The infamous "7 minutes"

[Vic]

I have often questioned the "7 minutes" thing. It is no surprise to me, and I didn't need Moore to tell me about it, I knew about it within a week after 9/11.
A lot of conspiracy theories or GW-is-an-idiot ideas came to my head.

But then I remembered one simple fact: during such an emergency situation, the President is no longer in control of his own movements. The Secret Service is.
If GW had wanted to leave the school immediately, and the SS had decided that he couldn't because such movement might (in their opinion only, and NOT the President's) jeopardize his safety, then he doesn't move. Put bluntly, GW did not have a say in whether he stayed or left, or for how long he would stay. It seems to me that, during those 7 short minutes, the SS told him to be calm and continue as though nothing had happened, while they prepared the way for his safe departure. During that time, he was naturally provided with the information that he needed so he could make decisions as necessary.

This is not an apology. I do not like GW and would never apologize for him. It is a simple fact. The Secret Service is very much in fact a modern-day Praetorian Guard.
Which brings up another point. A lot of people here (I am sure) have seen me bash Moore lately. Did Moore mention the SS? Like a slick salesman, he tells the truth only while misrepresenting its meaning.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Ozoned
:roll:

:cookie; for your non sequitur

I hate to say it, but this is another non sequitur in this context.

So does this imply you ARE a native English speaker? I really didn't mean that as insulting - it's just that you are so consistently obscure, and your posts are so unclear, that they read like the English in a badly-translated owner's manual. I honestly never understand what you're talking about. As such, I just inferred that you weren't a native speaker. I apologize for the misunderstanding if you are.

The topic is "The infamous "7 minutes"

Are you going to let me know what's wrong with my manner?

What amazes me Gaard, is not the things you fixate on, but rather the manner in which you fixate upon them...

You are drawing your conclusion that I said there was something wrong with your "manner" in the exact same place as most people are drawing their conclusion about the infamous 7 minutes. Right out of Thin air.

Almost every poster in P&N has posted personal observations about other posters. This statement would include you, and obviously Don Vito. Is there some sort of initiation that I must go through to ascend to Gaard and Don Vito's posting level that allows me to participate in this posting ritual, or is this just another example of your fixation????????

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Ozoned
:roll:

:cookie; for your non sequitur

I hate to say it, but this is another non sequitur in this context.

So does this imply you ARE a native English speaker? I really didn't mean that as insulting - it's just that you are so consistently obscure, and your posts are so unclear, that they read like the English in a badly-translated owner's manual. I honestly never understand what you're talking about. As such, I just inferred that you weren't a native speaker. I apologize for the misunderstanding if you are.

The topic is "The infamous "7 minutes"

Are you going to let me know what's wrong with my manner?

What amazes me Gaard, is not the things you fixate on, but rather the manner in which you fixate upon them...

You are drawing your conclusion that I said there was something wrong with your "manner" in the exact same place as most people are drawing their conclusion about the infamous 7 minutes. Right out of Thin air.

Almost every poster in P&N has posted personal observations about other posters. This statement would include you, and obviously Don Vito. Is there some sort of initiation that I must go through to ascend to Gaard and Don Vito's posting level that allows me to participate in this posting ritual, or is this just another example of your fixation????????

Huh? You said that...well just look at the quote. What about my manner in which I fixate on things amazes you?

 

[biostud]

Originally posted by: Vic

But then I remembered one simple fact: during such an emergency situation, the President is no longer in control of his own movements. The Secret Service is.

I know he is a 'puppet', but that Secret Service can actually control him around is pretty cool. Although I guess that the crew that controls his facial movements have been replaced for skipping on duty.

They might also want a new man for the 'dubbing'

 

[Genx87]

It is the same thing as what people got stuck on those 12 words in a speech filled with what, 2000 words?

It is politicizing something that is insiginifcant but can be exploited. I dont know what they really expect him to do. But if you ask anybody they probably cant provide an answer either.

Last week illustrated the smear campaign and about how baseless it really is. I watched Hannity and Combs. They have Ann Coultier and some Democratic Analyst. Nevermind Annes rather immature laughing through the whole thing. But when it got down to it Ann finally made a rather good point. She asked the two liberals on the panel just exactly what has bush done that is so horrible. The answer took some time and all she could come up with was the prison scandal. A scandal which wasnt even a scandal but a bunch of hooligans performing some personal justice on some prisoners. They cant even connect the dots to anybody in the administration without skewing facts to the extreme.

