[Split]Bush at the School - Split from: New Griffin book out on March 14, 2008.

[Sizzler]

The new David Ray Griffin book, titled "9/11 CONTRADICTIONS: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press (http://www.amazon.com/11-CONTRADICTIONS-Letter-Congress-Press/dp/1566567165/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1199605200&sr=1-1)" is due to be released on March 14, 2008. Griffin seems to have a clear tactic. When his old book is criticized, he won't answer to the criticism but writes a new book with more falsehoods.

Here is a sneak peek into the first chapter, released in the Canadian newspaper.

http://www.agoracosmopolitan.com/home/Frontpage/2008/01/07/02080.html

This chapter is about president Bush and his school visit.



Of course, this is the same old recycled stuff.

But here Griffin actually manages to contradict himself:



Bush is not quickly taken to another location, Cheney and Rice are. Griffin accuses them all of being in on this inside job. Why would they deliberately choose to quickly evacuate Cheney and Rice, but not Bush? Why would Cheney and Rice need to be taken anywhere, sure they would also know they were not in danger? This inside job gets more and more incompetent.

Bush in the classroom is very strange. I thought, "what the f" when it happened, and I still think "what the f".

The strange thing is that his location was public knowledge.

This doesn't prove squat, so don't jump on me. It is just one those things that makes me wonder, "what the f?"

[DGM]

Bush in the classroom is very strange. I thought, "what the f" when it happened, and I still think "what the f".

The strange thing is that his location was public knowledge.

This doesn't prove squat, so don't jump on me. It is just one those things that makes me wonder, "what the f?"
What makes you think it was public knowledge? The POTUS schedule is not widely publicized.

What do you think he or the secret service should have done?

[westprog]

Bush in the classroom is very strange. I thought, "what the f" when it happened, and I still think "what the f".

The strange thing is that his location was public knowledge.

This doesn't prove squat, so don't jump on me. It is just one those things that makes me wonder, "what the f?"


There are two possibilities. Firstly, Bush knew that about the conspiracy in advance. When he was told about it, he knew exactly what was going to happen, and he deliberately stayed reading because he wanted to give an impression of courage under fire.

Or Bush was totally shocked, like everyone else, and not having a plan ready made for when hijacked aircraft were flown into the WTC, he froze for a couple of minutes while he collected his thoughts.

It doesn't seem likely that Bush was in particular danger where he was. He'd have been in more danger in the White House. It wouldn't have been very easy to hit a moving president with a jet.

[RedIbis]

I haven't seen a thread on jref about Bush's actions. I always thought this would make an interesting topic for friendly and productive discussion.

[ref]

I haven't seen a thread on jref about Bush's actions. I always thought this would make an interesting topic for friendly and productive discussion.

This topic has been discussed. I guess it has been inside other threads then. What are your thoughts?

[CHF]

Why any twoofer would use the Florida school incident as proof of a conspiracy is beyond me.

If 9/11 was planned or allowed to happen then Bush would be made to look good! He would immediately leap into action, give orders, appear in charge.

He wouldn't be made to sit there looking like a complete idiot while the nation is under attack!

[Firestone]

Had they immediately rushed Bush out to ... somewhere else, the same truthers would have found that suspicious as well.

[ref]

Could MM or RedIbis say, why do you think Cheney and Rice were rushed to other locations and Bush not then?

[RedIbis]

Could MM or RedIbis say, why do you think Cheney and Rice were rushed to other locationsand Bush not then?

Cheney was rushed to the PEOC because someone had to be president that day.

[Dave Rogers]

I haven't seen a thread on jref about Bush's actions. I always thought this would make an interesting topic for friendly and productive discussion.

It's been discussed here, but I don't think many of us can see anything unusual about Bush responding like a rabbit in the headlights. As for the "secure location" business, he was in a building that had been checked out as safe by Secret Service agents, would have been a significantly harder target to identify from an airliner than three of the world's largest office buildings, and AFAIK there were no reports of hi-jacked airliners anywhere in the vicinity of Florida, so it's not outwith the bounds of possibility that the Secret Service made a quick assessment and decided that, for the moment, the President's safety was best assured by leaving him where he was.

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

Could MM or RedIbis say, why do you think Cheney and Rice were rushed to other locations and Bush not then?

Actually, the more pertinent question is where Cheney and Rice were rushed to safe locations from.

Dave

[HappyHarryHampton]

Bush in the classroom is very strange. I thought, "what the f" when it happened, and I still think "what the f".

The strange thing is that his location was public knowledge.

This doesn't prove squat, so don't jump on me. It is just one those things that makes me wonder, "what the f?"

Yep.

'America is under attack'....

any questions?

None.

But that's not at all strange I've been told.

Nothing to see here.

[Good Lt]

Yep.

'America is under attack'....

any questions?

None.

But that's not at all strange I've been told.

Nothing to see here.

Do you have a point here, or is it just the usual blue plate special of inaninty?

[johnny karate]

I would like any CTer to explain how Bush's "strange" behavior fits into a conspiracy theory.

Any takers?

[RedIbis]

I would like any CTer to explain how Bush's "strange" behavior fits into a conspiracy theory.

Any takers?


I'll play along.

Convenient photo op. Bush wasn't rushed out of the classroom because he didn't want to scare the kids, but a half hour later, the kids are lined up behind him to tell the nation that we're under attack.

What was the point of having the kids behind him?

[Good Lt]

I'll play along.

Convenient photo op. Bush wasn't rushed out of the classroom because he didn't want to scare the kids, but a half hour later, the kids are lined up behind him to tell the nation that we're under attack.

What was the point of having the kids behind him?

Because of the Mossad, and also to distract from the fact that he had just ordered the secret strike team to prepare the explosives in the Twin Towers and WTC 7 for detonation on his command.

Simple.

[GStan]

I'll play along.

Convenient photo op. Bush wasn't rushed out of the classroom because he didn't want to scare the kids, but a half hour later, the kids are lined up behind him to tell the nation that we're under attack.

What was the point of having the kids behind him?

How does that fit into a conspiracy theory?

[Dave Rogers]

I'll play along.

Convenient photo op. Bush wasn't rushed out of the classroom because he didn't want to scare the kids, but a half hour later, the kids are lined up behind him to tell the nation that we're under attack.

What was the point of having the kids behind him?

Very poor cost/benefit analysis, though. It assumes that the conspiracy is broadened to include everyone in the Secret Service chain of command merely so that Bush gets a specific photo-op that didn't even get particularly widespread coverage. Add to that the fact that any photo-op that he did get was completely cancelled out by the fact that sitting reading "My Pet Goat" for eight minutes made him look like a complete moron, a result which anyone could have foreseen. In moments of crisis, one doesn't give the impression of a strong leader by sitting and staring gormlessly at a children's book, and a cute photo-op a few minutes later doesn't (in fact, didn't) help. All that staying in the classroom seems to have achieved is to generate more ammunition for Michael Moore.

Dave

[JamesB]

It is kind of ironic, the truthers don't think the hijackers should have been able to hit the Pentagon, the worlds largest and possibly most prominent building, but they should have been able to take out some obscure grade school in Florida.

[eeyore1954]

Had they immediately rushed Bush out to ... somewhere else, the same truthers would have found that suspicious as well.exactly almost all the truther arguments could go both ways. if he had been rushed out without first determining if it was safe to leave then that would have been suspicious.

[CHF]

I'll play along.

Convenient photo op. Bush wasn't rushed out of the classroom because he didn't want to scare the kids, but a half hour later, the kids are lined up behind him to tell the nation that we're under attack.

What was the point of having the kids behind him?

Bush could have looked "in charge" and still have had some kids behind him in a photo later on.

It's not like this was a case of choosing between a) kids in a photo, and b) Bush looking competent during a national emergency.

And why would the government choose the former anyway?

Everyone remembers Bush looking like a dolt on 9/11. No one cares whether he had kids behind him during a speech.

[1337m4n]

Bush's stupor, like the "molten steel for weeks" and "concrete pulverized to dust" arguments, is another fine example of Truthers taking any strange anomalies they can find as "evidence" without even thinking about whether they fit any coherent alternative theory of 9/11.

Truthers say "Why did Bush go into a stupor?"
Truthers say "Why was there molten steel?"
Truthers say "Why was there pulverized concrete?"
I respond with, "Yes, good question. Why indeed? Why don't you tell us, Truthers?"

[RedIbis]

No one cares whether he had kids behind him during a speech.

I do. The Pentagon isn't hit yet, planes still unaccounted for, and he's in a public elementary school, no more than a few miles from an airport.

If one of those kids were mine, I'd be mad as hell they didn't evacuate when Card tells Bush of the second attack.

[CHF]

Truthers say "Why did Bush go into a stupor?"
Truthers say "Why was there molten steel?"
Truthers say "Why was there pulverized concrete?"
I respond with, "Yes, good question. Why indeed? Why don't you tell us, Truthers?"

Oh they can tell you, but their answers just make things more difficult for them.

Why was there molten steel? "Thermite!" - In other words, enough thermite to cause, and sustain, molten steel not for minutes, or hours, or days....but WEEKS! No twoofer can explain how much thermite this would take or why this would even be necessary.

Why was there pulverized concrete? "Cuz the concrete was blasted into dust by bombs!" - This of course means that there were enough bombs in the WTC to do this...on every floor...next to, or within, all concrete....and the bombs weren't loud enough to be recorded.

It's not hard to see why twoofers like DR Griffin prefer to JAQ off rather than pose actual theories.

[kookbreaker]

I do. The Pentagon isn't hit yet, planes still unaccounted for, and he's in a public elementary school, no more than a few miles from an airport.


An elementary school building is a lot harder to hit than 3 of the world's largest office buildings. You'd actually be hard pressed to what building is a school from an airplane. Furthermore, AQ would have had to adjust their plans constantly to make an attempt on the president as he moved around, wheras the buildings would pretty much be there every day.

Again, the immediate area was secure. Why do you feel the need for the Secret Service to panic?

[nicepants]

I do. The Pentagon isn't hit yet, planes still unaccounted for, and he's in a public elementary school, no more than a few miles from an airport.

If one of those kids were mine, I'd be mad as hell they didn't evacuate when Card tells Bush of the second attack.

Evacuate the school? And what? Every other school in the US near an airport? No one (save the hijackers) knew on 911 what all was going to be hit, and when the president is in town, security is TIIIIIIGHT! That school was probably the safest place in the US at the time of the attack.

[Sizzler]

There are two possibilities. Firstly, Bush knew that about the conspiracy in advance. When he was told about it, he knew exactly what was going to happen, and he deliberately stayed reading because he wanted to give an impression of courage under fire.

Or Bush was totally shocked, like everyone else, and not having a plan ready made for when hijacked aircraft were flown into the WTC, he froze for a couple of minutes while he collected his thoughts.

It doesn't seem likely that Bush was in particular danger where he was. He'd have been in more danger in the White House. It wouldn't have been very easy to hit a moving president with a jet.

a couple of minutes means 2. do you know how long he stayed there? do you know what he continued to do?

if anyone here thinks his actions aren't strange, please watch a video of it.

the terrorists could have easily known where he was. he should have been in a moving vehicle, or moved away from that classroom. at the very least, he shouldn't have finished the classroom reading lesson.

it is creepy, straight up hands down.

it doesn't prove anyting, so don't worry guys, no need to debunk anything.

[MarkyX]

The Secret service is supposed to "act on the side of caution."

It's supposed to be standard operating procedure during a threat situation for the Secret Service to move the president and key members of his cabinet to safety.

In the case of the president that day, his location was well publicized and the Secret Service behaved very suspiciously in not insisting that he leave immediately.

MM

So you worked at the Secret Service and understand their protocols?

[T.A.M.]

I do. The Pentagon isn't hit yet, planes still unaccounted for, and he's in a public elementary school, no more than a few miles from an airport.

If one of those kids were mine, I'd be mad as hell they didn't evacuate when Card tells Bush of the second attack.

What Bush did that morning, and did not do is interesting, I will grant you. I do not think there was anything malicious or malignant about his actions.

Here is my take.

1. I would imagine, like all areas/locales he visits, the school was "swept" by SS and cleared as safe.
2. Keeping him there, while the details of what was going on, etc... were being obtained and processed, was probably an acceptable thing to do.
3. If I recall, at some point (I am not sure if it was before or after the school that SS became aware of it) Air Force One was considered a potential target, so this may have factored in the delay to getting him out.

As for why Bush Stayed sitting there for so long, not sure, but I personally think it was part "I don't want to look panicked etc..." combined with "holy **** now what am I gonna do".

TAM:)

[Sizzler]

So your answer is to move him from a secure location to an unsecure route to a location that may or may not be secure?

how is the school secure? it is a sitting duck. america was under attack. he should have been the commander in chief. instead he was watching kids read. and then he continued to ask them questions.

please you tube the video. we can speak freely about this issue.

[Pardalis]

Maybe it's just me, but an elementary school is not really a dangerous place.

[GStan]

it was known he was at the school.

it would have been a big event.

ss should have taken him out straight away either to a safer place or atleast to a place where he could be commander in chief.

There is no evidence to suggest that the SS chain of command did not assess that the school was the safest place for the President to conduct his CIC duties for that 30 minutes.

Is there evidence that they just sat and waited without making a safety assessment?
Is there evidence that they determined that somewhere else would have been safer, but that assessment was ignored?

[T.A.M.]

If there were no planes in the area with transponders off, or acting strangely (not answering ATC calls etc...) then fear from the skies to hit that tiny school (not much of a land mark to hit from the sky in a jet airliner) were minimal, particularly if Air Force One was a potential target, and if the site was swept and cleared by SS, which I would assume it was...I see nothing wrong with them keeping him there as they did, for the duration they did, at the time.

TAM:)

[Sizzler]

There is no evidence to suggest that the SS chain of command did not assess that the school was the safest place for the President to conduct his CIC duties for that 30 minutes.

Is there evidence that they just sat and waited without making a safety assessment?
Is there evidence that they determined that somewhere else would have been safer, but that assessment was ignored?

I'm just saying it is weird. He knew america was under attack, it was now obvious. the commander in chief of the united states of america decides to question children about their class.

Are you kidding me?

Again, this proves nothing. i get that. but it is extremely odd.

[kookbreaker]

a couple of minutes means 2. do you know how long he stayed there? do you know what he continued to do?

if anyone here thinks his actions aren't strange, please watch a video of it.

the terrorists could have easily known where he was. he should have been in a moving vehicle, or moved away from that classroom. at the very least, he shouldn't have finished the classroom reading lesson.

it is creepy, straight up hands down.

it doesn't prove anyting, so don't worry guys, no need to debunk anything.

So, again, your solution is for him to be moved from a secured location onto roads that would not have been secured.

Ambushers love armchair tacticians like you.

[Sizzler]

If there were no planes in the area with transponders off, or acting strangely (not answering ATC calls etc...) then fear from the skies to hit that tiny school (not much of a land mark to hit from the sky in a jet airliner) were minimal, particularly if Air Force One was a potential target, and if the site was swept and cleared by SS, which I would assume it was...I see nothing wrong with them keeping him there as they did, for the duration they did, at the time.

TAM:)

Fine.

But why continue the class? It makes no sense.

[DavidJames]

how is the school secure? it is a sitting duck. america was under attack. he should have been the commander in chief. instead he was watching kids read. and then he continued to ask them questions. This is direct from the 9/11 CTists handbook, well done.

Here is a clue. Just because things didn't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean the way they happened is wrong and indicative of something. You found out in your first thread how wrong you were about the physics of the collapse. Unfortunately, it appears you didn't learn from that experience.

A clear sign of someone possessed by CT "woo" is when they, despite having little or no education or not having any direct experience, think they know better then those with the education and experience.

I refer to this as the A&I of CT. Arrogance and Ignorance. It's one thing to be ignorant of something (by ignorant, I mean lacking knowledge) We are all ignorant of some things. But when we arrogantly feel we know more then those that have the education and experience and can support their claims with evidence, we've crossed the line from critical thinking into the land of make believe.

[Sizzler]

So, again, your solution is for him to be moved from a secured location onto roads that would not have been secured.

Ambushers love armchair tacticians like you.

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Is the president not the commander in chief? Was America not being attacked, more than once?

People in denial are painfully obvious.

[T.A.M.]

Fine.

But why continue the class? It makes no sense.

Like I said, I think he was "stunned" by the news, and also did not want to look panicked by storming out of the room, and did not want to frighten the kids.

Do we know, if after he exited, the teachers had a sit down with the children to explain to them what had happened, prior to them being placed in the background for his speech.

I agree, if was not his most shining moment, but I do not see any evidence, at all, of maliciousness, or a cover up, or anything really inappropriate.

TAM:)

[CHF]

the terrorists could have easily known where he was. he should have been in a moving vehicle, or moved away from that classroom. at the very least, he shouldn't have finished the classroom reading lesson.

it is creepy, straight up hands down.

it doesn't prove anyting, so don't worry guys, no need to debunk anything.

Bush acted like a clueless dolt on 9/11, which jives pretty nicely with everything we've seen from him since.

I fail to see what's so creepy about that.

[kookbreaker]

Fine.

But why continue the class? It makes no sense.

At the time, only the Towers had been hit. There was no indication of the disaster. The towers had not yet falled, so it was not quite the disaster of a day we know it to have become. You are looking back on the day after all the events had come to fruition, 2 collapsed towers, a damaged Pentagon, and 4th plane crashed in PA. At the time it was just a pair of attacks on the tower.

Can you tell me what Clinton was doing when the WTC was bombed in '93?

[nicepants]

how is the school secure? it is a sitting duck. america was under attack.

Have you ever been in a city when the president is in town? The area is scoped out days before the visit. Hours before the visit, roadways the are blocked off, the airspace over/around the area is closed down & patrolled and there are secret service agents everywhere. That school was probably one of the safest places in the entire country on 9/11. (Turns out even safer than the Pentagon!)

[Sizzler]

This is direct from the 9/11 CTists handbook, well done.

Here is a clue. Just because things didn't happen the way you think they should, doesn't mean the way they happened is wrong and indicative of something. You found out in your first thread how wrong you were about the physics of the collapse. Unfortunately, it appears you didn't learn from that experience.

A clear sign of someone possessed by CT "woo" is when they, despite having little or no education or not having any direct experience, think they know better then those with the education and experience.

I refer to this as the A&I of CT. Arrogance and Ignorance. It's one thing to be ignorant of something (by ignorant, I mean lacking knowledge) We are all ignorant of some things. But when we arrogantly feel we know more then those that have the education and experience and can support their claims with evidence, we've crossed the line from critical thinking into the land of make believe.

You are wasting your words.

i understand it proves nothing.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.

[T.A.M.]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Is the president not the commander in chief? Was America not being attacked, more than once?

People in denial are painfully obvious.

you want to expand on this accusation????

TAM:)

[GStan]

I'm just saying it is weird. He knew america was under attack, it was now obvious. the commander in chief of the united states of america decides to question children about their class.

Are you kidding me?

Again, this proves nothing. i get that. but it is extremely odd.

The whole day was odd, quite extraordinary actually. So pointing out this one debatably odd event as if it is somehow important among the many unanticipated chaotic events of the day seems......well.....odd.

[kookbreaker]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?


You think an elementary school has the communication resources to act as a control center for the POTUS? That's a bad, bad joke, buddy

They probably did what was the best solution, ramp up the schedule and get the president to a secure location along secure roads.

[T.A.M.]

You are wasting your words.

i understand it proves nothing.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.

You are wrong on this...

See, just as my opinion that you are wrong is worthless, and just an opinion, so is your initial opinion that the SS and Bush were wrong.

As others have said, you are repeating the Woo Mantra, and my opinion of where you stand is evolving as this happens.

TAM:)

[Firestone]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Is the president not the commander in chief? Was America not being attacked, more than once?Of course!

But, the man who was supposed to advise him, general Myers, was unavailable at that time. :boxedin:

[nicepants]

You are wasting your words.

i understand it proves nothing.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.

I, personally, find it comforting that the actions of the Secret Service are not so predictable as to be easily guessed by the likes of someone on an internet message board.

[GStan]

You are wasting your words.

i understand it proves nothing.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.

Do you have some specific knowledge or expertise on the subject matter of protecting the president that we should be aware of? If you don't, you are the one who is wasting your words. Without a knowledge base from which you can make an informed judgement as to what the President and Secret Service should have done, your assertion that they were wrong is nothing more than an argument from ignorance, and a weak one at that.

[DGM]

You are wasting your words.

i understand it proves nothing.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.
Based on what? Your gut feelings.

[Sizzler]

Like I said, I think he was "stunned" by the news, and also did not want to look panicked by storming out of the room, and did not want to frighten the kids.

Do we know, if after he exited, the teachers had a sit down with the children to explain to them what had happened, prior to them being placed in the background for his speech.

I agree, if was not his most shining moment, but I do not see any evidence, at all, of maliciousness, or a cover up, or anything really inappropriate.

TAM:)

like i said, no evidence of ct.

so lets speak freely. his actions were wrong. why should he be concerned about the childrens feelings when american lives are being lost? It makes no sense.

I see the merit in your example about the ss already knowing he was safe. but bush should have gone and done his job. plain and simple.

[NDBoston]

I'm just saying it is weird. He knew america was under attack, it was now obvious. the commander in chief of the united states of america decides to question children about their class.

Are you kidding me?

Again, this proves nothing. i get that. but it is extremely odd.



The White House announced schedule for Bush on 9-11 listed Sarasota, Florida and a speech at an elementary school but it wasn't specific to which one.

There's 22 in Sarasota.

[Sizzler]

Based on what? Your gut feelings.


he is the commander in chief. it is his job to call the shots. he didn't do his job. plain and simple.

[Sizzler]

The White House announced schedule for Bush on 9-11 listed Sarasota, Florida and a speech at an elementary school but it wasn't specific to which one.

There's 22 in Sarasota.

So how hard would it be to get that information? I think most people in that town would have known where he would be. Or does the president do surprise pop ins?

[Dave Rogers]

If one of those kids were mine, I'd be mad as hell they didn't evacuate when Card tells Bush of the second attack.

Yet another reason why one would expect Bush, with foreknowledge, to have acted completely differently to the way he did.

Dave

[nicepants]

he is the commander in chief. it is his job to call the shots. he didn't do his job. plain and simple.

It's not like America's response to the attack stops to a stand-still waiting for Bush's say-so. Bush didn't tell the SS to "get me out of here". He knew that there were other people perfectly capable of dealing with what was going on until he had a chance to determine a course of action. I don't really understand what Bush could have done differently that would have affected the outcome (other than avoiding criticism for sitting there).

[Sizzler]

Do you have some specific knowledge or expertise on the subject matter of protecting the president that we should be aware of? If you don't, you are the one who is wasting your words. Without a knowledge base from which you can make an informed judgement as to what the President and Secret Service should have done, your assertion that they were wrong is nothing more than an argument from ignorance, and a weak one at that.

Right, because nothing went wrong that day. everything followed according to rules and proper conduct. no one in america made a wrong decision in protecting america, right?

the commander in chief (that means boss/leader/etc) decided not to take charge, but instead ask school children questions.

if you can't see the error in his judgement, you need to look the this word up,

denial

[DGM]

he is the commander in chief. it is his job to call the shots. he didn't do his job. plain and simple.
But you don't see it's all clear to you in hindsight. When he was first told of 175 hitting the tower, did he know there were more planes or did he think it was over? You have all this info all lined up for you, he didn't. The school had already been cleared and was safe. You know the outcome of the day so things seam obvious now.

[nicepants]

Right, because nothing went wrong that day. everything followed according to rules and proper conduct. no one in america made a wrong decision in protecting america, right?

the commander in chief (that means boss/leader/etc) decided not to take charge, but instead ask school children questions.

if you can't see the error in his judgement, you need to look the this word up,



Ok, chief: What should Bush have done differently? And how would that have affected the outcome?

[GStan]

he is the commander in chief. it is his job to call the shots. he didn't do his job. plain and simple.

We get it. Your opinion is that he was wrong. Your lack of expertise on which to base this opinion makes it totally meaningless in a logical argument. But your personal opinion is noted. Move on.

[kookbreaker]

So, Bush is being criticized by Sizzler for not being a micro-manager of crisis events?

Quite frankly, what was the President supposed to do that day that other members of the staff or the USG were not authorized to do?

[Sizzler]

But you don't see it's all clear to you in hindsight. When he was first told of 175 hitting the tower, did he know there were more planes or did he think it was over? You have all this info all lined up for you, he didn't. The school had already been cleared and was safe. You know the outcome of the day so things seam obvious now.


That analysis has merit, in fact very often. But I don't buy it for this. He knew about the first going in. He was then told about the second. after the second, it was painfully obvious america was under attack. that is a fact. it is his job to call the shot in such times. he did not do that. he made a huge mistake.

[NDBoston]

That analysis has merit, in fact very often. But I don't buy it for this. He knew about the first going in. He was then told about the second. after the second, it was painfully obvious america was under attack. that is a fact. it is his job to call the shot in such times. he did not do that. he made a huge mistake.


Could you please admit you're a truther? Let's move on from the facade you're just asking questions.

[Sizzler]

How did they not know more were coming? In fact more came. And they missed them. Perhaps the man elected to call such shots, should have been doing it. So what I am not an expert? Give me one reason why he should have stayed in that chair? To save the childrens' hurt feelings?

He should have:

Stood up. Gone to a new room with communications. Gotten all the information he could, and then stand by for info and give instructions when needed. For example, he could have given orders to shoot more hijacked planes. In reality that order would not have been possible, but how did the ss service know that? They didn't, so they should have been prepared for anything.

What possible protocal would call for him remaining in his chair? For MANY minutes?

[GStan]

Right, because nothing went wrong that day. everything followed according to rules and proper conduct. no one in america made a wrong decision in protecting america, right?

Strawman. Never said anything like that.

the commander in chief (that means boss/leader/etc) decided not to take charge, but instead ask school children questions.

Strawman #2. I'm not arguing his leadership, the paragraph you are quoting, I'm arguing whether you have the relevant qualifications to assess the SS decision to move him or not.

if you can't see the error in his judgement, you need to look the this word up,

denial

Wow. Three strawmen in one tiny post. That's gotta be some kinda record. I'm not commenting on his judgement, which was marginal at best. We are arguing the SS protocol and whether or not you are capable of delivering an informed opinion about it. (You're not.) And the judgement of when it was appropriate to move the President would likely not even consider the President's judgement in that matter anyway, it would be up to the SS.

[nicepants]

Sizzler -

A SIMPLE QUESTION:

Since you believe what Bush did was wrong, explain what you think he should have done, and how that would have affected the outcome.

[Dave Rogers]

Fine.

But why continue the class? It makes no sense.

OK, so let's assume the Secret Service have made a quick assessment of the situation and decided that, pending more knowledge of the situation, the safest place for the President is right where he is. What now?

(1) Go in, get the President out of the classroom, take him somewhere else (where, exactly? Somewhere else in the school?) and don't tell him anything about what happens next because there's no plan yet?

(2) Let the class continue for the moment, because there's enough to do just trying to get in touch with the command structure and find out what's happening?

Option (1) achieves nothing but makes the Secret Service men look stupid. Option (2) is in line with what's already been chosen as the safe option. When you have no plan of action, but good reason to believe inaction is safe, why rush to act?

Dave

[nicepants]

He should have:

Stood up. Gone to a new room with communications. Gotten all the information he could, and then stand by for info and give instructions when needed. For example, he could have given orders to shoot more hijacked planes. In reality that order would not have been possible, but how did the ss service know that? They didn't, so they should have been prepared for anything.

What possible protocal would call for him remaining in his chair? For MANY minutes?

In your "he should have" scenario, the outcome is the same.

