9/11 Happened On Your Watch, Dick Cheney

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has been making the rounds over the last few weeks telling everyone that President Obama is making us “less safe” by moving away from some of the Bush/Cheney approaches (torture) of the last 8 years.

He usually includes a warning of how the changes President Obama is bringing could lead to a future terrorist attack. It’s as if he’s betting on a future attack so that he can then lay the blame on Obama and say “I told you so.”

The problem with this line of thinking, this tortured logic, is where it leads. If Obama is responsible for a terrorist attack that happens while he is President then aren’t Dick Cheney and George W. Bush responsible for 9/11?

Remember that the Bush admin ignored warnings of a hijacking plan and according to Richard Clarke they ignored many of the warnings of the Clinton admin about the Al-Qaeda problem from the get go.

Dick Cheney should be careful as to how he wants to lay blame on the current President because if Obama deserves blame for some theoretical terrorist attack in the future then the Bush/Cheney admin deserves blame for the very real attack on 9/11 that killed nearly 3000 Americans.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


18 Comment(s)

  1. Umm. I’m sorry, but Bill Clinton could have gotten rid of Bin Laden during his administration. It’s just as much his fault if not MORE than Cheney’s or Bush’s.

    Thomas | May 25, 2009 | Reply

  2. For Cheney to say his administration kept us safe for 7 1/2 years is like the prime minister of Japan saying he kept Hiroshima and Nagasaki safe for all but one day.

    Wayne | May 25, 2009 | Reply

  3. Nonsense Thomas. Using that logic we can blame Bush/Cheney for anything that happens while Obama is President too.

    This is probably the most amusing thing about the right wingers – they already want folks to stop talking about all of the problems Bush/Cheney left behind and for Obama to take the blame for all of them. Meanwhile they are STILL talking about Clinton even though he left Bush with a balanced budget.

    admin | May 25, 2009 | Reply

  4. Amen to that.

    Wayne | May 25, 2009 | Reply

  5. Bill Clinton might have been able to get rid of Bin Laden if he hadn’t been spending all his energy fighting off a politically motivated impeachment. Regardless, Bush/Cheney were WARNED MANY TIMES about a terrorist threat, and THEY DID NOTHING.

    bilbo | May 25, 2009 | Reply

  6. Yeah, and Bush could have gotten rid of Bin Laden as well, but chose not to. And don’t forget, Clinton kept us safe for 7 years after the first attack on the WTC.

    Mark | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  7. Oh, come on…9/11 doesn’t count. Cheney and his buddies perpetrated that. Cheney is talking about “terrorist attacks”. And when he says that Obama is making “us” less safe..he means “us(G.W. Bush, Condi Rice, Cheney, et al)”, the people who will be exposed for crimes against humanity.

    Shane | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  8. While listening to Cheney, I thought it interesting that he would express his worries about some one coming into this country with some weapons now, while the Bush administration was instrimental in keeping our suthern borders wide open for those same 7 years.

    Cranford | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  9. 9/11 War Games during 9/11
    by the US military & CIA
    paralysis of air defenses to ensure the attack succeeded?
    who coordinated these efforts?

    There has been virtually no media coverage of the issues of the 9/11 war games, the “amazing coincidence” of a “plane into building” exercise being conducted that morning, or the alleged role of Vice President Richard Cheney in overseeing the war games that morning.

    http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html

    patreich orchard | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  10. 9/11 was a hoax. There were no commercial airliners involved in the attacks, and there were no Arab hijackers; in fact, there were no hijackers at all.

    Why is there no video of anybody boarding the planes? Why has the government been unable to produce one piece of wreckage from any of those flights, or any of the thousands of parts with serial numbers stamped on them? WHY HAVE NEITHER OF THOSE TWO AIRLINES EVER FILED LOSS CLAIMS OVER THOSE FLIGHTS?

    Jesus, people — I wouldn’t want you to rush into anything here. You’ve only had seven and a half years to think for yourselves, instead of enabling these murderers in DC and Tel Aviv by your collective belief in this idiotic fairy tale.

    What a damning indictment of the “public education” system.

    One more thing. Osama bin Bogeyman has been dead for years. Like Casey Stengel said, you could look it up. Just look somewhere else besides the Zionist-controlled “mainstream” media, please.

    Big M | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  11. Big M, what do you believe happened to the passengers who were on those planes then? Do you think our government killed them? What about the calls home that people received from those on the planes?

    I agree that many of the events of 9/11 were and are suspicious and I think that the 9/11 commission was BS. But I find some of these “conspiracy” claims even more dubious.

    admin | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  12. Why would I believe that there were passengers, when they can’t produce any video of them boarding? You can’t board a commercial airliner in the U.S. without being videotaped. If there’s no video, there weren’t any passengers.

    A woman who still lives in New York spent five years looking for relatives of 64 people on “Flight 175′s” passenger list, and she never found anybody. That’s proof that the passenger lists are fake.

    Do you actually believe that those planes could crash and that everything, including all of the passengers, their luggage, the huge outboard engines, the tail sections, the tubular steel seat frames, and the fuselages, along with the wings, could simply vanish off the face of the earth? Apparently, not only are these “Arabs” invisible, they can suspend laws of physics hours after going to meet their virgins. Why do you believe ANYTHING told to you by anybody in either the “mainstream” media or in DC? After Vietnam, Ruby Ridge, OKC, the moon landings, Waco, WMD in Iraq, the Warren Commission, etc., etc., ad nauseam, only a fool would pay any attention to any of them, much less take what they say seriously.

    The phone calls were faked. Voice-morphing technology has been perfected to the point that somebody faked Colin Powell’s voice to some government people a while back, and they were completely fooled.

    As for “eyewitnesses,” it’s been proven that almost every one of these people, at the WTC and the Pentagon, were media figures. At the Pentagon, there were allegedly 10(!) eyewitnesses who just happened to be editors and the like for Gannett, which just happens, coincidentally, to publish Air Force Times, Army Times, Marine Corps Times, Armed Forces Journal, Military Market, Military City, and Defense News. Just your typical, non-biased news organization.

    In less than 10 minutes after the first explosion at the WTC, every major news organization had cameras on the tops of surrounding buildings, choppers in the air, and they were already interviewing alleged “eyewitnesses,” almost all of whom just happened to be employees of those same news organizations. Just how, exactly, do you get all of that up and running within 10 minutes of a “surprise” terror attack? And did you happen to see the article recently identifying the guy in the Harley Davidson shirt, being interviewed by Fake News, as a B-list Canadian actor named Mark Adrian Humphrey? No sooner did he get tagged then the videos were being pulled off the Internet faster than a Catholic priest can get a young boy’s pants down.

    It’s obvious that Bush knew what was coming, even though they didn’t tell him everything. Why do you think he made no move to leave that school after he admitted to being told that there was an attack going on? Are you kidding me? The alleged leader of the country is informed, by his own words, that his country is under “terrorist” attack, and he continues to sit on his ass and do absolutely nothing to take control of the situation, and his Secret Service detail makes no move to take him out of there when, according to Bush, everybody in the room, including the kids, were potential terror targets? And nobody — I mean NOBODY — in Congress ever demanded that he be impeached for his inaction, as well as be tried for treason?

    Bush fought for over a year to keep 9/11 from being investigated. Even Inspector Clouseau could tell you that when somebody tries to prevent the investigation of a crime, especially THE HEAD OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, you can damn well bet the kid’s college fund they were involved.

    One more thing. The “official” story is a conspiracy theory. OK?

    Big M | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  13. Jersey McJones Says:

    May 27th, 2009 at 12:38 am
    It’s difficult to put to words what I think about Richard Cheney.

    The other day I was talking with a man who actually knows Cheney (or at least met him on a couple occasions). Apparently, everyone in Wyoming knows each other. This guy had a high opinion of the man. I remember thinking rather highly of Cheney myself some years ago. I remember when almost all – right, left, and middle – were bashing GHW Bush for neglecting to depose Saddam Hussein after the Gulf War. Bush’s decision made perfect sense to me at the time, and it made perfect sense to Richard Cheney as well. Who’d be stupid enough to want that mess?

    Cheney, back then, was who we used to call a “Realist” (not many around anymore). Kissinger, Cheney, Baker, Nunn, Kemp, Reagan, and many more, these people came from that school of thought. They put reality ahead of ideology. For whatever their motives, whatever their interests, whatever their biases, they were realists – they believed there was a wall of separation between where failing ideology and reality met. Cheney gave up on that. Failure, after all, is not always unprofitable (just ask a derivative trader!).

    Cheney is now proving something that I and many others suspected from the beginning of the “GW Bush” adminstration – that he, at least in many ways, was the 43rd President of the United States. He is defending his legacy, his foreign policy.

    No wonder President George W Bush is keeping quiet. As far as I’d be concerned, if I were GWB, I’d be happy to give Cheney his due. And I’d be happy to let him defend his legacy. I have the feeling that one day, when Bush publishes his definitive memoires, he only contrition will be the power he ceded to people like Richard Cheney. Something tells me Bush would have been a much better president were it not for the likes of Richard Cheney (and Karl Rove and a few others). Whatever one thinks of Dubya, he’s still the kind of guy anyone could enjoy a beer with. Cheney is only the kind of guy you’d want to give you industrial military contractor investment advise, just before the war he promises to come.

    JMJ

    Jersey McJones | May 26, 2009 | Reply

  14. Lets go over how Bush and Cheney “kept us safe.”

    1. They were warned for months prior to 9/11 ABOUT 9/11. In various ways. And the most Bush did about it was saying to the last person to warn him that he covered his ass and that he can go away now. 9/11 happened and thousands of people lost their lives. Clinton was warned and he actually started making plans, Bush tells a CIA advisor to bug off. Protection?

    2. Okay, so after 9/11, we expect the Bush Administration to, I don’t know, step up and actually do something to protect us. What do they do? Invade Afghanistan, a country that was confirmed not to even have the actual al Qaeda leaders in it in the first place (Look to Pakistan.). Okay, so maybe abroad we shouldn’t have expected to have the extremely ambiguous term “terrorism” easily found. How about domestically…?

    3. Sniper outside Washington DC kills several people. We get an anthrax scare and maybe a few anthrax attacks. Katrina kills people and makes many many many more people homeless and Bush waits four days before doing anything at the very least. Bomb attacks on several US embassies. The PATRIOT Act, spying on American people, hauling political opponents to Gitmo under the premise of “ties to terrorism.” And Bush saying about Osama bin Laden “I reall am not that concerned about him.” They didn’t protect us. They’re just taking credit for there being no real terrorist attacks even attempted in the US after 9/11… because no terrorists were trying to after 9/11!

    4. So now the year is 2003. We’re thinking maybe our military might be closing in on Osama bin Laden, right? Suddenly Bush, under deliberately falsified evidence, including “evidence” from a KNOWN German lunatic known as “curveball” as well as torturing a “terrorist” who, after realizing that they’re not looking for the truth but some reason to have Iraq involved with al Qaeda, told a bunch of lies, and got us into… the Second Gulf War. Over the course of his presidency, Bush would lie about WMDs that were not there since long before he was president, “terrorism,” which was a bad argument considering how fiercely a secularist Saddam Hussein was, he DID NOT HARBOR OR EVEN REMOTELY TOLERATE THE AL QAEDA! Then, when all his lies didn’t work, he wrapped it up in the typical “democracy and freedom” excuse used to get us into Vietnam. Meanwhile, millions of people, both military and civilian on both sides get killed or severaly injured. On top of this, Iraq was a sovereign nation that had never once in its entire history actually threatened the US. Protection much?

    5. Back to the US. So, now that we have all this “protection” Bush and Cheney had for us, they begin to do the typical neocon thing and begin to bleed us dry and tank our economy and deny we torture… Oh… whoops… Abu Ghraib and Gitmo. My bad.

    It’s always interesting how everything good that happened on their presidency, they’ll take credit for, but anything horrible, like two wars, 9/11, various scares and attacks on US soil that they “protected” us from… they’ll try to blame on Clinton and Obama, despite the fact it really was their damn fault.

    Yaro | May 27, 2009 | Reply

  15. Thomas are you kidding…bush/cheny had 8 years to do the same and they did not get it done. i have a son and daughter fighting your war and you are not going to sit there and tell me or anyone else with a brain that bin laden had/has anything to do with us going to war in iraq. come on .. even the DICK has come clean. he is a liar, bush is a liar and thats the facts. you are a winer like the rest of the looser right wing’s who have brought this country to its knees with their greed and bull —-! the fact is that dick and the bush had enough intellegence to stop 911. fact! its time for you and all that think like you get your heads out of your ass and be honest. not like DICK

    michael | Jun 3, 2009 | Reply

  16. Cheney has no standing to comment on national security.
    _______________
    SCANDAL! SCANDAL! SCANDAL!

    EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!

    George W. Bush continuously criminally stalked Margie Schoedinger to the point that she could not get away from it, and she committed suicide in desperation to escape: he murdered her.

    “In her suit, Margie Schoedinger states that George W. Bush committed sexual crimes against her, organized harassment and moral pressure on her, her family members and close relatives and friends. As Schoedinger said, she was strongly recommended to keep her mouth shut. . . . Furthermore, she alleges that George Bush ordered to show pressure on her to the point, when she commits suicide” (blog of drizzten).

    “One of those ‘very leasts’ [was] George Bush’s personal complicity in the death (murder to be precise) of my friend Margie Schoedinger in September of 2003. Determining the exact whereabouts and contacts of [then] president-elect George Bush on September 21 thru 22, 2003, should be entirely lacking in difficulty” (Leola McConnell—Nevada Progressive Democratic Candidate for U.S. Senate in 2010).

    Leola McConnell is correct: Bush applying pressure (continuously criminally stalking Margie Schoedinger) purposefully to force Schoedinger to commit suicide does in fact constitute murder where it culminated in her death.

    BEWARE: If the president of the United States hates one—for whatever reasons—he can continuously criminally stalk one to the point that one cannot get away from it, and one ultimately commits suicide in desperation to escape. He can murder people in this way.

    Bush is getting away with his murder of Schoedinger—with no sheriff, prosecutor, or court willing to uphold the rule of law.

    Bush’s method of murdering Schoedinger cannot exist in a vacuum: he must have murdered other people in the same way.

    Bush should confess, come out with the names of all of the people whom he murdered in the disgusting way he murdered Schoedinger, undergo execution, and accordingly find himself at the intersection where he would be free.

    (There are thousands of copies of the information above on the Internet. It exists very extensively in all major search engines. Please feel free to go to any major search engine, type “George W. Bush continuously criminally stalked Margie Schoedinger to the point that she could not get away from it, and she committed suicide in desperation to escape: he murdered her,” hit “Enter,” and find innumerable results.)
    _______________
    Andrew Wang
    (a.k.a. “THE DISSEMINATING MACHINE”)
    B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
    Messiah College, Grantham, PA
    Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993

    The Disseminating Machine | Jun 14, 2009 | Reply

  17. You are exactly right Big M. Keep up the information. There were no commercial planes on 9-11. It exposes everything with regards to TSA, patriot act, homeland security, pre-emptive invasions, torture, renditions, gitmo, and suicides of potential witnesses.

    Fanof BigM | Jun 27, 2009 | Reply

  18. There is NO video of ANY passenger boarding any plane from any of the airports from 9-11. Not one video of anyone checking baggage, buying tickets, going through security, or boarding any planes. There were videos of “Arabs” shown immediately after 9-11 going through a security checkpoint though the day, time, and airport location is not on 9-11!! Over 80+ videos of a “plane” at the Pentagon were confiscated and destroyed by the FBI on the morning of 9-11. They will never been seen. At the exact spot were the “nose of the plane” hit at the Pentagon…it had more than 6 cameras pointing directly at the helo-pad. All have been confiscated and can never be seen because of “national security”?!!! There are no videos of anyone at any parking garage from any of the airports from 9-11. There is not one video of any family member of any of the passengers at any of the airports. All the video at ground zero has been confiscated. This includes ALL video that was taken in and around the city 2-4 weeks BEFORE 9-11. Why? You would see the demolition companies going in and out of the WTC’s 1,2,5,6,and 7 days, weeks, and months BEFORE 9-11. All the video from all the cameras at ground zero has been confiscated. Every single video ever shown of “planes” from 9-11 was vetted by the FBI BEFORE you saw it. Every single one. On the day of 9-11 a total of 7 SECONDS of video was given to the world as proof of an airplane crash. Amazing when you consider that dozens of helicopter flights were recording WTC2 before the crash. ALL the film combined from these cameras on the day of 9-11 totaled 7 seconds!!!

    The reason you will find constant and never ending problems with supposed video of 9-11 is because there were no commercial planes on 9-11. Just like the WMD’s in Iraq….it was staged by the US military and government to spend trillions and kill millions.

    Tonia | Jul 13, 2009 | Reply

Post a Comment



Plugin from the creators of Brindes :: More at Plulz Wordpress Plugins