My Bush-supporting bro-in-law warns of a pre-election terror strike...

[Westegg]

...to "disrupt our democratic process." This is fairly predictable boiler-plate rhetoric, of course, so my question to him is: "What makes you think BUSH isn't 'Osama's man'? " to paraphrase one detestable bumper sticker.

He has yet to respond but: what say you good people? Look, I know this has been discussed before and sorry to be boring, BUT I really am trying to muster up a cogent and winning response to his POV, and I need your help. I should mention that my bro-in-law is whip-smart, extremely well read, and a loquacious and sophisticated debater. So I need some help. Thanks!

[Union Thug]

1. Why? Is he and the GOP working on making it happen?

[Westegg]

13. HE isn't---he's not that ambitious! But as far as the Bush Admin...

pulling a "Dirty Tricks" campaign that could make Nixon's henchman look like a bunch of frat boys on a panty-raid, yeah, I'll buy that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Ask him simply

if this were to happen, who is in charge and who has the watch?

So why didn't they prevent it?

Then bring up both the Bohica and Millenium Plots and how they were dealt with effectively and with no need to scare us.

[Westegg]

14. Good point. Thanks.

[daddybear]

3. What could be worse....

than seeing Bush return to the oval office as resident? Now THAT is a terror attack!

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. that tack will not work with the bro in law

[IdaBriggs]

4. Will Wrong Way RESIGN if there is another terrorist attack?

Doesn't it PROVE he isn't able to protect us? Kerry and his team aren't in charge yet, therefore, Its Wrong Way's Fault, Correct? :)

[Liberal Veteran]

6. You should tell him to stay at home at not vote.....

...since you care so much for his safety.

[dorktv]

7. Remember how Dick Cheney said there will be an attack unless

we vote for Bush/Cheney? How does he know that?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

8. Remind him

that BUSHCO was responsible for 9/11. Period. It happened on his watch, and enough of the truth has come out of the investigations to show that warnings were ignored and that the pResident panicked that morning.

[Vickers]

9. Ask him how it would "disrupt our democratic process."

If by that he means folks would see his failure to protect our country after he has strutted around like some fucking banty rooster translating in to Kerry/Edwards votes, then tell him that means the Democratic process is WORKING.

It's called getting rid of a guy who is not qualified to do the job.

[shraby]

11. This is a big country and

any attack would be a local one which probably would affect 1 city or maybe 2. Not like Spain which is the size of ONE of our states, maybe 2 depending on the states.
Voting could still go on everyplace else in the country without a hitch. We just have to convince people if there is an attack, it's on Bush's watch and might not have happened if he'd put more resources into prevention.

[Mz Pip]

10. I heard an interview with Richard Clarke

a couple of days ago. He was asked if there was a higher probability of a terrorist attack if Kerry was elected. He said it didn't matter who got elected. We would be attacked again because we heven't taken the necessary steps to prevent it i.e. real homeland security. Nothing has been done about our rail system or about inspecting out ports.

I kinda don't think there will be a pre election attack. I suspect it will happen after the election regardless of who wins. I really don't have any facts to back up my opinion other than the terrorists seem to hit when it's least expected and since we seem to be expecting a pre election attack they will probably wait.

It's pretty hard to second guess psychopaths.

MzPip
:dem:

[shraby]

12. One more thought about this

If terrorists wanted to freak the country out, New York on New Year's Eve, either convention, large campaign rallies, sports games, or any place else where there are masses of people would have been a good time to hit...not just before the election or on election day where the polling places are so scattered.

[Westegg]

15. I agree. I'll admit that, as a New Yorker, I was very worried...

...about the Repub. convention. I figured, if they're going to hit us because of Bush, they'll do it now. I know half a dozen folks who, quite literally, left town because of this possibility. I never got that freaked out but, as someone else mentioned, I guess a terror strike isn't (and wouldn't be) about Bush v. Kerry at all.

[markomalley]

21. This just goes to show you...

...that the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend. It sounds to me like Clarke is as bad a fascist as the shrub's people. Just that he didn't get listened to...

"real homeland security" my ass! If we got any more "real homeland security" than we have now, we'd have to all walk in a goosestep!

[sffreeways]

16. Why ?

To disrupt the democratic process ? If we are talking about the same terrorists they know perfectly well that wouldn't serve their cause.

If in fact Bin Laden attacked because he wants the US out of Saudi Arabia the next attack would be for the same reason and now because we have invaded Iraq, another of the most holiest places for Muslims.

The attack would contain the same logic. Damage our economy, destroy our symbols of power. Money and might. What enables us to remain where we are not welcome.

If these terrorist believe that by attacking us close to an election the attack could influence the continuation of our presence there negatively that would make sense. For example if Kerry was promising to withdrawl all troops from the MidEast their logic might assume Americans would vote for Kerry if they attacked again with the same demands as before, that our Military leave Saudi Arabia.

To disrupt the democratic process is in line with because they hate us for our freedom. That is not why we were attacked.

I would say your argument is focus on the real reasons America has been attacked by Bin Laden to date. Motive, the motive has never been to disrupt our democratic process.

[salin]

17. If he believes that - then he must not believe Cheney

and his assertion that the only way to be safe from an attack is to vote for George and Dick. Ask him if that were to happen, would he then vote for Kerry since Dick would have let him down?

[Randypiper]

18. Bush is 'Osama's man'

Bush has alienated the world against us, you think bin laden wants Kerry in?

[GodHelpUsAll2]

19. I would simply say

How on earth could we have another attack. It's simply not possible because Bush has made us so much safer since 9-11. After all, he did capture Sadam. We are practically the safest country on earth according to this administration so I am not worried at all. Unless, however, you think maybe they have not made as safe as they claim.

[bobbyboucher]

20. If the terrorists are so afraid of McChimpster, then

why did they kill 3000 people right under his nose?