Posted by a member of a local forum:

Here it is 4.5 years on from the 9-11 attacks and I'd like to look at what has changed, what has not, and what has or has not been done.

Justice. First target should have been the man who attacked us, Osama bin Laden. He is still free. He is still organizing attacks. He is still issuing public statements. We have not really even done anything serious to look for him since Bush began his misadventure in Iraq. Bush went from two days after 9/11, declaring: "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our No. 1 priority, and we will not rest until we find him.” He also made several references to old west, WANTED: Dead or Alive posters. Sadly only six months later, laying political groundwork for the Iraq war, the president said: "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority." He has shown this to be true. The man who caused this 9-11 attacks is being left to do as he will so Bush can settle his old family score in Iraq.

Rebuilding the Damage. Everybody from President Bush to the most ordinary of New York citizen declared over and over again, we will rebuild. We have not even begun that process. We have made and then later rejected several plans for new office complexes at Ground Zero. None of them match in any way the scope and majesty of what had been destroyed. People keep talking about not making a target. Fear is a lousy factor in making up urban planning. Yes plan the construction to minimize dangers but don't make not offending people who hate us a major priority.

National Security. The other big bugaboo Bush and Company talked about was National Security. They used these attacks to consolidate yet more power in Washington DC. They used it to create an entire new government bureaucracy called the Homeland Security Department. This is the department that was supposed to protect us from all danger. From Chemical attacks. From Nuclear attacks, and from biological attacks. Yet it has been completely flummoxed by that biological agent known as standing water in the Gulf Coast and one of its sub-agencies FEMA has been exposed as utterly and completely incompetent and a place friends of campaign donors get put in charge of rather than professionals at disaster management, well at least under the Bush administration. So with the exception of Patriot Acts one and two which attack our Constitutional freedoms and creating a concentration camp in Cuba not much has been done here. The one real victory was overthrowing the Taliban, but Afghanistan is still a mess where we control only those areas where we have actual boots on the ground, and we have very few boots there.

International Relations. After the 9-11 attacks the sympathy and good will of all the non-Muslim world was with the USA, how has that changed? Well first we created a naziesque concentration camp in Cuba, because what we do there is illegal under both our law and international laws and treaties we are signatory meant it had to be somewhere not really US soil. A military base in Cuba fit the bill. Then Bush created out of a tissue of lies, a war the rest of the world told him over and over again were lies and the war was not needed. For months Cheney and the rest of the administration outright lied and told the American people Saddam had massive quantities of weapons of mass destruction and had serious ties to 9-11 and was in fact one of those responsible for the attacks on our soil. Not only were all of these lies, but they had the evidence that shows all of them were lies and they didn't care, they wanted this war and they created it. This administration of chicken hawks who all avoided Vietnam, and none of whom have children in the fight are sending our kids to die in Iraq so Bush could avenge his father and Cheney can add to the bottom line of Halliburton. Iraq continues to degrade as more and more people are radicalized by all the violence. Trying to teach Muslims democracy is as doomed to fail as trying to teach pigs to sing. Corporations make huge money, politicians use the war to scare and control us, and all this for only the cost of a few thousand ordinary lives. . . .

What really sickens me looking at this list is that all of those Bush backers and apologists point to his Post 9-11 leadership as his greatest asset. What leadership? Someone needs to send his kids, and then him to Iraq to see what he made first hand, in the front lines and without his bodyguards. But no, he would only get drunk and go AWOL again I am sure. It is the chicken hawk way of his. Of course he'd blame some combat vet for it though. Always refusing to take blame for his mistakes is his way as well. The guy simply sickens me.

I realise that he does a lot of Bush bashing in this post ... but ... his reasoning and his rationale coincides with the findings of many investigations and historical observations of the last 4 1/2 years.

I believe that my opinion of King George is well known on this forum ... I have made no 'BONES" about how I feel (excuse the pun).

LEAVE THE REALISATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH IRAQ SOONER OR LATER OUT OF YOUR DISCUSSIONS ... IT HAS NO BEARING ON THIS POST.

