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: Brumar89 who wrote (29039)	6/6/2004 5:26:16 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

So your argument is that Bush should not have taken warnings about Al Qiada hijackings in the US seriously because some of the information had been out there previously? Well if it was old info then it was around when Bush first took office, so he should have studied it, and so should have Condi Rice. And then one asks why did neither one of them even mention terrorism as one of our major defense priorities until after the 9-11 attacks? Why did they demote Richard Clarke and pick no one to replace him? Why was there not a single cabinet level meeting about terrorism? Also, if some of the info was old, why was it put in front of the prez's nose that day on 8-6? Apparently the CIA or someone wanted Bush to take notice as the problem had hardly gone away? Correct? My problem with Bush is not with his not stopping 9-11, it's the fact he totally ignored the suibject altogether before 9-11 when ahnyone one of us would have known it was the #1 most probably threat. Meanwhile Bush was out talking about SDI as what we needed to protect us. Against who? The Chinese? And SDI doesn't even work. it's still an experimental program and spending black hole.