Why, then, was he wrong to do what he did?

[DavidJames]

You are wasting your words.Yes, I know that now. You have proven you are just another garden variety 9/11 CTist. You fall into the lying disingenuous category. You have good company here. Enjoy your stay. I must congratulate you on how long you tried to maintain the charade. Most succumb much sooner.

[A W Smith]

a couple of minutes means 2. do you know how long he stayed there? do you know what he continued to do?

if anyone here thinks his actions aren't strange, please watch a video of it.

the terrorists could have easily known where he was. he should have been in a moving vehicle, or moved away from that classroom. at the very least, he shouldn't have finished the classroom reading lesson.

it is creepy, straight up hands down.

it doesn't prove anyting, so don't worry guys, no need to debunk anything.


Do you know how many elementary schools there are?
Results 1-10 of about 3,432 for elementary schools near (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=elementary+schools&near=Sarasota,+FL&fb=1&view=text&sa=X&oi=local_group&resnum=1&ct=more-results&cd=1)Sarasota, FL (http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&q=elementary+schools&near=Sarasota,+FL&fb=1&view=text&sa=X&oi=local_group&resnum=1&ct=more-results&cd=1)are you aware their architecture is similar if not nearly identical? Can you pick out a specific school from the pilots seat of a 747? is it easier for a gunman to assassinate someone who is inside a brick veneered building or fleeing in a motorcade?

[DGM]

That analysis has merit, in fact very often. But I don't buy it for this. He knew about the first going in. He was then told about the second. after the second, it was painfully obvious america was under attack. that is a fact. it is his job to call the shot in such times. he did not do that. he made a huge mistake.
In the early stages of any emergency it the procedures already in place that call the shots. The POTUS job is to take the assessments of the people in charge of the individual agencies involved and decide on changes to these procedures. What happened that day was over before anything he could have done would have mattered.

[Dave Rogers]

That analysis has merit, in fact very often. But I don't buy it for this. He knew about the first going in. He was then told about the second. after the second, it was painfully obvious america was under attack. that is a fact. it is his job to call the shot in such times. he did not do that. he made a huge mistake.

Sizzler, which side of the debate are you on? Personally, I think Bush did show poor judgement by sitting still and looking like an idiot for eight minutes when it should have been clear there was an emergency. However, that's one of the most convincing arguments that there was no conspiracy element to his behaviour in the classroom. If the purpose of 9-11 was to push America to war with Bush as the war leader, those eight minutes were nothing but harmful. With foreknowledge, they wouldn't have happened. You're asking us to look up "denial", but can't you see how your own arguments deny foreknowledge?

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Next time I visit my son's primary school, somebody remind me to ask them if I can see the makeshift Presidential control room. I didn't know they had them in all primary schools.

Dave

[kookbreaker]

\are you aware their architecture is similar if not nearly identical? Can you pick out a specific school from the pilots seat of a 747? is it easier for a gunman to assassinate someone who is inside a brick veneered building or fleeing in a motorcade?

In addition, most other municipal buildings resemble elementary schools in size and shape: Community centers, libraries, Suburban township halls, etc.

Also, certain low rise commercial buildings match schools in shape and appearance from the top.

If I were to put up a map of a typical township, I doubt anyone would be able to spot the schools from the air.

Here is Barrington, NJ (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=08007&ie=UTF8&ll=39.86515,-75.042973&spn=0.024837,0.05785&t=h&z=14&om=1) there is at least one elementary school in this picture. Go ahead and point it out, please.

[GStan]

How did they not know more were coming? In fact more came. And they missed them. Perhaps the man elected to call such shots, should have been doing it. So what I am not an expert? Give me one reason why he should have stayed in that chair? To save the childrens' hurt feelings?

He should have:

Stood up. Gone to a new room with communications. Gotten all the information he could, and then stand by for info and give instructions when needed. For example, he could have given orders to shoot more hijacked planes. In reality that order would not have been possible, but how did the ss service know that? They didn't, so they should have been prepared for anything.

What possible protocal would call for him remaining in his chair? For MANY minutes?

my bolding. I will give you those points for sure. However, this section of the forum is about conspiracy theories. Do you have any evidence or explanation for how the incompetency argument you are making ties in with any 9/11 conspiracy theory? If not, there are plenty of political threads where you argue your Bush is incompetent points.

BTW, if Bush had immediately gotten up from the chair and saved those 7 to 9 minutes of lost response time, can you think of any significant events of the day that might have turned out differently? I'm not absolving him of not responding well, just wondering if you think any significant benefit would be expected if he had done so.

[nicepants]

In addition, most other municipal buildings resemble elementary schools in size and shape: Community centers, libraries, Suburban township halls, etc.

Also, certain low rise commercial buildings match schools in shape and appearance from the top.

If I were to put up a map of a typical township, I doubt anyone would be able to spot the schools from the air.

Here is Barrington, NJ (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=08007&ie=UTF8&ll=39.86515,-75.042973&spn=0.024837,0.05785&t=h&z=14&om=1) there is at least one elementary school in this picture. Go ahead and point it out, please.

In addition to the trouble of simply finding the school, you've got the added problem of the airspace in the area being closed to all traffic except those planes/helicopters doing security patrols. (At least, that's how it's done now, I'm assuming similar circumstances pre-911)

[WildCat]

So how hard would it be to get that information? I think most people in that town would have known where he would be. Or does the president do surprise pop ins?
It's really irrelevant. Even if the terrorists had tried to crash a hijacked plane into him, it is quite hard to find a small target like an elementary school from the air and hit it. You may have noticed that the targets that were his were rather large...

[A W Smith]

In addition, most other municipal buildings resemble elementary schools in size and shape: Community centers, libraries, Suburban township halls, etc.

Also, certain low rise commercial buildings match schools in shape and appearance from the top.

If I were to put up a map of a typical township, I doubt anyone would be able to spot the schools from the air.

Here is Barrington, NJ (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=08007&ie=UTF8&ll=39.86515,-75.042973&spn=0.024837,0.05785&t=h&z=14&om=1) there is at least one elementary school in this picture. Go ahead and point it out, please.

ill have to call up the Air National Guard (http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/041106-strafing-range.htm)to identify that one

[JamesB]

In addition, most other municipal buildings resemble elementary schools in size and shape: Community centers, libraries, Suburban township halls, etc.

Also, certain low rise commercial buildings match schools in shape and appearance from the top.

If I were to put up a map of a typical township, I doubt anyone would be able to spot the schools from the air.

Here is Barrington, NJ (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&time=&date=&ttype=&q=08007&ie=UTF8&ll=39.86515,-75.042973&spn=0.024837,0.05785&t=h&z=14&om=1) there is at least one elementary school in this picture. Go ahead and point it out, please.

Hey, remember these are the same people who argue that the hijackers would have had trouble finding the Pentagon from the air. Quick, what does the Pentagon look like from above?

[Dave Rogers]

Hey, remember these are the same people who argue that the hijackers would have had trouble finding the Pentagon from the air. Quick, what does the Pentagon look like from above?

Square, isn't it?

Dave

[kookbreaker]

Hey, remember these are the same people who argue that the hijackers would have had trouble finding the Pentagon from the air. Quick, what does the Pentagon look like from above?

Oddly enough, a rhombus. Its a great optical illusion!

[Billdave2]

I think Sizzler is right. Anybody with half a brain in Bush's position would have Immediatly got up, ran out of the room, and started calling "shots". I can see him now running up and down the halls of the school yelling "Shots! Shots! Shots!". That would have been much better.

I guess in 2008, "calling the shots" is the new "propitious"

[uk_dave]

It's not the shape of the pentagon wots important, it's the size, innit?

I mean all buildings are identical in size. The size wot they are really just depends on how big your monitor is. Right?

[johnny karate]

I'm guessing the extent of Sizzler's knowledge about what the President should do in a time of crisis is limited to repeated viewings of Air Force One.

[HappyHarryHampton]

Trying to pretend that the way Bush and team acted in the Florida classroom is somehow normal is well... woo.

The POTUS is alledgedly told 'a plane hit the second tower, America is under attack' and nothing else and he doesn't ask a single goddamn question for 15 minutes.. you know like.. 'what are we doing about it'... 'what should I do about it'....

Woo.

Where's that Razor the supposed skeptics are so found of.

He didn't ask because he didn't need to, he already knew what was happening.

THE 9/11 smoking gun.

[HappyHarryHampton]

'He didn't want to scare the children...'

5

4

3

2

1....

[kookbreaker]

Trying to pretend that the way Bush and team acted in the Florida classroom is somehow normal is well... woo.

The POTUS is alledgedly told 'a plane hit the second tower, America is under attack' and nothing else and he doesn't ask a single goddamn question for 15 minutes.. you know like.. 'what are we doing about it'... 'what should I do about it'....

Woo.

Where's that Razor the supposed skeptics are so found of.

He didn't ask because he didn't need to, he already knew what was happening.

THE 9/11 smoking gun.

Where is that laughing dog when you need him?

[uk_dave]

He didn't ask because he didn't need to, he already knew what was happening.

THE 9/11 smoking gun.

5

4

3

2

1

....He wanted you to know.

Just you and a handful of others. He knew everyone else would just concentrate on the statement he made with the kiddies behind him. But he wanted you to obsess about him sitting there looking like a dumb schmuck while the supposed terrorist attack was taking place because he knew that only you would see that footage. He thinks you're special.

[HappyHarryHampton]

5

4

3

2

1

....He wanted you to know.

Just you and a handful of others. He knew everyone else would just concentrate on the statement he made with the kiddies behind him. But he wanted you to obsess about him sitting there looking like a dumb schmuck while the supposed terrorist attack was taking place because he knew that only you would see that footage. He thinks you're special.

Right... it's all perfectly normal.

Nothing to see here.

The first time I saw that footage was in Michael Moore's film.

I didn't see the mainstream media telling us about it before. Were we supposed to see it?

No matter how you cut it... it there are no reasonable explantions for Bush's lack of questions about being told 'America is under attack'

In his own words he was apparantly having an existential moment wondering 'what it meant for America to be under attack'.

Pzzt!

[Gravy]

...
As an article in The Washington Times points out, Mr. Kerry’s reaction to the attacks of Sept. 11 wasn’t exactly the stuff of the Minutemen. Mr. Kerry told “Larry King Live” that on the morning of Sept. 11 nearly three years ago, he “sat stunned and unable to think for more than 30 minutes in the Capitol until he and other senators were whisked out of the building to safety,” the Times reports.

...No wonder my mother was a little breathless on the telephone. “Listen to this,” she said, preparing me for a snippet from a tome by the popular, late and liberal historian William Manchester. It describes Franklin D. Roosevelt’s initial reaction to news of the surprise attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, that devastated the American fleet, killing 2,403 soldiers, sailors and civilians.

After calling the secretary of state, Manchester writes, “the President of the United States did nothing for 18 minutes.” Source (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0804/west1.asp)

[johnny karate]

I have just acquired this Top Secret transcript from NWO Headquarters dated September 10, 2001.

I'm not sure how long it will be up before The Powers That Be take it down, so read quickly:

NWO Operative#1: Okay, so everything seems to be in place. Now we just have to figure out what to do with Bush.

NWO Operative#2: Well, obviously we need to have him act surprised and outraged, and then have him make a show of leaping into action. Otherwise we run the risk of teenagers with access to Youtube figuring out our impossibly complex plot.

NWO Operative#1: Good point. Or how about this: We have him just sit there looking stupid?

NWO Operative#2: Works for me.

[The sound of a high-five]

NWO Operative#2: Wait... what's Youtube?

NWO Operative#1: Check your NWO Agenda for 2005. Page 103, Section 4.

[GStan]

Right... it's all perfectly normal.

Nothing to see here.

The first time I saw that footage was in Michael Moore's film.

I didn't see the mainstream media telling us about it before. Were we supposed to see it?

No matter how you cut it... it there are no reasonable explantions for Bush's lack of questions about being told 'America is under attack'

In his own words he was apparantly having an existential moment wondering 'what it meant for America to be under attack'.

Pzzt!

You are so right, and the least reasonable of all is to explain that it is an indicator of a government conspiracy and cover-up in the attacks, an explanation for which not a shred of actual evidence exists.

It was a blatantly incompetent 8 minutes for sure. Not a shred of evidence suggests that it was anything else. If you have some evidence to the contrary, present it; otherwise, let it go and move on.

[Jonnyclueless]

I would be willing to bet an amount of money that when Harry saw the planes hit the WTC he sat there dumbfounded and speechless just like everyone else. So I guess he, like everyone else was all in on it because we all knew about it in advance.

And there ya have it folks, proof of an inside job because a guy didn't get up and leave. How could a court of law not convict with that kind of hard core evidence?

[Sizzler]

Sizzler -

A SIMPLE QUESTION:

Since you believe what Bush did was wrong, explain what you think he should have done, and how that would have affected the outcome.


I answer this question above. He wouldn't have been able to do anything becuase of the confusion in the air and what not. However, they didnt know that their actions would be meaningless. Many things could have happened.

You guys are right, I am not an expert. But, I think it is pretty clear that protocal exists.

How is sitting in a chair talking to children for several minutes during the worst attack in on american soil part of protocal?

[Sizzler]

Sizzler, which side of the debate are you on? Personally, I think Bush did show poor judgement by sitting still and looking like an idiot for eight minutes when it should have been clear there was an emergency. However, that's one of the most convincing arguments that there was no conspiracy element to his behaviour in the classroom. If the purpose of 9-11 was to push America to war with Bush as the war leader, those eight minutes were nothing but harmful. With foreknowledge, they wouldn't have happened. You're asking us to look up "denial", but can't you see how your own arguments deny foreknowledge?

Dave

Thats fine. I never once suggested they did.

[uk_dave]

How is sitting in a chair talking to children for several minutes during the worst attack in on american soil part of protocal?

OK so who is at fault, or..... in on it!!11!!!?

So Bush is told about the attack and sits there doing nothing.

