• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ridge accuses Bush White House of political use of terror alert system

There's also a rule against harrassment, I believe. Maybe you should check it out since you're so anal about the rules?

If you feel I am harassing you, feel free to contact a mod.
 
Is this really a matter of debate? I remember being told I was unpatriotic because I didn't believe in the "War on Terror." I was literally yelled at because I was "unpatriotic." It freaking blows my mind to think people still defend Bush on the grounds that Obama is worse, when there should be serious investigations into things like this. If there are grounds for an investigation, what is wrong with an investigation, especially if the administration supposedly has nothing to worry about. Oh, because it is in the past.

I can hire a non govt group to assassinate people, or use terror to sway the collective support for myself, or show pictures of hospitals and warehouses and call them chemical weapons factories so long as it happened in the past. Let's move on! David Berkowits might have had a great argument if he just said Ted Bundy was worse and that it's in the past.

The law is the law...
 
Well, since it doesn't read "Bush rose the terror alert to influence the election" I'm guessing that Bush refused to give in to his aides' pressure. Good for him

No, according to the story it was Ridge and others who pulled Donald Scumsfeld aside and talked him out of a really bad and corrupt idea.

The fact that it was even floated is really scary.

Don't pat W. on the back for any pre-election decisions. Remember, he didn't declare himself the 'decider' until after the 2004 election.;)
 
When was this? 300 years ago? You do know that Washington and Jefferson were still politicians regardless of all the beautiful things they were right? Their anatomy, brain waves and general humanity were not that much different then yours or mine. They still lied, played tricks and brought as much drama to the executive office as other President. The only difference is that back then C-SPAN wasn't around and their every word, thought or belief could not be scrutinized.
Good thing they wrote lots of letters so we could know.
 
Ridge did NOT accuse the Bush White House of political use of terror alert system

The quote from Ridge's book that has the left celebrating stated:

“There was absolutely no support for that position within our department. None.” He then says, “I wondered, ‘Is this about security or politics?’ "

Notice he doesn't point any fingers, reference any incidents or conversations, nor does he offer evidence of any kind to back up that claim.

There's a reason for this... It's because it was just a passing thought based on the fact that he didn't feel the threat level needed to be raised. It wasn't an accusation.

The reason I know it wasn't an accusation, is because Ridge stated very definitively earlier in the book, when addressing allegations that political pressure had been applied to raise threat levels, said:

"Let me make it very clear. I was never directed to do so no matter how many analysts, pundits or critics say so."

So there you have it...

All this false hype is designed to appeal to Bush haters on the left, to sell a few books.

.
 
Ridge did NOT accuse the Bush White House of political use of terror alert system

The quote from Ridge's book that has the left celebrating stated:

“There was absolutely no support for that position within our department. None.” He then says, “I wondered, ‘Is this about security or politics?’ "

Notice he doesn't point any fingers, reference any incidents or conversations, nor does he offer evidence of any kind to back up that claim.

There's a reason for this... It's because it was just a passing thought based on the fact that he didn't feel the threat level needed to be raised. It wasn't an accusation.

The reason I know it wasn't an accusation, is because Ridge stated very definitively earlier in the book, when addressing allegations that political pressure had been applied to raise threat levels, said:

"Let me make it very clear. I was never directed to do so no matter how many analysts, pundits or critics say so."

So there you have it...

All this false hype is designed to appeal to Bush haters on the left, to sell a few books.

.

Just wondering, could you actually show us where you got those quotes?
 
Ridge did NOT accuse the Bush White House of political use of terror alert system.

Politicization is exactly what it seems to be. From the book:

Ridge writes that there was a "vigorous, some might say dramatic, discussion" about raising the threat level. He says his aides told the White House that doing so would politicize national security.

"I believe our strong interventions had pulled the 'go-up' advocates back from the brink," Ridge writes. "But I consider the episode to be not only a dramatic moment in Washington's recent history, but another illustration of the intersection of politics, fear, credibility and security."

"After that episode, I knew I had to follow through with my plans to leave the federal government for the private sector," Ridge, who resigned soon after the election...
 
