What do you think we would have thought if Shrub had listened to

[napi21]

Richard Clark and prevented the attack of 911? Would we have believed him?

I think they could have stopped it by paying attention to the PDB;s that spoke of airplanes used as missles and attack is imminent by notifyint all the airlines and paying attention to those who rold them about students wanting to learn how to fly a plane but not worring about how to land!

For whatever their reasons, they igonred all of that.

If they HAD paid attention to the alarms, and prevented the attack, would we as lefties believed them?

[JuniperLea]

1. I think most of my cynicism stems from BushCo lies told after 9/11...

It's hard to say for certain, but I think I may have believed him.

[azmouse]

2. If the attacks had been prevented

they would have most likely caught and arrested the hijackers, so there would have been a trial.

Yep, I probably would have believed him.

[Believing Is Art]

3. To some extent

I don't disbelieve that they stopped other plots. I just don't believe there were as many as they claim, I don't believe torture and illegal wiretapping were necessary to discover them, and I don't believe they were as imminent as BushCo says. It's a good thing they weren't imminent, but they are trying to capitalize off possible acts of terrorism for politics.

So yeah, I probably would have believed them. The idea that Al Qaeda wants to attack us isn't novel.

[drmeow]

4. If they had announced that

through intelligence gathering they had learned of an imminent threat, had worked with the airlines to block it, had taken some potential terrorists into custody, and were going to try them I would have thought, "Goody for you, you did your job. You're still not my President, Mr. Election Stealer A$$hole."

[RandomThoughts]

5. I think they already had a 'war on a certain group' mentality.

Before 9/11 they already believed it was a war against people not of their group. In that war, 9/11 was most likely, in their mind, allowed to happen, and as spoken in many planning papers, a needed event in their world view.

They may have even helped or created part of it, it makes more logical sense once you remove the disbelief that they could do that. The biggest argument people use to not hold them responsible for 9/11 is to say they would not do that to their own people.

But they have a thinking of who is in 'their' group that does not include average Americans. Same reason the economic strife, or prison strife, or Katrina strife, does not bother them. To them, it is highly probable that they consider most Americans part of the enemy, since their group is only a few self proclaimed top 5%. And I don't think they apply the teachings of love your enemy very often.

I think, and the documents from some think tanks suggest, they figured it would give them the anger and hate needed to go to war.

[zbdent]

6. major flaw in their arguments about torture being used to stop terrorist plots ...

they already had information on "terrorists" in the U.S. ... and chose not to act in any way, shape, or form ...

A number of the perps who flew the planes on 9/11 were noted in Florida, arousing suspicion there ... and the agent notified the superiors ... and the superiors chose to do nothing ...

[Demeter]

7. Believed Them About What?

That they actually did the job for which they were elected and paid? That they didn't F it up?

you are right. see my sig line.