Right.
Running off again are you? Why does that not surprise me.
Kerry followed the matter on TV and came to the correct conclusion, whereas Bush avoided dealing with the situation and instead read “My Pet Goat.”
For this, you started a thread attacing Kerry.
You have been hauled on the carpet for your this, so now you are running away to start another of your whiny threads.
You are truly pathetic. You should simply admit that Kerry acted appropriately, and retract the OP of your first thread. But of course that would take honesty.
Well it’s pretty clear to me that Kerry is just as culpable for his lack of response on the morning of 9/11. He should have pulled an Alexander Haig and taken over the duties of Commander in Chief. If he’d done that, then it’s abundantly clear, from the tone of sincere disappointment expressed by the compassionate conservatives in this and other threads, that he’d have the full and loyal support of the Republican party today.
I think this pitting started on a wrong foot. Based on my limited experience with the pittee, I can’t imagine pervert “kicking ass”. I think pervert’s style is to “torture ass” by stinging queries. My image of pervert is the one of easy-going inquisitioner. The “ass”, of course, still hurts.
I could have, but I am a notoriously bad speller. When I fail to use a checker, I am mostly hopeless. My bad definately.
Except that no one did. No one answered what Bush could have done which would have made any difference. No one even suggested anything which could be related to the amount of emotional attachment given this issue. I may certainly have missed it. The posts were coming fast and furious. If you could give me a post number I’d be happy to go back and respond. Remember, though, I need some substantive suggestions as to what Bush could have done differently and what difference it would have made. Alternatively, I need some good reason why his actions were so negligent to engender such hatred.
I like that. Can I use that in the future? Easy-going inquisitioner?
I can’t imagine me kicking ass either, BTW.
Yes, as a matter of fact, we could set the bar lower. Go back and read some of your own posts. What, again, could he have done which would not have been a hinderance to those attempting to do their jobs.
Remember, we are not talking about all day, or even later that same hour. You guys are still trying to make the case that not doing some unknown thing for 7 minutes amounts to some sort of treasonous action. “Ridiculous” is the right word.
Yes, this is what they are asking. However, it is not at all clear that he did no have any curiosity. It is only clear that he did not express it in some way for you to see. As he said, he thought it important at that time for those minutes to display calm. Displaying curiosity might have comprimised this.
Dude, seriously, listen to the case. Go back and read the commission report. It is simply not true that Bush did nothing. It is simply not true that he made no response at all. He simply did not take irrelevant and uninformed action for 7 minutes. You are the one trying to make out that he abandoned his post.
My fault probably. If I had simply let the liberals pile on you and gone elsewhere, it might not have gone so bizarro. I thought your OP was a pretty funny bit, and could not understand the vitriol it invoked. It was kind of fun, in an odd way though.
Quite so, I was responding to a specific question from Marley23, I think. I used the terms defending because he did, you know, for continuity.
No, you don’t. IF you think there is a wrong and right here, you still don’t get it.
K.
True.
True, I assume you mean to the course of events, that is the attacks and their aftermaths?
False. At least if we are talking about the same situation.
Maybe, I’m not sure about reasonable and good understanding of the powers and responsibilities of the president. It is certainly possible that a reasonable person could be mistaken about the president’s powers. When in doubt, guess, so I’ll answer “False”.
(Note - whether, in hindsight, he actually did or didn’t is irrelevant)
I submit that not all the answers are true and that therefore it was his job to project an image of calm confidence. Further, the terrorists are responsible for what happaned on 9-11. Any attempt to blame Bush for the attacks, the aftermath, or the results of the attacks is ridiculous. Showing such ridiculousness by attempting to blame Kerry in the same way is therby quite funny. 
I missed it, sorry.
I do too. They almost always devolve into the sort of trash talk that this one did. But remember, the OP was not a petty and stupid attack on Kerry. It was a funny, if somewhat obvious, attack on the attacks agains Bush.
Fair enough. This is at least honest. You do realize that you are attributing things to that “look” which may not be true.
That too.
Really? Didn’t you say:
Try what exactly? What was he to do short of flying around all kryptonian?
