Getting your debate tactics and opinions from the guys at South Park....how cute.
I'm just trying to add some light to the thread. How is posting this my opinion?.. Bush is an idiot. That's my opinion. He can't act if he wanted to. We're argueing about nothing. He acted like an idiot on 9/11 because he IS an idiot. People give him WAAAY too much credit. THAT'S my opinion.
Obvious he knew before? based on what? that he didnt jump up and scream in front of some young children, AMERICA IS UDER ATTACK GET UNDER YOUR DESKS! would that have been acceptable? or then you would say its obvious he was acting, trying to pretend he didnt know. simply amazes me that someone would believe that.
both sides of this thread are like the far right and the far left, extremely opposite and illogical.
it is logical that he wouldn't 'jump up and scream', but bush's excuse is that he wanted to portray a feeling of 'calmness'. I interpret that as he didn't want to scare the kids. okay, but he could have calmly left the room and informed the kids he had some business to do. do you honestly think those kids would have freaked out if he did something along those lines?
im not president, but it seems common sense that if the country i was in charge of was under attack, i would have acted differently. it makes him look ridiculously incompetent, or seriously sinister.
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
im not president, but it seems common sense that if the country i was in charge of was under attack, i would have acted differently. it makes him look ridiculously incompetent, or seriously sinister.
and I'm pretty sure if he had it to do again, he prob would act differently. He made a choice to stay and have other people keep him informed about it; it's not a wrong choice or a right choice...He used the chain of command and delegated...yes, most would agree that he could have made something up to get out of the classroom, and perhaps should have...but it's not like if he would have left the other things wouldn't have happened. I think this whole argument that keeps getting brought up really does nothing to solve any problems; it merely serves to distract, polarize and infuriate.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
both sides of this thread are like the far right and the far left, extremely opposite and illogical.
it is logical that he wouldn't 'jump up and scream', but bush's excuse is that he wanted to portray a feeling of 'calmness'. I interpret that as he didn't want to scare the kids. okay, but he could have calmly left the room and informed the kids he had some business to do. do you honestly think those kids would have freaked out if he did something along those lines?
im not president, but it seems common sense that if the country i was in charge of was under attack, i would have acted differently. it makes him look ridiculously incompetent, or seriously sinister.
its easy to say after the fact what he should or shouldnt have done. I have no idea what I would have done. I believe he had no prior knowledge of the atacks. with that said, can you imagine what was going on in his head. america has been attacked like that on its mainland ever.
to say he knew something based on his actions when he was told is ridiculous and a pointless argument really. chopitdown is right, he probably would have acted differently would anything have changed that day if he did? no.
its easy to say after the fact what he should or shouldnt have done. I have no idea what I would have done. I believe he had no prior knowledge of the atacks. with that said, can you imagine what was going on in his head. america has been attacked like that on its mainland ever.
.
your last point is what i've been thinking about a lot. I mean, can you imagine the thoughts going through his mind...esp I'm sure he had been presented with purely hypothetical examples of planes being hijacked...but what are the odds this terrorist attack would come to fruition. I don't know how many threats they get a day, but seriously, before 9-11 would you really think that terrorists would hijack a plane AND use it as a weapon, not collateral to get what you want? I prob woulda crapped my pants if someone had told me that america had been attacked in that manner and now I'm the man who's got to get us through this.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
your last point is what i've been thinking about a lot. I mean, can you imagine the thoughts going through his mind...esp I'm sure he had been presented with purely hypothetical examples of planes being hijacked...but what are the odds this terrorist attack would come to fruition. I don't know how many threats they get a day, but seriously, before 9-11 would you really think that terrorists would hijack a plane AND use it as a weapon, not collateral to get what you want? I prob woulda crapped my pants if someone had told me that america had been attacked in that manner and now I'm the man who's got to get us through this.
