I don’t know. I only looked at the page content for the link I provided. But going back to look at the main page, I can see that most of the “hate” seems directed towards Bush. Is that the problem? As with anything on the net, you may agree with what is on a site and you may not. There are some viewpoints that I don’t agree with here either. I don’t get upset, I just ignore them and move on <shrug>…
iamme99: I looked at your link, and I have to say the author sounds rather shrill. Not only that, but he seems to be using “20/20 hindsight”. Of course we can see events bettrer after they happened!
He makes much of the FACT ( :rolleyes: ) that there were interception procedures in-place prior to 9/11. This is true. But I have never heard of interceptions taking place, other than for training purposes, except under certain circumstances. We have the ADIZ (Air Defence Identification Zone) where aircraft may be intercepted if they enter it without a flight plan and prior notification. We also have Restricted Areas, Military Operations Areas (MAs), Warning Areas, and a whole bunch of other regulated airspace. Unless someone is flying in an ADIZ or a Restricted Area, I doubt that anyone would have been scrambled prior to 9/11. In fact, even violating a restricted area might not have resulted in scrambling jets. It’s easier and cheaper to just watch where the violator is going and catch him on the ground.
He also says:
Define “a moment’s notice”. Assuming the pilots are in a ready room, they would sprint to their aircraft. The aircraft have to be started. I’d assume the computers have to initialize. They’d have to get vectors to their targets (and possibly punch coordinates into their nav equipment) and taxi to the runway and take off. Granted, this can all happen pretty quickly; but it’s not as if there are pilots sitting in their cockpits with the engines running. And, again, who was prepared at the time to issue an order to shoot down a civilian airliner? There were lots of jets in the air that day. What if they shot down the wrong one? What if they shot down one or both of the jets that hit NYC when the aircraft were over Manhattan? Sure, the WTC could hve been saved; but at what cost on the ground?
But as I said, the author is stating his opinions with information that was not available at the time; i.e., that there would be an attack on 9/11/2001. It’s easy to criticize when you have information that was not available at the time.
I’m no fan of Duhbya, and there’s a lot for which he deserves blame; but I don’t think we can blame him for not intercepting the jets on 9/11.
Perhaps. But Bush’s ferver for mixing government and religion (via faith-based initiatives) and for public funding of religious schools (via vouchers) is very troubling and patently unconstitutional.
And the fact that Bush cares not one whit about this patent unconstitutionality is very troubling and causes people to worry tremendously about the slippery slope that he has put us on. Because history has shown over and over again that these type of things – even though they are but small steps – can lead to fundamentalist regimes.
Bush has managed to cause all of our nation’s Founding Fathers to spin in their graves – I guess that’s a leadership of sorts …
Well hell, there’s your problem. Bush runs the country like the CEO of a big corporation. When was the last time you heard of a CEO doing anything to benefit anyone but himself and his cronies?
Until another Democratic candidate wins the White House, I’m sure.
Yeah…That’s about where I am on this. (Frankly, I didn’t even bother to read the link because I doubted it was worth my time.) Hell, there are enough real things to blame Bush for without having to make arguments like this!
Generally, I don’t correct my typos; but just to be clear, Military Operations Areas are MOAs, and not MAs.
Are you dense? Regardless of what they may say about Bush, including “articles” about the Jewish conspiracy’s control of the media completely erases a site’s credibility.
This is a message board. People post their opinions here and others critique them. If they’re inflammatory, the moderators close threads and ban users. Rense.com is a web site. It has an editor (presumably) and a specific goal. They are responsible for the site’s content. There is a difference.
I suppose I could’ve ignored it, as you said, and passed it off as just another looney web site for UFO enthusiasts. But since it features anti-Semitic ravings and links to white supremacist sites it kind of, you know, ticks me off.
Leaving aside 95% of the OP (which was wacked, as usual…jets sitting on the tarmac with weapons and fuel, preped and ready to go? In what universe?) and focusing on the one decent question: Is Bush a good leader? I’d have to say that, IMO he is not. From my perspective Bush neither leads nor follows but kind of just does his own thing along with a small close circle of advisors. I think the time for leadership, both of the country and even to the world was when 9/11 happened. I’m no appeaser wanting America to check with every odd country out there for permission to do this or that, but I think a golden oppertunity was lost when Bush didn’t rally the world (or at least NATO) behind us for Afghanistan. I also think that, after that affront (which a good diplomat would NOT have blundered in) the follow up by going off tangent into Iraq really showed Bush at his worst.
So no…he’s not a good leader IMO. A good leader LEADS, but is mindful of those who are following him. Bush is not.
-XT
I only vote against people so Gore got my vote. I just watched Bush on TV for 10 minutes and wondered what was wrong with the Republicans.
The only reason I would vote for GWB for dog catcher is because it would be so much fun watching the dogs outsmart him.
Dal Timgar
Is Bush a leader? Yeah, I guess. So was Custer.
“We got 'em now, boys! Got all 1100 of 'em, riding around in a circle, all we gotta (ouch!) do now (mmmm, that stings!) is pick 'em off! (oooooof!..)”
The hell is wrong with you people? Objectively speaking, if the subject at hand is merely the question of Bush’s effectiveness as a leader, regardless of whether you agree about where he’s been leading us, then he gets high marks.
He wanted a massive (and irresponsible) tax cut. He got it.
He wanted to invade Iraq. He got it.
He wanted to marginalize the United Nations. He got it.
He wanted to push the judiciary to the right. Including his recess appointments, he’s getting what he wants.
And so on, and so forth. Look, I’m with those who say Bush’s policies are short-sighted, divisive, and ultimately destructive. I cannot wait to vote against these selfish bastards. But you cannot underestimate the power of the machine that has been assembled; it is focused, it is ruthless, and it has not yet encountered an obstacle into which it couldn’t at least put a huge dent, if not crush it entirely.
Forget “good” or “bad” as adjectives, for they carry much unrelated baggage. If you consider Bush as a leader, and use as your criteria what he has been able to accomplish, then he’s a freakin’ juggernaut.
Just goes to show - you can fool most of the people most of the time!
But a juggernaut with mounting credibility issues even within his own party:
Yours is certainly a different perspective on leadership... but you answer the issue yourself when you say "machine that has been assembled". Bush is not leading anymore... the machine around him is and his cabinet people are taking him for the ride. Passengers are not leaders.I just hope our next president apologizes to the rest of the world for GW’s irresponsible behavior. If I were to visit a foreign country tomorrow, I would certainly be hesitant to say I am an American.