santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1847 times:
It's always interesting to see how so many dyed-in-the-wool "anti-truthers" -- for lack of a better term -- dwell on the soporific verbal diarrhea coming from noted architectural authorities like Rosey O'Donnell (any relation to Christine?) about what brought down building 7 or the blather offered by any given edition of the Nation of Islam's The Final Call about Ariel Sharon having warned all Jews to stay home that Tuesday, or about somebody's cousin seeing Hillary Clinton and Vince Foster leaving the men's room on the North Tower at 8:45 a.m.
Can you imagine what an unspeakable pain in the rear purchasing and destroying an entire run of a book must be? The only fun part is that it's at taxpayer expense.
Items like this one give me pause. Consider the author of the book and the network that is running the story. I'd like to see the usual suspects like Hannity et al. reconcile that story with their dreamworld "liberals vs. the rest of us" vision.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
Something usually lost on truthers like youself. These witnesses prove nothing along the lines of Bush and the DD being involved in 9/11. It more points to trying to cover up the fact they had a beat on this guy and didn't follow up on it or stay viligiant which could have prevented 9/11 but even that is a stretch. This article does not prove that Atta was in the employ or was a prisoner of the US forced to fly a plane into the WTC by Bush. It's total lunacy that you seem to want to continue every time an article like this surfaces. If you want us to believe that Bush planned and carried out 9/11 you need to provide some evidence. Not this.
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1760 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 2):
actual facts
Something usually lost on truthers like youself (sic).
Never assume.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): These witnesses prove nothing along the lines of Bush and the DD being involved in 9/11.
I didn't suggest that. What I am pointing out is that something sufficiently explosive was included in that first printing of Operation Dark Heart to lead the Pentagon to buy the entire batch and light it up.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): This article does not prove that Atta was in the employ or was a prisoner of the US forced to fly a plane into the WTC by Bush.
And my post doesn't suggest that. Not sure where you got that from.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): It's total lunacy that you seem to want to continue every time an article like this surfaces
What's lunacy is the knee-jerk distortions, drooling, and uncontrolled flatulence that a simple news item like this one triggers in some sectors. Who mentioned GWB? I certainly didn't.
You think "deep politics" fits into the nice little compartmentalized playing field of Teabaggers vs. BamBots or Freepers vs. Nanny Staters? The first thing that usually goes out the window when dealing with "into the looking glass" type scenarios -- of which 9-11 arguably is one -- is the artificial distinction of "right vs. left", "conservative vs. liberal" or "Real American vs. socialist".
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): If you want us to believe that Bush planned and carried out 9/11 you need to provide some evidence. Not this.
Again...your post somehow decided that this thread is all about Bush and then it's off to the races.
Back here on the ground, I'll paraphrase the late Dr. Carl Sagan, who said that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Is that evidence in? No. Will it ever be in? Who knows?
But one thing is certain. Somebody at the Pentagon got real nervous with the contents of a book written not by a talking head or a pundit, but by a Lt. Col. in a position to know much more about the evidence than any of us regular schlubs. And the contents, mind you, had been cleared not once but twice.
Just sayin'...its one of those things that make you go
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3): I didn't suggest that. What I am pointing out is that something sufficiently explosive was included in that first printing of Operation Dark Heart to lead the Pentagon to buy the entire batch and light it up.
Care to point that out?
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3): And my post doesn't suggest that. Not sure where you got that from.
Then why did you start this thread? Let me ask you honestly do you think Bush or Cheney or any US government official had any knowledge or participated in 9/11. Please answer truthfully.
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3): What's lunacy is the knee-jerk distortions, drooling, and uncontrolled flatulence that a simple news item like this one triggers in some sectors. Who mentioned GWB? I certainly didn't.
Again I ask why did you start this? What do you think that article means?
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3): The first thing that usually goes out the window when dealing with "into the looking glass" type scenarios -- of which 9-11 arguably is one -- is the artificial distinction of "right vs. left", "conservative vs. liberal" or "Real American vs. socialist
See it's this lunacy that prevents a normal discussion here. Why are brining MSNBC talking points into this? Do you believe we were attacked or not? Why do you spin this into a hate war when the real thing is being a truther or not?
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3): But one thing is certain. Somebody at the Pentagon got real nervous with the contents of a book written not by a talking head or a pundit, but by a Lt. Col. in a position to know much more about the evidence than any of us regular schlubs. And the contents, mind you, had been cleared not once but twice.
