The question is: Who would the American people blame MORE for another 9-11-like attack: The Bush Administration or the terrorists?

Sky of Mind says people would blame the Bush Administration more. I strongly disagree and say the American people would blame the "terrorists" more.

What do you think?

Without question, as related to what happened November 7th, they would blame Bushco. In fact, they already do!

Crimes are the fault of the perpetrators.

9/11 was caused by terrorists, not Bush.

Iraq's civil war is caused by sectarians, not Bush.

The trillion dollars we have dumped into nation-building with nothing to show for it -- that's all Bush.

Granted, those guilty of the act are to blame.
But Bush would be blamed for allowing it to happen, AGAIN!
Instead of invading Iraq, he should have focused on making his people safer!

I think they'd probably be 50/50. So much would depend whether they got a really, REALLY good Snow job and media spin, but I like to think that with stalwarts like Keith Olbermann actually DEFENDING truth, and insisting on honest journalism (now THAT was an oxymoron during the dark PNAC years...), I would hope that the American public is now not so easy to sucker in.

I could always be wrong, though. Many Americans apparently still think that they were attacked by OBL and Al Qaida on 9/11, and that Saddam was somehow involved in the attack, and that he had weapons of mass destruction !!

Depends on when it happens. If enough time passes and Democrats have effected a significant change of direction in Iraq, encumbered Bush's assault on our constitution in the name of protecting us or taken other actions that can Be spun as 'told you so'
then many will blame us (Dems). If people become afraid again, as many would, history, not just our own, show they will once again become willing to surrender their freedoms to those who persuade them that tyranny will protect them. Guess who that would be come '08.

It's possible that I'm in the minority on this, but I don't think the government owes me safety. If my taxes go toward safety-related efforts, I expect them to be honest efforts, but I don't believe absolute security even exists, and I certainly don't want to push politicians into striving for it because the first thing they'll do is make government even larger.

The do anything and everything necessary attitude was what brought us the PATRIOT act. 1000 pages of new powers for the government with almost no discussion by our elected officials.

9/11 was more than an attack on the people in those buildings and airplanes; it was an attack on US national pride. Fuck that, they can have my national pride. If there's an opportunity to kill some people who funded the attacks, great. But I for one am not looking for any guarantees.

You would probably be arrested for gunning down Dick Cheney and members of the PNAC, so go careful, they'll be well protected....

"The terrorists" is pretty damned vague. If the governments' version of the attack on the WTC is factual and complete and true, which I doubt, then the perpetrators died in the attack, and will not be mounting another in this lifetime. the attacks' alleged planner and financier has been at large since the attack and we are not looking for him. Huh? That's right, we are not looking for Osama Bin Laden. At least, not in connection to the WTC attack. Do you think the gummint knows something they aren't telling us? "The terrorists" are anybody who stands in the way of PNAC's plans for world domination, and is a necessarily vague and flexible term. "The terrorists," like the poor, alas, will always be with us.

Bush had an approval rating of 90% after the 9-11 attacks. Clearly the American people did not blame him for 9-11, even if it happened on his watch. The American people do blame the Bush administration for many things, which explains November 7th, but 9-11 is not one of them. And a "new 9-11", IMO, would transform public opinion towards Bush overnight. Most Americans would rally behind the President in this event.

The world has turned many times since 9/11, many very significant events and changes.
For 2 or more years after 9/11, the very idea of Congress coming under Democratic control was not even imaginable, and yet itp;s happened. The same emotion and feelings and facts that brought that around indicate a massive shift in attitude, which came about because the informed few made enough noise.

Bush has not even gone so far as to secure our ports. Less than 5% of all containers receive any inspection, and then usually it's customs, and not HSD. The fact is we are LESS safe today than we were pre-9/11, and nearly every American both Red and Blue knows this to be true.

All true, zooks, but you know as I do that "truth" is whatever the public (dare I use the word "sheeple"?) and MSM perceive it to be. My point is that all blame would immediatly fall on "the terrorists" like a blanket. Whatever wrongs Bush has done would be forgotten as the country reacted to this event. When people are afraid, they don't think. They react. And often its a "gut reaction". Everyone has a right to their opinion, but I think some here place too much faith in the American people to say that they would criticize and condemn Bush for "allowing" a new attack to happen on his watch, and not protecting the American people. It would not work that way. People would not think about that at all. The mood of the country would shift very dramatically and long-term, but it would not be against Bush. In fact, people would rally behind the President very strongly.

