10:30 pm PDT April 10, 2004

Just pretend you are the president of the United States of America.  You are on vacation at your ranch in Texas.  You “ask” for a briefing and receive the document below (Notice the title) as part of your daily briefing.  Just over a month later you are sitting in a classroom with the knowledge of one plane crashing into the WTC.  Your chief of staff pauses at the door and during a slight pause approaches you and whispers in your ear the following “A second plane has hit the WTC. America is under attack.”

What would you do?

Would you continue to read a story about a goat to a group of kids for seven minutes?

According to numerous accounts, Bush talked to Condi Rice just before he entered that classroom at Booker Elementary in Sarasota on September 11, 2001.  Did the National Security Advisor tell the president of the United States, what the FAA knew and what NORAD knew, that at least two more planes were presumed hijacked?

If she did, why did he sit in that chair for seven more minutes with the knowledge that at least one more plane remained hijacked?

The image of Bush as a strong, bold and decisive leader is just that, an image.  Try sitting in a chair doing anything after being told a loved one of yours has been killed and the rest of your family is under attack.  Tell me about your experience. 

Bush deserves one term.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text of Bush's August 6, 2001 Brief

 

 

Clandestine, foreign government and media reports indicate Bin Ladin since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the U.S. Bin Ladin implied in US television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and ''bring the fighting to America.''

After US missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, Bin Ladin told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to xxxxxxxxxxx service.

An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told an xxxxxxxxxx service at the same time that Bin Ladin was planning to exploit the operative's access to the US to mount a terrorist strike.

The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of Bin Ladin's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the US. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin Ladin lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own US attack.

Ressam says Bin Ladin was aware of the Los Angeles operation.

Although Bin Ladin has not succeeded, his attacks against the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Ladin associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.

Al-Qa'ida members - including some who are US citizens - have resided in or traveled to the US for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks. Two al-Qa'ida members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our Embassies in East Africa were US citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.

A clandestine source said in 1998 that a Bin Ladin cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.

We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a xxxxxxxxxx service in 1998 saying that Bin Ladin wanted to hijack a US aircraft to gain the release of ''Blind Shaykh'' 'Umar 'Abd al-Rahman and other US-held extremists.

Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.

 

09:00 am PST March 5, 2004
Mr. Bush was in the area yesterday.  The headline read “Bush says the choice is clear”.  He said “They have a clear choice between an America that leads the world with strength and confidence or an America that is uncertain in the face of danger”.  I wanted to ask Mr. Bush a question but couldn’t get near enough.  My question “Mr. Bush, when you sat in that chair for 13 to 20 minutes reading a story about a goat to a group of children after Mr. Card whispered in your ear “America is under attack” on 9/11 did that exhibit to the world the traits of strength and confidence or the trait of uncertainty?

 

Yes Mr. Bush our choice is clear.  Do we want a president that sits in a chair with no reaction when told of the greatest disaster in his life or a president that faces danger head-on?  Both candidates for president have shown us how they react under fire.  Kerry rushes in head on and takes it out.  Bush sat in a chair.  For Bush to attempt to claim first he is “decisive and bold” and now “strong and confident” is ludicrous and a lie.  Next we will be told Bush is articulate.  I keep waiting for the press to challenge some of his statements.  Not later on page 20.  In real time on page one.

17:20 pm PST February 19, 2004

I went to the Democrats in  Marin county  meet-up last night.  I expected to find four maybe five people based on the on-line sign-up count yesterday morning.   My estimate is that over 25 energized people attended the meeting.  All of us were united in one cause – One term for Bush. 

Organization was not our long suit.   After acknowledging our common goal, the conversation drifted without direction to various discussions such as how to vote when your candidate has declared out  to “What can we do now?” 

What we can do now -
1.  Learn about the Democratic nominee.  Visit his web site.  Review his policy statements. 
2.  When the negative comments come, and they will, immediately research the truth and tell your friends.  The lesson of Gore/Davis is “Don’t let the other side define you!”
3.  Learn about Bush’s misleadership.  The many links on this page, especially the daily’s, provide a portal to an abundant amount of information to keep you informed and up to date.
4.  Talk to others.  First you may be surprised as I am at how many people are excited about retiring Bush but frustrated by a lack of awareness of efforts to organize a retirement party. A great ice-breaker is wearing your candidate’s campaign button.
5.  Go and participate in meetings in-person and on-line.  Bring a friend.
6.  Don’t forget.  We must always remember the statements and actions of the Bush administration and hold them accountable.  They count on the public having a short memory. “Iraq wouldn’t allow the inspectors in”.  Their most favorite ploy is to blame the messenger and mis-direct the criticism.

20:20 pm PST January 26, 2004

All this talk about Bush and his record made me do a little looking up of things.  One of the first things I did was look at the copy of the paper where Bush was suspended for failure to accomplish annual medical exam.  There are rumors that he either avoided the exam because of the recent implementation of random drug testing by the armed forces or that he actually took one and failed the drug test.  In the process of reviewing the document I noticed another person listed as being suspended for the same reason and the same time.  I thought if one wanted to get closer to the truth perhaps one could contact the other person listed on the suspension notice.  I entered the name “James R Bath” in my search engine and was quite surprised with the results.  If you look at the link you will quickly see why my fantasy of contacting one James R Bath and asking him if he failed a drug test or failed to show for a med exam would probably be ignored and met with derision.  Perhaps some enterprising reporter will follow-up and tell the true story of Bush’s military history of perhaps Bush will just release his full records as John McCain did in 2000 and put these rumors to rest.  I wouldn’t bet on it. 

09:25 am PST January 18, 2004

Cognitive dissonance, a strange term to appear in a web site with a political goal?  I finally understand it in ways that have escaped me in the past.  I didn’t like it when I felt it with regards to; republicans hold your ears, Clinton and his libido.  Now I see it and feel it in those that like Bush.

Mention the fact that Bush misled us and the world about Iraq and without thought comes, “Clinton lied” as if that is a justification for 500 US military deaths as of today and $150B.  Talk about the 17 to 20 minutes on September 11, 2001 Bush sat in a classroom reading a story about goats to a group of children after his chief of staff whispered in his ear “A second plane has hit the towers in New York.  America is under attack” and with very little thought (I surmise because for most it is the first time they focused on those minutes) out comes “That’s just hindsight having a better view” their mind refusing to even question Bush’s non-actions.

As more of Bush’s actions and non-actions are mentioned the level of anxiety increases and can be felt as energy pointed at the messenger (me) or the person seeks to escape any further discussion.  Both have happened around me.  The energy can be felt and usually turns into a sociable acceptable form such as betting aggressively.  One friend refuses to discuss politics via email after I provided him a series of articles and statements about the veracity of Bush’s pre-war statements before our “pre-emptive” invasion of Iraq.  Once enough evidence had been provided that by the way has since proved to be 100% accurate, my friend deemed me (the messenger) a psychotic and sent a refusal to engage in any future political discussions.

I see it in the larger political community.  As more and more evidence is presented that Bush deserves to retire, supporters are getting louder or cocooning with Fox News and Joe Scarbrough.  Can these people be treated in time to help Bush retire to his western ranch movie set in Crawford?  Not by comments like the one I just made.  It only increases the anxiety level.  They need to be loved. Hug them; allow them to experience the full extent of their cognitive dissonance.  (They may even look up the term).  Only then, I predict, will they be able to listen to those cold hard facts about Bush they have not allowed to get past their feelings of like for him.

Upcoming items:

I am working on my sign for my free-speech zone here in Marinwood.  I plan to be out on the corner near the freeway off ramp where a lot of people get off to attempt to bypass the morning traffic jam.  I will post a picture when it happens.

I am working on a play about Bush and his 17 minutes of non-actions on 911-01.

 I am in the final editing of a short story currently titled “George the Chief deckhand and the loose cannon”

8:30 am PST Oct 31, 2003

“The recall will fail”

Yes, I said that and reality proved me wrong.  For me, living in the island of liberalism that is the SF Bay Area (60% voted no on the recall) the lesson of the recall is react faster to attacks and make sure the good news is being spread. 

It is evident that talk radio, FOX News and other venues have been successfully exploited as a means to get a message out, keep that message in front of people and moving them to action.  Something else,  these media outlets monopolize some people’s allotted viewing time for political news allowing no time for differing views. I am doing my part to get those differing views in front of as many people as I can.  Why? I want one term for Bush.

 

When the energy crisis first hit in California and Cheney was asked for help he said no and blamed it on the California environmentalist movement for not allowing more production facilities.  Reality proved him wrong when it turned out that Bush biggest supporter, “Kenny  Boy”, was a chief ingredient in the problem and the problem had nothing whatsoever to do with a lack of energy production caused by California’s environmental stance.  Have you heard him say “Yes, I said that and reality proved me wrong”?  If I missed it, please send me a link.

Last night, I was watching a fox news program, I don’t remember which one, they all say the same theme.  The fox commentator was animatedly putting forth the argument that the S. Cal fires were because the environmentalists had blocked funding for taking out the dead trees.  Fox had the usual, a loud and boisterous person blaming the liberal left and a docile ill-informed and uncommitted defender of opposing view.  Today, front-page above the fold in the SF chron, “Bush ignored fire plea”. Apparently, that terrible Gov Davis, had declared three of the four counties with the big California fires, disaster areas months ago.  He asked for US gov assistance as early as last April, 2003.  Bush said nothing all summer then turned that aid down just last week.  Now his people are the first to shout  see,  we told you we needed to pass the “healthy forest” act.  They should be saying “See, we would rather spend $150 Billion in Iraq than the $430 million Gov Davis requested to cut trees in California.  If any Californian votes for Bush after learning that he played politics with our lives, property and natural resources, they should be sent to Florida.

 

 

6:50 pm PDT Sept 13, 2003

My wonder is “On 9-11-01, what was Bush doing sitting there in Booker Elementary School with sixteen students for 17 minutes after being told “America is under attack”- Andrew Card?”  A great leader would have done exactly what Card said “…looked up -- it was only a matter of seconds, but it seemed like minutes -- …And he just excused himself very politely to the teacher and to the students, and he left. “. Card is practicing revisionism a year later.

Have you seen the video put together by the school?  The man sat there for almost 20 minutes after being told we were under attack.  I know different reactions for different people.  But I defy you to tell me the name of any other leader republican democrat or foreign that would sit there only knowing that “America is under attack”.

What would you do?  If all I knew was two planes had hit the WTC and I had the ultimate decision making authority about shooting down any other planes I would make sure I was in a position to exercise that authority immediately.  What was Bush doing during those 17 minutes?  What was his staff doing?  On the surface it is gross incompetence and hopefully that is all. 

Count me among those that think there is more than incompetence at work. Whatever your belief about what happened and how much Bush knew, you should read this exhaustive well-researched timeline of that day.

 

  

6:30 pm PDT Aug 24, 2003

An informed electorate will always vote for it’s own best interest.  I have found it interesting that many of the people I talk to were initially ambivalent about the recall are now saying they are against it.  This poll from the LA Times indicates the same thing may be happening on a state-wide basis.

The shift in attitude is coming as people learn the standard arguments for recall, mismanagement of energy crisis, deceiving us on the budget, limp personality and loss of jobs are as hollow as Bush’s pre-Iraq war statements.  Paul Krugman has written an excellent article undermining the arguments screamed at us for months. (It’s free for current articles but older articles require a fee.)

The recall will fail.  Why, because people are waking up and shedding their comfortable blinders.  Due, mostly, to the incredibly lousy job our news media did in actually reporting about Iraq, people are willing to question what they are reading and seeing.  When we see that no foundation exists for the loud claims from certain segments of our society we are energized to insure they make no gain on their distortions. The arguments against Davis are melting under the scrutiny of reality.  Our best interest is to reject this attempt to remove Davis and send a message to those that would try to deceive.

 

 

12:00 noon PDT Aug 22, 2003

I remember it so vividly.  That debate where Bush was asked about his resistance to hate-crime legislation in Texas, my reaction to his response shocked me; it was as if my whole being felt a shift in the direction of our evolution.  It wasn’t just the cultivated arrogant and cocky fashion Bush used to dismiss the question but the much stronger sense that same manner dictated his everyday life and decisions.  In other words, I came to believe, Bush feeling strongly about something would be anathema to any consensus building more likely leading to more conflicts in our heterogeneous country and world.  Events since and subsequent acquisition of more knowledge of Bush’s past for the most part reinforced my belief.

That plaintive cry “Can’t we all get along” has been answered by Bush and his answer is “No, unless you do it my way.”  It is my belief that we as a nation and a world have suffered as a result.  It is this core belief of his that has led us to where we are today in less than three years.

How long will we be respected in the world if we are the world’s bully?
Bush’s core belief has led to a dogma called preemptive strikes.  That same belief led us into a preemptive strike based on what has proven to be suspect and in some cases proven incorrect intelligence.  I was and still am against the US fighting a war with Iraq.  I told any of my friends who would still listen to me that “Yes, agreed Saddam was a bad guy, but it is the proper role of the UN to take care of him” Not the US as the world’s self appointed legislators, law enforcement officers, judges, jurors, and executioners.

If you want, you can ignore the fact that you were dramatically and systematically mislead about the reasons for the war but please at least question why we had to have the war now? And why it had to be us leading the way?  I am afraid both answers lie in Bush’s belief that he knows how we can all get along and no other way is to be considered.

Does it make sense that cutting trees would prevent devastating forest fires?
In the extreme, if all the trees were cut there would be no forest to catch fire.  Of course clearing parts of a forest will prevent devastating fires.  But allowing the cutting of older trees as an economic incentive to clear the underbrush is the result of Bush’s “do it my way” attitude.  We have other ways of paying for saving the forest than destroying the forest.

Do the ends justify the means?
I come to that evolution shift that occurred.  We were on a path that said the answer was a resounding No!  Bush has proven over and over that his answer is Yes!  And for now he is in charge.

This brings me to the reason for this site.

One term for Bush