THIS IS NOT ->Delawareliberal

Some people think that Bush did not have prior knowledge of the attacks and some think he did.

I think the April PDB is conclusive proof that the knowlwedge was in front of his face - whether he ignored it out of stupidity of design is an open question.
 

And while nobody denies the fact that George Bush has been the biggest beneficiary of Osama Bin Laden's inhumanity....

I have to disagree....Haliburton and the Oil companies have been pretty big beneficiaries....

I put w in the top 5 though
 

I watched Matt Lauer's interview with W on Today this morning. Our president looks pretty insane to me. It was very scary to watch.
 

Michael Castle thinks he is doing a great job.
 

add another layer of tin foil, Haliburton has upped the power on their mind control sattalites.
 

hap & hube.

Now I'm curious. What evidence would you have to have in hand befor you changed your minds about Bush?

Would a video tape of him having a cup of tea with Osama make you wonder if Bush is the leader you imagine him to be?

Big Oil and Haliburton profits are meaningless to you. Okay. The April PBD, and Niger Unranium scam - so much Democratic propaganda...okay. The PNAC plan just a coincidence. Fine.

Is there anything you could learn about Bush that could make you not like him?

What evidence of Bush's Iraq war crime would you find legitimate?
 

Did Bush have prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks?

Let's look at the facts:

He had Able Danger which knew the identities of four 9/11 hijackers. He had the April PDB saying that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US with Planes. He had Richard Clark saying can we PLEASE take Al Qida seriously. He had Sandy Berger saying "you are going to be spending more time on terrorism than you can image". He had the complete Clinton plan ready to root out Al Qida from day one and he ignored it. he had an Attorney General named John Ashcroft who stopped flying commercial airlines in July of 2001 due to a threat assessment.

The info was there but he ignored it. Does that mean he did not have prior knowlwedge? That is a semantic question. If you choose to ignore something - do you have knowledge of it?

I will allow that it is open to debate, but given the facts I'm saying that he had prior knowledge.
 

I don't think he had prior knowledge but then again who knows?
 

"He had the April PDB saying that Bin Laden was determined to attack the US with Planes..."

First of all, the Clinton administration had similar intel. Second, does this mean Bush had specific knowledge of 9/11? No it does not. Using this as an argument of Bush's knowledge of 9/11 specifically is just outright stupid. Stop begging.

"He had the complete Clinton plan ready to root out Al Qida from day one and he ignored it."

Why didn't Clinton execute this plan, Jason? Further, why didn't he take out Bin Laden? Does he bear no fault in this whatsoever?

What about our embassy? What about the Cole?