{"article":{"id":117386,"heading":"A MOM'S FYI: "The George W. Bush Wars: An Internet Primer for Dummies"","author":"DF","created":"2004-10-04 20:06:13","modified":"2013-11-11 00:30:53","last_modified":"Mon, 11 Nov 2013 07:30:53","article":"

AOctober 3, 2004.....A Mom's FYIA

***

\"Nuclear war would really set back cable.\"

--Ted Turner

***

The George W. Bush Wars:

An Internet Primer for Dummies

--D.F., mom, educator, peace activist, voter

Orange, CA, U.S.A.

ps4erth@yahoo.com<\/a>

----

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/<\/a>

Well....it all started back in February of 2001.....when Ari Fleischer discussed.....IRAQ.....WOW!!!

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

February 16, 2001



Remarks by Ari Fleischer in Q&A with the Travel Pool

Rancho San Cristobal

San Cristobal, Mexico



1:36 P.M. (L)



MR. FLEISCHER: Since 1991, coalition aircraft have been enforcing the no-fly zone in Iraq. Today allied armed forces conducted a routine strike associated with enforcement of the no-fly zone. Coalition aircraft struck targets that were instrumental in providing air defenses that threaten coalition aircraft that were on patrol in the southern no-fly zone.

The President authorized the strike because of the risk posed to our aircraft. All coalition aircraft have returned safely....

MR. FLEISCHER: It was a routine enforcement and it was part of protecting a coalition in Iraq.

Q You wouldn't say there is a message being sent here to Saddam Hussein or any other --

MR. FLEISCHER: The President has always said that he takes seriously our responsibility to protect our coalition allies and to enforce the no-fly zone.

Thank you, everybody.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/02\/20010216-2.html<\/a>

-----

Then George W. Bush wrote this letter regarding.....IRAQ...

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

April 13, 2001



Text of a Letter From the President to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate



April 12, 2001







Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Consistent with the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), and as part of my effort to keep the Congress fully informed, I am reporting on the status of efforts to obtain Iraq's compliance with various resolutions adopted by the United Nations Security Council. The last report, consistent with Public Law 102-1, was transmitted on January 19, 2001.

Sincerely,

GEORGE W. BUSH

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/04\/20010413-8.html<\/a>

-----

And then George W. Bush discussed the threats of the 21st century...

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

June 8, 2001



President Speaks at Tax Celebration Event in Iowa



Our United States and our allies ought to develop the capacity to address the true threats of the 21st century. The true threats are biological and informational warfare. The true threats are the fact that some rogue nations who can't stand America, our allies, our freedoms or our successes would try to point a missile at us. And we must have the capacity to shoot that missile down. It's time to think differently about defense. (Applause.)

We're making progress. We're not only making progress and changing the tone, we're making progress of convincing people that some issues require a different way of thinking.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/06\/20010608-2.html<\/a>

----

George W. Bush warned us of Usama bin Laden......oh, yes he did!

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

July 2, 2001

Notice

Continuation of Emergency with Respect to the Taliban

The Taliban continues to allow territory under its control in Afghanistan to be used as a safe haven and base of operations for Usama bin Laden and the al-Qaida organization who have committed and threaten to continue to commit acts of violence against the United States and its nationals. For these reasons, I have determined that it is necessary to maintain in force these emergency authorities beyond July 4, 2001. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing the national emergency declared on July 4, 1999, with respect to the Taliban. This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

June 30, 2001.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/07\/20010702-10.html<\/a>

-------------

George W. Bush needed a supplemental appropriation for, uh, military readiness....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

July 24, 2001

Statement by the President



Today I signed into law H.R. 2216, the \"Supplemental Appropriations Act, FY 2001,\" which provides funding for the Department of Defense and other departments. This important supplemental appropriation provides urgently needed resources to enhance defense readiness and operations and maintenance;....

...The resources I requested for the Department of Defense will help our military readiness and help lay the groundwork for further strengthening after Secretary Rumsfeld's ongoing strategy review.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/07\/20010724-2.html<\/a>

For dollar amounts of H.R.2216: http:\/\/frwebgate.access.gpo.gov\/cgi-bin\/getdoc.cgi?<\/a>

------------

And Paul Wolfowitz declared...\"GET RID OF SADDAM HUSSEIN.\"

U. S. Department of Defense News Transcript

July 28, 2001

Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with the New York Times

.....The Army is thinking at this point that they're more at a four or five to one rotation base ratio. But that's today. I mean, in other words, we've got commitments in Europe, we've got commitments in Korea, we have commitments in Southeast Europe which are brand new, we have commitments in the Persian Gulf which may be reduced or go away as we get rid of Saddam Hussein at some point, but as long as he's there, it drives a lot.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08012001_t728shan.html<\/a>

-----------

Now, remember....George W. Bush did warn us about IRAQ....Oh, yes he did!

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

July 31, 2001

Notice: Continuation of Iraqi Emergency

On August 2, 1990, by Executive Order 12722, President Bush declared a national emergency to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions and policies of the Government of Iraq. By Executive Orders 12722 of August 2, 1990, and 12724 of August 9, 1990, the President imposed trade sanctions on Iraq and blocked Iraqi government assets. Because the Government of Iraq has continued its activities hostile to United States interests in the Middle East, the national emergency declared on August 2, 1990, and the measures adopted on August 2 and August 9, 1990, to deal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond August 2, 2001. Therefore, in accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing the national emergency with respect to Iraq.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE White House,

July 31, 2001.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/07\/20010731-7.html<\/a>

-----------

& George W. Bush hinted....September....September....September....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

August 3, 2001

Remarks by the President On His Agenda

The Rose Garden

THE PRESIDENT:....Six months ago, I chose a distinguished Cabinet, took a solemn oath, and promised to fight for the things close to my heart. My administration pledged to bring stability and high standards to Washington and to lead for the sake of all Americans.

....We have taken the first steps toward revitalizing and transforming our military so it can meet the threats and challenges of the future....

And we are on our way to the second largest surplus in history, as well as paying down a significant amount of U.S. debt....

In September, the second stage of our work begins, and I will be guided by a few goals....

Beginning in September, I'll be proposing creative ways to tackle some of the toughest problems in our society....

In a few days, I'm headed home to the heartland, to listen to the American people, and to talk about the values that unite and sustain our country. Members of Congress are going home as well. When we all come back in September, so many accomplishments are within our reach. And I look forward to the work ahead.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/08\/20010803-10.html<\/a>

----------

Donald Rumsfeld had....an IRAQI strategy...

United States Department of Defense.

News Transcript

August 3, 2001

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

Q: If I could just follow up quickly. I understand that you met -- the national security team met yesterday on the subject of Iraq policy. Can you give us any hint about whether you're closer to fashioning a new policy or a new approach regarding Iraq?

Rumsfeld: No. (Laughter.)

Q: You can't tell us, or you're not any closer?

Rumsfeld: No, I said I wouldn't give you any hint. (Laughter.)

Q: Mr. Secretary, a follow-up to that --

Rumsfeld: We are -- you're quite right, we do discuss this subject, and there any number of things being looked at, But, of course, the no-fly zone piece is just a small part of an overall Iraqi strategy.

Yes?

Q: Mr. Secretary, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, on the Sunday talk shows a week ago, mentioned that there should be a more resolute response to these provocations from Iraq. Is that an indication that the Bush administration is prepared to be more aggressive in response to these provocations and not just take out air defenses but go after some of the heart of Saddam Hussein's military?

Rumsfeld: Yeah, I think that's not a subject that I'm inclined to discuss. What we decide to do, we'll decide to do and we'll do it, rather than announcing it.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08032001_t0803asd.html<\/a>

--------

Soooooo......On August 6, 2001, George W. Bush received this, uh, memo regarding Usama bin Laden:

BIN LADEN DETERMINED TO STRIKE IN US

http:\/\/www.thesmokinggun.com\/archive\/0409041pdb1.html<\/a>

------------

Quite logically.....Paul Wolfowitz discussed rogue states: Iraq, Iran, North Korea...& Saddam Hussein....

United States Department of Defense.

News Transcript

August 6, 2001

Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz

Mr. Jaco: Dr. Wolfowitz, who is missile defense aimed to protect against? Is it the Chinese? Is it the so-called rogue states like Iraq Iran, North Korea? Is it a free-lance terrorist like Osama bin Laden who might have an ICBM? Who is this particularly a defense against?

Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz: Well, we're talking about defenses against missiles of a variety of ranges and I'll give you a real example that's out of history, in fact I think you were in the Persian Gulf during Desert Storm yourself and you saw what even those limited Iraqi SCUD missiles were able to do. They almost succeeded in dragging Israel into the war actively, which would have changed the whole character of the war. The single worst hit we took during the war was when a single SCUD missile hit a barracks in Dhahran.

That's a real world threat from ten years ago that today is much worse in the Korean Peninsula than anything we encountered in the Gulf. Hopefully we have Saddam Hussein lower down now, but it's a threat we could face in the future in the Gulf either from Iraq or Iran.

Finally, there's the longer-range threat which could attack the United States.

And hostile countries like North Korea are working at all ranges. The North Koreans have already deployed a lot of missiles of the short range, SCUD type, and a pretty large number we think of the intermediate range. And we think they're working, and within five to ten years will have a capability to target the United States.

We're trying to get our ability to defend against those threats out in front of the threats, and we aren't yet there. We're still just a year away from deploying an answer to that SCUD missile that we dealt with ten years ago.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08072001_t806jaco.html<\/a>



On his August vaaaacaaaation....George W. Bush discussed the menace....SADDAM HUSSEIN.....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

August 7, 2001

Remarks by the President to the Pool

Ridgewood Country Club

Waco, Texas ...........

Q Are you taking any naps in the afternoon, sir?

THE PRESIDENT: I'm working, enjoying myself -- getting a lot done on the ranch, too. One of the things I find to be, you know, helpful, is to get outdoors. Washington, D.C. is a fine place, and I'm honored to be working in the Oval Office, staying in the compound there. But I'm the kind of person that needs to get outdoors. I like to be outdoors, I like to work outdoors. It keeps my mind whole, it keeps my spirits up. I think it's important for people to get outside and to work.

And I'm making a lot of improvements on the ranch, and I find that to be -- I find that to be a good part of keeping me a balanced person.....

Q Also today, apparently the Iraqis fired upon some allied planes in the no-fly zone and we bombed, apparently, some of the sites there. What do you have on that?

THE PRESIDENT: I've been briefed on it. As you know, our military can make accordance with established allied war plans. decisions as they see fit to protect our pilots -- unless, of course, it's close to Baghdad, in which case it requires my approval....... As I said, Saddam Hussein is a menace, he's still a menace and we need to keep him in check, and will......

Q Are they ratcheting it up, though? We've had a lot of incidents lately.....

THE PRESIDENT: No -- are they, the Iraqis? He's been a menace forever, and we will do -- he needs to open his country up for inspection, so we can see whether or not he's developing weapons of mass destruction...

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/08\/20010807-2.html<\/a>

------------

George W. Bush found IRAQ 'very worrisome'. He mentioned a 'blow up last night'...

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

August 8, 2001

Remarks by the President

(In Front of Gowan Family Home in Waco, Texas)

9:55 A.M. CDT.........

THE PRESIDENT: It's the real world. It's part of keeping one's perspective. Washington's a wonderful place, but it's not exactly the real world, if you know what I mean.

Q Some of these folks say you're -- when you're in Texas. You're taking too long of a vacation.

THE PRESIDENT: They don't understand the definition of work, then. I'm getting a lot done. Secondly, you don't have to be in Washington to work. It's amazing what can happen with telephones and faxes.

Q What are you doing the rest of the day?

THE PRESIDENT: Karen Hughes is coming over. We're working on some things. And --

Q Any in particular?

THE PRESIDENT: She'll be over here, we'll work on a few things that matter.

Q Oh, come on, you can tell me.

THE PRESIDENT: I'm working on some initiatives. You'll see. There will be some decisions that will -- I'm here, and we'll be announcing them as time goes on....

THE PRESIDENT: I've got a lot of national security concerns that we're working on -- Iraq; Macedonia, very worrisome right now. Kind of a blowup last night and yesterday it looked like we had a peaceful resolution; it's now in doubt. Urge all -- we're urging all the parties to get back to the table and renounce the violence. The Secretary of Defense and I are working on some projects. There will be some announcements.......

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/08\/20010808-4.html<\/a>

---------

Rear Admiral R. Quigley spoke of Iraqi air defenses & Saddam....