I know. its easy for everyone to say, he should have done this, I would have done this. its complete bullshit
your last point is what i've been thinking about a lot. I mean, can you imagine the thoughts going through his mind?
what good does it do to do the same thing i did, only with a different opinion? i think the only way we can argue this subject is by debating specific examples and presenting all sides equally. so, you are right. it is pointless to argue what was going through his mind. he has told us in interviews. he wanted to portray an act of 'calmness', and that is why he stayed and listened to the rest of the pet goat story. secondly, he said he saw the first plane hit on t.v. that is not possible unless they had prior knowledge and technology set up to see it. was it a slip of the tongue? maybe. what do you think?
I'm sure he had been presented with purely hypothetical examples of planes being hijacked...but what are the odds this terrorist attack would come to fruition?
The Tripod II Biowarfare Exercise,,The Alert II Terrorism Drill, The National Reconnaissance Office Plane Crash Drill, The Global Guardian Exercise, The Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian Training Exercises, Operation Northern Vigilance
those were war games that were in operation the morning of 9/11. all of them were related to highjackings, planes into buildings, and biowarfare.
coincidence, maybe. mass distraction, maybe. what do you think?
Three weeks ago there was another warning that a terrorist strike might be imminent - On September 10, Newsweek has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns 'Bush: We're at War, Newsweek, 9/24/01'
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown admitted to having received a warning from what he described as his airport security late Monday evening, just hours before the attack.
I don't know how many threats they get a day, but seriously, before 9-11 would you really think that terrorists would hijack a plane AND use it as a weapon, not collateral to get what you want?
people were warned not to fly.
in the days after the attacks the bin ladens were flown out of the country when thousands of americans were stranded with no flights.
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
what good does it do to do the same thing i did, only with a different opinion? i think the only way we can argue this subject is by debating specific examples and presenting all sides equally. so, you are right. it is pointless to argue what was going through his mind. he has told us in interviews. he wanted to portray an act of 'calmness', and that is why he stayed and listened to the rest of the pet goat story. secondly, he said he saw the first plane hit on t.v. that is not possible unless they had prior knowledge and technology set up to see it. was it a slip of the tongue? maybe. what do you think?
Prob was a slip of the tongue, again you and I have the luxury of not being in that situation. Everyone on this board is so quick to show how bumbling and how stupid bush is and can't say anything right, but yet everyone picks this as his one instance of clarity? Besides, look at the psychological response to trauma and to terrible news, recall of events is not very reliable. Also, we always say the gov't is inept, yet supposedly at 9-11 this was supposed to be their moment of clarity where everything and everyone in the gov't (who are all human and subject to the shortcomings therein) does exactly what they are supposed to do. I'm sure in drills they screw up and that's when there is no danger...now we have complete chaos b/c no one knows what is going on and it's not a drill...don't forget the circumstances in which decisions were made etc...
The Tripod II Biowarfare Exercise,,The Alert II Terrorism Drill, The National Reconnaissance Office Plane Crash Drill, The Global Guardian Exercise, The Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian Training Exercises, Operation Northern Vigilance
those were war games that were in operation the morning of 9/11. all of them were related to highjackings, planes into buildings, and biowarfare.
coincidence, maybe. mass distraction, maybe. what do you think?
The only known source for the exercise named Vigilant Warrior is Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies. 3 It is possible that the exercise referred to by Clarke was actually Amalgam Warrior, a NORAD field training exercise involving life-fly air interception, held twice yearly, in the spring on the East Coast and the fall on the East Coast. 4
On the morning of the attack, a large-scale military training exercise called Global Guardian was "in full swing." Global Guardian is an annual exercise involving Stratcom (the US Strategic Command), the US Space Command, and NORAD http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/wargames.html
I realize the dates were changed...but again, with any huge even there are always coincidences.
my point with these is that some of these happen more than once. Also most of these have the roman numeral II, which in my line of thinking means the second which means that there must have been a first, so it's not like these never happen.
