Skip to main content

Another phenomenal reporting job by The Washington Post's Dana Priest has this bombshell:

Intelligence officials think that bin Laden is hiding in the northern reaches of the autonomous tribal region along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. This calculation is based largely on a lack of activity elsewhere and on other intelligence, including a videotape, obtained exclusively by the CIA and not previously reported, that shows bin Laden walking on a trail toward Pakistan at the end of the battle of Tora Bora in December 2001, when U.S. forces came close but failed to capture him.

That was December 2001. Only two months later, Bush decided to pull out most of the special operations troops and their CIA counterparts in the paramilitary division that were leading the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan to prepare for war in Iraq, said Flynt L. Leverett, then an expert on the Middle East at the National Security Council.

"I was appalled when I learned about it," said Leverett, who has become an outspoken critic of the administration's counterterrorism policy. "I don't know of anyone who thought it was a good idea. It's very likely that bin Laden would be dead or in American custody if we hadn't done that."

Hot on bin Laden's trail, when his basic whereabouts were still known, and just months after bin Laden engineered the most devestating foreign attack on American soil in our history, this president gives up the chase to fight a bogeyman in Iraq who had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks. The basic reality of the situation was that George W. Bush just wasn't all that interested in seeing bin Laden brought to justice, either in December 2001, or a few months later when he shifted focus to Iraq, or a year later on March 13, 2003 when he said these infamous words:

And, again, I don't know where he [bin Laden] is.  I  --  I'll repeat what I said.  I truly am not that concerned about him.

As DemFromCT points out, this disregard, this cutting and running from the job in Afghanistan, has been paid for dearly in terms of coalition troop losses, a resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan, making that nation even more unstable, and of course, the escape of bin Laden. Not to mention the havoc his Iraq Debacle has wreaked in the Middle East. In combination, these factors make the world a far more dangerous place than it was five years ago.

What I want to know is, did any of these choice scenes make "The Path to 9/11," or are they all the made-up ones about that other president who didn't get bin Laden? I mean, here's the opportunity for some great, dramatic scenes of loss of presidential will and nerve that they wouldn't even have had to fake. Here's the president who really did decide he didn't want to get bin Laden. Suppose ABC has any of that footage in their movie? I suspect not, or we'd be hearing the shrieking of the 900 wing-nuts who got advanced review copies from shore to shore.

Update: Blutodog points out that Tora Bora was after September 11, so the screenwriters didn't have to deal with any of the messy facts of the BushCo response. Maybe they were so appalled by the incompetence, the willful disregard, the cutting and running by Bush that they had to write it in, and so attributed it all to Clinton. Yeah, I'm sure that's what happened. Was that a pig that just flew by?

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:09 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I see a campaign ad. (9+ / 0-)

    Talk about a flip flopper.

    One day Osama is Hitler, the next he has sanctuary in the hills of Pakistan.

    Overthrow the Government ~Vote~

    by missliberties on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 06:58:30 AM PDT

  •  This needs to be the topic (16+ / 0-)

    of the blogosphere from now until November.
    No Mickey Movie.
    No Lieberman's not pure enough.
    Fritz Allen has probably already hung himself.

    Bush fumbled the most important decision of our lifetimes. Period.
    Fork time.

  •  I posted a related diary this morning (7+ / 0-)

    centered on how Iraq was the distraction that may have lost UBL for good.

    The Constitution is not negotiable

    by Hkingsley on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:00:06 AM PDT

  •  Post 9/11 (7+ / 0-)

    Not in defense of the ABC fakudrama but Tora Bora was as we all know post-9/11 not pre- 9/11

    "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

    by Blutodog on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:00:17 AM PDT

  •  an unacceptable outrage! been outraged ever since (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  Pumpkinhead taking down Cheney onTV now (7+ / 0-)

    Of course, Cheney is hooked up to a respirator, so it's lacking drama

  •  The Big Lie, or Doublethink for the proles (7+ / 0-)

    ABC/Disney/rightwing portrays Clinton as letting Bin Laden go free.

    It was Bush who did that.

    Say the lie. Repeat it.

    See the latest release from the "Ministry of Truth".




    "Hypocrite lecteur, -- mon semblable, -- mon frère!" -- Baudelaire

    by Valtin on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:02:45 AM PDT

  •  They were also intercepting his radio comm (5+ / 0-)

    See CNN here.

    The meme for this election is "Bush let Bin Laden go when we had him surrounded in Tora Bora."

    "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter." Dr. ML King, from a jail cell in Birmingham, Alabama in 1963.

    by bewert on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:02:46 AM PDT

  •  The big angle (6+ / 0-)

    is that it was because Iraq was already central to W's thinking. It was Iraq that got in the way. They can't get away with this.

    The Constitution is not negotiable

    by Hkingsley on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:03:53 AM PDT

  •  In other words... (8+ / 0-)

    ...they confabulated the scene in "The path to 9/11" in order to facilitate countering of their own actual failures.

    "Projection" indeed, as pointed out above.

    We need to end this bullshit.  

    Never, never brave me, nor my fury tempt:
      Downy wings, but wroth they beat;
    Tempest even in reason's seat.

    by GreyHawk on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:04:28 AM PDT

  •  Harvey Keitel (0+ / 0-)
    I want to know how all these actors are unaware of the Tora Bora incident as well as the numerous remarks where Bush says he's apathetic about Osama.

    I am EXTREMELY suspicious of the intentions of the cast of this fucking movie.

    Benjamin Moore Paints, Bosch tools and appliances, and Thermador sponsor Desperate Housewives on ABC.

    by LandSurveyor on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:04:35 AM PDT

  •  Dana Priest has courage (9+ / 0-)

    and if our newspapers all across the country fails to report this, then we must write letters to the editors by the tens of thousands.

