Kids in class with Bush on 9/11 speak out

[DarrinS]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2069327,00.html#ixzz1LKFS8GEw






There has rarely been a starker juxtaposition of evil and innocence than the moment President George W. Bush received the news about 9/11 while reading The Pet Goat with second-graders in Sarasota, Florida.

Seven-year-olds can't understand what Islamic terrorism is all about. But they know when an adult's face is telling them something is very wrong — and none of the students sitting in Sandra Kay Daniels' class at Emma E. Booker Elementary School that morning can forget the sudden, devastated change in Bush's expression when White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card whispered the terrible news of the Al Qaeda attack. Lazaro Dubrocq's heart started racing because he assumed they were all in big trouble — with no less than the Commander-in-Chief — but he wasn't quite sure why. "In a heartbeat he leaned back and he looked flabbergasted, shocked, horrified," recalls Dubrocq, now 17. "I was baffled. I mean, did we read something wrong? Was he mad or disappointed in us?"



All sorts of similar kid fears started running through Mariah Williams' head. "I don't remember the story we were reading — was it about pigs?" says Williams, 16. "But I'll always remember watching his face turn red. He got really serious all of a sudden. But I was clueless. I was just seven. I'm just glad he didn't get up and leave because then I would have been more scared and confused." Chantal Guerrero, 16, agrees: even today she's grateful that Bush regained his composure and stayed with the students until The Pet Goat was finished. "I think the President was trying to keep us from finding out," says Guerrero, "so we all wouldn't freak out."

Even if they didn't freak out, it's apparent that sharing the terrifying Tuesday of 9/11 with Bush has affected those second-graders in the decade since — and, they say, made the news of Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden's killing by U.S. commandos on Sunday all the more meaningful. Dubrocq, now a junior at Riverview High School in Sarasota, doubts he'd be a student in the rigorous IB, or international baccalaureate program, if he hadn't been with the President as one of history's most infamous global events unfolded. "Because of that," he says, "I came to realize as I grew up that the world is a much bigger place, and that there are differing opinions about us out there, not all of them good."



Guerrero, today a junior at the Sarasota Military Academy, believes the experience "has since given us all a better understanding of the situation, sort of made us take it all more seriously. At that age I couldn't understand how anyone could take innocent lives that way. And I still of course can't. But today I can problem-solve it all a lot better, maybe better than other kids because I was kind of part of it." Williams, also a junior at the military academy, says those 9/11 moments spent with Bush conferred on the kids a sort of historical authority as they grew up in Sarasota. "Today, when we talk about 9/11 in class and you hear kids make mistakes about what happened with the President that day, I can tell them they're wrong. Because I was there."



One thing they'd like to tell Bush's critics — like liberal filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 2004 documentary Fahrenheit 911 disparaged Bush for lingering almost 10 minutes with the Booker students after getting word that two planes had crashed into New York's World Trade Center — is that they think the President did the right thing. "I think he was trying to keep everybody calm, starting with us," says Guerrero. Dubrocq agrees: "I think he was trying to protect us." Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose'-Rigell, who died in 2007, later insisted, "I don't think anyone could have handled it better. What would it have served if [Bush] had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?"



When the children's story was done, Bush left for the school's library, where he discussed the New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania nightmare with aides, reporters and another group of students waiting for him. Back in the classroom, Daniels brought in a television and turned on the first bewildering images of the Twin Towers in flames and smoke. At that point the kids started connecting the dots. "It was pretty scary," says Williams, "and I remember thinking, So that's why the President looked so mad."



Dubrocq got mad himself. "But I had to wait a few years before I could digest what had really happened and why they attacked us," he says. "I of course grew up to have nothing but contempt for Osama bin Laden." Yet he adds the episode "motivated me to get a better handle on the world and to want to help improve the world." It also made Dubrocq, who wants to study international business, more aware of his own multinational roots — he's French and Cuban on his father's side and Spanish and Mexican on his mother's. Not surprisingly, he also wants to learn other languages, like Chinese and, in an echo of his 9/11 memories, perhaps even Arabic.

Williams says she also hated Bin Laden more as she grew up and gained a better appreciation of how fanatics had changed her world on 9/11. "All that just because he wanted to control everybody in the world, control how we think and what we do," she says. Williams doesn't plan to pursue a military career — she wants to be a veterinarian — but the military academy student was impressed by the Navy SEAL raid in Pakistan that killed Bin Laden: "I was shocked — I thought after 10 years they'd never find him. But what the SEALs did, it, like, gives me even more respect for that kind of training."




Guerrero, in fact, may as well be part of that training. She also plans a civilian life — she hopes to study art and musical theater — but she's a Junior ROTC member and part of her school's state champion Raiders team, which competes against other academies in contests like rope bridge races, map navigation and marksmanship. In other words, the same sort of skills the SEAL commandos have to master. She admits to feeling an added rush when she woke up to Monday morning's news: the SEALs operation, she says, "was very, very cool."

More than cool, Guerrero says, it was also "so reassuring, after a whole decade of being scared about these things." Most of all, it "brought back a flood of memories" of their tragic morning with a President — memories that prove kids can carry a lot heavier stuff in those plastic backpacks than adults often realize

[Blake]

Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose'-Rigell, who died in 2007, later insisted, "I don't think anyone could have handled it better. What would it have served if [Bush] had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?"


What would it have served to have the Commander in Chief jump out of his chair and do his job after finding out our country is under attack? Really?

I wonder what her thoughts of how Bush handled Katrina were.

[boutons_deux]

"I think he was trying to keep everybody calm, starting with us," says Guerrero. Dubrocq agrees: "I think he was trying to protect us."

Everything else about simpleton, ignorant dubya says he was nothing but a stupid deer caught in the headlights of a disaster he allowed to happen.

[George Gervin's Afro]

What's the point of this thread?

[clambake]

he had that look of "i should have listened"

[clambake]

lol darrin starting a thread about "story time".

[TeyshaBlue]

What would it have served to have the Commander in Chief jump out of his chair and do his job after finding out our country is under attack? Really?

I wonder what her thoughts of how Bush handled Katrina were.

Please elaborate. What steps should the CIC have taken at that moment?

Be specific.

/ChumpDumper.

[TeyshaBlue]

What's the point of this thread?

Bingo.:toast

[hater]

Stand up and say "excuse me" and leave the room

the monkey didn't even have the brainpower to accomplish that :lol

[Blake]

Please elaborate. What steps should the CIC have taken at that moment?

Be specific.

/ChumpDumper.

I don't know what presidential protocol is if he finds out the country is under attack, but my opinion is that he should have gotten up, gotten to a phone, found out exactly what the fuck was going on, get on a plane and get to work IMMEDIATELY at protecting the people that elected him President.

[TeyshaBlue]

Ok. So you don't know whether or not he was abrogating his duties nor have any cogent clue as to what said duties are, but just wanted to shit on Bush again. I get it.

[TeyshaBlue]

It's an easy game to play and everybody wins!

[TeyshaBlue]

'cept logic.

[TeyshaBlue]

Stupid thread generates stupid posts. No suprise here.

gfy DarrinS.

[MannyIsGod]

Keeping elementary school kids calm <<<<<<<<< Doing your duties as CIC.

Sure, this immediate response probably wouldn't have done anything in that situation, but the fact that our country was under attack and he just sat there is amazing. Quite frankly the fact that the SS LET him sit there is rather amazing too.

[MannyIsGod]

What indefensible position will Darrin take up in his next thread?

[Blake]

Ok. So you don't know whether or not he was abrogating his duties nor have any cogent clue as to what said duties are, but just wanted to shit on Bush again. I get it.

when DarrinS highlights the part where Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose'-Rigell says she doesn't think anyone could have handled it any better, I took exception to the statement because I think he could have handled it better myself.

No, I don't know if he really abrogated his duties, but just as I would expect a fireman to jump up and run if hears that a 4 alarm fire has broken out, so would I also expect the President, Bush or otherwise, to jump and run if he hears the words "America is under attack."

I'll see if I can find what protocal should be for a president in this situation so that you don't shit on my response again.

[MannyIsGod]

There is no protocol. If our country is attacked, you react. You certainly don't sit there.

There may not be a book with a long set of directions on what the president does depending on the situation or the news he gets, but this much should be common sense. When the nation is under attack, you do not wait to react.

Mr President, there are ICBMs headed our way!

10 minutes later a mushroom cloud goes up over his corpse.

[TeyshaBlue]

when DarrinS highlights the part where Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose'-Rigell says she doesn't think anyone could have handled it any better, I took exception to the statement because I think he could have handled it better myself.

No, I don't know if he really abrogated his duties, but just as I would expect a fireman to jump up and run if hears that a 4 alarm fire has broken out, so would I also expect the President, Bush or otherwise, to jump and run if he hears the words "America is under attack."

I'll see if I can find what protocal should be for a president in this situation so that you don't shit on my response again.

lol...calm down. I'll take off the ChumpDumper mask now.

My point is:
At that point we knew jack shit. A plane flew into a building. It wasn't apparent that it was an attack until sometime later. Did he indeed hear the words "America is under attack?" I dunno. If he did, then he shit the bed. If he didn't then...what?

[TeyshaBlue]

If he didn't then...what?

Answer: We get a stupid thread from DarrinS again.

[MannyIsGod]

I think you're missing the important fact that we do know he was told that we were under attack, Teysha. He was told of the first plane going in and they didn't know what was going on, but when the second plane went in he was told "america is under attack". 10 minutes later, it processed.

[TeyshaBlue]

I think you're missing the important fact that we do know he was told that we were under attack, Teysha. He was told of the first plane going in and they didn't know what was going on, but when the second plane went in he was told "america is under attack". 10 minutes later, it processed.

lol...then I rescind my recent, stinging defense. He shit the bed.

[MannyIsGod]

I opened the door to the classroom and the press pool was gathered at the back of the classroom. I walked up to the president and leaned over and whispered into his right ear: “A second plane” — I was very very succinct, very purposeful with my diction — “A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.” And I stood back from the president so that he couldn’t ask me a question and then I inched my way back to the door. I was all business. I was all business.

Andrew Card in an interview a couple of years ago.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32782623/ns/us_news-9/11_eight_years_later/

[TeyshaBlue]

Which is waaaay better than what I would've done....start screaming like a 9 year old girl.

[TeyshaBlue]

From the Andrew Card Interview: "There was a lot of criticism of the president not being immediately available on the day of the attacks. What do you have to say about that?
There should be no criticism for the way the president responded to the attacks on September 11. I thought he was masterful and disciplined and inclusive and decisive. If people are criticizing him, they are criticizing from afar, and not from the reality of the moment."

[ChumpDumper]

he had that look of "i should have listened"It's not often there is a video record of the exact moment a president realized he fucked up so colossally. Deer/headlights was understandable.

[boutons_deux]

Andrew Card? a WH political employee defending his ignorant, incomptent, criminal boss?

[LnGrrrR]

I can't really blame Bush for his reactions on this one. Heck, him trying to remain calm to talk to the children might have been his own defense mechanism, in order to keep himself rational.

It's really hard to say what any of us would have done in that situation. I'd like to think that I would've asked the aide if my vice was on it, and to give me five minutes. Then I would have speed-read through the rest of the book, thanked the kids, and high-tailed it out of there. :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

*sigh* Yeah, boutons. He's quite the political shill. http://www.audioandanarchy.com/images/smilies/fack.png

[MannyIsGod]

From the Andrew Card Interview: "There was a lot of criticism of the president not being immediately available on the day of the attacks. What do you have to say about that?
There should be no criticism for the way the president responded to the attacks on September 11. I thought he was masterful and disciplined and inclusive and decisive. If people are criticizing him, they are criticizing from afar, and not from the reality of the moment."

LOL Trust me, we all lived in the reality of the moment. I saw that second plane go in, I saw those towers fall. I was at work and I fielded phone calls from people looking for their family members we employed all over NYC - including large offices in the WTC. When they called I didn't sit there in silence for 10 minutes.

I don't expect Card to throw his former boss under the bus, but I'm pretty sure almost no one agrees with just sitting there.

Except Darrin. :lol

[TeyshaBlue]

I don't expect Card to throw his former boss under the bus, but I'm pretty sure almost no one agrees with just sitting there.

Except Darrin. :lol

:lol:lol

[MannyIsGod]

I can't really blame Bush for his reactions on this one. Heck, him trying to remain calm to talk to the children might have been his own defense mechanism, in order to keep himself rational.

It's really hard to say what any of us would have done in that situation. I'd like to think that I would've asked the aide if my vice was on it, and to give me five minutes. Then I would have speed-read through the rest of the book, thanked the kids, and high-tailed it out of there. :lol

Oh I have no doubt it was a Bush defense mechanism but I'm sorry if I don't want my president to be a man or woman who has to calm himself down in the event of an attack.

[Stringer_Bell]

As long as the kids in the class thought Bush was protecting them, that's all I care about.

[LnGrrrR]

Oh I have no doubt it was a Bush defense mechanism but I'm sorry if I don't want my president to be a man or woman who has to calm himself down in the event of an attack.