Three weeks ago there was another warning that a terrorist strike might be imminent - On September 10, Newsweek has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns 'Bush: We're at War, Newsweek, 9/24/01'
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown admitted to having received a warning from what he described as his airport security late Monday evening, just hours before the attack.
“How did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?” Bush replied, “I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower—the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there’s one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there, I didn’t have much time to think about it.”
“How did you feel when you heard about the terrorist attack?” Bush replied, “I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower—the TV was obviously on. And I used to fly, myself, and I said, well, there’s one terrible pilot. I said, it must have been a horrible accident. But I was whisked off there, I didn’t have much time to think about it.”
Weird slip ot the tongue.
yep, he said that on december 4th of that year...almost 3 months after the attacks...and countless times after seeing the attacks on tv, seeing them in briefings, etc... It's not like he said this on sept 11th and 12th. He mispoke plain and simple. I'm sure we all have mispoken at times. It happens.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
yep, he said that on december 4th of that year...almost 3 months after the attacks...and countless times after seeing the attacks on tv, seeing them in briefings, etc... It's not like he said this on sept 11th and 12th. He mispoke plain and simple. I'm sure we all have mispoken at times. It happens.
was it you who said how people around here rag on bush for being the worst speaker ever? (rightfully so, I think, the guy is a horrible speaker) but this particular time is a rare moment of clarity.
was it you who said how people around here rag on bush for being the worst speaker ever? (rightfully so, I think, the guy is a horrible speaker) but this particular time is a rare moment of clarity.
it was, but i'm sure the conspiracy theorists have some story to justify that he should have perfect recall about this event. I mean c'mon people, he was a
C student in college...how can you expect him to remember stuff from 3 months prior? He's an idiot. He says nucular for cryin' out loud. You have to throw all of those presuppositions out of the window in order to believe he was responsible.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
Obvious he knew before? based on what? that he didnt jump up and scream in front of some young children, AMERICA IS UDER ATTACK GET UNDER YOUR DESKS! would that have been acceptable? or then you would say its obvious he was acting, trying to pretend he didnt know. simply amazes me that someone would believe that.
Based on his account of the day and his reaction to Card informing him, some of us are more informed on this subject than you might assume.
I'm amazed that you believe every word that comes out of this corrupt administration that has documented credibility issues.
yep, he said that on december 4th of that year...almost 3 months after the attacks...and countless times after seeing the attacks on tv, seeing them in briefings, etc... It's not like he said this on sept 11th and 12th. He mispoke plain and simple. I'm sure we all have mispoken at times. It happens.
That is alot of clarity and specifics for a simple mispeak, IMO. The guy is either lying or makes up little fantasy stories in his head. I dont know which would be worse.
But let's face it,Americans have become the laughing stock of the world with these conspiracy theories.
I'd say they've become the laughing stock of the world because they have a deceitful administration feeding them crap and they still swallow, instead of taking serious actions against it.
And in regard to the topic, it's quite strange to have your country under attack and keep reading a kids book in a class room. "Sorry kids the president is off to handle a matter of national security" would be appropriate, he is the leader of the country and should be on top of the suituation. Arguements that he was in shock or these events are planned in advance are no excuse for his (non-)reaction.
How could he NOT remember the worst day in recent memory?
Could the hacks get any more apologetic for this guy?
just to clarify, we are discussing why he mispoke 3 months after the fact re: seeing planes on tv before going into a classroom. I'm guessing that he saw video footage of that roughly, every day about 5 times a day. Oh wait, that's how often i saw it; i'm sure he, not being general public saw it many more times. Keep reaching. If you want him to be responsible for it and it makes you guys feel better, then by all means you can assign him blame.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
That is alot of clarity and specifics for a simple mispeak, IMO. The guy is either lying or makes up little fantasy stories in his head. I dont know which would be worse.
