Quote:
Originally posted by Lanny_MacDonald+Oct 19 2004, 09:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Lanny_MacDonald @ Oct 19 2004, 09:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-calculoso@Oct 19 2004, 08:50 PM
You're portraying everything in a vacuum, as if it's cut and dried that the event was going to happen and it was simply ignored.
|
No, I am not. I am basing the premise on years of data and numerous reports. When you have multiple reports that state a threat is imminent do you not listen? When your head of Counterterrorism tells your cabinet that shizzle is about to his the fan, do you not listen? It seems you are the one trying to portray things in an unfair light, like the information was just dropped in his lap minutes before the attack. The US knew this was coming from 1996 on. Bush knew it was imminent from August 6th on. Yet he did nothing. No vaccum. Just a whole of people being sucked in by an administration which refuses to acknowledge its part in history. [/b][/quote]
I think what he's trying to say is that he did know about it, and about many others. 9/11 happened and others did not. Which means we can give him credit for those others not happening. Which makes little sense to me. And...given that logic, how is the US safer under Bush, if it's all just a crap shoot as to which threats turn out to be real. Hell let Kerry role the dice, he may get lucky
