they refused to do anything about them. The Saudis knew about it, told the Whitehouse, but they decided to ignore it. Clinton's group was told that there was a planned attack on the US using commercial planes, but they ignored it as well.

It has been said that FDR knew about the Japanese attacking Perl harbor, and he let it happen so that we'd have a reason to enter the war. If it was prevented and our ships moved out, the people wouldn't support a war against Japan or Germany.

Bush knew about the 911 attacks, yet decided to do nothing about them. Sometimes when good men do nothing, evil men do great evil. Does that make the good man about as bad as the evil men then? I think this was used as an excuse to pass a lot of draconian laws to take away the rights of US citizens all in the name of the war on terror. The terror happened because Bush was sitting on his thumbs with his thumbs up his arse. The war on terror will draw attention away from Bush's other shortcomings, and idiot mistakes. He may be an idiot, but sometimes even an idiot gets a few things right once in a while. He is right that we should strike back at terror, but we shouldn't just let terror happen in order to further our own political agenda?

If you ask me, Bush is trying to get attention away from the fact that his tax cuts don't add up, and that he isn't keeping his promises. He is being a divider when he divides the Islamic group from the rest of the country, and his involvment in Enron and other big Oil and Energy companies are being covered up. Face facts, we are about to enter another recession, and he is going to approve military spending hikes to fight terrorists in areas that we are not even sure they exist in.