More speculative hyperbole from the Left. I guess you missed this part of the story so I used a much bigger crayon:

UPDATE: Bush's former homeland security adviser, Frances Townsend, told the Associated Press today that politics never played a role in determining alert levels. She noted that in the weeks before the electio two videotapes, including one from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, were released that she said contained "very graphic" and "threatening" messages.

"Never were politics ever discussed in this context in my presence," she said.

Asked if there was any reason for Ridge to have felt pressured, Townsend told the AP: "He was certainly not pressured. And, by the way, he didn't object when it was raised and he certainly didn't object when it wasn't raised."

Ridge's comments are speculative hyperbole???? BRILLIANT!!!!!

No matter how many former Bush officials come out of the woodwork and tell their stories they will always end up being lying villains to you.

You're a hilarious little guy that's for sure!

:rofl:rofl:rofl
 
Ridge's comments are speculative hyperbole???? BRILLIANT!!!!!

No matter how many former Bush officials come out of the woodwork and tell their stories they will always end up being lying villains to you.

You're a hilarious little guy that's for sure!

:rofl:rofl:rofl

Next tactic will be: but the liberals did it!
 
Damn. I thought it was odd how after Bush was reelcted all those "terror alerts" went away.

Seems the GOP have proven themselves to be much, much worse than anything we could have imagined.

If history is written correctly, this will be seen as the time when the GOP lost all credibility and never, ever regained power as a party ever again.

UPDATE: Bush's former homeland security adviser, Frances Townsend, told the Associated Press today that politics never played a role in determining alert levels. She noted that in the weeks before the electio two videotapes, including one from al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, were released that she said contained "very graphic" and "threatening" messages.

"Never were politics ever discussed in this context in my presence," she said.

Asked if there was any reason for Ridge to have felt pressured, Townsend told the AP: "He was certainly not pressured. And, by the way, he didn't object when it was raised and he certainly didn't object when it wasn't raised."

Reading comprehension problem?
 
Reading comprehension problem?

I would ask you the same question.

Ridge writes that there was a "vigorous, some might say dramatic, discussion" about raising the threat level. He says his aides told the White House that doing so would politicize national security.

"I believe our strong interventions had pulled the 'go-up' advocates back from the brink," Ridge writes. "But I consider the episode to be not only a dramatic moment in Washington's recent history, but another illustration of the intersection of politics, fear, credibility and security."

"After that episode, I knew I had to follow through with my plans to leave the federal government for the private sector," Ridge, who resigned soon after the election...
 
Is this really a matter of debate? I remember being told I was unpatriotic because I didn't believe in the "War on Terror." I was literally yelled at because I was "unpatriotic." It freaking blows my mind to think people still defend Bush on the grounds that Obama is worse, when there should be serious investigations into things like this. If there are grounds for an investigation, what is wrong with an investigation, especially if the administration supposedly has nothing to worry about. Oh, because it is in the past.

I can hire a non govt group to assassinate people, or use terror to sway the collective support for myself, or show pictures of hospitals and warehouses and call them chemical weapons factories so long as it happened in the past. Let's move on! David Berkowits might have had a great argument if he just said Ted Bundy was worse and that it's in the past.

The law is the law...
There's no evidence of law breaking.
 
I agree, and this type of dictatorial behaviour does seem to be a common theme under the Bush administration. I think it's important for the American people to ensure that this type of governance does not happen again, and this is why is important that the truth come out.

As far as whether this won them the election, I don't know. I doubt it, but it still might have played a role with some folk. Historically, instilling fear in a population has proven to work.
How could it win them the election if they never even did it? The reason I said it was serious was that I thought Ridge accused Rumsfeld and Ashcroft of overtly attempting to politicize the alert system. Now it looks like Ridge never even made that accusation. Either way, the alert level wasn't raised.
 
Just wondering, could you actually show us where you got those quotes?