    We should also give Dana much love.

  •  Scapegoating + (6+ / 0-)

    The Rethugs are real good at scapegoating not just swiftboating. This so called movie is really an attempt at doing both. The Rethugs know the War is lost and are now setting up the public for the old stab in the back scenario.

    "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

    by Blutodog on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:05:06 AM PDT

    •  so.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Iraq was because of
      which was because
      the Democrats let OBL get away?

      Okay, anyone who believes the first half will probably believe the second half.

      The failure in Iraq
      was because of
      (Osama bin Laden?  the Taliban?  Saddam Hussein?  The people in charge of the military, from the Commander in Chief to Rumsfeld?)

      We must never lose it, or sell it, or give it away. We must never let them take it from us.

      by Fabian on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:22:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The failure of Iraq was because of (0+ / 0-)

        Bill Clinton, silly.  They just haven't worked that one out yet, but it will be the sequel to this movie.  It'll come out in, oh probably...September, 2008.

        "Do your best, and keep your sense of humor."--My Mom

        by mainely49 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 10:24:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Statute of Limitations (0+ / 0-)

          Isn't there a statute of limitations on blaming past President's for all the current regimes screw ups? Sure doesn't seem to be one when it comes to Billy Clinton.

          "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

          by Blutodog on Mon Sep 11, 2006 at 08:56:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think there will ever be a limit (0+ / 0-)

            on blaming Clinton.  The history books published in Texas--the capital of textbook publishing--will frame the Clinton administration as the turning point in Western and Eastern civilization if they have their way.  So ridiculous!

            "Do your best, and keep your sense of humor."--My Mom

            by mainely49 on Sat Sep 16, 2006 at 08:32:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Shocked! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    irate, Superpole, kidneystones

    Shocked, I say(in sarcasm)!
    Watching Cheney now on Meet the Press and what "we know".  The American people will probably never be sure of what "we" really know, anymore.  Shameful.

  •  The Liberal Media floodgates are officially open! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shaking the Tree, PoliticAl2008

    Over the next two days we get the beating. We have to endure the crap, the lies, the prevarications, the deceptions, the evasions and the attacks.

    And then...precedent has been set. One of the four living ex-Presidents has had a "fictional" account of his time in office released on TV.

    What do you think our movies are going to look like?

    It's open season on Bushco and everything literally is possible.

    Of course, the facts alone are damning enough.

    Our day will come.

  •  Why does bin Laden set our Iraq Strategy? (5+ / 0-)

    What is so amazing is that Bush takes bin Laden’s view on Iraq as key to success in Iraq.  He can’t see that Iraq is taking resources away from the pursuit of bin Laden, that bin Laden wants us in Iraq so the Taliban can rebuild.  What kind of idiot takes his enemy’s statements as their policy?  Sure makes you think Bush and bin Laden are so tightly in bed with each other that Blair is jealous.

    Do the right thing 'casue it feels better.

    by John Boy on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:10:10 AM PDT

  •  so what you are saying is (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, irate, Shaking the Tree
    The infamous sandy berger fabrication actually happened but it was under BUSH!!!

    The eyes of fear want you to put bigger locks on your doors, buy guns, close yourself off. The eyes of love, instead, see all of us as one. -Bill Hicks

    by waitingforvizzini on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:10:30 AM PDT

    •  after this dog airs (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shaking the Tree

      I think that point should be hit hard.  

      Republican'ts thought this would help them.  We should use this as an advantage to bludgeon them with the truth.

      They should feel the heat until the election about this just like ABC has for the last few days.  This has given us a way to focus on all of Bush and the rubber stampers failures and why we need change.

      "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little safety will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

      by glynis on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:50:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Sunday news shows (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Da Rat Bastid
    If our liberal pundit types on TV are smart, they will be able to use the controversy about "Path to 9/11" to publicize this story.  It is a great, clear talking point - "They fictionalized a scene of Clinton calling off capturing OBL and letting him get away, but Bush did it for real."  And the CIA has it on videotape, so this is actually documentary truth, not 'docudrama' truth.
  •  New Campaign Slogan (4+ / 0-)

    "Bush Let Bin Laden Go"

    Say it over and over and over and over...

    The Meek Shall Inherit NOTHING

    by LickBush on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:14:23 AM PDT

  •  We can use this in Path to 200(?) (0+ / 0-)
  •  Notice what it doesn't say? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mcjoan, sessal, gchaucer2

    "This could all end tomorrow." One unsolicited walk-in. One tribesman seeking to collect the $25 million reward. One courier who would rather his kids grow up in the United States. One dealmaker, "and this could all change," Berntsen said.

    NOT "one illegally intercepted covert extradition to a foreignn extra waterboarding session at Guantanamo..."

    Well you loved me as a loser and now you're worried that I just might win.

    by SingularExistence on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:17:26 AM PDT

  •  Don't Make Such a Big Deal About Bin Laden (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Yes of course we should be focusing much more on the Islamic extremist threat instead of Iraq.  But by stressing so much that we haven't found Bin Laden we Democrats are setting ourselves up for disaster when Bin Laden is found.  Assume he will be found eventually (before the election??).  When he is found, I do not want the reaction to be "now the Repblicans have won the war on terror -- their strategy is best".  The correct reaction would be "any one person is not that important, we are still not doing all we should to overcome Al Queda and Islamic extremism."

    •  I agree, in part (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Coherent Viewpoint

      We shouldn't set ourselves up for an October surprise that UBL is caught.

      But here's another point.  UBL has been on the loose all these years ... free to recruit, free to train, free to another attack and another and another.  If he's caught tomorrow, he was free to do his deed until then.

    •  Bin Laden is much more useful to Bush (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      alive than he is dead. It reminds me of the way parents in Ancient Rome used Hannibal to keep their kids in line -- "You'd better be good or Hannibal will come and get you."

      •  been selling that one for 3 years (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        mainely49, Coherent Viewpoint

        ..a word to the wise is sufficient...even Google won't help a fool..

        by Demogator on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:08:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Am I the only one who learned to punctuate? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I guess while I was studiously learning about Mr. Comma and Mr. Apostrophe instead of scheming how I was going to get into Suzie Johnson's pants, the world passed me by.

          Seriously, this poster loses a lot of its punch because Mr. Comma and Mr. Apostrophe aren't where they belong.

          •  no, but close - (0+ / 0-)

            I wish people understood that grammar, spelling and punctuation are a big deal - this could have been a GREAT poster, but sadly any impact it might have had has been completely negated by the lack of communication skills possessed by the author.

            And, Champurrado, some of us managed to learn punctuation AND get into Ms. Johnson's pants, it just requires a willingness to work as hard at the one thing as the other :)

    •  another turning point? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Da Rat Bastid

      just like when we killed Sadaam's sons, found all those other guys and killed Zhwarhi (sp?) that vindicated their strategy?

      Bush made a big deal out of bin Laden when they couldn't deliver he backed off and tried to pretend he wasn't that important.

      He's important because he masterminded 9/11.  It's important to bring him to justice (if he's not dead already).

      But brining him in won't "win" the WOT and it won't "win" the war in Iraq or Afghanistan.  Just like all those other single incidents didn't have much effect.  Because the WOT, as the Brits showed, is about intelligence gathering and police work not war.

      I say we make a big deal and we point all this out at the same time.  

      "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little safety will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

      by glynis on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:02:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  No No No - It was CLINTON who had UBL (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    It was Clinton who could have killed UBL and that was PRIOR to 9/11.   No, it was Bush that could have killed IBL but let him go. ..... Oh shit, who can tell??  Who can KNOW the truth?  Maybe both are true, but they're probably both lies.  S.N.A.R.K.

    Effective negating of Bush letting UBL go.

    •  According (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Have we learned no lessons from our past?
      to an article in the Iran Daily, dated August 6, 2006:

      "[Secretary of Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali] Larijani emphasized that the root cause of unrest in the region is the US attitude."
      "'We have been informed that the US ambassador to Iraq (Zalmay Khalilzad) has held talks with the leaders of Iraqi terrorist groups and urged them to shift their policy and focus their operations on Iran and Iraqi Shiites, instead of the US,' he said."

      We have purportedly played Iran against Iraq and Iraq against Iran when it has been thought to be in our best interest in the past. We armed Iran to fight Iraq, and when Iran went overboard & took U.S. hostages, we armed Iraq to help them defeat Iran. So, is it so unthinkable that the terrorists we call our enemies are now the ones with whom we are trying to make into our allies against Iran?

      Have we learned NOTHING about this sort of dealings?!  We can't trust our Administration and they can't trust these "friendships" they make.  UBL was once a "friend" we empowered against Russia's invasion into Afghanistan.

      •  I am in no way saying (0+ / 0-)

        I am in no way saying Mr. Larijani is stating the truth or if he really has proper information of such a conversation. But, I am saying that his claims are not far fetched, based on our past behavior. Regardless, this sort of activity - getting in bed with the enemy - has got to stop once and for all. It haunts us in the end, every time, and it deteriorates our integrity completely.

    •  That's the entire Karl Rove gig. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Southern Mouth

      Lie, lie some more, confuse, muddy the water, obfuscate, lie some more. That's the entire Rove M.O. When it all gets sorted out we're into the next century.

  •  whatever happened to the anthrax terrorist? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    people for truth

    The anthrax terrorist DID unleash wmds on American soil and this event has all but been forgotten by Bush and the press. This fact alone has made me very suspicious of Bush's war on terra.

  •  A typical "Rovian" strategy.,, (8+ / 0-)

    attack your opponent for the crimes you are guilty of.

    "Gentlemen, Chicolini may sound like an idiot and look like an idiot, but don't let that fool you, he really is an idiot ." Rufus T Firefly

    by irate on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:22:14 AM PDT

    •  time to turn it on them (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      irate, Shaking the Tree

      and the lies in this movie give us the opportunity to do so.

      The MSM play on this is negative. Yeah there are a few trying to carry the water but there's too many panning it because of the inaccuracies.  

      We use that as the wedge.

      "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little safety will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

      by glynis on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:08:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Interesting indeed... (4+ / 0-)

    I didn't really think this information would ever emerge into the blogosphere much less the lickspittle corporate media.

    Of course Bush pulled the pursuit off OBL. The last thing he and Cheney want is to catch Osama. He is their most valuable tool in the suppression of dissent and the destruction of our freedom here at home.

    Fortunately, many Americans are now aware that Bush and Cheney and the people who put them in power, no I don't mean the Supreme Court, do not have America's best interests at heart.

    OBL has lost much of his 'scare power' due to The Idiot's mishandling of the 'OBL wants to blow up your bingo game...' meme so I don't think we will see or hear much about him personally in this 'be afraid' campaign the Bushist scum are trying to mount to cling to power.

    It will be more lies about Iraq as even the AssClowns like Mehlman and Frist know that Iraq is killing them politically.

    I don't put it past OBL to try another 'I'm comin' to git ya...' video though.

    Put please let's put to bed the idea that Bush and his cabal ever wanted to catch Osama.

    "Such is the irresistible nature of truth that all it asks, and all it wants, is the liberty of appearing."

    by Nestor Makhnow on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:23:28 AM PDT

  •  Did the Vice President just say (6+ / 0-)

    on MTP the Bin Laden has been the Administration's top priority over the past few years?

    Wow...who knew MTP would be the most fictional show on TV the Sunday of the Mouse-U-Mentary?

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you...then you win -- Mahatma Gandhi

    by justmy2 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:24:08 AM PDT

  •  Plus (6+ / 0-)

    You really should research the reactions of the British SAS team who unlike the lies in the Mickey Mouse propaganda really did have eyes on Bin Laden at Tora Bora and could have easily mouse trapped him there (they had him on three sides and only need to close the door, which they were certain they could.)

     Either Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld at the Pentagon then for some mysterious reason ordered some gold coins sent for some war lord to capture or kill Bin Laden and called the SAS off the kill/capture. The money and the warlord were three days getting there and the SAS who had worked hard to trap Bin Laden had to set and watch him escape. Research the comment made by the British SAS team leaders and men, it's an eye opener and a complete 180-degree reversal of the blame game played in the Mickey Mouse ABC Docu drama. The Neo-Con are not only propagandizing, playing with history, but trying to cover their arses in regard to who keeps giving Osama passes.  

    Integrity is the doing what is right in the absence of witnesses and with no other gain in mind.

    by Bobjack23 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:27:04 AM PDT

    •  Perfect! (0+ / 0-)

      That's how we should refer to it.

      The Mickey Mouse docudrama.  

      "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little safety will deserve neither and lose both." Benjamin Franklin

      by glynis on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:11:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Considering the close ties between (0+ / 0-)

      the Bush family and the Bin Laden family, and the fact that Bush Sr. was with one of the Bin Laden's on 9-11, I imagine a deal was struck to keep Osama safely in exile.  I know he is not in favor with his family, but he is still part of their kinship group, and I don't think they would let him be captured by the West.

      Just my thoughts on this.

      "Do your best, and keep your sense of humor."--My Mom

      by mainely49 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 10:35:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  No one could have forseen Osama escaping, snark (3+ / 0-)

    The book "Jawbreaker" is by one of the commanders of the Special Forces that had Osama backed up to the mountains at Tora Bora. This Jawbreaker author(I forget his name) asked Rumsfled numerous times over the course of many days to drop additional Special Forces behind Bin Laden in the mountains so he couldn't get away. Rumsfled said the mountains were impassable. Yeah right, people have only been going over those mountains for the last 5,000 years. And of course Bin Laden simply walked a trail over the mountains. Obviously Rumsfled allowed this, as did Bush and Cheney. You might say that Bin Laden rums-fled from Tora Bora.

  •  Uh oh... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Mr. Medal of Freedom is the next to get thrown under the bus based on VP Cheney's answers on MTp....some one needs to ask him what he thinks of getting his name sullied all over the place...oh wait...he probably care less now that he has his "Keep Your Mouth Shut" medal...

    How can Tenet, Franks, and Bremer sleep at night...

    the mind boggles...

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you...then you win -- Mahatma Gandhi

    by justmy2 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:31:11 AM PDT

  •  come on... it's quite simple (3+ / 0-)

    Bush needs Bin Laden alive. Peeople need to be scared of the boogeyman, and noone is scared of a dead boogeyman.

    The moment the boogeyman is dead, people will forget about him and Al Queda and will start worry instead about health care, education, unemployment and government corruption.

    And that makes starting new wars much more difficult.

  •  McJoan (0+ / 0-)

    You should include a link to the latest DNC ad which ties the Bin Laden/Bin Forgotten/Suddenly Bin Remembered 2 Months Before An Election meme together.

    Phillybits - A Showcase Of Political News And Thought

    by Stand Strong on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:33:48 AM PDT

  •  Usama's escape (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mainely49, upperleftedge

        On the occasion of the capture of one of an enemy's favored princes, one may, upon such an occasion, EXILE but not EXECUTE said prince.                                  After all, these "Geoges" are not named after Washington.

  •  "Willful disregard" and "criminal endangerment" (3+ / 0-)

    should be watch-terms for today.

    Never, never brave me, nor my fury tempt:
      Downy wings, but wroth they beat;
    Tempest even in reason's seat.

    by GreyHawk on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:38:51 AM PDT

  •  IMO, there needs to be (7+ / 0-)

    a clear and concise connection made between the bush Crime Family and the Bin Laden Family.

    There is so much out there to prove that both of these families go WAAAY back, like decades.  And, during such an intense election year, and as a way to combat the "Mock-You-Drama", I think this would stick.

    Hell, georgie and Osama's brother went into business together when georgie was living in TX!  And, iirc, the bin Laden family helped to bail georgie out during one of his many "fecal touch" business failings.

    If ANYone has a conflict of interest with regard to capturing or KILLING OBL, it is most certainly georgie w. bushCo.

    What an opitome of evil, this cabal.  Honestly, they are a cancer across our country, our World, mestasticizing daily and devouring our various riches.

    •  This is close to my comment above (0+ / 0-)

      that these families are very closely tied to one another, and that it seems a deal has been worked out to keep Osama safely in exile.  This way both families win:  the bushco's get to have their bogeyman to scare us with; the bin laden's get an annoying and embarassing member of the family safely tucked away and out of their hair.

      "Do your best, and keep your sense of humor."--My Mom

      by mainely49 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 10:40:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This was reported on MSNBC and in the WSJ before (0+ / 0-)

    MSNBC reported this way back after it happened, and the Wall Street Journal followed up with a report confirming the story in December of 2004 - conveniently publishing it after the election.

    And, yes, that Wall St. Journal.

    Does the Post add anything to what has been previously reported?

