach of the American justice system. (Saudi Arabia has no extradition treaty with the U.S.)


USS Cole

The bombing occurred one month before the 2000 presidential election, so even under the best of circumstances it was unlikely that the investigation could have been completed before the end of President Clinton's term of office three months later.