But no one else does anything either. Card doesn't wait by his CinC's side awaiting orders.

The SS don't rush in and physically lift him out of the chair to spirit him away to safety.

Are they all incompetent? Are they all.....in on it!!11!!1?

Or maybe, just maybe, the situation was confused, information was still coming in, the SS was working out a plan which would keep their charge safe, the rest of his officials are feverishly trying to locate everyone and...the last thing they need is either panic in the school or a POTUS running around like a headless chicken getting in their way. So they let him sit there like a good little boy until they had the situation assessed and damn the consequences when the footage is seen later, because peoples lives are at stake right now.

ETA : In addition to the above, the later statement made with the kiddies behind him makes even more sense. They know they've got footage out there of the POTUS sitting with 'My Pet Goat' while all hell is breaking loose elsewhere. If they then spirit him away the only shots of Bush will be the 'sitting there doing nothing' ones. So they have a nice, "don't panic, I'm in command" statement to the press before he leaves the building.

[Jonnyclueless]

They most certainly would have known the president would have been of no use in such a situation regardless of the attack style. That's the military's job, not his.

The only argument I can think of, which is weak, is that maybe the terrorist had targeted the school, which I think is really stretching it by far.

[1337m4n]

Trying to pretend that the way Bush and team acted in the Florida classroom is somehow normal is well... woo.

The POTUS is alledgedly told 'a plane hit the second tower, America is under attack' and nothing else and he doesn't ask a single goddamn question for 15 minutes.. you know like.. 'what are we doing about it'... 'what should I do about it'....

Woo.

Where's that Razor the supposed skeptics are so found of.

He didn't ask because he didn't need to, he already knew what was happening.

THE 9/11 smoking gun.

So let me get this straight: Bush and his cohorts had 9/11 planned in advance, according to you. And THIS is how they chose to play things out?

I can imagine how the discussion went:

Evil Conspiracy Planner (ECP): Okay, now after the plane hits, one of your Secret Service will probably notify you that the nation is under attack.

Bush: Okay. What should I do?

ECP: When that happens, you must look dumbfounded for a minute, then continue reading to the children as if nothing happened.

Bush: Uh...what?

ECP: Just keep acting stupid as if nothing happened.

Bush: Won't that make people suspicious? If we want this thing to be believable, we should make it look good. Why can't I just tell the children that I'm late for a doctor's appointment or something, say I'll finish the story later, and rush off to the scene to look like a hero? Wouldn't that be better?

ECP: Look, who's the Evil Conspiracy Planner, you or me? I'm the boss, and I want you to look like an idiot!

Bush: But why?

ECP: Because F*** you, that's why! Ask another stupid question and I'll have you executed!

ECP: Oh, and we'll have it on film, too.

[Sizzler]

my bolding. I will give you those points for sure. However, this section of the forum is about conspiracy theories. Do you have any evidence or explanation for how the incompetency argument you are making ties in with any 9/11 conspiracy theory? If not, there are plenty of political threads where you argue your Bush is incompetent points.

BTW, if Bush had immediately gotten up from the chair and saved those 7 to 9 minutes of lost response time, can you think of any significant events of the day that might have turned out differently? I'm not absolving him of not responding well, just wondering if you think any significant benefit would be expected if he had done so.

Nothing would have changed.

Except, he'd be the man responsible for calling the shots, if any were to arise.

CT being true or not;

Bush was simply stunned enough to not be able to do his job. Take that to mean whatever you want, because unless Bush ever says anything about it, we will never know.

[pomeroo]

I'm just saying it is weird. He knew america was under attack, it was now obvious. the commander in chief of the united states of america decides to question children about their class.

Are you kidding me?

Again, this proves nothing. i get that. but it is extremely odd.


No, it isn't "extremely odd." People with absolutely no understanding of the job are presuming to tell agents of the Secret Service how they should have acted. This sort of silliness is tiresome. On learning of the attacks on the Twin Towers, the people protecting Bush had to decide what to do with him. Why isn't that obvious? Having decided that he was, for the moment, in a secure environment, they quickly formulated a course of action and implemented it. Why should they have done anything differently? They were correct in their assessment, were they not? When does the nonsense stop?

[1337m4n]

'He didn't want to scare the children...'

5

4

3

2

1....

Let me guess: You actually believe Bush is intelligent.

[nicepants]

I answer this question above. He wouldn't have been able to do anything becuase of the confusion in the air and what not. However, they didnt know that their actions would be meaningless. Many things could have happened.

You guys are right, I am not an expert. But, I think it is pretty clear that protocal exists.

How is sitting in a chair talking to children for several minutes during the worst attack in on american soil part of protocal?

Argument from ignorance, it would seem.

I didn't create the protocol, nor do I know what it states. Do you?

You have failed to show any possible benefit to be gained by Bush doing anything any differently than he did....aside from avoiding criticism from folks like yourself.

[A W Smith]

I answer this question above. He wouldn't have been able to do anything becuase of the confusion in the air and what not. However, they didnt know that their actions would be meaningless. Many things could have happened.

You guys are right, I am not an expert. But, I think it is pretty clear that protocal exists.

How is sitting in a chair talking to children for several minutes during the worst attack in on american soil part of protocal?

How about making certain that a safe route to air force one has not been compromised by terrorist agents in this nation wide attack?

[Sizzler]

No, it isn't "extremely odd." People with absolutely no understanding of the job are presuming to tell agents of the Secret Service how they should have acted. This sort of silliness is tiresome. On learning of the attacks on the Twin Towers, the people protecting Bush had to decide what to do with him. Why isn't that obvious? Having decided that he was, for the moment, in a secure environment, they quickly formulated a course of action and implemented it. Why should they have done anything differently? They were correct in their assessment, were they not? When does the nonsense stop?

You have no idea what caused the actions that we all witnessed.
No more than I do. So your judgement remains your own. As does mine.

Perhaps this nonsense does need to stop.

[Sizzler]

No, it isn't "extremely odd." People with absolutely no understanding of the job are presuming to tell agents of the Secret Service how they should have acted. This sort of silliness is tiresome. On learning of the attacks on the Twin Towers, the people protecting Bush had to decide what to do with him. Why isn't that obvious? Having decided that he was, for the moment, in a secure environment, they quickly formulated a course of action and implemented it. Why should they have done anything differently? They were correct in their assessment, were they not? When does the nonsense stop?

You have no idea what caused the actions that we all witnessed.
No more than I do. So your judgement remains your own. As does mine.

Perhaps this nonsense does need to stop.

[Disbelief]

How about making certain that a safe route to air force one has not been compromised by terrorist agents in this nation wide attack?

Don't forget, making sure that there is a secure destination to take him to and a secure route for AF One to take.

[Sizzler]

How about making certain that a safe route to air force one has not been compromised by terrorist agents in this nation wide attack?

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating? Everyone in America had their eyes glued to this event be it TV, radio, etc, but Bush sat and talked to children all the while knowing america was under attack.

how many people in america continued working when they heard about this?

think about that.

[Arus808]

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating?

Hindsight from 6 years later makes you see things, in a chaotic situation, differently.

Now put yourself 6 years ago in his shoes and the SS shoes:

tell us, what room could he be moved to?
this is a public school wasn't it? that means, there are no empty rooms to move to.

the classroom had already been secured by his SS. So moving him to a room that hasn't been checked; hasn't been secured would mean.....? (give you a guess there)

[DGM]

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating? Everyone in America had their eyes glued to this event be it TV, radio, etc, but Bush sat and talked to children all the while knowing america was under attack.

how many people in america continued working when they heard about this?

think about that.
Communicate with who? The head of NORAD/Ect. knows his job better than Bush does. If they needed him he was just a phone call away. It's just that simple.

[Gravy]

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating? Everyone in America had their eyes glued to this event be it TV, radio, etc, but Bush sat and talked to children all the while knowing america was under attack.
Sounds wise. Didn't happen. Grow up and live with it.

[Jonnyclueless]

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating? Everyone in America had their eyes glued to this event be it TV, radio, etc, but Bush sat and talked to children all the while knowing america was under attack.

how many people in america continued working when they heard about this?

think about that.

He has a large staff with him for that purpose. That staff can also keep him updated, such as coming into the room and giving him messages,etc. If something comes up where a decision needs to be made by him, then they can pull him out. But until then, what's the point. Much better to first figure out everything that is going on with the people who's jobs it is to do so. Before the president can make any decisions, it has to be determined what is going on. He's the president, not a general. Just as we don't have him calling the shots on all the military strikes in Iraq.

[Sizzler]

Hindsight from 6 years later makes you see things, in a chaotic situation, differently.

Now put yourself 6 years ago in his shoes and the SS shoes:

tell us, what room could he be moved to?
this is a public school wasn't it? that means, there are no empty rooms to move to.

the classroom had already been secured by his SS. So moving him to a room that hasn't been checked; hasn't been secured would mean.....? (give you a guess there)

do you think that room would be the only secure room in the school?

are you kidding me? the president of the united states of america in a public school and ss only secure the very classroom he is in?

if that is the case, no wonder no one did anything. geesh.

[Arus808]

do you think that room would be the only secure room in the school?

the building maybe, but usually only the room he will be in and the rooms near it. THIS IS A PUBLIC school. Not exactly something that would have empty rooms just accessible to anyone.

Apparently, you have NO idea what is involved in the visiting of a president to a PUBLIC school.


educate yourself about how our president gets around before you make idiotic comments.

[nicepants]

do you think that room would be the only secure room in the school?

are you kidding me? the president of the united states of america in a public school and ss only secure the very classroom he is in?

if that is the case, no wonder no one did anything. geesh.

I'm sure the entire school was secured, but again, we've not been able to establish any benefit for the President leaving the room/area prior to when he did.

[Sizzler]

Communicate with who? The head of NORAD/Ect. knows his job better than Bush does. If they needed him he was just a phone call away. It's just that simple.


If my boss told me to keep working and nevermind the terror attacks occuring "right now!" I would have punched him in the face.

Give me a break.

[alexg]

do you think that room would be the only secure room in the school?

Not the only but the MOST secure, by far.

Perhaps they made an error in judgement on this general point, perhaps not, we cannot say for sure Sizzler, yet you seem so darn SURE you are correct.

The main thing is that even if they did make an error it would not point to any CT. It's points as much to the opposite - that they were caught unprepared.

We have a big SO WHAT? here.

[Sizzler]

Sounds wise. Didn't happen. Grow up and live with it.

Yes point taken. I have come to terms with it. However for the moment I'm having problems understanding how people can't see why this is strange. I'm sure you can relate:)

[Jonnyclueless]

So had Bush simply moved to another room you would be satisfied? So long as he isn't in a room of children? Somebody please explain this logic to me. Now it's an inside job just because of the particular room he was in. Nice.

And I am sure Sizzler would have punched someone in the face because it goes along with this nonsense logic that because he didn't get up and leave for no reason, that it's suspicious.

[Jonnyclueless]

Yes point taken. I have come to terms with it. However for the moment I'm having problems understanding how people can't see why this is strange. I'm sure you can relate:)

What's so strange about having the same reaction as pretty much everyone else in the world?

[Arus808]

If my boss told me to keep working and nevermind the terror attacks occuring "right now!" I would have punched him in the face.

Give me a break.


1) he was not in any immediate danger
2) reports were still coming in, sketchy at best, until finally he was told what was happening and then escorted from the classroom and school

hindsight IS CLEARER 6 years later!

[kookbreaker]

If my boss told me to keep working and nevermind the terror attacks occuring "right now!" I would have punched him in the face.

Give me a break.

So what the heck did you do on 9/11? Find a phone booth and change into your cape and tights? Or did you look at the TV coverage stunned and numbed like most of the USA?

For the record, I was at work and did work. With lots of breaks to view the ongoing coverage. It was how I kept my sanity that day.

[Sizzler]

He has a large staff with him for that purpose. That staff can also keep him updated, such as coming into the room and giving him messages,etc. If something comes up where a decision needs to be made by him, then they can pull him out. But until then, what's the point. Much better to first figure out everything that is going on with the people who's jobs it is to do so. Before the president can make any decisions, it has to be determined what is going on. He's the president, not a general. Just as we don't have him calling the shots on all the military strikes in Iraq.

Point taken for sure. I see merit in both options. i am more troubled with bush in a way though.

imagine you told your friend this. and he did what bush did. wouldn't you think something was strange?

you probably wouldnt becuase you would be reacting like everyone else.

----->paying attention to the events.

[kookbreaker]

When the WTC was bombed in '93, did they hustle Clinton from wherever he was into a small metal box? Or did he proceed, allowing local authorities and protocols in place to do their jobs?

[nicepants]

If my boss told me to keep working and nevermind the terror attacks occuring "right now!" I would have punched him in the face.

Give me a break.

If your job is to locate these hijacked planes...do you want to concentrate on that, or do you want your boss on the phone asking you what's going on?

[boloboffin]

I personally fault Bush because there was a better option for him: getting up, apologizing to the class, and moving to the room prepared for him. As far as faulting goes, there are a vast array of Bush deeds that I consider more blameworthy than that. I've not seen any evidence that Bush was aware that the problem was larger than a terrorist attack on the Towers.

But that's politics. I do not fault the SS at all. If they had had actionable intelligence about a direct threat to the President, they would have stepped on the children to get him out of there. They did not, and the rules are you don't manhandle the President and cause a scene without actionable intelligence. Cheney was hustled down to the PEOC because they had actionable intelligence of a direct threat, what would prove to be Flight 77 looping around and heading back toward the District of Columbia.

P.S.: How does it change things to have the President leaving immediately, perhaps even skipping the televised message? Well, he could have jumped into a fighter plane and shot down the other planes that were off course! But, NOOOOOOOOO.

I kid. Bush also had no way of knowing if his duty to make decisions was needed or not. The smart choice would have been assuming that it was needed, and to make himself available to do so immediately and constantly. He didn't. FDR knew that he could afford to do nothing for 18 minutes, and he was still available to do what he could.