    "I'm not a member of an organized political party. I'm a Democrat!" - Will Rogers

    by newjeffct on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:40:28 AM PDT

  •  Russert is doing a pretty good job on Cheney (2+ / 0-)

    He started off a little bit weak, getting deep into the weeds on Afghanistan, and not pinning Cheney down on several questionable assertions.

    But he's got the Evil One in a pretty tight box on Iraq.

    He's disavowing any connection between Iraq and 9/11, but insisting that the "historical relationship" with Al Qaeda was sufficient reason to invade.

    The Senate Intelligence Committee report is really making their rhetorical lives more difficult.

    The smell of bullshit is now thick in the air.  

  •  Again, Folks, It's Academic (4+ / 0-)

    just who fears OBL the most? the "royal family" in Saudi Arabia, that's who.

    OBL has made it clear the House of Saud is a prime target, mainly because they allow the presense of the U.S. military in the Holy Land. the House of Saud now for decades has used their petrol-profits to buy U.S. produced armaments and training-- which of course has been a cozy relationship for both parties.

    we never hear about this in the MSM of course, but poverty is becoming a real problem for the House of Saud:

    The dozen years since the Persian Gulf War have seen slums grow up on the outskirts of Jeddah and Riyadh, the capital. Beggars hawk bottles of water at intersections. Penniless women huddle in strips of shade outside their crumbling mud-brick houses, begging for money. Many families in the capital are so poor they can't afford electricity. Raw sewage runs through parts of Jeddah... The increasingly perilous economic situation that all in Saudi Arabia but the royalty face today may be a big factor in recruiting young Saudis to terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda. Chronic joblessness, diminished incomes and difficulty in collecting enough money to marry and start families are all issues that can evoke anger.[1]

    poverty breeds extremism-- a no brainer. just as al Sadr is considered a hero by significant numbers of poor Iraqi citizens, OBL is considered a hero by significant number of poor people in Saudi Arabia.

    "Peace is not the absence of war; it is a virtue; a state of mind; a disposition for benevolence; confidence; and justice." Spinoza

    by Superpole on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:43:17 AM PDT

  •  Now that the MSM (0+ / 0-)

    are in the hip pocket of the ruling class (cons) in America and therefore the enemy of hard working people everywhere, its no wonder that they are doing everything possible to keep the fascists in power, lying is one of the less evasive means they and the cons rely on.

  •  Who 'Made up' this scene? (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:

    Clinton drops the ball.

    Ah yes, Tom Brokaw, wingnut.

    Methinks ya'll doth protest too much.

    "It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man."

    by Kid Dynomite on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 07:51:18 AM PDT

    •  is it that hard to type? (0+ / 0-)



      Here's some free advice:  when you start trolling,it's good to start off subtly, so that people like me don't start troll-rating you from your first post onwards.

      Stupid.  You'll go down quick.

  •  Cheney is on Meet the Press. (4+ / 0-)

    I find him difficult to listen to.  I know I should listen carefully for his next BIG LIE, but it is "hard work".

    Here is one catch phrase he has repeated a few times and I think we'll need a counter for: "Validates the Strategy of the Terrorists".

    Russert is asking him about the Times article about Osama...  Cheney says that there has been no lessening of their activity or their interest {bullshit}

    Now peace pact between Pakistan and Taliban is a "wrong premise" and not true says Cheney.

    Cheney disagrees that we took our eye off the ball in Afghanistan because there were always narcotics being produced there (that wasn't the heart of the question Dick) and he says that everything is groovy because they have a parliament - it is not easy - they have effectively gotten the "locals" into the fight - {HA - yes we saw the Taliban attack yesterday Dick}.

    Cheney says that Iraq is part of the War on Terror.  "Great progress" against "one of the worst regimes of modern times" - elections, parliament, bazillions of Iraqi troops!  Its all good.  Now we are in the "Imagine" part about if we still had Saddam. {Yoko Ono really should sue for copyright infringement - kidding but wouldn't it be nice}

    It is all George Tenet's fault that we went into Iraq because he said "It is a slam dunk" - {hope "it" really meant Iraq - wouldn't that be embarassing if he was talking about something else}

    Okay so we are back to the 9/11 crutch for why we invaded Iraq - that "drove our thinking" Cheney says... He is talking really fast saying lots of things that don't really make sense - thatis why he is talking fast - so you can't follow the lies too closely. {But this was a moment where Dick could be said to be a paraniod cause he says we were attacked so they decided lots of people wanted to attack us - which just was not true at that time - right after 9/11}

    "Everybody" believed that there were WMD in Iraq - "even Bill Clinton" - {probably because you kept telling everyone that there were WMD, but never mind Dick}

    It is the CIA's fault. {But it is NOT the CIA's fault - it is Bush/Cheney's fault and it always will be}

    Iraq was a "State Sponsor of Terror" in 1990.  More "George Tenet said that"...

    59% that the war in Iraq is not worth it. Cheney says people are frustrated {no lie there}

    Millions of Iraqis are counting on us says Dick. Cheney asks, "What's Karzi going to think in Kabul?" if we leave Iraq.  If we leave they will all feel abandoned.  {Personally, I'd be relieved if I were an Iraqi, but that's just me}

    Cheney says, "Absolutely essential that we complete that mission" {problem is that there is no definition for "complete" ever from these people}

    "We did not anticipate an insurgency that would last this long" Cheney says and, "We have done a helluva job here at home in securing the nation..."

    "Treat this as a war not a law enforcement problem which is the way they treated these things before we arrrived"

    Now he says that the Shiia and Sunni strife in Iraq is because of Al Qaeda which is bullshit.

    Tim asks: What is victory?  What is winning?

    Cheney basically says it is when Iraq is not a threat and is all happy and peaceful.  

    Commercial break and I am out...

  •  I will repeat this.. often (3+ / 0-)

    ..a word to the wise is sufficient...even Google won't help a fool..

    by Demogator on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:11:07 AM PDT

  •  Perhaps Bush has reason not to be concerned (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, Demogator, Da Rat Bastid

    Maybe he knows that without his own incompetence or willful ignorance, bin Laden wouldn't have succeeded at all. Even on 9/11.

    -8.38, -4.97 "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

    by thingamabob on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:11:40 AM PDT

  •  We cut and ran from Afghanistan (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Da Rat Bastid

    to go on a snark hunt in Iraq.

    My contribution to today's discussion: a sound byte.

    We're all pretty crazy some way or other; some of us just hide it better. "Normal" is just a setting on the dryer.

    by david78209 on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:13:30 AM PDT

  •  Al-Qaeda is Cellular (0+ / 0-)

    I don't have any proof, but bin Laden seems intelligent enough that he must have plans in place in the event of his capture or death.

    There are cells of stateless, desperate people willing to die in order to damage "the west." Traditional deterrence is not effective on these people. A threat will continue to grow after Osama unless basic conditions change.

    Where I diverge from the Bush agenda, of course, is in what to do about it.

    I think the key is to reduce our vulnerability to attack while we reduce the recruiting opportunities of these desperate cells.

    What tools do we have? When I  say "behavior" below, I mean "objectives and actions."

    We can control the behavior of:

    1. Businesses based in democratic countries that are active in Muslim countries, particularly oil and resource companies;
    1. The CIA, both overt, covert, and the off-budget black ops spooks;
    1. The World Bank, IMF, and other aid programs;
    1. The U.S. Dept of State and "western" diplomacy;
    1. Law enforcement, trade and travel security;
    1. Military forces.  

    I've put them in this order because I believe there is a rough correlation to importance and impact on the problem. Of course our own addiction to oil is a major factor that has to be addressed as quickly as possible.

    If we coordinated and aligned the behavior of all these entities towards the objectives of:

    Reducing the desperate circumstances that are fertile ground for recruiting suicide terrorists;


    Real trade and travel security;

    we would stand a chance of regaining stability and safety.

    With Bush putting 6) Military forces first, I think it is clear we are creating 10 "terrorists" for every one we kill. By condoning unfair business practices and corruption, we till the soil and plant the seeds of desperation. Some supporters of violence against the west come to their desperation not from financial hardship, but from a confluence of religious belief and a sense of social and economic injustice.

    To me the most problematic entity to control above are the off-budget black-ops spooks. There are a lot of mercenary provocateurs who profit from chaos. Our ability to rein them in is questionable, but we have to find a way.

    By the way, as I learn more about Wes Clark's positions, it seems he comprehends this wholistic view of national security very well.

    Justice - Peace.    

    (PC: -5.75, -6.56) Good men through the ages, tryin' to find the sun, still I wonder, still I wonder, who'll stop the rain? -J. Fogerty

    by RichRandal on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:13:51 AM PDT

    •  Cellular structure may mean Al Qaeda (0+ / 0-)

      could survive after bin Laden.  But that doesn't remove the fact that the capture or the killing of bin Laden would be of great political utility to the Republicans and the Bush administration.

      Katrina was America's Chernobyl.

      by lysias on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:51:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ABC DOC the best thing for sunshine ..... (0+ / 0-)

    Perhaps ABC is really on the side of the good folks, because this is going to open up all the issues that they raise to minute inspection.

    Because of this documentary, we are going to be able to lift the stone of public indifference and expose every little and big Republican vermin to daylight and sunshine.

    Thanks ABC!!!!

    •  As Always: Be Careful What U Wish For. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Keone Michaels

      Other than that, except for the left blogosphere initiative to take this propaganda film apart, PT911 would have been hailed by the SCLM as the "history project" the makers initially billed it as.

      Notice: This Comment © ROGNM

      by ROGNM on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:30:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Is this an attempt of (3+ / 0-)

      Reverse psychology by the RWCM toward bushCO???  Don't count on it.

      This is a deliberate and deceptive attempt to propagandize, lie like hell to the public, and massage the message with the blowhard echo chamber (ala Druggy LimpDong) from now until November just for the sake of winning an election.  They are trying to manipulate public opinion through the most aggregious of maneuvers ever experienced here in America (I think).  It's really just sickening and so very Soviet of them all.  Their calloused disregard for our Ideals is so obvious, it calls into question just who is assigned to the pronouns when bushCO claims, "They hate us for our freedoms".  It almost seems like they hijacked that phrase just so we couldn't use it against them!

      Makes the brain hurt, really.

      Now, that said, I truly wish that you were correct; I'm just too cynical anymore and will never ever put ANYTHING past these mofo's.

  •  I'm surprised someone hasn't come up with a decen (0+ / 0-)

    decent conspiracy that explains why this happened.

    Maybe it was just a stupid decision to leave OBL be when we had him in our sights, but usually those kinds of decisions aren't made in moments like that.

    Look at these people! They suck each other! They eat each other's saliva and dirt! -- Tsonga people of southern Africa on Europeans kissing.

    by upstate NY on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:15:45 AM PDT

    •  I touched on this in another comment (0+ / 0-)

      here, but my take is that georgie and Osama grew up together...they're relatively close in age...and I think they were childhood friends.  They probably got into all sorts of trouble together over the years..and probably LOVED to play "Risk".

      With such a history with someone, I would think it would be extremely difficult to kill that someone later on in life.

  •  Bush never cared about getting OBL (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Da Rat Bastid

    just the opposite. In a perverse way, OBL's existence helps Bush & Co. That's why they never wanted to get him. Communist Russia/China helped the Repubs. In exactly the same way, OBL and his ilk help the repubs. There is always an "enemy". Having a villain as a foil always helps repubs. They can obliterate domestic issues and tie in other foreign problems with the overarching "red scare" "wot" whatever.

    •  It's been said more than once (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      that OBL couldn't want a better 'Poster Child' for his organization than Bush.  I'm sure most of the militant Islam world feels the same.

    •  The fall back Enemy (0+ / 0-)

      First there was Osama bin Laden.
      Then there was the Taliban.
      Then there was Saddam Hussein and his imminent, threatening WMDs.
      Then there wasn't Saddam Hussein anymore.
      We didn't find his WMDs but huge stashes of weapons and explosives were 'lost'.
      The Taliban was officially declared no longer a threat.

      The 'democracies' in Afghanistan and Iraq are crumbling.  Warlords and the Taliban are staging a resurgence in Afghanistan.  Sectarian violence is destabilizing Iraq.

      a convenient group of al Quaeda members ready for "trial"
      Osama bin Laden

      We're winning, we're WINNING, damn it!  Do not talk about civil war or the record opium harvest.  And if we aren't 'winning' well, it is really Clinton's fault and we have this televised fiction to prove it.

      We must never lose it, or sell it, or give it away. We must never let them take it from us.

      by Fabian on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:32:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Only 50 to 60 American troops at Tora Bora (2+ / 0-)

    and the CIA urgently requested 600 to 800 more troops to come to Tora Bora to finish the job.  George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld in their infinite wisdom chose not to send any more troops to ensure that Bin Laden would be caught and killed. This is the real story that Christian Amamnpour brought to light in CNN Presents: In the Footsteps of Bin Laden.  Another incredible factoid brought to light was the August meeting between a CIA analyst and Bush in Crawford while Bush was taking a monthlong vacation following the 8/6/01 CIA memo saying Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US:  
    Bush's response to the CIA analyst resonates - "All right, you've covered your ass, now."

    Democrats need to be like pitbulls with this information.  These two events show the unseriousness of George W. Bush in the war on terror.

    While this most certainly is not the first time this stuff has been disseminated, it's the first time I have been so aware of it and I imagine most Americans have learned this.

    The full text of the highlights of CNN Presents: In the Footsteps of Bin Laden can be read here:

    "I thought you were gonna ask me about the pig." - George W. Bush

  •  When 60 minutes did their story (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    on Bush's "service" to our country, two items turned out to be false. After that the right considered the entire story to be false. Now it's time for payback. The fake scenes in this movie make the entire thing a lie. Case closed.

    Hot enough for ya?

    by kitebro on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 08:37:30 AM PDT

  •  Isn't Bin Laden Still On The CIA Payroll? (3+ / 0-)

    In any event G.W. Bush has shown an extraordinary "lack of interest" in the pursuit of Osama.

  •  2000 Presidential Campaign (0+ / 0-)

    What I'm wondering about is...if Bushco is so concerned about people's freedom's around the world, especially the Iraqis, why wasn't this discussed as part of his platform during the 2000 elections?   I don't recall Bush stating that one of his goals as President would be to free oppressed people around the world including the Iraqis.  When he speaks, it's as if the invasion of Iraq is the culmination of a lifelong dream to see freedom and democracy spread around the world, something he dreamt of before the attacks of 9/11. During his 'press' conferences, I mean, mini speeches, he pontificates over and over in his inept way about how everyone loves freedom.  Freedom is loved by everyone.  Everyone wants to be free.  Freeing everyone is a good thing but it's hard work.  (Then he gestures to a few reporters in the front row and says "I know, I know, there are some of you here who are tired of me talking about this but I'm gonna tell it to you again.")

    Seriously though, Bush didn't talk about toppling dictators as part of his vision for the future when he was running for President.  Just something about him, among millions of other things, that bugs me.

  •  Bush says to "flood the zone" three months ago... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lysias, upperleftedge

    In the damning WashPost story this morning about the inability to catch Bin Laden, Bush instructed troops to "flood the zone" three months ago to try and capture UBL.  So in this timeline, go after him with every resource in June, make major "Bin Laden is Hitler" speeches in September just before 9/11 anniversary, and then, what, a "major announcement" by, say, late October?  Just in time for Election Day.  And the formula from '02 and '04 repeats.  Hopefully the voters will be able to decipher this crap, but the White House's perverted co-opting of military and foreign policy in such an unprecedented and cynical way remains one of our most challenging issues.  Why wasn't the zone "flooded" in 2002, 2003, 2004, or 2005?  We ask these questions--and we know the answers--but when we're fighting against the images of a captured or dead Bin Laden at the end of this October it's going to be exceptionally hard to get oxygen when the Democrats will be put in a impossible position of having to praise the capture of UBL while criticizing the White House.  This is the kind of thing that people smarter than me need to be anticipating and preparing the effective response because we know it's coming.

  •  Bin ladden and Torra Borra (2+ / 0-)

    Bin Ladden is and was CIA. He will never be captured.

  •  A katrina foreign policy (0+ / 0-)

    That's how John Kerry put it today on CNN's Late Edition.

    That's good.

    D-Day, the newest blog on the internet (at the moment of its launch)

    by dday on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 09:13:07 AM PDT

  •  When will America (0+ / 0-)

    wake up to the fact that you could have had Bin Laden if Afghanistan had not been invaded? In stead, thousands of innocent civilians were killed in less than six months in a particularly grusome air war. Those who voted for this are complicit and should all be held accountable.

    Their [the Taliban's] initial responses demanded evidence of bin Laden's culpability in the September 11th attacks and included a proposal to try him in an Islamic court. Later, as the likelihood of military action became more imminent, they offered to extradite bin Laden to a neutral nation. Moderates within the Taliban allegedly met with American embassy officials in Pakistan in mid-October to work out a way to convince Mullah Muhammed Omar to turn bin Laden over to the U.S. and avoid its impending retaliation. President Bush rejected these offers made by the Taliban as insincere.

    March 2002

    When U.S. warplanes strafed [with AC-130 gunships] the farming village of Chowkar-Karez, 25 miles north of Kandahar on October 22-23rd,killing at least 93 civilians, a Pentagon official said, "the people there are dead because we wanted them dead." The reason? They sympathized with the Taliban1. When asked about the Chowkar incident, Rumsfeld replied, "I cannot deal with that particular village."2

    "What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties -- 3,000 - 3,400 [October 7, 2001 thru March 2002] civilian deaths -- in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan."

    Professor Marc W. Herold
    Ph.D., M.B.A., B.Sc.

    The belief that the US war in Afghanistan was not one of choice, is a grand illusion. The solid support among Americans of all party affiliations is one of the greatest American tragedies of the 21st century -- both because of the thousands of civilians who were killed, primarily by bombs and missiles, as well as the continuing chaos; but also because the invasion of Afghanistan was the real critical juncture -- not 9/11, however tragic.

    There's this difference? What's it about? -- G. W. Bush to members of the Iraqi opposition, January 26, 2003.

    by LodinLepp on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 09:47:20 AM PDT

    •  From the independent today (0+ / 0-)

      Army officer quits in protest at 'mad' Afghan war

      "We've been grotesquely clumsy - we've said we'll be different to the Americans who were bombing and strafing villages, then behaved exactly like them," he said.

      Speaking to The Sunday Times, Mr Docherty said the campaign was "a textbook case of how to screw up a counter-insurgency."

      British operations have been dogged by a badly-planned strategy, a lack of local knowledge, and shortage of troops and resources.

      The British mission has "deviated spectacularly" from its original aim of be nation-building, and troops are now scattered throughout towns in northern Helmand, where their only hope of survival is "to increase the level of violence so more people get killed".

      There's this difference? What's it about? -- G. W. Bush to members of the Iraqi opposition, January 26, 2003.

      by LodinLepp on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 11:05:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I wonder if CBS or NBC... (0+ / 0-)

    would be interested in making and airing "The Path out of Tora Bora" and airing it on the aniverary of bin Laden's escape?

    If faced with a stark choice between security and freedom, doesn't it seem like the choice of a courageous, patriotic American should be obvious?

    by Ken in Tex on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 10:01:08 AM PDT

  •  The Path After 9/11 (0+ / 0-)

    If we really want to make the Republicans look as weak on the war on terror as they actually are, we should come up with our own diary collection entitled:

    The Path After 9/11

    Afterall, isn't the nation's path since 9/11 much, MUCH more important than anything Clinton did?

    This article is a great start. Add in not deploying the hellfire-armed predators until after 9/11, and a bunch of other goodies, and that would be quite a counter-punch. It would be a very long list.

    Although, I guess a more complete diary would be a summary of Bush Counter-terrorism policies 2001-2006. But that doesn't have the zing of the Path After 9/11.

  •  Already captured or killed? (0+ / 0-)

    Maybe someone wrote about this already and I missed it, but I can't get rid of this sinking feeling that BinLaden has been captured or killed and they're waiting until days before the election to announce it.

    I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I can't understand why they would even want to keep mentioning him over and over again, making him the main boogeyman unless they planned to follow through with an announcement that he's been found.  Repeating his name only gives the Dems the opportunity to point out how inept they've been in finding him.

    So I think it's an enormous set up and the Dems are going to be caught by surprise... and then, of course, we lose.

    •  Some wars are not meant to be won (0+ / 0-)

      I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but I can't understand why they would even want to keep mentioning him over and over again, making him the main boogeyman unless they planned to follow through with an announcement that he's been found.

      I can.

      There's this difference? What's it about? -- G. W. Bush to members of the Iraqi opposition, January 26, 2003.

      by LodinLepp on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 10:29:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bush refuses Taliban offer (0+ / 0-)

    to extradite bin Laden to a neutral nation.  In early October of '01 under threat of an attack on Afghanistan by the US, some top Al Quaeda officers offered to extradite bin Laden to a neutral country.  Bush refused the offer.  Bush said they weren't "sincere."  

    The fact is the bin Laden family, like the Saudi royal family have long-time ties to the Bush family.  Think oil.

  •  Setting the terms of the national debate (0+ / 0-)

    Bush/Cheney are trying desperately to steer the public discussion away from Iraq to their invention of Islamic fascism as the epic struggle.  Bloggers should note the cpportuniy to gain control of the terms of the debate.  Bush/Cheney are open to the charge that the Iraq invasion served and strehgthened the terrorist cause and weakeened America.  We paid huge and ongoing costs in lives,treasure, and influence abroad with the effect of aiding the enemy.  This charge goes beyond thos of Iraq failure and distraction to far worse accusation of aiding the enemy and harming America. The record amply supports the charge. Once in the public arena, it will set the terms of the national debate. Bush/Cheney wil be on the defensive; Republican candidates will have a difficult time confronting it, and Republican voters already worried about Iraq will reconsider their votes.  Bloggers, here is a cchance to make History!  --Ben

  •  Dems won't but they should (0+ / 0-)

    go after Bush on this as a full-court press from now until November. Surely the blog community and the decent press (aka "the press with balls") can find enough on how Bush caved on searching the Tora Bora caves to let bin Laden remain free so Bush could keep him public enemy No. 1 and cash in on the terror ratings game. Meme: Bush risked American security for political purposes, one of many of his crimes against the state.

    "Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again." --George W. Bush

    by RevJoe on Sun Sep 10, 2006 at 01:32:42 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site