So just like the thread we had on here a couple of weeks ago where people had to come up with exactly what Bush has dont sooo wrong the aanswers were pretty silent.

When it comes down to it we can dwell on 7 whole minutes after the attack. But really, what are you going to accomplish by wondering? And exactly what would you do that is so much different? And what would gore do? What did Clinton do for 7 minutes after he found out about the bombing in Oklahoma? Should we blast him for not jumping out of whatever he was doing and getting on AF1?

This guy has a good point about the attack. These kinds of attacks you dont know wtf and where the hell they will hit next. It could very well be they are waiting at the airport for Bush to get on AF1. 7 mins during that situation is not very long. In fact it took me longer to write this than it took for Bush and his team to get things reorganized so he could get on AF1 and into the air with an escort.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Ozoned
:roll:

:cookie; for your non sequitur

I hate to say it, but this is another non sequitur in this context.

So does this imply you ARE a native English speaker? I really didn't mean that as insulting - it's just that you are so consistently obscure, and your posts are so unclear, that they read like the English in a badly-translated owner's manual. I honestly never understand what you're talking about. As such, I just inferred that you weren't a native speaker. I apologize for the misunderstanding if you are.

The topic is "The infamous "7 minutes"

Are you going to let me know what's wrong with my manner?

What amazes me Gaard, is not the things you fixate on, but rather the manner in which you fixate upon them...

You are drawing your conclusion that I said there was something wrong with your "manner" in the exact same place as most people are drawing their conclusion about the infamous 7 minutes. Right out of Thin air.

Almost every poster in P&N has posted personal observations about other posters. This statement would include you, and obviously Don Vito. Is there some sort of initiation that I must go through to ascend to Gaard and Don Vito's posting level that allows me to participate in this posting ritual, or is this just another example of your fixation????????

Huh? You said that...well just look at the quote. What about my manner in which I fixate on things amazes you?

Gaard, the things that amaze me are not open to discussion. The fact that I posted an observation about you could be if you choose to make it an issue. I would suggest that you take my post as a compliment (as it is nothing less than that) and divert your fixation to a topic that is more important than what amazes Ozoned.

Have a nice day.

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: Ozoned
:roll:

:cookie; for your non sequitur

I hate to say it, but this is another non sequitur in this context.

So does this imply you ARE a native English speaker? I really didn't mean that as insulting - it's just that you are so consistently obscure, and your posts are so unclear, that they read like the English in a badly-translated owner's manual. I honestly never understand what you're talking about. As such, I just inferred that you weren't a native speaker. I apologize for the misunderstanding if you are.

The topic is "The infamous "7 minutes"

Are you going to let me know what's wrong with my manner?

What amazes me Gaard, is not the things you fixate on, but rather the manner in which you fixate upon them...

You are drawing your conclusion that I said there was something wrong with your "manner" in the exact same place as most people are drawing their conclusion about the infamous 7 minutes. Right out of Thin air.

Almost every poster in P&N has posted personal observations about other posters. This statement would include you, and obviously Don Vito. Is there some sort of initiation that I must go through to ascend to Gaard and Don Vito's posting level that allows me to participate in this posting ritual, or is this just another example of your fixation????????

Huh? You said that...well just look at the quote. What about my manner in which I fixate on things amazes you?

Gaard, the things that amaze me are not open to discussion. The fact that I posted an observation about you could be if you choose to make it an issue. I would suggest that you take my post as a compliment (as it is nothing less than that) and divert your fixation to a topic that is more important than what amazes Ozoned.

Have a nice day.

Whatever Ozoned. I guess you post a " :frown: " when you give compliments. (look at your 10:01 PM comment to me) My guess is you just wanted to criticize me but can't really explain your citicism. But you're right, it's not important.

Have a nice day.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: biostud666

Originally posted by: Vic
But then I remembered one simple fact: during such an emergency situation, the President is no longer in control of his own movements. The Secret Service is.

I know he is a 'puppet', but that Secret Service can actually control him around is pretty cool. Although I guess that the crew that controls his facial movements have been replaced for skipping on duty.

They might also want a new man for the 'dubbing'

It is not (necessarily) that he is a puppet. The Secret Service is responsible for his physical safety. In a time of crisis, it is they and they alone who are given the decision as to where it is safe for the President to be or not.