Agreed, the publics' visceral reaction would be to circle the wagons and point the guns outward, BUT I also think bush would not be allowed to start bombing foreigners and rounding up suspected terrorists or sympathizers again, even though the agencies and precedent are in place. the last one hasn't cooled off yet, and more and more people are asking more and more questions, and the administartion is stonewalling more and more. I don't think there is another rabbit in that magic hat. Besides, the first one accomplished everything it was supposed to, no matter who perpetrated it. If it was Osama Bin Laden/Al-Qaeda because they hate our freedom, and wanted our troops out of Saudi Arabia, our troops and much of our freedom are now gone. If it was PNAC/bush/cheney, they got their oil war and ten giant steps forward in the class war here at home. bush was right...mission accomplished! You just didn't understand the true nature of the mission. Global class war.

Global Class war that can be defined either by skin color, or natural resources.
Though, even if you have the resources, but not the skin color, you still won't be allowed into the country club!

Guys,

If anything even remotely similar to 9/11 were to happen again, the people would rally around Bush like flies around dung. He would bring out his American flag and drape himself so much in it that he'd probably wind up showering with it. If you've been keeping track, you'd notice that ANYTIME a "suspected" terrorist attack occurs, be that in the US, Madrid, London, or anywhere around the world, the ratings for Bush go up immediately. Even when his rating is in the 30s, they invariably go up when the merest hint of another attack occurs. Should this admin decide that another one is necessary, it will be to rally the sheeple around the president once again and probably to obscur what is really happening behind the scenes.

I do not agree. TOEG. Too much has changed in the last year!
Shit, what are Bushes numbers now, 30%, and of that 70% a good portion (most) simply can't stand the man OR his lying politics.
No, he must certainly would NOT gain any support.


Fool me once, um, er, heh heh, the point is, I can't get fooled again!

To answer this question at it's most basic level, the American people would blame the attacker, whoever that may be. You have to remember how impatient Americans are today. They want it fast, they want it now, instant gratification, instant answers, instant success, etc.

Let's just hope we never have to learn the answer to this poll.

This is a very good point, CA, and I think it explains in large part why the Iraq War happened and why it initially got so much support (including support from a majority of Democrats) on such flimsy "evidence". Iraq may have had nothing to do with 9-11, but the decision to attack it was a political "gut reaction" from 9-11. But if there was another attack, there would be no thought. The idea that the American people would blame Bush for allowing another attack to happen is completly absurd.

Agreed. Another attack would be the very worst thing that could happen to the United States of America. At the same time, it would be the very best thing that could happen for George W. Bush and the neo-cons. They would be more than ready to fully exploit such an attack for their own political ends, just as they did with 9-11.

Again, I cannot agree with your assessment.
An attack today would kill the Republican party instantly, and Bush would be blamed for letting it happen (AGAIN) on his watch.

We agree to disagree then, Sky. I know that you would blame Bush and the Republican Party for letting another attack happen, but you do not represent the vast majority of American people. Another attack would change everything overnight, just as 9-11 did. And it would certainly not be a change in the favor of freedom, progressiveness, or Democrats. It would be the equivalent of inserting 'three aces' into Bush's lousy current hand. I think he would know what to do with those cards.

I know that nearly everything has changed since 9-11. Some more than others, but changed none the less.
Reaction then, can't be the same as thet would require that all things be the same, which clearly they are not.

To start, check the polls again on any issue you care to compare between then and now.


Yes, if an attack happened today Americans would want those responsible found and hung, in public.
But they would also hold Bush respinsible for once again not protecting his people and his country, in spite of the billions spent and thousands of lost lives!

In fact, if it were to happen again, such an event may well guarantee his impeachment! (over and above the other investigations)

Think what you will, sky.

Americans tend to rally around the flag in moments of national crisis. The president is often the living embodiment of that flag. Just watch where Bush speaks from.