Again, with the confusion on my part. It is not at all outrageous. The leader of the free world spent 7 minutes doing something else besides making phone calls and givine orders when said phone calls and orders were given without him (and they were supposed to be). I really don’t know what you think the president is supposed to be. Perhaps we have all watched too many movies where the drama is hightened with unrealistic components.
But this is a fundemtnally unfounded characterization of what happened. He recieved a breifing before going into the classroom. He recieved information while there. There was no reason to beleive that his personall attention would have changed anything, and some small value in his not panicking.
Really!? I do feel honored. I’m serious about owing you one. Remind me sometime in the future of this, and I am at your disposal.
Here’s an idea: Just vote for Kerry and then poor George doesn’t have to deal with the “unfair” criticism anymore
Pervert, this has been answered many, many times! This is the exact thing you are being pitted for. The answer is - whatever he could to remedy the situation.
If there had been a quick order at 9:05 or so, ordering all planes to barricade their cockpits, be aware of possible hijackers aboard and land at the nearest airport, perhaps some people may have been saved. If there had been fighter jets in the air, they may have been able to shoot down one or two of the later hijacked airliners, thus saving the lives of some people in the target zones. These things may or may not have been possible.
Bush didn’t make these orders. He didn’t know how many planes were still flying around, or even that there were hijacked planes still flying around. Does this not strike you as grossly incompetent? That you or I, in front of CNN at home, had a better grasp of the situation than the President of the United States? But he just sat there and did nothing at all. If it was so important for him to project calm, he could have calmly shook the teacher’s hand, thanked the class for having him and been out the door in a matter of seconds. That would be both calm and competent, see?
It was half an hour in question - the time between Bush being informed of the nature of the attacks and the end of the photo op. Don’t let me see you use the “seven minutes” figure again. You know it is incorrect - to use it would be trolling.
Excuse me???
Who are you to be issuing warnings and making declarations as to what constitutes trolling?
What noive! :smack:
A member. What, I’m not allowed to call someone on being an asshole any more? I’m not saying I’ll ban him if he does it!
The fact is that repeatedly throwing the same piece of bullshit into a conversation after it has been thoroughly debunked constitutes saying something you do not believe in for the sake of pissing people off, ie trolling.
Well, you did ask so I hope my answer won’t seem to be junior modding itself, but you didn’t just call him an asshole (which is allowed…go figure :D). You said “Don’t let me see you using [such-and-so] again.” And then you drug out the “T” word.
The first sounds like a threat, and although admittedly you don’t have anything to back it up, it sounds like modding. And it’s generally acknowledged around here that if the “T” word is to be used, it’s up to the mods to decide who is and who isn’t to be the recipient of it.
If you suspect someone of trolling it’s advised that a mod be notified by email, not publically here on the boards. And you aren’t allowed to use the threat or supposed observation of trollery to try to shut down the wording of someone you disagree with. I don’t think his use of the seven minute time span would qualify anyway. You just have different opinions, that’s all.
I won’t say any more for fear of overstepping the bounds myself, but I would suggest you contact a mod by email to find out what the boundries are.
But this is an answer that does not address the question. What, could he have done to remedy the situation?
These are both excellent suggestions and reflect a very healthy hind sight on your part. Can you explain how you would have come to this conclusion on the morning of 9-11?
No, it does not. Who did know that other planes were hijacked on 9-11 at 9:05? Do you know that even before then the FAA and military were already trying to coordinate and scramble a response? Go and read the commission report Here it is Look at the first chapter entitled “We have some Planes”. Much of the actions you wish Bush would have taken were happening already before he knew about the second tower hit. They had not told pilots to bar the doors, but on FAA operator did warn flight 93, apperently, and it did no good.
Well, it would if this were true. But it is not true.
Well, I am going to turn this around on you. This is something you heard somewhere and continue to believe. That’s fair, but you need to document it. I get my figure from the 9-11 commission report. “The President was seated in a classroom when,at 9:05,Andrew Card whispered
to him: “A second plane hit the second tower.America is under attack.”[…]
The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes,
while the children continued reading. He then returned to a holding room
shortly before 9:15, where he was briefed by staff and saw television coverage.” So, Don’t let me see you use the half an hour figure again:( 
:(. *
*Of course, this is tounge in cheek. Please feel free to post anything you want. 
Okay, now you are misrepresenting what happened. Why you are doing it despite my explaning this to you twice, I don’t know. I could speculate, but let me just say that I had regarded you as a potentially reasonable member of the right after our exchange in a thread a few months back. Now I don’t.
A United controller (not the FAA) began on his own sending messages to other planes at 9:19. Flight 93 got it four minutes before the attack on their plane began. Two minutes after they received it, they were still seeking clarification as to what it meant. Yeah, apparently it didn’t work because they did not get the message and understand it before the terrorists acted. IF there had been action beforehand to send out this message, rather than waiting for one mid-level guy at United to initiate it, they might have gotten a message that they understood in time to try to do something. Further, as I said before, it appeared from the 9/11 Commission Report, that the message was via some sort of text messaging (since they quoted the co-pilot as saying something to the effect of “please confirm, plz - Jason”). If there had been verbal communication, back and forth, ten minutes sooner, perhaps they may have been able to change the outcome.
I don’t think I did. Let’s check.
Correct. I did not mean that the FAA management or the organization as a whole sent messages. Neither did I mean to say that what happened was ideal. I only meant that people under the supervision of the FAA sent such messages. Obviously I mispoke. The operator in question works for United Airlines not the FAA. my bad. Is that the misrepresentation you meant? I tend to doubt that, but if so, let this be my appologies.
And also possibly because there was little they could have done if they had recieved it a few minutes earlier.
Bar the door? Use their axe? Ask more clarifying questions which would then have gone up the chain of command before such clarification was offered? Really, its not like they only had to look at page 346 of their proceedural manual. They would have had to improvise a defence in an operating plane full of passengers against armed, trained, and motivated attackers. I agree there might possibly be something they could have done. But do you really expect that formulating a plan would have only taken a few extra minutes?
Perhaps. But this does not complete the story.
Let’s take at face value that verbal communication, say, 10 minutes earlier would have allowed flight 93 to save itself. It would have had to put down in some sort of emergency location, holding armed attackers out of the cockpit while passengers and crew members died, but certainly not out of the realm of the possible.
How would this communication have to have been initiated? Some time would have been necessary for a presidential command to be communicated through the chain of command and reach Mr. Ballinger. He might then have communicated his warning a few minutes earlier, but I really doubt it.
I agree the president could have simply said tell all the planes to bar the doors. But is this really a reasonable thing for him to think about 2 or 3 minutes after hearing about the attacks? Really? Remember that they were still trying to make heads or tails of the situation well after 10:00 long after the couple minutes were up.
I’m not saying it is impossible. I think I did credit you with the one plausible suggestion of what he might have done in that thread. I’m simply saying that tuesday morning quarterbacking over a couple minutes does not make for a good basis on which to make profound judgements.
If we moved 9/11 back in time a decade or two, the plane crashes might have been a Soviet diversionary tactic to cover a first strike missile launch. Your couple of minutes, more like half an hour in actuality, would have left the cities of the US in smoking ruins. I like the defender of our lives and our freedoms to show a little more on the ball initiative in carrying out his responsibilities.
Maybe, and if we moved then through time to the days of dragons* the results might have been different still.
The fact of the matter is that the attacks were not part of a soviet first strike. The fact of the matter is that if such a strike been detected, and Presidential authority needed for a response, he would have been hustled out of the room just as you want. The problem is that these attacks were totally unprecedented, and for a few minutes the President was doing something which was not to your liking now, several years later. Again, for those few minutes.
I’ll agree with you, for the sake of argument, that he should not have stayed in his seat for those minutes. But so what! the OP in that other thread was still funny. The charge that those few minutes were some sort of malfeasance is still ridiculous.
*Just to be safe, I know dragons did not live in the past. I was trying to add an additional level of fantasy to the scenario to demonstrate that changing the actual events significantly changes everything, not just the interpretation of those few minutes.
I have that much faith in your grip on reality pervert. It’s just that we spent the last 35 or so years with the president available to make life and death decision for the country on a minute by minute basis. It was a bit of a shock to see it revealed so graphically that that level of readiness no longer exists.