Which as I have said probably means someone knew of Atta as s threat and didn't follow up or stay vigliant and missed this signs he was going to attack us. That is far from "Fox being closet truthers" but not far from an op to being your hate US rhetoric. Give us a break. Osama attacked us buddy and Bush didn't have anythng to do with it.
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1708 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3):
I didn't suggest that. What I am pointing out is that something sufficiently explosive was included in that first printing of Operation Dark Heart to lead the Pentagon to buy the entire batch and light it up.
Care to point that out?
From Herridge's report: "Last month, the Defense Department took the highly unusual step of buying and destroying 9,500 copies of Shaffer's book "Operation Dark Heart" at a cost of $47,000 to U.S. taxpayers."
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3):
And my post doesn't suggest that. Not sure where you got that from.
Then why did you start this thread?
Apart from the fact that -- to paraphrase Ronald Reagan -- I am paying for this bandwidth, I started the thread because this particular angle of 9-11 is so often overlooked and drowned out by more incendiary rhetoric. Also of note is that fact that Fox News aired the story -- which takes the wind out of the right-wing peanut gallery's sails.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Again I ask why did you start this? What do you think that article means?
What this article means is that there is evidence, in the form of the witnesses Herridge spoke to, that there is some disturbing skullduggery afoot at the Pentagon. Why were the witnesses treated in such a hostile manner?
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 3):
The first thing that usually goes out the window when dealing with "into the looking glass" type scenarios -- of which 9-11 arguably is one -- is the artificial distinction of "right vs. left", "conservative vs. liberal" or "Real American vs. socialist
See it's this lunacy that prevents a normal discussion here.
If by "normal" you mean a typical Airliners "a vs. b" free-for-all, then I guess I'm having to have an abnormal discussion based on this very intriguing report by Fox News.
Don't confuse normal with simplistic.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Why are brining MSNBC talking points into this?
I don't even get MSNBC where I live, so the question is moot. Are MSNBC talking points by definition invalid?
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Why do you spin this into a hate war when the real thing is being a truther or not?
Dude, take it easy. I'm not spinning anything. This is what I mean by off to the races. You're already at 11 on the shrillness level. Hate? Where's the hate? Are you questioning Lt. Col. Shaffer's patriotic credentials? You'll have to take that up with him.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): That is far from "Fox being closet truthers"
Note to self: avoid self-explanatory irony when naming threads.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): but not far from an op to being your hate US rhetoric.
Which, if I chose, would be fully within my rights to do. But what's interesting is when a report like this one from Fox raises intriguing questions, some sectors immediately go apeshit and out of control, talking about anti-US rhetoric, tinfoil hats, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria (with apologies to Bill Murray). Try discussing the story on its merits.
Same thing happens when somebody says the US demand for cocaine helps fuel the Mexican drug wars: "oh, it's the same old BS from the 'Blame America' crowd." Get real. Read Herridge's item -- does her report make her a US hater?
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Give us a break. Osama attacked us buddy and Bush didn't have anythng to do with it.
Enough with the cartoonishness. Nowhere do my posts question whether an attack occurred. Read Herridge.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1697 times:
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): From Herridge's report: "Last month, the Defense Department took the highly unusual step of buying and destroying 9,500 copies of Shaffer's book "Operation Dark Heart" at a cost of $47,000 to U.S. taxpayers."
I meant what part of the book is so explosive? Plenty of copies still out there no?
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): overlooked and drowned out by more incendiary rhetoric
No it's because no evidence exists that Bush planned 9/11. When you or anyone can provide some maybe people will listen but when people just throw out anything and prays it sticks well..
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): What this article means is that there is evidence, in the form of the witnesses Herridge spoke to, that there is some disturbing skullduggery afoot at the Pentagon. Why were the witnesses treated in such a hostile manner?
Evidence only that the US knew Atta was a terrorist a year before he acted. Nothing more.
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): Are MSNBC talking points by definition invalid?
Yes.
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): Dude, take it easy. I'm not spinning anything. This is what I mean by off to the races. You're already at 11 on the shrillness level. Hate? Where's the hate? Are you questioning Lt. Col. Shaffer's patriotic credentials? You'll have to take that up with him
This is second time you dodged the question. I'll ask a third time. Do you think Osama Bin Laden attacked us or Bush planned it? Easy question.