Think of it this way. When Hinckley shot Reagan, the SS agents grabbed the President, covered him with their bodies, and literally threw him into the limo. Who else could be allowed to do that to the President himself?

While I do question GW as a leader, and while this event does not help my feelings in that regard (thank God the Russians weren't attacking!), I think that it is important to be fair. This was not a situation were any type of immediate action by the President could have had any effect (in other words, the Russians weren't attacking), and it is quite likely that GW was either given false or perhaps unwise information initially or was instructed to stay in that classroom for those 7 minutes for his own safety. There is simply no way of knowing.

In the meantime, all this "Why didn't the President react sooner?" is all simple rabble-rousing designed to inflame the ignorant masses who foolishly believe that the President is all-powerful, and that government should be able to make their every whim reality.
Of all of GW's doings, the 7 minutes is of small concern. I'm much more concerned about what he knew about the California Power Crisis and the fall of Enron, what actual and substantial evidence his administration has against Bin Laden and Al-Queda regarding 9/11, how he can justify Ashcroft and the Patriot and Homeland Security Acts, the REAL reasoning for attacking Iraq, just why our military needs so much money to fight wars and problems so far away, how he can claim to be for small government while increasing both its size, budget, and powers, and how he can claim to have long-term solution for America when all his decisions seem to be fixated on short-term results.

That's all

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: Vic
But then I remembered one simple fact: during such an emergency situation, the President is no longer in control of his own movements.

How is this different from any other time? Say, right now for instance?


My take on the incident:

SS informs him of first tower being hit. He decides to go ahead with photo op because he knows being in the Pentagon now would be a bad idea, after all, they did PLAN to hit there too.

When they inform him of the second plane hitting, it is also no surprise.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: glugglug
My take on the incident:

SS informs him of first tower being hit. He decides to go ahead with photo op because he knows being in the Pentagon now would be a bad idea, after all, they did PLAN to hit there too.

When they inform him of the second plane hitting, it is also no surprise.

Kind of a stretch, don't ya think?

I admit that I entertained similar thoughts in the past, but the reality is that they don't pan out logically. I won't deny that such a conspiracy is possible, but unlikely. That things are not what they seem is certain, but extremist convictions will only bring you the truth you want to believe, and not necessarily the real truth.

My take is that when the 1st place hit, no one knew what was happening. Not until the 2nd plane hit did anyone recognize the situation for what it was (and even then IMO, not the full enormity), and only then was any action taken. That a short delay took place in implementing those actions, during which time the President decided to act calmly, is understandable. Only in hindsight is it clear that he did not exercise the best judgement.
Now if you scenario were true, and a full-fledged conspiracy with the President in full knowledge taking place, then I believe that for the sake of appearances the President would have done the exact opposite, and acted immediately and without hesitation. And why would he have hesitated? He would have been prepared.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Aelius

You give Bush too much credit.

If he was a manager of a bank and came to the conclusion he did then he can be forgiven.

He is the President. Yes he is human just like you and me but what people think when they elect a CiC is someone whom is prepared for anything. Instead they got this guy. He may even be an OK President if he wasn't the CiC but the fact is he is.

I made my points based on facts on hand. Don't get so caught up in your moral high horse that you forget the fact that you have but a single point that even I brought up, which you STILL refuse to acknowledge.

You are also splitting hairs on how you describe how Bush acted. You call it a mistake in judgment. I call it incompetence.

Let me tell you what a mistake in judgment was.

When Bush decided he could actually speak coherently at any given news conference without the aid of talking points and speech writers, that was a mistake in judgment.

Assuming the best possible circumstances when he was first told then told again of the second plane hitting the WTC as if everything was rosy, that's incompetence.

Thanks for totally ignoring my arguments and creating a nice strawman. I'm done with you I do believe.

Nothing was ignored. You do not agree so you refuse to read anything. Nice tunnel vision bud.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: glugglug
My take on the incident:

SS informs him of first tower being hit. He decides to go ahead with photo op because he knows being in the Pentagon now would be a bad idea, after all, they did PLAN to hit there too.

When they inform him of the second plane hitting, it is also no surprise.

Kind of a stretch, don't ya think?

I admit that I entertained similar thoughts in the past, but the reality is that they don't pan out logically. I won't deny that such a conspiracy is possible, but unlikely. That things are not what they seem is certain, but extremist convictions will only bring you the truth you want to believe, and not necessarily the real truth.