Department of Defense, News Transcript

August 9, 2001

Rear Adm. Craig R. Quigley, DASD PA

Q: Just to follow up, to bring it more or less up to date, the secretary did say a few days ago, admitted something that is, I guess, rather self-evident about the Iraqi air defenses have improved and they have the ability to reach higher than they did before, more sophisticated missiles. Given that, does that change at all his view of the recommendations of a couple of months ago? Is he moving toward modifying the policy?

ADM. QUIGLEY: I think from a strategic sense, the answer is no. From a tactical sense, certainly. It's something that air crews both in the north and the south are very aware of, and they, more than any of us, are aware of the increasing level of activity trying to shoot down a coalition aircraft by Saddam.

So, tactically it's something that they watch close every day, but strategically I think I'd stick with the first part of the answer, that the status quo that we have been doing for a while will remain in force at least for now.

QCraig, is the explosive political situation in the Middle East in any way being factored into whether or not the United States moves again -- the United States and Britain move again to denigrate Iraqi air defenses?

ADM. QUIGLEY: I don't think that you can divorce any incident in the world from any other. I think that's taking a pretty short-sighted view of things. But the weight, the value, if you will, of any particular set of circumstances changes over time. In some instances, it's more important; the same set of circumstances under different circumstances elsewhere in the world would have a different weight in the equation, if you will. It's a very fluid situation, Charlie, one that you try to keep your finger on the pulse of as best you can over time and weigh all those factors before taking any action that you think is appropriate. There are pluses and minuses.

QDoes that mean yes, that the political situation -- (laughter) --

ADM. QUIGLEY: I don't know if I can you that simple an answer.

Q-- is being considered?

ADM. QUIGLEY: You never divorce your judgments as to what action to take from political situations. That is an element of the planning and an element of the thinking from the get-go.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08092001_t809dasd.html<\/a>

--------

And Donald Rumsfeld recognized 'potential threats here in the United States'....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 9, 2001

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

Town Hall Meeting with Rumsfeld

.....Q: Sir, you mentioned being mindful of the taxpayers' dollars. Clearly, some of the efficiencies that -- cost efficiencies that could be realized are available through the Reserve components and National Guard. Right now almost half the entire American presence in Bosnia is National Guard.

My question, sir, is, as you look to the future, what proportion of overseas missions do you see going to the National Guard, or do you perceive that some part of the National Guard might be focused strictly on domestic, homeland security-type missions?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Well, I think it's a good question, and it's one that's been surfaced in our review. There is no question but that we do have a total force concept. There's also no question but that the OPTEMPO problem has been moderated substantially by the extent we've been able to use the Guard and the Reserve. And it's been an enormous benefit.

The discussions taking place currently are that there could very well be a significant role for the Guard with respect to homeland defense. And given the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the risks that we face with respect to chemical and biological, as well as nuclear, weapons -- it used to be threats at some distance. Now we recognize our potential threats here in the United States, as well as to our deployed forces. There's a certain compelling logic to a role for the National Guard with respect to that subject......

Q: In testimony you have indicated that an additional $18 billion is required for defense. What do you believe is the likelihood of us receiving authorization for higher levels of spending?

SEC. RUMSFELD: Higher than the 18 (billion) in the year 2002?

Q: Eighteen billion -- yes, sir. Eighteen billion is what was -- what you said was required above the current budget level.

SEC. RUMSFELD: Yeah. You know, I have been away from Washington for a quarter of a century, and I watch the Congress on an issue like this, and on the one hand you hear a great many people saying that the Pentagon needs the 18-plus billion, and we need more. And then you see a good number of people saying that that's too much, that here's the Department of Defense, we're at peace, it's a prosperous world, and we got $328 billion, and it's more than most of our allies combined, and why do they need more money if the world's peaceful? So you hear that debate up on the Hill. How it will sort out I don't know.

I know this: I know the President is determined to do everything in his power to help -- and so is Vice President Cheney -- to see that we get every single cent of it, because there isn't a doubt but that we need every nickel.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08092001_t809town.html<\/a>

-------

Rumsfeld....Iraq bombing? \"Not that I have heard\"....

DOD News Transcript

August 10, 2001

Background Briefing on Secretary Rumsfeld's Upcoming Trip to Moscow

Q: Could I just ask briefly, Craig --

Adm. Quigley: Yes, sir.

Q: -- before we get going, as the spokesperson in the room, has there been any analysis at all of the bombing raid in Iraq this morning? Have you any idea whether or not the targets were hit?

Adm. Quigley: Not that I have heard, no, we have no assessment of the damage yet.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08102001_t810russ.html<\/a>

-------

Rumsfeld discussed missile attacks from rogue states....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 13, 2001

Secretary Rumsfeld Media Availability with Russian Journalists

Q: Mr. Rumsfeld, well, almost three years ago your commission that you headed, the Rumsfeld Commission, issued a report on missile threats from rogue states, and I remember you also came to Moscow here with Congressman Weldon to brief the Duma and also met with journalists. And members of your commission were then saying that in five years time Iran will have ICBMs that can threaten and attack the United States, Korea will have in five years ICBMs to attack the United States, Iraq will have maybe in 10 years ICBMs to attack the United States. Well, at least more than half of that five-year term has already expired. Where are the ICBMs? And when will those rogues begin pouring concrete into their silos? And maybe now you will say that your report of your commission was a bit, well, panicky, to put it mildly, or maybe that those rogues got frightened by the commission report and maybe will not be building ICBMs after all.

Rumsfeld: I think, if you go back and read the report, you'll find that what we said was that, because of the extensive proliferation of technologies relating to ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, that it was our estimate that several states could have ballistic missiles capable of reaching Europe and the United States within a period of five years. It was not a prediction that somebody would fire a ballistic missile at Europe or the United States within five years. We pointed --

Q: No, I'm talking about having them, not --

Rumsfeld: Right, right. And, of course, North Korea has launched a three-stage ballistic missile within that time and demonstrated the very thing that people said that states like North Korea or Iran were not capable of doing; that is to say, taking SCUD technology and adapting it for multiple-stage ballistic missiles. That has been demonstrated. They are selling those weapons to other countries. And I think that the phraseology in that report will prove to be exactly accurate, and it was not in any way written in a manner that you characterized as being -- trying to scare people. It was a very factual, matter-of-fact explanation of what has, in fact, taken place and what I would say today in the year 2003 is proving to be the case. If you think about it, you can deliver a weapons of mass destruction from a ballistic missile that has intercontinental range. You can also deliver a weapon of mass destruction from a ballistic missile that has less than intercontinental range by using, as we said in our report, several techniques. One is to put it on a ship, peel back the cover, use a transporter-erector-launcher, and fire it from a distance shorter than ICBM range. That has been done. Still another is to sell --

Q: My problem -- sorry --

Rumsfeld: I'm calculating in my mind what is classified and what is not. (Laughter) Let me just leave it. A rogue state has done that.