Criticism is warranted; I just don't think anyone knows what they'd do in that situation.

When our responsibilities are limited, our response time is quicker. For instance, I was in my dorm room on Randolph AFB sleeping when it happened. (I worked the night shift.) When my friend came in to tell me to get dressed because we got attacked... well, let's say I was pretty sure he was screwing with me. Except he wasn't. So I threw on my uniform, headed to the squadron, and started securing the network.

Now Bush, he finds out about the attack. As a President, he literally had thousands of different options. I can understand why that might cause paralysis analysis, and there's a good chance he was thinking about his response in the back of his head while he finished the story.

Again, I don't know. I personally won't excoriate him for the response.

[clambake]

apparently he didn't tell the kids that he heard it was coming.

[MannyIsGod]

LNG, then don't run for president. No one is saying he's a bad person, but it certainly is the mark of a bad president. Since when the fuck do I want people in that office who react badly to pressure?

There's no excuse here. As president you're held to a higher bar. Thats the bottom line.

[MannyIsGod]

LNG, then don't run for president. No one is saying he's a bad person, but it certainly is the mark of a bad president. Since when the fuck do I want people in that office who react badly to pressure?

There's no excuse here. As president you're held to a higher bar. Thats the bottom line.

[TeyshaBlue]

LNG, then don't run for president. No one is saying he's a bad person, but it certainly is the mark of a bad president. Since when the fuck do I want people in that office who react badly to pressure?

There's no excuse here. As president you're held to a higher bar. Thats the bottom line.

Fuck you! LnGrrR for POTUS!

[LnGrrrR]

LNG, then don't run for president. No one is saying he's a bad person, but it certainly is the mark of a bad president. Since when the fuck do I want people in that office who react badly to pressure?

There's no excuse here. As president you're held to a higher bar. Thats the bottom line.

I don't think that immediate reaction is necessarily a positive. Assuming leadership was effective, he should be able to trust his people to hold up the fort for ten minutes. As it was, there was a limited amount he could do at that instant in time; scramble fighters and talk to the various national defense agencies. In my eyes, I don't think ten minutes made any difference there. YMMV.

[LnGrrrR]

Now, the "proper" answer is to politely excuse himself, explain that he had an important job to do to the children, then leave. But I'm not going to try to intimate that those ten minutes were the difference between life or death, because I don't think it was.

[ChumpDumper]

Now, the "proper" answer is to politely excuse himself, explain that he had an important job to do to the children, then leave. But I'm not going to try to intimate that those ten minutes were the difference between life or death, because I don't think it was.In hindsight, sure -- but given the uncertainty of the day, just sitting there doesn't seem like the best option.

It's not like if he left immediately the kids would speak out today saying Bushy scurred them.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't think that immediate reaction is necessarily a positive. Assuming leadership was effective, he should be able to trust his people to hold up the fort for ten minutes. As it was, there was a limited amount he could do at that instant in time; scramble fighters and talk to the various national defense agencies. In my eyes, I don't think ten minutes made any difference there. YMMV.

You're in the military and you don't think 10 minutes makes a difference while under attack in today's environment? Holy shit LNG, now I"m worried.

[LnGrrrR]

You're in the military and you don't think 10 minutes makes a difference while under attack in today's environment? Holy shit LNG, now I"m worried.

Ten minutes makes a ton of difference, sure. But I assume that, if for some reason I'm unavailable, that I've trained my troops well enough to be able to handle crises in my absence.

Of course, if there IS a crisis, I will respond in the best way I know how, ASAP. (Like yesterday, when one of my troops accidentally momentarily took down communications for the PACAF commander.... :bang)

My shop should be able to function capably if I'm not around; if not, I haven't done my job training them. My job (at this level) is to focus priorities, identify organizational shortcomings, etc etc. But as you get higher and higher in the ranks, you get further removed from the people actually "doing" stuff, the hands on the ground.

I assume that all the "hands on the ground" people were already responding, and didn't need say-so from the President in those ten minutes.

[JoeChalupa]

I don't think Bush reacted badly but I also believe that he could have also excused himself from the class without causing the kids to panic. I think even the kids would understand that as POTUS he can't always stay on schedule. Or he could have directed someone to pull the fire alarm.

[ChumpDumper]

Ten minutes makes a ton of difference, sure. But I assume that, if for some reason I'm unavailable, that I've trained my troops well enough to be able to handle crises in my absence.Finding out how My Pet Goat turns out isn't really a compelling reason though.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm not sure how much I like that you assume that, to be quite honest. I think you shoul.d hope the training takes over should be unable to respond due to forces out of your own control, but I don't think you should ever knowingly not respond because you think someone else is going to.

If eveyone assumes that, LNG, who the fuck responds?

[TeyshaBlue]

I'm not sure how much I like that you assume that, to be quite honest. I think you shoul.d hope the training takes over should be unable to respond due to forces out of your own control, but I don't think you should ever knowingly not respond because you think someone else is going to.

If eveyone assumes that, LNG, who the fuck responds?

Alexander Haig.

[clambake]

It's not often there is a video record of the exact moment a president realized he fucked up so colossally. Deer/headlights was understandable.

interesting how this falls on deaf ears.

[Spurminator]

Yeah it's pretty hard to say he did the right thing.

The criticism, while warranted, was pretty over-the-top and was a bit too easy for people like Michael Moore to exploit. I don't think this particular incident makes him a buffoon, or uncaring, or complicit in the attacks. But like Manny already said, you want more from the President of the United States. I want a President who's first reaction is to find out as much as he can as fast as he can.

And I can't imagine there are many Republicans who would have argued beforehand that this is how a President should react when told that the country is under attack. I mean can you imagine if it had been some snooty liberal President reading a children's book to a classroom on 9/11? I don't even want to imagine how many times Darrin would have posted that YouTube.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm not sure how much I like that you assume that, to be quite honest. I think you shoul.d hope the training takes over should be unable to respond due to forces out of your own control, but I don't think you should ever knowingly not respond because you think someone else is going to.

That's an important distinction. I'm not saying I WOULDN'T/SHOULDN'T respond, but that I trust my troops to do so if I can't for some reason.


If eveyone assumes that, LNG, who the fuck responds?

This somewhat ties in to my reasoning. You've heard about the curious effect where some people are hurt/injured/etc, and the more bystanders around, the less of a chance that someone will take responsibility or help out, because they assume someone else will take over?

At lower/more focused levels of responsibility, I think it's easier to "take charge" of your section than at higher levels, where the multitude of options to take can paralyze someone.

I assume that the "lower level" functions (ie. responding directly with fighters, securing the area, etc etc) were being handled by their respective departments. I'm not sure who the President could've directed in those ten minutes. I assume he would've just used the ten minutes to gather intelligence and information.

In the same vein, our squadron has a Chief Master Sergeant, who keeps track of long-term projects, the overall enlisted health of our area, etc etc. But in a comm emergency, I'm not going to wait for CMSgt to tell me what to do to respond, because he's just too many layers above me.

So, combining the paralysis/analysis with my belief that there was a limited number of actions the President could have effectively achieved in those ten minutes is what prevents me from being too concerned about this. I don't begrudge others their opinions.

[hater]

what ppl don't understand is that this is notable because this is 1 example of Bush's incompetence which was documented on film. Who knows how many hundreds of times he was caught distracted and unprepared and ended up letting others make the decisions for him.

"Mr. President, we are going to lie about WMDs.."
(Bush playing tic tac toe on his blackberry)

"Mr. President, I am giving a massive contract to my own contracting company in Iraq"
(Bush looking for pretzels under his couch)

"Mr. President, New Orleans is gone"
(Bush 10 minute blank stare)

"Mr. President, I shot someon in the face"
(Bush trying to pick a monster booger out of his skull)

[lefty]

Bushed didnt look surprised at all

[LnGrrrR]

To summarize: I'm not saying it was the "proper" response. I'm saying I'm willing to let it slide because a) he's human, and I think it's hard to judge people on reactions to these once in a lifetime events, and b) besides getting intel quicker, I don't think his delay had serious ramifications.

I am not saying he did the right thing, but I dont hold it against him.

[Blake]

lol...calm down.

lol that was my calm internet voice.

had I been even slightly perturbed, I might have called you a fucking idiot.

lol

[TeyshaBlue]

lol that was my calm internet voice.

had I been even slightly perturbed, I might have called you a fucking idiot.

lol

Who do you think you are? My wife?:lol

[lazerelmo]

http://i54.tinypic.com/24y4oza.jpg

Proper Presidential response to crisis situation.

[Blake]

That's an important distinction. I'm not saying I WOULDN'T/SHOULDN'T respond, but that I trust my troops to do so if I can't for some reason.


I also think perception is somewhat important.

The nonverbal message he sent out by just sitting there can be deciphered in a number of negative ways, but none positive that I can think of......unless you are one of the kids that apparently felt that the President was sitting there protecting them.

[Blake]

Who do you think you are? My wife?:lol

You were the one telling me to calm down. Did you think I was your wife?

Don't worry, I'm not.

[DarrinS]

LMAO at all the responses to this.


If Obama had the same reaction, he would be described as thoughtful. He would've been praised for having such a "poker face".


Something like this from the HuffingtonPuffingtonPost


Obama Keeps Poker Face After Osama Bin Laden Order





WASHINGTON — In a remarkable 72 hours of his presidency, Barack Obama carried a momentous secret and gave no hint of it as he consoled tornado victims, delivered a college commencement address and cracked jokes at a black-tie dinner.

What few insiders knew was that Obama gave the go-ahead Friday for the military operation that would end with the death of terrorist leader Osama bin Laden, target of the world's most intense manhunt.

After giving his consent, Obama, wife Michelle and daughters Sasha and Malia left the White House on a busy day of travel, with three stops in two states.

In Alabama, one of several Southern states battered by fierce tornados, Obama assumed his role as consoler in chief as he and the first lady got an up-close look at communities in Tuscaloosa that had been flattened by the twisters.

Next stop: Cape Canaveral, Fla., even though Endeavour's launch, the next to last one before the shuttle fleet is retired, had been scrubbed for technical reasons well before Obama left Alabama. He stuck to his schedule, touring NASA facilities with his family. He also met privately with wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz. Her husband, Mark Kelly, is the shuttle commander.

The president also delivered an evening commencement address at Miami Dade College before returning to Washington.

Obama wore a poker face throughout the weekend.

On Saturday, Obama attended the White House Correspondents' Association annual dinner and lobbed a few barbs at Donald Trump after having endured weeks of attacks by the prospective Republican presidential candidate over whether Obama is U.S.-born.

On Sunday, Obama headed for the Andrews Air Force Base golf course, as he does on many weekends when the weather is nice. But he only played nine holes, instead of his customary 18, and left after about four hours. The reporters who accompany him on public outings thought the chilly, rainy weather played into his decision to leave hours earlier than usual.

Actually, Obama was headed for a meeting to review final preparations for the operation against bin Laden.

In retrospect, there were some meager clues that something may have been going on. Obama went straight to the Oval Office in his golf shoes, instead of to the residence as he normally does after golf. Photos showed him looking tense and clench-jawed.

All became clear late Sunday when Obama told the nation shortly before midnight that bin Laden had been killed at the hands of U.S. forces.

[z0sa]

I'm still waiting for the specifics of what he was supposed to do in that ten minute time-frame. I assume that the first ten minutes, even hour of a national terrorist incident has "automated, in-place" defense mechanisms/procedures the president has no reason to interfere with or change. Flying to the phone would have saved no one and scared a bunch of children.

It may look stupid, may even be stupid, but I don't think My Pet Goat changed anything on 9/11.

[Blake]

LMAO at all the responses to this.


If Obama had the same reaction, he would be described as thoughtful. He would've been praised for having such a "poker face".


Something like this from the HuffingtonPuffingtonPost


Obama Keeps Poker Face After Osama Bin Laden Order

So you are comparing Obama's actions heading into an order to kill a terrorist with Bush's reaction after hearing that America is under attack?

LMAO at you.

[TeyshaBlue]

LMAO at all the responses to this.


If Obama had the same reaction, he would be described as thoughtful. He would've been praised for having such a "poker face".


Something like this from the HuffingtonPuffingtonPost


Obama Keeps Poker Face After Osama Bin Laden Order

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/itstimetostoppostingCat.jpg

[Blake]

I'm still waiting for the specifics of what he was supposed to do in that ten minute time-frame. I assume that the first ten minutes, even hour of a national terrorist incident has "automated, in-place" defense mechanisms/procedures the president has no reason to interfere with or change. Flying to the phone would have saved no one and scared a bunch of children.

It may look stupid, may even be stupid, but I don't think My Pet Goat changed anything on 9/11.

Do you think there was a better way to handle the news that we were under attack than to go ahead and finish reading My Pet Goat?

[cheguevara]

I am no Obama fan but I remember in his inauguration when Kennedy passed out at the luncheon. Obama was the only one to run to his aid and start ordering ppl to call the medics etc, etc.

the other stupid senator fucks had the same look Bush had. :lol

again, no Obama fan here. But I am confident Obama woudl have reacted by rushing out to find out what the fuck was going on.

[DarrinS]

I am no Obama fan but I remember in his inauguration when Kennedy passed out at the luncheon. Obama was the only one to run to his aid and start ordering ppl to call the medics etc, etc.

the other stupid senator fucks had the same look Bush had. :lol


Well, it was Kennedy.

[DJ Mbenga]

he should have just said sheeeeeeeeit wtf is going on. look kids i gotta take a dump. i must be going now

[DMX7]

Bush honestly looked more sorry for himself that he got exposed than anything else...

[clambake]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/itstimetostoppostingCat.jpg

:lol

[MannyIsGod]

I'm still waiting for the specifics of what he was supposed to do in that ten minute time-frame. I assume that the first ten minutes, even hour of a national terrorist incident has "automated, in-place" defense mechanisms/procedures the president has no reason to interfere with or change. Flying to the phone would have saved no one and scared a bunch of children.

It may look stupid, may even be stupid, but I don't think My Pet Goat changed anything on 9/11.

When the country is attacked the president should not sit by and finish a fucking children's book. For one, assuming the scope of the attack is pretty god damn stupid considering just 30 minutes earlier (if that long) they didn't know ANY attack is coming.

[MannyIsGod]

As I said before, I think its also damn stupid the secret service just let him sit there.

[z0sa]

When the country is attacked the president should not sit by and finish a fucking children's book.

I'm still waiting for the specifics on what exactly he was supposed to do in that ten minute time frame that would have changed anything. It's your argument to make, so make it.

If you want to say that, from an "image" standpoint, it was the wrong thing to do, it's certainly arguable, but as for policy? I don't think policy dictated he do anything different than what he did.

[Marcus Bryant]

That's great. What does it have to do with the fact that OBL sleeps with the fishes right now?

Partisanship makes one stupid.™

[z0sa]

As I said before, I think its also damn stupid the secret service just let him sit there.

What should the secret service have done, presuming he is clearly 100% safe in their opinion?

[boutons_deux]

Repug/VRWC lying machine pulling out all stops to whitewash dubya and dickhead, while denying:

1) all responsibility for 9/11

2 Barry credit for getting OBL.

[z0sa]

Repug/VRWC lying machine pulling out all stops to whitewash dubya and dickhead, while denying:

1) all responsibility for 9/11

2 Barry credit for getting OBL.

So the 9/11 six and seven-year-olds are part of the Repug/VWRC lying machine.

Does your conspiracy nuttiness know any bounds? :lol

[DarrinS]

As I said before, I think its also damn stupid the secret service just let him sit there.


Was he in grave danger at the school?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Maybe some people here need to be elected president and have two planes fly into two tall buildings on their watch and let's see how you react. What does anyone do when you get news of a death from someone close? Do you "rush into action"? Puhleease. And I'd say this no matter who's in office. Yeah. That 10 minutes was crucial in catching OBL. Let's just knock of 10 minutes off his death certificate. :jack

[hater]

As I said before, I think its also damn stupid the secret service just let him sit there.

so the secret service not only babysit him but tell him how to run the country? :downspin:

[Splits]

They just found the goat.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/04/goat_death/



Cross-dresser kills goat while high on bath salts


A 19-year-old American man has blamed the narcotic effects of bath salts* for sparking an episode that resulted in the death of a pygmy goat.


Mark L Thompson of Alum Creek, West Virginia, was arrested on Monday after police had been called by the owner of a pygmy goat, a neighbour of Thompson's, who had complained that the 19-year-old was holding the beast captive in his home.

http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/ad/reg.oddsandsods.4159/bootnotes;tile=2;pos=top;dcove=d;sz=336x280;ord=Tc HExMCoAT4AAHOwfv4AAABc? (http://ad.uk.doubleclick.net/jump/reg.oddsandsods.4159/bootnotes;tile=2;pos=top;dcove=d;sz=336x280;ord=Tc HExMCoAT4AAHOwfv4AAABc?)
The neighbour's nephew and two women went into Thompson's house. Thompson warned them off, saying he was naked.



When they pushed Thompson's bedroom door open, the neighbour told The Charleston Gazette (http://wvgazette.com/News/201105020871): "He was standing there with his pants down. He had on women's clothing and the goat was dead and there was blood everywhere. It was just a scene."
A pornographic photo was apparently found lying near the carcass of the goat.
Thompson took to his heels, still in bra and panties, and police spent several hours scouring local woods for the cross-dressing caprine killer.


When they cornered him eventually, Thompson told police he had been high on bath salts for several days.


The teenager is being held on animal cruelty charges. He was taken into custody by Adult Protective Services.



"Bath salts", a designer drug, has become the latest legal high worry for the authorities on both sides of the Atlantic. It is typically based on methylenedioxypyrovalerone (MDPV) and is also known as Magic and Super Coke. It induces similar effects to mephedrone, the last big legal high worry. It is not actually recommended for use as part of a beauty regime, but rather is sold in packaging that mimics that of a beauty product... Lawmakers are working towards a total ban. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/31/us-drugs-bathsalts-odds-idUSTRE70U4YE20110131)

[ChumpDumper]

LMAO at all the responses to this.


If Obama had the same reaction, he would be described as thoughtful. He would've been praised for having such a "poker face".


Something like this from the HuffingtonPuffingtonPost


Obama Keeps Poker Face After Osama Bin Laden OrderYou're trying to compare Bush's disposition in a period of complete inaction to Obama's disposition after he gave the order to kill Bin Laden.


http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/itstimetostoppostingCat.jpgThat was a long time coming.

[MannyIsGod]

Hey geniuses if he was so fucking safe there why did they then put hi in an airborne command post? When they got their shit together they realized they fucked up. Some of you are fucking retarded.

[MannyIsGod]

Was he in grave danger at the school?

No darrin. He was so damn safe he went on an airborne tour of the us.



If this happened today they would instantly move the president.

[ChumpDumper]

To the apologists, how long could he have just sat there in your opinion?

An hour?

Til Domino's got there?

And what would have been the consequences had he simply excused himself as soon as Card told him just how badly they all fucked up?

[MannyIsGod]

You want specifics on what he should have done? Whatever the fuck he did 10 minutes later.

[MannyIsGod]

If I'm told that we've been attacked I can think of dozens of questions I need to ask. Who? How? How bad? How do we stop them? Are we in danger? For starters.

[clambake]

If I'm told that we've been attacked I can think of dozens of questions I need to ask. Who? How? How bad? How do we stop them? Are we in danger? For starters.

don't forget..... he knew who and how.

[Blake]

If I'm told that we've been attacked I can think of dozens of questions I need to ask. Who? How? How bad? How do we stop them? Are we in danger? For starters.

Does My Pet Goat die in the end?

[MannyIsGod]

Hey, he was in a secret location. Its not like the Presidents Itinerary is fucking public or anything. How would attackers find that?

[LnGrrrR]

To the apologists, how long could he have just sat there in your opinion?

An hour?

Til Domino's got there?

And what would have been the consequences had he simply excused himself as soon as Card told him just how badly they all fucked up?

I'd say ten minutes is an upper limit, but of course that's my subjective take. Long enough to finish a kids story, I guess.

And I think that excusing himself would have been perfectly acceptable. I just don't think those "wasted" ten minutes had a strong impact, neither do I fault him for being momentarily overwhelmed.

[Wild Cobra]

Lots of naysayers here, but its a good story to have the take from those in the room then.

Nice find Darrin.

[ChumpDumper]

Internets tough guys like Darrin and WC become weepy, Oprah watching pussies when their partisan hackery calls for it.

Thank God Bush took all that extra time and kept those children from getting confused (not scared, mind you -- they knew fuck all about what was happening) while American was under attack.

[Nbadan]

:lol

I bet most of those kids went home and watched the planes hitting the towers, people jumping from both towers, and the towers collapsing over and over again at home...but as long as Bush kept them calm for those 10 minutes...

...oh wait, the fucken country was under attack and Bush was on National TV which was broadcasting his exact location...only a few miles from a national airport!

[Stringer_Bell]

http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-04-01/1238538624426.jpg

[DarrinS]

Internets tough guys like Darrin and WC become weepy, Oprah watching pussies when their partisan hackery calls for it.

Thank God Bush took all that extra time and kept those children from getting confused (not scared, mind you -- they knew fuck all about what was happening) while American was under attack.


Says the guy who calls people pussy from behind his firewall. :lmao

I'm sorry those students and their dead teacher don't hate Bush, like you want them to.

[MannyIsGod]

I could give two shits who those kids hate. Their opinion was important to you and you alone. I didn't see anyone else rushing to post this article. Don't project your stupid interests on others.

[DarrinS]

I could give two shits who those kids hate. Their opinion was important to you and you alone. I didn't see anyone else rushing to post this article. Don't project your stupid interests on others.


You've been pretty outspoken in this thread about how much you don't care. :lol

[diego]

" At that age I couldn't understand how anyone could take innocent lives that way.... "Today, when we talk about 9/11 in class and you hear kids make mistakes about what happened with the President that day, I can tell them they're wrong. Because I was there."

:lol those kids think they're special because they were there, that it was somehow important for bush to stay with them.



"All that just because he wanted to control everybody in the world, control how we think and what we do,"


is she talking about al qaeda or the US? it seems bush's presence in the classroom had lasting effects after all! :lol

seriously though, how can anyone defend the reaction? all he had to do was say "excuse me children, I have an urgent matter to attend to" and get on with it. 10 minutes is a lot of time, its too easy to say afterwards that it was irrelevant for him to be at the classroom instead of managing the crisis, unless you consider his problem solving ability to be irrelevant, in which case you might be right.

tomorrow i'm reading my children a bedtime story and my sister in law calls to tell me that my wife was a in a car accident. Should I finish the story so as to not alarm the children and trust that my wife will get proper medical attention, or tell the children I'm leaving them at grandma's and go make sure my wife is getting the treatment she needs? if you have more than 2grams of functioning brain cells, you know what to choose.

[MannyIsGod]

You've been pretty outspoken in this thread about how much you don't care. :lol

Find a post where I even mention the kids. I care a lot about how our president responds to an attack. The kids opinions? Not so much.

[Kermit]

I've always wondered what the fuck was going through his head, but I highly doubt it was "I've got to make sure these children don't freak out." That's just me.

[RandomGuy]

In regards to the OP:

I think Bush in the few months after did/said a lot of the exact right things.

He carried himself well in front of that class, and for a few months afterwards.

He flattened the Taliban, and that was all well and good.

Then came Iraq, and no amount of testifying by these kids will ever make up for the sheer negligence and stupidity of that.

The blood of the thousands of US soldiers who arguably died due to Bush's negligence is not so easily washed off, Darrin.

How ever much you might wish that away with lame threads like this one.

[RandomGuy]

I've always wondered what the fuck was going through his head, but I highly doubt it was "I've got to make sure these children don't freak out." That's just me.

I think that was part of it, albeit a small part.

[Mr. Peabody]

As long as the kids in the class thought Bush was protecting them, that's all I care about.

:lmao :toast

[ferg]

this thread reminds me of a bunch of young troops (or airmen in my case) talking about deploying to iraq or afghanistan for the first time. "man i cant wait to shoot one" or "man if i get in a fire fight im gonna do this or that". knowing damn well they have never been in that position. fact of the matter is that NOBODY in this thread can sit there and dictate how the POTUS should have reacted because they will NEVER in their lives be in that position to have to make such decisions. "oh well he finished a childrens story instead of doing his job blah blah blah". "he looked like a deer in the headlights blah blah blah". really ppl? this shit happend 10 fucking years ago. get over it already!

Can i remind ya'll that bill clinton dropped the ball on taking care of bin laden? after all 1993 WTC was bombed from below, 1995 attack on us military headquarters in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, 1996 Khobar Towers, 1998 US emabssies in Africa, 2000 USS Cole. what happend on w's watch? 9/11. and what else? What the fuck was his response? Getting his dick sucked? Putting a cigar in an interns snatch? and you idiots wanna criticize Bush?

[RandomGuy]

I'd say ten minutes is an upper limit, but of course that's my subjective take. Long enough to finish a kids story, I guess.

And I think that excusing himself would have been perfectly acceptable. I just don't think those "wasted" ten minutes had a strong impact, neither do I fault him for being momentarily overwhelmed.

I would agree.

I think a lot of the spin on his actions in that class were overblown, and rather yucky partisanship. Bush did quite enough stupid/partisan shit already to ding him for.

[RandomGuy]

this thread reminds me of a bunch of young troops (or airmen in my case) talking about deploying to iraq or afghanistan for the first time. "man i cant wait to shoot one" or "man if i get in a fire fight im gonna do this or that". knowing damn well they have never been in that position. fact of the matter is that NOBODY in this thread can sit there and dictate how the POTUS should have reacted because they will NEVER in their lives be in that position to have to make such decisions. "oh well he finished a childrens story instead of doing his job blah blah blah". "he looked like a deer in the headlights blah blah blah". really ppl? this shit happend 10 fucking years ago. get over it already!

