BUSH: Capturing Bin Laden "Low Priority" Use Of American Resources

[kpete]

Bush Tells Barnes Capturing Bin Laden Is ‘Not A Top Priority Use of American Resources’

Weekly Standard editor Fred Barnes appeared on Fox this morning to discuss his recent meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. The key takeaway for Barnes was that “bin Laden doesn’t fit with the administration’s strategy for combating terrorism.” Barnes said that Bush told him capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.”
Full transcript:

HOST: Alright Fred, you and a few other journalists were in the Oval Office with the President, right? And he says catching Osama bin Laden is not job number one?

BARNES: Well, he said, look, you can send 100,000 special forces, that’s the figure he used, to the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan and hunt him down, but he just said that’s not a top priority use of American resources. His vision of a war on terror is one that involves intelligence to find out from people, to get tips, to follow them up and break up plots to kill Americans before they occur. That’s what happened recently in that case of the planes that were to be blown up by terrorists, we think coming from England, and that’s the top priority. He says, you know, getting Osama bin Laden is a low priority compared to that.

VIDEO:
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/14/barnes-osama/

[radfringe]

1. but using him as a political prop is top priority

booga-booga

[Kikosexy2]

2. The more I hear shit...

like from our Commander is a Thief, the more I believe he and the Bin Ladens are in cahoots over 9/11...again, I say connect the dots and follow the money....this reeks of something very sinister....

[AndyA]

3. It's pretty easy to see why Osama bin Laden would be a low priority...

After all, what has he done to us?

[Kikosexy2]

4. Osama delivered ...

political capital to Bushco...so why bother capturing him?....The terror enterprise has worked out so well for both of them...

[warrens]

5. Torturing innocent Iraqis is MUCH more important

If, that is, you want a REAL WWIII, which I am beginning to think those nazis do.

[BattyDem]

6. So the pResident thinks capturing the man responsible for ...

the worst terrorist attack on American soil is a low priority ... and yet the Bushbots think he's the guy who's going to protect them! Are people blind, brain damaged or just plain stupid? :shrug:

It's becoming painfully obvious that * does not want to capture Bin Laden. I wonder why? :tinfoilhat:

[tibbiit]

7. So its okay for Bush to say osama is a low priority

and right wingers and fox news says yeah thats fine... but its not okay for Clinton to not have caught him... before 9-11.
Yeah that makes sense. (not)
lol how do they (wingnuts and repigs) lie with themselves and the lies?
tib

[BattyDem]

9. Don't try to make sense of the RW logic

It will make your head explode! :crazy:

[treestar]

10. Exactly, lol, if Clinton's admin. killing him would have stopped the

attacks, then it follows that Osama is so important to Al Qaeda that without him, they won't be able to plan and carry out their attacks, in which case, the best way to fight terra is to catch him.

Hypocritical morans.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

8. What do 9/11 victims' families think about these priorities?

Why didn't Bush announce this in his 9/11 speech, that justice for the man behind the crime of the century is "low priority", compared to getting reserves for big oil companies in Iraq?

[pa28]

11. Tough on terror?

I think America deserves an official response from the White House confirming or denying this statement. That's the second time he's said "not a priority".

The media keeps telling me Bush is the terror President. He sure is.

[BreweryYardRat]

12. I will not post something that will get me in trouble with Agent Mike.

However...

RRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THAT SLIMY LITTLE SON OF A BITCH-SPINELESS LYING ASSHOLE!!!

:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:
:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: