Share
 

<sigh> Is there anything more tiresome than going round-n-round with a “disconnected from reality” Bush apologist?

If you aren’t already aware, I maintain a video archive on YouTube called “The Thinking Liberal” under the name “BI30” (“Mugsy” was taken). The mantra to all the videos I post: “No opinion, spin or conspiracy theories. Just hard facts straight from the horses mouth.” You can argue someone’s opinion, but you can’t argue hard fact when it stares you in the face (though many still try).

In any case, one of my most recent videos is from a newscast just eleven days before George Bush took office proving that his Administration chose to ignore the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole:

“This newscast, just 11 days before Bush takes office, is *the first time* anyone reports that OBL was reportedly behind the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in October of 2000.”

…a clip from 1/9/01 reporting for the first time that the bombing of the Cole was connected to Osama bin Laden. Bush then took office and did NOTHING in response. Faced with this evidence, the Bush apologists have gone on the attack, blaming Clinton for 9/11 and anything else they can think of. Sadly, half of the comments in response to this video have been replies by me responding to their ridiculous arguments and defenses. Apparently, reminding me that “Bush wasn’t even in office when the Cole was attacked”, despite the fact that is the description beside the video and the first frames in the video is text saying that very thing… is the most popular response I get. The second most popular theme is to blame Clinton for 9/11 yet excuse every failure of George Bush in the months before. I want to share with you one exchange with a rabid Bush apologist that has his own video collection of Fox and GOP Talking Points blaming Clinton and the Democrats for everything bad that has ever happened since the crucifixion of Christ 2000 years ago (if you REALLY want to see his clips, you can find his link though his comments).

From “ArcticGarlicX:”

> The Cole bombing occured on Oct 12,2000, Al-Qaeda declared
> responsibility immediately. Al-Qaeda, was active
> throughout the 90’s, Clinton’s own ppl have faulted his
> lack of dealing with Al-Qaeda properly. I am one of those
> ppl who FIRMLY believe had Clinton done his job, 911 never
> would have happened. It matters little when the Media gets
> wind of W.H. Media is irrelevent to the true workings of
> the administration.

My response:

First, “reminding me” when the attack occurred is pretty obtuse since THE first image in my video is text noting that the bombing took place in October of 2000, so obviously I am well aware of when it took place.

It helps in these matters to have a good memory of what the political climate was like at the time. Every time President Clinton tried to use force to get bin Laden or contain Saddam Hussein, Republicans screamed “Wag the Dog!”, suggesting he was “inventing” conflicts to divert attention from the non-scandal of him cheating on his wife with some 22-year old tart in the Oval Office.

As for the Cole, the Presidential election was barely four weeks away, and the Republican Party had created a “what’s Bill going to try and pull to help Gore?” overtone to the looming election.

IF YOU CAN PRODUCE EVEN ONE CLIP OF A LEADING REPUBLICAN *DEMANDING* CLINTON ATTACK AL QAEDA IN RESPONSE TO THE COLE, then I will delete my video. Yes AQ “accepted responsibility right away”, but you conveniently forget that they claimed responsibility for EVERY attack, trying to provoke the U.S. into a war.

Regarding 9/11, I have yet to hear ANYONE in the GWB Administration DENY that they were warned by the outgoing Clinton Administration about the threat of AQ. One of the few holdovers from both Clinton and Bush-41, Richard Clarke, has repeatedly talked about how he could not even get Dubya and Rice to meet with him to discuss AQ until September 1st. And let’s please not forget the infamous August 6th PDB that warned that bin Laden was scouting buildings in New York for an imminent attack. Dub’s response was to ignore it. Rice called the PDB “historical”. Since when does the CIA waste the President’s time loading up his daily intelligence briefings with history lessons? Remember how hard they fought the release of that particular “history lesson” because they considered those PDB’s so sensitive.

“Blaming Clinton” for failing to prevent 9/11 is a joke. The GOP did its damnedest to tie his hands for eight years with countless pointless investigations (by comparison, they spent $20 Million investigating the “misuse” of the WH Xmas Card List” but recently only $5 million to investigate Abu Ghraib).

But with the ignored 8/6 PDB, refusal to meet with Clarke until 9/1, and now evidence that OBL himself was not connected to the attack until just days before taking office and Dubya chose NOT TO RESPOND… had Bush of acted on ANY ONE of these, he himself might of prevented 9/11. But instead, you engage in “revisionist history”, ignore/excuse Dub’s failures, and try to pin the blame on a guy who wasn’t even in office at the time and whose hands you tied for eight years with countless pointless investigations.

Why can’t “the Party of Personal Responsibility” accept responsibility for ANYTHING?

I love the defense that “if Clinton had done his job, 9/11 would not of happened. Poor George, if Bill had just taken care of OBL for him before he left office, he wouldn’t of had his glorious agenda sidetracked having to deal with terrorism. Just imagine how GREAT his Presidency might of been if he didn’t have to waste all his time hunting down bin Laden and fighting “terrorists” in Iraq! Yeesh.

Share