Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mph who wrote (18832)	4/28/2004 10:31:06 AM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

pbs.org "Dead or alive," said the president. We were promised Osama bin Laden's head on a platter. On Sept. 13, 2001, President Bush said this to a grieving and shocked nation, "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our number one priority and we will not rest until we find him." But then his focus shifted and there was a new public enemy number one: Saddam Hussein. Eighteen months later to the day, President Bush said this of bin Laden, "I don't know where he is and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." What did Osama do to move so quickly from being the administration's number one priority to not even being a priority at all? Eighteen months after Sept. 11, bin Laden was still alive, and for all we know, still plotting to kill even more of us. It wasn't anything bin Laden did; it was Bush's short attention span. Bush has a weird way of shifting his policy direction mighty quickly. While laying out his "strategery" for Iraq, we were given many mixed messages. We needed to invade because of weapons of mass destruction. We needed to invade because Hussein was brutalizing his people and needed liberation. We needed to invade because al Qaeda had set up shop in Baghdad. We were given so many seemingly reasonable arguments for starting up a war, and now none of them are being explored. And if they are being explored, they are yielding limited results. Bush has now refused to allow United Nations inspectors back into the country. The world wants to know why he's done this. Perhaps it's because he knows they won't find anything but sand and about 400 tons of U.S.-made depleted uranium shells. Others have suggested another reason why Bush doesn't want an independent investigation of Iraq. UN inspectors might make it impossible to plant our justification for war somewhere in Iraq. Don't think it couldn't happen. Our military has been caught in a lie before in places like Nicaragua, Cambodia and El Salvador — not to mention the Bay of Pigs fiasco. Perjury also played a big role in the first Gulf War. On Oct. 10, 1990, a 15-year-old girl calling herself "Nayirah" told her tear-jerking story in front of Congress. Turned out that the girl (who was using a stage name) was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. Her story was completely fabricated and she had been coached for the staged event by the Hill and Knowlton PR agency. Ironically, the same agency later went to work on Bush Sr.'s reelection. Wagging the American dog was pretty easy, since no one bothered to look into "Nayirah's" identity until after the war was already over. In our latest war, there were also a few stretches of the truth. Our two biggest pieces of evidence that Iraq was still pursuing nuclear weapons were speedily debunked by scientists and experts. The aluminum rods you heard so much about were found to be completely unsuited for refining fissionable material. We even forged documents that seemed to suggest that Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger. These too were found to be hoaxes. So Bush shifted his focus yet again. All of a sudden, you heard less about "noo-kyoo-luhr" weapons and more about chemical and biological ones. While he was still shoring up support for his war, Mr. Bush painted a grim picture of Iraq. He spoke of mushroom clouds, poison factories, gallons upon gallons of lethal substances and horrible weapons ready for export to terrorists. But when after we planted our tanks in Baghdad, we found little to no evidence of any of these things. There is still no smoking gun in Iraq. Their military offered only token resistance. They were hardly the death squads of elite troops that we were warned about. So where is the justification for the mess we've made over there? It's a moot question to pose now that the deed is done. All the people of Iraq care about now is getting some stability in their lives so that things can get back to normal. Let's hope that the president's attention span doesn't prevent us from shifting our focus away from them yet again. amenusa.org The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our Number one priority and we will not rest until we find him!" - George W. Bush, September 13, 2001 I don't know where he is. . . I just don't spend that much time on him really, to be honest with you. . . I truly am not that concerned about him. George W. Bush, March 13, 2002 cnn.com

To: mph who wrote (18832)	4/28/2004 10:32:23 AM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 81568

Wanted: Dead or Alive Bush Reasserts Demand to Afghans: Turn Over Bin Laden Sept. 17 — President Bush Monday repeated his vow to track down Osama bin Laden, the prime suspect in last week's terror attacks while Wall Street reopened to its biggest point drop ever. "I want justice," Bush said. "And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'" Nearly a week after the assault on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, New York City tried to return to work and the nation braced for the economic impact of the tragedy. Wall Street was shaken by the tragedy, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average closing down 684 points, or 7 percent, to 8,921. It was the biggest point drop ever for the Dow and the first time it fell below 9,000. It was the biggest point drop ever for the Dow and the first time it fell below 9,000 since Dec. 3, 1998. The Nasdaq closed down 115.59 points, also about 7 percent. abcnews.go.com

To: mph who wrote (18832)	4/28/2004 10:38:56 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

mph, I agree that we need to challenge everything that is posted here.

To: mph who wrote (18832)	4/28/2004 10:45:40 AM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

After Bush's initial blustering about Osama bin Laden, he simply stopped saying anything about him. There were also sites devoted to how many days, weeks, months it had been since he mentioned Osama. I don't recall ever hearing bush follow up on Osama. I can find nothing to support the quote saying finding Osama was unimportant.