Poll: Rise of the Truthers?

posted at 12:49 pm on November 24, 2007 by Bryan

Well, great. Trutherism is a growing cancer on the country. If this poll is accurate, two-thirds of Americans subscribe to some form of Trutherism, a huge increase from a similar poll conducted last year.

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings, according to a Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll.

A national survey of 811 adult residents of the United States conducted by Scripps and Ohio University found that more than a third believe in a broad smorgasbord of conspiracy theories including the attacks, international plots to rig oil prices, the plot to assassinate President John F. Kennedy in 1963 and the government’s knowledge of intelligent life from other worlds.

The high percentage is a manifestation, some say, of an American public that increasingly distrusts the federal government.

“You wouldn’t have gotten these numbers a year or two after the attacks themselves,” said University of Florida law professor Mark Fenster. “You’ve got an increasingly disaffected public that is unhappy with the administration.”

I would like to see how the question was phrased in the poll. The story doesn’t offer that. It’s well known that, in retrospect, some federal officials (if you consider FBI field agents and the like federal officials, which they are) had data that could possibly have led to stopping the attacks if it had been pieced together and reported to higher officers in a timely manner. It’s less well known but still almost common knowledge that better immigration enforcement could have prevented the attacks, or at least kept some of the hijackers from being able to board airplanes that day. But the way the question is reported presumes a few things, among them that the FBI and CIA could share intelligence data prior to 9-11 (Jamie Gorelick’s wall prevented that) and that some of them actively chose not to. It also presumes perfect law enforcement across the board, which is an unattainable standard. And there is always the possibility that there are or were moles or sympathizers who were working for the enemy in one way or another. Peggy Noonan even wondered about that back in 2002, and she’s no Truther. I’ve wondered the same thing since 9-11, because in wartime the possibility of double agents and turncoats should never be ruled out. If the question were worded broadly enough, it might capture me as suspecting that “federal officials” might have been complicit in some way, but the federal officials I would suspect wouldn’t be the same ones that actual Truthers suspect. Bona fide Trutherism is nonsense on stilts. The way the question is reported, though, it captures everyone from low level grunts to the President himself, and that’s an over broad swath of the government to rake up in one question.

Bottom line, I just don’t think that two-thirds of Americans have succumbed to Trutherism. Yet. Before I write off two-thirds of Americans as hopeless idiots, I’d like to learn more about the questions they were actually asked.

(h/t The Pool Bar)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Exactly, things like the notes in the margins of the papers that Sandy stole would make me answer “yes” and I loathe the rtoofers.

bbz123 on November 24, 2007 at 12:53 PM

I don’t think this is about “trutherism”. We all know that further attacks will probably be carried out by arabs/persians/muslims (since almost all past ones were) and yet we still don’t do anything targeted at that group. If it happens again, the answer to the question would be that “we knew” but did nothing substantial. This is just political correctness that risks all of our lives (and sacrifices the comfort of the majority). It isn’t any sort of “conspiracy” though.

The dems expressed this feeling very clearly in their last debate, in which all but Dodd put human rights above US national security. Bush also subscribes to this notion, though not as badly as the dems. I believe that this is what this poll is identifying, IMO.

progressoverpeace on November 24, 2007 at 12:57 PM

“What (the recent survey) could mean is that people are thinking that the Bush administration is incompetent, that there were warnings out there and they chose to put their attention on other things,” Fenster said.

http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/28533

That seems likely

bnelson44 on November 24, 2007 at 12:57 PM

Uh…

The government of the United States WERE warned of possible attacks and they DID choose to ignore these warnings. This is FACT, not “trutherism”.

Read a book or two.

kafiiri on November 24, 2007 at 12:59 PM

. Before I write off two-thirds of Americans as hopeless idiots, I’d like to learn more about the questions they were actually asked.

I agree. I know alot of hand wringing, Bush Is Hitler types, but none of the are in the “Loose Change” trufer mode.

But some people (and to an extent me) can think that our intelligence services could have done a better job without thinking there was some kind of ungodly conspiracy between Halliburton, the VRWC, etc…

darkpixel on November 24, 2007 at 1:00 PM

kafiiri on November 24, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Fan of Loose Change among us?

