Over the past number of years, whenever I suggested that George W. Bush was actually an American terrorist leader, I was quickly reprimanded by those Serious and Grown-up Conservatives who immediately sought to describe the former president as "protecting us from Islamofascists."
Now, former Bush Homeland Security head, Tom Ridge, in a new book, follows in the footsteps of The Reverend, and tells his readers that, yes, George W. Bush terrorized the American people for political gain.
Former US homeland security chief Tom Ridge charges in a new book that top aides to then-president George W. Bush pressured him to raise the "terror alert" level to sway the November 2004 US election.
Then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and attorney general John Ashcroft pushed him to elevate the color-coded threat level, but Ridge refused, according to a summary from his publisher, Thomas Dunne Books.
……
He also says that Bush's homeland security adviser at the White House, Fran Townsend, called his department ahead of an August 1, 2004 speech to ask Ridge to include a reference to "defensive measures … away from home" — language that he read as being a reference to the Iraq war.
In those remarks, Ridge said he was raising the threat alert level for the financial services sector in New York City, northern New Jersey, and Washington DC, and went on to praise Bush's leadership against extremism.
……
He later publicly acknowledged that much of the information underpinning the new alert was three years old, stoking Bush critics' charges of political manipulation.
I wrote many times during the Bush-Cheney overthrow of the United States that Karl Rove's obsession with a permanent Republican majority led him and Bush to politicize everything emanating from the White House. Early critics of the Bush administration called the Bushies "Mayberry Machiavellis" for a reason. "Everything was political," is the answer.
When a high government leader seeks to frighten the population he is responsible to protect, and he does so for the purpose of gaining a political edge……that person is a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden's political philosophy and George W Bush's were the same. Bin Laden's philosophy states that if people are scared, terrorized by events, political leanings can be altered, changed.
George W. Bush thought the same as Bin Laden. The Bushies actively sought to terrorize the American voting population just prior to the 2004 election, without any credible evidence to justify the terrorizing, in order to alter the outcome of what looked to be a very tight presidential race with John Kerry.
None of this is new. I've known about Ridge raising the terror chart levels for political purposes for years. But as Glenn Greenwald blogs, whenever someone, you know, from the loony left, suggested that's what was going on…..well, we were just loony…..and not Serious, like corporate-whore media members.
And it wasn't just terror color charts. The Iraq crime was sold to America using terror. "Mushroom clouds", "chemical and biological weapons", "WMD", "no doubt that Saddam has reconstituted his weapons program"…..etc. Spying on Americans without benefit of warrants, torturing detainees, Gitmo, extrordinary kidnappings…..all of this was sold to us with terror. All of this, as we have witnessed with The Dick since Obama's inauguration, was meant to scare, to terrorize the American people for conservative political purposes.
It's not simply George W. Bush who is guilty of terrorizing the American people during his administration, though he definitely is guilty. The Republican Party has become the Party of Terror. Constantly seeking to frighten and terrorize Americans through the use of imminent danger fear. That's the purpose of the townhall bust-ups, the carrying of semi-automatic weapons, the shouts, the visible hatred…..it's to scare, to terrorize other Americans for a political objective, in this case, to defeat health care reform.
All of this is transparently obvious, just as it was transparently obvious when the Bushies were leading the nation around using terror tactics in order to complete their wet dream of attacking and occupying Iraq.
It's a good thing that a moderate Republican, like Tom Ridge, is setting the record straight.
UPDATE: Here's a prime example of what I'm getting at today, from Idaho.
{ 28 comments… read them below or add one }
Reverend, we know! That is why we voted the bums out, that is why we voted for BHO! What we didn't realize was it was soon to be amateur hour at the White House. We didn't know we were being lied to about Gitmo, we didn't know the great orator would not only fail in bringing the two parties together as promised but can't even bring his own party together. Yes Pelosi and Reid hijacked his popularity right from the start with all the pork in the stimulus package. But now he needs to become Reaganesque, take the battle right to the people and overwhelm the opposition. Bush lied to us, we get it, move on!
Just thought Ridge's comments were kind of newsworthy.