Can i remind ya'll that bill clinton dropped the ball on taking care of bin laden? after all 1993 WTC was bombed from below, 1995 attack on us military headquarters in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, 1996 Khobar Towers, 1998 US emabssies in Africa, 2000 USS Cole. what happend on w's watch? 9/11. and what else? What the fuck was his response? Getting his dick sucked? Putting a cigar in an interns snatch? and you idiots wanna criticize Bush?

The US, and Clinton by extension, was hampered by an intelligence apparatus still geared to watching the USSR's troop movements than for the kinds of intelligence required to fight the likes of Al Qaeda.

Having been part of that intelligence apparatus, albeit a very minor part, I speak of that first hand. We had a LOT of technical gee-whiz bullshit, but ground spooks was a particular failing that everybody knew about and it was widely discussed and acknowledged by people who were experts in the intel community.

OBL was a priority, and Clinton did expend a fair effort on trying to get him, but it was just not anyone's overriding priority, and your criticism seems to assume it was, which is just not the way it was, if you are old enough to remember.

[z0sa]

I would agree.

I think a lot of the spin on his actions in that class were overblown, and rather yucky partisanship.

Agreed. There's just nothing he could've done in that ten minutes that would have changed anything, and those criticizing him for it have no actual evidence he did anything against policy (as evidenced in this thread). Some people may have felt scaring the children further was necessary and stepped out; in the case of one man, even a president, a thousand miles from the nearest terrorist attack, I don't think it really matters what elapsed in those ten minutes. Furthermore, I think those kids' opinions reinforces the merits of his decision.

Whether or not he damaged his image in that classroom is irrelevant, as well. Dude went on to get re-elected. He may be a buffoon but this one doesn't really fall in that category, IMHO.

[ChumpDumper]

Says the guy who calls people pussy from behind his firewall. :lmaoIt's merely a statement of fact with you, pussy.


I'm sorry those students and their dead teacher don't hate Bush, like you want them to.As Manny said, we don't care what those people thought then or what they think now. That's the whole point -- Bush shouldn't have either at that point because at the very worst they would have been confused as to why he had to leave early.

I know you are sad Oprah is going off the air, but try to hold it together.

[ferg]

then bill clinton with his lack of action should be criticsized just as much as bush was if not more. he sat on his hands. we have had the planes that could have flown from whiteman to afghanistan to drop bombs and then fly back to the united states have we not? also we did have the abilities back then with the predator as discussed here (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4540958/ns/nightly_news/) to provdie "real time" feeds to the CIA we could have easily had bombs on target. imagine the stamp on clintons presidency if he would have killed/captured bin laden? we knew where he was. we've always had the capabilities. clinton dropped the ball at the end and passed it along to dubya. then again its still the "in" thing to bash bush.

[ChumpDumper]

Agreed. There's just nothing he could've done in that ten minutes that would have changed anything, and those criticizing him for it have no actual evidence he did anything against policy (as evidenced in this thread).It's policy to finish a children's book when the nation is under attack?
Some people may have felt scaring the children further was necessary and stepped out; in the case of one man, even a president, a thousand miles from the nearest terrorist attack, I don't think it really matters what elapsed in those ten minutes. I think those kids' opinions reinforces the merits of his decision.Why would the kids have been scared? Was it a school for clairvoyants?

You're doing the same thing those interviewed did by applying hindsight to that situation.


Whether or not he damaged his image in that classroom is irrelevant, as well. Dude went on to get re-elected.Presidents make mistakes and get reelected.

[ferg]

hey chump when you were president and the nation fell under attack what did you do?

[ChumpDumper]

hey ferg when you were president and the nation fell under attack what did you do?

[ferg]

im not the one criticizing the man. i cant answer that question because unlike you, i am not qualified nor do i think im qualified. so again; what did u do? u seem to have the qualifications. i would like to know....

[ChumpDumper]

im not the one criticizing the man. i cant answer that question because unlike you, i am not qualified nor do i think im qualified. so again; what did u do? u seem to have the qualifications. i would like to know....You criticized Clinton. How are you qualified to do that?

I would like to know.

[ferg]

how are you qualified to criticize bush? wanna keep playing this game? i did exactly what you people are doing except put the blame a little more where it belongs.... again what actions did you take? also, what i presented are facts. not what i FEEL.

[ferg]

double post

[ChumpDumper]

how are you qualified to criticize bush?How are you qualified to criticize Clinton?
i did exactly what you people are doing except put the blame a little more where it belongs....Where you FEEL it belongs, Oprah.
again what actions did you take?What actions did you take?
also, what i presented are facts. not what i FEEL.The facts are Bush finished a children's story while America was under attack. Our pointing that out makes you FEEL angry. We can tell.

[z0sa]

It's policy to finish a children's book when the nation is under attack?

Irrelevant line of questioning. The burder of proof is on those who claim he did something other than policy. Until you can point out the specifics of what he was supposed to do in that ten minutes, it must be assumed he had nothing to do, at least with the children in mind, and at least for a few minutes.


Why would the kids have been scared?

You should read the article and then ask them if you have any further questions.


You're doing the same thing those interviewed did by applying hindsight to that situation.

And what other sight is supposed to be used when referring to events of the past?

Do you have anything to say?


Presidents make mistakes and get reelected.

Yep. Which means continuing to call him out for a possible minor PR mistake (but not a policy one, til you prove otherwise) is pretty dumb. Additionally, many seem to think he responded to 9/11 pretty well overall, at least initially (pre-Iraq).

The only thing running to the phone would have done is given Moore 8 less minutes (or whatever) of a movie and given partisans less ammo - like you need any more. :lol

[ferg]

no chump pointing out that he finished a childrens story doesnt make me feel angry. however i can tell by what i brought to the argument it did in fact agner you. truth hurts doesnt it? bush finishing that story had what impact on 9/11? answer that one. what exactly could he have accomplished in those 10 minutes that would have made a difference in the grand scheme of things? who could he have called which could provide him with more intel than "two planes just flew into WTC"? what could he have done? what military action could have been taken? why is this even an issue ten years later? the guy handled himself better then any one of us would have im sure. as pointed out by RG the intelligence apparatus was crippled (paraphrasing). so what exactly could he have done to make a difference and stop the attacks?

[ChumpDumper]

Irrelevant line of questioning. The burder of proof is on those who claim he did something other than policy. Until you can point out the specifics of what he was supposed to do in that ten minutes, it must be assumed he had nothing to do, at least with the children in mind, and at least for a few minutes.It's quite relevant. Show me the policy that says calming children who wouldn't be upset anyway is the procedure.


You should read the article and then ask them if you have any further questions.They said they were clueless.


And what other sight is supposed to be used when referring to events of the past?The sight that is honest about what one knew at the time.


Do you have anything to say?I already said it.


Yep. Which means continuing to call him out for a possible minor PR mistake (but not a policy one, til you prove otherwise) is pretty dumb. Additionally, many seem to think he responded to 9/11 pretty well overall, at least initially (pre-Iraq).I do think he responded well overall -- but making his sitting for 10 minutes out to be heroic is stupid.


The only thing running to the phone would have done is given Moore 8 less minutes (or whatever) of a movie and given partisans less ammo - like you need any more. :lolAgain, it was a mistake. We're only going over it because Darrin got all weepy thinking about the possibility of mildly confused kids who admitted they were clueless at the time.

[z0sa]

My point is simply that there are already counter-terrorist procedures set in place for the first ten minutes (or more) of a major terrorist incident. The president is essentially helpless at this time and must rely on others. Why run to the phone and make it seem as if he's horrified or anxious in front of a bunch of children, especially if the SS has deemed he's safe?

That is one thing I'd like to know more about - whether the SS thought he was actually 100% safe. But I can't seem to find any information relevant to that.

I said myself it may have been a PR mistake. But I don't think it was the wrong decision overall, a questionable one, but one he can't be criticized over "policy" for.

[ChumpDumper]

no chump pointing out that he finished a childrens story doesnt make me feel angry.Of course you're angry.
however i can tell by what i brought to the argument it did in fact agner you. truth hurts doesnt it?Not this truth. The fact you are making such a big deal out of how you FEEL about this speaks volumes.
bush finishing that story had what impact on 9/11? answer that one. what exactly could he have accomplished in those 10 minutes that would have made a difference in the grand scheme of things?Who knows? Perhaps several trucks loaded with explosives were headed toward the school right then.
who could he have called which could provide him with more intel than "two planes just flew into WTC"? what could he have done? what military action could have been taken? why is this even an issue ten years later? the guy handled himself better then any one of us would have im sure. as pointed out by RG the intelligence apparatus was crippled (paraphrasing). so what exactly could he have done to make a difference and stop the attacks?So you FEEL in hindsight nothing at all could have happened in those ten minutes anywhere, including that school.

Oprah is so glad you are in touch with your feelings.

If anything, this is a minor mistake in the scheme of things. If you actually look into Bush's policy RE: bin Laden in the months of January to September, you might FEEL that he made much more critical mistakes then.

But you won't.

[ferg]

like what mistakes? january to september of what years? all you are doing is providing me with entertainment my friend. not pissing me off. i find this rather amusing. so what mistakes and what years? what would you have done differently? seeing as how you have all the intel he had im SURE you could make a reasonable decision.

[clambake]

no chump pointing out that he finished a childrens story doesnt make me feel angry. however i can tell by what i brought to the argument it did in fact agner you. truth hurts doesnt it? bush finishing that story had what impact on 9/11? answer that one. what exactly could he have accomplished in those 10 minutes that would have made a difference in the grand scheme of things? who could he have called which could provide him with more intel than "two planes just flew into WTC"? what could he have done? what military action could have been taken? why is this even an issue ten years later? the guy handled himself better then any one of us would have im sure. as pointed out by RG the intelligence apparatus was crippled (paraphrasing). so what exactly could he have done to make a difference and stop the attacks?

i know why it took 10 minutes.

it took that long for him to digest the fact that he knew he completely ignored the warnings of what would happen........and the attacks that took place were exactly what was expected.

[ferg]

how could he have enough time from january to september to ignore something if barrack obama couldnt make a difference in a year? as stated earlier by RG bin laden wasnt an overriding priority for bill clinton so how would that change from one pres to the next? "hey theres this guy; kinda been a pain in the ass but i wouldnt worry about him".

[ChumpDumper]

My point is simply that there are already counter-terrorist procedures set in place for the first ten minutes (or more) of a major terrorist incident. The president is essentially helpless at this time and must rely on others. Why run to the phone and make it seem as if he's horrified or anxious in front of a bunch of children, especially if the SS has deemed he's safe?

That is one thing I'd like to know more about - whether the SS thought he was actually 100% safe. But I can't seem to find any information relevant to that.He was so safe they just decided to put him in the air for a sightseeing tour.

Again, too much is being made of this. Considering what Bush knew that morning (if he could have put the first crash and all his bin Laden briefings and memos together), it could be argued that he should have at least postponed the reading in the first place. I'm only going by what was known at the time -- something others here are not.

[clambake]

how could he have enough time from january to september to ignore something if barrack obama couldnt make a difference in a year? as stated earlier by RG bin laden wasnt an overriding priority for bill clinton so how would that change from one pres to the next? "hey theres this guy; kinda been a pain in the ass but i wouldnt worry about him".

wtf?

[ChumpDumper]

like what mistakes? january to september of what years? all you are doing is providing me with entertainment my friend. not pissing me off. i find this rather amusing. so what mistakes and what years? what would you have done differently? seeing as how you have all the intel he had im SURE you could make a reasonable decision.


how could he have enough time from january to september to ignore something if barrack obama couldnt make a difference in a year? as stated earlier by RG bin laden wasnt an overriding priority for bill clinton so how would that change from one pres to the next? "hey theres this guy; kinda been a pain in the ass but i wouldnt worry about him".So you don't know anything about Bush's policy on terror before 9/11.

Just as I thought.

Arguing from a position of such ignorance isn't a good thing. Just a little FYI.

You're welcome.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm on my phone so ill respond fully later but I find the notion that were not allowed to be critical of a presidents actions because were not president to be flat out laughable.

[ferg]

so if im ignorant chump why dont u educate me? what was bushes police on terror? or are you just gonna keep jumping around?

[ChumpDumper]

so if im ignorant chump why dont u educate me? what was bushes police on terror? or are you just gonna keep jumping around?No, your display of ignorance is quite enough for my purposes..

If you really want to know, the information is available. It's probably best you not actually read it if you want to maintain your myths about Bush and Clinton.

[ferg]

I'm on my phone so ill respond fully later but I find the notion that were not allowed to be critical of a presidents actions because were not president to be flat out laughable.

i never said you cant criticize him. all im saying is these arm chair quarterbacks that sit there and act like they know what was going on in somebody's head are luaghable. this whole thread is laughable. it happend 10 years ago. u guys really need to move on to criticizing the new president...oh wait its been awhile guess hes not so new but in this places eyes hes the greatest.

[LnGrrrR]

this thread reminds me of a bunch of young troops (or airmen in my case) talking about deploying to iraq or afghanistan for the first time. "man i cant wait to shoot one" or "man if i get in a fire fight im gonna do this or that". knowing damn well they have never been in that position.