Q: On sea they demonstrated the capability.

Rumsfeld: They have fired a ballistic missile from a ship simply by peeling back the top, erecting it, firing it off, launching it a good distance, and covering it back up and moving the ship away. Another way you can use something less than ICBM range is to sell a weapon to another country that happens to be in closer proximity. Another way you can develop ballistic missiles is to test ballistic missiles in another country. That is currently being done. Now, with respect to the warheads, ballistic missiles obviously can carry -- we know that ballistic missiles have been weaponized for nuclear weapons obviously, but also for chemical and biological weapons.

Q: Are there some proofs that there are some preparations to make such warheads?

Rumsfeld: Yes, there is proof that rogue states have demonstrated the use of chemical weapons on ballistic missiles.

Q: You include into these rogue states what countries, first of all?

Rumsfeld: Well, it's an imperfect phrase, rogue states. But certainly you would include in that category North Korea and Iraq and Iran and Libya -- and North Korea. The interesting thing about that report was that it was -- we were asked to look at the ballistic missiles. There's no question but cruise missiles also pose problems. And, of course, the numbers of countries in the five years -- in the three years since the Ballistic Missile Threat Commission that have ballistic missiles and have cruise missiles and the numbers of total missiles have gone up significantly in this period of time as we predicted it would.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08132001_t813russ.html<\/a>

----------

Rumsfeld discussed evidence of terrorism...even on TV.....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 13, 200

Secretary Rumsfeld and Minister Ivanov in Russia

We also discussed a rather new series of issues upon which we agree absolutely with the United States, and that is one of terrorism, real terrorism, something which you can observe every night on television and something which appears in many, many different spots around our globe.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08142001_t813mosc.html<\/a>

-----

Admiral Quigley spoke about the raid in Iraq...

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 14, 2001

DoD News Briefing - Rear Adm. Craig R. Quigley, DASD PA

Q: Craig, would you give us the dump on the raid in Iraq today?

ADM. QUIGLEY Coalition aircraft struck a surface-to-air missile site near An Nasiriyah-- about 175 miles southeast of Baghdad. This is south of the 33 parallel -- 33-degree parallel. Another element in the Iraqi integrated air defense system that had been very active in threatening coalition aircrews, and the opportunity presented itself. Good planning was carried out, and we did the strike, about 8:15 our time this morning.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08162001_t816dasd.html<\/a>

-------

And Paul Wolfowitz identified Iraq as a threat....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 16, 2001

Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Briefing on the Defense Planning Guidance

Q: Mr. Secretary, regarding these, there are reports, as you know. floating around out there about the force cuts that you're -- that are under consideration -- I mean, deep cuts in the Army divisions, air wings, possibly a carrier battle group.

Are you going to go to the services when you talk about these five criteria or targets or whatever you're talking about, and say, \"Look, we have decided or are proposing that these cuts be made in the Army, Air Force, and Navy, and we want you to come back to us with plans for these, in these criteria, based on these cuts\"? Are you going to suggest cuts, are you going to order cuts and say let's build around those, or are you going to give any figures at all to the services?

Wolfowitz: That really hasn't been decided yet. It's something we're going to decide. I think both the QDR process and the defense planning guidance process need some structure to work around. As I think I briefed you -- when was it -- last week [ Transcript ], we presented the secretary with some alternative ways of looking at force structure. We basically have been told to go back and develop another alternative, which we're working on. And hopefully sooner rather than later we'll have guidance on that that goes to both the people doing the QDR and the people doing this exercise.

Wolfowitz: On the other subject that you raised, let me go back and repeat some things I've said before. When you look beyond -- I mean, we can identify Iraq as a threat today and we can identify North Korea as a threat today. When you look out 10 years and beyond, it's, I think, almost foolhardy to try to say who is going to threaten us. In fact, you've probably heard this; if you haven't you should hear it now.

When Secretary Cheney went up for his confirmation testimony in 1989, the word \"Iraq\" did not appear once in the entire hearing, out of his mouth or anyone else's.....

So when we say we're doing a capabilities-based approach to the future, not a threat-based approach to the future, that's what we mean. And I think probably politically that's also a better way to go at it.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08162001_t0816dsd.html<\/a>

-------

Donald Rumsfeld discussed Iraqi capabilities....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 17, 2001

Secretary Rumsfeld at the Pentagon

Q: On Iraq, if I may. Within the last week, there have been two strikes to erode the Iraqi radar capabilities. Now Iraq, as we understand, always contended that the no-fly zones and no-drive zones are illegal and that there is no mandate from the United Nations Security Council for them.

Is the United States prepared to look into the no-fly zones within any new arrangement in the United Nations Security Council, new deal, or are they considered as essential as sending the observers in?

And my second question is, do you need another Desert Fox to erode the advancement in Iraqi capabilities -- radar capabilities?

Secretary Rumsfeld: The purpose of the flights, as we all know, is that coalition aircraft make those flights for the purpose of keeping track of what Saddam Hussein may or may not be doing with respect to his forces and his prior activities of attempting to do damage to the Shi'a in the South or to the Kurds in the North, or to Kuwait.

The flying is perfectly legal. It is clearly within the U.N. resolutions, the numbers of which I've forgotten. But there's no ambiguity about that. The lawyers are all -- it's one of those rare occasions where they all agree.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08172001_t817pent.html<\/a>

------

And Victoria Clarke discussed incoming ballistic missiles 'from a rogue state like Iraq or Libya or North Korea'....

United States Department of Defense News Transcript

August 17, 2001

Assistant SecDef Victoria Clarke Interview with WAAM-AM Ann Arbor, Mich.

Q: With that in mind, the changing face of defense, who are we most likely to see incoming missiles from? We know North Korea, Saddam Hussein is trying to put something together. There are other rogue regimes as you would like to call them, rogue states, that are trying to come up with long range ICBMs. Who are we most likely to see a threat from? It's not going to be probably a Russia or a China necessarily, but it could be a terrorist.

Clarke: Well, you're absolutely right about that. The secretary is fond of saying it's harder these days to tell from whom the threat might come. It's increasingly easy to see the kinds of threats.

It could be an incoming ballistic missile from a rogue state like Iraq or Libya or North Korea.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08172001_t817waam.html<\/a>

-----

Did someone say.......CODE RED......????

Department of Defense News Transcript

August 24, 2001

Media Roundtable with ASD C3I Stenbit

Q: I assume when you came in you were briefed on the threat of information warfare on military networks. Can you tell us how this year, or what you've heard, has stacked up against previous years? Is it continuing to be a more threatening environment?

Stenbit: I don't think I have any credentials to do that, since I'm sort of snowed under and I'm getting what's going on right now. And historical (perspective) comes with a little bit more time.

Q: Well, can you tell us what's going on right now?

Stenbit: Well, it's very active. I mean, you've read about Code Red 1 and 1.1 and 2 and 2.1 and so forth. Those are very different from the kinds of attacks that occurred several years ago. I sat on a Defense Science Board panel that looked at information warfare, gosh, about eight or nine years ago, and we could see things like this coming. But even in those days, the kinds of attacks that these represent were not the kinds we were talking about. We were talking about a brute force denial of service. We were talking about penetration and getting at things, the kind of things that hackers think about. These are much more sophisticated and have unknown future ramifications. We hope we know what they are. We have guesses. But this is a game that's very, very sophisticated. And so if you want me to say it's worse today than it was in the past, I believe that's fair, but I don't have any ability to do a balanced judgment.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08242001_t0824c3i.html<\/a>

-----

Saddam Hussein and wmd....

Department of Defense News Transcript

August 28, 2001

Media Roundtable with ASD (ISP) Crouch

…..A second question. You haven't addressed Saddam Hussein. He hasn't had any arms inspections in the last -- more than two years. So what are you doing -- or what are your plans on counterproliferation that way?

(To colleague) Bob, anything I'm forgetting? (Laughter.)

Q: You're doing pretty well!

Crouch: Okay. The Hussein question is one that at this point I'm going to have to kind of punt on. Obviously, Peter is more involved in the U.N. sanction side with respect to Iraq than I am. We remain concerned, obviously, about the continuing development of his weapons programs, including weapons of mass destruction programs.

And you are right that there have been no inspections there for over two years. At this point, you know, I know that -- at this point, I would have to sort of, you know, assess what is it that we would have to give up to get those inspections, and what are those inspections likely to do for us in terms of confirming -- maybe confirming what we already know to be the case.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08292001_t0828isp.html<\/a>

-----

President George W. Bush...Our 'enemies'...

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

August 29, 2001

President Discusses Defense Priorities at American Legion

Remarks by the President at the American Legion's 83rd Annual Convention

San Antonio Convention Center

San Antonio, Texas

.....But there's more. This budget I submitted to Congress makes national defense a priority. I've asked Congress to provide the largest increase in military spending since Ronald Reagan was the President and Commander-in-Chief of the United States. (Applause.)

And to meet any dangers, our administration will begin building the military of the future. We must and we will make major investments in research and development. And we are committed to defending America and our allies against ballistic missile attacks, against weapons of mass destruction held by rogue leaders in rogue nations that hate America, hate our values and hate what we stand for. (Applause.)

We have a clear eye on foreign policy. We recognize it's a dangerous world. I know this nation still has enemies, and we cannot expect them to be idle. And that's why security is my first responsibility. And I will not permit any course that leaves America undefended.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/08\/20010829-2.html<\/a>

-------

The threat of a terrorist attack...

Department of Defense News Transcript

August 30, 2001

Media Roundtable with PDASD RA Duehring

….Q: John Liang with InsideDefense.com. You've pretty much stood up all of your weapons of mass destruction civil support teams. How are you planning to maintain and keep them -- maintain their readiness?

Duehring: Well, we just had a discussion about that with the deputy secretary a little bit earlier today, and we were reviewing the costs associated with it. You know that we have stood up nine teams, and I was told today I think that the 10th team, Georgia, will probably be certified in about two weeks.

And that's just a guess on our part right now. Then we'll be looking at the next set after that, until we get tp the grand total of 32 teams. There are costs associated with it, the initial start-up cost running about $5 million per team. The continuing cost year after year is about half that, about 2.6 million per year. We will -- it is a significant cost, but when you think about the payback, especially from the threat of terrorist attack, we have to do something.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t08312001_t830dueh.html<\/a>

----

George W. Bush asked for an increase in defense spending....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

September 3, 2001

Remarks by the President Upon Departure from Green Bay, Wisconsin

Austin Straubel International Airport

Green Bay, Wisconsin

11:01 A.M. CDT

Dick Cheney and I made this promise. And, by the way, he's doing just fine. I couldn't have picked a better man as Vice President of the United States than Dick Cheney. (Applause.)

We say this. We say we'll have a foreign policy that's clear-eyed and steady and realistic. And good foreign policy starts with making sure our military is well funded and that there's high morale amongst those who wear the uniform. And we're making good on that promise. (Applause.)

It starts with making sure our troops get paid well and are housed better. Morale begins with the understanding that those who wear the uniform deserve the utmost respect and the utmost help by their federal government. I signed an appropriations bill that does just that.

I also requested the highest increase in defense spending since Ronald Reagan was the President. A strong defense means we'll have a more peaceful world. (Applause.)

And I call upon the appropriators in Washington, D.C., to let the country know the level of defense appropriations and the level of education appropriations early in the process rather than late. These are national priorities and they ought to be priorities of our appropriators in the halls of Congress as well.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/09\/20010903-2.html<\/a>

--------

WMD, WMD, WMD....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

September 4, 2001

U.S., China to Discuss Missile Defense

Statement by the Press Secretary

We believe missile defense can contribute to stability in Asia. Moreover, missile defense is an important element of our broader strategy to combat proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destruction.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/09\/20010904-16.html<\/a>

-------------

Douglas Feith: \"Saddam Hussein regime is continuing to pursue weapons of mass destruction and missile capabilities\"....

Department of Defense News Transcript

Sept. 4, 2001

Media Roundtable with USD (P) Feith

Q: Can I ask a question about Iraq The recent--the increasing number of attacks on Iraq in the no-fly zone, is that a reflection of any change in policy or approach toward Iraq, or is it simply a reactive response to events that's going on over there? Can you characterize that for us at all or explain that at all?

Feith: Iraq has been challenging the U.S. and U.K. aircraft that have been patrolling the no-fly zones, and the coalition forces are responding. And we're not going to just absorb passively these challenges to crews who are enforcing a U.N. policy. They're performing an important function, and the Iraqi government has no right to be shooting at them.

Q: What is the enforcement of the -- the continued enforcement of the no-fly zones accomplishing, given the risk, the continued risk to pilots?

Feith: The purposes of the no-fly zones are to protect the Kurdish populations that have been victims of Saddam's oppressive policies and to protect Iraq's neighbors, who have also been victims of Saddam's policies, his challenge to -- one of the purposes of the policy is to protect Kuwait.

And as I said, this is a -- these no-fly zones are created to fulfill a UN policy, a UN mandate, and we are not going to -- we're not going to allow Saddam to shoot at those pilots without responding.

Q: Just one last thing. Iraq says it's at war with the United States. Does the United States consider itself to be in a state of war with Iraq? Or if not, how would you describe the continuing combat situation that's going on over there?

Feith: What we're doing is we're patrolling the no-fly zones.

Q: What is the U.S. --

Q: A follow-up. Doug, can you help us with what the administration's Iraq policy is? When President -- when candidate Bush was campaigning, he said we're going to come in with a new policy, it's going to be tougher, it's going to be this, it's going to be that. As best I can determine, there is no new policy yet; it is a continuation of the previous administration's policy. Sort of tell us where the deliberations are, or if there is a new policy, what is it?

Feith: I am not -- I'm not now going to elaborate a new policy. This isn't the forum to make a major policy announcement. What I would say, though, is we note that the Saddam Hussein regime is continuing to pursue weapons of mass destruction and missile capabilities. It continues to pose a threat to neighboring states. It is engaged in subversive activities throughout the region. It's working to aggravate our Israeli problems, for example. And it's seeking to undo the no-fly zone policy by continually attacking the coalition aircraft. The Saddam Hussein regime is a serious threat to its neighbors and the well being of its own people, and we will be taking all of this into account. That's all I want to say at the moment.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t09052001_t904usdp.html<\/a>

----

Victoria Clarke....Antrax....Iraq....Anthrax....Iraq....

DoD News Briefing

September 4, 2001

Victoria Clarke, ASD PA

……Q: Does this research involve creating any germs in the laboratory?

Clarke: There has been, about 1997, I think it was, and what you're talking about, is some reporting about developing a strain, a new strain of anthrax. In 1997 there was a journal called \"Vaccine\" which reported on a new or modified anthrax strain that the Russians may have been developing. We have a vaccine that works against most of the known -- all of the known anthrax strains. What we want to do is make sure we are prepared for any surprises, we're prepared for anything else that might happen that might be a threat. So about in the early part of this year, the DIA started to look into the feasibility, and doing all the legal consultations, doing all the appropriate interagency consultations to look into how we could develop that modified anthrax strain so we could test our vaccines against it and make sure we prevent against any surprises, and make sure we could protect the men and women in uniform from potential threats.

Q: Torie, U.S. jets bombed air defense sites in southern Iraq for the fourth time in recent days, again today. Are these -- this is obviously an ongoing effort to degrade Iraq air defenses and to slow their aggressive attempts to shoot down a plane. Are these -- would you characterize these as pinprick attacks? And are they degrading Iraqi air defenses?

Clarke: Would I -- I'm sorry. I missed the first part --

Q: Would you characterize these as pinprick attacks, and are these -- are these efforts degrading Iraqi air defenses? It doesn't seem to be slowing down their attempts to shoot down aircraft.

Clarke: Well, I don't know how much I can help with you -- help you with -- on characterizations. But they are a continuing effort by Saddam Hussein to threaten coalition aircraft. The reason we're patrolling the no-fly zones is to make sure Saddam Hussein cannot threaten his neighbors, cannot impose aggression against his own people, as he has done. And he is the one and his people are the -- his folks are the ones who threatening the coalition aircraft. As long as they threaten coalition aircraft, we will respond.

Q: But these attacks don't seem to be slowing down their attempts to do it.

Clarke: Well, these strikes are an effort to degrade his systems.

Q: And --

Clarke: And the battle damage assessments over the last several strikes have shown we have been effective.

Yeah?

Q: Do the frequency of these attacks represent a new approach or some change in the way the administration is approaching this problem? The frequency of them --

Clarke: You know, I think the less information we provide about how and when and where we do this, or trying to characterize as one thing or another, is better. The less information we give Saddam Hussein, the better. So as we've said before, we will respond in a time and a manner and a place of our choosing. And again, if he was not threatening coalition aircraft, then these strikes wouldn't be occurring.

Q: Iraq has said that it's in a war with the United States and Great Britain. Would you -- do you consider what's been -- what's going on in Iraq now, the regular bombings that take place, as a war? And if not, if it's not a war, what would you call it?

Clarke: Again, I'll leave the characterizations and the labels up to others. Saddam Hussein has made it clear what his intent is. He's made it clear that he would like to shoot down coalition aircraft. We consider these things aggressive, and we'll respond appropriately.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t09052001_t0904asd.html<\/a>

----

Jeb Bush signed Executive Order allowing him to declare martial law in Florida...

September 7, 2001

EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER

01-261

http:\/\/www.buzzflash.com\/perspectives\/911bush.html<\/a>

----

Donald Rumsfeld warned of Saddam Hussein, WMD, Iraq....

Department of Defense

September 9, 2001

Interview with Secretary Rumsfeld

Snow: There are reports now that Iraq is reconstituting its military manufacturing capabilities. Is it time for the allies to step up efforts against Iraq, and would it be legitimate to go after those manufacturing facilities?

Rumsfeld: Well, that's a call for the president and the coalition partners as to at what point it would be appropriate. But you're quite right. There's no question but that Saddam Hussein and that regime is an outlaw regime.

They have an appetite to impose their will on their neighbors. They have an appetite for weapons of mass destruction. They have been, every period since they've been able to get the inspectors out of there, working diligently to increase their capabilities in every aspect of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile technology.

And as they get somewhat stronger, the problem becomes somewhat greater.

Snow: It's widely agreed that chemical and biological weapons -- big threat in the future. How do we fight them other than simply to bomb factories?

Rumsfeld: First of all, it's very difficult to find them. They do a good deal underground. A biological capability is not something that takes enormous facilities. They've been weaponizing, other countries in the region have been weaponizing chemical and biological weapons.

And that problem, particularly biological weapons over the coming decade, is going to be an increasingly serious one. It will have to be attacked from a whole range of methods. Bombing -- trying to find -- some of them are mobile. They can move them. They're in vans.

So, it is not a simple thing. But it will have to be dealt with using a variety of techniques.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t09102001_t909foxn.html<\/a>

----

A few words from The 9\/11 Commission Report....

(From the 9\/11 Commission Report), p 35: “White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card told us he was standing with the President outside the classroom when Senior Advisor to the President Karl Rove first informed them that a small, twin-engine plane had crashed into the World Trade Center. The President's reaction was that the incident must have been caused by pilot error. At 8:55, before entering the classroom, the President spoke to National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, who was at the White House. She recalled first telling the President it was a twin-engine aircraft—and then a commercial aircraft—that had struck the World Trade Center, adding ‘that's all we know right now, Mr. President.'”

(9\/11 Commission Report), pp. 38-39: “The President was seated in a classroom when, at 9:05, Andrew Card whispered to him: ‘A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack…' The President remained in the classroom for another five to seven minutes, while the children continued reading.” )

-------------

John Ashcroft spoke of the tragedy, 9\/11. He knew the terrorists were 'armed with knives....'

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

September 11, 2001

Press Briefing by Attorney General, Secretary of HHS, Secretary of Transportation, and FEMA Director

Press Briefing by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Secretary of HHS Tommy Thompson, Secretary of Transportation Norm Mineta, and FEMA Director Joseph Allbaugh

The Briefing Room .......

ATTORNEY GENERAL ASHCROFT: Thank you. Today America has experienced one of the greatest tragedies ever witnessed on our soil. These heinous acts of violence are an assault on the security of our nation. They are an assault on the security and the freedom of every American citizen.......

The following is a summary of the known facts surrounding today's incidents. American Airlines Flight 11 departed Boston for Los Angeles. Hijacked by suspects armed with knives, this plane crashed into the World Trade Center. United Airlines Flight 175 departed Boston for Los Angeles, was hijacked and crashed into the World Trade Center........

American Airlines Flight 77 departed Washington-Dulles for Los Angeles, was hijacked and crashed into the Pentagon. United Airlines Flight 93 departed Newark for San Francisco, was hijacked and crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania......

We will not tolerate such acts. We will expend every effort and devote all the necessary resources to bring the people responsible for these acts, these crimes, to justice......

We will find the people responsible for these cowardly acts, and justice will be done.......

SECRETARY MINETA: One of the most cherished freedoms is the freedom of movement, the ability to move freely and safely. But today, that freedom was attacked. But we will restore that freedom throughout the national transportation system as soon as possible. And we will restore the highest-possible degree of service.

These terrorist acts are designed to steal the confidence of Americans. We will restore that confidence. We have already taken some first steps as a precaution. I have ordered the FAA to ground all commercial air traffic until at least tomorrow afternoon...

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/09\/20010911-10.html<\/a>

-----------

With all of the warnings about bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, WMD, and terrorists, why was SECRETARY OF STATE, Colin Powell in South America on September 11, 2001?....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

September 11, 2001

Press Briefing by Karen Hughes, Counselor to the President

National FBI Headquarters

MS. HUGHES: .....As you know, President Bush was in Sarasota, Florida when the first attack occurred this morning. Air Force One has now landed at Offitt Air Force Base in Omaha, Nebraska, and the President is in a secure location. He is in continuous communication with the Vice President and key members of his Cabinet and national security team.

Vice President Cheney and our National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, are in a secure facility at the White House. I have just come from there. The Secretary of Transportation and other members of our White House senior staff are gathered at a command center there, and we are coordinating with other branches of our federal government.

The Secretary of Defense remains at the Pentagon, and the Secretary of State is en route back to Washington from his trip to South America.

Transportation Secretary Mineta has directed the Federal Aviation Administration to suspend operations until at least 12:00 noon tomorrow. So, no airline flights will operate until at least then, and until the FAA anounces that operations will be resumed.

...Our fellow citizens and our freedom came under attack today. And no one should doubt America's resolve....

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/09\/20010911-11.html<\/a>

-------------

Yet....Ari Fleischer told the Press there was 'NO WARNING' of a terrorist attack....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

September 11, 2001

Press Briefing to the Pool By Ari Fleischer

Aboard Air Force One

1:47 P.M. EDT

.....Q Does the President now know anything more about who is responsible, the coordinated attack, and whether this is it or --

MR. FLEISCHER: That information is still being gathered and analyzed. And I anticipate that will be an ongoing process for a little while. Often, at a time like this, information comes in, it turns out not to be true. The proper procedure is to carefully, thoroughly evaluate all information and do so in a ?

Q Had there been any warnings that the President knew of?

MR. FLEISCHER: NO WARNING.

Q Does the President? is he concerned about the fact that this attack of this severity happened with no warning?

MR. FLEISCHER: First things first: his concern is with the safety of people who have lost their ? the health and security of the American people and with the families of those who have lost their lives. There will come an appropriate time to do all appropriate look backs. His focus is on events this morning.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/09\/20010911-6.html<\/a>

-----

Donald Rumsfeld wouldn't discuss Osama bin Laden & denied U.S. involvement in bombings in Afghanistan....

Department of Defense

Sept. 12, 2001

Donald Rumsfeld

Q: Mr. Secretary, did you have any inkling at all, in any way, that something of this nature and something of this scope might be planned?

Rumsfeld: Charlie, we don't discuss intelligence matters.

Q: I see. And how -- how would you respond if you find out who did this?

Rumsfeld: Obviously, the president of the United States has spoken on that subject, and those are issues that he will address in good time.

Yes?

Q: Mr. Secretary, we are getting reports from CNN and others that there are bombs exploding in Kabul, Afghanistan. Are we, at the moment, striking back? And if so, is the target Osama bin Laden and his organization?

Rumsfeld: I've seen those reports. They -- in no way is the United States government connected to those explosions.

