Posted on 05/17/2002 8:54:11 PM PDT by Pokey78
I have to say I'm a little angry today.
Many months after 9-11, the media suddenly want to hold President Bush accountable for what took place.
They are even invoking Watergate and the mantra of cover-up: "What did the president know and when did he know it?”
Don't get me wrong. I believe this president – and every president – should be held accountable to the American people for all the things that happen under his watch.
But I also believe the media should have demanded accountability immediately after 9-11.
In fact, they have yet to do so.
Since 9-11, congressional investigations have begun, but little has come of them so far.
It took five months – five months – before CIA Director George Tenet was brought before the Congress to testify.
He boldly told Congress there was nothing that could have been done to prevent the September tragedy.
The truth is evident for anyone with a brain: Nothing could have been done because of the catastrophic failure of our intelligence agencies, particularly the CIA and the FBI.
Immediately after 9-11, NewsMax revealed – we were the first – that during the Clinton years the CIA had stopped recruiting spies within the terrorist networks.
The media have gone to great lengths to avoid the story.
To date, they have yet to question, seriously and vigorously, Bill and Hillary Clinton for their actions in their eight years in the White House.
In President Bush's defense, he had arrived at the White House just months before 9-11.
But the media have not asked the Clintons, under whose watch the attacks were planned, why they failed us.
In this new era of Clintonian politics (and the Clintons still dominate the political scene), there is no accountability, especially if it involves Democrats.
Obviously, this is an election year, and the Democrats want to score as many points as possible against a very popular president.
Here we are witnessing the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. Given the opportunity, the Democrats will always go for the jugular, while the Republicans will always try to take the high road.
It's not difficult to understand, then, why the Republicans are usually on the losing side.
The Democrats also have a very powerful ally in the establishment media, which always back them up.
The Roper Study found that 89 percent of the Washington press corps voted for Bill Clinton. Presumably, they would like to see Hillary in the White House as well.
The serious issue is not what the president knew and when he knew it.
The real question is why the American media gave Bill Clinton a free ride for eight years while he plundered national treasures such as the Lincoln Bedroom, politicized the FBI, gave away our nuclear and ballistic secrets to China, led the most corrupt administration in history – and yet and yet and yet, the liberal media have never viewed any of this as important.
Americans saw the results of the media's blatant failure to perform their job on 9-11.
I'm afraid that unless we take substantial action and find out who really was responsible for not preventing Sept. 11, future tragic events, more sensational than we have ever seen, will happen again. And this time we might not be so lucky.
I believe that Clinton should be held accountable for his nonaction in this whole mess, but I believe that our current government should be held accountable as well for its inaction of preventing 9/11.
I don't think so.
Your " knowledge " and suppossed research, aren't up to even the " average " norm, on FR. What you're throwing out, oh so arrogantly and pompously, has been done to death and with far more intelligence , as well as with greater sophistication for more than 4 years here. Trite, boring, numbingly boring, and devoid of substance , is what your debut postings actually are.
You'll find a small, but extremely vocal group here, who share your views. The rest of us SHALL reply to you with refutation, and you'd either better get used to it, or leave. This isn't a 5 year old's " tea party " for her dolls . If you can't do any better than this, then you are going to have a vry large number of posts to ignore. Personally, I don't care if you ignore my posts at all. LOL The lurkers still get to see other postions, and that's why I'll post to you.
No, I didn't " blame " Clinton and his administration, for not preventing the attack on the USS Cole, the embassies, nor even the first WTC attack. I blamed him and them for NOT doing anything worthwhile, afterwards ! I blamed Clinton for NOT going to the funerals of the first WTC attack and treating it as just a " criminal " manner , instead of what it really was ... an attack by a foreign terrorist group.
Real life isn't a fiction novel a T.V. show, nor a movie, where things are neatly tied up in a matter of a very short time, and the intelligence groups are clever, wise, all knowing, and came come to spectacuar conclusions, with only a few haphazard clues. Even during WW II , with broken codes, we didn't stop many horrors , that we knew about prior to their occurrence .
You're in waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay over your depth here, dear. :-)
Name every single " right " that you have lost , since the ay you were born, and then, seperately, the ones that you have lost due to the Patriot Act, and the institution of Homeland Defense ( which is NOT a cabinet post, FYI . So much for your " knowledge " ), headed by Ridge.
Days after the 9/11 attacks, Bush sought permission to arrest suspected terrorists. That in itself was not bad. However, the problem lies with the fact that these suspected terrorists would not be given the right to a fair trial by a jury of their peers, but instead be put in front of a military tribunal.
In the state that I live in, I am no longer allowed to hold my cell phone and drive at the same time. What will be next, no more radio? Will I not be allowed to talk to fellow passengers?
Our government has gone way beyond its Constitutional boundaries in the name of security. Clinton did it, Bush is doing it.
And you must not have been watching Bush's speech right after Sept. 11, when he made the announcement of a new Cabinet level office known as Homeland Security. He did not propose it in his speech, but said it was already set up. That in itself is scary.
Just because a Republican is in the White House should not constitute that we should be less wary of him. I believe we should be more critical if anything.
Yup,if terrorism didn't exist,they would have to invent it.
The way our government was originally set up, our elected leaders were accountable to the people. When exactly did we lose that?
With the passage of the "Civil Wrongs Act of 1964",also known of as "The Lawyers Full-Employment Act". It actually started under King Franklin,but LBJ made it official.
It may not be working against the democrats but it sure works on me. I find myself going to bat to protect him like a mother hen - I think since I know he will just take the abuse without wasting time fighting back as he continues plugging along doing his job. If he was battling it out with them - I would probably just watch.
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.