:lol I've got one of those airmen too.

Can i remind ya'll that bill clinton dropped the ball on taking care of bin laden? after all 1993 WTC was bombed from below, 1995 attack on us military headquarters in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, 1996 Khobar Towers, 1998 US emabssies in Africa, 2000 USS Cole. [/quote]

You are aware that Clinton did try to strike at some terrorists, and it was mostly stopped by Republicans who claimed he was trying to distract from his infidelities? :)

[clambake]

i never said you cant criticize him. all im saying is these arm chair quarterbacks that sit there and act like they know what was going on in somebody's head are luaghable. this whole thread is laughable. it happend 10 years ago. u guys really need to move on to criticizing the new president...oh wait its been awhile guess hes not so new but in this places eyes hes the greatest.

are you saying, in that ten minutes, that it never crossed his mind to think "I should have listened"?

[DarrinS]

It's merely a statement of fact with you, pussy.


You're a tough guy.

[ChumpDumper]

i never said you cant criticize him. all im saying is these arm chair quarterbacks that sit there and act like they know what was going on in somebody's head are luaghable. this whole thread is laughable. it happend 10 years ago. u guys really need to move on to criticizing the new president...oh wait its been awhile guess hes not so new but in this places eyes hes the greatest.What qualifies you to criticize Obama?

I'd like to know.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm on my phone so ill respond fully later but I find the notion that were not allowed to be critical of a presidents actions because were not president to be flat out laughable.

I think you can be critical, but I think it should be noted that no one can say for certain what they would have done in the same situation. Everyone likes to think they would act optimally, of course, but the human brain doesn't always process things that way.

Now, you can argue, "He's president! He needs to be responding ASAP" etc etc, and I wouldn't say you're wrong. But you can say that about numerous people in critical/emergency situations who make mistakes, don't think, hestitate, etc etc.

As RG said, I think Bush did enough things I disagree with that this is a minor, minor blemish in his career.

[ferg]

No, your display of ignorance is quite enough for my purposes..

If you really want to know, the information is available. It's probably best you not actually read it if you want to maintain your myths about Bush and Clinton.

my myths about bush and clinton? really? its not myth that bin laden was treated as a "law enforcement problem" by clinton. if clinton disregarded bin laden that much why would anything change from one president to the next?

[ChumpDumper]

my myths about bush and clinton? really? its not myth that bin laden was treated as a "law enforcement problem" by clinton. if clinton disregarded bin laden that much why would anything change from one president to the next?Again, live with your ignorant myths. I'm sure it's better for your feelings.

[ferg]

:lol I've got one of those airmen too.

Can i remind ya'll that bill clinton dropped the ball on taking care of bin laden? after all 1993 WTC was bombed from below, 1995 attack on us military headquarters in Riyadh Saudi Arabia, 1996 Khobar Towers, 1998 US emabssies in Africa, 2000 USS Cole.

You are aware that Clinton did try to strike at some terrorists, and it was mostly stopped by Republicans who claimed he was trying to distract from his infidelities? :)[/QUOTE]

mmmm no i was not aware of it. thanks for making me aware of it though without being a smartass about it and calling me ignorant. i appreciate that. must be that USAF bond or something. however, im not making about the parties im making it about the respective presidents. as i said earlier i feel the blame for 9/11 needs to be shared by both clinton and bush. :spless: whats that? i blamed bush a little bit? yeah i sure did. he could have/should have taken action pre-9/11. but again like you said earlier its hard to say what one could have/would have done in that situation because NONE of us will ever be in that position of that much responsibility. that is what i have been trying to get through peoples head like chump dumper who just wants to call people ignorant.

chump didnt mean to hurt your feelings there lil guy.

[Drachen]

I'm still waiting for the specifics on what exactly he was supposed to do in that ten minute time frame that would have changed anything. It's your argument to make, so make it.

If you want to say that, from an "image" standpoint, it was the wrong thing to do, it's certainly arguable, but as for policy? I don't think policy dictated he do anything different than what he did.

Havent read the whole thread so maybe someone has already responded, but every time this question has been asked, I keep thinking the following.

"we have a 4th plane flying into downtown Chicago toward the sears tower, our fighters have scrambled, and tried to hail it to no avail, we have a lock, permission to fire?"

[ChumpDumper]

mmmm no i was not aware of it.:lmao No shit.
blamed bush a little bit? yeah i sure did. he could have/should have taken action pre-9/11. What qualifies you to say that?

[ferg]

:lmao No shit.

so is that what you were talking about? or u wanna just keep being a fucking smart ass about it?

[ChumpDumper]

so is that what you were talking about? or u wanna just keep being a fucking smart ass about it?Nope, that's merely one aspect.

Sorry U mad.

[ChumpDumper]

Seriously ferg, go read a fucking book.

[clambake]

hey, did you know where all the nukes were, too?

[ferg]

what book? point me in a direction man... im ASKING....

[LnGrrrR]

mmmm no i was not aware of it. thanks for making me aware of it though without being a smartass about it and calling me ignorant. i appreciate that. must be that USAF bond or something.

No problem. Some examples:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/clinton.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_policy_of_the_Bill_Clinton_administration# Counterterrorism_and_Osama_bin_Laden



On August 7, 1998, bin Laden struck again, this time with simultaneous bombings (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/1998_United_States_embassy_bombings) on the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Nairobi,_Kenya), and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Dar_es_Salaam,_Tanzania). (see above) The CIA, having confirmed bin Laden was behind the attack, informed Clinton that terrorist leaders were planning to meet at a camp near Khowst (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Khowst), to plan future attacks. According to Tenet, “several hundred,” including bin Laden, would attend. On August 20, Clinton ordered the military to fire cruise missiles at the camp and a pharmaceutical factory in Khartoum (http://spurstalk.com/wiki/Khartoum), where bin Laden was suspected of manufacturing biological weapons. While the military hit their targets, bin Laden was not killed. The CIA estimated that they had missed bin Laden by “a few hours.”[39] (http://spurstalk.com/forums/#cite_note-Clarke-38)


Just FYI.

[LnGrrrR]

Havent read the whole thread so maybe someone has already responded, but every time this question has been asked, I keep thinking the following.

"we have a 4th plane flying into downtown Chicago toward the sears tower, our fighters have scrambled, and tried to hail it to no avail, we have a lock, permission to fire?"

I don't think that requires Presidential permission. I might be wrong.

[ChumpDumper]

I recommend The Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright and Against All Enemies by Richard Clarke. The latter might be open to criticism for being political, but the dude did work for both Republican and Democratic presidents.

[MannyIsGod]

I think you can be critical, but I think it should be noted that no one can say for certain what they would have done in the same situation. Everyone likes to think they would act optimally, of course, but the human brain doesn't always process things that way.

Now, you can argue, "He's president! He needs to be responding ASAP" etc etc, and I wouldn't say you're wrong. But you can say that about numerous people in critical/emergency situations who make mistakes, don't think, hestitate, etc etc.

As RG said, I think Bush did enough things I disagree with that this is a minor, minor blemish in his career.

What I don't understand is how people on this board - and this is almost EVERYONE - have such a hard time with context. Its the same thing in the Indian thread. If someone even talks about it - mind you not even having to start a thread - they somehow are obsessed with the issue.

I don't think the 10 minutes is that big of a deal either and I've never said as much but the thread was started and I've simply debated my position. I didn't go home last night and stay up late unable to sleep because Bush was too stunned to react. This shit gets so tired. You can't debate anything on here because the moment someone disagrees with you they say "OMG 10 YEARS LET IT GO".

As for how the majority of people react, its obvious not everyone acts in an optimum manner when the shit hits the fan. The opposite has never even been proposed. The only criticism being levied against Bush is that he acted poorly by waiting those 10 minutes. I'm not sure why people can't accept that at face value.

Bush acted poorly. How others would have reacted isn't really relevant to the fact that Bush reacted well below the expectations I set for the president of the United States. Its not an all consuming concern of mine, but that doesn't change anything.

[MannyIsGod]

Havent read the whole thread so maybe someone has already responded, but every time this question has been asked, I keep thinking the following.

"we have a 4th plane flying into downtown Chicago toward the sears tower, our fighters have scrambled, and tried to hail it to no avail, we have a lock, permission to fire?"

Authorization had been given by both the Vice President and the President after the 2nd plane hit the tower.

You guys should all read at least the part of the 9/11 commission report that details the events that happened that day. Its a fairly fascinating read.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't think that requires Presidential permission. I might be wrong.

Shooting down a commercial airliner may now be built into a predetermined reaction plan but on 9/11 it sure as hell would have required presidential permission with the possible exception of secret service action to shoot down a plane headed for the President.

[MannyIsGod]

i never said you cant criticize him. all im saying is these arm chair quarterbacks that sit there and act like they know what was going on in somebody's head are luaghable. this whole thread is laughable. it happend 10 years ago. u guys really need to move on to criticizing the new president...oh wait its been awhile guess hes not so new but in this places eyes hes the greatest.

Its not an either or. Its obvious you're not much for history, but people still criticize actions made or not made by each and every president we've ever had. We can both be critical of Obama and still have a discussion on this action by Bush. I don't understand why you or anyone else is so bothered by the mere action of discussing it, however. No one is making you read it.

Also, this board is HIGHLY critical of Obama. So far all you've spewed is a bunch of bullshit.

[MannyIsGod]

mmmm no i was not aware of it. thanks for making me aware of it though without being a smartass about it and calling me ignorant. i appreciate that. must be that USAF bond or something. however, im not making about the parties im making it about the respective presidents. as i said earlier i feel the blame for 9/11 needs to be shared by both clinton and bush. :spless: whats that? i blamed bush a little bit? yeah i sure did. he could have/should have taken action pre-9/11. but again like you said earlier its hard to say what one could have/would have done in that situation because NONE of us will ever be in that position of that much responsibility. that is what i have been trying to get through peoples head like chump dumper who just wants to call people ignorant.

chump didnt mean to hurt your feelings there lil guy.

You know why the discussion in this thread centers on being critical of Bush? We're discussing a Bush action, thats why. Too much of a logical leap for you?

[LnGrrrR]

As for how the majority of people react, its obvious not everyone acts in an optimum manner when the shit hits the fan. The opposite has never even been proposed. The only criticism being levied against Bush is that he acted poorly by waiting those 10 minutes. I'm not sure why people can't accept that at face value.

Maybe I haven't been clear, but I think I've stated that already. I just don't think said actions had a strong negative impact, so I don't fault him too much.


Bush acted poorly. How others would have reacted isn't really relevant to the fact that Bush reacted well below the expectations I set for the president of the United States. Its not an all consuming concern of mine, but that doesn't change anything.

I disagree. I liken it to those morality questions like "If you could push one old dude into a bus to save three children, would you?" In extreme situations like those, I don't think one's actions especially speak to their morality.

I understand if people have high expectations for the President; I tend to as well. But I'm willing to believe that due to the unique situation presented, I can forgive him for not making the optimal choice. Others, like yourself, feel differently. *shrug*

[LnGrrrR]

Shooting down a commercial airliner may now be built into a predetermined reaction plan but on 9/11 it sure as hell would have required presidential permission with the possible exception of secret service action to shoot down a plane headed for the President.

I actually have the 9/11 commission report, but it's been a few years since I read it. I'll have to thumb through it again.

Edit: Does it mention that specifically in the report? Just wondering where you found this info from.

[MannyIsGod]

Maybe I haven't been clear, but I think I've stated that already. I just don't think said actions had a strong negative impact, so I don't fault him too much.


I have a question for you, LNG. Suppose you build a 20 buildings in 20 earthquake zones across the world. None are built to earthquake proof standards. Within 10 years, 1 of those buildings has been in a large earthquake and has collapsed while the 19 others are still standing because they have not undergone earthquakes.

How many of those buildings were mistakes to build? Only the one that was destroyed by an earthquake or all?




I disagree. I liken it to those morality questions like "If you could push one old dude into a bus to save three children, would you?" In extreme situations like those, I don't think one's actions especially speak to their morality.


WTF does morality have to do with this conversation? This has nothing to do with morality. You've lost me here.



I understand if people have high expectations for the President; I tend to as well. But I'm willing to believe that due to the unique situation presented, I can forgive him for not making the optimal choice. Others, like yourself, feel differently. *shrug*

Its not about forgiveness or not. Its about whether or not it was a mistake. No one is expecting him to be perfect. Chump has even flat out said this.

[ferg]

You know why the discussion in this thread centers on being critical of Bush? We're discussing a Bush action, thats why. Too much of a logical leap for you?

not too much of a logical leap for me. i understand people wanted him to react differently. roger that, got it. what im saying is, this goes for this entire forum as well, the people that sit here and say "well i would have done this or i would have done that" have no basis to sit there and say what they "would have done". again i go back to my original post i made on this topic, everytime airmen in my career field gets deployed they talk about wanting to get in a fire fight and "do this or that" and THAT is how i view this thread. a bunch of people bashing someone and saying they would have done this or that. when the reality of the matter is they dont know how they will react or what decisions they will make. maybe my interpretation is different from yours; i dunno. again none of us really can say how they would have acted in that situatoin unless you are that person.

[MannyIsGod]

Well, the funny thing is I got the same news Bush did that morning and I didn't react by finishing a book I was reading to children. I asked questions.

It is quite a reasonable expectation to not have your president sit and do nothing for 10 minutes when he's told the country is under attack. If one cannot meet that simple criteria then they likely have no business trying to be a countries leader.

If you'll remember, Bush ASKED for this job. If you'll remember back to the primaries in the last election, Obama was criticized because he wouldn't be able to react in this type of a situation. Its a pretty damn common expectation of the job. THATS why he's been criticized.

No one is saying Bush should have grabbed the closest M16, parachute, and demand the military air lift him to Afghanistan so he could go Rambo on Bin Laden.

It is ironic you guys feel the need to defend Bush when he himself choose the lable DECIDER. I guess he forgot slow and late.

[MannyIsGod]

LNG


Prior to 9/11, it was understood that an order to shoot down a commercial aircraft would have to be issued by the National Command Authority (a phrase used to describe the president and secretary of defense). Exercise planners also assumed that the aircraft would originate from outside the United States, allowing time to identify the target and scramble interceptors. The threat of terrorists hijacking commercial airliners within the United States-and using them as guided missiles-was not recognized by NORAD before 9/11.98

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

The report is online.

[LnGrrrR]

I have a question for you, LNG. Suppose you build a 20 buildings in 20 earthquake zones across the world. None are built to earthquake proof standards. Within 10 years, 1 of those buildings has been in a large earthquake and has collapsed while the 19 others are still standing because they have not undergone earthquakes.

How many of those buildings were mistakes to build? Only the one that was destroyed by an earthquake or all?

All of them if they are all in zones equally likely to have similar earthquakes, but I don't follow the point.


WTF does morality have to do with this conversation? This has nothing to do with morality. You've lost me here.

Maybe poorly done, but I was trying to point out that in extremely critical/severe/urgent etc etc situations, I don't fault someone for not performing optimally, and I limit my criticisms of them.


Its not about forgiveness or not. Its about whether or not it was a mistake. No one is expecting him to be perfect. Chump has even flat out said this.

Sure, it was a mistake. But I don't think it had any impact on what happened that day, and to me, I don't think 10 mins was an exceedingly lengthy amount of time, so I don't really care much about that mistake.

[LnGrrrR]

LNG
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch1.htm

The report is online.

Thanks!

[MannyIsGod]

All of them if they are all in zones equally likely to have similar earthquakes, but I don't follow the point.


The point is that in this thread you and others have demonstrated results oriented thinking. You've stated that you give Bush slack because nothing happened as a result of his lapse. Whether or not a specific event happens does not make a decision a mistake or a good decision but rather whether or not that decision caused unnecessary risk.

In other words the mistake had nothing to do with an earthquake actually occurring but the decision to build in the zone to begin with. Even though 19 of those buildings remain, they were still bad choices. Even though Bush's actions did not directly lead to anything bad happening, they were a mistake.

My frame of reference is different due to the risk analysis that was critical when I played poker, but the fundamentals guiding correct decisions are the same when analyzing risk in any arena.





Sure, it was a mistake. But I don't think it had any impact on what happened that day, and to me, I don't think 10 mins was an exceedingly lengthy amount of time, so I don't really care much about that mistake.

See above.

[clambake]

gnsf addressing everyone on this forum. lol

[ferg]

The point is that in this thread you and others have demonstrated results oriented thinking. You've stated that you give Bush slack because nothing happened as a result of his lapse. Whether or not a specific event happens does not make a decision a mistake or a good decision but rather whether or not that decision caused unnecessary risk.

In other words the mistake had nothing to do with an earthquake actually occurring but the decision to build in the zone to begin with. Even though 19 of those buildings remain, they were still bad choices. Even though Bush's actions did not directly lead to anything bad happening, they were a mistake.

My frame of reference is different due to the risk analysis that was critical when I played poker, but the fundamentals guiding correct decisions are the same when analyzing risk in any arena.




See above.

i think myself and LnG's thinking, since it seems to be along the same lines, comes from our time in the military. we try to cut out all unncessary actions to achieve optimal results. thus my thinking of 10 mins really doesnt amount to a hill of beans in this instance. he cut out running out on the children and possibly appearing scared and still achieved the same result. he gathered the intel we had, which wasnt much, and got on his plane. now, as pointed out, obama rushed to the side of kennedy during his inaugural luncheon and started barking out orders while everyone stood around with their thumbs up their asses was a decision that could have had an effect if he waited and didnt spring into action. 9/11 was a catastrophy at ground zero, in our personal lives, and for our government. however, i think we learned from 9/11 about the "new" enemy we were facing and the unpredictability of being attacked.

[clambake]

i think myself and LnG's thinking, since it seems to be along the same lines, comes from our time in the military. we try to cut out all unncessary actions to achieve optimal results. thus my thinking of 10 mins really doesnt amount to a hill of beans in this instance. he cut out running out on the children and possibly appearing scared and still achieved the same result. he gathered the intel we had, which wasnt much, and got on his plane. now, as pointed out, obama rushed to the side of kennedy during his inaugural luncheon and started barking out orders while everyone stood around with their thumbs up their asses was a decision that could have had an effect if he waited and didnt spring into action. 9/11 was a catastrophy at ground zero, in our personal lives, and for our government. however, i think we learned from 9/11 about the "new" enemy we were facing and the unpredictability of being attacked.

the attacks were predicted.

[Drachen]

Authorization had been given by both the Vice President and the President after the 2nd plane hit the tower.

You guys should all read at least the part of the 9/11 commission report that details the events that happened that day. Its a fairly fascinating read.

was this before or after he finished the story. This is my point. People keep acting like 10 mins is no big deal, and in hindsight, THOSE 10 minutes werent. However, no one knew at THAT time that there weren't dozens of other planes in the sky ready to smack into large buildings. I distinctly remember those on the news wondering aloud under what circumstances would the president order the killing of a commercial airliner. Shoot, my buddy was in the federal building downtown and they evacuated that shit right away. Yes, a small building in little old San Antonio. Why? because NO ONE knew the scope of the attack. Those 10 mins could have meant another 3k lives. I will say this though, after those first 10 mins, Bush performed EXTREMELY admirably up until the Iraq debacle. I didn't vote for him, but I backed the hell out of him during that time, then he lost me again. I can absolutely see through partisanship to admit that. However, to pretend that those 10 mins and that reaction were no big deal on THAT day is completely dishonest or ignorant.

[MannyIsGod]

Drachen, exactly. The fact that the 10 minutes didn't cost any lives doesn't mean it couldn't have. Everyone is trying to look back with hindsight in order to evaluate his actions which is a mistake.

[MannyIsGod]

I've never put it on Bush but rather on the entire system, but the inability to see the attacks as a possibility was a supreme failure. Tom fucking Clancy had worked in the fucking scenario as an ending to his best selling novel. The CIA had reported it as a possibility. They have wargames and plans for what to do if Putin farts in the wrong direction but they didn't see this coming. Just makes me SMH.

[ferg]

I've never put it on Bush but rather on the entire system, but the inability to see the attacks as a possibility was a supreme failure. Tom fucking Clancy had worked in the fucking scenario as an ending to his best selling novel. The CIA had reported it as a possibility. They have wargames and plans for what to do if Putin farts in the wrong direction but they didn't see this coming. Just makes me SMH.

i agree 100% with this. its already been said. this whole thing was a failure from the GROUND UP!

[ferg]

i still dont think that 10mins was a big deal go ahead and label what you want. i really dont care.

[LnGrrrR]

The point is that in this thread you and others have demonstrated results oriented thinking. You've stated that you give Bush slack because nothing happened as a result of his lapse. Whether or not a specific event happens does not make a decision a mistake or a good decision but rather whether or not that decision caused unnecessary risk.

We all do that. The person who drives home drunk and doesn't hit anyone is as morally at fault as the person who drives home drunk and does hit someone. But the person who hits someone will be considered more morally culpable.

What about a coach who calls a risky play? The same thing occurs; it succeeds and the coach is a genius. It fails and the coach is a dunce.

And you've failed to show anywhere that said ten-minute lapse actually involved unnecessary risk. I can't imagine what could have occurred in the space of those ten minutes that would've required any such decision. What unnecessary risk was Bush taking?


In other words the mistake had nothing to do with an earthquake actually occurring but the decision to build in the zone to begin with. Even though 19 of those buildings remain, they were still bad choices. Even though Bush's actions did not directly lead to anything bad happening, they were a mistake.

Have I ever said it wasn't a mistake? I just think that a) it wasn't a big one and b) due to the gravity of the situation, I expect that a greater than average amount of humans placed in the same situation might also present errors in action/judgment.


My frame of reference is different due to the risk analysis that was critical when I played poker, but the fundamentals guiding correct decisions are the same when analyzing risk in any arena.

I know a good deal about risk analysis, though moreso from a network security standpoint. And you should know that poker isn't always about the odds, right? It's about mental toughness, and sometimes people don't have it.


See above.

Can you detal what actions Bush could have taken in those ten minutes that might have had a strong impact on the situation?

[LnGrrrR]

was this before or after he finished the story. This is my point. People keep acting like 10 mins is no big deal, and in hindsight, THOSE 10 minutes werent. However, no one knew at THAT time that there weren't dozens of other planes in the sky ready to smack into large buildings.

So what should the President have done in those ten minutes? Order fighters at every major base to get in the air? Order planes shot down? Is there a specific action he could have performed in those ten minutes that would have saved additional lives?


Why? because NO ONE knew the scope of the attack. Those 10 mins could have meant another 3k lives.

How so? This seems like pure conjecture.


However, to pretend that those 10 mins and that reaction were no big deal on THAT day is completely dishonest or ignorant.

Thanks, but I don't need someone else putting words in my mouth. :tu Saying that my personal opinions are either dishonest or ignorant is somewhat offensive.

[Drachen]

We all do that. The person who drives home drunk and doesn't hit anyone is as morally at fault as the person who drives home drunk and does hit someone. But the person who hits someone will be considered more morally culpable.

What about a coach who calls a risky play? The same thing occurs; it succeeds and the coach is a genius. It fails and the coach is a dunce.

And you've failed to show anywhere that said ten-minute lapse actually involved unnecessary risk. I can't imagine what could have occurred in the space of those ten minutes that would've required any such decision. What unnecessary risk was Bush taking?


Nothing happened the rest of that day, would you be ok if he read the rest of the 2nd grade books in the school library to the kids? You know, since in hindsight it was no big deal.

Also, is time not a factor in military operations? 7 other planes could have slammed into buildings in ten minutes. Or 15 planes. Maybe they could have detonated a couple of bombs at the base of the 50 tallest buildings in the US. Who knows? No one did at that time.


So what should the President have done in those ten minutes? Order fighters at every major base to get in the air? Order planes shot down? Is there a specific action he could have performed in those ten minutes that would have saved additional lives?

At the very least (as has been posted in this thread) probably the things he did in the 10 minutes after leaving the room.
Also:
See my post previous to the one you quoted for a hypothetical.



Thanks, but I don't need someone else putting words in my mouth. :tu Saying that my personal opinions are either dishonest or ignorant is somewhat offensive.


You are quite welcome

[Nbadan]

One of the Bush administrations biggest failure was ignoring German intelligence on Muhammad Atta and letting him back into the U.S. without notifying domestic intelligence sources of his whereabouts and his suspicious behavior and associations in Germany 2000

[Nbadan]

...but there were operational errors too that could have lead to instability in the whole country...had the third plane hit the white House or Congress, as many have speculated, it could have led to the decapitation of our nation's leadership.....an effective coup putting the military in control....I'm not saying that Bush could have done anything in the first 10 minutes after the attacks, just saying that he should have used the media more effectively to assure people that he was on top of things and there was still stability in our nations leadership structure....

[Nbadan]

The U.S. had the intelligence apparatus in place to identify 3 of the 4, or more, terror teams, including Muhammad Atta, to claim now that we were simple short sighted is intellectually dishonest...


After Weldon's assertions were disputed, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, a member of the Able Danger team, identified himself as Weldon's source. Shaffer claimed that he alerted the FBI in September 2000 about the information uncovered by the secret military unit "Able Danger," but he alleges three meetings he set up with bureau officials were blocked by military lawyers. Shaffer, who at the time worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency, claims he communicated to members of the 9/11 Commission that Able Danger had identified two of the three cells responsible for 9/11 prior to the attacks, but the Commission did not include this information in their final report.[25]

Shaffer's lawyer, Mark Zaid, has revealed that Shaffer had been placed on paid administrative leave for what he called "petty and frivolous" reasons and had his security clearance suspended in March 2004, following a dispute over travel mileage expenses and personal use of a work cell phone.[26]

As Lt. Col. Shaffer received a memorandum of OPCON status from Joint Task Force (JTF) 121, confirming his attachment to this element 1 November through 1 December 2004, and participating in the 75th Ranger Regiment's nighttime air assault of 11 November 2003, the controversy of his wearing the 75th Ranger Regiment patch as his "combat patch" is closed in his favor. In the Army Reserve, LtCol Shaffer is now assigned as the G6 of the 94th Division (Prov), Ft. Lee, VA.

Congressman Weldon asked for a new probe into the activities undertaken to silence Lt. Col Shaffer from publicly commenting on Able Danger and Able Danger's identification of the 9/11 hijackers. Weldon called the activities "a deliberate campaign of character assassination."[27]

Shaffer has also told the story of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) opposition to Able Danger, prior to 9/11, based on the view Able Danger was encroaching on CIA turf. According to Shaffer, the CIA representative said, "I clearly understand. We're going after the leadership. You guys are going after the body. But, it doesn't matter. The bottom line is, CIA will never give you the best information from "Alex Base" or anywhere else. CIA will never provide that to you because if you were successful in your effort to target Al Qaeda, you will steal our thunder. Therefore, we will not support this."[28]

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger)

[Nbadan]

Atta was identified by Able Danger in January/February 2000," he was quoted as saying.

Navy Captain Scott Phillpott

Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger)

[Nbadan]

So why did the government destroy tetrabytes of information uncovered by Able Danger and intimidate witnesses.... what did it have to hide?


Five witnesses who had worked on Able Danger and had been questioned by the Defense Department's Inspector General later told investigative journalists that their statements to the IG were distorted by investigators in the final IG's report, or the report omitted essential information that they had provided. The alleged distortions of the IG report centered around excluding any evidence that Able Danger had identified and tracked Atta years before 9/11. The witnesses reported to the journalists that the IG investigators got increasingly hostile in an effort to intimidate the witnesses into changing their testimony to drop any assertion that they had identified and tracked Atta, and this suggests a cover-up by the IG of Able Danger's findings. Witnesses reported telling Philip Zelikow, executive director of the 9/11 Commission, that Able Danger had identified Atta well before the 9/11 attacks, but Zelikow showed no interest in their testimony. Lt. Col Tony Shaffer also reported that the DOD has retaliated against him for speaking out publicly about the IG report's distortions.[55]

Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger)

[Nbadan]

Finally,,


With a scheduled release of August 31, 2010, Operation Dark Heart, by Anthony A. Shaffer, was released. It includes memories of his time reporting to the 9/11 commission about Able Danger's findings. The 10,000 copies of the books have not been released yet. The DOD's Defense Intelligence Agency reviewers identified more than 200 passages suspected of containing classified information.[57] "Specifically, the DIA wanted references to a meeting between Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer, the book's author, and the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow, removed".[58] DOD took the highly unusual step of purchasing all available copies of Shaffer's book at a cost of $47,000 and destroying them to deny the public the ability to read the book.[55]

Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Able_Danger)

The government not only had the operational capability to identify Atta and many other 911 conspirators, it did....first-hand evidence like this is preciously why I support another investigation into not only the events of 911, but also the circumstances that lead to 911.... anyone who supports the 911 commission report and its fabrication of distortions is lying - book it.

[ChumpDumper]

Which kid from the 9/11 reading wrote that wikipedia entry?

[Blake]

What about a coach who calls a risky play? The same thing occurs; it succeeds and the coach is a genius. It fails and the coach is a dunce.

what do you call the coach who isn't even at the game when his team starts play?


And you've failed to show anywhere that said ten-minute lapse actually involved unnecessary risk. I can't imagine what could have occurred in the space of those ten minutes that would've required any such decision. What unnecessary risk was Bush taking?

In your opinion, what's the appropriate amount of time for Bush to leave when told of an attack before he should be criticized?

[DarrinS]

One of the Bush administrations biggest failure was ignoring German intelligence on Muhammad Atta and letting him back into the U.S. without notifying domestic intelligence sources of his whereabouts and his suspicious behavior and associations in Germany 2000


How can YOU think this was a failure when YOU believe Bush/Cheney brought down those buildings?

[clambake]

he gotcha there, danny.

[LnGrrrR]

what do you call the coach who isn't even at the game when his team starts play?

Jim Caldwell.


In your opinion, what's the appropriate amount of time for Bush to leave when told of an attack before he should be criticized?

Already answered, but the "appropriate" time would of course be as soon as he heard it. Anything over 15 mins would be "grossly inappropriate". Anything under that is "inappropriate."

Again, I don't think it was necessarily the "right" move to make, but I don't think it made a big difference.

[LnGrrrR]

Nothing happened the rest of that day, would you be ok if he read the rest of the 2nd grade books in the school library to the kids? You know, since in hindsight it was no big deal.

I already answered that above; if he had stayed much longer than he did I would be agreeing with all of you.


Also, is time not a factor in military operations? 7 other planes could have slammed into buildings in ten minutes. Or 15 planes. Maybe they could have detonated a couple of bombs at the base of the 50 tallest buildings in the US. Who knows? No one did at that time.

So what was Bush supposed to have done, in that instance? Help me out: in your hypothetical, what could he have done? Call out fighters to escort each plane out of the sky? Mobilized the military and instituted martial law?

If the above DID happen, then Bush would have reacted to them as they occurred. And if another plane/atk occurred somewhere else, it's quite likely that his aides would have informed him the moment they were made aware.


At the very least (as has been posted in this thread) probably the things he did in the 10 minutes after leaving the room.

So did his actions in that first ten minutes save 3k potential lives? What actions do you think he took in that first ten minutes?


You are quite welcome

If you're interested in debating fairly, the least you could do is not assume your opponent is a dullard.

[Blake]

Already answered, but the "appropriate" time would of course be as soon as he heard it. Anything over 15 mins would be "grossly inappropriate". Anything under that is "inappropriate."

Again, I don't think it was necessarily the "right" move to make, but I don't think it made a big difference.

In hindsight, it apparently made no discernable difference at all, but the wrong move is still the wrong move.... regardless of how much the kids and the principal gushed over the way Bush continued to finish reading My Pet Goat

[ChumpDumper]

No shit, what if the school was planned to be hit? Are you telling us they knew that wasn't going to happen at the time?

[clambake]

No shit, what if the school was planned to be hit? Are you telling us they knew that wasn't going to happen at the time?

keeping bush alive had to be part of the plan.

[LnGrrrR]

No shit, what if the school was planned to be hit? Are you telling us they knew that wasn't going to happen at the time?

If they had the timing and intel to know he would be in the school, and be able to hit him within that ten minute window, I doubt that him moving anywhere would have made a difference. If they had planning on blowing up/attacking the school while he was there, they could have done it as soon as they saw him starting to leave.

[ChumpDumper]

keeping bush alive had to be part of the plan.lol But seriously, Secret Service agents practically lifted Cheney up by his arms and hustled him out of the White House at the same time this stuff was going on, and that place is a slightly harder target than an elementary school.

[ChumpDumper]

If they had the timing and intel to know he would be in the school, and be able to hit him within that ten minute window, I doubt that him moving anywhere would have made a difference. If they had planning on blowing up/attacking the school while he was there, they could have done it as soon as they saw him starting to leave.Why would they have to wait until he left? Why stay anywhere people would know you were scheduled to be at that point?

[LnGrrrR]

In hindsight, it apparently made no discernable difference at all, but the wrong move is still the wrong move.... regardless of how much the kids and the principal gushed over the way Bush continued to finish reading My Pet Goat

I don't think I've said it was the correct move. I just think there's much ado over nothing.

[ChumpDumper]

Ultimately it is a minor point, but some douchebag wanted to bring it up.

[clambake]

might have been the only mistake-free ten minutes of his presidency.

[LnGrrrR]

Why would they have to wait until he left? Why stay anywhere people would know you were scheduled to be at that point?

Yes, for security reasons it probably would've made more sense to move him immediately. But if he was threatened at the school, then I don't think him moving in those ten minutes made much of a difference. (Ie. if they were going to attack Bush there, everything would've been planned in advance with them able to "push the button" at any time.)

Also, the building was likely "cased out" beforehand for bombs and weapons, but that's just an assumption.

[ChumpDumper]

Yes, for security reasons it probably would've made more sense to move him immediately. But if he was threatened at the school, then I don't think him moving in those ten minutes made much of a difference. (Ie. if they were going to attack Bush there, everything would've been planned in advance with them able to "push the button" at any time.)

Also, the building was likely "cased out" beforehand for bombs and weapons, but that's just an assumption.Did they check for superexplosivenanothermite?

[MannyIsGod]

Yes, for security reasons it probably would've made more sense to move him immediately. But if he was threatened at the school, then I don't think him moving in those ten minutes made much of a difference. (Ie. if they were going to attack Bush there, everything would've been planned in advance with them able to "push the button" at any time.)

Also, the building was likely "cased out" beforehand for bombs and weapons, but that's just an assumption.

I love how you think its ok for a country that was just attacked by surprise to make assumptions about safety.

[MannyIsGod]

If they had the timing and intel to know he would be in the school, and be able to hit him within that ten minute window, I doubt that him moving anywhere would have made a difference. If they had planning on blowing up/attacking the school while he was there, they could have done it as soon as they saw him starting to leave.

LOL At Intel. The Presidential interary is very public information.

[LnGrrrR]

I love how you think its ok for a country that was just attacked by surprise to make assumptions about safety.

I love how you think you know more about security than the secret service. :tu :lol

[LnGrrrR]

LOL At Intel. The Presidential interary is very public information.

How far in advance? I'd assume that any such assassination attempt would take a few months to plan.

[Nbadan]

he gotcha there, danny.

Doubting the series of events that lead to, and on the day of 9/11, as reported by both the 9/11 commission report and NIST, is hardly believing that 'Bush/Cheney brought down the towers"...but what do you expect from a proven birther...and now deather...

[Nbadan]

Which kid from the 9/11 reading wrote that wikipedia entry?

Which part is in doubt? or you just gonna be a douche like usual?

[Nbadan]

keeping bush alive had to be part of the plan.

Unless Bush knew the plan....

[clambake]

you just did it again, dan.

[LnGrrrR]

Did they check for superexplosivenanothermite?

I should hope they did; there are devices that can sniff out explosives after all. *shrug*

[Nbadan]

you just did it again, dan.

Did what? I never said Bush made the plan....

[MannyIsGod]

I love how you think you know more about security than the secret service. :tu :lol

I love how if this happened today they'd move him. Here we go again, apparently the secret service doesn't make mistakes and no one can critique them because we're not in the secret service and don't know as much as them.

I would critique the decision to let Kennedy ride in an open top car but apparently that would be invalidated because I'm not part of the secret service.

[MannyIsGod]

How far in advance? I'd assume that any such assassination attempt would take a few months to plan.

Yeah if I decided to hit target location A 3 months ahead with a plane I couldn't change that because planes aren't mobile. At all.

[LnGrrrR]

Yeah if I decided to hit target location A 3 months ahead with a plane I couldn't change that because planes aren't mobile. At all.

That's kinda my point. If they moved him ten minutes earlier, the terrorists could've just hit him where he moved to.

[LnGrrrR]

I love how if this happened today they'd move him. Here we go again, apparently the secret service doesn't make mistakes and no one can critique them because we're not in the secret service and don't know as much as them.

And yet, you would've had the foresight to move him at the time. The secret service and his aides are all dumber than you, apparently.


I would critique the decision to let Kennedy ride in an open top car but apparently that would be invalidated because I'm not part of the secret service.

So those secret service agents were dumb too, in your opinion?

[MannyIsGod]

That's kinda my point. If they moved him ten minutes earlier, the terrorists could've just hit him where he moved to.

Really? How would they know where they moved him to? Did you know where the president was on 9/11?

[MannyIsGod]

And yet, you would've had the foresight to move him at the time. The secret service and his aides are all dumber than you, apparently.



So those secret service agents were dumb too, in your opinion?

The secret service agents that let Kennedy ride in a car with an open top may or may not have been dumb. I don't believe I ever characterized anyone as dumb.

That being said, they obviously made a mistake. To their credit, they've learned from it. I don't think I've ever seen a president in that setting again. Have you?

That brings us back to your first point. I never said anything about foresight either. I'm looking back in hindsight, actually. None of that changes the actions that were made that day included mistakes.

You are the one somehow building up the secret service as a group that never makes mistakes and making it seem I can't be critical of them for anything because I'm not an agent and if I say they made a mistake obviously I'm calling them dumb.

[MannyIsGod]

LNG - think about how the SS reacted with Cheney once they realized what was happening compared to how they reacted with Bush. There was an obvious delay in between the original attacks on NYC and when they realized what could happen but to act like that delay was anything but a slow reaction time is just ridiculous. This is even a far more indefensible position than defending Bush's own actions. Bush's team was even slower to react. The dude wanted to go back to Washington and had to have Rice practically shout him down on that issue.

[LnGrrrR]

Really? How would they know where they moved him to? Did you know where the president was on 9/11?

I'm pretty sure they couldn't move him to a secure location in ten minutes. Do you think they could?

[LnGrrrR]

That being said, they obviously made a mistake.

Great! So you've proven Bush/secret service made a mistake. However, I never denied it was a mistake. I just dont think it was a mistake with a great chance of operational impact.