he's either lying, making up stories, or got something out of order...you have to acknowledge that is a possibility. He was at a fundraiser and he was on stage; he's a politician and wants to come across strong...someone asked him a question he answered it, my guess is rather hastily (he is a poor public speaker, remember??) and gave an answer. So you think he was lying because he got a something out of order by about 10 minutes???? If he would have said those words before the attacks...I'd be on the bandwagon with you. The simple fact is this was said 3 months after the attacks. let me ask you did you put your socks on first or your pants on first 3 months ago? If you get it wrong you are a deliberate liar...that's how this argument seems to be going. I realize the gravity of the situations is different but sheesh, think of context and if you want to believe he did it (which by your options given in your above quote, that leaves little doubt in my mind) then go ahead.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
he's either lying, making up stories, or got something out of order...you have to acknowledge that is a possibility. He was at a fundraiser and he was on stage; he's a politician and wants to come across strong...someone asked him a question he answered it, my guess is rather hastily (he is a poor public speaker, remember??) and gave an answer. So you think he was lying because he got a something out of order by about 10 minutes???? If he would have said those words before the attacks...I'd be on the bandwagon with you. The simple fact is this was said 3 months after the attacks. let me ask you did you put your socks on first or your pants on first 3 months ago? If you get it wrong you are a deliberate liar...that's how this argument seems to be going. I realize the gravity of the situations is different but sheesh, think of context and if you want to believe he did it (which by your options given in your above quote, that leaves little doubt in my mind) then go ahead.
I remember exactly where I was and what I saw that morning. I also remember my reaction and actions when I saw it. I also saw the footage ten thousand times over the next three months but i didnt decide to make up a fantasy scenario where everything was different. Like I said, he is either lying or crazy. Or maybe pandering for empathy not knowing a film of him sitting on his ass reading would come out later. (I always put my socks on before my pants just FYI !)
I remember exactly where I was and what I saw that morning. I also remember my reaction and actions when I saw it. I also saw the footage ten thousand times over the next three months but i didnt decide to make up a fantasy scenario where everything was different. Like I said, he is either lying or crazy. Or maybe pandering for empathy not knowing a film of him sitting on his ass reading would come out later. (I always put my socks on before my pants just FYI !)
Good, I'm glad you can, which doesn't mean everyone can. How is it a fantasy situation where everything was different? He said he was at the school, he said he saw the planes hit it; he switched it around. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt re: the sitation and you are not... odds are we'll never know, but I'll be the first to say I'm wrong if it's PROVEN he knew about it a priori.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
i ask those who support bush...would REAGAN or BUSH SR. or (insert your fave repub. prez) or CLINTON have sat there while our nation was under attack? hell no! they would have gotten up off their asses and acted presidential. W didn't because, well, he ain't that good at his job.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have not done anything that morning. I would hvae liked to have seen him excuse himself and take care of things.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
your last point is what i've been thinking about a lot. I mean, can you imagine the thoughts going through his mind...esp I'm sure he had been presented with purely hypothetical examples of planes being hijacked...but what are the odds this terrorist attack would come to fruition. I don't know how many threats they get a day, but seriously, before 9-11 would you really think that terrorists would hijack a plane AND use it as a weapon, not collateral to get what you want? I prob woulda crapped my pants if someone had told me that america had been attacked in that manner and now I'm the man who's got to get us through this.
Yeah because no one ever suggested that terrorists might hi-jack planes and fly them into WTC.....oh, wait, they did.
Good, I'm glad you can, which doesn't mean everyone can. How is it a fantasy situation where everything was different? He said he was at the school, he said he saw the planes hit it; he switched it around. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt re: the sitation and you are not... odds are we'll never know, but I'll be the first to say I'm wrong if it's PROVEN he knew about it a priori.
I don't know a single person who doesn't remember exactly where they were and what they were doing when they first heard about the attacks, and when they first saw the footage. Although I suppose it wouldn't be all that surprising if our jackass of a presidential imposter was the one guy in all America who didn't immediately grasp the importance of what was happening.
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." ~ MLK, 1963
I don't know a single person who doesn't remember exactly where they were and what they were doing when they first heard about the attacks, and when they first saw the footage. Although I suppose it wouldn't be all that surprising if our jackass of a presidential imposter was the one guy in all America who didn't immediately grasp the importance of what was happening.
That's crap. Many people didn't grasp the importence immediately. It took quite a bit of time. Talking...'Did you hear about the plane?'...'Was it a small plane?'....'2 planes'....'What?'.....
It didn't just hit everyone at the same moment...but everyone had that moment at some point once they knew exactly what had happened.
let me ask you did you put your socks on first or your pants on first 3 months ago? If you get it wrong you are a deliberate liar...
I always put my pants on before my socks. Wanna know why? Because I tend to make logical decisions. Should something happen and you can't finish getting dressed it's gonna be far more beneficial to be sockless than pantless. So, now that we've established the fact that I tend to make logical decisions, let's make the assumption that I can recognize logic. Otherwise, how would I be able to make logical decisions, right? So, having now established that I have the ability to recognize logic, I can assure you that it's entirely logical to believe the president had prior knowledge of the attacks. Thank you and goodnight.
I remember exactly where I was and what I saw that morning. I also remember my reaction and actions when I saw it.
Easy explanation for this flywallyfly - The attacks were a very shocking surprise to you. If you had known they were going to happen they wouldn't have made nearly the impact on your memory....hence king george's confusion on the subject. In his mind, I'm sure it was just another pushing of the red button.
Easy explanation for this flywallyfly - The attacks were a very shocking surprise to you. If you had known they were going to happen they wouldn't have made nearly the impact on your memory....hence king george's confusion on the subject. In his mind, I'm sure it was just another pushing of the red button.
Good point. Plus I dont need to lie about that day. Facts are easy when you are telling the truth.
Yeah because no one ever suggested that terrorists might hi-jack planes and fly them into WTC.....oh, wait, they did.
which goes back to my previous statement, admitting that and expanding on that idea by saying ego got in the way and seriously, before 911, who would have thought the threat would have come to fruition...they get terrorist threats everyday.
make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
which goes back to my previous statement, admitting that and expanding on that idea by saying ego got in the way and seriously, before 911, who would have thought the threat would have come to fruition...they get terrorist threats everyday.
how much have you researched on the warnings they received?
why were some people told not to fly that day?
foreknowledge, because they were warned. if it was enough to stop a few key players, it should have been enough to stop the whole fucking thing.
you're a real hooker. im gonna slap you in public.
~Ron Burgundy
Comments
both sides of this thread are like the far right and the far left, extremely opposite and illogical.
it is logical that he wouldn't 'jump up and scream', but bush's excuse is that he wanted to portray a feeling of 'calmness'. I interpret that as he didn't want to scare the kids. okay, but he could have calmly left the room and informed the kids he had some business to do. do you honestly think those kids would have freaked out if he did something along those lines?
im not president, but it seems common sense that if the country i was in charge of was under attack, i would have acted differently. it makes him look ridiculously incompetent, or seriously sinister.
~Ron Burgundy
and I'm pretty sure if he had it to do again, he prob would act differently. He made a choice to stay and have other people keep him informed about it; it's not a wrong choice or a right choice...He used the chain of command and delegated...yes, most would agree that he could have made something up to get out of the classroom, and perhaps should have...but it's not like if he would have left the other things wouldn't have happened. I think this whole argument that keeps getting brought up really does nothing to solve any problems; it merely serves to distract, polarize and infuriate.
its easy to say after the fact what he should or shouldnt have done. I have no idea what I would have done. I believe he had no prior knowledge of the atacks. with that said, can you imagine what was going on in his head. america has been attacked like that on its mainland ever.
