[bannie]

the takeaway from the movie is not that the Clinton Administration was responsible for 9/11, because emphatically they were not.

Don't interpret for me: I have a brain.

[the_Watchman]

Let's not blame Clinton. Let's not blame Bush. Let's all agree that we are at war!

[A CA Guy]

Without the Gorelick wall that blocked communication, it could be 9/11 would have ever happened, I disagree.

[gedeon3]

Wrong. It happened because of the Clintons, and the band of buffoons in his administration. The CIA and FBI of 2001, were an inheritance from Clinton. And of course, the Rats blame Bush for 9/11.

[Richard Axtell]

No need to counsel about Euphoria, I have never been to that part of the country anyway. I think the important point of the article is that the Clinton-Democrat-Leftist way of governing and dealing with national security issues, in particular this new Islamo-Fascist threat, has to be seen as a proven failure, one which we cannot foolish opt to return to. The Democrat's "new direction" is neither new nor a direction, it is simply failure and defeat, the old road to nowhere.

[mathprof]

From the article:

  two important takeaways unrelated to blaming the Clinton Administration:

1. The first stems from the recognition that pre-9/11 American society was structurally vulnerable; that the people of that society – petulant, prosperous, and deluded by soft years of a pseudo-peace – would never permit the measures necessary to stop a determined, suicidal enemy. Perhaps the September 11th plot of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed could have been foiled, but the mixture of Islamofascism, Western freedom and technology was destined to violently explode on American soil. Recognizing this, it is clear that neither the Clinton Administration nor the Bush Administration was responsible for 9/11, debunking once and for all the hysterical attempt by the Left to blame Bush on the heels of Richard Clarke's duplicitous 9/11 Commission testimony.
2. The second takeaway is that Democrats, being creatures of moral relativism and globalism, are incapable of decisive, wartime leadership. The first three hours of the Path to 9/11 gives a breathtaking glimpse into minds paralyzed by the inability to make judgments.  This movie unequivocally demonstrates why the country owes a debt of gratitude to the determination of George W. Bush, and why it should never, ever  place the defense of this country into the hands of people like the hacks in the Clinton Administration, hacks who are still out there, hovering, eager to return for a third Clinton Administration in 2008.

 

[originalbuckeye]

I will always believe that, had we had ANY other President during the run-up to 9/11, we would not have had 9/11 at all. Clinton was nothing but a caretaker President and, when it is all shuffled out, the only person he took care of was himself.

[Chode]

you are right... the HIGHJACKERS are, THEN SLICKWILLIE!!!

[pollyannaish]

Of course. That is very clear and I think we all believe that completely.

I think most conservatives are just happy to have ANYTHING treat the subject fairly instead of trying to put all the responsibility on the current President.

This was a long time coming...it will take a long time to solve.

[pollyannaish]

Did you write this?

[Petronski]

...member of the Mainstream Media chose not to whitewash the Clinton Administration’s confused and ineffectual response to terrorism.

Chose not to whitewash?   It was at least varnished, if not enameled beyond recognition.

[NaughtiusMaximus]

Well, the Clintons were certainly eager to attack and slaughter Americans at Waco, the schmucks. Never forget!

[Cicero]

Personally, I think Mueller was a lousy appointment to head the FBI. He still has done zero, zilch, nada to straighten out the mess clinton left.

But that has little or no bearing on Bush's responsibility for not anticipating 9/11. Let's not forget the chad wars, and clinton's disgusting refusal to allow any kind of transition to the Bush administration for months after election day.

Then the Democrats in the Senate obstructed and delayed all of Bush's appointments.

As a result, Bush was unable to appoint a new FBI director until September 4, 2001. One week before 9/11. Not a whole lot of time to get the FBI up and running under new management.

http://www.fbi.gov/libref/directors/directmain.htm

As for the CIA, that was headed by that treasonous clintonoid, George Tenet. And Jamie Gorelik's wall of separation was still in place, because all of clinton's stooges were still in place in these two agencies.

So, Bush might have been president, but the corrupt hand of bill clinton still weighed heavily on our security agencies. And as a matter of fact, it still does. Bush shares the blame for letting it go so long, but he could not have been blamed as early as 9/11.

[Darkwolf377]

I don't think too many blame 9/11 on Clinton, but I know many wish the MSM would deal fairly with the failures of Clinton, and not continue to overdo Bush's failures.

It doesn't take a brain surgeon to think "Clinton was President for 8 years, during which Al Qaeda announced it was at war with the US and attacked its interests overseas multiple times, while Bush was President for 8 months, after which the 9/11 conspiracy was well on its way, so why does Bush seem to get 95% of the blame in the MSM?"

[TexasPatriot8]

Well so much for all the Bush bashing I was expecting. Now the liberals will REALLY scream it was biased. It seemed pretty clear to me that those in power were well and truly hamstrung in the first months of the Administration because of the Clinton orders and rules set in place the previous eight years. That seemed abundantly clear. There was plenty of recognition that something big was coming, but there wasn't anything concrete and clear enough to really act on it to point to 9-11 specifically. Unlike Clinton, Bush never took a pass on hitting at Bin Laden when he showed his head. Period.

I was put off though by the "grading" at the very end, showing the precious grades given to government by the 9-11 commissions, showing the D's and F's. What is this, kindergarten??? All the commissions precious bad grades, and still we're not attacked. They say not enough is done in airport screening, and no one can get so much as a toothpick on a plane if they're not supposed to. And most of those F's are pie in the sky stuff that they recommended without saying how to do it or pay for it. It's dirt easy making recommendations when you don't have to pay for it or hammer out a shread of the logistical issues in implimenting it. That was the weakest part of the movie. The value of grading assumes that those giving the grade are qualified at assessing abilities and recommending improved courses of action for better results. I fail to see how anyone on the 9-11 Commission, ANY OF THEM, are so qualified that they know better then the people in the Bush administration making decisions how to protect the country. If they're so good and so smart, why then were they not chosen for positions in government to make the big decisions huh? The commission has read too much of their own press when it comes to their importance and intellect in protecting the country. They make suggestions, but it's the Bush adminsitration and intelligence and law enforcement agencies that have actually done the JOB of keeping America safe and preventing ALL attacks the past five years. THAT'S a fact.

[zip]

ping

[Dead Dog]

Someone posted here earlier. This flick is about taking out the Clintons and the members of the Bush Administration for 2008. They must not thing the DNC can win with either in race, so they are clearing the decks to match weak republicans against their handpicked Democrat.

[MedullaPancreasOblongata]

I'd like to use the "Media Uncertainty Principle" trump card for 500, Alex. What is Media Uncertainty Principle?