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): Which, if I chose, would be fully within my rights to do. But what's interesting is when a report like this one from Fox raises intriguing questions, some sectors immediately go apeshit and out of control, talking about anti-US rhetoric, tinfoil hats, dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria (with apologies to Bill Murray). Try discussing the story on its merits
I can discuss it on it's merit and it points to someone screwing up and not following Atta not Bush planting bombs and Cheney having a missle fired at the Pentagon which you are trying to infer.
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6): nough with the cartoonishness. Nowhere do my posts question whether an attack occurred. Read Herridge
Your dodging yet again. One more time and answer truthfully. Who was responsible for this attack?
san747 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 4936 posts, RR: 13 Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1661 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
Are MSNBC talking points by definition invalid?
Yes.
Thanks for clarifying that.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
No it's because no evidence exists that Bush planned 9/11. When you or anyone can provide some maybe people will listen but when people just throw out anything and prays it sticks well..
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
This is second time you dodged the question. I'll ask a third time. Do you think Osama Bin Laden attacked us or Bush planned it? Easy question.
No person who has done serious research on the subject believes Bush was in on it, OK? I agree with santosdumont, settle down Nick.
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1654 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
From Herridge's report: "Last month, the Defense Department took the highly unusual step of buying and destroying 9,500 copies of Shaffer's book "Operation Dark Heart" at a cost of $47,000 to U.S. taxpayers."
I meant what part of the book is so explosive? Plenty of copies still out there no?
No. A guy on E-bay has a clean version of the book and is asking something like $2,000 for it.
From Amazon:
"Based on Department of Defense security concerns, sections of Operation Dark Heart have been redacted in the published edition."
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
overlooked and drowned out by more incendiary rhetoric
No it's because no evidence exists that Bush planned 9/11.
You're the one stuck on Bush. I never mentioned him nor did I suggest he planned 9-11. I'm talking about Operation Dark Heart and why the Pentagon has censored it.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
What this article means is that there is evidence, in the form of the witnesses Herridge spoke to, that there is some disturbing skullduggery afoot at the Pentagon. Why were the witnesses treated in such a hostile manner?
Evidence only that the US knew Atta was a terrorist a year before he acted. Nothing more.
That's like saying, "yeah, I humped this chick and didn't use a condom...you know, nothing more."
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
Are MSNBC talking points by definition invalid?
Yes.
Seeing as the story was on Fox, that's moot -- not to mention fallacious.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): I can discuss it on it's merit and it points to someone screwing up and not following Atta not Bush planting bombs and Cheney having a missle fired at the Pentagon which you are trying to infer.
You're the one focusing on Bush and Cheney. Start another thread and knock yourself out. I'm focusing on the story about Lt. Col. Shaffer.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 6):
nough with the cartoonishness. Nowhere do my posts question whether an attack occurred. Read Herridge
Your dodging yet again.
Dude...you may want to just quit at this juncture. If you come away from the Fox story thinking "Bush and Cheney" then I can't really help you there. For the seventh time, I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about the book in general and Operation Able Danger in particular.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1632 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 9): What do you think is being covered up here? If it isn't about Bush then what is it about?
Glad you asked. In a nutshell, it's about how a bloated, brain-dead military intelligence bureaucracy -- which, last time I checked, is immune to who is sitting in the Oval -- could fail to seriously pursue Lt. Col. Shaffer's findings. Based on the reviews of the book that are available, Operation Able Danger identified a number of the 9-11 hijackers. But for some reason or another when military pencil-pushers got a hold of the findings, they sat on them.
It reminds me of the same bureaucratic mentality that greeted FBI whistle-blowers. You know, that field agent who told her superiors "look, there are some Arab students at a flight school and they're only interested in learning how to take off, not how to land."
To summarize, the guys in the field do their job but the suits don't do theirs.
If you're interested, the E-bay guy is giving a discount on the clean version of the book. It can be yours for just $780.00
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1612 times:
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 10): Operation Able Danger identified a number of the 9-11 hijackers. But for some reason or another when military pencil-pushers got a hold of the findings, they sat on them
They didn't know they were 9/11 hijackers though. This is what you fail to point out. All this proves is someone dropped the ball and that maybe if they were more vigliant they could have acted before 9/11. Why you throw out the birther bomb just goes back to your disdain for the US. If you want to slag the US there are plenty of other threads here to do it you don't have to start another silly birther thread or a thread implying that FOX thinks there is any credibility to the birther movement.
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1595 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 11): They didn't know they were 9/11 hijackers though.