to say he knew something based on his actions when he was told is ridiculous and a pointless argument really. chopitdown is right, he probably would have acted differently would anything have changed that day if he did? no.
your last point is what i've been thinking about a lot. I mean, can you imagine the thoughts going through his mind...esp I'm sure he had been presented with purely hypothetical examples of planes being hijacked...but what are the odds this terrorist attack would come to fruition. I don't know how many threats they get a day, but seriously, before 9-11 would you really think that terrorists would hijack a plane AND use it as a weapon, not collateral to get what you want? I prob woulda crapped my pants if someone had told me that america had been attacked in that manner and now I'm the man who's got to get us through this.
I know. its easy for everyone to say, he should have done this, I would have done this. its complete bullshit
what good does it do to do the same thing i did, only with a different opinion? i think the only way we can argue this subject is by debating specific examples and presenting all sides equally. so, you are right. it is pointless to argue what was going through his mind. he has told us in interviews. he wanted to portray an act of 'calmness', and that is why he stayed and listened to the rest of the pet goat story. secondly, he said he saw the first plane hit on t.v. that is not possible unless they had prior knowledge and technology set up to see it. was it a slip of the tongue? maybe. what do you think?
The Tripod II Biowarfare Exercise,,The Alert II Terrorism Drill, The National Reconnaissance Office Plane Crash Drill, The Global Guardian Exercise, The Vigilant Warrior and Vigilant Guardian Training Exercises, Operation Northern Vigilance
those were war games that were in operation the morning of 9/11. all of them were related to highjackings, planes into buildings, and biowarfare.
coincidence, maybe. mass distraction, maybe. what do you think?
Three weeks ago there was another warning that a terrorist strike might be imminent - On September 10, Newsweek has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns 'Bush: We're at War, Newsweek, 9/24/01'
San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown admitted to having received a warning from what he described as his airport security late Monday evening, just hours before the attack.
http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml
Salman Rushdie, who is under the continuous protection of Scotland Yard, was prevented from flying on September 11th, 2001
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/sept11/londontimes_rushdieairban.htm
these are just a few of the many people who were warned.
people were warned not to fly.
in the days after the attacks the bin ladens were flown out of the country when thousands of americans were stranded with no flights.
~Ron Burgundy
Prob was a slip of the tongue, again you and I have the luxury of not being in that situation. Everyone on this board is so quick to show how bumbling and how stupid bush is and can't say anything right, but yet everyone picks this as his one instance of clarity? Besides, look at the psychological response to trauma and to terrible news, recall of events is not very reliable. Also, we always say the gov't is inept, yet supposedly at 9-11 this was supposed to be their moment of clarity where everything and everyone in the gov't (who are all human and subject to the shortcomings therein) does exactly what they are supposed to do. I'm sure in drills they screw up and that's when there is no danger...now we have complete chaos b/c no one knows what is going on and it's not a drill...don't forget the circumstances in which decisions were made etc...
The only known source for the exercise named Vigilant Warrior is Richard Clarke's book, Against All Enemies. 3 It is possible that the exercise referred to by Clarke was actually Amalgam Warrior, a NORAD field training exercise involving life-fly air interception, held twice yearly, in the spring on the East Coast and the fall on the East Coast. 4
On the morning of the attack, a large-scale military training exercise called Global Guardian was "in full swing." Global Guardian is an annual exercise involving Stratcom (the US Strategic Command), the US Space Command, and NORAD http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/defense/wargames.html
I realize the dates were changed...but again, with any huge even there are always coincidences.
my point with these is that some of these happen more than once. Also most of these have the roman numeral II, which in my line of thinking means the second which means that there must have been a first, so it's not like these never happen.
in re: to the bin ladens http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
Weird slip ot the tongue.
yep, he said that on december 4th of that year...almost 3 months after the attacks...and countless times after seeing the attacks on tv, seeing them in briefings, etc... It's not like he said this on sept 11th and 12th. He mispoke plain and simple. I'm sure we all have mispoken at times. It happens.
was it you who said how people around here rag on bush for being the worst speaker ever? (rightfully so, I think, the guy is a horrible speaker) but this particular time is a rare moment of clarity.
it was, but i'm sure the conspiracy theorists have some story to justify that he should have perfect recall about this event. I mean c'mon people, he was a
C student in college...how can you expect him to remember stuff from 3 months prior? He's an idiot. He says nucular for cryin' out loud. You have to throw all of those presuppositions out of the window in order to believe he was responsible.