Well thank you for that. Though it's rather condescending of you, I do appreciate your permission for me to do as I will.

I'll throw my two bits in.

All you have to do to prove that the increased anti-American terrorism lays at the feet of the Bush Administration is to make it clear that Bush has decreased national security spending, whilst the funding of the Iraq Occupation has continued to soar virtually uncontrollably (and with very little Executive oversight, as well as congressional oversight from the 109th and 108th Congress, naturally).

Furthermore, in Mr. Keith Olbermann's Special Comment on Bush's 'surge' speech', it becomes clear that the President has continued to lie and deceive the American people, and dragging the honor of the men and women whom I have served with, who are doing what they feel is their duty to the country through the mud!!!

Amen my warrior brother.

If another 9/11 were to occur, 95% of Americans would rally around the flag and would inculcate the most obvious suspect, and all without reason. We have been amply prepared by our biased media to hate "certain" people, and to hold them responsible even if all information points to the contrary.

It worked on 9/11, it worked during the USS Liberty attack, it worked during the Gulf of Tonkin lie, and it will continue to work in the US. Americans don't receive real news. They receive carefully orchestrated sound bite that specifically show their president and Congress in a good light, and some nebulous evil foreigner in a bad light.

It's almost like taking candy from a baby.

And Americans are known around the world as the biggest babies there are.

The above poll that shows that "terrorists" that evil nebulous that allows this and any American government to name their foe, is the winner. Clearly, Americans prefer an unknown, nebulous enemy to be responsible, rather than indicting their own.

Let's look at the facts shall we??

Gulf of Tonkin ............................... this resolution sent 500,000 American soldiers into battle, and more than 56,000 to their death. Yet, the US was never attacked by the North Vietnamese at the Gulf of Tonkin. NEVER, NOT ONCE, THIS WAS A TOTAL LIE BY JOHNSON ............................ A DEMOCRAT!!!!!!!! (I say this because everyone here tells me that the Democrats never do anything wrong, only the Republicans). Yeah, vote Democrat, they are truly different.

The First Gulf War ........................ President Bush's government told Saddam that his beef with Kuwait was a regional affair that the US "would not intervene on." So much for that lie.

Remember the Maine ............................ a total fabrication of reality as published by Hearst and Pulitzer in the New York papera. ALL of American bought into their lies, and we went to war against Spain.

USS Liberty ................................. attacked by Israel.



http://www.ussliberty.org/

Now who here wishes to go on record to say that American sailors are making this up?? C'mon, you know that the US never officially recognized this atrocity committed by Israel. Prove these American sailors false and liars. Go against your own Americans if you dare. Let's see those who wish to prove that Israel NEVER attacked the US, even with all our proof.

There are countless other examples, but if you feel that the above are lies, then you will never be convinced of the truth.

Pathetic.

Seems like an odd little transient comment.
But what do I know? I'm just a local.

I just searched the boards for other references to the USS Liberty. Rousseau has mentioned it, so you're in good company. Also in a thread called "The 2 party system is a fraud: controlled oppostition Democrats", started by one Minuteman_Matt, who left before you arrived.

Things that make ya go hmm..........

I'm wondering what the Kool Aid de'jour is today?

My God, are you blind??

http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/margolis12.html

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ussliberty.html

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07....liberty.tapes/

http://www.wrmea.com/backissues/0693/9306019.htm

http://logogo.net/liberty.htm

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsourc...ry/liberty.html

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/sh-usn/...h-l/agtr5-k.htm

http://www.wingtv.net/documentaries.html

http://www.usslibertyinquiry.com/

http://judicial-inc.biz/uss_liberty.htm

http://www.the7thfire.com/new_world_order/...USS_Liberty.htm

You have not seen any of these sites???

What do you google in braile??

I guess it's like I've been saying:

Republicans = don't want to hear the truth

Democrats = follow the Republican lead.

I donated 50 dollars
The democrats and republicans are twins
I'm smarter than everyone and if you don't recognize that, you'll live in shameful ignorance for EVAR!

Got anything else to offer? 'Cause, if you want, you can just copy and paste those three lines everytime you post and save yourself (and us) a little trouble.