But they knew they were Al-Qa'ida sympathizers.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 11): All this proves is someone dropped the ball and that maybe if they were more vigliant they could have acted before 9/11
Yeah, that's all it proves. No biggie. No harm done. It's not like the price of such a screw-up was, you know, exorbitant, right? I mean, $47,000 isn't that much to spend on buying an entire first printing of a book and destroying it. Look, it's the pencil pushers' job not to drop the ball -- especially when terrorism is at issue and when military intelligence had identified Al Qa'ida as a known quantity.
But both you and I know that the Pentagon would be okay with the publishing of information that would make it look bad.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 11): Why you throw out the birther bomb just goes back to your disdain for the US
Two things: 1) it's called irony. 2) Do not confuse having a critical eye and having an opinion that is different from yours with harboring disdain for the US.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 11): If you want to slag the US there are plenty of other threads here to do it you don't have to start another silly birther thread or a thread implying that FOX thinks there is any credibility to the birther movement.
See point #2 above. Silly? I don't think there was anything silly about the Fox story, I think it was very thought-provoking. Apparently so did you. I mean, you wouldn't waste your time on a silly thread, now would you?
I'm not talking about your crude definition of truthers. I'm talking about what happens when the guys in the field do their job and the suits refuse to act on valuable information.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12): Yeah, that's all it proves. No biggie. No harm done. It's not like the price of such a screw-up was, you know, exorbitant, right? I mean, $47,000 isn't that much to spend on buying an entire first printing of a book and destroying it. Look, it's the pencil pushers' job not to drop the ball -- especially when terrorism is at issue and when military intelligence had identified Al Qa'ida as a known quantity.
We know many AQ operatives. Again it was a major failure but no intelligence is an absolute but it sure seems like an angle a good America hater can use huh?
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12): Two things: 1) it's called irony. 2) Do not confuse having a critical eye and having an opinion that is different from yours with harboring disdain for the US
LOL, come on pal you may as well wear a sign on your forehead that says "I hate the USA"
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12): I don't think there was anything silly about the Fox story, I think it was very thought-provoking. Apparently so did you. I mean, you wouldn't waste your time on a silly thread, now would you?
Right up to the point where you wrote "closet truther" Thought provoking? No you jumped at a chance to bash the US after FOX ran with a story you would more see on MSNBC.
Arrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2582 posts, RR: 2 Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1576 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 11): All this proves is someone dropped the ball and that maybe if they were more vigliant they could have acted before 9/11. Why you throw out the birther bomb just goes back to your disdain for the US. If you want to slag the US there are plenty of other threads here to do it you don't have to start another silly birther thread or a thread implying that FOX thinks there is any credibility to the birther movement.
I read through this parry and thrust between you and Santosdumont, and finally decided I'd better go read the article and see what all the fuss was.
Interesting piece. But who are "birthers" and how do they relate to this story? And how does Bush get into the discussion?
It looks to me like this guy Shaffer has written a book that exposes some horrendous gaps in pre-9/11 intelligence -- so horrendous that the current brass don't want the cat let out of the bag. This is hardly novel; throughout history there are countless examples of how great powers get smacked because they're asleep at the switch, or too arrogant to think anyone else could be smart enough or capable enough to deliver a nasty hit. That will never change, it's human nature.
I'll be interested to see how the rest of this series plays out. Although -- far too many unnamed sources in this piece for my liking.
Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1553 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 13): Again it was a major failure but no intelligence is an absolute but it sure seems like an angle a good America hater can use huh?
You're out of ammo, so you go personal?
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 13): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12):
Two things: 1) it's called irony. 2) Do not confuse having a critical eye and having an opinion that is different from yours with harboring disdain for the US
LOL, come on pal you may as well wear a sign on your forehead that says "I hate the USA"
It's like this. If you wore a sign on your forehead that said "I pay money to look at pictures of airplanes on the Internet" and somebody -- dunno, maybe your wife or significant other -- started giving you grief, I would come to your defense.
So when you draw pseudo-personal myopic conclusions because you have nowhere else to go, you're gonna find yourself stranded.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 13): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12):
I don't think there was anything silly about the Fox story, I think it was very thought-provoking. Apparently so did you. I mean, you wouldn't waste your time on a silly thread, now would you?
Right up to the point where you wrote "closet truther"
Note to self: The idea of irony is apparently lost on part of the A.net crowd's posts. Avoid.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 13): Thought provoking? No you jumped at a chance to bash the US after FOX ran with a story you would more see on MSNBC.