Q: What about Osama bin Laden, do you suspect him as the prime suspect in this?

Rumsfeld: It's not the time for discussions like that.

http:\/\/www.dod.mil\/transcripts\/2001\/t09112001_t0911sd.html<\/a>

-----

Donald Rumsfeld admitted to daily sloppy handling of classified information....

Department of Defense.

Sept. 12, 2001

Donald Rumsfeld

Q: Was sloppy handling of classified information -- did that play some role in the attack?

Rumsfeld: Not to my knowledge.

Clarke: Okay, sir.

Rumsfeld: It is an issue that I think, however, needs to be elevated and looked at and that people in all aspects of government --

Q: What's the catalyst, why are you raising that today?

Q: Yeah, has it happened in the aftermath?

Rumsfeld: It has been happening daily.

Q: Thank you, sir.

----

After 9\/11, George W. Bush said that Americans would go about their lives 'in a normal' way.....FEAR, ANTHRAX, GAS MASKS....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

October 2, 2001

President Meets with Congressional Leaders

Remarks by the President in Photo Opportunity with Speaker Hastert, Leader Daschle, Minority Leader Lott and Minority Leader Gephardt

The Oval Office

THE PRESIDENT:.... And I'm most pleased with the conversations we've had. I admired all four Leaders prior to September 11th; I admire them even more after September 11th, because they're dedicated patriots, anxious to bring our government together to make sure that we respond to the American people in a positive way.

Q Mr. President, out of this terror comes fear.

THE PRESIDENT: What? Out of what?

Q Out of this terror on September 11th comes fear. Many Americans are still gripped with this fear, and they're buying gas masks in exuberant numbers. And they're also looking to -- for anthrax vaccinations. What do you say to those people? Is their fear warranted?

THE PRESIDENT: I say that America ought to be on alert, but we need to get back to business. That's why I'm opening up Reagan Airport. That's why we had Cabinet members get on commercial airlines over the weekend. The good news is, is that some of the load factors on American airlines looked like they increased over the weekend. Americans know their government is doing everything they can to disrupt any terrorist activity that may occur. We're following every lead, we're interrogating every possible suspect. We're on full alert in America.

But the good news is, Americans also realize that in order to fight terrorism, they're going to go about their lives in a normal way. And Americans are.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/10\/20011002-1.html<\/a>

----------

George W. Bush announced $60-75 billion more needed to stimulate economy....unemployment...er...displaced workers....

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

October 3, 2001

President Works on Economic Recovery During NY Trip

Remarks by the President in Photo Opportunity with Business Leaders

Freedom Hall

New York, New York

THE PRESIDENT:.....And we've had a very frank discussion about the state of our economy. I think there's no question we all agree that the events of September 11th shocked our economy, just like it shocked the conscience of our nation. But like those terrorists, they can't affect our soul, they can't affect the greatness of America. We all believe that the underpinnings are there for economic recovery.

And we all must do our part. And the federal government has a role to play. Today Secretary Paul O'Neill testified at Congress, saying that the administration believes that we ought to have $60 billion to $75 billion more of stimulus to encourage consumer confidence, to enhance business investment, as well as to take care of displaced workers.

http:\/\/www.whitehouse.gov\/news\/releases\/2001\/10\/20011003-4.html<\/a>

---------

George W. Bush enhanced his vocabulary: EVILDOERsS....TAX REBATES....Keep that fear going, GWB!

For Immediate Release

Office of the Press Secretary

October 4, 2001

President Unveils Back to Work Plan

Remarks by the President to the Employees of the Department of Labor Washington, D.C.

THE PRESIDENT:....The evildoers struck, but they may have hurt our buildings, and they are obviously affecting some family lives in such a profound and sad way. But they will not touch the soul of America. They cannot dim our spirit. (Applause.)

All of us, from the President all the way throughout our government, must be diligent and strong and unwavering in our determination and our dedication to win the war on terrorism.

I've got a job to do, and that's to explain to the American people the truth. And the truth is that we're now facing a new threat for freedom; that on September 11th, war was declared on the United States, not by a religious group, not by one country versus another, but by people motivated by evil. And I'm going to make it clear to the world what I made clear to America, that this great country will not let evil stand. (Applause.)

The attack on our land roused a might nation. We've never been united like we have been -- as we are today. And we're examining a lot of things. We're examining, as moms and dads, what it means to be a parent. There are many Americans on bended knee from all different religions, praying to an almighty God. We're a nation united in our conviction that we must find those evildoers and bring them to justice. We seek not revenge in America, we seek justice. (Applause.)

Americans understand that this is a different type of campaign; it's a different type of struggle to defeat an enemy that's sometimes hard to see, and sometimes hard to find. But what the enemy has found out is we're a determined people, and we're patient, and we will do what it takes to bring them to justice.

We built a vast coalition of nations from all around the world to join us -- nations which understand that what happened in New York and Washington could happen to them, as well. They understand it's now time to unite to defeat evil. Each nation comes with a different set of capabilities and a different set of -- a different willingness to help. America says, we don't care how you help, just help. Either you're for us, or you're against us. (Applause.)

And the progress to date has been positive, really positive. We've got nations around the world willing to join us in cutting off the money of the evil ones. Our attitude is, if they can't fund evil deeds, they're not going to be able to affect freedom. And so we're talking to countries and banks and financial institutions, and saying either you're with us, or against us: cut off their money.

We're applying diplomatic pressure from around the world. I promise you this: I will enforce the doctrine that says that if you house a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorists themselves. (Applause.) This is our calling. This is our nation's time to lead the world, and we're going to do that. And we must do so in a bold and strong, and determined fashion. We will not waver.

I fully understand, as I said to Congress, there will be times when people feel a sense of normalcy -- and I hope that happens sooner rather than later -- and that September 11th may be a distant memory to some. But not to me, and not to this nation. Now is the time -- now is the time to root out evil so that our children and grandchildren can live with freedom as the beacon all around the world.

The evildoers cost Americ<\/p>\n","contact":"ps4erth@yahoo.com","link":"","address":"","phone":"","parent_id":0,"mime_type":"text\/plain","summary":"The George W. Bush Wars: An Internet Primer for Dummies","numcomment":0,"fileurl":"\/uploads\/","filesize":null,"article_url":"\/news\/2004\/10\/117386.php"},"attachments":[],"comments":[]}