[sub]Wonderful, now I don’t have to go[/sub]
[list][list][list][list][list][list][list][list][list]get the wax out of my ears!
[list]list)
The networks presentation of the President’s taped speech from an “undisclosed location” in Louisiana was extremely disappointing. The .jpg breakup of the video feed immediately after the presidents declaration that the attackers were “cowards” (as seen on Fox) did less than nothing to reassure me, and probably anyone who happened to see it, that the free world was in capable hands.
I can live with that, but this attempt to paint the whole series of SNAFU’s as a hyper-rational or “legally mandated” response to potential threats to the President’s safety is being massively overblown. There were a lot of screw ups by a lot of different people.
I’m sorry to come back to this, but it really gets me.
During the criticism of what the president was up to Tuesday, and immediately after the release of the story that there were ‘real’, ‘legitimate’ and ‘verifiable’ reasons to believe the presidents plane was a target, in response to a reporter asking, ‘How do you know this’, the spokesman said something to the effect of, ‘We can’t tell you what it was, but it was’.
That’s what initially ticked me off, and it appears to tick you off, because you said, “prove it”.
Well, someone said ‘prove it’ to the spokesman, and he simply said, ‘trust me’.
That wouldn’t fly here, so why should it fly there?
It shouldn’t, and therefore the continuing qustions on the matter.
*I specifically didn’t post quotes around those statements because they’re not the actual comments, it was a close as I could get to what was said at the time.
I am really at a loss to understand why CnoteChris and kniz are so keen to grind this particular axe.
I think we are all agreed that GWB’s actions were perfectly sensible at the time. Cnote wishes he had “stepped up to the plate” and been more like Churchill. Whatever. I’m sure you would have done better in his shoes, CC.
In any case, you have offered absolutely no evidence that the story was “spin”.
So the secret service didn’t share their source with a room full of reporters. So what? I wouldn’t have either in their place.
So okay, we get it that you think the story was false. Now I would suggest, with all due respect, that until you have some evidence, you give it a rest.
Hey Tap I’m sure they will drop it if you will. Or do you mean that they should drop it only after you’ve had the last word? :rolleyes:
Consider it dropped.
(Tee hee! I got the last word!)
Regarding the William Safire op-ed: the thing he pointed out that I haven’t seen followed up anywhere else is that if the caller had detailed knowledge of Secret Service codes and AF1 procedures, then there might very well be a mole in the White House (or Secret Service, or FBI, or FAA, etc).
It’s one thing for determined terrorists to get past our airport security rent-a-cops, and even to slip through the cracks of our intelligence networks; it’s another thing entirely for them to tap into top government secrets.
Therefore, if the AF1 threat was not overstated, it should follow that there should currently be an investigation into a breach in Presidential security. Has anyone seen any further commentary along those lines?
To the best of my understanding, the Secret Service would still be obligated to do whatever they could to protect the President. Getting them to stop would require an act of Congress. I don’t think the President has all that much control over what the Secret Service does to protect him, and the best he could do is to try to slip away or something.
GWB: "Hey look, over there! It’s Osama Bin Laden!
SS Agent: “Where?” (turns)
GWB: (Sneaks out back door)
Seriously, I don’t have cite, but I don’t see how Congress enters into it. The USSS is part of the Treasury Det, which is part of the Executive branch.
FYI…
We happened to catch 9am -10am on Tivo. In response to the new thread about whether or not the networks should stop playing the tape over and over again, I went and watched that hour over again. I wanted to see how I felt re-living the moment.
I’ll spare you the details of how I felt, but I did catch something interesting. As of 9:45am CBS was reporting that they had gotten a report from the secret service that they had received “credible” threats against the President, the Whitehouse and the Capitol.
So this story started to unfold fairly early in the day.
If you want a cite, then stop on by my house and I’ll play you the tape:)
Check out this article:
Egyptian President and the Deputy Prime Minister of Italy have said that they were aware of a threat from Osama bin Laden’s network to kill President Bush last July.
Now this I consider credible, far more than endless speculation as to who knew what and when on the morning of September 11, 2001, and a likely factor in determining President Bush’s actions that day.
According to this week’s Economist, Bush Administration sources have acknowledged that they handled poorly the whole AF1 business, and that they should have just said (to paraphrase): “the Pentagon had just been attacked. Of course the President didn’t head right back to D.C.,” and left it at that. As one said, (actual quote): “it was not our finest hour.”
Sua
NaSultainne, you seem to be missing the point.
Few are questioning the wisdom of not returning to Washington immediately. What is being questioned is the veracity of the white house and its spokesmen.
I remember watching the part where Bush was flying back to the Whitehouse on Marine One that fateful day. All the TV cameras were focused on the helicopter landing. A Marine came out and opened the door and a Secret Service Agent exited the helicopter. Waiting, a little waiting, and then Bush came walking out of nowhere past Marine One into the camera frame, suggesting that he arrived by other means.
I think this might be evidence to reasonably assume that they were taking all the precautions necessary and to second the argument of the possible threat of surface to air missiles in the area. I would assume a large helicopter would be an easy target to hit while settling down.
So… can we reasonably assume that hitting AF1 with a missile might have been in the plans?
When did these credible reports come in, because it seems a strange that if AF1 was a target, an experienced security team would actually let GWB on the thing. It certainly wasn’t a secret that he was in FLA. Missiles in Florida or missiles in D.C., what’s the difference. An inconspicuous rental car up I-95 seems a lot safer than getting into the “target”.
Quoting myself from the first page:
I think the whole thing is weird. That morning was so screwed up that nobody in their right mind could expect the president to fly in to Washington. No excuses were necessary, and I find it unbelievable that they were laying the groundwork for a backlash before the Towers had even fallen.
Having said that…
The Bush team is certainly playing this like they are embarrassed and covering their asses.
From the Washington Post: White House Drops Claim of Threat to Bush. Oops.
White House Drops Claim of Threat to Bush
Apparently no one in the White House can find any record of the threatening phone call.
Well surprise surprise!
Fools.
Spin is most effective when it’s closests to the truth.