My take is that when the 1st place hit, no one knew what was happening. Not until the 2nd plane hit did anyone recognize the situation for what it was (and even then IMO, not the full enormity), and only then was any action taken. That a short delay took place in implementing those actions, during which time the President decided to act calmly, is understandable. Only in hindsight is it clear that he did not exercise the best judgement.
Now if you scenario were true, and a full-fledged conspiracy with the President in full knowledge taking place, then I believe that for the sake of appearances the President would have done the exact opposite, and acted immediately and without hesitation. And why would he have hesitated? He would have been prepared.

Best analogy I can think of to extend this part of the conspiracy theory. (Goes along with my theory on Bush having been a CGI character for the past 2.5 years or so, but if he's computer generated, "why does he screw up so often?")

From The Matrix

he first Matrix failed because it was too perfect. It was a virtual paradise, a utopia for humanity. Unfortunately, humans are not accustomed to living in a perfect world, and the test subjects rejected the simulation because it just wasn't right. The second Matrix he designed more closely resembled the 'real world' of 1999: it was hard, it was dirty, it had death, violence, war, atrocities, and everything else a flawed species would likely create for itself.

I believe "CGI Bush" makes mistakes for this same reason to make him more believable.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: glugglug
Best analogy I can think of to extend this part of the conspiracy theory. (Goes along with my theory on Bush having been a CGI character for the past 2.5 years or so, but if he's computer generated, "why does he screw up so often?")

From The Matrix

he first Matrix failed because it was too perfect. It was a virtual paradise, a utopia for humanity. Unfortunately, humans are not accustomed to living in a perfect world, and the test subjects rejected the simulation because it just wasn't right. The second Matrix he designed more closely resembled the 'real world' of 1999: it was hard, it was dirty, it had death, violence, war, atrocities, and everything else a flawed species would likely create for itself.

I believe "CGI Bush" makes mistakes for this same reason to make him more believable.

All I can say to that, glugglug, is that I think you give GW and his administration far too much credit (if you are even being serious).

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

Look, think about it for one second...

The President of the United States is sitting in front of School Children. What was he supposed to do? Abruptly run out of there? No President would have done that, and you darn well know it.

The White House, like ALL of us who watched the event LIVE, get that, LIVE on Television from the FIRST plane, had NO idea what was going on, so this is just a stupid argument.

My opinion? I believe he full well knew what he was doing once he heard of the second attack. He didn't want to disturb the children, and he didn't, and he didn't want to cause panic.

Can you imagine if the President caused that big of a raucous? Would there have more hysteria around the country had secret serviceman carried him out, which is damn sure what WOULD have happened had they thought the President was in danger.

This argument, opinion is lame to even write about, 7 minutes, sheesh...

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: M0NEYSH0T
Look, think about it for one second...

The President of the United States is sitting in front of School Children. What was he supposed to do? Abruptly run out of there? No President would have done that, and you darn well know it.

The White House, like ALL of us who watched the event LIVE, get that, LIVE on Television from the FIRST plane, had NO idea what was going on, so this is just a stupid argument.

My opinion? I believe he full well knew what he was doing once he heard of the second attack. He didn't want to disturb the children, and he didn't, and he didn't want to cause panic.

Can you imagine if the President caused that big of a raucous? Would there have more hysteria around the country had secret serviceman carried him out, which is damn sure what WOULD have happened had they thought the President was in danger.

This argument, opinion is lame to even write about, 7 minutes, sheesh...

As I've said before (what feels like at least 5 times), I don't really fault the President for the way he dealt with this incredibly stressful situation, but I think it's stupid and nonproductive to insist his reaction was the most appropriate one, or that it doesn't matter because his inaction wasted "only 7 minutes."

There's no reason he couldn't have politely told the kids that he needed to leave to take care of Presidential business, and been on his way. You can't seriously believe that an Ivy League-educated adult (who you apparently support) couldn't gracefully leave early from a feel-good elementary school appearance to deal with the greatest national security crisis in 60 years. Why would anyone have to carry him out? This is just silliness.

The issue was not one related to his personal safety, but to our national security. The CINC has unique authority to make decisions related to national security, including but not limited to the authority to intercept civilian aircraft over US airspace.

In this instance, thank God, those seven minutes didn't make much difference. What would your expectation be if he had been notified that a rogue state had captured and launched an ICBM nuke toward the United States? Those "mere" 7 minutes could have been dispositive to national security.

None of this is meant to bash President Bush, but if all we do is clap him on the back for sitting there like a deer in the headlights, how are we (including the President) going to do better if and when this happens again?

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: M0NEYSH0T
Look, think about it for one second...

The President of the United States is sitting in front of School Children. What was he supposed to do? Abruptly run out of there? No President would have done that, and you darn well know it.

The White House, like ALL of us who watched the event LIVE, get that, LIVE on Television from the FIRST plane, had NO idea what was going on, so this is just a stupid argument.

My opinion? I believe he full well knew what he was doing once he heard of the second attack. He didn't want to disturb the children, and he didn't, and he didn't want to cause panic.

Can you imagine if the President caused that big of a raucous? Would there have more hysteria around the country had secret serviceman carried him out, which is damn sure what WOULD have happened had they thought the President was in danger.

This argument, opinion is lame to even write about, 7 minutes, sheesh...

As I've said before (what feels like at least 5 times), I don't really fault the President for the way he dealt with this incredibly stressful situation, but I think it's stupid and nonproductive to insist his reaction was the most appropriate one, or that it doesn't matter because his inaction wasted "only 7 minutes."

There's no reason he couldn't have politely told the kids that he needed to leave to take care of Presidential business, and been on his way. You can't seriously believe that an Ivy League-educated adult (who you apparently support) couldn't gracefully leave early from a feel-good elementary school appearance to deal with the greatest national security crisis in 60 years. Why would anyone have to carry him out? This is just silliness.

The issue was not one related to his personal safety, but to our national security. The CINC has unique authority to make decisions related to national security, including but not limited to the authority to intercept civilian aircraft over US airspace.

In this instance, thank God, those seven minutes didn't make much difference. What would your expectation be if he had been notified that a rogue state had captured and launched an ICBM nuke toward the United States? Those "mere" 7 minutes could have been dispositive to national security.

None of this is meant to bash President Bush, but if all we do is clap him on the back for sitting there like a deer in the headlights, how are we (including the President) going to do better if and when this happens again?

What if indeed.

I expect better from you DonVito.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: etech

What if indeed.

I expect better from you DonVito.

How so? I think I've been completely even-handed on this one. I just think it is counterproductive to blithely say, "no harm, no foul," and pretend that it made sense to sit there listening to "A - girl - got - a - pet - goat. But - the - goat - did - some - things - that - made - the - girl's - dad - mad" for 7 minutes while the US was under attack in the largest terrorist plot in world history.

I said, in the very post you quoted, that the loss of seven minutes did not have major impact on this situation, but that doesn't mean it was the most appropriate way of responding. I am not picking on President Bush - he was put in an incredibly challenging situation - but I don't think his response was the ideal one, and my hope is that he can see that and will respond differently if it is ever necessary in the future.

As for the rogue state example, take note of the post I was responding to, which was just the most recent of at least ten here that seemed more preoccupied with the spectre of scaring a couple of dozen schoolchildren than with national defense. I think that's just stupid.

 

[M0NEYSH0T]

In this instance, thank God, those seven minutes didn't make much difference. What would your expectation be if he had been notified that a rogue state had captured and launched an ICBM nuke toward the United States? Those "mere" 7 minutes could have been dispositive to national security.

Different situation. We had no idea what was going on...

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: etech

What if indeed.

I expect better from you DonVito.

How so? I think I've been completely even-handed on this one. I just think it is counterproductive to blithely say, "no harm, no foul," and pretend that it made sense to sit there listening to "A - girl - got - a - pet - goat. But - the - goat - did - some - things - that - made - the - girl's - dad - mad" for 7 minutes while the US was under attack in the largest terrorist plot in world history.

I said, in the very post you quoted, that the loss of seven minutes did not have major impact on this situation, but that doesn't mean it was the most appropriate way of responding. I am not picking on President Bush - he was put in an incredibly challenging situation - but I don't think his response was the ideal one, and my hope is that he can see that and will respond differently if it is ever necessary in the future.

As for the rogue state example, take note of the post I was responding to, which was just the most recent of at least ten here that seemed more preoccupied with the spectre of scaring a couple of dozen schoolchildren than with national defense. I think that's just stupid.

I assume you are aware that Pres. Bush was only a few feet away from a communications center that had been set up with secure phones. He was in contact with his administration.

You may think it's stupid but people that know much more about the situation don't think that at all.

"Bush made the right decision in remaining calm, in not rushing out of the classroom," said Lee Hamilton, vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission and a former Democratic congressman from Indiana.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: M0NEYSH0T

In this instance, thank God, those seven minutes didn't make much difference. What would your expectation be if he had been notified that a rogue state had captured and launched an ICBM nuke toward the United States? Those "mere" 7 minutes could have been dispositive to national security.

Different situation. We had no idea what was going on...

By the time he exited the classroom, NORAD knew of the hijacking of Flight 93. Within 8 minutes, they knew about the hijacking of Flight 77. Even to the extent he wasn't told about these planes in the classroom (which I'm sure he wasn't), everyone I know concluded we were under a terrorist attack the moment that second plane hit the WTC.

Can you imagine your reaction if you were the CINC? What would you have done?

I think what I would do (and I honestly don't mean to second-guess the President - it's easy for me to say it now) would be to gently tell the children, "I'm very sorry, but something's come up, and I have to be going. Thank you all very much for having me here today, and I look forward to hearing about your successes in the future," or some other platitude, and gotten the hell out of there, calmly but with a sense of urgency. I would have proceeded to my limo and gotten on the phone with my National Security Advisor and the heads of DIA and CIA to find out what was going on.

I really don't mean to be unfairly critical - I just think it's important to dissect a catastrophy like 9/11 to ensure we do the best job possible in case it ever happens again. If we completely fail to acknowledge the many small imperfections in our actions that day, we are doomed to fail to respond optimally to any similar event.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: etech

I assume you are aware that Pres. Bush was only a few feet away from a communications center that had been set up with secure phones. He was in contact with his administration.

You may think it's stupid but people that know much more about the situation don't think that at all.

"Bush made the right decision in remaining calm, in not rushing out of the classroom," said Lee Hamilton, vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission and a former Democratic congressman from Indiana.

With all due respect to Rep. Hamilton, I don't agree. I think in that situation, leadership means showing a sense of urgency. The President could easily have exited gracefully, and gotten underway with the business of being a wartime leader.

He was "in contact with his administration" in the sense that he had a thumbnail briefing whispered to him in the classroom. This isn't the same thing as contacting his many national security and intel advisors for more detailed info.

I never said the President or his actions were stupid, and I want to be clear about that. I said it was stupid to say today that his reaction was the most optimal one. The difference is that I am not trying to insult or second-guess him, but to suggest that there is room for improvement.

 

[LunarRay]

The President does not evaluate data nor formulate information from it. He would get maybe a one page synopsis and recommendation options from his NS adviser and others. If he was sitting on the potty or asleep the only thing that matters is the decisions that are to be made by him. Thus the only question is how long did he have the requisite information before he made a decision. And, sitting here today what decision(s) did he have to make?
Stuff follows established protocol. Geepers, Seven minutes talking to kids kinda reassures the greater population that all is OK and under control. Least ways to me it did.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Comically, in my view, Andrew Card told the SF Chronicle on the one-year anniversary of 9/11 that President Bush "politely excused himself" within seconds of hearing about the second plane, just the course of action I have consistently been suggesting throughout this thread. He said the same thing to MSNBC.

And I held up two fingers, said, 'A second plane,' and then waited for a slight break in the conversation in the classroom and went up to the president's right ear and said, 'A second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack.' And then I pulled away from the president, and not that many seconds later the president excused himself from the classroom and we gathered in the holding room and talked about the situation.

 

[Cobalt]

Originally posted by: shinerburke

Originally posted by: steeplerot
Shouldn't you be jocking one of your fellow bigots?

All you do is come on here and spew mindless hatred. Go away....some of us would like to have an intelligent discussion.

Don't be a hypocrite please. The only posts I've ever seen you make were partisan and spewing hatred against the other side.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: cobalt

Don't be a hypocrite please. The only posts I've ever seen you make were partisan and spewing hatred against the other side.

I wouldn't say that. For the most part I think shinerburke is pretty reasonable, though I have had any number of good-natured arguments with him (not to mention that he's an Okie!). There are plenty of thoughtless partisan drones here, and I don't think he's one.