That brings us back to your first point. I never said anything about foresight either. I'm looking back in hindsight, actually. None of that changes the actions that were made that day included mistakes.

And it's one thing to say the secret service made mistakes; it's another to imply that you would have been the one to predict otherwise in advance. People make mistakes in these situations, which is what I've been saying since the beginning.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm pretty sure they couldn't move him to a secure location in ten minutes. Do you think they could?

I know they could.

[MannyIsGod]

Great! So you've proven Bush/secret service made a mistake. However, I never denied it was a mistake. I just dont think it was a mistake with a great chance of operational impact.

That brings us back to your first point. I never said anything about foresight either. I'm looking back in hindsight, actually. None of that changes the actions that were made that day included mistakes.

And it's one thing to say the secret service made mistakes; it's another to imply that you would have been the one to predict otherwise in advance. People make mistakes in these situations, which is what I've been saying since the beginning.

Now you're just making shit up. I said I would have predicted something in advance?

Also if something doesn't have a chance at impacting operations then its not a mistake so you yourself are contradicting your own points. And you DID say something about foresight. Its only a few posts up.

Are you drunk?

[LnGrrrR]

I know they could.

How do you know that? Just curious.

[LnGrrrR]

Now you're just making shit up. I said I would have predicted something in advance?

You said it was a mistake, right? Do you think it's a mistake in hindsight, or do you think the secret service showed poor judgment at the time?

Also, earlier your posts seemed incredulous that the secret service didn't move him, as if the answer was obvious.


Also if something doesn't have a chance at impacting operations then its not a mistake so you yourself are contradicting your own points. And you DID say something about foresight. Its only a few posts up.

Are you drunk?

I said it was a mistake because 1) it looked bad politically and 2) it would be smarter to move him immediately, even if the chance of attack is infinitesmal because its better to be safe than sorry. That said, given the situation, I can excuse poor reactions.

And that foresight was a failed quotation on my part. You don't recognize your own words?

[ChumpDumper]

You said it was a mistake, right? Do you think it's a mistake in hindsight, or do you think the secret service showed poor judgment at the time?

Also, earlier your posts seemed incredulous that the secret service didn't move him, as if the answer was obvious.As we both said, the difference between the Secret Service teams of Cheney and Bush is pretty much night and day.

There was certainly much confusion that day. Once they finally got out of the school they realized AF1 itself might be a target, and there was a big delay while they had dogs check the plane and everything going on it on the tarmac. Why did they take that into consideration? Because that's where the President was expected to go.

After some flying in circles and arguing, Bush was sent to a nuclear bombproof bunker in Nebraksa, not Washington as Bush wished. Why? Because Bush might be expected to return to the capital where he could be attacked.

It's not a matter of what he could have done in those minutes -- it's really a matter of why the fuck would anyone want the POTUS to stick around and stay on schedule in a vulnerable location while the nation is under attack? It's just dumb.

But yeah, thank God those self-admittedly clueless kids weren't slightly confused just because the leader of the free world had to be somewhere less easy to be killed.

[diego]

Great! So you've proven Bush/secret service made a mistake. However, I never denied it was a mistake. I just dont think it was a mistake with a great chance of operational impact.
considering the 2 planes that failed to hit and the number of additional targets and means of attacks possible, how can you possibly calculate the chance of operational impact? the whole point of the criticism is that Bush took an extra 10 minutes to assess the threat and response, apparently to keep some 7 year olds calm, or find out what happened to my pet goat.




And it's one thing to say the secret service made mistakes; it's another to imply that you would have been the one to predict otherwise in advance. People make mistakes in these situations, which is what I've been saying since the beginning.

not all mistakes are created equal. If I make a mistake while speaking arabic, its easily understandable because I've never studied, dont do it professionally and have in fact never done it in my life. nobody's life/career/well being/hapiness is at stake when I mispronounce/mispell a salaam alai kum. If the secret service makes a mistake with security protocol, its quite different because that is what they are trained, hired and paid to do.

If a president makes a mistake that potentially exposes his nation to attacks / retards his ability to manage the aftermath of a crisis, it is serious because that is one of his primary responsibilities; even if he has never been in such a situation in his life, the job he voluntarily campaigned for requires him to be ready for such contingencies.

Its one thing to criticize Bush's actual appraisal of the threat or his strategy to defuse it- considering the circumstances there are a number of difficulties in performing that task well, much less flawlessly- but its another thing entirely to excuse him for delaying that task, even if for 10 minutes. In times of uncertainty, with millions of lives, the economy, the well-being of your nation, hell, "the fate of the free world" (as he himself liked to say) at stake, 10 minutes is an eternity.

Again, if you get a call telling you your wife is in unspecified danger while you are playing with your kids, do you trust the person who called you to handle it while you finish playing with your kids so as to not alarm them, or do you leave your kids with someone you trust and go help your wife?

No one is saying Bush had to spazz out and kick the children out of the way. He just had to say excuse me and go take care of presidential business and leave the storytelling to someone else. I dont see how anyone can use the "it wasn't a big deal / it was a difficult situation to react to" excuse for this.

[LnGrrrR]

As we both said, the difference between the Secret Service teams of Cheney and Bush is pretty much night and day.

There was certainly much confusion that day. Once they finally got out of the school they realized AF1 itself might be a target, and there was a big delay while they had dogs check the plane and everything going on it on the tarmac. Why did they take that into consideration? Because that's where the President was expected to go.

After some flying in circles and arguing, Bush was sent to a nuclear bombproof bunker in Nebraksa, not Washington as Bush wished. Why? Because Bush might be expected to return to the capital where he could be attacked.

It's not a matter of what he could have done in those minutes -- it's really a matter of why the fuck would anyone want the POTUS to stick around and stay on schedule in a vulnerable location while the nation is under attack? It's just dumb.

But yeah, thank God those self-admittedly clueless kids weren't slightly confused just because the leader of the free world had to be somewhere less easy to be killed.

I can't really argue with any of this too much. Like you said, there was a lot of confusion that day, and mistakes were made.

[ploto]

Don't the "kids" realize that by his staying there, he could have been endangering them?

[MannyIsGod]

I can't really argue with any of this too much. Like you said, there was a lot of confusion that day, and mistakes were made.

:lol

And yet you have, Lng. :lol :toast

[LnGrrrR]

considering the 2 planes that failed to hit and the number of additional targets and means of attacks possible, how can you possibly calculate the chance of operational impact? the whole point of the criticism is that Bush took an extra 10 minutes to assess the threat and response, apparently to keep some 7 year olds calm, or find out what happened to my pet goat.

You know this argument works against you, as well. If you say I can't claim to possibly know the operational impact, then no one can say that, rendering the argument pointless.

And your comment of "apparently to keep some 7 year olds calm, or find out what happened to my pet goat" is pretty misleading, obviously. No one can claim to know the reasons for his delay. Was he scared? Dumbfounded? Shocked? Nervous? etc etc. I'm sure many emotions played a part in his actions. (For the seventh time or so), people react non-optimally at times in emergency situations. People are human.


not all mistakes are created equal. If I make a mistake while speaking arabic, its easily understandable because I've never studied, dont do it professionally and have in fact never done it in my life. nobody's life/career/well being/hapiness is at stake when I mispronounce/mispell a salaam alai kum. If the secret service makes a mistake with security protocol, its quite different because that is what they are trained, hired and paid to do.

Agreed. Chumpdumper points out the difference in the reactions between the teams with Cheney and Bush. Now, I don't know if that's because one team was slow and the other wasn't, or if they had a feeling that the White House was much more likely to be a target than a school.


If a president makes a mistake that potentially exposes his nation to attacks / retards his ability to manage the aftermath of a crisis, it is serious because that is one of his primary responsibilities; even if he has never been in such a situation in his life, the job he voluntarily campaigned for requires him to be ready for such contingencies.

Every President who's ever been President has, at times, made mistakes that affect the nation. The job requires near super-human dedication, motivation, etc etc. Bush's was much more visible than most.

Its one thing to criticize Bush's actual appraisal of the threat or his strategy to defuse it- considering the circumstances there are a number of difficulties in performing that task well, much less flawlessly- but its another thing entirely to excuse him for delaying that task, even if for 10 minutes. In times of uncertainty, with millions of lives, the economy, the well-being of your nation, hell, "the fate of the free world" (as he himself liked to say) at stake, 10 minutes is an eternity.


Again, if you get a call telling you your wife is in unspecified danger while you are playing with your kids, do you trust the person who called you to handle it while you finish playing with your kids so as to not alarm them, or do you leave your kids with someone you trust and go help your wife?

You know, everyone's doing this "If your wife was hurt" analogy... but that's really completely different. That's one person, with a limited amount of actions available. And even then, I bet there are some people who would cry in grief first, or go numb, not want to face the problem, etc etc.

It's hard to come up with a good analogy, because it's hard to come up with a job that has as much oversight and power as the President of the US.


No one is saying Bush had to spazz out and kick the children out of the way. He just had to say excuse me and go take care of presidential business and leave the storytelling to someone else. I dont see how anyone can use the "it wasn't a big deal / it was a difficult situation to react to" excuse for this.

And throughout, I've said that would've been the "correct" response. However, I don't see how you can't understand the "It didn't affect us/it was a difficult situation" excuse.

Did it have a big impact?

Wasn't it a difficult situation?

[LnGrrrR]

:lol

And yet you have, Lng. :lol :toast

Point out where I said it wasn't a mistake. :) I just said I don't consider it that big of a mistake. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

Agreed. Chumpdumper points out the difference in the reactions between the teams with Cheney and Bush. Now, I don't know if that's because one team was slow and the other wasn't, or if they had a feeling that the White House was much more likely to be a target than a school.The difference as far as I can tell was Bush. He decided to sit there showing a note to Andrew Card not to say anything, finish listening to the reading, compliment the kids, have photos taken, take a question, talk about his education policy, wait until all the reporters clear the room to go next door to meet with his staff, make a statement at a time and location that was on the itinerary, then leave more or less on schedule to the next obviously logical location.

[MannyIsGod]

Point out where I said it wasn't a mistake. :) I just said I don't consider it that big of a mistake. :lol

Fair enough good sir.

[baseline bum]

LOL @ the kids thinking they're so important that the President of the United States should personally soothe them in the middle of a national emergency.

[Winehole23]

lol darrin starting a thread about "story time".

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-75MIyXMAYQlA3?format=jpg&name=small

[Thread]

LOL @ the kids thinking they're so important that the President of the United States should personally soothe them in the middle of a national emergency.

bumster, you posted that 2 years + a month before they was selling your shit.

[Thread]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-75MIyXMAYQlA3?format=jpg&name=small

Release all the shit...then we can settle.

[Winehole23]

1436333941934497794

[Winehole23]

back then they called us traitors and terrorist sympathizers

1436364118034993155

[baseline bum]

bumster, you posted that 2 years + a month before they was selling your shit.

You have no room after blowing that lead in November 2020.

[Thread]

You have no room after blowing that lead in November 2020.

Dude, they'd strung your restraining ropes, the charter was warming up. Your people were congregating out at SAX. I was ready to do the Dutch. They started selling your shit.

White woman from town stole your cookie.

[ElNono]

They started selling your shit.

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61d2tXOUNDL._AC_UX385_.jpg

As seen on Nigerian TV in December...

[baseline bum]

Dude, they'd strung your restraining ropes, the charter was warming up. Your people were congregating out at SAX. I was ready to do the Dutch. They started selling your shit.

White woman from town stole your cookie.

Your boy claimed victory on November 4th 2020, only for the states of Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania to tell him nuh uh fattie, Biden has more votes here. You guys even tried to rig it in your favor with Dejoy's shenanigans but still blew it.

[Thread]

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61d2tXOUNDL._AC_UX385_.jpg

As seen on Nigerian TV in December...

He's still President forever, just like the 44 before him.

And that is what will gall you to the grave, El.

He got ya's.

[Thread]

Your boy claimed victory on November 4th 2020, only for the states of Arizona, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania to tell him nuh uh fattie, Biden has more votes here. You guys even tried to rig it in your favor with Dejoy's shenanigans but still blew it.

Oh, yeah, we opened our bowels and fouled the entire election cycle.

& we're still shittin' on it. And will forever more.

Just try and stop me, bum. I want to see you try.

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-8h0-RWEAILFKl?format=jpg&name=medium

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E--uGl2XoAIQLlo?format=jpg&name=900x900

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E--DHMhWUAIxvtL?format=jpg&name=small

[Thread]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E--uGl2XoAIQLlo?format=jpg&name=900x900

:lmao

[Winehole23]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-9CzJVXMAAVnvw?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

[Winehole23]

never forget 9/11 turned us into the biggest pussies in the world

equating turbans with terrorism, for example

1436474406394552320

[Thread]

never forget 9/11 turned us into the biggest pussies in the world

equating turbans with terrorism, for example

1436474406394552320

Rag-headed fucks.

[Winehole23]

Rudy jealous now :lol

1436682379247210503

[benefactor]

Rudy jealous now :lol

1436682379247210503
:lol...what a faggot