I got them from an article published by The American Spectator. Here is a relevant excerpt from that piece:

In October of 2004, a videotaped message from Osama Bin Laden surfaced. There were mere days until the election. There was, of course, a Homeland Security meeting. According to Ridge, an internal consensus was reached that they did not need to raise the threat level to orange. Security was heightened already in advance of the election, but had not been officially designated as a new threat level. Then the decision was brought to a security meeting with the FBI, the State Department, the Defense Department and so on. According to Ridge, Ashcroft argues for raising the threat level, while Ridge argues against. Here is the apparent money quote:

"I wondered, 'Is this about security or politics?'"

He wondered. "There was no consensus reached at that session, and we took it upon ourselves to keep it that way," he concludes, which I can only assume is what we are supposed to call "thwarting" a "plan" to raise the alert level.

It is possible, at this point, that you find none of this very definitive. But that is OK, because Tom Ridge has a definitive statement for you. Earlier in the book, addressing the allegations that political pressure had been applied to raise threat levels, Ridge has this to say:

"Let me make it very clear. I was never directed to do so no matter how many analysts, pundits or critics say so."​

That is very clear indeed, Secretary Ridge.

.
 
In Afganistan, they are comming off of heightened alert, because they raised the threat level because of the election.

The same thing was done in Iraq.

And I would not be surprised if President Obama has it raised in 2012 during the next election.

Political? No. This is simply a target date that would get terrorists a greater amount of coverage of their act, and would disrupt our political process.

Duh!

However, the difference is that I will not be going around accusing the President of raising the level for political gains.
 
They didn't have to, they instead released a months old video of Bin Laden less than a week before the election. That video is probably what killed Kerry's chances.

This is a blatant lie.

On October 29, 2004, at 21:00 UTC, the Arab television network, Al Jazeera, broadcast excerpts from a videotape of Osama bin Laden addressing the people of the United States

...

According to the Agence France-Presse, U.S. diplomats in Qatar were given a copy of a videotape of al-Qaida leader, Osama bin Laden, before it aired on Al-Jazeera television; the diplomats unsuccessfully sought to prevent the Arabic-language network from broadcasting it.[3] The United States State Department requested that the government of Qatar (where Al Jazeera is located) discourage the station from airing the videotape, according to a senior State Department official.

[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Osama_bin_Laden_video]2004 Osama bin Laden video - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The US not only had nothing to do with the release of this video, they actively tried to prevent it.

Got any more conspiracy theories you want to throw out there?
 
How could it win them the election if they never even did it? The reason I said it was serious was that I thought Ridge accused Rumsfeld and Ashcroft of overtly attempting to politicize the alert system. Now it looks like Ridge never even made that accusation. Either way, the alert level wasn't raised.

You've kind of hit the nail on the head with this post. Because this is how the MSM operate... take a non-story and turn it into a story by confusing facts until the majority of the public believe a whole alternate version of history.


:2wave:
 
Next tactic will be: but the liberals did it!

Did what exactly? They had a meeting and nothing was done to change the levels. Ridge had a spider sense tingly feeling and the world turns upside down?

If anyone finds solid evidence of anything illegal PLEASE prosecute....otherwise..stfu
 
Last edited:
How could it win them the election if they never even did it? The reason I said it was serious was that I thought Ridge accused Rumsfeld and Ashcroft of overtly attempting to politicize the alert system. Now it looks like Ridge never even made that accusation. Either way, the alert level wasn't raised.

I wasn't trying to specify the terrorist alert level at the time of the election, but more the approach the Bush campaign took to get re-elected. Things like saying that only Bush will keep America safe, and all of the other bull**** that the American people ate up.
 
The American voter shouldn't have to wonder what their President is lying about.

There was once a time where that Office was a symbol of honor, courage, and leadership by example, NOT power...

It all depends how you view history. And, how far back you go.

The nature of politics is to influence others to obtain your goal. Thus, you have to con to get what you want. If you con, you have to bend the truth, or over enhance the truth, which in itself is a lie.
 
I'm not GOP, and I am smacking his ass. He lied during his campaign. Said he was going to bring decency back to the White House. He didn't.

Please share how he lied?
 
Back
Top Bottom