Here, the author brings up the question of whether the President should have immediately left the classroom after hearing the news of the second attack. He correctly states my argument that the President did not want to scare the children. However, he misrepresents it by implying that I believed this was the only reason he did not leave immediately. I actually stated several possibilities, such as a desire to maintain an image of calm in front of the cameras, or that the President needed a moment to collect his thoughts. My position on this has always been: So what? If the President had left five, ten, or fifteen minutes earlier - would it have made any difference? What actions could he have taken that would have prevented loss of life, given the chaotic nature of events that day? At best, it would have reassured the nation by projecting an image of the President as a Man of Action (although some would have seen it as a foolhardy, panic-stricken, and insensitive reaction, like George Kostanza pushing children out of the way to escape a fire). Instead, he projected the image of a man who does not panic in times of crisis (although some argue that his actions were not aggressive enough). You can't please everyone, even if you are the President of the United States. 

This is Not a Conspiracy Theory response:

George W. Bush himself stated the reason he didn't exit the second-grade classroom upon learning from Andrew Card that America is under attack.

While Reese can claim it is his argument, that Bush did not leave the room immediately because he didn't want to scare the children, implying he, Reese came up with that argument, the reason was stated by Bush in an interview.  (I'll find the source in my files, I believe the interview was with the Washington Post in their series a year after 9/11.)

It really doesn't matter what conjectures might be made concerning the reason President Bush did not leave the room (immediately and after being told by Andrew Card that a second plane had crashed into the World Trade Center).

The reason was given by President George W. Bush and that answer was "he didn't want to scare the children."

Since that was Bush's answer, the answer raises the scrutiny.  (Our speculation about what reasons might be are useless.  Bush already gave his ONLY reason.)

The first and most important determination to be made is this:  Was President Bush told any time prior to entering the second grade classroom (about 9:03 a.m.) (and prior to being told by Card, America is under attack approximately 9:07 a.m.) by anyone in his Administration that a plane or planes had been reported as "hijacked."

The drama in Sarasota  A day promoting the president's education policy suddenly becomes a historical turning point.  By BILL ADAIR and STEPHEN HEGARTY © St. Petersburg Times published September 8, 2002http://www.sptimes.com/2002/09/08/911/The_drama_in_Sarasota.shtml

The 9/11 Commission Report does not include the full transcript of the President's private testimony before them.  Therefore, the public will never know whether President Bush was even asked whether he was told a plane or planes had been reported as off-radar, transponders turned off, hijacked, or any other terminology that might be specifically used before he entered the second-grade classroom to listen to the children practice reading, and more importantly, before he was told America is under attack, by Andrew Card.

Also, the public should be informed about the September 11, 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing given to President Bush reportedly at 8:00 a.m.

On his return to the Colony, the President showered, changed into a lightweight, dark blue suit, and, still glowing from the morning's exertion, sat down for the first routine intelligence briefing of the day. It was 8am.

Fourteen hundred miles away, American Airlines Flight 11 was taking off from Boston's Logan International Airport bound for Los Angeles, with 81 passengers and 11 crew aboard. It would be followed 14 minutes later by the departure, from the same airport, of United Airlines Flight 175, also LA-bound, with 56 passengers and nine crew.

The President's briefing appears to have included some reference to the heightened terrorist risk reported throughout the summer, but contained nothing specific, severe or imminent enough to necessitate a call to Condoleezza Rice, his 47-year-old National Security Adviser who, at the same moment, was travelling through the rush hour traffic from her home in north-west Washington to her office at the White House.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2001%2F12%2F16%2Fwbush16.xml

Since the mainstream Press has not bothered to demand release of the PDB the President was given the morning of September 11, 2001, and since the 9/11 Commission didn't reveal the transcript of the President's testimony we the American public will never know what President Bush was told at 8 a.m. the morning of September 11, 2001.

The PDB might show nothing of any consequence, but the Press doesn't know what its contents were, yet the Press speculated The President's briefing appears to have included some reference to the heightened terrorist risk reported throughout the summer, but contained nothing specific, severe or imminent enough to necessitate a call to Condoleezza Rice.

Further, years ago, This is Not a Conspiracy Theory narrowed down the timeline to 6-mintes between Bush being told by Andrew Card a second plane crashed into the World Trade Center 9:07 a.m. and the time Bush exited the second grade classroom at about 9:13 a.m.

That timeframe is noted from references contained in my timeline on this site.

We'll leave that matter for now and continue with responding to John Reese.

Reese next poses If the President had left five, ten, or fifteen minutes earlier - would it have made any difference? What actions could he have taken that would have prevented loss of life, given the chaotic nature of events that day?

The answer in my mind is the reason I continue updating This is Not a Conspiracy Theory five years after I began. 

Yes, Bush arising out of his seat after learning that America Was Under Attack and exiting the second grade classroom to enter an adjacent "holding" room set up with secure phone lines - would have made a difference.

