That all recent presidents have had attacks on their watch: Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II. Some were responded to others were not as each situation had different circumstances tied to it. For Clinton, he never denied military or civilian intel operations requests for funding and that is on the record. He placed Richard Clark (a non-partisan terrorism expert) in a cabinet level position and held daily meetings. Clinton drafted ominibus anti-terrorism legislation that was grossly watered down by the Repub congresses of the 90's. Clinton's admin saw the stopping of numerous potential attacks. Bush got into office and demoted Clark to a coordinator slot below Rice and she ignored his pleas to urgently meet up to 9/11. Cheney took over anti-terrorism in 4/01 and promptly shelved the Hart-Rudman report (the report proved to be quite prophetic). Cheney held no meetings prior to 9/11-NONE. Bush ignored warnings in a memo given to him while vacationing in Texas in 8/01. Any explanations for this?

You have it backwards. The Bush admin was hostile to the Clinton holdovers like Richard Clarke who repeatedly warned "the principals" that the biggest threat the US would face would be AQ and OBL. He was set aside, removed from attending principal meetings. Ostracized because he had worked in the Clinton admin (and the Regan admin too). The Bushers had a toxic view of anything Clinton & this was the result. The admin with Condi focused on a long-gone coldwar soviet union threat & a missile defense system. And 6-time deferrment specialist Cheney never conveened his anti-terrorism task force cuz he was busy meeting w/ Enron & Exxon types to draft an energy bill.

I also served under elderBush who, along with Cheney started chopping the military even more than Clinton did with his republican majority Congress. Show us how much incompetent Bush was trying to build up the military prior to 9-11.

Because there is no way possible that the state of our country and military on 9/11 could in any way be attributed to whoever it was running the country for the previous EIGHT years...

I remember serving in the Marine Corp when Clinton was elected. WAS NOT A GOOD DAY TO BE A MARINE! I saw drastic cut after cut when Clinton was in office. Oh, remind me about all those terrorist actions that Clinton stopped while in office like USS Cole.

Thanks to a total majority republican Congress since late 1994.

So many excuses from the Bush apologists for his incompetence leading up to 9-11.

Bush has disappointed me in many ways, but holding him responsible for not preventing the attacks on 9/11 is irrational.

Up until August he was trying to get the Senate to confirm his national security appointees. Prior to that he was working with hostile Clinton holdovers and a partisan Senate bent on using their oversight of the appointment process to sabotage every aspect of the executive branch.

The preparations for the attack were begun at least two years earlier and the terrorists were in place before Bush's team was confirmed, much less having time to change the culture of the intelligence services.

Criticize Bush for overspending and not having an 'end game' plan for Iraq, but the blame for not stopping the 9/11 attacks belongs to his predecessor.

There's so much fiction here it should be the book-of-the-month club. But I will agree on one thing, our military was sent to war with inadequate protective gear and other equipment.

Clinton gutted the miltary, and when their service was needed they paid the price. Anyone who blames Bush for a lack of military equipment in 2001 is truly in the business of writing fiction.

jmo

Mr. Burton, Bush did send our men and women to Iraq. The vote that you refer to, as does the administration, was made on faulty intelligence. This administration did everything it could to force intelligence fit a mold the administration needed it to fit. This is an administration that drafted intelligence to suit it's policy. To cite that vote is disingenuous, and frankly is an insult to my intelligence -- as it should be to any independent thinker. This administration would leak information to papers such as the NY Times, and go on the press circuit citing that article as a third-party endorsement for their actions. And Johnbo, this congresional majority was not re-elected. It was a republican majority since day one of the Bush administration. You may have forgotten events of the past, but I have and will not.

Ryan: I agree with you 100%. I think the "bleeding heart liberals" would open their arms to terrorists moving in to our country. They would be there with all the social service handouts and all the other tax free help. Their goal would be to talk them out of their nasty behavior, as if that has ever made a difference!!!!!!!!

Victoria

You don't have to lie. I do show our troops respect. I support them too, unlike the republicans who sent them off to fight and die with inadequate protective gear. It is interesting that you 'prove' Clinton did not neglect terrorism as most right wingers claim. He did the right thing if you claim that Bush did the right thing. Can you imagine Reagan reading a little kiddy book while our country was under attack?

"skepticism"..... Wow! You do show how weak a leader incompetent Bush has been.

Bush DID did put 150,000 our of troops in Iraq. And in a show of "solidarity" w/ the troops, he gave up golfing. What a guy. Although that too turns out to be just one more lie. A Republican majority rubber-stamping congress for Shrub's first 6 years green-lighted every policy position of the WorstPresidentEver. The Dems meager majority in Congress is not enough to override vetos. So he continues to drive the agenda. As a consequence, the dems have failed to follow thru on the public's desire to get out of Iraq, short of cutting off all funds. The public is over Bush's fiasco, they want the troops home, and they want Bush to head to Crawford, unless warcrime trials start.

President Bush was doing the same thing his predecessor was doing, and what his predecessors predecessor was doing…gathering conclusive intelligence. There was that little bit of skepticism that prevented action. Also, the very thing the Presidents Clinton and Bush could have done is the very thing you abhor now. It’s called the Patriot Act. What our current administration has put in place has prevented any further attacks on our country. But all you have to do is complain about it. It would do you well to swallow your over-inflated pride and just be grateful that you or your family hasn’t been blown up by a suicide bomber at the mall. We have some of the world’s bravest men and women in harms way. Show them some respect.

I agree with you as well. My nephew also left this week, on his way to Afghanistan. He also enlisted voluntarily.

Tell us all, johnbo; What did incompetent Bush do about the threat of terrorism prior to 9-11?

I agree with you totally and remind people to that the so called problems with the ECONOMY which by chance is controlled by the congress and done nothing but go downhill since a certain party was re-elected to the majority. This party has FAILED to follow thru with the things they promised like removing emarks from the budget and numerous other promises made in the election yr 2 yrs ago. OH yea they did follow thru with 1 promise to hold congressional investigation after investigation into useless matters which have proven NOTHING and done nothing except to cripple the goverment. They have tried to Raise taxes again and again,tried to pass bill after bill to grant illegal immigrants immunity in the US and to do nothing except critize our good men and women serving their country. YES PEOPLE maybe we all should wake up and see what we voted into office before it is true to late and we have 4 yrs of raised taxes, universal failed health care and more lies about not knowing about Preachers or bombers of the Pentagon.