You can't bring two parties together when one wants no part of it.
Far as I know, Obama didn't lie about closing Gitmo. His policy of closing it remains. If you recall, it's the fearmongering by radicals that is slowing it down, but Obama hasn't changed his policy.
Your characterization of the stimulus as pork-laden is just that, a characterization. The evidence shows that the stimulus, at the very least, has slowed our nation's downward economic spiral.
But I agree with you that Obama must take it strong to the American people….now, let's see if he does.
Blah Blah Blah, we will keep hearing these 50% truths until the end of Obama's term when ever he is going down in the polls like he is. Sort of a "but remember we could still have this" type of BS. This is why poor people stay poor, they live in the past and keep other peoples opinions and truths as their gospel. Move on, this is old news Rev and most of it is BS as Obama is finding out first hand.
Rev, again, he can't even bring his own party together.
My characterization of the stimlus pork is just that, a characterization? Oh but what you write is 100% fact?
Remember, Blogs (like government) are fine as long as you keep the politics out of it!
Keep it up Rev, someday you'll see the light and know what the rest of us know, none of them (right or left) deserve to be running this country.
'none of them (right or left) deserve to be running this country." No truer words were ever spoken Steve…
I can always depend on conservatives to take an all or nothing position.
It's simply not true that every Congressional representative is hopelessly compromised. There are many who are honestly trying to advance our society, to do the right thing. For me, the answer is more and better Democrats, with more emphasis on the better part. I suppose for conservatives it would be more and better Republicans, but with the evangelical, militia groups around the neck of the GOP like a monkey, I'm not seeing it.
Rev, I think a good purging would be a good thing. It would shake things up and force them to actually remember who they represent. The funny thing is, everyone thinks that there is npthing wrong with their represenatatives so they keep voting them in.
What militia groups are you talking about? One of the guys carrying the automatic weapon looked like he may have been part of the Black Panthers.
I like the new look
Rev,
How does this story make Bush a terrorist ? You lost me right off the bat with that accusation.
If true, this story makes Bush a manipulative politician, just like Obama was being when he said we'd face economic catastrophe if his stimulus package didn't pass immediately. That was obviously manipulative BS designed to scare people. We didn't need to hand Obama $787 billion to avoid catastrophe. We all know that now, but I wouldn't call Obama a terrorist because of it.
Were people even still paying attention to the terror alert level in 2004 ? What is the terror alert level now ? I have no idea. The terror alert level was a stupid idea in the first place. It's not like anyone's plans change if the terror alert level is orange, red, green, or whatever. We don't all go down and hide in a hole.
And I'm with joe. Vote them all out of office. That, and that alone, will get their attention. Both parties have shown they are capable of doing little more than running the country into the ground and robbing the taxpayers blind. We need to start over. I'd even get rid of the two parties if I could. They only make things worse and polarize people.
Terrorist:
2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others.
Terrorism:
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
Can't be much more clear than that. They created fear in people to influence their decisions by issuing bogus alerts.
They are all terrorists then, right? We are a countyr led by terrorists. Seems about right……
Obama must be a terrorist since he made all those economic panic statements to push through his trillion dollar roll in the pig slop back in January.
jimmy,
I was frightened by the movie The Exorcist long ago, but I wouldn't call the director a terrorist.
Sorry, try again.
larry, don`t you know Obama is Muslim, for God`s sake he was born in Kenya!!! Of course he`s a terrorist.
Steve, if nobody is fit to run the country, who is going to be our fuhrer, I mean our leader, I mean our csar, I mean our tsar, I mean our King, I mean our holiness, I mean our
……AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Rev., I loved your comment "I can always depend on conservatives to take an all or nothing position" I just hoped I was one of the ones it was pointed at. My wife and father-in-law are always on me about my "liberal ways", they got a good chuckle out of me being called a conservative. I guess my goal to be a free thinker has worked, "government is great, as long as you keep the politics out of it".
I anticipated the Obama-scared-people-with-stimulus, equivalency attempt.
But sorry, no cigar.
