Chris Matthews: Bush's war

That clintoon sycophant, Mathews, is at it again.

So...Bush is luckey to have this chance, how disgusting

Mathews, just sit down and SHUT UP.

Here's my email to Matthews: "What is it with you people? Do you think all presidents look at everything through the lens of history or the lens of a photo opportunity? It would seem that people who REALLY care do the right thing and let history sort things out. For just a few days, don't you think you media pundits could do the same?"

LOL!

Coast Guard, you have said it all. That is PRECISELY what would have happened (in fact, that is pretty much what DID happen after the first WTC bombing).

I used to wonder which side these media loudmouths were on- I don't wonder any longer.

He felt our pain, he bit his lip, he wagged his finger, he sold pardons, sold secrets, wasted tons of cash on travelling the world, left our economy in disrepair, left our military and intelligence communities in even worse disrepair.

But he never got the opportunity George W. Bush was given this Tuesday: the historic chance to lead.

Thank God Clinton never got the chance!!!
God knew he wasn't leadership material and our country would have been truly and utterly destroyed!!!

Chris Matthews: "Bill Clinton never had his shot at greatness. . .
he never got the opportunity George W. Bush was given this Tuesday: the historic chance to lead."

Washington -- Lucky though he was, Bill Clinton never had his shot at greatness...he never got the opportunity George W. Bush was given this Tuesday: the historic chance to lead.

Chris Matthews: Bush's war

From Woodward's book, The Choice - p 65:


...Clinton held a secret strategy session in the White House with Hillary, Gore, Panetta, Ickes and several cabinet secretaries. clinton asked everybody to keep the discussion private. He said he wanted to recapture winning themes of his 1992 victory, with emphasis on the middle class and traditional party groups such as labor. But it was a mushy meeting, and because some details soon leaked to the media no more such large sessions were held.


As Clinton continured his search, he lamented that he could not see a big, clear task before him. Part of him yearned for an obvious call to action or even a crisis. He was looking for that extraordinary challenge which he could define and then rally people to the cause. He wanted to find that galvanizing moment.


"I would have preferred being president during World War II" he said one night in January 1995. "I'm a person out of my time."

Chris--

clinton failed to achieve "greatness" (or even garden-variety adequacy ) not because of an absence of "opportunities"--but rather because of an absence of guts and selflessness and honesty to take the "shot," and an absence of skill to make it in any case...

MORE

Mia - I would pay big money to have you get in a room with Chris Matthews and Tim Russert and Peter Jennings and all the media whores - with all of them forced to shut up and listen and watch as you make to them your "Clinton Crimes" presentation. I would want it on film. And it would sell a zillion copies. We could fund the war effort with it. Whadya think?

reaming it since the elections....who screamed BOB JONES University ? Who screamed Confererate Flag and who screamed Kathryn Harris louder and FIRST ? Yep,,,silly boy Matthews. He always has Katrena Vandendumerthanrocks from THE NATION as a guest.....Why ? Cause she is Chrissy in a dress

dang...your's is better than mine..lol...great insight

My letter to Chris Matthews:

Words fail me at the shallow, casually hurtful manner in which you opened your column for today. Do you think President Bush thinks he is LUCKY? Do you think those pilots were at fault for the hijackings? Whatever possessed you to write this insulting tripe?

The President is doing a wonderful job given the mess that he was left with due to your hero, Bill Clinton. President Bush is emerging as the man that those of us who voted for him knew he was, tough, determined, organized, and courageous. He is a man of faith, and kindness, and patriotism.

You, however, have revealed yourself as one who knows not the value of true leadership. I consider your column to be detrimental to the war effort. You owe the President, the pilots' survivors, and your reading public an apology.

That guy has the biggest HEAD I have ever seen... Physically

And he spits when he speaks.

No doubt he was to get fired until this "opportunity" came.

cactusSharp! Don't ever think that what you have to say or how you say it isn't worth hearing by others on this forum.

My letter to Matthews:

"As I recall, Clinton had at least 7 years to hunt down and bring to justice Osama Bin Laden and his network of butchers.

