posted
Jay: I think we all know just how abominable Bush's record is. The question is how many people are out there who just can't understand that. All Bush has to say is "I took down the Taliban and Saddam Hussein", and a certain number of people will be utterly convinced that he's the A+ #1 best president of all time. Also, there's a certain number of people (and I'm looking at my parents here...) who will vote for Bush for absolutely no other reason than that he's the Republican candidate. It doesn't matter one whit what he's done, is doing, or plans to do: there are only two real parties, and a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Satan and baby-raping*.
What it really comes down to is just how numerous those two groups are. And how many people who normally don't vote can be convinced that it is imperative that they go out and vote against Bush, lest the country be destroyed.
---
*Okay, a slight exaggeration. Maybe.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Dammit, I accidentally hit the back button on the wrong window and thereby deleted my extensive and well-researched post. Now it's late and I'm tired and I was almost finished and I'm pissed.
Well, quick recap:
1. Michael Moore's argument strategies are unethical. He employs manipulative editing, straw men, and other anti-contextual irrationalities to foster his enmity. Just do some Google searches like I did for some of the things he says in the first few paragraphs of his self-defense that someone posted a link to. You'll find that he's full of misquotes and mischaracterizations, personally attacking those who disagree with him (and creating straw men of their positions) instead of going up against what they say.
2. In short, Moore's attack on Bush for not rushing out of the schoolroom is based on a selective use of context. Bush only knew what he had been told, and everyone was confused in those first minutes. There was no way for him to have known what September 11 was to become. Further, there was no reason for him to suspect that he was a target. Hindsight is an exact science, but you can't convict a man for failing to have it in advance of events.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by TSN: Jay: I think we all know just how abominable Bush's record is. The question is how many people are out there who just can't understand that. All Bush has to say is "I took down the Taliban and Saddam Hussein", and a certain number of people will be utterly convinced that he's the A+ #1 best president of all time. Also, there's a certain number of people (and I'm looking at my parents here...) who will vote for Bush for absolutely no other reason than that he's the Republican candidate. It doesn't matter one whit what he's done, is doing, or plans to do: there are only two real parties, and a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Satan and baby-raping*.
What it really comes down to is just how numerous those two groups are. And how many people who normally don't vote can be convinced that it is imperative that they go out and vote against Bush, lest the country be destroyed.
---
*Okay, a slight exaggeration. Maybe.
That's all true enough.
All I'm saying is that George W. Bush seems like he's about to implode and John Kerry hasn't really even started to make his case.
So electoral pessimism might not be the order of the day.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Guardian 2000: 2. In short, Moore's attack on Bush for not rushing out of the schoolroom is based on a selective use of context. Bush only knew what he had been told, and everyone was confused in those first minutes. There was no way for him to have known what September 11 was to become. Further, there was no reason for him to suspect that he was a target. Hindsight is an exact science, but you can't convict a man for failing to have it in advance of events.
Well, I have to disagree with that.
It�s the duty of a president to move immediately to find out what�s going on and to act accordingly. Those who say his inaction stems from confusion, his own and others, may be right, but it in no way lift the responsibility of the presidential mantle from him.
It seems no positive affirmation of the President to say he didn�t move because he was confused. Being confused is one thing. Being confused and doing nothing about it is another.
Have we come to expect so little of Mr. Bush? Verbal gaffs may be expected and dispelled because of low expectations, but inaction in the face of being told of the second plane crash seems a bit much to dismiss by simply saying he was confused.
Which is worse, the president not acting because he was too busy projecting stalwart calm for the children and the nation or not acting because he was confused?
Neither of which seem the appropriate response to the events he�d been told about.
One plane hitting the WTC is a major event.
A second plane hitting the WTC makes an already major event much more serious because it greatly increases the chances that it is a terrorist attack.
A second plane implies coordination. A second plane means there implies conspiracy. A second plane means it wasn't an accident involving some wayward pilot. A second plane hitting the WTC is an event clearly requiring immediate presidential attention.
When we are attacked by terrorists, the president must act quickly to assess the situation and make the decisions necessary to defend the nation, because the president, as Commander-In-Chief, is the only one in the national command authority who can issue shoot down orders of civilian aircraft.
And the 9-11 Commission indicates that by 8:37 the FAA was suggesting that might be necessary because when they contacted the military�s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) the FAA suggested they �scramble some F-16s,� which NEADS promptly did. These aircraft could have done nothing against civilian aircraft without presidential authority. And if the 9-11 Commission is correct, any possible shoot down of the hijacked aircraft could not have happened till almost an hour later. Mr. Bush is responsible for approximately 35 minutes of that time.
The Commission indicates that no one in the administration was made aware of the situation at all until after 8:46.
quote: When American 11 struck the World Trade Center at 8:46, no one in the White House or traveling with the President knew that it had been hijacked. Immediately afterward, duty officers at the White House and Pentagon began notifying senior officials what had happened.
Mr. Bush was informed about the first aircraft at 8:55. He ignored the information. As Lee points out, this is somewhat understandable, because it was just one plane. I don�t agree with that assessment, but I see the point.
But from 9:05, when he was told of the second plane crash by Mr. Card, until 9:30, Mr. Bush apparently did nothing other than listen to the children read and work on remarks.
quote:The President was seated in a classroom of second graders when, at approximately 9:05, Andrew Card whispered to him: �A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.� The President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The national press corps was standing behind the children in the classroom; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening.
The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes, while the children continued reading. He then returned to a holding room shortly before 9:15....
----
Between 9:15 and 9:30, the staff was busy arranging a return to Washington, while the President consulted his senior advisers about his remarks. No one in the traveling party had any information during this time that other aircraft were hijacked or missing. As far as we know, no one was in contact with the Pentagon. The focus was on the President's statement to the nation. No decisions were made during this time, other than the decision to return to Washington.
So, it's not 7 minutes. It's more like 25.
Who knows what would have happened if Mr. Bush had left the classroom immediately to find out what had happened. We�ll never know, because he just sat there projecting what he says was an air of calm. Or was it confusion.
[ June 22, 2004, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
"Just do some Google searches like I did for some of the things he says in the first few paragraphs of his self-defense that someone posted a link to."
Well, if you already did the searches, would you care to provide some links? Especially to things you say he misquoted? It seems like it would be pretty stupid of him to change a quote someone said, if someone could just do a Google search and find the real quote.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Wow, Jay. You've modified a comment regarding how no one could've known what was going on into Bush failing to be psychic and being frozen by psychological disarray. I applaud your rhetoric, but it is meaningless . . . I find the effort by Moore to attack Bush for failing to live up to some comic book hero standard to be ridiculous.
quote:Originally posted by Jay the Obscure: One plane hitting the WTC is a major event.
One "small, twin-engine plane" hitting the WTC is a tragic accident, probably in overcast skies. Or at least, that's what everyone supposed at the time.
quote:A second plane hitting the WTC makes an already major event much more serious because it greatly increases the chances that it is a terrorist attack.
Yes, it does increase the chances of terrorism if the report is accurate. And so, with New York seemingly under attack, Bush quickly concluded his event in Florida, went to be briefed more thoroughly, and prepped for his return to Washington.
Moore demands a leap in logic at this point, arguing that Bush should've known he was a target, and was thus endangering the children either knowingly or foolishly unknowingly . . . but that doesn't logically follow as a conclusion based on the events to that point.
quote:These aircraft could have done nothing against civilian aircraft without presidential authority.
Evidently you didn't read the part about NORAD having the authority in an attack situation. Sure, it is mentioned as unlikely to be employed, but as long as you're expecting omniscience and perfection from your government and officials therein why bother with minutiae?
quote:And if the 9-11 Commission is correct, any possible shoot down of the hijacked aircraft could not have happened till almost an hour later. Mr. Bush is responsible for approximately 35 minutes of that time.
CAP wasn't known by the upper echelons to be in the air over Washington until just before 10am, and the White House's request for it didn't reach the proper authorities until 09:59, by which point it had already become airborne. Bush could've ordered CAP to shoot down aircraft at whatever time that White House request was, but it wouldn't have been relevant.
quote:Mr. Bush was informed about the first aircraft at 8:55. He ignored the information. As Lee points out, this is somewhat understandable, because it was just one plane. I don�t agree with that assessment, but I see the point.
Why don't you agree? Sure, in the hindsight of a post-9/11 world I can see where one might disagree, but you can't blame Bush pre-9/11 for living in the context of pre-9/11.
quote:But from 9:05, when he was told of the second plane crash by Mr. Card, until 9:30, Mr. Bush apparently did nothing other than listen to the children read and work on remarks.
Thank you Mr. Moore. In fact, the report has Bush wrapping up his appearance within 5-7 minutes, then departing to be briefed by staff (and television coverage, which is where even government officials were getting a lot of news that day). It wasn't until the Pentagon was hit that Bush, like many of us, came to realize that the entire nation was under attack. The Pentagon, after all, was the first non-WTC, non-New York, non-civilian target.
quote:Who knows what would have happened if Mr. Bush had left the classroom immediately to find out what had happened.