Could the hacks get any more apologetic for this guy?
Based on his account of the day and his reaction to Card informing him, some of us are more informed on this subject than you might assume.
I'm amazed that you believe every word that comes out of this corrupt administration that has documented credibility issues.
That is alot of clarity and specifics for a simple mispeak, IMO. The guy is either lying or makes up little fantasy stories in his head. I dont know which would be worse.
And in regard to the topic, it's quite strange to have your country under attack and keep reading a kids book in a class room. "Sorry kids the president is off to handle a matter of national security" would be appropriate, he is the leader of the country and should be on top of the suituation. Arguements that he was in shock or these events are planned in advance are no excuse for his (non-)reaction.
just to clarify, we are discussing why he mispoke 3 months after the fact re: seeing planes on tv before going into a classroom. I'm guessing that he saw video footage of that roughly, every day about 5 times a day. Oh wait, that's how often i saw it; i'm sure he, not being general public saw it many more times. Keep reaching. If you want him to be responsible for it and it makes you guys feel better, then by all means you can assign him blame.
he's either lying, making up stories, or got something out of order...you have to acknowledge that is a possibility. He was at a fundraiser and he was on stage; he's a politician and wants to come across strong...someone asked him a question he answered it, my guess is rather hastily (he is a poor public speaker, remember??) and gave an answer. So you think he was lying because he got a something out of order by about 10 minutes???? If he would have said those words before the attacks...I'd be on the bandwagon with you. The simple fact is this was said 3 months after the attacks. let me ask you did you put your socks on first or your pants on first 3 months ago? If you get it wrong you are a deliberate liar...that's how this argument seems to be going. I realize the gravity of the situations is different but sheesh, think of context and if you want to believe he did it (which by your options given in your above quote, that leaves little doubt in my mind) then go ahead.
I remember exactly where I was and what I saw that morning. I also remember my reaction and actions when I saw it. I also saw the footage ten thousand times over the next three months but i didnt decide to make up a fantasy scenario where everything was different. Like I said, he is either lying or crazy. Or maybe pandering for empathy not knowing a film of him sitting on his ass reading would come out later. (I always put my socks on before my pants just FYI !)
Good, I'm glad you can, which doesn't mean everyone can. How is it a fantasy situation where everything was different? He said he was at the school, he said he saw the planes hit it; he switched it around. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt re: the sitation and you are not... odds are we'll never know, but I'll be the first to say I'm wrong if it's PROVEN he knew about it a priori.
I'm not saying he shouldn't have not done anything that morning. I would hvae liked to have seen him excuse himself and take care of things.
That's crap. Many people didn't grasp the importence immediately. It took quite a bit of time. Talking...'Did you hear about the plane?'...'Was it a small plane?'....'2 planes'....'What?'.....
It didn't just hit everyone at the same moment...but everyone had that moment at some point once they knew exactly what had happened.
Good point. Plus I dont need to lie about that day. Facts are easy when you are telling the truth.
which goes back to my previous statement, admitting that and expanding on that idea by saying ego got in the way and seriously, before 911, who would have thought the threat would have come to fruition...they get terrorist threats everyday.
how much have you researched on the warnings they received?
why were some people told not to fly that day?
foreknowledge, because they were warned. if it was enough to stop a few key players, it should have been enough to stop the whole fucking thing.
~Ron Burgundy