Evidently he was too busy getting BJ's in the Oval Office and covering up dozens of other scandals. Clinton had eight years to become a "great President." He blew this opportunity as surely as Monica blew him.

Grow up, Chris. Your rants about your hero Clinton are gotting old.

By the way, you are LONG past your opportunity of being a great journalist. You're just another whiney media liberal, no different than any other whiney media liberal."

I think we should horse whip Matthews. Bush will not make a mistake on this. He knows exactly what we are up against. He also knows there is no choice. The next time it will be nukes. How about we ask Matthews to tell the truth.

Matthews uses 9/11/01 to yet again lament the disgraced Clinton legacy? He's more of an idiot and kool-aid drinking zealot than I ever suspected.

clinton really did...but instead of telling Americans the truth about the terrorist attacks he had them covered up. TWA800, OKCB....clinton was never a leader...instead Hillary tried to be but failed miserably.

He could lower the jobless rate, balance the budget, ...

Of course, he never did any of those things. All of those things happened ONLY after a GOP Congress was elected in 1994. Why else was Clinton and his cronies predicting deficits as far the eye could see? The revisionism of the CLinton years has already begun.

Hey Chrissy....Clinton would have PERSONALLY done what the terrorists did for his chance at greatness.

If you think Geo. Bush RELISHES this monumental burden, you are creepy.....how does a person even THINK that way??? Sicko.

I'd like to drop some bombs myself, but there is another perspective which needs examination -

AMR and the FAA delivered this disaster; United did their share.

The hijackers succeeded because they had an invitation from the FAA. Now the airlines are wanting billions as a reward - as well as interest free loans. They are also asking Congress to pass an ex-post-facto law relieving them of the responsibility!RIGHT!

They will probably get what they want - believe it or not! Write / E-mail your congressman.

The horrific terrorist attack on America was a repeat event with a long history - make no mistake about it.

The 9-11 attack on America has its roots in the Afghan war. Osama Bin Laden received his training, experience and his initial assets there. In the aftermath of the Afghan war, many Muslims, probably thousands, were assisted in gaining residence / citizenship for their support of the CIA efforts in Afghanistan. Beyond the Afghan refugees, an unknown number of Kurds were also flown into the U.S., as refugees from the Gulf War.

Prejudice being what it is, few questioned the role of the CIA in the Afghan war. 'Intelligence' is one thing, war is another. Yet, in the shadowed tradition of the secret war in Laos & Cambodia, the U.S. intelligence agency was essentially conducting a war against the Russians.

Among other issues of that effort, comes the non-accountability of such assets as the supply of Stinger missiles from the Afghan conflict.

The first World Trade Center bombing was in 1993. The Muslim connection is well known. In the background of that effort was another Bin Laden terrorist effort, known as "Project Bojinka," targeting U.S. Airliners in the Pacific. By accident, it was discovered in the Philippines and thwarted. Note that there was no warning to Americans.

One of the key players in Project Bojinka was an individual known as Ramsi Yousef. He was also one of those convicted in the first WTC bombing. Yousef, among other things, told the FBI that his 'group' was responsible for the downing of TWA-800. That claim has more than sufficient credibility to be taken very seriously.

While 'official' sources denied any criminal activity in TWA-800, Yousef's claim has radically more merit and probability than the nonsensical 'short-circuit' claim of the NTSB. The discovery of the PETN traces indicate a U.S. military 2.75 inch solid rocket motor. The alleged bomb-dog test doesn't hold water. The number of witnesses who claimed to have seen a missile numbered in the hundreds. There was too much evidence that TWA-800 was taken down by at least one missile. Other than nonsensical theory, there was no evidence of the center-wing fuel tank explosion as the initial event. The 'official' proving theories and tests don't hold up under elementary scrutiny.

In brief, there is no shortage of protests documenting government cover-up in the TWA-800 disaster.

In the case of the Oklahoma City bombing, McVeigh's attorney turned up frightening evidence of a middle-eastern connection. His requests for further evidence were denied. The introduction of the middle-eastern connection in court was stifled. The forewarning by the BATF informant, Carol Howe was suppressed.

Now, with the facilitation of all agencies looking the other way, America faces the recent tragedy and a terrible aftermath, which will forever change the freedoms of America. That didn't have to happen.

A relatively well-known GAO report to Congress slams the FAA for the lax security standards. Part of the report was kept secret, as it damnably quantified the risk to Americans - still no change. A recent report warned that such an event was imminent. Why was there no significant warning? Why was there no stepped up security?

The Boston airport, in particular, has a prominent history of lax security standards; what happened?

Three weeks before the 9-11 attack, the overseas papers quoted Bin Laden as saying that a major strike against the USA was soon to come. That's a lot of warning, by any standard. Bin Laden almost always telegraphs a warning - he's not to be ignored. Sixty-minutes did a report on the Afghan sentiments against the U.S. which telegraphed a warning sixty days before the attack. Regardless of who actually did the attack, there were credible warnings of an attack.

As time goes on, more-and-more reports are surfacing which warned of this attack. However horrrible the thought is, it must be asked, "Why were they ignored in the face of such historically clear, and even imminent threat???"

Bear in mind that the FAA gave Bin Laden an engraved invitation with their selective ignorance of airport security, defying Congress with the GAO citing the FAA blatant failures. That issue has no shortage of government documentation.

In the months ahead we may see the major airlines citing phony bankruptcy likelihood. Beneath that veneer, note that they won't talk about the associated holding company which is sucking out all the real profit, while making it appear that the airline is anything but at programmed risk. If there's an associated holding company, look for a scam.

Terrorist, Ramsi Yousef, claimed his group was responsible for TWA-800. Yet the FBI's Kallstrom said there was no evidence. So, why did the FBI go fishing for Stinger remnants after the recovery effort?

Still, there was no appreciable increase to aircraft security. The FAA has a nifty set of "stall tactics;" there was no appreciable increase anywhere. Rhetoric will be heard to the effect of, "...changes were proposed." As usual, results are as evasive as ever.

Mary Schiavo cited the legislation already proposed to exempt American & United from accounting for the deaths on the ground. It may have been introduced under the direct lobbying of the airlines, or the 'special' lobby which manipulates the FAA to spare the airlines such costs as the lax airport security which brought us to this thread.

Each airline ticket contains a sizable tax which is supposed to prevent such disasters. Instead, it's either allowed to accumulate (no doubt in favored banks) or is pillaged and-or spent on indirect benefits to the airlines. None of it gets spent for safety - strange; or is it? The regulations / laws were there, millions were made for the FAA permitting the airlines to ignore those; the airlines don't deserve a break.

Look for Norm Minetta to cover for the FAA.

Jane Garvey (FAA Administrator) knew full well; now, does she deserve to answer to a criminal court?

One should note the New York Times catch of the FBI involvement in the first WTC bombing. There was warning!

The FAA allowed a smuggler's paradise to be built in the new Guam airport terminal under Clinton. With "Project Bojinka" in the immediate background; and the first Muslim attack on the World Trade Center - there was no excuse.

Among others, former FAA security agent, Steve Elson, has had a crusade against all of Washington D.C. on the lack of airport security. There was warning galore - as usual.

Again, Boston, in particular, has a terrible record for airport security.

It's early, but it appears that the hijackers slipped knives past security - no big trick by the FAA 'special' standards. The hijackings were done with teams of 4 or 5 per aircraft.

Looking to what is known about the effort, the terrorists picked two airlines, "United" (States) and "American." No doubt the names were highly symbolic. The aircraft were just beginining their day's flying, ensuring that they would depart on time. The day (Tuesday) reasonably assured a low passenger count - least risk for passenger interference. The originating airports and their destination ensured the high fuel load.

