9/11 - What's the Difference?

We all know that being US Commander in Chief is a very difficult job. Investigating 9/11
also exposes the reality that many of the US Administrations since World War 2 have lied
about policy and failed to protect America - including in Korea, Vietnam, Iran/Contra, The
Drug War, Iraq 1- now Iraq 2 etc. Now more than ever we need wise, competent, honest
presidents at the helm for the campaign to Globally End Terrorism. Comparing leadership
skills and character traits of past, present and future leaders and their ability to protect the
security and SPIRIT of America is important in deciding who should get that difficult job next:
Clinton, GW Bush, Kerry - What’s the difference?

Clinton:
1. +worked hard on Israel/Palestine crisis with good will attempt
2. +Cabinet PRINCIPLES met about terroism issues
3. +increased attention during dangerous Millenium period averting major terrorist activities.
4. + attempted to go after bin Laden with cruise missles (and Republicans criticized) then authorized assassination
5. +launched the Hart/Rudman Commission to recommend how to better protect 21st century America
6. +had good relations with most other countries for help and co-operation
7. +began development and use of surveillance drones and other new tactics to fight terror abroad
8. -wrongly started media deregulation with AM radio (now we have Clear Channelitus)
9. -missed Oklahoma Bombing then started precursor policies of Patriot Act
10.-Federal Policing over reached domestically in such actions as Waco and the (unconstitutional) “Drug War”
11.-indiscreet - therefore was handicapped by an illegal Republican impeachment
12.+recently testified at the 9/11 Commission - to their complete and unanimous satisfaction

Some success, some failure - but Clinton clearly recognized the potential terrorist threat
and took a lot of proactive measures to counter it. He came to the right conclusion - if possible,
assassinate bin Laden. Then he took further steps to study what more could and should be done
to improve the security of America. He warned Bush that bin Laden was a highest priority concern.
Clinton would definitely have acted on the type of numerous warnings GWB got in the summer of 2001

GW Bush:
1. - blew Road Map with obvious bias for Israel - dissing Palestine officially and publicly now
2. - demoted terrorism priority to a few Deputy meetings before 9/11
3. - took vacation - had many warnings but few meetings and no action during the summer of threat in 2001
4. -let bin Laden escape at Tora Bora - diverting major resources in his haste to invade Iraq
5. -totally ignored the prescient findings and comprehensive recommendations of the Hart/Rudmen Commission
6. -insulted and alienated every country in the world, then ignored their many terror event warnings
7. -pre 9/11 decided not to arm the surveillance drones to target bin Laden - or even read the Clinton files on terrorists
8. -invaded Iraq (no WMD) and befriended Pakistan (proliferated WMD)
9. -cozy personal and business relations with a leading breeding ground and supporter of terrorists - Saudi Arabia
10.-winning in Afghanistan and “finding” bin Laden still on the back burner because of Iraq
11.-trashing the Constitution - Incorporating America - neo Inquisition - Theocrats - depleting the US Treasury - lying IS policy
12.-constant impediments and delays being imposed on the 9/11 Commission (and the many other investigations)

War President? Slacker in Chief Bush Jr apparently lacks the brains, the balls or both to face
the 9/11 Commission alone to explain his policies without holding the hand of Vice CEO Cheney.
Pre 9/11 there were so many warnings and so little follow up action taken - it makes one wonder why?
AWOL AGAIN? Too busy scheming on fat juicy Star Wars missle defense contracts and the Crusade of
Conquest in Iraq? We’ve already seen a lot more “actionable intelligence" evidence against al Qaeda
and bin Laden then there ever was about Iraq - but Iraq had good Targets and Oil. It sure would have been
a lot less costly had Bush just waited for the opportunity to assassinate Saddam Hussein instead of invading.
Of course WAR is the only effective way of feeding that Corporate-Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex
of Campaign Supporters that our tax dollars are paying for. He may sometimes be a great cheerleader, but
as a president of the people GW Bush has a record of total failure - both domestically and abroad.

Kerry:
1. + was a war hero - has seen real action and showed bravery
2. +was a war protester - stood up for truth when government was wrong about Vietnam
3. +has been a US Senator for 20 years - good on environment and anti bank corruption
4. -voted for Iraq and the USA Patriot Act - should have known better
5. -voted against Iraq funding - an obvious political play to counter anti war candidate Howard Dean
6. +would pursue better international relations - more friendship and co-operation
7. +would pursue better economic policies - and cancel upper tax cuts
8. +would respect civil rights and the Constitution
9. +would do better on Palestine/ Israel crises and Iraq
10.+better understands the threat of terrorism - willing to listen to new ideas - can express himself coherantly
11.+not a religious extremist
12.+not looking for a war

Is there any doubt Kerry is much smarter and has more wisdom then Bush? No! Honestly,
can you imagine Kerry conducting a press conference as feeble as Bush did April Fools month?
We have serious business needing serious leadership going forward. Sure, Kerry has his faults -
he is a politician after all - but he also has a history of rising to the challenge when the going gets
really tough. Kerry has the potential of possibly becoming a great president in a critical era for
America and the world. At the very least he would certainly improve our relations with the
international community, improve the economy some and improve the environment a lot.
Actually, I think he will make most of us feel like grownups are in charge again.

Electing John Kerry and the maximum possible number of other Democrats in 2004 is just the first step.
The next step will be to either reform the Democratic Party or (more likely) leave it behind and turn the
Green Party into an organized and dedicated powerful neo-progressive machine over the next four years
and beyond. In the short term, the Campaign to Globally End Terrorism must be a co-operative effort with
the world’s governments and organizations like the United Nations and NATO. Iraq and the Israel/Palestine
conflicts are also very tough first priority problems that need solutions - and that takes intelligent leadership.
Kerry would have a much better chance of making that happen. The truth is, rest of the world is not going to
respect the American People very much if we endorse by re-election GW Bush and his Administration.

On September 11, 2001 as I watched the second plane plow into the World Trade Center
on live TV, my first thought was that the world has forever changed. Since then it has been
common to hear people say that “after 9/11 everything is different.” What’s the difference?
It is really just more of the same. More lies, more greed, more war, more death, more hate,
more disease, more hunger, more ignorance, more injustice and more unsustainable policies.
When GW Bush says “we can change the world”, his is a singular vision of exerting military power
to impose “HIS” change by force. The time HAS come for sweeping and progressive change - but that will
take new leadership. In 2004 Kerry is the only electable alternative to more of the same (but likely worse).

In the longer term - to survive as a species - we must progressively evolve into an international federation of
sovereign regional States that celebrate the diversity of humanity with policies based on social justice, peace,
conservation, the sharing of resources, costs and benefits. That will require an end to the Era of Corporation
DomiNation. The People of America and all over the world must put governments in place that will allow real
solutions to happen. Ultimately, The Powers That Be cannot stop the focused Power of the People. The way
to really end Terrorism and make the whole world a lot more secure is to end the offensive semi-imperialistic
foreign policy the US has demonstrated over the past 60 years. The future Global Federation of Nations will
work together to stop violent radicals and aggressive nations early with a modern International Peace Force.
If freedom, fairness and justice everywhere were policy, and people had a real chance to pursue happiness,
not many would become terrorists.

The neocon solution of world domination is so 20th century - it ain’t gonna work - so get over it!!
Time for the human race to start taking the first steps toward growing up .....curt

(originally posted 4/15/04)