Not a single thing different than what did happen. He's the president . . . not some comic book deity. 5-7 minutes wouldn't have made a bit of difference that day. If you bothered to read the Commission report you linked to, you'd see that.
-------------------- . . . ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.
quote:Originally posted by Omega: It's easy to say "anything would be an improvement..."
Yes. And you're NEVER SUPPOSED TO SAY THAT! It's right up there with "what could possibly go wrong?"
It's disturbing how close the rules of politics mirror those of horror movies.
Soon we'll see Kerry say "wait here while I go check it out" ot "No one could've survived that"... While we al shout at the TV "Nooo you idiot!!!"
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Wow, Jay. You've modified a comment regarding how no one could've known what was going on into Bush failing to be psychic and being frozen by psychological disarray.
Firstly, I assert that he should have acted to find out what was going on. Sitting in the class does no one any good.
Second, your psychic jab widely misses the mark because as I posted, Andrew Card tells Mr. Bush: "A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." At that point Mr. Bush knows. He knows and does nothing.
Thirdly, as to me saying Mr. Bush was "frozen by psychological disarray," well, no. You're the one saying he was all confused and couldn't act. Not me.
quote:Moore demands a leap in logic at this point, arguing that Bush should've known he was a target, and was thus endangering the children either knowingly or foolishly unknowingly . . . but that doesn't logically follow as a conclusion based on the events to that point.
What exactly are you basing this on? Have you seen the film prior to it's coming out?
It's certainly not my line of argument and if you intend to refute what I write, do so. If you want to argue about Mr. Moore, do so. Do not conflate the two.
quote:Evidently you didn't read the part about NORAD having the authority in an attack situation. Sure, it is mentioned as unlikely to be employed, but as long as you're expecting omniscience and perfection from your government and officials therein why bother with minutiae?
You want to cite that the part of the 9-11 Commission report that says NORAD has independent, non-presidential authority to shoot down civilian aircraft?
This:
quote:At the same time, the NEADS Mission Crew Commander was dealing with the arrival of the Langley fighters over Washington, DC. He was sorting out what their orders were with respect to potential targets. Shortly after 10:10, and having no knowledge either that United 93 had been heading toward Washington, DC or that it had crashed, the Mission Crew Commander explicitly instructed that the Langley fighters did not have "clearance to shoot" aircraft over the nation�s capital.
Page 17.
And this:
quote:10:15. By that time the Langley fighters were over Washington. But, as late as 10:10, the operating orders were still "negative clearance to shoot" regarding non-responsive targets over Washington, DC. The word of the authorization to shoot down hijacked civilian aircraft did not reach NEADS until 10:31.
Page 19.
*Emphasis added.
And pages 23 - 28 would seem to contridict you assertion.
I just don't think that anyone could give NORAD independent dicision making on the matter of shooting down civilian passenger aircraft. There is no way they would have done so without express presidential authority.
Read how the military went to the Vice President Cheney to get a shoot down order, which he gave, he says, on authorization from the President Bush.
quote:CAP wasn't known by the upper echelons to be in the air over Washington until just before 10am, and the White House's request for it didn't reach the proper authorities until 09:59, by which point it had already become airborne. Bush could've ordered CAP to shoot down aircraft at whatever time that White House request was, but it wouldn't have been relevant.
The Combat Air Partol you refer to is over Washington D.C. and you are correct that no one apparently knew about it until 9:58.
However, the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) had F-15 fighters were ordered scrambled at 8:46 from Otis Air Force Base. These military aircraft were airborn at 8:53 and over New York at 9:08. Page 6.
quote:
quote: Mr. Bush was informed about the first aircraft at 8:55. He ignored the information. As Lee points out, this is somewhat understandable, because it was just one plane. I don�t agree with that assessment, but I see the point.
Why don't you agree? Sure, in the hindsight of a post-9/11 world I can see where one might disagree, but you can't blame Bush pre-9/11 for living in the context of pre-9/11.
I'm sure you've read my previous posts because I've laid it out before. I just think that it was important enough to leave a photo op to find out about. Because:
We live in an age of terror
The WTC is an important site
To those I'll add this...