Bush appears to have repeatedly cut himself off from contact in that first hour. Seven minutes in the classroom. The televised speech at the bottom of the hour (it was planned so the kids were there for that). He appears to have gone offline in the limo as well. Cheney always seems to be waiting for Bush to call or trying to call Bush in that first hour, according to the 911CR.

That, by the way, directly set up the "who gave the order to shoot down 93" incident. The 911CR gives the details of two separate stories and leaves it to the reader to decide, and this account has to be one of the reasons that the 9/11 Commission wanted to talk to Bush and Cheney, and why they refused to do so until they could be together in the room without a transcription or notes.

[Sizzler]

I personally fault Bush because there was a better option for him: getting up, apologizing to the class, and moving to the room prepared for him. As far as faulting goes, there are a vast array of Bush deeds that I consider more blameworthy than that. I've not seen any evidence that Bush was aware that the problem was larger than a terrorist attack on the Towers.

But that's politics. I do not fault the SS at all. If they had had actionable intelligence about a direct threat to the President, they would have stepped on the children to get him out of there. They did not, and the rules are you don't manhandle the President and cause a scene without actionable intelligence. Cheney was hustled down to the PEOC because they had actionable intelligence of a direct threat, what would prove to be Flight 77 looping around and heading back toward the District of Columbia.

P.S.: How does it change things to have the President leaving immediately, perhaps even skipping the televised message? Well, he could have jumped into a fighter plane and shot down the other planes that were off course! But, NOOOOOOOOO.

I kid. Bush also had no way of knowing if his duty to make decisions was needed or not. The smart choice would have been assuming that it was needed, and to make himself available to do so immediately and constantly. He didn't. FDR knew that he could afford to do nothing for 18 minutes, and he was still available to do what he could.

Bush appears to have repeatedly cut himself off from contact in that first hour. Seven minutes in the classroom. The televised speech at the bottom of the hour (it was planned so the kids were there for that). He appears to have gone offline in the limo as well. Cheney always seems to be waiting for Bush to call or trying to call Bush in that first hour, according to the 911CR.

That, by the way, directly set up the "who gave the order to shoot down 93" incident. The 911CR gives the details of two separate stories and leaves it to the reader to decide, and this account has to be one of the reasons that the 9/11 Commission wanted to talk to Bush and Cheney, and why they refused to do so until they could be together in the room without a transcription or notes.

Thanks a lot. Wicked detail. Very wise.

[Jonnyclueless]

Point taken for sure. I see merit in both options. i am more troubled with bush in a way though.

imagine you told your friend this. and he did what bush did. wouldn't you think something was strange?

you probably wouldnt becuase you would be reacting like everyone else.

----->paying attention to the events.

No I wouldn't find it strange. And if a friend told me while I was in the middle of something like Bush was, I wouldn't have the ability to pay attention to the events. I would probably be too buys trying to take in the depth of the news and contemplating what to do. Do I interrupt what I am doing and the people I am doing it for? Is it really true? It seems so surreal, could it be a mistake? I wouldn't want to cause panic i it's some kind of mistake. Could this be something we don't want the world to know about right away, in which running out would make obvious?

Hindsight is always 20/20. I can tell you for fact that when it happened I didn't have access to a TV or any means of news or anything, I was on my way into NYC. And I along with everyone else I was with were pretty much speechless and in pretty much the same state of mind Bush was. I was like mass confusion and disbelief.

I am sure some people don't act this way and would do exactly as some expect Bush should have done. But to think that everyone should, when clearly the majority of people wouldn't is not really fair. And to expect him to be super human simply because he is president is also not fair.

Yes the behavior can be considered odd, but weren't the circumstances?

[Sizzler]

So what the heck did you do on 9/11? Find a phone booth and change into your cape and tights? Or did you look at the TV coverage stunned and numbed like most of the USA?

For the record, I was at work and did work. With lots of breaks to view the ongoing coverage. It was how I kept my sanity that day.

as did millions others. but when you first heard of it, you didn't just nod and keep working. you probably tried to find some way of getting more information, be it tv radio or whatever tech what available.

at the very least, you eyes may have gotten bigger. you mouth may have dropped. these are regular responses to things that are unimaginable.

bush did none of these.

[Jonnyclueless]

Bolo, keep in mind that part of the problem you bring up was due to communications problems on a technical level. It wasn't that they were refusing to communicate, it was that they couldn't. It could be another possible reason they didn't immediately get in Air Force One. They could possibly have felt that due to its communications problems they could get better info staying there. And if there was a need to the President to make a decision, they could just grab him from the classroom.

There's pretty much an unlimited possibilities. All this argument on Griffen's part is is bad speculation.

[GStan]

That, by the way, directly set up the "who gave the order to shoot down 93" incident. The 911CR gives the details of two separate stories and leaves it to the reader to decide, and this account has to be one of the reasons that the 9/11 Commission wanted to talk to Bush and Cheney, and why they refused to do so until they could be together in the room without a transcription or notes.

This is something I've never understood. What is the purpose of demanding to testify only without transcription or notes? Or at least is there a stated purpose for only agreeing to testify this way?

[pomeroo]

You have no idea what caused the actions that we all witnessed.
No more than I do. So your judgement remains your own. As does mine.

Perhaps this nonsense does need to stop.


No, you're confused. My judgment is irrelevant. The judgment of the agents whose job is to protect the President is all that matters here. Their reasons for handling the situation as they did are not subject to review by uninformed persons with thinly-veiled agendas. The actions we witnessed can be summarized: Bush was informed of the attacks in NYC and was kept in what was deemed a secure location until it was determined how best to proceed. There is no evidence for products of your imagination.

[RedIbis]

Can the esteemed researchers here tell me if Bush is lying or had a close circuit feed into his limo when he was crossing the Ringling causeway because that's where he was when the N. Tower is struck, not waiting outside the classroom.

" actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011204-17.html

"Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html

[Sizzler]

Yes the behavior can be considered odd, but weren't the circumstances?

Completely.

[pomeroo]

This is something I've never understood. What is the purpose of demanding to testify only without transcription or notes? Or at least is there a stated purpose for only agreeing to testify this way?


They are simply trying to avoid setting a precedent. Perhaps someday the fantasists will explain why the Democrats on the commission didn't find anything startling in the testimony they heard. Oh, I forgot: they're in on it, too.

[A W Smith]

Sure.

But why not move to a room and start communicating? Everyone in America had their eyes glued to this event be it TV, radio, etc, but Bush sat and talked to children all the while knowing america was under attack.

how many people in america continued working when they heard about this?

think about that.

Why would he hide in another room in an occupied school? and where? the janitors closet? did it occur to you that no war rooms exist in todays elementary schools? Did it also occur to you that today communication is wireless? maybe a big red rotary phone in the teachers conference room with a funny James bond ring tone direct to a bunker at the Pentagon would make you happy? :rolleyes: does that make more sense than taking a few moments to verify a safe route and destination and only then GTF out of there?

[pomeroo]

Can the esteemed researchers here tell me if Bush is lying or had a close circuit feed into his limo when he was crossing the Ringling causeway because that's where he was when the N. Tower is struck, not waiting outside the classroom.

" actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011204-17.html

"Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html


Yawn. The answer, as you know, is c) Neither.

[Sizzler]

There is no evidence for products of your imagination.

THis sounds familar...but i can't quite place it:jaw-dropp

[RedIbis]

Yawn. The answer, as you know, is c) Neither.

So he's telling the truth and you're suggesting he was waiting outside the classroom and watched the N. Tower get struck on TV?

Is that what you're going with?

[uk_dave]

Can the esteemed researchers here tell me if Bush is lying or had a close circuit feed into his limo when he was crossing the Ringling causeway because that's where he was when the N. Tower is struck, not waiting outside the classroom.

" actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, "There's one terrible pilot." And I said, "It must have been a horrible accident."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/12/20011204-17.html

"Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020105-3.html
Well the only footage of the first hit was from the Naudets and since they were already in the thick of it, I kinda doubt the first strike was broadcast anywhere close to the actual event, let alone live as he was in his car. You do understand the difference between a live broadcast and recorded footage, don't you?

[RedIbis]

Well the only footage of the first hit was from the Naudets and since they were already in the thick of it, I kinda doubt the first strike was broadcast anywhere close to the actual event, let alone live as he was in his car. You do understand the difference between a live broadcast and recorded footage, don't you?

You're correct. So how did Bush see the first strike on TV as he stated on two different occassions, waiting outside the classroom?

[A W Smith]

So he's telling the truth and you're suggesting he was waiting outside the classroom and watched the N. Tower get struck on TV?

Is that what you're going with?


What? the north tower hit was televised as it happened? do you want to re-think that?

[Sizzler]

Why would he hide in another room in an occupied school? and where? the janitors closet? did it occur to you that no war rooms exist in todays elementary schools? Did it also occur to you that today communication is wireless? maybe a big red rotary phone in the teachers conference room with a funny James bond ring tone direct to a bunker at the Pentagon would make you happy? :rolleyes: does that make more sense than taking a few moments to verify a safe route and destination and only then GTF out of there?

who needs a war room?

no wireless?

big red phones?

i hope you are trolling

[RedIbis]

What? the north tower hit was televised as it happened? do you want to re-think that?

No, do you?

[A W Smith]

You're correct. So how did Bush see the first strike on TV as he stated on two different occassions, waiting outside the classroom?


he could not have witnessed the first hit. He had to be seeing either the aftermath or the second hit. Chalk it up to Bush stupidity or fog of war.

[pomeroo]

So he's telling the truth and you're suggesting he was waiting outside the classroom and watched the N. Tower get struck on TV?

Is that what you're going with?


No, you're right. He was confessing on national television to the existence of a gigantic, mathematically impossible conspiracy whose goal was to...to...uh, well, they must have had some goal. As we are talking about George Bush, it is, of course, inconceivable that he misspoke.

[pomeroo]

No, do you?


What pleasure do you conspiracy liars get from raising nonsensical points that can't possibly help your evil cause?

[RedIbis]

Shocking that you guys would dig up the ol' incompetence theory.

At least admit that the guy is lying through his teeth.

[CHF]

So how did Bush see the first strike on TV as he stated on two different occassions, waiting outside the classroom?

Could it be that maybe, just maybe, Bush mispoke and meant to say "I saw THAT a plane had hit the tower?"

No, that's impossible!

Bush would never, ever stumble over his words. :rolleyes:

The more likely explanation is that Bush watched the first plane on a live CIA feed and then came out and admitted it by mistake. Sorta like Silverstein's "pull it" gaffe, right?

[uk_dave]

You're correct. So how did Bush see the first strike on TV as he stated on two different occassions, waiting outside the classroom?

He didn't. He saw the news footage of the tower on fire after a plane had hit it.

You don't seriously expect Bush to be as eloquent in that way what he speaks like I is, do you? Seriously?

"We talked about Darfur. We talked about Afghanistan and Iraq. And I appreciate very much the EU support of the international compact that will be meeting on Iraq here in Sharm el-Sheikh."


Comments made in meeting at the White House with German Chancellor Merkel and European Commission President Barroso, White House, Apr. 30, 2007


He thought he was in Egypt

"So, welcome to Washington, D.C. I think this is our fifth visit. Every time, I've left our visits inspired by your vision."


Welcome offered to President Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, New York, New York, Sep. 20, 2006


He thought he was in Washington

more.... http://www.dubyaspeak.com/

'nuff said?

[RedIbis]

What pleasure do you conspiracy liars get from raising nonsensical points that can't possibly help your evil cause?

Self righteous indignation, wow Pom, you're really on a roll this afternoon.

I was pointing out his simple error.

[Gravy]

Yes point taken. I have come to terms with it. However for the moment I'm having problems understanding how people can't see why this is strange. I'm sure you can relate:)And again you're wrong. I try not to project my expectations on people who are in stressful situations that I've never experienced. That's why I posted the FDR and Kerry stories above.

[A W Smith]

Could it be that maybe, just maybe, Bush mispoke and meant to say "I saw THAT a plane had hit the tower?"

No, that's impossible!

Bush would never, ever stumble over his words. :rolleyes:

The more likely explanation is that Bush watched the first plane on a live CIA feed and then came out and admitted it by mistake. Sorta like Silverstein's "pull it" gaffe, right?

jejAjZQkAhE

[pomeroo]

Shocking that you guys would dig up the ol' incompetence theory.

At least admit that the guy is lying through his teeth.


Really, is there an epidemic of dumbth among the loons? He didn't see the plane hit the North Tower because it wasn't possible. Undoubtedly millions of people, on hearing that a plane crashed into one of the Towers, surmised that pilot error was responsible. Why on earth would Bush be lying? What conceivable motive could he have? No matter how stupid and hopelessly blinkered you may be, is there any remotely plausible explanation other than that he was confused?

[RedIbis]

Could it be that maybe, just maybe, Bush mispoke and meant to say "I saw THAT a plane had hit the tower?"

No, that's impossible!

Bush would never, ever stumble over his words. :rolleyes:

The more likely explanation is that Bush watched the first plane on a live CIA feed and then came out and admitted it by mistake. Sorta like Silverstein's "pull it" gaffe, right?

No because the second time he said it, he coulldn't have been more clear:

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

[nicepants]

Shocking that you guys would dig up the ol' incompetence theory.

At least admit that the guy is lying through his teeth.

Lying would mean that he knew the truth and deliberately deceived. I'm going for the dumb-bush argument here. He likely saw the aftermath of the first impact on television....I'm not aware of any news agency who had live footage of the first impact.

Even if you assume that he was lying....what would the point be? How would that help in his grand conspiracy?

[RedIbis]

No matter how stupid and hopelessly blinkered you may be,


Not only is personalizing the discussion with juvenile insults against the rules here, it's a sign of deep desperation.

When in doubt just attack your oponent. This is the consistently the most disappointing aspect of such a great site. How can this be a legitimate forum for debate when any voice of dissent is attacked with silly insults?

[pomeroo]

Self righteous indignation, wow Pom, you're really on a roll this afternoon.

