Will Bunch returns us to that awful day of 9/11, when brave brave sir Bush bravely ran away, leaving no one in charge, as the nightmare was descending. On that day there was a colossal failure of leadership and a colossal failure by NORAD to respond to the unfolding threats.
Just curious how many of you believe that once the planes were hijacked and en route that NORAD could have done something about it and that Bush is to blame because they didn’t.
Because I am in a foul, dark, cranky mood this morning (some work related stuff infuriated me), I will file this under “normal hysterical opposition politics of the Democrats.”
SomeCallMeTim
Gimmee a break, John. IIRC, Rumsfeld, who’s building had been attacked, stuck around and tried to help with the rescue and damage control efforts at the Pentagon. Bush tucked his tail between his legs and ran to Nebraska. Do you really not see in Bush’s response the germs of the fear-based overreaction that is the current Bush Administration policy?
John Cole
I agree with you. Bush should have stepped aside as President, donned a flight suit, and led the NORAD attack to shoot down every civilian airliner in the air. Hopefully they had a two-seater plane so Cheney could ride “shotgun.”
I hope it was a real fast plane, though. It would have taken a while for Bush to get from Florida to NY/PA/DC.
John Cole
BTW- Early nominee for psychobabble of the week.
Zifnab
Ha!
This is what I love. When it’s a hard-line Bush criticism with somewhat shacky merit, it must be from the Democrats.
I know a fair number of non-partisans who will argue to their dying breath that the 9/11 hijackings were a conspiracy cooked up by Rove and Cheney. Frankly, not even Howard Dean has the balls to run with “Bush Bombed America”. Certainly, no panty-waste East Coast desk-bound Democratic strategist came up with “Bush sat on his lorrels while the Towers crumbled.”
Frankly, I don’t care of Bush could have done something. I’m just a bit miffed that his active response was to continue reading The Happies Duckling to a bunch of 3rd graders.
In a nuclear age – you know, the one with all the WMDs in it – when ICBMs can reach our country in an hour, it’s nice to see a President willing to get off his ass when the shit hits the fan. Bush will never know what NORAD’s response to the 9/11 hijackings would have been, because for 7 whole minutes he wasn’t racing for a phone, surrounded by top advisors, demanding casaulty reports and mobilizing a recovery effort. He was too busy doing a photo-op.
Bad President. Bad.
OCSteve
Sure – let’s assume the fighters were spotted in the right place and launched immediately after the first plane hit the tower. Let’s assume they successfully intercepted and shot down the other 3 planes.
Can you imagine the heads that would have rolled? And most certainly Bush would have been to blame for that. 3 planeloads of civilians shot out of the sky! Damage and more death as they crashed into a city or two.
It would have been claimed that there was no way to know that the other three planes were not old fashioned hijackings. Possibly the first plane crashing into the tower was just an accident. The incident would have most certainly ended in impeachment hearings and several hundred lawsuits.
Mr Furious
Shhhh, Zif. John’s in no mood…
SomeCallMeTim
He could have gone back to the Capitol, just as signal to reassure America. Entirely symbolic? Yes. But then I guess scurrying as fast as possible to find a “secure undisclosed” is symbolic in its own way.
Kirk Spencer
Bad question, John, though the intent is right.
NORAD’s duty was solely tracking the threat. They ASSIST the commands that are tasked by the president to respond to the threat. (They don’t order the counterstrike missiles. They tell the president who orders the counterstrikes and ABMs, and then they give guidance to those two elements as to the origin for the counterstrikes and tracking for the ABMs.)
Allegedly – that is, I’ve been told by a family member who’s a retired Col USAF (SAC) and seen it in the press, but nothing official – there’s been a general order since the height of the cuban hijacking era that any aircraft identified as hijacked gets an armed USAF escort asap. One of the “P” factors, however, is authorization from the commander in chief or his legally authorized delegate.
Allegedly again, but this time solely from news reports, aircraft weren’t launched and escorting because the president didn’t authorize it. At a guess, the procedure went: NORAD sent alert, pilots and crews scrambled to planes, hurry up and wait took effect, wait became “too late, stand down.”
Had the planes been scrambled it’s possible but unlikely that neither of the towers (much less anything else) would have been hit. Had they been standing by, once the first plane hit they’d have been in position to ensure none of the rest hit.
So no, I don’t think Bush is to blame because NORAD didn’t act. I think Bush is to blame because the fighter commands of the USAF didn’t act because he went out of contact, but not in such fashion as to authorize a new delegate.
Oh, I’ll add my reason for bias on this. Jimmy Carter and the Tehran embassy. I’ve a friend who was a SEAL at that time. He’s told me, and I’ve seen enough bits and pieces to believe it likely, that his full team then in Greece was orbiting above the embassy less than 2 hours after they started the attack. And orbitted for the next few hours till it was over, waiting for the President to authorize their forceful intervention and defense of the compound. Sometimes I ponder how different it’d have been if, about the time the abductors were finally getting past the marines at the gate, 50 SEALS with full assault gear had arrived as reinforcements.
It’s not the decision not to go – for Carter or for Bush – that annoys me the most. It’s the dithering in a time-critical situation. When success depends on acting now, decide – even if the decision is to not act.
Sorry, shouldn’t rant on your pages. But some things…
Zifnab
I have a hard time believing that, with the Republicans running the media spin-machine, anyone would have blamed the administration by the end of the week.
Barbar
Atrios’s criticism of Bush looks a little better when you place it in context.
Yes, Bush is just a man, not a superhero. Fair enough.
But, Bush was portrayed as Our Bold Fearless Courageous Leader, the guy who grabbed a bullhorn and wound up dressed up in a flight suit under the “Mission Accomplished” banner. That, of course, was the “jump the shark” moment for Bush, and it’s been all downhill (except for re-election) from there, but the preceeding couple of years we had an emperor with no clothes and PLENTY of people who saw just the opposite.
Complain about hysterical Democrats all you want, the reality is that the Bush administration has screwed up so many things that I’m too tired to even be outraged about it at this point. “Oh, we have undeniable evidence that Bush was lying and knew he was lying in the runup to Iraq… yawn.”
Zifnab
… although you make a valid point, OCSteve. Preventing 9/11 would have been political suicide.
Mr Furious
It is really monday-morning quarterbacking to claim that as those events unfolded, jets could have been scrambled and the last planes averted. But there is nothing wrong with pointing out that Bush didn’t do shit that morning. And his galivanting around the country for the better part of the day was hardly his finest moment.
I’ll actually go as far as to say it was more the fault of those around him that he was shuttled around “for his safety”, but he sure as hell should have jumped his ass out of the chair when told the country was under attack.
This ain’t “Independance Day” and I know Bush wasn’t going to jump into the cockpit of the nearest F102 and have a dogfight with Flight 93, but something would have been nice.
VidaLoca
John,
Agreed, the post by Duncan Black is not well written. Kirk’s comment above points out some of the issues that are being conflated.
Possibly a better way to phrase the question: “What did the President do and when did he do it?” Then start the critique from there.
Sojourner
How about shutting down the national air space more quickly. At least one of the four planes might have been kept on the ground if they had reacted more quickly. Perhaps if the Bushies had taken the hijacking threat more seriously, they would have been quicker to get and keep the planes on the ground.
zzyzx
I have many problems with Bush; this isn’t really one of them.
Barbar
If President Al Gore had kept on reading “My Pet Goat” to kids after a plane flew into the World Trade Center, this wouldn’t be something that a conservative blogger would mention 5 years later while shaking his head. That image would have been plastered all over the media throughout Gore’s only term in office, with the “liberal media” wondering what it signified about Gore’s courage and ability to lead, and Rush Limbaugh and Anne Coulter ranting about it every day, and the entire Republican Party running political ads based on it. (Because the Republicans are patriotic and wouldn’t want no limp-wristed weenie running our government in a time of war.)
LITBMueller
That’s really two part question, John.
As for part one, the 9/11 Commission Report repeatedly asserted that NORAD had never dreamed that terrorists could hijack planes and use them as missiles. This is completely wrong, as this USA Today article explains: NORAD had run drills for just that scenario:
So, first, you have a lack of planning, vision, and preparedness.
Next, you have a lack of decision makers. Cheney was in charge in the Situation Room on 9/11. Bush was whisked off to Offut AFB to be hidden in a bunker. Rummy himself was busy playing fireman at the Pentagon (a great humanitarian reaction, but shouldn’t he have been on the phone or something?). Air Force General Myers was chatting with Max Cleland in Cleland’s office on Capitol Hill.
So, Dead-Eye Dick is in charge of defending the nation. What happens? Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta was in the Situation Room with Cheney, and this is what he recalled at a Commission hearing:
What was the order? A shoot down, or a stand down? Some have speculated it was the latter.
So, who is to blame? I don’t blame Bush. He proved himself pretty damn useless by staying in that chair reading “My Pet Goat.” But, Cheney was in charge that day. He gets the blame.
Kirk Spencer
A casual search brings need for much correction and some clarification.
NORAD could and did order fighters scrambled when the hijack notice came in. Boston Air Control reported one at 8:38, the FAA reported a second at 8:43, and NORAD gave the scramble order to Otis ANG base (Massachussets) at 8:44.
The president never authorized a shoot-down order, but my information was wrong and his order to scramble was not required.
Oh – for the record, the F-15s from Otis were in the air in 8 minutes. The “crunch” time – the window that could have been compressed to allow the fighters to be in place on time – was in the air traffic control/FAA arena. And it was a whopping 18 minutes. The F-15s were about 1 minute too late to stop the second tower strike – they were 70 miles out at time of impact. The F-16s from Langley AFB had no chance of intercepting the Pentagon bird – FAA determination was faster, the aircraft were in the air in 8 minutes, and even though they were at max thrust they were still almost 12 minutes too late.
Therefore I will retract my primary assumption that the president’s failure to act would have had an effect on the outcome. I’m still bothered by the appearance of dithering – no shootdown order ever came, that sort of thing. But it’s not as egregious as I thought.
gratefulcub
I have plenty of problems with Bush, but the NORAD response isn’t one of them.
Reading My Pet Goat is one, but not a big one. The fact that so many americans fell for his macho act after his reaction does bother me.
With so many good arguments to make against Bush this week, why would Atrios use 9/11 Saddam rhetoric with Bush NORAD. For that alone, Wanker of the Day is a nice description, especially for someone that gives out the daily award and then screams about the poor political discourse.
Lee
Of course he’s not too blame…given what we know now about his utter incompetence, he performed exactly as expected.
Mr Furious
Nice info, Kirk. That’s what I mean when I say second-guessing is useless, I’m not sure anything would have worked out differently. But gratefulcub touches on what pisses me off too: Bush froze like a freaking deer and got away with it.
canuckistani
I have to side with the lefty whackos in this one, John. I’m not going to get all conspiracy-nutty and blame the Bush cabal for deliberately allowing 9-11 as their Reichstag Fire moment, but Bush did suffer a failure of nerve or leadership while he read My Pet Goat, and we will never know if quick decisive action may have saved many lives.
At the time, I was willing to give him a pass on the grounds that better men than him have panicked in a crisis, but given the success rate of the other Bush projects, I can only see it in retrospect as the incompetence of a man in over his head.
The Other Steve
This is a wonderful strawman:
I listened to the Congressional Testimony from the 9/11 commission on what happened that day with regards to flight control operations. The flights hitting the WTC and Pentagon occured in too short of a time for them to understand what had happened. Flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania, was a cluster fuck. Not because I think they could have shot it down, but because they lost the plane and had no fucking clue where it was while it flew around for over an hour. Air traffic control saw the transponder vanish off their screen, but rather than turning on active radar they ignored it. Then when they finally did start trying to find it, they were looking for a west bound plane when it was moving east. It was just a big series of cluster fucks.
The civilians on board that plane acted heroically with what they had and what they knew.
Nobody faults any of those actions. The only way to have stopped those planes, was for the airline security to have been in place to prevent hijacking. That’s 20/20 hindsight, because much of it had to do with the mentality of hijackers at the time.
However, I do fault Brave Sir Bush for boldly running away. Not because he could have shot down planes(I mean how fucking moronic to you have to be to claim that?), but rather that he could have offered steady leadership instead of contributing to the fear. Instead Bush vanished from the public for like 3 days.
The truth is. Bush is a yellow bellied coward.
And the reason that pisses a lot of us off, is because there are a lot of jackasses who try to claim otherwise.
jaime
IIRC, Bush knew before he ever sat down and read to the kiddies that a plane had crashed into the WTC. I’m not sure if he knew about the other hijackings, but he knew that potentially hundreds of people died instantly and hundreds of lives were at risk. A disaster of major proportions.
Yet the motherfucker went ahead and read to the kiddies anyway. No delaying his photo op, no getting the full story of such a tragedy, his No Child Left Behind photo was more important.
Say what you want about Guliani; the man, though pure luck found himself in the middle of the calamity and instead of hi-tailing it to Jersey, HE WALKED TO THE SCENE putting himself in greater danger. And there were wingnuts that were pissed that Rudy won Time Magazine Man of the Year and not Bush.
Steve
Let’s actually read the linked post. Will Bunch notes that NORAD failed to intercept United Flight 93 even though it was in the air for over an hour following the attack on the Twin Towers, and for nearly half an hour after controllers on the ground unambiguously knew the flight had been hijacked. Well, true statement.
I didn’t see anywhere that he said it was Bush’s fault, although I know John Cole’s absolute favorite strawman is to say “what could Bush possibly have done to personally stop X?” Bunch’spoint is that there has been virtually no discussion in the blogosphere about why NORAD failed to do its job or whether it should have been in a position to do more, perhaps because talking about such things gets one branded as a 9/11 conspiracy nut.
Atrios’ crack about Bush doesn’t imply that a real President would have stopped the attacks or saved Flight 93, it just means that Bush didn’t do anything in particular on 9/11 to make us proud of him as a leader. (On the other hand, Cheney probably doesn’t get enough credit for providing a steady hand when one was needed.) Atrios deplores that the script has long since been written where 9/11 was Bush’s finest hour and that people (like John!) get outraged if you suggest anything to the contrary.
In my book, the heroes of 9/11 are, for the most part, either dead or suffering from lung disease at this point.
OCSteve
BTW – if you haven’t seen the trailer for Flight 93 – it is chilling. Saw it for the first time on TV last night. It brings back the whole day. I haven’t decided yet if I’m going to watch the movie. Most likely I will.
jg
What a whiny ass post. Bush did nothing but hesitiate and flee. Fight or flight? Could he have stopped the attack if he got off his ass? Is this the level of argument you put to us John?
He did nothing. He sat and stared. Then he hid. All he had to do was show up. The nation is under attack, where’s our president? Why isn’t he in charge, giving orders, leading? Same with Katrina your only response is some school yard horseshit like he’s not Superman. That excuses him for doing absolutely nothing in your wingnut world. Its hard to believe your hatred for dems can go this deep. So deep that you can’t stand with the people asking where their president was when the nation was under attack.
Barbar
Bush knew before he ever sat down and read to the kiddies that a plane had crashed into the WTC
No; didn’t someone come in while he was reading to tell him that a plane had crashed?
jaime
WINGNUT: “Are you blaming Bush for causing the Hurricane, too?”
Steve
Perhaps it’s a moot point because we all agree that this scenario wasn’t physically possible. But I still find it a crazy post. The idea that after a plane crashes into the World Trade Center, the President would be impeached for ordering three other hijacked planes to be shot down… seriously, I just think you’re way overboard on that one.
The Other Steve
Bush’s cowardness has nothing to do with whether quick decisive action could have saved lives. In hindsight, it probably would not have made a difference.
Leadership, however, is not always about quick decisive action. It is about showing calmness in a crisis, to not promote panic and fear amongst those around you.
As much as I do not like him for other things, Rudy Guilliani had that leadership ability in a crisis. It was his city, it was his buildings crashing down and what did he do? He got in a car with the other city officials and drove down there.
Bush exhibited something else. Panic.
Even his speech at the WTC was pathetic. The only reason he went down there was because Bill Clinton had been down there earlier in the day. He was afraid of being overshadowed by the former President.
REPUBLICANS ARE A BUNCH OF FUCKING COWARDS WHO ACT LIKE TOUGH LITTLE BULLIES JUST TO HIDE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE SCARED LITTLE WEENIES.
jg
I still believe the last plane was shot down. It just seems too conveneient that the plane crashed in an empty field in the middle of nowhere. I hope the passengers got a couple of good kicks to the terrorists heads first.
The Other Steve
I’m going to repeat that again…
REPUBLICANS ARE A BUNCH OF FUCKING COWARDS WHO ACT LIKE TOUGH LITTLE BULLIES JUST TO HIDE THE FACT THAT THEY ARE SCARED LITTLE WEENIES.
Jim Allen
John, I’m pretty much in agreement with you in re: what NORAD could possibly have done (either politically, in shooting down a passenger jet, or chronologically, given the time available). But I think your “wanker” epithet was aimed badly, and should have gone to Will Bunch (who wrote it) rather than Duncan Black (who merely summarized what Bunch wrote).
jaime
No; didn’t someone come in while he was reading to tell him that a plane had crashed?
1st plane hits at 8:48. At that time, it was known that 3 other planes had been hijacked.
He knew before he stepped foot inside the school of, at the very least, a horrific accident killing hundreds, and at the most of a developing terrorist attack.
At 9:03 Bush talks to the kiddies.
The Other Steve
I thought so at first, as well. But after the 9/11 commission report came out and it noted the fact that the Air Traffic Controllers didn’t even have any idea where the plane was.
It disappeared off their screen when the pilots shut off the transponder. But they didn’t go trying to look for it or figure out what might have happened for 15 minutes or so. Then when they did start to look, they were looking in the wrong spot because after they shut off the transponder, the plane turned.
No, the passengers on board the plane tried to take control again. They showed true bravery in a crisis, and every last one of them ought to be awarded a Medal. And yes, I hope they got in a few good kicks too.
croatoan
The reason Rudy Giuliani was Time magazine’s 2001 Man of the Year was his “superhuman courage” on September 11. He did was Bush should have done: projected a strong, commanding presence that assured people things would be OK. The US was a nation of scared children, and he was daddy saying everything would be fine.
There was a shoot-down order on September 11.
capelza
jg, I agree somewhat, only because: which admin dude, Rumsfeld?, accidentally said it had seen shot down?
But aside from that, I do believe whether it was shot down, or brought down by the passengers, they WERE heroic and were taking steps to take the plane back. No matter what comes out of it in years to come…we must never forget they were trying to do it. IMHO
Steve
Let’s remember, most of America is empty fields in the middle of nowhere.
Mr Furious
If I recall correctly, he heard about the first crash on his way into the school, which is when he made his bad pilot comment. At this point it is still plausibly a horrible accident. I would contend at this point, it would have behooved Bush to take a timeout from his scheduled event and find out what happened. It’s not exactly an everyday occurence that jetliners crash, and each one is a tragic event. But when one crashes in Manhattan, he keeps right on going? What the fuck is wrong with that guy?
When Andy Card leaned in and told him the country was under attack was after the second or third crash. Bush proceeded to shit his drawers, blink repeatedly and go on reading…
But I guess his bullhorn moment washes this all away …
OCSteve
Think back. After the first crash initial speculation was that it had to be an accident. Hell, I thought it had to be an accident, anything else was impossible to contemplate at the time. After the second crash I agree with you – intentions were pretty clear. But I don’t think that the first crash was enough to order the shooting down of every other plane off course that morning. Only with hindsight was it fully justified.
Once they were shot down and so never hit their targets – how would you then prove to the public at large that it was justified, that they were definitely planning to crash into other targets. Couldn’t take the chance that they would seems like a weak defense.
I question even today – if a plane (full of passengers) turned from its course and headed for DC or NY and refused all tower communications – would the order be given? I’m not sure it would, at least not until it was very clear what was going to happen and possibly too late to avoid collateral damage.
jaime
You getting your info from a news broadcast and having the FAA and NORAD reporting hijackings and deviation of routes from the city are different.
Anyone in charge with a brain who was in the loop could have put the pieces together after the first plane hit with another right behind it.
Steve
When I got to work on 9/11, no more than a couple miles from Ground Zero, someone told me a plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. I was sure it was a tiny plane and just some kind of really unlucky accident, even though my coworker was like “Dude, trust me, it’s terrorists!” Of course, once the second plane hit, that was pretty much settled.
I’m not sure exactly what Bush was told, prior to when Andy Card told him we were under attack. If he knew it was a jumbo jet, I guess I’d say yeah, that’s something that would cause me to stop going about my business. But there was just so much misinformation and incomplete information going around that morning, I really don’t know if he had reason to react any differently than I did.
Mr Furious
I think they would wait as long as possible to confirm, but they would shoot it down (if they could). And they wouldn’t be blamed for it.
Then again, has any protocol changed since 9/11? Are there fighters closer than Otis AFB to NYC? Would hijackers narrow the window and take plane before it was in the air long enough to be intercepted? Passangers would never be hijacked again…
Lot’s of what-ifs…
jg
I certainly do believe that.
And that is also a very good point.