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:03 PM

The government of the United States WERE warned of possible attacks and they DID choose to ignore these warnings. This is FACT, not “trutherism”.

Having warnings about generic “possible attacks” is quite different from having warnings about specific attacks containing concrete information about who, what, where and most importantly, how and when.

Read a book or two.

kafiiri on November 24, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Excellent advice. Here are few pieces of advice for you: 1) understand what you’re reading, 2) get enough formal education to be able to distinguish sh*t from shinola, and 3) take your meds as prescribed.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 1:12 PM

Where can I buy some truther offsets?

Wade on November 24, 2007 at 1:12 PM

kafiiri on November 24, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Fan of Loose Change among us?

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:03 PM

Brian, he is kinda right. But the warnings (e.g., pilots training in Phoenix who didn’t want to learn how to land), didn’t really go very far up the chain. Also we had rules in place that stopped domestic intelligence from sharing information. Not sure how incompetent our intelligence agencies were at the time, that is not my call.

bnelson44 on November 24, 2007 at 1:15 PM

Republicans should embrace this. The government will implant tracking devices in you if they institute socialized medicine.

This video should be embedded into this thread.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/in_the_know_is_the_government

lorien1973 on November 24, 2007 at 1:15 PM

Without knowing the question, this is BDS propaganda.

infidel on November 24, 2007 at 1:20 PM

bnelson44 on November 24, 2007 at 1:15 PM

I’m not sure if he’s kinda right or just a Truther nut. Putting things in ALL CAPS leads me to think the latter. The rules that were in place prevented data sharing, but don’t reach over into Trutherism to be explained. Democrat stupidity suffices just fine for that.

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Whether or not this poll is accurate, trutherism IS a growing cancer in this country. Thanks to a postmodern mindset, too many people think how they feel is equal to actual fact and that vague, paranoid questions are equal to evidence. They also don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation.

This is going to get a lot worse before it gets better, and the only cure for this cancer is a serious effort to push back against it, and to openly mock the loons who subscribe to it.

Laura on November 24, 2007 at 1:24 PM

The government of the United States WERE warned of possible attacks and they DID choose to ignore these warnings.

Um, AP and the article said “Specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks,” not some vague notion of “possible attacks.” Get a clue.

(I’ve got a raging clue right now….)

calbear on November 24, 2007 at 1:26 PM

As the country swings back to conservatism the Paulnuts will be the new “left” of the right side of the politcal spectrum. In the same way communists and socialist took over organazations like Greepeace. They will galvanize behind the emblematic Ron Paul. We as conservatives should be ready for it and preemptively address it before the GOP falls prey to the same scenario that took the Democrats to the far right.

Laura Ingraham guest hosting the Factor could have a very nice segment interviewing Storm Front and asking them what it is about Ron Paul they love so much sounds like a good idea.

Theworldisnotenough on November 24, 2007 at 1:30 PM

T be honest after the propaganda movies like farenheit 911 and Loose change and all other garbage the american people have been bombarded with Im not surprized it hasnt move the numbers a bit.

William Amos on November 24, 2007 at 1:31 PM

“You’ve got an increasingly disaffected public that is unhappy with the administration.”

Bush…

Rick on November 24, 2007 at 1:46 PM

two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings,

Close to 2/3 of Americans will answer any “is it possible” question affirmatively, unless they decide to answer the question they think the pollster is asking rather than the one the pollster is literally asking.

We’ve all seen way too many movies, and there are way too many federal officials, for any of us to state categorically and absolutely that not a single one of them etc. etc. Maybe there was an Al Qaeda spy in the government! Maybe an official has ESP, experienced a very vivid prophetic dream, or received a visitor from the very far future in an alternative universe! Who knows? Coming soon to a theater or prime time TV and of near nil political significance.

Polls like that are inexpressibly stupid.

CK MacLeod on November 24, 2007 at 2:05 PM

I wouldn’t call disregarding specific warnings about 9/11 “trutherism” if there is no implication of government complicity in the attacks. “Trutherism” involves some level of malevolence on the behave of government officials.

Perhaps, a good many of the respondents were thinking that government officials without malice disregarded a warning. To give these respondents credit, given the human tendency towards our heads being the sand, I would predict that 99% of law enforcement individuals would have disregarded warnings of 9/11 on 9/10. They just would have thought the warning a false alarm. It was after all more extreme than anything we had experienced. I know this didn’t happen, but I’m just trying to figure out what people could be thinking.

thuja on November 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM

Goebbles
If you tell a big lie often enough, soon people will believe it. Even if only in part.

Defector01 on November 24, 2007 at 2:08 PM

I’ve wondered the same thing since 9-11, because in wartime the possibility of double agents and turncoats should never be ruled out.

I would go even further, Bryan, and say that quislings should be expected. I doubt that there was ever a war since the beginning of time that didn’t have them, and this war is no different. The line between enough trust to get the job done and being suspicious of everyone is a fine one, difficult to tread.

Bob's Kid on November 24, 2007 at 2:09 PM

If you really need an example of how silly most polls are, go out and ask 20 people:

“Dihydrogen monoxide is a chemical compound which has contaminated 90% of our food supplies. Should it be banned?”

c6gunner on November 24, 2007 at 2:11 PM

If you really need an example of how silly most polls are, go out and ask 20 people:

“Dihydrogen monoxide is a chemical compound which has contaminated 90% of our food supplies. Should it be banned?”

c6gunner on November 24, 2007 at 2:11 PM

Man reminds me of a hillarious fight that broke out in another forum. So Palistinian kid said he had proof that the US government was using our military to bombard the atmosphere with dyhydro monoxide and posioning the planet.

He even showed plane contrails as proof of the “spraying” of said liquid.

William Amos on November 24, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Thanks for the hat tip, Bryan!

flipflop on November 24, 2007 at 2:23 PM

As Defect01 pointed out..”Truthers” use the same tactics as histories’ nototious dictators propaganda way of gaining power. Tell a lie long enough and ignoring/omitting the truth, and it eventualy becomes the truth because the real facts are not repeated as often or as loudly as the propaganda. Sad. Very sad.

kafiiri
Try reading some more yourself before jumping into koolaide parties. It was liberal and Clinton era laws that forbid the CIA nad FBI from sharing info that could have positively IDed Mahamad Atta, and other important info. Even Al Gore (and x-Clinton Advisor Dick Morris) claims his software identified many of the hijackers and threw up red flags before they even boarded the plane. But the PC police moreless prevented any intervetion.

No conspriacy theories. It was simply incompetance (on Clinton and those who erected that legal wall) and complacency by both Clinton and Bush.

El Guapo on November 24, 2007 at 2:25 PM

I recommend seing FarenHype 9/11. A great documentary about Michael Moore’s lies, and The Path to 9/11 (The movie that Clinton demanded be edited or not shown at all).

El Guapo on November 24, 2007 at 2:29 PM

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 1:12 PM

Bingo.

This is FACT, not “trutherism”. Read a book or two.

kafiiri on November 24, 2007 at 12:59 PM

Because when I type with ALL CAPS, it gives my opinions GREATER WEIGHT, and because everything written in books is certified fact.

Hey, douchebag, “specific warnings” might be something like “hey, guys, Islamic terrorists are going to hijack your planes and crash them into very tall buildings next month”.

Or were you assuming something less specific?

Jaibones on November 24, 2007 at 2:37 PM

When are you ‘neocons’ going to admit that 9/11 was made up? It was all part of a deal made with aliens back in the 60′s. They taught us how to make integrated circuits, and in exchange we gave them a huge crater to incubate their young, with plenty of people nearby for their children to eat.

It’s all so clear, I can’t believe you don’t see it. What other logical explanation would there be for there being no effort to rebuild, 6 years later? It’s aliens. A-L-I-E-N-S.

Side note: Did you know that the creators of the modern computer era, colloquially known as Texas Instruments (TI), is actually run by these same aliens, and its true name is Tau Ispilon (TI), the name of their home planet?

Of course, now that I’ve let the truth out, they’ll be coming for me, but it had to com $#&!e%a ~NO CARRIER

Kevin M on November 24, 2007 at 2:38 PM

Oh, and for the record: I believe that huge numbers of Americans are imbeciles.

Jaibones on November 24, 2007 at 2:39 PM

LOL Jaibones, kafiiri

Speaking louder and more violently is also the tactic of those who want to be heard over the silent majority (key word, “majority”) so that they appear to be in the media and their viewers’ eyes as the majority.

I would call that a variant of fascism.

El Guapo on November 24, 2007 at 2:40 PM

Oh, and for the record: I believe that huge numbers of Americans are imbeciles.

Jaibones

Public education and liberal values of teaching to the bottom of the class at its best! Not to mention the new tactic of forbiding things like Valedictorian, keeping score at kids’ games, etc.

AND BANNING DODGEBALL!! Come on you sissies! WE use to play dodgeball with BASKETBALLS because the rubber ones kept popping!

School and childhood, not the workplace, is the place to learn about winning and losing and the rewards of hard work.

El Guapo on November 24, 2007 at 2:46 PM

But the US is hiding UFO secrets!

As for the “warnings”, I’m sure we currently have several thousand warnings, of course when law enforcement tries to act on warnings they are accused of being facsists, taking away civil liberties, etc… Morons.

Everyone is a genius after the fact. It’s like watching The Usual Suspects when you know Verbal is really Keyser Soze.

reaganaut on November 24, 2007 at 2:47 PM

“government’s knowledge of intelligent life from other worlds”

I happen to believe this, only because its fun to do so.

As for 9/11, well its a loaded question….clinton could have killed OBL when he had the chance, the FBI sent the memo about possible hijacking threats etc. If i were to answer absolutely truthfully (wince) i would have to say that yes it is possible that the government had warning. However hind sight is 20/20 and theres no telling how many thousands of ‘warnings’ we have right now coming in from all corners of the globe as we speak. Some of them they will stop, some of them will be determined not to be a real threat, and perhaps others will be misjudged and the attacks will come.
Do I think the government had warning? Probably. Do I think they maliciously and purposefully ignored those warnings? Absolutely not. I think mistakes were made. For us, we have to get it right 100% of the time. Terrorists only have to get it right once

Keli on November 24, 2007 at 3:38 PM

I would love to know the methodology of this “poll”; not only the exact questions asked, but the “scientific” split between Dems, “independents” and Pubbies. I wouldn’t be surprised if the breakdown turned out to be 40/35/25, with a significant amount of that 25 “Pubbie” being Paul-Nuts.

steveegg on November 24, 2007 at 3:55 PM

Lies lie in statistics… I wonder how the question was asked. They probably tried to include people who just think the government is incompetent, not that they purposefully tried to do anything.

libertytexan on November 24, 2007 at 4:11 PM

Bottom line, I just don’t think that two-thirds of Americans have succumbed to Trutherism. Yet. Before I write off two-thirds of Americans as hopeless idiots, I’d like to learn more about the questions they were actually asked.

I suspect this reflects the acceptance of the repeated liberal line “Bush was warned and did nothing”… Even though everyone knows it wasn’t specific, etc. I don’t think this huge jump shows people are believing in some Illuminati conspiracy, I think it shows they’re critical of intelligence handling. Although the article does refer to “specific warnings:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings….

But take a look at that again:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings

There’s yer problem! Possible? So the poll question was essentially “could some people have known?” Not “Do you believe they knew?”, right? That’s why they got the unusually high number (which they likely sought).

I do still, however, maintain that within a few years will have roughly 50% of the population buying in to some form of Trutherism. I’ve literally said that in dozens of threads here, and will continue to.

That said…. RON PAUL 2008! (j/k of course)

RightWinged on November 24, 2007 at 4:40 PM

Democrat stupidity suffices just fine for that.

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM

In this instance this gives far too much credibility to the Republicans. To equate trutherism to those who believe that the federal government is incompetent is ridiculous. There is a big difference between those who believe that the government brought down Tower 7 and those who think that the ’93 attempt, the USS Cole, the African Embassies etc should have been enough to wake up this government. Apparently I ask too much.

Good job; Keep blaming truthers

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 4:46 PM

AND BANNING DODGEBALL!! Come on you sissies! WE use to play dodgeball with BASKETBALLS because the rubber ones kept popping!

This offends me, because I was a sissy, nonathletic gay boy. However, I was so good at dodge ball that I was always the last kid to be hit. Why are the nanny staters deny kids like me the chance to excel at our one athletic skill: avoiding getting hit? (Actually, I also could do the most pull-ups due to my love for climbing trees–which explains my ecology thing.)

thuja on November 24, 2007 at 4:57 PM

There is a big difference between those who believe that the government brought down Tower 7 and those who think that the ‘93 attempt, the USS Cole, the African Embassies etc should have been enough to wake up this government. Apparently I ask too much.

Good job; Keep blaming truthers

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 4:46 PM

Truthers blew up the African embassies!?!!?! All this time I thought it was Islamists. /sarc

No, Truthers aren’t to blame for the inaction and incompetent action against nineties-era Islamist terrorism. (Good thing Bryan didn’t say that.) Various levels of the government are, as any observer knows.

There is, however, a difference between incompetence and willful action, sweeper. The problem with Truthers and those who take them seriously is this: they can’t tell the difference. This goes back to my advice at 1:12PM–understand what you read.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:10 PM

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:10 PM

Bryan suggests that those who believe that the government’s incompetence is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism.

If this poll is accurate, two-thirds of Americans subscribe to some form of Trutherism

Is there anyone here who thinks that all the time, money and resources spent on intellligence gathering picked up nothing? Isn’t it just logical, the simplest of answers, that the government was just incompetent on almost every level.

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Bryan suggests that those who believe that the government’s incompetence is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism

No. He suggested that those who believe that the government’s allegedly quite competent execution of a malevolent against the American people is a major factor in not preventing 9/11 is akin to trutherism. And that’s exactly what Trutherism is.

From the article:

Nearly two-thirds of Americans think it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings, according to a Scripps Howard News Service/Ohio University poll

The bolded phrases do not suggest “governmental incompetence”; they suggest a government which is quite competent at willfully ignoring specific pre-9/11 warnings. Those phrases contend that that the government knew specific intelligence items about 9/11–who, what, how, when and where–and purposefully did nothing. The words ‘specific’ and ‘chose’ exclude accidents, inattention and incompetence. Truthers don’t get or refuse to get this. Problem is that they aren’t the only ones.

This is what I mean about how one needs to understand what he/she reads.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:50 PM

So a phone poll of 811 people is now representative of all Americans?

And yet, just months ago, Zogby found that only 4% subscribed to MIHOP Trooferism, and at MOST 36% engaged in knowing or unknowing LIHOP?

Something doesn’t smell right here.

Good Lt on November 24, 2007 at 5:52 PM

This is what I mean about how one needs to understand what he/she reads.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 5:50 PM

I understand quite well. If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

it is possible that some federal officials had specific warnings of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warning

Again, have all the disdain in the world for truthers but the way the question is worded: Count me as in the majority

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 6:03 PM

He even showed plane contrails as proof of the “spraying” of said liquid.

William Amos on November 24, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Have you seen THIS ITEM ? It’s a “chem-buster”…to counter the effects of chemicals the government is poisoning us with (apparently).

I’m in contact with a couple of truthers…who believe in FEMA camps, chemtrails, 9/11 inside job, etc etc…but that thing in the link takes the cake.

JetBoy on November 24, 2007 at 6:35 PM

If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

Not quite. Individual governmental entities do not have unlimited access to the information of all the others. In some cases, certain agencies (the CIA and the FBI) were prohibited by law to exchange information with each other.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 7:26 PM

If employees of the government were warned about certain elements taking flight training and did not follow up and others being warned of islamist attempting to fly planes into building, and did not follow up, then ipso facto

Also, is there any evidence that some gov’t agency knew specifically that planes flying out of Boston, Newark and DC would be commandeered on the morning of 9/11/01?

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 7:31 PM

Count me as in the majority

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 6:03 PM

Noted.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 7:32 PM

(the CIA and the FBI) were prohibited by law to exchange information with each other.

baldilocks on November 24, 2007 at 7:26 PM

Are you saying that some government agents had specific information? and chose not to do anything with it?

Look, I have a feeling that our difference is mostly with the threshold of specific information.
Here is my definition: Federal authorities knew that islamist would attempt to destroy the World Trade Center Towers.
Defining trutherism down is a dangerous game. Our expectation of our government should be higher, but no matter how low we set expectation, our federal government continues to underwhelm.

sweeper on November 24, 2007 at 8:59 PM

Are you saying that some government agents had specific information? and chose not to do anything with it?

No. I was just giving an example of how inherent gov’t limits can cause (and have caused) problems. You see, I’ve actually worked for the gov’t before.

Look, I have a feeling that our difference is mostly with the threshold of specific information.

On target. I know for a fact that bad things happen in government more often due to negligence (human failings such as incompetence or failure to ask the right questions–due to lack of imagination–or failure to hire the right people) or just the simple inability to uncover all the necessary facts, rather than due to purposeful malevolence (like having all of the specific information and ignoring it in order to shape public opinion). In other words, I don’t think that any one agency in the gov’t wanted 9/11 to happen, had all the necessary pieces to the puzzle but sat back and allowed it to happen. And I definitely don’t think that our gov’t made 9/11 happen, as the Truthers believe.

Back when our gov’t failed to properly react to nineties-era Islamist terrorism, I chalked it up to that very same type incompetence. But as much as I disliked the Clinton Administration, it never would have occurred to me that any agency under its purview specifically allowed those incidents to occur.

Again, the problem with the Truthers is that they aren’t smart enough and/or they don’t have enough life experience to know that the type of conditions specified in this comment and willful malevolence often produce the same type of results: bad ones.

And one thing you should know about intel: I only know of one incident in history in which one of our intel agencies (CIA) knew in advance that something was going to happen: the Six Day War. And that’s because the Israelis told us. (Of course no one knew that it was only going to last six days.)

Dude, none of our agencies knew that the Berlin Wall was going to fall. So when the Truthers say “we knew about this” folks like me know that they’re just looking for conspiracies. I would speculate why they would think this way and why they would make up laughable scenarios to “prove” their theories, but this comment is long enough.

Nice talking to you and see ya tomorrow.

baldilocks on November 25, 2007 at 12:14 AM

Oops. I forget to close a blockquote tag but you’ll figure out where it’s supposed to go. Later.

baldilocks on November 25, 2007 at 12:16 AM

Does 811 people really represent over 300,000,000 people mathamatically? I don’t think any of these polls are accurate.

gator70 on November 25, 2007 at 11:22 AM

The rules that were in place prevented data sharing, but don’t reach over into Trutherism to be explained. Democrat stupidity suffices just fine for that.

Bryan on November 24, 2007 at 1:22 PM

Well said and I couldn’t agree more. In addition lets not forget that not only did the Clintoon administration create the wall between intelligence agencies that prevented the sharing of critical information that would have made the picture of the pending 9-11 attack more clear but the Clintoon adminstration also gutted our military and intelligence to the point where they were only a hollow shell of their previous selves. How else do the lib-tards think Clinton was able to create such big budget surplus that and all the lib-tards are always bragging about?

Not only that but Bush was in office only 8 months when 9-11 occured and as we now know the 9-11 plot had been in the works well before Bush ever took office and 8 months in office was not enough time for Bush to get our military and intelligence agencies back on their feet and efficiently doing their jobs after Clintoon gutted them!

Also, as others have mentioned here the fact Clintoon had several opportunities to get OBL, that and he was so busy playing hide-the-cigar with Monica and covering for his many indiscretions that he failed to uphold the most important part of his oath as President, to protect the Republic and its people!

The bottom line is the Clintoon administration has much more responsibility for 9-11 happening then Bush ever will and regardless of what the lib-tard moonbats say, 9-11 happened on Clintoon’s watch, not Bush’s!

Yeah, thanks for the budget surplus Slick Willy, it was so worth it getting caught with our pants down on 9-11!!

Liberty or Death on November 25, 2007 at 10:41 PM