We can speculate about an array of differences, but one is crystal clear: 

On September 11, 2001 at approximately 9:07 a.m., the American public would have known absolutely and without doubt that President Bush recognized he became Commander-in-Chief the instant he was told, "America is under attack, Mr. President." 

The words of Andrew Card to President Bush America is under attack were left unexplained for some 6-minutes while President Bush remained seated in front of a classroom of schoolchildren. 

Instead of thinking of not scaring children reading before him, President Bush should have been demonstrating he was prepared to make the best attempt ever seen as Commander-in-Chief to thwart an attack on the United States of America.

President Bush did not demonstrate that he was prepared to take and/or enable to be taken by others all measures possible to thwart "further" attack on us.  He didn't demonstrate that for those approximate 6 minutes he remained in the second-grade classroom.

Reese poses  What actions could he have taken that would have prevented loss of life, given the chaotic nature of events that day?

Reese does major twisting by posing what actions could he have taken that would have prevented loss of life.

You see, we will never know whether that six minute period could have included actions by the President of the United States which would have prevented loss of life after the second plane crash.

What we do know in our guts is this:  if any one of us had just been told that America is under attack, any one of us would have felt the imerative need to have this question asked and answered, right now: 

Who is attacking the United States of America?

George W. Bush did not ask that question for six minutes. 

Truly puzzling is that Bush's answer he didn't want to scare the children rests on his basically leaving the room in a dramatic way which would scare the children.

But Bush could have quietly arisen from his seat without the children ever becoming scared of a hurried, or dramatic, or in any way odd, movement.

President Bush could have handled the situation of the unexpected interruption by Andrew Card merely by saying "excuse me." 

Instead, after being told America is under attack, George W. Bush picks up the school textbook (which he had not held prior to Andrew Card's pronouncement) and does what?  According to Bush, he ponders in that time what it means to be Commander-in-Chief.

He doesn't even ponder how can I save America from possibly further attack from I don't know by what country in the world.  He doesn't do anything for 6-minutes.

And that legacy is unfortunately the legacy George W. Bush himself created when he sat for a 6-minute period instead of taking his first action, whatever that would be, as Commander-in-Chief.

Bill Sammon called Bush "Dawdler-in-Chief."  That from his book entitled, FIGHTING BACK. 

What American school children need to know because it is the truth, is George W. Bush, allowed 6 potentially crucial minutes to pass before he assumed himself in his role as Commander-in-Chief.

That is why This is Not a Conspiracy Theory remains after five years committed to spreading that absolute and incontrovertible and facutal truth.

The September 11 X-Files

Anti-Conspiracy Theories Friday, April 01, 2005

It’s official.
As of April 1, 2005 I’m an ANTI-conspiracy theorist.
This is no joke, and I suggest you become one too.

What on earth am I talking about?

Think about it:
- How much time have you and I wasted reading the rantings of various conspiracy theorists?
- Has any of that time enriched our lives?
- Has the world become a better place as a result of our reading or their outbursts, however well-intentioned?
- Are you any more prepared in case some or all of these theories prove accurate?
- Can any of these theories be either proven or disproven?

For those who’ve been at this game for a while, you’ll understand my point, but please bear with me for a moment of explanation.

The War in Iraq, the coming War in Syria, World War Three - none of these are the real issue.  There’s a much bigger war going on: a spiritual battle for control of your mind.  And conspiracy theory sites are unwittingly aiding the battle, by spreading fear, gloom and a sense of futility, instead of providing practical, meaningful solutions.  And I’m not talking about building log cabins in the wilderness stockpiled with long-life foods, or emigrating to the wilds of Borneo.

There’s a grand plan unfolding, and conspiracy theory sites (those worth their salt) know there’s absolutely nothing that can be done, but still seem satisfied with believing they’re smart enough to have “it all figured out”. 

Why do you think conspiracy sites are permitted to continue operating?  If they’re a threat, wouldn’t they all be shut down?  Truth is, conspiracy sites are aiding and abetting the grand plan, by enslaving people’s minds through fear.

My suggestion?

Drastically reduce the amount of time you spend assimilating “news”, from either traditional or alternative sources.

Radical, I know.  And I say this because, for most of us, NONE of the news reported affects us personally.  Not Annan’s imminent departure from the UN; not the latest earthquake in SE Asia; not school shootings; not events in Israel and Palestine; not the battle going on for Schiavo’s life and the related court rulings; not the rapidly-fading pope and the significance of who will be next.  If they don’t affect us personally, why worry about these stories?

Instead, spend time coming to grips with the bigger picture:
- World events, both politically and geo-physically, particularly in the next few years, are going to become cause for more and more alarm.  The individual events themselves matter little - what matters is the trend, or the unfolding grand plan.  Once you’ve understood the grand plan (which you cannot do while worrying about individual events) you’ll be able to live in peace because your mind is prepared mentally;

So with the clear knowledge that three planes had been hijacked, with one of them already crashed into the World Trade Center, who would have possibly assumed that Flight 11's crash was an accident? Yet that is precisely what the official story claims.

There are a number of different "official" accounts, but all of them stress that Bush wasn't told until after he arrived inside the school (contrary to the account of Captain Loewer) and that it was assumed to be an accident (contradicting Tenet being told that it was an attack).

In addition, conspiracy theories are almost by definition unfalsifiable. Any evidence against the theory is dismissed, because, as far as the conspiracy buff is concerned, the conspirators planted the evidence. A classic example is the hype surrounding the supposed "UFO Crash" at Roswell. It doesn't matter that newly unclassified documents reveal that the incident had a perfectly logical, terrestrial explanation. UFOlogists want to believe in a conspiracy to hide evidence of alien life, so they dismiss the evidence as part of a government cover-up.

Whenever a significant event occurs, there are conspiracy nuts coming out of the woodwork to explain to us what really happened. This is the case with an article written by Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, called "An Interesting Day: President Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11". It appears on the website for the "Center for Cooperative Research" which, as far as I can tell (the page describing the purpose of the site is extremely evasive), is an alternative news source. The central thrust of this article is that President Bush's actions were unusual and inappropriate for circumstances surrounding the September 11 terrorist attacks. It states that investigations are needed to explain certain irregularities, implying that a bizarre conspiracy of silence was in place that day.

Although this article is clearly well researched and contains links to its sources, it is at its core a journalistic train wreck. Many of the reference links are broken, point to dubious web sites, or refer to articles that simply do not support the statements made. Numerous attempts are made to mislead and confuse the reader, while maintaining a veneer of accuracy and professionalism. In my opinion, the twisted logic of this article trivializes one of the most traumatic incidents in our nation's history. In the paragraphs that follow I will attempt to work through the baffling mish-mash of ideas that comprise the work.

http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/conspiracy911.htm

"Who was really in control? Certainly not Bush."

"In the back of the room, Press Secretary Ari Fleischer caught Bush's eye and held up a pad of paper for him to see, with "DON'T SAY ANYTHING YET" written on it in big block letters. [Washington Times, 10/7/02]"

"Nearly every news account fails to mention when Bush left the classroom after being told America was under attack. Three mention 9:12 a.m. [New York Times, 9/16/01 (B), Telegraph, 12/16/01, Daily Mail, 9/8/02] Remaining in the classroom for approximately five to seven minutes is inexcusable, but the video of Bush in the classroom suggests he stayed longer than that. The video contains several edits and ends before Bush leaves the room, so it also doesn't tell us exactly how long he stayed. One newspaper suggested he remained "for eight or nine minutes" - sometime between 9:13 and 9:16, since Card's arrival is uncertain. [Tampa Tribune, 9/1/02]"

A discernable pattern emerges upon reading through the sources provided in the article. The authors begin with a premise, then look for snippets of news stories to support it. If the stories are read in their entirety, they tend to contradict some of the contentions made by the authors in other parts of the article.

"Air Force One landed at Barksdale Air Force base near Shreveport, Louisiana at about 11:45 a.m. [CBS, 9/11/02, Telegraph, 12/16/01, Sarasota Magazine, 11/01] "The official reason for landing at Barksdale was that Bush felt it necessary to make a further statement, but it isn't unreasonable to assume that - as there was no agreement as to what the President's movements should be it was felt he might as well be on the ground as in the air." [Telegraph, 12/16/01, CBS, 9/11/02] Ironically, the landing came only a short time after Bush's plane was finally protected by fighters."

"The many accounts of what happened to Bush on 9/11 are riddled with disinformation of false threats, omitted details, fudged timing, and more. But around September 11, 2002, the heavily publicized first anniversary of the attacks, there was an obvious attempt to further rewrite the story.

Chief of Staff Andrew Card claimed that after he told Bush about the second World Trade Center crash, "it was only a matter of seconds" before Bush "excused himself very politely to the teacher and to the students, and he left" the classroom…The Booker school video shows these statements are lies - unless "a matter of seconds" means over 700 seconds!"

"Sandra Kay Daniels, the teacher whose second-grade classroom Bush visited on 9/11, told the Los Angeles Times that after Card informed Bush of the second crash, Bush got up and left. "He said, 'Ms. Daniels, I have to leave now.' ... Looking at his face, you knew something was wrong. I said a little prayer for him. He shook my hand and left." Daniels also said, "I knew something was up when President Bush didn't pick up the book and participate in the lesson." [Los Angeles Times, 9/11/02] However, the Booker video clearly shows that Bush did follow along after being told of the second plane."

In their conclusion, the authors make a brave attempt to solidify the hodge-podge of data with which they have assailed their readers:

"There are many questions that deserve answers. So many pieces of the puzzle do not fit. Simply by reading the mainstream media reports, we can see that mere incompetence doesn't explain what happened to Bush on that day. For instance, it makes no sense that Bush would listen to a story about a goat long after being told the US was under attack, and even after the Secret Service decided to immediately evacuate him from the school. It defies explanation that Air Force One's fighter escort took two hours to appear. And it is mind-boggling that there are seven different versions of how Bush learned about the first crash."