Today, President Obama laid a wreath at Ground Zero in New York, four days after the killing of Osama bin Laden, in order, he said, to bring some sense of closure to the 9/11 attacks. He was cheered loudly by firefighters from Engine Company 54, Ladder Company 4 and Battalion 9, which lost 15 members during their response to the attacks (the largest loss of life of any firehouse.
“What happened on Sunday, because of the courage of our military and the outstanding work of our intelligence, sent a message around the world, but also sent a message here back home — that when we say we will never forget, we mean what we say,” the president told the firefighters.
Former Pres. Bush was invited to join Obama at Ground Zero, but Bush refused, saying he’s trying to keep a low profile. The New York Daily News, however, reports that a “highly placed source” near Bush told the paper that Bush feels he and his former team are not being recognized enough for the work they put into the search for Osama. The source told the Daily News, “”[Bush] viewed this as an Obama victory lap,” and that “Obama gave no credit whatsoever to the intelligence infrastructure the Bush administration set up.”
A couple of things: 1. Pres. Obama has generously thanked and congratulated the nation’s intelligence community and the military each time he has even mentioned the bin Laden raid. And 2. Just six months after 9/11, Bush told a press conference, regarding Osama bin Laden, “I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you.” And that was the problem all along. Forget bin Laden, we’ve got a country to invade! Thankfully, he was followed in the White House by a guy who made taking out bin Laden the CIA’s top priority.
This article appears in May 3-9, 2011.
Too bad this won’t result in repeal of the Patriot Act or restoration of liberties lost. It won’t change anything. Perpetual war is the official policy of both parties is it not?
Anyone else catch the mix up in the article? “Obama” when it should have read “Osama”. I mean, what were the odds that when Osama was finally captured and killed it would be a president named Obama that made it happen. Pretty funny 🙂
BV:
You are absolutely correct.
Dear BV, Jennifer, and DLP,
Your views are irrelevant because you refuse to sign your full real names.
Sincerely,
John Groomzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>> we’ve got a country to invade!
… called Libya.
“Juan” fails reading comprehension (again).
“The personal insults toward Rhi are repugnant, which is to be expected — and this is the bottom line for me — from people without the courage to even sign their real names to their vile ranting.”
I think Grooms and Bowman (and anyone else with any sense) would agree that when intelligent, civil debate is taking place, there’s no need for full names. But when someone hides behind Internet anonymity to launch cowardly, vulgar attacks – which is basically all “Juan” does – then a full name should be displayed to show the world that he’s not as gutless as everyone believes him to be. It’s really not that hard a concept to grasp, even for a spineless simpleton like “Juan.”
Christopher Torino