The WTC has a history of being a target of terrorists. In 1993 the WTC was attacked by terrorists who used a bomb in the parking garage if I'm not mistaken. So you'd figure the President would want to figure out what had happened.
quote:Thank you Mr. Moore. In fact, the report has Bush wrapping up his appearance within 5-7 minutes, then departing to be briefed by staff (and television coverage, which is where even government officials were getting a lot of news that day).
Again, we'll go to the 9-11 Commission report:
quote:Between 9:15 and 9:30, the staff was busy arranging a return to Washington, while the President consulted his senior advisers about his remarks. No one in the traveling party had any information during this time that other aircraft were hijacked or missing. As far as we know, no one was in contact with the Pentagon. The focus was on the President's statement to the nation. No decisions were made during this time, other than the decision to return to Washington.
Page 22 - 23.
Mr. Bush clearly wasn't in contact with anyone while listening to the children read. From to 8:55 to 9:30, the report indicates that Mr. Bush was not in contact with the Pentagon and had made no decisions other than to return to Washington.
And at 9:05, when Mr. Card told him of the second plane hitting the WTC, Mr. Bush knew it was a coordinated attack.
quote:It wasn't until the Pentagon was hit that Bush, like many of us, came to realize that the entire nation was under attack. The Pentagon, after all, was the first non-WTC, non-New York, non-civilian target.
Why do we have to wait for a military target to be attacked? Isn't hitting the two WTC towers enough to still action?
quote:If you bothered to read the Commission report you linked to, you'd see that.
That's rather problematic.
[ June 22, 2004, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: Jay the Obscure ]
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Both of you bring up valid points but what good would have shooting down the second jet have done?
That's several hundred tons of burning debris raining down over a larger (possibly citywide) area instead of a single target (assuming they did not manage to destroy the plane a few miles out)
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Both of you bring up valid points but what good would have shooting down the second jet have done?
That's several hundred tons of burning debris raining down over a larger (possibly citywide) area instead of a single target (assuming they did not manage to destroy the plane a few miles out)
I don't, in reality, think that much could have been done about the second jet in NYC. The Pentagon, maybe. But that's just a maybe.
However, not knowing the potential targets of non-responding hijacked civilian aircraft is no reason for inaction. The president would have to have made the decision about whether shooting down these aircraft was better than letting them go on until they reached their destination.
Mobilizing the military nationally is about the potential of other jets around the country.
Which we know now in hindsight, there were.
Even so, if there is two, there's no reason not to act like there is more with a wide array of targets.
And because I don't grant psychic powers to Mr. Bush, I assert that he should have moved immediately to find out more about the situation. And that his not doing so constitutes a failure in leadership on his part.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Hmmm....I dont think anyone believes things could'nt have been handled more smoothly, but it's hard at this point to even recall the sense of (false) invulnerability the US held prior to 9/11.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Not before Sept 11, we didn't. And "age of terror" is certainly hyping things up a wee bit.
Unless this is quoting something that I'm unaware of, in which case, continue.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
It may be a bit of an overstatement. But I don't think that one can deny the increased use of terror tatics even before 9-11.
Because of the WTC bombing in 1993, one can't even say that the 9-11 attacks were the first non-domestic terror attacks on U.S. soil.
And I should imagine that most people had heard the name Bin Laden prior to 9-11 would have understood him to be a terrorist, though I have no data to back that up. I don't wonder too much why everyone thinks "terror attack" when things happen like the shuttle blowing up, and I don't think that pre 9-11 it was much different.
However, I will grant that the statement is a bit of an overreach on my part. But I still can't understand why Mr. Bush would continue with a photo op and not want to figure out what happened. Even prior to 9-11 it's certainly reasonable to think that a plane hitting the WTC might be a terror attack.
-------------------- Great is the guilt of an unnecessary war. ~ohn Adams
Once again the Bush Administration is worse than I had imagined, even though I thought I had already taken account of the fact that the Bush administration is invariably worse than I can imagine. ~Brad DeLong
You're just babbling incoherently. ~C. Montgomery Burns
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I'd never heard of Bin Laden before 9/11- I dont know of anyone who had, really.
There was an increased number of attacks abroad but the worst terrorist strike was (at that time) the ATF bombing and that was a domestic attack. I dont think anyone was considering civillian centers to be a high risk at that point. Though security had been elevated in government buildings before 9/11.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: I'd never heard of Bin Laden before 9/11- I dont know of anyone who had, really.
I had heard of Bin Laden as that's the guy they were going after when they sent those Tomahawks into the aspirin factories. The guy who'd masterminded the embassy attacks. I mean I didn't know much about him, but I'd definitely heard of him.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic