Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Deepest Darkest Secret of the Bush Administration

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 07:36 AM
Original message
The Deepest Darkest Secret of the Bush Administration
Edited on Sat Nov-25-06 07:38 AM by kentuck
It's a small circle that knows the real truth. It's a secret they have been keeping to themselves since before 9/11. If it were to be exposed, they would all go down. The small circle would include Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheney, Rice, Card, and perhaps, Colin Powell. What is it that they keep to themselves and never whisper?

They did not do their job. Even with all the warnings and intelligence briefings, they ignored their responsibilites. All of them - but especially Bush and Cheney. They were still celebrating and rolling around in their new-found power. They were exploring the different corners of the earth where they could use their power and "expertise" to enrich their friends in the Big Oil industries. They were having secret meetings with buddies, including Enron, to discuss how they might enrich themselves.

They dismissed the threats from al Qaeda as commonplace and nothing out of the ordinary, despite warnings from the intelligence leaders of the previous Administration. They had more important things to do. Such as, go on vacations and play golf. After all, the previous Administration had left them in the best of financial condition.

So, whats the secret? The secret is that they all knew Bush was asleep at the wheel and they have covered for him for these last several years. Mr Bush went on a revenge crusade against those that took advantage of his lack of vigilance and his nonchalant attitude toward his job before 9/11. Not a day has gone by since then that Mr Bush has not thought of how to get his revenge. It's a personal crusade for him. They made him look foolish.

It is this cover-up of Mr Bush's failings that is the dark secret of this Administration. That is why some insiders were shocked that Rumsfeld was let go? After all, he had rewarded Rice for her compliance - with the Secretary of State position. But there are folks out there that know the truth but they have not come forward. Be it a matter of loyalty or indecision or fear for their own complicity, they have remained silent. But there is a dark secret that is hiding still...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ixion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. he was on vacation much of those first nine months
I don't think he ever really wanted the job in the first place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. "When you are 'special' you get lots of extra vacation." - Commander AWOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dmosh42 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
3. Once a few subpoenas are issued, the 'truths' will come forward!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MGD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. Try a few thousand instead. Newt Ging-rich and Co. issued thousands to get Clinton
and that was all over blowjob.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
4. George Bush reminds me
of a puppet someone hauls out of a traveling suitcase once the stage is set. He`s nothing without his handlers. Nothing, as in My Pet Goat, as in Hurricane Katrina, as in the civil war horror in Iraq.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
formercia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Now I know what that thing was in his back
a bracket so they could hang him in the closet when they were done with the dog and pony show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
livetohike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I have to stop drinking coffee while reading DU!
This was a good one :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shrub chipper Donating Member (622 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
6. As if...
McCain will pass the sniff test of the Religious Right, much less Lieberman.

The GOP base think McCain is too liberal (and his actaul voting record should be FAR too conservative for the MSM new discovery - the Center)so how do ya think the GOP would react to Lieberman's voting record which is, aside from his horrible Bush/Iraq/drug industry blind spots, quite liberal.

I don't think so.

And , as a previous poster wrote, what's up with thinking that running 2 of the staunchest Iraq hawks would be a good idea after the 2006 elections??


Ain't gonna happen.

It would be an Inside Washington Wet Dream, but wouldn't get out of the GOP convention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
watercolors Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. I'm waiting for all those
tell all books that will come out after bush is gone from office! I imagine there will be plenty of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cassiepriam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. I can't wait either. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
9. Proud to kick to the greatest page: may all the great secrets of this administration
be exposed for the world to see. :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
11. They did their job- Really
The job of all the people in the top posts at this Administration was the work of PNAC

They succeeded.

War games were in place for Sept 11th 2001

Graphic artists created detailed videos of planes crashing into towers (One of those was prominently used again and again - plane heads towards the second tower that is hit - the building shimmers and the plane does too and then enters the building like someone said "AbraCaDabra")

I'm not saying that the planes did not really crash into the towers. I'm saying that some of the footage that was released is very suspect and cannot possibly be real. A tower does not shimmer and then open up. A plane should at lest partially have things blow back (wing pieces etc) when the collision occurs).

Myers and others testified at 9/11 hearings that they were not sure when they saw the buildings on flame if it was real or part of the War Game scenario.

When golfer Payne Stewart's small plane went off course - it took eleven minutes for our country's defensive air teams to respond.

On 9/11, where was our country's defense?

According to Hersh, Iran is still fully on the table -though there may be the possibility that it won't happen.

I used to think 9/11 was LIHOP. Realize now it was MIHOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joanne98 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. I with you. MIHOP!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #11
18. Whatever theories one might spin about those events, these facts
Edited on Sat Nov-25-06 12:40 PM by petgoat
remain:

1. There was effectively no air defense for 100 minutes

2. 200 of the Widows' 300 questions got no response whatsoever

3. NORAD has changed its story 3 times, and maybe as many of 7 times

4. The collapse of WTC Building 7 has never been explained

5. The steel from the WTC was hastily recycled, and the few samples
investigators recovered do not support the official story that fire
weakened the steel

6. Bush was allowed to remain in the Booker School even though the
nation was under aerial attack, FAA thought as many as 11 planes may have
been hijacked, Bush's appearance at the school was well-publicized, and
the school was in line with the runways at Sarasota Int'l just 2-1/4
miles (20 seconds) away.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #18
22. "The steel from the WTC was hastily recycled, and the few samples
investigators recovered do not support the official story that fire weakened the steel"

Umm - NO - actually ALL the studies support exactly THAT conclusion.

Only in you wild imagination is that even considered...

I've never read such a bullshit statement - but you people keep trying - UNSUCESSFULLY - to spew such crap...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. I said the samples did not support the conclusion that fires weakened the steel.
Edited on Sat Nov-25-06 07:04 PM by petgoat
That is absolutely true. NIST has not one piece of core steel showing heating
above 250 degrees C.

I've never read such a bullshit statement

My, my. Are you laboring under the illusion that such hyperbole improves
your credibility?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
localroger Donating Member (663 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #23
29. Well, I've heard it both ways
I've heard this argument, and also that the salvagers found pools of molten steel in the wreckage as an argument that explosives must have been used.

Actually, both no hot steel and molten steel are consistent with the standard story. Given that the structural failure probably began with the clips that secured the perimeter of a floor to the outer columns, the amount of steel heated to softening is likely to be small compared with the mass of the entire building, making finding such evidence a needle in a haystack proposition. And the collapse itself released a tremendous amount of energy, more than capable of not just snapping but squeezing and even melting steel at the bottom of the pileup. The chaos of the collapse would make the collection of forensically useful evidence iffy in the best of situations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. I don't think that finding pools of molten steel would mean a thing
Regarding as to the means of how the steel became molten inthe first place.

The thing that we do know is that a plane crashing into a skyscraper cannot be responsible for
enough heat to cause steel to melt. A controlled demolition could be responsible for such.

A 747 crashed into a skyscraper in Spain, and although the building burned for two days, it did NOT fall to the ground at the speed of gravity, with its rubble landing in its footprint.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. Your information is obsolete. Dr. Eagar's zipper theory that has
the perimeter clips failing has been rejected by NIST and no one
in the world will defend it, not even Dr. Eagar.

Now the perimeter clips are so freaking strong that saggy floors buckled
the perimeter columns! Of course never mind that NIST's floor sag tests
failed to produce the desired amount of sag.

the amount of steel heated to softening is likely to be small compared
with the mass of the entire building


Every piece of steel was marked with a stamped ID number. The reasonable
thing would have been to photograph, identify, and log every piece of steel
as it came off the pile. The pieces from the impact zone could then have
been identified and set aside.

But no, the steel was removed so hastily that the firemen rioted, protesting
that the "scoop and dump" operation was desecrating the remains of the dead.


Declaration that the 9/11 attacks were an act of war and not a crime meant
that the NTSB was excluded from the plane crash investigations, and meant the
engineering investigators were excluded from Ground Zero.

Beware of inventing the facts necessary to bolster your complacency. That's
what I did, assuming that there were four simultaneous air attacks and the
whole thing was over in fifteen minutes. Only when a loony conspracy theorist
pointed out to me that there was no air defense for 100 minutes did I wake up
and start asking questions.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #22
27. One of the top steel experts in the country
Lost his job at Underwriters' Laboratory because he would not back off statements that
the official story does not hold water.

And if you can prove just how two buildings both collapsed at just a fraction of a second over the speed of gravity, and both collapsed inside their footprints, supposedly there is at least one person or group of people who will pay you a cool million.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
localroger Donating Member (663 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #18
28. WTC 7
I agree with your other points, but I hate how this bit about WTC 7 keeps coming up.

WTC 7 had an extremely large fuel tank on its roof to service the backup generators for the data processing centers it housed. The tank was on the roof so that fuel could be extracted from it to any part of the building without using pumps. Such installations are not common. Falling debris from WTC 1 and 2 ruptured this rooftop fuel tank and it fuelled a very hot fire such as one would not usually see in a high rise building, just as the fuel from the airliners fuel tanks burned hot enough to soften the steel of WTC 1 and 2. When you know about the fuel tank the collapse of WTC 7 ceases to be all that surprising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. Look, here's what U need to consider - the owner of WTC 7
said while being interviewed by MSM media that he had the building pulled. (That interview can be seen in its entirety on various Truth for 9/11 web sites)

The media was very blase and did not say, as any thinking journalist would have, "Uh, just how do you decide to "pull" a building late in the afternoon when the entire neighborhood is under seige?"

People (except for rescue squads) were not being allowed in.

So we have two possibilities here: despite police keeping people out of the area - the owner had a squad of demolition experts come in and place explosives in a building that is already on fire (I don't know of any demolition experts that would undertake such activity at a burning building)

Two: The demolition devices were already in place.

The owner gives the order, and BOOM! the building goes down... Doesn't that raise your suspicions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-27-06 01:05 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. A project censored story weighs in
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2007/index.htm#2


Research into the events of September 11 by Brigham Young University physics professor, Steven E. Jones, concludes that the official explanation for the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) buildings is implausible according to laws of physics. Jones is calling for an independent, international scientific investigation “guided not by politicized notions and constraints but rather by observations and calculations.”

In debunking the official explanation of the collapse of the three WTC buildings, Jones cites the complete, rapid, and symmetrical collapse of the buildings; the horizontal explosions (squibs) evidenced in films of the collapses; the fact that the antenna dropped first in the North Tower, suggesting the use of explosives in the core columns; and the large pools of molten metal observed in the basement areas of both towers.

Jones also investigated the collapse of WTC 7, a forty-seven-story building that was not hit by planes, yet dropped in its own “footprint,” in the same manner as a controlled demolition. WTC 7 housed the U.S. Secret Service, the Department of Defense, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management, the Internal Revenue Service Regional Council, and the Central HERE YOU CAN LINK TO
http://www.projectcensored.org/censored_2007/index.htm#2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pberq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. Yes - PNAC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ooga booga Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
13. Bush is Bush League
I think that the real deal is that Dubya is not and never has been capable of doing the job. Period. He continually arrives at those deer-in-the-headlights (My Pet Goat) moments when he's required to step up a be a real leader. He's a front for a bunch of suits -- Cheney being the leader of that pack.

Remember, when Dubya got the nomination and spent a weekend in Crawford with Cheney trying to choose a VP running mate? Remember that? Dubya emerged and announced that HE had chosen Cheney himself! Cheney knew he needed to stay close to Dubya. Now, six years later, the nature of that relationship has become painfully clear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
26. It was the Secret Service's job to whisk Bush out of harm's
Edited on Sat Nov-25-06 09:04 PM by petgoat
way when the nation was under aerial attack and Bush was 2-1/4 miles from
(and in direct line with the runways of) an international airport 20 seconds
away.

His inaction was obviously staged at the highest levels. Who had the authority
to make the Secret Service stand down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wishlist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 10:59 AM
Response to Original message
14. Their lies and coverups of the warnings are not secret anymore though
Obviously Bush was guilty of negligence but there has been no proof of any deliberate malicious intent to allow or facilitate the attacks. Despite his failure to take preventative action when warned and then his blatant lies and coverups about the warnings, Bush has escaped any significant criticism. With the exception of a few brave souls like Richard Clarke and Al Gore, Bush has basically been given a pass on 9/11.

On the other hand, it has become more apparent that he deliberately and fraudulently presented the case for invading Iraq to the Congress and the American people. The perception that he was sleeping at the wheel before 9/11 pales in comparison to the realization that he employed an elaborate scheme of lies and deception to get us into this disastrous war. With a Dem Congress, I have some hope that there will be more accountability and blame placed on him for invading Iraq without justification.

The fact that Bush got rid of Rummy right after the Dem victory is a signal to me that he is more afraid of scrutiny and blame over Iraq by the new Congress, than for any new scrutiny or blame for 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Indeed; "Why did they allow it to happen?" - Leahy
Whether or not they did allow it (9/11) to happen, is no longer a question even in mainstream politics. The question now is "why?".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tblue37 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
15. Cheney and his PNAC buddies always wanted an excuse to
invade Iraq. They didn't do it in frustration. They were thrilled to have the opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KAT119 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. Needing a 'Pearl Harbor type event" was written into the original PNAC
proposal/charter for global empire, in order to rally the people 'round the flag.

Cheney's meetings w/Enron and other oil giants mapped out the pipelines world- wide they would control....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
twilight_sailing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
17. They did not do their job.
Yep, kentuck. That's right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
opihimoimoi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. Avarice gone wild....Sanity soon will return....to restore our place in the Sun
Until then, we must contend with the GOP BS
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Nov-25-06 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
20. i am not seeing this is a secret???? confused. the whole world
knows this secret. that bush was complacent?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
30. And yet, this was somehow never mentioned in the 2004 campaign
Bush isn't the only one who didn't do his job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. There were a lot of things not mentioned in the 2004 campaign.
The fact that the bills that would have outlawed touchscreen voting machines were
being held up in committee was not mentioned by anyone, not even by the authors of
the Senate version of the bill, Clinton and Boxer.

The fact that 9/11 could not have happened under Gore was not mentioned.

The explanation for Kerry's differing votes on the $87 billion (one was deficit-funded
and one was tax-funded) was not mentioned, nor was the fact that the Bush administration
threatened to VETO the very same bill!

Dems painted themselves as "nearly as strong on terrorism as Bush!" despite the fact
that Bush ignored warnings from 13 countries, 3 FBI offices, the CIA, Richard Clarke,
Bill Clinton, Sandy Berger, and David Schippers--and the fact that 9/11 could not have
happened under Gore because Richard Clarke's plan for military action against al Qaeda
would have been implemented.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-26-06 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. "nearly as strong on terrorism as Bush!"
Heh -- nice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rniel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-27-06 01:27 PM
Response to Original message
37. Bush - Born on 3rd base
and thought he hit a triple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. I would amend that to Bush-Born on 3rd base
and believes he's playing hockey.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calimary Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
38. Yup. All I can say.
It's the biggest unspeakable truth. At least at present. I suspect that may change. Now that at least some of our media are emboldened enough to say "CIVIL WAR" flat-out, that may be only the beginning. At least I hope so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cleita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-28-06 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
40. This is why sometime in the future, I want to see each and every
one of them under oath and made to answer hard questions. I don't care if it's hearing for impeachment, war crimes or just where did the money go? I want the truth out of them so that history gets the facts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 02:36 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC