Countering "We haven't been hit since 9/11"

[Qutzupalotl]

You've heard it before. Some wingnut tells you, "Bush must be doing a good job, since we haven't been hit at home by terrorists since 9/11." How should you respond?

All you have to do is turn around and ask him what he would do if, God forbid, we do get hit again. "Would you turn on the president? I don't think so! No, you'd be the first to say we have to rally around the president. This just goes to show that your support of Bush is not based on his performance, but is based instead on blind loyalty."

[BattyDem]

1. One word:

Anthrax

[Qutzupalotl]

2. I thought about that.

Anthrax and 9/11 are so connected in people's minds that they are seen as somehow linked, even though those attacks were likely homegrown (and the anthrax itself definitely was).

[BattyDem]

12. You're right. Most people tend to link them

That's why it's always good to remind them that the attacks happened a month later ... and like 9/11, Bushco hasn't arrested or convicted anyone involved. :evilgrin:

[liberaldemocrat7]

36. More words: The right wing anthrax killer.

He killed several people and sent anthrax to 2 Democratic Senators at that point.

He acted very partisan in his target of Senators to target.


Timothy McVeigh: The right wing bomber.

Terry Nichols the right wing accomplice of Timothy McVeigh

Eric Rudolph the right wing bomber.


Why do these right wingers hate America and our freedom?

We have no war on terror. We have a war on Liberals.

[babylonsister]

3. Yes, we have, with Katrina. Their inaction & ineptness spoke volumes. nt

[Qutzupalotl]

6. True, but the phrase is usually "by terrorists".

But Katrina definitely shows we are unprepared for disasters.

[babylonsister]

11. And unprepared to be 'hit', I'm sure. We're not prepared for

anything, including this damn war!

[minnesota_liberal]

37. The anthrax biz was technically a form of terrorism

That there were no explosions involved is less important than the effects. And the person responsible was technically a terrorist.

[lonestarnot]

24. Inaction my ass! They have boarded up homes that were untouched

by Katrina, homes that belong to poor black people located in what they want to make into rich whore'n gambling money making tourist holes.

[babylonsister]

39. Pls. provide a link for that. nt

[StraightDope]

4. Anthrax attacks.

The perpatrator of which still hasn't been brought to justice.

[pooja]

5. don't say it out loud... they may still have something up their

sleeves... If dems win the House, you know they are going to open up a whole lot of whoop ass... the whole clan will be handcuffed and chained when all the bullshit really hits the fan... so tread lightly and work hard... but don't tempt them.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

7. We have been hit many times since 9/11

we were hit by ANTHRAX and that terrorist is still running around loose and free.

We have beeen hit by giving up our personal liberties since 9/11. We take for granted that we will be surveilled and wiretapped but hey, that's the price of freedom, right?

We have lost over 26000 lives in a fruitless war fought to contain a boogeyman that was already contained and no threat

We have ruined our country fiscally boxing at shadows.

We have alllowed other terrorists to become stronger due to our inattention, like Iran and N. Korea.

Yeah, things are going just great.

[lonestarnot]

25. Home repos up 50% from this time last year, so don't leave out

the homeless population increase.

[longship]

8. "Do you mean other than the Anthrax Attacks?"

:crickets: :crickets:

[Qutzupalotl]

10. See post #2.

You are correct, but I'm not sure it's as effective in altering their thinking.

[Kutjara]

9. An alternative explanation:

It seems to me that recent reports of Bin Laden being harbored by our ally Pakistan, together with the virtual conquest of Anbar Province in Iraq by Al Qaeda, points to a deal of sorts between the US and Al Qaeda. Is it beyond the bounds of possibility that we have agreed with Al Qaeda to allow them to establish a secure base of operations and not to hassle their leadership, in exchange for cessation of their operations in the USA?

During the IRA vs. Loyalist conflict in Northern Ireland, the two sides agreed not to target eachother's leadership or carry out attacks in certain 'heartland' communities. What I'm suggesting is that we've agreed something similar with Al Qaeda.

Plausible or should I start making myself another tinfoil hat?

[lonestarnot]

26. Part of the deal is very plausible.

[W_HAMILTON]

13. How many times have we been attacked inside the US to begin with?

By Al Qaeda? Twice? Twice in the past 13 years?

Hell. Twice possibly in the history of our country? The WTC attacks in '93 and 9/11. Are there any others?

[LSK]

14. they havnt tried anything since 9/11???

We were not prior to 9/11 since 93???

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. We've been hit almost 3000 times by people who were never

going to hit us..... ever... and that is the simple truth of it.

[RamboLiberal]

16. Well hell we weren't hit in the US again under Clinton for 7 years

That would be my response. Ask them if they think Clinton was doing a good job?

[Hamlette]

17. right, Clinton went 7 years and 11 months without "another attack"

When Bush as gone that long, we'll call it a tie. That's what I say.

[johnfunk]

18. Haven't been hit? YES WE HAVE! The anthrax attacks...

... numerous attacks on US Embassies -- are these guys KIDDING?

