Al-Qaida releases new Bin Laden tape just before U.S. election - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

bling · 10-30-2004, 06:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodyhammer86

Why is the seven minutes thing even an issue for Bush? There was absolutely nothing he could've done in those seven minutes that would've either saved lives or any difference at all, period.

It's an issue of character. His 7 minutes of nothingness demonstrate an irrational reaction to very important information.

Bodyhammer86 · 10-30-2004, 06:57 PM

Irrational reaction? Hardly. He remained calm and did not panic. In a time of chaos, he kept composure.

archer2371 · 10-30-2004, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bling

It's an issue of character. His 7 minutes of nothingness demonstrate an irrational reaction to very important information.

So what about John Kerry's inability to think for thirty minutes? By the same measure, his irrational reaction is worse. However, I don't fault either of them for their reactions, because, this is pretty much how everyone else felt, politicians are human too guys.

bling · 10-30-2004, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bodyhammer86

Irrational reaction? Hardly. He remained calm and did not panic. In a time of chaos, he kept composure.

Like I said - there are more than 2 reactions to the situation. 7 minutes of a blank stare is not keeping composure, jumping out of his seat is not keeping composure.

I am not the President of the United States - and yet, when I was told about the attack, even being awoken from sleep, I immediately got up to turn on the television to find out what "we're under attack" meant. In fact, my absolute first thought was that my girlfriend had been on an airplane that had crashed - as she was flying back that morning.

It was a simple, rational reaction to the information I had received. I did not lie in bed for 7 minutes and do nothing. I did not run outside naked, screaming in fear.

I would expect the President to have a similar, rational reaction to such information - particularly as he is in a far better position to affect change in the course of events, should he be able to affect change in the course of events. Based on the non-substantial information he had, he didn't even know if he could have done anything .... for 7+ minutes. But he certainly could have used those 7 minutes to find out.

Boo · 10-31-2004, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bling

It amazes me that this absolutist line of reasoning, particularly on this issue, continues.

Is it honest to suggest that Bush had two options? Sit on his ass and do nothing or jump up immediately and cause a panic (or in this case, don Superman's clothes to save the day)?

Obviously not. There were many possible reactions to the information he received. One of them would obviously be politely interupting the teacher and addressing the children that he had to excuse himself for a moment. Such a response would be called rational.

Or maybe he knew there was nothing that he could do to based on the information provided. That new information was forthcoming and that he had time to finish his business at hand. Such a response could be called rational based on the information at the time (and not 2 hours or 6 weeks later).

Evil Milkman · 10-31-2004, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boo

Or maybe he knew there was nothing that he could do to based on the information provided.

Maybe he could've got off his ass and got on the phone with NORAD or the FAA?

Just sayin'.

bling · 10-31-2004, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Boo

Or maybe he knew there was nothing that he could do to based on the information provided. That new information was forthcoming and that he had time to finish his business at hand. Such a response could be called rational based on the information at the time (and not 2 hours or 6 weeks later).

He was literally told "America is under attack". It is impossible to know the ramifications of that without obtaining more information. Instead of obtaining more information, he sat on his ass for 7 minutes.

This is irrational.

Note, this is not the most important reason to not vote for Bush. This is simply a view into his character. His character is found lacking.

Ustwo · 10-31-2004, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bling

He was literally told "America is under attack". It is impossible to know the ramifications of that without obtaining more information. Instead of obtaining more information, he sat on his ass for 7 minutes.

This is irrational.

Note, this is not the most important reason to not vote for Bush. This is simply a view into his character. His character is found lacking.

Ah so thats what was whispered in his ear. Does the CIA know what a security leak you are?

bling · 10-31-2004, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Ah so thats what was whispered in his ear. Does the CIA know what a security leak you are?

Yes of course they do.

Quote:

I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower. America's under attack."
-- Bush

Not enough information to decide to sit on your ass for 7 minutes.

Willravel · 10-31-2004, 12:51 PM

"I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower. America's under attack." Bush also mentioned that he saw the first plane hit the first tower on the t.v.

A student asked: "What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first tower?"
Bush responsed: "Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida. I'd gone down to tell my little brother what to do. And uh, [pause for laughs] just kidding Jeb! And uh, [it's] the mother in me [pauses for more laughs]. Anyway, I was sitting there and my cheif of staff...well first of all when I walked in the classroom, I had seen the plane fly into the first building. There was a t.v. set on. I thought it was pilot error..."

Now for all of you who are wondering, there was no live tv coverage of the initial attack. None. Alzheimers perhapse? He is either imcompetent, or a liar.

sprocket · 10-31-2004, 04:26 PM

I cant believe people make an issue out of Bush's initial reaction (or lack of). There are real things to critisize the president for, this is not one of them. How can anyone presume to know what was in his mind or what was he needed to do at that moment?

Was there any tangible harm done to this country based on this reaction that everyone seems fit to crucify him for? I think its fair to at least give him enough credit to know whether or not there would be anything he could do in the next 7 minutes.

This is beyond rediculous.

reiii · 10-31-2004, 05:41 PM

irateplatypus said:

I would expect Al-Qaida would have a strategy to effect the U.S. elections. Whether those plans would be similar to what happened in Spain... I do not know. What do you all think about his statements regarding the motivation behind the 9-11 attacks (U.S.'s role in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict)? Personally, I don't think the real motivations are anywhere near that simple or contained within that scope. I wonder what the political shakout would be if another attack was attempted...?

I also wonder why Osama seemed to stick to that angle in the tape. I would have expected him to address vague and long past American mis-deeds rather than sticking with the Israel/Palestine conflict.

The 9-11 terrorists seemed to have more complex motives so I don't really buy Osama's statement. From what i've read that group was radicalized in Europe, and had much more fundamental problems with western society/capitalism, which is kind of ironic given the Arab nation's proclivity towards capitalism.

It is a little unsettling to hear a terrorist explain why exactly he is fighting us. It is much easier for us to hear "I don't like your entire western world so we are going to fight".

DJ Happy · 10-31-2004, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprocket

I cant believe people make an issue out of Bush's initial reaction (or lack of). There are real things to critisize the president for, this is not one of them. How can anyone presume to know what was in his mind or what was he needed to do at that moment?

What did you do when you first heard about it? Did you just sit around and stare into space for a bit, or did you try to find out more? The first thing I did was head to the TV so that I could see the news and I'm just an ordinary bloke. The leader of your country did nothing. His reaction was completely irrational.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprocket

Was there any tangible harm done to this country based on this reaction that everyone seems fit to crucify him for? I think its fair to at least give him enough credit to know whether or not there would be anything he could do in the next 7 minutes.

We'll never know if there was any difference he could've made as he never even tried.

guthmund · 11-01-2004, 06:35 AM

I don't think there was much President Bush could've done by himself under the circumstances.

However, knowing that the two planes have hit the WTC, not knowing who or what the next target could be and sitting in a roomful of kids should have brought the President to his feet and out the door. It was a significant enough threat to have the President criss-crossing the country at random, but not significant to get him up out of the chair immediately?

The President's schedule is, for the most part, public knowledge. How hard would it have been for a fifth group of hi-jackers to grab a truck, rig it with explosives and drive it into the school? Especially with everybody in the "pre 9-11" mindset the Right talks about. Of course, I simplified that significantly, but you get the gist, right?

In that instance, I would've expected the President to make an excuse and leave with his secret service detail. Instead, he sat for an additional 7 minutes, not knowing what was next, out of the loop and potentially endangering everyone in that school.

I expect calm, cool leadership from my President. That's his job.

And that's the reason the 7 minutes are so important to me.

roachboy · 11-01-2004, 07:40 AM

from a televised image perspective, from a cinematic image perspective, there is no way to distinguish between "cool and calm" and totally vacant.

maybe bush supporters simply have to conflate the two because that is how the apparatus to which they owe the form and content of their positions packages them.

vacancy as resoluteness.
it is one of the great cons on the century.
it would make p.t. barnum proud--and you know what barnum thought of the american public.
maybe he was right.

Bodyhammer86 · 11-01-2004, 09:21 AM

I am going to say this again, there was absolutely nothing Bush could've done in those seven minutes that would have either saved lives or made a difference period. From moorewatch.com:

Quote:

The systemic failures of 9/11 are too numerous to count. This is not because the FAA or NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) didn’t have a plan for protecting US citizens, but because no one had conceived of hijackers turning transcontinental flights filled with 11,400 gallons of jet fuel, essentially, into missiles. Not only did all 19 hijackers defeat multiple layers of security—which had the sole purpose of stopping a hijacking from occurring in the first place—but, once successful, they “invented a new kind of war,” as one military commander put it. “No one at the FAA or the airlines that day had ever dealt with multiple hijackings. Such a plot had not been carried out anywhere in the world in more than 30 years, and never in the United States. As news of the hijackings filtered through the FAA and the airlines, it does not seem to have occurred to the leadership that they needed to alert other aircraft in the air that they too might be at risk” (10).

Some of you will want timelines. This is not a surprise since you’ve been so concerned with “seven minutes” in the first place. What I’m telling you is: forget the timelines. This is not because they invalidate what I’m saying (they most certainly do), but because the chaos that ensued because of this new kind of warfare made certain those planes were going to crash. The following are key factors in contributing to this chaos:

a.) NORAD Mission and Structure. NORAD was structured to counter a Soviet threat, not hijackers flying plans into downtown Manhattan. As one of the fighters originally scrambled from Langley said, “I reverted to the Russian threat…I’m thinking cruise missile threat from the sea. You know you look down and see the Pentagon burning and I thought the bastards snuck one by us…You couldn’t see any airplanes, and no one told us anything” (45).

b.) Interagency Collaboration. The FAA and NORAD had a system in place for dealing with a hijacking—a “routine” hijacking. Normally, in the event of a hijacking a pilot would notify FAA controllers by “squawking” a transponder code of “7500” (17). This would set in motion the proper procedures for dealing with such a situation. Those procedures, which include sending information up the chain of command and waiting for orders to come back down, takes time. On 9/11 they didn’t have time. Because the terrorists turned off the aircrafts’ transponders, FAA officials were left scratching their heads (for much longer than seven minutes). As one official said on 9/11: “I don’t know where I’m scrambling these guys to. I need a direction, a destination” (20). One needs to simply read page 27 of the report to see the consequences turning off the transponders had on the outcome of September 11th: “The Langley fighters were heading east, not north, for three reasons. First, unlike a normal scramble order, this order did not include a distance to the target or the target’s location. Second, a “generic” flight plan--prepared to get the aircraft airborne and out of local airspace quickly—incorrectly led the Langley fighters to believe they were ordered to fly due east (090) for 60 miles. Third, the lead pilot and local FAA controller incorrectly assumed the flight plan instruction to go “090 for 60” superseded the original scramble order...The time was 9:38. The Pentagon had been struck by American 77 at 9:37:46. The Langley fighters were about 150 miles away” (27).

Finally, let us assume that for some reason George Bush was able to give the “engage” order to the proper military commanders as he sat in front of the school children reading “My Pet Goat.” Would it have helped? No. Even after the order to engage civilian aircraft was authorized and passed to NEADS (NORAD’S Northeast Air Defense Sector), the commanders in charge of passing along the order to their pilots refused! “The NEADS commander told us he did not pass along the order because he was unaware of its ramifications. Both the mission commander and the senior weapons director indicated they did not pass the order to the fighters circling Washington and New York because they were unsure how the pilots would, or should, proceed with this guidance. In short, while leaders in Washington believed that the fighters above them had been instructed to “take out” hostile aircraft, the only orders actually conveyed to the pilots were to ‘ID type and tail’” (43).

(Some of you will ask about the “interceptor” plane that arrived two minutes after flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania. Sorry, it wasn’t an interceptor—it was an unarmed C-130 Cargo plane.)

I’m sure that many Moore fans are still unconvinced. It won’t matter that, “As it turned out, NEADS air defenders had nine minutes’ notice on the first hijacked plane, no advance notice on the second, no advance notice on the third, and no advance notice on the forth” (31). It won’t matter that commanders ignored to pass the “engage” order on, even after the President sent the order. All that will matter is that Moore says otherwise. Some will concede that nothing could have been done, but that the president still looked indecisive. Here is what the 9/11 Commission reports:

“The president told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening” (38).

DJ Happy · 11-02-2004, 12:00 AM

Quote:

“The president told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis. The press was standing behind the children; he saw their phones and pagers start to ring. The President felt he should project strength and calm until he could better understand what was happening”

Unless he knew that another plane would crash into the second tower 7 minutes later and that nothing he could do would've prevented it (which poses even greater issues), he should've acted immediately. How did he propose to "better understand what was happening" by reading children's stories? Absolutely preposterous.

10-30-2004, 06:57 PM	#42 (permalink)
Bodyhammer86 Insane Location: Mattoon, Il	Irrational reaction? Hardly. He remained calm and did not panic. In a time of chaos, he kept composure. __________________ Pantera, Shadows Fall, Fear Factory, Opeth, Porcupine Tree, Dimmu Borgir, Watch Them Die, Motorhead, Beyond the Embrace, Himsa, Black Label Society, Machine Head, In Flames, Soilwork, Dark Tranquility, Children of Bodom, Norther, Nightrage, At the Gates, God Forbid, Killswitch Engage, Lamb of God, All That Remains, Anthrax, Mudvayne, Arch Enemy, and Old Man's Child \m/

10-31-2004, 04:26 PM	#51 (permalink)
sprocket Psycho Location: In transit	I cant believe people make an issue out of Bush's initial reaction (or lack of). There are real things to critisize the president for, this is not one of them. How can anyone presume to know what was in his mind or what was he needed to do at that moment? Was there any tangible harm done to this country based on this reaction that everyone seems fit to crucify him for? I think its fair to at least give him enough credit to know whether or not there would be anything he could do in the next 7 minutes. This is beyond rediculous. __________________ Remember, wherever you go... there you are.

10-31-2004, 05:41 PM	#52 (permalink)
reiii unstuck in time Location: Nashville/D.C.	irateplatypus said: I would expect Al-Qaida would have a strategy to effect the U.S. elections. Whether those plans would be similar to what happened in Spain... I do not know. What do you all think about his statements regarding the motivation behind the 9-11 attacks (U.S.'s role in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict)? Personally, I don't think the real motivations are anywhere near that simple or contained within that scope. I wonder what the political shakout would be if another attack was attempted...? I also wonder why Osama seemed to stick to that angle in the tape. I would have expected him to address vague and long past American mis-deeds rather than sticking with the Israel/Palestine conflict. The 9-11 terrorists seemed to have more complex motives so I don't really buy Osama's statement. From what i've read that group was radicalized in Europe, and had much more fundamental problems with western society/capitalism, which is kind of ironic given the Arab nation's proclivity towards capitalism. It is a little unsettling to hear a terrorist explain why exactly he is fighting us. It is much easier for us to hear "I don't like your entire western world so we are going to fight". __________________ "Jombe? The chocolate icing" -hedonism bot

11-01-2004, 06:35 AM	#54 (permalink)
guthmund big damn hero	I don't think there was much President Bush could've done by himself under the circumstances. However, knowing that the two planes have hit the WTC, not knowing who or what the next target could be and sitting in a roomful of kids should have brought the President to his feet and out the door. It was a significant enough threat to have the President criss-crossing the country at random, but not significant to get him up out of the chair immediately? The President's schedule is, for the most part, public knowledge. How hard would it have been for a fifth group of hi-jackers to grab a truck, rig it with explosives and drive it into the school? Especially with everybody in the "pre 9-11" mindset the Right talks about. Of course, I simplified that significantly, but you get the gist, right? In that instance, I would've expected the President to make an excuse and leave with his secret service detail. Instead, he sat for an additional 7 minutes, not knowing what was next, out of the loop and potentially endangering everyone in that school. I expect calm, cool leadership from my President. That's his job. And that's the reason the 7 minutes are so important to me. __________________ No signature. None. Seriously.

11-01-2004, 07:40 AM	#55 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	from a televised image perspective, from a cinematic image perspective, there is no way to distinguish between "cool and calm" and totally vacant. maybe bush supporters simply have to conflate the two because that is how the apparatus to which they owe the form and content of their positions packages them. vacancy as resoluteness. it is one of the great cons on the century. it would make p.t. barnum proud--and you know what barnum thought of the american public. maybe he was right. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

10-31-2004, 12:51 PM	#50 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	"I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, "A second plane has hit the tower. America's under attack." Bush also mentioned that he saw the first plane hit the first tower on the t.v. A student asked: "What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first tower?" Bush responsed: "Well, I was sitting in a schoolhouse in Florida. I'd gone down to tell my little brother what to do. And uh, [pause for laughs] just kidding Jeb! And uh, [it's] the mother in me [pauses for more laughs]. Anyway, I was sitting there and my cheif of staff...well first of all when I walked in the classroom, I had seen the plane fly into the first building. There was a t.v. set on. I thought it was pilot error..." Now for all of you who are wondering, there was no live tv coverage of the initial attack. None. Alzheimers perhapse? He is either imcompetent, or a liar.