I was pointing out his simple error.


It's bizarre that you clowns are compelled to lie when the evidence that catches you is on the same page. Here in post #167 you write: "Shocking that you guys would dig up the ol' incompetence theory.

At least admit that the guy is lying through his teeth."

So, we can agree that you were not pointing out a "simple error"; you were making a ridiculous accusation. Why you would trap yourself in such an easily-exposed falsehood is the reason you're a conspiracy liar.

[GStan]

No because the second time he said it, he coulldn't have been more clear:

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

How could he possibly have seen it?

[nicepants]

How could he possibly have seen it?

He couldn't have. Not live, anyways.

[kookbreaker]

Not only is personalizing the discussion with juvenile insults against the rules here, it's a sign of deep desperation.

When in doubt just attack your oponent. This is the consistently the most disappointing aspect of such a great site. How can this be a legitimate forum for debate when any voice of dissent is attacked with silly insults?

This is very ironic since the thing you are harping about has nothing to do with any conspiracy theory and merely is some game-playing to try (and fail) to get us to say something about Bush that has no relevancy.

Methinks you protest to much.

[uk_dave]

No because the second time he said it, he coulldn't have been more clear:

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

OK so he confessed to having seen live what no one else had seen (except those on the ground in NYC)

Take it to a judge and get prosecuting.

Or..... would you feel rather silly doing that?
Go on, it's ok, you can admit it.... you know Bush is possibly the worst 'communicator' the US has ever elected to office.

You know he never saw the first impact, right? You know he is describing the aftermath of that impact, but doing it so badly that he keeps repeating the same stupidity.

You know this, and you've known it for the last six years...so that's why you haven't done anything more than post on an internet forum with your mock 'suspicions'. Right? Go on, you can tell me. I'll keep it to myself. No one else is reading this. Go on. Admit it.:D

[pomeroo]

Not only is personalizing the discussion with juvenile insults against the rules here, it's a sign of deep desperation.

When in doubt just attack your oponent. This is the consistently the most disappointing aspect of such a great site. How can this be a legitimate forum for debate when any voice of dissent is attacked with silly insults?


You are making absurd accusations and exhibiting dishonesty while doing so.

[CHF]

No because the second time he said it, he coulldn't have been more clear:

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

So you're going with this as your explanation, Red?

Bush watched the first plane on a live CIA feed and then came out and admitted it by mistake. Twice.

And this moron pulled off 9/11, huh? :rolleyes:

[pomeroo]

So you're going with this as your explanation, Red?

Bush watched the first plane on a live CIA feed and then came out and admitted it by mistake. Twice.

And this moron pulled off 9/11, huh? :rolleyes:


It infuriates me that these ignorant liars play such stupid games. Bush confesses to the existence of a gigantic conspiracy that has committed a mass murder. Not a single reporter anywhere in the world smells a story.

[RedIbis]

FTR: I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying. He's repeated this lie to cover up whatever deranged thoughts were running through that shrivelled up walnut brain of his.

If your position is that Bush is dumb, can't use the English language, etc, you'll get no argument from me. But don't let him off the hook that easy. He's dumb like a fox, always has been. If he has any skill at all, that's it and it's gotten him damn far.

[A W Smith]

nvm

[RedIbis]

Not a single reporter anywhere in the world smells a story.

Wanna bet?

[CHF]

FTR: I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying. He's repeated this lie to cover up whatever deranged thoughts were running through that shrivelled up walnut brain of his.

If your position is that Bush is dumb, can't use the English language, etc, you'll get no argument from me. But don't let him off the hook that easy. He's dumb like a fox, always has been. If he has any skill at all, that's it and it's gotten him damn far.

Red, if you admit that Bush is a bumbling idiot who slaughters the English language then why do you think his quote is proof of anything?

[pomeroo]

FTR: I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying. He's repeated this lie to cover up whatever deranged thoughts were running through that shrivelled up walnut brain of his.

If your position is that Bush is dumb, can't use the English language, etc, you'll get no argument from me. But don't let him off the hook that easy. He's dumb like a fox, always has been. If he has any skill at all, that's it and it's gotten him damn far.


FTR, nobody thinks that Bush saw the crash of the first plane because he couldn't have. The only one lying here is you. His reaction when he heard about the first crash was that it was pilot error. He later conflated this reaction with the image in his brain of a plane crashing into one of the Towers. This ain't rocket science.

[CHF]

Wanna bet?

American Free Press Nazis don't count, just so you know.

[pomeroo]

Wanna bet?

Yes, but you and every other conspiracy liar wouldn't touch that bet.

[kookbreaker]

FTR: I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying. He's repeated this lie to cover up whatever deranged thoughts were running through that shrivelled up walnut brain of his.

If your position is that Bush is dumb, can't use the English language, etc, you'll get no argument from me. But don't let him off the hook that easy. He's dumb like a fox, always has been. If he has any skill at all, that's it and it's gotten him damn far.

Start reading some Heinlein. Please.

[RedIbis]

Yes, but you and every other conspiracy liar wouldn't touch that bet.

I'm a betting man, try me.

[RedIbis]

This ain't rocket science.

No, but it's one hell of an excuse for the commander in chief to forget exactly where he was and what he was doing when he first heard of the attacks. Twice.

[nicepants]

FTR: I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying.

False Dichotomy Fallacy

Making an incorrect statement does not mean he is lying.

A lie has 2 components:

- False Statement
- Intent of deception

Both have to be present for something to be a lie. So far we only have 50%. Do you have evidence/proof that Bush INTENTIONALLY made this incorrect statement?

[pomeroo]

I'm a betting man, try me.



It is less important that you claim to be a betting man than it is that you are known to be a lying man. My chance of collecting from you is nonexistent.

Bush made these statements over six years ago. During that period, none of the researchers for the Democratic National Committee who place his every word under a microscope to discover yet another means of smearing him has found any use for your quote. How do you account for that? Yes, yes, they're all in on it and Kerry wanted to lose in 2004.

So, you're sitting on the biggest story in the history of journalism and no one will take you seriously. There's a good reason not to take you seriously, but I hate to repeat myself.

[RedIbis]

False Dichotomy Fallacy

Making an incorrect statement does not mean he is lying.

A lie has 2 components:

- False Statement
- Intent of deception

Both have to be present for something to be a lie. So far we only have 50%. Do you have evidence/proof that Bush INTENTIONALLY made this incorrect statement?


It's not a false dichotomy if I'm not offering the options in argument. That's why I used the phrase "I think" to suggest my opinion or perspective.

[RedIbis]

It is less important that you claim to be a betting man than it is that you are known to be a lying man. My chance of collecting from you is nonexistent.

Bush made these statements over six years ago. During that period, none of the researchers for the Democratic National Committee who place his every word under a microscope to discover yet another means of smearing him has found any use for your quote. How do you account for that? Yes, yes, they're all in on it and Kerry wanted to lose in 2004.

So, you're sitting on the biggest story in the history of journalism and no one will take you seriously. There's a good reason not to take you seriously, but I hate to repeat myself.

There's a real strain of extremism in your rhetoric even when you've calmed down a bit.

[nicepants]

It's not a false dichotomy if I'm not offering the options in argument. That's why I used the phrase "I think" to suggest my opinion or perspective.

" I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying."

The fact that Bush could not have seen this happen live is evidence of an incorrect statement. What evidence do you have that he intentionally deceived people by telling them he saw it, knowing that to be false?

To put it simply: What makes you think he is lying as opposed to just being wrong?

(Or is this an assumption based on a pre-established conclusion of Bush being involved in a conspiracy?)

[pomeroo]

There's a real strain of extremism in your rhetoric even when you've calmed down a bit.


There's a real strain of dishonesty in your rhetoric--always. I am no more or less calm now than I have been all day. Nice diversion attempt, however.

[CHF]

RedIbis, what is your theory?

You admit that Bush is a moron. You admit he slaughters the English language. So what is his quote therefor proof of?

[stateofgrace]

No because the second time he said it, he coulldn't have been more clear:

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

Didn't also say something along the lines that he thought that the planes pilot was a terrible one ?

[RedIbis]

" I don't think Bush saw it either. I think he's lying."

The fact that Bush could not have seen this happen live is evidence of an incorrect statement. What evidence do you have that he intentionally deceived people by telling them he saw it, knowing that to be false?

(Or is this an assumption based on a pre-established conclusion of Bush being involved in a conspiracy?)

It is my opinion that he is lying. He's not an honest man. He's lied in the past. He made a statement that can't possibly be true. Twice. I conclude he's lying.

I know it's easy to call Bush stupid and a mangler of the English language, which he is, but he's also a liar, always has been, always will be, no matter how stupid he is.

[pomeroo]

There's a real strain of extremism in your rhetoric even when you've calmed down a bit.


Responding to concrete questions isn't your style, but how do you account for the indifference of Bush's foes to his spectacular admission of the existence of a gigantic conspiracy? Is my assumption that he actually has foes incorrect? Is everybody except a handful of low-IQ paranoiacs in on it?

[pomeroo]

It is my opinion that he is lying. He's not an honest man. He's lied in the past. He made a statement that can't possibly be true. Twice. I conclude he's lying.

I know it's easy to call Bush stupid and a mangler of the English language, which he is, but he's also a liar, always has been, always will be, no matter how stupid he is.


And yet you are incapable of stating a single lie Bush has told.

[RedIbis]

Responding to concrete questions isn't your style, but how do you account for the indifference of Bush's foes to his spectacular admission of the existence of a gigantic conspiracy? Is my assumption that he actually has foes incorrect? Is everybody except a handful of low-IQ paranoiacs in on it?

No, responding to concrete questions is exactly my style. Resonding to longwinded rhetorical questions that you answer for yourself is not.

Do you have one? Preferably, without the invective.

[pomeroo]

No, responding to concrete questions is exactly my style. Resonding to longwinded rhetorical questions that you answer for yourself is not.

Do you have one? Preferably, without the invective.


Yes. It would be the concrete question that you've been ignoring--the one that asked you to account for the indifference of Bush's foes to his staggering confession.

[RedIbis]

And yet you are incapable of stating a single lie Bush has told.

I'm incapable?

Even the most basic etiquette for informal debate would be helpful at this point.

[pomeroo]

I'm incapable?

Even the most basic etiquette for informal debate would be helpful at this point.



As no one to date has managed to state an unambiguous lie told by Bush, it is safe to assume that you will have no better luck.

[funk de fino]

I think Bush is the most incompetant leader the US has had in my lifetime. He has also undoubtedly lied in the past. I have no proof of this but most politicians lie and deceive so it is not out of character. Clinton lied and was caught.

However in this case I think Bush is not lying and was just being stupid. Regardless, it means nothing in the grand scheme of what happened on 911. Ths fact that truthers cling to this claim in the face of apathy from Bush's political opponents says more for their lack of anything more substantial than it does his stupidity or complicity in a heinous act.

[RedIbis]

Yes. It would be the concrete question that you've been ignoring--the one that asked you to account for the indifference of Bush's foes to his staggering confession.

Oh right. The Democratic Party. I'm supposed to expect that they'll spearhead an investigation to the vast deceptions that have gone on? I wouldn't wait on that one.

[nicepants]

It is my opinion that he is lying. He's not an honest man. He's lied in the past. He made a statement that can't possibly be true. Twice. I conclude he's lying.

It's clear that the statement he made was incorrect...but what makes this incorrect statement by Bush any more likely to be a lie than any other incorrect statement he's made?

Furthermore, what did Bush have to gain by lying about this?

[funk de fino]

No, responding to concrete questions is exactly my style. Resonding to longwinded rhetorical questions that you answer for yourself is not.

Do you have one? Preferably, without the invective.

Would that be pulverised concrete?

[alexg]

"I had seen this plane fly into the first building."

1. In ths South it is common to say "I saw" when you mean "I saw where" as in " I saw where the Dallas Cowboys beat the Packers last week". The 'where' is frequently omitted. If someone says "I saw the Dallas cowboys beat the Packers last week" they may very well mean they heard the results but did not see the game. Bush did after all here about it and see the smoking hole in the building.

2. He was just mistaken. He would have seen video of the second hit at some point and may simply have misremembered when asked about it much later.

[pomeroo]

I think Bush is the most incompetant leader the US has had in my lifetime. He has also undoubtedly lied in the past. I have no proof of this but most politicians lie and deceive so it is not out of character. Clinton lied and was caught.

However in this case I think Bush is not lying and was just being stupid. Regardless, it means nothing in the grand scheme of what happened on 911. Ths fact that truthers cling to this claim in the face of apathy from Bush's political opponents says more for their lack of anything more substantial than it does his stupidity or complicity in a heinous act.


Why do people go on and on about Bush's incompetence, stupidity, etc, when it invariably turns out that they disagree with his policies? I don't own a crystal ball. My prediction for the ultimate outcome in Iraq is of no value because I lack the necessary perspective. If Iraq evolves into a stable democracy, Bush's decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime will be viewed as a masterstroke.

[pomeroo]

Oh right. The Democratic Party. I'm supposed to expect that they'll spearhead an investigation to the vast deceptions that have gone on? I wouldn't wait on that one.


Gee, that's quite an answer. No wonder we're so impressed with your analytical skills. Uh, why wouldn't his implacable enemies want to exploit the opportunity of a lifetime and destroy him utterly? Why wouldn't they have wanted to sweep both houses of Congress and win the presidency in a landslide? You don't want us to think that you are as empty-headed as you appear, do you?

[uk_dave]

Gee, that's quite an answer. No wonder we're so impressed with your analytical skills. Uh, why wouldn't his implacable enemies want to exploit the opportunity of a lifetime and destroy him utterly? Why wouldn't they have wanted to sweep both houses of Congress and win the presidency in a landslide? You don't want us to think that you are as empty-headed as you appear, do you?

Coz they iz all inz on it!!111!!!

[DavidJames]

1. In ths South it is common to say "I saw" when you mean "I saw where" as in " I saw where the Dallas Cowboys beet the Packers last week". The 'where' is frequently omitted. If someone says "I saw the Dallas cowboys beat the Packers last week" they may very well mean they heard the results but did not see the game. Bush did after all here about it and see the smoking hole in the building.

2. He was just mistaken. He would have seen video of the second hit at some point and may simply have misremembered when asked about it much later.Yes, it could have happened that way. But you need to remember, in the world of the CTists, life plays out like TV and the movies. Where the lone clever protagonist uncovers the diabolical plot by reviewing the video over and over until the light bulb finally goes off and the single clue, the smoking gun, that everyone else missed is revealed to him. It's that Columbo moment that the CTists dream about. Bush said he saw the first plane hit. Silverstein said pull it. These obscure comments, overlooked by "normal" people betray the perps to the clever CTists.

[uk_dave]

It's not as if Bush isn't prone to repeating the same inanities over and over and over and over again.....You know, I kind of wonder what was going through the enemy's mind when they attacked us. They probably thought we were so selfish and that our true religion was materialism, so self-centered that after 9/11, 2001, oh, we might file a lawsuit or two. I guess they've been watching too much TV. They don't understand the country.

(Oct. 31, 2002)


You see, I'm amazed of what — I try to speculate what went on in the minds of these people when they attacked us. They must have thought we were weak. You know, they must have thought that — this kind of false image of materialism affected their thinking. They thought we were so materialistic we wouldn't react. They probably thought all we were going to do is maybe file a couple of lawsuits. They were watching the wrong TV show.

(May 10, 2002)


http://www.dubyaspeak.com/repeatoffender.phtml?offense=holygrail

[RedIbis]

Gee, that's quite an answer. No wonder we're so impressed with your analytical skills. Uh, why wouldn't his implacable enemies want to exploit the opportunity of a lifetime and destroy him utterly? Why wouldn't they have wanted to sweep both houses of Congress and win the presidency in a landslide? You don't want us to think that you are as empty-headed as you appear, do you?

Why do you insist on personalizing the discussion?

These questions are based on very illogical premises. I'm not so naive to think that Dems have any interest nor the power to upset the applecart.

There are enough real foes of Bush, citizens, regular ol Americans, sadly, they don't have any recourse, other than being informed.

Unless you find a way to get more specific and less personal with your discouse, I'm not going to spend much time with this line of questioning.

[pomeroo]

Why do you insist on personalizing the discussion?

These questions are based on very illogical premises. I'm not so naive to think that Dems have any interest nor the power to upset the applecart.


Have you recently been released from a mental institution? You're not so naive as to think that the Dems have any interest in winning???? Well, just how naive are you? What do you suppose their purpose is? Do you think Bush's strident foes really like him and support the policies they undermine at every step? Surely there are some limits to the madness you embrace?




There are enough real foes of Bush, citizens, regular ol Americans, sadly, they don't have any recourse, other than being informed.

But the Democrats aren't his "real" foes? And my premises are illogical?

Do you begin to see why your evil movement died?


Unless you find a way to get more specific and less personal with your discouse, I'm not going to spend much time with this line of questioning.


You want me to get more specific? Your world is an interesting place.

[CHF]

Red, what is Bush's quote evidence of? What do you think happened?

[HappyHarryHampton]

Still nobody has a reasonable explanation as to why when told 'America is under attack' the POTUS doesn't have a single question for at least the next 8 minutes.

What's the simplest explanation using the much loved skeptical razor?

[T.A.M.]

My take:

Bush is far from the sharpest tool in the shed. The MIS-STATEMENTS made by him were evidence of either being completely muddled/confused at the time and/or REMEMBERING something else he saw, and speaking of it as the first tower being hit.

I do not think he was lieing on this occasion. I agree that he, like most human beings, at times, is a liar. Who will pick up the first stone to hit him with?

Bush, IMO, should have gotten up, firmly but not panicky, and left the classroom, within a minute or so...he did not. It is easy to say what should have been done in such a situation when you were not there, and when you have the benefit of hindsight.

TAM:)

[funk de fino]

Why do people go on and on about Bush's incompetence, stupidity, etc, when it invariably turns out that they disagree with his policies? I don't own a crystal ball. My prediction for the ultimate outcome in Iraq is of no value because I lack the necessary perspective. If Iraq evolves into a stable democracy, Bush's decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein's regime will be viewed as a masterstroke.

Why do you assume I disgree with his Iraq policy? I fought in the 1st Gulf war against Saddam. I think it is great he is gone.

I still think Bush is an incompetant and stupid. Do you disagree?

[T.A.M.]

Still nobody has a reasonable explanation as to why when told 'America is under attack' the POTUS doesn't have a single question for at least the next 8 minutes.

What's the simplest explanation using the much loved skeptical razor?

He was stunned, scarred, uncertain what to do...He was Bush.

What is not the simplest explanation is that he was covering up some vast, completely insane and far fetched conspiracy of an inside job. So slice that on old Occam.

TAM:)

[SDC]

Let me chip in something, probably minor. Bush is not stupid. Do not think that. He is, by all indications, an intelligent man; but also an inarticulate one. Intelligence is not the same thing as articulateness. He is certain of his rightness and rectitude, and seems extremely stubborn. None of this means he is stupid. I wish people wouldn't make those statements; they don't help. If you don't like his policies, or acts, well say so. But don't assume these are results of stupidity.

[eeyore1954]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Is the president not the commander in chief? Was America not being attacked, more than once?

People in denial are painfully obvious.

his actions were wrong. the ss actions were wrong. thats it.

I am sure this has been commented on in this thread but

And you wonder why people treated you as if you were being disingenuous before. It is very hard to think you are anything other than a truther who is tyrying to pretend he is not

[Jonnyclueless]

This may have already been addressed, but I can't bare to read the 2 pages of nonsense that have cropped up because of this derailment from RedIbis.

Bush did not actuall SEE the first plane hit the tower. He was WATCHING the TV news, and on the news he SAW *that* the plane had hit the tower. He was using his EYES to see the news report, hence him using the term "saw".

Just like I might say to you "Hey, I saw you got a raise at work today". That doesn't mean I literally witnessed you getting the raise. It's just a way of speaking. One that is very VERY common among people form Texas.

Talk about one of the most insane claims of lying.

[eeyore1954]

The Secret service is supposed to "act on the side of caution."

It's supposed to be standard operating procedure during a threat situation for the Secret Service to move the president and key members of his cabinet to safety.

In the case of the president that day, his location was well publicized and the Secret Service behaved very suspiciously in not insisting that he leave immediately.

MM

Do you know standard operating procedure for the secret service?
Acting on the side of caution was exactly what they did instead of rushing him out without first determining the best action.

[Jonnyclueless]

Still nobody has a reasonable explanation as to why when told 'America is under attack' the POTUS doesn't have a single question for at least the next 8 minutes.

What's the simplest explanation using the much loved skeptical razor?

Actually, there are 6 pages of people giving reasons. Next time, you might want to try reading them instead of pretending they don't exist. But that's kinda the twoofer motto. Pretend the counter arguments don't exist.

[T.A.M.]

Let me chip in something, probably minor. Bush is not stupid. Do not think that. He is, by all indications, an intelligent man; but also an inarticulate one. Intelligence is not the same thing as articulateness. He is certain of his rightness and rectitude, and seems extremely stubborn. None of this means he is stupid. I wish people wouldn't make those statements; they don't help. If you don't like his policies, or acts, well say so. But don't assume these are results of stupidity.

Perhaps a better expression of how I feel about him, is that he has done A LOT OF STUPID THINGS, that have, in turn, made him appear...less than smart.

TAM:)

[HappyHarryHampton]

He was stunned, scarred, uncertain what to do...He was Bush.

Er.. that's complete rubbish.

He was told off camera by way of a hand written note on a held up note pad "don't say anything yet".

"About what".... would be the obvious response.

But... zip... nada... nothing... no "excuse me one moment"...

How was he supposed to know what not to say?

If this doesn't switch on your skeptic radar then I don't know what will.

Where's that razor.

Did they know and let it happen because it suited the PNAC agenda? The PNAC were wishing for a mid-set changing event, they sure got it. Lucky for them.

"Nobody could have imagined planes being used in this way"... *****

[nicepants]

Did they know and let it happen because it suited the PNAC agenda? The PNAC were wishing for a mid-set changing event,

I'm sure you wouldn't make a claim like that without a source to back it up....please post it!

[HappyHarryHampton]

I'm sure you wouldn't make a claim like that without a source to back it up....please post it!

You really don't know?

You don't know the very famous document signed up to by the promiment members of the PNAC (you must know who they are) where they clearly state they won't get what they want without a "new Pearl Harbor".

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_ Harbor.22

[DavidJames]

Er.. that's complete rubbish.

He was told off camera by way of a hand written note on a held up note pad "don't say anything yet".

"About what".... would be the obvious response.

But... zip... nada... nothing... no "excuse me one moment"...

How was he supposed to know what not to say?

If this doesn't switch on your skeptic radar then I don't know what will.

Where's that razor.What's your point? The fact that Bush and the SS didn't act the way you thought they should means what?

[HappyHarryHampton]

What's your point? The fact that Bush and the SS didn't act the way you thought they should means what?

Ah.. you're right... nothing strange at all about any of this.

Perhaps I should move along.

Why should the POTUS ask any questions when America is under attack.

That would be a ridiculous thing for him to do.

[DavidJames]

Ah.. you're right... nothing strange at all about any of this.

Perhaps I should move along.

Why should the POTUS ask any questions when America is under attack.

That would be a ridiculous thing for him to do.Answer my questions.

What's your point?
The fact that Bush and the SS didn't act the way you thought they should means what?

[CHF]

Ah.. you're right... nothing strange at all about any of this.

Perhaps I should move along.

Why should the POTUS ask any questions when America is under attack.

That would be a ridiculous thing for him to do.

Oh boy. Another piece of evidence that proves.....something.

[Jonnyclueless]

Harry, can you stay away from the uber cliche conspiracies like the PNAC one? Just use the search function to find the threads on that already. We're sick of going over that dead horse for the millionth time.

What, you think you're the first lemming to come on here and bring that up?

[JamesB]

You really don't know?

You don't know the very famous document signed up to by the promiment members of the PNAC (you must know who they are) where they clearly state they won't get what they want without a "new Pearl Harbor".

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_ Harbor.22

Uhh, no, actually it does not say that anywhere in the document. It only states that the process of technical transformation that they propose would be slower without one.

[Jonnyclueless]

Ah.. you're right... nothing strange at all about any of this.

Perhaps I should move along.

Why should the POTUS ask any questions when America is under attack.

That would be a ridiculous thing for him to do.

It wouldn't be ridiculous, but it also isn't for him to not. What IS ridiculous is for you to pretend there is and isn't a proper way to respond. Especially in a situation that you have no comprehension of. Especially when he has people do deal with that.

Most people didn't immediately ask questions. Most people sat there stunned in disbelief. And more importantly, HAD he actually responded the way you think he should have, then you would be sitting here claiming THAT to be evidence of an inside job. If all you want to see is one thing, then that one thing is all you're going to see.

[nicepants]

You really don't know?

You don't know the very famous document signed up to by the promiment members of the PNAC (you must know who they are) where they clearly state they won't get what they want without a "new Pearl Harbor".

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_ Harbor.22

Where in that document does it say that they were

"wishing for a mid-set changing event"?



Also, where do they

"clearly state they won't get what they want without a "new Pearl Harbor"?

Quotes, please.

?

[Corsair 115]

Still nobody has a reasonable explanation as to why when told 'America is under attack' the POTUS doesn't have a single question for at least the next 8 minutes.

What's the simplest explanation using the much loved skeptical razor?The simplest explanation? Bush is not a very good politician in public engagements. Just look at any of his speeches, or especially when answering questions from reporters in a press conference. It's downright painful to watch since he's usually awful at such public situations.

A good politician would have been up and out of the room in thirty seconds and done so in such a way as to have everyone in the room laughing and smiling and none the wiser that something dreadful was unfolding. That's what a politician highly skilled in public matters and public speaking would have been able to do.

Bush is not such a politician.

[Hokulele]

PNAC again? Fine, here the Pearl Harbor quote in context (my bolding).

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions. A decision to suspend or terminate aircraft carrier production, as recommended by this report and as justified by the clear direction of military technology, will cause great upheaval. Likewise, systems entering production today - the F-22 fighter, for example - will be in service inventories for decades to come. Wise management of this process will consist in large measure of figuring out the right moments to halt production of current-paradigm weapons and shift to radically new designs. The expense associated with some programs can make them roadblocks to the larger process of transformation - the Joint Strike Fighter program, at a total of approximately $200 billion, seems an unwise investment. Thus, this report advocates a two-stage process of change - transition and transformation - over the coming decades.


That doesn't really sound like hoping for a catastrophe.

(If HHH uses the word "propitious", mjd would appear to have a sock.)

[T.A.M.]

Ah.. you're right... nothing strange at all about any of this.

Perhaps I should move along.

Why should the POTUS ask any questions when America is under attack.

That would be a ridiculous thing for him to do.

Since you are going to be so rude, then I feel I should reciprocate. I feel you are full of rubbish. Your comments are full of baseless opinion, with a heaping tablespoon of paranoia, and a pinch of hatred.

I have bolded in your quote, the only bright thing you have managed to post.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

Harry, can you stay away from the uber cliche conspiracies like the PNAC one? Just use the search function to find the threads on that already. We're sick of going over that dead horse for the millionth time.

What, you think you're the first lemming to come on here and bring that up?

My new favorite descriptive for the average truther.

TAM:)

[Sizzler]

I am sure this has been commented on in this thread but

And you wonder why people treated you as if you were being disingenuous before. It is very hard to think you are anything other than a truther who is tyrying to pretend he is not

I have since rethought my position on the ss. Certain people here have commented quite nicely on that.

My Bush comment stand though.

Troubles of imagination are your own. Believe what you want.

