Bush Had No Plan to Catch Bin Laden after 9/11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
By Wendy
@jerzgirl (9384)
United States
September 30, 2008 7:03pm CST
Just what has to happen in this country for justice to prevail?? Do we have to lose 100% of our freedoms before we realize the crimes perpetrated against us? Why can't SOMEONE take charge and prosecute these crimes against our country, which if not treasonous, are bordering on treason? 
Read this article and tell me honestly how a president of this country could get away with this and NOT be considered a criminal, to have acted with only personal interest in mind, to have acted AGAINST the security interests of this country?? I don't see how it is possible.
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1722
I don't care what your political leaning is. If we have been attacked - if a declaration of war has been made against us - is it right for ANY president of ANY party to refuse to go after those responsible? Is it responsible for ANY president to focus solely on taking over oil fields (we apparently do have proof now that was the only goal in mind) rather than to defend our borders and international honor? How can we turn out backs on this and even WANT to elect someone else even remotely like this man?? 
I don't intend to insult anyone's perspective, and I'd like it if readers don't either, but can you defend these actions (or inactions) at all? If so, how? I just want to know HOW anyone can say what was AND wasn't done about 9/11 were appropriate after reading this. Please. Do you have an answer? 
Read this article and tell me honestly how a president of this country could get away with this and NOT be considered a criminal, to have acted with only personal interest in mind, to have acted AGAINST the security interests of this country?? I don't see how it is possible.
http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=1722
I don't care what your political leaning is. If we have been attacked - if a declaration of war has been made against us - is it right for ANY president of ANY party to refuse to go after those responsible? Is it responsible for ANY president to focus solely on taking over oil fields (we apparently do have proof now that was the only goal in mind) rather than to defend our borders and international honor? How can we turn out backs on this and even WANT to elect someone else even remotely like this man??
I don't intend to insult anyone's perspective, and I'd like it if readers don't either, but can you defend these actions (or inactions) at all? If so, how? I just want to know HOW anyone can say what was AND wasn't done about 9/11 were appropriate after reading this. Please. Do you have an answer? 2 people like this
3 responses
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
1 Oct 08
Wow, a link to an anti-Bush article on a pro-Obama site. Sure, that's credible. Why is it that the article fails to cite any sources? I recommend doing research with valid sources before believing everything you read from the anti-Bushies.
2 people like this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
1 Oct 08
He didn't invade Iraq before Afghanistan. It wasn't until some time after. He waited until he had enough evidence to justify that attack. Congress seemed to feel it was justified at the time. I didn't agree with the war in Iraq, but that decision wasn't made unilaterally by Bush. I can't really argue the context of any BBC article unless you provide me with it.
The site used by the OP was clearly biased. I looked through several pages of articles on it. There were pro-Obama articles, anti-Bush articles, and anti-McCain articles. I didn't see a single article that criticized Obama or complimented McCain. One such article may exist, but I went back through over a month's worth of articles and didn't find one.
1 person likes this
@dlbruce85 (110)
• United States
1 Oct 08
There seems to be this common belief that congress approved of the war on Iraq. To the contrary, congress never voted in a declaration of war on Iraq at all. George Bush is just the latest thief in an ongoing system. Clinton, and Bush Sr. were also guilty of the same things. Building towards a "new world order" (George Sr and Bill Clinton's term, not mine). Increasing the leverage of banks in political affairs, and profiting companies like Halliburton, who also made a fortune during Clinton's administration by the way. An attack on Iraq was never justified, there is still no clear reason why we went there. They're is not a single shred of evidence linking bin Laden or Taliban to Iraq or Saddam Hussein. In fact the U.N. had documented for years the fact that Hussein despised these fundamentalist groups. I am not a democrat or republican, they both vote against our rights supporting unconstitutional bills like the Patriot Act(s), the FISA ruling, the Bush Doctrine, etc. Other than what they say in interviews, there is little difference between the actual legal ACTIONS of Obama and McCain, they have consistently voted the same on 70% of the bills Bush has passed. Taking away our liberties to protect us from terrorists, ha. Benjamin Franklin once said, "Those who sacrifice liberty for security will end up with neither." This is a good time to heed those words of wisdom.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
1 Oct 08
I sure wish I did have an answer, but I don't, and I sure can't think of any way to defend this Administration's lack of action. I'm also not all that surprised that it's your source that is being attacked since anything against any conservative has to be liberal, "anti-Bushie" propaganda, right?
Annie
2 people like this
@jerzgirl (9384)
• United States
2 Oct 08
Well, truth comes in many packages and as long as it's truth, I don't worry about the source. But, I've also seen this information in other places in bits and pieces - now I see the entire package and felt compelled to share it. I just don't see how anyone who has done this can be allowed to go free. I really don't care what party they belong to. It's just not right!
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
2 Oct 08
I, for one, am very glad you did share it. It's sad that for some here all that matters is the source when it comes us evil liberals like us posting anything less than favorable about the current Administration or the McCain/Palin camp. Truth is truth, period!
Annie
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
1 Oct 08
As long as Pakistan is hiding and protecting Bin Laden, what do you want Bush to do to get him?
1 person likes this
@jerzgirl (9384)
• United States
2 Oct 08
The point of the story was that bin Laden was STILL in Afghanistan and Bush refused to send anyone to block his exit. He even had to be talked into sending troops at all into Afghanistan because all he wanted was to go into Iraq. He never cared about who attacked us. Not once. He merely used it all as a springboard.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Oct 08
Name one time the commander of operations in Afghanistan was ever denied troops, equipment or supplies because the commander of operations in Iraq said he needed them more.