I have no doubts the passengers tried to take the plane back I’m just not sure they got the chance. If the gov’t knew where that plane was I don’t see how they let it keep flying. Then again maybe I’ve just read too many Clancy books.
jaime
There is an ANG base an hour north of NYC in Newburgh.
croatoan
Giuliani was a chickenshit choice as Man of the Year because Time’s criteria is the person who “for better or worse, has most influenced events in the preceding year,” and in 2001 that was clearly Osama bin Laden. Giuliani’s courage was a reaction to bin Laden’s actions. (It wouldn’t have been an endorsement of bin Laden; previous choices included Hitler and Stalin.) They should either change the criteria or change the title to Newsmaker of the Year.
Bush started lying about September 11 on September 11. “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans.” Uh, after I sat on my ass [.mov] reading “The Pet Goat.”
Dave Ruddell
I didn’t follow the 9/11 commission at all, so can somebody tell me, was Bush going off to an ‘undisclosed location’ with a bunker part of some pre-planned protocol for this type of situation? I’m not trying to suggest he lacked choice in the matter (presumably he could have simply said ‘screw this, I’m the president, I’m going to DC’). OTOH, I don’t think it was a terrible idea to have the president somewhere safe for the first few hours.
Mr Furious
9/11 was the last day of my honeymoon. we were getting picked up by a cab at our hotel at 9:00 am for a flight back to NYC that morning. Our cab driver (in Bermuda!) asked us if we knew a jetliner that had crashed into the WTC. I remember thinking “Crap, I’m about to get on a plane and fly to NYC. I don’t want to hear about a plane crash…”
By the time we got to the airport, I was wondering what effect this would have on our arrival in NY. Once inside the terminal, the other plane had hit and it was clear this was not an accident, and no one was going anywhere near NY.
In that airport there were no TVs, so no one really had a clear picture of what was happening, but it spread pretty quickly through the crowd that US airspace was closed and no one was going home. I also don’t believe anyone at that time knew the buildings had collapsed…
We made arrangements to go to another hotel close to the airport, and when we got there, people were riveted to the tVs. The first time I saw the buildings collapse (probably a couple hours after it happened) I could not believe my eyes.
I had an office in Brooklyn across the river from lower Manhattan and my window looked at the WTC. Those buildings were part of my peripheral vision for three years. If it had happened a different day I would have seen it unfold live from the best (worst) possible vantage point.
I’m glad I wasn’t there.
Pooh
I largely agree with OCSteve, I’m not sure how it would have been possible to get actionable intelligence to shoot down 3 jets in the time alotted after the first strike. We tend to be in agreement that “Shoot first, ask questions later” is the bad part of Bush’s defense policies.
I also have little problem with the plane flying around the country for a while. However bad Bush might be, a dead President on 9/11 would have been much much worse, and from what I understand, the best defense against an unknown threat is mobility.
That said, the “Pet Goat” thing remains inexplicable and troubling.
Mr Furious
Dave R-
I mentioned something similar way upthread. I’m sure there was a protocol about protecting the President—that’s not my problem. I don’t believe Bush was running around AF1 crying hysterically to “fly further away.”
My problem is with him at the school. That’s the freeze. The inaction.
Once onboard AF1, I presume the President has the equipment and info to begin WWIII if need be. I have a problem with how long it took him to reach a position where he could ascertain what was happening and what to do/what could be done.
Mr Furious
And there are ANG A-10s at Bradley Airport in Connecticut, but are they ready to scramble? Even if they are they are not nearly fast enough to intercept planes headed to NYC some 100 miles away…
Dave Ruddell
Oh, word. That staring/blinking thing just was so wrong.
The point I was trying to make that I don’t think Bush was necessarily a coward (as some have called him) for going to the bunker, since, as you pointed out, he can direct a response from just about anywhere.
Tractarian
Presidential Response Guide
A plane crashes into the WTC = probably an accident, continue photo op
A plane crashes into the WTC + 3 other hijackings reported = get off your ass and lead
The Other Steve
An A-10 wouldn’t have been much use. They’re stable at low speeds for air support against ground targets. They aren’t fast enough for incercept.
skip
When my lady went back to work the next AM, at the World Bank, a block from the White House, Cheney was cowering at Raven Rock, the clandestine facility on the MD-PA border.
Only the goat knows the real story, but the accepted version is iffy.
The Other Steve
I guess I tend to disagree.
CENTCOM is at MacDill in Tampa, just a bit north of Sarasota.
GOP4Me
I thought Duncan Black was the Wanker of the Day every day, John.
Mr Furious
TOS-
The missing comma in my sentence belies the fact that I know that. My uncle flies A-10s and I’ve watched them exercise. Cool fucking plane, but they are tank-killers not air-to-air interceptors. An A-10 would lose to an airliner in a race (420 mph vs. 580 mph for a 747), never mind intercept one with a headstart.
My point is that as far as we can tell (which is maybe the right thing?) nothing has changed to improve our odds should the same scenario unfold.
Steve
Well, maybe not intercept-wise, but hopefully next time our intelligence will be good enough to give us some kind of warning that a madman like bin Laden is determined to attack inside the U.S.
ppGaz
Lifelong aviation nut and pilot here … it’s my opinion that Norad did the best they could under the circumstances they had that day.
As for Bush at the school, I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don’t subscrive to the Michael Moore view that he should be ridiculed for his actions at the school. He had the same look on his face when he found out what was happening that I did. I think it’s called “Holy shit!” A human reaction.
Nobody likes to crap on Bush more than I do, but this stuff? Give him a frigging break.
map
There have been three major catastrophes during the Bush Administration: 9/11; the tsunami; and Katrina. In each case I had to ask myself: Where is Bush and what is taking so long for a government response? I gave Bush a pass after 9/11, but there seems to be a pattern here. I think that pattern is what is disturbing and has made me re-evaluate what happened on 9/11.
Mr Furious
Sorry, ppGaz, but I don’t vote for guys who will freeze, and say “Holy Shit!”
Of course I never voted for this turd in the first place, but that’s beside the point.
The President of the United States needs to do better than “Holy Shit!” And if he can’t, than he is supposed to be surrounded by experts that can. He doesn’t get a break for that from me and never will.
I can hardly believe I just read that coming from you…
Caseyl
How sad that, in retrospect, being shot down while on AF1 would have been Bush’s finest hour. He would have gone down in history books as a martyr on the order of Lincoln or Kennedy – and the nation would have been spared the destruction, pain and grief of the last 5 years.
The Other Steve
Sorry. It seemed like you were suggesting using A-10’s for coastal defense. :-)
The Other Steve
You aren’t President.
I’m sorry you have such low expectations for leadership positions.
Mr Furious
Yeah, President Cheney would have gone easy on us…
Barbar
and the nation would have been spared the destruction, pain and grief of the last 5 years.
Oh please.
The President gets killed on 9/11 by terrorists, and we get a “forceful” reaction ten times worse than what we actually got. And let’s not pretend that without Bush the Iraq war would never have gotten off the ground.
ppGaz
You guys are wankers.
I stand by what I said. There’s a long list of things to despise Bush for. The school thing? That’s just piling on and taking cheap shots. Useless.
Mr Furious
Bite me. I’ll arrange my “Despise Bush for” List the way I see fit, and there is no way this gets pushed off the front page.
It doesn’t matter whether he could change anything by acting differently, the very foundation of his Presidency is that he alone (not some pussy Democrat) is tough and brave enough to face the threats of this nation. That was exposed for the fraud that it is that morning, and it needs to be remembered, not discarded as piling on.
ppGaz
Whatever bakes your cookie. It’s meaningless, and useless.
The latter, because of the former.
Par R
It’s hard to see why John would expect to see much support here for his characterization of Tiny Meat as “Wanker of the Day,” given that so many of those commenting here are immigrants, illegal or otherwise, from Eschaton. With so much competition for idiotic and profane comments over there, they appear to have migrated here to leave the malodorous residue from their brain farts.
It goes without saying that Tiny Meat’s comment is so asinine and juvenile as to defy a proper response beyond John’s succinct and highly appropriate one.
Barry
OCSteve Said:
“Sure – let’s assume the fighters were spotted in the right place and launched immediately after the first plane hit the tower. Let’s assume they successfully intercepted and shot down the other 3 planes.
Can you imagine the heads that would have rolled? And most certainly Bush would have been to blame for that. 3 planeloads of civilians shot out of the sky! Damage and more death as they crashed into a city or two.”
We need braver leaders. Obviously GOP politicians are too scared to act in defense of the country, because they might be criticized.
This is such a punk-*ss excuse.
Darrell
What was actually written
He clearly implied that Bush acted like a coward… “running away” leaving no one in charge and all
The Other Steve
Oh, I’m dreadfully sorry. Maybe we should have followed the example of the Republicans who were fair and reasonable and didn’t take cheap shots about Monica?
Bite me, wanker.
The school thing, and Brave Sir Bush boldly running away are examples of the very fundamental problem with his Administration. That he’s a fucking coward, and his whole party is consumed with Cowardice.
Mr Furious
So what, Darrell? Can you remind us again what the right-wing version of that day is?
Is it more, or less, accurate?
The Other Steve
Will Bunch is a coward for implying, rather than straight out calling Bush a coward.
jaime
cockfuckshitcuntbitchwhoreasstitsballsdick
Do I win?
Darrell
Oooh, and what would have wanted Bush to do then? Get in AF1 and try to engage any planes that hadn’t yet landed?
jaime
We’ve covered that talking point already.
Darrell
Other Steve, you’re a putz, nothing more. Don’t let anyone tell you different
Par R
jaime asks:
As trailer park trash goes, you come awfully close.
jaime
The Chickenhawk rots from the head down.
jaime
Isn’t that’s what’s left of Bush’ base?
Would you quite this fake prude BS of yours? Oh your tender virgin ears!!!!
jaime
Damn it. Quit not Quite.
Par R
jaime writes
….thereby proving my point.
capelza
Is Par R the same poster as Pat R (or mere initator?)
Steve
I missed Darrell’s explanation of what Bush did on 9/11 that was actually brave.
metalgrid
Not pointing fingers at Bush here, but Mr. Cole, have you by any chance read this: http://www.reason.com/links/links033006.shtml
Do you think we’re any better off at getting information to the top today than we were pre-9/11?
Mr Furious
Gee, and I asked him, too.
I expect he’ll move on and pretend it never came up. He’ll probably throw a couple of “whackjobs” in for good measure.
He is truly a disciple of McClellan
The Other Steve
Ahh, but at least I’m not a coward or a pedophile.
I’m an ass. I’m just as likely to call you a coward to your face as from behind a keyboard.
Mr Furious
That’s good stuff, metalgrid.
Caseyl
No, I think we’d’ve been much better off with Bush dead, even if that meant Cheney in the WH.
Bush is, or was, considered “likeable” – for reasons that escape me, granted, but enough people said so that I guess there must be some truth to it.
Bush has been able to get away with so much of what he’s gotten away with because he is apparently able to convincingly fake human emotions like sympathy and comeraderie.
Cheney is not. Cheney scares people the minute he gets on TV. Nobody likes Cheney.
Cheney could not keep the social extremists and the corporate pigs in the same tent. He simply lacks the personal skills.
And Rove would not work for Cheney. Rove belongs to the Bushes. So Cheney would have had to make do with the likes of Mary Matalin – who is excellent at propaganda, not so good at personal destruction and earth-salting as Rove is.
The policies would be the same under a President Cheney – but his capacity to get them passed and implemented would be considerably less.
Which to me sounds like a net plus.
Darrell
Oh I see, if a person doesn’t do something notably brave or cowardly on a given day, then by whackjob logic they must therefore be a “coward”
You’ve really got a point there dumbass
Darrell
you’re a putz
Darrell
That is such a well thought out thesis
The Other Steve
Why?
ppGaz
My point, Stevarino, is that if you need examples of cowardly behavior from GWB you can find many. The school thing is not a particularly good or useful example.
How about using declassification and leaking to deflect attention from critics who have good reason to challenge your reason for war? THAT’S an example of cowardly behavior that you can make stick, because it’s an insult to the people who are risking their lives in the war.
But the school thing? Swizzlestix.
Look at it this way. If he had been a mensch about the war and the intelligence, would we care what happened at the school?
Ted
For that alone, Wanker of the Day is a nice description, especially for someone that gives out the daily award and then screams about the poor political discourse.
Actually, I read Black’s blog daily. I’ve never seen him scream about the poor political discourse. On the contrary, he seems to enjoy getting down into the political shit-pit the GOP has carefully dug.
Mr Furious
“Dumbass” and “putz” and, of course, “whackjob,” but no answer…
Classic Darrell.
canuckistani
No, people would care much less. Sensible people would cut him some slack for one normal human failure. It’s when we see a five year pattern of arrogant failure and incompetence that the goat moment takes on awful significance.
John S.
We know Darrell. One must pepper their posts with kook, moonbat and derisive use of ‘reality-based’ to register on your approval scale.
Steve
You acknowledge, then, that Bush did nothing notably brave on 9/11? Glad we could reach a bipartisan consensus.
Darrell
No, I didn’t happen to be with him that day. But I’m sure all those decisions he made were based in cowardice. The lefties say so.. so it must be true
Darrell
Re-read your posts on this thread. Seriously
ppGaz
B-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-h.
Also, goat moments are Brian’s purview.
Steve
Which decisions are you referring to?
JP
I’m surprised no one has mentioned yet the lie that accompanied the running around — that Air Force 1 was under attack. That story told me everything I needed to know about Bush on that day.
Elaine Scarry has an interesting take on the question of technology vs. citizen action as the best means of national defense, along with a detailed timeline of the day’s events, particularly in regard to Flight 93.
I agree with others that those passengers were the real heroes that day.
jaime
Is that all you’ve got? Attacking my spelling that was corrected in the very next post? Seriously? The best you can do is call someone trailer trash, and then correct their already corrected spelling?
Of course you can be a smug fuck when separated by thousands of miles of cable, but like the chickenhawk blowhards you vote for, face to face would be a much different story.
Zifnab
Ah Darrell, defending the indefensible by any means necessary. It’s nice to know that when Democrats don’t have a plan, they’re incompetent and cowardly. When Republicans sit on their hands, like they did on 9/11 and before that when Embassies were bombed in Nairobi and during the attack on the USS Cole and again and again whenever Al-Qaeda reared its ugly head under the Clinton administration, it’s perfectly excusable.
If I remember correctly, My Pet Goat wasn’t the first time Republicans dragged their feet in dealing with Al Qaeda.
Par R
jaime writes:
On my worst day, I could easily kick your sorry, trailer park trashy ass from New York to Tehran, a place to which you probably are regularly sending money. And unlike your shitty, cowardly self, I have actually served in the military.
ppGaz
Again, John and Tim: This is the kind of spoofed horsemanure we have to deal with now. WTF?
Is this the playground for the Three Stooges, Darrel, Par and Brian …. or ….?
Is there viable righty comment out there? If so, you need to show up and show that the right has something more than these devotees of diarrhea of the mouth.
The Other Steve
Actually, I think that’s just politics, and is to be expected.
Reading My Pet Goat, on the other hand is cowardly.
The Other Steve
You can’t be serious.
Everybody knows putzs can’t read.
Par R
Poor little ppGaz. His mommy forget to wipe his sorry little ass this morning before sending him on his merry little way…and now it hurts. God, what a CRY BABY. He constantly complains about the lack of substantive debate, and yet he can’t even respond to a simple request for a factual answer to a question. I’m sure that there are dumber lefties out there, but ppGaz probably smells worse.
ppGaz
Again, John and Tim:
Have you READ the Par posts?
WTF?
Blue Shark
Remember John…
…There is no 9/11 if W had bothered to read a PDB one month before the attacks that sorta said “Bin Laden determined to strike in America”. Sorry gotta vacation instead.
…Just because the incompetence goes back prior to 9/11 is not Bush’s fault…oh…wait a minute…Yes it is. He is the freakin’ commander in chief (at least he has outfits that he dresses in that say so).
…Fuckin’ tool and his band of boobs.
John S.
ParR shows off his giant e-penis, then rides off in his e-Porsche, hoping to reaffirm his e-prowess…
Welcome to 21st century macho.
scarshapedstar
Just curious how many of you believe that once the planes were hijacked and en route that NORAD could have done something about it and that Bush is to blame because they didn’t.
Come the fuck on, John. He didn’t even try. He didn’t even pretend to be thinking about trying. He stared into space with less gravity than Terri Schiavo until he was literally dragged out of the room.
The Other Steve
Sadly he’s been e-jected.
Zifnab
Now’s when I have the deep and lingering nostologia. Was political discourse always this high-brow or did we have to work our way up to it?
Have we ever had a Presidential cult this bad? Honestly, I don’t even remember the cult of Reagan developing such a hard-on for their beloved genius President… until people started comparing him to Bush.
Certainly, we haven’t had a cult this bad for a President that didn’t deserve it.
HH
“I know a fair number of non-partisans who will argue to their dying breath that the 9/11 hijackings were a conspiracy cooked up by Rove and Cheney.”
Non-partisan nutcases who hate Bush as opposed to the partisan ones, eh? Well that’s comforting.
Ted
I think those quotes speak for themselves as to what kind of person this commenter is. And I think most people can enjoy the irony in chosen words such as “asinine”, and “juvenile”, in the context of subsequent comments containing: “trailer park trash”, “trailer park trashy ass”, “shitty, cowardly self”, and, my favorite, “complains about the lack of substantive debate”.
I think the “smells worse” addendum is excellent as well. It reveals a genuine loathing.
It seems that our mighty soldier here has it in for immigrants, whether they come here legally or not. He/she also seems to despise lower income people who can’t afford a house.
Bottom line, this SOB wants to claim the impenetrable debate mantle of “soldier” in order to bash those he/she disagrees with, while hating the guts of about one third of the American population (I’m sure he/she hates gays as well, and likely isn’t too fond of non-Protestant Christians). You really can’t claim to be a defender of America when you clearly hate so many, many Americans.
Vlad
It would have been better for the country if Bush had been a lot quicker about cowboying up once he heard the news. I still remember watching CNN after the attack, at like 3 or 4 in the afternoon, and the only statement from the Prez that’s getting any play is “We’ll get the folks that did this.” Folks? “Folks” is a word you use to describe farmers on a stump speech in Iowa, not terrorist suicide attackers. It really pissed me off, for reasons that I still can’t exactly articulate.
I have a hard time leaning too hard on anybody for what they did on September 11, but Giuliani and Rumsfeld were much better at giving the impression that they were on top of things, and as a country we really needed that right then.
GRB
The chaotic response to 911 was understandable. And regardless of my distaste for the man, I was willing to forgive Bush’s own sorry performance that day. Following the advice of his security detail, rather than doing the symbolic leadership act of imediately returning to Washington was, I rationalized, because he was still young in his presidency. But unforgivable was this: After 911 Bush’s conduct that day was “explained” by White House officals as caused by a telephoned threat against Air Force One complete with “code words”. After a few news cycles this “threat” vanished. It had never existed we were told. It had all just been a misunderstanding. I know that’s possible, but to my eye the whole story looks like a cynical lie. There were thousands of dead still buried under smoldering ruins, and this White House was hyping fake terrorist threats to explain Bush’s 911 conduct. And my excusing Bush’s 911 conduct? When Katrina hit he was just as clueless as ever. He had learned nothing
Par R
Ted, another sick pup heard from….probably just ppGaz posting under a pseudonym.
Ted
Ted, another sick pup heard from….probably just ppGaz posting under a pseudonym.
No. Just another observer of your flailing hate. I still enjoy your use of “trailer park trashy ass” while bemoaning the “asinine” and “juvenile” comments of others, though.
Darrell
zifnab, Nairobi embassy attack and USS cole bombing happened under Clinton’s watch.. I guess he was “sitting on his hands” as you say.. Yes, you really are that ignorant
Ted
Yeah. Right on. That totally excuses Our Leader’s deer-in-the-headlights behavior that day. While those events weren’t in Manhattan, they totally seemed like they were.
kevin lyda
somehow the folks on flight 93 had enough leadership and presence of mind to come up with a plan and execute it.
bush sat on his ass and read a book.
that’s been my opinion since the first few days since 9/11 and bush’s feckless leadership since then (and before then) has only confirmed that opinion.
mr. cole, as a writer all you have is your reputation. you are rapidly burning through it.
Gray
“Just curious how many of you believe that once the planes were hijacked and en route that NORAD could have done something about it and that Bush is to blame because they didn’t.”
Yeah, sure. I haven’t been curios about your opinion on that issue since I expected that you know nothing about the timeline on 911, the locations of fighters on ready status near the planes and the possibility of interception. Your question shows that I’ve been right. I’ll never understand why don’t you inform yourself about the facts before starting discussions like this one. Just lazyness? Problems with reading? Do you fear your prejudices will be shattered? That’s pathetic, John.
jg
It only has to be ‘truthy’, not true so there’s no reason to do research.
ppGaz
Just for Par, this is me.
And of course …
Home sweet home
scarshapedstar
bush sat on his ass and read a book.
He doesn’t even have that excuse. Watch the video. He sits there and listens to four-year-olds read a book. And he actually comments on it an asks them questions. They had his rapt, fucking attention! Sorry, but this is not a man who’s pondering the defense of a nation. Whatever he was told, it completely and tragically failed to register. How does that happen? Was he stoned out of his gourd?