WAS THIS GENTLEMAN VERY FAR OFF THE MARK?

I reckon that articles like this will become more and more wide spread. I think the antagonists will get more and more agitated and react sharper. On the long run it can be one of those central issues that can divide and nation in two. Yep, this is has all the ingredients for a disaster.

Well, mostly this guy's post is just a parrot of a bunch of other articles from other websites. He's not really worried about the truth, he's more focused on crying about the POTUS and attacking everything.

Like this:

Well first we created a naziesque concentration camp in Cuba

I'm not even going to take the time to point out all of the other ridiculous comments, well, except for maybe this one:

Someone needs to send his kids,

What the heck do his kids have to do with anything?

This guy is angry and bitter, and nothing he said is of any value to me because all he did was rant and rely on ad hominem to support his copied opinions. I guess I just don't take anyone seriously that can't control themselves long enough to hit the facts and share their opinions without 3rd grade name calling.

In answer to your question Chief, I think it is a matter of opinion as to whether this guy is far off the mark or not.

I feel he didn't even put a round downrange let alone hit paper. All he did was fire blanks.

Originally Posted by Marinerhodes

In answer to your question Chief, I think it is a matter of opinion as to whether this guy is far off the mark or not.

I feel he didn't even put a round downrange let alone hit paper. All he did was fire blanks.

I think every round he fired whistled through the rigging. I may be wrong but he sounds like one of the irrational Bush haters who doesn't even know why he hates him.

Originally Posted by Missileer

I think every round he fired whistled through the rigging. I may be wrong but he sounds like one of the irrational Bush haters who doesn't even know why he hates him.

You're not far off the mark ... almost every post he has made that concerned Bush was in like vein ... the real problem that I see is that some of what he says resonates with many Americans (and not just Bush haters). Even some of his own Republicans have begun to question some of GW's decisions and are looking back with eyes open for the first time ... they are beginning to ask some of the same questions which this post asked.

No matter which side of the argument you come down on ... you will have to admit there are still unanswered questions about a whole host of issues that Bush was prime mover on.

Aren't there always unanswered questions when it comes to politics and the bullpucky that goes on behind closed doors?

No matter what is said or who says it President Bush - at least I think - did what he felt was best at the time. I try to never second guess the man (or woman) on the ground. He (or she) may have information I am not privy to at the time. Even if that information may or may not be correct.

Originally Posted by Marinerhodes

Aren't there always unanswered questions when it comes to politics and the bullpucky that goes on behind closed doors?

No matter what is said or who says it President Bush - at least I think - did what he felt was best at the time. I try to never second guess the man (or woman) on the ground. He (or she) may have information I am not privy to at the time. Even if that information may or may not be correct.

I'd like to agree with you ... but ... the bullpucky in this case is what took us to war (again) and the justification as enumerated by Bush and his minions just don't survive the 'smell test' ... this ISN'T a case of second guessing someone ... he and all of his toadies had it and still have it completely wrong ... every investigation into EVERY justification used by Bush etal has been proven to be a half truths at best or patently completely false (out and out lies).

Three years after the invasion of Iraq and GW and friends are still trying to come up with an excuse for the invasion that will resonate with the American public ... this is NOT the picture of a President who did what he thought was best ... this is the picture of someone who is still trying to cover his own *ss.

Originally Posted by Chief Bones

Three years after the invasion of Iraq and GW and friends are still trying to come up with an excuse for the invasion that will resonate with the American public ...

That says it all Chief. In general and in specific.

No matter what reasons are given if the American People are not happy with it, then the politicians are will keep looking until they find one that will make people happy. Whether it is factual is a whole different ball game. So far President Bush's opponents are on top.

All I can add is that I'd hate to be the next President, regardless of party they'd better be ready. After all the personal attacks on the President, nothing will be off the table. I guess that's what you could call setting a precedent. President Carter was the first ex to attack a sitting President, one no-no out of the way. President Clinton started out okay but he also joined in the cacaphony against the President. All this has succeeded in doing is tearing down America in the eyes of the world. If there was bi-partisan support for the war, Old Glory wouldn't be so soiled and limp by now.