[T.A.M.]

well all you have said is "Bush was wrong" and since that is simply an opinion, it can be taken for what it is worth, as we and you do, with all "opinions".

TAM:)

[beachnut]

Why was he not removed and brought into a makeshift control room (in the school) to call the shots?

Is the president not the commander in chief? Was America not being attacked, more than once?

People in denial are painfully obvious.
That is one dumb idea! Do you make up this crap on your own?

If I was president I would not be removed first for one plane, then even a second plane. If there is not shelter for the kids, I would stay with the kids. If you do not have a super bunker to take the kids, why would you go hide under the desk. They were attacking 110 story buildings at the time not some school in Florida! Did you see how small the school building was? The terrorist would miss anyway they would not even find it from the air. These terrorist are as bad as 9/11 truth, they need BIG targets, as in large! The tallest building is NYC, the biggest office building in the world, PA, etc.

Oh, lets take to AF1, oh a big jet someone can come get him? You are not going to be very good at being in charge until you get some experience.

Your dumb ideas on the President are just that. But who knows what the SS was doing to secure the sky over AF1, around the school etc. I wonder if they carry some special weapons? You don't know because you are too busy making up stupid ideas of the president should do but you have zero time line to match your great ideas to reality.

This is your ticket back to being 9/11 truthy.

[Slayhamlet]

Shocking that you guys would dig up the ol' incompetence theory.

At least admit that the guy is lying through his teeth.

Why? How does his easily disproved statement benefit him at all? What significance does any of this crap have?

[Slayhamlet]

HappyHarryHampton, you asked a question about the Holocaust in this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=102804) thread. A very detailed response was given but you seem to have missed it. Since I'm assuming your desire for an answer was genuine, it would be nice if you could respond to it. Thanks!

[CHF]

I have since rethought my position on the ss. Certain people here have commented quite nicely on that.

My Bush comment stand though.

Troubles of imagination are your own. Believe what you want.

What exactly do you believe? What do Bush's comments mean?

[pomeroo]

Why do you assume I disgree with his Iraq policy? I fought in the 1st Gulf war against Saddam. I think it is great he is gone.

I still think Bush is an incompetant and stupid. Do you disagree?


First, permit me to thank you for your bravery and your service to America.

I disagree that Bush is stupid. He is no mental giant, but he tested higher than John Kerry on a standard IQ test administered by the military. Kerry, always the gentleman, accounted for scoring lower than Bush by suggesting that he might been drinking the night before.

Is he incompetent? We know that Rumsfeld made some bad decisions and that Bush approved them. A review of the history of America's participation in World War II reveals incompetence on a massive scale. I'm not excusing Bush for bungling what, in my opinion, was a bold and visionary foreign policy initiative. I'm saddened that a golden opportunity to reverse decades of failures in the Middle East may have been squandered.

[pomeroo]

ANCIENT TWOOFER FALSEHOOD ALERT

You really don't know?

You don't know the very famous document signed up to by the promiment members of the PNAC (you must know who they are) where they clearly state they won't get what they want without a "new Pearl Harbor".

Are you serious?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_American_Century#.22New_Pearl_ Harbor.22


You have not read the PNAC document and are clueless about its contents.

[Slayhamlet]

First, permit me to thank you for your bravery and your service to America.

I disagree that Bush is stupid. He is no mental giant, but he tested higher than John Kerry on a standard IQ test administered by the military. Kerry, always the gentleman, accounted for scoring lower than Bush by suggesting that he might been drinking the night before.

Is he incompetent? We know that Rumsfeld made some bad decisions and that Bush approved them. A review of the history of America's participation in World War II reveals incompetence on a massive scale. I'm not excusing Bush for bungling what, in my opinion, was a bold and visionary foreign policy initiative. I'm saddened that a golden opportunity to reverse decades of failures in the Middle East may have been squandered.

Funk fought for the UK, I believe.

[Sizzler]

That is one dumb idea! Do you make up this crap on your own?

If I was president I would not be removed first for one plane, then even a second plane. If there is not shelter for the kids, I would stay with the kids. If you do not have a super bunker to take the kids, why would you go hide under the desk. They were attacking 110 story buildings at the time not some school in Florida! Did you see how small the school building was? The terrorist would miss anyway they would not even find it from the air. These terrorist are as bad as 9/11 truth, they need BIG targets, as in large! The tallest building is NYC, the biggest office building in the world, PA, etc.

Oh, lets take to AF1, oh a big jet someone can come get him? You are not going to be very good at being in charge until you get some experience.

Your dumb ideas on the President are just that. But who knows what the SS was doing to secure the sky over AF1, around the school etc. I wonder if they carry some special weapons? You don't know because you are too busy making up stupid ideas of the president should do but you have zero time line to match your great ideas to reality.

This is your ticket back to being 9/11 truthy.

shelter? a bunker? special weapons?

come on now. who said anything about that?

Gimme a break bud.

[Sizzler]

What exactly do you believe? What do Bush's comments mean?

I think it is plausible that the ss thought the school was the safest location. that is a very acceptable cause.

I don't know what comments you are referring to.

[beachnut]

Griffin's work a collection of hearsay BS junk. Zero use for reality or facts for 9/11.
Griffin's work is a good example of selling stupid to fools.

[ref]

Wow. Seven pages.

Bush's actions in no way give any hint of an inside job. That would be the most poorly executed job ever, if it was one.

About Griffin and yet another book. Boy, the cash the cash. Has the ink even properly dried from his previous book?

I'm soon going to add all the books, DVDs, stickers and other merchandise, lunches and donation pleas by various truth movement figures to my "exposed" article. I'll post the compilation in this forum after it's done. We are going to see a lot of salespeople there!

[HappyHarryHampton]

HappyHarryHampton, you asked a question about the Holocaust in this (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=102804) thread. A very detailed response was given but you seem to have missed it. Since I'm assuming your desire for an answer was genuine, it would be nice if you could respond to it. Thanks!

I switched off when I realised that you weren't interested in the truth.

The Dachau 'gas chamber' film was shown at Nuremberg, other stuff was entered as pre-trial evidence as 'proof' of gas chambers. Stories of gas chambers at Dachau were milked for many years afterwards (and still are in some quarters).

I'm not discussing that any more... been down that road... you get banned for having a different interpretation of history.

Wither free speech?

Sorry.

[HappyHarryHampton]

The simplest explanation? Bush is not a very good politician in public engagements. Just look at any of his speeches, or especially when answering questions from reporters in a press conference. It's downright painful to watch since he's usually awful at such public situations.

A good politician would have been up and out of the room in thirty seconds and done so in such a way as to have everyone in the room laughing and smiling and none the wiser that something dreadful was unfolding. That's what a politician highly skilled in public matters and public speaking would have been able to do.

Bush is not such a politician.

That simply doesn't cut it.

He didn't ask a single question.

No request for more information.

Told "don't say anything yet' (about what?) so it's not just him, his team were acting weird too.

The old incompetance theory. Not going to wash I'm afraid.

Also Bush was endangering the lifes of the children being publically known to be in such a public place.

He didn't even ask "are there any more planes".

He was the POTUS with the power to order the shooting down of civilian aircraft for goddsake.

Nothing to see here though.

[Corsair 115]

He didn't ask a single question. He was sitting in a classroom full of kids; what exactly is he going to ask in front of them?

No request for more information. See above. You're not going to discuss security matters in a classroom.

Also Bush was endangering the lifes of the children being publically known to be in such a public place. How on earth do you figure that?

He didn't even ask "are there any more planes". He's in a classroom full of kids. Not exactly the place to hold a security briefing.

He was the POTUS with the power to order the shooting down of civilian aircraft for goddsake. You may wish to recall the very confused news reports that day which reported on all manner of events which did not in fact happen. One term for it is "the fog of war." Confusion reigns in chaotic events.

You're also assuming his advisors would have been in possession of completely accurate, up-to-date information of what was happening vis-a-vis other hijacked aircraft. History has shown time and again that in a crisis clear and effective communication is one of the first things that often breaks down.

[Jonnyclueless]

I switched off when I realised that you weren't interested in the truth.



I think you switched off long before you started posting here.

[Jonnyclueless]

That simply doesn't cut it.

He didn't ask a single question.

No request for more information.

Told "don't say anything yet' (about what?) so it's not just him, his team were acting weird too.

The old incompetance theory. Not going to wash I'm afraid.

Also Bush was endangering the lifes of the children being publically known to be in such a public place.

He didn't even ask "are there any more planes".

He was the POTUS with the power to order the shooting down of civilian aircraft for goddsake.

Nothing to see here though.

Try that argument in a court of law and see how far it gets you thrown out of the room.

Why should have have requested information? You think that his staff doesn't give him information unless he asks?? You can't be serious with that question.

His team was not acting weird, that's called paranoia often induced by certain substances.

There was no incompetence other than these claims.

Bush was endangering the children:? Good lord that's the most idiotic claim yet. They were probably in the safest place they could possibly be in.

Why would he ask if there were any more planes??? You think that his staff wouldn't tell him these things??? Seriously??

He isn't the only one who could order a plane to be shot down, and if that was needed, he was there and ready for the request. You think they can enter the classroom and update him, but they can't enter and ask him for permission for a shoot down? Seriously?

Do you guys even think about this stuff before you play conspiracy?

[gumboot]

I have a couple of pertinent questions to ask...

1) Let's assume for a moment that the location of Bush on 9/11 was public knowledge, including his entire schedule. Let's assume the 9/11 hijackers actually knew he would be at Emma E. Booker Elementary School, and knew when he would be there. Did they also know which particular building he would be in? Did they know long enough in advance to do scouting trips to the school and get GPS coordinates? Did they know long enough in advance to hire a light aircraft in the area and fly over so they knew what their target looked like from the air?

2) The "official" Secret Service explanation for the delay in moving the President is that they waited to secure a route from the school to the airport where Air Force One was, and to gain information about the situation so they could make an appropriate decision.

(It is worth noting that the President moves at all times within a secure security cordon. His movements are planned well in advance to allow the USSS time to properly plan and secure all routes and locations. This is because a controlled environment is much easier to maintain security in than an uncontrolled environment. The USSS will only carry out emergency evacuation plans when the security cordon has been breached thus making the present location uncontrolled, unsecured, and posing an immediate threat.)

Taking into account this official explanation, does this seem logical or sensible? If not, why not?

3) A great deal is made about a continuing threat, and the President's lack of knowledge of what was happening. All we know for sure is that he was told "A second plane has hit the World Trade Center, America is under attack." A series of sub questions:
a) Could Bush have concluded from this that it was a terrorist attack? If not why not?
b) Were the USSS aware of other suspected hijackings at the time? If they were, who told them, and when? If they were not, when did they find out about other suspected hijackings?

4) Assuming for a moment that the attacks were a government false flag operation:
a) Did Bush know about them, and if he did:
i) Did the conspirators decide how Bush would react?
ii) If they did, why did they decide for him to act incompetently?
iii) If they did not, why not?
b) If Bush did not know about the attacks, how does his response prove a conspiracy?
c) Did the USSS know about the attacks, and if they did:
i) Did the conspirators decide how the USSS would react?
ii) If they did, why did they decide for the USSS to act so suspiciously?
iii) If they did not, why not?
d) If the USSS did not know about the attacks, how does their response prove a conspiracy?

-Gumboot

[HappyHarryHampton]

Why should have have requested information? You think that his staff doesn't give him information unless he asks?? You can't be serious with that question.
Now you can't be serious... Bush is told 'America is under attack' and no more.. and you think it's OK to have no questions?

His team was not acting weird, that's called paranoia often induced by certain substances.
Weird... everyone I have spoke to who have seen that video think it's weird.

Bush was endangering the children:? Good lord that's the most idiotic claim yet. They were probably in the safest place they could possibly be in.
How would Bush and team know? They supposedly didn't know about the first two planes.. they suddenly had a handle on the whole situation?
Come on!

Why would he ask if there were any more planes??? You think that his staff wouldn't tell him these things??? Seriously??
I refer to my first point, why wouldn't he ask... jeeze... America was under attack!

He isn't the only one who could order a plane to be shot down, and if that was needed, he was there and ready for the request. You think they can enter the classroom and update him, but they can't enter and ask him for permission for a shoot down? Seriously?
He's not the only one? OK.. so how did he know his services were not required immediately or in case the others got taken out?

Do you guys even think about this stuff before you play conspiracy?
I've thought about this stuff plenty.. believe me!

I find it incredible that people think it's OK for the POTUS to be told 'America is under attack' and for him not to ask any questions about it... he even dilli-dallied on the way out the classroom sometime later.

AMERICA WAS UNDER ATTACK!

For goddsake.

You'd think the stock market had fallen be .0001% instead.

[gumboot]

Bush wasn't just told "American is under attack". That's absurd. Had he been told something like that, no doubt his first response would have been something like "Is it the Russians?" He was told "Another aircraft has hit the world trade center, America is under attack."

This tells him a number of things:
1) Two aircraft have flown into the WTC in New York
2) It was deliberate
In addition he can probably further conclude:
3) It is a terrorist attack, not the Russians or Chinese
4) He is probably safe where he is

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

How would Bush and team know? They supposedly didn't know about the first two planes.. they suddenly had a handle on the whole situation?
Come on!


I have a few questions...

1) How many aircraft were hijacked on 9/11?
2) When was each flight hijacked?
3) When did US authorities first learn of each flight's hijacking?
3A) Which US agency first learned of each hijacking?
4) When did each flight crash?
5) When was Bush told "American was under attack"?
6) How many flights had been hijacked at this time?
7) How many flights did US authorities know had been hijacked at this time?
8) Which US agencies knew about which hijacked flights?
9) How many flights had crashed at this time?
10) Who was telling the USSS about the hijackings?
11) How was this person learning about the hijackings?
12) When did this person know about each hijacking?
11) When did they tell the USSS about each hijacking?

Please don't make the common mistake of looking at history with 20/20 hindsight and and assuming everyone at the time knew what you know now.

-Gumboot