Bush Weighs 9/11 Panel's Ideas as Pressure Builds

T

tekkmortal

Active Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2003
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
0
Bush Weighs 9/11 Panel's Ideas as Pressure Builds
Sat Jul 24, 2004 11:44 AM ET
By Caren Bohan

CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - As pressure built for swift U.S. government action on the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations to avert another terror attack, President Bush said on Saturday he wanted to "carefully examine" the ideas before deciding how to proceed.

Lawmakers rushed to respond to the panel's findings, announcing rare August recess hearings, as Sept. 11 commission Chairman Thomas Kean warned that security experts expect an al Qaeda attack on American soil and that "time is not on our side."

Kean said on Friday security experts believe militants will try to use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons, and added that if Congress and the president delayed making changes they would be held responsible by the American people.

The commission recommended sweeping changes to U.S. intelligence operations and how the government fights terrorism when it issued its final report on Thursday on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

In his weekly radio address, Bush acknowledged that the country still faces grave threats, although he said changes he had already undertaken to reorganize the government -- including creating a Homeland Security department -- had helped make the country safer.

Yet, he said, "no matter how good our defenses are, a determined enemy can still strike us."

"CAREFULLY EXAMINE" COMMISSION IDEAS

Bush did not specifically discuss the Sept. 11 commission's central recommendations of a new government position to oversee all intelligence agencies and the creation of a counterterrorism center.

But he said, "We will carefully examine all the commission's ideas on how we can improve our ongoing efforts to protect America and to prevent another attack."

The commission's recommendations "will help guide our efforts as we work to protect the homeland," he added.

The president, who is spending this week at his Texas ranch, has instructed White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card to coordinate the study of the commission's recommendations, but he has been given no specific deadline.

The 10-member commission's report found "deep institutional failings" and missed opportunities to thwart the attacks that killed almost 3,000 people in 2001.

In the immediate aftermath of the report's release, many officials in both the administration and Congress initially played down the prospect of any major action prior to the Nov. 2 U.S. election. But Kean and the other commissioners have pledged to spend the summer and fall lobbying officials to act as swiftly as possible.

Senate leaders said on Friday they hoped to have a bipartisan bill ready by Oct. 1 addressing the commission's recommendation to name a national intelligence director and create a new counterterrorism center.
 
*scoffs*
The 911 Committee was a whitewash.
They were in effect investigating themselves, so of course they will lie, aka the Warren Commission with the JFK assassination.
This reminds me of referees at a football game chockful of penalties being totally ignored, and after the game the referees say that the teams ought to be ashamed of themselves.
Phooey.

In his interview with Parade Magazine, Oct. 12, 2001 (with Lyric Wallwork Winik), Rumsfeld ADMITS that a missile hit the Pentagon, not an airliner.
"...It's a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend it every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, AND THE MISSILE TO DAMAGE THIS BUILDING and SIMILAR (inaudible) THAT DAMAGED THE WORLD TRADE CENTER. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them..."

Well, we do not have to look far, now do we?
Phooey.
 
Beowulf said:
In his interview with Parade Magazine, Oct. 12, 2001 (with Lyric Wallwork Winik), Rumsfeld ADMITS that a missile hit the Pentagon, not an airliner.
"...It's a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend it every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, AND THE MISSILE TO DAMAGE THIS BUILDING and SIMILAR (inaudible) THAT DAMAGED THE WORLD TRADE CENTER...."
Click to expand...
Rumsfeld did not admit a missile hit the Pentagon. If you read the sentence carefully, you will see that he is referring to the plane itself as a missile. A "missile" is any projectile used as an airborne weapon. A plane that is flown into a building with the intent of destroying that building is a "missile". Arrows and darts are missiles.
 
Reba said:
Rumsfeld did not admit a missile hit the Pentagon. If you read the sentence carefully, you will see that he is referring to the plane itself as a missile. A "missile" is any projectile used as an airborne weapon. A plane that is flown into a building with the intent of destroying that building is a "missile". Arrows and darts are missiles.
Click to expand...

Get real. He did use the word "missile" and he made a seperate reference to airliners. I think he can speak for himself without anyone hastening to interpret his meanings. It was no arrow or dart that hit the Pentagon, it was a missile and anyone with an IQ above room temperature can clearly see that from all the overwhelming evidence. He would not call a huge 747 a measly missile. It was a measly missile that hit the Pentagon and caused such neat, limited damage, and where can you see ANY SHRED of a jetliner in the area?
Jeeeez, it is said that if a lie if repeated often enough, people will start believing it, but the truth is more powerful than a measly missile.
Missile.
I am not letting this go, ooga booga.
Missile.
 
Last edited:
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2001/t11182001_t1012pm.html

I went to the interview and read it again. There is nothing in the interview to indicate that Rumsfeld said a missile hit the Pentagon. In fact, the interviewer just went on to the next question. Doesn't it seem logical that if Rumsfeld had made such a shocking statement about a missile attack, the interviewer would have followed up with more questions? The interview was widely read by thousands of people but no one else seemed to interpret that statement as being a declaration that a missile hit the Pentagon.

Sigh....I did not say an arrow or dart hit the Pentagon. I was explaining the meaning of the word "missile". Not every "missile" is an ICBM, Cruise, Patriot, etc. An airliner can be used as a missile.

If you really believe the Pentagon was attacked by a missile, where did the missile come from? What kind was this "measly" missile? What happened to the plane and the people onboard? The plane and its wreckage were imbedded thru 5 rings of recently reinforced concrete walls at about 350 mph; what did you expect to see, tail and wings sticking out?

What is the "overwhelming evidence" that you have?

it is said that if a lie if repeated often enough, people will start believing it
Click to expand...

Is that what you are trying to do?

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
 
Last edited:
p.s.
I paid $7.64 (including tax) for the commission's 9/11 book, softcover, at Books-A-Million at the mall, so it is not very expensive.
 
I haven't read the book yet -- it's being sold for $10 per book..that's in AUD, so it's not too bad. ;) Would be nice to find out what happened and learn more in depth of the process of how it was done and how the government and President Bush started the ball rolling in building up a defence against terrorism, etc.
I'm not very keen on Bush -- just hope that he'll be ousted from the Oval Office this November!
 
PurpleRose71 said:
I'm not very keen on Bush -- just hope that he'll be ousted from the Oval Office this November!
Click to expand...
In the U.S. we don't "oust" our presidents; we have elections. :)
I truly want President Bush re-elected!
 
Cheri said:
And I Don't! :ty:
Click to expand...


I am with you Cheri.. hes gone enough with 9/11 and iraqi and more. He sent so many soldiers to overseas and half of them never came home. Now, my friend's son is going to Iraqi. He came home last Dec 2003, now he have go back. God! I wish her son would say NO bec he went once that's enuff. No more Bush.. I am tired of his bs.. :madfawk:
 
Beowulf said:
He said missile.
I am not the only one who can read.
Click to expand...
I don't want to be cruel, but you really need to brush up on your critical reading skills. The word "missile" has more than one meaning, and Rumsfeld was obviously using it in the generic sense, describing how the plane was used as a missile.

Here's a new site...and there are thousands, that ought to tell you something.
http://www.thepowerhour.com/911_analysis/report.htm
Click to expand...
Yes, it tells me that there are a lot of people in this world who enjoy designing websites around conspiracy theories. I went to the site, looked at the photos, and read the text. Nothing new there.

If you really believe your version of what happened, you should be willing to answer my questions. I will try one more time.

1. If it wasn't Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon building, what exactly did hit the building?

2. If Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, what happened to the plane, crew, and passengers? Where did they go?

3. Radar tracks show the route of Flight 77 leading to the Pentagon. If it didn't hit the building, where did it go?

4. What would be the reason for the government and witnesses to lie about the plane hitting the Pentagon?

5. If Flight 77 was fake, then does that mean the planes hitting the WTC and the Pennsylvania field were fake too? If not, how did all that happen on the same day?

6. Usually when a missile strikes the side of a building it penetrates then explodes upward and outward. The Pentagon walls and roof collapsed downward and inward. What kind of missile was it? What aircraft fired it?

7. A smaller plane could not carry as much fuel to cause such a large fireball. What caused the extensive fire in the Pentagon?

8. What makes these websites believable to you? Are the people behind them experts that you can trust? Do you know their backgrounds and associates?
 
Lianca said:
He sent so many soldiers to overseas and half of them never came home.
Click to expand...
Do you mean that half of the 130,000 soldiers died? That's not true.

Now, my friend's son is going to Iraqi. He came home last Dec 2003, now he have go back. God! I wish her son would say NO bec he went once that's enuff.
Click to expand...
I am sure that the family is not happy about that but remember her son volunteered to serve in the military. No one forced him to sign up.
 
Reba said:
Do you mean that half of the 130,000 soldiers died? That's not true.
Click to expand...


Well, Bush is going to KILL all of them anyway if he keep sending more men and women overseas!! Its enough.. Alot of kids lost their mommies and daddies bec of Bush!




Reba said:
I am sure that the family is not happy about that but remember her son volunteered to serve in the military. No one forced him to sign up.
Click to expand...