Terrorizing Americans, scaring them into believing they will be killed by scary Islamics, and doing so by faking the scare to win re-election…..is a far cry from a newly elected president explaining to Americans, already prepped by Bush bailouts, that the way to prevent an economic disaster (non-bloody disaster) was for government to stimulate demand.
The first was based on years-old information dug up for the very purpose of ginning up terror to gain votes….the other was based on empirical evidence that all could see, (carmaker spiral), and explained clearly and convincingly after Obama was freshly elected.
jimmie has provided the needed definitions….and the unavoidable conclusion.
Steve, anyone who channels Reagan should never be accused of having "liberal ways".
Steve…I think it could be said that campaigning honestly and straightforwardly, as many candidates do, the stuff we consider to be "politics", is a good thing in a democracy.
Technology will eventually reform the whole process….but for now, it's not the "politics" per se, that's the problem…..it's the overt lying and propaganda, mainstreamed, by specific politicians and media figures. It's the dishonesty of the politics, the politics resulting from practicing to perfection the arts of deception.
And the campaign bribes.
Rev says, "The first [Bush officials wanting to raise the terror alert] was based on years-old information dug up for the very purpose of ginning up terror to gain votes…."
Plus the fact that Bin Laden made a threat just prior to the Bush officials wanting to raise the alert level. Plus the fact that the terrorists bombed Spain just prior to their elections.
In the words of Democrat Juan Williams "Tom Ridge is trying to sell his book." That's why Ridge is only bringing this up five years later.
Not to mention the fact that the terror alert was NOT raised in 2004. I'm pretty sure Obama's stimulus package WAS passed (to avoid the "catastrophe," lol).
Keep spinning, Rev.
This Ridge info has been known since 2005. In addition, we have Scott McClellan and Paul O'Neil's insider books which confirm what Ridge is saying about politics in the Bush administration.
When it comes to this stuff, your credibility is exposed King. You tell me you were against going to Iraq…and yet, you defend the Bush administration's propaganda, lies and manipulative "branding" efforts meant to deceive the American people into accepting going to Iraq.
I don't think you want to use McClellan as an example, Rev. He was going to write a pro-Bush book until the publishers told him they didn't want one. Then McClellan wrote an anti-Bush book. What a pillar of integrity he was.
And I fail to see how opposing the Iraq war exposes my credibility on whether or not the terror alert level should have been raised in 2004. Those are two separate issues, not to mention the fact that we were already in Iraq in 2004. The terror alert had nothing to do with that, except in the minds of the Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers, who must find a reason to oppose every single thing Bush ever said or did. You are pretty much a classic case.
I was never, you know, deranged about any of it. I opposed virtually every policy position Bush took…..but that was to be expected, he's a freaking Republican. What wasn't expected was the extent and scope of the crime wave that descended upon our nation.
Bush was a Republican, but you even opposed the liberal programs he started, like Medicare Part D. Your excuse there is the donut hole, which you use to obviate the fact that seniors get $2500 worth of prescription drugs very cheaply under Part D, which you should like. The real reason you find something to oppose in that bill is because the guy who passed it is named Bush.
I've never heard you give Bush any credit for increasing any spending for social programs, though he did that too. How about fighting AIDS in Africa ? No President ever did more in that area, but I've never heard you say a word about it. In fact, I've never heard you say a single word about Bush that wasn't a demonization of the man. That is the very definition of Bush Derangement Syndrome. You see him as Darth Vader or something. He isn't.
Mr. King,
Cheney is Darth Vader. Bush is Jar-Jar Binks.
Bush should be tried for treason. Anything good that came out of his administration will forever be shadowed by that treason.
Reagan had his moments, despite his crimes, same with Bush, the Elder…..with Junior the crimes are so over the top and despicable, there's nothing that can redeem his presidency.
I'm still looking forward to seeing any evidence of law breaking you can come up with, Reverend.
Rev says Bush is a criminal, Reagan was a criminal, Bush Sr. was a criminal…..
Anybody notice a pattern here ? Anybody notice who the Rev excluded from criminality ???
Bill Clinton. The guy who committed perjury and was disbarred, not to mention a host of other shady conduct.
Not that the Rev has an agenda or anything. LOL. Priceless.