Lest we forget...words of implication that issued forth from the Idiot in Chief's own mouth

[BridgeTheGap]

Public Testimony - (written in 2004)

Those of us who have held a distrust of the “establishment” for a long time now, yet maintain our fighting spirit, are not so surprised by the machinations of the standing order. We are rightly skeptical of the 9/11 Commission and its ability or inclination to reveal the truth about 9/11.

The current occupant of the White House is due to give his “not under oath” secret testimony soon before the 9/11 Panel – or part of the panel at any rate. One has to wonder if the panel will reflect the trend at work in the media to give Bush a “free pass” on his performance as a leader in responding to 9/11. Nothing more clearly illustrates this phenomenon than the following quotes that issued from the pResident’s own mouth. Their relevance to 9/11 is clear and their implications for Bush are staggering. This must explain why the U.S. media wouldn’t touch these with a 10 foot pole. Journalist Greg Palast was having a beer in the Orlando Airport, waiting for a flight back to England, when he witnessed the first of Bush’s statements on CNN.

“I nearly spit my beer out on the bar when I heard it. I fully expected the American press to jump on this, but the next morning, not a word.” This is what Palast heard and saw on CNN. The quote is still on the official White House web site:

"Well Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower--the TV. was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a terrible accident.’”

This quote could easily be written off as just another stupid “Bushism.” And surely, one would expect his handlers to reiterate the same words uttered by former Press Secretary, Ari Fleischer to: “Watch what you say.” So did the press write this statement off for this reason? There are plenty of quotes out there, books of them in fact, that give an indication of the “stature” of this man. But keep in mind that “Bush Dyslexicon” author, Mark Crispin Miller, contends that Bush is not stupid and that he can actually speak quite clearly when its something he cares about, say capital punishment, for example. Now the obvious question becomes (are you listening 9/11 Commission?): Why did Bush essentially repeat the same statement made in Orlando, a month later in California?

"Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I'm sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, "America is under attack.""

Obviously, the press has not been willing to hold Bush accountable for these statements or much else, until the pretexts for invading Iraq started unraveling. The use of the events of 9/11 to justify invading Iraq, as well as justifying record deficits and curtailing civil liberties, are reason enough to bring up Bush’s performance in the wake of these tragic events. In fact, the Republicans are running ads touting his leadership abilities supposedly demonstrated in response to 9/11. So yes, it’s time for the media to revisit this man’s performance and ask some questions about the words that issued from his own mouth. And while we may not be privy to Bush’s “not under oath” testimony to the 9/11 Commission, they too should ask some probing questions related to Bush’s public testimony on 9/11. This “leader” needs to be held accountable.

[BeFree]

1. Kick. No comment needed.

[LARED]

2. This has to be one of the top ten 'much ado about nothing'

"smoking guns" that truthers have been dragging around for nine years.

"Well Jordan, you're not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually, I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower--the TV. was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a terrible accident.’”

So the truther thought process is the Bush knew about the attack before it happened and slipped up not once, but twice, with those words because at the time there was no actual footage of the plane hitting the towers only a smoking black hole in the side.

There is no way in the mind of a truther that what he was saying was he saw on TV that a plane had hit the tower. Meaning he saw a news report that a plane had hit the towers. The same news report that millions heard or saw that morning.

With proof like that you guys are getting closer everyday.

[BeFree]

5. The BIT strikes again

Bush was incompetent and that's why he said what he said?

No way, bucko. I was watching the news and no one knew it was a plane for at least 30 minutes.

Tell ya what, we can clear this up because as I remember, before Bush went in the school, just out of the car, a reporter asked him if he heard about the tower on fire and Bush said then that he saw it, and it was a plane.

Now, when I find that article, you'll finally admit your spin, eh?

Bush quote:".... and I saw an airplane hit the tower..."

PS, did yall catch any of that fear the Truthers thread? It was hilarious.

[LARED]

6. Your reading comprehension is slipped again

Bush was incompetent and that's why he said what he said?

I in no way even remotely implied that.