The news footage of the WTC / Pentagon strikes strongly suggest that the hijackers were skilled pilots, with a bias toward the 757 / 767. Both aircraft had nearly identical cockpits and similar flying characteristics. The WTC / Pentagon flying was that of a pilot who is current at the controls of a simulator, with practice at hitting the specific targets.

The flying exhibited exact planning, practice and recent proficiency. At the airspeed of the strike, the eye-hand coordination demands would be too high for casual flying skill - with, or without, an autopilot engaged. At 290 knots, the individual towers and the front door of the Pentagon are not that big a target.

It's highly probable - and already, reasonably established - that proficiency was acquired / maintained in a Stateside flight simulator facility, offering airliner models with high-level graphics capability, with the WTC & the Pentagon in the visual data-base. It's unlikely that a program such as "Microsoft Flight Simulator" could account for the flying skills exhibited.

Relative to the FAA disregard for safety, evidenced by the GAO report on lax airport security, as well as other legitimate complaints - somebody needs to get the FAA honest. We're very likely to see this again.

The tragedy of Swiss Air 111 illuminated the FAA record for methodically overlooking the aircraft wiring issue. Backing the FAA was a Clinton's Presidential Executive Order 12866 - "If it costs the airline money - don't enforce it." Behind that was a change in U.S. Law, 'conveniently' relieving the FAA of the responsibility for aviation safety. The setup was nothing less than methodical.

The FAA has also permitted a flimsy cockpit door design on aircraft which couldn't keep anybody out. The airline industry has had cockpit break-ins before by sky-ragers; this isn't anything new.

Historically, the threat to a flight attendant or a passenger's life was sufficient to open the cockpit door - that may have now changed forever. Although a bit drastic, alternate methods are available for dealing with a threatened flight attendant or passengers life.

Returning to the terrorist issue, one should give notice, that in the history of bombings against the USA, there have been warnings galore in the newspapers, etc, but the security agencies always get surprised. Americans should notice that there have been no changes - until AFTER this disaster.

While the 9-11 terrorist operation was reasonably involved, the greatest probable sophistication was in keeping the pilot's skills up to the needed proficiency, and certainly the timing.

Complexity kills operations such as this, thus it is more probable that the terrorists kept it as simple as possible, with a fair amount of money behind them. The FAA track record on airport security is a joke. The security penetration was probably quite easy. As yet, there is no significant indication of airport 'inside workers.'

Many people are ignorant as to the thousands of Muslims that the CIA brought into the U.S. as a reward for supporting operations overseas.

The Muslim devotion to Islam far exceeds any other loyalty. While Americans are pandered the idealism of the equality issue, tribalism will always rule the planet. Reverse prejudice illuminates that truth in the USA.

With some good propaganda, the terrorists prostitute Islam to produce the tribalism we saw on the eleventh of September, probably taking a lesson from the Crusades.

In a sentence, radical changes are long overdue. It's time for America to demand their fundamental right to life, in addition to the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution. Persecuting the terrorist organizations only treats the symptoms.

Despite the undeniable horror of the 9-11 attacks, it knowingly began with our own government agencies and our own Congress. The issue isn't about apportioning blame, it's in the implementation of the known and needed repair - at home. For starters, Congress needs to reverse the law, making the FAA responsible for safety; then ensuring that the FAA complies with that law.

Permitting airlines or airports to maintain their own security is paramount to a prison system based on the "honor" system. That statement is not an exaggeration.

The "60-Minutes" segment, aired on 9-16-01, detailed the methodical gaps in security as well. The actions were criminal, yet the FAA did nothing worth mentioning. Previous criminal charges against the security contractors didn't affect anything appreciable in the FAA system.

Before the first rescue centers were set up, the airlines were lobbying for multi-billion dollar grants and interest-free loans. Legislation was requested to exempt the responsible airlines from civil litigation. These were the companies who knowingly delivered the avenue and means for the murders - knowingly facilitated by the FAA.

The threat was well-known; this horror could have been prevented. With the Congressional changes to Federal Law, and the FAA history of maximizing corporate profits, it was all but guaranteed, in some fashion. History warned us, as did the media; this didn't need to happen.