Historian Webster Tarpley Analyzes Bush's Behavior on 9/11

a reply to: rossacus

The people who were there with him completely disagree. They said his look was one of total shock.

none of the students sitting in Sandra Kay Daniels' class at Emma E. Booker Elementary School that morning can forget the devastating change in Bush's expression when White House chief of staff Andrew Card whispered the terrible news of the al-Qaeda attack.

Booker Principal Gwendolyn Tose-Rigell, who died in 2007, later insisted, "I don't think anyone could have handled it better. What would it have served if [Bush] had jumped out of his chair and ran out of the room?"

Keep ignoring everything that doesn't agree with you OP, despite these being the people who were ACTUALLY THERE.

Watch the video and what he says because its not just about Bush in the school. Tarpley is knowledgeable on these subjects.

So far I have seen nothing but attacks towards me and nothing to do with Tarpley.

Shadow Government forcing Bush to blame Al-Qa'ida for 9/11 under the threat of Nuclear annihilation of the Middle East....... NO!!! NO!!! NO!!!

Honestly Shadow, how can you, a person who has researched 9/11 possibly give this guy any credibility?

He is a cook!, no real evidence is presented by him, its just 11 minutes of him talking gibberish to a camera and from that we get this absurd thread about the "Shadow Government" threatening nukes after 9/11.

So much of what he has to say is based on his own assumptions such as saying that a camera crew turning up on the morning of 9/11 were assassins..... when the more likely explanation would be that it was just a crew trying their luck. I am sure it happens quite a bit. He is also wrong to attribute the assassination of the Northern Alliance leader Ahman Shah Massoud to the CIA, Massoud would have been the CIA's biggest ally in Afghanistan just pick up a book on the subject and that much is clear. The two books written by the JAWBREAKER (go ahead goggle it and then pretend you know what i am talking about) guys make that really quite clear.

I would be inclined to agree with this video for the first few minutes where he talks about how scared Bush seemed to be, but after that its just total rubbish.

Its claims like this that stop people taking 9/11 truth seriously.

I would also just like to add that I think it is very underhanded of you to have two threads on this subject and you just basically circumvented the mods by editing your other thread to effectively delete it because people where not disagreeing with you, then you create a almost carbon copy of the thread.

If you haven't seen this pretty extensive compilation of the events of that morning. it's worth a look. Warning though...it's total information overload and a lot to wade through, with plenty of contradictory and conflicting information, as many will say in natural during early reporting.

An Interesting Day: President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11

a reply to: Shadow Herder

Interesting perspective from Webster Tarpley. His take is different then the conspiracy theorists have been saying about the secret service leaving him the classroom on 911 when Dick Cheney was carried off to a bunker. He then goes on to mention how Bush was a target on the morning of 911 and some info about the wars

Obviously you haven't been around a bunch of young kids in that type of setting have you during a tragic event like this, because keeping them from getting hysterical is the first thing you do.

So exactly how would you have explained it to them and then what would you have done to keep them calm?

Guarantee you would do the same thing President Bush did...continue to read to them until you can get away without it looking suspicious.

And had Bush been in Washington he would have been in that bunker just the same, but he wasn't so you making statements about the bunker are a bit of a stretch, as Bush was not in harms way where he was unlike Cheney.

a reply to: Shadow Herder

Ahhh no, you closed a thread and had a tantrum. That's a fact, not an ad hominem. I have posted MANY rebuttals to the crap you have posted and you ignore every one of them. That's a FACT.

a reply to: tsurfer2000h

"Excuse me kids, the president has a urgent matter to tend to, his dog is sick, he will be back shortly" would of worked for me

Interesting about the launch codes never knew that.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

My very first post destroyed his source, he ignored it in the last post and cried foul saying I was attacking him, and he has ignored it again in this thread and used the same tactic. The fact is my post was a direct quote by his source, he ignores it.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04
To my basic understanding, isn't the US president the commander and chief of war. This being an act of war, isn't it his responsibility to act accordingly. I think portraying calmness undermines the position he holds and promotes a message of submisiveness
And lack of coping mechanisms.

originally posted by: ~Lucidity
If you haven't seen this pretty extensive compilation of the events of that morning. it's worth a look. Warning though...it's total information overload and a lot to wade through, with plenty of contradictory and conflicting information, as many will say in natural during early reporting.

An Interesting Day: President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11

Thanks so much for that, I am viewing it now.

a reply to: Shadow Herder

Interesting about the launch codes never knew that.

yes its does sound interesting, interesting how your confirmation bias is so strong you will believe anything anyone with a youtube channel has to say so long as it will back up your beliefs even if there is zero proof.

very interesting indeed.

Unless you have proof that the shadow government exists then that they have access to nuclear launch cods and then that they used this information to manipulate bush then this is only interesting in showing how gullible some people can be.

a reply to: Shadow Herder
So did most people.
Its too early for a trial because so many people are in denial they would get a not guilty when to outsiders, we can see who perpetrated this crime. Bush knew something was in the pipeline but isn't high up enough to know what and when. He just had cover up orders. How much info could have been passed on to him by security services, as im aware it was a quick spoken message. it seems like a confirmation message more than. Hey we are under attack and we have to get you safe because we have no idea how big that threat is. Or don't worry its gone off, sit tight I will be back to help you soon.

On a positive note we can also see the battle for control in USA. We can see your war coming, it is your battle between yourselves. I pray the right side win and true criminals brought to trial.
I personally hope I live long enough to see the trials at least begin or some arrest at least.

originally posted by: Shadow Herder
Interesting perspective from Webster Tarpley.

Who failed the Democratic Party primary for the U.S. Senate....

I suspect this is what the OP wanted President Bush to have done.

originally posted by: rossacus
a reply to: OccamsRazor04
To my basic understanding, isn't the US president the commander and chief of war. This being an act of war, isn't it his responsibility to act accordingly. I think portraying calmness undermines the position he holds and promotes a message of submisiveness
And lack of coping mechanisms.

Then you have literally no understanding of human behavior. Human behavior is what I do, I do behavior management in a psychiatric hospital, Bush gets an A for how he handled the situation.

Now factor in EVERY SINGLE PERSON who was there gives Bush an A, and said what he did was perfect, for the students, and the nation. Bush leaving would achieve literally nothing, his staying could put the Nation at ease, and that's exactly what he did.