No way, bucko. I was watching the news and no one knew it was a plane for at least 30 minutes.

Really I lived in NJ on 09/11/01, and there were almost immediate reports on the news that a small commuter plane had stuck the towers. Your full of crap.

Tell ya what, we can clear this up because as I remember, before Bush went in the school, just out of the car, a reporter asked him if he heard about the tower on fire and Bush said then that he saw it, and it was a plane.

Go for it.

[BeFree]

7. So

"Your full of crap"

Bush is sitting there with Secret Service all around him, and they all knew about the threat of airplanes being used in an attack, a plane has actually been reported as hijacked, and then the tower is burning and even you knew it was a plane, but no security folks advise the president of the facts? Sure. Right. You sure you want to stick with that theory?

And when I do present the story re: before entrance to the school, you will repent for your ignorance, right?

[Make7]

8. This is just sad.

BeFree wrote:

I was watching the news and no one knew it was a plane for at least 30 minutes.

That makes no sense whatsoever to anyone even casually acquainted with the facts. CNN broadcast breaking news of unconfirmed reports of a plane hitting the WTC a few minutes after the impact of Flight 11. They had an eyewitness who saw the plane on the air within five minutes.

How could no one have known it was a plane for thirty minutes? The impact of Flight 175 was caught live on television broadcasts less than seventeen minutes after the first impact.

Frankly I surprised even you would post something so obviously false.

BeFree wrote:

...you will repent for your ignorance, right?

Should you not be directing that question to yourself?
www.archive.org/details/cnn200109110848-0929

[BeFree]

11. Thanks for the correction Make

I repent.

You must be real proud, eh? You caught me making a mistake. Wow, you're so cool.

Now, back to bush. Have you ever caught him making a mistake... y'know, where people died?
Ever? Ya gonna ask him to repent? You are so cool, maybe you are the one who can Make him?

Bush is sitting there, sees the tower burning on TV, knows it was a plane, SS knows about threats to America using planes, and no one tells him anything? What do you Make of that?

[Make7]

19. LOL! Don't ever change, BeFree... don't you ever change. ( n/t )

[zappaman]

20. genius!

he really is!

[eomer]

9. There's no ambiguity about what he said.

He most definitely said he saw a plane hit on TV. What that means, if anything, is debatable but what he said is not.

So, yes, I do say there is no way "that what he was saying was he saw on TV that a plane had hit the tower". That's not what he said. He said he saw it hit.

And the statement by him is wrong for several reasons. He definitely did not see a plane hit on TV at that time. It is also incorrect that that time is when he first learned about the attack. He actually first heard at least as early as when he was arriving at the school and he probably heard earlier than that -- when he was still in the car on his way to the school.

So the debatable question is whether it is incriminating in some way that he was completely mistaken about where he was and how he learned of such a momentous event, sort of like how his father is one of the few Americans who can't accurately remember where he was when he learned that Kennedy had been assassinated.

Edit to add:
Here is the timeline of when and how he heard:
http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday

[LARED]

10. No one is debating the words of Bush

The issue is the meaning of those words.

[eomer]

12. That's still not quite right.

The meaning of the words is unambiguous, so the meaning of those words is not the issue.

The issue is whether he meant to say something different than what he said; meant to choose words different than the ones he chose. The words he chose are clearly a false statement.

[spooked911]

13. Probably-- it's not inconceivable he did see a secret feed with

the first plane hitting the tower. But there's no proof of this, so I think this issue is mostly a red herring.

Would be nice if a reporter asked Bush to clarify his comment.

[BeFree]

14. Eh?

You think THIS is a red herring, and CGI'ed planes into the towers is not? Eh?

[spooked911]

16. Yes, basically

Sorry. The problem is that it is just these two comments that could just be dumb Bush mis-speaking. Whereas the evidence for video fakery is supported by dozens of pieces of evidence.

[jberryhill]

22. A secret feed of the non-existent plane?

Good one, spooked.

[SDuderstadt]

23. Damn you, Berryhill...

you owe me a new keyboard.

Earlier I proposed giving awards or ratings for non sequiturs. What would you give Spooked?

[LARED]

17. Ok, do you think it was a false statement on purpose, or

just a poor choice of words that caused him to say something that sounded false.

And what difference does it make if it was one verses the other?

[eomer]

15. And even if we stipulate that he merely made a mistake in choosing his words, ...

he is still misstating where he was when he first heard and how and from whom he first heard.

He actually first heard no later than when he was arriving at the school. See the timeline I linked above.

[LARED]

18. So he heard outside the school, then he saw inside the school

on a TV.

Which bring us to an all important point.

So what!

How is that evidence of anything other than Bush's communication skills being marginal at best.

[jberryhill]

21. No... He didn't see it then either

In typical "I didn't want to seem misinformed" fashion, he said he saw the first hit on tv that morning. The problem is, nobody saw the first hit on tv that morning. The only footage of the first hit was the Naudet film, which would not be seen until much much later.

It's like Glenn Beck "holding in my hand" Washington's first inauguration speech - a pointless embellishment consistent with his character.

[BeFree]

25. Or, he really did see it

If they knew it was going to happen, placing a camera somewhere and running a private feed of the first hit would have been no problem.

That would explain his nonchalant actions at the school. He did nothing because there was nothing he could do. What was done was done and he was in no danger. Certainly the SS was not concerned about him being in any added danger.

Then he had to run away because he got drunk and couldn't be seen.

That is the only scenario that matches bush's MO and makes sense of all the oddities of his actions that day.

[eomer]

24. Right. This one is obviously going to depend on the bias that we each bring.

The inability to accurately state where, how, and from whom he learned of the most momentous event in decades will, to some, be evidence that he already knew. He can't remember the moment because it wasn't a shocking moment for him.

There will be others who always see the most innocent explanation for Bush, Cheney, and gang.

[LARED]

26. One's perspective clearly colors one's view

but what we do know clearly leans towards one perspective being far more aligned with reality than the other.

Bush is well know to have difficulty communicating. He has a significant history of saying stuff that make one scratch their heads and say huh, or perhaps duh.

We do know the news of a plane hitting the WTC was almost instantaneously communicated on the news. So Bush knowing about this is hardly a surprise.

Contrary to your view that Bush can't remember the moment accurately, you don't know that, What you do know is he did not communicated clearly. You have no clue what he remembers.

Your posit that because it was a shocking moment he should be able to accurately communicate the events is based on what? Is there some reason that people you hear about shocking event have an advantage in remembering and communicating that event? If anything I think shocking events often cause people to misremember events.

And lastly your characterization that somehow those that believe Bush simply failed at communicating once again is a "seeing a most innocent explanation for Bush, Cheney and gang" is just silly.

[jberryhill]

27. It's not an innocent explanation

The thing is, for is it is relating where we were during a momentous event.

For him.. Being caught like a deer in the headlights, not having a clue, having his emptiness laid bare and fleeing for a day... Filling in a detail with a casual falsehood in a narrative designed to convey he was informed and in charge is second nature to him.

This is a man who could get lost in the words of the simplest sayings - "fool me once, shame on, uh..". Like an adult illiterate who has developed a lifetime of strategies for hiding the fact he can't read (and they do develop strategies), Bush had a lifetime of filling in excuses and explanations for incompetence. It's like Pee Wee Herman's "I meant to do that",'the way kids save face on the playground.

[eomer]

28. Oh, sure (responding to both you and Lared)

Perhaps he's just dissembling or bumbling, both of which he is doing most of the time he is awake.

On the other hand, it also makes sense when you fit it into the larger picture that it may have been an incompetent attempt at a lie and/or an incompetent attempt at remembering something that to him was just a play act and not very important. In any event it is just one small data point out of thousands. It is like one pixel on your flat screen TV -- you can't tell what it is by itself but when you put it with all the other pixels the picture emerges.

[William Seger]

3. That's why we need a new investigation

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1jUIrTZGDU

[LARED]

4. +1 nt