The fact that Fox ran with it speaks volumes. Does Herridge bash the US in the story? No.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 13): It looks to me like this guy Shaffer has written a book that exposes some horrendous gaps in pre-9/11 intelligence -- so horrendous that the current brass don't want the cat let out of the bag. This is hardly novel;
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 15): The fact that Fox ran with it speaks volumes. Does Herridge bash the US in the story? No.
Sure they ran a story that they knew would bring clicks and views. It's how they make more monehy than anybody else. Still waiting to hear how this fact makes Herridge a truther.
Quoting Arrow (Reply 14): Interesting piece. But who are "birthers" and how do they relate to this story? And how does Bush get into the discussion?
It't not birthers. It's truthers. Truthers like the OP believe George Bush planned and carried out 9/11 by forcing Atta and the rest of the terrorists to fly the planes and had Cheney fire a missle at the Pentagon and do God knows what to the 757 and people on it. They use any thing they can to further this lunacy and this little rid but from FOX was all we needed to launch into yet another tin hat foil expedition.
JakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1247 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1534 times:
Was it an inside job? No.
Did some government officials know an attack was imminent? Yes.
Was anything done about it? No.
Why? Politics.
End of thread.
Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
If by politcs you mean inter-departmental rivalry, I would agree.
Add to that lack of interdepartmental communication, lacking clear chain of command with regard to where intel should go, too much fluff (eg having the Arab equivalent of "John Smith" on watchlists) and some pretty spectacular incompetence.
Beyond that, I'm getting my tin foil hat.
To no one will we sell, or deny, or delay, right or justice - Magna Carta, 1215
santosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4 Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 1390 times:
I've taken my bows, my curtain call, etc. etc...wrapping up:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 15):
You're out of ammo, so you go personal?
You posted the thread, if the show fits.
????
Like I said before, you pay money to look at pictures of airplanes on the Internet. So do I. Consequently, and also out of decorum, I won't return the favor.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): Quoting santosdumont (Reply 15):
The fact that Fox ran with it speaks volumes. Does Herridge bash the US in the story? No.
Sure they ran a story that they knew would bring clicks and views.
Oh so now the story's not true?
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): Still waiting to hear how this fact makes Herridge a truther.
Irony. Sarcasm. Tongue-in-cheek. Look these up.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): Quoting Arrow (Reply 14):
Interesting piece. But who are "birthers" and how do they relate to this story? And how does Bush get into the discussion?
It't not birthers. It's truthers. Truthers like the OP
Like I said, never assume.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): Truthers like the OP believe George Bush planned and carried out 9/11 by forcing Atta and the rest of the terrorists to fly the planes and had Cheney fire a missle at the Pentagon and do God knows what to the 757 and people on it.
All right...your posts have officially gone from simplistic to downright moronic. You brought Bush and Cheney into it. That angle -- about forcing Atta to watch old episodes of "Seinfeld," the missiles, Milli Vanilli, etc., is entirely on you.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 16): hey use any thing they can to further this lunacy and this little rid but from FOX was all we needed to launch into yet another tin hat foil expedition.
So then why would the Pentagon go to the trouble of buying an entire first edition of a book and destroying it? Boredom?
If by politcs you mean inter-departmental rivalry, I would agree.
Add to that lack of interdepartmental communication, lacking clear chain of command with regard to where intel should go, too much fluff (eg having the Arab equivalent of "John Smith" on watchlists) and some pretty spectacular incompetence.
The question is whether such a convoluted structure is still in place.
"Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
N1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 25852 posts, RR: 79 Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1377 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 4): Give us a break. Osama attacked us buddy and Bush didn't have anythng to do with it.
Well, I'm far from a Truther, but ignoring memos called "Bin Laden Determined to Attack the U.S." and bringing up Somalia when asking that Clinton not invade Afghanistan hardly suggest that Bush is absolved of guilt.
Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
planespotting From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3438 posts, RR: 5 Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1372 times:
Quoting santosdumont (Reply 12): Apparently so did you. I mean, you wouldn't waste your time on a silly thread, now would you?
I'm not talking about your crude definition of truthers. I'm talking about what happens when the guys in the field do their job and the suits refuse to act on valuable information.
I've wasted plenty of time trying to make sense of what he says, but to no avail. It's not worth the wasted keystrokes.
Sponsor Message: 
From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2582 posts, 
From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5746 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2009, 702 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
