SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Keith J who wrote (82458)11/1/2004 2:17:24 PM
From: SBHX  Respond to of 793858
 
if Bid Laden was such a large threat that Clinton didn't address, why didn't Bush take any significant action before 9/11? In fact, it appears that Bush didn't take the threat that seriously either.

Because on Sep 10th, everyone in the world thought terrorism was just a "nuisance" --- something like hunger, famine and genocide that only happens to "other people".

Of course, today, there's still people who share that train of thought or want to get back to Sep10th when it can be a "nuisance" again.

edit:: this is not a neutral thread. LOL.(G)



To: Keith J who wrote (82458)11/1/2004 2:53:32 PM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793858
 
In fact, it appears that Bush didn't take the threat that seriously either.


This is a neutral thread? That's news to me. :>) Bush didn't take Bin Laden seriously either. Osama attacked us on Clinton's watch. Bubba let it go.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News