Monday, June 07, 2004

Incompetence & blood lust: The REAL reasons I think Bush planned 9-11

I am working on this idea -- that 9-11 carries the stamp of the Bush/Rumsfeld Modus Operandi. This idea rings true -- but it needs facts to back it up with. Any ideas? Let me know (but only after we get back from our cruise; the one that Ashley's troop earned by selling 40,000 boxes of Girl Scout cookies!)

Here are some possible ideas to research and follow up on:

* One thing that sticks out about the 9-11 attack is Bush's and Rumsfeld's brilliance for planning stuff that involves death and killing -- and their total indiffererence to mercy, compassion and follow-up planning.

* Shoddy preparation (go to ANY 9-11 website if you doubt that one!) Lackluster carry-through (Read the 9-11 commishon report!) This has the Bush and Rumsfeld stamp. For instance, preventing the sacking of Baghdad and its occupation were totally overlooked. AND someone forgot to plan what would happen AFTER 9-11 too. The goat book? Come on.

* Then there's stuff like the hijacker's passport that survived the crash. That's too much like the Niger cake forgeries -- documents that conveniently just showed up.

* The various media attacks on the 9-11 families after they started investigating? So much like the attack on Clarke et al when they started getting close to the truth.

* What about that guy Vreeland who worked for the Penagon and said there were six more attacks planned -- if the first was not sucessful. Define Bush, Rumsfeld and the PNAC's definition of sucess?

Anyway, here is what I got so far:

In an article in the New Republic, former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski describes the Bush administration's invasion and occupation of Iraq as being "justified by falsehoods, pursued with unilateral arrogance, blinded by self-delusion, and stained by sadistic excesses."

Now doesn't that just describe the falsehoods, inefficiency, sadistic excesses and unilateral arrogance of 9-11? Think about it.

Incompetence? Rumsfeld planned the war on Iraq. Could Rumsfeld have planned the attack on the World Trade Center as well? The M.O. is certainly the same: Ego, lots of loose ends, in bed with questionable Arabs and plenty of "sadistic excesses".

Incompetence? Just consider the skills level of John Ashcroft. According to Senator Patrick Leahy, "preliminary findings of the 9/11 commission suggest that counterterrorism simply was not a priority of your Justice Department prior to September 11th."

According to Senator Leahy, "Problems ranged in your department from an understaffed foreign translation program, woefully inadequate information systems, cultural attitudes that frustrated information sharing across agencies. Just one day before the attacks, on September 10th, you rejected the FBI's request to include more money for counterterrorism in your budget proposal." Was Ashcroft involved in 9-11? Or was he just really, really incompetent?

Incompetence? As for George Bush himself, he certainly qualifies for incompetence. America's economy has tanked and half the world hates us since he moved into the White House. "Sadistic excesses?" The man certainly does love to blow stuff up (remember his childhood hobby -- blowing up frogs?). Plus Bush is the king of falsehood -- just ask any school child, veteran or expert on WMDs.

But would Bush qualify under the category of unilateral arrogance and self-delusion? Guess who stated "God told me to invade Iraq."

Perhaps I am being too hard on the boys? Let's have a (competent) court of law put them on trial and find out.