# Liberal hypocrisy--criticizing Bush for the war, and for not preventing 9/11 **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 23, 2003, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425 "2003-07-23T17:43:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/1 "2003-07-23T17:43:16Z")
Why do the same people who critcize the government for being too SLOW to act on vague intelligence info before Sept 11, also criticize the government for being to QUICK to act on vague intelligence after Sept 11? The quality of the intelligence before Sept 11 was very indefinite–a few vague rumors, one report filed by a junior agent in Arizona, a few suspicious characters, but no definite data. And yet the liberals are salivating at the smell of blood, anxious to investigate how this terrible lapse of intelligence happened, and to fire the Republicans who “should” have seen it coming. Contrast to Iraqi weapons: also vague rumors, but backed up by LOTS of suspicous activity–purchases of aluminum fuel rods, satellite photos of chemical protection vehicles and body suits, radio intercepts of officers hiding something quickly before UN inspectors arrive.True, this info does not prove the existance of chemical weapons, no smoking gun. But it’s all a lot more concrete evidence than we had about the Sept 11 attacks. So if liberals were opposed to the war, at least there were respectable reasons. But how can the same people demand an investigation into the failure of intelligence before Sept. 11? If you think the vague evidence then was sufficient to warn of a terror attack, why isnt the known evidence from Iraq sufficient reason for good people to act to prevent terror weapons being used again? ---
**Author:** ![Eva\_Luna](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e495f1/32.png) [@Eva\_Luna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eva_Luna)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/2 "2003-07-23T17:51:21Z")
Ummmm, cite? I haven’t seen any situations in which the same individuals who criticize Bush for civil liberties violations blame him for not preventing the 9/11 attacks. Not all liberals think the same way; really, we’re not interchangeable. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/3 "2003-07-23T17:51:48Z")
Bill Clinto really must be commended-he was able to duck all criticism for 9/11. The fact is, he was provided with many clear warnings about the intentions of OBL and Al Queda. The bombimg of the US embassy in Kenya, and the attack on the USS COLE happened on his watch-and he allowed Al Queda toescape scot-free. Why this man (Clinton) has never been called to task forhis stupifying incompetance is something I don’tunderstand! ---
**Author:** ![Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de053/32.png) [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackknifed_Juggernaut)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/4 "2003-07-23T17:57:51Z")
I haven’t heard too many liberals blame Bush for 9/11. If anything, our intelligence agencies were blamed. As for the Iraq war, Bush is blamed because he made the decision. I fail to see any hypocrisy. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/5 "2003-07-23T18:06:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ralph124c \* > \*\*Why this man (Clinton) has never been called to task forhis stupifying incompetance is something I don’tunderstand! \*\* Maybe it’s because he _hasn’t been president for almost three years_, and flogging him for it at this time sounds like pointless whining. ---
**Author:** ![Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/9de053/32.png) [@Jackknifed\_Juggernaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackknifed_Juggernaut)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/6 "2003-07-23T18:06:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ralph124c \* > \*\*Bill Clinto really must be commended-he was able to duck all criticism for 9/11. The fact is, he was provided with many clear warnings about the intentions of OBL and Al Queda. The bombimg of the US embassy in Kenya, and the attack on the USS COLE happened on his watch-and he allowed Al Queda toescape scot-free. > Why this man (Clinton) has never been called to task forhis stupifying incompetance is something I don’tunderstand! \*\* Uh yeah. And maybe if Bush didn’t take that 2-month vacation immediately after his inauguration, 9/11 could’ve been prevented. At least Clinton tried to eliminate OBL (remember when everyone accused him of wagging the dog?) What the heck did Bush do in his first 8 months besides smiling for the camera and taking “breaks” at his ranch? ---
**Author:** ![Achernar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e274bd/32.png) [@Achernar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Achernar)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/7 "2003-07-23T18:28:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chappachula \* > If you think the vague evidence then was sufficient to warn of a terror attack, why isnt the known evidence from Iraq sufficient reason for good people to act to prevent terror weapons being used again? I don’t know what actions could have been taken based on intelligence before the terror attack, but I imagine that whatever they are, it’s _not_ tantamount to going to war That’s the big thing, in my estimation. Tightening security at an airport (or whatever people have in mind) is something that you can do with little intelligence and not cause much more harm than good. Starting a war is not. ---
**Author:** ![minty\_green](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f6c823/32.png) [@minty\_green](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/minty_green)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/8 "2003-07-23T18:32:03Z")
9/11 criticism: Intelligence was misinterpreted, ignored, and unrecognized. Iraq war criticism: Intelligence was misinterpreted, ignored, and fabricated. So, where exactly is the alleged hypocricy here? ---
**Author:** ![hilltopper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c68b51/32.png) [@hilltopper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hilltopper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/9 "2003-07-23T18:37:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chappachula \* > \*\* > Contrast to Iraqi weapons: also vague rumors, but backed up by LOTS of suspicous activity–purchases of aluminum fuel rods, satellite photos of chemical protection vehicles and body suits, radio intercepts of officers hiding something quickly before UN inspectors arrive.True, this info does not prove the existance of chemical weapons, no smoking gun. But it’s all a lot more concrete evidence than we had about the Sept 11 attacks. > > So if liberals were opposed to the war, at least there were respectable reasons. But how can the same people demand an investigation into the failure of intelligence before Sept. 11? If you think the vague evidence then was sufficient to warn of a terror attack, why isnt the known evidence from Iraq sufficient reason for good people to act to prevent terror weapons being used again? \*\* Many who opposed the war don’t doubt that SH is a bad guy or even that he may have had/been trying to get WMD. War was not the only solution. There were plenty of non-war options out there. i.e. inspectors, squeezing the no-fly zone, etc. IMO whiile under the microscope it is unlikly SH whould have deployed WMD against us. So while I opposed the war I was not opposed to taking actions that would have protected us. ---
**Author:** ![Sofa\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/58956e/32.png) [@Sofa\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sofa_King)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/10 "2003-07-23T18:41:48Z")
Look, man. I’m one of those guys who are doing both. Unlike your straw man, however, I have a very simple, very real reason why I _partially_ blame Bush for 9/11. We had [three _vague_ sightings](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/2020/predator030624.html) of Osama bin Laden outside of his bunkers in Afghanistan in 2000 using Predator drones. When October came around, the drones were grounded due to high winter winds. During the hiatus, someone came up with the bright idea to arm the Predators themselves. The Bush administration never put them back up. There are indications that one reason why is because [the new kids couldn’t figure out whose job it was to kill bin Laden](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/attack/main560293.shtml). We _already knew_ that Osama bin Laden was a number one terrorist target–he’d blown up a U.S. barracks, two consulates and a frigate. Clinton’s leave-behind guy made it a priority to fully communicate the ongoing hit mission to the new intelligence team. Bush–meaning his intelligence people for whom the President is responsible–didn’t pursue it. You can argue all you want about how successful further flights _might_ have been, but you can’t deny that they didn’t happen at all. I consider that to be incompetent. I also consider it to be pretty effing hypocritical of conservatives to argue that the Bush administration scrubbed the bin Laden hit because the evidence was vague while simultaneously _providing false evidence to Congress_ to support a war about as justifiable as [either](http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/) of [these](http://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/1898/). I very much want to hunt down and kill international terrorists. I have yet to be convinced that knocking over Iraq supports that mission _at all_. Hence my hypocrisy, and thank you very much. ---
**Author:** ![hilltopper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c68b51/32.png) [@hilltopper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hilltopper)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/11 "2003-07-23T18:59:00Z")
TIME Magazine is the first US publication to investigate whether 9-11 could have been prevented. According to Time, the Clinton administration’s counter-terrorism czar on the National Security Council, Richard Clarke, presented Condi Rice with a plan to attack Al Qaeda during special transition briefings in the first week of January 2001. Condi IGNORED this plan - and urgent warnings from her predecessor, Sandy Berger - until late April 2001. And despite continued warnings from Clarke and CIA director George Tenet (both held over from the Clinton team), Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell and Ashcroft did not review the plan until 9-4-01. Why not? Because terrorism was NOT a priority for Team Bush, which was focused on creating an Oil-ogopoly (Cheney), Military dictatorship (Rumsfeld), and a Christian Theocratic Police State (Ashcroft). Many Security Council meetings had been held, but the topic of terrorism was only address twice up until 9/11. ---
**Author:** ![kwildcat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e5b9ba/32.png) [@kwildcat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kwildcat)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/12 "2003-07-23T19:12:30Z")
The thread topic is inherently incendiary. “Hypocrisy” is an explicit judgement before people’s opinions have even been considered. The two issues, 9/11 and Iraq II, have relatively little in common save the fact that most of the players are the same. Hypocrisy therefore does not apply. It seems to me that the thread’s author is irritated by the act of criticism of the administration. The fact that criticism is applied across so many different issues might indeed be perceived as general contrariness or blanket anti-Bush ideology, hence devoid of merit and “hypocritical”. Or it might be perceived as steadily growing evidence that our nation’s policymakers are grotesquely divorced from reality and have an unblemished record of screwing up. Bottom line is our system of government is dependent upon criticism in all its forms, both reasoned and visceral. If the critique happens to all come from the same place, rather than villify it, why not try to see if it contains some truth? ---
**Author:** ![Roger\_Mexico](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f6c823/32.png) [@Roger\_Mexico](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roger_Mexico)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/13 "2003-07-23T23:14:34Z")
It is clear that someone high up in the Bushevik hierarchy actively suppressed the FBI field agents investigations of terrorists in the US just prior to 9-11. Colleen Rowley’s supervisor, Dave Frasca, who sabotage her investigation, got a promotion afterwards, and her career is probably over. Who was the higherup who sabotage the FBI? My chief suspect is James Baker III. He is Chief Counsel for the DOJ’s Office of Intelligence Policy Review, where he would be in a position to suppress investigations. His many conflicts of interest include being on the board of the Carlyle Group and running his own law firm, Baker & Botts. Guess who his biggest client is right now? After victims of 9-11 sued the Saudi government, he is representing the Saudis! He should be hanged for treason. As for Iraq, there was never any credible intelligence that even suggested any links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. So any rational person would be critical of Bush for suppressing terrorist investigations, since they ultimately lead to his door, and for invading a country that had nothing to do with 9-11 and had cooperated fully with weapons inspectors for 10 years to the point that all the weapons were destroyed. There is no hypocrisy here on the part of liberals. There is just fascist, criminal insanity on the part of the Busheviks. Fire them all. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/14 "2003-07-23T23:23:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by chappachula \* > Contrast to Iraqi weapons: also vague rumors, but backed up by LOTS of suspicous activity–purchases of aluminum fuel rods, satellite photos of chemical protection vehicles and body suits, radio intercepts of officers hiding something quickly before UN inspectors arrive.True, this info does not prove the existance of chemical weapons, no smoking gun. But it’s all a lot more concrete evidence than we had about the Sept 11 attacks. If it’s so concrete, then where _are_ those WMDs? Hell, if it’s so concrete, why would the President need a [secret intelligence committee](http://www.utne.com/web_special/web_specials_2003-07/articles/10705-1.html) to **slant** the information they were getting from the CIA because it wasn’t incriminating enough? > [@](#): > > **Wolfowitz Committee Instructed White House To Use Iraq/Uranium Reference** > By Jason Leopold, Information Clearing House > > WASHINGTON, DC – A Pentagon committee led by Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, advised President Bush to include a reference in his January State of the Union address about Iraq trying to purchase 500 tons of uranium from Niger to bolster the case for war in Iraq, despite the fact that the CIA warned Wolfowitz’s committee that the information was unreliable, according to a CIA intelligence official and four members of the Senate’s intelligence committee who have been investigating the issue. > : > Patrick Lang, a former director of Middle East analysis at the Defense Intelligence Agency, said in an interview with the New Yorker magazine in May that the Office of Special Plans **"started picking out things that supported their thesis and stringing them into arguments** that they could use with the president. It’s not intelligence. It’s political propaganda." > : > By last fall, the White House had virtually **dismissed all of the intelligence on Iraq provided by the CIA,** which failed to find any evidence of Iraq’s weapons programs, in favor of the more critical information provided to the Bush administration by the Office of Special Plans. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2003, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/15 "2003-07-23T23:33:26Z")
Damn, if I’m gonna get any licks in, I’ll have to get here earlier. You guys have already kicked the living snot out of this. Now I’ll have sarcastic outrage constipation. “Bushiviks” Cool. I’ll steal that. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2003, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/16 "2003-07-24T02:03:50Z")
This just in: > **[White House 'delayed 9-11 report'](https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2003/07/25/White-House-delayed-9-11-report/94911059178258/)** > > The report of the joint congressional inquiry into the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to be published Thursday, reveals U.S. intelligence had no evidence that the regime of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was involved in the suicide hijackings that... "The report of the joint congressional inquiry into the suicide hijackings on Sept. 11, 2001, to be published Thursday, reveals U.S. intelligence had no evidence that the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, or that it had supported al-Qaida, United Press International has learned. “The report shows there is no link between Iraq and al-Qaida,” said a government official who has seen the report. Former Democratic Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, who was a member of the joint congressional committee that produced the report, confirmed the official’s statement. Asked whether he believed the report will reveal that there was no connection between al-Qaida and Iraq, Cleland replied: “I do … There’s no connection, and that’s been confirmed by some of (al-Qaida leader Osama) bin Laden’s terrorist followers.” The revelation is likely to embarrass the Bush administration, which made links between Saddam’s support for bin Laden – and the attendant possibility that Iraq might supply al-Qaida with weapons of mass destruction – a major plank of its case for war. “The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaida) to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war,” said Cleland. “What you’ve seen here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends.”… Wherein the trajectory of the shit intersects the locus of the fan. ---
**Author:** ![Roger\_Mexico](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f6c823/32.png) [@Roger\_Mexico](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roger_Mexico)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2003, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/17 "2003-07-24T02:09:41Z")
Yeah, elucidator, this is amazing. I am so used to cringing every time I post, waiting for the freepers to flame me. Are we finally winning the war of truth over insanity? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2003, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/18 "2003-07-24T02:16:50Z")
No. If it were that easy, we already would have done it. ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2003, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/19 "2003-07-24T02:20:28Z")
**Roger\_Mexico** , NEVER underestimate your opponent. I’m glad that **rjung** interjected a bit about the shady Office of Special Plans. I hope that more people learn about it. Apparently it’s so indefensable that not even **december** has checked in to defend it. Can you imagine? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2003, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425/20 "2003-07-24T02:26:57Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SimonX \* > \*\ ***Roger\_Mexico** , > NEVER underestimate your opponent. > \*\* …and never fight a land war in Asia, and never match wits with a Cecilian when death is on the line. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/liberal-hypocrisy-criticizing-bush-for-the-war-and-for-not-preventing-9-11/190425.md?page=2)