[Cincy911Truth]

19. The "We haven't been hit since 9/11 theory..."

...only stands up if you honestly believe that our U.S. government was "totally incompetent" in the lead up to and on 9/11 itself. But, we have somehow managed to change all that by invading Afghanistan and Iraq and through passage of the PATRIOT Act here at home but not through the implementation of the 9/11 Commission's recommendations.In other words, this theory is solely based on the proven successes of Bush/Cheny/Rumsfeld and Rice since 9/11!

Of course to accept the official U.S. government's "19 hijackers did it!" theory you must believe in a theory of "1000+ coincidences" happening before and on 9/11.

One amazing coincidence example: On 9/11 the "19 hijackers" just happened pick the same day the Pentagon, FEMA and Air Force were in the middle of massive military exercise drills that drew most of our air defense away from the East Coast region on that day. Also, FEMA had been sent to partake in an emergency exercise drill the evening of Monday, Sept. 10th at Pier 29 (?) in lower Mannhattan.

Speaking of 9/11 related coincidences...

In case you haven't heard, BYU Physics Professor and Co-founder of Scholars For 9/11 Truth Steven Jones, was placed on 'paid leave' last Friday (Sept. 8th) by the BYU administrators because of his 9/11 research in which he claims that the World Trade Center buildings #1, #2 and #7 were brought down by controlled demolition. Jones asserts that "thermate' was used in the implosions and that it must have been an inside job by some criminal faction of the U.S. government. BYU (Brigham Young University) was founded, supported, and guided by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

'9/11 theories put BYU prof on paid leave'
News source: http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_4311393

Oddly enough, just 9 days prior to Dr. Jones being placed on 'paid leave', on August 31st, George W. Bush was in Salt Lake City visiting The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints' and meeting with their President, Gordon B. Hinckley.

'Bush and Hinckley meet for a fourth time'
News source: http://www.sltrib.com/ci_4271005

If you would like to sign a petition supporting Dr. Steven Jones and his 9/11 research, please go here:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/...?ltl=1158106684

[lonestarnot]

27. I hadn't heard about bushitler's visit to BYU pres. Hinckley on

31 Aug. Interesting how things fit egh?

[gumby]

20. "We haven't been hit since 9/11"

That's because it hasn't been necessary again.... yet.

[lonestarnot]

28. People are still afraid of their own shadows. This weeks reruns

was plenty scarin for the next few months.

[madeline_con]

31. Wait till November when the hype heightens.

The ONLY ones who can save us are the repugs! :scared:

[lonestarnot]

32. Bite your tongue!

[Amonester]

21. Might as well not stand for very long(?)

Spread this (bad?) news around (worst than UAE Ports?? Or the PNAC crackpots R "hoping" for a "New September Eleven" this time because they want to bomb Iran and get the barrel of crude up to $250??)
Bush Gives Visas to 15,000 Saudi Wahabis
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2124851
:scared:

[lonestarnot]

30. That was a swell move.

[populistdriven]

22. How many US soldiers have died from terrorists attacks?

We get hit daily.

[johnnydrama]

23. doesn't it mean?

Doesn't that mean that Al Quaeda and Bin Laden are happy with the way things are going?

We've recruited thousands of new terrorists for them.
We're sacrificing civil liberties that we've enjoyed for the past 230 years.
2600 soldiers dead plus 10,000+ injured.

Maybe we haven't been attacked because Bushco has so hurt our image in the World, that
they don't want to upset that balance, and have people feeling sorry for us again.

[Poiuyt]

33. Don't forget that we took our military bases out of Saudi Arabia, which

was the reason Osama bin Laden gave for attacking us in the first place.

[madeline_con]

29. Yep, and my dog keeps elephants out of the yard! n/t

[WCGreen]

34. The president is right....

They are not killing Americans here...

We have shipped 140k men and women over to Iraq to provide an easy target....

Why mount an attack here in the US when they are killing, maiming our troops in Iraq and Afganistan....

[Justice Is Comin]

35. Bush has taken over as our terrorist now.

Why the hell should anybody have to attack, they're in a al Qida bar just laughing their ass off at their success.

An American buffoon for a world leader, all our civil liberties being taken away, all the recruiting ammunition they would ever need to sign up a million new terrorists, the war in Iraq bleeding us to death militarily and financially, more accomplished than Bin Laden could have ever hoped for and they should worry about attacking? The mere thought of it makes them choke on their beer, they're :rofl: so hard.

[flaminbats]

38. I still don't understand why they vote!

it isn't for small government, it isn't for the right to bare arms, it isn't because they are pro-life, it isn't for an exit strategy when we go to war, it isn't because they want a balanced budget, it isn't to end welfare, it isn't for less spending, it isn't for democracy, it isn't for better healthcare, it isn't to stop fear or terrorism, it isn't for moral leadership, and it isn't even for a free market system. The only reasons I now get are "because liberals are traitors and 9/11 is somehow Bill Clinton's fault!"

Even if another terrorist attack occurred, Republicans could never hold this idiot responsible. They're still bitter about Watergate, and they really want to have a king who can never be questioned or removed from office. The only problem is they can't put this into the Republican platform. :cry: