Number of times W publicly said "Al Qaeda" from 1-1 and 9-10-2001? ZERO

Star Wars missile defense was Bush's only spoken antidote to terror. What a doofus.


http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpcoc303729094mar30,0,6866268.column?coll=ny-viewpoints-headlines

>>>>>>>>

Here is what those lips said publicly about al-Qaida between Jan. 1, 2001, just before Bush was sworn in as president, and Sept. 10, 2001: Nothing.
There were zero references to al-Qaida during these months. That's according to Federal News Service, which transcribes every presidential utterance - speeches, news conferences, impromptu musings at photo ops, off-the-cuff remarks made striding toward a helicopter, official comments with foreign dignitaries. The search was conducted including the phrase "al Q" - to capture every possible spelling or translation for al-Qaida. Still nothing.

Of course, the president did mention terrorism, terrorists and counterterrorism 24 times before 9/11. But eight of these comments referred to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Another eight involved a range of terrorist threats, including ethnic terrorism in Macedonia and Basque separatists in Spain.
In the remaining eight references to terrorism, the new president offered his idea for how to combat it: the Reagan-era missile-defense system formerly known as Star Wars.

On Jan. 8, 2001, after a meeting in Austin, Texas, with congressional defense experts, the president-elect referred to missile defense as necessary to guard against "the real threats of the 21st century." In a Feb. 10, 2001, radio address, Bush said, "we must make sure our country itself is protected from attack from ballistic missiles and high-tech terrorists." On Feb. 27, in Bush's first address before a joint session of Congress, the new president delivered the clearest exposition of his thoughts on terrorism.
"Our nation also needs a clear strategy to confront the threats of the 21st century, threats that are more widespread and less certain. They range from terrorists who threaten with bombs to tyrants and rogue nations intent upon developing weapons of mass destruction," Bush said. "To protect our own people, our allies and friends, we must develop and deploy effective missile defenses."

During the spring and summer, Bush repeatedly pushed the missile-defense system - still not successfully tested - as the antidote to terror. He brought it up in conversations with Spanish president Jose Maria Aznar in Madrid; with Russian journalists on the eve of Bush's first meeting with Vladimir Putin and with Putin himself; with NATO leaders in Brussels and at the World Bank in Washington.

At the Genoa summit of western leaders in July - where, we now know, intelligence agencies feared a terrorist might try to slam an aircraft into the meeting - Bush pressed skeptical allies about going forward with "Star Wars" to fight terror.
>>>>>>>>>

I like this...How many times did Clinton talk about Al-Qaeda and bin Laden?

... the same search has to be done for Clinton... and she did it just for Al Qaeda, not Bin Laden.

I would venture a guess that Clinton did discuss Al Qaeda on a few occassions at least; especially after the Cole (although that was late in his last term). Although I don't necessarily think "Al Qaeda" was on everbody's tongues at the time. I remember hearing about "Al Qaeda" zero times from anyone before 9-11, although I did know who Bin Laden was.

Not to let Bush off the hook by a long shot, however. To have seen Al Qaeda as a significant threat, you would think he would have at least uttered the words at some point; and I'm sure Clinton did.

Although, again, to be fair, one must conduct an identical search of Clinton's public words to draw that conclusion.

Clarke said that Clinton gave several speeches on Al Qaeda/terrorism but they weren't picked up by the media at the time. Part of the Bushies problem that they wanted to be anti whatever Clinton did. Didn't work out did it?

that the media never covered properly.

SAD and DISGUSTING....I will never stop blaming the media or Bush for 9-11.

& he points out how each time Clinton talked about the threat from terrorism (& specifically al-Qaeda) the media either ignored him, or ran the Republican's claiming he was playing 'wag the dog' to divert attention away from the impeachment.

(Also -- I've just got my copy of "Ghost Wars" -- haven't started it yet, but the extract on the dust jacket is about another attempt by Clinton to kidnap bin Laden using Afghan proxies in 1998 (to find out what happens I guess I'll have to finish the book!))

He spoke of Osama bin Laden until the first anniversary, 9/11/2002, but then suddenly it was all Saddam and no mention of Osama. He was talking the same talk, he had just replaced one villains name with another villains name.

she'll get enough hate mail from those freepers.

I don't know if Bush mentioned UBL. She said that

"Of course, the president did mention terrorism, terrorists and counterterrorism 24 times before 9/11. But eight of these comments referred to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Another eight involved a range of terrorist threats, including ethnic terrorism in Macedonia and Basque separatists in Spain. In the remaining eight references to terrorism, the new president offered his idea for how to combat it: the Reagan-era missile-defense system formerly known as Star Wars.

on edit:
Wow. I just received an email back from her. That was fast.

The damned thing was only 25 paragraphs long--short ones at that.

:scared: Be afraid, be very afraid (NOT)

everytime condi-liar says there were daily briefings, they were at battle stations, etc. ALL fucking lies! I knew he never mentioned it publicly! Think about that July and August and not a fucking word to warn Americans. This needs to be sent to the commission. I am sure Gorelick, Roemer and Ben-Visente would love to see it!!!

... a specific mention of "Al Qaeda" by Clinton either (yet). I remember not hearing about "Al Qaeda" at all myself before 9-11, although I do remember hearing Bin Laden's name more than a few times. So to be fair, the author really should have done an identical search for Clinton, and perhaps searches for "Bin Laden" as well for both presidents.

Oh, it still does some damage to the charge that the Bush WH was "at battle stations" and considered Bin Laden/Al Qaeda an urgent threat before 9-11 (although Bush himself is quoted as saying it wasn't by Bob Woodward's book). But if public mentions of "Al Qaeda" alone is the only measure of that, I don't know if Clinton measured up any better. And I know it's not all about Bush vs. Clinton (although a core charge of Clarke is that Bush demoted terrorism to a much less urgent issue than Clinton).

But I'm just saying we need to be consistent lest our arguments be picked apart.

That being said, I think Clinton obviously placed Al Qaeda as a much higher priority than Bush. Below are some points where he publicly mentioned terrorism and Bin Laden (although I still fail to see "Al Qaeda" -- in any spelling -- despite specific mentions of Bin Laden's "network").

From Clinton's 1999 State of the Union:
"As we work for peace, we must also meet threats to our nation's security, including increased dangers from outlaw nations and terrorism. We will defend our security wherever we are threatened, as we did this summer when we struck at Osama bin Laden's network of terror. The bombing of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania reminds us again of the risks faced every day by those who represent America to the world."
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/01/19/sotu.transcript/

He also gave a speech after bombing Bin Laden in 1998 in which he often referred to the Bin Laden network".
http://www.cnsnews.com/InDepth/archive/199808/IND19980820o.html

Then Clinton gave a speech to the UN General Assembly on fighting terrorism, in which he specifically mentioned Osama Bin Laden.
http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF980918/epf505.htm

I'm sure Clinton did mention Al Quaeda quite a a few times. Remember the day of 9/11, a reporter asked him what his thoughts were on all of this and Clinton said the first thing he thought of was Bin Laden.

... to the Bin Laden network on more than one occasion (and probably numerous occasions).

But my point was for this search to really be strong evidence that Bush neglected terrorism and demoted it to an issue of much lesser import (than the Clinton White House), one has to demonstrate that he mentioned "Al Qaeda", or at least "Bin Laden", or at least "terrorism", much less than Clinton did. And her search does not do this.

HOWEVER, the article does pull out only 14 mentions of "terrorism" by Bush, none of which seem to be Al Qaeda OR Bin Laden related: 8 on Israel-Palestine, 8 dealing with "Star Wars" as a way to fight terror (REAL effective against box cutters, huh?), and 8 dealing with " range of terrorist threats" (implying that none of these dealt with Bin Laden or Al Qaeda).

That in itself is pretty damning, given that Clinton (whether he specifically mentioned "Al Qaeda" or not) DID give several speeches on terrorism, specifically related to Bin Laden and his network. Although she does not point this out in her article, it was pretty easy for me to find out. I just think that making THAT comparison would have given her column more weight.

... and go through all of the news releases by month (which include all his public statements catalogued there, I think), in the months before 9-11, you find ONE entry listing "terror" in the title: a brief statement condemning a terrorist bombing in Tel Aviv in June 2001.

Not exactly on the front burner.

I wish I could find the old site for the Clinton White House to search news briefings.

The feminist group I worked with was petitioning Clinton administration to get tough on Afghanistan and the Taliban because of their human rights abuses, especially of women and children. He came around by the end of 97.

Clinton ended up doing plenty behind the scenes that never got much mention in the media. He also knew that eliminating Bin Laden was key to breaking the stranglehold the Islamic Fundamentalists were developing and strengthening in that region.

not that we'll ever hear it since it's not public and Cheney'll be holding his hand the whole time!

that we do here.

It proves he didn't think that the public should be informed about it.