[nitpick]
He also sent a mid day video message from an “undisclosed location”, which later turned out to be Barksdale Air Force base in Lousiana.
You can find the video here: http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,310969-412,00.shtml
[/nitpick]
{You’ll have to copy and paste the link by hand to get it to work}
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Squink *
Thanks, Squink. Couldn’t remember the name of the base. IIRC, that location was quickly revealed.
In which case his reasons for stopping at Barksdale AFB near Shreveport are even more obscure to me than ever.
Just as a casual observation, and as somebody who was not in favor of Bush during the campaigns, might I point out that a hijacked plane was brought down in western Pennsylvania which was on a flight path that would take it to Washington D.C.?
It’s obvious that the Al Qaeda extremists, offended by the antics of the U.S. gay community, intended to crash it into Dupont Circle, since there are no other significant targets in Washington, right? :rolleyes:
Is it possible that our caught-by-surprise intelligence community might nonetheless have had some semblance of figuring out that Al Qaeda might be trying to take out the President and Congress as well? And acted in that regard.
The captain goes down with his ship. The admiral’s job is to stay alive and keep the fleet in being, so that his country can ultimately win the war.
Bush is the CinC, courtesy of several million Americans’ votes, 271 electoral votes, and the resolution of recount lawsuits in his favor by SCOTUS. His job is to take command and, advised by experienced military and others, ensure the survival and if possible safety of the country. If you want a photogenic, compliant media star to tell you good things, run Leo DiCaprio for President.
I know I’m repeating what others have said.
The fact that this is being debated is ridiculous. Bush’s job is to stay alive. We were under attack. Just because the FAA shut down all the airplanes didn’t mean we weren’t still being threatened. Who knew at the time that the end of the terror was at hand. What if there was a second wave planned for the afternoon or evening. Air Force One is probably the safest and most secure place for the President.
Why complain about Louisiana? Obviously the plan worked as it wasn’t the place you would expect him to go. That’s the whole freakin’ point of going there. You want him to be in the location you least expect him to be where he can carry out his duties as Commander in Chief.
Can you imagine the chaos if military action was immediately required and Bush was assassinated?
Bush was on the grounds of the White House that evening while the sun was still shining. He walked across his lawn, alone, to the White House. That’s good enough for me.
To say that our President should put himself in danger is incredibly selfish. That is not the time for symbolism. You didn’t know at the time that everything was over, attack wise. They were probably getting informtion from all over and it’s best to err on the side of caution. All of his duties can be carried out from where ever it was he was at.
Big time nitpicking going on here. I guess if it were Gore in charge and the same thing happened, we’d be in the same boat, just opposite nitpickers and defenders.
Whether or not it was Wise for AF1 to go back to Washington is not under debate. Some people have questioned the wisdom of going to Shreveport, but no one is saying he should have gone back to the capitol. The mere fact that Cheney was in the White House was sufficient reason to send Bush somewhere else. It’s not a good idea to have the two of them in the same building while there is any active threat.
again: There is no debate about whether or not he should have gone back to Wash. How about we stop beating that particular strawman?
The debate is whether or not Ari & Cheney lied to the press about the ‘crediblity’ of the threat. No actual threat was needed to justify the President’s movements. And, aparently, no credible threat existed. So, if they are making up stories to tell the American people, then that is itself an important fact.
During wartime, the Government is entitled to keep a lot of stuff secret, it might even be entitled to lie about certain things like troop movements in an effort to fake out an enemy. But it is never acceptable to lie about non-military issues.
when lies are told for no other reason than to manage the Presidents Image, then the administration has moved from working for the country, to working against it.
Personally, I don’t believe anything that Ari has to say until I hear it corroborated. The man defines sleaze. But Cheney is another matter. I find it hard to believe that he would lie just to burnish Bush’s image.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Ariadne *
Now they’ve quietly admitted that they lied. Here’s an article about it:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2001/09/27/spin/index1.html
[/quote\I didn’t see anything there in which anyone admited to lying, let alone the president. Perhaps it is you that is lacking in the honsesty department?
Tejota:
There quite clearly is. Why did you state something which is so obviously false?
Good one! After eight years of this from the Clinton administration, you’d think someone would have learned the lesson. Apparently not.
Apparantly there is a debate, or else I’m just seeing things that you are not seeing for some reason
The OP:
King Rat:
Chas.E:
I’m not saying he should’ve gone straight to the White House, although I’m glad he returned there by the end of the day. But while I don’t expect the President to risk life and limb on our behalf, at the time the notion that he - or someone in charge of his security - felt he had to go to BF Shreveport to be safe was unnerving. The implicit message was that if he had to run that far from everything - from Miami, from DC, from anything of significance - then none of us were safe.
As I’ve said before, I consider it a minor point in the overall scheme of things, like one dropped ball in the midst of a high-scoring baseball or football game. But if he’d stayed in Miami, or stopped in Atlanta, or headed straight to NORAD HQ, or even stayed up in the air - I would personally have found any or all of the above to be considerably less alarming at the time than what he actually did.