He CAME home recently. Why dont they give him a year break to be with his family? not like few months!!!!

I cannot wait to vote him OUT!! I have enough!
 
Lianca said:
Well, Bush is going to KILL all of them anyway if he keep sending more men and women overseas!!
Click to expand...
Now you know that isn't true.

Alot of kids lost their mommies and daddies bec of Bush!
Click to expand...
Of course that is tragic but it is not because of Bush. Put the blame where it belongs, on the terrorists and the people who support them.

Yes, it is very sad that so many wonderful soldiers have died protecting us. It is awful that they must spend time away from their families. But what do you want? Do you want them to quit fighting the terrorists overseas? Then we can sit here and wait for the war to happen in our own country. Then not only will our soldiers be in danger, but also our parents and children here will be in danger. Do you want the shooting to happen in Iraq or do you want it to happen in your back yard?
 
Lianca said:
I cannot wait to vote him OUT!! I have enough!
Click to expand...

Simply and powerfully said!

Dumbya, Crashcart and the whole PNAC crew just basically fucked up the Iraq war besides screwing loose with 9/11.

Now I'm using my voter card as a weapon against Dumbya and Crashcart this November 2nd and usher in Kerry and Edwards and clean up the huge stinking pile of elephant mess that was left behind!
 
Reba said:
I don't want to be cruel, but you really need to brush up on your critical reading skills. The word "missile" has more than one meaning, and Rumsfeld was obviously using it in the generic sense, describing how the plane was used as a missile.


Yes, it tells me that there are a lot of people in this world who enjoy designing websites around conspiracy theories. I went to the site, looked at the photos, and read the text. Nothing new there.

If you really believe your version of what happened, you should be willing to answer my questions. I will try one more time.

1. If it wasn't Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon building, what exactly did hit the building?

2. If Flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, what happened to the plane, crew, and passengers? Where did they go?

3. Radar tracks show the route of Flight 77 leading to the Pentagon. If it didn't hit the building, where did it go?

4. What would be the reason for the government and witnesses to lie about the plane hitting the Pentagon?

5. If Flight 77 was fake, then does that mean the planes hitting the WTC and the Pennsylvania field were fake too? If not, how did all that happen on the same day?

6. Usually when a missile strikes the side of a building it penetrates then explodes upward and outward. The Pentagon walls and roof collapsed downward and inward. What kind of missile was it? What aircraft fired it?

7. A smaller plane could not carry as much fuel to cause such a large fireball. What caused the extensive fire in the Pentagon?

8. What makes these websites believable to you? Are the people behind them experts that you can trust? Do you know their backgrounds and associates?
Click to expand...

I will try to answer your questions.
1) It was a missile.
2) That's what I want to know. Look at the site of impact. NO DEBRIS WHATSOEVER, just a tiny bit of damage. Where is the black box? We are to believe that EVERY MICROMETER OF THE PLANE VAPORIZED???
3) No one saw Flight 77. No one showed any evidence that it was on radar.
4) To rile public sentiment into going along with whatever they designed for post-911.
5) Not necessarily. You are trying to put assumptive words into my mouth. There are tapes of the jetliners at the WTC. No tapes except of the missile at the Pentagon.
6) If a huge jetliner hit the Pentagon, why was there so little damage? The missile hit at exact ground level, and it exploded inward as well as outward, so of course there was some structural collapse.
7) A missile. Come on now, look at the pictures and tapes of that fireball. It was not that HUGE. A Hellfire missile could easily do that. And witnesses in the area smelled cordite.
8) What makes the government so believable to you that you would believe THEM and not your lying eyes? That is ridiculous.
And finally, there are thousands of sites on this matter because the truth cannot be hidden forever. Where there's smoke, there's fire. The fire from a missile strike at the Pentagon for example.
Rumsfeld said "Missile." Leaders of other counties have said the same. Because they are absolutely correct.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with Lianca and the rest of the Supportive that doesn't support Bush....


Bush had lied way too many Times!
Purging Voters in Florida before Election 2000, Not protecting our country from and impeding an investigation of Sept. 11, and Lies to the Congress and the American people to justify an illegal War in Iraq,...Let's face it, now questioning why we ever went to war in Iraq in the first place? I never asked to have a war does he care what we think? Nope! there is no evidence to support that cause the 9/11 Damaged and people being Killed. Bush is not an expert on war. He doesn't even know what he is doing. he pretended 9/11 was the basis for invading Iraq, either due to alleged al Qaeda Links. This WAR in Iraq was needless and very costly. This president sent the American troops in unprepared and without an exit strategy!

My last piece on this is Bush, Go back to Crawford,Texas in November 2004!! :fingersx:
 
Back
Top