Posted on 10/20/2015 6:49:24 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Donald Trump has taken a lot of heat for his comments about George W. Bush and 9/11, but it turns out that he wrote extensively about the inevitability of a major terror attack almost two years before the event, and even mentioned Osama bin Laden. Andrew Kaczynski writes in Buzzfeed:
In 2000, 19 months before Sept. 11, 2001, Donald Trump wrote extensively of the terrorism threat the United States was facing.Trump, who at the time was considering a presidential bid on the Reform Party ticket, went so far as to say that an attack on a major U.S. city was not just a probability, but an inevitability.
“I really am convinced we’re in danger of the sort of terrorist attacks that will make the bombing of the Trade Center look like kids playing with firecrackers,” wrote Trump in his 2000 book, The America We Deserve. “No sensible analyst rejects this possibility, and plenty of them, like me, are not wondering if but when it will happen.”
Trump even mentions Osama bin Laden by name, in a criticism of an American foreign policy that too quickly jumps from one crisis to the next.
(Excerpt) Read more at andrewkaczynski ...
Given the recent history of terrorist attacks (Beirut, WTC I, USS Cole, US Embassys in Kenya and Tanzinia, Madrid restaurant bombing, Achille Lauro, TWA 840, Khobar Towers, Lockerbee, etc.) and the rescue of Kuwait after Saddam’s adventure there.... no same person would think that terrorists would for some reason suddenly stop wanting to kill the Great White Satan.
But Trump did nothing to prevent the attack, so he is obviously not qualified to be president. /sarc
I could name names but then I’d have to ping them and to do that I’d have to spell them right and one of them has an apostrophe and I NEVER get that right when I try to type it cold in the To: line.
Anyway, they know who you are. EVERYBODY here knows who they are.
He should bring up the fact that president Bush allowed the Saudi’s to fly out of the country right after 9/11. We can see what Jebba has to say about that.
bump.
Trump probably just talks about a subject and someone writes it down and edits it for him.
And the way such airbursts are planned is to knock out defense and radar to allow the main nuke missiles to hit their targets.
I can't see a terrorist using probably their only nuke just to cause a temporary black out and I don't think any nuclear power would use an EMP alone because once used its WW3 retaliation strike.
That always bothered me. We should have collected them and held them until we knew what was really going on.
I am sick of us bowing to the house of Saud
The man has vision...far better vision than those of DC. This commentary w/o help of daily security briefings. Follow the dots.
There is no denying that GWB failed to correct in time the security deficiencies inherited from the Clinton administration that allowed 9-11 to occur. However, it also cannot be denied that Clinton had largely ignored the threat to the USA presented by militant Islam and missed opportunities to address this threat directly, in addition to his many other failures, such as allowing North Korea to acquire nuclear weapons. As a Republican, I found GWB to be disappointing in many respects, but at least he was not the disgrace that Clinton had been or the disaster that Obama would later become. Trump is closer to GWB than to Clinton or Obama on security issues but, if elected president, I suspect would be better than all of them (and also better than any other current viable presidential candidate, with the possible exception of Ted Cruz).
Not kidding at all. That's why I added the "/sarc" tag. I've seen several posts making that exact point.
understood
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.