Sammon: Bush "a victim of his own success" in fighting terror, because "complacen[t]" public "picked on him on other stuff"
September 11, 2009 11:00 am ET
From the September 11 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
The Friday Rush: A series of conflicts
Contrary to media hype, Sarah Palin is very unpopular
Bush didn't fight terrorism, he increased it with his ham handed invasion of Iraq. When we invaded Iraq, that was, and still IS the best recruiting tool that terrorists could have wished for.
Not to mention that terrorists incidents went up markedly after we invaded Iraq, and continue to be high.
We are not 'safer' today, no have we been since 2003, despite what you and liked-minded conservatives would like everyone to believe.
prosecute
a. To pursue (an undertaking, for example) until completion; follow to the very end.
b. To chase or pursue (a vessel)
Mr. Bush "prosecuted" his phony "war on terror." One cannot "prosecute" a war on a tactic or idea. The "war on terror" title was bogus from the get go. What Mr. Bush DID was create terror in order to scare idiots like you into believing that invading Iraq had something to do with 9/11, which, of course, it did not.
Prosecute:
1. Law. a. to institute legal proceedings against (a person).
b. to seek to enforce or obtain by legal process.
c. to conduct criminal proceedings in court against.
2. to follow up or carry forward something undertaken or begun, usually to its completion: to prosecute a war.
3. to carry on or practice.
Ouch. That's gonna leave a mark.
Then, Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld "prosecuted" the 9/11 attacks by warmongering. And Bin Laden is still a free man. And tens of thousands of people are dead and the war profiteers are rich.
Hmmm...wonder which way works better? Guess you choose the method of death.
I think you're referring to the 1993 attacks on the WTC, which you are right about.
That's cause puppychasingitstail is a graduate of the Glenn Beck Skool of English . . .
When one conducts a "war," they "prosecute" it. That is exactly the context in which the word was being used.
Try again, puppies. You were wrong.
"You can quote Webster all you want but 'everyone knows' what the term...meant!"
Facts are the enemy of the baseless argument.
That's a laugh. For most of the right terrorism didn't exist until 9/11/2001. When Bill Clinton tried to go after bin Laden and al Qaeda the reps all said it was a distraction from the Lewinsky scandal. That he was wagging the dog. The right didn't give a flying f**k about terrorism until 9/11.
BTW, Mr. Clinton kept us "safe" from February 1993 until January 19, 2001 . . . you gonna give him credit for that?
And, I was not a Clinton supporter, never voted for the man, but your logic is flawed and, as usual, completely incorrect.
I think what you meant to say is that Clinton wasn't a warmonger.
Why do you love death so much?
Bush took his eye off the perpetrators of the attacks of 9/11 in order to PROSECUTE an unnecessary and unrelated invasion of a country which had not attacked us, had not threatened to attack us and which had absolutely no means to attack us. Bush's incompetence allowed bin Laden to escape and when asked about bin Laden on March 13, 2002, said "I truly am not that concerned about him."
Bush FAILED, puppies. His wrong-headed attack on Iraq was a recruiting tool for the people who attacked us.
Welcome to Planet Wingnut!
Where one president [Clinton] can catch BOTH the perpetrators of WTC I AND the OKC bombing -- and terrorism is considered "not his forte" . . .
. . . while another [GW Bush] can sit on his arse and read to schoolkids during the worst terrorist attack in US history, NOT catch those responsible for it 7.5 years afterward -- and be branded a "success" . . .
After the attack on the WTC in '93, the perpetrators were apprehended, imprisoned, PROSECUTED, and punished. There were no more attacks on American soil by foreign terrorists through the remainder of Clinton's 2 terms as president. Until the Bush administration which ignored the previous administrations warnings...
Here's the question: What were three things the Bush Administration never had, but preached that others should have?
They caught and convicted those responsible for the first WTC, unlike herr dubyah.
Apparently you were not alive when your fellow teabaggers were screeching, "No war for Monica", when Mr. Clinton was pursuing terrorists.
So, are you really this stupid or just really this uninformed?
Prove it.
Hey dumbass... where in the world did you get this little gem...
"Terrorism did not begin January of 2001 as you and like-minded liberals would like everyone to believe." ??
Name one... just one liberal/Democrat/etc... ANYONE! EVER! other than the usual right-wing suspects who have said that liberals have said that??
You want to come in here and speak your peace... I'm all for it, and defend your right to do it... but you damn well better be able to defend your accusations... especially one like that or shut the hell up!!
And before you go there... By demanding that you defend yourself or shutting the hell up is not infringing on your 1st amendment rights... as I said... speak your peace... just be ready to defend it!
This of course and that of all the other right-wing lunatics is code to the sheeples that actually believe these people are serious that it is actually Democrats, liberal, and progressives that have forgotten abou this day and what it meant and why it happened.
This is exactly also one of those reasons why I absolutley hate people like Glenn Beck (with his using of 9/11 by calling his little tax protesting group 9/12 Project) or dumbasses like Mr. Sammon here!
It all amounts tho these bastards trying to claim some moral highground in being the only ones effected by what happen 8 years ago today... and to them I say...
SCREW YOU and your self-righteous indignations!
Why isn't George W. Bush at the Memorial today in New York City?
Isn't it a sufficient enough photo opportunity for him, doesn't he want to come out of hiding for this Memorial?
It's a strange pride Fox News Channel expresses for George W. Bush on this solemn day... it would be stranger still, if George W. Bush stood up today to bask in Fox's glow.
No one was ever complacent, there was so much disrespect and lawlessness during his administration, sanctioned at top levels of government, people stopped believing that government was "for the people, by the people and of the people."
Bush was inept to politics, not political processes. He was also a man of no identity. He did not think for himself and he was not an independent leader. His loyalty to his friends is astounding and exposed. He was a loyalist who had the nerve to play the "fall guy" to advance private interest. This correlates to a good friend and partner, not a President.
People are not complacent either as there are many things in ones life that are more likely to happen. We each have a better chance of being hit by lighting than ever be the victim of a terrorist attack.
That doesn't mean we shouldn't be vigilant but we've always been under a threat of attack since before we were born
We could just sit in idle and wait for the odds to swing back the other way.
Suggesting that Americans have become "complacent" about terrorism while praising the guy whose lack of attention to the subject allowed 9/11 to happen....well, now I've heard everything.
By "other stuff", I guess this numbskull is referring to:
* Bush's alcohol and drug use
* His drunken driving arrest
* His failure to report for duty once the Air National Guard started random drug testing
* His string of business failures (even with his Harvard MBA)
* His forcing an underage girlfriend to get an abortion in the days before Roe v. Wade (when abortion was illegal)
And most of all...
* The way his lies resulted in the deaths of thousands of American servicemen and women (and countless Iraqi civilians) in his illegal war.
I think we have many reasons to "pick on" Bush. And to continue picking on Bush until he's sent to prison for his war crimes.
He also had a great deal of success in smearing his political opponents as un-American (just ask Max Cleland) and getting gullible, frightened idiots to vote them out of office.
Actually fighting terrorism? Not so much.
Here it is....
I am the reason Al Qaeda has not struck again.
Yep. Hold the applause please.
I am telling you this only because I don't have to prove how I did it, or show direct evidence.
I only have to say I did it, in order for you to believe me.
Oh? You ask why didn't I get Bin Laden yet?
Well, that part wasn't my job. I kinda thought I'd leave something for Bush to do. Sorry. Guess I should have taken care of that too. I was too complacent.
If only I'd gone for wash and wear.