Is Bush flip flopping?

On September 10, 2003, Bush stated “We have made clear the doctrine which says, if you harbor a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, if you hide a terrorist you're just as guilty as the terrorist” 
He stated this at the FBI Academy in Quantico, Virginia 

If we roll back to 2001, tell me, just where did those terrorists grab those planes from?  Field reports from FBI agents were coming in talking about some irregular type of activities by people with no pilot’s license and wanting to just learn how to handle a jet aircraft – minus taking off and landing.  The field agents were gaffed off by Bush – or were the FBI agents liberal leftists and Bush gaffed them off for that?  

Why does it seem that our policy doesn’t apply to us?  Didn’t a terrorist bomb a federal building in Oklahoma?  Don’t we have people in the United States that are advocating violence that we are not doing anything about?  We have hate groups that are buying guns and advocating a race war – but we prosecute hate crimes. 

Or does Bush mean as long as the terrorists are in another country?  

The LA Times, on 8/2/03, reported The Administration continues its close ties with the Saudis despite the findings of a bipartisan commission investigating 9/11. The commission found the Saudi government “not only provided significant money and aid to the suicide hijackers but also allowed potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to flow to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups through suspect charities and other fronts.” 

But, that gets confusing too.  As reported by LA Times, on 5/22/01, we sent a gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today, and the gift presentation was announced by Secretary of State Colin Powell.  Why did we say one thing and do another?   

Bush was very adamant that we will not win/we are winning/we have victory against the war on terrorism.  Bold words, but a memo that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld sent to top-ranking Defense officials on 10/22/03 as reported by USA Today: "The United States has no yardstick for measuring progress in the war on terrorism, has not "yet made truly bold moves".     

ABC News, a week after 9/11 featured an article that reported:  "I want justice," Bush said. "And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'", and that got our blood pumping.  I wonder what happened because in a White House briefing held March 13, 2002, Bush said: “You know, I just don't spend that much time on him” plus “I truly am not that concerned about him”   Perhaps, we can accuse a liberal microphone and liberal tape recorder for the contradiction, or maybe demonic forces at work – like Nixon used. 

I hope that this is as confusing for you as it is me, and probably a number of people.  We are only assured that the right wingers see every statement as the absolute fact at the time it was stated.   

Powell is back in the news – something about genocide in the Sudan.  A minor observation, we are talking about the same man who got up in front of the world, pointed at a picture taken from about 20 miles above the surface of the earth and declared that the trucks in the picture were part of the weapons of mass destruction program in Iraq.  We have no idea where these trucks were, but we just somehow knew WMD.   

Powell is talking about genocide.  ABC News, 9 September 2004, carried the story.  Correct me if I am wrong, but Powell is not Armenian, Native American Indian, and definitely not a German Jew.  We can also ascertain that he is not a Russian who suffered under Stalin.  Just what then does Powell know about genocide?   

Didn’t the US limp out of Somalia while trying to stop the genocide there?   We got out of there faster than a Domino Pizza driver can deliver a pizza. We don’t talk about that much.  What exactly are we going to do in Sudan, or is our liberalism actually giving a signal as to where the next military involvement is going to be?   

Now, I have another question – a rhetorical question that doesn’t need answering.  Isn’t freeing people from bondage and given them liberty a liberal concept?   

America has been very, very critical of Russia’s involvement in Chechnya – correct?  Chechnya is a run away province of Russia.  We jump up and down about Russia denying Chechnya self rule.  Still with me? 

Why then do we revere Abraham Lincoln to doing the same thing to the Confederate States of America?  Is that one of those you had to be there things?   

If we are so keen on this independence thing, why did we give $43 million to the Taliban, keep a cozy lover relationship with the Saudi’s and then turn around and topple two governments in as many years?  

Why is Bush kicking Kerry for changing his mind, and Bush is flip flopping like a fish out of water?