Or most other rational thinking people. Seriously, I can't believe this continues to be an "issue". What could he have done in 7 minutes to save the WTC and Pentagon? Should he have acted like George Costanza yelling fire at a childrens birthday party? Why didn't anyone bring this up before they saw it in Michael Moore's silly little movie? No one on the 9/11 Commission seemed to think it was a big deal. Of all the things to bash Bush about, many of them valid, this just seems petty.
did you at least find the passage in the report that mentions this? I know you had problems doing so previously.
Just thinking out loud---- "The nation is under attack we need to get the President's authorization to shoot down these passenger jets they appear to be headed for populated areas. Seeing as other commercial jets have slammed into major landmarks with thousands of people in them we need to act FAST!" Answer ---- "Please allow the president to finish reading "My Pet Goat" he's reading it slowly, but it shouldn't be more than 7 minutes." Is that rational? --------------------- ---- "FDR Pearl Harbor is under attack we need you immediately." "Just hold on for about 7 minutes while I read this book to school kids, photo ops are important as well." Rational?
White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card was with President Bush during a children's reading event at a Sarasota, Fla., public school when word came that planes had hit the World Trade Center. Card had to decide how to tell Bush without creating a national panic... I usually ask myself this: If I were president, would I want to know? And the test was yes, I would want to know. So then I decided that I would tell the president. And I went over to the door, and I actually did give some thought as to what I would say to the president because it's not an easy thing to interrupt a president during an event. First of all, you're watching, the cameras are on, and the audience is paying particular attention. And when it's a student audience, it's even a greater challenge. So I was very uncomfortable about interrupting the president during one of his events ... so I wanted to think, how can I convey to the president the situation? And I made a conscious decision to state the facts and to offer editorial comment. And the facts, as I knew them, were -- since he knew about the first plane, I said, "a second plane hit the second tower." Those were the facts. And the editorial comment was, "America is under attack." I said those things into the president's right ear, and I stepped back, because I did not want to invite a discussion from the classroom. But I tried to be succinct in what I told him so that he understood the enormity of the problem. He looked up -- it was only a matter of seconds, but it seemed like minutes -- and I thought that he was outstanding in his ability not to scare either the American people that were paying attention to the cameras or, more importantly, the students that were in the classroom. And he just excused himself very politely to the teacher and to the students, and he left. link "'A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.' And then I pulled away from the president, and not that many seconds later the president excused himself from the classroom and we gathered in the holding room and talked about the situation." link2 OMG, it seemed like minutes because it WAS!!!
Well, of course they mentioned it. I'm not arguing that it didn't happen. Can you cite the passage that states that the President's actions in those 7 whole minutes are in any way to blame for the events of that day?
Hindsight is 20/20 --- Something even more horrible could have happened during that time span and the POTUS would not have been available. There is no defense for this inaction --- I didn't continue reading the morning paper when I heard what was happening on 9/11. George W. Bush froze when we needed him the most.
If nothing else wouldn't you want to leave the classroom immediately to get the full details about what was going on. Bush (or anyone else) couldn't know in that moment whether his quick reaction would have an effect on the ultimate outcome of this attack. But you have to assume as a leader that there is something you can do. For instance, what if there were more highjackers on other planes and an order was given to ground all domestic flights immediately after the second plane hit the tower, thus preventing one of those planes from taking off. A difference of 3 minutes could prevent hundreds or thousands of deaths. The point is no one knew the scope of the attack at the time, but the president needs to start getting a handle on the situation IMMEDIATELY after being told we are under attack.
You do know that I'm showing grace by giving him a passing grade? What's his "participation in votes" percentage again? On a 100% scale, he's an utter failure.
Both images taken at 9:03 a.m.: Bush takes part in a meaningless photo-op, knowing full well the US is already under attack.
That picture shows the second plane hitting the WTC. How would the President know we were under attack before the second plane hit?
Because he had been told before he went into the classroom that the first building had been hit. You'd think he could put 2 & 2 together.
No one had any idea who was responsible... or that it was even intentional. This is so patently desperate.
He really didn't need to do the math. He was told "america is under attack" Even so...i find the debate about the seven minutes as relevant as the debate on the severity of Kerry's wounds. I give him a pass on that.
after all the chatter in the intel community in august 2001 you would think a plane crash into the same building terrorists hit 8 years prior would set off some bells