We talking about conduct of official business, or his personal life, Unc? AFAIAC, Bush can lie about his personal life all he wants, as long as he isn’t making an issue of it in the first place.
But if he says Jesus is his favorite political philosopher, and can’t say diddly about how Jesus’ words apply to politics, then that’s fair game, because he brought his own beliefs into play.
[end of hijack of hijack]
What’s the problem with his route ? Surely the fact that a direct line from southern Georgia, where AF-1 turned, to Crawford Texas passes through Shreveport is merely a coincidence ?
He stopped at Barksdale long enough to record a speech. Maybe you watched it? After recording it, he immediately got back on AF1 and continued on his way. His speech wasn’t even aired until after he was on AF1 and out of there.
What better place to stop? An AFB so obscure that it wouldn’t be a target seems like a good place to me. Why record a speech? Reassuring the American people seems to be a pretty good reason.
Do you disagree?
Demise - I watched the speech; that was a prerequisite to my comments. I would have had a hard time being unnerved by something I didn’t somehow experience.
Well, since you clearly haven’t read anything I’ve written in this thread - this is all I’ve been writing about, fercryinoutloud!! - there’s no point in my saying anything new.
I spose I could C&P from my previous posts, but I don’t have the energy. Go back and read them. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
And Squink - what the Sam Hill does Crawford have to do with it? Just how many twists and turns did AF1 take that morning?
The Bush ranch near Crawford was a possible destination for the president that morning.
If, as you say, there was no obvious reason for Bush to go to Barksdale, it may be that he initially planned to go to a destination along the same flight path, but later changed his mind. Crawford fits the bill nicely.
Ari Fleischer didn’t lie. Dick Cheney didn’t lie. They just didn’t know what the hell was going on when they spoke on the matter of the President’s immediate security. They weren’t in a position to accurately evaluate all the info coming at them from all sides in a time of considerable confusion.
Some advider or another likely told them off-the-cuff about “possible threats” or “probable targets”. Fleischer & Cheney passed these concerns on to the media without checking every iota – understandable considering the circumstances.
If Fleischer & Cheney admit later that there were no actual called-in threats or smoking-gun documents targeting the President … eh, so what? The worst they are guilty of is speaking somewhat hastily in a time of crisis.
I’m prepared to give Fleischer & Cheney all kinds of slack in this matter. Unfortunately, I have to think a little less of others who must continue to harp on this kind of micro-minutiae.
Have you read or seen something where the White House has said AF1 was at one point headed toward Crawford, or are you just conjecturing?
bordelond:
One more time: who gives a flip if Fleischer got it confused on the morning of 9/11? But by a few days later, he should have been able to start getting this straightened out. That’s his job. If he’d said on, say, 9/14, that it wasn’t clear where the report of a threat to AF1 had come from on the morning of 9/11, and that it wasn’t clear whether there had been a threat or not, then no one would have held it against him. But maintaining that such a threat existed until practically proven that it didn’t, for two weeks afterward…that was totally unnecessary.
Consider that a good reason for the President to not go back to DC right away was to keep AF1 away from commercial traffic, but not for AF1’s sake.
If AF1 gets in the air, with fighter escorts, and heads for Reagan National or Dulles right away, she’s flying right into substantial commercial traffic which the various flight centers are trying desperately to account for.
So a jetliner continuing on it’s planned course gets close to AF1, with a civilian pilot who now has an F-15 in his face, which may or may not correctly be getting hailing from the F-15 or from the ground. Does the Eagle pilot wait for the jetliner to get close to AF1? Does he follow the jetliner away from AF1, abandoning his post? OR does… he… shoot ?
This isn’t a position I’d want to put my escort pilots into, especially when I’m already aboard the finest flying command post there is. He stopped at Offutt and Barksdale to get a secure place to get on TV.
Karen Hughes was the first federal official to be able to get out of the security measures to get on TV. I, for one, am damn proud of her. She ought to be in the Senate, not that carpetbagger up in NYC.
Yeh, right. Had enough of her lies last November and December, thanks. She ought to be dogcatcher in Crawford, Nebraska. :rolleyes:
Look at a Map
Crawford is on the left edge of the map (red star). AF1 turned west from a point in southern Ga.
Presumably there was a good reason that AF1 took the path it did. Since the Sac base is ~a thousand miles to the north, Barksdale wasn’t just a pit stop on the way. The video message to the nation could have been recorded nicely at Atlanta, Montgomery, Jackson or some other location, so that’s no reason for AF1 to go to Shreveport. No one, Ari included, has let out even a whisper that there might have been some secret purpose for the Barksdale stop. The president certainly didn’t use the opportunity to launch an intercontinental bombing raid from Barksdale “Home of the B-52”. So why did he stop there ? Maybe the flight path was chosen at random, in which case the movement towards Texas would be a simple coincidence.
IOW, educated conjecture. Thanks.