9/11 Hearings Seem Trivial Compared To Benghazi And Bergdahl Controversies
We all know President Bush vacationed excessively, spending 1,020 days of his presidency on vacation. In 2001, he spent the entire month of August at his ranch in Crawford, Texas. On August 6, 2001, Bush received a briefing from the CIA saying that Al Qaeda is interested in hijacking U.S. commercial airliners. “The system was blinking red. By late July it could not get any worse.” -(CIA Director George Tenet to the 9/11 Commission). With that knowledge, he takes one of the longest presidential vacations (August 3-September 3) with some knowledge of terrorist threats.
He communicates minimally with NSA and CIA intelligence while away at Crawford and when he returns, he schedules a trip to Governor Jeb Bush’s state of Florida. Finding the agenda and “daily rundown” of Bush from Labor Day 2001-9/11 is not so easy. There is not much written on that time spent at the White House between September 3- September 9, 2001. I thought it’d be interesting to imagine President Obama in Bush’s position and venture a guess on how long impeachment hearings would commence after that awful Tuesday morning changed everything.
U.S. President George W. Bush greets the students of Justina Elementary School in Jacksonville, Florida, on September 10, 2001, during a Leadership Forum on the importance of reading programs for children. (PAUL J. RICHARDS/AFP/Getty Images)
Consider the relative safety of the state of Florida if he suspects something may go down on 9/11. No one outside the inner-sanctum of the Bush/Cheney intelligence community suspected anything was coming, so no eyebrows would be raised by the publicity trip. On September, 10, 2001:
At 6:30 p.m., President Bush arrives at the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort on Longboat Key, Florida. He is in Florida as part of a weeklong effort to place a national spotlight on education and reading, and visited a school in Jacksonville earlier in the day. In preparation for the president’s visit to the resort, all guests have been cleared out of the building “to make way for the invasion of White House staffers, aides, communications technicians—even an antiterrorism unit.” Overnight, snipers and surface-to-air missiles are located on the roof of the Colony and adjacent structures, to protect the president. “The Coast Guard and the Longboat Key Police Department manned boats that patrolled the surf in front of the resort all night. Security trucks with enough men and arms to stop a small army parked right on the beach. An Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) plane circled high overhead in the clear night sky.” (My emphasis in bold) Whether this is a typical level of security for a presidential visit, or is increased due to recent terror warnings, is unstated. The next day, President Bush made an appearance at Booker Elementary in Sarasota, Florida and we all unfortunately remember the book My Pet Goat forever.
It’s should be outrageous, but we’ve never been given full access to the findings of the 9-11 Commission. I thought it was worth a look back in history to see how things have changed when it comes to the culpability and treatment of the President of the United States. Every vacation President Obama has taken has been mired in outrage and disgust from those on the right side of the aisle. The GOP-led commotion about four dead Americans in Benghazi and the subsequent, costly hearings that have ensued levies far greater criticism and blame on the Obama Administration than the Bush Administration EVER received for not keeping us safe from terrorists in 2001.
Now an American POW has been swapped for five Gitmo detainees and the rush to judgement about the circumstances surrounding Bowe Bergdahl’s capture in 2009 have been harsh, to say the least. In fact, the right has changed its tune on the matter more radically than I initially realized.
A former Bush official said the George W. Bush administration would have made the same decision.
“I don’t see how these particular Taliban officials could ever have been tried in the southern district of New York,” John Bellinger, who served as an adviser to President George W. Bush explained during an appearance on Fox News Tuesday.
The point is, no one ever called President Bush unpatriotic, traitorous or dishonorable. Never. Anyone who called him out on starting a war on false pretenses or advising the administration against occupying Iraq with too small a force (Shinseki), was censured and berated by the media and Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld. No one could ever have imagined the inconsistent and hypocritical treatment of President Obama versus the unearned respect the Bush Administration received. It is just mind-numbing. It is just further proof the media is ANYTHING but liberal. The simple fact that a smear campaign has been launched against a POW before he has even been released from a military hospital proves that point absolutely.
Now back to Bush; how many lives, how many trillions of dollars, were lost under his “watch,” for NO legitimate reason other than to make a few very select, inner-circle, rich fat-cats even richer? It embarrassed me, you, and most Americans: the world has laughed at the U.S. for many years now. By contrast, all of Obama’s logical policy decisions are criticized incessantly and still, he keeps trying and by some miracle, he…succeeds. This is why the Republicans can’t stand this president. He can do what they cannot: govern.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: VegasJessie
A resident of Las Vegas Nevada, a graduate of the University of Oklahoma as a Political Science major. Very motivated to get people to participate in the electoral process.
21 responses to 9/11 Hearings Seem Trivial Compared To Benghazi And Bergdahl Controversies
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
ConservRedneck June 4th, 2014 at 12:24
hahaha…. your history is greatly distorted. I suggest you research your facts before opening your mouth. The Internet is a wonderful wealth of information.
granpa.usthai June 4th, 2014 at 13:00
the internet is a wonderful wealth of misinformation as well. Having lived through the GW misadventures, I note no distortions of any significant consequence in this posting. After the well defined ‘mission’ of kinda sorta keeping Osama Bin Laden in check in a general area of planet earth while stopping Saddam Hussein from using non existing WMD’s, the hazy objectives of POTUS Obama’s “we will hunt you down and kill you” upheld promise to the American people may seem a bit confusing to some, but I grasp the stated idea well enough.
ConservRedneck June 4th, 2014 at 13:13
*smile* I see you got my point. Everyone makes a decision based on information at hand. Some we win, some we lose. I fault no President on wrong decisions based on current info (right or wrong) unless their decision is not for the betterment of the Nation. Bush made made many mistakes also and he is not the Conservative I would have wanted. Actually I consider him to be a Liberal with an R in front of his name. But, with Obama, I feel his decisions since the beginning has been to destroy this Nation. When I say destroy, I mean to totally change the way this Nation was founded. I believe, if you take away mans need to better himself, you destroy the man.
arc99 June 4th, 2014 at 13:32
you are the only person who can control what you “feel”.
The President is not doing any of the things you claim. As the saying goes, your misconceptions are not our problem.
And sorry, but George W. Bush is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I do see that you give President Bush every benefit of the doubt. But when it comes to President Obama, you “feel” that his motives are to destroy the country.
That is precisely the kind of irrational hatred and hypocrisy which makes me completely dismiss the President’s critics. It is based on what you “feel” and not an objective comparison between the previous administration and the current one.
In my book, 3,000 dead on American soil on 9/11/2001 is infinitely worse than 4 dead in a foreign country halfway around the world on 9/11/2012, regardless of how you or any other right winger “feels”.
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 01:33
“When I say destroy, I mean to totally change the way this Nation was founded.”
You could say that about Lincoln, as well. The nation was founded on slavery and white supremacy, but Lincoln *destroyed* that. I’m sure, as a conservative redneck, you were not a big fan of him, either.
There are some things that need to be destroyed. The ideology of conservatism has always held back human progress. If it were up to conservatives, blacks would still be enslaved, women would not have the right to vote, there would be no progressive labor laws, no environmental protection, no regulations to protect consumers, no wide-scale infrastructure projects to increase our standard of living, no social safety net for the elderly and unemployed, and so on.
Practically EVERY improvement we have seen in the 200+ years of the Republic has been the result of liberals fighting for change, while conservatives were trying to sabotage progress at every turn.
ConservRedneck June 5th, 2014 at 08:36
I agree this Nation was founded with flaws and I agree that Men make mistakes. After all even the Fugitive Slave Law was a disgrace and it was put into place by the Dem’s. In 1854 they encouraged the spread of slavery with the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Then in 1854 a new party was formed from a few Dem’s that didn’t believe in Slavery. They were called the “Republican Party”. Hmmm, Dem’s form the Republican Party, go figure. Now, was the formation of the Republican Party a liberal progression?
There are probably many things I’m sure we can agree on. Then I’m sure many things we don’t. Petty things like vacations that the President was scolded about. I was not part of the scolding. My employees know I am not a baby sitter. They also know that they have a job to do and as long as its done, I’m happy. But, you cannot tell me that Bush was not hammered by the Dem’s press because that info is not hard to find and I’m not an investigative reporter.
Briefly, I believe that when you take a mans desire to better himself you destroy the man.
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 09:10
‘Now, was the formation of the Republican Party a liberal progression?”
Of course. In the 1850s, 1860s, and 1870s the Republican Party was clearly a left-liberal party. They wanted to bring about large-scale economic, cultural, political, and social change. The “Dems”, as you call them, were the arch-conservative party resisting that change. You provide examples yourself: the Fugitive Slave Law and the encouragement of the spread of slavery are clearly conservative measures, intending to preserve the privilege of the wealthy few and maintain a brutal system of oppression.
As for your silly idea of “taking away a man’s desire to better himself”, I think of no better way to do that than by removing opportunities to receive access to healthcare, a fair wage, and other fundamental human needs.
ConservRedneck June 5th, 2014 at 09:14
I guess I was wrong, we are further away than I suggested. I wish you well.
ConservRedneck June 4th, 2014 at 12:24
hahaha…. your history is greatly distorted. I suggest you research your facts before opening your mouth. The Internet is a wonderful wealth of information.
granpa.usthai June 4th, 2014 at 13:00
the internet is a wonderful wealth of misinformation as well. Having lived through the GW misadventures, I note no distortions of any significant consequence in this posting. After the well defined ‘mission’ of kinda sorta keeping Osama Bin Laden in check in a general area of planet earth while stopping Saddam Hussein from using non existing WMD’s, the hazy objectives of POTUS Obama’s “we will hunt you down and kill you” upheld promise to the American people may seem a bit confusing to some, but I grasp the stated idea well enough.
ConservRedneck June 4th, 2014 at 13:13
*smile* I see you got my point. Everyone makes a decision based on information at hand. Some we win, some we lose. I fault no President on wrong decisions based on current info (right or wrong) unless their decision is not for the betterment of the Nation. Bush made made many mistakes also and he is not the Conservative I would have wanted. Actually I consider him to be a Liberal with an R in front of his name. But, with Obama, I feel his decisions since the beginning has been to destroy this Nation. When I say destroy, I mean to totally change the way this Nation was founded. I believe, if you take away mans need to better himself, you destroy the man.
arc99 June 4th, 2014 at 13:32
you are the only person who can control what you “feel”.
The President is not doing any of the things you claim. As the saying goes, your misconceptions are not our problem.
And sorry, but George W. Bush is not a liberal by any stretch of the imagination. I do see that you give President Bush every benefit of the doubt. But when it comes to President Obama, you “feel” that his motives are to destroy the country.
That is precisely the kind of irrational hatred and hypocrisy which makes me completely dismiss the President’s critics. It is based on what you “feel” and not an objective comparison between the previous administration and the current one.
In my book, 3,000 dead on American soil on 9/11/2001 is infinitely worse than 4 dead in a foreign country halfway around the world on 9/11/2012, regardless of how you or any other right winger “feels”.
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 01:33
“When I say destroy, I mean to totally change the way this Nation was founded.”
You could say that about Lincoln, as well. The nation was founded on slavery and white supremacy, but Lincoln *destroyed* that. I’m sure, as a conservative redneck, you were not a big fan of him, either.
There are some things that need to be destroyed. The ideology of conservatism has always held back human progress. If it were up to conservatives, blacks would still be enslaved, women would not have the right to vote, there would be no progressive labor laws, no environmental protection, no regulations to protect consumers, no wide-scale infrastructure projects to increase our standard of living, no social safety net for the elderly and unemployed, and so on.
Practically EVERY improvement we have seen in the 200+ years of the Republic has been the result of liberals fighting for change, while conservatives were trying to sabotage progress at every turn.
ConservRedneck June 5th, 2014 at 08:36
I agree this Nation was founded with flaws and I agree that Men make mistakes. After all even the Fugitive Slave Law was a disgrace and it was put into place by the Dem’s. In 1854 they encouraged the spread of slavery with the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Then in 1854 a new party was formed from a few Dem’s that didn’t believe in Slavery. They were called the “Republican Party”. Hmmm, Dem’s form the Republican Party, go figure. Now, was the formation of the Republican Party a liberal progression?
There are probably many things I’m sure we can agree on. Then I’m sure many things we don’t. Petty things like vacations that the President was scolded about. I was not part of the scolding. My employees know I am not a baby sitter. They also know that they have a job to do and as long as its done, I’m happy. But, you cannot tell me that Bush was not hammered by the Dem’s press because that info is not hard to find and I’m not an investigative reporter.
Briefly, I believe that when you take a mans desire to better himself you destroy the man.
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 09:10
‘Now, was the formation of the Republican Party a liberal progression?”
Of course. In the 1850s, 1860s, and 1870s the Republican Party was clearly a left-liberal party. They wanted to bring about large-scale economic, cultural, political, and social change. The “Dems”, as you call them, were the arch-conservative party resisting that change. You provide examples yourself: the Fugitive Slave Law and the encouragement of the spread of slavery are clearly conservative measures, intending to preserve the privilege of the wealthy few and maintain a brutal system of oppression.
As for your silly idea of “taking away a man’s desire to better himself”, I think of no better way to do that than by removing opportunities to receive access to healthcare, a fair wage, and other fundamental human needs.
ConservRedneck June 5th, 2014 at 09:14
I guess I was wrong, we are further away than I suggested. I wish you well.
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 01:20
Excellent article, VegasJessie. Spot on.
VegasJessie June 5th, 2014 at 01:42
Much thanks Jasperjava!!
TeapartyCrasher June 13th, 2014 at 13:26
I’d still love to read the findings of the 9/11 commission. Aren’t they classified?
jasperjava June 5th, 2014 at 01:20
Excellent article, VegasJessie. Spot on.
TeapartyCrasher June 13th, 2014 at 13:26
I’d still love to read the findings of the 9/11 commission. Aren’t they classified?