When Richard Clarke was testifying before the 9/11 commision earlier this year he stated "they were aware of the possibility of a plot by al-Qaida involving airplanes in attacks against the U.S.A. prior to 9/11". Then later National Security advisor Condolezza Rice refuted Clarke's statement saying that "before 9/11 happened she hadn't been aware or heard of a plot by al-Qaida to use airplanes in attacks against the U.S.A.". I couldn't imagine that she wouldn't have known, even before 9/11 i had heard on a news program of the possibility of such a plot. Since the time Mrs. Rice made that statement, the Bush administration has admitted that they were aware of a possible terror attack prior to 9/11. She knowingly lied about this, more than likely she was told to lie. Instead of taking heed to Richard Clarke's advice about the threat of terrorism, Bush didn't take it seriously and chose to ignore it, and focused his efforts towards invading Iraq. Even though Bush knew al-Qaida was responsible for the attacks, he wanted desperately to find a way to implicate that Iraq may have been involved also. If they had done what Richard Clarke had advised them to do instead of ignoring it, 9/11 may have been prevented or the effects could have been lessened. Bush don't want the American people to realize that he was more concerned with his vendetta against Saddam Hussein, than preventing terrorism. G W Bush should have done something that may have prevented the deaths of nearly 3,000 people in the 9/11 attacks, but he didn't even try. He didn't even think it was serious enough to warn the country, instead he went on vacation.

If there was any real substance to the terror alerts (except as a way to instill fear into the hearts and minds of lots and lots of people) we've had so many of since 9-11, and especially in reference to the latest one, do you think Bush would keep campaigning as busily as he's been since the end of the DNC?

Catherine

I just heard about the bin Laden tape friday. It's amazing to me that the Bush administration claims that they were just informed of the tapes existance. I wonder if they were telling the truth, or just mentioning it just in time to coincide with the election. Anyway yes the tape is bin Laden, but it seems highly suspect on Bush's part to just inform us. More than likely they've known about this tape for at least two weeks or so at least. I don't believe that they just found out.

After 9/11, Bush promised to the American people that bin Laden would be captured dead or alive. He has not lived up to that promise. What does he think he should be given four more years to do it? Bush has already had three and a half years. I don't think he deserves another chance. He has failed to accomplish this objective, and instead got the U.S. involved in a war in Iraq under questionable reasons, reasons that turned out to false or outright deceptions. Bush should have focused on bin Laden and al-Qaeda before diverting into something else.

When Kerry becomes president he will make capturing bin Laden his number one priority. Even if it means removing troops from Iraq, and re-deploying them to Afghanistan. More troops are needed to do this.

Everyone believes that bin Laden is somewhere in Pakistan. The Pakistani government should be asked to search for bin Laden on their side of the border and throughout their country, while our troops continue to look on the Afghani side. Ask them if they think they will need assistance from us to do this. If they say no that wouldn't be a good idea. If they don't want help, then they should step up their efforts to find him.

Otherwise, tell them that we will go into Pakistan with or without their approval ourselves and look for him. If they object to our course of action and won't allow our troops to cross the border then they will face an attack from the U.S. to remove their government. As G W Bush has said "If you're not with us, then you're against us."

Pakistan isn't a free, Democratic country. Musharrif wasn't elected, he was placed in charge of Pakistan by the military. He is nothing more than a dictator. The only thing they want from the U.S. is money, and weapons. That can be stopped, and we can and should impose economic sanctions to get them to cooperate, and use war if necessary. If they are harboring bin Laden and won't turn him over, then they are our enemy as well.

Quote:
"It's bad enough when someone does something wrong to you. It's even worse when you do it to yourself, and stupid as well"

Vote KERRY/EDWARDS, to win the war on terror!!

Right on target, Tap...

Maybe we won't have to use just our troops to accomplish the mission (the REAL mission) of capturing OBL...John Kerry will develop strong alliances with countries that have troops to send. The Coalition of the Duped is really just America and the UK...some of those other countries have troops in non-combat roles, yet they are made to sound like they're doing what our troops are doing. Hogwash!

If FDR hadn't been able to establish alliances, we would not have won WW2. (at www.ragereport.com, there's an excellent post about FDR's grandson stating what makes a war president....and it isn't GWB!)

Keep positive thoughts..JFK is going to win.

Catherine

I BEG YOUR PARDON, MOPED...the response was meant to be addressed to you, instead of TAP!

Catherine